Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2010 08-17 CC CDC AGENDA PKT
Agenda Of The Regular Meeting — National City City Council / Community Development Commission of the City of National City Council Chambers Civic Center 1243 National City Boulevard National City, California Regular Meeting — Tuesday — August 17, 2010 — 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 and Community Development Commission (CDC) 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/Executive Director any matter that you desire the City Council or Community Development Commission Board to consider. We thank you for your presence and wish you to know that we appreciate your involvement. ROLL CALL Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag by Mayor Ron Morrison Public Oral Communications (Three -Minute Time Limit) NOTE: Pursuant to state law, items requiring Council or Community Development Commission action must be brought back on a subsequent Council or Community Development Commission Agenda unless they are of a demonstrated emergency or urgent nature. Upon request, this agenda can be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please contact the City Clerk's Office at (619) 336-4228 to request a disability -related modification or accommodation. Notification 24-hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. Spanish audio interpretation is provided during Council and Community Development Commission Meetings. Audio headphones are available in the lobby at the beginning of the meetings. Audio interpretacion en espanol se proporciona durante sesiones del Consejo Municipal. Los audiofonos estin disponibles en el pasillo al principio de la junta. Council Requests That All Cell Phones And Pagers Be Turned Off During City Council Meetings COPIES OF THE CITY COUNCIL OR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING AGENDAS AND MINUTES MAY BE OBTAINED THROUGH OUR WEBSITE AT www.nationaicitvca.gov CITY COUNCIL/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AGENDA 8/17/2010 - Page 2 PRESENTATIONS 1. Employee of the Month of July 2010 — Corporal Dan Nagle, Police Department 2. Employee of the Month of August 2010 — Josie Flores -Clark, Executive Assistant — Mayor's Office 3. Port Update — Chairman Robert "Dukie" Valderrama, Port of San Diego 4. Legislative Efforts — SB 1039 - Chairman/CEO Cruz Bustamante, Bustamante and Associates and President Gary Husk, Husk Partners CITY COUNCIL 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. 5. Approval of the Minutes of the Adjourned Regular City Council/Community Development Commission Meetings of March 30, 2010, August 3, 2010 and August 10, 2001. (City Clerk) 6. Approval of a motion to waive reading of the text of the 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) 7. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City approving an amendment increasing the not -to -exceed amount from $100,000 to $125,000 for the on -call agreement between the City and Project Partners to provide professional engineering and land surveying services for various Capital Improvement Projects. (Development Services/Engineering) 8. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the filing of a Federal TIGER II Discretionary Grant application requesting $10 million for construction of the Plaza Boulevard Widening Project, with a local match of $2.5 million funded through Prop A, Gas Tax, Transportation Impact Fee Program, Capital Outlay Fund and Rule 20A Fund for utility undergrounding. (Development Services/Engineering Division) CITY COUNCIUCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AGENDA 8/17/2010 - Page 3 CONSENT CALENDAR (Cont,) 9. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City waiving the bid process and authorizing a California Multiple Award Schedules (CMAS) purchase for synthetic turf and permanent striping material/product from Fieldturf USA, Inc. in the amount of $328,309 for the El Toyon Soccer Project, Specification Number 07-01. (Funded through Parks and Recreation Capital Outlay Funds). (Development Services/Engineering Division) 10. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City awarding a contract to Ohno Construction in the amount not -to -exceed $440,642.20 for construction improvements for the El Toyon Soccer Field Specification 07-01 and authorizing the Mayor to execute the contract. (Funded by CDBG Fund, County of San Diego Grants and Park & Recreation Capital Outlay Fund) (Development Services/Engineering) 11. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City awarding a contract to Blue Pacific Engineering for the base bid amount of $51,152.50 to complete the City's Cultural Arts Center Landscape Improvements and authorizing the Mayor to execute the contract. (Funded by Tax Increment Fund). (Development Services/Engineering) 12. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City: 1) accepting and approving the work performed by Conan Construction, Inc. for the final contract amount of $367,313.00; 2) filing of the Notice of Completion with the County Recorder; and 3) making the final payment of $1,111.20 and the retention amount of $18,257.71 for the National City Multiple Facility Project, FY 09-10. (Funded through Morgan/Kimball Senior Housing Replacement Reserve Account, Facilities Maintenance Fund and General Fund). (Development Services/Engineering) 13. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City accepting the 2010 San Diego Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (Al), and authorizing the Mayor to execute a certification letter stating that the Al represents National City's conclusions about impediments to fair housing choice, as well as actions necessary to address any identified impediments. (Community Development) 14. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the Mayor to execute a renewal Agreement in the not -to -exceed amount of $50,600 with South Bay Community Services to provide domestic violence response services for the CaI-EMA grant funded Children Exposed to Domestic Violence Specialized Response Program. (Police) CITY COUNCIL/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AGENDA 8/17/2010 - Page 4 CONSENT CALENDAR (Cont,) 15. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City approving the City Council's Response to 2009/2010 Grand Jury Report on Medical Marijuana, and authorizing the Mayor to execute said Response to the Grand Jury. (City Attorney) 16. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the Mayor to execute an Employment Agreement between the City of National City and Claudia Silva for the position of City Attorney. (City Attorney) 17. WARRANT REGISTER #3 Warrant Register #3 for the period of 07/14/10 through 07/20/10 in the amount of $686,924.62. (Finance) 18. WARRANT REGISTER #4 Warrant Register #4 for the period of 07/21/10 through 07/27/10 in the amount of $2,506,970.80. (Finance) 19. City Manager's Response to 2009/2010 Grand Jury recommendations pertaining to Ethics in Government, Codes of Ethics, Internal Controls, and Fraud Hotlines. (City Attorney/City Manager) 20. City Manager's response to 2009/2010 Grand Jury recommendation pertaining to Managed Competition, Outsourcing, Reengineering, and Reverse Auction Programs such as are employed by the County of San Diego. (City Attorney/City Manager) URGENCY ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION 21. An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City adopted pursuant to Government Code Section 36937 (b) as an Urgency Measure to take affect immediately, amending Chapter 18.62 of the National City Municipal Code by amending Section 18.62.170 pertaining to Temporary Signs to allow more than one sign on a residential parcel to preserve the public peace by providing reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on temporary signage in National City. (City Attorney) CITY COUNCIUCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AGENDA 8/17/2010 - Page 5 URGENCY ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION (Cont.) 22. An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City adopted pursuant to Government Code Section 36937 (b) as an Urgency Measure to take effect immediately, amending Chapter 18.62 of the National City Municipal Code by amending Section 18.62.170 pertaining to Temporary Signs to allow more than one sign on a residential parcel to preserve the public peace by providing reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on temporary signage in National City (Two Large Signs). (City Attorney) ORDINANCE FOR ADOPTION 23. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City to approve an amendment to the contract between the Board of Administration California Public Employees' Retirement System and the City Council of the City of National City to provide for a 2% @ 60 full formula benefit for Miscellaneous members entering membership for the first time in the Municipal Employees' Association and Confidential Subgroups. (Human Resources) NEW BUSINESS 24. Request to use Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Center (north room) by Diversity Solutions aka The Diversity Group, for a "Job Fair" on Wednesday, Sept. 29, 2010 from 10:30 a.m.— 2:30 p.m. Fee waiver (or discount) requested. (Community Services) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR 25. Resolution of the Community Development Commission (CDC) of the City of National City approving the Section 8 Management Assessment Program (SEMAP) for Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2010 and authorizing the submittal of the SEMAP to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (Community Development, Housing and Grants, Section 8 Program). 26. Authorize the reimbursement of Community Development Commission expenditures in the amount of $45,601.54 to the City of National City for the period of 07/14/10 through 07/20/10. (Finance) CITY COUNCIL/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AGENDA 8/17/2010 - Page 6 CONSENT CALENDAR (Cont.) 27. Authorize the reimbursement of Community Development Commission expenditures in the amount of $1,095,873.20 to the City of National City for the period of 07/21/10 through 07/27/10. (Finance) STAFF REPORTS 28. Closed Session Report (City Attorney) MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL 29. Discussion — Creation of a second tier retirement formula for newly elected officials. (Mayor) ADJOURNMENT Regular City Council and Community Development Commission Meeting — Tuesday — September 7, 2010 — 6:00 p.m. - Council Chambers — National City, California. ITEM #1 -0_CALIFORNIA -{+ N&TI L fairy acicpy INCORPORATED 8/17/10 E=SCHEDULE OF JULY RECOGNITION MEMORANDUM August 2, 2010 TO Chris Zapata, C. anager FROM Stacey Steven , uman Resources Director SUBJECT EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH PROGRAM The Employee of the Month Program is intended to communicate the City's appreciation for outstanding performance and service by recognizing those employees who maintain high standards of personal conduct and who make significant contributions to the work environment and our community. The employee selected by the Police Department to be recognized for the month of July 2010 is Corporal Dan Nagle. Dan has been re -invited to attend the Council meeting of Tuesday, August 17, 2010, and be recognized for his achievements and service. xc: Dan Nagle Chief Adolfo Gonzales Sergeant Graham Young Dionisia Trejo — Mayor/Council Office Josie Flores -Clark — Confidential Assistance Human Resources — Office File SS:lgr Human Resources Department Performance Recognition Prograiy4) E. 12th Street, Suite A, National City, CA 91950-3312 619/336-4300 Fax 619/336-4303 www.nationaicityca.gov City of National City Performance Recognition Award Nomination Form I nominate Corporal Dan Nagle for the Performance Recognition Award for the following reasons: Please state reason why your nominee should receive an award, (i.e., examples of service beyond requirements of position, exemplary service to the public, outstanding job performance, etc). Do not to exceed 150 total words. Please be as specific as possible when giving your examples. On May 19, 20I0 Leonard Scroggins, a dangerous parolee at large, a sex registrant and sexual predator robbed a lone female then attempted to kidnap a separate thirteen year old female at knifepoint within a two hour period in National City. Unbeknownst to officers who responded to the victim's locations, Scroggins had committed similar crimes in surrounding jurisdictions. With the help from observant victims, the National City Police Department's Patrol and Investigations Divisions were able to identify who Scroggins was and the type of vehicle he was driving. Each Patrol Squad that was being deployed into the field that evening was briefed of the threat Scroggins posed to the community for as long as he was not in custody. The urgency of all officers, investigators and dispatchers involved in the investigation was palatable. With Local murders of teenagers Amber Dubois and Chelsea King fresh in everyone's mind, all personnel involved were keenly focused and furiously working on finding Scroggins before he could attack again. Later that evening, Corporal Dan Nagle had a suspicion that Scroggins was still in the City around the area where he committed his previous crimes. Corporal Nagle positioned himself in a prime location to monitor traffic flow. Corporal Nagle's intuitiveness paid off and Scroggins' vehicle was observed driving in the area where he earlier committed his crimes. A short pursuit ensued and with the assistance of other officers, Corporal Nagle apprehended Scroggins. The entire investigation highlights the tremendous teamwork, commitment, dedication and professionalism of all personnel involved Corporal Nagle is being recognized as one of the key members of this outstanding team that saw this investigation through and placed a violent predatory offender behind bars. FORWARD COMPLETED NOMINATION TO: National City Performance Recognition Program Human Resources Department Nominated by: Sergeant Graham Young July 6, 2010 CALIFORNIA -+ 8/17/ITEM#102 cirr NATIT oR IN CORPORATED — MEMORANDUM August 12, 2010 TO Chris Zapata, C. anager FROM Stacey Steven uman Resources Director SUBJECT EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH PROGRAM The Employee of the Month Program communicates the City's appreciation for outstanding performance. In doing so, it recognizes employees who maintain high standards of personal conduct and make significant contributions to the workplace and community. The employee to be recognized in August 2010 is Josie Flores -Clark - Executive Assistant By copy of this memo, the employee is invited to attend the Council meeting on Tuesday, August 17, 2010 to be recognized for her achievement and service. Attachment cc: Mayor Ron Morrison Josie Flores -Clark — Executive Assistant Dionisia Trejo — Mayor/Council Office Human Resources — Office File SS:Igr Performance Recognition Program (2) Human Resources Department 140 E.12" Street, Suite A, National City, CA 91950-3312 619/336-4300 Fax 619/336-4303 www.nationalcityca.gov i,� City of National City Performance Recognition Award Nomination Form As public servants our number one goal is to provide service to our constituents at the very highest level. With that in mind, I am honored to nominate Josie Flores -Clark as Employee of the Month for August. Our office constantly receives phone messages, emails, cards and letters from local constituents, business people, and contacts from around the country expressing appreciation for the courtesy and services that Mrs. Clark provides. A common statement would be, "We're not used to government being this accessible and providing this level of service." She represents the Mayor and Council office at local and regional meetings and provides the office and staff support for the Mayor. Her tireless assistance during SB1039 working its' way through the legislature was a huge contributor to its final success. Her combination of personality and professionalism is both infectious and puts our City's very best foot forward. This summer Mrs. Clark worked with the Del Mar Fair to provide 450 admission tickets to the Fair for our employees and their families. Mrs. Clark also coordinates the major events through the Mayor's office. She is currently preparing for the fourth annual State of the City Address (with a twist). Last year's event involved 23 local restaurants and an atten4ance of 800. This year she has also planned the South County EDC Elected Officials Reception, which has a normal attendance of less than 200, but this year was over 400. Also this year was National City's turn to host the League of Cities Dinner, which normally attracts 70 people, 'Out this year by Mrs. Clark's efforts had a record 130 dignitaries, and was a very elegant evening held aboard a 151 foot yacht in our Marina. This event is still the talk of the County, and the amazing part is not only all the work that Mrs. Clark has put into these events, and how well they have showcased National City to the rest of our region, but that through the efforts of Mrs. Clark these elaborate, well planned, expensive, and very worth while events have not cost the taxpayers of National City a single penny. Josie Flores -Clark is an excellent example of the fine City employees that resolve to provide the highest level of services to the people of National City, and is a natural choice for Employee of the Month. FORWARD COMPLETED NOMINATION TO: National City Performance Recognition Program Human Resources Department Nominated by: Ron Morrison, Mayor on August 9, 2010 ITEM #3 1 want to begin by thanking Mayor Morrison and the City Council for being frank and fair in regards to Senator Denise Ducheny's proposed senate bill 1039. I realize you may be disappointed in the Senator's decision to pull the bill, but I am hopeful that our recent Board action last month will prove to be beneficial to your city. On July 6, the. Board of Port Commissioners approved a resolution that will set aside funding for the cities of San Diego and National City for projects to alleviate maritime impacts. We appreciate you taking the time to travel to Sacramento to meet with Senator Ducheny and her staff. The discussions allowed us to understand your position. The Marine Terminal Impact Improvement Fund will designate a half of one percent of gross revenue generated from the Tenth Avenue and National City marine terminals for the projects that will help alleviate the impacts the marine terminals have on the National City and San Diego communities. The Port needs to protect the more than 42,000 jobs and the nearly $8 billion in regional economic impact that maritime industry provides. At the same time, we realize our responsibilities of protecting the environment. We are committed to working with you and your staff on projects that will lessen the impact of our maritime operations. 8/17/10 2 Our mission is to balance regional economic benefits, recreational opportunities, environmental stewardship and public safety while protecting Tidelands Trust resources on behalf of the citizens of California. We keep a delicate balance through our tenant businesses and cargo operations that provide economic impact to the region, through our environmental initiatives that protect San Diego Bay, and our parks that provide recreational amenities. The Port's vision is to foster a world class port through excellence in public service. 4 This slide reflects figures from fiscal year 2009. Our fiscal year 2010 just ended, and we are compiling the financial data. Like most public agencies, our revenue was down. In 2009, our Real Estate revenue was down almost ten percent from the previous year. Maritime was down almost five percent. This year's results are showing a continued loss. 5 To help balance the budget, we've initiated cost-cutting measures. For the first time in the Port's history, we have implemented a mandatory, one day a month furlough day for all Port employees except for public safety personnel and marine operations personnel. We are limiting consulting services and eliminating temporary employees. We have a hiring freeze. Out of town travel is only on an as -needed basis and spending on supplies has been cut back. Additionally, we have been exploring ways to increase revenue. We are looking at installing cell phone transmission towers on Port property, allowing vending carts and vending machines on Port property and allowing companies to advertise on Port property. 6 Here are some of the public infrastructure projects that the Port of San Diego has been responsible for. Since 1963, the Port has invested $1.5 billion into the region through projects like these. In case you're wondering why I've got the airport listed up there, it's because up until 2002, the Port of San Diego managed San Diego International Airport. 7 The Port of San Diego has jurisdiction over some of the most picturesque real estate around. Our Real Estate department manages the leases of more than 600 tenants and subtenants. Tenants range from waterfront hotels to shipbuilding and repair companies such as General Dynamics/NASSCO. We also have small mom and pop businesses such as bait and tackle shops and ice cream shops. These tenants generate revenue for the Port. In fiscal year 2009, real estate revenue totaled $78.5 million. As I said earlier, this was down almost 10 percent from the 2008 total of $87.1 million. People weren't traveling as much and the hotels were having a hard time filling rooms. Restaurants and other attractions were hurting. Things are slowly starting to improve. 8 In National City, our newest Real Estate project is the Pier 32 Marina. The Pier 32 Marina opened in National City in August 2008. This is the first new marina on San Diego Bay in 15 years. The project has opened up the bay front to National City. The marina has 250 boat slips and other amenities. It fits in well with the surrounding development. We are working with the City on other ways to make the bay front more accessible. 9 Last April, the Port completed a $1.1 million project to re -do the Pepper Park public boat launch ramp in National City. The original concrete launch ramp that was built in 1969 was demolished. It was replaced with an eight -lane launch ramp. Two 10-foot wide boarding floats were also installed. The project was paid for with grant money from the California Department of Boating and Waterways and money from the Port's Capital Development Program. 10 Here's a shot of the new restroom in Pepper Park that recently opened. The old restroom was removed to make way for the new aquatic center. The new restroom is a $400,000 project. It is ADA-compliant. 11 The Port has been working with National City on the new Aquatic Center at Pepper Park. The City is seeking a building permit. The Port has pledged $850,000 to help pay for the $3.1 million project. National City and the Port recently submitted a grant application for a grant from the California State Parks to obtain the rest of the project's funding. In July, the Board approved leasing the site to the City. 12 The Port recently amended its Capital Development Program to include money for a park area near the Pier 32 marina. About $3 million was designated for design and construction that will include landscaping and more open space. We are also funding two traffic studies. One study will look at traffic routes in and around the terminal to determine ways to minimize the impacts of truck traffic. The other study will result in a traffic management plan for the area. The Port is spending $80,000 on the two projects. We're making progress on some freeway access projects that we've been working with SANDAG and CalTrans on. These include intersection improvements at Civic Center Drive and Bay Marina Drive at Interstate 5. In June, the Board of Port Commissioners approved an additional $2 million to complete the environmental review on these two projects. To date, the Port has contributed more than $7.33 million towards enhancement between the working waterfront and the nearby freeway. 13 ITEM #4 8/17/10 LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS - SB 1039 - CHAIRMAN/CEO CRUZ BUSTAMANTE, BUSTAMANTE AND ASSOCIATES AND PRESIDENT GARY HUSK, HUSK PARTNERS ITEM #5 8/17/10 APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR CITY COUNCIL/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETINGS OF MARCH 30, 2010, AUGUST 3, 2010 AND AUGUST 10, 2010 (CITY CLERK) City of National City Office of the City Clerk 1243 National City Boulevard, National City, CA 91950-4397 Michael R. Dalla, CMC - City Clerk (619) 336-4228 Fax: (619) 336-4229 To: Honorable Mayor and Council From: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk Subject: Ordinance Introduction and Adoption ITEM #6 8/17/10 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." ® Recycled Paper CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7 EM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City approving an amendment increasing the not - to -exceed amount from $100,000 to $125,000 for the on -call agreement between the City and Project Partners to provide professional engineering and land surveying services for various Capital Improvement Projects PREPARED BY: Stephen Manganiello, Traffic Engineer/2/ DEPARTMENT: PHONE: 619-336-4382 APPROVED EXPLANATION: See attached. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: APPROVED. ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: All costs are budgeted through various Capital Improvement Projects ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: Services/Eng. Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Explanation 2. Contract Amendment 3. Original Agreement 4. Resolution Explanation The Engineering Division of Development Services solicited requests for Proposals from professional engineering firms to provide general engineering, construction inspections and project management for various Capital Improvement Projects. Eleven firms responded and the City entered into agreements with 3 firms — Project Partners, Harris & Associates, and Wade & Associates. The agreements will expire in October 2010. Funds have been exhausted for both Project Partners and Harris & Associates. Of the 3 on -call firms, Project Partners has the most expertise in traffic signals and land surveying. Currently, Project Partners is performing a Citywide Traffic Signal Inventory, which is essential to maintain safety standards and improve traffic operations. This project is approximately 60% complete and additional funds are needed for Project Partners to complete the project. Also, since Project Partners has a certified Professional Land Surveyor their services are being utilized to provide parcel map and plan reviews. Approximately 2 months of service are still available under the current contract. If the increase is not approved, the project would experience significant delays, additional training would be needed to get a new consultant familiarized with the project, and additional staff time will be required to facilitate a transition. Staff recommends that the not -to -exceed amount increase by $25,000 to provide as -needed services for various Capital Improvement Projects through the end of the contract period of October 2010. 1 AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AND PROJECT PARTNERS, INC. This Amendment to Agreement is entered into this 17'h day of August, 2010 by and between the City of National City. a municipal corporation (the "CITY"), and Project Partners, Inc. (the "CONSULTANT"). RECITALS A. The CITY and the CONSULTANT entered into an Agreement ("the Agreement") on October 6, 2009, wherein the CONSULTANT agreed to provide on -call general engineering services, construction inspections and project management for various Capital Improvement Projects. B. The parties desire to amend the Agreement to increase the not -to -exceed limit by $25,000. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree that the Agreement entered into on October 6, 2009, through the adoption of City Council Resolution No. 2009-235 shall be amended by increasing the not -to -exceed limit by $25,000. The parties further agree that with the foregoing exception, each and every term and provision of the Agreement dated October 6, 2009, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year first above written. CITY OF NATIONAL CITY PROJECT PARTNERS, INC. By: By: Ron Morrison Kim Mayor Pr' cip.I, CEO By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Claudia G. Silva, Esq. City Attorney Markiva Raissdana Secretary 2 (Page 1 of 28) AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AND PROJECT PARTNERS, INC THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this 6th day of October, 2009, by and between the CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, a municipal corporation (the "CITY"), and Project Partner, Inc, (the CONSULTANT). RECITALS WHEREAS, the CITY desires to employ a CONSULTANT to provide on -call general engineering services, construction inspections and project management services for the City's Capital Improvement projects. WHEREAS, the CITY has determined that the CONSULTANT is qualified by experience and ability to perform the services desired by the CITY, and the CONSULTANT is willing to perform such services. FOLLOWS: NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO DO MUTUALLY AGREE AS 1. ENGAGEMENT OF CONSULTANT. The CITY hereby agrees to engage the CONSULTANT and the CONSULTANT hereby agrees to perform the services hereinafter set forth in accordance with all terms and conditions contained herein. The CONSULTANT represents that all services required hereunder will be performed directly by the CONSULTANT or under direct supervision of the CONSULTANT. 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES. The CONSULTANT will perform services on an on -call basis. The scope of work will be defined for each project in accords with Exhibit A. The CONSULTANT 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 CITY may unilaterally, or upon request from the CONSULTANT, from time to time reduce or increase the Scope of Services to be performed by the CONSULTANT under this Agreement. Upon doing so, the CITY and the CONSULTANT 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 5% from the base amount. 3. PROJECT COORDINATION AND SUPERVISION. Barbara Tipton hereby Is designated as the Project Coordinator for the CITY and will monitor the progress and execution of this Agreement. The CONSULTANT shall assign a single Project Director to provide supervision and have overall responsibility for the progress (Page 2 of 28) and execution of this Agreement for the CONSULTANT. Mr. Kimo Look thereby is designated as the Project Director for the CONSULTANT. 4. COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT. The compensation for the ____CEJNSIULTANT shalt be based on actual work requested and performed, not -to -exceed Z $100,000.Ionthly invoices will be processed for payment and remitted within thirty (30) days from0 .receipt of invoice, provided that work is accomplished consistent with Exhibit "A' as determined by the CITY. The CONSULTANT shall maintain all books. documents, papers, employee time sheets, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to costs incurred 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. ACCEPTABILITY OF WORK. The City shall decide any and all questions which may arise as to the quality or acceptability of the services performed and the manner of performance, the acceptable completion of this Agreement and the amount of compensation due. In the event the CONSULTANT and the City cannot agree to the quality or acceptability of the work, the manner of performance and/or the compensation payable to the CONSULTANT in this Agreement, the City or the CONSULTANT shall give to the other written notice. Within ten (10) business days, the CONSULTANT and the City shall each prepare a report which supports their position and file the same with the other party. The City shall, with reasonable diligence, determine the quality or acceptability of the work, the manner of performance and/or the compensation payable to the CONSULTANT. 6. LENGTH OF AGREEMENT. Work to begin upon receipt of signed agreement from the CITY and terminates on October 6, 2010. 7. DISPOSITION AND OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. The Memoranda, Reports, Maps, Drawings, Plans. Specifications and other documents prepared by the CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT hereby assigns to the CITY and CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT shall. upon request of the CITY. execute any further document(s) necessary to further effectuate this waiver and disclaimer. The CONSULTANT agrees that the CITY may use, reuse, atter, reproduce. modify, assign, transfer, or in any other way, medium or method utilize the CONSULTANT's written work product for the CITY's purposes. and the CONSULTANT expressly waives and disclaims any residual rights granted to it by Civil Code Sections 980 through 989 relating to intellectual property and artistic works. Any modification or reuse by the CITY of documents, drawings or specifications prepared by the CONSULTANT shall relieve the CONSULTANT 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 2 aye Standard Agreement - June 2008 revision (Page 3 of 28) • 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. 8. INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT. 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 CONSULTANT nor the CONSULTANTS 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 CONSULTANT and the CONSULTANT'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 CONSULTANT and its employees. Neither this Agreement nor any interest herein may be assigned by the CONSULTANT without the prior written consent of the CITY. Nothing herein contained is intended to prevent the CONSULTANT from employing or hiring as many employees, or subCONSULTANTs, as the CONSULTANT may deem necessary for the proper and efficient performance of this Agreement. All agreements by CONSULTANT with its SUBCONSULTANT(s) shalt require the subCONSULTANT to adhere to the applicable terms of this Agreement. 9. CONTROL. Neither the CITY nor its officers, agents or employees shall have any control over the .conduct of the CONSULTANT or any of the CONSULTANT's employees except as herein set forth, and the CONSULTANT expressly agrees not to represent that the CONSULTANT or the CONSULTANTs agents, servants, or employees are in any manner agents, servants or employees of the CITY, it being understood that the CONSULTANT, its agents, servants, and employees are as to the CITY wholly Independent CONSULTANTs and that the CONSULTANT's obligations to the CITY are solely such as are prescribed by this Agreement. 10. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAW. The CONSULTANT, 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 CONSULTANT, and each of its subCONSULTANTs, shall obtain and maintain a current City of National City business license prior to and during performance of any work pursuant to this Agreement. 11. LICENSES, PERMITS, ETC. The CONSULTANT represents and covenants that it has all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to practice its profession. The CONSULTANT represents and covenants that the CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT to practice its profession. 12. STANDARD OF CARk. A. The CONSULTANT, 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 CONSULTANT'S trade or profession currently practicing under similar conditions and In similar locations. The CONSULTANT shall take all special precautions necessary to protect the CONSULTANT'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. 3 Gty's Standard Agreement —June 2008 revision Page 4 of 28) B. Unless disclosed in writing prior to the date of this agreement, the CONSULTANT 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 conceming the CONSULTANTs professional performance or the furnishing of materials or services relating thereto. C. The CONSULTANT is responsible for identifying any unique products. treatments, processes or materials whose availability is critical to the success of the project the CONSULTANT has been retained to perform, within the time requirements of the CiTY, or, when no time is specified, then within a commercially reasonable fime. Accordingly, unless the CONSULTANT has notified the CITY otherwise, the CONSULTANT warrants that ail products, materials, processes or treatments identified in the project documents prepared for the CITY are reasonably commercially available. Any failure by the CONSULTANT to use due diligence under this sub -paragraph will render the CONSULTANT 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. 13. NON-DISCRIMINATION PROVISIONS. The CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT 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. 14. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. The CITY may from time to time communicate to the CONSULTANT certain confidential information to enable the CONSULTANT to effectively perform the services to be provided herein. The CONSULTANT shall treat all such information as confidential and shall not disclose any part thereof without the prior written consent of the CITY. The CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT. hereafter disclosed In publicly available sources of information; (ill) is already in the possession of the CONSULTANT without any obligation of confidentiality; or (iv) has been or is hereafter rightfully disclosed to the CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT 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. CONSULTANT shall be liable to CITY for any damages caused by breach of this condition, pursuant to the provisions of Section 14. 4 Citys Standard Agreement — June 2008 revisim (Page 5 of 28) 15. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS. The CONSULTANT agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of National City. its officers and employees, against and from any and all liability, loss, damages to property, injuries to, or death of any person or persons, and all claims, demands, suits, actions, proceedings, reasonable attorneys' fees, and defense costs, of any kind or nature, including workers' compensation claims, of or by anyone whomsoever, resulting from or arising out of the CONSULTANT% negligent performance of this Agreement. 16. WORKERS' COMPENSATION. The CONSULTANT 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 alt 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 attomey'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 CONSULTANT under this Agreement. 17. INSURANCE. The CONSULTANT, at Its sole cost and expense, shall purchase and maintain, and shalt require its SUBCONSULTANTS, 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 covering all bodily injury and property damage incurred during the performance of this Agreement, with a minimum coverage of $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident Such automobile insurance shall include owned, non -owned, and hired vehicles ("any auto"). C. Commercial general liability insurance, with minimum limits of $1,000,000 per occurrence/$2,000,000 aggregate, covering all bodily injury and property damage arising out of its operations under this Agreement. D. Workers' compensation insurance in an amount sufficient to meet statutory requirements covering all of CONSULTANT'S employees and employers' liability insurance with limits of at least $1,000,000 per accident. In addition, the policy shalt be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City. Said endorsement shall be provided prior to commencement of work under this Agreement 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 workers' compensation policies, shall name the CITY and its officers, agents and employees as additional insureds, and separate additional insured endorsements shall be provided. G. If required insurance coverage Is provided on a "claims made" rather than "occurrence` form, the CONSULTANT shall maintain such insurance coverage for three years after expiration of the term (and any extensions) of this Agreement. In addition, the "retro" date must be on or before the date of this Agreement. H. Any aggregate insurance limits must apply solely to this Agreement. 1. 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 VIII 5 Gys Standard Agreement —.hale 2008 revision Page 6 of 28) according to the current Best's Key Rating Guide, or a company equal Mandel stability that is approved by the City's Risk Manager. In the event coverage is provided by non -admitted "surplus lines' carriers, they must be included on the most recent California List of Eligible Surplus Lines Insurers (LESLI list) and otherwise meet rating requirements. 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 CONSULTANT 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_ K. All deductibles and self -insured retentions in excess of $10,000 must be disclosed to and approved by the CITY. 18. 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 attomey'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. Attomey's fees to the prevailing party if other than the CITY shall, in addition, be limited to the amount of attomey's fees incurred by the CITY in Its prosecution or defense of the action, irrespective of the actual amount of attorneys fees incurred by the prevailing party. 19. 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, Califomia, 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 bo 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. 20. TERMINATION. A. This Agreement may be terminated with or without cause by the CITY. Termination without cause shall be effective only upon 60-days written notice to the CONSULTANT. During said 60-day period the CONSULTANT shall perform all services in accordance with this Agreement. B. This Agreement may also he terminated immediately by the CITY for cause in the event of a material breach of this Agreement, misrepresentation by the CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT es provided for herein. 6 8 lily's Siandeal Agreement — Jima 2008 revision i (Page 7 of 28) D. in the event of termination, all finished or unfinished Memoranda Reports, Maps, Drawings, Plans, Specifications and other documents prepared by the CONSULTANT, whether paper or electronic, shall immediately become the property of and be delivered to the CITY, and the CONSULTANT 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 Tess any damages caused the CITY by the CONSULTANTs 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 CONSULTANT; (2) a reorganization of the CONSULTANT for the benefit of creditors; or (3) a business reorganization, change in business name or change in business status of the CONSULTANT. 21. 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 business day following its deposit in such ovemight mail facility, (ili) 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 speed above shall be directed to the following persons: To CITY: To CONSULTANT: City of National City Maryam Babaki, Director of Development Services 1243 National City Blvd National City, CA 91950 Project Partners Attn: Mr. Kinno Look 18301 Von Kerman Avenue, Suite 340 Irvine, Ca 92612 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. 22. CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND POLITICAL REFORM ACT OBLIGATIONS. During the term of this Agreement, the CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT also agrees not to specify any product, treatment, 7 Glyn Standard Agreement —June 2008 revision (Page 8 of 28) process or material for the project in which the CONSULTANT has a material financial interest, either direct or indirect, without first notifying the CITY of that fact. The CONSULTANT shall at all times comply with the terms of the Political Reform Act and the National City Conflict of Interest Code. The CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT has a financial interest as defined in Government Code Section 87103. The CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT shall comply with all of the reporting requirements of the Political Reform Act and the National City Conflict of Interest Code. Spedflcally, the CONSULTANT shall file a Statement of Economic Interests with the City Clerk of the City of National City in a timely manner on forms which the CONSULTANT shall obtain from the City Clerk. The CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT. 23. 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. L Entire Agreement. This Agreement supersedes any prior agreements, 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. 8 Citys Standard Agreement - June 2008 revla on 10 (Page 9 of 28) 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, (ili) 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 party's counsel and advisors have reviewed this Agreement, (v) each party has agreed to enter into this Agreement following such review and the rendering of such advice, 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 By Ron Morrison, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. t=iser, III City Attorney PROJECT PARTNERS, INC (Corporation - signatures of two corporate officers) (Partnership - one signature) (Sole proprietorship - . : signa ) By: (Na K WC) Lv as !C__ (Print) A-f� (Title) By: Il� 9 (Name) IvIAP-Kiss7 )AIR (Print) seGre,f-may (Title) Ciiys Standard ngreemenl - June 2008 revision 11 Page 10 of 23) EXHIBIT "A` The City will request various engineering services for the duration of this agreement. For each request, Consultant shall submit a cost proposal for the particular project/service consistent with hourly rates provided in Consultants response to the Citys initial Request for Proposal for On -Call Engineering Services. The City reserves the right to Interview and approve individuals selected from your firm to provide services to the City. 12 (Page 11 of 28) 1111 Project Partners EXHIBIT "A" National City Din Daneshfar, P_E. 8650 California Avenue National City, CA 91950 'The Right Staff at the Right Time and Price" www.projectpartners.com August 27, 2009 Re- Proposal for On -Call Professional Engineering, Financing, Surveying, Design, Project/Construction Management and Inspection Services Dear Mr Daneshfar Thank you for including Project Partners in the City of National City's (City) selection process for On -Call Professional Services. As previously mentioned in our August 4th 2009 Statement of Qualification documents, Project Partners is uniquely qualified, experienced and highly cost effective in providing Southern California Municipalities with interim professional resources. Pursuant to the City's — Request for Proposal dated 08/20/2009; we are pleased to provide you with the additional information requested; pertinent staff recommendations and of course, the most cost effective billing rates for professional caliber staff resources. It is our understanding that via this RFP that there are now 5 position classifications: a. Finance Analyst or Planner b Engineering Surveyor c_ Civil Engineer/Architect (design staff) d Project/Construction Manager e_ Engineering Field inspector Many of the Project Partners augmented staff recommendations contained herein are highly capable individuals that possess the'experience and know-how to perform within multiple position classifications, thereby providing maximum resource flexibility to the City. In addition, as a new client of Project Partners, the city qualifies for the 'first Week on Us" program (see details herein). Again I would like to thank you for considering the services of Project Partners; should you have any questions or desire additional information, please do not hesitate to call at any time. I will serve as one of your primary contacts. Sincerely, Doug Johnson Director of Client and Career Services 1E3301 Von Kaman Avenue Suite 340 Irvine. CA 92612 phone 949.852.9300 Fax 949.852.9322 13 'age 12 of 28) Excellent construction and technical resources - Project Partners has an excellent internal staff and an extensive database of inspectors, schedulers, civil engineers, oontract administrators, and other public works technical professionals. This multiple resource pool; built from years of meeting professionals in the field and working on Public 1Nbrks projects, provides a reliable source of professional talent. 2.2 Task Preformed by Our Staff Tasks and services our staff have preformed while assigned to public sector technical departments include: Public Sector Project Management • Prepare specifications, RFQs and RFPs for equipment and/or construction and installation of equipment consistent with local standards. • Assist in evaluation of proposals and responses to specifications and RFPs. • Compile and/or prepare technical documentation, as -built drawings, equipment lists, manuals, and training materials, etc_ • Provide general administrative support for engineering projects. • Manage pfoject procurement processes, construction and/or installation of specific projects or tasks. • Communicate with other local, state, and federal regulatory agencies. Engineering Analysis • Prepare conceptual and/or prelirninary designs_ • Conduct site evaluation, layouts, and selection. • Develop and analyze cost and schedule estimates. • Perform design reviews and construction monitoring. • Provide technical support of testing and commissioning. Project Partners Uualilications and Experience for National City RIP Section 2 Page 3 14 (Page 13 of 28) • Conduct environmental analysis, studies, and reports_ • Assist staff with reviews of engineering reports -and documents. • Preparation of Grants to assist fulfillment of proj6dt funding Construction Contract Administration Construction Contract Administration duties include: • Tracking of the projects schedule and budget • Receiving and processing of change orders • Assisting with change order negotiations • Project coordination • Correspondence, • Processing of progress payments Construction Inspection • Documenting; on a daily basis, events and progress made by awarded construction contractor(s) • Documentation of change orders • Documentation potential extra work items needed for successful construction completion • General public coordination • Coordination with other agencies affected by the construction. - 2.3 Professional Society Affiliations Project Partners has extensive associations with almost every civil engineering professional society in Southern California. We have been assisting these professional societies with advertising and managing professional events for over a decade. Key Benefits of our Professional Society Inv vement Due to Project Partners involvement with our in stries professional organizations, we know the civil engineering community better than any other organization. And because of it, Project Partners has a proven track record of being able Project Partners Qualifications and Experience for National City RFP Section 2 Page 4 15 Page 14 of 28) &CORD CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE PRODUCER D:'a1ey, Renton a Associates 199 South Los Robles Ave. Suite, 540 Pasadena CA 91 101 INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE DAaFmWOODOR 8/25/2009 t.9nP RA.Travele s Property Casualty Co of Ameri Project Partners 1NSURERR Travelers IndemnityCo:Coof Connecticut 18301 Von Karman 'NSW-RC:American Automobile j[ts. 'Co. - _ Suite 340 i.56REIiOU.S. Specialty Insurance Company Lrvine CA 92612 iN$URERE THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY ANO CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMENO, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. COVERAGES THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE SEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR TIIE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. i0THITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OP. CONI:TION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS :'ERTLPICATE MAY 3E ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE. INSURANCE AC OIUED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SOB.IELT TO AIL TICE OF SUED POLICIES- AC RECATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE 3EEN REDUCED 9Y PAID CLAIMS. _ _ TERNS. EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS .—..- POLICY IE1EC rive POLICY EXPIRATIOM1 FV SR _�_- I I POLICY NUMRER (1 aMtlls L , I; TYPE OF wwruxcE 4/16/2010 'EACn0CCURREMC2 11.,000,000 A GENERALLIANWrY Xi C.ONG MERAL GENERAL Ut Tit Y .�MEO 6809361L110 4/18/2009 _FIRE t3333.GC4 , FXP 1Any Gan INN Yam 1(An,00, s00C1T1S0 0, -_.._ 510,_000_ ' _�CLAMS M:.D� iX IOC -CUR _-_I - PERSONANLNA1*iISAIO3FGr.TE 2NINAIR S21,000.000. 000 OOG _ - PRODlX:rS • CDAwA7P AGO 12 000 000 lCLTAPPLIES PER GE1Gl AGGR ; PDLCY rX E LIMIT 'PRO I i Lm- g AU(0MOR1_I tIARILITY - 9A9361L484 4/18/2009 4/18/2010 COMRINED SINGLE LIUI 11, OOU, OHO ANYAvrc _, ALL OMINLO AUTOS 000NA INJURY (Prr P,rsanl 1 $G.* oui. O AUTOS MIRED AVID. ROUAY INJURY (Per a,YVIeN1 i LtON9MMFD AUTOS _— PROPER riIMMAGE 3 _i _. -_._.. - (Per actiUenV CyP4Cf LY1RIL1 (Y AU(0 ONLY EA ACCIOENI Uf11ER ELAN EA wc:C 1 3 1` j ANYA:10 1 TUIO ONLY'. ACAI S EAC-IOGCLIRREMCE 1 EXCESS UABAJ lY _ AGOIECATE OCCUR . J CLTRFS Maly - 1 1 1 _4 DEOUGIIa1E 1 RE (ENDO. 1 5/1/2009 I YM; SIPTU- � Oln 5/ 1 /2010 X 'rORYnLMDS: Fq C wo°RERSCOMPEHSARON ANo EMPLOYERS UARHIPY 14'LP80972232 E L_EACMACCIOENL s1,000,000 Et. DISEASE -[A EMPLOYEE 51 000, 000 El UiSFI.SF- POLICY LIMN I S1 , 000, 0Go 0 OTHER USO91O7StO5 -4/18/2009 Pro[. 1ona1 1..1.+I21 lily 4/16/2010 31,000,000 Per Claim 31,000,1700 Ann1 Ag9 regare UEscmP NUN OF OPERA IRLISILOCA IIONSNEINCLESIE%ELUSIONS ADDED RY ENDORSEMEN ttseLLIAL PAM/MIONS CERTIFICATE HOLDER I AODII1ONAL INSURED: INSURER LETTER. City of Nac ienai City ALtn N_ Din Daneshfar, P.E 1243 National City Olvd. National City CA 9195E av Not Ice SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES d6 CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING INSURED. TO WAIL 10 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO ='HE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAKED TO THE LEFT. AUDIwUI&U REPDESENrf II ACORD 25-S (7/97) ACORD CORPORATION 1938 16 (Page 15 of 28) �w 0 a- Project Partners City of National City Din Daneshfar, P.E. 8650 California Avenue National City, CA 91950 'The Right Staff at the Right Trine arrd t'we- www. proiectp artners. corn September 24, 2009 Re: Scope of Work for On -Call Professional Engineering, Financing, Surveying, Design, Project/Construction Management and Inspection Services Dear Mr. Daneshfar Per your request, please find in the following pages the Project Partners Scope of Work and Billing Rates for services to be provided under the City of National City On -Call Professional Engineering, Financing, Surveying, Project/Construction Management and Inspections Services contract. Again 1 would like to thank you for considering the services of Project Partners; should you have any questions or desire additional information, please do not hesitate to call at any time. I will serve as one of your primary contacts. Sincerely, Doug Johnson Director of Client and Career Services !lrofre 949.852.9300 +a., 949 17 Page 16 of 28) Page 1 Scope of Work Scope of Work and services to be preformed by our staff for the City of National City will include: Public Sector Project Management • Prepare specifications, RFQs and RFPs for equipment and/or construction and installation of equipment consistent with local standards. • Assist in evaluation of proposals and responses to specifications and RFPs. • Compile and/or prepare technical documentation, as -built drawings, equipment lists, manuals, and training materials, etc. • Provide general administrative support for engineering projects_ • Manage project procurement processes, construction and/or installation of specific projects or tasks. • Communicate with other local, state, and federal regulatory agencies. Engineering Analysis • Prepare conceptual and/or preliminary designs. • Conduct site evaluation, layouts, and selection. • Develop and analyze cost and schedule estimates. • Perform design reviews and construction monitoring. • Provide technical support of testing and commissioning. • Conduct environmental analysis, studies, and reports. • Assist staff with reviews of engineering reports and documents_ 18 (Page 17 of 28) Page 2 • Preparation of Grants to assist fulfillment of project funding Construction Contract Administration Construction Contract Administration duties include: • Tracking of the project's schedule and budget • Receiving and processing of change orders • Assisting with change order negotiations • Project coordination • Correspondence, • Processing of progress payments Construction Inspection • Documenting; on a daily basis, events and progress made by awarded construction oontractor(s) • Documentation of change orders • Documentation potential extra work items needed for successful construction completion • General public coordination • Coordination with other agencies affected by the construction. 19 Page 18 of 28) Page 3 Project Partners' Billing Rate Standard Billing Rate for 2009 Engineering Title Bill Rates Engineering Entry Level Engineer $ 52.50 Assistant Engineer $ 75.00 Associate Engineer $ 62.50 Staff Engineer $ 67.50 Project Management Project Engineer $ 72.00 Associate Project Manager $ 81.75 Project Manager $ 91.50 Senior Project Manager 1 $ 98.00 Senior Project Manager 11 $ 104.25 Senior Project Manager III $ 114.00 Specialist Engineering Specialist $130.00 Engineering Specialist $143.00 Engineering Specialist $156.00 Program Management Program Manager I $ 132.00 Program Manager 11 $ 136.75 Program Manager III $ 145.00 Inspectors Associate Inspector $ 46.25 Inspector $ 55.75 Senior Inspector I $ 72.25 Senior Inspector 11 $ 86.50 Senior Inspector III $ 107.50 Engineering Tech/CAD/GIS Entry Level Engineering Tech $ 46.25 Engineering Tech $ 55.75 Associate Tech $ 62.50 Senior Engineering Tech $ 81.75 20 Page 19 of 28) ' AGORD, CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE(MMIb 9/24/2009 OF INFORMATION CERTIFICATE EXTEND OR POLICIES BELOW. BOOUCER uealey, Renton & Associates 199 South Los Robles Ave. Suite: 540 Pasadena CA 91101 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE INs-uIEo Project Partners 18301 Von Karman Suite 340 Irvine CA 92612 1 INSURER A. Travelers Property Casualty Co of Ameri INSURER 9:Travelers IndelRnity Co. of Connecticut INSURER C American Automobile Ins, Co Nsusca -U.S. Specialty Insurance Company INSURER E THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER 000UMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSrONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. AGGREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS- INSR 1 TR TYPE OF INSURANCE POOCY NUMBER POUCY EFFECTNE BATF (MNEBBAVYl POUCY EXPIRATION DATE (1&MRXO/YYl LO WTS A GENERALUABIL/TY X COMMERCIAL GENERAL UABRNY 6809361L110 4/18/2009 4/18/2010 EACHOCCURRENCE $l 000 000 FIRE DAMAGE (Any one Tire) 31,000,000 CLAIMS MACE LI (YY]IR MEO EXP (My one penal) $10,000 GEN'L PERSONAL it ADV INJURY 31 D00.000 GENERAL AGGREGATE 323100 000 AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER POUCY IA I JF Q n LOC PRODUCTS - COMPIDP AGG 32,000 (NV 8 AUTOMOBREOABIUTY "— „{ }{ ANYAurD ALL OWNED AUTOS SCHEOIAED AUTOS nIRLDAUT05 N NGOMMED AUTOS DA9361L484 4/18/2009 4/18/2010 ( 4jsNCLEIIMir s1.,000,000 OOORYINJURY ler pelson) BOOBY PUURY R'er acdaen0 PROPERTYDAMAGE (Par aomee4 _ GARAGELIABIUTY - AUTOONLY-EA ACCIDENT S OTHERTNAN EAACC S AUTO ONLY: AGG $ ERCCESS _I LMBOIIY CUR ( I CLAIMS MADE ENCH OCCURRENCE 5 AGGREGATE S S S $ C WORKERSCOMPENLSATIONAND EMPLOYERTUABd1TY WZP80972232 5/1/2009 5/1/2010 WC SUTU- IOrH X ioHYulANNI IFR Et EACHACr.nFNT 51, 000, 000 EL DISEASE -EA EMPLOYEE S 1 , 000 , 000 Et. OMFASF-PODC.lmal $1.000, 000 Per Claim Anni Aggregate D OTHER Professional Liability US091075105 4/18/2009 4/18/2010 31,000,900 $1,000,00o DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONSiLOCAMONSNEHICLESXE (EtUSlONS ADOEB BY ENUORSEMI31DSPECUL PROYISION3 Re: On -Call Professional Engineering, Financing, Surveying, Design, Project / Construction Management and Inspection. -- City of National City, its elected officials, officers, agents, and employees are named as additional insured as respects general and hired/non-owned auto liability for claims arising from the operations of the named insured as required by written contract. CERTIFICATE HOLDER 1 1 ADDITIONAL INSURED; INSURER LETTER, City of National City c/o City Attorney's office 1243 National City Blvd. National City CA 91950-4301 CANCELLATION10 Dav Notice for Non-Paymnt of Prem SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING INSURER TO MAIL 30 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT. AUTHORILEO RFPRESEMAi1yA . ACORD 25-S (7197) OACORD CORPORATION 1988 21 (Page 20 of 28) POLICY NUMBER: 6809361L110 COMMERICAL GENERAL LIABILITY ISSUE DATE:9/24/2009 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. ADDITIONAL INSURED (ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS) This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART SCHEDULE NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ORGANIZATIONS): City of National City c/o City Attorney's Office 1243 National City Blvd. National City CA 91950-4301 PROJECT/LOCATION OF COVERED OPERATIONS: Re: On -Call Professional Engineering, Financing, Surveying, Design, Project / Construction Management and Inspection -- City of National City, its elected officials, officers, agents, and employees PROVISIONS A The following is added to WHO IS AN INSURED (Section II): The person or organization shown in the Sched- ule above is an additional insured on this Cover- age Part, but only with respect to liability for bod- ily injury", 'property damage or 'personal injury caused, in whole or in part, by your acts or omis - sions or the acts or omissions of those acting on your behalf. a. In the performance of your ongoing oper- ations; b. In connection with premises owned by or rented to you; or C_ ki connection with your work and included within the "products -completed operations hazard Such person or organization does not qualify as an additional insured for "bodily Injury% "property damage' or "personal injury for which that person or organization has assumed liability in a contract or agreement. CGD3820907 The insurance provided to such additional insured is limited as follows: d. This insurance does not apply to the render- ing of or failure to render any "professional services'. e. The limits of insurance afforded to the addi- tional insured shall be the limits which you agreed in that 'contract or agreement requir- ing insurance to provide for that additional insured, or the limits shown in the Declarations for this Coverage Part. whichever are less. This endorsement does not increase the limits of insurance stated in the LIMITS OF INSURANCE (Section Ill) for this Coverage ParL B. The following is added to Paragraph a. of 4. Other Insurance in COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CONDITIONS (Section IV): However, if you specifically agree in a contract or agreement requiring insurance that, fur the addi- tional insured shown h the Schedule, the insur- ance provided to that additional insured under this 02007 The Travelers Companies. Inc. Includes Oro copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office Inc., with its permission Page 22 (Page 21 of 28) COMMERICAL GENERAL LIABILITY Coverage Part must apply on a primary basis, or a primary and non-contributory basis, this insurance is primary to other insurance that is available to such additional insured which covers such additional insured as a named insured, and we will not share with the other insurance, provided that: (1) The "bodily injury or "property damage" for which coverage is sought occurs; and (2) The "personal injury" for which coverage is sought arises out of an offense committed; after you have entered into that "contract or agreement requiring insurance' for such additional insured. But this insurance still is excess over valid and collectible other insurance, whether primary, excess, contingent or on any other basis, that is available to the additional insured when the additional insured is also an additional insured under any other insurance_ C_ The following is added to Paragraph 8. Transfer Of Rights Of Recovery Against Others To Us in COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CONDITIONS (Section IV): We waive any rights of recovery we may have against the additional insured shown in the Schedule above because of payments we make for "bodily injury", "property damage" or "personal CG D3 82 09 07 injury arising out of "your work" on or for the project, or at the location, shown in the Schedule above, performed by you, or on your behalf, under a "contract or agreement requiring insurance" with that additional insured. We waive these rights only where you have agreed to do so as part of the "contract or agreement requiring insurance" with that additional insured entered into by you before, and in effect when, the 'bodily injury" or "property damage" occurs, or the "personal injury offense is committed. D. The following definition is added to DEFINITIONS (Section V): "Contract or agreement requiring insurance" means that part of any contract or agreement under which you are required to include the person or organization shown in the Schedule as an additional insured on this Coverage Part, provided that the "bodily injury" and 'property damage" occurs, and the "personal injury is caused by an offense committed: a. After you have entered into that contract or agreement; b. While that part of the contract or agreement Is in effect; and c. Before the end of the policy period. 02007 The Travelers Companies, Inc. Includes the copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office Inc., with Its permission Page 2 23 ;Page 22 of 26) POLICY #: BA9361L484 COMMERCIAL AUTO CA 20 48 02 99 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. DESIGNATED INSURED This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: BUSINESS AUTO COVERAGE FORM GARAGE COVERAGE FORM MOTOR CARRIER COVERAGE FORM TRUCKERS COVERAGE FORM With respect to coverage provided by this endorsement, the provisions ofthe Coverage Form apply unless modi- fied by this endorsement. This endorsement identifies person(s) or organization(s) who are "insureds" under the Who Is An Insured Provi- sion of the Coverage Form_ This endorsement does not alter coverage provided in the Coverage Form. This endorsement changes the policy effective on the inception date of the policy unless another date is indicated below_ Endorsement Effective: 9/24 J2009 Countteer^rsiigned By: ...? (Authorized Representative) Insured: Project Partners SCHEDULE Name of Person(s) or Organization(s): Re: On -Call Professional Engineering, Financing, Surveying, Design, Project / Construction Management and Inspection -- City of National City, its elected officials, officers, agents, and employees (If no entry appears above, information required to complete this endorsement will be shown in the Declarations as applicable to the endorsement.) Each person or organization shown in the Schedule is an "insured" for Liability Coverage, but only to the extent that person or organization qualifies as an "insured" under the Who Is An Insured Provision contained in Section It of the Coverage Form. CA 20 48 02 99 . Copyright, Insurance Services Office, Inc„ 1998 24 (Page 23 of 28) Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability Insurance Policy Waiver of Our Right to Recover From Others Endorsement - California WC 04 03 06 If the following information is not complete, refer to the appropriate Schedule attached to the policy. Insured:Project Partners Producer Dcalcy, Renton & Associates Policy Number WZP80972232 Effective Date 9/24/2009 Schedule Person or Organization City of National City c/o City Attorney's Office 1243 National City Blvd. National City CA 91950-4301 Additional Premium % We have the right to recover our payments from any- one liable for an injury- covered by this policy. We will not enforce our right against the person or organization named in the Schedule_ (This agreement applies only to the extent that you perform work under a written contract that requires you to obtain this agreement from us.) Authorized Representative WC040306 Job Description Re: On -Call Professional Engineering, Financing, Surveying, Design, Project / Construction Management and Inspection City of National City, its elected officials, officers, agents, and employees You mist maintain payroll records accurately segre- gating the remuneration of your employees while en- gaged in the work described in the Schedule_ The additional premium for this endorsement shall be the percentage, as shown in the Schedule applicable to this endorsement, of the California workers' compensation premium otherwise due on such remuneration. 25 Page 24 of 28) COMMERCIAL AUTO THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY BLANKET WAIVER OF SUBROGATION This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: BUSINESS AUTO COVERAGE FORM GARAGE COVERAGE FORM MOTOR CARRIER COVERAGE FORM TRUCKERS COVERAGE FORM With respect to coverage provided by this endorsement, the provisions of the Coverage Form apply unless modified by the endorsement Paragraph 5_ Transfer of Right Of Recovery Against Others To Us of the CONDITIONS section is replaced by the following- 5. Transfer Of Rights Of Recovery Against Others To Us We waive any right of recovery we may have against any person or organization to the extent CA T3 40 08 08 required of you by a written contract executed prior to any 'accident" or "loss", provided that the "accident" or loss' ariees out of the operations contemplated by such contract The waiver applies only to the person or organization designated in such contract. ©2008 The Travelers Companies, Inc. 1 26 RESOLUTION NO. 2010 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH PROJECT PARTNERS, INC., INCREASING THE NOT -TO -EXCEED AMOUNT FROM $100,000 TO $125,000 TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING AND LAND SURVEYING SERVICES FOR VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS WHEREAS, on October 6, 2009, the City Council adopted Resolution 2009-235, approving an agreement with Project Partners, Inc., in the not -to -exceed amount of $100,000 for a one year period to provide on -call Professional Engineering Financing, Surveying, Project/Construction Management, and Inspection Services for Various Capital Improvement Projects; and WHEREAS, an additional $25,000 is required for Project Partners to complete a ' Citywide Traffic Signal Inventory, which is essential to maintain safety standards and improve traffic operations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of National City that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute an Amendment to Agreement between the City of National City and Project Partners, Inc., in the not -to -exceed amount of $25,000 to provide on -call Professional Engineering Financing, Surveying, Project/Construction Management, and Inspection Services for Various Capital Improvement Project. Said Amendment to Agreement is on file in the office of the City Clerk. PASSED and ADOPTED this 17th day of August, 2010. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Claudia G. Silva, Esq. City Attorney CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8 .. EM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the filing of a Federal TIGER II Discretionary Grant application requesting $10 million for construction of the Plaza Boulevard Widening Project, with a local match of $2.5 million funded through Prop A, Gas Tax, Transportation Impact Fee Program, Capital Outlay Fund and Rule 20A Fund for Utility Undergrounding PREPARED BY: Stephen Manganiello, Traffic Engineer/gig' PHONE: 619-336-4382 EXPLANATION: See attached. DEPARTMENT: Develoirvices/ APPROVED BY. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: APPROVED: i Finance ACCOUNT NO. TIGER II Grant - $10 million APPROVED: V MIS 103-409-500-598-6569 (Capital Outlay) - $1 million; 307-409-500-598-6569 (Prop A) - $200,000; 109-409-500-598- 6035 (Gas Tax) - $200,000; 326-409-500-598-6569 (Transportation Impact Fee) - $600,000; Rule 20A - $500,000 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Explanation 2. Resolution Explanation The FY 2010 Appropriations Act, signed by the President on December 16, 2009, appropriated $600 million to be awarded by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) for National Infrastructure Investments, referred to as TIGER II (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) Discretionary Grant program. Key project selection criteria include, for example, job creation and economic stimulus, regional mobility, environmental sustainability and safety. As a regionally significant arterial, the widening of Plaza Boulevard from 4 lanes to 6 lanes between Highland Avenue and Euclid Avenue will better facilitate vehicular traffic, goods movements, enhanced transit service including connectivity to a future Bus Rapid Transit Station on 1-805 at Plaza Boulevard, transit -oriented development to improve walkability and reduce green house gas emissions, and safety enhancements through the construction of raised medians for access control (i.e. reduction in collisions involving conflicting left -turns with thru traffic). Staff is requesting authorization to file an application for the Federal TIGER II Discretionary Grant in the amount of $10 million for construction of the Plaza Boulevard Widening Project. The grant requires a minimum 20% local match, which equals $2.5 million. Funding is available in the following accounts: Capital Outlay - $1 million; Prop A - $200,000; Gas Tax - $200,000; Transportation Impact Fee Program - $600,000; and Rule 20A Fund for Utility Undergrounding - $500,000. The total estimated project cost for construction is $12.5 million, which includes reconstruction of the 1-805 bridge structure and interchange at Plaza Boulevard in preparation for the 1-805 Managed Lanes South Corridor Mobility Project. Project environmental and final design are complete, making this a "shovel - ready" project. Staff is requesting City Council support for the project, filing of the TIGER II grant application in the amount of $10 million, and commitment of $2.5 million (20%) in local matching funds as presented above. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT GENERATING ECONOMIC RECOVER (TIGER II) DISCRETIONARY GRANT APPLICATION REQUESTING $10 MILLION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE PLAZA BOULEVARD WIDENING PROJECT WHEREAS, as a regionally significant arterial, the widening of Plaza Boulevard from four lanes to six lanes between Highland Avenue and Euclid Avenue will better facilitate vehicular traffic; the movement of goods; enhance transit service, including connectivity to a future bus rapid transit station on Interstate 805 at Plaza Boulevard; provide transit -oriented development to improve walkability; reduce green house gas emissions; and provide safety enhancements through the construction of raised medians for access control; and WHEREAS, the Fiscal Year Appropriations Act appropriated $600 Million to be awarded by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) for National Infrastructure Investments, referred to as TIGER II Discretionary Grant program; and WHEREAS, the Development Services Division desires to file an application for the Federal TIGER II Discretionary Grant in the amount of $10 Million for construction of the Plaza Boulevard Street Widening Project; and WHEREAS, the grant requires the City to commit to providing 20% in matching funds, in the amount of $2.5 Million. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City hereby authorizes the filing of a Federal Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recover (TIGER II) Discretionary Grant Application requesting $10 million for construction of the Plaza Boulevard Widening Project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council agrees to commit 20% matching funds, in the amount of $2.5 Million as required for said Project. PASSED and ADOPTED this 17th day of August, 2010. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk Claudia G. Silva, Esq. City Attorney CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9 EM TITLE: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City waiving the bid process and authorizing a California Multiple Award Schedules (CMAS) purchase for synthetic turf and permanent striping material/product from Fieldturf USA, Inc. in the amount of $328,309.00 for the El Toyon Soccer Field Project, Specification Number 07-01. (Funded through Parks and Recreation Capital Outlay Funds) PREPARED BY: Kenneth Fernandez PHONE: 336-4388 EXPLANATION: DEPARTMENT: Development Services/ Engineer"•g 1' '.ion APPROVED B Please see attached explanation. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: APPROVED: afj Finance ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: MIS • Funds in the amount of $328,309.00 are available in expenditure account number 115-409-500-598-4076. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests and recommends the adoption of the resolution. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: 1. Explanation 2. CMAS Offer/Quote 3. Resolution Spec 07-01 CMAS EXPLANATION According to the City of National City's Purchasing Ordinances 1480 and 1903, a formal bidding procedure is generally required when City purchases at or above $15,000.00 are needed. In the case of the El Toyon Soccer Field Project, Specification Number 07-01, a resolution awarding a contract for construction services to the apparent lowest bidder is being processed independently. However, the artificial turf and its associated permanent striping were excluded from the contractors bid and held separately to get more competitive pricing and give the City a better opportunity in selecting a historically proven type of artificial turf that can withstand the anticipated demands of athletic usage with minimal maintenance. In compliance with National City's purchasing ordinances, Engineering has researched and found that the California Multiple Awards Schedule of the State of California, Department of General Services, Procurement Division (CMAS) is a qualified and pre -approved alternative from formally bidding or gathering three competitive quotes for public purchases of materials, equipments, or services. It is requested that Council waive the formal bidding requirements as allowed in Chapter 2.60.260 of the Municipal Code, and award the contract to Fieldturf USA, Inc. for the following reasons: 1) We recommend this product from said manufacturer because they meet the City's need for a durable synthetic field turf for soccer/football league and recreational types of play. 2) Purchasing the materials via a CMAS contract is allowed and an accepted form of public purchase in the State of California. CMAS contracts are not established through a competitive bid process. As a result, all pricing, products and/or services offered must have been previously bid and awarded on a Federal General Services Administration (GSA) schedule, i.e. "piggybacking". The total cost of the product is $328,309.00. This amount includes the materials, permanent striping, taxes, bonding, two years service, and delivery charges and is in stock and available for purchase. However, the actual purchase of the materials is anticipated for November 2010. In summary, the purpose of this resolution is to waive the bid process and approve the procurement of the synthetic turf and associated permanent striping at the not -to -exceed cost of $328,309.00 via CMAS. 1 .4.1r1TaL f U NJ 1 T E E 1 N S P O R T" Between: City of National City August 10th, 2010 CMAS OFFER/QUOTE Site: El Toyon Park And: FieldTurf USA, Inc. 8088 Montview Montreal TMR, Quebec H4P 2L7 To supply and install FieldTurf, product code FTOMPRO-1S Duraspine Monofilament a. Field size: 68,400 square feet. b. To supply and install our 2-1/2" thick outdoor FieldTurf Duraspine PRO rnonofilament grass with our special soft fiber for football, soccer to be installed on a base prepared according to the architect's specifications. c. All of the necessary infill ingredients will be supplied by FieldTurf. d. The panel seams will be sewn together by hand onsite. e. The color of the field will be all green. f. The soccer lines will be permanent as specified. A) BASE CONDITIONS I. FieldTurf USA, Inc.. will provide the specifications for the field installation. 2_ The base is to be completely prepared prior to the arrival of FieldTurf s installation crew. 3. A FieldTurf representative will occasionally he on site during the base construction process. B) INSTALLATION CONDITIONS 1. Precise measurement of the field is required to properly manufacture the rolls of grass_ This contract is based upon dimensions provided by Wade and Associates; final installation dimensions may vary based upon detailed plans. 2. FieldTurf's installation crew is to have uninterrupted access to the field during the installation period. 3. Field of play lines will be located and marked by stakes by the GC prior to installation and a drawing of the layout of the lines is to be provided. 4. Any underground wiring for the lighting system or any other underground use must be installed prior to our installation. 5. No unauthorized access to the field, (i. e. play, traffic, etc.), will be allowed prior to the signing of the Certificate of Completion. No vehicles are to circulate on the field once the installation is ready to begin. 6. Any strike or act of God that affects the delivery or the installation shall not be the responsibility of FieldTurf. 7. Any resulting increased costs incurred shall be borne by the Purchaser. 8. The exact address for the delivery of materials and installation of FieldTurf is the site address unless stated otherwise. 9. When the site is readied for a pre -installation walk through, another measurement will be taken and the size of the field to be installed will be altered accordingly. 2 GUARANTEE IS 8 YEARS FOR PREMATURE WEAR AND 8 YEARS FOR UV DEGRADATION. WARRANTY IS 3RD PARTY INSURED & PREPAID FOR THE 8 YEARS [REGULAR PRICING Regular cost per square tbot: Regular Price Sub -Total Permanent Markings: Tax on Material (8.75%) Bonding (1.25%) REGULAR PRICE TOTAL ICMAS PRICING $5.10 $355,680.00 $12,000 $24,218 $4,899 $396,797.00 CMAS cost per square foot: $4.35 (special discount) El Toyon Sub -Total $297,540.00 Permanent Markings: Soccer lines $6,000 Tax on Material (9.75%) $20,716 Bonding (1.25%) $4,053 FieldCare Service / 2 years no charge ($12,000 value) EL TOYON CMAS PRICE TOTAL $328,309.00 CMAS SAVINGS vs REGULAR PRICE <$68,488.00> * (*does not include general contractor mark-up) This contract excludes any design costs, base/drainage system installation costs, other unforeseen costs. C) PAYMENT CONDITIONS: 1. This contract is being offered in US Dollars. 2. Field production and installation crew scheduling will commence upon receipt of accurate drawings, electronic artwork, specifications and a bona fide Purchase Order from the customer. 3. Delivery time of materials is approximately 45 days. 4. FieldTurf will require weekly written updates on the progress of the base/drainage system installation for the last six weeks prior to FieldTurf installation work commencement, in order to properly schedule for this installation_ 5. A secure, paved staging area of the size of .12 of the square footage of the project will be required for FieldTurf installation crews, within 300' of the work site. 6. Retention shall be 10% of contract until `Certificate of Completion' is signed by owner. 7. CMAS terms are 100% of contract 45 days after `Certificate of Completion is signed by owner. 8. Progress payments may be requested in the event of work stoppage, due to atmospheric conditions. 9. All CMAS General Provisions apply. 10. All payments should be sent to: 3 FieldTurf USA, Inc. 8088 Montview Montreal TMR, Quebec Canada H4P 2L7 (800) 724-2969 This offer is valid through December 15th, 2010. We hereby accept the conditions of this offer .stipulated herein. Signed this of 2010. Materials remain the property of 1 .144 USA, Inc., until fully paid. Accepted by: For: Accepted by: For: t-"W sb USA, Inc. (Must be signed by a FieldTurf USA, Inc. Director) Materials remain the property of�� USA, Inc. until fully paid. Purchase orders should be sent to: ""0-14 USA, Inc. Attention: Ms. Susy Matos 8088 Montview Montreal, TMR, Canada H4P 2L7 Tel: (514) 340-9311 Fax: (514) 340-9311 susy.matos@fieldturftarkett.com www.fieldturf.com and Department of General Services (DGS) Procurement Division, Data Management 707 Third Street, 2nd Floor West Sacramento, CA 95605-2811 (IMS# Z-1) ********************************************* FOR QUESTIONS, CONTACT YOUR FIELDTURF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SALES OFFICE Tim Coury (760) 635-2504 (760) 632-0906 fax tcfieldturf@cox.net 4 RESOLUTION NO. 2010 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY WAIVING THE BID PROCESS AND AUTHORIZING A CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULES PURCHASE OF SYNTHETIC TURF AND PERMANENT STRIPING MATERIAL/PRODUCT FROM FIELDTURF USA, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $328,309 FOR THE EL TOYON SOCCER FIELD PROJECT WHEREAS, the City desires to purchase synthetic turf and permanent striping material/product for the El Toyon Soccer Field Project; and WHEREAS, Fieldturf USA, Inc., is a qualified vendor under the California Multiple Awards Schedule of the State of California, Department of General Services, Procurement Division (CMAS); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.60.260 of the National City Municipal Code, the City may buy directly from a vendor at a price established through competitive bidding by another public agency whose procedures have been determined by the Purchasing Agent to be in substantial compliance with the City's procurement procedures, and the Purchasing Agent has in this case made such determination. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City hereby affirms the determination that the State of California's procurement procedures are in substantial compliance with the City's, and pursuant to Section 2.60.260 of the Municipal Code authorizes the waiver of the bidding process for synthetic turf and permanent striping material/product. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby authorizes a California Multiple Award Schedules purchase of synthetic turf and permanent striping material/product from Fieldturf USA, Inc., in the amount of $328,309 for the El Toyon Soccer Field Project. PASSED and ADOPTED this 17th day of August, 2010. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk Claudia G. Silva, Esq. City Attorney CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 10 EM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of National City awarding a contract to Ohno Construction, in the amount not -to - exceed $440,642.20 for construction improvements for the El Toyon Soccer Field Specification 07-01 and authorizing the Mayor to execute the contract. (Funded by CDBG Fund, County of San Diego Grants and Park & Rec. Capital Outlay Fund) PREPARED BY: Barby Tipton T DEPARTMENT: Deve Jx rvices/ En PHONE: x-4583 APPROVED B EXPLANATION: The soccer field project includes demolition, clearing & grubbing, grading, special sub -grade preparation and drainage, installation of (City provided) synthetic turf for a joint use soccer/football field, goal posts, striping and maintenance equipment. On June 22, bids were opened. The apparent low bidder, Ohno Construction, came in at $440,642.20. Attached is the Bidders' Proposal Worksheet with the three lowest bid details. A contingency amount of $110,160.55 (25%) per "Greenbook" (Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction) will cover unforeseen changes. Staff recommends that the Resolution be adopted awarding the contract to Ohno Construction and appropriating the amount to cover the contract plus 25% contingency for a total $550,802.75 for the construction of the El Toyon Soccer Field. The Contractor has agreed to a set timeframe for the issuance of the Notice to Proceed, which may be issued between August 17, 2010 and December 15, 2010. They have further agreed to honor the bid proposal submitted for Bid Specification 07-01 thru this revised period. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance MIS Funds for a total amount of $550,802.75 (contract plus 25% contingency) are available in expenditure account numbers 115-409-500-598-4076 ($179,364.00) and 301-409-500-598-4076 ($371,438.75) ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution BOARD ! COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: 1. Bid Opening Information Sheet 2. Bid Proposal Spreadsheet for the 3 lowest bidders 3. First Amendment to Bid Specification 07-01 4. Resolution BID OPENING SPECIFICATION NUMBER: 07-01 PROJECT TITLE: NATIONAL CITY EL TOYON SOCCER FIELD PROJECT TIME: 2:00 P.M. DATE: TUESDAY, JUNE 22, 2010 ESTIMATE: BASE BID $960,750 PROJECT ENGINEER: BARBY TIPTON NO. BIDDER'S NAME (PAGE 15-16) BID AMOUNT (PAGE 18A ) (Per Add. #7) ADDENDA (PAGE 15) (9 Total) BID SECURITY (PAGE 23-CHECK) (PAGE 24 -BOND) 1 _ Ohno Construction Co. 16174 Boyle Avenue Fontana, CA 92337 $440,642.20 1 through 9 Bond 2. Valley Crest Landscape Development 8450 Miramar Place San Diego, CA 92121 $444,509.00 1 through 9 Bond 3. Koch -Armstrong General Eng. 15315 Old Hwy 890 El Cajon, CA 92021 $468,482.70 1 through 9 Bond 4. Mountain Movers Engineering 975 Linda Vista Drive San Marcos, CA 92078 $490,025.60 1 through 9 Bond 5. Byrom -Davey, Inc. 13220 Evening Creek Drive San Diego, CA 92128 $492,577.00 1 through 9 Bond Disclaimer: The apparent lowest bidder is Ohno Construction Company with a base bid of $440,642.20. This information is considered preliminary and should not be relied upon until final review. 1 El Toyon Soccer Field Lowest Bidders Soccer/Football Field Base Bid with Field Turf Durospine Ohno Construction Valley Crest Koch -Armstrong # : DESCRIPTION UNl,1'S QTY UNIT PFZICE EXTENSION <'Unit Price Extension' :Unit Price :Extension ..Unit Prtee :Extension : >' 1 Mobilization LS 1 25,000 25,000 62,700,00 62,700.00 60,643.00 60,643.00 17,690.00 17,690.00 2 Water Quality Control, MPDES LS 1 10,OOD 0,000 3,100.00 3,100.00 3,381.00 3,381.00 4,960.00 4,960.00 3 Clearing and grubbing LS 1 50,000 50,000 19,000.00 19,000.00 4.925.00 4,925.00 28,360.00 28,360.00 4 Surveying LS 1 10,000 10,000 5,000.00 8,000.00 8,686 00 8,686.00 3,710.00 3,710.00 5 Replace existing sewer main with 10" PVC, SDR 35, ASTM D3034 LE 489 160 78,240 55.30 27,041.70 70.13 34,293.57 135.00 66,015.00 6 Reptace existing sewer main with 8" PVC SDR35, ASTM 03034 LF 30 150 4,500 52.60 1,578.00 49.09 1,472.70 106.00 3,180.00 7 Conection to existing sewer main EA 3 500 1,500 1,370.00 4,110.00 2,805.00 8,415.00 807.80 2,423.40 8 Replace existing sewer lateral with 6" PVC, SDR35, ASTM D3034 w/connections LF 275 130 35,750 42,30 11,632.50 58.91 16,200.25 62.10 17,077.50 9 Replace existing manholes with new SDRSD SM-02 manholes EA 2 10,000 20,000 9,000.00 18,000.00 11,220.00 22,440.00 11,390.00 22,780.00 10 Install 6" sewer lateral cleanout. SDRSD SC-01 EA 3 750 2,250 500.00 1,500.00 1,403.00 4,209.00 405.60 1,216.80 11 Grading and drainage LS 1 210,000 210,000 193.300.00 193,300.00 202,770.00 202,770,00 225,480.00 225,480,00 12 Install concrete curbing with anchoring system, for perimeter of synthetic turf field LF 1,120 40 44.800 24.00 ".., 26,880,00 19.93 22,321.60 20,00 22,400.00 13 Provide and Install Soccer Goals ' EA 2 5,000 30,000 5,000.00 10,000,00 4,372.00 8,744.00 2,120 00 4,240.00 14 Provide and Install Football Goals EA 2 15,000 30,000 12,500.00 25,000.00 10,193.00 20,386.00 7,040.00 14,080.00 15 Perimeter Irrigation System LS 1 7,500 7,500 12,000,00 12,000.00 16,052.00 16,052.00 23,690.00 23,690.00 16 Provide Field Sweeper EA 1 7,500 7,500 1,300.00 1,300.00 3,127.00 3,127.00 1,030.00 1,030.00 17 Provide Field Groomer EA 1 7,500 7,500 6,400.00 6,400.00 3,127.00 3,127.00 5,150.00 5,150.00 18 Bonding LS 1 20,109 20,109 9,100.00 9,100.00 3,309.00 3,309.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 Total Estimate 594,649 Total bid 440,642.20 Total bid 444,502.12 Total bid 468,482,70 El Toyon - :er Field Lowe iders Soccer/Football Field Base Bid with Field Turf Durospine fled I re Additive Alternate Bid "A" Ohno Construction Valley Crest Koch -Armstrong # DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY UNIT PRICE EXTENSION Unit Price. •Extension:'. :UhitPrice': .Extension >` Unit Price:; Extension :. 1 R& R w/Overlay AC service road with 1 1/2" thick AC, SF 5,000 $ 7.00 $ 35,000 00 2.60 TOTAL BID $ 35,000,00 Total bid Total bid Total bid tinder. grubbing, water quality control, grading, hauling, bonding, overhead, profit, Additive Alternate Bid "B": Ohno Construction Valley Crest Koch -Armstrong # DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY UNIT PRICE EXTENSION .Unit Pricer ' .Extension• . •Umt Price •Extension, Unit Price s: ::,Extension :• 1 Restore decomposed granite path with 2" minimum thickness DG SF 33.880 $ 1.05 $ 35,574,00 0.55 2 Install recycled plastic redwood header LF 1,550 $ 3.75 $ 5,812,50 6.00 w TOTAL BID $ 41 ,386.50 Total bid Total bid Total bid \dditive Alternate Bid "C": Ohno Construction Valley Crest Koch -Armstrong # DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY UNIT PRICE EXTENSION Unit Price. Extension,':: Unit Price <• Extension > > Unit Price. Exlension,:,:?, 1 Install DG and concrete header adjacent to and south of soccer field LS 1 $ 22,500.00 $ 22,500,00 28,000,00 TOTAL BID $ 22,500.00 Total bid Total bid Total bid rinllare .dditive Alternate Bid "D": Ohno Construction Valley Crest Koch -Armstrong # DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY UNIT PRICE EXTENSION Unit Price •' Extension > Unit Price:.', Extension . Unit Price Extension, •..: 1 Relocate and paint bleachers LS 1 $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000 00 2,200.00 TOTAL BID $ 15,000.00 Total bid Total bid Total bid dditive Alternate Bid "E": Ohno Construction Valley Crest Koch -Armstrong # DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY UNIT PRICE EXTENSION Unit Price Extension.. >Unit.Ptice.. Extension .; Unit Pnce:: Extension:: 1 Adjust/install irrigation and sod south of soccer field SF 17,240 $ 2 50 $ 43,100,00 2.65 TOTAL BID $ 43,100 00 Total bid Total bid Total bid El Toyon Soccer Field Lowest Bidders Soccer/Football Field Base Bid with Field Turf Durospine Additive Alternate Bid "F": Ohno Construction Valley Crest Koch -Armstrong # DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY UNIT PRICE EXTENSION ::Unit;P.rice. Bxtertsior Uhit:P'rica: ;Extension: ::;:Unit?rice: 'EXtensign,:;;';: 1• Clear, grub, grade area inside dog runs and install 2" of Decomposed Granite SF 18,968 $ 1.75 $ 33,194.00 0.90 2 Install 4" high chain link fence LF 500 $ 24.00 $ 12,000.00 18.00 3 Install ADA compliant self closing/locking swing gates EA 4 $ 600,00 $ 2,400,00 275.00 TOTAL BID $ 47,594,00 Total bid Total bid v Additive Alternate Bid "G": Ohno Construction Valley Crest Koch -Armstrong # DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY UNIT PRICE EXTENSION Unit Price Extension Unit Price : Extensron .• Unit Price :: Extension' ;< 1 Install 4", 2500 psi concrete pads for benches and trash cans SF 500 $ 8,50 $ 4,250.00 5.00 2 Install City provided benches and trash cans EA 7 $ 200.00 S 1,400,00 210.00 TOTAL BID $ 5,650.00 Total bid Total bid Total bid additive Alternate Bid "H": Ohno Construction Valley Crest Koch -Armstrong # DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY UNIT PRICE EXTENSION Untt Price::; Extension Unit Price Extension::' Unit Price Extension: 1 Install 48" box tree, (Tlpuana) EA 7 $ 1,500.00 $ 10,500.00 1,600.00 TOTAL 81D $ 10,500 00 Total bid Total bid Total bid kdditive Alternate Bid "I" Ohno Construction Valley Crest Koch -Armstrong # DESCRIPTION UNITS QTY UNIT PRICE EXTENSION Unit Pricei Extension; Unt Price ;: Extension ; Unit Price Extension; 1 Rewire/breaker existing overhead outdoor stadium lighting system from SDG&E service point to lights LS 1 $ 20,000,00 $ 20,000.00 27,500,00 TOTAL BID $ 20,000.00 Total bid Total bid Total bid (rubbing, water quality control, grading, hauling, bonding, overhead, profit, FIRST AMENDMENT TO BID SPECIFICATION 07.01 BY AND BE1WEEN THE CITY OF NATIONAL IONAL CITY L HIM /WIN OHOHNO ('( t TDIIf 1 nwl NO YV fl % 1 V1\ This First Amendment to the Bid Specification 07-01 entered into this 17th August 2010 by and between the City of National City, a municipal corporation ("CITY"), and Ohno Construction Company (the "CONTRACTOR.). R, RECITALS The le CONTRACTOR was tow bidder on Bid Speilficat1oi-i 07-01. The, Bid Coer3fl tlon Stnte-s that the purest shall he awarded rded uvlthln Sixty days (60) Rites tha raid opening of the proposals, which has occurred, C. The Bid Specification states that the project shall be completed within seventy five (75) days after the commencement date specified in the Notice to Proceed for the base bid work. u. The parties seek to set a timeframe for the issuance of the Notice to Proceed and agree it may be issued between August 17' 2010 alid December 15, 2010. The parties agree that thg b!d nrnnnsal shell he valitl Il until the 14roirwn to Pro edt ig fsstlerl NOW. THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The Notice to Proceed may be issued anytime between August 17, 2010 and December 15, 2010. rt LtJ l �. id o_....:1;.a.. 07 0A h it Rd thr......t1. d until H.... L. H.II�ly.. bid proposal Bid �7IJtl[sIU LI 1 Vt-V 1 shall remain vac`, V11VVy17 and UIIUI %II -t4oti .e to rr.1ieed is issued. 3. The parties further agree that with the foregoing exception, each and every term and provision of Lid Specification 07-01, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment on the date and year first above written. �. cir-Y cW NATIONAL, CITY By: Ron Morrison, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: OHHNO /1 JJ I 11/17 PA if f/M/Tc1 BY: f AMA v CI L/ Uyl'j1U u 1,40 APrint) _ ) Claud a Silva ( i City Attorney " ' i\FC Bl''.R.R QT-tNU (Print) A t`.al (Tine) RESOLUTION NO. 2010 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AWARDING A CONTRACT TO OHNO CONSTRUCTION IN AN AMOUNT NOT -TO -EXCEED $440,642.20, AND APPROPRIATING AN ADDITIONAL 25% FOR CONTINGENCIES FOR CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE NATIONAL CITY EL TOYON SOCCER FIELD PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT WHEREAS, the Engineering Department, in open session on June 22, 2010, did publicly open, examine, and declare five sealed bids for the National City El Toyon Soccer Field Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City hereby awards the contract for the El Toyon Soccer Field Project to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, to wit: OHNO CONSTRUCTION BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of National City that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the City a contract in the not -to -exceed amount of $440,642.20 with Ohno Construction for the National City El Toyon Soccer Field Project. Said contract is on file in the office of the City. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City authorizes the appropriation of an additional $119,160.55 allocated for unforeseen changes. PASSED and ADOPTED this 17th day of August, 2010. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: Michael R. Della, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Claudia G. Silva, Esq. City Attorney CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 11 fEM TITLE: A Resolution of the City Council of National City awarding a contract to Blue Pacific Engineering for the base bid amount of $51,152.50 to complete the City's Cultural Arts Center Landscape Improvements and authorizing the Mayor to execute the contract (Funded by Tax Increment Fund) PREPARED BY: Din Daneshfar DEPARTMENT: Dev lop ent Svcs/ En ineering PHONE: 619-336-4387 APPROVEDEn EXPLANATION: See attached explanation. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance MIS The funds are available from Account No. 511-409-500-598-3744 ($125,000). Twenty five percent of the total contract amount (approximately $12,790) will be allocated for contingencies per the "GREEN BOOK" adopted by the City of National City. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Explanation C. resolution 3. Bid Information EXPLANATION: The project consists of the replacement of landscape plantings, construction of and enhancements to the irrigation system, construction of a perforated and non -perforated yard drain system, construction of a gravel walking trail and concrete headers, minor concrete work, replacement of and enhancement to disabled parking signs. Also, construction of a wood deck with cable guardrail system along with an exterior fire sprinkler system as bid alternates. The project will construct approx 4,505 square feet of Landscaping Demolition, 4,125 square feet of Landscape Planting and Irrigation, 850 square feet Mulch, 150 Lineal feet of Perforated and Non -Perforated Drain Line, I Drain Line Cleanout, 380 square feet D.G. Paving with header, 1 Ribbon Bike Rack, 100 lineal feet of 4" Concrete Header, Add 2 ADA Parking Signs to existing posts, 1 ADA parking Sign on New Breakaway Post. Add Alternates for approx. 1,115 square feet of wood deck with cable guardrail system along with approx. 310 lineal feet of exterior fire sprinkler system. The Add Alternates work may be incorporated to the project as a change order based upon availability of funds. The additive alternate work was included in the project in order to have the advantage to extend the improvements to the building surrounding based upon the bid results. However, due to the bid proposal results the project will need to be awarded only based upon the base bid proposal. On July 01, 2010 Engineering approved the final plans and specifications and advertised the project on the local and regional newspapers. On August 27, 2010 two bids were received and opened for the project. The Bid Opening Information Sheet and the cost proposals for the three bidders are attached for further review. Staff has reviewed the bid documents and found the lowest responsive bidder, Blue Pacific Engineering, to be qualified to perform the work. Therefore, it is recommended to award the contract to the lowest bidder, Blue Pacific Engineering, for the base bid at $51,152.50. Twenty five percent of the total contract amount (approximately $12,790) will be allocated for contingencies per the "GREEN BOOK) adopted by the City of National City. 1 CALIFORNIA -4- NATION �L=cIrir ancY INCORPORATED BID OPENING SPECIFICATION NUMBER: 09-17 PROJECT TITLE: National City Cultural Arts Center Landscape Improvements OPENING DATE: July 27, 2010 TIME: 3:00 pm ESTIMATE: $ 51,200.00 Base Bid; $42,000 Alternate #1 and $18,600 Alternate #2 PROJECT ENGINEER: Din Daneshfar No. Bidder's Name Page 14-15 Base Bid Amt. Page 16-18 Alternate No. 1 Alternate No. 2 Addenda Page 14 Bid Security Page 20-Check Page 21 - Bond 1 Blue Pacific Engineering 3770 Hancock St. #H San Diego, CA 92110 $51,152.50 $81,170 . $50,960 Yes Yes 2 Healey Construction 1545 Tidelands Avenue National City, CA 91950 $56,278.50 $60,375 $32,957 Yes Yes 2 Base Bid City of National City Blue Pacific Engineering Healy Construction Co. Engineer Cost Estimate No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Extention Quantity Unit Price Extention Quantity Unit Price Extention 1 Clearing & Grubbing (Including sod) s f. 4505 $1.00 $4,505.00 4505 $0.50 $2,252.50 4505 1 4505 2 Mobalization. construction BMP's etc. ea. 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 1 3000 3000 3 Topsoil import to make finish grade (In front) ea. 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 1 $3,600,00 $3,600.00 1 125 125 4 Drainage • Drain Imes and sump I.f, 150 $30.00 $4,500,00 150 $17.00 $2,550.00 150 8.5 1275 5 Drainiine cleanout ea. 1 $500.00 $500.00 1 $500.00 $500.00 1 70 70 8 Mulch only (In lieu of planting and irrigation) s f. 850 $0.60 $510.00 850 $3.00 $2,550.00 850 0.5 425 7 Stabilized decomposed granite (D.G.) paving with header s f 380 $7.50 $2,850.00 380 $6.00 $2,280.00 380 5.5 2090 8 Soil preparation s.t. 4125 $0.60 $2,475.00 4125 $1.00 $4,125.00 4125 0.45 1856.25 9 Landscape Planting s.f, 4125 $2.00 $8,250.00 4125 $4.20 $17,325.00 4125 5 20625 10 Landscape Irrigation s.f. 4125 $4.50 $18,552.50 4125 $2.40 $9,900.00 4125 2.75 11343.75 11 Ribbon Bike Racj - installed ea. 1 51,500.00 $1,500.00 1 $3,100.00 • $3,100.00 1 1950 1950 12 concrete header-4" if, 100 $12.00 $1,200.00 100 $40.00 $4,000.00 100 10 1000 13 ADA parking sign addition es. 2 $250.00 5500,00 2 5173.00 $346.00 2 100 200 14 ADA parking sinage on new breakaway post ea. 1 $300.00 $300.00 1 5750.00 $750.00 1 225 225 15 90 day maintenance (to turnover) ea. 1 $1,500,00 $1,500.00 1 $2,000.00 $2,000,00 1 2500 2500 SUM $51,152,50 SUM $56,278.50 SUM $51,190.00 Alternate No. 1 No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Extention Quantity Unit Price Extention Quantity Unit Price Extention 16 Overexavate and recompact soils below footings c.y. 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 1 $1,200.00 $1,200.00 1 $4,000,00 $4,000.00 17 Export spoils • c.y. 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 1 $1,000,00 $1,000,00 1 $750.00 5750.00 18 Wood deck s.f. 750 $60.00 $45,000.00 750 561.00 545,750.00 750 $35.00 526,253.00 19 Gaurdrail I.f. 45 $226.00 $10,170.00 45 $165.00 $7,425.00 45 $45.00 $2,025.00 20 Concrete band I.f. 50 $0.00 50 $0.00 50 560.00 $3,000.00 21 Dire sprinkler system for building exterioir along deck plus fees I.s. 1 $22,000.00 $22,000.00 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 1 $5,800.00 $5,800.00 SUM ,, $81,170,00 SUM $60,375,00 SUM $41,825.00 Alternate No. 2 No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Extention . Quantity Unit Price Extention Quantity Unit Price Extention 22 Overexavate and recompact soils below footings c.y. 1 1000 1000 1 750 750 1 $1,550.00 $1,650.00 23 Export spoils c.y. i $1,000.00 1000 1 $200.00 200 1 $260.00 $260.00 24 ALT. ITEM: Extend wood deck (N.I,C) s.f. 363 $60.00 21780 363 $61.00 22143 363 $35,00 $12,705.00 25 ALT. ITEM: Extend Huardrail (N,LC) I.f. 51 $226.00 11526 51 $164.00 8364 51 $45.00 $2,295.00 26 Fire Sprinkler System for building exterior along deck I.s. 1 $15,600.00 15600 1 $2,500.00 2500 1 $1,700.00 51,700.00 SUM $50,906.00 SUM $33,957.00 SUM $18,610.00 RESOLUTION NO. 2010 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AWARDING A CONTRACT TO BLUE PACIFIC ENGINEERING FOR THE BASE BID AMOUNT OF $51,152.50, AND APPROPRIATING AN ADDITIONAL 25% FOR CONTINGENCIES TO COMPLETE THE NATIONAL CITY CULTURAL ARTS CENTER LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT WHEREAS, the Engineering Department, in open session on July 27, 2010, did publicly open, examine, and declare two sealed bids for the National City Cultural Arts Center Landscape Improvements Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City hereby awards the contract for the National City Cultural Arts Center Landscape Improvements Project to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, to wit: BLUE PACIFIC ENGINEERING BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of National City that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the City a contract for the base bid amount of $51,152.50 with Blue Pacific Engineering for the National City Cultural Arts Center Landscape Improvements Project. Said contract is on file in the office of the City. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City authorizes the appropriation of an additional $12,790 allocated for unforeseen changes. PASSED and ADOPTED this 17th day of August, 2010. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Claudia G. Silva, Esq. City Attorney CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 12 EM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City: 1) accepting and approving the work performed by Conan Construction, Inc. for the final contract amount of $ 367,313.00, 2) filing of the Notice of Completion with the County Recorder, and 3) making the final payment of $1,111.20 and the retention amount of $18,257.71 for the National City Multiple Facility Project, FY 09-10. (Funded through Morgan/Kimball Senior Housing Replacement Reserve Account, Facilities Maintenance Fund and General Fund). PREPARED BY: James Slade PHONE: EXPLANATION: See attached Explanation FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. DEPARTMENT: Develo E APPROVED APPROVED: APPROVED: ent Servi s/ ring J„ Finance MIS Funds are available on PO #73551 on Acct #626-422-2233-288-0000 (Facilities Maintenance Fund), $723.30 and 001-409-000-288-0000 (General Fund), $2,222.40 and Morgan/Kimball Senior Housing Replacement Reserve Account per CDC in the amount of $16,423.21. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: 1. Explanation 2. Contract Final Balance 3. Notice of Completion 4. Resolution EXPLANATION Per Resolution No. 2009-260, the City Council awarded a contract to Conan Construction, Inc. in the amount of $313,900 for the construction of the National City Multiple Facility Project FY 09-10, Specification No. 09-04. During the course of construction, field conditions were discovered that would inhibit the completion of the project. The City -initiated four change orders which were approved and added to the project as follows: 1) Schedule A: Installation of additional rolling gate with V-rail, fencing and paving. This change order was necessitated because of errors in the Specifications pertaining to the quantities required to complete the project and as a result of this change produced a more complete product than was specified at time of bid adding a cost of $7890.00. 2) Schedule C: Replacement of the proposed Kitchen countertops and cabinets with plastic countertops and cabinets. This change order was necessitated because the Contractors bid came in over the available funds therefore the cost was renegotiated and the original counter tops and cabinets that were specified were replaced with plastic to bring the project within the budget at a cost of $21,699.00 with a savings of $4,100.00. 3) Schedule A: A quantity adjustment in the linear footage of fence panels was required. This change was necessitated because the bidding documents gave a certain linear footage estimate whereas field measurements during construction showed that more fence panels would be required to complete the project adding an additional amount of $23,299.00. 4) Schedule C: Raising two existing Kitchen electrical outlets to accommodate proposed cabinets. This change order was necessitated because the new Kitchen cabinets would cover the existing electrical outlets therefore raising the outlets was required at a cost of $525.00. Therefore, the original construction bid price of $313,900 was increased by $53,413.00 to a final amount of $367,313.00. A final inspection was completed and closing documentation was submitted to the City for review. After this review the work was eligible for a notice of completion. The work was then found to be in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Therefore, Engineering Staff recommends the acceptance of the work and the filling of a Notice of Completion for the National City Multiple Facility Project. Please see attached "Final Contract Balance Summary document for a breakdown of line items, change orders, and contracted work days. In summary, the purpose of this resolution is to approve the final amount of the project at $367,313.00, accept the work performed, authorize the filing of a Notice of Completion, and release the retention balance of $18,257.71. DATE: FINAL CONTRACT BALANCE August 17, 2010 PROJECT: National City Multiple Facility Repair Project, FY 09-10, Specification No. 09-04 TO: Conan Construction, Inc Mr. Frank P. Leon Jr. / Mr. Bruce Stone 5150 Waring Road San Diego, CA 92120 ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT: START DATE: COMPLETION DATE: ORIGINAL CONTRACT LENGTH: EXTENTION OF WORK DAYS: TOTAL CONTRACT TIME: $313,900.00 January 25, 2010 June 17, 2010 (includes down time due to multiple change orders, cleanup, and inspection) 60 working days 30 working days 90 working days SEE ATTACHED CONTRACT BALANCE SUMMARY DETAIL. This document and its purpose to balance payment shall be considered full compensation for furnishing and installed the materials, labor, tools and equipment , profit, overhead and all incidentals for performing the work described above. Conan Construction Inc. will not be entitled to damages or additional payment for delays as described in the 1997 edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, Section 6-6.3, for performing the work as described above. Page 1 FINAL CONTRACT BALANCE SUMMARY Original Contract Adjusted Contract No. Item Unit Bid Qty Unit Price Amount Qty Unit Price Amount 1 SCHEDULE A: Asphalt Paving at the north tower parking lot. See attachment "A" for line item and Unit breakdown. Varies 1 59,757 Varies 59,757 2 Morgan Tower stairwell Concrete repair project LS 1 9348 - LS 9348 3 Hot water Tank Installation at North Tower LS 2 69,332 2 69,332 4 Morgan/Kimball Towers Fencing Project L3 1 167,585 LS 167,585 5 SCHEDULE B: Kimball Senior Center Kitchen Hood Suppression and Misc. Repairs LS 1 7878 LS 7878 SUBTOTAL 313,900 313,900 CCOI Morgan/Kimball Installation of additional Rolling gate with V-rail, Fencing and Paving EA 1 7890 SCHEDULE C: Civic Center and Public Works. Kitchen & Lunchroom Renovation - EA 1 21,699 CCO3 Morgan/Kimball Adjustment in the linear footage of Fence Panels required EA 1 23,299 CCO4 Raising two existing Kitchen electrical outlets at Public Works to accommodate cabinets EA 1 525 GRAND TOTAL 313,900 367,313 Page 2 3 RECORDING REQUESTED BY WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY OF NATIONAL CITY 1243 NATIONAL CITY BOULEVARD NATIONAL CITY, CA 91950-4301 NOTICE OF COMPLETION CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE SECTION 3093 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN of the completion on June 17, 2010, of: National City Multiple Facilities. Project, FY 09-10, Specification No. 09-04 Work of improvement or portion of work of improvement under construction or alteration. Various street addresses throughout National City, CA Street address City State 91950 Zip Code The undersigned owns the following interest or estate in said property: N/A Nature of the interest or estate of owner (mortgagor, lessee, etc_) Said work of improvement was performed on the property pursuant to a contract with Conan Construction, Inc. Name of Original Contractor The following work and material were supplied: Laborer Groups, Helpers, Carpenters, Painters, Operators, Paving Equipment, Traffic Control Equipment, Sweeper, Loaders, Trucks, etc. General statement of kind of labor, services, equipment or materials The names and addresses of co -owners are: N/A Joint tenants, tenants in common, or other owners Dated: August 17, 2010. Ron Morrison, Mayor City of National City, 1243 National City Blvd., National City, CA 91950-4301 I, the undersigned, say: I have read the foregoing Notice of Completion, and know the contents thereof; the same is true of my own knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury that the forgoing is true and correct. Executed on August 17, 2010, at National City, California. Signature: RON MORRISON, MAYOR NOC 09_0J 4 RESOLUTION NO. 2010 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY ACCEPTING THE WORK PERFORMED BY CONAN CONSTRUCTION, INC., FOR THE FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $367,313, AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION WITH THE COUNTY RECORDER, AND AUTHORIZING THE RELEASE OF THE RETENTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,257.71 FOR THE NATIONAL CITY MULTIPLE FACILITY REPAIR PROJECT It appearing to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department that all work required to be done by Conan Construction, Inc., for the National City Multiple Facility Repair Project has been completed, the City Council of National City hereby accepts said work, authorizes the filing of the Notice of Completion, and orders that payment for said work be made in accordance with said contract, including retention in the amount of $18,257.71. PASSED and ADOPTED this 17th day of August, 2010. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Claudia G. Silva, Esq. City Attorney CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 13 iM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City accepting the 2010 San Diego Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (Al), and authorizing the Mayor to execute a certification letter stating that the Al represents National City's conclusions about impediments to fair housing choice, as well as actions necessary to address any identified impediments. PREPARED BY: Carlos Aguirr DEPARTMENT: Community Development PHONE: (619) 336-4391 �i% APPROVED BY: , 4 3 -___, EXPLANATION: Pursuant to CDBG regulations [24 CFR Subtitle A §91.225(a)(1)], to receive CDBG funds, the City of National City must certify that it "actively furthers fair housing choice" through the following: completion of an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (Al); actions to eliminate identified impediments; and maintenance of fair housing records. This report, the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (commonly known as the "Al"), presents a demographic profile of all jurisdictions in San Diego County, assesses the extent of housing needs among specific income groups, and evaluates the availability of a range of housing choices for residents. This report also analyzes the conditions in the private market and public sector that may limit the range of housing choices or impede a person's access to housing. As the name of the report suggests the document reviews "impediments" to fair housing. While this report also assesses the nature and extent of housing discrimination, the focus is on identifying impediments that may prevent equal housing access and developing solutions to mitigate or remove such impediments. The City of National City held a 30-day public review and comment period of the draft Al between April 28, —1 and May 27, 2010 and no comments were received. A complete copy of the Al is available for reference at the of the City Clerk and the Mayor and City Council's office. The document is also made available to the public on uie CDBG and HOME webpage of the National City website at http://www.nationalcitca.gov/index.iyspx?page=138. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. N/A ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Al does not require an environmental review. ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: . Notice of 30-day Public Review and Comment Period Al Signature Page (Certification Letter) Attachment No. 1 cA34- }A NATIO. ,. Cifp .. IRCORp ORATE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY PUBLIC NOTICE OF 30-DAY PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT PERIOD ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE (AI) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of National City has prepared a draft for public review and comment of the San Diego Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI). The issuance of this notice establishes the beginning of the required 30-day public review and comment period which begins Wednesday April 28, 2010 and runs through Thursday May 27, 2010. The AI has been prepared pursuant to the City's responsibilities as a grantee jurisdiction under the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Programs; specifically, the regulatory requirement to affirmatively further fair housing based on the obligation of the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) under Section 808 of the Fair Housing Act. Consequently, HUD requires grantee jurisdictions to (a) conduct an analysis to identify impediments to fair housing choice within the jurisdiction (b) take appropriate actions to overcome the effects of any impediments identified through the analysis and (c) maintain records reflecting the analysis and actions taken in this regard. The AI is a review of impediments to fair housing choice in both the public and private sectors. The AI involves a comprehensive review of a jurisdiction's laws regulations and administrative policies, procedures, and practices; an assessment of how those laws etc. affect the location availability and accessibility of housing; an assessment of conditions both public and private affecting fair housing choice for all protected classes; and an assessment of the availability of affordable accessible housing in a range of unit sizes. HUD suggests that grantee jurisdictions conduct their AI at the beginning of each Five -Year Consolidated Plan cycle. Since the City of National City's most recent AI was prepared in 2005, the City has elected to conduct a new AI in conjunction with the Five -Year Consolidated Plan which will be submitted to HUD in May 2010. A copy of the draft AI will be available for public review at the Office of the City Clerk of the City of National City, 1243 National City Blvd, National City, CA 91950. The draft AI will also be posted on the City's website at www.nationalcityca.gov. The public is invited to submit written comments on the draft AI. All comments can be submitted to the Housing and Grants Division no later than Thursday, May 27, 2010. Specific questions and comments may be addressed to Alfredo Ybarra, Housing Programs Manager, 1243 National City Blvd, National City, CA 91950 or via e-mail to housing@nationalcityca.gov or by telephone at (619) 336-4279. Hearing impaired persons please use the CAL Relay Service Number 711. Asistencia en Espanol: Para que le interpreten la informacion en espanol, llame al (619) 336- 4391. Chris Zapata, City Manager City of National City Pub: The San Diego Union Tribune Date: April 28, 2010 Attachment No. 2 SIGNATURE PAGE AN ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE 1 Mayor Ron Morrison , hereby certify that this San Diego Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice represents the City of National City 's conclusions about impediments to fair housing choice, as well as actions necessary to address any identified impediments. Name Mayor Title August 17, 2010 Date RESOLUTION NO. 2010 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY ACCEPTING THE 2010 SAN DIEGO REGIONAL ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A CERTIFICATION LETTER STATING THAT THE Al REPRESENTS NATIONAL CITY'S CONCLUSIONS ABOUT IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE, AS WELL AS ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ADDRESS ANY IDENTIFIED IMPEDIMENTS WHEREAS, the City of National City receives federal Community Development Block Grant ("CDBG") and Home Investment Partnerships ("HOME") funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD"); and WHEREAS, HUD requires the City to complete an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (commonly known as the "AI") every five years in parallel with the Five - Year Consolidated Plan as a requirement of receiving federal funds; and WHEREAS, the Al presents a demographic profile of all jurisdictions in San Diego County, assesses the extent of housing needs among specific income groups, and evaluates the availability of a range of housing choices for residents; and WHEREAS, the Al report also analyzes the conditions in the private market and public sector that may limit the range of housing choices or impede a person's access to housing, and reviews "impediments" that may prevent equal housing access and developing solutions to mitigate or remove such impediments; and WHEREAS, the City Council last approved an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice in 2005; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Commission of the City of National City ("CDC") entered into an agreement with Veronica Tam and Associates, LLC, on January 28, 2009, to prepare the Al for the City of National City in collaboration with other entitlement jurisdictions of San Diego County through the San Diego Fair Housing Resources Board; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed 30-day public review and comment period was held by the City from April 28 to May 27, 2010, for the purpose of gathering public comment on the draft Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice report; and WHEREAS, no public comments were received by the City of National City during the 30-day public review and comment period. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City hereby accepts the San Diego Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, dated April 2010, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute a certification letter stating that the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice represents National City's conclusions about the impediments to fair housing choice, as well as necessary actions to address any identified impediments. --- Signature Page to Follow --- Resolution No. 2010 — Page 2 PASSED and ADOPTED this 17th day of August, 2010. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Claudia G. Silva, Esq. City Attorney CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT •MTITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the Mayor to execute a renewal Agreement in the not -to -exceed amount of $50,600 with South Bay Community Services to provide domestic violence response services for the Cal-EMA grant -funded Children Exposed to Domestic Violence Specialized Response Program. MEETING DATE: Aug. 17, 2010' AGENDA ITEM NO. 14 PREPARED BY: Lt. Keith Fifield PHONE: 619-336-4514 EXPLANATION: DEPARTMENT: Police APPROVED BY: On May 19th, 2009, the City of National City passed a resolution accepting the Children Exposed to Domestic Violence (CEDV) Specialized Response Program grant award for $200,000 each year for three years, for a total of $600,000. South Bay Community Services (SBCS) was an initial grant partner that agreed to provide a Counselor funded by the grant covering .5 FTE or 1/2 of the Counselor's salary. SBCS has provided the Counselor and performed the agreed services since January 2009 by having the Counselor co -located at the National City Police Department working daily with the Police Officer assigned to the CEDV grant. This Agreement is a renewal from 2009 for the same amount and same services to be rendered in 2010, the second full year of the grant. This renewal covers the time period of January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010. • FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. 290-411-612-299-0000 FY10 $25.300 290-411-620-299-0000 FY11 $25,300 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: APPROVED: APPROVED: MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Resolution BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A TACHMENTS: dard Agreement Amendment Grant Award RESOLUTION NO. 2010 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT IN THE NOT -TO -EXCEED AMOUNT OF $50,600 WITH SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES TO PROVIDE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RESPONSE SERVICES FOR THE CAL-EMA GRANT -FUNDED CHILDREN EXPOSED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SPECIALIZED RESPONSE PROGRAM FROM JANUARY 1, 2010 TO DECEMBER 31, 2010 WHEREAS, on May 19, 2009, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2009- 109, accepting a Children Exposed to Domestic Violence Specialized Response Program grant award for $200,000 each year for three years, for a total of $600,000, and WHEREAS, South Bay Community Services (SBCS) was an initial grant partner and has provided a counselor since 2009 to provide domestic violence response services, who is funded by the grant covering one-half of the counselor's salary; and WHEREAS, the National City Police Department and SBCS desire to extend the agreement for a term of one year, January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010, for the not -to -exceed amount of $50,600. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of National City that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute an Amendment to Agreement with South Bay Community Services in the not -to -exceed amount of $50,600 to provide domestic violence response services for the Cal-EMA grant -funded Children Exposed to Domestic Violence Specialized Response Program for an additional term of one year, January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010. Said Amendment to Agreement is on file in the office of the City Clerk. PASSED and ADOPTED this 17th day of August, 2010. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Claudia G. Silva, Esq. City Attorney AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AND SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES This Amendment to Agreement is entered into this 1st day of January 1, 2010, by and between the City of National City, a municipal corporation ("the CITY"), and South Bay Community Services. (the "CONTRACTOR"). RECITALS A. The CITY and the CONTRACTOR entered into an agreement on January 1, 2009, ("the Agreement") wherein the CONTRACTOR agreed to provide domestic violence response services for the Cal-EMA grant funded Children Exposed to Domestic Violence specialized response program, January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009. B. In consideration of the mutual benefit to be derived there from, the parties agree to amend the term of the Agreement between the City of National City and SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES to extend the term for one additional year, January 1, 2010, and expiring on December 31, 2010, in the amount not to exceed $50,600.00. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree that the Agreement entered into on January 1, 2009, shall be amended as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A" which is incorporated herein by reference. The parties further agree that with the foregoing exception, each and every term and provision of the Agreement dated July 1, 2009, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year first above written. CITY OF NATIONAL CITY SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICE,INC. By: By: Ron Morrisorn Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Claudia G. Silva, Esq. City Attorney KA-rtlP.yt' LEmB Qs Print) , I By: Vv Don Hunter Department Director (Print) A.14,TOLD $CUWARZliNEGGER (Jo vRat\foi; June 30, 2010 1,1„ Keith Fifield Lieutenant National C,ity, City of 1200 National 'City Boulevard National City, CA 91-950 Subject: al GALIFORN,A ErwEaceney MANAGEMENT AGENGY APProvAiieS44grant,A,0144Mera Childeen,fiwoetit� BOttesg0 VielOtlee Award #.: MATTHEW R. BETIERTIAUSEN SECRETARY Dear Lt. Fifield: The California Emergency Management Ageney (CaIEMA) has received and approved the enclosed subgratit amendment request, for the subject grant. All other agreements shall remain as previously agreed upon. Please contact your Program Specialist if you have any questions about this arnendtnent PSVS GRANTS PROCESSING Enclosure c: Subgrentee file 3650 SCHRIEVER AltaltiE • mpaR, CA 95(55 PUBLIC SAFETY AND•vranm SERVICES MOGRAMS DIVISION TELEPROM (916) 32.4-5101 • FM: (916) 3244554 California Emer•enc. Mana•ementAgenc A.`r it i'!%.�?f;'i<`r w�Mi,�JxD i"`v� i�h'�e`�ti+l�r it}er,zeq, 41.J '�i C r�o�.��hr'r�'rF4w•.4.'ia i 'vj4cctu; . •c6, NIF# .4 , .i11VI � , rF;� g*11 J � kdi tiara,'?cn ar t a r•>,ttii`t210- 1N1Tr VIYAEiE� (6 EV09028608 a GRANT AWARD AMENDMENT THIS AMENDMENT, made and entered into on AMENDMENT NO, June 18, 2010 1 by and between the (Dale) California Emergency Management Agency, hereafter designated CalEMA, and the following Administrative Agency National Cif; C 0 J hereafter called the Recipient. WITNESSETH: That the Recipient agrees to the amendment of this Grant Award Agreement as_specifie4.bejow:.:a �q• e Grant Award Agreement EV 09028608 between the parties hereto is herby amended to: D t5 COt,•-:= .) .• .. Increase the 2008 CJA Funds by78 685 from 0 to 78 685. 1hp JUN 2 8 2010 $ $ $ lil� Increase the 2009 CJA fonds by $0 from $200,000 to $200,000. 76141. BY. __ -..:._.__._. Increase the'To1al Project Cost by $78,685 from $200,000 to $278,685. All other provisions of this agreement shall remain as previously agreed upon. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. This Grant Award Amendment has been executed by the parties hereto, upon the date written above. CALIFORNIA EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY for CalEMA use onl Bk'{A'3HORIZEUSIGNAIUt2ES k ir' ij ; .. w;`• :Y. 3;=�:;Pii 4:i::t I:':`f::%:,h:`•:Iit nERiN'f�O�NAiViE:O�i�EIiSONSI01iiIN0+l:.': s? �"-u:;. ; •r•. ti`�. ..�v::�.•":.'>:. +.�::,• . 0 413r;yiSHr Fpnr'i*;'•>l�:°:-'; :.. . 'qtl; �l' :,YiV �5�'� �Fp�+t}i:::n�JoSff ,Yti":aj::��a,:?tit:.::.".•r•��:+:{: RECIPIENT RECIPEENT City of National City BY (AUTHORIZFxq-91 AT DATE PRINTED NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING Keith Fifield, Lieutenant ./ ADDRESS 1200 National City Blvd. National City, CA 91950 ,AMOtinirONatimBERED BYTaistoCUM£NT•: 'i ::• .. "NNOGRAMfCATEGCRY COOEAND?ITf.E�•:%•.'•.'':.��UNRTiTIE''�="r.•.'i��:�t•�'..•:C•:,..,::.�Ti?'':��"a;•:':: U IQRAMCUN7gNe(h113EfigDggR7til4';.MATCti.•t'''" PIER :$TMUTE ZDo� zoo1 J10 A:;u.. ..r,.• ..Bw. :..�.< ..�..�: pi: ..;,�r Sa •a:':C, iAs}i Sari.'•<e:>t�'::p': •c'ai i:..� r'f. ::f'��,,,,.. "ti«.lt::F{id du.t i�t :.<:Ae'i;-�•0 ?i�T LANi0t1tJT�EN i7M ERED'rQQATfi"'t •I I{CA'Nll1N8ER � i-• •.�SEOTtdtlM8E12<z.c.:•..•..,+:<;.t?�:,y:s':.l(•vlxM,.,? 2-00 voc- 0Co90 • l0z• 0890 $ '2181 L g5 f S C A/. ! hereby certify upon my own personal knowledge That budgeted funds are available for the period FEDERAL LATE(iCRY i�GMt3l2,t};'jiritit;, and purpose of the expenditure stated above. . ,.�:. ..t �'i'i �"��:;'.:ia i.: .•:�': .:'a`.1:. ..•,,.� '�:.f•: ;;:<t. :.y:T.r;., v:. Li:' <SIG'NATUREOF'Ca1EMAfl$GA40FFiCERf'•.`+:� .• ••. • �5 :,..'•;3OATE•.�•:••.•. •�'?a=•. ;•r�� "" tfii Grant Award Amendment — CaIEMA 2-213 (formerly OES 513) (Revised 2/1/20091 •:;nri�^}i rt ..ed i+tyte: ih.i�.r� ��.. LEVS Budget Summary Report EVO9 Children Exposed to Domestic Violence Response Program National City, City of Children Exposed to Domestic Violence SR Award #: EVO9 02 8608 Award Period: 01/01/10 - 12131110 Latest Request: , Not Final 201 A. Personal Services - Salaries/Employee Benefits F/S/L Funding Source F 08C JAI F 09CJA0 Total A. Personal Services - Salaries/Employee Benefits: Budoet Amount Paid/Expended Balance Pending Pending Balance 0 0 0 0 0 102,912 0 102,912 0 102,912 102,912 0 102,912 0 102,912 B. Operating Expenses F/S1L Funding Source Budget Amount Paid7Expended Balance Pending Pending Balance F 08CJA1 48,685 0 48,685 0 48,685 F 09CJA0 91,088 0 91,088 0 91,088 Total B. Operating Expenses: 139,773 0 139,773 0 139,773 C. Equipment FISIL Funding Source F OBCJA1 F 09CJA0 Total C. Equipment: Budget Amount Paid/Expeaded Balance Pending Pending Balance 30.000 0 30,000 0 30,000 6,000 0 6,000 0 6,000 36,000 0 36,000 0 36,000 Budget Amount Paid/Exoended Balance Pending Pending Balance Total Local !Match: 0 0 0 O 0 Total Funded: 278,685 0 278,885 0 278,685 Total Project Cost: 278,685 0 278,685 0 278,685 FISIL (Funding Types): F=Federal, S=State, L=Local Match PaidfExpended=posted in ledger w/Ctaint Schedule, Pending=Processed, but not yet in Claim Schedule 06/30/10 SPECIAL CONDITION Grant Award Agreement No.EV09028608 is hereby approved with the following condition: 0 The 2008 CJA Funds in the amount of $78,685 must be expended by August 31, 2010, and the final 201 must be received by Cal EMA by September 30, 2010. This condition will reduce the liquidation period to zero days. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in the withholding and disallowance of grant payments, the reduction or termination of the grant award and/or the denial of future grant funds. .S Cal EMA Grant Award Modification Mall TO: California Emergency Management Agency 3650 Schriever Ave. Mather. CA 05655 Check correct btanch: [hug Vntorcemeni V. Justice It Chlldrons Como & rungs OV, 5A. E VW 3, Recipient/Implementing Agency City of National City llndicofe Uwnch onanvdopo) 4. Proiect fillet Children Exposed to Domestic Violence SR 5. Contact Person: Keith Fi(ield, Lieutenant 1. Award lf EV09028608 2. Modification #: Phone: (619) 336-4514 Ex: Fax. (619) 336-4525 Email Address: kfifield@nalionatcityca.gov 6. Grant Period: _ 01/01/2010' to 12/31/2010 ✓ 7. Payment Mailing Address: 1243 National City Blvd., National City. CA 91950 Gran 09 Yf• Yr Yr -3� 1'r Yr 09 Yr Yr s. Revision to Budget l"1 Check here if new. Current yQo�?1 Y�r Allocation(CA) t_ GraritFunds b ,fs x{+F`,cRequiodllatch Select Acronym t A. Personal. Services R. Operating expenses C' Equipment Fund Total Personal Services Operating Expenses C. Equipment Match Total Total CJAY16 7$102,912 $91,088 KOOK-. $2.00,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 Federal $0 $0 SO Federal $0 $0 $0 Slate •. C Y range (PC) SaF+AY>.,.`�lGu�Y (add (r) or subtract from $0 .. i budgeted amount) ... . -,Q>RLl:,..iProposed $0 $0 'CJA1 $20,000 $v8 $78,685 $0 $O $Q $0 $78,685 Federal $0 $0 $0 Federal $0 $0 $0 State . -�mry -- aa_eetimr.• cue�cnva> $0 $0 $0 ,rmc .cnmuwr¢. Revised Allocation (RA) i �� .a - Wrcs, >nr. "9'`'i0'°"""°`'-�• CJA1, $102,912 $ 1. $ b136, $-2- . $0 $0 $0 $0 11 -,- . Mk $0 Zf 6 = ZOo $o $o E $0 $0 $0 9. Justification for Modification: (If necessary, continue the justification on page 3.) Extend gran) period end dale from 6/30/10 to 0/30/10. All other provisions of this agreement shall remain as previously agreed upon. 9o^Loca(11 iiovafs z d Keith Fifield, Lieutenant Project Director (ly n Project Director Signature gi-xdsr t:a: ) 169tei Slana twos,: Pr S eclalist Grants Processing Dale: (7,Phb C Aec)s.ivJ3en..corn pte(e d 11r (`C' if. it Li JUN 2 8 2010 Li dleanelle Ladrido, Finance Director cial Officer 1 peQ.r Date: Fine Grant Award Modification - Cal EMA 2.223 (Revised 12/16/2009) Date: rpm e) eta, OIfic r Signature ate - Section Chie; 4� Date; Cal EMA I) ) usti(icatton for odification (cont.) We request that $78,685 of unspent funds from the 2008 CEDV Cal EMA award be re -allocated to the 2009 CEDV Cal EMA award. These funds are needed to meet the requirements and needs of the grant, They were unspent because of unanticipated administrative hurdles and time constraints encountered during the first year. The funds are specifically needed to contract with an outside agency to perform the required program evaluation. 10% of both the 2008 and 2009 budget awards are required to be allocated to the program evacuation, a total of$40,000 at this point. The remainder of the unspent funds will be allocated to equipment and a automobile for the CEDV Police Officer necessary to complete the program mission. Due to recent budget reductions additional vehicles are not being approved for the fleet. A vehicle for the CEDV Police Officer is essential to include transportation to crime scenes, client visits, meetings, court and training throughout National City, the San Diego Region and Southern California. It has also been determined that a black and white patrol vehicle does not meet the purposes of the CEDV Police Officer duties and a mono color low profile hybrid detective /patrol vehicle with spine interior emergency lighting and no exterior police markings is more appropriate for the assignment. Police Officers and City Employees are not allowed by policy to conduct business in their personal vehicles. 1 BUDGET CATEGORY AND LINE ITEM DETAIL A. Personal Services — Salaries/Employee Benefits CJA08 CJAD9 COST Police Officer Salary (CEDV investigator) $0 Police Corporal Jim White @ .75 l'TE 100,247 $100,247 Salary $80,948.92 $0 $0 Educational Incentive Pay $ 2,428.45 $0 Bilingual Pay $2,428.45 $0 Longevity Pay $ 480.22 $0 LTD $ 234.00 $o Uniform Allowance $ 750.00 $0 Total Salary & Special Pay = $87,270.04 $0 $0 so Benefits $0 Life Insurance $ 132.00 $0 Health insurance $ 4,747.32 $0 Workers Comp $ 8,491.35 $0 PERS $31,207.14 $0 EPMC $ 548.34 $0 Medicare $ 1,265.41 $0 Total Benefits = $46,391.56 $0 $0 Iota! Salary & Benefits = $133,661.60 $0 $0 75% of Total or .75 FTE _ $100,246.20 . $0 $0 $0 $0 Senior Office Assistant - Overtime Data Entry $0 $16.92 per hour @ time and half = $25.38 per hour—approx. 60 $0 hours local = 1,523 $1,523 (Needed to enter backlog of data Into required database.) $0 $0 $0 Crime Analyst - Overtime $0 For implementation and development of database. $25.37 per hour $0 @ time and half = $38.06 per hour approx. 30 hours total = 1,142 $1,142 (Needed to develop and implement required CEDV database using so capable in-house personnel utilizing Microsoft Office Access $0 database management system.) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 — _ Personal Section Totals[ $0 $102,912 $102,912 PERSONAL TOTALQ4n,Q49 CalEMA 2-106c (formerly OES A303c (Revised 2/1/2009) BUDGET CATEGORY AND LINE ITEM DETAIL A. Personal Services - Salaries/Employe Benefits CJA08 CJA09 COST Police Officer Salary (CEDV Investigator) $0 Police Corporal Jim White @ .75 FTE 100,247 S100,247 SO Salary $80,948.92 $0 Educational Incentive Pay $ 2,428.45 $0 Bilingual Pay $2,428.45 SO Longevity Pay $ 480.22 $0 LTD $ 234.00 $0 Uniform Allowance 1_750.00 $0 Total Salary & Special Pay = $87,270.04 SO SO $0 Benefits $0 Life Insurance $ 132.00 $$0 Health Insurance $ 4,747.32 $0 Workers Comp $ 8,491.35 $0 PERS $31,207.14 $0 EPMC $ 548.34 $0 Medicare $ 1,265.41 $0 Total Benefits = $46,391.56 so $0 Total Salary & Benefits = $133,681.60 $0 $0 75% of Total or .75 FTE _ $100,246.20 $0 $0 $0 $0 Senior Office Assistant - Overtime Data Entry SO $16.92 per hour @ time and half = $25.38 per hour--approx. 60 SO hours total = 1,523 51.523 (Needed to enter backlog of data into required database.) SO SO 50 Crime Analyst - Overtime 50 For implementation and development of database. $25.37 per hour $0 © time and half = $38.06 per hourapprox. 30 hours total = 1,142 $1,142 (Needed to develop and implement required CEDV database using 50 capable In-house personnel utilizing Microsoft Office Access $0 database management system.) $O S0 50 $0 $0 Personal Section Totals $0 $102,912 $102,912 PERSONAL TOTAL 5102,912 CamEMA 2-106c (formerly OES A303c (Revised 2/1/2009) BUDGET CATEGORY AND LINE ITEM DETAIL 8. Operating Expenses (page 1) CJA08 CJA09 COST Consultant (Dr. T. Herman) S20,000 $20,000 Dr. Herman will evaluate the CEDV program $0 $0 Cell Phone and Service 808 $808 Cost of cellular phone and service for CEOV Officer, $0 Calculated @ $67.33 x 12 months $0 $0 Eq-uiprnent (Under $5,000 per itern) Advocate Computer 2,500 $2,500 Advocate Printer 300 $300 Training 10,000 $10,000 (For CEDV Officer and Advocate) SO Subsistence (lodging and meals) 50% $5,000 So Tuition 20% $2,000 SO Travel 20% $2,000 SO Incidentals 10% $1,000 SO SO Printing 2,500 $2,500 (Funds to cover costs for materials and printing such as brochures and other documents used in the CEDV program.) - SO Sub -Contract - South Bay Community Services 50,600 $50,600 (Provide advocate staff to do follow-up and response to NCPD DV SO calls, Participate in the CEDV-SRP team and respond to DV calls $0 where children are present. Participate in the cross•Iraininy, $0 protocol development, data sharing and program coordination.) $0 $0 Breakdown of SI3CS sub -contractor's cost: SO Personnel Sgrvices $0 FTE Program Director @ B% x $65,000 = $ 5,200 $0 FTE Advocate if $18.50/hr. x 12 mats x 50% _ $19,240 $0 PTE DVRT On -Calf Staff @ $751shlft x 50% = $9,750 $0 FTE Contract Compliance @ $17.50Ihr. x $0 12 mths x 10% = $3,640 $0 Sub -Total Salaries $37,986 $O Fica @ 7.65% - $2,894 S0 Sui @ 1.1689% of first $7,000 In eaemings = $ 330 $0 Insurance Workers Comp c@ 2% _ $ 752 $0 Pension $13,41 x 12 mitts x .10 FTE _ $ 198 $O Hearth Insurance @ $221m1h x 12 x .70 FTE = $ 3,660 SO Total Salary and Benefits $45,670 $0 Operatina senses 50 Mitage @ 214 mileslmth x $ .550 $ 1,416 SO Office Supplies @ $421rnth $ 504 $0 Communications @ $50/mth x 12 mths $ 600 $0 Total Non -Personnel $ 2,520 $0 Total Direct Cost S48,190- SO So Consultant 20,000 $20,000 Required 20% of grant Indirect Costs 4,380 $4,380 Calculated @ 5% or less of allowable Direct Costs CatEMA 2-106c (formerly DES A303c (Revised 2/1/2009) 10 BUDGET CATEGORY AND LINE ITEM DETAIL B. Operating (page 2) CJA08 CJA09 COST NCPD Dispatcher Headsets (12 headsets) $2,400 $2,400 (Dispatchers are the first point of contact with DV victims who call using the 911 system. Headsets allow dispatchers to hear victims clearly and without background poises.) CD/DVD Burner $1,500 $1,500 Multi -CD burner for duplicating evidence photo CDs Computer Equipment for CEDV Advocate $500 $500 Advocate Projector $500 $0 (For use in group counseling and CEDV-related presanlations.) SO Cell Phone and Service for CEDV Officer $1,000 $1,000 Cost of cell phone/service for CEDV Officer calculated $0 at $83.33 x 12 months $0 $0 Training For CEDV Officer and Advocate $10,000 $10,000 Subsistence (lodging and meals) 50% $5,000 $0 Tuition 20% $2,000 $O Travel 20% $2,000 $0 Incidentals 10% $1,000 SO $0 Training For NCPD Patrol Officers and Dispatchers $10,000 S10,000 (Patrol Officers and dispatchers will benefit from DV training, and $0 will share those experiences with department through line-up training) $0 Subsistence (lodging and meals) 50% $3,750 $0 Tuition 20% $1,500 $0 Travel 20% $1,500 W0 Incidentals 10% $750 $0 $O Printing & Brochures $3,285 $3,285 Funds to cover costs for materials and printing used in CEDV prog. $0 $0 1 1 1 $0 1 $0 $0 Section Totals $48,685 591,088 $139,773 Operating Totals 1,7"1 403 44't:4440:44 ••P4° tJ '...6:4• ,f4..1,1. ••AM.MA.if• A.4�•.*:4:..;*14•M•4.:41. •:40,040 0:0 011•••PO VA,..Pt :;*:••X.X.Y•:4.:0.6 •• •4• •t•4'.. ••. 44•••°M.2.94.•• e.s 4.,ss,•.A.•ra.:a 4:44 :4: •0•0•• :4m. f.•. .1..AA...f.•...1..J..�I.f,,., �1A.A......•.I.I.A•.....MCI...•AA•i.A4..,•.IMwAM.%i.MA.•.%•.•.f.1VLA4,iiri..f.N..,/.IrR d 41Co •0•pdp••• .• �. ••. .• . 4• %• r .�A.%1�9tM.�R•.•A..:�.�: .. CaiEMA 2.106c (formerly OES A303c (Revised 2/1/2009) BUDGET CATEGORY AND LINE ITEM DETAIL C. Equipment CJAOS CJA09 COST $0 Vehicle for CEDV Officer $30,000 $30,000 (CEDV Officer does not have an assigned vehicle and frequently must use vehicles assigned to other units in order to respond to scenes or conduct other CEDV activity.) SO $0 Digital Voice Recorders for Patrol Officers 6,000 $6,000 (Needed to record interview statements during DV investigations-- SO $150 x 40 Patrol Officers.) SO SO S0 SO S0 SO SO SO $0 $0 $0 S0 S0 $0 $0 $0 30 SO $0 $0 $0 S0 $0 S0 SD $0 $0 S0 $0 $0 SO SO SO Equipment Section Totals $30,000 $6.000 $36,000 EQUIPMENT TOTAL 36,000 •• S..,w.OAnn n.. .nn,.w..•wn �..%nw .s..'iCes'u! •w.n 4'w. n.♦aaww•iw4w44•�T.'i!i.°.!iA4wAYwi•.!uAii°R.nA•bl!Jni!i'w�J.r Stj11)e,1s Block 1wG oit.GrenfAVlarU F„3co SUeoi 7(, 1at3 J CaIEIviA 2-106c (formerly OES A303c (Revised 2/1/2009) ACCFRD® CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE (MMIDOIYYYY) OP ID AW SOUT-17 07/15/10 PRODUCER Teague Insurance Agency, Inc. License #0525512 4700 Spring St., 4th Floor La Mesa CA 91942 Phone:619-464-6651 Fax:619-464-1901 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC # INSURED South Bay Community Services Inc 1124 Bay Blvd., Suite D Chula Vista CA 91911 INSURERA: American States Ins. Co. INSURER aZenith Insurance Company INSURER C: INSURER D: INSURER E: COVERAGES THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. AGGREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. 1NSR LTR ADU L NSRE TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFFECTIVE DATE (MMIDD/YYYY) POLICY EXPIRATION DATE (MMIDDIYYYY) LIMITS A GENERAL X LIABILITY COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY VIC1382969 01C1382969 07/08/10 07/08/11 EACH OCCURRENCE s1,000,000 UAMA[�E I E ncI Elie PREMISES(Eaocm, nce) I$.100,000 X CLAIMS MADE 1 I OCCUR MED EXP (Any one person) $ 5 , 000 X GENT -1 —1 Retro Date 7/1/92 PERSONAL&ADV INJURY i$ 1,000,000 GENERAL AGGREGATE $3,000,000 AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: POLICY PRO- X LOC PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG '$3,000,000 A AUTOMOBILE X X X LIABILITY ANY AUTO ALL OWNED AUTOS SCHEDULED AUTOS HIRED AUTOS NON -OWNED AUTOS 24CC28479710 07/07/10 07/08/11 COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT $ 1,000,000 (Ea accident) BODILY INJURY $ (Per person) BODILY INJURY ' $ (Per accident) PROPER IT DAMAGE j $ (Per accident) GARAGE LIABILITY ANY AUTO AUTO ONLY - EA ACCIDENT t$ OTHER THAN EA ACC i $ AUTO ONLY: AGG i $ A EXCESS I UMBRELLA LIABILITY OCCUR X CLAIMS MADE DEDUCTIBLE RETENTION $ 01XS159863 07/08/10 07/08/11 EACH OCCURRENCE I $ 4 , 000 , 000 AGGREGATE j$4,000,000 $ B WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVj OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? (Mandatory in NH) If yes, describe under SPECIAL PROVISIONS below Z069607103 01/01/10 01/01/11 WC SI A IU- 01H- TORY LIMITS ER E.L_EACH ACCIDENT I$1,000,000 E. L DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $ 1 , 0 00 , 000 E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT I $ 1,000,000 A A OTHER Professional Liab. Sexual Misconduct 01CI382969 07/08/10 07/08/11 Incident $1,000,000 Agg. $3,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS I LOCATIONS / VEHICLES / EXCLUSIONS ADDED BY ENDORSEMENT 1 SPECIAL PROVISIONS The Certificate Holder is added as Additional Insured for General Liability Coverage but only as their interest may appear with respect to the operations of the Named Insured. * 10. Day Notice of Cancellation Applies for Non Payment of Premium CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION City of National City Community Development Commission of National City 140 E. 12th Street, #B National City CA 91950 ACORD 25I (2009/01) SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING INSURER WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL 30 * DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO DO SO SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY OF ANY KIND UPON THE INSURER, ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES. AD MORIZED REPRESENTATIVE / �,l y © 1988-2009 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD 13 ,AR a® CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE PRODUCER Teague Insurance Agency, Inc. License #0525512 4700 Spring St., 4th Floor La Mesa CA 91942 Phone:619-464-6851 Fax:619-464-1901 OP ID S4 SOUT-17 DATE (MMIDO/YYYY) 07/08/10 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE I NAIC NSUREO South Bay Community Services Inc. 1124 Ba Blvd., Suite D Chula Vista CA 91911 INSURERA: American States Ins. Co. INSURERS: Zenith Insurance Company INSURERC: General Insurance Co. INSURER D: INSURER E: COVERAGES THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT. TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAYBE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS. EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. AGGREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INSKAUUL LTR NSRD TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFFECTIVE DATE (MMIDD!YYYY) POLICY EXPIRATION DATE (MMIDD/YYYY) LIMITS A X GENERAL X LIABILITY COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY 01CI382969 _ 07/08/10 07/08/11 EACH OCCURRENCE S1,000,000 PREMISES (Ea occurence) $100,000 X CLAIMS MADE OCCUR MED EXP (Any one person) $ 5 , 0 0 0 GEN'L PERSONAL &ADV INJURY S 1,000,000 GENERAL AGGREGATE $3,000,000 AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: POLICY PRO- X LOC JECT PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $3,000,000 C AUTOMOBILE X X X LIABILITY 24CC28479710 07/08/10 07/08/11 COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT (Eaawidenq $1,000,000 BODILY INJURY (Per person) $ BODILY INJURY (Per accident) $ PROPERTY DAMAGE (Per accident) $ GARAGE LIABILITY ANY AUTO AUTO ONLY - EA ACCIDENT $ OTHER THAN EA ACC $ AUTO ONLY: AGG $ EXCESS / UMBRELLA UABIUTY OCCUR I 7 CLAIMS MADE DEDUCTIBLE RETENTION $ EACH OCCURRENCE $ AGGREGATE $ $ $ Si B WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY Y / N ANYPROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIV OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? —J (Mandatory in NH) S yes, PRO',1SIO SPECIAL PROVISIONS belay Z069607103 01/01/10 01/01/11. WC STATU- DTH- X TORY LIMITS ER E.L EACH ACCIDENT $1,000,000 E.L. DISEASE- EA EMPLOYEE S 1 , 000,000 EL DISEASE - POLICY UMFT $ 1,000,000 C OTHER General Ins. Co. CM7745148 RETRO DATE 7/1/92 07/08/10 07/08/11 Occurrent $1,000.,000 Aggregate $3,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS l LOCATIONS / VEHICLES ) EXCLUSIONS ADDED BY ENDORSEMENT SPECIAL PROVISIONS - - The Certificate Holder is added as Additional Insured for General Liability coverage but only as their interest may appear with respect to the operations of the Named Insured. r 10 Days Notice of cancellation for Non -Payment of Premium. CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION The City of National City its elected officials, officers, agents & employees 1243 National city Blvd. National City CA 91950-4301 ACORD 25 (2009/01) SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POUCIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING INSURER WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL 30 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO DO 50 SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY OF ANY KIND UPON THE INSURER, ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES. AUTHORIZED REPRESENygTIVE / I s/ LACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. The ACORD name and logo are registe -d marks of ORD 1`� MME sMINIM s Litxrty Agency Underwriters:. POLICY NUMBER: 01-C I- 3 8 2 9 69-1 COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CG20260704 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. ADDITIONAL INSURED - DESIGNATED PERSON OR ORGANIZATION This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART SCHEDULE Name Of Additional Insured Person(s) Or OrganIzation(s) ANY AND ALL FUNDING SOURCES AS RESPECTS THE INSURED'S OPERATIONS Information required to complete this Schedule, if not shown above, will be shown in the Declarations. Section II - Who Is An Insured is amended to include as an additional insured the person(s) or organization(s) shown in the Schedule, but only with respect to liability for `bodily injury", "property damage" or "personal and advertising injury" caused, in whole or in part, by your acts or omissions or the acts or omissions of those acting on your behalf: A. In the performance of your ongoing operations; or B. In connection with your promises owned by or rented to you. CG 20 26 07 04 C ISO Properties, Inc., 2004 EP 15 FAGf P-PPIP0101-166i-0I561! Wyr Liberty Agency Underwriters„ COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CG7S350207 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. LIABILITY PLUS ENDORSEMENT This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART SCHEDULE Name of Person or Organization: ADDITIONAL INSURED — BY WRITTEN CONTRACT, AGREEMENT OR PERMIT, OR SCHEDULE The following paragraph is added to WHO IS AN INSURED (Section 11): 4. Any person or organization shown in the Sched- ule or for whom you are required by written con- tract, agreement or permit to provide insurance is an insured, subject to the following additional provisions: a. The contract, agreement or permit must be in effect during the policy period shown in the Declarations, and must have been exe- cuted prior to the "bodily injury", "property damage", or "personal and advertising injury". b. The person or organization added as an in- sured by this endorsement is an insured only to the extent you are held liable due to: (1) The ownership, maintenance or use of that part of premises you own, rent, (3) lease or occupy, subject to the following additional provisions: This insurance does not apply to any "occurrence" which takes place after you cease to be a tenant in any premises leased to or rented to you; This insurance does not apply to any structural alterations, new con- struction or demolition operations performed by or on behalf of the person or organization added as an insured; (2) Your ongoing operations for that in- sured, whether the work is performed by you or for you; The maintenance, operation or use by you of equipment leased to you by such person or organization, subject to the following additional provisions: (a) This insurance does not apply to any "occurrence" which takes place after the equipment lease expires; (a) (b) Includes Copyrighted Material of Insurance Services Office, Inc., with its permission. Copyright, Insurance Services, 2001 CG 76 35 02 07 Page 1 of 4 I EP C-AG.12-PR I t1T0G1-1553-0I5&N 11111.11111 v" - MINIPM • WOMEN (b) This insurance does not apply to "bodily injury" or "property darn - age" arising out of the sole negli- gence of such person or organization; (4) Permits issued by any state or political subdivision with respect to operations performed by you or on your behalf, subject to the following additional pro- vision: This insurance does not apply to "bodily injury", "property damage", or "personal and advertising injury" arising out of operations performed for the state or municipality. c. The insurance with respect to any architect, engineer, or surveyor added as an insured by this endorsement does not apply to "bodily injury", "property damage", or "per- sonal and advertising injury" arising out of the rendering of or the failure to render any professional services by or for you, includ- ing: (1) The preparing, approving, or failing to prepare or approve maps, drawings, opinions, reports, surveys, change or- ders, designs or specifications; and (2) Supervisory, inspection or engineering services. d. This insurance does not apply to "bodily injury" or "property damage" included within the "products -completed operations haz- ard". A person's or organization's status as an insured un- der this endorsement ends when your operations for that insured are completed. No coverage will be provided if, in the absence of this endorsement, no liability would be imposed by law on you. Coverage shall be limited to the extent of your negligence or fault according to the applicable princi- ples of comparative fault. NON -OWNED WATERCRAFT AND NON -OWNED AIRCRAFT LIABILITY Exclusion g. of COVERAGE A (Section I) is replaced by the following: g. "Bodily injury" or "property damage" arising out of the ownership, maintenance, use or entrustment to others of any aircraft, "auto" or watercraft owned or operated by or rented or loaned to any insured. Use includes oper- ation and 'loading or unloading". This exclusion applies even if the claims against any insured allege negligence or other wrongdoing in the supervision, hiring, employment, training or monitoring of others by that insured, if the "occurrence" which caused the 'bodily. injury" or "property damage" involved the ownership, mainte- nance, use or entrustment to others of any aircraft, "auto" or watercraft that is owned or operated by or rented or loaned to any in- sured. This exclusion does not apply to: (1) A watercraft while ashore on premises you own or rent; (2) A watercraft you do not own that is: (a) Less than 52 feet long; and (b) Not being used to carry persons or property for a charge; (3) Parking an "auto" on, or on the ways next to, premises you own or rent, pro- vided the "auto" is not owned by or rented or loaned to you or the insured; (4) Liability assumed under any 'insured contract" for the ownership, mainte- nance or use of aircraft or watercraft; or (5) "Bodily injury" or "property damage" arising out of: (a) the operation of machinery or equipment that is attached to, or part of, a land vehicle that would quality under the definition of "mobile equipment" if it were not subject to a compulsory or financial responsibility law or other motor ve- hicle insurance law in the state where it is licensed or principally garaged; or the operation of any of the machin- ery or equipment listed in Paragraph f.(2) or L(3) of .the definition of "mobile equipment". (6) An aircraft you do not own provided it is not operated by any insured. TENANTS' PROPERTY DAMAGE LIABILITY When a Damage To Premises Rented To You Limit is shown in the Declarations, Exclusion J. of Coverage A, Section 1 is replaced by the following: J. Damage To Property "Property damage" to: (1) Property you own, rent, or occupy, including any costs or expenses incurred by you, or Page 2 of 4 (b) zl FArrt Y-PNI N rmm1-I 663 0I59- (2) (3) any other person, organization or entity, for repair, replacement, enhancement, restora- tion or maintenance of such property for any reason, including prevention of injury to a person or damage to another's property; Premises you sell, give away or abandon, if the "property damage" arises out of any part of those premises; Property loaned to you; (4) Personal property in the care, custody or control of the insured; That particular part of real property on which you or any contractors or subcontractors working directly or indirectly on your behalf are performing operations, if the "property damage" arises out of those operations, or That particular part of any property that must be restored, repaired or replaced because 'your work" was incorrectly pertormed on it. Paragraphs (1), (3) and (4) of this exclusion do not apply to 'property damage" (other than damage by fire) to premises, including the con- tents of such premises, rented to you. A separate limit of insurance applies to Damage To Prem- ises Rented To You as described in Section 111 — Limits Of Insurance. Paragraph (2) of this exclusion does not apply if the premises are "your work" and were never occupied, rented or held for rental by you. Paragraphs (3), (4), (5)- and (6) of this exclusion do not apply to liability assumed under a side- track agreement. Paragraph (6) of this exclusion does not apply to "property damage" included in the "products - completed operations hazard". (5) (6) Paragraph 6. of LIMITS OF INSURANCE (Section III) is replaced by the following: 6. Subject to 5. above, the Damage To Premises Rented To You Limit is the most we will pay un- der Coverage A tor damages because of "property damage" to any one premises, while rented to you, or in the case of damage by fire, while rented to you or temporarily occupied by you with permission of the owner. The Damage To Premises Rented To You limit is the higher of the Each Occurrence Limit shown in the Declarations or the amount shown in the Declarations as Damage To Premises Rented To You Limit. WHO IS AN INSURED — MANAGERS The following is added to Paragraph 2.a. of WHO IS AN INSURED (Section 11): Paragraph (1) does not apply to executive officers, or to managers at the supervisory level or above. SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS — COVERAGES A AND B — BAIL BONDS — TIME OFF FROM WORK Paragraph 1.b. of SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS — COVERAGES A AND B is replaced by the following: b. Up to $3,000 for cost of bail bonds required because of accidents or traffic law violations arising out of the. use of any vehicle to which the Bodily Injury Liability Coverage applies. We do not have to furnish these bonds. Paragraph 1.d. of SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS — COVERAGES A AND B is replaced by the following: d. All reasonable expenses incurred by the in- sured at our request to assist us in the in- vestigation or defense of the claim or "suit", including actual loss of earnings up to $500 a day because of time off from work. EMPLOYEES AS INSUREDS — HEALTH CARE SERVICES Provision 2.a.(1)(d) of WHO IS AN INSURED (Section II) is deleted, unless excluded by separate endorse- ment. EXTENDED COVERAGE FOR NEWLY ACQUIRED ORGANIZATIONS Provision 3.a. of WHO IS AN INSURED (Section II) is replaced by the following: a- Coverage under this provision is afforded only until the end of the policy period. EXTENDED' PROPERTY DAMAGE" Exclusion a. of COVERAGE A (Section 1) is replaced by the following: a. "Bodily injury or "property damage" expected or intended from the standpoint of the insured. This exclusion does not apply to "bodily injury" or `property damage" resulting from the use of reasonable force to protect persons or property. CG 76 35 02 07 Page 3 of 4 18 EP C-AG-12-PRINT001-106301e0-N MINIMA EXTENDED DEFINITION OF BODILY INJURY Paragraph 3. of DEFINITIONS (Section V) is replaced by the following: 3. "Bodily injury" means bodily injury, sickness or disease sustained by a person, including mental anguish or death resulting from any of these at any time. TRANSFER OF RIGHTS OF RECOVERY The following is added to Paragraph 8. Transfer Of Rights Of Recovery Against Others To Us of COM- MERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CONDITIONS (Sec- tion IV): We waive any rights of recovery we may have against any person or organization because of payments we make for injury or damage arising out of your ongoing operations or "your work" done under a contract with that person or organization and included in the "products -completed operations hazard". This waiver applies only to a person or organization for whom you are required by written contract, agreement or permit to waive these rights of recovery. AGGREGATE LIMITS OF INSURANCE — PER LOCATION For all sums which the insured becomes legally obli- gated to pay as damages caused by "occurrences" under COVERAGE A (Section I), and for all medical expenses caused by accidents under COVERAGE C (Section I), which can be attributed only to operations at a single ."location": Paragraphs 2.a. and 2.b. of Limits of Insurance (Sec- tion III) apply separately to each of your locations" owned by or rented to you. "Location" means premises involving the same or connecting lots, or premises whose connection is interrupted only by a street, roadway, waterway, or right-of-way of .a railroad. INCREASED MEDICAL EXPENSE LIMIT The Medical Expense Limit is amended to $10,000. KNOWLEDGE OF OCCURRENCE The following is added to Paragraph 2. Duties In The Event 0f Occurrence, Offense, Claim 0r Suit of COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CONDITIONS (Section IV): Knowledge of an "occurrence", claim or "suit" by your agent, servant or employee shall not in itself constitute knowledge of the named insured unless an officer of the named insured has received such notice from the agent, servant or employee. UNINTENTIONAL FAILURE TO DISCLOSE ALL HAZARDS The following is added to Paragraph 6. Representa- tions of COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CONDI- TIONS (Section IV): ff you unintentionally fail to disclose any hazards ex- isting at the inception date of your policy, we will not deny coverage under this Coverage Form because of such failure. However, this provision does not affect our right to collect additional premium or exercise our right of cancellation or non -renewal. LIBERALIZATION CLAUSE The following paragraph is added to COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CONDITIONS (Section IV): 10. tf a revision to this Coverage Part, which would provide more coverage with no additional pre- mium, becomes effective during the policy period in the state shown in the Declarations, your pol- icy will automatically provide this additional cov- erage on the effective date of the revision. Page 4 01 4 C-AG-12-PRINT0014663-0161-N WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS LIABILITY INSURANCE POLICY TheZenith° WAIVER OF OUR RIGHT TO RECOVER FROM OTHERS ENDORSEMENT We have the right to recover our payments from anyone liable for an injury covered by this policy. We will not enforce our right against the person or organization named in the Schedule_ You must maintain payroll records accurately segregating the remuneration of your employees while engaged in the work described in the Schedule. The additional premium for this endorsement shall be 5% of the California workers compensation premium otherwise due on such remuneration. Minimum Premium: $0 Schedule Person Or Organization CITY OF NATIONAL CITY CIO CITY ATTORNEY OFFICE 1243 NATIONAL CITY BOULEVARD NATIONAL CITY, CA 91950 RE: ALL CALIFORNIA OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED This endorsement changes the policy to which it is attached and is effective on the date issued unless otherwise stated. Endorsement Effective 01/01/10 Insured SOUTH BAY CO1lIMUNITYSERVICES Policy No. Z069607103 Policy Period 01/01/10 To 01/01/11 Issued On 02/01/10 WC-04-03-06B (Ed. 10-07) At San Diego, CA AGENT COPY ZENITHINSURANCE COMPANY 1111 PRESIDENT Endorsement No. 17 IMPORTANT If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must be endorsed. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). If SUBROGATION. IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy,.certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer tights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). DISCLAIMER This Certificate of Insurance does not constitute a contract between the issuing insurer(s), authorized representative or producer, and the certificate holder, nor does it affirmatively or negatively amend, extend or alter the coverage afforded by the policies listed thereon. ACORD 25 (2009101) c/o City Attorney's Office CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO.15 M TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City approving the City Council's Response to 2009/2010 Grand Jury Report on Medical Marijuana, and authorizing the Mayor to execute said Response to the Grand Jury PREPARED BY: Claudia G. Silva PHONE: Ext. 4222 EXPLANATION: DEPARTMENT: ity Attorney APPROVED BY: Please see attached memorandum. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. N/A ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the response to the Grand Jury and authorize the Mayor to execute the response. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: norandum vuLy Council's Response to the Grand Jury Mayor Ron Morrison Council Members Alejandra Sotelo-Solis Jess Van Deventer Rosalie Zarate piegsRPOHig�D Office of the City Attorney City Attomey Claudia Gacitua Silva Special Legal Counsel George H. Eiser, III Senior Assistant City Attorney Jodi L. Doucette TO: Mayor and City Council DATE: August 17, 2010 FROM: City Attorney SUBJECT: City Council's Response to 2009/2010 Grand Jury Report on Medical Marijuana The San Diego County Grand Jury issued a report entitled "Medical Marijuana". The Grand Jury's Report focused on the County of San Diego and the City of San Diego, but requested the City Councils of the other cities in the County, including National City, to respond to certain recommendations made by the Grand Jury. Specifically, the Grand Jury made two findings that reference National City, and requested responses to three recommendations. Penal Code Section 933 and 933.05 set forth the requirements for responding to Grand Jury reports. As to each grand jury Finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: 1) The respondent agrees with the finding, or 2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. As to each grand jury Recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: 1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action, or 2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation, or 3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report, or 4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. Attached is the City Council's response to the Grand Jury re rt in comp' ce with the Penal Code. audia G. City At o ey 1243 National City Boulevard; National City, California 91950-4301 Tel.: (619) 336.4220 Fax: (619) 336.4327 August 17, 2010 The Honorable Kevin A. Enright Presiding Judge, Superior Court County of San Diego Hall of Justice 330 West Broadway, Suite 477 San Diego, CA 92101-3830 RE: Response to 2009/2010 Grand Jury Report: "Medical Marijuana in San Diego" Dear Judge Enright: The City of National City is in receipt of the San Diego County Grand Jury report entitled, "Medical Marijuana in San Diego" dated May 28, 2010. In accordance with California Penal Code Section 933(c), the City of National City is responding to the findings and recommendations made by the Grand Jury Report which reference the City of National City: Finding #05: Adopting a cost neutral zoning and land use ordinances is an effective method for the licensing, regulation and periodic inspection of cooperatives and collectives distributing medical marijuana in the unincorporated areas and eighteen cities of San Diego County. Response: The City of National City disagrees with this fording. There is insufficient information to find that cost neutral zoning and land use ordinances would be effective with respect to medicinal marijuana distribution, given the adverse secondary effects of medicinal marijuana dispensaries. The alleged effectiveness is questionable in light of the overall impact to the health, safety and welfare of the community. Finding #10: The current moratorium on the opening of cooperatives and collectives distributing medical marijuana in the unincorporated areas of San Diego County and the cities of Chula Vista, Imperial Beach, National City, Oceanside and Santee deprives some qualified medical marijuana patients of access to marijuana in their communities. Response: Respondent disagrees with this finding. The City of National City is immediately adjacent to the City of San Diego to the east and north. The Grand Jury Report references more than 100 dispensaries exist within the City of San Diego. Thus, qualified patients can access dispensaries in relative proximity. Mayor Ron Morrison 1243 National City Boulevard, National City, CA 91950-4301 619/336-4233 Fax 619/336-4239 www.nationalcityca.gov ey Page Two The Honorable Kevin A. Enright August 17, 2010 Recommendation 10-120: Enact an ordinance to establish a cost neutral program for the licensing, regulation and monitoring of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives, and establish a limit on the number of such facilities. Response: This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable at this time. Currently, the City of National City has adopted a moratorium banning dispensaries. The moratorium articulated the reasons for prohibiting dispensaries for an additional year. The reasoning stated in the moratorium still applies. Moreover, as this Grand Jury Report references, there is a pending appellate court decision in the matter of Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim, in which the issue of dispensary bans is central. In addition, California Proposition 19, the Marijuana Legalization Initiative is on the November ballot. The discussion of whether to enact such an ordinance may be appropriate after the court case is decided and the ballot initiative is voted upon. Recommendation 10-121: Adopt regulations which would allow for the closure of all unlicensed "dispensaries." Response: This recommendation has already been implemented based on the current land use code which provides that only permitted uses can exist and violations of the land use code can be pursued by both civil and criminal enforcement. Recommendation 10-122: Upon the enactment of such an ordinance, rescind the current moratorium on the opening of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives. Response: This recommendation requires further analysis. Dependent upon the outcome of the pending case and pending ballot initiative, the City of National City may need to take additional action. It is speculative at this time, however, to determine what that action may be. Very truly yours, Ron Morrison Mayor cc: City Councilmembers Chris Zapata, City Manager Leslie Deese, Assistant City Manager Claudia Silva, City Attorney Adolfo Gonzales, Police Chief RESOLUTION NO. 2010 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY APPROVING THE CITY COUNCIL'S RESPONSE TO THE 2009/2010 GRAND JURY REPORT ON MEDICAL MARIJUANA, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID REPORT WHEREAS, the San Diego County Grand Jury issued a report entitled "Medical Marijuana in San Diego", which focused on the County of San Diego and the City of San Diego, but requested the City Councils of the other cities in the County, including National City, to respond to certain findings and recommendations made by the Grand Jury; and WHEREAS, specifically, the Grand Jury made two findings that reference National City, and requested responses to three recommendations; and WHEREAS, the City Council's response to the Grand Jury Report is attached as Exhibit "A". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of National City hereby approves the City Council's response to the Grand Jury Report. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the City Council's response to the Grand Jury Report. PASSED and ADOPTED this 17th day of August, 2010. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Claudia G. Silva, Esq. City Attorney August 17, 2010 The Honorable Kevin A. Enright Presiding Judge, Superior Court County of San Diego Hall of Justice 330 West Broadway, Suite 477 San Diego, CA 92101-3830 RE: Response to 2009/2010 Grand Jury Report: "Medical Marijuana in San Diego" Dear Judge Enright: The City of National City is in receipt of the San Diego County Grand Jury report entitled, "Medical Marijuana in San Diego" dated May 28, 2010. In accordance with California Penal Code Section 933(c), the City of National City is responding to the findings and recommendations made by the Grand Jury Report which reference the City of National City: Finding #05: Adopting a cost neutral zoning and land use ordinances is an effective method for the licensing, regulation and periodic inspection of cooperatives and collectives distributing medical marijuana in the unincorporated areas and eighteen cities of San Diego County. Response: The City of National City disagrees with this finding. There is insufficient information to find that cost neutral zoning and land use ordinances would be effective with respect to medicinal marijuana distribution, given the adverse secondary effects of medicinal marijuana dispensaries. The alleged effectiveness is questionable in light of the overall impact to the health, safety and welfare of the community. Finding #10: The current moratorium on the opening of cooperatives and collectives distributing medical marijuana in the unincorporated areas of San Diego County and the cities of Chula Vista, Imperial Beach, National City, Oceanside and Santee deprives some qualified medical marijuana patients of access to marijuana in their communities. Response: Respondent disagrees with this finding. The City of National City is immediately adjacent to the City of San Diego to the east and north. The Grand Jury Report references more than 100 dispensaries exist within the City of San Diego. Thus, qualified patients can access dispensaries in relative proximity. Mayor Ron Morrison 1243 National City Boulevard, National City, CA 91950-4301 619/336-4233 Fax 619/336-4239 www.nationalcityca.gov Page Two The I Ionorable Kevin A. Enright August 17, 2010 Recommendation 10-120: Enact an ordinance to establish a cost neutral program for the licensing, regulation and monitoring of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives, and establish a limit on the number of such facilities. Response: This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable at this time. Currently, the City of National City has adopted a moratorium banning dispensaries. The moratorium articulated the reasons for prohibiting dispensaries for an additional year. The reasoning stated in the moratorium still applies. Moreover, as this Grand Jury Report references, there is a pending appellate court decision in the matter of Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim, in which the issue of dispensary bans is central. In addition, California Proposition 19, the Marijuana Legalization Initiative is on the November ballot. The discussion of whether to enact such an ordinance may be appropriate after the court case is decided and the ballot initiative is voted upon. Recommendation 10-121: Adopt regulations which would allow for the closure of all unlicensed "dispensaries." Response: This recommendation has already been implemented based on the current land use code which provides that only permitted uses can exist and violations of the land use code can be pursued by both civil and criminal enforcement. Recommendation 10-122: Upon the enactment of such an ordinance, rescind the current moratorium on the opening of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives. Response: This recommendation requires further analysis. Dependent upon the outcome of the pending case and pending ballot initiative, the City of National City may need to take additional action. It is speculative at this time, however, to determine what that action may be. Very truly yours, Ron Morrison Mayor cc: City Councilmembers Chris Zapata, City Manager Leslie Deese, Assistant City Manager Claudia Silva, City Attorney Adolfo Gonzales, Police Chief GRAND JURY County of San Diego Hall of Justice 330 W. Broadway, Suite 477 San Diego, CA 92101-3830 (619) 515-8707 Fax (619) 515-8696 VICTORIA D. STUBBLEFIELD, Foreperson May 28, 2010 CONFIDENTIAL SEE ATTACHED LISTING OF RESPONDING AGENCIES Re: Grand Jury Report: "Medical Marijuana In San Diego", Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury herewith provides the referenced report for your review and comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with the Penal Code of California §933(c). This report was prepared pursuant to §§925. and 925(a) of the Penal Code. In accordance with Penal Code §933.05(e), a copy of this report is being provided to affected agencies two working days prior to its public release and after being approved by the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Please note that §933.05(e) specifies that no officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to its public release. This report will be filed with the Clerk of the Court and released to the public on Monday, June 7, 2010. Sincerely yours, VICTORIA D. STUBBLEFIELD, Foreperson 2009/2010 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY VDS//Iln enc. Mailing List for Medical Marijuana Grand Jury Report: District Attorney, County of San Diego Sheriff, County of San Diego Board of Supervisors, County of San Diego Mayor, City of San Diego City Council, City of San Diego City Council, City of El Cajon City Council, City of Escondido City Council, City of San Marcos City Council, City of Vista City Council, City of Chula Vista City Council, City of Imperial Beach City Council, City of National City City Council, City of Oceanside City Council, City of Santee City Council, City of Carlsbad City Council, City of Coronado City Council, City of Del Mar City Council, City of Encinitas City Council, City of La Mesa City Council, City of Lemon Grove City Council, City of Poway City Council, City of Solana Beach MEDICAL MARIJUANA IN SAN DIEGO A Report by the 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury filed June 7, 2010 MEDICAL MARIJUANA IN SAN DIEGO INTRODUCTION The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury received more complaints on the subject of medical marijuana than on any other subject. The common thread of these complaints is the lack of clear and uniform guidelines under which qualified medical marijuana patients can obtain marijuana. The threat of reprisals against these patients and their suppliers by law enforcement agents was also a common concern. The collateral issue is the proliferation of storefront medical marijuana "dispensaries" in the City of San Diego, many of which community members allege are operating illegally. These issues have been compounded by a legislative/judicial quagmire of conflicting federal, State and local regulations and court decisions. The 2009 California Police Chief's Association "white paper" refers to the catch-22 in which local public entities are ensnared in trying to reconcile California's medical marijuana laws on one hand and federal regulations on the other. This report seeks to balance the concerns of patients for whom the use of medical marijuana has legally and legitimately been recommended with the concerns of residents disturbed by the activities that surround marijuana stores opening in their communities. This balance can be achieved by the adoption of enforceable ordinances for the licensing and monitoring of a limited number of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives in the eighteen cities and the unincorporated areas of the County. These collectives and cooperatives should be operated in strict accordance with the regulations in Senate Bill 420 (in effect as of January 1, 2004) and the guidelines set forth by the State Attorney General in August 2008. Until such ordinances can be put into effect, the Grand Jury is suggesting the enactment of an immediate moratorium on the opening of additional storefront dispensaries in the City of San Diego. The San Diego County District Attorney's Office has coordinated the execution of search warrants in the current fiscal year on a number of storefront dispensaries allegedly operating illegally. There are some operators of collectives and cooperatives who are trying to operate within the law. Consequently, the Grand Jury believes that the District Attorney's Office should publish a position paper to outline what it considers the legal and illegal operation of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives and should also establish a Medical Marijuana Advisory Council as a forum to engage in an ongoing dialogue with the operators, patients, and members of the public. Disclaimer: The report does not endorse or condone the illegal use of drugs. The report does not address the issue of whether marijuana has any medicinal value. California law is clear: the cultivation and possession of marijuana is not punishable under State law when necessary for medical purposes and authorized by a physician. 1 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) INVESTIGATION The Grand Jury: • Researched applicable federal, State and local laws and court cases • Researched the laws, regulations and guidelines of the fourteen other states that have medical marijuana programs, with the objective of identifying common successful best practices • Researched practices in other selected cities and counties in the State • Obtained and analyzed regulations for the County of San Diego and each of its eighteen cities • Monitored the activities and recommendations of the City of San Diego's Medical Marijuana Task Force • Interviewed selected Medical Marijuana Task Force members and elected officials • Interviewed community members who have identified possibly illegal dispensaries in their neighborhoods • Interviewed operators of marijuana collectives and visited two collectives • Interviewed County and City health and medical officials • Interviewed law enforcement personnel and reviewed the 2009 White Paper on Medical Marijuana Dispensaries published by the California Police Chiefs Association • Interviewed medical marijuana patients • Interviewed four attorneys with experience in medical marijuana issues • Observed operations of the Medical Marijuana ID. Card Program operated by the County Health and Human Services Agency • Reviewed and partially adapted the report of the 2004/2005 Grand Jury entitled The Politics of Medical Marijuana • Researched the web sites of the Medical Review Board of California and the Osteopathic Review Board of California Issues Identified: The purpose of the study is to identify the steps the County of San Diego and its eighteen cities have taken to implement the State of California's Compassionate Use Act of 1996. As a result of the Grand Jury's investigation, the following issues have been identified: • Lack of uniform guidelines for patient eligibility and identification • Lack of uniform guidelines for the licensing and regulation of operators of cooperatives, collectives and "dispensaries" • Moratoria and outright bans on medical marijuana distribution outlets in many communities in San Diego County • Conflicting federal, State and local regulations • Community outrage and possible criminal activity associated with unregulated storefront and mobile "dispensaries" • Large scale cash transactions not subject to audit; potential for tax fraud • Limited number of physicians prescribing marijuana; incomplete diagnoses based on patient's reporting of symptoms • Lack of dialogue between law enforcement agencies and patient advocacy groups 2 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) DISCUSSION Federal Law: Marijuana is a Schedule I Controlled Substance The Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq., makes it unlawful to "manufacture, distribute, or dispense, or possess with intent to manufacture, distribute, or dispense" any controlled substance. It is also a crime to possess any controlled substance except as authorized by the Act. Persons who violate federal law are subject to criminal and civil penalties. The restrictions that the Controlled Substances Act places on the manufacture, distribution, and possession of a controlled substance depend upon the schedule in which the drug has been placed. Since the Controlled Substances Act was enacted in 1970, marijuana has been classified as a Schedule I controlled substance. According to 21 U.S.C. 812(b) (1) (A)-(C), a drug is listed in Schedule I, the most restrictive schedule, if the following findings have been made: "(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse. (B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States. (C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision." Under federal law, it is unlawful to manufacture, distribute, dispense, or possess marijuana or any other Schedule I drug, except as part of a strictly controlled research project that has been registered with the Drug Enforcement Administration and approved by the Food and Drug Administration. In the case of Gonzales v. Raich, the United States Supreme Court declared that, despite the attempts of several states to legalize marijuana partially, it continues to be wholly illegal since it is classified as a Schedule I drug under federal law. The Controlled Substances Act does not recognize the medical use of marijuana. As such, there are no exceptions to its illegality. Over the past thirty years, there have been several attempts to have marijuana reclassified to a different schedule which would permit medical use of the drug. These attempts have all failed. The June 6, 2005 Gonzales v. Raich decision upheld the federal ban on the use of marijuana even where states approve its use for medicinal purposes. The mere categorization of marijuana as "medical" by some states fails to carve out any legally recognized exception regarding the drug. The government argued that if a single exception was made to the Controlled Substances Act, it would become unenforceable in practice. SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) A dissenting opinion in the Gonzalez v. Raich case stated "a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country." While the Drug Enforcement Administration has been very active in raiding medical marijuana dispensaries in California in the recent past, and arresting and prosecuting their principal operators under federal law in selected cases, the United States Attorney General announced in March 2009 a major change of federal position in the enforcement of federal drug laws with respect to marijuana dispensaries. Only those medical marijuana dispensaries that are suspected fronts for drug trafficking will be targeted for prosecution. The Federal Department of Justice has new guidelines that allow for non- enforcement of the federal ban in some situations: "It will not be a priority to use federal resources to prosecute patients with serious illnesses or their caregivers who are complying with state laws on medical marijuana, but we will not tolerate drug traffickers who hide behind claims of compliance with state law to mask activities that are clearly illegal." It remains to be seen what standards and definitions will be used to determine what indicators will constitute a drug trafficking operation suitable to trigger investigation and enforcement under these new federal guidelines. The Grand Jury investigation revealed that law enforcement personnel in San Diego County attribute the recent spike in the opening of storefront medical marijuana dispensaries to the apparent relaxation of enforcement at the federal level. California Law Proposition 215: On November 5, 1996, the voters of California passed Proposition 215. This initiative measure added Section 11362.5 to the California Health and Safety Code and is also known as the Compassionate Use Act of 1996. The purposes of the Act are "to ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes where the medical use is deemed appropriate and has been recommended by a physician who has determined that the person's health would benefit from the use of marijuana . . . and to ensure that patients and their primary caregivers who obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes upon the recommendation of a physician are not subject to criminal prosecution or sanction." Caregivers have the same right to legal possession, as does the patient. A primary caregiver is defined by the Act as "the individual designated by the person exempted under this section who has consistently assumed responsibility for the housing, health, or safety of that person." [Emphasis added] An analysis of the Compassionate Use Act reveals that it did not address several issues that became problem areas during its implementation. A fundamental weakness of the Act is that while it exempts qualified patients and their primary caregivers from State criminal prosecution, it does not address how those qualified patients obtain their SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) marijuana. Not all patients or primary caretakers are able to cultivate marijuana on their own due to the nature of their illness and limitations of their housing situation, and so they need an external source of supply. The words collaborative, collective and dispensary do not appear in the Act. The Act also does not address limits on the amount of marijuana that patients or caregivers are allowed to possess. It does not address the subject of medical marijuana identification cards or other documentation by which qualified patients could establish to law enforcement personnel their exemption from prosecution. The Compassionate Use Act is also subject to differing interpretations in the area of • patient eligibility. Physicians may recommend marijuana for persons whose health would benefit from the drug in the treatment of such conditions as cancer, anorexia, AIDS, glaucoma, arthritis and other specified conditions. However, physicians may also recommend marijuana to treat "any other illness for which marijuana provides relief." This gives physicians wide latitude and discretion to recommend the drug for patients who may not meet the description of "seriously ill Californians" that the legislation was intended to help. Senate Bill 420: Although the Compassionate Use Act provided no set limits regarding the amount of marijuana patients may possess and/or cultivate, the California legislature adopted guidelines in 2003. The Medical Marijuana Program Act, known as Senate Bill 420 (SB 420), incorporated as Health and Safety Code Sections 11362.7 -11362.83, was signed into law in October 2003 and took effect on January 1, 2004. It imposes statewide guidelines outlining how much medical marijuana patients may grow and possess. Under the guidelines, qualified patients and/or their primary caregivers may possess no more than eight ounces of dried marijuana and/or six mature (or twelve immature) marijuana plants. However, SB 420 allows patients to possess larger amounts of marijuana when a physician recommends such quantities. The legislation also allows counties and municipalities to approve and/or maintain local ordinances permitting patients to possess larger quantities of medical marijuana than allowed under the State guidelines. The provisions of SB 420 regarding limits on the amount of marijuana a qualified patient or primary caregiver could legally possess were successfully challenged in the case of The People v. Patrick Kelly. According to the decision of the California. State Supreme Court on January 21, 2010, the limit provisions of SB 420 have the effect of amending the Compassionate Use Act, which did not address limits on quantity for qualified medical marijuana patients. Since the Compassionate Use Act was enacted by ballot initiative, the Supreme Court (upholding the ruling of two lower courts) ruled that only another ballot initiative could legally amend it. Article II, section 10, subdivision (c) of the California Constitution provides the Legislature may "amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute that becomes effective only when approved by the electors unless the initiative statute permits amendment or repeal without their approval." The decision in the Kelly case did not invalidate SB 420 as a whole, only the provisions limiting quantities. Federal regulations on quantity limits continue to apply. SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) SB 420 also mandates that the California State Department of Health Services establish a voluntary medical marijuana patient registry and issue identification cards to qualified patients and caregivers. The cards are to be issued through County Health Departments or their designee. While an official identification card is optional and is not necessary to provide an affirmative defense, the card is a convenience when a qualified patient or caregiver is confronted by law enforcement. The system provides for a twenty-four hour telephone number for verification of patient and caregiver status. Verification can now also be done immediately on-line by entering the number of the ID card into the State Department of Public Health data base. Upon verification, there would be no arrest or citation and marijuana and/or plants would not be confiscated unless legal limits are exceeded. Such immediate verification is not always possible when the patient is carrying only the physician's recommendation or no documentation at all. SB 420 provides that medical marijuana patients and primary caregivers may "associate within the State of California in order to collectively or cooperatively cultivate marijuana for medical purposes." That is the only reference to collectives or cooperatives in SB 420. The term "dispensary" does not appear in the law. Attorney General's Guidelines: SB 420 does require the State Attorney General to "develop and adopt appropriate guidelines to ensure the security and nondiversion of marijuana grown for medical use by patients qualified under the Compassionate Use Act of 1996." This resulted in the promulgation of an eleven page document in August 2008, widely known as the Attorney General's Guidelines. Four pages of this document are devoted to guidelines for the operation of collectives and cooperatives. Those guidelines are summarized as follows: • Cooperatives and collectives must be non-profit entities; • Medical marijuana transactions are subject to sales tax, per a determination by the State Board of Equalization; • Cooperatives and collectives must follow generally accepted cash handling practices, such as maintaining a ledger of cash transactions; • Each member's status as a qualified patient or primary caregiver must be verified, either by possession of a valid Medical Marijuana ID Card or by authentication of a doctor's recommendation through contact with the issuing physician, and be documented in the records of the cooperative or collective; and, • Cooperatives and collectives must be self-contained; that is; they cannot distribute marijuana to or acquire marijuana from non-members. According to the Attorney General's Guidelines, some of the storefront medical marijuana "dispensaries" now operating in San Diego can be considered legal, but only if they are properly operated and organized as cooperatives or collectives and adhere to the guidelines above. Both medical marijuana advocates and law enforcement officials indicated during the investigation that the Attorney General's Guidelines are not specific enough and have been subject to a wide variety of interpretations by local governmental jurisdictions throughout the State. In particular, advocates have claimed that law SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) enforcement agencies in San Diego County have been overly aggressive in raiding collectives which are attempting to comply with the Attorney General's Guidelines. Programs In Other States California was the first state to adopt a law permitting the medical use of marijuana. Since 1996 fourteen other states have enacted medical marijuana laws whereby, to some degree, marijuana recommended by a physician to a specified patient may be legally possessed. These states are Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. The medical marijuana laws in those states differ from those of California in that their programs are all operated solely on the state level, with little or no interpretive discretion left to local governmental entities, such as counties and cities. Also many more of the issues associated with medical marijuana programs are addressed in the other states' authorizing legislation than are addressed in California's Compassionate Use Act. Ten of these states have statewide patient registries and ID Card programs; in all of those states, the state issued card is mandatory for patient and caregiver participation. The laws in ten of those states are silent on the subject of cooperatives and collectives. New Mexico and Rhode Island have state licensed and regulated providers of medical marijuana. The recently established program in New Jersey proposes to establish a network of distribution outlets under State management. A medical marijuana patient in Oregon must list his or her marijuana provider with the State as a "registered site." The majority of the other states are more specific than California in listing the diagnosed diseases which qualify a patient as eligible; those states have appeal processes under which additional medical conditions may be added. The limits for possession vary widely among the states which have medical marijuana programs. Local Government Implementation The 2004/2005 San Diego County Grand Jury published a report dated June 8, 2005 entitled The Politics of Medical Marijuana: A Question of Compassion, many parts of which have been adapted for this report. Among the major findings of the 2004/2005 Grand Jury was the failure of San Diego County to implement the provisions of the Compassionate Use Act and SB 420, Their report specifically cited the failure of the County to establish a program for the issuance of medical marijuana ID cards and the failure to issue uniform protocols for law enforcement personnel. Recommendations were addressed to the County Board of Supervisors on those two issues. ID Cards: Eight months after the 2004/2005 Grand Jury report was issued, the County of San Diego filed suit against the California Department of Health Services on February 1, 2006 in San Diego Superior Court. The County contended that the State law was pre- empted by federal prohibitions against marijuana. Therefore, the County of San Diego did not have to abide by the Compassionate Use Act and SB 420. 7 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) filed in response for the Repeal Supervisors claimed that their lawsuit was t Board of Sup ter of the National Organizationthe statep San Diego County the San Diego chap ,s objection to implementing o County v. o Marijuana Laws by OIL) over the County San Diego toa uanr Laws (N Therefore, the case is called of Mari) card program. the Court confirmed the validity of medicalnmarijuana ID 2006, > s challenge NORML. On December 6, San Diegomarijuana laws and rejected the County 22 2007. California medical Superior Court decision on February istrict, Diego appealed the Sup for the Fourth Appellate The County of San of Appeal,t position otheDhatthe Division i Julys31, One,2008, issued the Californiadeisin Courtt the basis that On a decision denying the County Pnot exempt applii at card expressly state the card will1 that the bearer from is identifiesethose persons applications for the ID Also, the card itself does not imp The card merely compliance from prosecution federal laws• penalties and thus there is no immune prosecution exefor mpt tfrfederal offenses. ate criminal California has, elected to exemp 's Petition for conflict with the federal Controlled 5ubstanCeS Act. denied the County to hear the Supreme Co >s request Review and the Unit,d Sae es Supreme Court denied the County and United States Sup May 26, 2009. Marijuana ID Card Program. Throw case on M y This is a low total, 2009, the County initiated its Medical 1vlarrJ medical marijuana had received 495 applications for the card. On July 6, considerably more) applications. Mace here are the County 5,000 (and probably more app ern are County. let ed to receive ma fee for ri ns. since th County staff were prepay basis, so the high fee 66 patients in Cardde amis operated on a cost recovery revealed that thetcardear 1 ($83The f i-Cal re The Grand Jury investigationapplicants as was the for Medi-Cal recipients). r of app daaa base available to owed that this t not t data case. All suspect's es and addresses would be entered into a entering by was not as much ei anua�f °r the relatively low n applicants that ni agents. The investigations ish e law enforcement personnel whethes s not law enforcement be able to ascertain transactions are held int tshe State confidence; basease; ID Card number into thv� ate data would only that card was currently ID Card Program 's Medical Marijuana San Diego. Unlike visited the County Street, uidelir' Members in the he GrandJury Complex at 3851 Rosecrans has San Di g othrlocated Health S marijuana law, the ID Card Program patients, aspects aomedicalrsa ong these are: caregivers and staff to follow. Among patients, primary applications must be filed in person. at the rani' • Primary as for a card must appear • primary caregivers applying patient. t be paid at the time of ar' • The non-refundable fee must proof of residencF • A photo identification card and application. recommendation must be preset. A valid doctor s er the recommending phYsr. • Staff must verify endat. • Staff must verify the authenticity of the recomm • SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed J. • Staff determine the validity of a primary cated abo's status in accordance with the • Approved a passionate Use Act, cited above. applications are entered into the State data base by the State Department of Health Services within thirtyand the card is issued Staff of the Medical days. sessions fore law Medical enfMarijuana ID Card Pro a card include: personnel in authenticating aaently conducting training the card. Advantages of having • Having the card should prevent Having the and should arrest or prosecution for guidelines. .possessing less medicine than allowed b patients dealingota with law • Not havingY county or state • tPossession an ID card might result in an arrest. probation. ID card is a now mandatory condition for those • The ID card is still an optional programPatients on may be useful in a law enforcement enor mall other patients, but having an ID enter. Law Enforcement Protocols: Law Enforcement the emen legalityProtocols: During the three uhe State's medical year period the Count County did very little to establish marijuana laws, localjurisdictionsY of San Diego was reoudi the outlets forestablish guidelines. This is especiallytrue intee in the regulati arils",obtaining marijuana: cooperatives, collectives tand area of "dispensaries". of . There have been a number of arch warrants for allegedly illegalandmco meerdical sting marijuana opera and Operators of some of these facilities have been Opera p medi an Charged. On September Operation Green Rx, a multi -agency arrested and charged. marijuana Op rat y investigation g On med9, mere dispensaries, resulted in the arrests of thirty-threegetin medical marijuanag fourteen medical Diego County District a patients. This operation conductedpebyle, fourteen o whom Diego Co enforcement acoalition a was nt and the Office l lawthe San agencies. Such operations haven not reduced dispensaries in the Citycounty municipal medical of San Diego. the proliferation prose of utstorefront marijuana collective o g Two recentac highly publicized prosecutions of owners resulted in acquittals. Community members opposed to the dispensaries inm their neighborhoods openingof are mehiml marijuana storefront Operators of apparently legal collectives also monitoring c ng them for opened of knowled epossible illegal newly been observed at some of the alleged illegaing outside ldispensaries:law. saries g that many of the newly The following types of activities have a) glossy advertisements in local publications b) inducements of free or reduced price marijuana c) sign twirler advertising d) patients congregating outside the facility e) younger customers with no apparent f) sales of other drugs and other non -marijuana products g) selling marijuana to non-members SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) 9 h obta ng i) tmarijuana from outside the County i) importing j) weapons on the premises k) frequented by members of street gangs 1) large supplies of cash with no ledger or records of transactions m) doctors associated with the facility giving recommendations, with little or no examination of patients n) failure to authenticate recommendations of prospective members o) operators of dispensaries acting as primary caregivers for multiple patients p) profit making dispensaries Even law enforcement personnel and community opponents of storefront dispensaries acknowledge that the dispensary clientele includes the seriously ill patients that of legally the medical marijuana legislation was intended to help. Patients and operators operating collectives are requesting guidelines from law enforcement so that patients may have safe access to medical marijuana and so that operators will not be subject to search warrants and arrests. The United States Attorney General has issued an enforcement opinion; the General has issued guidelines. The Grand Jury is proposing that the District Attorney of the County SAtrof San Diego follow suit by issuing a position nsidered a l tive or ive in this paper on what is and what is can be developed in cooperation with the Stan Diego County County. This position pap Sheriff's Department and in consultation with leaders of municipal law enforcement agencies throughout the County. Medical Marijuana Advisory Council: Another area of concern among medical marijuana advocates is the absence of aforum for m exchange fi�osrm ion between government leaders and the collectiveoperators important at a time when court and the City of d anproposed Diego are constantly changingtheregulatory ordinances by both the County , s web site lists about twenty advisory councils medical marijuana landscape. The County or committees. Examples are the Older Adults System of Care Advisory Council, the Parks Advisory Committee, and the Veterans Advisory Council. The Grand Jury is suggesting that a Medical Marijuana Advisory Council be established in the District e a Attornors Office. ateThiAdvisory marijuana cooperail would tivesdand collectives,sas well as patients gh which the operators of legitimate medical with representatives of the County and members of the public, could engage in dialoguere P law enforcement agencies on a regular basis. Regu_ latary Strategies: The County of San Diego and each theighteen of medical marijuana dispensariesin theifollor mg three strategies to control the establishment respective jurisdictions: 1. Enactment of interim moratoria 2. Outright bans 3. No permissible use under existing land use codes l O SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) Just because one of these strategies is in effect in a given community does not necessarily mean that there are no cooperatives or collectives currently operating in that jurisdiction. Moratoria: While in the process of investigating and researching the issue of licensing marijuana dispensaries, city councils may enact date -specific moratoria that expressly prohibit the presence of medical marijuana dispensaries and prohibit the sale of marijuana anywhere within the incorporated boundaries of the city until a specified date. Before such a moratorium's date of expiration, the moratorium may then either be extended or a city ordinance enacted allowing for the regulation, licensing and permitting of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives. A county board of supervisors can also enact a moratorium with respect to marijuana dispensaries within the unincorporated areas of a county. Approximately eighty California cities, including the cities of Chula Vista, Imperial Beach, National City, Oceanside and Santee have enacted moratoria on marijuana dispensaries. The following provisions of California Government Code Section 65858 apply when a moratorium is being established: • The legislative body to protect the public safety, health, and welfare, may adopt as an urgency measure an interim ordinance prohibiting any uses that may be in conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal that the legislative body, planning commission or the planning department is considering or studying or intends to study within a reasonable time. That urgency measure shall require a four -fifths vote of the legislative body for adoption. • The legislative body may extend the interim ordinance for ten months and fifteen days and subsequently extend the interim ordinance for one year. Any extension shall also require a four -fifths vote for adoption. Not more than two extensions may be adopted. • The legislative body shall not adopt or extend any interim ordinance unless the ordinance contains legislative findings that there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, or welfare. • Ten days prior to the expiration of that interim ordinance or any extension, the legislative body shall issue a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition which led to the adoption of the ordinance. The City of San Diego's Medical Marijuana Task Force is currently studying specific zoning and land use proposals for medical marijuana cooperatives and collectives. Until the recommendations of the Task Force are adopted into law, the City Council may enact a moratorium on the opening of any additional "dispensaries" under the provisions of Government Code Section 65858. Grand Jury proposes the enactment of such a moratorium. The failure to enact a moratorium in the ity o Los ge es as resu ted in the opening of an estimated 1,000 dispensaries that officials are now trying to regulate. SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) 11 On September 26, 2009 the County of San Diego Board of Supervisors enacted a moratorium on the establishment of medical marijuana collectives in the unincorporated areas. The purpose of the moratorium was to allow County staff the time to study how -collectives-should be permittedandappropriately regulated. The County Department of Planning and Land Use published regulatory guidelines and a draft ordinance on March 3, 2010. The draft ordinance marks a major step forward for the County after many years of challenging the legality of the State's medical marijuana laws. However, the ordinance was not developed in consultation with patient advocates and is much more restrictive than what has been recommended for the City of San Diego by the Medical Marijuana Task Force. Public comment on the draft ordinance closed on April 2, 2010. The ng n meeting on May 2010 and scheduled to be ce is on the on id the the Boardounty rof Supervisors on June 23,2010. 14, 2010 an is Bans: While the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 allows seriously ill persons to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes upon a physician's recommendation, it is silent on medical marijuana dispensaries and does not expressly authorize or prohibit the sale of medical marijuana to patients or primary caregivers. Neither Proposition 215 nor Senate Bill 420 specifically authorize nor prohibit the dispensing of marijuana from a storefront business. Also, no State statute expressly permits or disallows the licensing or operation of marijuana dispensaries. Consequently, over a hundred California cities and nine counties have prohibited marijuana dispensaries within their respective geographical boundaries. In San Diego County, the Cities of El Cajon, Escondido, San Marcos and Vista have enacted bans on medical marijuana dispensaries. These total bans deny some qualified patients access to medical marijuana in their communities of residence; they also place the onus of regulation and enforcement on neighboring cities that either permit and regulate such establishments or are presently considering the enactment of land use and zoning ordinances. The legality of outright bans will most likely be determined by the decision in the case of Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim, now pending in California's Fourth Appellate District Court. A decision was initially expected in December 2009, but the Court requested further briefing to seek clarification on whether the State legislature meant to prevent local governments from using nuisance statutes to outlaw medical marijuana distribution. The plaintiff, Qualified Patients Association, filed a lawsuit shortly after Anaheim adopted a ban on dispensaries in July 2007. It argued that the clear intent of the Medical Marijuana Program Act (SB 420), in providing an exemption under the nuisance law, was to preempt local ordinances and enforcement efforts based on nuisance law. It also argued that local governments cannot simply ban an activity that has been deemed lawful by the state. Qualified Patients Association had been in operation for about f ive Superior months prior to the ban. An appeal was filed in March 2008 after the Orange County Court ruled that Anaheim could prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries from operating within its city limits. 12 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) The Anaheim case has drawn considerable attention as more and more local governments confront the issue of access to medical marijuana. Many law enforcement associations in the State filed briefs in support of Anaheim, as have about thirty-six cities. The case is the first lawsuit of its kind to reach the appellate courts in California, and may shape the issue of access to medical marijuana for patients across the State. A decision by the Fourth Appellate District Court in the case is expected in the summer of 2010. Restricted zoning: City and County officials have the authority to restrict owners and operators to locate and operate "medical marijuana dispensaries" in prescribed geographical areas, and require them to meet prescribed licensing requirements. The City of San Diego is considering such an approach through its Medical Marijuana Task Force. In contrast to the County, the City of San Diego has conducted a much more open and inclusive process with significant input from patients, business owners, legal experts and community residents. The initial set of Task Force recommendations dealt with permitting and zoning regulations; hours of operation; non-profit status; and required lighting, signage, and security. On March 24, 2010, the City Council's Land Use and Housing Committee directed the City Attorney to prepare a draft ordinance, based largely on the Task Force's recommendations, for consideration at a future meeting of the full City Council. Other cities have land use codes that do not specifically recognize "medical marijuana dispensaries" as an allowable use and therefore have a de facto ban on granting permits. During the Grand Jury investigation, both proponents and opponents of medical marijuana agreed that many of the storefront "dispensaries" were operating outside the limited definition of cooperatives and collectives as implicitly stated in SB 420 and more explicitly defined in the Attorney General's Guidelines. There was agreement also that many patients obtaining medical marijuana from the apparently illegal storefront operations are truly qualified patients according to the original intent of the Compassionate Use Act. These are patients who are unable to cultivate their own marijuana due to extreme incapacity or by the restrictions of their own living arrangements. The County and every city therein should adopt land use regulations allowin the establishment of a invited number of coo eratives and collectives within eith lr jurisdictions, so that these qualified patients are able to obtain me is marijuana m their own communities. Facility Site Visits: Grand Jury members visited two facilities that appeared to be operating in accordance with the Attorney General's guidelines. Both of these operations blended in with their respective communities; patients were not congregating around their facilities. Both verified recommendations of prospective patients/members and maintained records of cash transactions. Both had business licenses and paid sales tax on their transactions. Both had not -for -profit status. Neither advertises in local publications. The major difference between them is size of membership: one would be considered a large collective and the other would be considered a small one. SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) 13 When regulations and guidelines are adopted to govern cooperatives/collectives, there should be a distinction drawn between a small cooperative/collective and a large one. Guidelines, when enacted, may direct cooperatives and collectives to: 1) install security measures, i.e., security guards or video surveillance 2) have annual or periodic audits 3) pay a business tax 4) report on payments to growers and suppliers 5) undergo land use processes (process 2 through process 5) 6) obtain business licenses/permits 7) install signage and special lighting 8) pay administrative fee costs The smaller cooperatives and collectives will be challenged to follow the guidelines because of budgetary constraints. Cooperatives or collectives that are providing a legitimate service to qualified patients, and are willing to follow the guidelines for their small group of medical marijuana patients, should not be forced to close because they cannot afford to remain in compliance with the new regulations. Physicians The Grand Jury's investigation reveals that law enforcement personnel and some government officials believe that there are physicians in San Diego County whose sole practice consists of writing medical marijuana recommendations. The Grand Jury has no jurisdiction over State agencies, such as the Medical Board of California or the Osteopathic Medical Board of California. We point out, however, that citizens who suspect professional malfeasance can register a complaint with either agency, as appropriate. The Grand Jury investigation revealed that the vast majority of medical marijuana recommendations in the San Diego area are being written by about twenty-five physicians, some of whom are affiliated with dispensaries. Advertisements for some of those dispensaries indicate that a physician is available to write a recommendation for an advertised fee. Very few mainstream doctors have been writing the recommendations, although their numbers are increasing. There are sufficient legal protections for doctors who write recommendations for medical marijuana. California Health & Safety Code section 11362.5(c) states "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no physician in this State shall be punished, or denied any right or privilege, for having recommended marijuana to a patient for medical purposes." The Medical Board of California, recognizing that medical marijuana is an emerging treatment modality, has assured physicians that they will not be subject to investigation or disciplinary action by the Board if they arrive at the decision to recommend marijuana in accordance with accepted standards of medical responsibility. The mere receipt of a complaint that the physician is recommending medical marijuana will not generate an investigation unless there is additional information indicating that the physician is not adhering to accepted medical standards. SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) 14 These accepted standards, according to the Medical Board, are the same as any reasonable and prudent physician would follow when recommending or approving any other medication, and include the following: 1. History and good faith examination of the patient 2. Development of a treatment plan with objectives 3. Provision of informed consent including discussion of side effects 4. Periodic review of the treatment's efficacy 5. Consultation, as necessary 6. Proper record keeping that supports the decision to recommend the use of medical marijuana If physicians use the same care in recommending medical marijuana to patients as they would in recommending any other medication, they would not be subject to license suspension or revocation. On the federal level, the United States Court of Appeals ruled in a 2002 decision in the Conant v. Walters case that the government could not revoke a physician's Drug Enforcement Administration registration merely because the doctor makes a recommendation for the use of medical marijuana based on a legitimate medical judgment, and could not initiate an investigation solely on that ground. These prohibitions would apply whether or not the doctor anticipates that the patient will use the recommendation to obtain marijuana in violation of federal law. The Court recognized that physicians have a constitutionally -protected right to discuss medical marijuana as a treatment option with their patients and to make recommendations for medical marijuana. These protections notwithstanding, the majority of doctors are reluctant to write medical marijuana recommendations for their patients. Some doctors, with a patient's consent, will share medical records with another physician who will write a recommendation. More frequently, however, a patient will seek out one of a small group of physicians who specialize in marijuana recommendations for a fee, usually between $100 and $200. The Grand Jury does not wish to paint all these physicians with the same brush, but there are some documented investigations in the files of both the Medical Board of California and the Osteopathic Medical Board of California of doctors who violated the above described standards of care when recommending medical marijuana. The Grand Jury's research of the public records of State medical boards revealed that disciplinary action has been taken against some physicians for improper conduct relating to medical marijuana patients. Disciplinary actions have included fines and license suspensions. Types of improper conduct include issuing medical marijuana recommendations without conducting adequate medical examinations, failure to consult with primary care or treating physicians or to obtain a review of the patients' medical records, and failure to maintain adequate documentation. FACTS AND FINDINGS Fact: The number of medical marijuana dispensaries in the City of San Diego has increased from less than fifty in June 2009 to over one hundred in March 2010. SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) 15 Fact: The County of San Diego District Attorney's Office, along with the County of San Diego Sheriffs Office, the San Diego Police Chiefs Office and other State and local law enforcement offices, announced on September 10, 2009 that search warrants were served at fourteen marijuana dispensaries in San Diego County. Fact: State of California medical marijuana legislation has been subject to variations in interpretations by cities and counties throughout the State. Fact: Medical marijuana advocates in San Diego County have been requesting guidelines from law enforcement agencies for several years. Fact: Most cities in San Diego County have bans or moratoria (de jure or de facto) on medical marijuana dispensaries. Fact: Some community activists and law enforcement personnel believe that the storefront medical marijuana dispensaries in the City of San Diego are operating illegally. Fact: The City of San Diego has impaneled a Medical Marijuana Task Force to make recommendations to the City Council for the regulation of cooperatives and collectives. Fact: Membership in individual cooperatives and collectives ranges from a few patients to over a thousand. Finding #01 : The District Attorney's Office has not published guidelines for the operation of legal medical marijuana cooperatives and collectives in San Diego County which would address the concerns of operators of those programs who are trying to comply with State law. Finding #02: There is currently no forum through which the operators of legitimate medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives could engage in dialogue with representatives of the District Attorney's Office on a regular basis. Finding #03: There are no clear and uniform guidelines for law enforcement personnel in San Diego County which would protect the rights of legitimate qualified medical marijuana patients. Finding #04: The San Diego City Council is empowered by Government Code Section 65858 to enact a moratorium on the opening of additional medical marijuana dispensaries. Finding #05: Adopting cost neutral zoning and land use ordinances is an effective method for the .licensing, regulation and periodic inspection of cooperatives and collectives distributing medical marijuana in the unincorporated areas and eighteen cities of San Diego County. SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) 16 Finding #06: The recommendations of the City of San Diego's Medical Marijuana Task Force for zoning and land use ordinances for cooperatives and collectives may serve as a model for adoption by other cities in the County. Finding #07: Annual financial reporting and periodic auditing of cooperatives and collectives, predominantly cash operations, are not currently required in San Diego County. Finding #08: The current ban on the opening of medical marijuana collectives in the Cities of El Cajon, Escondido, San Marcos and Vista deprives some qualified medical marijuana patients of access to marijuana in their communities. Finding #09: The lack of zoning and land use ordinances for the licensing, regulation and periodic inspection of cooperatives and collectives distributing medical marijuana in the cities of Carlsbad, Coronado, Del Mar, Encinitas, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, Poway and Solana Beach deprives some qualified medical marijuana patients of access to marijuana in their communities. Finding #10: The current moratorium on the opening of cooperatives and collectives distributing medical marijuana in the unincorporated areas of San Diego County and the cities of Chula Vista, Imperial Beach, National City, Oceanside and Santee deprives some qualified medical marijuana patients of access to marijuana in their communities. Finding #11: The imposition of regulatory fees and associated costs could create a financial hardship for the smaller medical marijuana cooperatives and collectives. RECOMMENDATIONS The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the County of San Diego District Attorney: 10-107: In consultation with the San Diego County Sheriff's Department and officials of the Police Departments of the Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, El Cajon, Escondido, La Mesa, National City, Oceanside and San Diego, publish a position paper which contains guidelines for the operation of legal medical marijuana cooperatives and collectives in San Diego County. 10-108: In cooperation with the San Diego County Sheriff's Department, establish a Medical Marijuana Advisory Council as a forum through which the operators of legitimate medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives, as well as patients and members of the public, could engage in dialogue with representatives of County law enforcement agencies on a regular basis. SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) 17 The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the County of San Diego Sheriff: 10-109: In cooperation with the County of San Diego District Attorney and in consultation with officials of the nine municipal police departments in. the County, publish a position paper which contains guidelines for the operation of legal medical marijuana cooperatives and collectives in San Diego County. 10-110: Adopt clear guidelines for law enforcement personnel so that the rights of legitimate medical marijuana patients will be respected. 10-111: In cooperation with the County of San Diego District Attorney, establish a Medical Marijuana Advisory Council as a forum through which the operators of legitimate medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives, as well as patients and members of the public, could engage in dialogue with representatives of County law enforcement agencies on a regular basis. The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the County of San Diego Board of Supervisors: 10-112: Adopt a cost neutral County program for the licensing, regulation and periodic inspection of authorized collectives and cooperatives distributing medical marijuana in the unincorporated areas of San Diego County, and establish a limit on the number of such facilities. 10-113: Adopt regulations which would allow for the closure of all unlicensed "dispensaries" in the unincorporated areas. The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the Mayor of the City of San Diego and the City Council of the City of San Diego: 10-114: Enact an ordinance creating an immediate moratorium on the opening of additional medical marijuana dispensaries in the City of San Diego, pending the adoption by the Council of guidelines regulating such establishments, as recommended by the Medical Marijuana Task Force with appropriate public input. 10-115: Enact an ordinance to establish a cost neutral program for the licensing, regulation and monitoring of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives, and establish a limit on the number of such facilities. 10-116: Adopt regulations which would allow for the closure of all unlicensed "dispensaries." 18 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the City Councils of El Cajon, Escondido, San Marcos and Vista: 10-117: Enact an ordinance to establish a cost neutral program for the licensing, regulation and monitoring medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives, and establish a limit on the number of such facilities. 10-118: Adopt regulations which would allow for the closure of all unlicensed "dispensaries." 10-119: Upon the enactment of such an ordinance, rescind the current ban on the opening of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives. The 2009/21110,saultiegu County Grand Jury recommends that the City Councils of Chula Vista, Imperial Beach, National City, Oceanside and Santee: 10-120: Enact an ordinance to establish a cost neutral program for the licensing, regulation and monitoring of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives, and establish a limit on the number of such facilities. 10-121: Adopt regulations which would allow for the closure of all unlicensed "dispensaries" 10-122: Upon the enactment of such an ordinance, rescind the current moratorium on the opening of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives. The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the City Councils of Carlsbad, Coronado, Del Mar, Encinitas, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, Poway and Solana Beach: 10-123: Enact an ordinance to establish a cost neutral program for the licensing, regulation and monitoring of medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives, and establish a limit on the number of such facilities. 10-124: Adopt regulations which would allow for the closure of all unlicensed "dispensaries." REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS The California Penal Code §933(c) requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) 19 the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such comment shall be within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code §933.05(a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a) As to each grand jury finding, the responding person or,entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with the Penal Code §933.05 are required from the: 20 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) Responding Agency District Attorney, County of San Diego Sheriff,, County of San Diego Board of Supervisors, County of San Diego Mayor, City of San Diego City Council, City of San Diego City Council, City of El Cajon City Council, City of Escondido City Council, City of San Marcos City Council, City of Vista City Council, City of Chula Vista City Council, City of Imperial Beach ;pity Cbii ell,'City a..National-city City Council, City of Oceanside City Council, City of Santee City Council, City of Carlsbad City Council, City of Coronado City Council, City of Del Mar City Council, City of Encinitas City Council, City of La Mesa Recommendations Date 10-107,10-108 10-109, 10-110, 10-111 10-112,10-113 10-114, 10-115, 10-116 10-114, 10-115, 10-116 10-117,10-118,10-119 10-117, 10-118, 10-119 10-117, 10-118, 10-119 10-117, 10-118, 10-119 10-120, 10-121, 10-122 10-120, 10-121, 10-122 10-120;1042.1,10-122 10-120,10-121, 10-122 10-120, 10-121, 10-122 10-123,10-124 10-123,10-124 10-123,10-124 10-123,10-124 10-123,10-124 8/6/10 8/6/10 9/6/10 9/6/10 9/6/10 9/6/10 9/6/10 9/6/10 9/6/10 9/6/10 9/6/10 9/6 0 9/6/10 9/6/10 9/6/10 9/6/10 9/6/10 9/6/10 9/6/10 21 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) City Council, City of Lemon Grove 10-123,10-124 9/6/10 City Council, City of Poway 10-123,10-124 9/6/10 City Council, City of Solana Beach 10-123, 10-124 9/6/10 22 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 7, 2010) CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 16 M TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City authorizing the Mayor to execute an Employment Agreement between the City of National City and Claudia Silva for the position of City Attorney PREPARED BY: George H. Eiser, III DEPARTMENT: City Attorney PHONE: Ext. 4221 APPROVED BY: EXPLANATION: This Employment Agreement memorializes the terms and conditions of Claudia Silva's employment as City Attorney, effective July 20, 2010, the date of the appointment by the City Council. The Agreement sets forth the at -will status of her employment, a six-month severance provision, and reflects the salary and compensation approved by Resolution No. 2010-164. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. Funds are budgeted. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: ployment Agreement .�Joiution RESOLUTION NO. 2010 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AND CLAUDIA G. SILVA FOR THE POSITION OF CITY ATTORNEY WHEREAS, on June 22, 2010, the City Council appointed Claudia G. Silva the Acting City Attorney, effective July 1, 2010; and WHEREAS, on July 20, 2010, the City Council appointed Claudia G. Silva to the position of City Attorney, and established the salary and compensation by adopting Resolution No. 2010-164; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to memorialize the terms and conditions of Claudia G. Silva's employment by setting forth the at -will status of her employment and a six- month severance provision in an Employment Agreement, which also reflects the salary and compensation approved by Resolution No. 2010-164. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby authorizes the Mayor to execute an Employment Agreement between the City of National City and Claudia G. Silva for the position of City Attorney. Said Agreement is on file in the office of the City Clerk. PASSED and ADOPTED this 17th day of August, 2010. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: Michael R. Della, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. Eiser, III Special Legal Counsel EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AND CLAUDIA G. SILVA This employment agreement is entered into this 20`h day of July, 2010, by and between the City of National City, a general law city ("City") and Claudia G. Silva, an individual ("Employee") with respect to employment as the City Attorney for the City. RECITALS Whereas, pursuant to Government Code section 36505, the City Council of the City of National City appoints the City Attorney. Whereas, the City Council appointed Employee the Acting City Attorney, effective July 1, 2010 and the City Attorney, effective July 20, 2010. Whereas, the parties desire to set forth certain matters related to the terms and conditions of employment of Employee as the City Attorney for the City. TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT In consideration of the faithful performance of the provisions and covenants set forth herein, the City and Employee agree as follows: A. Duration of Employment Employee shall hold the appointive office of City Attorney at and during the pleasure of the City Council. Employee shall also serve as General Counsel of the Community Development Commission and Legal Counsel for the City of National City Parking Authority. B. Compensation Employee shall receive an annual salary in an amount established by City Council resolution. The annual salary is $180,000 through June 30, 2011 and $199,900 commencing July 1, 2011. Employer shall consider increases to salary on an annual basis, commencing July 1, 2012, based upon factors such as Employee's performance, salary surveys and other relevant factors. Employee shall receive benefits and other compensation, such as vacation, sick leave, executive leave, short term disability, long term disability, retirement, health and dental, and any other benefits and compensation, as determined and established by City Council resolution for executive employees and the position of City Attorney. Resolution 2002-109 set the most current benefits and other compensation for executive employees and City Attorney. Those benefits and other compensation were modified by Resolution 2009-37 eliminating the car allowance for City Attorney and by amendments to the Ca1PERS agreements increasing employee retirement contributions. The Employee's Employment Agreement City Attorney 1 contribution to the Ca1PERS employer -paid member contribution is established at 6% effective July 1, 2010, and 8% effective July 1, 2011. C. Separation 1. Severance. Upon City Council action to terminate Employee's employment, upon resignation in lieu of termination, upon request for resignation, or upon notice of potential termination by the City Council, the City shall pay to Employee severance based upon six (6) months of compensation, including salary, benefits, and other compensation accruing to Employee's employment as City Attorney, for the six month period. Such payment may be paid in a lump sum payment made on the effective date of termination or resignation, or a future date agreed upon by the parties. 2. Misconduct. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, above, the City shall not be obligated to pay severance if Employee is terminated because of a felony conviction or a violation of law constituting misconduct in office. 3. Voluntary Resignation The City shall not be obligated to pay severance if Employee voluntarily resigns without any action taken by City to terminate, initiate termination proceedings, or request resignation. A resignation to pursue other employment or professional opportunities does not obligate City to pay severance. 4. Notice of Voluntary Resignation Employee agrees to provide City thirty (30) days notice of voluntary resignation. D. Performance Employee covenants to perform the duties of the office of City Attorney in a good and professional manner as her full-time employment. Employee will not engage in any other employment in conflict with her employment with the City. E. Miscellaneous Provisions 1. The relationship between the parties is an employment relationship for public office and is exempt from the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. National City. 2. The term City Council means the legislative body of the City of Employment Agreement City Attorney 2 3. This agreement may be amended only by a writing executed by the parties. IN WITNESS hereof, the parties have executed this agreement by their signatures set forth below: CITY OF NATIONAL CITY Claudia G. Silva Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: Mike Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. Eiser, III Special Legal Counsel Employment Agreement City Attorney 3 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 17 EM TITLE: Warrant Register #3 for the period of 07/14/10 through 7/20/10 in the amount of $686,924.62 PREPARED BY: K. Apalategui! DEPARTMENT: Figiar c PHONE: 1619-336-4331! APPROVED BY: EXPLANATION: Per Government Section Code 37208, attached are the warrants issued for the period of 06/16/10 through 06/22/10 The Finance Department has implemented a policy explanation of all warrants above $50,000.00 Vendor Check Amount Explanation Northrop Grumman Corp 237396 phlic Emp Ret. Systems 237404 57, 846.00 282,303.08 SW Support Service Period 7-10-3 FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. !N/AI ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Ratification of warrants in the amount of $686,924.62 BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: IN/AI ATTACHMENTS: rrant Register #3 ti PAYEE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION CA ASSO OF CODE ENFORCEMENT CA ASSO OF CODE ENFORCEMENT CHULA VISTA BLUEPRINT CO CITY OF MESA HOUSING AUTHORITY FEDEX HOGLE IRELAND INC HOME DEPOT/GECF MAINTEX INC PRO BUILD PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDER SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT STAPLES ADVANTAGE SWEETWATER AUTHORITY TIERRA WEST ADVISORS INC US BANCORP SERVICE CENTER iTA PAINT IAZON AT&T MOBILITY BAKER & TAYLOR BETTER LIFE MOBILITY BRODART CALIFA GROUP CITY OF NATIONAL CITY DEMCO INC EASY THE ESL SERIES HANSEN LIBRARY SALES LASER SAVER INC MIDWEST TAPE NATIONAL CITY AUTO TRIM PROLITERACY AMERICA SMART & FINAL SPRINT STAPLES ADVANTAGE THE SHOPPER, INC. U S POSTMASTER WILLYS ELECTRONIC SUPPLY WILSON LANGUAGE TRAINING XEROX CORPORATION ABCANA INDUSTRIES AFLAC LEEN SERRANO ..2JIS AWARD MASTER INC BOOT WORLD BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC WARRANT REGISTER # 3 7/20/2010 DESCRIPTION APA MEMBERSHIP CATEGORY F CACEO CLASS CACEO CLASS COPIES OF N.C. CUCLTURAL OVERPAYMT OF PORT -IN JUL 2010 EXPRESS MAIL COURIER SERVICES CONSULTANT AGREEMENT TOOL BOX CORNER TURKISH TOWELS MOP# 45707. GRAFITTI SUPPLIES MOP# 45742. LAUNDRY SERVICE RECONVEYANCE CDC-1983-48 NAT CITY CULTURAL ARTS CENTER MOP# 45704. OFFICE SUPPLIES WATER UTILITES FOR CDC AGREEMENT/ TIERRA WEST ADVISORS CREDIT CARD EXPENSE MOP# 68834. PAINT WOW MOBILE BOOK COLLECTION PHONE SERVICE FOR THE WOWMOBILE BOOKS FOR WOWMOBILE COLLECTION INSTALLATION OF POWER ENTRY AUTOMATION/PRECISION FOR FY 2010 CALIFA MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL OUT OF STATE SALES TAX MATERIALS & SUPPLIES FOR BOOK 237322 KIT INCLUDES TUTOR GUIDE WITH LESSON 237323 GIVEAWAY BOOKS FOR THE WOWMOBILE 237324 MOP #45725 HP INKJET CARTRIDGES 237325 DVD'S FOR COLLECTION 237326 RECOVER BENCH CUSHION 237327 ORGANIZATIONAL MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 237328 MOP#45756 SUPPLIES FOR WOWMOBILE 237329 VIDEO CONFERENCING/LONG DISTANCE 237330 MOP #45704 SUPPLIES THERMAL PRINTER ROLLS POSTAGE FOR LITERACY SERVICES. MOP #45763 PORTABLE P/A SYSTEM STUDENT WORKBOOKS FOR LITERACY BASE CHARGE FOR 8 XEROX MUNICIPAL POOL CHEMICALS AFLAC ACCOUNT BDM36 JULY 2010 REFUND FOR SUMMER CAMP FOR ARJIS COSTS CHARGE FOR CROWNS MOP #64096 WEARING APPAREL MUNICIPAL POOL CHEMICALS 1/4 CHK NO DATE AMOUNT 237297 7/20/10 465.00 237298 7/20/10 65.00 237299 7/20/10 45.00 237300 7/20/10 264.26 237301 7/20/10 640.59 237302 7/20/10 106.06 237303 7/20/10 2,046.98 237304 7/20/10 297.92 237305 7/20/10 522.29 237306 7/20/10 80.06 237307 7/20/10 13.34 237308 7/20/10 30.00 237309 7/20/10 676.00 237310 7/20/10 319.79 237311 7/20/10 576.42 237312 7/20/10 13,793.75 237313 7/20/10 1,291.20 237314 7/20/10 1,535.53 237315 7/20/10 1,241.45 237316 7/20/10 68.31 237317 7/20/10 4,173.42 237318 7/20/10 998.75 237319 7/20/10 444.82 237320 7/20/10 3,400.30 237321 7/20/10 433.36 7/20/10 199.54 7/20/10 1,132.01 7/20/10 452.17 7/20/10 967.83 7/20/10 513.64 7/20/10 231.17 7/20/10 159.00 7/20/10 46.77 7/20/10 11.33 237331 7/20/10 1,388.55 237332 7/20/10 327.16 237333 7/20/10 807.84 237334 7/20/10 350.10 237335 7/20/10 294.45 237336 7/20/10 1,301.14 237337 7/20/10 209.52 237338 7/20/10 1,655.60 237339 7/20/10 25.00 237340 7/20/10 37.00 237341 7/20/10 24.00 237342 7/20/10 447.95 237343 7/20/10 1,567.90 PAYEE BUSTER'S BEACH HOUSE S D CA ASSO OF CODE ENFORCEMENT CA ASSO OF CODE ENFORCEMENT CA BUILDING STANDARD COMMISION CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS' CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY CAMACHO CARQUEST AUTO PARTS CISSEL CITY OF NATIONAL CITY CLEAN HARBORS COMMERCIAL AQUATICS SERVICES COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CRPOA - ARPOC 2010 CRPOA - ARPOC 2010 CRPOA - ARPOC 2010 CRPOA - ARPOC 2010 CYBRARYN SOLUTIONS DAPPER TIRE COMPANY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DEPASCALE DEPT OF CONSERVATION ESGIL CORPORATION ESGIL CORPORATION GARY BELL DESIGN ASSOCIATION GEORGE H WATERS GEORGE H WATERS NUTRITION CTR GRAINGER GREENWOOD MEMORIAL HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC HUNTER'S NURSERY INC. HYDRO-SCAPE PRODUCTS INC. ICC ILGIA ILGIA ILGIA INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERING IRON MOUNTAIN RECORDS JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES LA PRENSA SAN DIEGO LEXIS-NEXIS MAINTEX INC MORE DIRECT MORRISON MUNICIPAL CODE CORPORATION WARRANT REGISTER # 3 7/20/2010 DESCRIPTION RESERVE DINNER CACEO CLASS CACEO CLASS BLDG STAND ADMIN 2ND QUARTER ANNUAL CPCA MEMBERSHIP 10/11 REFUND/UNEXPENDED GRANT FUNDS REFUND OF T&A FILING COSTS MOP 47557 AUTO PARTS CPR/FIRST AID TRAINING BOOKS PETTY CASH JUNE 2010 HAZARDOUS WASTE PICKUP POOL SERVICE & REPAIRS FEE CODE 6HBASE-EHO ELECTRONIC MAP FY 2009-2010 MAIL PROCESSING SERVICES ARPOC 2010 CONFERENCE ARPOC 2010 CONFERENCE ARPOC 2010 CONFERENCE ARPOC 2010 CONFERENCE CYBRARY N ANNUAL SOFTWARE TIRES FOR CITY FLEET HIGHWAY LIGHTING EDUCATIONAL REIMBURSEMENT SMIP CHARGES 2ND QUARTER CONSULTANT SERVICES / BUILDING PLAN CHECK SERVICES / FIRE DEPT MILE/CARS PRESENTATION FOLDERS NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL BREAKFAST CATERING SERVICES/PARADISE CREEK MOP 65179 SMALL TOOLS REFUND RETURNED VEH PERMITS CITY-WIDE H.V.A.C. MOP 45719 HORTICULTURE ITEMS MOP 45720 MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 2009/2010 BLDG CODE BOOKS ILGIA 2010 CONFERENCE ILGIA 2010 CONFERENCE ILGIA 2010 CONFERENCE PERFORM ANALYSIS RECORDS MANAGEMENT MOP 69277 PLANTING MATERIAL 2010 NOTICE OF ELECTION ONLINE CHARGES FOR JUNE 2010 MISC JANITORIAL SUPPLIES HP LASERJET M1522NF MFP TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT MUNICIPAL CODE EXTRA #29 2/4 CHK NO DATE AMOUNT 237344 7/20/10 1,009.35 237345 7/20/10 65.00 237346 7/20/10 45.00 237347 7/20/10 111.60 237348 7/20/10 1,600.00 237349 7/20/10 35,474.18 237350 7/20/10 2.26 237351 7/20/10 367.24 237352 7/20/10 25.00 237353 7/20/10 723.58 237354 7/20/10 2,713.88 237355 7/20/10 1,146.82 237356 7/20/10 420.00 237357 7/20/10 6.40 237358 7/20/10 5,601.91 237359 7/20/10 885.00 237360 7/20/10 885.00 237361 7/20/10 590.00 237362 7/20/10 295.E 237363 7/20/10 949. 237364 7/20/10 119.68 237365 7/20/10 2,513.03 237366 7/20/10 460.00 237367 7/20/10 368.61 237368 7/20/10 19,791.91 237369 7/20/10 121.95 237370 7/20/10 4,625.94 237 371 7/20/10 1,125.00 237372 7/20/10 350.00 237373 7/20/10 1,416.36 237374 7/20/10 2,015.00 237375 7/20/10 425.15 237376 7/20/10 188.95 237377 7/20/10 862.94 237378 7/20/10 1,995.23 237379 7/20/10 300.00 237380 7/20/10 300.00 237381 7/20/10 300.00 237382 7/20/10 5,035.00 237383 7/20/10 253.12 237384 7/20/10 413.25 237385 7/20/10 96.00 237386 7/20/10 427."' 237387 7/20/10 1,618 237388 7/20/10 559,,. 237389 7/20/10 521.24 237390 7/20/10 569.85 PAYEE MYRNA'S BEAUTY SHOPPE NAPA AUTO PARTS NATIONAL CITY AUTO TRIM NEXUS IS INC NORTHEAST WISCONSIN NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION ORKIN PEST CONTROL PATRICIA GARCIA PDSI PRO BUILD PROJECT PARTNERS INC PROJECT PARTNERS INC PUBLIC EMP RETIREMENT SYSTEM QUESTYS SOLUTIONS ROBINSON RON TURLEY ASSOCIATES, INC ROSALINA A GOMEZ D FIREFIGHTERS REGIONAL ALIGNMENT SERVICE ,AN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC SDG&E SILVA SMART & FINAL SOLANA CENTER SOUTHWEST SIGNAL SERVICE SPARKLETTS STAPLES ADVANTAGE STRATACOM SWEETWATER AUTHORITY THE FILIPINO PRESS THE LIGHTHOUSE INC THE NATIONAL CITY TIMES THE STAR NEWS U S BANK CORPORATE PAYMT SYS UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT UNION TRIBUNE PUBLISHING CO UNION -TRIBUNE PUB. CO. V & V MANUFACTURING WATSON WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY WESTFLEX INDUSTRIAL ILLY'S ELECTRONIC SUPPLY WARRANT REGISTER # 3 7/20/2010 DESCRIPTION BL ADMIN REFUND MOP 45735 AUTO PARTS R&M CITY VEHICLES NEXUS PHONE SYSTEM RE -CERTIFICATION COURSE NORTHROP GRUMMAN SW SUPPORT PEST MAINTENANCE REFUND FOR SUMMER CAMP TELESTAFF ANNUAL SERVICE MOP 45707 BUILDING MATERIAL MAP CHECK CENTRO T&A1214 MAP CHECK 1240 PALM T&A1364 SERVICE PERIOD 7-10-3 QUESTYS ANNUAL MAINTENANCE FIRE RESCUE CONFERENCE FLEET MANAGEMENT ANNUAL MAINT REFUND PRO REDUCED CITATION CITY PORTION OF WELLNESS EVALS MOP 72442 R&M AUTO EQUIPMENT STREET RESURFACING SPEC 10-1 GAS & ELECTRIC SERVICE STREET GAS & ELECTRIC TRAINING SEMINAR MOP 45756 RECREATION SUPPLIES PURCHASE RECYCLED ITEMS TRAFFIC SIGNAL & STREET LIGHTING WATER DELIVERY FOR NUTRITION MOP 45704 COMPUTER SUPPLIES MOP# 63845. BUSINESS CARDS STREET DIVISION WATER NOTICE OF ELECTION MOP 45726 AUTO PARTS PUBLIC NOTICE STREET RESURFACING SPEC 10-1 CREDIT CARD EXPENSES UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLICATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION NATIONAL CITY POLICE BADGES REIMB FOR ARPOC CONFERENCE JANITORIAL SUPPLIES MOP 63850 MATERIALS & SUPPLIES MOP 45763 ELECTRICAL MATERIAL 3/4 CHK NO DATE AMOUNT 237391 7/20/10 10.50 237392 7/20/10 71.50 237393 7/20/10 113.41 237394 7/20/10 665.00 237395 7/20/10 175.00 237396 7/20/10 57,846.00 237397 7/20/10 373.33 237398 7/20/10 150.00 237399 7/20/10 3,539.55 237401 7/20/10 12,027.41 237402 7/20/10 1,281.00 237403 7/20/10 366.00 237404 7/20/10 282,303.08 237405 7/20/10 13,716.85 237406 7/20/10 298.48 237407 7/20/10 1,600.00 237408 7/20/10 20.00 237409 7/20/10 31,614.00 237410 7/20/10 103.50 237411 7/20/10 663.60 237412 7/20/10 1,863.46 237413 7/20/10 29,531.96 237414 7/20/10 97.04 237415 7/20/10 201.54 237416 7/20/10 4,547.74 237417 7/20/10 5,710.10 237418 7/20/10 8.84 237419 7/20/10 1,642.16 237420 7/20/10 63.66 237421 7/20/10 579.22 237422 7/20/10 100.00 237423 7/20/10 12.82 237424 7/20/10 500.00 237425 7/20/10 891.75 237426 7/20/10 2,078.41 237427 7/20/10 126.00 237428 7/20/10 448.40 237429 7/20/10 426.40 237430 7/20/10 11.876.65 237431 7/20/10 265.00 237432 7/20/10 349.75 237433 7/20/10 457.11 237434 7/20/10 705.69 A/P Total 614,793.14 PAYEE WIRED PAYMENTS TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT SECTION 8 HAPS PAYMENTS WARRANT REGISTER # 3 7/20/2010 DESCRIPTION JUNE 2010 WC REPLENISHMENT Start Date End Date 7/14/2010 7/20/2010 4/4 CHK NO DATE AMOUNT 801640 7/14/10 54,907.01 17,224.47 GRAND TOTAL S 686,924.62 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO.1J8 EM TITLE: ;Warrant Register #4 for the period of 07/21/10 through 7/27/10 in the amount of $2,506,970.80 PREPARED BY: 'K. Apalategui PHONE: 1619-336-4331 EXPLANATION: Per Government Section Code 37208, attached are the warrants issued for the period of 06/16/10 through 06/22/10 The Finance Department Vendor Koch Armstrong Project Design cn Habitat for Humanity nGFA / City of El Cajon DEPARTMENT: APPROVED BY: has implemented a policy explanation of all warrants above $50,000.00 Check 237438 237468 237470 237503 Amount $ 364, 224.04 $91,186.48 $114,487.00 $82,969.47 Explanation Construction/Improvement Marina Consultation Services Affordable Housing Development dual Dispatching Svcs FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. N/A� ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/P ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Ratification of warrants in the amount of $2,506,970.80 BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/P ATTACHMENTS: rrant Register #4 PAYEE DOKKEN ENGINEERING FUSCOE ENGINEERING, INC. HARRIS & ASSOCIATES INC KOCH ARMSTRONG PALM ENGINEERING TORREY PINE BANK AIRGAS-WEST AMERICAN ROTARY BROOM CALIFORNIA COMMERCIAL SECURITY CALIFORNIA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CARQUEST AUTO PARTS DAPPER TIRE COMPANY DREW FORD FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC GRAINGER JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES ' 1SER SAVER INC %PA AUTO PARTS TERRY FORD PRO BUILD PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY SDG&E SOUTHERN CALIF TRUCK STOP SWEETWATER AUTHORITY THE LIGHTHOUSE INC VALLEY INDUSTRIAL SPECIALTIES ABUKAR YUSUF CITY OF SAN DIEGO DESROCHERS E2 MANAGE TECH INC KEYSER MARSTON ASSOC OPPER & VARCO PROJECT DESIGN CONSULTANTS PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY SAN DIEGO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY SANDOVAL STAPLES ADVANTAGE THE STAR NEWS ACEVES BIRRIAS GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS 4N DIEGO HOUSING COMMISSION ERIZON WIRELESS ACEDO AFFORDABLE BUTTONS.COM ALLEN ARJIS BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP WARRANT REGISTER # 4 7/27/2010 DESCRIPTION JUNE SERVICES 2010 PLAZA BONITA- MAY 2010 SERVICES T AVE SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT / MARINA CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS MARINA GATEWAY RETENTION MOP 45714 MATERIALS & SUPPLIES MOP 62683 SWEEPER PARTS MOP 45754 BUILDING MATERIAL MOP 45698 ELECTRICAL MATERIAL MOP 47557 AUTO PARTS MOP 72654 TIRES MOP 49078 AUTO PARTS MOP 45723 PLUMBING MATERIAL MOP 65179 BUILDING MATERIALS MOP 69277 MATERIALS & SUPPLIES MOP 45725 OFFICE SUPPLIES MOP 742075 AUTO PARTS MOP 45703 AUTO PARTS MOP 45707 SHOP SUPPLIES MOP 45742 LAUNDRY SERVICE FACILITIES GAS & ELECTRIC MOP 73565 GAS FACILITIES WATER BILL MOP 45726 SHOP SUPPLIES MOP 46453 PLUMBING MATERIAL SB RECOVERY OVERPAYMT ENTERPRISE ZONE ADMIN SERVICES RETIREMENT BENEFIT AUG 2010 CONSULTING SERVICES ECONOMIC CONSULTING SERVICES LEGAL SERVICES - EPA GRANT CONSULTATION SERVICES MOP# 45742. LAUNDRY SERVICES DDA WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY S8 FRAUD RECOVERY OVERPAYMT MOP# 45704. OFFICE SUPPLIES CULTURAL ARTS CENTER REIMBURSEMENT FOR RETURED CHECK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOAN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING REIMBURSEMENT PORT -IN FOR HAP/AD VERIZON WIRELESS SERVICE/ CDC RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 PIN -BACK BUTTONS RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 ARJIS COSTS / JPA COSTS ETHICS TRAINING SEMINAR 1/3 CHK NO DATE AMOUNT 237435 7/27/10 8,444.87 237436 7/27/10 4,782.25 237437 7/27/10 3,448.00 237438 7/27/10 364,224.04 237439 7/27/10 49,050.00 237440 7/27/10 19,169.69 237441 7/27/10 292.67 237442 7/27/10 501.83 237443 7/27/10 306.30 237444 7/27/10 1,088.54 237445 7/27/10 35.55 237446 7/27/10 539.43 237447 7/27/10 195.64 237448 7/27/10 492.86 237449 7/27/10 321.78 237450 7/27/10 71.78 237451 7/27/10 260.60 237452 7/27/10 535.80 237453 7/27/10 280.71 237454 7/27/10 197.70 237455 7/27/10 704.11 237456 7/27/10 31,983.34 237457 7/27/10 159.12 237459 7/27/10 32,904.66 237460 7/27/10 512.27 237461 7/27/10 231.95 237462 7/27/10 4.00 237463 7/27/10 48,500.00 237464 7/27/10 110.00 237465 7/27/10 7,649.34 237466 7/27/10 24,930.21 237467 7/27/10 2,360.00 237468 7/27/10 91,186.48 237469 7/27/10 13.34 237470 7/27/10 114,487.00 237471 7/27/10 70.00 237472 7/27/10 98.84 237473 7/27/10 871.25 237474 7/27/10 402.45 237475 7/27/10 1,088.73 237476 7/27/10 16,029.84 237477 7/27/10 11,640.74 237478 7/27/10 717.64 237479 7/27/10 160.00 237480 7/27/10 492.96 237481 7/27/10 125.00 237482 7/27/10 42,513.00 237483 7/27/10 1,800.00 PAYEE BOYD BSN SPORTS BUSTAMANTE & ASSOC CDWG CONDON COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO D MAX ENGINEERING INC D MAX ENGINEERING INC D MAX ENGINEERING INC DATA TICKET INC DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS DEFRATIS DICERCHIO DODSON STEVE WAYNE DREDGE EWERT FEDEX HANSON HAWTHORNE MACHINERY (INC.) HCFA C/O CITY OF EL CAJON HERNANDEZ HERNANDEZ HOLLIS III HOLLOWAY HYDRO-SCAPE PRODUCTS INC. INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY IRON MOUNTAIN RECORDS JAMES KIMBLE KOLANDA L N CURTIS & SONS LASER SAVER INC LAW OFFICES OF DON DETISCH LOPEZ MATIENZO MCCABE MORALES MORRISON MURRAY MYERS NOSAL WILLIAM A PAUU PERRY FORD POST POTTER PRO BUILD PROGRESSIVE SOLUTIONS INC WARRANT REGISTER # 4 7/27/2010 DESCRIPTION RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 COMMUNITY SERVICES SUPPLIES CONSULTING SERVICES NEC P221W-BK 22 DISPLAY, MFG RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 SHARE OF PARKING CIT REV JUN'10 DEPOSIT#1386 AUTOZONE DEPOSIT#1374 BAPTIST CHURCH DEPOSIT#1369 HARBOR CONDOS PARKING CITATION PROCESSING COMMUNICATIONS EQUIP SERVICE RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 REFUND OF DUPLICATE PAYMENT RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 FEDEX BIBLE BAPTIST CHURCH RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 TRANSPORT MACHINERY TO/FROM HMC FY11 ANNUAL DISPATCHING CHARGE REFUND OF CITATION DISMISSED REFUND OF OVERPAYMENT RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 RB ROTOR WITH SAW CONSULTING SERVICES CONSULTING SERVICES RECORDS MANAGEMENT RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 UNIFORMS MOP# 45725. TONER REVIEWED DOCUMTS TRIFTY OIL TRANSLATION SERVICES 07/06/2010 RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 LEASE PAYMENT FY2011 CERTIFICATE FRAMES RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 RETIREMENT SETTLEMENT AUG'10 RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 LABOR & MAINTENANCE REP VEH #398 RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 MISCELLANEOUS SMALL TOOLS BUSINESS LICENSE FORMS 2/3 CHK NO DATE AMOUNT 237484 7/27/10 145.00 237485 7/27/10 515.39 237488 7/27/10 6,391.40 237487 7/27/10 468.04 237488 7/27/10 280.00 237489 7/27/10 11,552.59 237490 7/27/10 1,820.00 237491 7/27/10 1,312.00 237492 7/27/10 550.00 237493 7/27/10 3,305.15 237494 7/27/10 280.00 237495 7/27/10 120.00 237496 7/27/10 70.00 237497 7/27/10 35.00 237498 7/27/10 250.00 237499 7/27/10 160.00 237500 7/27/10 34.92 237501 7/27/10 135.1 237502 7/27/10 1,401 237503 7/27/10 82,969.47 237504 7/27/10 305.00 237505 7/27/10 7.00 237506 7/27/10 185.00 237507 7/27/10 150.00 237508 7/27/10 1,108.38 237509 7/27/10 8,200.00 237510 7/27/10 6,000.00 237511 7/27/10 131.00 237512 7/27/10 140.00 237513 7/27/10 300.00 237514 7/27/10 135.00 237515 7/27/10 12,028.78 237516 7/27/10 169.95 237517 7/27/10 4,267.83 237518 7/27/10 280.00 237519 7/27/10 100.00 237520 7/27/10 280.00 237521 7/27/10 2,000.00 237522 7/27/10 24.69 237523 7/27/10 150.00 237524 7/27/10 140.00 237525 7/27/10 1,098,R4 237526 7/27/10 34C 237527 7/27/10 927. 237528 7/27/10 280.00 237529 7/27/10 150.00 237530 7/27/10 500.39 237531 7/27/10 905.11 PAYEE R.J. SAFETY SUPPLY RAY RUIZ SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF SARMIENTO SD COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT SHORT, CRAIG STAPLES ADVANTAGE VCA EMERGENCY ANIMAL HOSPITAL WALMART WILLY'S ELECTRONIC SUPPLY WOOD & WOOD YOUNG ZIETLOW EE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON PAYROLL Pay period Start Date 15 6/29/2010 WARRANT REGISTER # 4 7/27/2010 DESCRIPTION SAFETY GEAR RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 FY11 SANDAG ASSESSMENTS REFUND BANK DEBITED ACCT MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 COPIER, IC D1120, WHITE EMERGENCY ANIMAL CARE #79789 CERTIFICATE FRAMES MOP# 45763. ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES LIABILITY CLAIM COSTS S B LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AUG'10 HUD 108 LOAN - NC FIRE STATION End Date 7/12/2010 Check Date 7/21 /2010 3/3 CHK NO DATE AMOUNT 237532 7/27/10 744.29 237533 7/27/10 190.00 237534 7/27/10 310.00 237535 7/27/10 12,403.00 237536 7/27/10 30.00 237537 7/27/10 350.00 237538 7/27/10 300.00 237539 7/27/10 1,121.44 237540 7/27/10 165.00 237541 7/27/10 246.94 237542 7/27/10 128.44 237543 7/27/10 23,387.92 237544 7/27/10 419.58 237545 7/27/10 150.00 A/P Total 1,078,032.77 7/26/10 396,176.25 1,032,761.78 GRAND TOTAL $ 2,506,970.80 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 19 M TITLE: City Manager's Response to 2009/2010 Grand Jury Recommendations Pertaining to Ethics in Government, Codes of Ethics, Internal Controls, and Fraud Hotlines PREPARED BY: Claudia G. Silva, Esq. PHONE: Ext. 4222 EXPLANATION: Please see attached memorandum. DEPARTMENT: City Attorney APPROVED BY: FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. N/A ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept and file the City Manager's response to the Grand Jury. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: torandum _ __, Manager's Response to the Grand Jury Mayor Ron Morrison Council Members Alejandra Sotelo-Solis Jess Van Deventer Rosalie Zarate TO: CALIFORNIA NATIONAL IOW ^, INCORPORATED Office of the City Attorney Mayor and City Council FROM: City Attorney City Attorney Claudia Gacitua Silva Special Legal Counsel George H. Eiser. III Senior Assistant City Attorney Jodi L. Doucette DATE: August 5, 2010 SUBJECT: City Manager's Response to 2009/2010 Grand Jury Recommendations Pertaining to Ethics in Government, Codes of Ethics, Intemal Controls, and Fraud Hotlines The San Diego County Grand Jury issued a report entitled "Ethics in Government — Codes of Ethics, Internal Controls, Fraud Hotlines". The Grand Jury's Report focused on the County of San Diego and the City of San Diego, but requested the City Managers of the other cities in the County, including National City, to respond to certain recommendations made by the Grand Jury. Specifically, the Grand Jury requested responses to the following recommendations: 10-70 Bring before the legislative body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt integrated comprehensive Codes of Ethics defining and prohibiting fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest. 10-71 Bring before the legislative body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt and apply internal controls compliant with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards and/or Generally Accepted Accounting Principles as applicable. 10-72 Bring before the legislative body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt and implement fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest hotlines outsourced to third party providers assuring anonymity. Penal Code Section 933.05 sets forth the requirements for responding to a grand jury report. Attached is the City Manager's response to the Grand Jury r- ort in compliance with the Penal Code. audia G City Att CGS/gmo 1243 National City Boulevard; National City, California 91950-4301 Tel.: (619) 336.4220 Fax: (619) 336.4327 August 11, 2010 The Honorable Kevin A. Enright Presiding Judge, Superior Court County of San Diego Hall of Justice 330 W. Broadway, Suite 477 San Diego, CA 92101-3830 RE: Response to 2009/2010 Grand Jury Report: "Ethics in Government - Code of Ethics, Internal Controls, Fraud Hotlines" Dear Judge Enright, The City of National City is in receipt of the San Diego County Grand Jury report entitled, "Ethics in Government, Code of Ethics, Internal Controls and Fraud Hotlines" released May 27, 2010. In accordance with California Penal Code § 933(c), the City of National City is responding to the following recommendations made by the Grand Jury Report: Recommendation 10-70: The Grand Jury writes: "The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the City Managers of the cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, and Vista bring before the legislative body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt integrated comprehensive Codes of Ethics defining and prohibiting fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest." Office of the City Manager 1243 National City Boulevard, National City, CA 91950-4301 619/336-4240 Fax 619/336-4327 www.nationalcityca.gov Email cmo@nationalcityca.gov 0 Comment: The City of National City agrees with this recommendation and plans to augment and implement within the next six (6) months new Codes of Ethics administrative policies defining and prohibiting fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest. All National City employees are subject to City administrative policies. National City has practices and procedures in place to help ensure compliance. All elected City officials and appointed board and commission members are required to attend biannually a formal Ethics Training to comply with Assembly Bill No. 1234. To enhance the interactive process, we conduct the training in- house with a certified trainer and encourage attendance by more than those required to attend. The training is also offered online. National City has also adopted an administrative policy (City Administrative Policy 04.06) requiring all City employees to report any outside employment, self- employment, business, or similar activity or interest that may be deemed a conflict of interest or an incompatibility with their City employment. The policy was reissued to all employees in 2008; all employees were required to sign acknowledgements of receipt. All newly hired employees receive the policy as a part of their new employee orientation and are required to sign in acknowledgement of receipt. National City complies with the Political Reform Act which requires various City officials and employees to file an annual Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700). Those required to file statements are divided into two groups — those required to file under Government Code Section 87200 (mayors; council members, planning commissioners, city managers, city attorneys, and those who manage public investments), and those required to file under Government Code Section 87300. The reporting requirements of the Section 87200 filers are established by State law. The reporting requirements of the Section 87300filers are established by conflict of interest codes adopted by each city. Additionally, those individuals who must file a statement under the conflict of interest code is prescribed by such code. Although National City does not currently have formal Codes of Ethics policies, we have informal policies and procedures in place to help ensure compliance. Recommendation 10-71: The Grand Jury writes: "The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the City Managers of the cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, and Vista bring before the legislative body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt and apply internal controls compliant with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards and/or Generally Accepted .Accounting Principals as applicable." Comment: The City of National City agrees with this recommendation. The City is currently in the process of creating a formal Internal Control Policy to be approved by the City Council within the next six (6) months. The City's audited Comprehensive Financial Report includes an evaluation of internal controls. No findings or recommendations have been identified by the City's independent auditors, Mayer Hoffman McCann and therefore, internal controls are consistent with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS) and Generally Accepted Accounting Principals (GAAP). Conclusions, summaries and findings of an audited Comprehensive Annual Financial Report are presented at a publicly held meeting before the City Council and the City publishes and posts the CAFR and other financial reports on the City's website: www.nationalcityca.gov. Recommendation 10-72: The Grand Jury writes: "The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the City Managers of the cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, and Vista bring before the legislative body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt and implement fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest hotlines outsourced to third party providers assuring anonymity." Comment: The City of National City agrees with this recommendation and will implement a fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest hotline(s) within the next ninety (90) days. Due to budgetary constraints, however, the City will not outsource the hotline(s) to a third party provider. Calls will go directly to the City Manager or the City Attorney depending on the nature of the call. Both the City Manager and the City Attorney will ensure procedural actions for the reporting, investigation and confidentiality of individuals for reporting suspected fraud or abuse be maintained to the fullest extent possible. These procedural actions will also be established in the "Code of Ethics" policy referenced in the City's response above to Recommendation 10-70. Should you have any questions regarding the City's response to the above recommendations, please contact me at (619) 336-4240. Sincerely, Chris Zapata City Manager City of National City xc: Mayor & City Council Claudia Silva, City Attorney Leslie Deese, Assistant City Manager ETHICS IN GOVERNMENT CODES OF ETHICS, INTERNAL CONTROLS, FRAUD HOTLINES INTRODUCTION The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners reports that the typical American organization loses seven percent of its annual revenues to fraudulent activity.' Internal controls in compliance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards are the source of detection of more than one quarter of government fraud cases. However, the most common method of detecting occupational fraud is by a tip from an employee, customer, vendor or anonymous source; and almost a third of fraud cases were detected by way of hotline reports or other such formal forms of reporting.2 The CPA Journal concludes that the establishment of a fraud hotline is an integral part of an effective prevention and detection program.3 The implementation of a properly publicized and executed anonymous hotline, for fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest, leverages detection sources by enlisting employees, customers, vendors and other anonymous sources. The San Diego Unified School District (District) provides an example of effective implementation of the combination of internal controls and hotline. The District, serving 135,000 students in 221 schools with a FY 2010 budget of $2.2 billion, adopted a Code of Ethics and initiated an Ethics and Compliance Employee Hotline (District Hotline) in 2006. The enforcement of internal controls by the District Internal Auditor and investigations derived from the District Hotline, staffed by one of the District Internal Auditor's investigators, resulted in savings in excess of $4 million during the twenty months through October 2009, together with equally significant indirect savings in the form of employment of preventive processes. The City of San Diego (City) has an effective charter -based internal audit and hotline process in the Office of the City Auditor that is generating cost savings almost equal to its departmental budget for audit responsibilities that exceed internal controls and hotline. The potential monetary recoveries and cost savings resulting from the internal audits and recommendations of the City Auditor were about $7.4 million from July 1, 2008 through December 31, 2009, which equates to $3 in savings for every $1 in audit costs.4 The fraud recoveries from investigations initiated by City Hotline calls amounted to $142,798 in FY2009. Furthermore, the indirect savings in the form of corrective and preventive processes are significant. The County of San Diego (County) has a "Statement of Ethics and Legal Standards" that seems to be a summary or compilation of Board policies, dealing with equal opportunity, fraudulent conduct, violence in the workplace, discrimination and harassment, and drug and alcohol use. The County Office of Audits and Advisory Services (Office of Audits) 1 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, "2008 Report to Nation", "2002 Report to Nation". 2 Ibid. 3 "The Benefits of a Fraud Hotline", The CPA Journal, July 2003. 4 City of San Diego, City Auditor's Report to the Audit Committee, March, 2010. 127 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) deals with internal controls in the course of its audits, although not charged specifically with investigations of fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest. The principal task of another department, the Office of Internal Affairs, is to investigate allegations of improper government activity and illegal discrimination. The County has no published fraud hotline assuring anonymity and using a third party provider such as the District and the City employ. In order to estimate the extent of implementation of Codes of Ethics, internal control processes and fraud hotlines by government entities within the County, the 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury surveyed a sampling of cities within the County, a sampling of school districts and community college districts within the County, the San Diego International Airport Authority and the Unified Port of San Diego. The purpose of this report is to afford a snapshot of the extent and efficacy of employment of these procedures within San Diego County and to make recommendations in that regard. INVESTIGATION The Grand Jury reviewed: • San Diego City Charter, • San Diego Municipal Code, • San Diego City Policies and Procedures, • San Diego County Ordinances, and • San Diego Unified School District Bylaws, Policies and Procedures. The Grand Jury also obtained and considered numerous other sources of information, including: • County, City, School District, Port Authority and Airport Authority budgets and data; • The testimony of professional, auditing and lay witnesses; • The testimony of elected and appointed officials, and employees; • The Grand Jury survey of a sampling of cities, school and community college districts within the County, the San Diego International Airport Authority and the Unified Port of San Diego; • Reports, letters, analyses, websites and other sources of information; and • Reports of professional organizations and consultants. FACT -SET ONE Fact: In 2006, The San Diego Unified School District adopted a Code of Ethics and established the Ethics and Compliance Employee Hotline (District Hotline) under the Office of Audits and Investigations (District Auditor). The District Hotline deals with conflict of interest, influence abuse, inappropriate gifts, nepotism, and waste, fraud and abuse. Fact: The District Hotline calls are received and the telephone interviews and initial reports are conducted by a third party provider and forwarded to the District investigator. The annual fee of the third party provider is about $11,000. 128 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) Fact: The District Hotline investigator reports to the District Auditor who, according to the Bylaws of the Board of Education, Section 1019, reports to the Board. As a practical matter, the reports are routed through or concurrently to District Legal Counsel, who reports to the Superintendent, who reports to the Board of Trustees. Fact: The District Auditor, by sampling various District accounts for implementation of proper internal controls, identified over $4million in recoverable District funds over twenty months from March 1, 2008 to October 23, 2009. Fact: The staff of the District Auditor consists of seven auditors and investigators, one dedicated to the District Hotline, with a total departmental budget of approximately $914,486 or about 0.04% of the annual District budgets. Fact: The budget of the District Auditor amounts to approximately one-third of the recoverable funds (annualized) identified by the District Auditor. Fact: The District Hotline phone number is not posted on the Home page of the District website but can be found by using the search feature. Fact: During the period September 2006 through December 2009, a total of 420 calls were received by the District Hotline; 313 of these cases have been resolved; and 107 remained under investigation. Forty percent of the resolved cases resulted in corrective or disciplinary action, including the termination of fifteen employees. Fact: Examples of District Hotline cases investigated and resolved by disciplinary means through January 14, 2010 involved District employees at all levels, including school principals, involved in fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest. These cases included: embezzlement of almost $30 thousand; solicitation of minor prostitutes for sex; payment for hours not worked; misuse and mismanagement of Associated Student Body funds; falsification of student enrollment/attendance records; falsification of time records in order to receive overtime pay for hours not worked; and conflict of interest in the selection, award and performance of an almost $2 million design contract for a major construction project. Fact: Although direct savings resulting from the activities of the District Auditor, including the District Hotline, are significant indirect savings are achieved from audits and investigations applying Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and/or Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards. A variety of issues are addressed and corrective and preventive action taken, including: safety issues, falsification of student enrollment/attendance records, and failure to report vacation and sick leave. Fact: The Office of the District Auditor and the District Hotline have proven their worth in recovered funds and correction of ethical violations; but the District Hotline needs to 5 At least one large local government entity in California budgets 0.2% of the total budget for its audit department. 129 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) mitigate the backlog of complaints and the District Auditor should take steps to increase the sampling of the books and records of the District. FINDINGS Finding 01: The District Auditor, with a staff of only seven auditors and investigators (one dedicated to the District Hotline) over a period of twenty months, identified recoverable District funds that (annualized) equaled three times the cost of the staff of the District Internal Auditor. Finding 02: Through December 2009, approximately 107 Hotline cases remained under investigation. Finding 03: Investigations and audits by the District Auditor, whether initiated by District Hotline calls or otherwise, often result in savings due to prevention and increased efficiency. Finding 04: The District Auditor needs additional auditors to expand the sampling of the books and records of the District; the District Hotline needs an additional investigator to mitigate the backlog of complaints; and the District Hotline phone number needs to be more prominently posted. RECOMMENDATIONS The 2009-2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the San Diego Unified School District Board of Education and the District Superintendent: 10-60: Take steps to accomplish greater sampling of the books and records of the District. 10-61: Take steps to mitigate the backlog of District Hotline complaints. 10-62: Consider including a non -binding recommendation regarding disposition in District Auditor staff reports of cases involving fraud, waste, abuse and conflicts of interest. FACT —SET TWO Fact: The City of San Diego has an ethics ordinance, although the focus is on campaigns, lobbying and conflict of interest by elected or appointed officials other than classified employees. (As a practical matter, classified employees exclude managers and elected or appointed persons).6 6 San Diego Municipal Code, Article 7, Division 35 130 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) Fact: The City Auditor is appointed by the Mayor, confirmed by the City Council, and reports to the Audit Committee. Fact: The Audit Committee, composed of two City Council members and three members of the public, is appointed by and, as a practical matter, is accountable to the City Council.$ Fact: The City Auditor: • Has access to and authority to examine all records, documents, systems and files of the City; • May investigate any material claim of financial fraud, waste or impropriety within any City department; and • May summon and examine under oath any officer, agent, or employee of the City. Fact: All City contracts with consultants, vendors or agencies must include a clause to allow the City Auditor access to the contractor's records needed to verify compliance with the terms of the contract.9 Fact: The City Auditor publishes, on the departmental web page, explicit definitions of fraud, waste and abuse, accessed either as a separate link or through the City Employee Fraud Hotline Policy and Procedures Manual, also a separate link.1° Fact: City Hotline calls are processed as follows: • The City Hotline is accessed through an 866 phone number staffed by a third party provider. • The phone number is posted on the City Auditor's Departmental web page, or can be found through the City website search feature, entering "City Hotline". • The process of lodging a City Hotline complaint is thoroughly explained on the City Auditor's web page. • The City Hotline provider forwards an incident report to the Dissemination Team, composed of the City Auditor, the City Audit Manager, and the City Audit Analyst. • Fraud, waste, abuse or conflict of interest allegations that appear to be material are investigated in accord with procedures recommended by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. • Material internal control issues identified during an investigation are audited in compliance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards. • Non -fraud complaints involving employee relations, discrimination, harassment, and personnel related complaints are reviewed by the City Hotline Intake Review Charter of the City of San Diego, Section 39.2 (Charter amended effective July 1, 2008). The City Auditor is appointed for a term of ten years by the Mayor in consultation with the Audit Committee, is confirmed by the City Council and reports to and is accountable to the audit committee. 8Charter of the City of San Diego, Section 39.1. The audit committee is composed of two council members and three members of the public screened by a five member screening committee, all appointed by the City Council. 9 Ibid, FN 8 10 Office of the City Auditor, http://www.sandiego.gov/auditor/. 131 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) Committee, composed of the City Auditor, the Labor Relations Director and the Personnel Director and usually forwarded to appropriate departments or officials. ■ The City Auditor provides a quarterly summary and fourth quarter year-end report regarding the City Hotline calls to the Audit Committee.11 Fact: The potential monetary recoveries and cost savings resulting from the internal audits and recommendations of the City Auditor were about $7.4 million from July 1, 2008 through December 31, 2009, which equates to $3 in savings for every $1 in audit costs.12 The fraud recoveries from investigations initiated by City Hotline calls amounted to $142,798 in FY 2009.13 Fact: The City Auditor received 140 City Hotline complaints during FY 2009; and investigated, or was in the process of investigating, twenty-six complaints. Eight investigations were substantiated or resulted in corrective action, including complaints regarding conflict of interest, fraud, waste and abuse and theft.14 FINDINGS Finding 05: The City appears to have no integrated comprehensive Code of Ethics designed, for example, for classified employees and parties dealing with the City and addressing basics such as fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest. However, the City Auditor publishes, on the departmental web page, explicit definitions of fraud, waste and abuse, accessed either as a separate link or through the City Employee Fraud Hotline Policy and Procedures Manual. Finding 06: The City has an effective charter -based internal audit and hotline process managed by the City Auditor and resulting in identification of significant recoverable funds and cost savings Finding 07: Investigations and audits by the City Auditor, whether initiated by City Hotline calls or otherwise, often result in savings due to prevention and increased efficiency, not quantified in dollars. Finding 08: The City Hotline phone number is not posted on the Home page of the City website. RECOMMENDATIONS The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the City Audit Committee and the City Auditor of the City of San Diego: 10-63: Consider collecting and posting an integrated comprehensive Code of Ethics designed for classified employees and parties dealing with the 11 City Auditors Policy and Procedures, Section 9, Fraud Hotline Procedures. 12 City of San Diego, City Auditor's Report to the Audit Committee, March, 2010. 13 City of San Diego, City Auditor's Quarterly Fraud Hotline Report, Quarter 4 FY2009. 14 Ibid. 132 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) City and addressing basics such as fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest. 10-64: Consider posting the City Hotline phone number on the Home page of the City website, on the City Television Network (Channel 24), and post prominently the phone number in City workplaces. 10-65: Consider including a non -binding recommendation regarding disposition in City Auditor staff reports of cases involving fraud, waste, abuse and conflicts of interest. FACT -SET THREE Fact: The County of San Diego has a Statement of Ethics and Legal Standards15 that appears to be a summary or compilation of policies of the Board of Supervisors dealing, for example, with fraud (a perversion of truth or false representation of fact) and declaring it improper to accept gratuities in return for special favors. Fact: The County Office of Audits and Advisory Services deals with internal controls in the course of its audits, although not charged specifically with investigations of fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest. Fact: The County has no published fraud hotline using a third party provider, as is the case with the District and the City. Fact: Although its principal task is to investigate allegations of discrimination, the Office of Internal Affairs also oversees the implementation of County policy on Ethical and Legal Standards. The Office of Internal Affairs receives complaints; but complaints must be filed in writing so anonymity is not assured. FINDINGS Finding 09: The County appears to have no integrated comprehensive Code of Ethics designed, for example, for classified employees and parties dealing with the County and addressing basics such as fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest. Finding 10: The County has neither fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest anonymous hotline contracted to an independent third party provider, nor other process that addresses these issues specifically and assures the anonymity of the complainant. RECOMMENDATIONS The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors and the Chief Administrative Officer of the County of San Diego: 15 Statement of Ethics and Legal Standards, incorporating by reference Board of Supervisors Policy No. A- 120, and Board of Supervisors Policy No. D-7. 133 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) 10-66: Bring before the Board of Supervisors for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to revise, reorganize and publicize the Code of Ethics so that it will serve as an integrated comprehensive Code of Ethics designed for all employees and parties dealing with the County and addressing basic issues such as fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest. 10-67: Bring before the Board of Supervisors for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to initiate a fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest County Hotline for complaints regarding these issues, outsourced to a third party provider who forwards the initial report to the County Office of Audits where material complaints are investigated by its Certified Fraud Examiner, assuring the anonymity of the caller. 10-68: If a Hotline is created as recommended in Recommendation 10-67 above, consider posting the County Hotline phone number on the Home page on the County website and post prominently the phone number in County workplaces. 10-69: If a Hotline is created as recommended in Recommendation 10-67 above, consider including a non -binding recommendation regarding disposition in County Office of Audits and Advisory Services staff reports of cases involving fraud, waste, abuse and conflicts of interest FACT SET FOUR Fact: The Grand Jury surveyed the County of San Diego, a sampling of the eighteen cities within San Diego County, a sampling of school districts and community college districts, the San Diego International Airport Authority, and the Unified Port of San Diego. Fact: With the exception of the City of San Diego, few cities have integrated comprehensive Codes of Ethics, internal auditors, or fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest hotlines, although most have Codes of Ethics of some sort. Most cities refer fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest complaints to the applicable operational department. The anonymity of the complainant is not preserved in this sort of process. Fact: The San Diego County Office of Education has a Code of Ethics for employees dealing primarily with conflict of interest issues, as opposed to fraud, waste and abuse, and utilizes and makes available to school districts, the WeTip crime hotline. With the exception of the San Diego Unified School District, most school districts have some sort of Code of Ethics, but neither internal auditors nor fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest hotlines administered by third party providers assuring anonymity. Fact: Most community college districts have some sort of Code of Ethics, but not all have an internal auditor or fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest hotlines 134 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) administered by a third party provider assuring anonymity. For example, some have an email fraud reporting process. Some have adopted board policies regarding conflict of interest by incorporating Government Code Section 87300 and other provisions. Fact: The Unified Port of San Diego has a Code of Ethics, internal auditor and an internal fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest ethics hotline outsourced to a third party provider; but only employees of the Unified Port of San Diego have access to the hotline. Hotline calls are fielded by the provider and an initial report forwarded to the audit manager where the complaint is assigned to a Certified Fraud Examiner for investigation as appropriate. Anonymity is assured. Fact: The San Diego International Airport Authority has a Code of Ethics, internal auditor and Ethics Violation Form that may be accessed online and filed anonymously. The Code of Ethics incorporates by reference the Fair Political Practices Commission conflict of interest regulations at California Regulations Section 18730 that references the Government Code. The Airport Authority has no fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest hotline serviced by a third party provider assuring anonymity. FINDINGS Finding 11: Most of the surveyed cities have some sort of Code of Ethics, but excepting the City of San Diego, few have internal auditors or hotlines outsourced to a third party provider assuring anonymity. Finding 12: Excepting the San Diego Unified School District, most school districts have a Code of Ethics for various subject matters such as sports, but most have neither internal auditors nor fraud hotlines outsourced to third party providers assuring anonymity. Finding 13: Most community college districts have a Code of Ethics of some sort, but few have internal auditors or fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest hotlines and none are outsourced to third party providers assuring anonymity. Finding 14: The Unified Port of San Diego has a Code of Ethics, an internal auditor and an internal ethics (fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest) hotline outsourced to a third party provider assuring anonymity, but available only to employees. Finding 15: The Airport Authority has a Code of Ethics, internal auditor and Ethics Violation Form which may be accessed online and filed anonymously but does not appear to have a fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest hotline outsourced to a third party provider assuring anonymity. Finding #16: The Grand Jury finds that most of the governmental organizations within San Diego County lack either an integrated comprehensive fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest Code of Ethics, a consistently applied internal controls process compliant with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards and/or Generally 135 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) Accepted Accounting Principles, or a fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest hotline outsourced to a third party provider assuring anonymity. Finding 17: Governmental organizations within San Diego County are no less subject to fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest than the average American organization (including public and private sector), which on average loses seven percent of its annual revenues to such activities. Finding 18: Cities, school districts, community college districts, and other governmental organizations within San Diego County not named herein could benefit by considering the facts, findings and recommendations in this report and should consider adoption and implementation of some, if not all, of the recommendations set forth below. RECOMMENDATIONS The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the City Managers of the cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, and Vista: 10-70: Bring before the legislative body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt integrated comprehensive Codes of Ethics defining and prohibiting fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest. 10-71: Bring before the legislative body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt and apply internal controls compliant with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards and/or Generally Accepted Accounting Principles as applicable. 10-72: Bring before the legislative body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt and implement fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest hotlines outsourced to third party providers assuring anonymity. The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the Superintendents of the San Diego County Office of Education and the following school districts: Alpine Union, Bonsai' Union, Borrego Springs Unified, Cajon Valley Union, Cardiff Elementary, Carlsbad Unified, Chula Vista Elementary, Coronado Unified, Dehesa, Del Mar Union, Encinitas Union, Escondido Union, Escondido Union High, Fallbrook Union Elementary, Fallbrook Union High, Grossmont Union High, Jamul-Dulzura Union, Julian Union, Julian Union High, La Mesa -Spring Valley, Lakeside Union, Lemon Grove, Mountain Empire Unified, National, Oceanside Unified, Poway Unified, Ramona Unified, Rancho Santa Fe, San Diego Unified, San Dieguito, San Marcos, San Pasqual Union, San Ysidro, Santee, Solana Beach, South 136 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) Bay Union, Spencer Valley, Sweetwater Union High, Vallecitos, Valley Center Pauma Unified, Vista Unified, and Warner Unified: 10-73: Bring before the governing body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt integrated comprehensive Codes of Ethics defining and prohibiting fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest. 10-74: Bring before the governing body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt and apply internal controls compliant with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards and/or Generally Accepted Accounting Principles as applicable. 10-75: Bring before the governing body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt and implement fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest hotlines outsourced to third party providers, assuring anonymity. The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the Superintendents of Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District, MiraCosta Community College District, Palomar Community College District, San Diego Community College District, and Southwestern Community College District: 10-76: Bring before the governing body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt integrated comprehensive Codes of Ethics defining and prohibiting fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest 10-77: Bring before the governing body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt and apply internal controls compliant with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards and/or Generally Accepted Accounting Principles as applicable. 10-78: Bring before the governing body of each entity listed above for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt and implement fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest hotlines outsourced to third party providers, assuring anonymity. The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Port Commissioners of the Unified Port of San Diego: 10-79: Bring before the Board of Port Commissioners for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to open the internal fraud hotline to employees, vendors, customers, or other anonymous sources. 137 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the Airport Authority Board of the San Diego International Airport: 10-80: Bring before the governing body of the Airport Authority for its consideration in a public meeting a proposal to adopt and implement a fraud, waste, abuse and conflict of interest hotline outsourced to a third party provider, assuring anonymity. REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS The California Penal Code §933(c) requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such comment shall be within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code §933.05(a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a) As to each grand jury fmding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the fmding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. 138 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) (c) If a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with the Penal Code §933.05 are required from the: Responding Agencv Recommendations Date Auditor, City of San Diego 10-63 through 10-65 8/25/10 Audit Committee, City of 10-63 through 10-64 San Diego Chief Administrative Officer, 10-66 through 10-69 County of San Diego Board of Supervisors, County 10-66 through 10-69 of San Diego Board of Trustees, San Diego 10-60 through 10-62 Unified School District Superintendent San Diego 10-60 through 10-62 Unified School District Superintendent, San Diego 10-73 through 10-75 County Office of Education City Manager, City of Chula Vista 10-70 through 10-72 City Manager, City of Carlsbad City Manager, City of Coronado City Manager, City of Del Mar City Manager, City of El Cajon City Manager, City of Encinitas City Manager, City of Escondido 10-70 through 10-72 10-70 through 10-72 10-70 through 10-72 10-70 through 10-72 10-70 through 10-72 10-70 through 10-72 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 139 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) City Manager, City of Imperial 10-70 through 10-72 8/25/10 Beach City Manager, City of La Mesa 10-70 through 10-72 City Manager, City of Lemon Grove City Manager, City of National City City Manager, City of Oceanside 10-70 through 10-72 10-70 through 10-72 10-70 through 10-72 City Manager, City of Poway 10-70 through 10-72 City Manager, City of San Marcos 10-70 through 10-72 City Manager, City of Santee 10-70 through 10-72 City Manager, City of Solana Beach City Manager, City of Vista 10-70 through 10-72 Alpine Union School District 10-73 through 10-75 Bonsall Union School District 10-73 through 10-75 Borrego Springs Unified School 10-73 through 10-75 District Cajon Valley Union School District 10-73 through 10-75 Cardiff School District 10-73 through 10-75 Carlsbad Unified School District 10-73 through 10-75 10-70 through 10-72 Chula Vista Elementary School 10-73 through 10-75 District Coronado Unified School District 10-73 through 10-75 Dehesa School District 10-73 through 10-75 Del Mar Union School District 10-73 through 10-75 140 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) Encinitas Union School District Escondido Union School District Escondido Union High School District Fallbrook Union Elementary School District Fallbrook Union High School District Grossmont Union High School District Jamul-Dulzura Union School District Julian Union School District 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 Julian Union High School District 10-73 through 10-75 La Mesa -Spring Valley School District Lakeside Union School District Lemon Grove School District Mountain Empire Unified School District National School District 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 Oceanside Unified School District 10-73 through 10-75 Poway Unified School District 10-73 through 10-75 Ramona Unified School District 10-73 through 10-75 Rancho Santa Fe School District 10-73 through 10-75 San Dieguito School District San Marcos School District 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 141 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) San Pasqual Union School District 10-73 through 10-75 San Ysidro School District Santee School District Solana Beach School District South Bay Union School District Spencer Valley School District Sweetwater Union High School District Vallecitos School District Valley Center-Pauma Unified School District Vista Unified School District Warner Unified School District 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 10-73 through 10-75 Grossmont-Cuyamaca Communityl0-76 through 10-78 College District MiraCosta Community College District Palomar Community College District Southwestern Community College District Chancellor San Diego Community College District Board of Port Commissioners Unified Port of San Diego Airport Authority Board Filed: May 27, 2010 142 10-76 through 10-78 10-76 through 10-78 10-76 through 10-78 10-76 through 10-78 10-79 10-80 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 8/25/10 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 FINAL REPORT (June 24, 2010) CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 20 :M TITLE: City Manager's Response to 2009/2010 Grand Jury Recommendation Pertaining to Managed Competition, Outsourcing, Reengineering, and Reverse Auction Programs such as are Employed by the County of San Diego PREPARED BY: PHONE: Ext. 4222 EXPLANATION: The San Diego County Grand Jury issued a report entitled "Managed Competition, tutsourcing, Reengineering, and Reverse Auction Programs". The Grand Jury's Report focused on the County of San Diego, and the City of San Diego, but requested the City Managers of the other cities in the County, including National City, to respond to certain recommendations made by the Grand Jury. Specifically, the Grand Jury asked for a response to the following Recommendation 10-102: Study, adopt and/or piggyback on, as appropriate, managed competition outsourcing, reengineering and reverse action programs such as are employed by the County of San Diego. Claudia G. Silva, Esq.K/ DEPARTMENT: City Attorney APPROVED BY: Penal Code Section 933.05 sets forth the requirements for responding to such a report. Attached is the City Manager's response to the Grand Jury, in compliance with the Penal Code requirements. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. N/A ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept and file the City Manager's response to the Grand Jury. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Manager's Response to the Grand Jury August 11, 2010 The Honorable Kevin A. Enright Presiding Judge, Superior Court County of San Diego Hall of Justice 330 W. Broadway, Suite 477 San Diego, CA 92101-3830 RE: Response to 2009/2010 Grand Jury Report: "Efficiency in Government — Managed Competition, Outsourcing, Reengineering and Reverse Auction within San Diego County." Dear Judge Enright, The City of National City is in receipt of the San Diego County Grand Jury report entitled, "Efficiency in Government — Managed Competition, Outsourcing, Reengineering and Reverse Auction within San Diego County" released June 23, 2010. In accordance with California Penal Code § 933(c), the City of National City is responding to the following recommendations made by the Grand Jury Report: Recommendation: The Grand Jury writes: "The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the City Managers of the cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, and Vista to study, adopt and/or piggyback on, as appropriate, managed competition, outsourcing, reengineering and reverse auction programs such as are employed by the County of San Diego." Office of the City Manager 1243 National City Boulevard, National City, CA 91950-4301 619/336-4240 Fax 619/336-4327 www.nationalcityca.gov Email cmo@nationalcityca.gov 6� Comment: Managed Competition and Outsourcing: The City of National City agrees with the recommendation and we have implemented certain components. While the City has not formally implemented managed competition and outsourcing initiatives, we have outsourced specific services where possible and not constrained by law. For example, National City recently outsourced its risk management services and contracted with a third party administrator for claim adjusting, workers compensation and risk management functions. National City also contracts with third party providers for services such as trash, sewer and water. Trash Disposal: The City has contracted with EDCO Disposal since 1976 for residential and commercial waste disposal, residential and commercial recycling. Sewer Collection: The City has contracted with the City of San Diego since 1963 for the transportation and treatment of sewage wastewater. Water: The City has contracted with Sweetwater Authority as the City's water provider since it took over from Cal American in 1977. Consulting Services: National City also hires consultants to provide special expertise on specific projects or processes. Such relationships have allowed enhanced flexibility and cost savings. Public Agency Partnerships: The City recognizes the benefits of shared resources and expertise via regional partnerships. National City has contracted with other local agencies to supplement technical and professional resources during peak periods. National City continues to explore the viability of additional regional partnerships. Reengineerinq: National City has been actively engaged in continuous improvement for the last five years. The results of these efforts have included the consolidation of departments, the elimination of several management level positions, the restructuring of workloads and more efficient use of technology. These efforts have resulted in a decrease in personnel expenses and an increase in efficiency. Reverse Auctions: While the City of National City has not formally studied the concept of a reverse auction, we routinely and successfully piggy back on County of San Diego and other public entity bids through a variety of processes, including: 1. "Cooperative Bids" which allow other small agencies to submit their estimated needs to the County's bid process thereby allowing larger quantities to generate more competition and drive the process down for all participating agencies. 2. "Public Agency Clause" which allows the vendor to agree to extend the County's bid prices to any other public agency that wants to 'piggyback' the bid. Agreeing to a Public Agency Clause usually brings in more business for the vendor without having to go through multiple bid processes with various agencies. It is not normally a beneficial process for a small agency to conduct its own reverse auction. The low volume of goods normally does not generate a lot of competition or interest, especially with a process that requires so much set-up and pre -coordination. We have found that it is more advantageous for us to enter into a cooperative bid with the County or to piggyback their end results. For the reasons discussed above, the recommendation for National City to implement a reverse auction process is not warranted. Should you have any questions regarding the City's response to the above recommendations, please contact me at (619) 336-4240. Sincerely, Chris Zapata City Manager City of National City xc: Mayor & City Council Claudia Silva, City Attorney Leslie Deese, Assistant City Manager GRAND JURY County of San Diego Hall of Justice 330 W. Broadway, Suite 477 San Diego, CA 92101-3830 (619) 515-8707 Fax (619) 515-8696 VICTORIA D. STUBBLEFIELD, Foreperson May 28, 2010 CONFIDENTIAL SEE ATTACHED LISTING OF RESPONDING AGENCIES Re: Grand Jury Report: "Efficiency In Govemment—Managed Competition, Outsourcing, Reengineering And Reverse Auction Within San Diego County". Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury herewith provides the referenced report for your review and comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with the Penal Code of California §933(c). This report was prepared pursuant to §§925, 925(a) and 933.5 of the Penal Code. In accordance with Penal Code §933.05(e), a copy of this report is being provided to affected agencies two working days prior to its public release and after being approved by the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Please note that §933.05(e) specifies that no officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to its public release. This report will be filed with the Clerk of the Court and released to the public On Thursday, June 3, 2010. Sincerely yours, tittuu idlik.bbl.461.60 VICTORIA D. STUBBLEFIELD, Foreperson 2009/2010 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY VDS//Iln enc. Mailing List of Responding Agencies Mayor, City of San Diego City Council, City of San Diego Chief Administrative Officer, County of San Diego Board of Supervisors, County of San Diego Superintendent San Diego Unified School District City Manager, City of Chula Vista City Manager, City of Carlsbad City Manager, City of Coronado City Manager, City of Del Mar City Manager, City of El Cajon City Manager, City of Encinitas City Manager, City of Escondido City Manager, City of Imperial Beach City Manager, City of La Mesa City Manager, City of Lemon Grove City Manager, City of National City City Manager, City of Oceanside City Manager, City of Poway City Manager, City of San Marcos City Manager, City of Santee City Manager, City of Solana Beach City Manager, City of Vista Alpine Union School District Bonsall Union School District Borrego Springs Unified School District Cajon Valley Union School District Cardiff School District Carlsbad Unified School District Chula Vista Elementary School District Coronado Unified School District Dehesa School District Del Mar Union School District Encinitas Union School District Escondido Union School District Escondido Union High School District Fallbrook Union Elementary School District Fallbrook Union High School District Grossmont Union High School District Jamul-Dulzura Union School District Julian Union School District Julian Union High School District La Mesa -Spring Valley School District Lakeside Union School District Lemon Grove School District Mountain Empire Unified School District National School District Oceanside Unified School District Poway Unified School District Ramona Unified School District Rancho Santa Fe School District San Dieguito School District San Marcos School District San Pasqual Union School District San Ysidro School District Santee School District Solana Beach School District South Bay Union School District Spencer Valley School District Sweetwater Union High School District Vallecitos School District Valley Center-Pauma Unified School District Vista Unified School District Warner Unified School District Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District MiraCosta Community College District Palomar Community College District Southwestern Community College District Chancellor San Diego Community College District Board of Port Commissioners Unified Port of San Diego Airport Authority Board EFFICIENCY IN GOVERNMENT Managed Competition, Outsourcing, Reeningeering And Reverse Auction Within San Diego County A Report by the 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury filed June 3, 2010 EFFICIENCY IN GOVERNMENT MANAGED COMPETITION, OUTSOURCING, REENGINEERING AND REVERSE AUCTION WITHIN SAN DIEGO COUNTY INTRODUCTION Proposition C on the November 2006 ballot_ amended the San Diego City Charter.' to permit the City of San Diego (the City) to employ independent contractors to perform city services. The measure passed by a significant margin: sixty percent against forty percent. The City has yet to enter a contract under the charter amendment. Four months later, in March 2007, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors granted the County Director of Purchasing and Contracting expanded authority to enter into contracts to purchase, rent, or lease all personal property for the County and to engage independent contractors to perform services for the County. The Director used this authority to enter managed competition, outsourcing and reverse auction contracts under the ordinance which, together with savings from reengineering, resulted in savings of $678,596,736 for the taxpayers of the County through-FY 2008.2 Both statutory processes are often referred to as "managed competition" although the statutes may allow other processes such as outsourcing and reverse auction. Managed competition, while similar to outsourcing, differs in that current govent employees are encouraged to devise and submit their own bids to compete with Ovate sector providers for a contract. The objective of managed competition, outsourcing and reverse auction, as well as "reengineering", remains the same: to realize greater economy and efficiency on behalf of the taxpayer. The benefits -of mano ged competition include: reduced cost, enhanced quality, timeliness of delivery, flexible staffmg, access to expertise, innovation due tocompetitive contracting, and shifting of risk to contractors.3 The cost savings realized by public agencies such as the Department of Defense, for example, have ranged from about thirty-one percent to forty-two percent 4 Managed competition for the City of San Diego has been the subject of numerous press releases, news reports, studies, analyses and editorials. More objective than most editorials is Managing Competition, Union -Tribune, February 14, 2010. The Mayor (as. reported by the Union -Tribune on December 4, 2006) has noted that the City proposal requires that a managed competition contract may be awarded to an outside bidder. only if the taxpayers will realize at least a 10% savings, significantly tipping the scales against the outside bidder and in favor of City employees. However, the unions want that advantage in addition to the exclusion of their health insurance, valuedat more than $6,000 per employee per year, from their bid. One council member, frustrated with the failure of the City to implement managed competition has proposed a new ballot 1 San Diego City Charter, Article VIII, Section 117, Unclassified and Classified Services. 2 County of San Diego, Business Processes Report, April 8, 2009. 2 Streamlining San Diego, Achieving Taxpayer Savings and Government Reforms Through Managed Competition, San Diego Institute for Policy Research, September 2007. 4 Ibid, Appendix 1. 1 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 3, 2010) initiative on the subject.5 Unfortunately for the City of San Diego and its taxpayers, managed competition has become a union versus management battle accompanied by substantial campaign funding. Two councilmembers who oppose managed competition received about $529,000 from unions in the 2008 elections and about $103,000 were spent by unions in the 2008 election against one councilmember and one candidate for council who both favor managed competition (as reported by a San Diego Ethics Commission Audit Report, December 4, 2009 and by the Office of the City Clerk, Independent Expenditures Filings, 2008). The Union -Tribune reported on October 28, 2009, that the vote of the City Council to reject impasse as requested by the Mayor came down on party lines, with six members of the Council (of eight council seats) siding with organized labor. Conversely, to the good fortune of its taxpayers, the County managed competition program stands out as a model of collaborative effort resulting in significant savings. The City has completed or is in the process of completing twenty-five Business Process Reengineering (BPR) studies. BPR is conducted by City employees, who research industry benchmarks, conduct internal and external customer surveys, and map existing processes and organizational structures, all designed to deliver better service and save money.6 BPR stands alone and should be conducted and implemented by all: departments without regard to whether a managed competition is contemplated. However, the failure of the City and the affected union to meet and confer regarding implementation of the Facilities Division BPR almost two years after completion of the study illustrates the difficulty facing the City in these matters. Most local entities are unaware or only vaguely aware of the reverse auction tool. The auction is conducted online real-time by way of a specialized program that pits the bidding contractors or suppliers against their competition. The actual auction is preceded by an online transmission of the specifications and the online process, as well as a rehearsal auction. The competing bidders do not know the identity of their competitors, only the amount of the last bid. The baseline is the last contract formerly entered for the goods and/or services subject of the auction. The auction ends at a pre -specified deadline or after a pre -specified time has elapsed since the last bid. Savings can be significant. For example,. the County saved $228,918 on the cost of tree removal in reverse auctions conducted in December 2009. In order to estimate the extent of implementation of managed competition, outsourcing, reengineering and reverse auctions within the County, the 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury surveyed cities, a sampling of schooland community college districts and the Unified Port of San Diego (Port District). The purpose of this report is simply to afford a snapshot of the state of managed competition, outsourcing, reengineering and reverse auctions within San Diego County and to make recommendations in that regard. 5 Competition and Transparency in City Contracting Initiative, 2010. 6 City of San Diego, Fiscal Year 2010 Proposed Budget, Business Office. SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 3, 2010) INVESTIGATION The Grand Jury reviewed: • San Diego City Charter; • Proposition C 2006, Contracting Out of City Services, City of San Diego; • Managed Competition Guide, Version 3.0, October 8, 2009 Draft, City of San Diego; • Ordinance No. 9336, Article XXIII, San Diego County Administrative Code; and ■ County of San Diego Managed Competition Guide (Draft), September 2009. The Grand Jury also obtained and considered numerous other sources of information, including: • Reverse auctions conducted by the County; ■ SANDAG 2050 Regional Growth Forecast, February 26, 2010; • The testimony of a number of professional, auditing and lay witnesses; • The testimony of a number of elected officials, government managers and union representatives; • The Grand Jury survey of a sampling of cities within the County, a sampling of school and community college districts within the County, and the Unified Port of San Diego; and • Reports, letters, analyses, news reports, websites and other sources of information. FACTS —SET ONE Fact: Proposition C on the November 7, 2006 ballot amended the San Diego City Charter, Section 117(c)7 to permit the City of San Diego to employ independent contractors to perform city services that the Mayor and City Council determine can be provided more economically and efficiently. Fact: The process for implementation of managed competition or outsourcing under Section 117(c) may be summarized$ as follows. • The City Council must by ordinance provide for appropriate policies and procedures to implement Section 117(c). • The Mayor must first determine that City services can be provided more "economically and efficiently" by an independent contractor than by persons employed in the classified service9 while maintaining service quality and protecting the public interest. ■ The Mayor must submit the proposed outsourcing contract to the Managed Competition Review Board and if a City department submits a proposal for the services, the department must be provided with an opportunity and resources to San Diego City Charter, Article VIII, Section1117, Unclassified and Classified Services. 8 Outsourcing City Services, City Attorney, City of San. Diego, October 8, 2009. 9 The classified service is composed of employees other than management and elected officials. 3 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 3, 2010) develop efficiency and effectiveness improvements in their operations as part of the department's proposal. • The proposed outsourcing contract must then be submitted to the City Council, which has the authority to accept or reject in its .entirety any proposed agreement with an independent contractor. • In attempting to implement amended Charter Section 117(c) the City must comply with the meet and confer rules set forth in the State Meyers-Milias-Brown Act. Fact: All City contracts with consultants, vendors or agencies must include a clause to allow the City Auditor access to the contractor's records needed to verify compliance with the terms of the contract.]° Fact: On December 4, 2006, the Mayor called for the City Council to pass the implementing ordinance requiredby amended Charter Section 117(c), noting that the City had negotiated with a coalition of four labor unions in thirty-one meetings of about four hours each. Fact: Since 2006, the City has been negotiating with labor organizations attempting to put in place an implementing ordinance and corresponding administrative regulations acceptable to the unions and the City Council. Fact: Before and after the passage of Proposition C in 2006, City management and American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 127, and the Municipal Employees Association (MEA) engaged in extensive negotiations, argued unfair labor practices charges, and ultimately litigated those issues before the California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB). In a decision that was entered on September 18, 2008, the Administrative Law Judge ordered the City to follow the impasse procedures and to bargain in good faith!' Fact: After the PERB decision, the City negotiated with Local 127 in more than forty sessions and with MEA in more than thirty-three sessions. The parties failed to reach agreement and the City initiated the impasse procedure.12 Fact: The impasse procedure might ultimately have resulted in a decision to resolve the matter in accord with the last and best offer of the City.13 On October 27, 2009, the mayor, in requesting impasse, again called on the City Council to "honor the will of the voters on managed competition." But the City Council rejected the Mayor's request for impasse, sending the parties back to further bargaining. As the Union -Tribune reported on October 28, 2009, six Council members sided with organized labor. 1° Charter of the City of San Diego, Section 39.2 (Charter amended effective July 1, 2008). 11 AFSCME Local 127 & San Diego Municipal Employees Association v. City of San Diego (2008) 32 PERC 146. 12 City of San Diego Memorandum to Council President, September 29, 2009; Council Policy 300-06 providing for resolution by the City Council where the City and Labor are unable to agree. 13 City Attomey, City of San Diego, Memorandum of Law, January 26, 2009. SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 3, 2010) Fact:. A union representative accused the City of a "shameless bait and switch". A City spokesman responded: "The mayor has worked hard to implement managed competition and the only thing we've gotten from the unions is delay after delay". Fact: The City has yet to enter a contract under the amended Charter Section 117(c) passed by the voters on November 7, 2006. Fact: The City's total expenditures for FY 2010 are expected to be $2,944,282,705.14 A citizens task force of distinguished business and civic leaders noted in its December 2009 report that the City's projected FY 2011 deficit is $179,000,000; but the City has not implemented its most powerful tool, Managed Competition.t5 FINDINGS Finding #01: In November 2006 the voters of the City of San Diego amended Section 117(c) of the City Charter to permit the City to employ independent contractors to perform city services and requiring that the City Council enact an ordinance implementing the amended City Charter. Finding #02: The City has expended many hours in numerous sessions attempting to negotiate with City unions the terms of the implementing ordinance and managed competition guide. Finding #03: The City has yet to enter a contract under the charter amendment passed by the voters on November 7, 2006. Finding #04: Managed Competition is stalled in a political and ideological battle that may ultimately have to be resolved: by enactment in November 2010 of the alternative Competition and Transparency in City Contracting Initiative 2010, an election result that alters the partisan split, or by some other means. Finding #05: The Grand Jury is empowered to make recommendations to the Mayor and City Council; but lacks the jurisdiction to make recommendations to the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 127,'and the Municipal Employees Association: If the Grand Jury had such jurisdiction it would include these employee organizations in its recommendation. RECOMMENDATION The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the Mayor and the City Council of the City of San Diego: 10-99: Proceed with the impasse process or other appropriate process to approve and enact the implementing ordinance, approve the Managed Competition is City of San Diego, Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Budget. i5 City of San Diego's Fiscal Outlook, December 11, 2009, Citizens' Task Force Report Highlighting Challenges & Opportunities. SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 3, 2010) Guide, and proceed to full implementation of amended Section 117(c) of the City charter. FACTS —SET TWO Fact: The City Facilities Maintenance Division has completed its Business Process Reengineering (BPR) by diligently researching industry benchmarks, conducting internal and external customer surveys, and mapping existing processes and organizational structures. Fact: On June 3, 2008, the City so notified AFSCME Local 127, requesting that the Union meet and confer with the City to discuss implementation of the Facilities Division BPR. Fact: The City wrote to the Union again on October 16, 2008, explaining that the BPR process pre -dated the managed competition program, in response to cancellation of negotiations by the union on the ground that managed competition must first be resolved. Fact: On October 30, 2008, the City notified the Union that its lack of 'response to the City's request to meet was deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to meet and confer. Fact: On July 16, 2009, the City again notified Local 127 that its lack of response to the City's request to meet was deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to meet and confer. Fact: Through March 2009, Local 127 has declined to meet and confer and the City has therefore been unable to implement the Facilities Division BPR. FINDINGS Finding #06: The City Facilities Division completed its Business Process Reengineering in June 2008, but the BPR has not been implemented because the Union will not meet and confer on implementation. Finding #07: The Grand Jury is empowered to make recommendations to the Mayor and City Council; but lacks the jurisdiction to make recommendations to the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 127, and the Municipal Employees Association. If the Grand Jury had such jurisdiction it would include these employee organizations in its recommendation. RECOMMENDATION The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the Mayor and the City Council of the City of San Diego: 10-100: Proceed with the impasse process or other appropriate process to approve and implement the Facilities Maintenance Division Business Process Reengineering, as well as other BPRs that have been completed by the City but havenot been implemented because of refusal of the applicable union to meet and confer regarding BPRs. SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 3, 2010) FACTS —SET THREE Fact: On March 13, 2007, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance No. 983616 granting the Director of Purchasing and Contracting expanded authority to enter into contracts to purchase, rent or lease all personal property for the County and to engage independent contractors to perform services for the County. The ordinance also granted the Director authority to enter into contracts, without the approval of the Board of Supervisors, where the total anticipated value of the services or non - services provided are under $1,000,000 per year. Fact: The Director of Purchasing and Contracting has administered managed competition, outsourcing and reverse auction transactions under the County ordinance, which together with reengineering, have resulted in savings of $678,596,736 for the taxpayers of San Diego County through FY 2008.17 Fact: The County's managed competition program resulted in savings of $78,935,727 through FY 2008. Fact: Contrary to arguments of opponents of managed competition, only two of the nine managed competition contracts went to outside contractors; the remaining seven were retained by competitive County departments made more efficient by the process. Fact: Information technology, printing shop, and records were outsourced by the County, resulting in savings of $104,776,909 through FY 2008. The County both piggybacks on other entities' outsourcing and allows other governmental entities to piggyback on its outsourcing, to the benefit of all. Fact: Hand -in -hand with the County's managed competition program is the County re - engineering program, whereby County departments effectively made managed competition unnecessary by implementing more efficient processes which resulted in savings of $494,623,182 through FY 2008. Fact: The County saved $261,100 on the cost of supplies and tree removal in reverse auctions conducted in December 2009 alone. Fact: The reverse auction employs a specialized web -based process. While not inexpensive, the reverse auction process saved the County four times its annual fee in reverse auctions conducted during December 2009 alone. The County allows other governmental entities to piggyback in its auctions. Fact: The savings of $678,596,736 compared to estimated in-house costs previously incurred for the same level of service amounts to about 18% of the $3,765,901,0001 of total expenditures of governmental funds by San Diego County for FY 2008. 16 County Administrative Code, Article XXIII, Department of Purchasing and Contracting. 17 County of San Diego, Business Processes Report, April 8, 2009. 18 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for FY June 30, 2008, County of San Diego. SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 3, 2010) FINDINGS Finding #01: The County Director of Purchasing and Contracting has administered numerous managed competitions, outsourcing and reverse auction transactions under County Ordinance No. 9836 which, together with reengineering, have resulted in savings of $678,596,736 for the taxpayers of San Diego County through FY 2008. Finding #02: The savings, compared to estimated in-house costs previously incurred for the same level service, amount to about 18% of the $3,765,901,000 total expenditures of governmental funds by San Diego County for the FY 2008. Finding #03: The County saved $261,100 on the cost of supplies and tree removal in reverse auctions conducted in December 2009 alone. Finding #04: Two of the nine managed competition contracts administered by the County went to outside contractors; the remaining seven were retained by competitive County departments made more efficient by the process. RECOMMENDATION The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the San Diego County Board of Supervisors and the County of San Diego's Chief Administrative Officer: 10-101: Apply the principles proven by the implementation of County Ordinance No. 9836 throughout the County departments and agencies. FACTS —SET FOUR Fact: The Grand Jury surveyed the County of San Diego, eighteen San Diego County cities, a sampling of school and community college districts, and the Unified Port of San Diego. Fact: The County has a managed competition program in place; but none of the rest of the respondents indicated that they had a managed competition program in place. Fact: The County and many other respondents indicated that they did engage in outsourcing, to greater or lesser extent. For example, many respondents indicated that they outsourced consultants, various maintenance and custodial services, and trash collection. Fact: The County has a reengineering program in place and the City of San Diego has a stalled reengineering program; but none of the rest of the respondents indicate that they have a reengineering program in place. Fact: Only the County has a reverse auction program in place; and the County permits other governmental entities to join in the auctions, thus resulting in significant savings to all on account of the greater volume. SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 3, 2010) Fact: The query regarding reverse auction was frequently met with the comment that reverse auction is not a suitable means of processing bids for services; but the County has successfully used the process for services, for example: tree removal. Fact: Some of the respondents indicated that they piggyback in purchasing goods. For example, one governmentalentity might join another in purchasing goods at reverse auction. FINDINGS Finding #01: All governmental entities within San Diego County would benefit from considering. adoption and implementation of managed competition, outsourcing, reengineering and/or reverse auction programs; and/or piggybacking on such programs that are in place at other governmental entities within the County. RECOMMENDATIONS The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the City Managers of the cities. of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado; Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, and Vista: 10-102: Study, adopt and/or piggyback on, as appropriate, managed competition outsourcing, reengineering and reverse auction programs such as are employed by the County of San Diego. The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the Superintendents of the following school districts: Alpine Union, Bonsai! Union, Borrego Springs Unified, Cajon Valley Union, Cardiff Elementary, Carlsbad Unified, Chula Vista Elementary, Coronado Unified, Dehesa, Del Mar Union, Encinitas Union, Escondido Union, Escondido Union High, Fallbrook Union Elementary, Fallbrook Union High, Grossmont Union High, Jamul-Dulzura Union, Julian Union, Julian Union High, La Mesa -Spring Valley, Lakeside Union, Lemon Grove, Mountain Empire Unified, National, Oceanside. Unified, Poway Unified, Ramona Unified, Rancho Santa Fe, San Diego Unified, San Dieguito, San Marcos, San Pasqual Union, San Ysidro, Santee, Solana Beach, South Bay Union, Spencer Valley, Sweetwater Union High, Vallecitos, Valley Center-Pauma Unified, Vista Unified, and Warner Unified: 10-103: Study, adopt and/or piggyback on, as appropriate, managed competition, outsourcing, reengineering and reverse auction programs such as are employed by the County of San Diego. The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the Chancellors and/or Superintendents of the following community college districts: Grossmont- Cuyamaca Community College District, MiraCosta Community College District, SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 3, 2010) Palomar Community College District, San Diego Community College District, and Southwestern Community College District: 10-104: Study, adopt and/or piggyback on, as appropriate, managed competition, outsourcing, reengineering and reverse auction programs such as are employed by the County of San Diego. The 2009/2010 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Port Commissioners of the Unified Port of San Diego and the Airport Authority Board of the San Diego International Airport: 10-105: Study, adopt and/or piggyback on, as appropriate, managed competition, outsourcing, reengineering and reverse auction programs such as are employed by the County of San Diego. REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS The California Penal Code §933(c) requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such comment shall be within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code §933.05(a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a) As to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for thematter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the 10 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 3, 2010) governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with the Penal Code §933.05 are required from the: Responding Agency Recommendations Date Mayor, City of San Diego 10-99,10-100 9/1/10 City Council, City of San Diego 10-99,10-100 9/1/10 Chief Administrative Officer, 10-101 9/1/10 County of San Diego Board of Supervisors, County 10-101 9/1/10 of San Diego Superintendent San Diego 10-103 9/1/10 Unified School District Board of Port Commissioners 10-105 9/1/10 Unified Port of San Diego Chancellor San Diego 10-104 9/1/10 Community College District City Manager, City of Chula Vista 10-102 9/1/10 City Manager, City of Carlsbad 10-102 9/1/10 City Manager, City of Coronado 10-102 9/1/10 City Manager, City of Del Mar 10-102 9/1/10 11 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 3, 2010) City Manager, City of El Cajon 10-102 City Manager, City of Encinitas 10-102 City Manager, City of Escondido 10-102 City Manager, City of Imperial 10-102 Beach City Manager, City of La Mesa 10-102 City Manager, City of Lemon 10-102 Grove City Manager, City of National 10-102 City City Manager, City of Oceanside 10-102 City Manager, City of Poway 10-102 City Manager, City of San Marcos 10-102 City Manager, City of Santee 10-102 City Manager, City of Solana 10-102 Beach 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 City Manager, City of Vista 10-102 9/1/10 Alpine Union School District 10-103 9/1/10 Bonsall Union School District 10-103 9/1/10 Borrego Springs Unified School 10-103 9/1/10 District Cajon Valley Union School District 10-103 9/1/10 Cardiff School District 10-103 9/1/10 Carlsbad Unified School District 10-103 9/1/10 Chula Vista Elementary School 10-103 9/1/10 District 12 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 3, 2010) Coronado Unified School District 10-103 9/1/10 Dehesa School District 10-103 Del Mar Union School District 10-103 Encinitas Union School District 10-103 Escondido Union School District 10-103 Escondido Union High School 10-103 District Fallbrook Union Elementary 10-103 School District • 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 9/1/10 Fallbrook Union High 10-103 9/1/10 School District Grossmont Union High 10-103 9/1/10 School District Jamul-Dulzura Union School 10-103 9/1/10 District Julian Union School District 10-103 9/1/10 Julian Union High School District 10-103 9/1/10 La Mesa -Spring Valley School 10-103 9/1/10 District Lakeside Union School District 10-103 9/1/10 Lemon Grove School District 10-103 9/1/10 Mountain Empire Unified School 10-103 9/1/10 District National. School District 10-103 9/1/10 Oceanside Unified School District 10-103 9/1/10 Poway Unified School District 10-103 9/1/10 Ramona Unified School District 10-103 9/1/10 13 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 3, 2010) Rancho Santa Fe School District 10-103 9/1/10 San Dieguito School District 10-103 9/1/10 San Marcos School District 10-103 9/1/10 San Pasqual Union School District 10-103 9/1/10 San Ysidro School District 10-103 9/1/10 Santee School District 10-103 9/1/10 Solana Beach School District 10-103 9/1/10 South Bay Union School District 10-103 9/1/10 Spencer Valley School District 10-103 • 9/1/10 Sweetwater Union High School 10-103 9/1/10 District Vallecitos School District 10-103 9/1/10 Valley Center-Pauma Unified 10-103 9/1/10 School District Vista Unified School District 10-103 9/1/10 Warner Unified School District 10-103 9/1/10 Grossmont-Cuyamaca Communityl0-104 9/1/10 College District MiraCosta Community College 10-104 9/1/10 District Palomar Community College 10-105 9/1/10 District Southwestern Community 10-106 9/1/10 College District Airport Authority Board 10-105 9/1/10 14 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009/2010 (filed June 3, 2010) CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO, 21 M TITLE: An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City adopted pursuant to Government Code Section 36937(b) as an Urgency Measure to take effect immediately, amending Chapter 18.62 of the National City Municipal Code by amending Section 18.62.170 pertaining to Temporary Signs to allow more than one sign on a residential parcel to preserve the public peace by providing reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on Temporary Signage in National City PREPARED BY: Claudia G. Silva PHONE: Ext. 4222 EXPLANATION: DEPARTMENT: ity Attorney APPROVED BY: Please see attached memorandum. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. N/A ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: APPROVED: APPROVED: X Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance. BOARD 1 COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: norandum ,.,posed Ordinance Mayor Ron Morrison Council Members Alejandra Sotelo-Solis Jess Van Deventer Rosalie Zara Office of the City Attorney City Attomey Claudia Gacitua Silva Legal Counsel George H. Eiser, III Senior Assistant City Attorney Jodi L. Doucette TO: Mayor and City Council DATE: August 12, 2010 FROM: City Attorney SUBJECT: An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City adopted pursuant to Government Code Section 36937(b) as an Urgency Measure to take effect immediately, amending Chapter 18.62 of the National City Municipal Code by amending Section 18.62.170 pertaining to Temporary Signs to allow more than one sign on a residential parcel to preserve the public peace by providing reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on Temporary Si gnage in National City Section 18.62.170 of the National City Municipal Code restricts residential parcels to temporary signage no greater than a total of six square feet, which generally equates to a single two -by -three foot sign. The citizens of National City seek to exercise their right to free speech through signs in their front yards on a temporary basis, especially for events of a local, state, or federal nature. Currently, the public cannot place more than a single two -by -three foot sign on their property without violating the Municipal Code and subjecting themselves to possible enforcement action of either a civil or criminal nature. The City seeks to also preserve the health of its community by placing reasonable limitations on temporary signage for aesthetic purposes. For the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety, an amendment to Section 18.62.170 of the Municipal Code is suggested to remedy what is currently a one -sign limit on residential parcels by allowing temporary signs of limited size on residential parcels. It is essential to protect the public peace, health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of National City to enact this urgency ordinance allowing the display of more than a single two -by -three sign on their residential parcel. This ordinance allows temporary signs up to six square feet in size each, and large signs up to sixteen square feet on corner lots, without numerical lim.tation. udiaGL:Iva ity Atto CGS/gmo 1243 National City Boulevard; National City, California 91950-4301 Tel: (619) 336.4220 Fax: (619) 336.4327 ORDINANCE NO. 2010 — AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY ADOPTED PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 36937(b) AS AN URGENCY MEASURE TO TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY, AMENDING CHAPTER 18.62 OF THE NATIONAL CITY MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SUBSECTION D OF SECTION 18.62.170 PERTAINING TO TEMPORARY SIGNS TO ALLOW MORE THAN ONE SIGN ON A RESIDENTIAL PARCEL TO PRESERVE THE PUBLIC PEACE BY PROVIDING REASONABLE TIME, PLACE, AND MANNER RESTRICTIONS ON TEMPORARY SIGNAGE IN NATIONAL CITY WHEREAS, Section 18.62.170 of the National City Municipal Code restricts residential parcels to temporary signage no greater than a total of six square feet, which generally equates to a single two -by -three foot sign; and WHEREAS, the public seeks to exercise their right to free speech through signs in their front yards on a temporary basis, especially for events of a local, state, or federal nature; and WHEREAS, currently, the residents of National City cannot place more than a single two -by -three foot sign on their property without violating the Municipal Code and subjecting themselves to possible enforcement action of either a civil or criminal nature; and WHEREAS, the City of National City seeks to also preserve the health of its community by placing reasonable limitations on temporary signage for aesthetic purposes; and WHEREAS, for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety, the City of National City seeks to amend Section 18.62.170 (D) of the Municipal Code to remedy what is currently a one -sign limit on residential parcels by allowing temporary signs of limited size on residential parcels; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds it essential to protect the public peace, health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of National City to enact this urgency ordinance allowing the display of more than a single two -by -three foot sign on their residential parcel. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of National City that Chapter 18.62 of the National City Municipal Code is hereby amended by amending Subsection D of Section 18.62.170 to read as follows: 18.62.170 Temporary signs permitted in all zones. D. Additional temporary signs erected due to an event are permitted as follows: 1. Commercial/manufacturing/multi-family/institutional zones. a. One or more temporary signs, each of which is thirty-two square feet or less in area, shall be permitted per parcel. b. Temporary signs, except flags and banners, shall not be fastened directly to the exterior wall or face of any building. Such signs may be displayed in windows or on display boards, provided the combined total area of all signs does not exceed ten percent of the area of the building face upon which the signs are mounted. (See Section 18.62.100 for restrictions on flags and banners.) c. This Section shall not apply to existing billboards. d. Such signage is permitted on a temporary basis as defined hereinafter, in addition to other sign allotment per site. 2. Single-family residential zones. a. One or more temporary signs, each of which is six square feet or Tess in area, shall be permitted per parcel. b. A corner lot parcel can also have larger temporary signs each of which is sixteen square feet or less in area. c. Permission of the property owner or occupant where the sign is placed shall be required. d. No temporary signs are permitted in the public right-of-way. Section 2. This Ordinance is adopted as an urgency ordinance necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety within the meaning of the Government Code and shall take effect immediately. Section 3. 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 17th day of August, 2010. Ron Morrison, Mayor ATTEST: Michael R. Dalia, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Claudia G. Silva City Attorney Ordinance No. 2010 — 2 18.62.170 - Temporary Signage CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 22 M TITLE: An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City adopted pursuant to Govemment Code Section 36937(b) as an Urgency Measure to take effect immediately, amending Chapter 18.62 of the National City Municipal Code by amending Section 18.62.170 pertaining to Temporary Signs to allow more than one sign on a residential parcel to preserve the public peace by providing reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on Temporary Signage in National City (Two Large Signs) PREPARED BY: Claudia G. Silva PHONE: Ext. 4222 EXPLANATION: DEPARTMENT: City Attorney APPROVED BY: Please see attached memorandum. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. N/A ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: APPROVED: APPROVED: X Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: norandum rtuposed Ordinance Mayor Ron Morrison Council Members Alejandra Sotelo-Solis Jess Van Deventer Rosalie Zarate Office of the City Attorney City Attorney Claudia Gacitua Silva Legal Counsel George H. Eiser, III Senior Assistant City Attorney Jodi L. Doucette TO: Mayor and City Council DATE: August 12, 2010 FROM: City Attorney SUBJECT: An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City adopted pursuant to Government Code Section 36937(b) as an Urgency Measure to take effect immediately, amending Chapter 18.62 of the National City Municipal Code by amending Section 18.62.170 pertaining to Temporary Signs to allow more than one sign on a residential parcel to preserve the public peace by providing reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on Temporary Signage in National City Section 18.62.170 of the National City Municipal Code restricts residential parcels to temporary signage no greater than a total of six square feet, which generally equates to a single two -by -three foot sign. The citizens of National City seek to exercise their right to free speech through signs in their front yards on a temporary basis, especially for events of a local, state, or federal nature. Currently, the public cannot place more than a single two -by -three foot sign on their property without violating the Municipal Code and subjecting themselves to possible enforcement action of either a civil or criminal nature. The City seeks to also preserve the health of its community by placing reasonable limitations on temporary signage for aesthetic purposes. For the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety, an amendment to Section 18.62.170 of the Municipal Code is suggested to remedy what is currently a one -sign limit on residential parcels by allowing temporary signs of limited size on residential parcels. It is essential to protect the public peace, health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of National City to enact this urgency ordinance allowing the display of more than a single two -by -three sign on their residential parcel. This particular ordinance places a limitation on large signs on corner lots. Comer lots, under this Ordinance, would be limited to two large size signs, in addition to smaller signs. udia G. ity Attor CGS/gmo 1243 National City Boulevard; National City, California 91950-4301 Tel.: (619) 336.4220 Fax: (619) 336.4327 ORDINANCE NO. 2010 -- AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY ADOPTED PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 36937(b) AS AN URGENCY MEASURE TO TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY, AMENDING CHAPTER 18.62 OF THE NATIONAL CITY MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SUBSECTION D OF SECTION 18.62.170 PERTAINING TO TEMPORARY SIGNS TO ALLOW MORE THAN ONE SIGN ON A RESIDENTIAL PARCEL TO PRESERVE THE PUBLIC PEACE BY PROVIDING REASONABLE TIME, PLACE, AND MANNER RESTRICTIONS ON TEMPORARY SIGNAGE IN NATIONAL CITY WHEREAS, Section 18.62.170 of the National City Municipal Code restricts residential parcels to temporary signage no greater than a total of six square feet, which generally equates to a single two -by -three foot sign; and WHEREAS, the public seeks to exercise their right to free speech through signs in their front yards on a temporary basis, especially for events of a local, state, or federal nature; and WHEREAS, currently, the residents of National City cannot place more than a single two -by -three foot sign on their property without violating the Municipal Code and subjecting themselves to possible enforcement action of either a civil or criminal nature; and WHEREAS, the City of National City seeks to also preserve the health of its community by placing reasonable limitations on temporary signage for aesthetic purposes; and WHEREAS, for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety, the City of National City seeks to amend Section 18.62.170 (D) of the Municipal Code to remedy what is currently a one -sign limit on residential parcels by allowing temporary signs of limited size on residential parcels; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds it essential to protect the public peace, health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of National City to enact this urgency ordinance allowing the display of more than a single two -by -three foot sign on their residential parcel. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of National City that Chapter 18.62 of the National City Municipal Code is hereby amended by amending Subsection D of Section 18.62.170 to read as follows: 18.62.170 Temporary signs permitted in all zones. D. Additional temporary signs erected due to an event are permitted as follows: 1. Commercial/manufacturing/multi-family/institutional zones. a. One or more temporary signs, each of which is thirty-two square feet or less in area, shall be permitted per parcel. b. Temporary signs, except flags and banners, shall not be fastened directly to the exterior wall or face of any building. Such signs may be displayed in windows or on display boards, provided the combined total area of all signs does not exceed ten percent of the area of the building face upon which the signs are mounted. (See Section 18.62.100 for restrictions on flags and banners.) c. This Section shall not apply to existing billboards. d. Such signage is permitted on a temporary basis as defined hereinafter, in addition to other sign allotment per site. 2. Single-family residential zones. a. One or more temporary signs, each of which is six square feet or less in area, shall be permitted per parcel. b. A parcel that is a corner lot can also have up to two signs greater than six square feet in area, but less than or equal to sixteen square feet in area per parcel. c. Permission of the property owner or occupant where the sign is placed shall be required. d. No temporary signs are permitted in the public right-of-way. Section 2. This Ordinance is adopted as an urgency ordinance necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety within the meaning of the Government Code and shall take effect immediately. Section 3. 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 17th day of August, 2010. ATTEST: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Claudia G. Silva City Attorney Ron Morrison, Mayor Ordinance No. 2010 — 2 18.62.170 - Temporary Signage CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 23 rEM TITLE: Ordinance of the City of National City to Approve an Amendment to the Contract Between the Board of Administration California Public Employees' Retirement System and the City Council of the City of National City to Provide for a 2% @ 60 Full Formula Benefit for Miscellaneous Members Entering Membership for the First Time in the Municipal Employees' Association and Confidential Subgroups PREPARED BY: Stacey Stevenson DEPARTMENT: PHONE: 336-4308 APPROVED B EXPLANATION: urces As provided for in the current contract between the City of National City and CaIPERS, City of National City employees working in designated miscellaneous classifications have a retirement formula of 3% @ 60 (Section 21354.3). On May 18, 2010, the City Council of the City of National City voted to effectuate a two tiered retirement system under which individuals hired into the City's Municipal Employees' Association and Confidential groups (sub categories of the Miscellaneous employees group) for the first time will not receive the benefit of the 3% @ 60 formula. Instead, such new hires will receive a benefit of 2% @ 60 (Section 21353). Such a change is allowable under Section 20475 (Different Level of Benefits). FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: Finance APPROVED: MIS The change in formula is projected to result in an ultimate savings of 4.754% of the City's annual payment to CaIPERS. The timeline for savings is dependent on the City's hiring patterns. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: IN/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend adoption of the Ordinance BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: IN/AI ATTACHMENTS: rdinance Ca1PERS Califomia Public Employees' Retirement System EXHIBIT 44100. AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT Between the Board of Administration California Public Employees' Retirement System and the City Council City of National City AO - The Board of Administration, California Public Employees' Retirement System, hereinafter referred to as Board, and the governing body of the above public agency, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency, having entered into a contract effective July 1, 1948, and witnessed May 1, 1948, and as amended effective March 1, 1954, July 1, 1954, April 1, 1956, April 1, 1970, December 1, 1972, September 28, 1973, October 1, 1973, March 1, 1974, October 1, 1974, January 16, 1977, October 16, 1978, October 1, 1980, July 16, 1983, January 1, 1985, December 27, 1988, December 12, 1989, November 15, 1991, December 27, 1991, June 11, 1993, May 2, 1996, July 9, 2002, September 17, 2002, July 6, 2004 and January 27, 2009, and March 18, 2010 which provides for participation of Public Agency in said System, Board and Public Agency hereby agree as follows: A. Paragraphs 1 through 17 are hereby stricken from said contract as executed effective March 18, 2010, and hereby replaced by the following paragraphs numbered 1 through 18 inclusive: 1. All words and terms used herein which are defined in the Public Employees' Retirement Law shall have the meaning as defined therein unless otherwise specifically provided. "Normal retirement age" shall mean age 60 for local miscellaneous members; age 50 for local fire members; age 50 for local police members entering membership in the police classification on or prior to March 18, 2010; and age 55 for local police members entering membership for the first time in the police classification after March 18, 2010. 2. Public Agency shall participate in the Public Employees' Retirement System from and after July 1, 1948 making its employees as hereinafter provided, members of said System subject to all provisions of the Public Employees' Retirement Law except such as apply only on election of a contracting agency and are not provided for herein and to all amendments to said Law hereafter enacted except those, which by express provisions thereof, apply only on the election of a contracting agency. 3. Public Agency agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Califomia Public Employees' Retirement System (CaIPERS) and its trustees, agents and employees, the CaIPERS Board of Administration, and the California Public Employees' Retirement Fund from any claims, demands, actions, losses, liabilities, damages, judgments, expenses and costs, including but not limited to interest, penalties and attorneys fees that may arise as a result of any of the following: (a) Public Agency's election to provide retirement benefits, provisions or formulas under this Contract that are different than the retirement benefits, provisions or formulas provided under the Public Agency's prior non-CaIPERS retirement program. (b). Public Agency's election to amend this Contract to provide retirement benefits, provisions or formulas that are different than existing retirement benefits, provisions or formulas. (c) Public Agency's agreement with a third party other than CaIPERS to provide retirement benefits, provisions, or formulas that are different than the retirement benefits, provisions or formulas provided under this Contract and provided for under the California Public Employees' Retirement Law. (d) Public Agency's election to file for bankruptcy under Chapter 9 (commencing with section 901) of Title 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code and/or Public Agency's election to reject this Contract with the CaIPERS Board of Administration pursuant to section- 365-, of Title 11, of the United States Bankruptcy Code or any similar provision of law. (e) Public Agency's election to assign this Contract without the prior written consent of the CaIPERS' Board of Administration. (f) The termination of this Contract either voluntarily by request of Public Agency or involuntarily pursuant to the Public Employees' Retirement Law. (g) Changes sponsored by Public Agency in existing retirement benefits, provisions or formulas made as a result of amendments, additions or deletions to California statute or to the Califomia Constitution. LASE L'L 4. Employees of Public Agency in the following classes shall become members of said Retirement System except such in each such class as are excluded by law or this agreement: a. Local Fire Fighters (herein referred to as local safety members); b. Local Police Officers (herein referred to as local safety members); c. Employees other than local safety members (herein referred to as local miscellaneous members). 5. In addition to the classes of employees excluded from membership by said Retirement Law, the following classes of employees shall not become members of said Retirement System: NO ADDITIONAL EXCLUSIONS 6. Prior to January 1, 1975, those members who were hired by Public Agency on a temporary and/or seasonal basis not to exceed 6 months were excluded from PERS membership by contract. Government Code Section 20305 supersedes this contract provision by providing that any such temporary and/or seasonal employees are excluded from PERS membership subsequent to January 1, 1975. 7. This contract shall be a continuation of the contract of the Community Development Commission of the City of National City, hereinafter referred to as "Former Agency". The accumulated contributions, assets and liability for prior and current service under the Former Agency's contract shall be merged pursuant to Section 20508 of the Government Code. Such merger occurred March 20, 2008. 8. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local miscellaneous member in employment before and not on or after September 17, 2002 shall be determined in accordance with Section 21354 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 55 Full). 9. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local miscellaneous member in employment on or after September 17, 2002 and not entering membership for the first time in the miscellaneous classification after the effective date of this amendment to contract shall be determined in accordance with Section 21354.3 of said Retirement Law (3% at age 60 Full). 10. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited current service as a local miscellaneous member entering membership for the first time in the miscellaneous classification after the effective date of this amendment to contract shall be determined in accordance with Section 21353 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 60 Full). 11. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local fire member and for those local police members entering membership in the police classification on or prior to March 18, 2010 shall be determined in accordance with Section 21362.2 of said Retirement Law (3% at age 50 Full). 12. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited current service as a local police member entering membership for the first time in the police classification after March 18, 2010 shall be determined in accordance with Section 21363.1 of said Retirement Law (3% at age 55 Full). 13. Public Agency elected and elects to be subject to the following optional provisions: a. Section 20425 ("Local Police Officer" shall include employees of a police department who were employed to perform identification or communication duties on August 4, 1972 and who elected to be local safety members). b. Section 21222.1 (One -Time 5% Increase - 1970). Legislation repealed said Section effective January 1, 1980. c. Sections 21624 and 21626 (Post -Retirement Survivor Allowance). d. Section 21573 (Third Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits). e. Section 20965 (Credit for Unused Sick Leave). f. Section 21325 (One -Time 3% to 15% Increase For Local Miscellaneous Members Who Retired or Died Prior to January 1, 1974). Legislation repealed said Section effective January 1, 2002. g. Section 20042 (One -Year Final Compensation), h. Section 20903 (Two Years Additional Service Credit). Section 20475 (Different Level of Benefits). Section 21363.1 (3% @ 55 Full formula) is applicable to local police members entering membership for the first time in the police classification after March 18, 2010/and Section 21353 (2% @ 60 Full formula) is applicable to local miscellaneous members entering membership for the first time in the miscellaneous classification after the effective date of this amendment to contract. 14. Public Agency, in accordance with Govemment Code Section 20790, ceased to be an "employer" for purposes of Section 20834 effective on January 16, 1977. Accumulated contributions of Public Agency shall be fixed and determined as provided in Govemment Code Section 20834, and accumulated contributions thereafter shall be held by the Board as provided in Government Code Section 20834. 15. Public Agency shall contribute to said Retirement System the contributions determined by actuarial valuations of prior and future service liability with respect to local miscellaneous members and local safety members of said Retirement System. 16. Public Agency shall also contribute to said Retirement System as follows: a. Contributions required per covered member on account of the 1959 Survivor Benefits provided under Section 21573 of said Retirement Law. (Subject to annual change.) In addition, all assets and liabilities of Public Agency and its employees shall be pooled in a single account, based on term insurance rates, for survivors of all local miscellaneous members and local safety members. b. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment within 60 days of date of contract to cover the costs of administering said System as it affects the employees of Public Agency, not including the costs of special valuations or of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. c. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment as the occasions arise, to cover the costs of special valuations on account of employees of Public Agency, and costs of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. 17. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be subject to adjustment by Board on account of amendments to the Public Employees' Retirement Law, and on account of the experience under the Retirement System as determined by the periodic investigation and valuation required by said Retirement Law. 18. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be paid by Public Agency to the Retirement System within fifteen days after the end of the period to which said contributions refer or as may be prescribed by Board regulation. If more or less than the correct amount of contributions is paid for any period, proper adjustment shall be made in connection with subsequent remittances. Adjustments on account of errors in contributions required of any employee may be made by direct payments between the employee and the Board. B. This amendment shall be effective on the BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM BY LORI MCGARTLAND,-CHIEF EMPLOYER SERVICES DIVISION PUBLIC EMPLOYEE'S' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AMENDMENT ER# 190 PERS-CON-702A day of CITY COUNCIL CITY OF NATIONAL CITY BY PRESIDING OrFICER Witness Date Attest: Clerk CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 24 EM TITLE: Request to use Martin Luther King Jr. Community Center (north room) by Diversity Solutions aka The Diversity Group, for a "Job Fair" on Wednesday, Sept. 29, 2010 from 10:30am-2:30pm. Fee waiver (or discount) requested.. PREPARED BY: Brenda E. Hodges, Director PHONE: X4290 EXPLANATION: terA DEPARTMENT: Community Services Diversity Solutions, aka The Diversity Group, is requesting use of MLK North Room, for a Job Fair that will be open to the public. The request is consistent with Policy 801 governing use of the facility. Diversity estimates approximately 20 companies, and 100 attendees with 40% from National City. They have requested a waiver of the $281.44 Hall Fee. Fees: Facility Use Fee: $ 50.00 Hall Fee: $281.44 Chairs/Tables: $ 55.00 Custodial: $ 44.00 Total: $420.00 Refundable Deposits: Cleaning: $100.00 FINANCIAL STATEMENT: APPROVED: Finance ACCOUNT NO. n/a APPROVED: MIS Approving the request will result in fees in the amount of $420.00 plus a refundable deposit of $100.00. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: n/a ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Request for Use, with no waiver of fees. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: n/a ATTACHMENTS: 1. Facility Use Application (3 pages) Jul 21 10 05:18p Oran 1-619-262-1247 p.2 - CALIFORNIA NATIONAL CITv 1J:'1 +scanrun 'rk The City of National City Facility Use Application 140 E. 12th Street, Ste. B National City, CA 91950 (619) 336-4290 Fax(619)336-4292 After hours dispatch: (619) 336-4411 TO ALL APPLICANTS: It is strongly recommended that an applicant requesting use of City Facility attend the City Council meeting when the item is scheduled for consideration in order to answer any questions from the City Council. Facility Requested: please circle Martin Luther King Jr. Building North Roo South Room Entire Facility Date(s) of Use: S T - ZCl , \ f Day(s) of Use: 0 Y\ e De..../ Time of Use: From: / I 1�1 PM To: 2 AM/'!'�' INCLUDE SET-UP & CLEAN UP TIME tot 30 A,,.... -10 2: 30 'l„ ,— 4- ..5 P t- c�1,--- - P Type of Func on/Aetivity: Is the event open to the public? VE'.S Name & Address of Organization/Group: iJ':UeR-Si)``y 5o1S 2..7 L. GLLv,.-c_L..tv«RQ (>s- cl23/4,tA Tax ID # O4-333. amp Non- profit organization !" Anticipated Maximum Attendance:a) Co+w(10•AcS Percentage of National City Residents �i0 4h Will Admission be charged? Ai() Amount $ Equipment Requested: -Z - 2S # of chairs '• 5 # of banquet tables Podium/Microphone Will this be a Fund Raising Event? /t)fl Stage **PLEASE ATTACH SEATING DIAGRAM** Use of Kitchen: Yes X' No Use of Gas for Range and Oven: Is the Use of Alcohol Requested? Will other paid services be used (L e, commercial caterer, DJ, Band, etc)? Name: Phone: Name: Phone: Yes ,)Q No Yes X(, No IUD 21 20102 1MNIUM)_. ' i iVICES IDEA) NATIONAL CITY, CA Jul 21 10 05:18p Oran 1-619-262-1247 p.1 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY PUBLIC PROPERTY USE HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT Person 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 include 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: ; e42-5i -1 9-01 Person in charge of activity: Art t r` Address: L c� r-c9 5N- S 0 C 7211 (f Telephone: tcl2 7 7- `b 11 E-Mail:nC.) i,c\-V\.% y� bl ; L e_ e�t�.1. Ca City Facilities and/ or property requested: ! '\ Date(s) of use: 1e -- be (t LC) t C HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT 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 or related to the use of public property or the activity taken under the permit by the permit or its agents, employees or contractors. '71 2 t l 10 Signature of applicant Date Certificate of Insurance Approved by 1N/\o,t,-.0Q0. f Name and Title 4 Jul 21 10 05:25p Oran 1-619-262-1247 p.l How many times in the last twelve months have you requested to use a City Facility'? ,L It is expressly understood and agreed that the applicant assumes all risk for Loss, damage, Liability, injury, cost or expense that may arise during or be caused in any way by such use or occupancy of the facilities of the City of National City and/or Community Services Department. The applicant further agrees that in considerations of being permitted the use of the facilities agreed to, they will save and hold harmless the said City of National City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers from any loss, claims, and liability damages, and/or injuries to persons and property that in any way may be caused by applicant's use or occupancy. I, the undersigned, hereby certify to abide by the regulations governing said facility and agree to abide by all City of National City ordinances and facility rules and policies, and be representative of the user organizations. Further, I agree to be personally responsible for any damage/loss sustained by the ground, building, furniture or equipment or unusual clean up occurring through the occupancy of said facilities. Application recognizes and understands that use of the City's facility may create a possessory interest subject to property taxation and that applicant may be 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 City's facility. I CERTIFY THAT I HAVE RECEIVED A COPY OF THE RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE FACILITY REQUESTED, AND I AGREE FOR MY ORGANIZATION/ GROUP TO CONFORM TO ALL OF ITS PROVISION. DALE. h COMPLETED: JUt j 21) S ft7 PRINT NAME: D Q- am- S3 ND," ✓� SIGNATURE: ADDRESS OF APPLICANT: 527 6- CITY, STATE. AND ZIP CODE5q 0 PHONE: DAY l� k �'�7 ! ??atx NUMBER:6IS •33 "2Ro CONTACT PERSON ON THE DAY OF THE EVENT: '( )tZL\._ 6 PHONE:61,0 2,7%- i y f CELL:46 Z77'i'a19 HAVE YOUR COPY OF APPLICATION IN POSSESION DURING USE Please type or print clearly with a Ballpoint pen. Complete application must be submitted and payment submitted in advanced of the event. Community Services Staff Only - Rental Amount Received: Receipt Number: Deposit Amount: Deposit/ Key Returned: Check Kev issued: YES NO 3 CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: AUGUST 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 25 ... M TITLE: A resolution approving the Section 8 Management Assessment Program (SEMAP) for Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2010 and authorizing the submittal of the SEMAP to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. PREPARED BY: Hermi Oliveria \f 5�'Q HousingProgramsManager Mana r PHONE: 619-336-4259 EXPLANATION: Refer to Staff Recommendation Below. DEPARTMENT: APPROVED BY. Community Development, Housing and Grants, Section 8 Program FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. N/A ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: APPROVED: APPROVED: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. ADOPT Resolution approving the Section 8 Management Assessment Program (SEMAP); and 2. AUTHORIZE the submittal of the SEMAP to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. ATTACHMENTS: Background Report 2. Resolution 3. SEMAP REPORT RESOLUTION NO. 2010 - RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY APPROVING THE SECTION 8 MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (SEMAP) FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2010, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO SUBMIT THE ANNUAL SEMAP TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, on September 10, 1998, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) published its final rule for the Section 8 Management Assessment Program (SEMAP) which took effect on October 13, 1998; and WHEREAS, SEMAP provides for the objective measurement of the performance of a Public Housing Agency (PHA) in key areas of the Section 8 Tenant -based Rental Assistance Program; and WHEREAS, the SEMAP requires a Public Hearing Agency (PHA) who administers Section 8 Tenant -based Rental Assistance Programs to submit annually a SEMAP certification form. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Community Development Commission of the City of National City hereby approves the Section 8 Management Assessment Program (SEMAP). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Executive Director is hereby authorized to submit the SEMAP certification form to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. PASSED and ADOPTED this 3rd day of August, 2010. Ron Morrison, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Raulston, Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Claudia G. Silva, Esq. General Council, CDC Community Development Commission Of the City of National City August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. _ Background Report: On September 10, 1998, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) published its final rule for the Section 8 Management Assessment Program (SEMAP), which took effect on October 13, 1998. SEMAP provides for the objective measurement of the performance of a Public Housing Agency (PHA) in key areas of the Section 8 Tenant -based Rental Assistance Program. SEMAP enables HUD to ensure program integrity and accountability identifying PHA management capabilities and deficiencies and by improving risk assessment to effectively target monitoring and program assistance. PHAs' can use SEMAP performance analysis to assess their own program operations. The SEMAP Indicators Report provides information on families participating in the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. The report is one of the several inputs used to derive a score and rating for PHAs as it relates to SEMAP certification. The SEMAP requires a PHA who administers Section 8 Tenant -based Rental Assistance Programs to submit annually a SEMAP certification form. On July 28, 2010, the Community Development Commission of National City (CDC) submitted its SEMAP certification report to HUD. The Section 8 Rental Assistance Program has a current lease -up rate of 96%. With National City's population of 63,000, there are 1023 low-income families that are currently receiving rental assistance through the program and 3,351 waiting to be assisted. To be eligible to the program, an applicant must either reside or work in the jurisdiction of the City of National City and be a very low-income household. In addition, applicants that are elderly, disabled, or families with dependent children are given a higher priority in the waiting list. Below is the breakdown of participants and applicants to the program as of August 1, 2010. (see next page) RACE PARTICIPANTS APPLICANTS White 857 2469 Black/African American 64 285 American Indian / Alaska Native 5 21 Asian 92 506 Native Hawaiian / other Pacific Islander 5 70 TOTAL 1023 3351 ETHNICITY PARTICIPANTS APPLICANTS Hispanic 790 2303 Non Hispanic 233 1048 TOTAL 1023 3351 Elderly 421 851 Disabled 209 902 Families with Children 393 1598 TOTAL 1023 3351 2 JL~,MAY Lertlrlcatlon LOGOFF rage t or 3 HUD HOME PIN HOME Q & A SEARCH! INDEX E-MAIL WASS MAIN liermi O iveria (1498564) PIC Home WASS Main PIC Main Logoff SEMAP Reports '[ Submission 1 List Surnrnary Certification Field Office: 9DPH LOS ANGELES HUB OFFICE Housing Agency: CA116 National City PHA Fiscal Year End: 6/30/2010 Profile Comments OMB Approval No. 2577-0215 SEMAP CERTIFICATION (Page 1) Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 12 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.This agency may not conduct or sponsor, and you are not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. This collection of information is required by 24 CFR sec 985.101 which requires a Public Housing Agency (PHA) administering a Section 8 tenant -based assistance program to submit an annual SEMAP Certification within 60 days after the end of its fiscal year. The information from the PHA concerns the performance of the PHA and provides assurance that there is no evidence of seriously deficient performance. HUD uses the information and other data to assess PHA management capabilities and deficiencies, and to assign an overall performance rating to the PHA. Responses are mandatory and the information collected does not lend itself to confidentiality. Check here if the PHA expends less than $300,000 a year in federal awards r Indicators 1 - 7 will not be rated if the PHA expends less than $300,000 a year in Federal awards and its Section 8 programs are not audited for compliance with regulations by an independent auditor. A PHA that expends less than $300,000 in Federal awards in a year must still complete the certification for these indicators. Performance Indicators 1 Selection from Waiting List (24 CFR 982.54(d)(1) and 982.204(a)) a. The HA has written policies in its administrative plan for selecting applicants from the waiting list. PHA Response Yes b. The PHA's quality control samples of applicants reaching the top of the waiting list and admissions show that at least 98% of the families in the samples were selected from the waiting list for admission in accordance with the PHA's policies and met the selection criteria that determined their places on the waiting list and their order of selection. PHA Response Yes 2 Reasonable Rent (24 CFR 982.4, 982.54(d)(15), 982.158(f)(7) and 982.507) a. The PHA has and implements a reasonable written method to determine and document for each unit leased that the rent to owner is reasonable based on current rents for comparable unassisted units (i) at the time of initial leasing, (li) before any increase in the rent to owner, and (iii) at the HAP contract anniversary if there is a 5 percent decrease in the published FMR in effect 60 days before the HAP contract anniversary. The PHA's method takes into consideration the location, size, type, quality, and age of the program unit and of similar unassisted units and any amenities, housing services, maintenance or utilities provided by the Page 3 https://pic.hud.gov/pic/semap/slnpassessmentcertification.asp 7/28/2010 3trv1Nr Lernncauon rage L 01 J owners. PHA Response Yes b. The PHA's quality control sample of tenant files for which a determination of reasonable rent was required to show that the PHA followed its written method to determine reasonable rent and documented its determination that the rent to owner is reasonable as required for (check one): PHA Response At least 98% of units sampled 3 Determination of Adjusted Income (24 CFR part 5, subpart F and 24 CFR 982.516) The PHA's quality control sample of tenant files show that at the time of admission and reexamination, the PHA properly obtained third party verification of adjusted income or documented why third party verification was not available; used the verified information in determining adjusted income; properly attributed allowances for expenses; and, where the family is responsible for utilities under the lease, the PHA used the appropriate utility allowances for the unit leased in determining the gross rent for (check one): PHA Response 80 to 89% of files sampled 4 Utility Allowance Schedule (24 CFR 982.517) The PHA maintains an up-to-date utility schedule. The PHA reviewed utility rate data that it obtained within the last 12 months, and adjusted its utility allowance schedule if there has been a change of 10% or more in a utility rate since the last time the utility allowance schedule was revised. PHA Response Yes 5 HQS Quality Control (24 CFR 982.405(b)) The PHA supervisor (or other qualified person) reinspected a sample of units during the PHA fiscal year, which met the minimum sample size required by HUD (see 24 CFR 985.2), for quality control of HQS inspections. The PHA supervisor's reinspected sample was drawn from recently completed HQS inspections and represents a cross section of neighborhoods and the work of cross section of inspectors. PHA Response Yes 6 HQS Enforcement (24 CFR 982.404) The PHA's quality control sample of case files with failed HQS inspections shows that, for all cases sampled, any cited life -threatening HQS deficiencies were corrected within 24 hours from the inspection and, all other cited HQS deficiencies were corrected within no more than 30 calendar days from the inspection or any PHA -approved extension, or, if HQS deficiencies were not corrected within the required time frame, the PHA stopped housing assistance payments beginning no later than the first of the month following the correction period, or took prompt and vigorous action to enforce the family obligations for (check one): PHA Response At least 98% of cases sampled 7 Expanding Housing Opportunities. (24 CFR 982.54(d)(5), 982.153(b)(3) and (b)(4), 982.301(a) and 983.301(b)(4) and (b)(12)) Applies only to PHAs with jurisdiction in metropolitan FMR areas Check here if not applicable P' Page 4 https://pic.hud,gov/pic/semap/smpassessmentcertification..asp 7/28/2010 ativiAr ueruucauon raga .) ur c a. The PHA has a written policy to encourage participation by owners of units outside areas of poverty or minority concentration which clearly delineates areas in its jurisdiction that the PHA considers areas of poverty or minority concentration, and which includes actions the PHA will take to encourage owner participation. PHA Response Not Applicable b. The PHA has documentation that shows that it took actions indicated in its written policy to encourage participation by owners outside areas of poverty and minority concentration. PHA Response Not Applicable c. The PHA has prepared maps that show various areas, both within and neighboring its jurisdiction, with housing opportunities outside areas of poverty and minority concentration; the PHA has assembled information about job opportunities, schools and services in these areas; and the PHA uses the maps and related information when briefing voucher holders. PHA Response Not Applicable d. The PHA's information packet for certificate and voucher holders contains either a list of owners who are willing to lease, or properties available for lease, under the voucher program, or a list of other organizations that will help families find units and the list includes properties or organizations that operate outside areas of poverty or minority concentration. PHA Response Not Applicable e. The PHA's information packet includes an explanation of how portability works and includes a list of neighboring PHAs with the name, address and telephone number of a portability contact person at each. PHA Response Not Applicable f. The PHA has analyzed whether voucher holders have experienced difficulties in finding housing outside areas of poverty or minority concentration and, where such difficulties were found, the PHA has considered whether it is appropriate to seek approval of exception payment standard amounts in any part of its jurisdiction and has sought HUD approval when necessary. PHA Response Not Applicable Go to Comments Page 5 Page 1 of https://pic.hud.gov/pic/semap/smpassessmentcertification.asp 7/28/2010 JLivi/ .r ueruileauoii Hermi Oliveria (M98564) PIC Home MASS Main PIC Main Logoff LOGOFF ASSEiS$Tne.nt Profile List Field Office: rage 1 vi J HUD HOME PIH HOME Q & A SEARCH! INDEX E-MAIL WASS MAIN Reports Submission 1 Summary Certification Profile Comments 9DPH LOS ANGELES HUB OFFICE Housing Agency: CA116 National City PHA Fiscal Year End: 6130/2010 SEMAP CERTIFICATION (Page 2) SEMAP Performance indicators 8 Payment Standards(24 CFR 982.503) The PHA has adopted current payment standards for the voucher program by unit size for each FMR area in the PHA jurisdiction and, if applicable, for each PHA -designated part of an FMR area, which do not exceed 110 percent of the current applicable FMR and which are not less than 90 percent of the current FMR (unless a lower percent is approved by HUD). (24 CFR 982.503) PHA Response Yes FMR Area Name San Diego -Carlsbad -San Marcos FMR 1 of 1 Enter current FMRs and payment standards (PS) 0-BR FMR 945 1-BR FMR 1082 2-BR FMR 1324 3-BR FMR 1883 4-BR FMR 2326 PS 922 PS 1052 PS 1277 PS 1861 PS 2244 If the PHA has jurisdiction in more than one FMR area, and/or if the PHA has established separate payment standards for a PHA -designated part of an FMR area, add similar FMR and payment standard comparisions for each FMR area and designated area. 9 Timely Annual Reexaminations(24 CFR 5.617) The PHA completes a reexamination for each participating family at least every 12 months.(24 CFR 5.617) PHA ResponseYes 10 Correct Tenant Rent Calculations(24 CFR 982, Subpart K) The PHA correctly calculates tenant rent in the rental certificate program and the family rent to owner in the rental voucher program (24 CFR 982,Subpart K) PHA ResponseYes 11 Pre -Contract HQS Inspections(24 CFR 982.305) Each newly leased unit passes HQS inspection before the beginning date of the assisted lease and HAP contract.(24 CFR 982.305) PHA ResponseYes 12 Annual HOS Inspections(24 CFR 982.405(a)) The PHA inspects each unit under contract at least annually (24 CFR 982.405(a)) PHA Response Yes 13 Lease -Up The PHA executes assistance contracts on behalf of eligible families for the number of units that has been under budget for at least one year. The PHA executes assistance contracts on behalf of eligible families for the number of units that has been under budget for at feast one year PHA ResponseYes Page 6 https://pic.hud.bov/pic/semap/smpassessmentcertificationcontd.asp 7/28/2010 JC1V1H1' ucruneauon rabcz.ul) 14 Family Self -Sufficiency (24 CFR 984.105 and 984.305) 14a.Family Self -Sufficiency Enrollment. The PHA has enrolled families in FSS as required. Applies only to PHAs required to administer an FSS program. Check here if not applicable P.- a. Number of mandatory FSS slots (Count units funded under the FY 1992 FSS incentive awards and in FY 1993 and later through 10/20/1998. Exclude units funded in connection with Section 8 and Section 23 project -based contract terminations; public housing demolition, disposition and replacement; HUD multifamily property sales; prepaid or terminated mortgages under section 236 or section 221(d)(3); and Section 8 renewal funding. Subtract the number of families that successfully completed their contracts on or after 10/21/1998.) Or, Number of mandatory FSS slots under HUD -approved exception (If not applicable, leave blank) b. Number of FSS families currently enrolled c. Portability: If you are the initial PHA, enter the number of families currently enrolled in your FSS program, but who have moved under portability and whose Section 8 assistance is administered by another PHA Percent of FSS slots filled (b+c divided by a) (This is a nonenterable field. The system will calculate the percent when the user saves the page) 14b. Percent of FSS Participants with Escrow Account Balances.The PHA has made progress in supporting family self-sufficiency as measured by the percent of currently enrolled FSS families with escrow account balances.(24 CFR 984.305) Applies only to PHAs required to administer an FSS program Check here if not applicable PHA NA Response Portability: If you are the initial PHA, enter the number of families with FSS escrow accounts currently enrolled in your FSS program, but who have moved under portability and whose Section 8 assistance is administered by another PHA 15 Deconcentration Bonus The PHA is submitting with this certification data which show that : Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable (1) Flail or more of all Section 8 families with children assisted by the PHA in its principal operating area resided in low poverty census tracts at the end of the last PHA FY; (2) The percent of Section 8 mover families with children who moved to low poverty census tracts in the PHA's principal operating area during the last PHA FY is atleast two percentage points higher than the percent of all Section 8 families with children who resided in low poverty census tracts at the end of the last PHA FY; or (3) The percent of Section 8 mover families with children who moved to low poverty census tracts in the PHA's principal operating area over the last two PHA FY is at least two percentage points higher than the percent of all Section 8 families with children who resided in low poverty census tracts at the end of the second to last PHA FY. Page 7 https://pic.hud.gov/pic/selnap/smpassessmentcertificationcontd.asp 7/28/2010 JGIvltlr U(. ! uiii;uuou rage 0i PHA Response No Go to Comments Back to Pagel Page 8 https://pic.hud.gov/pic/semap/smpassessmentcertificationcontd.asp 7/28/2010 ETING DATE: CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. �6 ITEM TITLE: Authorize the reimbursement of Community Development Commission expenditures in the amount of $45,601.54 to the City of National City for the period of 7/14/10 through 7/20/16 PREPARED BY: K. Apalategui DEPARTMENT: PHONE: 1619-336-4331 APPROVED BY: EXPLANATION: Effective July 1, 2008 the Community Development Commission's fiscal operations have been merged with the City of National City. In order to streamline the payment process, the City of National City pays for all expenditures for the CDC. Attached is a detailed listing of all CDC warrants paid for with the City General Funds. Staff requests approval of the reimbursement of CDC activity. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: APPROVED: Approve the reimbursement of funds to the City of National City in the amount of $45,601.54 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: Finance MIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept and File. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A TACHMENTS: Warrants for the period of 07/14/10 through 07/20/1 f COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Warrant Register # 3 7/20/2010 502 SECTION 8 FUND 505 HOME FUND 506 HOME LOAN PROGRAM FUND 511 TAX INCREMENT FUND 522 LOW/MODERATE HOUSING FUND 18,371.97 17.41 50.00 24,765.18 2,396.98 45,601.54 '" i 8.81 • :. • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION WARRANT REGISTER #3 7/20/2010 PAYEE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION CA ASSO OF CODE ENFORCEMENT CA ASSO OF CODE ENFORCEMENT CHULA VISTA BLUEPRINT CO CITY OF MESA HOUSING AUTHORITY FEDEX HOGLE IRELAND INC HOME DEPOT/GECF MAINTEX INC PRO BUILD PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDER SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT STAPLES ADVANTAGE SWEETWATER AUTHORITY TIERRA WEST ADVISORS INC "Q BANCORP SERVICE CENTER iTA PAINT ,Y OF NATIONAL CITY COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO GARY BELL DESIGN ASSOCIATION GEORGE H WATERS NUTRITION CTR SECTION 8 SECTION 8 HAPS PAYMENTS DESCRIPTION APA MEMBERSHIP CATEGORY F CACEO CLASS CACEO CLASS COPIES OF N.C. CUCLTURAL OVERPAYMT OF PORT -IN JUL 2010 EXPRESS MAIL COURIER SERVICES CONSULTANT AGREEMENT TOOL BOX CORNER TURKISH TOWELS MOP# 45707. GRAFITTI SUPPLIES MOP# 45742. LAUNDRY SERVICE RECONVEYANCE CDC-1983-48 NAT CITY CULTURAL ARTS CENTER MOP# 45704. OFFICE SUPPLIES WATER UTILITES FOR CDC AGREEMENT/ TIERRA WEST ADVISORS CREDIT CARD EXPENSE MOP# 68834. PAINT PETTY CASH JUNE 2010 MAIL PROCESSING SERVICES MILE/CARS PRESENTATION FOLDERS CATERING SERVICES/PARADISE CREEK Start Date End Date 7/14/2010 7/20/2010 CHK NO DATE AMOUNT 237297 7/20/10 465.00 237298 7/20/10 65.00 237299 7/20/10 45.00 237300 7/20/10 264.26 237301 7/20/10 640.59 237302 7/20/10 106.06 237303 7/20/10 2,046.98 237304 7/20/10 297.92 237305 7/20/10 522.29 237306 7/20/10 80.06 237307 7/20/10 13.34 237308 7/20/10 30.00 237309 7/20/10 676.00 237310 7/20/10 319.79 237311 7/20/10 576.42 237312 7/20/10 13,793.75 237313 7/20/10 1,291.20 237314 7/20/10 1,535.53 237353 7/20/10 130.03 237358 7/20/10 501.91 237370 7/20/10 4,625.94 237372 7/20/10 350.00 A/P Total $ 28,377.07 17,224.47 GRAND TOTAL $ 45,601.54 ETING DATE: CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT August 17, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO. 27 ITEM TITLE: Authorize the reimbursement of Community Development Commission expenditures in the amount of $1,095,873.2 to the City of National City for the period of 7/21/10 through 7/27/101 PREPARED BY: K. Apalategu PHONE: 619-336-43311 DEPARTMENT: APPROVED BY: EXPLANATION: Effective July 1, 2008 the Community Development Commission's fiscal operations have been merged with the City of National City. In order to streamline the payment process, the City of National City pays for all expenditures for the CDC. Attached is a detailed listing of all CDC warrants paid for with the City General Funds. Staff requests approval of the reimbursement of CDC activity. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: APPROVED: Finance ACCOUNT NO. APPROVED: MIS Approve the reimbursement of funds to the City of National City in the amount of $1,095,873.20I ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N// ORDINANCE: INTRODUCTION: FINAL ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept and File. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A 'ACHMENTS: Warrants for the period of 07/21/10 through 07/27/10 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Warrant Register # 4 7/27/2010 502 SECTION 8 FUND 505 HOME FUND 506 HOME LOAN PROGRAM FUND 511 TAX INCREMENT FUND 522 LOW/MODERATE HOUSING FUND 32,111.84 116,432.34 396,176.25 539,931.95 11,220.82 1,095,873.20 1- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION WARRANT REGISTER #4 7/27/2010 PAYEE KOCH ARMSTRONG TORREY PINE BANK ABUKAR YUSUF CITY OF SAN DIEGO DESROCHERS E2 MANAGE TECH INC KEYSER MARSTON ASSOC OPPER & VARCO PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY SAN DIEGO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY SANDOVAL STAPLES ADVANTAGE THE STAR NEWS BIRRIAS GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS SAN DIEGO HOUSING COMMISSION VERIZON WIRELESS N DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON PAYROLL Pay period Start Date 15 6/29/2010 DESCRIPTION CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT / MARINA MARINA GATEWAY RETENTION S8 RECOVERY OVERPAYMT ENTERPRISE ZONE ADMIN SERVICES RETIREMENT BENEFIT AUG 2010 CONSULTING SERVICES ECONOMIC CONSULTING SERVICES LEGAL SERVICES - EPA GRANT MOP# 45742. LAUNDRY SERVICES DDA WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY S8 FRAUD RECOVERY OVERPAYMT MOP# 45704. OFFICE SUPPLIES CULTURAL ARTS CENTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOAN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING REIMBURSEMENT PORT -IN FOR HAP/AD VERIZON WIRELESS SERVICE/ CDC FY11SANDAG ASSESSMENTS HUD 108 LOAN - NC FIRE STATION End Date Check Date 7/12/2010 7/21/2010 CHK NO DATE AMOUNT 237438 7/27/10 364,224.04 237440 7/27/10 19,169.69 237462 7/27/10 4.00 237463 7/27/10 48,500.00 237464 7/27/10 110.00 237465 7/27/10 7,649.34 237466 7/27/10 24,930.21 237467 7/27/10 2,360.00 237469 7/27/10 13.34 237470 7/27/10 114,487.00 237471 7/27/10 70.00 237472 7/27/10 98.84 237473 7/27/10 871.25 237475 7/27/10 1,088.73 237476 7/27/10 16,029.84 237477 7/27/10 11,640.74 237478 7/27/10 717.64 237535 7/27/10 3,813.00 A!P Total $ 615,777.66 7/26/10 396,176.25 83,919.29 GRAND TOTAL $ 1,095,873.20 ITEM #28 8/17/10 CLOSED SESSION REPORT (CITY ATTORNEY) ITEM #29 8/17/10 DISCUSSION - CREATION OF A SECOND TIER RETIREMENT FORMULA FOR NEWLY ELECTED OFFICIALS (MAYOR)