Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
062601 CC Agenda
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (909) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II] AGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE JUNE 26, 200'1 - 7:00 P.M. At approximately 9:45 P.M., the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 P.M. and may continue all other items on which additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 11:00 P.M. 5:30 P.M. - Closed Session of the City Counci Sections: pursuant to Government Code Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Governmen~ Code Section 54956.9(b)('1) with respect to two matters of potential litigation. With respect to such matters, the City Attorney has determined that a point has been reached where there is a significant exposure to litigation involving the City based on existing facts and circumstances and the City will decide whether to initiate litigation. Conference with real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 concerning acquisition of real property located at the intersection Of Winchester Road at Murrieta Hot Spring~ R~ad (APN 956-270- 015, 956-270~016, 956-270.019). The negotiating pa~ties are the City of Temecula and Fairfield-Murrieta, LLC. Under negotiation is the price and terms of the real property interests proposed to be acquired. The City negotiators are Shawn Nelson and Jim O'Grady. Public Information concerning existing litigation between the City and various parties . may be acquired by review ng the public documents held by the City Clerk. CALL TO ORDER: Prelude Music: Invocation: Flag Salute: ROLL CALL: R:~Agenda\062601 Mayor Jeff Comerchero Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 2001-07 Resolution: No. 2001-58 Eve Craig Pastor George Simmons of House of Praise Boy Scout Troop # 337 Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone, Comerchero www.cityofte mecula.org PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Council on items that appear within the Consent Calendar or ones that are not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on an item which is listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you am called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all Public Hearing or Council Business matters on the agenda, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the Council addressing that item. Them is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports. CONSENT CALENDAR NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless Members of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. I Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Minutes 3 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of April 24, 2001; 2.2 Approve the minutes of May 15, 2001; 2.3 Approve the minutes of May 22, 2001. Resolution approving List of Demand,~ RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:~Agenda\062601 www.cityoftemecula.o rg 2 RESOLUTION NO. 0t- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 6 7 8 Up,qrade of Financial Accountin,q Software RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve a Software License and Use Agreement with Eden Systems, Inc. in the amount of $144,050; 4.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve contract amendments in an amount not to exceed $14,405 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount; 4.3 Authorize the City Manager and City Attorney to execute all necessary agreements. Purchase of a Postaqe Meter Machine RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve the purchase of Pitney Bowes Postage Meter in the amount of $14,670.00. Records Destruction Approval RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve the scheduled destruction of certain City records in accordance with the City of Temecula approved Records Retention Policy. Riverside County Library Contract Amendment No. 4 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement to provide Library Services (additional staff); 7.2 Authorize the expenditure of an amount not to exceed $150,000 to fund the Temecula Library Volunteer Coordinator half-time position and to subsidize funding to maintain the Senior Reference Librarian and Reference Librarian positions for fiscal year 2001-02. Second Amendment to the Uniforms, Floor Mats, Dust Mops, and Towels Service, A.qreement with AmeriPride Uniform Services - FY2001-0? RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve Amendment No. 2 with AmeriPride Uniform Services which will exercise the City's option for a second one-year extension of the Agreement and, thereby, extending the Agreement through June 30, 2002; R:~Agenda\062601 www.cityoffemecula.org 3 8.2 Authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount of $10,550.00 for uniform, floor mats, dust mops, and towel services. 9 10 Third Amendment to the HVAC Preventative Maintenance A,qreement with Kinetics Service Company for FY2001-02 RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve Amendment No. 3 to the HVAC Preventative Maintenance Agreement with Kinetics Service Company to exercise the City's option for a one-year extension and, thereby, extending the Agreement through June 30, 2002; 9.2 Authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount of $30,640.00 for preventative maintenance services, repairs, and extra work items for Fiscal Year 2001-02. Agreement for Weed Abatement Services between the City of Temecula and A.S.A.P. Services RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve the contract with A.S.A.P. Services for Weed Abatement Services for a total of $26,250.00. 11 Agreement for Weed Abatement Services between the City of Temecula and Rory Rieck and Chuck Ma¢iel Weed Abatement RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Approve the contract with Rory Rieck and Chuck Maciel's Weed Abatement for Weed Abatement Services for a total of $26,250.00. 12 Agreement for Consultinq Services between the City of Temecula and PELA RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Approve the contract with PELA for landscape plan check and inspection services in the amount of $98,500.00. 13 Authorize Temporary Street Closure of Old Town Front Street between Moreno Road and Second Street; Main Street from the brid,qe to Old Town Front Street; Second Street; Third Street; Fourth Street; Fifth Street; and Sixth Street for the Star Spangled Fourth of July Parade and dele,qate authority to issue Special Events/Street Closures Permit tn Director of Public Works/City En.qineer RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:~Agenda\062601 www.cityoftemecula .org 4 RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF OLD TOWN FRONT STREET BETWEEN MORENO ROAD AND SECOND STREET; MAIN STREET FROM THE BRIDGE TO OLD TOWN FRONT STREET; SECOND STREET; THIRD STREET; FOURTH STREET; FIFTH STREET; SIXTH STREET FOR THE STAR SPANGLED FOURTH OF JULY PARADE AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES 14 Authorize Temporary Street Closure of Pauba Road between Marqar ta Road and Yne7 Road for the July 4th, 2001, Fireworks Show and dele.qate authority to issue Special Events/Street Closures Permit to Director of Public Works/City En.qineer RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF PAUBA ROAD BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD FOR THE JULY 4TM, 200t, FIREWORKS SHOW AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES 15 Parcel Map No. 29438 (located at Enterprise Circle South) RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Approve Parcel Map No. 29438 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval. 16 Acceptance of Offer of Dedication - Road Purposes on Western Bypass Corridor and Roick Drive per Tentative Parcel Map No. 28473 Conditions of Approval RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:~Agenda\062601 www.cityoffemecula.org 5 RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING AN OFFER OF DEDICATION OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR ROAD AND UTILITY PURPOSES FOR WESTERN BYPASS CORRIDOR AND ROICK DRIVE AS REQUIRED BY THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 28473, PA98-0005, BUT NOT ACCEPTING STREETS INTO THE CITY-MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM AT THIS TIME 17 Amendment to Professional Services Aqreement Inspection Services - Various Proiect,~ RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Approve Amendment No. 3 to the Professional Inspection Services Agreement with Vail Cooper and Associates, Inc. for an amount equal to $38,500 and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment; 17.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders/amendments not to exceed the contingency amount of $10,626.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 18 19 Amendment to Professional En.qineer n,q Services Agreement - Mar,qar ta Road Wideninq - Project No. PW99-01 RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Approve amendment No. 6 to the Professional Engineering Services Agreement with GFB-Friedrich & Associates, Inc. for an amount equal to $24,250 and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment; 18.2 Extend the term of the contract with GFB-Friedrich to December 31, 2001. Award of Construction Contract for the Pavement Manaqement System FY2000-01 - Project No. PW00-30 RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Award a contract for the Pavement Management System FY2000-01 - Project No. PW00-30- to McLaughlin Engineering & Mining for $2,093,991.32 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 19.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $209,399.13 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount; 19.3 Approve an acceleration of $735,600.00 in Measure A Funds from FY2002-03 to FY2001-02 for the Pavement Management System Project - Project PW00-30. R:~Agenda\062601 www.cityo ftemecula.o rg 6 20 Award the Construction Contract for Citywide Asphalt Concrete Repairs for FY2000-01 - Proiect No. PW01-01 21 RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Award a construction contract for the Citywide Asphalt Concrete Repairs - FY2000- 01 - Project No. PW01-01 - to Cunningham-Davis Corporation for $117,587.20 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 20.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $11,758.72 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. Acceptance of Median Landscape Bonds and A,qreement along Meadows Parkway for Tract No. 24187 - Newland Communities, LL~ RECOMMENDATION: 21.1 Accept the agreement and surety bonds from Newland Communities, LLC, Inc. to the landscaped medians along Meadows Parkway in Paseo del Sol - Specific Plan No. 219, Tract No. 24187. RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY R:~,genda\062601 www.cityo ftemecula.org 7 Next in Order: Ordinance: No. CSD 2001-01 Resolution: No. CSD 2001-14 CALL TO ORDER: President Jeff Stone ROLLCALL: DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Board of Directors on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item no~t on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of April 24, 2001; 1.2 Approve the minutes of May 15, 2001; 1.3 Approve the minutes of May 22, 2001. 2 Completion and Acceptance of Rancho California Sports Park Field Lighting - Proiect No. PW00-19CSD RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Accept the project Rancho California Sports Park Field Lighting - Project No. PW00-19CSD as complete; R:~Agenda\062601 www.cityoftemecula.org 8 3 4 2.2 Authorize the Clerk to file the Notice of Completion; 2.3 Accept the Maintenance Bond in the amount of %10 of the contract. Award of Construction Contract for the Mary Phillips Senior Center Expansion Project Project No. PW99-19 RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Award a contract for the Mary Phillips Senior Center Expansion Project - Project No. PW99-19 - to R. Moody Construction for $508,500.00 and authorize the President to execute the contract; 3.2 Authorize the General Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the Contingency amount of $50,850.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount; 3.3 Approve the project plans and specifications. First Amendment to the Restroom Maintenance Services Contract with Self's Janitorial Service for Fiscal Year 2001-02 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Restroom Maintenance Services Contract with Self's Janitorial Service to extend the Agreement to June 30, 2002; 4.2 Authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount of $48,720.00 for restroom cleaning services and park gazebo cleaning services; 4.3 Approve a contingency of 10% in the amount in the amount of $4,872.00 for extra work items. Acceptance of Offers of Dedication from Temeku Hills Properties, LLC, and Mc Millin Companies, LLC, for maintenance of slopes and perimeter landscaping w th n Tract Nos. 23371-9 and 23371-10 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ACCEPTING THE OFFERS OF DEDICATION FROM TEMEKU HILLS PROPERTIES, LLC, AND MC MILLIN COMPANIES, LLC, FOR EASEMENTS FOR MAINTENANCE OF SLOPES AND PERIMETER LANDSCAPING IN TRACT NOS. 23371-9 AND 23371-10 R:~Agenda\062601 www.cityoftemecula.org 9 6 A,qreement for Softball Officiating Services RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve the agreement between the City of Temecula and the Margarita Officials Association for providing City softball league officiating services from July 1, 2001, through July 30, 2005, with a fifth-year option to renew. 7 Professional Services Agreement for TCSD Landscape Plan Check and Inspection Services RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve a Professional Services Agreement with PELA, a landscape architectural firm, for TCSD landscape plan check and inspection services in the amount of $80,000 and authorize the Board President to execute the agreement; 7.2 Authorize the General Manager to approve additional services not to exceed the Contingency amount of $8,000 which is equal to 10% of the agreement amount. DISTRICT BUSINESS 8 Namin,q of the Paseo del Sol Park Site RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the name Meadows Park as recommended by the Community Services Commission as the name for the five-acre park site located on Meadows Parkway in the Paseo del Sol Development. 9 Naminq of the Temecula Children's Museum RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve Imagination Workshop as the name for the new Temecula Children's Museum. 10 Water Park Feasibility Study RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Receive and file the findings of the Water Park Feasibility Study. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT R:~Agenda\062601 www.cityoffemecula.org 10 BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, July 10, 2001, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~,genda\062601 www.cityoffe mecula.o rg 11 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Ron Roberts ROLL CALL AGENCY MEMBERS: PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided Next in Order: Ordinance: No. RDA 2001-01 Resolution: No. RDA 2001-05 Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts so members of the public may address the Redevelopment Agency on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item no~t on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record~ For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENTCALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of April 24, 2001; 1.2 Approve the minutes of May 15, 2001; 1.3 Approve the minutes of May 22, 2001. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS R:~Agenda\062601 www.cityoftemecula.org 12 ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, July 10, 2001, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\062601 www.cityoftem ecula.org 13 Next in Order: Ordinance: No. TPFA 2001-01 Resolution: No. TPFA 2001-05 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Jeff Comerchero ROLL CALL BOARDMEMBERS: PUBLIC COMMENTS Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone, Comerchero A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Temecula Public Financing Authority on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item no~t on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. Convene a Joint Meeting of the City Council and the Temecula Public Financing Authority AUTHORITY BUSINESS 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of April 24, 2001; 1.2 Approve the minutes of May 15, 2001. 2 Initial actions relatin,q to Formation of a Community Facilities District for Wolf Creek RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: R:~Agenda\062601 www.cityofte mecula.o rg 14 2.1 RESOLUTION NO. 0t- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING DEPOSIT/REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT That the Authority adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF A DEPOSIT RELATIVE TO THE FORMATION OF A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO Recess City Council meeting EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT R:~Agenda\062601 www.cityoftemecula.org 15 RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public Hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the Approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. 22 Planninq Application No. 94-0073 (Annexation) -Adoption of a Resolution initiatinq annexation proceedinqs for a 640-acre portion of the Roripau.qh Ranch Specific Plan Area as proposed by Ashby Development Company RECOMMENDATION: 22.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS REORGANIZING THE JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY DESCRIBED AS A 640-ACRE PORTION THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AREA TO INCLUDE THIS AREA WITHIN THE CORPORATE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND TO DETACH SAID TERRITORY FROM CSA 143 AND THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATED AS PORTION OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0075 (RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN) 22.2 Direct staff to prepare and file the annexation application, the Plan of Services, the Fiscal Impact Report, and all other associated materials for the annexation with the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). 23 Environmental Assessment for the Date Street Crossinqs (EA-82) RECOMMENDATION: 23.1 Continue this matter to the July 10, 2001, City Council meeting. R:~Agenda\062601 www.cityoftemecula.org 16 COUNCIL BUSINESS 24 Piannin,q Commission Appointments RECOMMENDATION: 24.1 Appoint two applicants to serve on the Planning Commission for full three-year terms through June 4, 2004. 25 Roripau,qh Specific Plan - Status Report RECOMMENDATION: 25.1 Provide direction to staff on increasing the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEiR) public review period from 30 days to 45 days. 26 Lea.que of California Cities Grassroots Campai,qn RECOMMENDATION: 26.1 Consider voting for the ballot measure that would establish and fund the proposed Grassroots Network. If this ballot were approved by 2/3rds of the general membership of the League of California Cities, Temecula's dues will increase a total of $5,103 annually. 27 Mor,qan Hill Miti,qation Aqreement RECOMMENDATION: 27.1 Approve mitigation agreement for the Morgan Hill Specific Plan. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS CITY MANAGER'S REPORT CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: City Council, Tuesday, July 10, 2001, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\062601 www.cityoftemecula.org 17 ITEM 1 ITEM 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL APRIL 24, 200'1 The City Council convened in Closed Session at 5:00 P.M. and convened in a regular meeting at 7:00 P.M., on Tuesday, April 24, 2001, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Present: Absent: PRELUDE MUSIC Councilmembers: Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone, Comerchero Councilmember: None The prelude music was provided by Margaret Bird. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor Koger of Hope Lutheran. ALLEGIANCE The salute to the Flag was led by Councilman Pratt. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Re~ay For Life Presentation and Proclamation Mr. Ron McClelland informed the City Council and the viewing audience of the First Annual Relay for Life on June 2 -3, 2001 at Murrieta Valley High School; highlighted the history of Relay for Life; and commented on the organization's goal to raise $100,000, noting that raised monies will be contributed toward research, patient services, and education of cancer. On behalf of the City, Mayor Comerchero presented to Mr. McClelland a City proclamation in honor of this event. 2001 National Crime Victims' Ri,qhts Week Proclamation A proclamation presented by Mayor Comerchero was accepted by Ms. Karen Chizo who briefly referenced available services to those in need. Help Make Great Strides to Cure Cystic Fibrosis Proclamation Mayor Comerchero presented the proclamation to Ms. Shannan Burk, Great Strides Chairperson, who apprised the public of an upcoming event on Sunday, April 29, 2001, at 8:00 A.M., at the Temecula Sports Park in an effort to raise $50,000 toward cystic fibrosis and thanked the City Council for its support. Presentation by Juvenile Diabetes Foundation Ms. Mary Jaquish, representing the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation, apprised the public of an upcoming fundraiser walk on Sunday, May 6, 2001, at 11:30 A.M., at the Sports Park. Ms. R:\Minutes\042401 1 Jaquish introduced Ms. Megan Christine Kingastian who shared her story of what it is like to be 10 years old and live with diabetes. Councilman Stone informed the public that he will provide his services at the fundraiser walk and take free blood sugar tests. PUBLIC COMMENTS A. Having lived in Temecula for the past nine years, Mr. Albert Ball, 31836 Corte Mendoza, praised the City Council on its efforts specifically to those associated with cultural opportunities and thanked the City Council for the opportunity to utilize the Duck Pond Park for the Idyllwild International Chamber Orchestra on Sunday, May 13, 2001, for Mother's Day. B. Mr. Joe Grammatico and Mr. Bob Ingertson, representing the American Legion, advised that the Boys' State Program, sponsored by the American Legion, has selected two boys from Temecula Valley High School who will join 35 other boys from Riverside County to proceed to the Boys' Nation in Sacramento. At this time, Mr. Grammatico introduced Mr. Patrick Davis who ranked 26th of 633 in grade point average and Mr. Cole Konasaka who ranked 1st of 633 in grade point average. In response to Councilman Stone, Mr. Ingertson advised that associated costs with sending these boys to Sacramento are defrayed by way of City support and fundraisers. Mr. Stone requested that the consideration of allocating $1,000, in honor of each boy, to the American Legion be agendized for the next City Council meeting. B. Ms. Rebecca Weersing, 41775 Yorba Avenue, representing the Temecula Valley Rose Society, invited the City Council and the public to the Rose Haven for the First Bloom Party, Sunday, April 28, 2001, between 1:00 P.M. and 4:00 P.M. C. Ms. Martha Minkler, P.O. Box 954, thanked the City Council for the City street banners advertising the Arts in the Country Festival (May 5 - June 17, 2001). D. Ms. Maryann Edwards apprised the City Council and the public of an upcoming fundraiser to assist the Lopshire Family with defraying their son's (Nathan) medical expenses, advising that the fundraiser will be on Wednesday, April 25, 2001, 6:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M., at Stadium Pizza in Redhawk. E. Mr. Harold Provin, 44750 Villa Del Sol, thanked Mayor Comerchero, Mayor Pro Tern Roberts, and Councilman Stone and City staff members for their hard work, noting that the City of Temecula is one of the best cities to live in the country and stating that such past efforts were accomplished without any political mudslinging. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. Councilman Pratt informed the City Councilmembers that he had attended the Student of the Month event on Monday, April 23, 2001. B. Mayor Pro Tem Roberts advised that he had testified for the MetroLink to the Assembly Committee on Transportation, in Sacramento, with regard to AB 1396 (rail facilities), noting that the bill did pass the Assembly Committee and will proceed to Appropriations. Mr. Roberts noted that he has put together a meeting on Thursday, April 26, 2001, to discuss the partnership development of a natural gas fueling station in the City. R:\Minutes\042401 2 C. In response to Councilman Stone, Police Chief Domenoe commented on the success of the Stop Light Abuse Program (SLAP), noting that 76 citations have been issued since the implementation of the program, as well as, 15 good driver awards. Mr. Stone also commended the Police Department on the Enforce Responsible Alcohol Consumption in Temecula (ERACIT) program, noting that last weekend two drunk drivers were eliminated from City roads as a result of this program. To further encourage the elimination of graffiti throughout the City, Councilman Stone reminded the public of the reward issued by the City with the successful prosecution of anyone who graffitied within the City. D. Mayor Comerchero informed the public that he will be in Sacramento on Wednesday, April 25, 2001, in order to testify before the Local Government Committee of the Assembly with regard to a bill pertaining to property taxes. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of January 23, 2001. 3 Resolution Approving List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-25 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 4 Request for Le.qislative Nominations for Grant Fundin,q for the Children's Museum and the Community Theater RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: R:\Minutes\042401 3 RESOLUTION NO. 0t-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING THE NOMINATION OF THE TEMECULA CHILDREN'S MUSEUM PROJECT BY OUR STATE LEGISLATOR FOR AN URBAN RECREATION AND CULTURAL CENTERS GRANT THROUGH THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS, CLEAN WATER, CLEAN AIR, AND COASTAL PROTECTION BOND ACT OF 2000 4.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-27 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING THE NOMINATION OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY THEATER PROJECT BY OUR STATE LEGISLATOR FOR AN URBAN RECREATION AND CULTURAL CENTERS GRANT THROUGH THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS, CLEAN WATER, CLEAN AIR, AND COASTAL PROTECTION BOND ACT OF 2000 Councilman Stone abstained with regard to this matter. (This item was considered under separate discussion; see pages 6-7.) 5 Approval of Funds for Plan Review Services with Van Dorpe Chou and Associates 6 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve an expenditure in an amount not to exceed $35,000 for Plan Check Services with Van Dorpe Chou Associates. Approval of the Plans and Specifications and authorization to solicit Construction Bids for the Pavement Mana,qement System - Citywide - FY2000-2001 - Proiect No. PW00-30 RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Pavement Management System - Citywide - FY2000-2001 - Project No. PW00o30. 7 Approval of the Plans and Specifications and authorization to solicit Construction Bids for Citywide Asphalt Concrete Repairs for FY2000-2001 - Proiect No. PW01-01 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve the Construction PJans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for Citywide asphalt concrete repairs for FY2000-2001 - Project No. PW01-01. R:\Minutes\042401 4 8 Reimbursement Agreement between Rancho California Water District and the City of Temecula for Margar ta Road Wideninq from Plo Pico Road to Dartolo - Proiect No. PW99-01 RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the Reimbursement Agreement between Rancho California Water District (RCWD) and the City of Temecula for the Margarita Road Widening from Pio Pico Road to Dartolo - Project No. PW99-01. 9 Award of Construction Contract for the Pavement Management System - Project No. PW99- 17 - Jefferson Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Award a contract for the Pavement Management System - Project No. PW99-17 - Jefferson Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation - to R.J. Noble Company for $603,425.00 and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract; 9.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $60,342.50 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 10 Meandering Sidewalk along North General Kearny Road for Christ the Vine Lutheran Church Project (LD00-210GR) - (located south of North General Kearny Road approximately 325 feet east of the Marqarita Road and North General Kearny Road centerline intersection RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Accept a meandering sidewalk easement along North General Kearny Road for public use only. 11 Consideration of sponsorship request for the Temecula Valley International Film Festival RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Consider the sponsorship request of $30,000 for the 2001 Temecula Valley International Film & Music Festival. (This item was considered under separate discussion; see page 7.) 12 1-15/Rancho California Road Interchange Improvements (Proiect No. PW95-12) Southern California Gas Company (SCG) Work Authorization Agreement to Relocate an existing 6" High Pressure Gas Main RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Authorize payment to the Southern California Gas Company (SCG) for construction fees in the amount of $27,409.40. R:\Minutes\042401 5 MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-3 and 5-10 and 12 (item Nos. 4 and 11 considered under separate discussion). The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and voice voted reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who abstained with regard to Item No. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS CONSIDERED UNDER SEPARATE DISCUSSION 4 Request for Leqislative Nominations for Grant FundinR for the Children's Museum and the Community Theater RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 0t-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING THE NOMINATION OF THE TEMECULA CHILDREN'S MUSEUM PROJECT BY OUR STATE LEGISLATOR FOR AN URBAN RECREATION AND CULTURAL CENTERS GRANT THROUGH THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS, CLEAN WATER, CLEAN AIR, AND COASTAL PROTECTION BOND ACT OF 2000 4.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-27 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING THE NOMINATION OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY THEATER PROJECT BY OUR STATE LEGISLATOR FOR AN URBAN RECREATION AND CULTURAL CENTERS GRANT THROUGH THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS, CLEAN WATER, CLEAN AIR, AND COASTAL PROTECTION BOND ACT OF 2000 Councilman Stone abstained with regard to this matter. Community Services Director Parker presented the staff report (as per agenda material). Ms. Beverly Stephenson, 27740 Jefferson Avenue, thanked Mayor Comerchero, City Manager Nelson, and Building Official Elmo for their assistance with a recent staging problem for an upcoming production, noting that such a problem would not have arisen if the City of Temecula would have its own theater. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Stone who abstained. 11 Consideration of sponsorship request for the Temecula Valley International Film Festival RECOMMENDATION: R:\Minutes\042401 6 11.1 Consider the sponsorship request of $30,000 for the 2001 Temecula Valley International Film & Music Festival. Councilman Naggar apprised the public that this year's Festival will include a music component. Mayor Comerchero noted that although a new component has been added to the Festival, the sponsorship request remained the same as last year. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. At 7:57 P.M., Mayor Comerchero called a recess and then convened as the Community Services District, the Redevelopment Agency, and the Temecula Public Financing Authority and reconvened the City Council meeting at 9:07 P.M. The Redevelopment Agency and the Temecula Public Financing Authority meetings were recessed until after the discussion of City Council Business Item No. 15 (Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Processing Schedule). At 10:59 P.M., Mayor Comerchero called a short recess and reconvened the Redevelopment Agency and Temecula Public Financing Authority meetings. After adjourning those meetings, Mayor Comerchero reconvened the City Council meeting at 11:11 P.M. COUNCIL BUSINESS 13 Discussion of 1999 Draft Traffic Study (Requested by Councilman Naggar) RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Provide direction to staff concerning the Draft 1999 Traffic Study. Deputy City Manager Thornhill reviewed the staff report (of record), noting the following: That the City Council in March of 1998 had approved a contract with Wilbur Smith and Associates to update the Circulation Element of the General Plan in order to address concerns of development in the County areas, commenting on the County's deviation from the Southwest Area Plan Land Use designations; · That in March of 1998, the County had not yet initiated the Riverside County Integrated Project; That in March of 2000, the City Council had adopted the City's Growth Management Action Plan and at which time, the Council directed staff to undertake a complete and comprehensive update of the City's General Plan, including the Circulation Element; That Cotton Bridges Associates will address all components of the City's General Plan, including the Circulation Element, and, as well, will evaluate the land uses and traffic impacts associated with the City of Murrieta and the County's Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP). In response to Councilman Stone, Deputy City Manager Thornhill advised that the City's overall densities have been reduced by 8 to 10%; that the traffic levels at various intersections in the 1999 traffic study were determined by the higher density levels; that the 1999 Traffic Study included the Wolf Creek project at 2,600 to 2,700 units, noting that the actual total will be 2,000 or less units; that the Acacia project (Pechanga Tribe) has been transferred into trust land (140 R:\Minutes\042401 7 units); that the Querry property will be included in the trust purchased by the Pechanga Tribe (120 acres); that Harveston was considered at 2,600 to 2,700 units, noting that the actual total will be around 2,000 units or less; and that the Campos Verdes project (multi-family) has been reduced by 800 units. Because the County has not yet completed its RCIP and in light of the City's adoption of its Growth Management Action, at which time, the City Council directed staff to update its General Plan, including the Circulation Element, Mr. Thornhill recommended the completion of a new traffic study to reflect the revised City Land Use Plan as well as the project land uses in the unincorporated areas through the RClP. For Councilman Naggar, Deputy City Manager Thornhill noted that the differences between the 1993 and the 1999 traffic study are not significant, advising that the 1999 traffic study was utilized for the purposes of updating the Circulation Element and that for those new projects, which require referencing the General Plan, the 1993 traffic study would be utilized as reflected in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Public Works Director Hughes stated, for Councilman Naggar, that in the engineering analysis of projects, the Public Works Department will reference the 1999 traffic study primarily for the purpose of double checking assumptions and that the 1999 traffic study has been utilized with reference to undesirable levels of service as it relates to County projects. Deputy City Manager Thornhill advised that the 1999 traffic study has been referenced because it took into account changes occurring in the County area such as Vail Lake Specific Plan. Although not having been involved in the process with the 1999 traffic study, Public Works Director Hughes stated that this study would be somewhat more conservative as it relates to trip generation factors than the 1993 traffic study. For Councilman Naggar, Mr. Thornhill readdressed the reduction of density and its relation to the Circulation Element, noting that the major impacts on the City's infrastructure problems are County driven. Councilman Stone noted that the City's Capital Improvement Program is a living document which may be amended at any time based on the City's needs. In light of the City's available resources, infrastructure may be upgraded in order to accommodate those needs. Clarifying his goal, Councilman Naggar noted that it would be his intent to have the most accurate and updated study adopted into the City's General Plan. Because the General Plan indicates that the Circulation Element should be updated every three years, Mr. Naggar noted that by not updating this Element every three years, the City will not derive the benefits from accurate counts on cumulative traffic impacts. Because it has been noted that the 1999 traffic study was not accurate, Mr. Naggar requested that the traffic engineer who completed this study either defend the study or that the City be reimbursed $100,000. Mr. Naggar expressed concern with upcoming projects utilizing the 1993 traffic study when the 1999 traffic study is available. MOTION.: Councilman Naggar moved to direct the Planning Commission to evaluate the 1999 traffic study and its adoption into the General Plan and to forward a recommendation to the City Council. The motion was seconded by Councilman Pratt. (This motion ultimately failed; see below.) Although staff is of the opinion that the 1999 traffic study is not as accurate as the 1993 traffic study, Councilman Stone noted that the developer of a major project such as Wolf Creek would be required to provide a traffic study separate from the City's studies; and that developers are held accountable for providing infrastructure prior to the issuance of building permits. R:\Minutes\042401 8 Commenting on the importance of knowing the cumulative traffic impacts, Mr. Stone spoke in support of completing a new traffic study to ensure current and updated information be utilized. Although the 1993 traffic study does not reflect the density reduction of 8 to 10% which in terms of traffic is significant, Mayor Comerchero noted that as a result, counts being used are actually inflated. Versus duplicating efforts by validating the 1999 traffic study, Mr. Comerchero expressed concerns with the 1999 traffic study as it relates to trip generation rates and counts and, therefore, supported the completion of a new study which should correlate with the City's updated General Plan as well as the RCIP. Councilman Pratt relayed his support of the Planning Commission reviewing the 1999 traffic study and its adoption with the updated General Plan. At this time, voice vote of the above-mentioned motion reflected denial of the motion as follows: AYES: Naggar, Pratt NOES: Comerchero, Roberts, Stone ABSENT: None. 14 Proposed Eastern Urban Limit Line RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Adopt a map titled Proposed Eastern Urban Limit Line. In light of the County's approval of the Morgan Hill project, Mayor Comerchero advised that staff has requested that this matter be continued off calendar. MOTION: Councilman Stone moved to continue this matter off calendar. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 15 Roripau,qh Ranch Specific Plan Processinq Schedule RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Provide direction to staff. Deputy City Manager Thornhill provided an overview of the staff report (as per written material), noting that the developer has requested that the consideration of the Roripaugh Specific Plan and the Environmental Impact Report be expedited; that the assigned City Council subcommittee (Mayor Comerchero and Mayor Pro Tern Roberts) and staff have met with the applicant; that the subcommittee had agreed to expedite the project as much as possible but clarified that a set City Council hearing date could not be confirmed due to the involvement of the Planning Commission and its hearings; and that he as well would prefer that the project be located in Temecula to ensure land use control, noting that the City would impose more stringent conditions than the County would impose; and that staff is attempting to meet the deadlines. Mr. Wesley Hylen, 31566 Railroad Canyon Road, Canyon Lake, consultant representing the developer of Roripaugh Ranch, advised that a new draft EIR and Specific Plan for the 1,721-unit R:\Minutes\042401 9 project has been completed, which is currently under review by staff; that the project description and land use plan has been reviewed by staff and the City Council subcommittee; and that since 1994, the project density has been reduced from 2,665 units to 1,721 units. Addressing the project, Mr. Hylen noted that the applicant has agreed to the following: · Full mitigation of school facility requirements · Energy-efficient homes and buildings, including a 60-day moratorium every 12 months for issuance of building permits after a blackout caused by a Stage 3 Power Alert called by the State · Study to establish traffic baseline data to determine traffic impacts of the project with respect to affected intersections · Moratorium on building permits if any of the affected intersections were to remain below a Level of Service D. Advising that the current traffic study for this project is based on a 1998 model1 completed by Wilbur Smith and Associates, Mr. Hylen noted that in order to complete and make Butterfield Stage Road operable by early 2003, the applicant would require a City Council approval by August 2001. Reviewing the time schedule (as per overheads), Councilman Stone reiterated his desire to have this project in the City of Temecula because of local authority over land uses and the extension of Butterfield Stage Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road. In response to Councilman Stone, Mr. Hylen advised that in an effort to reduce the time schedule in order to achieve City Council approval by August, the applicant would be requesting the following of staff: · Second review of the EIR could be reduced to 14 days · Third staff review to be completed within a week · Final staff check reduced to 7 days · Public review period reduced from 45 days to 30 days For Councilman Naggar, Mr. Hylen clarified that an expedited time schedule is being requested in order for the applicant to meet a project option which expires September 30, 2001, and in order to commence construction on the Butterfield Stage Road extension in March of 2002 (right after the rainy season) to ensure completion by March 2003. Mr. Hylen noted that if by expediting this process the City were to incur any additional expenses, the applicant would be willing to pay for those expenses. At 10:00 P.M., the following motion was offered: MOTION: Councilman Stone, seconded by Councilman Naggar, moved that the remaining agenda items be considered this evening. Voice vote of the motion reflected unanimous approval. To further expedite the process, Councilman Stone suggested the scheduling of Planning Commission workshops. Advising that he has no interest in this property, Mr. Dan Stephenson, 27740 Jefferson Avenue, relayed his support of the project. R:\Minutes\042401 10 Although you may request the Planning Commission to conduct special meetings with regard to this project, City Attorney Thorson, for Councilman Naggar, advised that the City Council may not compel the Commission to meet. In light of the Planning Department's loss of two planners, Mayor Pro Tem Roberts relayed his support of the project but commented on the impact, as a result of fast tracking this project, will have on staff as well as the Commission, noting that other projects such as Harveston are on schedule as well. Because of the opportunity to complete the Butterfield Stage Road extension to Murrieta Hot Springs Road, Councilman Pratt, as well as Councilman Naggar, relayed their concurrence with Councilman Stone's recommendation to expedite this project to ensure its approval within the City. In response to Councilman Naggar's concern with impacts on other projects as a result of expediting this project, City Attorney Thorson advised that the City must adhere to time frames within which to process projects and that priorities have been set with regard to other projects and clarified that the City Council cannot commit to an approval date for this project. Commenting on the City's opportunity to approve this project within the City, Councilman Stone stressed to staff that this project must take a higher priority. Deputy City Manager Thornhill ensured Mr. Stone that staff will explore all options in expediting this project. Councilman Naggar requested that project status reports be presented at every City Council meeting and that possibly a subcommittee be created. Deputy City Manager Thornhill noted that the reduction of meetings/special meetings will as well expedite this project. City Manager Nelson confirmed that staff will create an aggressive schedule to expedite this project in conjunction with balancing other City priorities and requested that if the developer were not to meet any of the designated time frames, the matter would be agendized for City Council review. MOTION: Mayor Comerchero moved to direct staffto expedite this project and to provide project status reports at every City Council meeting. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 16 Selection of City Council representative to serve on Design Team for the Wolf Creek Fire RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Select one member to serve on the Design Team for the Wolf Creek Fire Station. MOTION: Mayor Comerchero moved to appoint Councilman Stone to serve on the Design Team for the Wolf Creek Fire Station. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. R:\Minutes\042401 11 17 Authorization to file letter of protest with the California Public Utilities Commission reqardinq the issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the Valley Rainbow Interconnect Proiect (Application Number :A.01-03-036) RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Authorize the City Attorney to file a letter of protest with the California Public Utilities Commission regarding the issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the Valley Rainbow Interconnect Project as proposed by the San Diego Gas and Electric Company. Assistant City Manager O'Grady provided the staff report (as per agenda material), reviewing elements of the proposal, advising that the Electrical Needs Committee (Mayor Comerchero and Councilman Naggar) concurs with the proposed recommendation, and referencing City concerns, including the following: visual, economic, public facilities, and noise. For Councilman Stone, Mr. O'Grady advised that the longest stretch to underground these lines is 2/3 of a mile. Although not opposing the electrical need, Mr. Faddoul Baida, 34860 Calle Arnaz, relayed his opposition to the routing of the proposed Valley Rainbow Interconnect project, commenting on radiation and other possible health problems as a result of this project; requested the scheduling of additional public meetings; submitted to City Clerk Jones a four-page letter with regard to this project; and commented on the importance of an EIR. For Councilman Naggar, Assistant City Manager O'Grady advised that San Diego Gas and Electric Company has prepared a proponent's environmental assessment which will be utilized by the California Public Utilities Commission during the preparation of the environmental report, which should be completed within the next 12 to 18 months. Referencing the various routes, Ms. Loma Basinger, 40125 Scanlon Road, noted that all routes are between Rainbow and Romoland; that none of the routes are outside of Southwest Riverside County; that she is not against reliable energy; and that the proposed lines are for want versus need. In closing, Ms. Basinger encouraged the City to be a part of this process and supported staff's recommendation. Ms. Barbara Wilder, 28560 Via Santa Rosa, spoke in support of staff's recommendation; commented on the adverse impacts this project would have on the City; encouraged the City and its residents to be a part of this process; and requested that future meetings/hearings with regard to this matter be held in Temecula. With regard to a flier that was sent out and reflected incorrect comments made by Mayor Comerchero, Ms. Wilder clarified that although the organization name of Save Southwest Riverside County (SSRC) was used on this flier, no such authority was granted and that SSRC had no participation in those comments. Mr. Wayne Hall, 42131 Agena Street, addressed potential long-term health problems associated with such power lines and noted that, in his opinion, the proposed lines are for export, not necessity. In the spirit of time, Ms. Marina Santoro, 40766 Calle Cancion, relayed her concurrence with the previously made comments. Mr. Paul O'Neal, 27740 Jefferson Avenue, consultant for San Diego Gas and Electric Company, commented on the Company's desire to have the City be a participant in this process; suggested that workshops be scheduled in the City of Temecula in order to address concerns/questions; and read into the record a statement by San Diego Gas and Electric. R:\Minutes\042401 12 Councilman Naggar concurred with the scheduling of public workshops. Mayor Comerchero, echoed by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts, relayed his strong support of staff's recommendation. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to concur with staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mayor Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. In response to Councilman Pratt, Mr. O'Neal noted that if this project were not approved, San Diego will continue to experience rolling blackouts. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS No additional comments. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT No additional comments. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT With regard to Closed Session Item No. 1, City Attorney Thorson advised that there was no reportable action under the Brown Act. Summarizing City Council action with regard to Item No. 2, Mr. Thorson advised that the City Council had voted 3-0 (with Councilman Naggar and Councilman Pratt not participating in the vote) to authorize the defense with the reservation of rights for Councilman Naggar and Councilman Pratt subject to conditions and reservations as outlined in Government Code Sections 825 and 995; and that he would follow up with Councilman Naggar and Councilman Pratt by way of letter, explaining the City Council's action and will accordingly proceed. At this time, Mayor Comerchero made a short statement with regard to the Council's action, commenting on the reasoning of this action. Councilman Naggar advised that he had requested City Attorney Thorson to provide an opinion as to when a City Councilmember is or is not a City Councilmember. ADJOURNMENT At 11:17 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, May 8, 2001, at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:\Minutes\042401 13 ITEM 3 RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A, on file in the Office of the City Clerk, have been audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby allowed in the amount of $3,967,105.89. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 26th day of June, 2001. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:/Resos2001/Resos 01- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 01- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 26th day of June, 2001 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos2OO1/Resos 01- 2 CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 0w07/01 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 06/14/01 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 06~26/01 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 06~7101 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 06/26/01 COUNCIL MEETING: DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA DEV-LOWR~IOD BET ASIDE 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 183 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TDSD SERVICE LEVEL D 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ. FUND 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY~:~IP 300 INSURANCE FUND 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES 100 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA-LOWRdOD SET ASIDE 190 ~NITY SERVICES DISTRICT 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TDSD SERVICE LEVEL D 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY~:~IP 300 INSURANCE FUND 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FAClUTIES TOTAL BY FUND: $ 809,557.04 249,159.97 2,682,570.74 $ 3,967~105.89' 931,414.68 30,052.63 193,141.77 30,343.11 38,276.10 1,276,318.43 679,194.69 520.855.00 19,824.59 3,870.77 16,723.20 101,660.42 3,845.60 2,944.79 523.60 783.66 $ 3,741,287.75 225,818.14 $ 3,967,105.89 , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 14 06/07/01 08:51 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA DEV- LO~/MOD SET ASIDE 190 COHMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL E 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 500 INSURANCE FUND 320 INFORHATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES TOTAL AMOUNT 192,109.25 3,128.39 51,744.59 43.77 3,049.11 917.60 135,119.90 402,640.02 419.04 6,069.83 2,215.63 12,099.91 809,557.04 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 06/07/01 08:51 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETHA 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 BLSH[ELD 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HLSH[ELD 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 CIGNA 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH [NSUR. PRE 000245 KAISER 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACCARE 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH IHSUR, PRE 000245 PACCARE 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR, PRE 000245 PACCARE 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACCARE 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR, PRE 000245 PC 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH IHSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS DED 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH [NSUR. PRE 000245 PERS-ADM 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 UN[ 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 UN[ 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH [NSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH IHSUR, PRE 000245 AETHA 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH [NSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH [HSUR, PRE 000245 AETNA 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH IHSUR, PRE 000245 AETNA 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HLSHIELD 65324 06/07/01 O00245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HLSHIELD 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH IHSUR. PRE 000245 CIGHA 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 65324 06/07/01 000245 PRES (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH IHSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISER 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACCARE 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACCARE 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS CHEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACCARE 65324 06/07/01 000245 PERS (HEALTH [NSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO 65324 06/07/01 000265 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS REV 65414 06/07/01 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 65414 06/07/01 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 65414 06/07/01 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 65414 06/07/01 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 65414 06/07/01 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 65414 06/07/01 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-2090 165-2090 190-2090 280-2090 330-2090 340-2090 001-2090 190-2090 001-2090 001-2090 190-2090 193-2090 194-2090 340-2090 001-2090 001-2090 190-2090 193-2090 340-2090 001-2090 001-2090 190-2090 280-2090 001-2090 001-2090 001-2090 190-2090 001-2090 165-2090 190-2090 280-2090 340-2090 001-2090 190-2090 001-2090 001-2090 190-2090 340-2090 001-2090 001-2090 190-2090 340-2090 001-2090 001-2090 001-2390 165-2390 190-2390 192-2390 193-2390 194-~90 ITEM AMOUNT 3,042.39 254.63 1,141.99 84.87 97.00 244.07 1,594.12 468.53 926.50 4,688.47 1,438.36 59.18 29.59 768.95 2,847.96 4,149.17 944.84 244.62 144.45 758.00 4,050.97 4.21 1.26 990.28 572.44 2,037.16 166.98 158.61 123.68 119.01 41.22 8.13 55.47 54.51 35.78 143.43 31.24 .36 23.43 119.46 18.59 2.32 93.56 1,028.80- 26,898.21 651.49 4,753.57 11.61 414.86 101.25 PAGE 1 CHECK AMOUNT 31,T30.99 VOUCHRE2 06/07/01 08:51 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 2 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/0?/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 65414 06/07/01 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS RET PERS (EMPLOYEESv RETIRE 000246 PERS RET PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS RET PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS RET PERS (EMPLOYEESv RETIRE 000246 PERS RET PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS-PRE PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR PERS (EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 69557 06/05/01 000154 C S M E 0 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 459032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 439032 06/07/01 000283 LOCAL GOVT SEM:6/20/OI:PB/GR 280-2390 300-2390 320-2130 320-2390 330-2390 340-2390 001-2130 001-2390 165-2390 190-2390 192-2390 193-2390 194-2390 280-2390 300-2390 320-2390 330-2390 340-2390 001-140-999-5258 ITEM AMO~JNT 282.59 131.24 26.51 1,054.89 232.18 588.78 182.91 96.59 1.87 19.07 .05 1.82 ,36 .92 .46 3.72 1.39 2.65 130.00 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 001-2070 25,803.45 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 165-2070 464.44 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 190-2070 5,505.74 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 192-2070 16.58 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEOERAL 193-2070 362.69 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 194-2070 131.18 INSTATAX (IRS) 0002&3 FEDERAL 280-2070 180.65 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 300-2070 77.85 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 320-2070 1,183.74 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 330-2070 293.74 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 FEDERAL 340-2070 484.68 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 001-2070 6,240.13 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 165-2070 150.18 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICAEE 190-2070 1,499.80 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 192-2070 2.62 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 193-2070 106.45 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 194-2070 22.26 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 280-2070 68.61 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 300-2070 29.93 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 320-2070 287.80 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 330-2070 78.Z4 INSTATAX (IRS) 000283 MEDICARE 340-2070 141,32 439070 06/07/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 439070 06/07/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 439070 06/07/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 439070 06/07/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 4390?0 06/07/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 439070 06/07/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 439070 06/07/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI OOO444 SDI 000444 SDI 001-2070 1~5-2070 190-2070 193-2070 280-2070 320-2070 330-2070 91.62 3.40 130.10 2.80 .65 12.83 8.25 CHECK AMOUNT 35,458.99 130.00 43,132.58 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 3 06/07/01 08:51 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER 439070 06/07/01 000444 439070 06/07/01 000444 439070 06/07/01 000444 439070 06/07/01 000444 439070 06/07/01 000444 439070 06/07/01 000444 439070 06/07/01 000444 439070 06/07/01 000444 439070 06/07/01 000444 439070 06/07/01 000444 439070 06/07/01 000444 439070 06/07/01 000444 69560 06/07/01 69560 06/07/01 69560 06/07/01 VENDOR NAME INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EOD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) IflSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EO0) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EDD) INSTATAX (EOD) 002786 4N6XPRT SYSTEMS 002786 4N6XPRT SYSTEMS 002786 4N6XPRT SYSTEMS 69561 06/07/01 003552 69561 06/07/01 003552 69561 06/07/01 003552 69561 06/07/01 003552 69561 06/07/01 003552 69561 06/07/01 005552 69561 06/07/01 003552 69561 06/07/01 003552 69561 06/07/01 003552 69561 06/07/01 003552 69561 06/07/01 003552 69561 06/07/01 003552 69561 06/07/01 003552 69561 06/07/01 003552 69562 06/07/01 000116 69562 06/07/01 000116 69562 06/07/01 000116 69562 06/07/01 000116 69562 06/07/01 000116 69562 06/07/01 000116 69562 06/07/01 000116 69562 06/07/01 000116 69563 06/07/01 003304 69564 06/07/01 002733 69565 06/07/01 004432 69566 06/07/01 004240 69566 06/07/01 004240 AFLAG AFLAC AFLAC AFLAC AFLAC AFLAC AFLAC AFLAC AFLAC AFLAC AFLAC AFLAC AFLAC AFLAC A V P VISION PLANS A V P VISION PLANS A V P VISION PLANS A V P VISION PLANS A V P VISION PLANS A V P VISION PLANS A V P VISION PLANS A V P VISION PLANS AC}AMS ADVERTISING INC ALBAO, NANCY ALBERTSONS GROCERY STOR AHERICAN FORENSIC NURSE AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSE ITEM DESCRIPTION 000444 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE SOFTWARE UPDATE:EXPERT AUTO FREIGHT SALES TAX 003552 CANCER 003552 CANCER 003552 CANCER 003552 CANCER 003552 CANCER 003552 EXP PROT 003552 EXP PROT 003552 EXP PROT 003552 HOSP IC 003552 STD 003552 STD 003552 STD 003552 STD 003552 STD 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP 000116 AVP BILLBOARD CHG:PAINT FESTIVAL TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS SR EXCURSION SUPPLIES:DEL MAR CITY LIMITS BLOOD DRAWS-PD/CHP CITY LIMITS BLO00 DRAWS-PD/CHP ACCOUNT NUMBER 340-2070 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 192-2070 193-2070 194-2070 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-170-999-5221 001-170-999-5221 001-170-999-5221 001-2330 190-2330 193-2330 194-2330 340-2330 001-2330 190-2330 320-2330 001-2330 001-2330 190-2330 193-2330 194-2330 340-2330 001-2310 165-Z310 190-2310 193-2310 194-2310 280-2310 330-2310 340-2310 280-199-999-5250 190-183-999-5330 190-183-999-5350 001-170-999-5328 001-170-999-5328 ITEM AMOUNT 3.32 7,001.62 131.42 1,216.18 1.94 63.56 30.43 53.41 16.29 266.75 71,06 100.75 280.00 21.75 21.00 357.70 14.34 14.34 4.78 14.34 128.30 55.80 27.90 17.50 566.40 155.20 9.60 3.20 20.80 706.03 17.60 89.02 5.59 1.68 5.86 5.58 42.23 500.00 656.00 128.00 377.00 84.00 CHECK AMOUNT 9,206.38 322.75 1,390.20 873.59 500.00 656.00 128.00 461.00 69567 06/07/01 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. TEMP HELP WE 05/19 WYTRYKUS 001-162-999-5118 572.00 VOUCHREZ CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 06/07/01 08:51 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 69567 06/07/01 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. 69568 06/07/01 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER INC 69568 06/07/01 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER INC 69568 06/07/01 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER IND 69569 06/07/01 002381 BEAUDOIN, LINDA 69570 06/07/01 002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRV 69571 06/07/01 000586 BOOK PUGLISHING COMPANY 69572 06/07/01 004513 BROCK ENTERPRISES, INC. 69572 06/07/01 004513 BROCK ENTERPRISES, INC. 69573 06/07/01 003582 BROWN JR., WILLIAM E. 69574 06/07/01 003553 6957¢ 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69574 06/07/01 003553 69576 06/07/01 69576 06/07/01 69576 06/07/01 69577 06/07/01 69577 06/07/01 69577 06/07/01 69577 06/07/01 C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA C GNA CAL-WEST POOL & SPAS IN CAL-WEST POOL & SPAS IN CAL-WEST POOL & SPAS IN 002520 CALIFORNIA T'S SCREENPR 002520 CALIFORNIA T~S SCREENPR 002520 CALIFORNIA T~S SCREENPR 002520 CALIFORNIA T~S SCREENPR ITEM DESCRIPTION TEMP HELP W/E 05/19 CP~AMER BOTTLED WATER SVC: MNTC FAC BOTTLED WATER SVC: CRC BOTTLED WATER SVC: CITY HALL REINB ACCELA CONF:4/30-5/04/01 AC SIDEWALK REPAIR:3RD ST/FRNT BOOKS:MUNI CODE ORDINANCES SWIMSTART:START SYS FOR S~M MT FREIGHT MILEAGE REIMB-PW SIGNAL TECH ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-186-999-5118 340-199-702-5250 190-182-999-5250 340-199-701-5250 001-162-999-5261 001-164-603-5250 001-120-999-5250 190-186-999-5242 190-186-999-5242 001-164-602-5262 ITEM AMOUNT 345.80 239.67 94.75 535.13 209.83 4,640.00' 247.55 724.00 30.00 115.23 003553 LTD 001-2380 1,612.91 003553 LTD 165-2380 39.10 003553 LTD 190-2380 299.92 003553 LTD 192-2380 .71 003553 LTD 193-2380 26.38 003553 LTD 194-2380 6.08 003553 LTD 280-2380 17.29 003553 LTD 300-2380 7.99 003553 LTD 320-2380 66.99 003553 LTD 330-2380 13.45 003553 LTD 340-2380 37.67 003553 STD 001-2500 2,251.34 003553 STD 165-2500 54.57 003553 STD 190-2500 418.64 003553 STD 192-2500 .99 003553 STD 193-2500 36.82 003553 STD 194-2500 8.49 003553 STD 280-2500 24.15 003553 STD 300-2500 11.15 003553 STO 320-25OO 93.49 OO3553 STO 330-25OO 18.78 003553 STD 340-2500 52.59 REFD: OVRPMT OF FEES B01-1392 001-2290 REFD: OVRPMT OF FEES B01-1392 001-162-4200 REFD: OVRPMT OF FEES B01-1392 001-162-4285 NATAL PW WEEK:STAFF T-SHIRTS SALES TAX TOTE BAGS:EXTREME RECYCLING SALES TAX 001-164-604-5243 001-164-604-5243 194-180-999-5265 194-180-999-5265 .10 49.50 66.00 280.00 17.25 140.00 10.50 CHECK AMOUNT 917.80 869.55 209.83 4,640.00 247.55 754.00 115.23 5,099.50 115.60 447.75 69578 06/07/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 001-2360 645.13 69578 06/07/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE 1NS 165-2360 13.01 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 5 06/07/01 08:51 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 69578 06/07/01 003554 CANADA LIEE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 190-2560 133.26 69578 06/07/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 192-2560 .33 69578 06/07/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 193-2360 12,68 69578 06/07/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 194-2360 2.59 69578 06/07/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 280-2360 6.49 69578 06/07/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 300-2360 3.24 69578 06/07/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 320-2360 26.00 69578 06/07/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 530-2360 9.75 69578 06/07/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 340-2360 18.5B 871.00 69579 06/07/01 004093 CARDIO CARE PLUS TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330 352.00 352.00 69580 06/07/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 001-2120 123.50 69580 06/07/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 190-2120 5.60 69580 06/07/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 193-2120 .60 69580 06/07/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 194-2120 .20 69580 06/07/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 330-2120 5.50 69580 06/07/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 340-2120 .60 136.00 69581 06/07/01 002147 COMPLIMENTS COHPLAINTS FAMILY FUN NIGHT: CRC 6/15/01 190-18~-999-5371 75.00 75.00 69582 06/07/01 002945 CONSOLIDATEO ELECTRICAL ELECT REPAIR: AGUATICS 190-186-999-5212 27.95 69583 06/07/01 CONTRERAS, JOSEPH REFUND:TINY TOTS-CREATIVE BEG 190-183-4982 30.00 6958/+ 06/07/01 001264 COSTCO WHOLESALE EMPLOYEE COMPUTER PRGH:S.JONES 001-1175 1,741.46 27.95 30.00 1,741.46 69585 06/07/01 004517 COYOTE HILLS JAZZ BAND ENTERTAINMENT:JAZZ FESTIVAL 280-199-999-5362 1,200.00 1,200.00 69586 06/07/01 002661 CUMMINS CAL PACIFIC INC SVC: CRC BACK-UP GENERATOR 190-182-999-5250 674.63 69586 06/07/01 002661 CUMMINS CAL PACIFIC INC SVC: CRC BACK-UP GENERATOR 190-182-999-5250 267.15 941.78 69587 06/07/01 001255 DANS FEED & SEED INC PROPANE GAS:PW MNTC CREWS 001-164-601-5218 14.54 14.54 69588 06/07/01 001393 DATA TICKET INC 69588 06/07/01 001393 DATA TICKET APR PRK CITATION PROCESSING 001-170-999-5250 140.00 APR CITATION PROCESS/H.OFFICER 001-170-999-5250 249.50 389.50 69589 06/07/01 003681 DAVIDSON & ALLEN, ARCHI MAY DESIGN SVC:SR CENTER 810-190-163-5802 87.39 87.39 69590 06/07/01 DEAN, RATHY REFUND: ARTS/CRAFTS-CHILDRENS 190-183-4982 3.00 3.00 69591 06/07/01 000518 DEL RIO CARE ANIMAL HOB POLICE K-9 MEDICAL TREATMENT 001-170-999-5327 146.30 146.30 69592 06/07/01 DIX, TERESA REFUND: AQUATICS- WSI 190-183-4982 50.00 50.00 69593 06/07/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 190-180-999-5263 614.77 69593 06/07/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-163-999-5263 59.66 69593 06/07/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-162-999-5263 113.87 69593 06/07/01 004192 DO~NS COHMERCIAL FUELIN FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-165-999-5263 102.75 69593 06/07/01 004192 DO~NS COMMERCIAL FUELIN FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-164-604-5263 71.20 69593 06/07/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-164-601-5263 595.31 1,557.56 VOUDHRE2 06/07/01 08:51 VOUCHER/ CHEEK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 69594 06/07/01 001380 E S I EMPLOYHENT SERVIC 69594 06/07/01 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVID 69594 06/07/01 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 69595 06/07/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 69595 06/07/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 69595 06/07/01 001056 EXCEL LANOSCAPE 69595 06/07/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 69596 06/07/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 69596 06/07/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 69596 06/07/01 000165 FEOERAL EXPRESS INC 69596 06/07/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 69597 06/07/01 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 69598 06/07/01 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 69598 06/07/01 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 69598 06/07/01 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 69598 06/07/01 003347 FIRST BAMKCARD CENTER 69598 06/07/01 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 69599 06/07/01 004558 FIX IT MAN, THE 69600 06/07/01 FORD, RICK 69600 06/07/01 FORD, RICK 69600 06/07/01 FORD, RICK 69600 06/07/01 FORD, RICK 69601 06/07/01 003815 GFB FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIA 69601 06/07/01 003815 GFB FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIA 69602 06/07/01 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE 69602 06/07/01 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE 69602 06/07/01 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE 69602 06/07/01 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE 69603 06/07/01 000520 H D L COREM & CONE INC 69604 06/07/01 000186 BANKS HARDWARE INC 69604 06/07/01 000186 HANKS HARDWARE IgC 69604 06/07/01 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 69604 06/07/01 000186 HANKS HAROWARE INC 69604 06/07/01 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 69604 06/07/01 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 69604 06/07/01 0001~ HANKS HARDWARE INC 69605 06/07/01 003844 HERITAGE MEDIA GORPORAT 69606 06/07/01 HICKOX, MISTY CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM DESCRIPTION TEMP HELP W/E 5/18 HANSEN TEMP HELP W/E 05/18 HANSEN TEMP HELP W/E 05/18 HANSEN ~L~Y LDSCP IMPR:WINCHESTER CRK MAY LDSCP IMPR: SAODLEWO00 I~AY LDSCP IMPR: RIVERTON PRK MAY LDSCP IMPR:S-8 VILLAGES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES LOT BOOK REPORTS: SCHAPEL XX-7824 COMERCHERO:CF EXPENSES XX-9277 R.ROBERTS:CONF EXPENSE XX-6165 YATES:AMER VINEYARD MT X-1143:PARKER:MTG/CF-ST.LOUIS X-1143:PARKER:MTG/CF-ST.LOUIS DOOR REPAIR/OLD TWN POLICE DPT REFUND: PERMIT FEES PA01-0147 REFUND: PERMIT FEES PA01-0147 REFUNO: PERMIT FEES PA01-0147 REFUND: PERMIT FEES PA01-0147 FEB/MAR SVCS:MARGARITA RD IMPR FEB/MAR SVCS:MARGARITA RD IMPR CROSSOVER CAT5 CABLE:IMF SYS DLT BACKUP TAPE:INF SYS FREIGHT SALES T~ 2ND CAL GTR-PRPRTY T~( CONSULT HARDWARE SUPPLIES: TCSD MNTC HARDWARE SUPPLIES: TCSD MNTG HARDWARE SUPPLIES: PW MNTC TOOLS & EQUIP: TCSD MNTC TOOLS & EQUIP: TCSD MNTC TOOLS & EQUIP: TCSD MNTC HARDWARE SUPPLIES: CRC ADVERTISING:TEM VLLY GUIDE 01 REFUND:GYMNASTICS-BEGINING GYM ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-120-999-5118 001-16~-604-5118 001-161-999-5118 193-180-999-5212 193-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 193-180-999-5415 001-111-999-5230 001-150-999-5230 001-162-999-5230 001-140-999-5230 165-199-999-5250 001-1990 001-1990 001-1990 190-180-999-5260 190-180-999-5258 001-170-999-5229 001-162-4227 001-171-4036 001-161-4127 001-163-4388 210-165-706-5802 210-165-713-5802 320-199-999-5221 320-1~9-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 001-140-999-5248 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 001-164-603-5212 190-180-999-5242 340-199-701-5242 340-199-702-5242 190-182-999-5212 001-111-999-5270 190-183-4982 ITEM AMOUNT 631.11 937.98 561.63 146.69 166.03 162.45 300.00 40.83 12.92 24.45 14.83 150.00 1,063.32 405.31 56.00 166.88 1,076.52 45.00 31.00 329.00 1,476.00 118.00 3,275.48 310.67 31.95 619.90 20.08 49.96 2,400.00 299.84 571.62 75.20 838.80 866.27 675,37 163.53 2,715.75 55.00 PAGE 6 CHECK AMOUNT 2,130.72 93.03 150.00 2,768.03 45.00 1,954.00 3,586.15 721.89 2,400.00 3,490.63 2,715.75 55.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 7 06/07/01 08:51 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIl)OS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUHT CHECK AMOUNT 69607 06/07/01 002107 69607 06/07/01 002107 69607 06/07/01 002107 69607 06/07/01 002107 69607 06/07/01 002107 69607 06/07/01 002107 69607 06/07/01 002107 69607 06/07/01 002107 69607 06/07/01 002107 69607 06/07/01 002107 69607 06/07/01 002107 69607 06/07/01 002107 69607 06/07/01 002107 69607 06/07/01 002107 HIGHNARK INC 002107 VL ADVAN 001-2510 225.15 HIGHNARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 001-2510 204.65 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 190-2510 11.86 HIGNMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 193-2510 2.22 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 194-2510 .74 HIGHNARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 300-2510 .80 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 340-2510 4.88 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VL REVER 001-2510 228.90- HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 001-2510 208.40 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 190-2510 11.87 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 193-2510 2.22 H[GHNARK IHt 002107 VOL LIFE 194-2510 .74 HIGHMARK [NC 002107 VOL LIFE 300-2510 .80 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 340-2510 4.87 450.30 69608 06/07/01 HORCHAK, JACGUELYN REFD: SECURITY DEPST MS01-0293 190-2900 100.00 100.00 69609 06/07/01 000194 69609 06/07/01 000194 69609 06/07/01 000194 69609 06/07/01 000194 69609 06/07/01 000194 69609 06/07/01 000194 69609 06/07/01 000194 C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 001-2080 2,498.69 C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 165-2080 445.85 c M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 190-2080 513.21 C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 193-2080 40.00 C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 194-2080 16.50 C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 280-2080 165.01 C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 300-2080 50.01 69610 06/07/01 002787 IDENTICATOR CORPORATION FINGERPRINT INK REPLACEMNT PAD 69610 06/07/01 002787 IDENTICATOR CORPORATION FREIGHT 69610 06/07/01 002787 IDENTICATOR CORPORATION SALES TAX 001-170-999-5292 001-170-999-5292 001-170-999-5292 164.00 5.18 12.30 3,729.27 181.48 69611 06/07/01 001123 INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION MiSt NNTC SUPPLIES:PW CREWS 69611 06/07/01 001123 INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION SALES TAX 001-164-601-5218 001-164-601-5218 693.28 52.00 745.28 69612 06/07/01 002726 INLAND EMPIRE BUSINESS 1YR SUBSCRIPTION:O~GRADy 001-111-999-5228 24.00 24.00 69613 06/07/01 003280 JON LASKIN BAND ENTERTAINMENT:JAZZ FEST]VAL 280-1~-~9~-5362 69614 06/07/01 004481 KIMLEY HORN & ASSOCIATE APR SVCS:DIAZ RD EXTENSION PRd 210-165-684-5802 69615 06/07/01 000206 KINKOS INC STATIONERY PAPER/MISG SUPPLIES 330-199-999-5220 500.00 1,660.00 90.30 500.00 1,660.00 90.30 69616 06/07/01 001690 LAUTZENHISERS STATIONER RESO & MINUTE BOOKS 001-120-999-5220 69616 06/07/01 001690 LAUTZENHISERS STATIONER PRINT 4 LINES FOR BOOK BINDING 001-120-999-5220 69616 06/07/01 001690 LAUTZENHISERS STATIONER PRINT 6 LINES FOR BOOK BINDING 001-120-999-5220 69616 06/07/01 001690 LAUTZENNISERS STATIONER FREIGHT 001-120-999-5220 69616 06/07/01 001690 LAUTZENHISERS STATIONER SALES TAX 001-120-999-5220 386.60 21.20 31.80 11.99 32.97 484.56 69617 06/07/01 004087 LO~E'S EXTREME RECYCLING AWRD:IO CERT 194-180-999-5265 350.00 350,00 69618 06/07/01 004141 ~L~INTEX IHt NAINT FAC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES 340-199-702-5212 62.84 69618 06/07/01 004141 MAINTEX IHt TCC CUSTOUIAL SUPPLIES 190-184-999-5212 91.78 69618 06/07/01 004141 MAINTEX INC TCC CUSTOOIAL SUPPLIES 190-184-999-5212 97.16 VOUCHRE2 06/07/01 08:51 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 8 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 69618 06/07/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 69618 06/07/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 69618 06/07/01 004141 HAINTEX INC 69618 06/07/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 69618 06/07/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 69618 06/07/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 69619 06/07/01 002011 MARTIN, ICATRARINA E. 69620 06/07/01 MARTINEZ, FRANCESCA ITEM DESCRIPTION CITY HALL CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES TCC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES MAINT FAC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES CRC CUSTOUIAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS REFUND:EXERCISE-BELLY DANCING 69621 06/07/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMp 003076 DENTALML 69621 06/07/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 69621 06/07/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 OENTALML 69621 06/07/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 OENTALML 69621 06/07/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 69621 06/07/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 OENTALML 69621 06/07/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 69621 06/07/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 69622 06/07/01 001868 HIYAMOTO-JURKOSKY, SUSA 69623 06/07/01 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING 69624 06/07/01 004490 MUSCO LIGHTING INC 69624 06/07/01 004490 MUSCO LIGHTING INC 69624 06/07/01 004490 MUSCO LIGHTING INC 69625 06/07/01 001986 MUZAK INC 69626 06/07/01 002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS 69627 06/07/01 NATIONAL INFOR~LRTION DA 69628 06/07/01 004191 NORTH COUNTY TIMES-PHT 69629 06/07/01 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S ACCOUNT NUMBER 69630 06/07/01 004231 OLD TOWN JAZZ BAND 69631 06/07/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 69631 06/07/01 002105 OLD TC~JN TIRE & SERVICE 69631 06/07/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 69631 06/07/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 69631 06/07/01 002105 OLO TCRJN TIRE & SERVICE 69631 06/07/01 002105 OLD TCR~N TIRE & SERVICE 69631 06/07/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 69631 06/07/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 69632 06/07/01 002668 OMEGA LAKE SERVICES 340-199-701-5212 340-199-701-5212 190-184-999-5212 340-199-702-5212 190-182-999-5212 340-199-701-5212 190-183-999-5330 190-183-4982 001-2340 165-2340 190-2340 193-2340 194-2340 280-2340 330-2340 340-2340 TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330 RMV SILT/DEBRIS:SANTIAGO/J.W. 0011164-601-5401 VAR SPORTS PARKS 1500 WZ LAMPS 190-180-999-5212 FREIGHT 190-180-999-5212 SALES TAX 190-180-999-5212 JUN MUSIC BROADCAST:OLD TCR~N 001-164-603-5250 NAINT SUPPLIES/PW MAINT CREWS 001-164-601-5215 2001NATfL ZIP CODE DIRECTORY 330-199-999~5250 RENEW ANNUAL SUBSCRPTN:FINANCE MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES/FINANCE ENTERTAINMNT:JAZZ FEST:5/12-13 CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & RAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & RAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & ~LRINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT JUN DUCK POND WATER NAINT SVC 001-140-999-5228 001-140-999-5220 280-199-999-5362 190-180-999-5214 001-162-999-5214 001-161-999-5214 001~162-999-5214 190-180-999-5214 190-180-999-5214 190-180-999-5214 001'161-999-5214 190-180-999-5250 ITEM AMOUNT 286.58 171.53 32.81 16.40 32.81 32.81 217.60 21.88 4,151.35 200.93 687.56 61.12 5.44 100.45 18.15 130.60 333.60 15,000.00 780.00 34.80 58.50 59,50 27.94 39.95 61.00 18.86 1,080.00 41.99 29.15 63.15 93.92 13.91 20.00 15.95 800.00 CHECK AMOUNT 824.72 217.60 21.88 5,355.60 333.60 15,000.00 873.30 59.50 27.94 39.95 61.00 18.86 1,080.00 287.82 800.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 06/07/01 08:51 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTEH FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 9 VO~JCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION 69633 06/07/01 001958 PERS LONG TERM CARE PHO 001958 PERS L-T 69634 06/07/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69634 06/07/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69634 06/07/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69634 06/07/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69634 06/07/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69634 06/07/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69635 06/07/01 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE CO'PAN 69635 06/07/01 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COflPAN 69635 06/07/01 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN 69636 06/07/01 69636 06/07/01 69637 06/07/01 69638 06/07/01 69639 06/07/01 69639 06/07/01 69640 06/07/01 69640 06/07/01 002??6 PRIME MATRIX INC 002776 PRIME MATRIX INC 003697 PROJECT DESIGN CONSULTA 004425 PUBLIC ENTERPRISE GROUP 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS 696~1 06/07/01 003591 RENES COMMERCIAL MANAGE 69641 06/07/01 003591 RENES COflMERCIAL MANAGE 69642 06/07/01 002110 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORAT 696~2 06/07/01 002110 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORAT 696~2 06/07/01 002110 RENTAL SERVICE COHPORAT 69642 06/07/01 002110 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORAT 69643 06/07/01 003119 RHODES DESIGN 696~3 06/07/01 003119 RHOOES DESIGN 69643 06/07/01 003119 RHODES OESIGN 69643 06/07/01 003119 RHOOES DESIGN 69644 06/07/01 0002~ RIGHTWAY 69645 06/07/01 69645 06/07/01 69646 06/07/01 69647 06/07/01 000353 RIVERSIDE CO AUDITOR 000353 RIVERSIDE CO AUDITOR 000411 RIVERSIDE CO FLOOD CONT 000955 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFF SW 69668 06/07/01 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION 69648 06/07/01 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION 696~8 06/07/01 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION PETTY CASH REIMBURSENENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT APR PUBLIC NOTICES:CITY CLERK VARIOUS RECRUITMENT ADS FOR HR VARIOUS RECRUITMENT ADS FOR HR APR CELLULAR SVCS:SENIOR VAN APR CELLULAR SVCS:CITY VAN MAR-APR DSGN SVCS:MURRIETA CRK PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR TCSD ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-2122 190-185-~-5301 190-183-999-5320 001-1990 001-1990 001-161-999-5220 001-164-601-5250 001-120-999-5256 001-150-999-5254 190-180-999-5254 190-1990 190-180-999-5208 210-165-602-5802 190-180-999-5250 MAY 01-99-02003-0 FLOATING HTR 001-16~-601-5250 MAY 02-79-10100-1NW SPORTS PK 190~180-999-5240 DUPL BLUEPRINTS:SE CTE EXPAN. 210-190-163-5804 DUPL BLUEPRINTS-SE CTR EXPAN. 210-190-163-5804 WEED SPRY/ABATE/CLEAN:VIA LOBO 001-16~-601-5401 DEL REY/P.C.CHANNEL CLEANING EQUIP/TOOLS-PW MAINT CREWS SALES TAX EQUIP RENTAL-PW MAINT CHEWS EQUIP RENTAL-PW MAINT CREWS CITY OF TEMEUCULA 8PG BROCHURE SALES TAX GRAPHICS/MARKETING MATERIALS SALES TAX JUN EQUIP RENTAL - RIVERTON PK 001-164-601-5401 001-164-601-5242 001-164-601-5242 001-164-601-5238 001-164-601-5238 001-111-999-5270 001-111-999-5270 001-111-999-5270 001-111-999-5270 190-180-999-5238 APR PARKING CITATION ASSESSMNT 001-2260 APR PARKING CITATION ASSESSMNT 001-2265 DIGITAL MAP/COHTOUR LAYER:DIAZ 210-165-684-5802 TRAFFIC CONTROL SVCS:04/03/01 001-170-999-5288 APR PEGS PMT#14:lST ST BRIOGE 280-199-807-5804 CREDIT:EXTRA ~ORK:IST ST BRIDG 280-199-807-5804 CREDIT:EXTRA ~ORK:IST ST GRIDG 280-199-807-5804 ITEM AMOUNT 115.36 22.68 8.06 9.03 48.77 6.42 7.04 8.00 3,579.24 3,095.51 40.21 28.06 1,155.30 2,980.00 210.82 95.35 214.94 541.64 4,87'5.00 5,000.00 115.00 8.63 26.88 409.09 1,400.00 186.00 700.00 93.00 62.88 1,~87.00 550.00 207.00 1,110.18 400,178.79 752.50- 1,320.00- CHECK AMOUNT 115.36 102.00 6,682.75 68.27 1,155.30 2,980.00 306.17 756.58 9,875.00 559.60 2,379.00 62.88 2,337.00 207.00 1,110.18 398,106.29 VOUCHRE2 06/07/01 08:51 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 10 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 69649 06/07/01 000271 ROBERT BEIN h'M FROST & 69649 06/07/01 000271 ROBERT BEIN WI4 FROST & 69650 06/07/01 SARXIS, SUSAN 69651 06/07/01 0006~5 SMART & FINAL 69652 06/07/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 69652 06/07/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 69652 06/07/01 000537 SO CALIF EOISON 69652 06/07/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 69652 06/07/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 69652 06/07/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 69652 06/07/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 69652 06/07/01 000537 SO CALIF EOISON 69652 06/07/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 69652 06/07/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 69652 06/07/01 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 69652 06/07/01 000537 SO CALIF EOISON 69652 06/07/01 000537 SO CAL]F EDISON 69653 06/07/01 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 69653 06/07/01 001212 SO CALIF GAS C{~4PANY 69653 06/07/01 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 69653 06/07/01 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 69653 06/07/01 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 69653 06/07/01 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 69654 06/07/01 SOTO, JENNIFER 69655 06/07/01 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR 69655 06/07/01 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR 69655 06/07/01 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR 69656 06/07/01 004456 T & M CONSTRUCTION 69656 06/07/01 004456 T & M CONSTRUCTION ITEM DESCRIPTION APR CONSULT SVC:I15/79S/SANTIA APR CONSULT SVC:I15/79S/SANTIA REFUND:AOUATICS-JR.LIFEGUARD REC SUPPLIES FOR MPSC MAY 2-10-331-2153 TCC MAY 2-19-538-2262 VARIOUS MTRS MAY 2-19-683-3255 FRONT ST PED MAY 2-19-683-3263 FRONT BT PED MAY 2-00-397-5042 CITY HALL MAy 2-00-397-5067 VARIOUS MTRS MAY 2-00-397-5067 VARIOUS MTRS MAY 2-21-911-7892 S.SIDE PK LT MAy 2-02-502-80?7 MAINT FAC MAY 2-18-528-9980 SANTIAGO RO MAY 2'Z0-792-2444 VARIOUS MTRS MAY 2-20-817-9929 PD SATELLITE CREDIT:LATE PAYMENT CHARGE MAY GAS METERS/CITY FACILITIES MAy GAS METERS/CITY FACILITIES MAY GAS METERS/CITY FACILITIES MAY GAS METERS/CITY FACILITIES MAY GAS METERS/CITY FACILITIES MAY GAS METERS/CITY FACILITIES ACCOUNT NUMBER 210-165-662-5802 210-165-705-5802 190-183-4982 190-181-999-5301 190-184-999-5240 190-180-999-5240 001-164-603-5319 001-164-603-5319 340-199-701-5240 190-180-999-5240 193-100-999-5240 210-165-828-5804 340-199-702-5240 190-180-999-5319 190-180-999-5319 001-170-999-5229 193-180-999-5240 190-181-999-5240 190-182-999-5240 190-186-999-5240 190-184-999-5240 190-185-999-5240 340-199-702-5240 REFUND:SEC.DEPOSIT:MS01-1330 190-2900 T.V. NED CHPL PEST CONTROL SVC T.V. MUSEUM PEST CONTROL SVCS SENIOR CENTER PEST CONTROL SVC PRGS PMT#1:MNTC FAC PH 3:00-16 RET.~/H PMT#1:MNTC FAC PH 3 190-185-999-5250 190-185-999-5250 190-181-999-5250 210-190-158-5804 210-2035 ITEM AMOUNT 254.94 95.06 55.00 86.67 705.13 68.38 288.80 256.84 4,834.31 26.78 820.62 130.61 820.52 190.02 214.75 169.69 65.50- 35.06 707.88 2,000.00 43.57 78.69 102.07 100.00 32.00 42.00 29.00 43,835.00 4,383.50- 69657 06/07/01 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 001-2125 596.24 69657 06/07/01 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 190-2125 96.75 69657 06/07/01 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 193-2125 6.7'5 69657 06/07/01 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 194-2125 2.25 69657 06/07/01 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 320-2125 45.00 69657 06/07/01 001567 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 330-2125 33.76 69657 06/07/01 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 340-2125 51.75 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 001-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 165-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 190-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 192-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 193-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 194-1020 69658 06/07/01 0006~2 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 69658 06/07/01 0006~2 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 69658 06/07/01 0006~2 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 69658 06/07/01 0006~2 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 69658 06/07/01 OD06~2 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 69658 06/07/01 000642 TEMECULA CZTY FLEXIBLE 4,709.25 225.00 934. O0 1.25 9.75 3.75 CHECK AMOUNT $50.00 55.00 86.67 8,460.95 2,967.27 100.00 103.00 39,451.50 832.50 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 11 06/07/01 08:51 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIOUS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE 69658 06/07/01 69658 06/07/01 69658 06/07/01 69659 06/07/01 69660 06/07/01 69661 06/07/01 69662 06/07/01 69663 06/07/01 69664 06/07/01 6966~ 06/07/01 69664 06/07/01 69665 06/07/01 69665 06/07/01 69665 06/07/01 69665 06/07/01 69665 06/07/01 69666 06/07/01 69666 06/07/01 69667 06/07/01 69667 06/07/01 69668 06/07/01 69668 06/07/01 69668 06/07/01 69668 06/07/01 69668 06/07/01 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 001672 TEMECULA DRAIN SERV & P 000168 TEMECULA FLOWER CORRAL 003677 TEMECULA MOTORSPORTS LL 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER 000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER 000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER 000515 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER 000306 TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE & 000306 TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE & 000306 TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE & 000306 TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE & 000306 TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE & 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURIT 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURIT 003149 TERRA CAL CONSTRUCTION 003149 TERRA CAL CONSTRUCTION 000320 TOUNE CENTER STATIONERS 000320 TC)~NE CENTER STATIONERS 000320 TC~NE CENTER STATIONERS 000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS 000320 TO'NE CENTER STATIONERS ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUT]OM TO FLEX 280-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 330-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 340-1020 CITY HALL PLUMBING SERVICES 340-199-701-5212 SUNSHINE FUND 001-2170 MOTORCYCLE REPAIR/MAINT:TEM PD 001-170-999-5214 WINTER/SPRING BASKETBALL AWRDS 190-187-999-5313 ECON.REALITIES:COMERCHERO:6/14 ECON.REALITIES:6/14:AA/GW/KN ECON.REALITIES:6/14:AA/G~/KN ECON.REALITIES:6/14:AA/GW/KN 001-100-~99-5260 001-110-999-5260 001-111-999-5260 001-161-999-5260 RCSP TOT LOT PED.DRNN FOUNTAIN TCSD HARDWARE/MAINT SUPPLIES CRC PLUMBING SUPPLIES-HOT STEM RPG 05-535 COLO STEM SALES TAX CITY HALL LOCKSMITH SERVICES CITY HALL LOCKSMITH SERVICES 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-182-999-5212 190-182-999-5212 190-182-999-5212 340-199-701-5212 340-199-701-5212 PRGS PMT#1:VIA MONTEZUMA CROSS Z10-165-707-5804 RET.W/H PMT#1:VIA MONTEZUMA 210-2035 OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR LAND DEV 001-163-999-5220 CIP DIV TYPEWRITER/PRINTWHEELB 001-165-999-5242 SALES TAX 001-165-999-5242 OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR PW ADMIN 001-164~604-5220 OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR ClP DIV 001-165-999-5220 75.00 466.66 11.25 55.00 107.39 453.83 49.83 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 1,060.70 81.66 190.56 190.56 28.58 20.38 299.04 97,483.75 9,748.38- 128.73 789.66 59.22 235.32 869.58 69669 06/07/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 001-2360 148.88 69669 06/07/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&I) 165-2360 3.01 69669 06/07/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&O 190-2360 30.76 69669 06/07/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 ADgD 192-2360 .08 69669 06/07/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 193-2360 2.93 69669 06/07/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&O 194-2360 .59 69669 06/07/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 280-2360 1.49 69669 06/07/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 300-2360 .74 69669 06/07/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 320-2360 6.00 69669 06/07/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 ADgD 330-2360 2.25 69669 06/07/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&O 340-2360 4.27 69670 06/07/01 004542 TRUGREEN LAND CARE 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) PURCHASE/PLANT 10-36" BX TREES 190-180-999-5416 001065 DEF COMP 001-2080 69671 06/07/01 5,000.00 11,239.81 6,435.91 55.00 107.39 453.83 49.83 30.00 90.00 1,552.06 319.42 87,735.37 2,082.51 201.00 5,000.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 06/07/01 08:51 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIDOS PAGE 12 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM ~MOUNT CNECK AMOUNT 69671 06/07/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 165-2080 101.16 69671 06/07/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COf~P) 001065 DEF CUMP 190-2080 1,944.10 69671 06/07/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 192-2080 7.50 69671 06/07/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 193-2080 168.71 69671 06/07/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF CUMP) 001065 DEF Ct~4P 194-2080 44.51 69671 06/07/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 280-2080 115.85 69671 06/07/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF CUMP) 001065 DEF COMP 300-2080 88.54 69671 06/07/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMp) 001065 DEF COMP 320-2080 1,416.68 69671 06/07/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 340-2080 169.44 69672 06/07/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 001-2160 813.58 69672 06/07/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 165-2160 88.30 69672 06/07/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 190-2160 1,164.16 69672 06/07/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBILR) 000389 PT RET1R 193-2160 23.38 69672 06/07/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 280-2160 25.46 69672 06/07/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 320-2160 106.94 69672 06/07/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 330-2160 68.76 69672 06/07/01 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 340-2160 27.80 69673 06/07/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 001-2120 127.05 69673 06/07/01 000325 UN]TED WAY 000325 UW 165-2120 8.75 69673 06/07/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 uw 190-2120 22.60 69673 06/07/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 192-2120 .11 69673 06/07/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 193-2120 2.20 69673 06/07/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 194-2120 .49 69673 06/07/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 280-2120 2.50 69673 06/07/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 320-2120 5.00 6967'3 06/07/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UM 330-2120 5.00 69673 06/07/01 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UW 340-2120 .60 15,296.30 2,318.38 174.30 69674 06/07/01 004504 VAIL RANCH SELF STORAGE AUDIO/VIDEO TAPE STORAGE 001-120-999-52~7 57.00 57.00 696~5 06/07/01 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA MAY XXX-1289 PRATT 320-199-999-5208 69675 06/07/01 004261 VERIZOM CALIFORNIA MAY XXX-2629 NAGGAR 320-199-999-5208 69675 06/07/01 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA MAY XXX-3539 GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 6967'5 06/07/01 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA MAY XXX-5509 GENERAL USAGE 320-1~-999-5208 69675 06/07/01 004261 VER]ZON CALIFORNIA MAy XXX-9897 GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 69676 06/07/01 004279 VERIZON CALIFORNIA INC. JUN ACCESS-CRC OPEN PHONE LINE 320-199-999-5208 88.41 42.58 38.35 130.42 75.92 342.02 375.68 342.02 696~7 06/07/01 001342 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY I TRASH CAN LINERS FOR OLD TOUN 001-16~-603-5212 696~ 06/07/01 001342 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY I SALES TAX 001-164-603-5212 69678 06/07/01 003063 WEAVER PACIFIC PUBLICAT WNTR/SPRING 2002 POCKET GUIDE 001-111-999-5270 69678 06/07/01 003063 WEAVER PACIFIC PUBLICAT SUMMER/FALL 2002 POCKET GUIDE 001-111-999-5270 69679 06/07/01 000345 XEROX CORPOMATION BILLI APR LEASE DCCS50 COP]ER 330-2800 69679 06/07/01 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI APR INTEREST DCCSSO COPIER 330-199-999-5391 69679 06/07/01 000345 XEROX COMPORATION gILL] APR DCCS COPIER USAGE 330-199-999-5217 696?9 06/07/01 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI APR BASE CHARGE 5830 COPIER 330-1~-~-5217 1,142.10 85.66 3,000.00 3,000.00 288.68 232.66 53.74 80.30 1,227.76 6,000.00 655.38 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 13 06/07/01 08:51 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIOOS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION 69680 06/07/01 003607 XPECT FIRST AID SKATE PARK FIRST AID SUPPLIES 69681 06/07/01 003434 Z E P HANUFACTURING COM SUPPLIES FOR PW MAINT. CREWS 69681 06/07/01 003434 Z E P MANUFACTURING COM FREIGHT 69681 06/07/01 003434 Z E P MANUFACTURING COM SALES TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-183-999-5305 001-164-601-5218 001-16z.~-601-5218 001-164-601-5218 ITEM AMOUNT 199.37 308.80 23.20 23.16 CHECK AMOUNT 199.37 355.16 TOTAL CHECKS 809,557.04 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEHECULA PAGE 06/14/01 11:35 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PENIOOS FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA DEV- LON/MOD SET ASIDE 190 COHHUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 210 CAPITAL IHPROVEHENT PROJ FUND 280 REDEVELOPHENT AGENCY - CIP 300 INSURANCE FUND 320 INFORHATION SYSTEHS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES TOTAL ANOUNT 69,914.68 26,924.24 58,600.78 30,299.34 5,691.99 182.43 25,138.14 12,062.44 853.74 13,754.76 1,655.14 4,082.29 249,159.97 VOUCHRE2 06/14/01 11:35 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE I VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE 132863 06/11/01 69~84 06/14/01 69(:~ 06/14/01 69d~4 06/14/01 69685 06/14/01 69685 06/14/01 69686 06/14/01 69686 06/14/01 69686 06/14/01 69686 06/14/01 69687 06/14/01 69688 06/14/01 69689 06/14/01 69690 06/14/01 69690 06/14/01 69690 06/14/01 69690 06/14/01 69690 06/16/01 69690 06/14/01 69690 06/14/01 69690 06/14/01 69691 06/14/01 69691 06/14/01 69692 06/14/01 69693 06/14/01 69694 06/14/01 69695 06/14/01 69696 06/14/01 69697 06/14/01 69698 06/14/01 69699 06/14/01 69700 06/14/01 69700 06/14/01 VENDOR NUMBER 003614 000724 000724 000724 004524 004524 000434 000434 000434 000434 003304 004240 003520 003285 003285 003285 003285 003285 003285 003285 003285 000101 000101 003266 004273 003126 003455 004225 002099 003138 003138 0044~ 0044~ VENDOR NAME CRESTA VERDE ESCRO~ A & R CUSTOM SCREEN A & R CUSTOH SCREEN PRY A & R OUSTOH SCREEN PRI ABSOLUTE ASPHALT ABSOLUTE ASPHALT ACCELA.COM ACCELA.CON ACCELA.CO~ ACCELA.COM ADAMS ADVERTISING INC AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF COM AHERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV AMER]PRIDE UNIFORM SERV ANERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV AHERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV AHERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV ANERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERV APPLE ONE, INC. APPLE ONE, INC. ARCUS DATA SECURITY BLUES TESTAHEBT, THE BOOflGAARDEN, DENNIS BROADCAST MUSIC INC BURL SLONE COUNTRY MUSI BUTTERFIELD ENTERPRISES CAL HAT CAL MAT CALIFORNIA TRUCK EGUIPM CALIFORNIA TRUCK EQUIPN ITEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMBER 1ST TIME BUYER PRGM:NAY,LINDA 4TH OF JULY T-SHIRTS S-L 4TN OF JULY T-SHIRTS XXL SALES TAX POTHOLES ASPHALT REPAIRS:PM SALES TAX 165-199-999-5449 190-18~-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 001-164-601-5218 001-164-601-5218 PERMITS PLUS ~ORKFLOW SOFTWARE 320-1980 SALES TAX 320-1980 ~ORKFLOW MNTC 4/01/01-06/30/01 320-1980 BALES TAX 320-1980 JUNE OLD TWN BILLBOARD AGRMNT 280-199-999-5362 CITY LIMITS BLOOD DRAUS-PD/CHP 001-170-999-5328 BROAOCASTING OLD TWN EVENTS 280-199-999-5362 HAY HAT/TCR4EL RENTAL:CITY HALL 340-199-?01-5250 HAY MAT/TO~EL RENTAL:MNTC FAC HAY MAT/TOUEL RENTAL:SR CTR HAY HAT/TO~EL RENTAL:TCC HAY HAT/TOVEL RENTAL:MUSEUM MAY MAT/TOWEL RENTAL:CRC HAY UNIFORMS FOR PW MNTC HAY UNIFORMS FOR TCSD MNTC 340-199-702-5250 190-181-999~5250 190-184-999-5250 190-185-999-5250 190-182-999-5250 001-164-601-5243 190-180-999-5243 TEMP HELP W/E 05/26 CRAMER TEMP HELP N/E 05/26 CRAMER 190-186-999-5118 190-186-999-5118 HAY OFFSITE RECORDS STORAGE ENTERTAINMENT:STREET PAINTING TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS BROADCASTING:OLD TWN EVENTS ENTERTAINMENT:STREET PAINTINO RESTROOMS LEASE AGRMNT:OLD T{N PW PATCH TRUCK MATERIALS PW PATCH TRUCK MATERIALS [NSTALL DOOR TO M£DIC VEHICLE SALES TAX 001-120-999-5277 280-199-999-5362 190-183-999-5330 280-199-999-5362 280-199-999-5362 280-199-999-5234 001-16~-601-5218 001-16~-601-5218 001-171-999-5214 001-171-999-5214 ITEM AMOUNT 22,400.00 594.00 168.00 57.15 728.00 54.60 6,000.00 450.00 165.51 6.21 1,751.00 105.00 350.00 95.40 34.20 51.36 36.96 31.~ 8~.24 95.08 70.00 204.25 232.55 125.50 400.00 213.60 150.00 50.00 826.00 1,227.91 618.85 1,000.00 33.20 CHECK AJ4OUNT 22,400.00 819.15 782.60 6,621.72 1,751.00 105.00 350.00 498.88 436.80 125.50 400.00 213.60 150.00 50.00 826.00 1,227.91 618.85 1,033.20 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2 06/14/01 11:35 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIOOS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 69701 69701 69701 69702 69703 69704 69705 69705 69706 69707 69708 69708 69709 69710 69711 69711 69711 69712 69713 69714 69714 69714 69714 69714 69714 69714 69714 69715 69715 69715 69715 69715 69715 69715 69715 69715 69715 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 06/14/01 003629 CALTROP ENGINEERING COR 003629 CALTROP ENGINEERING COR 003629 CALTROP ENGINEERING COR 004228 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY 000131 CARL WARREN & COMPANY I 00377~ CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL 002756 COMPLETE EMBROIDERY DES 002756 COMPLETE EMBROIDERY DES 002147 COMPLIMENTS COMPLAINTS 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS 002405 COMPUTER PROTECTION TEC 002405 COMPUTER PROTECTION TEC 001923 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS 003739 COTTON BELAND ASSOCIATE 0026~1 COUNTS UNLIMITED INC 002631 COUNTS UNLIMITED INC 002631 COUNTS UNLIMITED INC 004559 D & D ELECTRIC 002701 DIVERSIFIED RISK 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 004192 DO~IS COMMERCIAL FUELZN 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 004197 DOWNS C{~V~4ERCIAL FUELIN 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 001380 E S 001380 E S 001380 E S 001380 E S 001380 E S OO138O E S 001380 E S 001380 E S OO138O E S 001380 E S EMPLOYMENT SERVIC EMPLOYMENT SERVIC EMPLOYMENT SERVIC EMPLOYMENT SERVIC EMPLOYMENT SERVIC EMPLOYMENT SERVIC EMPLOYMENT SERVIC EMPLOYMENT SERVIC EMPLOYMENT SERVIC EMPLOYMENT SERVIC ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT FEB/MAR 1st ST BRDG INSPECTION 280-199-807-5801 MAR/APR Ist ST BRDG INSPECTION 280-199-807-5801 APR/MAY 1st ST BRDG INSPECTION 280-199-807-5801 RECREATION SUPPLIES- TCC CLAIM ADJUSTER SERVICES dULY 4TH ALL CITY BAND:BUS EXP S.L.A.P. CAP EMBROIDERY:POLICE SALES TAX DESPT:ENTERTAINMENT:VAIL RANCH REPLACE ALARM BATTERY:MUSEUM 190-184-999-5301 300-199-999-5205 190-183-999-5370 001-170-999-5243 001-170-999-5243 190-183-999-5370 190-180-999-5250 PREVENTATIVE MNTC:UPS/BATTERIE 320-199~~-5215 PREVENTATIVE MNTC:UPS/BATTERIE 320-199-999-5215 APR GEOTECH SVC:MURR CRK CROSS 210-165-707-5804 FEB/MAY NOOSING ELEMENT UPDATE 001-161-999-5248 TRAFFIC COUNT CONSENSUS 001-164-602-5250 TRAFFIC COUNT CONSENSUS 001-164-602-5250 TRAFFIC COONT CONSENSUS 001-164-602-5250 OLD TWN PRKLOT TEMP LIGHTING 210-165-828-5802 MAY SPECIAL EVENTS PREMIUMS 300-2180 FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VERICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES TEMP HELP W/E 06/01 EBON TEMP HELP W/E 06/01 EBON TEMP HELP W/E 06/01 HANSEN TEMP HELP W/E 06/01 HANSEN TEMP HELP W/E 06/01 HANSEN TEMP HELP W/E 06/01 NANSEN TEMP HELP W/E 06/01 HANSEN TEMP HELP W/E 05/18 DAVIS TEMP HELP W/E 06/01 DAVIS TEMP HELP W/E 06/01 BROWN 001-162-999-5263 001-161-~-5263 001-140-999-5262 001-1990 001-120-~-5262 001-164-601-5263 001-161-999-5263 001-161-610-5262 340-199-701-5118 340-199-702-5118 001-164-604-5118 190-180-999-5118 001-161-999-5118 001-120-999-5118 001-120-999-5118 190-186-999-5118 190-186-999-5118 001-164-604-5118 3,010.00 860.00 946.00 18.80 725.56 300.00 168.00 12.60 125.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 2,645.00 922.50 1,575.00 225.00 2,909.00 508.00 128.18 35.98 205.62 15.21 17.90 44.34 10.47 6.17 17.82 853.80 284.60 150.54 46.32 741.12 583.51 452.90 803.32 690.30 3,968.06 4,816.00 18.80 725.56 300.00 180.60 125.00 75.75 5,000.00 2,645.00 922.50 4,709.00 508.00 128.18 353.51 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 3 06/14/01 11:35 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE 69715 06/14/01 69715 06/14/01 69716 06/14/01 69717 06/14/01 69718 06/14/01 69718 06/14/01 69718 06/14/01 69718 06/14/01 69718 06/14/01 69718 06/14/01 69719 06/1~/01 69720 06/14/01 69720 06/14/01 69720 06/14/01 69720 06/14/01 69720 06/14/01 69720 06/14/01 69720 06/14/01 69;20 06/14/01 69720 06/14/01 69720 06/14/01 69720 06/14/01 69720 06/14/01 69;20 06/14/01 69720 06/14/01 69720 06/14/01 69720 06/14/01 69;21 06/14/01 69721 06/14/01 69721 06/14/01 69;22 06/14/01 69722 06/14/01 69722 06/14/01 69722 06/14/01 69722 06/14/01 69?22 06/14/01 69;22 06/14/01 69;22 06/14/01 69722 06/14/01 69722 06/14/01 697~2 06/14/01 69722 06/14/01 69?22 06/14/01 69722 06/14/01 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 002917 EDWARDS CINEMAS 000478 FAST SIGNS 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS lNG 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS IRC 000165 FEOERAL EXPRESS 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS IRC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 004243 GHERARDI, LUCIARO 000177 GLENNIES OFF[CE PRODUCT 0001?7 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 0001~7 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 00017-/ GLENN[ES OFF[CE PRODUCT 000177 GLENRIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFF[CE PRODUCT 000177 GLERNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 0001~7 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENRIES OFF[CE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFF[CE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PROOUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 00017? GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000180 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COHPAN 000180 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPAN 000180 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO#PAN 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE lNG 000186 HANKS HARDWARE IRC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE IRC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE IRC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE IRC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE IRC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE IRC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE IRC 000186 HANKS RARDUARE IRC ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT TEMP HELP W/E 06/01 OBMANR TEMP HELP W/E 06/01 HEER 001-171-999-5118 001-162-999-5118 MOVIE TICKETS:RECOGNITION Ak~S 001-150-999-5265 FAC IMP PRGM:TIMES OF OUR LIVE 280-199-813-5804 EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS RAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-110-999-5230 001-162-999-5230 001-164-604-5230 001-165-999-5230 001-140-999-5230 001-111-999-5230 ENTERTAINMENT:STREET PAINTING 280-199-999-5362 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY MGR 001-110-999-5220 #ISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY CLRK 001-120-999-5220 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-COPY CTR MiSt OFFICE SUPPLIES-FINANCE MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-HR HISC OFFICE SUPPL[ES-GZS MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-PLANNING MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-PLANNING MISC OFF[CE SUPPLIES-D&S MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-POLICE 330-199-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 001-150-999-5220 001-161-610-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-170-999-5229 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 001-171-999-5220 RISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-RDA:LO~/M 165-199-999-5220 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-RDA:LOW/M 280-199-999-5220 MlSC OFFICE SUPPLIES-REGRD MGT 001-120-999-5277 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-EGO DEV 001-111-999-5220 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-EGO DEV 001-111-999-5220 CORTELCO SINGLE LINE PHONE FREIGHT SALES TAX 320-199-999-5242 320'199-999-5242 320-199-999-5242 HARDWARE SUPPLIES-PLANNING HARDWARE SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT SMALL TOOLS & EGUIP:TCSO MNTC SMALL TOOLS & EQUIP:TCSD MRTC SMALL TOOLS & EQUIP:TCSD MNTC HAROWARE SUPPLIES-TRAFFIC HARDWARE SUPPLIES- CITY HALL HARDWARE SUPPLIES- CRC HARDWARE SUPPLIES- SPTS PRGM RAROWARE SUPPLIES- CRC HARDWARE SUPPLIES- B&S HARDWARE SUPPLIES- SR CENTER HARDWARE SUPPLIES- TCC HARDWARE SUPPLIES- MNTC FAC 001-161-999-5440 001-171-999-5212 190-180-999-5242 340-199-701-5242 340-199-702-5242 001-16~-602-5242 340-199-701-5212 190-182-999-5212 190-187-999-5301 190-182-999-5212 001-162-999-5242 190-181-999-5212 190-184-999-5212 340-199-?02-5212 1,577.83 685.92 500.00 1,526.00 12.92 82.57 28.53 11.00 11.00 14.82 250.00 184.83 46.81 185.40 547.19 134.60 354.13 500.00 137.43 184.92 36.44 57.48 58.32 58.31 110.50 81.68 320.25 1,451.70 27.14 109.10 6~ .46 163.85 429.80 443.87 346.06 58.57 10.85 237.22 65.60 302.54 441.29 9.12 126.61 10,858.22 500.00 1,526.00 160.84 250.00 2,998.89 1,587.94 VOUCHRE2 06/14/01 11:35 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIOOS PAGE 4 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE 69722 06/14/01 69722 06/14/01 69723 06/14/01 69723 06/14/01 69724 06/14/01 69725 06/t4/01 69725 06/14/01 69725 06/14/01 69726 06/14/01 69726 06/14/01 69727 06/14/01 69728 06/14/01 69728 06/14/01 69729 06/14/01 69?'30 06/14/01 697~J0 06/14/01 69731 06/14/01 69732 06/14/01 69733 06/14/01 69734 06/14/01 697'~4 06/14/01 06/14/01 69736 06/14/01 69736 06/14/01 69736 06/14/01 69736 06/14/01 06/14/01 6973B 06/14/01 69738 06/14/01 69739 06/14/01 69740 06/14/01 69741 06/14/01 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME 000186 HANKS HARDWARE IRC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 002372 HARMON, JUDY 002372 HARMON, JUDY 003857 003857 003857 0011~ 001123 003319 001407 001407 000501 003046 003046 001091 003631 001282 004412 004412 003286 004383 004383 004383 004383 003782 004141 004141 000217 004107 002046 HOLLAND, RICK IDEA ART IRC IDEA ART [NC IDEA ART INC INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION ITEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMBER HARDWARE SUPPLIES- CITY HALL 340-199-?01-5212 HARDWARE SUPPLIES- MUSEUM 190-185-999-5242 TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-18~-999-5330 TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-18~-999-5330 REFUND:SECURITY DPST MS01-1094 190-2900 JULY 4TH PAPER-ORE NATIOR JULY 4TH PAPER-STAR SPANGLED FREIGHT SUPPLIES FOR STENCIL TRUCK SALES TAX INLAND ENTERTAINMENT RO ADVERTISING:STREET PAINTING INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPL POOL SANITIZING CHEMICALS INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPL POOL SANITIZING CHEMICALS 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 001-164-601-5218 001-16~-601-5218 280-199-999-5362 190-186-999-5250 190-186-999-5250 INTL INSTITUTE OF MUNIC MEMBERSHIP:S.JONES/M.BALLREICH 001-120-999-5226 K F R 0 G 95.1 FM RADIO BROADCASTING:STREET PAINTING 280-199-999-5362 K F R 0 G 95.1 FM RADIO BROADCASTING:STREET PAINTING 280-199-999-5362 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIAT dUN SVC:PUJOL STR HOUSING OEVE 165-199-999-5250 KLEINFELDER INC KNORR SYSTEMS LEANDER, KERRY O. LEANDER, KERRY D. LIBRARY SYSTEMS & SERV! MACKENZIE ELECTRIC IRC MACKENZIE ELECTRIC INC MACKENZIE ELECTRIC INC MACKENZIE ELECTR]C MAIN STREET SIGNS MAINTEX INC MAINTEX IRC MAY SVCS:PALA BRDG PW97-15 MISC POOL SUPPLIES * CRC TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS MAY SVCS-LIBRARY SYSTEM AGRMT 210-165-631-5801 190-186-999-5212 190-18~-999-5330 190-183-999-5330 001-101-999-5285 C/O #1PMT:RCSP FLD LGHT:O0-19 210-190-174-5804 RET.W/H C/O#1:RCSP FLD LGHT C/O #1PMT:RCSP FLD LGHT:O0-19 RET.W/H C/O PMT:RCSP FLD LGNT MISC HARDWARE SUPPLIES FLOOR POLISHER MACHINE SALES TAX MARGARITA OFFICIALS ASS MAY SPORTS PRGH UMPIRE SVCS MASSA-LAVITT, SANDRA 5/29-6/06/01CONSULT]NG SVCS MASTER K 9 INC JUL 2000 K-9 NAINT TRAINING 210-2035 210-190-174-5804 210-2035 001-164-601-5244 340-199-701-5610 340-199-701-5610 190-187-999-5250 001-161-999-5248 001-170-999-5327 ITEM AMOUNT 12.79 32.67 208.80 298.00 100.00 7.45 19.95 7.90 601.30 45.10 213.75 253.70 209.30 215.00 320.00 52.50 4,465.92 1,914.50 238.20 468.00 416.00 1,282.47 13,000.00 1,300.00- 2,589.00 258.90- 261.23 1,125.87 84.44 3,124.00 1,215.95 75.00 CHECK AMOUNT 2,832.09 506.80 100.00 35.30 646.40 213.75 463.00 215.00 372.50 4,465.92 1,914.50 238.20 884.00 1,282.47 14,030.10 261.23 1,210.31 3,124.00 1,215.95 75.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 5 06/14/01 11=35 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE 69742 06/14/01 69743 06/14/01 69743 06/14/01 69744 06/14/01 69744 06/14/01 69744 06/14/01 69744 06/14/01 69745 06/14/01 69745 06/14/01 69745 06/14/01 69745 06/14/01 69745 06/14/01 69746 06/14/01 69747 06/14/01 69747 06/14/01 69747 06/14/01 69748 06/14/01 69748 06/14/01 69748 06/14/01 69748 06/14/01 69748 06/14/01 69748 06/14/01 69748 06/14/01 69748 06/14/01 69749 06/14/01 69750 06/14/01 69751 06/14/01 69752 06/14/01 69752 06/14/01 69752 06/14/01 69752 06/14/01 69752 06/14/01 69752 06/14/01 69753 06/14/01 69754 06/14/01 69755 06/14/01 69755 06/14/01 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME 002693 MATROS, ANDREA 003448 MELODYS AD WORKS 003448 MELODYS AD WORKS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MIHUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUI 000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUI 000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUI 00097'5 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUI 000973 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUI 002727 MUNICIPAL MGMT ASSISTAN 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES- ATT 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES- ATT 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES- ATT 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S 005964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S 003299 OLDER THAN DIRT GANG 004152 OMALLEY ENGINEERING COR 004045 ORVAC ELECTRONICS 003955 PANE CONSULTING SERVICE 003955 PANE CONSULTING SERVICE 003955 PANE CONSULTING SERVICE 003955 PANE CONSULTING SERVICE 003955 PANE CONSULTING SERVICE 003955 PANE CONSULTING SERVICE 004074 PARTY CITY OF TEMECULA PASADENA HILTON HOTEL 003218 PELA 003218 PELA ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS PROF SVCS:STREET PAINTING FEST CREDIT:EXCEEDS CONTRACT AMOUNT 1500 ENVELOPES:CITY CLERK DEPT FIRE PREV'ENVELOPES/LETTERHEAD REISSUE ~69264:1NV#14945/15026 REISSUE ~69264:INV#14945/15026 190-183-999-5330 280-199-999-5250 280-199-999-5250 001-120-999-5222 001-171-999-5222 001-170-999-5222 001-162-999-5222 PALA CC}NM PRK PLAYGROUND EQUIP CITY PARKS PLAY STRUCTURE 20 SEAT CLEVIS FREIGHT SALES TAX 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-180-~99-5212 190-180-999-5212 24TH ANNUAL CF:A.ADAMS:7/25-27 001-110-999-5258 RECRUITMENT AD:RECREATION ASST 001-150-999-5254 DISPLAY ADS:VAR.CONSTR.UPDATES 001-165-999-5256 DISPL.ADS:PLN COMM.VACANCIES 001-120-999-5254 PD CRIME PREVENTION SUPPLIES 51644Y INK CARTRIDGE 51~44C INK CARTRIDGE 51644M INK CARTRIOGE 51640A CARTRIOGE SALES TAX LAPTOP COMPUTERS FOR POLICE SALES TAX 001-170-999-5292 001-170-999-5221 001-170-999-5221 001-170-999-5221 001-170-999-5221 001-170-999-5221 001-170-502-5610 001-170-502-5610 ENTERTAINMNT:BLUEGRASS:3/24-25 280-199-999-5362 EXTRA SURVEYING SVCS:MARB RD 210-165-706-5804 MISC A/V ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT QTY 500 PENCILS SET-UP QTY 100 LETTER OPENERS SET-UP FREIGHT SALES TAX RECREATION SUPPLIES FOR MPSC HTL:SAFETY COURSE:A.M.:6/18-20 320-199-999-5210 001-101-999-5280 001-101-999-5280 001-101-999-5280 001-101-999-5280 001-101-999-5280 001-101-999-5280 190-181-999-5301 190-180-999-5261 APR/MAY TCSD PLAN CHECK SVCS APR/HAY TCSD PLAN CHECK SVCS 190-180-999-5248 193-180-999-5248 ITEM AMOUNT 192.00 2,000.00 957.76- 160.47 367.17 43.02 123.36 4,985.79 260.00 200.00 12.00 34.50 165.00 67.20 533.80 241.98 344.74 27.85 27.85 27.85 27.09 8.29 2,038.00 152.86 200.00 736.25 119.86 125.00 40.00 690.00 50.00 28.00 67.88 49.13 188.16 225.00 CHECK AMOUNT 192.00 1,042.24 694.02 5,492.29 165.00 842.98 2,654.53 200.00 736.25 119.86 1,000.88 49.13 188.16 2,025.00 VOUCHRE2 06/14/01 11:35 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIOOS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAHE 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASN 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASH 69756 06/14/01 000249 PETTY CASN 69758 06/14/01 000580 PHOTO WORKS OF TEMECULA 69758 06/14/01 000580 PHOTO ~ORKS OF TEMECULA 69759 06/14/01 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE CONPAN 69759 06/14/01 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COHPAN 69760 06/14/01 004494 RAMONA TIRE INC 69760 06/14/01 004494 RAJ4ONA TIRE INC 69760 06/14/01 004494 RAMONA TIRE 69760 06/14/01 004494 RAMONA TIRE INC 69761 06/14/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 69761 06/14/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 69761 06/14/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 69761 06/14/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 69761 06/14/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 69761 06/14/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER OIST 69761 06/14/01 000262 RANCHO CAL]F WATER DIST 69761 06/14/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 69761 06/14/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 69761 06/14/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER OIST 69761 06/14/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER D[ST 69761 06/14/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 69761 06/14/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 69761 06/14/01 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 69762 06/14/01 000907 RANCHO CAR WASN 69762 06/14/01 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 69762 06/14/01 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 69762 06/14/01 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER PETTY CASN REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASN REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASN REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASN REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 001-170-999-5229 001-170-999-5292 001-170-999-5220 001-170-999-5250 001-170-999-5242 001-170-999-5371 001-170-999-5242 001-170-999-5371 190-183-999-5370 001-171-999-5261 001-171-999-5261 190-180-999-5260 001-150-999-5260 190-180-999-5230 001-1990 001-163-999-5228 190-180-999-5220 001-162-999-5222 001-140-999-5222 190-180-999-526~ MAy FILM/PHOTO DEV - CIP 001-165-999-5250 MAY FILM/PHOTO DEV - ECON DEV 001-111-999-5270 MAY VAR.PUBLIC NTCS:CITY CLERK 001-120-999-5256 RECRUITMENT AD:RECREATION ASST 190-180-999-5254 REPAIR/MAINT-FIRE VEHICLES 001-171-999-5214 REPAIR/MAINT-FIRE VEHICLES 001-171-99~-5214 SALES TAX/INV61128/61332/62607 001-171-999-5214 SALES TAX FOR INV# 63452 001-171-999-5214 MAY 01-06-8~0-5 PUJOL BT MAY 01'02-98000-0 STN ~ MAY 01-02-98010-0 STN ~ VARIOUS WATER METERS VARZOLIS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARZOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS CITY VEHICLE DETAILING CITY VEHICLE DETAILING CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & FUEL CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & FUEL 280-199-807-5801 001-171-999-5240 001-171-999-5240 190-180-999-5240 190-181-999-5240 190-182-999-5240 190-184-999-5240 190-1~-~-5240 193-180-999-5240 340-199-701-5240 190-185-999-5240 001-164-603-5240 001-165-999-5250 210-165-828-5804 001-162-999-5214 001-165-999-5214 001~110-999-5214 001-110-999-5265 ITEM AMOUNT 17.69 5.98 3.86 43. O0 10.75 46.15 18.25 37.06 26.88 26.40 5.00 7.38 26.89 20.39 19.29 28.00 38.8~ 7.38 5.27 10.00 49.60 6.93 221.46 532.09 1,621.43 191.06 86.77 8.70 53.42 12.03 349.89 10,606.21 129.94 892.84 290.20 211.10 3,891.99 491.14 69.83 410.82 808.59 50.47 56.00 7.00 35.00 142.16 CHECK AMOUNT 404.45 56.53 753.55 1,907.96 18,268.47 VOUCHRE2 06/14/01 11:35 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PER[ODS PAGE 7 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAHE 69762 06/14/01 000907 RANCHO CAR WASN 69762 06/14/01 000907 RANCHO CAR ~ASH 69762 06/14/01 000907 RANCHO CAR ~ASH 69762 06/14/01 000907 RANCHO CAR ~ASN 69762 06/14/01 000907 RANCHO CAR ~ASH 69762 06/14/01 000907 RANCHO CAR ~ASH 69763 06/14/01 002654 RANCHO FORD LINCOLN MER 6976~ 06/14/01 6976~ 06/14/01 6976~ 06/14/01 6976/* 06/14/01 6976~ 06/14/01 69765 06/14/01 69766 06/14/01 69767 06/14/01 69768 06/14/01 69769 06/14/01 69769 06/14/01 69769 06/14/01 69770 06/14/01 69770 06/14/01 69770 06/14/01 69771 06/14/01 697T2 06/14/01 69772 06/14/01 69772 06/14/01 69772 06/14/01 69772 06/14/01 69772 06/14/01 69772 06/14/01 69772 06/14/01 69772 06/14/01 69772 06/14/01 69772 06/14/01 69772 06/14/01 69772 06/14/01 69773 06/14/01 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPNICS 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS 003591 RENES COMMERCIAL MANAGE 002110 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORAT 000411 RIVERSIDE CO FLO00 CONT 000268 RIVERSIDE CO HABITAT 001592 RIVERSIDE CO INFO TECHN 001592 RIVERSIDE CO INFO TECHN 001592 RIVERSIDE CO INFO TECNN 000645 SMART & FINAL INC 0006~5 SMART & FINAL INC 0006~5 SMART & FINAL INC SMITH, BARBARA 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISOR 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISOR 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER CITY VEHICLE FUEL CITY VEHICLE DETAILING CITY VEHICLE DETAILING CITY VEHICLE FUEL CITY VERICLE DETAILING & GAS CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS 340-199-701-5263 001-163-999-5214 001-164-604-5214 001-164-604-5263 190-180-999-5214 190-180-999-5263 TCSD VEHICLE REPAIR/MAINT SVCS 190-180-999-5214 ADD~L BLUEPRINTS:CNPRL POOL ADD~L BLUEPRINTS:CHPRL POOL BLUEPRINT SUPPLIES:CNPRL POOL ADD~L BLUEPRINTS:DIAZ RD ADD~L BLUEPRINTS:IST ST EXTEN. 210-190-170-5804 210-190-170-5804 210-190-170-5804 001-165-999-5250 280-199-807-5804 R-O-g ~EED NC~ING:DIAZ/JEFFERS 001-164-601-5402 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FOR PW CREWS 001-16~-601-5238 MAR PLAN CRECK FEES/PALA RD 210-165-603-5802 MAY 2001 K-RAT PAYMENT 001-2300 APR EMERG. RADIO RENTAL:P.D. HAY EMERG. RADIO RENTAL:P.D. dUN EMERG, RADIO RENTAL:P.D, NIGN HOPE PROGRAM * SUPPLIES 4TH OF JULY PARADE SUPPLIES NEIGHBORNO00 EVENT SUPPLIES REIMB:EXTREME RECYCLERS PROM JUN 2-17-214-0428 MEADOWS Pk%/Y JUN 2'06-105-0654 VARIOUS MTRS JUN 2-10-331-1353 STN ~ JUN 2-18-363-1902 PAUBA RD JUN 2'22-057-2226 VARIOUS MTRS JUN 2-22'057-2234 HAR~RITA RD MAY 2-20-798-3248 VARIOUS MTRS dUN 2-02-351-5281 CRC JUN 2-02-351-5281 CRC JUN 2-01-202-7330 VARIOUS MTRS JUN 2'01-202-7330 VARIOUS MTRS JUN 2'01-202-7603 VARIOUS MTRS JUN 2-05-791-8807 VARIOUS MTRS JUN 095-167-7907-2 STN ~ 001-170-999-5238 001-170-999-5238 001-170-999-5238 190-183-999-5320 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5371 194-180-999-5265 190-180-999-5319 190-180-999-5319 001-171-999-5240 190-180-999-5319 190~180-999-5319 190-180-999-5319 190-180-999-5240 190-182-999-5240 190-186-999-5240 192-180-999-5319 192-1990 190-180-999-5319 190-180-999-5319 001-171-999-5240 ITEM AMOUNT 37.66 14.00 7.00 14,32 42.00 21.84 71.95 1,000.00 1,627.49 45.69 12.67 3.22 3,700.00 421.42 80.66 1,930.00 282.75 282.75 282.75 123.98 237.56 227.01 182.43 162.39 1,650.07 774.25 60.43 76.01 65.86 209.92 1,750.00 3,027.88 21,769.46 8,529.88 11,750.19 6,411.43 135.07 CHECK AMOUNT 376.98 71.95 2,689.07 3,700.00 421.42 80.64 1,930.00 848.25 588.55 182.43 56,238.57 135.07 697?4 06/14/01 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR PD CABOOSE PEST CONTROL SVCS 001-170-999-5250 29.00 697~'4 06/14/01 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR TCC PEST CONTROL SVCS 190-18~-999-5250 36.00 65.00 VOUCHNE2 06/14/01 11:35 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK HUMBER DATE 69775 06/14/01 69776 06/14/01 69777 06/14/01 697'78 06/14/01 69778 06/14/01 69779 06/14/01 69780 06/14/01 69781 06/14/01 69781 06/14/01 69781 06/14/01 69781 06/14/01 69782 06/14/01 697B3 06/14/01 69783 06/14/01 69784 06/14/01 6978/* 06/14/01 69785 06/14/01 69786 06/14/01 69787 06/14/01 69788 06/14/01 69788 06/14/01 69788 06/14/01 69789 06/14/01 69790 06/14/01 69791 06/14/01 69791 06/14/01 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIOOS VENDOR VENDOR ITEM NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION 004496 SPARKS EXHIBITS & ENVIR C/O~ 1PMT:CHILDREN~S MUSEUM 003840 000305 000305 003140 O03862 003862 003862 003862 002452 003366 003366 003031 003031 000978 002065 004504 004261 004261 004261 004279 000345 000345 STORKERSEN, MONET STRONGS PAINTING TARGET STORE TARGET STORE REFUND:GYMNASTICS-TUMBLING TOT CRC RESURFACE NON-SLIP FLOOR VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION SUPPLIES RECREATIOH SUPPLIES - MPSC TEMECULA VALLEY TAEIQ~ON TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED REFUND:SEC.DEPOSIT:MS01o0916 THYSSEN DOVER ELEVATOR TNYSSEN DOVER ELEVATOR THYSSEN DOVER ELEVATOR THYSSEN DOVER ELEVATOR TOP LINE INDUSTRIAL TOBAN DEVELOP. & CONSTR TORAN DEVELOP. & CONSTR JUN MUSEUM ELEVATOR INSPECTION JUN MUSEUM ELEVATOR INSPECTION JUN CITY HALL ELEVATOR INSPECT JUN CITY HALL ELEVATOR INSPECT MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES FOR PW BOARDWALK/SIDEWALK REPAIR/MNTC PONER WASH'O.T.SIDEWALKS/CURBS TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE NISC MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES - TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE MISC.MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES - TRAUMA INTERVENTION PRG 4TH GTR EMERG.RESPONSE VOL,PRG UNISOURCE PAPER SUPPLIES COPY CTR VAIL RANCH SELF STORAGE MAR AUDIO/VIDEO TAPE STORAGE VERIZON CALIFORNIA MAY XXX-1408 PD SATELLITE STN VERIZON CALIFORNIA dUN XXX-1941 PTA CD TTACSD VERIZON CALIFORNIA MAY XXX'2670 911 AUTO DIALER VERIZON CALIFORNIA INC. JUN ACCESS'RVSD CO OPEH LINE WORTHINGTON, NORMA J. REFUNO:VICR FEE XEROX CORPORATION 81LL! NAy BASE CHARGE 5830 COPIER XEROX CORPORATION BILLI SALES TAX TOTAL CHECKS ACCOUNT NUMBER 210-190-165-5804 190-18~-4982 190-182-999-5416 190-18~-999-5370 190-181-999-5301 190-183-999-5330 190-2900 190-185-999-5250 190-185-999-5250 340-199-701-5250 340-199-701-5250 001-164-601-5214 001-164-603-5250 001-164-603-5250 001-164-601-5218 001-164-601-5218 001-171-999-5274 330-199-999-5220 001-120-999-52~7 001-170-999-5229 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 001-170-999-5250 330-199-999-5217 330-199-999-5217 ITEM AMOUNT 2,500.00 48.00 3,000.00 10.75 61.16 20.00 100,00 74.85 60.15 67.50 67.50 17.00 20,000,00 980.00 2,498.03 619.20 1,620.00 1,389.44 158.21 329.89 54.84 28.38 342.02 45.00 80.00 .30 PAGE 8 CHECK AMOUNT 2,500.00 48.00 3,000.00 71.91 20.00 100.00 270.00 17.00 20,980.00 3,117.23 1,620.00 1,389.44 158.21 413.11 342.02 45.00 80.30 249,159.97 VOUCHRE2 06/'i,'+/01 12;~0 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 3 FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 190 CO~MUNITY SERVZCES DISTRICT 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 280 REDEVELOPNENT AGENCY - FACILITIES TOTAL AMOUNT 669,390.75 82,7'96.40 29,535.00 1,275,218.40 518,936.65 106,152.54 541.00 2,682,570.74 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 06/14/01 12:10 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 69794 69794 69794 69795 69795 69795 69795 69795 69795 69795 69795 69795 69795 69795 69795 69795 69795 69?95 69795 69?96 69796 69797 69798 69?98 69?99 69799 69800 69801 69802 69802 69802 69802 69803 69804 69805 69806 69806 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE HUMBER NAME 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SEBVIC 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANOSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANOSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANOSCAPE 000711 GRAPHICS UNLIMITED LITH 000711 GRAPHICS UNLIMITED LITH 0036~0 GP~YNER ENGINEERING 004485 K E C ENGINEERING 004485 K E C ENGINEERING 001719 L P A INC 001719 L P A INC 003286 LIBRARY SYSTEMS & SERV! 003782 MAIN STREET SIGNS 004141 MAINTEX INC 004141 NAINTEX INC 004141 MAINTEX INC 004141 HAINTEX INC 003?90 MOCKINGBIRD NURSERIES 004152 OMALLEY ENGINEERING COR 002256 P & D CONSULTANTS INC 002800 PACIFIC STRIPING INC 002800 PACIFIC STRIPING INC ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT TEMP HELP W/E 05/18 VOSHALL TEMP HELP W/E 05/18 NAASEH TEMP HELP W/E 05/18 NAASEH 001-161-999-5118 001-161-999-5118 001-161-999-5118 MAY LDSCP MNTC:NEIGHBORHODO PK 190-180-999-5415 MAY LDSCP MNTC:SPORTS PRK MAY LDSCP MNTC:MEDIANS MAY LDSCP MNTC:SOUTH SLOPES MAY LSCP MNTC:NORTH SLOPES MAY LDSCP MMTC; CRC MAY LDSCP MNTC:SR CENTER MAY LDSCP MMTC: MNTC FAC MAy LDSCP MHTC: TCC MAY LDSCP MNTC:STATION 8~ MAY LDSCP MHTC:SIXTH STREET MAY LDSCP MHTC:OLD TWH STSCPE MAY LDSCP MNTC:MUSEUM MAY LDSCP MMTC:NEIGHBORHO00 PK MAY LDSCP MHTC:CHILDREN MUSEUM 190-180-999-5415 193-180-999-5415 193-180-999-5415 193-180-999-5415 190-182-999-5415 190-181-9{2{2-5415 340-199-701~5415 190-184-999-5415 001-171-~99-5212 001-164-603-5415 001-164-603-5415 190-185-999-5415 190-180-999-5415 190-180-999-5415 MAy LDSCP MNTC:NADA FLOOD CTRL 190-180-999-5415 SUMMER/FALL BROCHURE PRINTING 190-180-999-5222 SUMMER/FALL BROCHURE PRINTING 190-180-999-5222 MAY DESIGN SVC-MERCANTILE BLDG 210-190-167-5802 MAY PRGSS:RANCHO CA SPRTS PRK 210-190-178-5804 RETENTION:MAY PRGSS:R.C.SPT PK 210-2035 MAY DESIGN SVC:TEM LIBRARY REIMBURSABLES 210-199-129-5802 210-199-129-5802 MAY SVCS-LIBRARY SYSTEM AGRMT 001-101-999-5285 STREET NAME SIGN REPLACEMENTS 001-164-601-5244 AUTOMATIC FLOUR SCRUBBER ABRASIVE MACH BRUSH 05726 NYLON BRUSH ASSEMBLY SALES TAX 190-180-999-5610 190-180-999-5610 190-180-999-5610 190-180-999-5610 NATIVE PLANT SPECIES:PALA BRDG 210-165-631-5804 SURVEY SVCS:MARG RD WIDENING 210-165-706-5804 MAY TEMP BLDG INSPECTOR SVCS 001-162-999-5118 PRGS PMT#3:VAR.STREET STRIPING 001-164-601-5410 PRGS PMT#3IVAR.STREET STRIPING 001-164-602-5410 2,736.67 9,776.69 5,646.27 11,635.00 25,325.00 1,975.00 13,375.00 8,878.00 1,444.00 361.00 541.00 193.00 400.00 250.00 987.00 285.00 1,000.00 155.00 165.00 17,796.06 1,035.09 5,536.79 55,250.00 2,987.50- 7,866.69 742.14 10,611.53 9,056.88 7,381.25 328.34 273.90 598.76 5,409.72 7,444.00 17,424.16 80,393.17 8,039.32 18,159.63 66,969.00 18,831.15 5,536.79 52,262.50 8,608.83 10,611.53 9,056.88 8,582.25 5,409.72 7,444.00 17,424.16 ~,432.49 69807 06/26/01 003218 PELA APR/MAY PLAN CK SVCS:PLANNING 001-161-999-5250 8,180.00 8,180.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2 06/14/01 12:10 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIOOS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 69808 69809 69809 69810 69810 69810 69810 69810 69810 69810 69810 69810 69810 69810 69811 69812 69813 69814 69815 69815 69816 69817 69817 69817 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 06/26/01 004519 PYRO SPECTACULARS ]NC 004457 R J NOBLE COHPANY 004457 R J NOBLE COHPANY 000406 000406 000406 000406 000406 000406 000406 000406 000406 000406 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 002181 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION 002191 SAN DIEGAN 003840 STRONGS PAINTING 001035 TEMECULA ENVIRONMENTAL 003149 TERRA CAL CONSTRUCTION 00B149 TERRA CAL CONSTRUCTION 004368 VALI COOPER & ASSOCIATE 003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS IN 003?30 NEST COAST ARBORISTS IN 003?30 WEST COAST ARBORISTS IN ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT FIREWORKS PRESENTATION 7/4/01 190-183-999-5370 PRSG PMT#1:MARG IMPRV:PW99-01 210-165-706-5804 RET.W/H PNT# I:MARG IMPRV:9901 210-2035 3/08-4/04/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 3/08-4/04/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 3/08-4/04/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 3/08-4/04/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 3/08-4/04/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 3/08-4/04/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 3/08-4/04/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 3/08-4/04/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 3/08-4/04/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT 3/08-4/04/01 LAW ENFORCEMENT APRIL 2001 BOOKING FEES 001-170-999-5288 001'170-999-5299 001-170-999-5298 001-170-999-5294 001-170-999-5297 001-170-999-5305 001-170-999-5291 001-170-999-5281 001-170-999-5262 001-170-999-5279 001-170-999-5273 PRGS PMT#15:1ST ST EXTEN:95-08 280-199-807-5804 FULL PG COLOR AD IN SAN DIEGAN 001-111-999-5270 MAINTENANCE SVCS:OLD TOWN 001-164-605-5250 JAN-JUN 2001 TRASH HAULING SVC 194-180-999-5315 PRGS PMT#2:VIA MONTEZUMA:99-15 210-165-707-5804 RET.W/H PMT#2:VIA MONTEZUMA 210-2035 APR TEMP INSPECTOR HOFFMAR 001-165-999-5118 VARIOUS SLOPE AREAS TREE HAINT 193-180-999-5415 VARIOUS PARK AREAS TREE MAINT 190-180-999-5415 CITYWlDE TREE MAINTENANCE SVCS 001-164-601-5402 12,500.00 189,913.T/ 18,991.38- 237,799.10 8~,129.40 26,132.00 10,723.40 16,003.20 20,905.60 9,576.00 39,925.28 21,108.17 7,528.83 11,812.80 106,152.54 5,194.00 5,400.00 1,275,218.40 298,613.80 29,861.38- 10,085.38 5,307.00 2,320.00 9,565.90 12,500.00 170,922.39 485,643.78 106,152.54 5,194.00 5,400.00 1,275,218.40 268,752.42 10,085.38 17,192.90 TOTAL CHECKS 2,682,570.74 ITEM 4 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR. OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER ~_ City Manager/City Council Genie Roberts, Director of Finance~ June 26, 2001 Upgrade of Financial Accounting Software PREPARED BY: Tim McDermott, Assistant Finance Director~',~.~ RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Approve a Software License and Use Agreement with Eden Systems, Incorporated in the amount of $144,050 2. Authorize the City Manager to approve contract amendments in an amount not to exceed $14,405 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount 3. Authorize the City Manager and City Attorney to execute all necessary agreements DISCUSSION: In 1992 the City entered into a software licensing agreement with Eden Systems, Incorporated ("Eden") for its Command Series financial accounting software. Eden is used for the following areas: financial accounting, budgetary control, accounts payable, cash receipts, purchasing, payroll, and personnel. Staff has been generally satisfied with the Command Series product. However, the Command Series product is a Dos-based program utilizing old technology, and is not fully compatible with the City's current network environment. In addition, Eden has notified all of its Command Series users that it will no longer be providing support to this product line after January 1, 2002. Staff is recommending that the Council approve a Software License and Use Agreement with Eden to upgrade to their new InForum Gold product line. InForum Gold is a fully integrated Windows-based application that will be fully compatible with the City's network environment, and will provide the City with greatly enhanced report generation and data access capabilities. Staff has seen several demonstrations of InForum Gold, and has been very impressed with the product. No additional network hardware or software will be required to be purchased as a result of this upgrade Eden has offered the upgrade to its existing clients with no license fees, resulting in a savings of $147,500. The City will only pay for the cost of data conversion, product installation, staff training, and project management, which is anticipated to total $144,050. Staff is requesting that the City Manager be given the authority to approve an additional $14,405 (10%) if needed, to ensure that the software implementation is done thoroughly, and that staff is fully trained on the new system. FISCAL IMPACT: $125,000 is included in the FY 2000-01 Information Systems Internal Service Fund budget for the upgrade to InForum Gold. Adequate reserves are available in the Information Systems Fund for the requested contract amount of $144,050, plus the $14,405 contingency amount. Attachment: -Software License and Use Agreement THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between Eden Systems, Incorporated (hereinafter "Licensor"), a corporation duly authorized and existing under the State of Washington and having its principal offices at 507 Industry Drive, Seattle, Washington 98188, and the City of Temecula, (hereinafter "Licensee"), a government organization having its principal offices at 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. Licensor desires to grant to Licensee, and Licensee desires to acquire from Licensor a non- exclusive right and license to use certain computer software as hereinafter defined. Both parties agree they are able to comply with and will satisfy the terms and conditions as set forth in this Agreement. Both parties, intending to be legally bound, agree to the following: SECTION I - DEFINITIONS The definition of terms set forth in this section shall apply when such terms are used in this Agreement, its exhibits, and any amendmeots: 1,1 "Licensed Program." The computer program specifically identified within the Exhibits herein as applications within the InForum Go/dTM, InForumTM, or Command SeriesTM product lines, including object cede, as well as related procedural code, and documentation of any type which describes it. 1.2 "Licensed Documentation." The system and other documentation made available by Licensor, for the Licensed Program. 1.3 "EnhancementS." Changes or additions, other than Maintenance Modifications, to the Licensed Program or Licensed Documentation that add significant new functions or substantially improved performance thereto by changes in system design or coding. 1.4 "Error." Problem caused by incorrect operation of the computer code of the Licensed Program or an incorrect statement or diagram in Licensed Documentation that produces incorrect results or causes incerrect actions to occur. 1.5 "Error Correction." Either a software modification or addition that, when made or added to the Licensed Program, establishes material conformity of the Licensed Program to the Licensed Documentation, or a procedure or routine that, when observed in the regular operation of the Licensed Program, eliminates the practical adverse effect on Licensee of such non-conformity. 1.6 "Maintenance Modifications." Modifications or revisions to the Licensed Program or Licensed Documentation that correct Errors. 1.7 ,,Specifications." The functional performance parameters of the Licensed Program effective on the date of this Agreement, as set forth in Licensed Documentation. 1.8 "Proprietary Information." Unpublished "know-how' and "trade secrets" which shall include, without limitation, computer programs, program designs, algorithms, subroutines, system specifications, test data, charts, graphs, operation sheets, and all other technical information, owned by Licensor or under its control, relating to the development and production or use of the Licensed Program and the design, configuration, programming, and protocol of the Licensed Program. 1.9 "Normal Working Hours." The hours between 8AM and 5PM PST (Pacific Standard Time), on the days Monday through Friday, excluding regularly scheduled holidays of Licensor. 1.10 "Releases." New versions of the Licensed Program, as specified by Licensor, which new versions may be prompted by Error Corrections and/or Enhancements. 1.11 ,,Support Agreement Term." A fiscal year, commencing on January 1 and ending on December 31, during which support and services are provided subject to the terms and conditions set forth in Section 9, Software Support. SECTION 2 - GRANT OF LICENSE 2.1 Scope of License. Subject to compliance by Licensee with the terms hereof, Licensor hereby grants to Licensee, in perpetuity unless terminated as provided herein, a personal, non-exclusive, nontransferable license (without the right of sublicense), to: ~ Install, use, and execute the Licensed Program on computers owned or leased and used by Licensee at its C:XDocuments and Settings~ncdermt~Local Settings\Temp\Temecula CS to IG Upgrade.DOC Page 1 05/16/01 facilities, for up to the number of concurrent users specified in this Agreement in Exhibit Al, for the sole and express purpose of supporting the internal business activities of Licensee; and b. Use the Licensed Documentation only in conjunction with installation and use of the Licensed Program. 2.2 Delivery of Materials. Licensor shall deliver one copy of the Licensed Program and Licensed Documentation to Licensee within a reasonable time following final execution of this Agreement. 2.3 Minimum Hardware and Software Requirements. Licensee acknowledges that in order to be executed, Licensee's computers must meet or exceed the minimum published hardware and software requirements for the Licensed Program. Licensee agrees such requirements are subject to change, and that future versions of the Licensed Program may have different hardware and software requirements that those presently in effect. The acquisition of necessary hardware and software meeting the requirements then in effect shall be the sole responsibility of Licensee. Licensee acknowledges that Licensor software support does not cover third party software unless otherwise specified. 2.4 Necessity for Third-party Software. Licensee acknowledges that in order to be executed, the Licensed Program requires certain third-party software not provided by Licensor. The acquisition of necessary licenses and support for this software shall be the sole responsibility of Licensee. Licensee acknowledges that Licensor software support does not cover third party software unless otherwise specified. 2,5 Assignment of Rights in Licensee Maintenance Modifications and Enhancements. All right, title, and interest in all Maintenance Modifications and Enhancements developed by Licensee during the term of this Agreement remains with Licensor. Licensee agrees that such Maintenance Modifications and Enhancements shall be used by Licensee, and will not be distributed or otherwise made available to any third party other than Licensor. 2.6 Availability of Licensor Enhancements. Licensor agrees to offer to Licensee a license to Enhancements that Licensor develops and offers generally to licensees of the Licensed Program according to the terms under Section 9.1 .b. 2.7 Licensee Notification and Delivery of Materials. Licensee shall notify and deliver to Licensor one copy of any Maintenance Modifications and Enhancements developed by Licensee within a reasonable period after developmenL SECTION 3 - TITLE TO MATERIALS 3.1 Title to Licensed Program and Licensed Documentation. All right, title, and interest in and to the Licensed Program and Licensed Documentation, including the media on which the same are furnished to Licensee, are and shall remain with Licensor. Licensee acknowledges that no such rights, title, or interest in or to the Licensed Program and the Licensed Documentation is granted under this Agreement, and no such assertion shall be made by Licensee. Licensee is granted only a limited right of use of the Licensed Program and Licensed Documentation as set forth herein, which right of use is not coupled with an interest and is revocable in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 3.2 Title to Enhancements and Maintenance Modifications; Restrictions on Use, Disclosure, Access, And Distribution. All right, rifle, and interest in and to any Enhancements and Maintenance Modifications developed by either Licensor or by Licensee shall be and remain with the Licensor. Licensee shall treat all such Enhancements and Maintenance Modifications in accordance with the restrictions and limitations set forth herein respecting Licensed Programs and Licensed Documentation. SECTION 4 - FEES AND PAYMENTS 4.1 License Fee. In consideration of the licenses granted hereunder, Licensee shall pay Licensor a one-time license fee as well as other associated costs as further defined in Exhibit Al, attached hereto. 4.2 Software Support. Software Support is subject to the terms and conditions of Section 9, Software Support, and may be offered, at the Licensor's sole option, on a year by year basis. 4.3 Per Diem. Charges for meals and incidental expenses associated with the delivery of the Licensed Program will be charged on a per diem basis. The rate for such per diem shall be the maximum meals and incidental expenses allowed for Licensee's locality as C:XDocuments and Se~ings~mcdermt~ocal Scttings\Temp\Temecula CS to IG Upgrade.DOC 05/16/01 Page 2 specified in 41 CFR Section 301 Appendix A of the code of Federal Regulations. 4.4 Other Costs. Other costs, including but not limited to air/train/taxi fare, charges for reasonable and normal travel time to and from the customer site, parking, freight costs, reproduction charges, and other incidental expenses incurred by Licensor on account of this Agreement, shall be billed to the Licensee. 4.5 Administrative Fee. Licensor shall have the right to charge Licensee a 5% administrative fee for all invoices which are over 30 days past due. 4.6 Payment. Payment for all fixed fees and charges shall be in accordance with the payment schedule set forth in Exhibit B - Billing/Payment Schedule. Payment for all estimated fees and charges shall be in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibits D - Services and E - Committed Modifications. 4.7 Taxes. The fees and charges specified in this section are exclusive of any federal, state, or local excise, sales, use, and similar taxes assessed or imposed with respect to the service and support provided hereunder. Licensee shall pay any such amounts upon request of Licensor accompanied by evidence of imposition of such taxes. SECTION 5 - PROPRIETARY PROTECTION OF MATERIALS 5.1 Acknowledgment of Proprietary Materials; Limitations on Use. Licensee acknowledges that the Licensed Program and Licensed Documentation are unpublished works for purposes of federal copyright law and embody valuable confidential and secret information of Licensor, the development of which required the expenditure of considerable time and money by Licensor. Licensee shall treat the Licensed Programs and Licensed Documentation in confidence and shall not use, copy, or disclose, nor permit any of its personnel to use, copy, or disclose the same for any purpose that is not specifically authorized under this Agreement. In the event of a public records request for the Licensed Program and Licensed Documentation, Licensee shall promptly provide a copy of such request to Licensor so that it has at least seven business days from Licensor's receipt of such copy in which to seek an order restraining the Licensee from disclosing the Licensed Program and Documentation pursuant to such public records request. If Licensor does not obtain a restraining order within such period of time, Licensee may disclose the Licensed Program and Licensed Documentation pursuant to such public request as Licensee deems appropriate. 5.2 Secure Handling. Except for copies of the Licensed Program installed and operated upon its computers as permitted hereunder, Licensee shall require that the Licensed Program and Licensed Documentation be kept on Licensee's premises which shall be maintained in a manner so as to reasonably preclude unauthorized persons from gaining access thereto, and Licensee shall permit access only as necessary for either party's use thereof in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 5.3 Proprietary Legends. Licensee shall not permit anyone other than Licensor to remove any proprietary or other legend er restrictive notice contained or included in any material provided by Licensor. 5.4 Reproduction of Licensed Documentation. Licensee may reproduce the Licensed Documentation provided by Licensor, provided that such reproductions are for the private internal use of Licensee, and all such reproductions bear Licensor's copyright notices and other proprietary legends. 5.5 Injunctive Relief. Licensee recognizes and acknowledges that any use or disclosure of the Licensed Program or Licensed Documentation by Licensee in a manner inconsistent with the provision of this Agreement may cause Licensor irreparable damage for which remedies other than injunctive relief may be inadequate. In the event of such a violation of this Agreement. Licensor shall be entitled, upon application to a court of competent jurisdiction, to a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction, to restrain and enjoin Licensee from such violation, without prejudice to any other remedies available to Licensor. 5.6 Technical Protections. Licensor may from time to time prescribe password protection as an additional security measure for the Licensed Program, and Licensee shall cooperate with Licensor in connection therewith. 5.7 Survival of Terms. The provisions of Sections 5.1 through 5.6 shall survive termination of this Agreement for any reason. C:kDocuments and Settings~mcdermtXLocal Set~ings\Temp\Temecula CS to IG Upgrade. DOC Page 3 05/16/01 SECTION 6 - LIMITED WARRANTY, LIMITATION OF LIABILITY, AND INDEMNITY 6.1 Limited Warranty Against Infringement. Licensor warrants that the Licensed Program and Licensed Documentation as delivered to Licensee do not infringe any third-party rights in patent, copyright, or trade secret in the United States. 6.2 Limited Warranty of Conformity. Licensor warrants, for the benefit only of Licensee, that for the life of the Agreement, the Licensed Program will conform in a~l material respects to the Licensed Documentation (except for modifications made by Licensee or by Licensor at the request of Licensee), but only if Licensee maintains uninterrupted Software Support as described in Section 9. Licensor assumes no responsibility for obsolescence of the Licensed Program nor for lack of conformity occurring from Licensee's failure to update the Licensed Program with distributed Enhancements, Maintenance Modifications, or Error Corrections. 6.3 Exclusive Remedy. As the exclusive remedy of Licensee for any nonconformity or defect constituting an Error in the Licensed Program for which Licensor is responsible, Licensor shall use commercially reasonable efforts to provide Maintenance Modifications with respect to such Error. However, Licensor shall not be obligated to correct, cure, or otherwise remedy any Error in the Licensed Program resulting from any (1) modification of the Licensed Program by Licensee, or (2) failure of Licensee to notify Licensor of the existence and nature of such nonconformity or defect promptly upon its discovery. 6.4 Disclaimer. EXCEPT AS SPECIFICALLY SET FORTH HEREIN, LICENSOR MAKES NO wARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, REGARDING OR RELATING TO THE LICENSED PROGRAM OR LICENSED DOCUMENTATION OR TO ANY OTHER MATERIALS FURNISHED OR PROVIDED TO LICENSEE HEREUNDER. LICENSOR SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A pARTICULAR PURPOSE WITH RESPECT TO SAID MATERIALS OR THE USE THEREOF. 6.5 Limitation of Liability. EXCEPT WITH RESPECT TO LIABILITY ARISING FROM CLAIMS OF iNFRINGEMENT OF THIRD-PARTY RIGHTS IN THE UNITED STATES IN COPYRIGHT, TRADE SECRET, OR PATENT, IN NO EVENT SHALL LICENSOR BE LIABLE UNDER ANY CLAIM, DEMAND, OR ACTION ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING T© iTS OR LACK THEREOF UNDER THIS AGREEMENT FOR ANY SPECIAL, INDIRECT, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, WHETHER OR NOT LICENSOR HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH CLAIM, DEMAND, OR ACTION. 6.6 Licensee Indemnification. Licensee shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, hold and save Licensor from liability against any claim, demand, loss or action (1) resulting from Licensee's use or modification of the Licensed Program and Licensed Documentation and (2) alleging that any Maintenance Modifications made by Licensee infringe any third-party rights in the United States respecting copyright, trade secret, or 6.7 Licensor Indemnification. Licensor shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, hold harmless, and save Licensee from liability against any claim, demand, loss, or action alleging that the Licensed Program and Licensed Documentation or any Maintenance Modifications or Enhancements made by Licensor infringe any third-party rights in the United States respecting copyright, trade secret, or 6.8 Survival of Terms. The provisions of Sections 6.1 through 6.7 shall survive termination of this Agreement. SECTION 7 - TERM AND TERMINATION 7.'1 Term. This Agreement shall commence on the date and year contained herein and shall continue until terminated in accordance with the terms thereof. 7.2 Termination by Either Party. Either party may terminate this Agreement upon 60 days written notice to the other party if the other party commits a breach of any term hereof and fails to cure said breach within that 60-day period. Such notice shall set forth the basis of the termination. 7.3 Actions Upon Termination. Upon termination of this Agreement for any reason, Licensee shall immediately cease use of, and return forthwith to Licensor, the Licensed Program and Licensed Documentation, and any copies or portions thereof, including Maintenance Modifications or Enhancements. C:~Documents and Setfings~mcdermt~ocal Settings~'remp\Temecula CS to IG Upgrade.DOC 05/16/01 Page4 SECTION 8 - MISCELLANEOUS 8.1 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties and supersedes all proposals, presentations, representations, and communications, whether oral or in writing, between the parties on this subject. Neither party shall be bound by any warranty, statement, or representation not contained herein. In the event of any conflict in the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the documentS shall control in the following order: This Software License and Use Agreement; b. Licensor's Response to Licensee's Request for Proposal, if applicable; Licensee's Request for Proposal, if applicable. 8.2 No Assignment. Licensee shall not sell, transfer, assign, or subcontract any right or obligation hereunder without the prior written consent of Licensor. Any act in derogation of the foregoing shall be null and void; provided, however, that any such assignment shall not relieve Licensee of its obligations under this Agreement. 8.3 Force Majeure. Excepting provisions of this Agreement relating to payment of license fees, and protection of Licensor's Proprietary information, neither party shall be in default of the terms hereof if such action is due to a natural calamity, or similar causes beyond the control of such party. 8.4 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of Washington. Venue will be deemed appropriate in the county of Yakima, Washington. 8.5 Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to law, the remaining provisions of this Agreement will remain in full force and effect. 8.6 Notice. Any notice required or permitted to be made or given by either party under this Agreement shall be made in writing and delivered by hand or by certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed as first set forth above or to such other address as a party shall designate by written notice given to other party. 8.7 Acceptance Testing. Within ten (10) business days of Licensor's notification to Licensee that the Licensed Program or portion thereof is installed and the applicable training administered, Licensee shall begin performance of Acceptance Testing, for the sole and express purpose of determining whether the Licensed Program operates as described in the Licensed Documentation. Licensee must complete such Acceptance Testing within thirty (30) days of commencement of testing. The passage of the thirty (30) day testing period without official written notification from Licensee to Licensor that module of Licensed Program has failed Acceptance Testing indicates that the module is accepted and that any portion of the license fees attached to Licensed program's acceptance are due and payable. 8.8 Failure of Acceptance Testing, Retesting. If the parties agree that the Licensed Program does not successfully pass Acceptance Testing, the Licensee shall notify Licensor in writing ("first notice of failure") and shall specify with as much detail as possible in which respects the Licensed Program failed to pass the Acceptance Testing. Licensor shall make such necessary corrections and modifications in the Licensed Program to establish a reasonable basis for additional Acceptance Testing within a period of thirty (30) days from the first notice of failure. Licensor shall notify Licensee when such retesting can begin and the Licensee shall complete Acceptance Testing within a period of ten (10) business days from the date of notification. If the parties agree that the Licensed Program continues to fail Acceptance Testing, the Licensee shall notify Licensor in writing of the Licensee's intention to terminate and if the Licensor fails to remedy the defect within (60) days of receipt of said notification, the Licensee has the right, at its option, to terminate the Agreement by giving written notice of such termination to the Licensor. Upon the Licensee's termination of this Agreement due to failure of the second Acceptance Test, the Licensee shall promptly return the Licensed program and documentation and all related materials to the Licensor. 8.9 Acts of Insolvency. The Licensee may terminate this Agreement by written notice to the Licensor if the Licensor becomes insolvent, makes a general assignment for the benefit of creditors, suffers or permits the appointment of a receiver for its business or assets, becomes subject to any proceeding under any domestic bankruptcy or insolvency law or publicly announces liquidation proceedings. 8.t0 Insurance. During the term of this Agreement. Licensor shall maintain an appropriate level of insurance against all personal and property damage caused by Licensor's employees while on Licensee's premises and shall exhibit certificates of C:~Documents and Settings~mcdermt~Local Settings\Temp\Temecula CS to IG Upgrade. DOC 05/16/01 Page 5 evidence of such insurance upon request by Licensee. 8.11 Equal Opportunity Employer. Licensor shall not discriminate in its recruiting, hiring, promotion, demotion, or termination practices on the basis of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, age, or physical handicap in the performance of this Agreement. SECTION 9 - SOFTWARE SUPPORT 9.1 Scope of Service. Licensor shall render support and services during Normal Working Hours for the following: · . Telephone Support- Calls for assistance related to operation of the Licensed Program, reporting of a potential error condition or abnormal termination of a program, or request for minor assistance related to the Licensed Program; ~. Support Enhancements- Selected Enhancements, the nature and type of which shall be determined solely by the Licensor. Such provision shall not preclude Licensor from providing other Enhancements of the Licensed Program for license fees, training charges, and other related service fees and charges. ~. Source Code Maintenance- Library of Licensed Program maintained by Licensor for Licensee complete with modifications authorized by Licensee and performed by Licensor. Software Warranty- If Licensee obtains Software Support from Licensor, and such Software Support is in effect without interruption from inception of this Agreement, then Licensor will warrant the Licensed Program to be free of errors for the life of this Agreement. 9.2 Fees and Charges. Licensee shall pay Licensor annual support charges based on an annual rate determined by Licensor at the beginning of each Support Agreement Term. Such annual rate shall be multiplied times the amounts shown in Exhibit A1 under the column headed 'License Fee (Support Basis)" for each covered product. No increase in the support rate shall be in excess of 10% of the support rate for the prior year. All annual support charges are due and payable on or before the 1st working day of each Support Agreement Term. Failure to make such payment shall constitute cancellation and termination of support by Licensee and no further service er support will be provided by Licensor. 9.3 Licensee Responsibilities. Licensee shall be responsible for the procuring, installing, and maintaining all computer equipment, telephone lines, communications interfaces, and other hardware necessary to operate the Licensed Program and to obtain from Licensor the services called for according to Licensor's then existing policy. 9.4 Proprietary Rights. To the extent that Licensor may provide Licensee with any Error Corrections or Enhancements or any other software, including any new software programs or components, or any compilations or derivative works of the Licensed Program prepared by Licensor, Licensee may (1) install copies of the Licensed Program adequate to serve the concurrent users specified in this Agreement in Exhibit Al, in the most current form provided by Licensor, in Licensee's own facility; and (2) use such Licensed Program in a manner consistent with the requirements of the Agreement, for purposes of serving Licensee's internal business needs. Licensee may not use, copy, or modify the Licensed Program, or make any copy, adaptation, transcription, or merged portion thereof, except as expressly authorized by Licensor. The Licensed Program is and shall remain the sole property of Licensor, regardless of whether Licensee, its employees, or contractors may have contributed to the conception of such work, joined in the effort of its development, or paid Licensor for the use of the work product. Licensee shall from time to time take any further action and execute and deliver any further instrument, including documents of assignment or acknowledgment, that Licensor may reasonably request in order to establish and perfect its exclusive ownership rights in such works. Licensee shall not assert any right, title, or interest in such works, except for the non-exclusive right of use granted to Licensee at the time of its delivery or on-site development. 9.5 Disclaimer of Warranty and Limitation of Liability. EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH HEREIN, LICENSOR EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES CONCERNING THE SYSTEM OR THE SERVICES TO BE RENDERED HEREUNDER, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. C:~Documents and Settings~nedermt~Loca] Settings\Temp\Temecula CS to IG Upgrade. DOC Page 6 05/16/01 9.6 Termination of Support. Support may be terminated as follows: ,. Upon the termination of the License Agreement; or b. Upon notification by either party to the other, at the beginning of any Support Agreement Term; c. Upon 60 days' prior written notice if the other party has materially breached the provisions of this Agreement and has not cured such breach within such notice period. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as set forth below. [Licensee] Signature: Title: Date: [Licensor] Eden Systems, Inc. By: Signature: Title: Date: C:~Documents and Setfings~ncdermt~-ocai Settings\Temp\Temeeula CS to IG Upgrade.DOC Page 7 05/16/01 Eden Systems, Inc. Software License and Use Agreement Exhibits Section Exhibit A 1 - Eden Systems Deliverables Exhibit B - Billing/Payment Schedule Exhibit C - Third Party Products, Tools Exhibit D - Services Exhibit E- Committed Modifications Exhibit F- Database Server Exhibit G - ESRI Products and Services C:XDocuments and Settings~mcdermt~ocal Settings\Temp\Temecula CS t~ IG Upgrade. DOC Page 1 05/! 6/01 Eden Systems, Inc.; 507 Industw Drive, Seattle, WA 98188; (800) 328-0310; sales~edeninc.com ~ i ~1~ ~ ~11~ Customer Price Quotation I Customer Name: Temecula Revisited I Release/Dbase/OS: InForum Gold Upgrade Concurrent Usera: 16 Concurrent Users y s t e m s Date: Ap ,.,200t Service Charges (Training, Base Discount Data Cony, & Expenses & Product Description License Fee Allowed Net Amount Proj Mgmt) Taxes Total Eden - System, Database, OS Setup System Admthistration $ $ $ $ 5,000.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 6,600.00 Database Setup $ $ $ $ 500.00 $ $ 500.00 Hardware/OS Setup $ $ $ $ 500.00 $ $ 500.00 Eden - Financial Applications Financial Core (GL/AP, Purchasing, Requisitioning, ~R, Budget Preparation) $ 65,000.00; $ (65,000.00) $ $ 46,000.00 $ 7,800.00 $ 53,800.00 ProjectAccounting $ 16,000.00 $ (16,000.0[~ $ $ 12,000.00 $ 2,400.00 $ 14,400.00 Dash Receipting Interface $ $ $ $ $ $ FtxedAssets $ 12,000.00 $ (12,000.00) $ $ 4,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 5,000.00 FayrolllPositionBudgeting $ 35,000.00 $ (35,000.00) $ $ 35,000.00 $ 5,600.00 $ 40,600.00 ~lumanResources $ 18,000.00 $ (18,000.00) $ $ 8,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 10,000.00 Business Licensing (Futura Module) $ $ $ $ $ $ Eden - Land-Based Applications ~arcel Manager $ $ $ $ $ $ · em~its & Inspections $ $ $ $ $ $ Jtility Management $ ~'ash Receipting Interface $ $ $ $ $ $ JM Hand Held Interface(s) $ $ $ $ $ I $ Other Data Dictfonaw $ 1,500.00 $ (1,500.00) $ $ $ : $ Eden - Other Products & Services C~stalReports $ 1,950.00 $ $ 1,950.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 1,200,00 $ 8,150.00 Total Standard Forms $ 4,500.00 $ $ 4,500.00 3rd Pan'y . Database (Estimated) Database, Tools $ $ $ $ $ $ Database Server $ $ $ $ $ $ 3rd Par~ - Applications (Estimated) Business Licensing $ $ $ $ $ $ Cash Register Receipting , $ $ $ $ $ $ Applicant Tracking $ $ $ $ $ $ Document Imagin~!/Mgmt $ $ $ $ $ $ SubTotal II s 149,450.00II $ u47,500.00)11 $ 1,95o.ooII s120,500.00 $ 21,600.00 li$ 144,050.00 Applicable Taxes , .... II IJ I ..... I,' I1,, I I, IIIIIIII $ - lis - Grand Total JL.~.~~o,500.00 $ 21,600.00 $ 144,050.00 ;tandard Su. Eport - Eden Products Only $ 22,125.00 all prices except for those marked as 'Estimated' are good for 120 days fi.om the above date. "Estimated' quotes are subject to immediate change without ~otice. Eden Systems offers software support on items under the 'Eden' categories. Support and maintenance on alt other items is offered directly by the supplier or manufacturer. All client computers must meet the minimum client hardware and software requirements defined by Eden. Sales taxes will be :flarged to Washington customers. Estimated costs of Travel and Expenses includes estimated charges for travel to and from the customer site. Eden Technology - "Solutions Serving Government' sales~edeninc.corn ITEM 5 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~,~ DIR.OF FINANCE/:~ CITY MANAGER ' CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: City Manager/City Council /.~usan W. Jones, City Clerk/Director of Support Services June 26, 2001 SUBJECT: Purchase of a Pitney Bowes Postage Meter PREPARED BY: Michaela A. Ballreich, Deputy City Clerk RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the purchase of a Pitney Bowes Postage Meter in the amount of $14,670.00. BACKGROUND: The existing postage meter (American Business Systems, pumhased in April of 1990) is showing signs of failure and is indicating signs of no longer being able to handle the City's postage meter load in an efficient manner. The City currently meters approximately 9,000 pieces of mail a month (an estimated monthly cost of $4,500). With such a meter load, a new machine would not only assure the efficiency but would as well assure the managing and controlling of postage expenses by maximizing efficiency when processing material of varying weights, enabling the system to weigh each piece and determine the correct postage at speeds up to 50 pieces per minute. With such capability, the need for mail sorting is reduced which, in turn, increases productivity. Three quotes were obtained from the following vendors for the purchase of a postage meter: 1) Pitney Bowes purchase price of 14,670.00, 2) American Mailing Equipment purchase price of $15,377.00, and 3) American Business Systems purchase price of $21,570.00. Because Pitney Bowes is the only company to currently provide digital technology - a future requirement of the U.S. Postal Service, it is being recommended that the purchase of a postage meter be approved from Pitney Bowes. The digital technology as well provides advanced Postage by Phone, a system which, by way of modem, permits the user to push a single button in order to refill the meter in seconds. FISCAL IMPACT: The purchase of this postage meter was not included in the FY 2000-01 Operating Budget. Adequate reserves are available in the Support Services Internal Services Fund to fund the requested purchase. ATTACHMENT: Sales and Equipment Maintenance Agreement 1 Pitney Bowes SALES & EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 4/20/01 SIP APPR NO BILL-TO: CIT¥/STATFfLrP: TEMECULA CITY OF TEMECULA 43200 BUSINESS PARK DR CA 92590-3650 INSTALL AT (IF DIFFERENTI: CUST NAME: CITY OF TEMECULA ADDRESS: 43200 BUSINESS PARK DR ClT¥/ST^T~ZlI': TEMECULA, CA 92590-3650 atLL TO i O NO 18187612868 LOCATION LD NO. 18187612868 State I I County I I City QTY ITEM SS PCN I SPG0 UTOV 1 U7TR 1 SPT9 N70V XB22 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION Mailing System - 5 STANDARD U733 Tagge£1css Galaxy 180 WOW w/ E301 Meter and Drop Stacker STANDARD Smart Services Training for Galaxy STANDARD 7K00 0-30 lb Electronic Scale w/Scale Stand S&H CHARGIShipping and Handling GSA UNIT PRICE SIC CODE EM~, CODE 8900 DISCOUNT / TRADE tN ALLOWANCE NET PRICE $0.00 $0.00 N $10,914 $0.00 $10,914.00 Y $263 $0.00 $263.00 N $3,493 $0.00 $3,493.00 N $0.00 $0.00 TOTALS $14,670 $0.00 $14,670.00 ] EMA TOTAL ANNUAL $1,133 $0 $413 All Products Shown Above Are Y2K Compliant Unless Otherwise Noted. ITEM SERIAL ITEM SERIAL ITEM SERIAL ITEM SERIAL REQUEST INSTALLATION DATE 4/20/01 EPEMJASSO lot? 921774 030 0 Quiet Enough For The Office, Tough Enough For The Mailroom The new GalaxyTM 180 is super quiet and as rugged as they come, It's designed to function unnoticed in an office as well as dependably in the mail center.' · Perfect for the office environment becaus¢~ the GalaxyTM 180 operates at a whisper-quiet 64 dba (it won't even disturb your phone conversations), and its sleek lines fit just about any office decor, · Dependable enough for a busy mailroom be'cause it's built to last, with fewer parts and engineering that focuses on reliability. · Easy to maintain because the system's advanced technology makes everything simpler. Supplies are easily replaced, paperflow problems are corrected quickly, and preventive maintenance is only required once a year, : The GalaxyTM 180 Mailing System, Does More And Does It Faster Combining speed and reliability, the GalaxyTM 180 delivers an unparalleled level of productivity for mid- volume mailers. It can feed, weigh, seal, meter, and stack mail in one continuous stream., .it literally auto- mates 100% of your mail processing functions. · Weigh-On-The-Way (W-O-WT~) maximizes efficiency when processing material of varying weights up to 13 oz. This option enables the system to weigh every piece, determine the correct postage, and set the meter...all at speeds up to 50 pieces per minute. · Reduced mail sorting increases productivity when the W-O-W'" option is utilized. Mail of varying thick- nesses (up to 1/2') can be intermixed, and only minimal feeder adjustments are required to accomodate different envelope widths. · Regular mailings get out the door quickly due to Galaxy's ability to operate at variable speeds up to a super-fast 180 pieces a minute for uniform mail. And, Galaxy can even handle sealed and unsealed material, intermixed, without slowing down. · GalaxyTM keeps running without interruption due to its high capacities. The input feeder accepts a 7' pile of mail while the output stacking options can handle up to 800 mail pieces. · Tip-to-tip sealing ensures security for your confi- dential correspondence and billing transactions. You'll never have to worry about important business com- munications becoming lost or exposed due to an opened envelope flap. · Processing parcels or oversized mail is a snap due to Galaxy's tape dispensing options. You can choose from self-adhesive or water soluable tapes, and the system will even generate multiple tapes of the same denomir~ation, · A reliable system from a company you can count on. By combining proven technology with new advances, Galaxy provides both maximum uptime along with unsurpassed features. ......-~f W-O-W® (Weigh-On-The-Way) weighing option Processes some size mailpicces of different Single control POSTAGE BY PHONE~ Easy main tenonce Super-f~st Productive stocking options Centralized Control Panel makes operation cosy A Single Central Control Panel For Ease Of Use The Centralized Control Panel puts you in charge of the system. All functions (including accounting, advertis- ing, sealing, metering, weighing, etc.) are activated at the touch of a button. · User friendly controls guide operators through every processing step with easy-to-follow instructions. - ~ · The di~pll~y ~',~-reen makes it simple to monitor and '" t~'~k*~ccounting n,.fq[m_~tigo.o_r pe. rf._or_rn_di~gnos~ic . 'i :;,trbut~le-shooting. There are even prompts to replenish supplies. · Handles internal communications easily by pro- gramming the system to seal without printing postage. This is especially useful for payroll applications. · Program up to five jobs in the system's memory, so your frequently produced work can be set-up instantly. Also. this feature enables inexperienced operators to easily run routine jobs. Galaxy" processes your moil at speeds o f up to 180 pieces per minute! Powerful stacking options increase productivity Mixed-thickness feeding capability maximizes efficiency seoo $00-0O° J^" o~ ee , Digital Metering Technology Provides Unequaled Flexibility The digital printing of postage is the future of metered mail, and the GalaxyTM Meter is the first high speed, digital postage meter to be approved by the U.S. Postal Service. Digitized imprints permit the use of encryption technology, and ultimately this will ~nable the postal service to process mail faster and more cost effectively - a winning proposition for ali. · You will never run out of postage with the Galaxy's advanced Postage By Phone® System. It warns you when you are 'low" on postage, and then by pushing a single button can refill your meter in seconds by modem. · Your mail will not be returned because of incorrect dating due to the internal clock that automatically advances the date. · Your mail will look clean and stylish due to Galaxy's digital printing capability. There will be no broken imprints due to unevenly filled envelopes and the imprint itself will be in 2 colors. · Deliver your message when you send your mail by selecting any one of ten seperate meter advertise- ments that the GalaxyTM Meter stores in memory. · You'll be ready for the future with the GalaxyTM Meter due to the inherent flexibility of digital techrd~. Track Your Postage And Ensure Its Security With The GalaxyTM Meter Postage is a significant cost for most businesses, and the Galaxy,'~Meter provides thb tools for ,managing and ConiT~lli~g ~ese expenses. · Good information enables good business deci- sions, and the GalaxyTM Meter accounts for every cent you spend. Tracking for 10 accounts is standard, and 100 account capacity is available as an option. · Your postage is always safe from unauthorized use because access is protected by password security. Add An INTEGRATM Scale For Complete Versatility Most mailing operations are confronted with oversized envelopes and small parcels that must be processed. A 15 lb. capac- ity IntegraTM Scale handles these applications easily: · Save on postage expense through precise elec- tronic weighing, independent surveys suggest these savings can be as high as 20%. · Get the best rates for your material. The integra 15 has both USPS and UPS rates and fees built in. · It's easy to operate with an 8 line graphic display, operator prompts, and 5 preset job keys. Pmtney Bowes Specifications Galaxy 180 Mailing Machine Dimsnsi~ns Size: 45"L (1143 mm) x 25'W/635 mm) x 17"H (431 mm) Weight: 137 lbs. (62.2 kg) without meter Electrical 100-240 VAC, 60-+1 Hz, UL 1950, UL Listed Speed Processing Speed: 50 per minute (using W-O-W) 180 per minute (non W-O-W) Envelopes Size: Min.- 3.5" (88.9 mm) x 5' (127 mm) Max. (no W-O-W) - 13' (330 mm) x 15' (381 mm) Max. (W-O-W) - 13" (330 mm) x 13" (330 mm) Thickness: Min.- 0.007' (0.2 mm) Max.- 0.5' (12 mm) Flap Depth: Min,- 1" (26 mm) Max,- 3,875" (98 mm) Safety Compliance UL 1950, UL Listed Weights & Measures NIST GalaxyTM Meter Maximum Input: $99.999 Reset Type: Postage By Phone® Piece Count: Up to 8 digits Postage Used Register: 10 digits Postage Unused Register: 8 digits Batch Counter (resettable): 6 digits Batch Value (resettable): 8 digits Integra" 15 Electronic Scale Dimensions Size: 12.75"W (323 mm) x 10.5'D (266 mm) x 3.3"H (84 mm) Weight:5.5 lbs, (2.5 kg) Electrical 115 VAC, 60 Hz Our Service Professionals Are Ready When You Need Them If you do need service, our nationwide service network of 2000 trained Pitney Bowes service professionals are ready to help, Our Computer Enhanced Service Management System lets us record your service request, instantly call up a complete history of the equipment, and quickly dispatch a local Customer Service Representative with the rig ht skills, And, we can even provide in depth and on site training for your operators as an option at any time. We Guarantee Your Satisfaction At Pitney Bowes Mailing Systems, we are committed to providing oor customers with the finest products backed by the highest quality service, and we won't be satisfied until you are satisfied. Ask your sales representative for more information about our Customer Satisfaction Guarantee.sm Pitney Bowes World Headquarters Stamford, CT 06926-0700 For more information call: 1-SOO-MR BOWES (7-800-672-6937) Ask for Program Number 8500 htt p://www, pltneybowes.com © 1998 Pitney Bowes Inc. An Equal Opportunity Employer, Printed In U.S.A. AD t'i246 P,tney Bowes One EImcroft Road Stamford CT 06926-0700 ROBERT W GLEASON 25 PARK CIRCLE ITEM 6 APPROVAL ClTY~Y ~ FINANCE DIR ECTO~R CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk June 26, 2001 Records Destruction Approval PREPARED BY: Gwyn R. Flores, Records Coordinator RECOMMENDATION: Approve the scheduled destruction of certain City records in accordance with the City of Temecula approved Records Retention Policy. BACKGROUND: On March 22, 1992, the City Council approved Resolution No. 92-17 which authorizes the destruction of certain City records which have become outdated, obsolete or are excess documents, in compliance with State of California Govemment Code, Sections 34090 through 34090.7. Attached Exhibit A, lists records from the Public Works Department, Box 46, consisting of 1991- 1994 AD 161 files. These records have been imaged and identified within Group IV of the Records Retention Schedule. Attached Exhibit B, lists records from the Building and Safety Department consisting of vadous years of residential building permits. These records have been imaged and identified with group IV of the Records Retention Schedule. Attached Exhibit C, lists records from the Finance Department consisting of FY96/97 Accounts Payable Invoices. These records have been imaged and identified with group XII of the Records Retention Schedule. The imaging of these records complies with the requirements of Government Code Section 3409035. The City Attorney has reviewed this request and has signed the Exhibits, as provided for in Resolution No. 92-17. ATTACHMENTS: Destruction of Records Request, Public Works Department Exhibit A, List of Records recommended for destruction Destruction of Records Request, Building and Safety Department Exhibit B, List of Records recommended for destruction Destruction of Records Request, Finance Department Exhibit C, List of Records recommended for destruction TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Gwyn R. Flores, Records Coordinator June 26, 2001 Request for Destruction of Records Attached is a listing of records (box 46), maintained in the Public Works Department that that has been imaged into the City's LaserFiche Imaging System and is eligible for destruction in accordance with the City of Temecula approved Retention Policy. The imaging of these records complies with the requirements of Government Code Section 34090.5 The attached list of records has been identified within Retention Group IV, as outlined in "Exhibit 1", Schedule A, of Resolution No. 92-17. The undersigned have reviewed and approved this destruction request. Pursuant to the requirements of Govemment Code Section 34090.5, I hereby give my consent to the destruction of records under the direction of the City Clerk pursuant to the City of Temecula's adopted Destruction of Obsolete Records Policy. APPROVED: Department Head: APPROVED: City Attomey: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works Date P&ter/Thoyson TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Gwyn R. Flores, Records Coordinator June 26, 2001 Request for Destruction of Records Attached is a listing of building permits, maintained in the Building and Safety Department that that has been imaged into the City's LaserFiche Imaging System and is eligible for destruction in accordance with the City of Temecula approved Retention Policy. The imaging of these records complies with the requirements of Government Code Section 34090.5 The attached list of records has been identified within Retention Group IV, as outlined in "Exhibit 1", Schedule A, of Resolution No. 92-17. The undersigned have reviewed and approved this destruction request. Pursuant to the requirements of Government Code Section 34090.5, I hereby give my consent to the destruction of records under the direction of the City Clerk pursuant to the ' City of Temecula's adopted Destruction of Obsolete Records Policy. APPROVED: Department Head APPROVED: City Attorney: Tony EImoA Chief Building Official Dat~ ' Pot~rtThomon Oa~e' i' EXHIBIT "B" 40148 Alexandria Drive 40158 Alexandria Drive 43620 Altamura Court 43698 AItamura Court 43040 Argo Court 41645 Avenida De La Reina 31565 Avenida Del Reposo 31635 Avenida Del Reposo 41050 Avenida Verde 40794 Baccarat Road 43839 Barletta Street 43867 Barletta Street 43937 Barletta Street 41622 Big Sage Court 41399 Bitter Creek Court 32878 Bonita Mesa 32887 Bonita Mesa 32888 Bonita Mesa 32897 Bonita Mesa 32898 Bonita Mesa 32907 Bonita Mesa 32908 Bonita Mesa 32917 Bonita Mesa 32918 Bonita Mesa 32927 Bonita Mesa 32928 Bonita Mesa 32937 Bonita Mesa 32938 Bonita Mesa 32947 Bonita Mesa 32948 Bonita Mesa 32957 Bonita Mesa 32958 Bonita Mesa 32967 Bonita Mesa 32968 Bonita Mesa 32977 Bonita Mesa 32978 Bonita Mesa 32987 Bonita Mesa 32988 Bonita Mesa 32997 Bonita Mesa 30895 Brassie Lane 43279 Brockway Drive 43287 Brockway Drive 43288 Brockway Drive 43655 Buckeye Road 41875 C Street 32009 Cala Gerona 32041 Cala Gerona 32080 Cala Gerona 43631 Calabro Street 43810 Calabro Street 43528 Calle De Velardo 43864 Calle De Velardo 40435 Calle Fiesta 31680 Calle Girasol 30439 Calle Katerine 40334 Calle Katerine 40371 Calle Katerine 40382 Calle Katerine 40406 Calle Katerine 40430 Calle Katerine 40445 Calle Katerine 40447 Calle Katerine 40452 Calle Katerine 40454 Calle Katerine 40469 Calle Katerine 40478 Calle Katerine 40481 Calle Katerine 40493 Calle Katerine 40505 Calle Katerine 40541 Calle Katerine 40548 Calle Katerine 40564 Calle Katenne 40565 Calle Katenne 40601 Calle Katerine 40629 Calle Katenne 40643 Calle Katerine 40657 Calle Katerine 40671 Calle Katenne 40685 Calle Katerine 40699 Calle Katerme 40713 Calle Katerine 40727 Calle Katerme 40741 Calle Katerine 40755 Calle Katerine 40769 Calle Katerine 40782 Calle Katerine 40783 Calle Katerine 40796 Calle Katerine 40797 Calle Katedne 40810 Calle Katerine 40811 Calle Katerine 40822 Celle Katerine 32054 Calle Marquis 43310 Calle Mataro 40490 Calle Torcida 29833 Camino Del Sol 32230 Camino Herencia 32187 Camino Nunez 31107 Camino Verde 43823 Carentan Drive 43880 Carentan Drive 43883 Carentan Drive 43891 Carentan Drive 41853 Carleton Way 41861 Cadeton Way 40427 Carmelita Circle 40463 Carmelita Circle 40489 Carmelite Circle 32360 Cassino Court 32384 Cassino Court 31821 Cercle Chambertin 45528 Classic Way 45552 Classic Way 46030 Clubhouse Dr. 46050 Clubhouse Dr. 41187 Coghill Drive 41196 Coghill Drive 41206 Coghill Drive 41216 Coghill Drive 41226 Coghill Drive 41236 Coghill Drive 30345 Colina Verde 30554 Colina Verde 44011 Coronado Drive 31072 Code Alamar 31170 Code Alhambra 31171 Corte Alhambra 31211 Code Alhambra 31300 Code Alhambra 43090 Code Alhambra 31009 Code Arroyo Vista 31010 Code Arroyo Vista 31030 Code Arroyo Vista 31701 Code Avalos 32047 Code Bacarro 43460 Code Benavente 43480 Code Benavente 43515 Code Benavente 43565 Code Benavente 43579 Code Benavante 43512 Code Benisa 43515 Code Benisa 43516 Code Benisa 43520 Code Benisa 43410 Code Benitez 33549 Code Bonilla 33571 Code Bonilla 33621 Code Bonilia 33624 Code Bonilla 33625 Code Bonilla 45074 Code Bravo 42948 Code Cabello 43625 Code Cabral 42945 Code Cabrera EXHIBIT "B" 43024 Code Cabrera 43105 Corte Cabrera 43227 Code Cabrera 43171 Code Cabrera 43177 Code Cabrera 43233 Code Cabrera 43068 Code Cabrera 43139 Code Cabrera 43221 Code Cabrera 43212 Code Colanda 43151 Code Colanda 31356 Code Camarillo 32025 Code Canel 32097 Code Canel 29948 Code Cantera 29972 Code Cantera 29994 Code Cantera 30018 Code Cantera 30054 Code Cantera 30078 Code Cantera 30125 Code Cantera 30150 Code Cantera 30161 Code Cantera 30231 Code Cantera 32084 Code Carmela 30140 Code Coehlo 29570 Code Copa 32207 Code Del Cerro 31711 Code Encinas 31759 Code Encinas 31766 Code Encinas 33473 Code Figueroa 29816 Code Granada 29820 Code Granada 29821 Code Granada 29824 Code Granada 32255 Corte IIIora 32284 Code IIIora 32020 Code La Puenta 41814 Corte Lara 41851 Code Lara 43485 Corte Logrono 43495 Corte Logrono 28242 Code Malbino 28250 Corte Malbino 28260 Code Malbino 28267 Code Malbino 31404 Code Malloma 31427 Code Mallorca 33451 Code Mangarino 33475 Code Mangarino 31831 Code Montecito 31367 Code Montiel 31405 Code Montiel 31416 Code Montiel 31440 Code Montiel 31458 Code Montiel 31666 Code Padrera 31515 Code Rimol 45061 Code Rosa 31640 Code Rosario 30003 Code San Luis 42945 Code Sirero 31379 Code Sonora 43126 Code Tolosa 31375 Code Tunas 41800 Code Valentine 45057 Code Valle 44627 Code Veranos 44633 Code Veranos EXHIBIT "B" 43129 42352 33156 33165 33240 33305 33227 32265 42020 42176 42266 42309 42339 42342 42347 42401 42441 42450 42461 40945 44637 41435 41467 41475 41476 32180 32182 32187 32190 32195 32201 32204 32209 32212 32217 32220 32225 32228 32233 32235 32238 Corte Villa Corte Villosa Code Yaca Code Yaca Code Yaca Code Yaca Code Yaca Corte Zamora Cosmic Drive Cosmic Drive Cosmic Drive Cosmic Drive Cosmic Drive Cosmic Drive Cosmic Drive Cosmic Drive Cosmic Drive Cosmic Drive Cosmic Drive Country Circle Dr. Country Glen Way Cour Beaune Cour Beaune Cour Beaune Cour Beaune Cour Magdalaine Cour Magdalaine Cour Magdalaine Cour Magdalaine Cour Magdalaine Cour Meyney Cour Meyney Cour Meyney Cour Meyney Cour Meyney Cour Meyney Cour Meyney Cour Meyney Cour Meyney Cour Meyney Cour Meyney 32241Cour Meyney 32246 Cour Meyney 32249 Cour Meyney 32257 Cour Meyney 32245 Cour Pomerol 32246 Cour Pomerol 32253 Cour Pomerol 32254 Cour Pomerol 32261 Cour Pomerol 32262 Cour Pomerol 32269 Cour Pomerol 32270 Cour Pomerol 32277 Cour Pomerol 32278 Cour Pomerol 32280 Cour Pomerol 32285 Cour Pomerol 32286 Cour Pomerol 32293 Cour Pomerol 32294 Cour Pomerol 29441 Courtney Place 29512 Courtney Place 29540 Courtney Place 39666 Creative Drive 33969 Creative Drive 39732 Creative Drive 39784 Creative Drive 39813 Creative Drive 39843 Creative Drive 34835 Creative Drive 39830 Creative Drive 39859 Creative Drive 45656 Creekside Way 45668 Creekside Way 45682 Creekside Way 45696 Creekside Way 45710 Creekside Way 45724 Creekside Way 45768 Creekside Way 45775 Creekside Way 45787 Creekside Way 45795 Creekside Way 45798 Creekside Way 41231 Crooked Stick Drive 39820 Cross Creek Ct. 39821 Cross Creek Ct. 39825 Cross Creek Ct. 39828 Cross Creek Ct. 39901 Cross Creek Ct. 30768 Crystalaire Drive 30957 Crystalaire Drive 31043 Crystalaire Drive 31577 Culbe~son Lane 31580 Culbe~son Lane 31585 Culbe~son Lane 31588 Culbe~son Lane 31593 Culbe~son Lane 31596 Culbedson Lane 31601Culbe~son Lane 31602 Culbe~son Lane 30163 Cupeno Lane 30171Cupeno Lane 30179 Cuaeno Lane 30186 Cu3eno Lane 30187 Cu3eno Lane 30194 Cu3eno Lane 20195 Cuaeno Lane 30202 Cu ~eno Lane 30203 Cu3eno Lane 30210 Cu3eno Lane 30211Cu3eno Lane 30218 Cu3eno Lane 30219 Cuaeno Lane 30226 Cuaeno Lane 30227 Cuaeno Lane 30231Cu3eno Lane 30235 Cu3eno Lane 30236 Cuaeno Lane 30242 Cuaeno Lane 30243 Cuaeno Lane 30246 Cuaeno Lane 30247 Cuaeno Lane 30250 Cuaeno Lane 30251Cu3eno Lane 30254 Cu3eno Lane 30255 Cu3eno Lane 30262 Cuaeno Lane 30263 Cu3eno Lane 30270 Cu3eno Lane 30271Cu3eno Lane 30278 Cuaeno Lane 30279 Cu3eno Lane 30286 Cu )eno Lane 30287 CL )eno Lane EXHIBIT "B" 30294 Cupeno Lane 30295 Cupeno Lane 30302 Cupeno Lane 30303 Cupeno Lane 30310 Cupeno Lane 30311 Cupeno Lane 30318 Cupeno Lane 30324 Cupeno Lane 30329 Cu ~eno Lane 30334 Cu ~eno Lane 30342 Cu ~eno Lane 30343 Cu ~eno Lane 30350 Cu ~eno Lane 30351 Cu ~eno Lane 30359 Cu ~eno Lane 30361 Cu ~eno Lane 30632 Cu ~eno Lane 30369 Cupeno Lane 30370 Cupeno Lane 30377 Cupeno Lane 30385 Cupeno Lane 30389 Cupeno Lane 30393 Cupeno Lane 30397 Cupeno Lane 30401 Cupeno Lane 30405 Cupeno Lane 30409 Cupeno Lane 30413 Cupeno Lane 30417 Cupeno Lane 42050 D Street 27492 Dandelion Court 27543 Dandelion Court 27564 Dandelion Court 27594 Dandelion Court 27598 Dandelion Court 31645 Dane Cou~ 31745 Dane Cou~ 31795 Dane Cou~ 31824 Dane Court 31864 Dane Coud 31895 Dane Court 31904 Dane Court 31944 Dane Coud 31945 Dane Court 31984 Dane Cou~ 30413 Danube Court 30416 Danube Cou~ 30443 Danube Court 30486 Danube Court 30493 Danube Court 30496 Danube Court 29710 Dawncrest Circle 29714 Dawncrest Circle 29719 Dawncrest Circle 29725 Dawncrest Circle 29732 Dawncrest Circle 20739 Dawncreet Circle 29744 Dawncrest Circle 29751 Dawncrest Circle 29756 Dawncrest Circle 29763 Dawncrest Circle 29768 Dawncrest Circle 29775 Dawncrest Circle 29780 Dawncrest Circle 29787 Dawncrest Circle 29792 Dawncrest Circle 29799 Dawncrest Circle 29813 Dawncrest Circle 29816 Dawncrest Circle 29596 Deal 29597 Deal 29608 Deal 29609 Deal 29620 Deal 29621 Deal 29632 Deal 29633 Deal 29644 Deal 29645 Deal 29656 Deal 29657 Deal 29678 Deal 29679 Deal 29690 Deal 29691 Deal 29700 Deal 41818 Deepwood 41823 Deepwood 41824 Deepwood 41831Deepwood 41836 Deepwood 41837 Deepwood 41848 Deepwood 41849 Deepwood 41860 Deepwood 41861 Deepwood 30378 Deer Meadow Road 30165 Deer Meadow Road 30181 Deer Meadow Road 30197 Deer Meadow Road 30213 Deer Meadow Road 30245 Deer Meadow Road 30277 Deer Meadow Road 30298 Deer Meadow Road 30344 Deer Meadow Road 30359 Deer Meadow Road 30360 Deer Meadow Road 30424 Deer Meadow Road 30439 Deer Meadow Road 30455 Deer Meadow Road 30466 Deer Meadow Road 30010 Del Mar Court 30011 Del Mar Court 30020 Del Mar Court 30040 Del Mar Court 30041 Del Mar Court 29631 Del Rey Road 29638 Del Rey Road 29663 Del Rey Road 29684 Del Rey Road 29701 Del Rey Road 29710 Del Rey Road 29723 Del Rey Road 29730 Del Rey Road 29741 Del Rey Road 29795 Del Rey Road 29850 Del Rey Road 29885 Del Rey Road 29905 Del Rey Road 29935 Del Rey Road 29955 Del Rey Road 29960 Del Rey Road 30010 Del Rey Road 30011 Del Rey Road 30040 Del Rey Road 30050 Del Rey Road 30065 Del Rey Road 30100 Del Rey Road 30115 Del Rey Road 30130 Del Rey Road 30135 Del Rey Road 30213 Del Rey Road 30215 Del Rey Road EXHIBIT "B" 30220 30325 30405 30410 30425 30475 30490 30521 30571 30580 30581 30600 30603 30636 30641 30688 30701 30725 30758 30780 30793 30832 30839 30882 30903 30914 30959 30994 31004 31005 31034 31039 31066 31126 31158 31173 31210 31213 31240 31365 30033 30065 30160 30300 30355 30375 30401 30430 30435 30451 Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road De~ Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road Del Rey Road De Portola Road De Portola Road De Portota Road De Portola Road De Portola Road De Portola Road De Portola Road De Portola Road De Portola Road De Portola Road 30605 De Portola Road 30753 De Portola Road 30955 De Portola Road 31411 De Portola Road 31775 De Portola Road 32099 De Portola Road 32562 De Portola Road 33184 De Portola Road 33270 De Portola Road 33360 De Portola Road 33388 De Portola Road 33598 De Portola Road 33654 De Portola Road 31122 Dog Leg Circle 45364 Escalante Court 43484 Fassano Court 33226 Fox Road 33234 Fox Road 33243 Fox Road 33250 Fox Road 33251 Fox Road 33305 Fox Road 33306 Fox Road 33317 Fox Road 33318 Fox Road 33330 Fox Road 33335 Fox Road 33342 Fox Road 33351 Fox Road 33355 Fox Road 33366 Fox Road 33375 Fox Road 33395 Fox Road 33415 Fox Road 29482 Georgetown Lane 29492 Georgetown Lane 29497 Georgetown Lane 29502 Georgetown Lane 29512 Georgetown Lane 29522 Georgetown Lane 29523 Georgetown Lane 29533 Georgetown Lane 29538 Georgetown Lane 39775 Goldenrod 39795 Goldenrod 31369 Inverness Court 31404 Inverness Court 31437 Inverness Court 31440 Inverness Court 31449 Inverness Court 31472 Inverness Court 31483 Inverness Court 30620 Jedediah Smith 43854 Jerez Lane 43561 John Warner Road 31167 Kahwea Road 39868 Knollridge Drive 40555 La Colima Road 44300 La Paz Street 30085 La Primavera 30965 La Serena Way 31120 Lahonthan Street 41355 Lancashire Common 41715 Lancashire Common 43105 Lancashire Common 43115 Lancashire Common 43125 Lancashire Common 43165 Lancashire Common 43983 Larino Court 28790 Las Haciendas 30058 Laurel Creek 30066 Laurel Creek 30074 Laurel Creek 41574 Laurel Valley Circle 30743 Links Court 30791 Links Court 30984 Lolita Road 30807 Loma Linda Road EXHIBIT "B" 30811 Loma Linda Road 31658 Loma Linda Road 32305 McCabe Drive 27312 Madison Avenue 32402 Magenta Court '32418 Magenta Court 43009 Manchester Ct. 43017 Manchester Ct. 43025 Manchester Ct. 43030 Manchester Ct. 43033 Manchester Ct. 43038 Manchester Ct. 43041 Manchester Ct. 43046 Manchester Ct. 43049 Manchester Ct. 43054 Manchester Ct. 43057 Manchester Ct. 43062 Manchester Ct. 43065 Manchester Ct. 43070 Manchester Ct. 43078 Manchester Ct. 43086 Manchester Ct. 43301 Manchester Ct. 30036 Manzanita Ct. 30037 Manzanita Ct. 30044 Manzanita Ct. 30047 Manzanita Ct. 30052 Manzanita Ct. 30060 Manzanita Ct. 30067 Manzanita Ct. 30068 Manzanita Ct. 43596 Manzano Dr. 43601 Manzano Dr. 43603 Manzano Dr. 41819 Marwood Cr. 30924 Mashie Way 32008 Merlot Crest 30524 Milano Rd. 29589 Mira Loma Dr. 42959 Montelegro Way 43080 Montelegro Way 43136 Montelegro Way 43235 Montelegro Way 43538 Montelegro Way 43539 Montelegro Way 43538 Montelegro Way 31250 Montelena Circle 31258 Montelena Circle 31266 Montelena Circle 31274 Montelena Circle 31282 Montelena Circle 31290 Montelena Circle 31298 Montelena Circle 41000 Montelena Circle 41005 Montelena Circle 41008 Montelena Circle 41033 Montelena Circle 41084 Montelena Circle 29620 Monte Verde 29625 Monte Verde 29640 Monte Verde 29645 Monte Verde 29660 Monte Verde 29675 Monte Verde 29680 Monte Verde 29705 Monte Verde 29720 Monte Verde 29745 Monte Verde 29760 Monte Verde 29785 Monte Verde 30375 Moonlight Court 30378 Moonlight Court 30385 Moonlight Court 30392 Moonlight Court 30395 Moonlight Court 30408 Moonlight Court 30415 Moonlight Court 30422 Moonlight Court 30425 Moonlight Court 30435 Moonlight Court 30436 Moonlight Court 30445 Moonlight Court 30450 Moonlight Court 30451 Moonlight Court 30568 Moontide Court 30601 Moontide Court 30620 Moontide Court 30634 Moontide Court 30664 Moontide Court 30661 Moontide Court 41852 Moreno Road 41856 Moreno Road 34590 Murfield Drive 44828 Murfield Drive 44840 Murfleld Drive 44849 Murfield Drive 44852 Murfield Drive 44861 Murfield Drive 44864 Murfield Drive 44873 Murfield Drive 44876 Murfield Drive 44885 Murfield Drive 44888 Murfield Drive 44897 Murfield Drive 44900 Murfield Drive 44909 Murfield Drive 44912 Murfield Drive 44921 Murfield Drive 44924 Murfield Drive 44933 Murfield Drive 44936 Murtield Drive 44945 Murfield Drive 44947 Murfield Drive 44948 Murfield Drive 44960 Murfield Drive 44972 Murfield Drive 44983 Murfield Drive 44984 Mudiled Drive 44993 Murfield Drive 44994 Murfield Drive 45004 Murfield Drive 45009 Murfield Drive 45014 Murfield Drive 45024 Murfield Drive 45630 Mudield Drive 45644 Murfield Drive 45651 Mudield Drive 45656 Mudield Drive 45661 Murfield Drive 45664 Murfield Drive 45667 Murfield Drive 45670 Mur'[ield Drive 45679 Murfield Drive 45680 Muffield Drive 45690 Murfleld Drive EXHIBIT "B" 45691 Murfield Drive 43502 Nantes Court 43509 Nantes Court 43510 Nantes Court 43519 Nantes Court 43520 Nantes Court 43529 Nantes Court 43530 Nantes Court 43539 Nantes Court 43540 Nantes Court 43549 Nantes Court 43550 Nantes Court 43559 Nantes Court 43560 Nantes Court 43569 Nantes Court 43570 Nantes Court 31089 Nassau Court 31090 Nassau Court 31091 Nassau Court 31097 Nassau Court 31104 Nassau Court 31105 Nassau Court 31112 Nassau Court 31113 Nassau Court 31120 Nassau Court 31121 Nassau Court 31128 Nassau Court 31129 Nassau Court 31136 Nassau Court 31160 Nassau Court 31161 Nassau Court 31177 Nassau Court 30290 Nebula Lane 30321 Nebula Lane 40526 New Town Drive 40531 New Town Drive 40536 New Town Drive 40539 New Town Drive 40554 New Town Drive 40550 New Town Drive 40555 New Town Drive 40558 New Town Drive 40563 New Town Drive 40571 New Town Drive 40579 New Town Drive 41811 Niblick Road 41821 Niblick Road 41833 Niblick Road 41845 Niblick Road 41857 Niblick Road 41869 Niblick Road 41881 Niblick Road 41893 Niblick Road 41905 Niblick Road 41917 Niblick Road 41931 Niblick Road 41943 Niblick Road 41967 Niblick Road 41973 Niblick Road 41974 Niblick Road 41979 Niblick Road 41985 Niblick Road 41986 Niblick Road 41991 Niblick Road 41992 Niblick Road 41995 Niblick Road 41997 Niblick Road 41998 Niblick Road 42003 Niblick Road 27058 Nicholas Road 27060 Nicholas Road 27062 Nicholas Road 27215 Nicholas Road 27469 Nicholas Road 27615 Nicholas Road 28000 Nicholas Road 30074 Nicholas Road 30101 Nicholas Road 30301 Nicholas Road 30203 Nicholas Road 30800 Nicholas Road 30574 Nicholas Road 31220 Nichotas Road 31253 Nicholas Road 31300 Nicholas Road 37900 Nicholas Road 39960 Nicholas Road 29599 Nightcrest Circle 29580 Nightcrest Circle 29575 Nightcrest Circle 29560 Nightcrest Circle 29553 Nightcrest Circle 29540 Nightcrest Circle 29600 Nightcrest Circle 29611 Nightcrest Circle 29620 Nightcrest Circle 29633 Nightcrest Circle 29640 Nightcrest Circle 29655 Nightcrest Circle 29660 Nightcrest Circle 29680 Nightcrest Circle 29691 Nightcrest Circle 29700 Nightcrest Circle 29703 Nightcrest Circle 29721 Nightview Circle 29728 Nightview Circle 29733 Nightview Circle 29740 Nightview Circle 29745 Nightview Circle 29752 Nightview Circle 29757 Nightview Circle 29764 Nightview Circle 29769 Nightview Circle 29776 Nightview Circle 29781 Nightview Circle 29788 Nightview Circle 29793 Nightview Circle 29800 Nightview Circle 29805 Nightview Circle 29812 Nightview Circle 29824 Nightview Circle 40524 Nob Court 40531 Nob Court 40538 Nob Court 40545 Nob Court 40552 Nob Court 40559 Nob Court 40566 Nob Court 40570 Nob Court 40573 Nob Cou~ 40584 Nob Court 40598 Nob Court 40612 Nob Court 43960 Northgate Avenue 44053 Northgate Avenue 44113 Northgate Avenue 42779 North Start Court 42780 Northstar Court 42793 Northstar Court 42794 Northstar Court 42825 Northstar Court EXHIBIT "B" 39281 Oak Cliff Drive 39371 Oak Cliff Drive 39503 Oak Cliff Drive 39536 Oak Cliff Drive 39537 Oak Cliff Drive 29586 Oak Cliff Drive 39640 Oak Cliff Drive 39708 Oak Cliff Drive 39792 Oak Cliff Drive 39804 Oak Cliff Drive 39810 Oak Cliff Drive 39816 Oak Cliff Drive 31040 Oak Hill Drive 31045 Oak Hill Drive 31048 Oak Hill Drive 31053 Oak Hill Drive 31056 Oak Hill Drive 31061 Oak Hill Drive 31064 Oak Hill Drive 31069 Oak Hill Drive 31074 Oak Hill Drive 31075 Oak Hill Drive 45504 Olympic Way 45505 Olympic Way 45514 Olympic Way 45521 Olympic Way 45524 Olympic Way 45533 Olympic Way 45534 Olympic Way 45540 Olympic Way 45546 Olympic Way 45558 Olympic Way 45559 Olympic Way 45573 Olympic Way 45573 Olympic Way 45574 Olympic Way 45584 Olympic Way 45585 Olympic Way 45597 Olympic Way 47558 Olympic Way 45610 Olympic Way 45626 Olympic Way 45640 Olympic Way 45651 Olympic Way 45654 Olympic Way 45670 Olympic Way 45698 Olympic Way 45716 Olympic Way 45734 Olympic Way 45750 Olympic Way 45770 Olympic Way 30610 Open Court 30611 Open Court 30621 Open Court 30641 Open Court 30650 Open Court 30651 Open Court 43600 Ortona Street 43610 Ortona Street 43630 Ortona Street 43642 Ortona Street 43652 Ortona Street 43666 Ortona Street 43668 Ortona Street 43680 Ortona Street 43696 Ortona Street 43708 Ortona Street 41704 Overland Drive 41705 Overland Drive 31368 Pahuta Street 31376 Pahuta Street 31384 Pahuta Street 31392 Pahuta Street 31397 Pahuta Street 31405 Pahuta Street 31421 Pahuta Street 44564 Pale Road 44715 Pale Road 45115 Pala Road 45256 Pale Road 45394 Pala Road 45600 Pala Road 45604 Pala Road 45665 Pala Road 45667 Pala Road 46699 Pala Road 54610 Pala Road 44011 Palma Drive 44055 Palina Drive 45660 Palma Drive 45680 Palma Drive 45700 Palma Drive 45740 Palmetto Way 45760 Palmetto Way 45771 Palmetto Way 45780 Palmetto Way 45825 Palmetto Way 45826 Palmetto Way 45838 Palmetto Way 45841 Palmetto Way 45848 Palmetto Way 31500 Palmetto Way 27488 Parkside Drive 27494 Parkside Drive 27500 Parkside Drive 27506 Parkside Drive 27511 Parkside Drive 27512 Parkside Drive 27518 Parkside Drive 27524 Parkside Drive 27530 Parkside Drive 27536 Parkside Drive 27542 Parkside Drive 27548 Parkside Drive 27554 Parkside Drive 27560 Parkside Drive 27566 Parkside Drive 27572 Parkside Drive 27578 Parkside Drive 27584 Parkside Drive 27590 Parkside Drive 27596 Parkside Drive 27602 Parkside Drive 27608 Parkside Drive 27614 Parkside Drive 27620 Parkside Drive 27626 Parkside Drive 27632 Parkside Drive 27638 Parkside Drive 27644 Parkside Drive 27650 Parkside Drive 27656 Parkside Drive 27662 Parkside Drive 27668 Parkside Drive 27674 Parkside Drive 27680 Parkside Drive 45948 Parsippany 45959 Parsippany 29753 Pasada Road 27960 Pasada Road 29810 Pasada Road 29815 Pasada Road 42070 Paseo Brillante 42086 Paseo Brillante 42102 Paseo Brillante 42105 Paseo Brillante 31336 Paseo De Las Olas 31347 Paseo De Las Olas 31359 Paseo De Las Olas 31373 Paseo De Las Olas 31378 Paseo De Las Olas 31407 Paseo De Las Olas 31408 Paseo De Las Olas 31424 Paseo De Las Olas 31446 Paseo De Las Olas 31447 Paseo De Las Olas 31452 Paseo De Los Olas 31484 Paseo De Los Olas 31519 Paseo De Los Olas 31532 Paseo De Las Olas 31538 Paseo De Las Olas 31586 Paseo De Las Olas 31618 Paseo De Las Olas 31657 Paseo De Las Olas 31693 Paseo De Las Olas 31708 Paseo De Las Olas 31734 Paseo De Las Olas 31746 Paseo De Las Qlas 31756 Paseo De Las Olas 31760 Paseo De Las Olas 31768 Paseo De Las Olas 31772 Paseo De Las Olas 31778 Paseo De Las Olas 31782 Paseo De Las Olas 31786 Paseo De Las Olas 40280 Paseo Del Cielo 40285 Paseo Del Cielo 40298 Paseo Del Cielo 40339 Paseo Del Cielo 40410 Paseo Del Cielo 40479 Paseo Del Cielo 31315 Paseo Goleta 31365 Paseo Goleta 31370 Paseo Goleta 31377 Paseo Goleta 31380 Paseo Goleta 31390 Paseo Goleta 31412 Paseo Goleta EXHIBIT"B" 31425 Paseo Goleta 31435 Paseo Goleta 31465 Paseo Goleta 31470 Paseo Goleta 31480 Paseo Goleta 31490 Paseo Goleta 31500 Paseo Goleta 31510 Paseo Goleta 31520 Paseo Goleta 31530 Paseo Goleta 31540 Paseo Goleta 31550 Paseo Goleta 31562 Paseo Goleta 31572 Paseo Goleta 31582 Paseo Goleta 31584 Paseo Goleta 31594 Paseo Goleta 31606 Paseo Goleta 31616 Paseo Goleta 31628 Paseo Goleta 31638 Paseo Goleta 31650 Paseo Goleta 31660 Paseo Goleta 31672 Paseo Goleta 34684 Paseo Goleta 31695 Paseo Goleta 31705 Paseo Goleta 31715 Paseo Goleta 31727 Paseo Goleta 31737 Paseo Goleta 31749 Paseo Goleta 31761 Paseo Goleta 42073 Paseo Rayo 42081Paseo Rayo 42088 Paseo Rayo 42095 Paseo Rayo 42096 Paseo Rayo 42104 Paseo Rayo 42107 Paseo Rayo 32144 Paseo San Esteban 40150 Paseo Sereno 40174 Paseo Sereno 40175 Paseo Sereno 40195 Paseo Sereno 40200 Paseo Sereno 40215 Paseo Sereno 40224 Paseo Sereno 40245 Paseo Sereno 40274 Paseo Sereno 40324 Paseo Sereno 40325 Paseo Sereno 40340 Paseo Sereno 40365 Paseo Sereno 40374 Paseo Sereno 42064 Paseo Sunrisa 42065 Paseo Sunrisa 42071Paseo Sunrisa 42072 Paseo Sunrisa 42079 Paseo Sonrisa 42080 Paseo Sonrisa 42088 Paseo Sonrisa 42091Paseo Sonrisa 42096 Paseo Sonrisa 42104 Paseo Sonrisa 42112 Paseo Sunrisa 42120 Paseo Sonrisa 42128 Paseo Sonrisa 32824 Paterno Street 32833 Paterno Street 32834 Paterno Street 32841 Patemo Street 32842 Paterno Street 32849 Paterno Street 32850 Patemo Street 32857 Paterno Street 32858 Paterno Street 32865 Paterno Street 32866 Paterno Street 32874 Patemo Street 32881 Paterno Street 32884 Paterno Street 32889 Patemo Street 32894 Paterno Street 32897 Paterno Street 32904 Paterno Street 32905 Paterno Street 32912 Paterno Street 32913 Paterno Street 32920 Paterno Street 32921 Patemo Street 32928 Paterno Street 32929 Paterno Street 32936 Patemo Street 32937 Paterno Street 32944 Paterno Street 32945 Paterno Street 32952 Paterno Street EXHIBIT "B" 32960 Paterno Street 32961 Paterno Street 32970 Paterno Street 32971 Paterno Street 32980 Paterno Street 32981 Paterno Street 32990 Paterno Street 32991 Paterno Street 33000 Paterno Street 33001 Paterno Street 33011 Paterno Street 33020 Paterno Street 33021 Paterno Street 33031 Paterno Street 33037 Paterno Street 33038 Paterno Street 29992 Pechanga Road 27049 Quail Slope Drive 44007 Quite Meadow Road 29745 Ramsey Court 42575 Remora St. 43500 Ridge Park 30480 San Pasqual Rd 30276 Santa Cecilia 31752 Santiago Road 40201 Starling Street 42160 Stonewood Road 42164 Stonewood Road 42166 Stonewood Road 42168 Stonewood Road 42170 Stonewood Road 42172 Stonewood Road 42174 Stonewood Road 42176 Stonewood Road 42178 Stonewood Road 42180 Stonewood Road 42182 Stonewood Road 43450 Sunny Meadows Dr. 39888 Sweet Brier Cr. 39935 Sweet Brier Cr. 39947 Sweet Brier Cr. 42125 Sweetshade Ln. 30290 Tadewater Ct. 40221TannagerWay 41975 Teatree Court 41687 Temeku Dr. 41687 Temeku Dr. 43032 Teramo St. 43033 Teramo St. 43053 Teramo St. 43086 Teramo St. 43093 Teramo St. 43113 Teramo St. 43115 Teramo St. 45346 Tesiben Ct. 45347 Tesiben Ct. 45359 Tesiben Ct. 27455 Tierra Alta 27799 Tierra Vista 28184 Tierra Vista 28187 Tierra Vista 28192 Tierra Vista 28203 Tierra Vista 28208 Tierra Vista 28216 Tierra Vista 28240 Tierra Vista 28248 Tierra Vista 28251 Tierra Vista 28263 Tierra Vista 28272 Tierra Vista 28275 Tierra Vista 28280 Tierra Vista 28288 Tierra Vista 28304 Tierra Vista 28320 Tierra Vista 28336 Tierra Vista 28344 Tierra Vista 28352 Tierra Vista 28368 Tierra Vista 39528 Tischa Dr. 39528 Tischa Dr. 45385 Tournament Lane 45568 Tournament Lane 28895 Vallejo Ave. 40174 Varerinane Ct. 42952 Via Alhama 32184 Via Cordaro 32197 Via Cordaro 32198 Via Cordaro 32211 Via Cordaro 32212 Via Cordaro 32225 Via Cordaro 32226 Via Cordaro 31645 Via Cordaro 31655 Via Cordoba 31665 Via Cordoba 31675 Via Cordoba 31685 Via Cordoba 31695 Via Cordoba 31700 Via Cordoba 31705 Via Cordoba 31715 Via Cordoba 31725 Via Cordoba 31730 Via Cordoba 31735 Via Cordoba 31740 Via Cordoba 31745 Via Cordoba 31750 Via Cordoba 31755 Via Cordoba 31760 Via Cordoba 31765 Via Cordoba 31770 Via Cordoba 31775 Via Cordoba 31785 Via Cordoba 31795 Via Cordoba 31800 Via Cordoba 31810 Via Cordoba 31820 Via Cordoba 31830 Via Cordoba 31840 Via Cordoba 31850 Via Cordoba 31860 Via Cordoba 31865 Via Cordoba 31870 Via Cordoba EXHIBIT"B" 31875 Via Cordoba 31880 Via Cordoba 31885 Via Cordoba 31890 Via Cordoba 31895 Via Cordoba 31900 Via Cordoba 31905 Via Cordoba 31910 Via Cordoba 31915 Via Cordoba 31920 Via Cordoba 31925 Via Cordoba 31930 Via Cordoba 31935 Via Cordoba 31940 Via Cordoba 31950 Via Cordoba 31960 Via Cordoba 31970 Via Cordoba 31980 Via Cordoba 31990 Via Cordoba 31995 Via Cordoba 32000 Via Cordoba 32005 Via Cordoba 32010 Via Cordoba 32015 Via Cordoba 32020 Via Cordoba 32025 Via Cordoba 32035 Via Cordoba 32045 Via Cordoba 32065 Via Cordoba 32075 Via Cordoba 32080 Via Cordoba 32095 Via Cordoba 32100 Via Cordoba 32105 Via Cordoba 32115 Via Cordoba 32120 Via Cordoba 32125 Via Cordoba 32135 Via Cordoba 32140 Via Cordoba 32155 Via Cordoba 32160 Via Cordoba 32210 Via Cordoba 32240 Via Cordoba 33310 Via Cordoba 33320 Via Cordoba 30164 Via Corsica 30178 Via Corsica 30179 Via Corsica 30192 Via Corsica 30207 Via Corsica 30234 Via Corsica 31093 Via Corsica 42080 Via Cuesta Al Sol 42085 Via Cuesta Al Sol 42096 Via Cuesta Al Sol 42097 Via Cuesta Al Sol 42104 Via Cuesta Al Sol 30070 Via De La Mesa 30090 Via De La Mesa 30110 Via De La Mesa 30115 Via De La Mesa 30130 Via De La Mesa 30135 Via De La Mesa 30165 Via De La Mesa 30175 Via De La Mesa 30195 Via De La Mesa 42700 Via Del Campo 42701 Via Del Campo 42721 Via Del Campo 45000 Via DelCoronado 43119 Via Dos Picos 31408 Via Eduardo 41701 Via El Greco 41721 Via El Greco 41743 Via El Greco 41759 Via El Greco 41768 Via El Greco 41769 Via El Greco 41788 Via El Greco 41798 Via El Greco 41808 Via El Greco 41821 Via El Greco 32175 Via Flore 32176 Via Flore 32189 Via Flore 32190 Via Flore 32203 Via Flore 32204 Via Flore 32217 Via Flore 32218 Via Flore 32231 Via Flore 32245 Via Flore 32259 Via Flore 42850 Via Gandia 42870 Via Gandia 42875 Via Gandia 42890 Via Gandia 42905 Via Gandia 42910 Via Gandia 42930 Via Gandia 42935 Via Gandia 42950 Via Gandia 42965 Via Gandia 42970 Via Gandia 42990 Via Gandia 42995 Via Gandia 31029 Via Gilberto 31103 Via Gilberto 41026 Via Halcon 41041 Via Halcon 41044 Via Halcon 41054 Via Halcon 41060 Via Halcon 41065 Via Halcon 41080 Via Halcon 41098 Via Halcon 41134 Via Halcon 41149 Via Halcon 42890 Via Jumilla 42902 Via Jumilla 42914 Via Jumilla 42926 Via Jumilla 42938 Via JumilJa 42950 Via Jumilla 42962 Via Jumilla 42974 Via Jumilla 42986 Via Jumilla 42998 Via Jumilla 43022 Via Jumilla 43034 Via Jumilla 43046 Via Jumilla 43058 Via Jumilla 43078 Via Jumilla 43082 Via Jumilla 29740 Via La Vida 29744 Via La Vida 29748 Via La Vida 29752 Via La Vida EXHIBIT"B" 29756 Via La Vida 29760 Via La Vida 29764 Via La Vida 29766 Via La Vida 42095 Via La Vida 42101 Via La Vida 29728 Via Las Chacras 29732 Via Las Chacras 29733 Via Las Chacras 29736 Via Las Chacras 29737 Via Las Chacras 29740 Via Las Chacras 29741 Via Las Chacras 29744 Via Las Chacras 29745 Via Las Chacras 29748 Via Las Chacras 29749 Via Las Chacras 29752 Via Las Chacras 29757 Via Las Chacras 29758 Via Las Chacras 29761 Via Las Chacras 28762 Via Las Chacras 29765 Via Las Chacras 29769 Via Las Chacras 29773 Via Las Chacras 29777 Via Las Chacras 29778 Via Las Chacras 29781 Via Las Chacras 29785 Via Las Chacras 29789 Via Las Chacras 29793 Via Las Chacras 29797 Via Las Chacras 29497 Via Las Chacras 41709 Via Lomas Vista 41700 Via Lomas Vista 41712 Via Lomas Vista 40820 Via Los Altos 40825 Via Los Altos 40880 Via Los Altos 40899 Via Los Altos 40900 Via Los Altos 40905 Via Los Altos 29489 Via Los Colina 44986 Via Lucia 44989 Via Lucia 44992 Via Lucia 44995 Via Lucia 44604 Via Lucido 44610 Via Lucido 44616 Via Lucido 44622 Via Lucido 44628 Via Lucido 44631 Via Lucido 44634 Via Lucido 44637 Via Lucido 44640 Via Lucido 44643 Via Lucido 44646 Via Lucido 44649 Via Lucido 44652 Via Lucido 44655 Via Lucido 44658 Via Lucido 44661 Via Lucido 44664 Via Lucido 44665 Via Lucido 44667 Via Lucido 44670 Via Lucido 44673 Via Lu¢ido 44676 Via Lucido 44679 Via Lucido 44682 Via Lucido 44688 Via Lucido 44694 Via Lucido 44700 Via Lucido 44706 Via Lucido 40860 Via Media 40880 Via Media 40885 Via Media 40910 Via Media 40915 Via Media 40930 Via Media 40935 Via Media 40935 Via Media 40950 Via Media 29613 Via Mondo 29621 Via Mondo 29629 Via Mondo 29630 Via Mondo 29637 Via Mondo 29645 Via Mondo 29653 Via Mondo 29661 Via Mondo 29669 Via Mondo 29677 Via Mondo 29685 Via Mondo 30110 Via Monterey 30115 Via Monterey 30130 Via Monterey 30135 Via Monterey 30140 Via Monterey 30150 Via Monterey 28715 Via Montezuma 28825 Via Norte 28860 Via Norte 28870 Via Node 28915 Via Notre 28930 Via Node 28960 Via Notre 28975 Via Node 29025 Via Node 29045 Via Norte 29065 Via Norte 29085 Via Norte 29090 Via Notre 29140 Via Node 29170 Via Norte 29270 Via Norte 29300 Via Node 29301 Via Norte 29321 Via Norte 29345 Via Notre 29365 Via Norte 29385 Via Norte 29414 Via Norte 29657 Via Node 29660 Via Notre 29700 Via Norte 29720 Via Node 29789 Via Norte 29887 Via Node 29935 Via Notre 29991 Via Norte 30032 Via Node 30035 Via Norte 30066 Via Norte 30098 Via Node 30145 Via Norte 30195 Via Norte 30400 Via Node 30665 Via Notre 31760 Via Te[esio EXHIBIT"B" 41950 Via Toreno 30276 Via Val Verde 30298 Via Vel Verde 41800 Via Vase uez 41810 Via Vase uez 41823 Via Vase uez 41824 Via Vase uez 41835 Via Vase uez 41847 Via Vase uez 41859 Via Vase uez 41871 Via Vasc uez 41883 Via Vasc uez 41895 Via Vas~ uez 41910 Via Vasc uez 30011 Via Velez Place 30030 Via Velez Place 30048 Via Velez Place 30049 Via Velez Place 30065 Via Velez Place 30079 Via Velez Place 30097 Via Velez Place 40211 Vidiette Circle 40237 Vidiette Circle 29835 Villa Alturas Dr. 29836 Villa Alturas Dr. 29848 Villa Alturas Dr. 29873 Villa Alturas Dr. 29921 Villa Alturas Dr. 29957 Villa Alturas Dr. 30065 Villa Alturas Dr. 30095 Villa Alturas Dr. 30096 Villa Alturas Dr. 30129 Villa Alturas Dr. 30152 Villa Alturas Dr. 30166 Villa Alturas Dr. 30167 Villa Alturas Dr. 30180 Villa Alturas Dr. 30205 Villa Alturas Dr. 30214 Villa Alturas Dr. 30219 Villa Alturas Dr. 30226 Villa Alturas Dr. 30247 Villa Alturas Dr. 30262 Villa AIturas Dr. 44750 Villa Del Sur Dr. 42821 Villa Terrace Ct. 42836 Villa Terrace Ct. 40012 Villa Venecia 40024 Villa Venec~a 40048 Villa Venec~a 40049 Villa Venecia 40060 Villa Venec~a 40061 Villa Venec~a 40072 Villa Venecia 40073 Villa Venecia 40084 Villa Venecia 40085 Villa Venec~a 40096 Villa Venec~a 40097 Villa Venecia 40108 Villa Venecia 40109 Villa Venec~a 40120 Villa Venecia 40121 Villa Venecia 40132 Villa Venec~a 40133 Villa Venec~a 40144 Villa Venec~a 40145 Villa Venec~a 31769 Vineyard 31777 Vineyard 31819 Vineyard 31875 Vineyard 31903 Vineyard 32037 Vineyard 31288 Vintage Circle 31296 Vintage Circle 31309 Vintage Circle 41041 Vintage Circle 41049 Vintage Circle 41057 Vintage Circle 41064 Vintage Circle 41065 Vintage Circle 41073 Vintage Circle 41074 Vintage Circle 41087 Vintage Circle 41089 Vintage Circle 41090 Vintage Circle 41097 Vintage Circle 41104 Vintage Circle 41105 Vintage Circle 41112 Vintage Circle 41120 Vintage Circle 41128 Vintage Circle 41137 Vintage Circle 41145 Vintage Circle 41150 Vintage Circle 41153 Vintage Circle 41161 Vintage Circle 41169 Vintage Circle 43081 Vista Del Rancho 43066 Volterra Ct. 30502 Wailea Court 30503 Wailea Court 30509 Wailea Court 30516 Wailea Court 30519 Wailea Court 30530 Wailea Court 30531 Wailea Court 40030 Walcott Lane 40055 Walcott Lane 40095 Walcott Lane 40393 Walcott Lane 39511 Warbler Circle 40126 Warbler Circle 40140 Warbler Circle 40154 Warbler Circle 40168 Warbler Circle 39538 Warbler Drive 39539 Warbler Drive 39544 Warbler Drive 39545 Warbler Drive 39550 Warbler Drive 39551 Warbler Drive 39562 Warbler Drive 39568 Warbler Drive 39569 Warbler Drive 39576 Warbler Drive 39584 Warbler Drive 31157Washana Ct. 29539Waynewood Dr. 29561Waynewood Dr. 29583Waynewood Dr. 29601Waynewood Dr. 29623Waynewood Dr. 29645Waynewood Dr. 29667Waynewood Dr. EXHIBIT "B" 29689Waynewood Dr. 29711Waynewood Dr. 29733Waynewood Dr. 30916Wedge Way 30924Wedge Way 30932WedgeWay 30933Wedge Way 30941WedgeWay 30942WedgeWay 30949WedgeWay 31664Weibel Cr. 31665Weibel Cr. 31675Weibel Cr. 31676Weibel Cr. 31685Weibel Cr. 31686Weibel Cr. 31693Weibel Cr. 31694Weibel Cr. 31696WeibelCr. 31705Weibel Cr. 31706Weibel Cr. 31715Weibel Cr. 31716Weibel Cr. 31720Weibel Cr. 30869 Wellington Ct. 30870 Wellington Cr. 30882 Wellington Cr. 30893 Wellington Cr. 30944 Wellington Cr. 30956 Wellington Ct. 30980 Wellington Cr. 30993 Wellington Cr. 31004 Wellington Cr. 31052 Wellington Cr. 31064 Wellington Cr. 31065 Wellington Cr. 31112 Wellington Cr. 30850 White Rocks Cr. 30851 White Rocks Cr. 30860 White Rocks Cr. 30861 White Rocks Cr. 30870 White Rocks Cr. 30871 White Rocks Cr. 30880 White Rocks Cr. 30881 White Rocks Cr. 30890 White Rocks Cr. 30891 White Rocks Cr. 30900 White Rocks Cr. 30901 White Rocks Cr. 30910 White Rocks Cr. 30921 White Rocks Cr. 41402 Willow Run 41405 Willow Run 41412 Willow Run 41422 Willow Run 41432 Willow Run 41440 Willow Run 41452 Willow Run 41472 Willow Run 41482 Willow Run 41492 Willow Run 41501 Willow Run 41502 Willow Run 41512 Willow Run 41522 Willow Run 41525 Willow Run 41532 Willow Run 41542 Willow Run Rd. 41549 Willow Run Rd. 41552 Willow Run Rd. 41562 Willow Run Rd. 41572 Willow Run Rd. 41573 Willow Run Rd. 41582 Willow Run Rd. 41591 Willow Run Rd. 41592 Willow Run Rd. 27090 Winchester 41630 Winchester 41669 Winchester 41698 Winchester 41735 Winchester 42116 Winchester 43880 Windcrest Lane 43920 Windcrest Lane 40312Windsor Rd. 40324Windsor Rd. 40325Windsor Rd. 40336Windsor Rd. 40337Windsor Rd. 40348Windsor Rd. 40360Windsor Rd. 40372Windsor Rd. 40375Windsor Rd. 40384Windsor Rd. 40396Windsor Rd. 40408Windsor Rd. 40421 Windsor Rd. 40432Windsor Rd. 40433Windsor Rd. 40444Windsor Rd. 40456Windsor Rd. 40468Windsor Rd. 40479Windsor Rd. 40480Windsor Rd. 40498Windsor Rd. 40497Windsor Rd. 40511Windsor Rd. 40511Windsor Rd. 40523Windsor Rd, 40523Windsor Rd. 40528Windsor Rd. 40535Windsor Rd. 40540Windsor Rd. 40547Windsor Rd. 40583Windsor Rd. 40588Windsor Rd. 40595Windsor Rd. 40600Windsor Rd. 40623Windsor Rd. 40624Windsor Rd. 40624Windsor Rd. 40636Windsor Rd. 29693 Windwood Circle 29700 Windwood Circle 29705 Windwood Circle 29710 Windwood Circle 29717 Windwood Circle 29729 Windwood Circle 29734 Windwood Circle 29741 Windwood Circle 29753 Windwood Circle 29765 Windwood Circle 29774 Windwood Circle 29777 Windwood Circle 29786 Windwood Circle 29798 Windwood Circle 29799 Windwood Circle 29810 Windwood Circle 29811 Windwood Circle 29813 Windwood Circle 29822 Windwood Circle 41428 Yankee Run 41436 Yankee Run 41451 Yankee Run 41456 Yankee Run 41461 Yankee Run 41468 Yankee Run 41476 Yankee Run 41487 Yankee Run 41488 Yankee Run 41496 Yankee Run 41508 Yankee Run 41511 Yankee Run 41516 Yankee Run 41528 Yankee Run 41529 Yankee Run 41535 Yankee Run 41536 Yankee Run 41547 Yankee Run 41548 Yankee Run 41556 Yankee Run 41559 Yankee Run 41567 Yankee Run 41578 Yankee Run 41585 Yankee Run 41586 Yankee Run 41598 Yankee Run 41606 Yankee Run 40409 Yardley Ct. 40413 Yardley Ct. 40417 Yardley Ct. 40426 Yardley Ct. 40429 Yardley Ct. 40447 Yardley Ct. 40457 Yardley Ct. 40485 Yardley Ct. 40487 Yardley Ct. 40498 Yardley Ct. 41640 Yorba Ave. 41685 Yorba Ave. 41705 Yorba Ave. 41775 Yorba Ave. 41780 Yorba Ave. 41925 Yorba Ave. 42000 Yorba Ave. 41308 Yuba Cr. 41311Yuba Cr. 41338 Yuba Cr. 41339 Yuba Cr. 41348 Yuba Ct. 41357 Yuba Cr. EXHIBIT "B" 41358 Yuba Cr. 41459 Zinfandel 41487 Zinfandel 41514 Zinfandel 41515 Zinfandel 41542 Zinfandel 41669 Zinfandel 41698 Zinfandel 41725 Zinfandel 41726 Zinfandel 45323 Zuma Drive 45326 Zuma Drive 45331 Zuma Drive 45333 Zuma Drive 45339 Zuma Drive 45343 Zuma Drive 45351 Zuma Drive 45355 Zuma Drive 45358 Zuma Drive 45359 Zuma Drive 45362 Zuma Drive 45366 Zuma Drive 45367 Zuma Drive 45330 Zuma Drive 45370 Zuma Drive 45374 Zuma Drive TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Gwyn R. Flores, Records Coordinator June 26, 2001 Request for Destruction of Records Attached is a listing of records maintained in the Finance Department that that has been imaged into the City's LaserFiche Imaging System and is eligible for destruction in accordance with the City of Temecula approved Retention Policy. The iroaging of these records complies with the requirements of Government Code Section 34090.5 The attached list of records has been identified within Retention Group XII, as outlined in "Exhibit 1", Schedule A, of Resolution No. 92-17. The undersigned have reviewed and approved this destruction request. Pursuant to the requirements of Government Code Section 34090.5, I hereby give my consent to the destruction of records under the direction of the City Clerk pursuant to the City of Temecula's adopted Destruction of Obsolete Records Policy. APPROVED: Department Head: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance Date APPROVED: City Attorney: Peter/Thorsen ,r / Date ( ITEM 7 APPROV/~t'7,~. CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN~E~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Parker, Director of Community Services(~? Herman June 26, 2001 Riverside County Library Contract Amendment No. 4 PREPARED BY: -~'~Phyllis L. Ruse, Deputy Director of Community Services RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Approve Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement to Provide Library Services (Additional Staff). Authorize the expenditure of an amount not to exceed $150,000 to fund the Temecula Library Volunteer Coordinator half-time position and to subsidize funding to maintain the Senior Reference Librarian and Reference Librarian positions for fiscal year 2001-02. DISCUSSION: The Riverside County Library system (RCLS) has been operating under a contract with Library Systems and Services, Inc. (LSSl) since July 1, 1997. This contract is administered by RCLS by breaking the County into three service areas. The Temecula Library is in the Mid-South Zone Service Area and received funding from Temecula, Sun City, Lake Elsinore, Canyon Lake, San Jacinto, Valle Vista, Id~lwild, Calimesa, and Anza regions. For the past year, the Temecula Branch Library has been open to the general public for 52 hours per week, an increase of 4 hours per week from previous years. The library staffing for FY 2000- 2001 was as follows: POSITION TITLE NUMBER OF FULL TIME EQUIVALENTS (FTE) Librarian (Branch Manager) Reference Librarian Librarian Associate Library Technician Library Assistant Volunteer Coordinator Library Page 1 2 1 2 3.5 .5 5 TOTAL 15 R:\RUSEP~AGENDAS\2001-02 libraryamendment,doc On July 1, 1998, the City of Murrieta withdrew from the RCLS and, therefore, the library property taxes generated within the Murrieta city limits have been redirected from RCLS to the City of Murrieta. This has resulted in a revenue shortfall to the Mid-South Zone for each fiscal year since 1998. The City of Temecuia subsidized 2.5 full time equivalent positions in FY 1998-99 through FY 2000- 01 in an amount not to exceed $150,000. The positions provided for are two Reference Librarians and a half-time Volunteer Coordinator. Without the additional revenue from the City, the RCLS would not be able to provide these positions or the services that they offer to the community. FISCAL IMPACT: Cost to provide funding for 2.5 full time equivalent positions at the library is not to exceed $150,000. Sufficient funding has been included in the Council discretionary line item in the approved FY 2001-02 Community Support budget in Account 001-101-999-5285. R:\RUSEP~AGENDAS\2001-02 library amendment.doc FOURTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT TO PROVDE LIBRARY SERVICES (Additional Staff) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE - RIVERSIDE COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM And the CITY OF TEMECULA (Fiscal Year 2001-2002) WHEREAS, the County of Riverside, Riverside County Library System ("County") and the City of Temecula ("City") have entered into an agreement to provide library services (additional staff) (the ~'Agreement"), as amended, and the parties wish to further amend the Agreement, to be effective on July 1, 2000: NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: A. Section 1. RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PARTIES is amended to change the time period in sub- section 1.1, as amended, to "July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2002". All other provisions of the section, as amended, shall remain unchanged. B. Section 4.2 Term is amended to add the following paragraph to the end of the existing section, as amended: "The term of this Agreement is extended, and shall include the time period from July 1,2001 through June 30, 2002. City or County may terminate this Agreement, as amended, for no cause, on the giving of thirty (30) days written notice to the other party." R:\RUS E?\CONTRACTh2001-02 library amendment no 4.doc I C. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement, as amended, shall remain unchanged and remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, County and City have caused this Third Amendment to be duly executed by the parties hereto: CITY OF TEMECULA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE By: By: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Chair, Board of Supervisors Attest: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney Attest: Gerald A. Maloney, Clerk By: Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM: WILLIAM C. KATZENSTE1N County Counsel By: Deputy County Counsel LIBRARY SYSTEMS AND SERVICES, LLC By: President, LSSI R:\RUSEP\CONTRACq52001-02 library amendment no 4.doc 2 ITEM 8 APPROVAL~.~'"'- CITY ATTORNEY. FINANCE DIRECTO~ ClIYMANAGER~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services~, June 26, 2001 Second Amendment to the Uniforms, Floor Mats, Dust Mops and Towels service Agreement with AmeriPride Uniform Services FY2001-02 PREPARED BY: RECOMMENDATION: Kevin T. Harrington, Maintenance Superintendent That the City Council: 1. Approve the Second Amendment with AmeriPride Uniform Services, which will exercise the City's option for a second one-year extension of the Agreement. The Agreement will be extended through June 30, 2002. 2. Authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount $10,550.00 for uniform, floor mats, dust mops and towel services. BACKGROUND: In May 1998, the City conducted a Request for Proposals for Uniforms, Floor Mats, Dust Mops and Towel services. We received proposals from three vendors and City staff determined that AmeriPride Uniform Services was the lowest qualified vendor. The City entered into a two year agreement on July 15, 1998 to provide uniform services for City maintenance staff and floor mat, dust mop and towel services for City facilities. The vendor provided satisfactory service. The Agreement was amended on June 30, 2000, to exercise the City's option to extend the agreement for an additional year. The Second Amendment is now requested to authorize the final one-year extension, as permitted per the Agreement. The current contract amount is $25,000.00. The cost to provide these services for Fiscal Year 2001-2002 is $10,550.00. This additional year of service will bring the total contract amount to $35,550.00 FISCAL IMPACT: The cost to provide uniform, floor mat, dust mop and towel services for Fiscal Year 2001-2002 is $10,550.00. Sufficient funds have been included in the Annual Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2001-02 in accounts 190-180, 190-181,190-182, 190-184, 190-185, 340- 701,340-702 and 001-164. R:kHARR1NGK~AGENDA.RPTXAmerPride Amend2 FY01-02.do¢ ATTACHMENTS: Original Agreement Amendment No. 1 Amendment No. 2 R:~HARRINGK~AGENDA. RPT~erPride Amend2 FY01-02.doc SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETVVEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERVICES THIS SECOND AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of June 26, 2001 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and AmeriPride Uniform Services ("Vendor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: On July 16, 1998 the City and Vendor entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Vendor Services Uniforms, Floor Mats, Dust Mops and Towels" ("Agreement"). On June 30, 2000 parties amended the Agreement to extend the term through June 30, 2001. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. The term of the Agreement is herebyextended through June 30, 2002. Effective July 1, 2001 each City employee will be properly fitted with new 100% cotton uniforms, at no cost to the City. This will include the Vendor providing and attaching employee's name and City seal tags to clothing. The City agrees to pay Vendor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein bythis reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual services provided. This amount shall not exceed. Thirty-Five Thousand Five Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($35,500.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. RAHARRINGKIAGREEMNIX4MERIPRIDE2NDAMENDMEArI~DOC I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA BY: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: BY: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: BY: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney VENDOR BY: NAME: TITLE: BY: NAME: TITLE: (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) R:IHARRINGKMGREEMNTOIJ~ERIPRIDE2NDAMENDMENT. DOC 2 EXHIBIT "B" Location Qty. CITY HALL 7 4x6 mat (charcoal) $2.15 2 3x5 mat (teal) $1.60 1 24" dust mop $0.60 10 Towels (white) $0.10 10 Towels (brue) $0.10 Total 2001-2002 PAYMENT SCHEDULE CUSTODIAL ITEMS Size/item Unit Price Weekly Price Annual $15.05 $3.20 $0.60 $20.85 $1,084.20 MAINTENANCE FACILITY I 4x6 mat (teal) $2.15 $2.15 3 3x5 mat (teal) $1.60 $4.80 1 24" dust mop $0.60 $0.60 5 Towels (white) $0.10 $0.50 5 Towels (blue) $0.10 $050 Total $855 $444.60 OLD TOWN TEMECULA SENIOR CENTER 3 4x6 mats (charcoal) $2.15 $6.45 1 36" dust mop $0.79 $0~79 10 Towels (white) $0.10 $1.00 10 Towels (blue) $0.10 $1.00 TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER 3 4x6 mats (blue) $2.15 1 3x5 mat (blue) $1.60 1 3x10 mat (blue) $3.00 1 36" dust mop $0.79 5 Towels (white) $0.10 5 Towels (blue) $0.10 $9.24 $480.48 $0.45 $1.60 $30O $0.79 $0.50 $0.50 $12.84 $667.68 TEMECULA VALLEY MUSEUM 2 4x6 mat (tan) $2.15 $4.30 1 3x5 mat (tan) $1.60 $1 60 1 24" dust mop $0.60 $0.60 10 Towels (white) $0.10 $1.00 $7,50 $390.00 COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER 5 4x6 mat (gray) $2~15 $10.75 2 3x5 mat (gray) $1.60 $3.20 2 36" dust mop $079 $1~58 2 48" dust mop $1.15 $2.30 20 Towels (white) $0.10 $2.00 10 Towels (blue) $0.10 $1.00 $20,83 $t,083.16 UNIFORM SERVICE Location Qty. Size/item Unit Price Weekly Price Annual Community Services 6 Workers 30 Dark Brown Pants $0.50 $1500 10 LS White Shirts $0,50 $5.00 20 SS White Shirts $0.50 $10.00 "Miscellaneous Fees" Not To Exceed $30,00 $1,560.00 $500.00 Public Works 9 Workers 45 Dark Brown Pants $0.50 $2250 45 Orange Shirts $0.50 $22.50 "Miscellaneous Fees" Not TO Exceed $2,060.00 $45.00 $2,340.00 $ 1.000.00 $ 3,340.00 Contingency Fees 10% $ 955.01 ANN UAL TOTAL-CUSTODIAL & UNIFORMS $10,505.13 EXHIBIT B MISC~r.I A.NEOUS FEES Initial Account Set-up Fee Per Person Per Shin Set-up Fee For Each New Employees Added During Asreement Term Price For Each Employee Name Tag Price For Each City Seal Ball Caps With City Seal Insulated Zipper Sackers with City Seal Replacement/Loss Industrial Shirt Replacemant/Loss Industrial Pant SO $0.75 FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETVVEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of June 30, 2000 byand between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and AmeriPride Uniform Services ("Vendor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: A. On July 16, 1998 the City and Vendor entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Vendor Services Uniforms, Floor Mats, Dust Mops and Towels" ("Agreement"). Amendment. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this 2. The term of the Agreement is herebyextended through June 30, 2001. The City agrees to pay Vendor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein bythis reference as though set forth in fulJ, based upon actual services provided. This amount shall not exceed $25,000 for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. 4. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. R:IHARRINGKMGREEMN'I~MERIPRIDEIST3MENDMEN*EDOC I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA BY: ~,~ - Shawn D. Nelson, City Manager ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk_~ ~ Approved As to Form: BY: ~ey VENDOR T'TLE: ~~ /~J,c:~'~--~~. BY: ~~.-'~.~"~.~-~'- TITLE: (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) R:tHARRINGKLdGREEMN7'~,MERIpPJDEI~AMENDMEI~T. DOC 2 EXHIBIT "B" Location 2000-2001 P.O. PAYMENT SCHEDULE CUSTODIAL ITEMS Qty. Size/Item Unit Price Weekly Price Annual CITY HALL 7 4x6 mat (charcoal) $2,15 $15.05 2 3x5 mat (teal) $1.60 $3.20 1 24" dust mop $0.60 $0.60 10 Towels (white) $0.10 $1.00 10 Towels (blue) $0.10 $1,00 Total $20.85 $1,084.20 MAINTENANCE FACILITY 4x6 mat (teal) 3x5 mat (teal) 24" dust mop Towels (white) Towels (blue) $2.15 $1,60 $0.60 $O.lO $0.10 Total $2.15 $4.80 $0.60 $0.50 $0.50 $8.55 OLD TOWN TEMECULA SENIOR CENTER 3 1 10 10 4x6 mats (charcoal) 36" dust mop Towels (white) Towels (blue) $2.15 $0.79 $0.10 $0.10 $6.45 $0.79 $1.00 $1.00 $9.24 $480.48 TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER 3 1 1 1 5 5 4x6 mats (blue) 3x5 mat (blue) 3x10 mat (blue) 36" dust mop Towels (white) Towels (blue) $2.15 $1.60 $3.00 $0.79 $0.10 $0.10 $6.45 $1,60 $3.00 $0.79 $0.50 $0.50 $12.84 $667.68 TEMECULA VALLEY MUSEUM 2 1 1 10 4x6 mat (tan) 3x5 mat (tan) 24" dust mop Towels (white) $2.15 $1.60 $O.6O $0.10 $4.30 $1.60 $0.60 $1,00 $7.50 $390.00 Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT"B" Location Qty. CUSTODIAL ITEMS Size/Item Unit Price Weekly Price Annual COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER 5 2 1 2 2O 10 4x6 mat (gray) $2.15 $10.75 3x5 mat (gray) $1.60 $3.20 36" dust mop $0.79 $0.79 48" dust mop $1.15 $2.30 Towels (white) $0.10 $2.00 Towels (blue) $0.10 $1.00 $20.04 $1,042.08 Location Qty. UNIFORM SERVICE Size/Item Unit Price Weekly Price Annual Community Services 5 Workers Public Works 6 Workers 25 8 17 Dark Brown Pants$0.37 $0.37 LS White Shirts $0.33 $0.33 SS White Shirts $0.33 $0.33 "Miscellaneous Fees" Not To Exceed 30 30 $9.25 $2.64 $5.61 $17.50 $910.00 $500.00 Dark Brown Pants $0.37 $11.10 Orange Shirts $0.33 $9.90 "Miscellaneous Fees" Not To Exceed $1,410.00 $21.00 $1,092.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 2,092.00 Contingency Fees 10% $ 761.10 ANNUAL TOTAL-CUSTODIAL & UNIFORMS $8,372.14 Page 2 of 3 EXl:rmlT B MISC~r.~.~NEOUS FEES Initial Account Set-up Fee Per Person Per Shin Set-up Fee For Each New Employees Added During Agreement Term Price For Each Employee Name Tag Price For Each City Seal Ball Caps With City Seal Insulated Zipper lackets with City Seal RepiacementJLoss Industrial Shirt Replacemant/Loss Industrial Pant $0.75 Page 3 of 3 CITY OF TEMECULA AGREEMENT FOR VENDOR SERVICES UNIFORMS, FLOOR MATS, DUST MOPS AND TOWELS THIS AGRF, EMENT, is made and effective as of July 15, 1998, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and AmeriPride Uniform Services, ("Vendor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on July 16, 1998, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2000, unless extended or sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. The City reserves the option to extend the contract under the same terms and conditions for a maximum of two (2) additional one-year terms per the attached pricing schedule in Exhibit B. 2. SERVICES. Vendor shall perform the tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Vendor shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A. 3. l~.Pd~[(~. Vendor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Vendor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are rex/uired of Vendor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Vendor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. This amount shall not exceed Twelve Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty-Three Dollars and Ninty-Six Cents ($12,723.96) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Vendor shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager. Vendor shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by City Manager and Vendor at the time City's written authorization is given to Vendor for the performance of said services. The City Manager may approve additional work not to exceed ten percent (10%) of the amount of the Agreement, but in no event shall such sum exceed ten be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Vendor shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Vendor. With respect to computer files, Vendor shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files. 8. ~. The Vendor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Vendor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the negligence of the City. 9. INSURANCE REOUIREMEN~. Vendor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insuranee against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Vendor, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (l) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code I (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Vendor shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. f. Verification of Coverage. Vendor shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City· All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Vendor's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Vendor is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Vendor shall at all times be under Vendor's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Vendor or any of Vendor's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Vendor shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Vendor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Vendor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Vendor as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Vendor for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Vendor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 11. LEGAL RESPONglRII.ITW.~L The Vendor shall keep itself informed of State and Fede~ laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Vendor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Vendor to comply with this section. 12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Vendor in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Vendor without City's prior written authorization. Vendor, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authoriTa6on from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Vendor gives City not/ce of such court order or subpoena. b. Vendor shall promptly notify City should Vendor, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Vendor and/or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 18. AUTHORrrY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Vendor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Vendor and has the authority to bind Vendor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have mused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. Ron Roberts, Mayor Attest: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney Vendor AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SERVICES By: EXHIBIT B PAYMENT SCltF~ULE UNIFORM. FLOOR MAT. DUST MOP AND TOWEL SERVICE PRICE SHEET Location Oty. Size Weekly Price CITY HALL 7 4x6 mat (charcoal) $2.15 2 3x5 mat (teal) $1.60 1 24" dust mop $0.60 10 Towels (white) $0. I0 10 Towels (blue) $0.10 Weekly Total $20.85 Annual MAINTENANCE FACILITY 1 4x6 mat (teal) 3 3x5 mat (teal) 1 24" dust mop 5 Towels (white) 5 Towels (blue) $2.15 $1.60 $0.60 $0.10 $0.10 Weekly Total $8.55 Annual $444.60 OLD TOWN TEMECULA SENIOR CENTER 3 1 10 10 4x6 mats (charcoal) 5;2.15 36" dust mop $0.79 Towels (white) $0.10 Towels (blue) $0.10 Weekly Total $9.24 Annual $480.48 TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER 3 1 1 1 5 5 4x6 mats (blue) $2.15 3x5 mat (blue) $1.60 3x10 mat (blue) $3.00 36" dust mop $0.79 Towels (white) $0.10 Towels (blue) $0.10 Weekly Total $12.84 Annual $667.68 EXHIBIT B MISCELLANEOUS FEES Initial Account Set-up Fee Per Person Per Shirt $3.85 Set-up Fee For Each New Employees Added During Agreement Term 5;0 Price For Each Employee Name Tag $0,75 Price For Each City Seal $3.10 Ball Caps With City Seal $8.10 Insulated Zipper Jackets with City Seal $25.00 Replacement/Loss Industrial Shirt $12.00 Replacemant/Loss Industrial Pant $16.00 CONTRACT/P.O. TOTAL TOTAL ANNUAL FEES FOR UNIFORMS, MATS TOWELS $5,398.64 $10,797.28 SET-UP FEE FOR CiTY SEALS/NAME TAGS ON 99 SHIRTS $ 381.15 $ 381.15 BALL CAPS (24 PER YEAR) $ 194.40 $ 388.80 10% CONTINGENCIES $597.42 $ 1.156.73 TOTAL $6,571.61 $12,723.96 ITEM 9 APPROV/~,~.. ~ CITY ATTORNEY I ~'~.~ FINANCE DIREC'~OR I ~ CITY MANAGER ~ TO: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council FROM: DATE: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services June 26, 2001 SUBJECT: Third Amendment to the HVAC Preventive Maintenance Agreement with Kinetics Service Company for FY2001-02 PREPARED BY: Kevin T. Harrington, Maintenance Superintendent RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Approve Amendment No. 3 to the HVAC Preventative Maintenance Agreement with Kinetics Service Company to exercise the City's option for a one-year extension and, thereby, extending, the Agreement will be extended through June 30, 2002; 2. Authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount of $30,640.00 for preventative maintenance services, repairs and extra work items for Fiscal Year 2001-02. BACKGROUND: In September 1999, the City conducted a Request for Proposals for HVAC Preventive Maintenance, Repair and Extra Work Services. We received proposals from five vendors and City staff determined that 1st Mechanical, Inc. was the lowest qualified vendor. The City entered into a 20-month agreement on October 28, 1999. The Agreement was amended on March 13, 2000, due to a change in ownership, with Kinetics Service Company becoming the new owner. The original Agreement was for $25,000.00 for the above-mentioned services. The amount for the preventive maintenance services was $9,870.00 and the amount for repair and extra work items was $15,130.00. Due to unforeseen required repairs, the aging condition of the air conditioning units at City Hall and the requests for the installation and modification of several air conditioning units at City Hall a Second Amendment was entered into on August 8, 2000 for additional funds not to exceed $19,870.00. The initial Agreement Term will end June 30, 2001. The Third Amendment is required to authorize the first optional one-year extension. The Amendment also provides for the expenditure of funds for the one-year extension in the amount, $5,640 for preventative maintenance and $25,000 for repair and extra work, for a total one year amount not to exceed $30,640. This will bring the total authorized under this contract since inception to $15,510 for preventative maintenance and $60,000 for repairs and extra work. R:\HARRINGK~AGEN DA.RPT~in¢ct icsAmend3 FY01-02,doc FISCAL IMPACT: The contract amount for Kinetics Service Company is $5,640.00 for preventive maintenance services and $25,000.00 for repair and extra work items for a total amount not to exceed $30,640.00 for Fiscal Year 2001-2002. Sufficient funds have been included in the Annual Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2001-02 in accounts 190-180, 190-181,190-182, 190-184, 190-185, 340-701,340-702 and 001-164. ATTACHMENTS: Original Agreement Amendment No. 1 Amendment No. 2 Amendment No. 3 R:~HARRINGK~AG ENDA. RPTxKinecticsAmend3 FY01-02.doc THIRD AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BE'rVVEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND KINETICS SERVICE COMPANY THIS THIRD AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of May 30, 2001 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Kinetics Service Company ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: This Amendment is made with respect to the f~llowing facts and purposes: On October 28, 1999 the City and 1sT Mechanical, Inc. entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement HVAC Preventative Maintenance" ("Agreement"). On March 13, 2000 the Agreement was amended to reflect that all sections of the Agreement that referred to the Contractor as "1st Mechanical, Inc." shall be changed to "Kinetics Service Company" pursuant to the ownership change of said company on Mamh 13, 2000. On August 8, 2000 the Agreement was amended to increase the total amount for repairs and/or extra work items for the term of the Agreement not to exceed Thirty Five Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($35,000.00) unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. The City desires to exercise its option to extend the Agreement term for one year, which will subsequently require an increase in payments. 2. TERM. The term ofthe Agreement is extended to June 30, 2002. PAYMENT. The City agrees to pay Contractor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Fifteen Thousand Five Hundred Ten Dollars and No Cents ($15,510.00) for HVAC preventive maintenance services for the term of the Agreement. Sixty Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($60,000.00) for repairs and/or extra work items for the term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. R:WARRINGK~AGREEMN73KENETICS3RDAMEN. DOC 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA BY: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: BY: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk Approved As to Form: BY: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR KINETICS SERVICE COMPANY BY: NAME: TITLE: BY: NAME: TITLE: R:IHARRINGK~AGREEMN'~KENETICS3RDAMEN. DOC 2 " EXHIBIT B PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE PRICING Sffk'~.T HVAC PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE DESCRIPTION PRICE PER PRICE PER YEAR CITY HALL HVAC $675.00 $2,700.00 CITY HALL MISCEL!ANEOUS VENT FANS No Charge No Charge MAINTENANCE FACILITY HVAC $37.50 $150.00 _ VlAI~ANC~__FA~CILITY MI_SCE_LLANE.O_US_yENT ~._A_N_S .......... No ~.~arge ' ' No __Charge CO MM UNIT~_.RECREAXION_C~_H¥_AC ......... ~;453.75 .... ~i,815.00 ...... COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTIz;R MISCELLANEOUS No Charge No Charge VENT FANS TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER I-IVAC $93.75 $.:375.00 TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTre. MISCELLANEOUS No Charge No Charge VENT FANS OLD TOWN SENIOR CENI'I~t HVAC $37.50 $150.00 OLD TOWN SENIOR CENTER MISCELLANEOUS VENT FANS No Charge No Charge TEMECULA VALLEY MUSEUM $112.50 $450.00 TEMECULA VALLEY MUSEUM MISCELLANEOUS VENT No Charge No Charge FANS TOTAL $1,410.00 $$,640.00 ALTERNATE BID ITEMS-For repair or extra work authorized by City MARK-UP ADDED TO VENDOR'S WHOLESALE PRICE OF PARTS & EQUIPMENT 40 % HOURLY RATE PER REGUALR MAN HOUR-Sam To Spin Monday through Friday $60.00 HOURLY RATE PER OVERTIME MAN HOUR-After-hours, $90.00 Weekends, Holidays, etc. /:~Agreements~Con~actor 99 SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND KINETICS SERVICE COMPANY THIS SECOND AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of August 8, 2000 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Kinetics Service Company (~ Contractor"-). In cunMde~atiun of th~ muruM cow~mas a~ad conditior~s set-forth h~s~h~, ~h~ parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: A. On October 28, 1999 the City and 1s'r Mechanical, Inc. entered into that certain a~greeme~t___e_nlitled _'~Ci~ of Temecula Ag_reeme_nt HVAC Preventative Maintenance" ("Agreement"). On March 13, 2000 the Agreement was amended to reflect that all sections of the Agreement that referred to the Contractor as "1st Mechanical, Inc.' shall be changed to "Kinetics Service Company" pursuant to the ownership change of said company on March 13, 2000. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Contractor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Dollars and No Cents ($9,870.00) for HVAC preventive maintenance services for the term of the Agreement and Thirty Five Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($35,000.00) for repairs and/or extra work items for the term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. R..IHARRINGKIAGREEMIV'TIKENETICS2NDAMEN. DOC 1 IN W1TNESS ~OF the parties hereto have caused this Agre~ament to be executed the day and year firsi above written. CITY OF TEMECULA ATTEST: Approved As to Form: BY: ~ey CONTRACTOR KINETICS SERVICE COMPANy R:IHARRINGKt4GREF. MNTff(.ENETICS2NDAMEN. DOC 2 EXHIBIT B PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE PRICING HVAC PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE DESCRIPTION PRICE PER PRICE PER YEAR CITY HALL HVAC $675.00 $2,700.00 CITY HALL MISCELLANEOUS VENT FANS No Charge No Charge MAINTENANCE FACILITY HVAC. $37.50 $150.00 _ MAINTENANCE FACILITY MISCELLANEOUS VENT FANS No Charge . __i ' No Charge ....J3OMMUNITYRECREATIONJ~EN'~'~-g t{VA C $45335_ ___ $i,8 ! ~ off COMMUNITY RECREATION CEN'I'I~R MISCEI.IANEOUS No Charge No Charge VENT FANS TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER HVAC $93.75 $375.00 TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER MISCF. LLANEOUS No Charge No Charge VENT FANS OLD TOWN SENIOR CENTER HVAC $37.50 $150.00 OLD TOWN SENIOR CEN'I'~_~ MISCELLANEOUS VENT FANS No Charge No Charge TEMECULA VALLEY MUSEUM $112.50 $450.00 TEMECULA VALLEY MUSEUM MISCELLANEOUS VENT No Charge No Charge FANS TOTAL $ 1,410.00 $5,640.00 ALTERNATE BID ITEMS-For repair or extra work authorized by City MARK-UP ADDED TO VENDOR'S WHOLESALE PRICE OF PARTS & EQUIPMENT 40% HOURLY RATE PER REGUALR MAN HOUR-Sam To 5pm Monday through Friday $60.00 HOURLY RATE PER OVERTIME MAN HOUR-After-hours, $90.00 Weekends, Holidays, etc. I:'V~emen~s~Conlraclor 99 FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND 1st MECHANICAL, INC./KINETICS SERVICE COMPANY THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of March 13, 2000 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Kinetics Service Company ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: On October 28, 1999 the City and 1s* Mechanical, Inc. entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement HVAC Preventative Maintenance" ("Agreement"). The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. All sections of the Agreement that refer to the Contractor as "1a Mechanical, Inc." shall be changed to "Kinetics Service Company" pursuant to the ownership change of said company on March 13, 2000. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. R: I WEDEKIBIRFPSIttV~ C 99-Ol ~I ST AMENDMENT. DOC I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Shawn D. Nelson, City Manager ATTEST: k Sus+ W. Jon~s, CMCfiAAE "-C~ Clerk ~ Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR KINETICS SERVICE COMPANY 5607 Palmer Way I'~ fi/ Carlsbalt, CA 920Q8 /, //! 760/43 -5 NAME: Scott F. Williams TITLE: Service Manaqer ~ME: John D. Williams / TITLE: operations Manager R"iWEDEKIBtRFPSlHVAC g~OIII~TAMENDMEArI~DOC 2 CITY OF TEMECULA AGREEMENT HVAC PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of October 28, 1999, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and 1= Mechanical, Inc., ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on November 1, 1999, and shall remain and continue in effect until June 30, 2001, with two (2) one year extensions at the sole option of the City, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICES. Contractor shall perform the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Contractor shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A, and shall provide and furnish all labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment and all utility and transportation services required to perform HVAC maintenance and repair. 3. PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. Contractor warrants that all service performed shall be consistent with manufacture's specifications. Additionally Contractor agrees to accept liability for any damage to the buildings, such as roofs, water or electrical damage that may be caused as a result of Contractor performing any preventative maintenance duties. 4. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Contractor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Dollars and No Cents ($9,870.00) for HVAC preventive maintenance services and Fifteen Thousand One Hundred Thirty Dollars and No Cents ($15,130.00) for repairs and/or extra work items for the term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Contractor shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager. Contractor shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by City Manager and Contractor at the time City's written authorization is given to Contractor for the performance of said services. The City Manager may approve additional work not to exceed ten percent (10%) of the amount of the Agreement, but in no event shall such sum exceed twenty -five thousand dollars ($25,000.00). Any additional work in excess of this amount shall be approved by the City Council. ' c. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all nondisputed fees. If the City disputes any of Contractor's fees it shall give written notice to Contractor within 30 days of receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. P~Agreernents~Contractor 99 5. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSF. a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Contractor the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 4. 6. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR. a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 7. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. a. Contractor shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Contractor shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identi- fied and readily accessible. Contractor shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission P~Agreements\Con~actor 99 2 of the Contractor. With respect to computer files containing data generated for the work, Contractor shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files. 8. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert witness fees, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions arising out of or in any way related to the performance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the negligence of the City. 9. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Cove, rage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No. CG 00 01 11 85 or 88. (2) Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 06 92 covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). If the Contractor owns no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. If the Contractor has no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Contractor shall execute a declaration that it has no employees. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. P~Agreements~Contractor 99 (3) Worker's Compensation as required by the State of California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. (4) Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liability for the Consultant's profession. c. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: (1) The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor;, products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. (3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (4) The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. (5) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements. P~Agreements\Contractor 99 4 f. Verification of Coveraqe. Contractor shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements ara to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Contractor's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Contractor is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents ara in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 11. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Contractor shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Contractor in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Contractor without City's prior written authorization... Contractor, itsofficers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Contractor gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Contractor shall promptly notify City should Contractor, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Contractor and/or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Contractor agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Contractor. However, City's p~Agreements\Contractor 99 5 right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. 13. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (I) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above. To City: To Contractor: City of Temecula Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager 1" Mechanical, Inc. 10457 Roselle St. Suite K San Diego, CA 92121 14. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. Upon termination of this Agreement, Contractor's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Contractor. 15. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 16. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Contractor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's judgement, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted. 17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding be~een the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. P~,greements~Contractor gg 6 18. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. S'~a~n D. Nelson, City Manager Attest: · Jones, lerk pproved As to F P~ter M. Thereon, City Attorney CONTRACTOR (Signatures of two corporate officers required for Corporations) P~.greements[Con tractor 99 EXHIBIT A TASKS TO BE PERFORMED CITY OF TEMECULA REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL HVAC PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PART I: SELECTION CRITERIA A £mal contract will be awarded to the Vendor who can best meet the requirements as specified; and provide the highest quality and cost effective professional service to the City, as determined by the City Council based on the following factors (which are listed without implication of priority): Information regarding the Vendor's experience and qualifications to successfully repair, service and maintain various HVAC systems. The ability and willingness of the Vendor to meet all requirements and a statement regarding the Vendor's experience and qualifications to provide the service as outlined in the Specifications/Scope of Work (see Exhibit A). Vendor's ability to supply copies of all current licenses and/or permits required by the City and State of California, as applicable. A list of client references and an outline of any experience the Vendor has had in meeting the needs of other governmental organizations, or any organization, which requires ongoing preventative maintenance of HVAC equipment. Name and references of any subcontractors who will be utilized to supply the services as outlined in the Specifications/Scope of Work (see Exhibit A). The thoroughness and conformity of the proposal package, cost of services to be provided, and quality of parts and materials used. Overall cost of the service to the City, including, but not limited to, pricing of the services, delivery schedule, terms of payment and the ability of the Vendor to perform preventative maintenance in a timely manner per Specifications/Scope of Work (see Exhibit A) and to respond to emergencies as may be required from time to time by the City. Ability of Vendor to maintain adequate inventory of parts, equipment and labor to perform all work necessary to fulfill the contract. Financial ability of Vendor to provide the services as outlined in the Specifications/Scope of Work (see Exhibit A). 10. Hourly rates and percentage of mark-up, which will be added to wholesale cost of parts PXAgreements\Contractor 99 8 required to perform extra work or repair of equipment (see Exhibit "A', Pricing Sheet, Alternate Bid Item). All additional work other than normal preventative maintenance must be approved by authorized City personnel prior to commencement of work. PART II: INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, LEGAL REQUIREMENTS Provide pricing on all requirements as outlined in Exhibit "A". If there are discrepancies between services, labor, parts, materials, maintenance costs, trait prices and extensions, the City reserves the right to clarify pricing with the affected Vendors. Vendor agrees that failure on its part to list all cost components related to the service will not be accepted by the City as an acceptable justification to re-quote the proposal. Vendor acknowledges that the original proposal and costs provided stand. However, Vendor has the option of withdrawing a proposal at any time until a final contract is executed. Delivery schedules shall be a part of the consideration. Vendor shall perform preventative maintenance as outlined in the Specifications/Scope of Work (see Exhibit A) four times a year. First service will occur in November with subsequent services in February, May and August. Preventative maintenance will occur during normal City business hours. The Vendor must obtain approval from the authorized City personnel of the exact date and time of the preventative maintenance, at least one week prior to performing such duties. If Vendor's schedule varies fi.om the general periods proposed above (November, February, May, and Augus0, the Vendor shall so state the specific schedule of those items in the proposal sheet (Exhibit A). Once a Vendor has been selected for award, the City reserves the right to renegotiate delivery terms based on changing situations or the convenience of the City. Vendor shall provide an original and four (4) copies of the proposal upon submission. Failure to provide four (4) copies may result in disqualification from consideration for contract award. The City of Temecula has outlined the requirements herein in as much detail as is currently known. Please provide any exceptions, additional information, or suggestions that will aid in~he~2ity's-selectiorrproee~. All services provided by the Vendor shall be performed in strict accordance with the manufacturer's standards and State of California and Federal specifications. 7. Vendor is to provide preventative maintenance as outlined in the attached proposal sheets. Pricing for preventative maintenance will include all parts, labor, materials, and any required inspections. 8. The City may request the Vendor to perform repairs to various HVAC units or install new units, components or make emergency repairs after hours or weekends. The Vendor shall provide pricing under "Alternate Bid Item' in Exhibit "A" for such additional service or repair. Parts shall be at wholesale plus a flat percentage mark-up, as provided by Vendor in P~AgreementstContractor 99 9 Exhibit "A". This schedule will be incorporated into a contract negotiated between the City of Temecula and the Vendor. All additional work other than normal preventative maintenance must be approved by authorized City personnel prior to commencement of work. The Vendor shall defend, indemnify, and hold the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, volunteers and employees harmless from any and all causes of action or claims of damages arising out of or related to the Vendor's performance under this contract. 10. The City reserves the right to negotiate terms and specifications/scope of work with the highest ranked Vendor. If an agreement cannot be negotiated the City reserves the right to negotiate with any other finalist. ll. Vendor shall identify those services that will be outsourced to a subcontractor or subvendor. The prime Vendor will be responsible for verifying the qualifications and validity of all licenses or permits for any outsourced work to sub-vendors. The prime Vendor is also responsible for paying its employees and any sub-vendors the prime Vendor hires. 12. Selected Vendor is required to comply with all existing State and Federal labor laws. Selected Vendor is also responsible for complying with all OSHA standards and requirements. If Vendor outsources any work or job to a sub-vendor, it will be the prime Vendors responsibility to ensure that all sub-vendors meet the requirements as stated in this RFP. 13. All requirements stated in "Exhibit A" must can~ a 6-month warranty for labor and manufacturer's warranty on parts. Vendor agrees that any outsourced work or jobs will cany the same warranty. The Vendor warrants that all service performed shall be consistent with manufacturer's specifications. The Vendor shall also warrant that any failure of materials or services within the warranty period that is traceable to materials or labor supplied during the service, shall be replaced or repaired at no additional charge to the City. Additionally, vendor agrees to accept liability for any damage to the buildings, such as roof, water or electrical damage that may be caused as a result of Vendor performing these preventative maintenance duties. 14. A final contract will be awarded to the most competitively priced and qualified proposal. Although price is of prime consideration, it is not the sole determining factor. The City reserves the right to select the appropriate firm based on the most qualified proposal. The determination of the most qualified and most competitively priced proposal may involve all or some of the following factors: price, thoroughness of the proposal package, previous experience and performance; conformity to specifications in Exhibit A; financial ability to fulfill the contract; ability to meet Specifications/Scope of Work; terms of payment; compatibility, as required; number of sub-vendors the main Vendor may need to employ for outsourced work; other costs; and other objective and accountable factors which are reasonable. The City reserves the right to select a Vendor to perform all of the work identified in the RFP, or only selected portions based on price and/or other factors. P~Agreements~Contractor 99 10 15. At time of execution of the contract, the selected Vendor is obligated to provide evidence of insurance liability to include: Worker's Compensation, General Liability, Automobile Liability, Excess/Umbrella Liability, and Personal Property Damage in the amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence, and abide by the City's Insurance procedures in accordance with Exhibit "A" 16. The successful Vendor shall be an independent contractor, and nothing shall be construed to cause the Vendor to be deemed or represent itself as an agent or employee of the City. The Vendor shall defend, indemnify, and hold the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, volunteers and employees harmless from any and all causes of action or claims of damages arising out or related to the Vendors performance under this contract. 17. The Vendor shall be excused from performance hereunder during the time and the extent that he/she is prevented from obtaining, delivering, repairing, or performing in the customary manner, by acts of God, fire, war, strike, and loss or shortage of transportation facilities. Vendor shall provide the City satisfactory evidence that non-performance is due to other than fault or negligence on the Vendors part. 18. Any evidence of agreement or collusion among Vendors acting illegally to restrain freedom of competition by agreement to propose a fixed price, or otherwise, will render the proposal of such Vendors void. 19. The selected Vendor agrees to maintain a City of Temecula Business License for the duration of the contract. 20. Qualified personnel shall do all work. Vendor will provide copies of all Federal, State, County and City licenses or certificates required by the Specifications/Scope of Work. 21. The Vendor shall provide a local telephone number where service personnel can be roached on an "on call" basis twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven days per week. This telephone number will be made available to all authorized personnel designated by the City. Vendor shall respond to any service call request within four (4) hours, between 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM and within eight (8) hours on weekends and holidays. 22. Vendor agrees that all service by the Vendor shall be to the satisfaction of authorized City personnel. In the event tha~t-~he Vendor de-t'aults on performance of-~y~f these requirements, then the City shall have the right to terminate this agreement upon thirty (30) days written notice delivered to the Vendor by certified mail or courier. The Vendor shall maintain the contract during the termination period. Termination of the contract will not relieve the Vendor of any liability to the City for damages sustained by the City because of any breach of contract by the Vendor, and the City may withhold any payments to the Vendor until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from the Vendor is determined. 23. The Vendor shall submit a list of at least five (5) references who have purchased similar services from the Vendor. Vendor shall provide company name, contact name and phone number for each reference. p~Agreernents[Contractor gg 11 24. 25. 26. The term of the contract shall commence upon award by the City Council and continue through June 30, 2001. The City reserves the option to extend the contract(s) under the same terms and conditions for a maximum of two (2) additional one-year terms per the attached pricing schedule in Exhibit "A". The contract between Vendor and the City is non-transferable. Vendor shall under no circumstances assign the agreement without written permission of the City. Vendor shall notify the City, in writing, of any change in shop ownership at least thirty (30) days prior to said change. All equipment or parts provided or installed, as a result of either work required under this preventative maintenance proposal or any additional work or repairs authorized by the City representative, must carry a 6-month warranty for labor and a minimum of 90 days on parts. Vendor shall also fully describe th~ terms of all warranties received from the manufacturer. 27. The City's terms for payment are net thirty (30) days upon receipt of invoice. Vendor shall submit invoices between the first and fifteenth business day of each month for services provided the previous month. Payment shall be make within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all undisputed fees. PART IIh GENERAL INFORMATION Vendor is required to carefully and fully investigate all of the requirements of this RFP, as well as, the site where the work will take place and all work or arrangements needed to fulfill the terms of the Proposal. By submitting a Proposal, Vendor represents and certifies to the City that such investigation has been completed and that it fully understands the Specifications/Scope of Work. The Specification Sheet/Scope of Work (Exhibit A) shall be signed by an authorized official of the company. 3. The City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals. 4~e City-will not-rehnbmsc Vcndu, s ,%, any costs iavulved-in~reparatirm~alrd submission of proposals. Furthermore, this RFP does not obligate the City to accept or contract for any expressed or implied services. The City reserves the right to request any Vendor submitting a proposal to clarify its proposal or to supply additional material deemed necessary to assist in the selection process. If an Exhibit "A" requirement cannot be met by a Vendor, then the Vendor should submit a "No Proposal" response for the items affected. Alternate or equivalent items may be submitted for consideration by the City, unless otherwise specified. P~,greements\Contractor 99 12 o 10. 11. 12. Exhibit "A' provides for Alternate Bid Items. These items cover rates and costs for any additional work or repair the City may request. The Vendor should provide hourly rates and the percentage of mark-up on wholesale parts and equipment. All additional work other than normal preventative maintenance must be approved by authorized City personnel prior to commencement of work. All submitted proposals and information included therein or attached thereto shall become public records upon contract award. Vendor is requested to provide any exceptions, additional information or suggestions that will aid in the City's selection process. The attached Exhibit "A " is a suggested list only. If Vendor needs to revise or make additions to the exhibit, computer or typed alterations are allowed as long as the City format is maintained. The attached Exhibit "C' is a copy of the City's standard Agreement for Professional Services. This is a sample document, which requires no action at this time. Any questions regarding this RFP should be referred, in writing, to Kevin Harrington, or Bruce Wedeking at fax number (909) 694-6488. Questions may also be mailed or delivered to the address stated herein. CITY OF TEMECULA HVAC PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE DUTIES FOR CITY OF TEMECULA SPECIFICATIONS/SCOPE OF WORK EXHIBIT "A" OF EXHIBIT "A" 1. Preventative maintenance duties described in this Scope of Work are to be performed on the HVAC equipment and vent fans at the following six locations in Temecula: · City Hail, 43200 Business Park Drive · Maintenance Facility, 43210 Business Park Drive · Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street · Old Town Senior Center, 41845 6~ Street · Temecula Valley Museum, 28314 Mercedes Street 2. The items in this scope of work are to be completed four times a year at each location, unless noted otherwise. The tentative schedule is for this to be completed in November, February, May and August each year during the term &the contract. 3. Preventative maintenance duties to be performed at each location, four times a year are as follows: Test and observe heating/cooling operation all equipment. Furnish and replace all air filters to manufacturer's specification. Note size and quantity of each filter for each HVAC unit. Check for correct amperage draw out/unit components. Check refrigerant system for leaks/proper charge. Check and clean condensate pans, drains and drain lines. Check all electrical contacts/relays for wear/lube as needed. Clean equipment of excessive grease and oil. Secure all panels, covers, guards, etc. Inspect drive belts for tension, wear, and alignment. Inspect/adjust equipment operation and safety controls. Inspect/adjust furnace burners, ignition equipment, heat exchangers and gas valves. Inspect fan blades/blowers wheels for balance, condition and cracks. Check shaft/bearings condition and lubricated as required. Check all electrical connectors for condition/tightness. Clean evaporator and condenser coils. Brash/clean all return air grills. Observe air distribution devices for restrictions and adjust as needed. Check thermostat/time clock system seuings and operation. Adjust as directed by Maintenance Supervisor. Notify Maintenance Supervisor of any needed repairs. Once a year at City Hall, during August's preventative maintenance period, use high pressure air to blow all condenser lines clean. P~Agreements~Cor)tractor 99 14 The Vendor will complete the "Preventative Maintenance Program" form (see Exhibit "D") for each HVAC unit at each of the six facilities. This form is completed each time preventative maintenance is performed. All thermostats shall have an identifying number physically applied to its exterior. This thermostat number will then be applied to the exterior of the air handler and compressor units controlled by that thermostat. The Vendor will provide a numbering system, for each of the five facilities, which meet the Maintenance Supervisor's approval. Vendor will apply identifying numbers during the first preventative maintenance check in November. "Exhibit E" is an equipment inventory list for all HVAC units. It should be noted that all filters are located in standard locations in each unit except for units at City Hall. Air filters on most City Hall units have been removed fi-om the air-handler units and are now located in the return air registers. It should be noted that "Exhibit E" may not show all kitchen hood exhaust fans and bathroom vent fan equipment. Vendor is responsible for lubricating and checking belts on these vent fan units. A line item for servicing miscellaneous vent fans has been included in Exhibit "A" Price Sheet for each location. P~Agreements~Contractor 99 EXHIBIT B PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE PRICING SHEET HVAC PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE DESCRIPTION PRICE PER PRICE PER YEAR QUARTER CITY HALL HVAC $678.00 $2,700.00 CITY HALL MISCELLANEOUS VENT FANS No Charge No Charge MAINTENANCE FACILITY HVAC $37.50 $150.00 MAINTENANCE FACILITY MISCELLANEOUS VENT FANS No Charge No Charge COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER HVAC $453.75 $1,815.00 COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER MISCELLANEOUS No Charge No Charge VENT FANS TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER HVAC $93.75 $375.00 TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER MISCELLANEOUS No Charge No Charge VENT FANS OLD TOWN SENIOR CENTER HVAC $37.50 $150.00 OLD TOWN SENIOR CENTER MISCELLANEOUS VENT FANS No Charge No Charge TEMECULA VALLEY MUSEUM $112.50 $450.00 TEMECULA VALLEY MUSEUM MISCELLANEOUS VENT No Charge No Charge FANS TOTAL $1,410.00 $5,640.00 ALTERNATE BID ITEMS-For repair or extra work authorized by City MARK-UP ADDED TO VENDOR'S WHOLESALE PRICE OF PARTS & EQUIPMENT 40 % HOURLY RATE PER REGUALR MAN HOUR-8am To 5pm Monday through Friday $60.00 HOURLY RATE PER OVERTIME MAN HOUR-After-hours, $90.00 Weekends, Holidays, etc. P~Agreements\Contractor 99 16 CITY OF TEMECULA REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL EXHIBIT "A" of I~3o:IIBIT "A" PRICING SHEET HVAC PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE DESCRIPTION PRICE PER PRICE PER YEAR QUARTER · o~, CITY HALL HVAC CITY HALL MISCELLANEOUS VENT FANS MAINTENANCE FACILITY HVAC ~-~ .~.R. /~"-O '~'~-' MAINTENANCE FACILITY MISCELLANEOUS VENT FANS COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER HVAC q ~ ~ '~ ~' i. ~ t ~ .o..~._ COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER MISCELLANEOUS VENT FANS TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER HVAC TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER MISCELLANEOUS VENT FANS /~ OLD TOWN SENIOR CENTER HVAC ..~.-i _~o. ] ~ .__~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~_ OLD TOWN SENIOR CENTER MISCELLANEOUS VENT FANS TEMECULA VALLEY MUSEUM I I 7~ ~ q ~"-(~.g~-- TEMECULA VALLEY MUSEUM MISCELLANEOUS VENT FANS ANNUAL TOTAL ALTERNATE BID ITEMS-For repair or extra ~vork authorized by City MARK-UP ADDED TO VENDOR'S WHOLESALE PRICE OF PAW. TS & EQUIPMENT HOURLY RATE PER KEGUALR MAN HOUR-Sam To 5pm Monday through Friday HOURLY RATE PER OVERTIME MAN HOUR-After-hours, Weekends. Holidays, etc. /-/0 % q0 ..Sig-~.tu red, th ori z ed Representative Name and Title 9 ~ATEMENT OF QUALIFICAT 1. Attach a statement of qualifications outlining vendor's corporate profile and experience in providing maintenance to public restroom as required by this RFP. 2. Attach a list of client references, to include the following information for each reference: Reference Company Name Point of Contact Company Street Address City, State, Zip Code Telephone Number 3. Attach a statement &warranty for all work to be provided. 4. Attach a copy of all City, County, Federal and State licenses required, as applicable. 5. Selected Vendor will provide the following documentation upon execution of the contract: 1. Certificate of Insurance for: Workers Compensation, General Liability, Automol~ile Liability, Excess/Umbrella Liability, Personal Property Damage and Professional Liability in the amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence. 6. Ear~ Pay Discount: A ,.~ % discount is offered for payment within ,.~ days. (Note: No less than 15 days will be considered for purpose of bid evaluation). By signing this RFP, Vendor has read and will comply with all terms and conditions herein. Signature of Authorized Representative Name and TitleI ~ 10 POLICY NUMBER: 1075199736. EXHIBIT "B"ENDORSEMENT:Of EXIqIBIT "A" #1 NAMED hNSURED: 1st Mechanical, Inc, EFF. DATE: 06/01/99 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY, ADDITIONAL INSURED - OWNERS, LESSEES OR CONTRACTORS (FORM B-AMENDED) This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART COMMERCIAL AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COVERAGE PART SCHEDULE Name of Person orOrganizat[on: City of Temecuta, City Clerk's Office, P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 THE CITY OF TEMECULA, ITS OFFICERS, OFFICIALS,EMPLOYEES OR VOLUNTEERS. RE: (If no entry appears above, infomlation required to complete this endorsement will be shown in the Declarations as applicable to this endorsement.) WHO iS INSURED is amended to include as an insured the person or organization shown in the Schedule, but only with respect to liability arising out of "your work" for that insured by or for you. PRIMARY INSURANCE Il is agreed tl~at such insurance as is afforded by this policy for the benefit of the named insured and THE CITY OF TEMECULA shall be primary insurance as respects any claim, loss or liability arising out of operations by the named insured, or by its independent contractors for which Ihe named insured is found to be liable and which liability appfies to the special contract under which the named insured has agreed to perform specific operations, and any other insurance maintained by THE CITY OF TEMECULA, shall be excess and non-contributory with the insurance p_r_q_vjoed he-r~b-nd e~: ........................................... SEVERAIBILITY OF INTEREST It is agreed that [he insurance arl'orded by thi,~ policy applies separately to each insured who is seeking covera_c,e or against wi~om a claim is made or a suit is brought, except with respect to the company's limit of liability. POLICY NUMBER: EXHIBIT "B" of ~:xHIBIT "A" 10751997536 ENDORSEMENT: #2 NAMED INSURED: Ist Mechanical, Inc. EFF. DATE: 06/01/99 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY, ADDFTJONAL INSURED * OWNERS, LESSEES OR CONTRACTORS (FORM B-AMENDED) This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART COMMERCIAL AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COVERAGE PART SCHEDULE Name of Person or Organization: City of Temecuia, City Clerk's Office, P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 THE CITY OF TEMECULA, ITS OFFICERS, OFFICIALS,EMPLOYEES OR VOLUNTE~'RS. RE: (If no entry appears above, information required to complete this endorsement will be shown in the Declarations as applicable to this endorsement.) WHO IS INSURED is amanded to include as an insured the person or organization shown in the Schedule, but only with respect to liability adsing out of "your work" for that insured by or for you. PRIMARY iNSURANCE It is agreed that such insurance as is afforded by this policy for the benefit of the named insured and THE CITY OF TEMECULA shall be primary insurance as respects any claim, loss or liability adsing out of operations by the named insured, or by its independent contractors for which the named insured is found to be liable and which liability applies to the special contract under which the named insured has agreed to perform specific operations, and any other insurance maintained by THE CITY OF TEME~_U__L~_: shall b_e ex_c_e_s..~__a_n_d non-cont_r!_b_u_.t_~_ry- with the irL~_uran_ce provided -hereunder: SEVERABILITYOFINTEREST It is agreed that the insurance afforded by this policy applies separately to each insured who is seeking coverage or against whom a claim is made or a suit is brought, except with respect to the company's limit of liability, EXHIBtT "B" of I':xHIBIT SIGNATURE OF INSURER (Underwriter or Officer) l'l~a,~e John A. Clanton _(prJnf/type name), warrant that authority to bind the below listed insurance company and by my signature hereon do so bind this company. SIGNATURE OF INSURERE (Underwriter or Officer) ORGANIZATION' % l~a Sorrento Parkway, #300 AOO~ESS; San Diego, CA 92121 T~TLE: Vi.ce President' TELEPHONE:L (85'8) 452-2200 EXHIBIT "B" of RXRIBIT "A" pOLICY NUMBER: 1075199722 __ ENDT. NUMSER;__?3 NAMED INSURED: 1st Mechanical, Inc. EFF.DATE; 06/01/99 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY/ WORKER'S COMPENSATIONIEMPLOYERS LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT Name of Person or Organization: TIlE CITY OF TEMECULA, ITS OFFICERS, OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES OR VOLUNTEERS. City of Temecula City Clerk's Office P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 in consideration of the policy premium and notwithstanding any fnconsfstent statement in the policy to which this endorsement is attached or any other statement in the policy to which Ibis endorsement is attached or any ether endorsement attached or any other endorsement attached thereto, it is agreed as follows: _C. ancellatJon Notice. The insurance afforded by this poticy shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' pdor writlen ~otice by certified mail return receipt requested has bean given to the Cfty of Temecula. Such notice shall be addressed ~s shown in the heading of this endorsement. Waiver of Subroaation. The h~surance Company agrees to waive all rights of subrogation against the City of Temecula, its elected or appointed officers, efficiale, volunteers and emptoyees for losses paid under the terms of this policy which arise from work performed by the N,~med Insured for the City of Temecula, SIGNATURE OF INSURER (Undervcri[er or Officer) John A. Clanton l, (print/type name), warrant that I have authority to bind ~:he below listed insurance company and by my signature hereon do so bind this company. SIGNATURE OF INSURER (Underwriter or Officer) (Original signature required on~ndorsemeht'furr/i:shgd'tdlh~ City-of TemeS'Ql~) ORGANIZATION: %.~p._~¢.2~ .~_..~~ 105~rento Parkway, #300 ADDRESS: San Diego, CA 92121 TITLE: Vice President TELEPHONE: (858) 452-2200 EXHIBIT "D" of CITY OF TEMECULA HVAC PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM FACILITIES City Hall Maintenance Facility Community Recreation Center Temecula Community Center Old Town Senior Center Temecula Valley Museum UNIT NO. MAKE & MODEL NO. ItVAC PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE REPORT Test and observe heating/cooling operation all equipment. Furnish and replace all air filters to manufacturer's specification. Size Qty.. Check for correct amperage draw out/unit components. Check refrigerant system for leaks/proper charge. Check and clean condensate pans/drains/drain lines. Check all electrical contacts/relays for wear/lube as needed. Clean equipment of excessive grease and oil. Secure all panels, covers, guards, etc. Inspect drive belts for tension, wear, and alignment. Inspect/adjust equipment operation and safety controls. Inspect/adjust fnmace burners, ignition equipment, heat exchangers and gas valves. Inspect fan blades/blowers wheels for balance, condition and cracks. Check shaft/bearings condition and lubricated as required. Check all electrical connectors for condition/tightness. Clean evaporator and condenser coils. Brush/clean all return air grills. ~--"Oi3-~T~r distrib~F~o-n devices forr~strictions and iidjfist fi.~i~e~ed7 - Check thermostat/time clock system settings and operation. Adjust as directed by Maintenance Supervisor. Notify Maintenance Supervisor of any needed repairs. Remarks: Signature (Technician) Date Performed: o E m 0 0 o ~ ~ i < < < < E E < > r~ .< Z CERTIFIC/ OF LIABILITY INSI. 09/21/99 ?ODUCE~ THIS CERTIFICATE IS ~'UED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE ~ateridge Insurance Services .0525 Vista Sorrento Pkw~ #300 ;a~ Diego CA 92121 To. A. Clanton '~ho~e No. 858--452--2200 F,x No. 858--452--6004 HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE COMPANY A CNA Insurance Companies COMPANY 1st Mechanical, Inc. Larry Mc Cain 2425 La Mirada Drive Vista CA 92083 B COMPANY C COMPANY D ;OVERAGES A 1075199736 PRODUCT~ - COMP~P I I C~MEMAOE~OCCU" A ~ ANYAUTO WORKERS COMPENSATION AND OFFICERS ARE: EXCL I 10751997536 1075199722 DATE (MM/DDITY) DATE (MM/DD/YY) 06/01/99 06/01/00 ' I 06/01/99 I 06/01/00 06/01/99 MED EXP (Any one plf~ea) EACH OCCURRENCE ; AGGREGATE I EL EACH ACC1DENT 0 6 / 01/0 0 I EL DISEASE - POUCY LIMIT I E~. CmEASE- EA EMPLO'nm $2?000?000 $2?000?000 $170007000 sit000?000 $1007000 $10?000 $1,000,000 1000000 1000000 $1000000 )EECRIPTION OF OPERA TION SA.OCATIO NS/VEHICLS,~/S P ECLAL ITEMS *.10 days notic.e of cancella, tiqn,, w~ll ~be. issued for non paym. ent of premium. iertiflcaMe ho%der is n~ame~ acceL, ion,al 1ns~red per.attaChed G-17957; .overage is Dr~.mary an~ w, alver o= su~rogatlon applles with respects to the Dperat~ons o= ~ne ~nsureo. :ERTIFICATE HOLDER TEMECU1 City of Temecula City Clerk's Office P.O. Box 9033 Temecula CA 92589-9033 ~CORD 25-S (II95) CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL ~ MAIL AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE John A. Clanton ,.....*-.~ ~ "ACORD CORPO~TION t988 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. . CONTRACTOR'S BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT Thl~ endorsement modifies insurance provided under the roll.g: COMMERCIAL GENE,RAL LLABIUTY COVERAGE PART A. WHO IS AN INSURED (Section II) is amended to a. Include as an ir~ured any person or organization (cetled additional Insured) wflom you are required to add as an a~l,fittonal insured on this policy unde~ 1. A written contract or agreement; or 2, An oral contract or agreement where a certh'ioats of insurance showing that person or organization as an additional insured has been issued; but the written er oral contract or agreement must be: · l. Currently in affect or becoming effective during the teal et this policy; and 2. Executed prior to the 'bodily injury', 'property damage", 'pemonsl injury' or "advertising injury", E3. The insurance provided to the additional insured is limited as follows: 1, That person or organization is only an additional insured with respect to liability arising out of: a. Your premises; - b. 'Your werX~- for that add~lonaJ Insure~; c. Acts or omissions of He adclitlona/ insured In connect/an with the ~eneral super~sion of 'your work', 2. The Limits of Insurance applicable to the aclaftionaJ insured are those'specified in the written contrac~ or agreement or in the Declarations for this policy, whichever is less. These Limits of insurance are inciu--ive and not in addition to the Limits of insurance shown in the Declarations· ,1. Except when required by contract or agreement, the coverage provided to the additional insured by this endorsement does not apply to: 'Eedily injury" or 'property damage' after:. (1) All work on t~e project (ot~er than servic,' maintenance or repairs) to be performed or on behalf of the addftional'.tnsured et th site of the covered operations has bee completed: or (2) That portion of "your wor~' out of which th injury or damage arises has I:~een put to intended use by any person or opgani~atic ot~er than another contractor subcontractor engaged in pefformir operations for a principal as part of ti' same project. b. 'Bodily injury' ur'property damage' arising out acts or omissions of the additional Insur~ other than in connection with the genar supervision of 'your wor~'. The insurance provided to the additional lnsur~ · does not apply to "bodily Injury"', 'property damage 'per~cnal injury", or 'advertising injury' arising of an architect's, engineer's, or surveyor's rerlderit of or failure to .render any professional se~'vfc~ including: a. The preparing; approving, or failing-to I~'ePar or approve maps, drawings, opinions, report surveys, c~ange o~ers, design c ~..pecificetions; and i~. Supervisory, inspection, or engineertn services. Any ~verage provided under this endorsement ' an additional insured shall be exceS~ over ar other vatid and collectible insurance aysilahIe the additional insured wl~ether primary, exceS: c~ntt~,gent or on any other basis unless a contra[ specifically requires that this insurance be primal. ITEM 10 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager June 26, 2001 APPROVAL C TYATTORNEY DIR.OF FINANC~ CITY MANAGER ~ Agreement for Weed Abatement Services Between the City of Temecula and A.S.A.P. Services. PREPARED BY: Stephen Brown, Senior Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Contract with A.S.A.P. Services for Weed Abatement Services for a total of $26,250.00. BACKGROUND: The City returned to providing weed abatement services in 2000. To accomplish this task, the City entered into agreements with two local contractors to provide forced abatement services. The contracts were written to allow two annual extensions. This contract renewal represents the first annual extension for forced abatement services. The fees paid to the contractors are recovered by the City through direct billing or property liens that are collected through County property taxes. The two prime contractors have agreed to keep the same rates for weed abatement that were in rome last year. In addition to providing forced abatement services for private properties, the City is desirous of having these contractors perform weed abatement on City property. The rates negotiated by City staff are favorable and the City of Temecula will realize a cost savings over separate contracts with other abatement contractors. FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds have been included in the FY 2001-02 budget accounts 001- 161-999-5440 (Planning) and 190-180-999-5250 (TCSD). ATrACHMENTS: City of Temecula Agreement for Consulting Services (Weed Abatement Services) R:~ROWNS\Code\weed abate staffrpt 2001-02 ASAP.doc 1 CITY OF TEMECULA CONTRACT AGREEMENT FOR WEED ABATEMENT SERVICES THIS MAINTENANCE CONTRACT, made and entered into as of July 1, 2001, by and between the City of Temecula, and A.S.A.P. Services ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM This Agreement shall commence on July 1, 2001, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2002, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SCOPE OF WORK Contractor shall perform all of the work described in the Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. ("Work") and shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required for the Work. All of said Work to be performed and materials to be furnished for the Work shalI be in strict accordance with the specifications set forth in the Scope of Work. 3. PAYMENT The City agrees to pay Contractor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and schedules and terms as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. This amount shall not exceed Twenty Six Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($26,250) per year for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment or change order is approved as provided in this Agreement. a. Contractor shall submit invoices monthly for actual services performed detailing the work performed in a form acceptable to the Director of Finance. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of contractor's fees it shall give written notice to Contractor within 30 days of receipt of invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. 4o Council. CHANGE ORDERS Change orders exceeding these limits shall be approved by the City 5. PERFORMANCE Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 6. CITY APPROVAL All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed subject to the approval of the City or its authorized representatives. 7. WAIVER OF CLAIMS On or before making final request for payment under Paragraph 3., above, Contractor shall submit to District, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this contract; the acceptance by Contractor of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against the City under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. Contractor shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. 8. PREVAILING WAGES Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the District Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's in Temecula Contractor shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. R:\BROWNS\Code\ASAP Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the District, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 9. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Contractor the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 10. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 11. INDEMNIFICATION The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 12. LIABILITY INSURANCE Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code I (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: R:~B RO~3~NS\Code~A S A P Weed Abatement contxact 20014)2.doc General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: $I,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. (3) Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. c. Acceptability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. d. Verification of Coverage Contractor shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. e. Contractor, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workman's Compensation or undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." 13. TIME OF THE ESSENCE Time is of the essence in this Contract. 14. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Contractor is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against the City, or bind City in any manner. a. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, the City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for City. District shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 15. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 16. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary independent examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by the City for purposes of letting this Contract out to proposal will be accepted as an excuse for any failure or omission on the part of the Contractor to fulfill in every detail all requirements of this Contract. Nor will such reasons be accepted as a basis for any claims whatsoever for extra compensation or for an extension of time. R:\BROWNS\CodeXASAP Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc 17. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT After the completion of the Work contemplated by this Contract, Contractor shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors on the Work have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California. 18. PROHIBITED INTEREST No member, officer, or employee of the City of Temecula or of a local public body shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in the contract of the proceeds thereof during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. Furthermore, the contractor covenants and agrees to their knowledge that no board member, officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the contracting party other than the City of Temecula, and that if any such interest comes to the knowledge of either party at any time, a full and complete disclosure of all such information will be made, in writing, to the other party or parties, even if such interest would not be considered a conflict of interest under Article 4 (commencing with Section 1090) or Article 4.6 (commencing with Section 1220) of Division 4 of Title I of the Government Code of the State of California. 19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 20. BOOKS AND RECORDS Contractor's books, records, and plans or such part thereof as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the City. 21. UTILITY LOCATION The City acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215. 22. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS Contractor agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4215. 23. DISCRIMINATION Contractor represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin, color, sex, age, or handicap. 24. WRITTEN NOTICE Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agre~/ment must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice: To City: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Contractor: A.S.A.P. Services P.O. Box 2322 Temecula, CA 92593 25. ASSIGNMENT The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. 26. LICENSES At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. R:\BROWNS\Code~ASAP Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc 27. GOVERNING LAW The District and Contractor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and ' also govern the interpretation of this A~'eement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. 28. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 29. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. R:\BROWNS\CodeXASAP Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA BY: Shawn D. Nelson, City Manager Attest: SusanW. Jones, CMC, CityClerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR Name By: Name: Title: (Two Signatures Required for Corporations) R:\BROWNS\Code\ASAP Weed Abatement contract 2001 02.doc 6 EXHIBIT "A" PART: I SCOPE OF WORK The contractor shall provide Weed abatement services to the City of Temecula in accordance with the Exhibit "A', Fee Schedule, Part II, Procedures, and Part III Instructions, Conditions, and Legal Requirements of this contract. PARTII PROCEDURES DISCING - Weed abatement by disking shall be accomplished by disking with a double-throw disc at sufficient depth to place all weeds under the surface. Disking is the plowing of weeds using reasonable care so as to not disturb under/over ground utilities, destruction to fencing, trees, bushes, buildings, equipment, supplies or adjoining land, including fire due to reckless/negligent disking of land, wherever practical and unless otherwise specified, disking is to be considered the primary method of abating weeds. Cross Disking - Where the nature of the soil is such that it is not receptive to the cutting edge of the discs, the area shall be cross-disked to reduce the magnitude of any exposed combustibles. Special Disking Conditions - Where the nature of the soil is such that it is not receptive to the cutting edge of the disc being used and where the cross disking fails to meet the standards of the Hazardous Reduction Program, it shall be the responsibility of the firm to provide the proper equipment to accomplish the approved cleaning. Dust Control - During windy conditions, the firm shall postpone work until the wind subsides or watering is provided to minimize blo,wing dust. EQUIPMENT - The firm selected shall furnish tractors, discs, mowers, etc. in all areas suitable to complete the job of disking property. The firm shall provide transportation to and from the job sites, for his equipment and all necessary fuel, etc., at his/her own expense. Flail mowing may be necessary in areas where environmental concerns won't allow disking. Qualified Personnel/Operators - All personnel involved in this program, must be a Fire Certified inspector and a qualified, cooperative, experienced tractor operator. Ail tractors and other equipment will be maintained by the firm at their expense and on his own time. Fire Fighting Safety Equipment - All tractors are to be equipped with an approved spark arrestor when not equipped with turbo charger and also an approved 2-1/2 gallon pressurized water type fire extinguisher and shovel. Disc - Unless otherwise approved by the Hazard Reduction Program Manager, the disc used shall be - hydraulically controlled. It shall be able to turn easily and maneuver in small areas. It shall be heavy duty and capable of accomplishing a thorough mixing of soil and weeds. The disc must be in good mechanical condition. Transport Truck - The transport truck for hauling the tractor and disc shall be of suitable size and horsepower to easily maneuver and negotiate all terrain traveled to reach the job sites. Transports wilt have a tilt type for easy loading and unloading. All equipment must meet highway specifications and safety regulations. Trucks will be in good mechanical condition and will be operated and maintained at the expense of the firm and at a time before or after working hours. Flagman - If required or necessary for any reason, the firm will furnish, at no expense to the City, flagpersons for loading and unloading of equipment. The only equipment allowed will be tractors with discs with the exception of those areas, which will require different equipment as necessary. The City Fire Chief, Chief Building Official or the City Code R:\BROWNS\Code\ASAP Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc 7 Enforcement Officers will advise contractors/consultants where the mowing or other methods will be allowed. The use of non-authorized equipment or methods will result in non-payment by the City. STANDARD FOR CLEARING - The purpose of removal is for the reduction of fire and safety hazards and will be accomplished by turning under and mixing weeds with the soil or by mowing, hauling, trimming, and grubbing using manual labor or by any combination of methods that are approved and included in the scope of the contract. All clearing must meet the specifications of the Hazard Reduction Program and must be approved in writing by the program representative. Method of Clearing - Five (5) acres and less will be cleared completely. Where the acreage consists of more than five (5) continuous acres, a one hundred (100) foot wide strip shall be cleared at the perimeter of the property, and through the remainder of the property there shall not be any portion of land larger than two and one-half (2-1/2) acres which is not enclosed by itself within such a strip, which shall be a fire break. If the clearing is made to the letter of the herein stated standard, the payment would be based on fifth (50) percent of the total square footage. It may be determined that only a portion of a parcel exceeding five (5) acres needs to be cleared to adequately provide the necessary fire protection to the surrounding improvements. In these cases, payment would be based on actual square footage disked. Tumbleweed Abatement - The awarded firm will also be used in tumbleweed abatement in all areas during the months of August through October. TRACTOR MOWING General - When, in the opinion of the Inspector, and at all times in areas of high erosion, it is determined that for any reason disking of a property is impractical or undesirable, mowing of vegetative ground cover may be accomplished provided that an approved, heavy duty mower is used, and that the vegetation is cut to a distance of no higher than two (2") inches from the solid surface and as close to adjoining improvements as possible, but in no event further than eighteen (18") inches. Operation and Maintenance -Tractor mowers will be operated by a qualified, cooperative, experienced operator. They will be operated and maintained in good condition by the contractor at his expense and on his own time. Safety Shields - All tractor mowers are to be equipped with safety shields to prevent or reduce the throwing of rocks or other material that could result in injury or damage to private property. Clean up of Streets and Sidewalks - All streets and sidewalks am to be left in a clean condition. Necessary tools for cleaning streets and sidewalks are to be available on the job site. The charge for this operation shall not be separate, but will be included in the unit price for cleaning the parcel. HAND CLEANING AND HAULING General - Whenever it is impractical by mason of topography, location of trees, shrubbery, buildings, fences or type of vegetative cover to disc or use a tractor mower and when authorized by the Building Department, or designee, the vegetation shall be removed or thinned by hand labor using hand labor type tools. Handcrews shall consist of not less than two people. Additional manpower may be used, however no additional compensation will be allowed. Disposal of Cuttings - The excess accumulated material cut down by hand labor shall be disposed of by hauling the material to the nearest County landfill site, or an approved "clean green waste" compost facility. Required Tools and Equipment - The contractor shall furnish all hand tools, power equipment and safety equipment necessary to accomplish the specified work. R:\BROWNS\Code\ASAP Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc 8 Supervision Furnished by Contractor - Supervision of hand crews will be furnished by the contractor at his own expense. All supervisors must be experienced and verbally capable of communicating with the inspector. Hauling Trimmings - Hauling of trimmings due to hand cleaning are considered one and of the same type of operation and therefore billing will be considered the same. Type of Work Authorized - The amount of work and type of work to be performed shall be under the direction of and only with the authorization of the Building Department, or designee. Hand Cleaning Charges to Include Loading - Hand cleaning charges on parcels to be cleaned will include the loading of vegetative materials that are to be removed to the nearest landfill site or compost facility. Removal charges can be added ifa landfill tipping fee receipt is presented with the billing. Travel time to Landfill -Travel time to and from the landfill or compost facility shall not be charged. The contractor's charge for the truck are included as part of the rate. RUBBISH, REFUSE AND DIRT General - Whenever it is impractical by reason of location of rubbish, refuse, and dirt to disc or use a tractor mower and when authorize by the Building Department, the rubbish, refuse, and dirt shall be removed. The degree of removal to be accomplished on any parcel will be specified by the City. Definition of rubbish, refuse, and dirt are as follows, discarded asphalt and concrete, abandoned foundations, litter, trash, trees, piles of dirt; making clearing the parcel impossible. Contractor shall photograph the debris prior to removal and a second photograph shall show the trash in the haul away vehicle for comparison. Disposal of Rubbish, Refuse, and Dirt -The material shall be disposed of by hauling the material to the nearest County landfill site. Required Tools and Equipment - The contractor shall furnish all equipment necessary to accomplish the specific work. Supervision Furnished by Contractor - Supervision of crews will be furnished by the Contractor at his own expense. Charges: Rubbish, and Refuse - The charge for clearing of rubbish and refuse from a parcel will include the cleaning and loading of the materials that are to be removed to the landfill site and the hauling of the materials to the landfill site and the hauling of the materials to the landfill site are considered one and of the same type of operation and therefore billing will be considered the same. Travel Time to Landfill - Travel time to and from the landfill shall not be charged. This charge is included in the rate. Piles of Dirt - All parcels that have piles of dirt shall be leveIed in a matter authorized by the Building Department. Exceptions - Any exceptions to the foregoing regulations will be at the discretion of the Building Official, or designee, should special circumstances exist. PART llh 1NSTRUCTIONS~ CONDITIONS~ and LEGAL REQUIREMENTS 1. All services provided by the Contractor shall be performed in strict accordance with the City of Temecula Municipal Code 816 and Ordinance 1103.2.4 of the 1998 California Fire Code. R:\BROWNS\Code\ASAP Weed Abatement contract 2001 02.doc 9 10. 11. 12. Contractor shall identify those services, if applicable, that will be out-sourced to a subcontractor. The prime Contractor will be responsible for verifying the qualifications and validity of all licenses, permits and quality of work for any out sourced work to sub-Contractors. The prime Contractor is also responsible for paying its employees and any sub-Contractors the prime Contractor hires. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages by each craft or type of workman needed to execute the contract in the locality in which the work is to be performed shall be paid. (Contractor shall submit certified payroll to the City) The contractor is required to comply with all existing State and Federal labor laws. Selected Contractor is also responsible for complying with all OSHA standards and COSHA standards and requirements. If Contractor outsources any work or job to a sub-Contractor, it will be the prime Contractors responsibility to ensure that all sub-Contractors meet the requirements as stated in this RFQ. The contractor shall be an independent contractor, and nothing shall be construed to cause the Contractor to be deemed or represent itself as an agent or employee of the City. The Contractor shall be excused from performance hereunder during the time and the extent that he/she is prevented from obtaining, delivering, repairing, or performing in the customary manner, by acts of God, fire, war, strike, and loss or shortage of transportation facilities. Contractor shall provide the City satisfactory evidence that non-performance is due to other than fault or negligence on the Contractors part. The selected Contractor agrees to maintain a City of Temecula Business License for the duration of the contract. All work shall be done by qualified personnel. Contractor shall provide copies of all Federal, State, County and City licenses or certificates required by this contract. The Contractor shall provide a local telephone number where service personnel can be reached on an "on call" basis twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven days per week. This telephone number will be made available to all authorized personnel designated by the City Contractor agrees that all service by the contractor shall be to the satisfaction of authorized City Code Enforcement personnel. In the event that the Contractor defaults on performance of any of these requirements, then the City shall have the right to terminate this agreement upon thirty (30) days written notice delivered to the Contractor by certified mail or courier. The Contractor shall maintain the contract during the termination period. Termination of the contract will not relieve the Contractor of any liability to the City for damages sustained by the City because of any breach of contract by the Contractor, and the City may withhold any payments to the Contractor until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from the Contractor is determined. The term of the contract shall commence upon award by the City Manager/City Council and continue through June 30, 2001. The City reserves the option to extend the contract(s) under the same terms and conditions for an additional three years. Price adjustments may occur during the first thirty-six (36) months of this agreement. Upon request of the contractor and agreement by the City, the item prices may be adjusted by the amount equal to the increase or decrease, during the previous twelve (12) months, in the Riverside, San Bernardino All Urban Consumers Index to determine the percentage of increase or decrease, the term "previous twelve months" shall mean the twelve month period ending June 30th of that year, or if not available, the prior month. The contract between Contractor and the City is non-transferable. Contractor shall under no circumstances assign the agreement without written permission of the City. Contractor shall notify the City, in writing, of any change in shop ownership at least thirty (30) days prior to said change. The City's terms for payment are net thirty (30) days upon receipt of invoice. Contractor shall submit invoices between the first and fifteenth business day of each month for services provided the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all undisputed fees. R:\BROWNS\Code\ASAP Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc 13. The City reserves the right to add or eliminate parcels and neighborhoods to the scope of work of the Weed Abatement Contract as circumstances require. Contractor agrees pricing will be the same for any additional parcels. 14. Prohibited Interest - No member, officer, or employee of the City of Temecula shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this agreement, the proceeds thereof, the Contractor, or Contractor's sub- contractors for this project, during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. The Contractor hereby warrants and represents to the City that no officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether conlractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the Contractor or Contractor's sub-contractors on this project. Contractor further agrees to notify the City in the event that any such interest is discovered whether or not law or this agreement prohibits such interest. 15. The awarded firm shall at all times take precautions (where necessary) to insure the protection of the public and meet OSHA and COSHA requirements. All work performed shall be done in a prompt, thorough, lawful and professional manner. Contractor shall perform work in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, rules, ordinances, regulations, and permit conditions. The contractor shall review and be familiar with the conditions of approval of the weed abatement permit issued by the Federal Fish and Wildlife Service related to weed abatement on sensitive habitats. 16. The Contractor shall take clear and concise pictures of the area demonstrating need for abatement. These pictures will be taken immediately "before" and "after" abatement work is done and submitted to the department. If pictures do not show justification of charge, payment will not be made. Each picture shall include time and date picture was taken and the parcel number it represents. Contractor will furnish the camera, film and envelopes to hold the pictures. Each "after" picture shall be taken from the same location as the "before" picture, showing some outstanding landmark. 17. The contractor shall not miss more than two (2) consecutive days or more than five (5) days out of a twenty (20) day period, when work has been assigned, regardless of the reasons (i.e., equipment failure, illness, etc.) 18. In case of default by the contractor, the City may procure the work, or services from an alternate firm. The City may deduct any excess cost from any unpaid balance due the assigned firm, or may bill for the same at the City's discretion. The prices paid by the City, in such events shall be considered the prevailing market price at the time of purchase. 19. The work, labor and/or materials which the contractor proposed to furnish to the City must comply in all respects with the appropriate equipment and safety regulations of all Federal, State and local regulatory commissions whether such equipment or safety features have been specifically outlined or required in these specifications or not. 20. Where there are locked gates to the property, the firm will be given instructions on how to enter the property. The firm will be responsible for any damage done not in accordance to given instructions. 21. All discing or other services must be done during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday except City recognized holidays. 22. Complaints - The contractor will be responsible for promptly answering inquiries and complaints of the Building Department or private property owners or citizens relative to any work, charges, damage or any other questions that may arise as a result of abatement operations by the contractor. 23. Operations may be suspended at any time by the Building Official, or his designee, until appropriate corrective measures are taken, if any, of the conditions set forth in this contract are found to exist. 24. Final Decisions - All scheduling of cleaning operations will be determined by the Building Official, or his designee. At any time during the cleaning operations, should a controversy arise as to the number of lots cleaned, the amounts of work done, or not to be done, or the size of parcels cleaned by the contractor, the matter will be studied and explained fully and the decision made by the Building Official, or his designee, shall be final. R: \BROWNS\Code\ASAP Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. Hold Harmless Clause - The contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, and employees, from and against any and all claims, demands, loss or liability of any kind or nature which the City of Temecula, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them or any of them for injury to, or death of persons; or damage to property arising out of or in any manner connected with the negligence or lack of care of the contractor, his officers, agents, or employees in the performance of this contract. This provision shall include any and all claims arising from sub-contractors retained by the contractor. Reports of Damage - The contractor will promptly notify the Building Department of any damage to private property as a result of abatement operations. Supervision - The contractor shall be responsible for providing qualified supervision in all areas of operations. Supervision will be provided at the expense of the contractor. The supervisor will make necessary reports and work directly with the area inspector in planning and scheduling the work. Transportation - All transportation of equipment and personnel to and from the job site will be arranged by the contractor. Sanitary Facilities - The contractor shall be responsible for making available the sanitary facilities necessary for all his personnel. Aforementioned sanitary facilities shall meet the standards of State and local law. Parking Equipment - The contractor shall make arrangements for parking sites for his equipment at night and on Sundays or holidays. Equipment shall not be parked or stored on private property without the express permission of the property owner. Removal of Private Property - Under no condition will the contractor or his agent or workmen remove any item or items from any private property except that which has been authorized by the Building Official, or his designee. Operations - The contractor is required to provide sufficient operable equipment, replacements, and personnel during hazard abatement cleaning as deemed necessary by the Building Official, or his designee. Removal of any such equipment designated to the Abatement Program without an immediate replacement must be approved by the Building Official, or his designee. Termination of Operations -Final authorization to terminate abatement operations will be made by the Building Official, or his designee. Furnish Manpower and Equipment - Furnish all supervision, labor, materials, equipment and tools such as, but not limited to tractors, discs, trucks, mowers, whip hoes, rakes and other tools and equipment as required for the removal of weeds, debris and vegetative growth from parcels, within the City of Temecula. Unauthorized Work - Payment will not be made to the contractor for work accomplished that was not authorized by the Building Department. Interpretation of Specifications - Should it appear that any matter relative to these specifications has not been sufficiently detailed or explained, the Contractor shall contact the Building Department for clarification. In the event that satisfaction has not been reached, the contractor may appeal to the Building Official. Error or Omission of Specifications - The contractor will not be allowed to take advantage of any error or omission in these specifications and plans. Full instructions will always be given by the Building Official or his designee, when such error or omission is discovered. R:\BROWNS\Code\ASAP Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc EXHIBIT "B" FEE SCHEDULE 2. 3. 4. Weed removal shall be billed at a rate of $80.00 for the first acre or fraction thereof. This does not include handwork. Every acre or fraction thereof after the first acre shall be billed at a rate of $35.00. This does not include handwork. All parcels that are a quarter acre (0.25 acres) or less shall be billed at a rate of $80.00. This shall include all handwork. In the event dust control is necessary, the contractor may charge and additional $40.00 per acre or fraction thereof for use of a water truck. Trash removal shall be billed at a rate of $35.00 per cubic yard. Handwork along property edges fence lines and similar situations shall be billed on a running foot basis up to a maximum of 15 feet in width. The cost shall be $.05 (five cents) per linear foot. Handwork on slopes and similar places that are not accessible by tractors or other similar vehicles shall be billed at $40.00 per hour. R:\BROWNS\Code\ASAP Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc ITEM 11 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR.OF FINANC F~,~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager DATE: June 26, 2001 SUBJECT: Agreement for Weed Abatement Services Between the City of Temecula and Rory Rieck and Chuck Maciel's Weed Abatement. PREPARED BY: Stephen Brown, Senior Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Contract with Rory Rieck and Chuck Maciel's Weed Abatement for Weed Abatement Services for a total of $26,250.00. BACKGROUND: The City returned to providing weed abatement services in 2000. To accomplish this task, the City entered into agreements with two local contractors to provide forced abatement services. The contracts were written to allow two annual extensions. This contract renewal represents the first annual extension for forced abatement services. The fees paid to the contractors are recovered by the City through direct billing or property liens that are collected through County property taxes. The two prime contractors have agreed to keep the same rates for weed abatement that were in force last year. In addition to providing forced abatement services for private properties, the City is desirous of having these contractors perform weed abatement on City property. The rates negotiated by City staff are favorable and the City of Temecula will realize a cost savings over separate contracts with other abatement contractors. FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds have been included in the FY 2001-02 budget in accounts 001-161-999-5440 (Planning) and 190-180-999-5250 (TCSD). A'I-FACHMENTS: City of Temecula Agreement for Consulting Services (Weed Abatement Services) R:'~BROWNS\Code\weed abate staffrpt 2001-02 reick-maciel.docl CITY OF TEMECULA CONTRACT AGREEMENT FOR WEED ABATEMENT SERVICES THIS MAINTENANCE CONTRACT, made and entered into as of July 1, 2001, by and between the City of Temecula, and Rory Reick and Chuck Maciel's Weed Abatement ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM This Agreement shall commence on July 1, 2001, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2002, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SCOPE OF WORK Contractor shall perform all of the work described in the Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. ("Work") and shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required for the Work. All of said Work to be performed and materials to be furnished for the Work shall be in strict accordance with the specifications set forth in the Scope of Work. 3. PAYMENT The City agrees to pay Contractor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and schedules and terms as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. This amount shall not exceed Twenty Six Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($26,250) per year for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment or change order is approved as provided in this Agreement. a. Contractor shall submit invoices monthly for actual services performed detailing the work performed in a form acceptable to the Director of Finance. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of contractor's fees it shall give written notice to Contractor within 30 days of receipt of invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. Council. CHANGE ORDERS Change orders exceeding these limits shall be approved by the City 5. PERFORMANCE Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 6. CITY APPROVAL All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed subject to the approval of the City or its authorized representatives. 7. WAIVER OF CLAIMS On or before making final request for payment under Paragraph 3., above, Contractor shall submit to District, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this contract; the acceptance by Contractor of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against the City under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. Contractor shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. 8. PREVAILING WAGES Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the District Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's in Temecula Contractor shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and I813 of the Labor Code. R:\BROWNS\Code~Reick-Maciel Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the District, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 9. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Contractor the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 10. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by !he Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractors control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. I1. INDEMNIFICATION The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 12. LIABILITY INSURANCE Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Emp oyer's Liability Insurance. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: R:\BROWNS\CodehReick-Maciel Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. (3) Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. c. Acceptability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. d. Verification of Coverage Contractor shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. e. Contractor, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workman's Compensation or undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." 13. TIME OF THE ESSENCE Time is of the essence in this Contract. 14. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Contractor is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against the City, or bind City in any manner. a. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, the City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for City. District shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 15, LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIE~ The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 16. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary independent examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by the City for purposes of letting this Contract out to proposal will be accepted as an excuse for any failure or omission on the part of the Contractor to fulfill in every detail all requirements of this Contract. Nor will such reasons be accepted as a basis for any claims whatsoever for extra compensation or for an extension of time. R:\BROWNS\Code~Reick-Maciel Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc 17. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT After the completion of the Work contemplated by this Contract, Contractor shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors on the Work have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California. 18. PROHIBITED INTEREST No member, officer, or employee of the City of Temecula or of a local public body shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in the contract of the proceeds thereof during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. Furthermore, the contractor covenants and agrees to their knowledge that no board member, officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the contracting party other than the City of Temecula, and that if any such interest comes to the knowledge of either party at any time, a full and complete disclosure of all such information will be made, in writing, to the other party or parties, even if such interest would not be considered a conflict of interest under Article 4 (commencing with Section 1090) or Article 4.6 (commencing with Section 1220) of Division 4 of Title I of the Government Code of the State of California. 19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 20. BOOKS AND RECORDS Contractor's books, records and plans or such part thereof as may be engaged n the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the City. 21. UTILITY LOCATION The City acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215. 22. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS Contractor agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4215. 23. DISCRIMINATION Contractor represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, nationaI origin, color, sex, age, or handicap. 24. WRITTEN NOTICE Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice: To City: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Contractor: Rory Rieck & Chuck Maciel's Weed Abatement 15860 Oro Glen Moreno Valley Ca 92551 25. ASSIGNMENT The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. 26. LICENSES At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. R:\BROWNS\CodeXReick-Maciel Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc 27. GOVERNING LAW The District and Contractor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. 28. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 29. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. R:\BROWNS\Code~Reick-Maciel Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA BY: Shawn D. Nelson, City Manager Attest: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR Name By: Name: Title: (Two Signatures Required for Corporations) R:\BROWNS\Code\Reick-Maciel Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc 6 EXHIBIT "A" PART: 1 SCOPE OF WORK The contractor shall provide Weed abatement services to the City of Temecula in accordance with the Exhibit "A", Fee Schedule, Part II, Procedures, and Part III Instructions, Conditions, and Legal Requirements of this contract. PARTII PROCEDURES DISCING - Weed abatement by disking shall be accomplished by disking with a double-throw disc at sufficient depth to place all weeds under the surface. Disking is the plowing of weeds using reasonable care so as to not disturb under/over ground utilities, destruction to fencing, trees, bushes, buildings, equipment, supplies or adjoining land, including fire due to reckless/negligent disking of land, wherever practical and unless otherwise specified, disking is to be considered the primary method of abating weeds. Cross Disking - Where the nature of the soil is such that it is not receptive to the cutting edge of the discs, the area shall be cross-disked to reduce the magnitude of any exposed combustibles. Special Disking Conditions - Where the nature of the soil is such that it is not receptive to the cutting edge of the disc being used and where the cross disking fails to meet the standards of the Hazardous Reduction Program, it shall be the responsibility of the firm to provide the proper equipment to accomplish the approved cleaning. Dust Control - During windy conditions, the firm shall postpone work until the wind subsides or watering is provided to minimize blowing dust. EQUIPMENT - The firm selected shall furnish tractors, discs, mowers, etc. in all areas suitable to complete the job of disking property. The firm shall provide transportation to and from the job sites, for his equipment and all necessary fuel, etc., at his/her own expense. Flail mowing may be necessary in areas where environmental concerns on t allow thsk~ng. Qualified Personnel/Operators - All personnel involved in this program, must be a Fire Certified inspector and a qualified, cooperative, experienced tractor operator. The firm at their expense and on his own time will maintain all tractors and other equipment. Fire Fighting Safety Equipment - All tractors are to be equipped with an approved spark arrestor when not equipped with turbo charger and also an approved 2-i/2 gallon pressurized water type fire extinguisher and shovel. Disc - Unless otherwise approved by the Hazard Reduction Program Manager, the disc used shall be - hydraulically controlled. It shall be able to turn easily and maneuver in small areas. It shall be heavy duty and capable of accomplishing a thorough mixing of soil and weeds. The disc must be in good mechanical condition. Transport Truck - The transport truck for hauling the tractor and disc shall be of suitable size and horsepower to easily maneuver and negotiate all terrain traveled to reach the job sites. Transports will have a tilt type for easy loading and unloading. All equipment must meet highway specifications and safety regulations. Trucks will be in good mechanical condition and will be operated and maintained at the expense of the firm and at a time before or after working hours. Flagman - If required or necessary for any reason, the firm will furnish, at no expense to the City, flagpersons for loading and unloading of equipment. The only equipment allowed will be tractors with discs with the exception of those areas, which will require different equipment as necessary. The City Fire Chief, Chief Building Official or the City Code R:\BROWNS\Code\Reick-Maciel Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc 7 Enforcement Officers will advise contractors/consultants where the mowing or other methods will be allowed. The use of non-authorized equipment or methods will result in non-payment by the City. STANDARD FOR CLEARING - The purpose of removal is for the reduction of fire and safety hazards and will be accomplished by turning under and mixing weeds with the soil or by mowing, hauling, trimming, and grubbing using manual labor or by any combination of methods that are approved and included in the scope of the contract. All clearing must meet the specifications of the Hazard Reduction Program and must be approved in writing by the program representative. Method of Clearing - Five (5) acres and less will be cleared completely. Where the acreage consists of more than five (5) continuous acres, a one hundred (100) foot wide strip shall be cleared at the perimeter of the property, and through the remainder of the property theme shall not be any portion of land larger than two and one-half (2-1/2) acres which is not enclosed by itself within such a strip, which shall be a fire break. If the clearing is made to the letter of the herein stated standard, the payment would be based on fifth (50) percent of the total square footage. It may be determined that only a portion of a parcel exceeding five (5) acres needs to be cleared to adequately provide the necessary fire protection to the surrounding improvements. In these cases, payment would be based on actual square footage disked. Tumbleweed Abatement - The awarded firm will also be used in tumbleweed abatement in all areas during the months of August through October. TRACTOR MOWING General - When, in the opinion of the Inspector, and at all times in areas of high erosion, it is determined that for any reason disking of a property is impractical or undesirable, mowing of vegetative ground cover may be accomplished provided that an approved, heavy duty mower is used, and that the vegetation is cut to a distance of no higher than two (2") inches from the solid surface and as close to adjoining improvements as possible, but in no event further than eighteen (18") inches. Operation and Maintenance -Tractor mowers will be operated by a qualified, cooperative, experienced operator. They will be operated and maintained in good condition by the contractor at his expense and on his own time. Safety Shields - All tractor mowers are to be equipped with safety shields to prevent or reduce the throwing of rocks or other material that could result in injury or damage to private property. Clean up of Streets and Sidewalks - All streets and sidewalks are to be left in a clean condition. Necessary tools for cleaning streets and sidewalks are to be available on the job site. The charge for this operation shall not be separate, but will be included in the unit price for cleaning the parcel. HAND CLEANING AND HAULING General - Whenever it is impractical by reason of topography, location of trees, shrubbery, buildings, fences or type of vegetative cover to disc or use a tractor mower and when authorized by the Building Department, or designee, the vegetation shall be removed or thinned by hand labor using hand labor type tools. Handcrews shall consist of not less than two people. Additional manpower may be used, however no additional compensation will be allowed. Disposal of Cuttings - The excess accumulated material cut down by hand labor shall be disposed of by hauling the material to the nearest County landfill site, or an approved "clean green waste" compost facility. Required Tools and Equipment - The contractor shall furnish all hand tools, power equipment and safety equipment necessary to accomplish the specified work. R:\BROWNS\Code\Reick-Maciel Weed Abatement contract 2001 02.doc 8 Supervision Furnished by Contractor - Supervision of hand crews will be furnished by the contractor at his own expense. All supervisors must be experienced and verbally capable of communicating with the inspector. Hauling Trimmings - Hauling of trimmings due to hand cleaning are considered one and of the same type of operation and therefore billing will be considered the same. Type of Work Authorized - The amount of work and type of work to be performed shall be under the direction of and only with the authorization of the Building Department, or designee. Hand Cleaning Charges to Include Loading - Hand cleaning charges on parcels to be cleaned will include the loading of vegetative materials that are to be removed to the nearest landfill site or compost facility. Removal charges can be added ifa landfill tipping fee receipt is presented with the b.illing. Travel time to Landfill - Travel time to and from the landfill or compost facility shall not be charged. The contractor's charge for the truck are included as part of the rate. RUBBISH, REFUSE AND DIRT General - Whenever it is impractical by reason of location of rubbish, refuse, and dirt to disc or use a tractor mower and when authorize by the Building Department, the rubbish, refuse, and dirt shall be removed. The degree of removal to be accomplished on any parcel will be specified by the City. Definition of rubbish, refuse, and dirt are as follows, discarded asphalt and concrete, abandoned foundations, litter, trash, trees, piles of dirt; making clearing the parcel impossible. Contractor shall photograph the debris prior to removal and a second photograph shall show the trash in the haul away vehicle for comparison. Disposal of Rubbish, Refuse, and Dirt - The material shall be disposed of by hauling the material to the nearest County landfill site. Required Tools and Equipment - The contractor shall furnish all equipment necessary to accomplish the specific work. Supervision Furtiished by Contractor - Supervision of crews will be furnished by the Contractor at his own expense. Charges: Rubbish, and Refuse - The charge for clearing of rubbish and refuse from a parcel will include the cleaning and loading of the materials that are to be removed to the landfill site and the hauling of the materials to the landfill site and the hauling of the materials to the landfill site are considered one and of the same type of operation and therefore billing will be considered the same. Travel Time to Landfill - Travel time to and from the landfill shall not be charged. This charge is included in the rate. Piles of Dirt - All parcels that have piles of dirt shall be leveled in a matter authorized by the Building Department. Exceptions - Any exceptions to the foregoing regulations will be at the discretion of the Building Official, or designee, should special circumstances exist. PART III: INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, and LEGAL REQUIREMENTS 1. All services provided by the Contractor shall be performed in strict accordance with the City of Temecula Municipal Code 816 and Ordinance 1103.2.4 of the 1998 California Fire Code. R:\BROWNS\Code\Reick-Maciel Weed Jkbatement contract 2001-02.doc 9 10. 11. 12. Contractor shall identify those services, if applicable, that will be out-sourced to a subcontractor. Th~ prime Contractor will be responsible for verifying the qualifications and validity of all licenses, permits and quality of work for any out sourced work to sub-Contractors. The prime Contractor is also responsible for paying its employees and any sub-Contractors the prime Contractor hires. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages by each craft or type of workman needed to execute the contract in the locality in which the work is to be performed shall be paid. (Contractor shall submit certified payroll to the City) The contractor is required to comply with all existing State and Federal labor laws. Selected Contractor is also responsible for complying with all OSHA standards and COSHA standards and requirements. If Contractor outsources any work or job to a sub-Contractor, it will be the prime Contractors responsibility to ensure that all sub-Contractors meet the requirements as stated in this RFQ. The contractor shall be an independent contractor, and nothing shall be construed to cause the Contractor to be deemed or represent itself as an agent or employee of the City. The Contractor shall be excused from performance hereunder during the time and the extent that he/she is prevented from obtaining, delivering, repairing, or performing in the customary manner, by acts of God, fire, war, strike, and loss or shortage of transportation facilities. Contractor shall provide the City satisfactory evidence that non-performance is due to other than fault or negligence on the Contractors part. The selected Contractor agrees to maintain a City of Temecula Business License for the duration of the contract. All work shall be done by qualified personnel. Contractor shall provide copies of all Federal, State, County and City licenses or certificates required by this contract. The Contractor shall provide a local telephone number where service personnel can be reached on an "on call" basis twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven days per week. This telephone number will be made available to all authorized personnel designated by the City Contractor agrees that all service by the contractor shall be to the satisfaction of authorized City Code Enforcement personnel. In the event that the Contractor defaults on performance of any of these requirements, then the City shall have the right to terminate this agreement upon thirty (30) days written notice delivered to the Contractor by certified mail or courier. The Contractor shall maintain the contract during the termination period. Termination of the contract will not relieve the Contractor of any liability to the City for damages sustained by the City because of any breach of contract by the Contractor, and the City may withhold any payments to the Contractor until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from the Contractor is determined. The term of the contract shall commence upon award by the City Manager/City Council and continue through June 30, 2001. The City reserves the option to extend the contract(s) under the same terms and conditions for an additional three years. Price adjustments may occur during the first thirty-six (36) months of this agreement. Upon request of the contractor and agreement by the City, the item prices may be adjusted by the amount equal to the increase or decrease, during the previous twelve (12) months, in the Riverside, San Bernardino All Urban Consumers Index to determine the percentage of increase or decrease, the term "previous twelve months" shall mean the twelve month period ending June 30th of that year, or if not available, the prior month. The contract between Contractor and the City is non-transferable. Contractor shall under no circumstances assign the agreement without written permission of the City. Contractor shall notify the City, in writing, of any change in shop ownership at least thirty (30) days prior to said change. The City's terms for payment are net thirty (30) days upon receipt of invoice. Contractor shall submit invoices between the first and fifteenth business day of each month for services provided the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all undisputed fees. R:\BROWNS\Code\Reick Maciel Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc 13. The City reserves the right to add or eliminate parcels and neighborhoods to the scope of work of the Weed Abatement Contract as circumstances require. Contractor agrees pricing will be the same for any additional parcels. 14. Prohibited Interest - No member, officer, or employee of the City of Temecula shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this agreement, the proceeds thereof, the Contractor, or Contractor's sub- contractors for this project, during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. The Contractor hereby warrants and represents to the City that no officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the Contractor or Contractor's sub-contractors on this project. Contractor further agrees to notify the City in the event that any such interest is discovered whether or not law or this agreement prohibits such interest. 15. The awarded firm shall at all times take precautions (where necessary) to insure the protection of the public and meet OSHA and COSHA requirements. All work performed shall be done in a prompt, thorough, lawful and professional manner. Contractor shall perform work in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, rules, ordinances, regulations, and permit conditions. The contractor shall review and be familiar with the conditions of approval of the weed abatement permit issued by the Federal Fish and Wildlife Service related to weed abatement on sensitive habitats. 16. The Contractor shall take clear and concise pictures of the area demonstrating need for abatement. These pictures will be taken immediately "before" and "after" abatement work is done and submitted to the department. If pictures do not show justification of charge, payment will not be made. Each picture shall include time and date picture was taken and the parcel number it represents. Contractor will furnish the camera, film and envelopes to hold the pictures. Each "after" picture shall be taken from the same location as the "before" picture, showing some outstanding landmark. 17. The contractor shall not miss more than two (2) consecutive days or more than five (5) days oat of a twenty (20) day period, when work has been assigned, regardless of the reasons (i.e., equipment failure, illness, etc.) 18. In case of default by the contractor, the City may procure the work, or services from an alternate firm. The City may deduct any excess cost from any unpaid balance due the assigned firm, or may bill for the same at the City's discretion. The prices paid by the City, in such events shall be considered the prevailing market price at the time of purchase. 19. The work, labor and/or materials which the contractor proposed to furnish to the City must comply in all respects with the appropriate equipment and safety regulations of all Federal, State and local regulatory commissions whether such equipment or safety features have been specifically outlined or required in these specifications or not. 20. 21. Where there are locked gates to the property, the firm will be given instructions on how to enter the property. The firm will be responsible for any damage done not in accordance to given instructions. All discing or other services must be done during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday except City recognized holidays. 22. Complaints - The contractor will be responsible for promptly answering inquiries and complaints of the Building Department or private property owners or citizens relative to any work, charges, damage or any other questions that may arise as a result of abatement operations by the contractor. 23. Operations may be suspended at any time by the Building Official, or his designee, until appropriate corrective measures are taken, if any, of the conditions set forth in this contract are found to exist. 24. Final Decisions - All scheduling of cleaning operations will be determined by the Building Official, or his designee. At any time during the cleaning operations, should a controversy arise as to the number of lots cleaned, the amounts of work done, or not to be done, or the size of parcels cleaned by the contractor, the matter will be studied and explained fully and the decision made by the Building Official, or his designee, shall be final. R:\B~OWNS\Code\Reick-Maciel Weed Abatement contract 2001-02.doc 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. Hold Harndess Clause - The contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, and employees, from and against any and all claims, demands, loss or liability of any kind or nature which the City of Temecula, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them or any of them for injury to, or death of persons; or damage to property arising out of or in any manner connected with the negligence or lack of care of the contractor, his officers, agents, or employees in the performance of this contract. This provision shall include any and all claims arising from sub-contractors retained by the contractor. Reports of Damage - The contractor will promptly notify the Building Department of any damage to private property as a result of abatement operations. Supervision - The contractor shall be responsible for providing qualified supervision in all areas of operations. Supervision will be provided at the expense of the contractor. The supervisor will make necessary reports and work directly with the area inspector in planning and scheduling the work. Transportation - All transportation of equipment and personnel to and from the job site will be arranged by the contractor. Sanitary Facilities - The contractor shall be responsible for making available the sanitary facilities necessary for all his personnel. Aforementioned sanitary facilities shall meet the standards of State and local law. Parking Equipment - The contractor shall make arrangements for parking sites for his equipment at night and on Sundays or holidays. Equipment shall not be parked or stored on private property without the express permission of the property owner. Removal of Private Property - Under no condition will the contractor or his agent or workmen remove any item or items from any private property except that which has been authorized by the Building Official, or his designee. Operations - The contractor is required to provide sufficient operable equipment, replacements, and personnel during hazard abatement cleaning as deemed necessary by the Building Official, or his designee. Removal of any such equipment designated to the Abatement Program without an immediate replacement must be approved by the Building Official, or his designee. Terndnation of Operations - Final authorization to terminate abatement operations will be made by the Building Official, or his designee. Furnish Manpower and Equipment - Furnish all supervision, labor, materials, equipment and tools such as, but not limited to tractors, discs, trucks, mowers, whip hoes, rakes and other tools and equipment as required for the removal of weeds, debris and vegetative growth from parcels, within the City of Temecula. Unauthorized Work - Payment will not be made to the contractor for work accomplished that was not authorized by the Building Department. Interpretation of Specifications - Should it appear that any matter relative to these specifications has not been sufficiently detailed or explained, the Contractor shall contact the Building Department for clarification. In the event that satisfaction has not been reached, the contractor may appeal to the Building Official. Error or Onfission of Specifications - The contractor will not be allowed to take advantage of any error or omission in these specifications and plans. Full instructions will always be given by the Building Official or his designee, when such error or omission is discovered. R:\BROWNS\Code\Reick-Maciel Weed Abatement contract 2001 02.doc EXHIBIT "B" FEE SCHEDULE 2. 3. 4. Weed removal shall be billed at a rate of $80.00 for the first acre or fraction thereofi This does not include handwork. Every acre or fraction thereof after the first acre shall be billed at a rate of $35.00. This does not include handwork. All parcels that are a quarter acre (0.25 acres) or less shall be billed at a rate of $80.00. This shall include all handwork. In the event dust control is necessary, the contractor may charge and additional $40.00 per acre or fraction thereof for use of a water truck. Trash removal shall be billed at a rate of $35.00 per cubic yard. Handwork along property edges fence lines and similar situations shall be billed on a running foot basis up to a maximum of 15 feet in width. The cost shall be $.05 (five cents) per linear foot. Handwork on slopes and similar places that are not accessible by tractors or other similar vehicles shall be billed at $40.00 per hour. R:\BROWNS\Code\Reick-Maciel Weed Abatement contract 2001 02.doc 13 ITEM 12 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CiTY ATTORNEY DIR.OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council Gary Thornhili, Deputy City Manage'~~-~'~ June 26,2001 Agreement for Consulting Services Between the City of Temecula and PELA PREPARED BY: Stephen Brown, Senior Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the Contract with PELA for landscape plancheck and inspection services in the amount of $98,500.00. BACKGROUND: The Community Development Department's Planning Division has for the past seven years utilized the services of a consultant as an extension of staff to provide landscape review and inspection services. Over that period of time, the department has retained the services of PELA (formerly named PELA/THE ELLIOTT GROUP) to perform these services. The current contract expires on June 30, 2001. Several fees associated with this contract are proposed to increase for the first time since 1992. The attached matrix indicates the current and proposed fees. Staff would like to note that the landscape review services are provided on a cost recovery basis. The Planning Department requests a line item during the City's annual budget process to fund the on-going task of landscape review. The landscape contractor invoices the City and is paid from the line item. Fees paid by applicants during the development review process are paid to the general fund, which offsets the invoiced amounts paid by the City to the landscape contractor. FISCAL IMPACT: Contract funded in 2001-02 FY budget under Account No. 161-999-5250. ATrACHMENTS: Revised Fee Matrix City of Temecula Agreement for Consulting Services (Landscape Plancheck and Inspection) R:~BROWNS~Jandscape~staffrpt cc 2001-02.doc 1 Revised Fee Matrix Development Review Committee Stage Conceptual Plan Review I Proposed Flat Fee of $250 I Existing Flat Fee of $225 Landsca De Construction Plan Review Stage Square footage of Project Proposed Flat Plan Check Fee Existing Plan Check Fee 0-10,000 $600 $540 10,001-25,000 $860 $810 25,001-100,000 $1,120 $1,080 100,001-135,000 $1,380 $1,350 Landscape Inspection Proposed Flat Fee of $250 I Existing Flat Fee of $225 I Attendance at Meetings Proposed Flat Fee of $250 I Existing Flat Fee $250 I R:\BROWNS~Jandscape~staffrpt cc 2001-02.doc 2 CITY OF TEMECULA AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES (LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK AND INSPECTION) THIS AGREEMENT is made and effective as of July1, 2001, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and PELA, ("Consultant"). In consideration ofthe mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on July 1,2001, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2002, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A. 3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Ninety Eight Thousand Five Hundred Dollars and no Cents ($ 98,500.00) for the term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all nondisputed fees. If the City disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within 30 days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. 5. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSF a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. R:XBROWNS\landscape~landscape services agreement FY OI-02.doc b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 4. 6. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT. a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work. performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 7. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identi- fied and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files containing data generated for the work, Consultant shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files. c. With respect to the design of public improvements, the Consultant shall not be liable for any injuries or property damage resulting from the reuse of the design at a location other than that specified in Exhibit A without the written consent of the Consultant. 8. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert R:\BROWNS~andscape~landscape services agreement FY 01-02.doc witness fees, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions arising out of or in any way related to the performance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the negligence of the City. 9. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No. CG 00 01 11 85 or 88. (2) Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 06 92 covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). If the Consultant owns no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability insurance. If the Consultant has no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Consultant shall execute a declaration that it has no employees. (4) Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liability for the Consultant's profession. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (t) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and propertydamage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. (3) Worker's Compensation as required by the State of California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. (4) Professional Liability coverage) One million ($1,000,000) per claim and in aggregate. c. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a R:XBROWNS\landscape\landscape services agreement FY O1-02.doc bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A: VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements. f. Verification of Covera.qe. Consultant shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. R:\B ROWNS\landscapcklandscape services agreement FY O1-02.doc 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 11. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. 12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shalJ not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. R:\BROWNSXlandscape\landscape services agreement FY 01-02.doc 13. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (I) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above. To City: To Consultant: City of Temecula Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager PELA 637 Arden Drive Encinitas, CA 92024 Attn: Michael G. Elliott 14. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, only Michael G. Elliott shall perform the services described in this Agreement. Michael G. Elliott may use assistants, under their direct supervision, to perform some of the services under this Agreement. Consultant shall provide City fourteen (14) days' notice prior to the departure of Michael G. Elliott from Consultant's employ. Should he or she leave Consultant's employ, the City shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement, within three (3) days of the close of said notice period. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Consultant. 15. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 16. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's judgment, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted. 17. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No officer, or employee of the City of Temecula shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, the proceeds thereof, the R:\BROWNS\landscape\/andscape services agreement FY 01-02.doc Contractor, or Contractor's sub-contractors for this project, during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. The Contractor hereby warrants and represents to the City that no officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the Contractor or Contractor's sub-contractors on this project. Contractor further agrees to notify the City in the event any such interest is discovered whether or not such interest is prohibited by law or this Agreement. 18. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further rome or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 19. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Attest: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:~BROWNS'dandscape\landscape services agreement FY 01-02.doc Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT By: Name: Title: By: Name: Title: (Signatures of two corporate officers required for Corporations) R:\BROWNS~landscapeklandscape services agreement FY 01-02.doc EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES R:\BROWNS~landscape'dandscape services agreement FY 01-02.doc Scope of Work Development Review Committee Review Upon notification from the Community Development Department that landscape plans are ready for review, the contractor will pick up plans at the City. If desired by the City, plans can be mailed to contractor's office. Two sets of landscape plans along with one copy of the conceptual grading plan, architectural site plan and architectural elevations will be transmitted to the contractor so that it can be insured that landscaping is compatible with the architecture and appropriate for the proposed grading. The contractor may be required to meet with the project planner to discuss the project prior to beginning the review. This option will be left up to the individual planner. The contractor will review the plans verifying consistency with the City Development Code and other Ordinances in effect. A site visit will be performed to become familiar with the site and surrounding area. One set of plans will be redlined with comments notifying the applicant of necessary revisions to be made to bring the plans into conformance with City requirements. Items not addressed in the City Development Code or applicable Ordinances but that are outside of professional norms will also be marked for explanations from the applicant. Plans will be crosschecked against the architectural and grading plans. The contractor will return one set of redlined plans along with plan check comments to the project planner. Plan check comments will also be sent to the project planner via e-mail for use in formulating reports back to the applicant. One set of plans will be kept on file at the contractor's office so that if questions arise from either the project planner or the applicant, the contractor with full knowledge of the project can provide answers. On larger projects where many comments are made, the contractor shall provide a second review, if necessary, based on the project planners direction to insure that plans have been revised to be in conformance with City requirements. Comments should be returned to the project planner within ten calendar days after receipt of the landscape plans but in no case later than two weeks after notification of plan pick up. Multiple reviews shall not be covered under the initial conceptual review cost. Additional conceptual reviews beyond the first review shall be billed at the flat rate fee indicated on Exhibit B "Payment Rates and Schedule." R:\BROWNS\Iandscape~PELA Plan Check Scope FY 01-02.doc Construction Documents Review Upon notification from the Community Development Department that construction landscape plans are ready for review, the contractor will pick up plans at the City. If desired by the City, plans can be mailed to the contractor's office. Two sets of landscape construction plans along with one copy of the approved conceptual landscape plan, conditions of approval, and final precise grading plan will be transmitted to the contractor. The contractor will review the plans verifying consistency with the City Development Code, other Ordinances in effect, the approved conceptual landscape plan and conditions of approval. One set of plans will be redlined with comments notifying the applicant of necessary revisions to be made to bring the plans into conformance with City requirements and the approved landscape plan. Items not addressed in the City Development Code or applicable Ordinances but that are outside of professional norms wilt also be marked for explanations from the applicant. Plans will be crosschecked against the final precise grading plans. The contractor will return one set of redlined plans along with plan check comments to the project planner. Plan check comments will also be sent to the project planner via e-mail for use in formulating reports back to the applicant. One set of plans will be kept on file at the contractor's office so that if questions arise from either the project planner or the applicant, the contractor with full knowledge of the project can provide answers. Once the applicant has resubmitted revisions, the contractor will pick up the plans at the City and re-check them for conformance. Two sets of revised plans along with a cost estimate of the landscape work will be needed. Should all revisions have been made and all questions answered, the plans will be returned to the project planner with a letter recommending approval. If all revisions are not made, one set of plans will be redlined again and returned to the applicant a second time for revisions. This process will continue until the plans are brought into conformance with City standards, professional norms, and approved landscape plans. The contractor will review the cost estimate and where appropriate, the project planner will be notified that the estimate is appropriate for required bonding requirements. Plan checks beyond the third check will be billed a the rate indicated on Exhibit B "Payment Rates and Schedule." The contractor shall provide a unit cost breakdown for applicants to use in preparing their cost estimates. This is to insure that below market costs are not provided that could cost the City money if the project fails to be completed and the City is forced to collect on bonds. Comments/redlines should generally be returned to the project planner within one week and in no case later than two weeks after notification of plan pick up. Landscape Inspection Once notified that the applicant has completed the landscape installation, the contractor will provide a landscape construction inspection in order to insure implementation is in conformance with the approved plans. A written report will be provided to the project planner after each inspection indicating the status. If desired by the project planner, the contractor will send a copy of the report to the applicant/contractor so that they will know which items need correction or completion. Each landscape inspection will be billed at the rate indicated on Exhibit B "Payment Rates and Schedule." Landscape Architectural Resources The contractor shall be available to act as a resource for City staff responding to general questions or questions regarding specific projects. Should staff require other tasks to be performed, the contractor shall provide services based on the attached exhibit B of "Payment Rates and Schedule" or a mutually agreed upon flat fee. Attendance at Meetings The Principal Landscape Architect shall be available attend Development Review Committee and Planning Commission meetings as requested by City of Temecula Planning Staff based on the attached exhibit B of "Payment Rates and Schedule". EXHIBIT B PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE R:\BROWNSXlandscape'dandscape services agreement FY 01-02.doc Following is the breakdown of fees proposed for the plan check and inspection services outlined in the scope of work. These fees are based on present insurance requirements of $1,000,000.00 for errors and omissions. Conceptual Plan Review FLAT FEE OF $250.00 The following fees are based on reviewing a maximum of 3 submittals from the applicant. Should additional reviews be necessary they will be charged at the rate of $85.00 per sheet. SQUAREFOOTAGEOFPROJECT 0-10,000 10,001-25,000 25,001 -100,000 100,001 -135,000 135,001 -165,000 165,001- 200,000 200,001 -250,000 250,001 -300,000 300,001- 350,000 350,001 -400,000 400,001 & up FLAT PLAN CHECK FEE $600 $860 $1,120 $1,380 $1,620 $1,890 $2,160 $2,430 $2,700 $2,970 $2,970 +.0075for each sq. ff. above 400,000 sq. ~. Plan checks beyond the 3rd Check $85.00/sheet Landscape Inspection FLAT FEE OF $250.00NISIT We are always available to act as a resource for City staff. Over the past 8 years working with the City we have provided numerous consultations with staff responding to general questions or questions regarding specific projects. This resource has been provided at no additional cost to the City. We will continue to make ourselves available and propose to provide these same resources to City staff at no charge. Should staff require other tasks to be performed we will be happy to provide services based on our hourly rates or a mutually agreed upon fiat fee based on the scope of work. Attendance at Development Review Committee and Planning Commission meetings will be performed at the fiat fee rate of $250/meeting. ITEM 13 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council /~ William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 26, 2001 Authorize Temporary Street Closure of Old Town Front Street between Moreno Road and 2nd Street; Main Street from the Bridge to Old Town Front Street; 2nd Street; 3rd Street; 4th Street, 5th Street, and 6~h Street for the "Star Spangled 4th of July Parade" and Delegate Authority to Issue Special Events/Street Closures Permit to Director of Public Works/City Engineer. PREPARED BY: ~.~_ Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works (..~)Ciement M. Jimenez, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF OLD TOWN FRONT STREET BETWEEN MORENO ROAD AND 2ND STREET; MAIN STREET FROM THE BRIDGE TO OLD TOWN FRONT STREET; 2ND STREET; 3R° STREET; 4TM STREET; 5TM STREET; AND 6TM STREET FOR THE "STAR SPANGLED 4TM OF JULY PARADE" AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES BACKGROUND: The Annual City-sponsored "Star Spangled 4th of July Parade" necessitates temporary street closures to protect the participants and facilitate this event. The subject special event requires the closure of entire and portions of streets in the Old Town area on July 4, 2001 from approximately 8:00AM until 11:15 AM. The parade hours are from 10:00 AM to approximately 11:15 AM. However, staging for the parade will begin at 8:00 AM. The approximate hours of street closures are from 8:00 AM till 11:15 AM. The police department will determine the exact hours of street closures. Also, no parking will be allowed on these subject streets from 5:00 AM till 12:00 noon. Under Vehicular Code Section 21101, "Regulation of Highways", local authorities, for those highways under their jurisdiction, may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution for, among other instances, "temporary closing a portion of any street for celebrations, parades, local special events, and other purposes, when, in the opinion of local authorities having jurisdiction, the 1 r:~agdrpt~2001~0626~star spangled 4~' of july, 2001 parade,street closures closing is necessary for the safety and protection of persons who are to use that portion of the street during the temporary closing". The City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-96 on September 10, 1991, which provided standards and procedures for special events on public streets, highways, sidewalks, or public rights-of-way. This resolution set forth processes for staff reviewing applications, denying approval or approving subject to conditions including events requiring changes in normal traffic patterns, and an appeal process to the City Manager. However the resolution did not delegate authority to temporarily close streets for these special events. The subject resolution delegates the authority to approve temporary street closures for the specific event, the Temecula Community Services Department sponsored "Star Spangled 4t~of July Parade" to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. All other special events requiring temporary street closures, construction-related closures, etc, shall remain subject to the approval of the City Council subject to rules and regulations established by the City Council. These rules and regulations shall also be adopted by resolution in accordance with California Vehicular Code Section 21101. Some partial closures, such as limiting lane widths for construction purposes or partial closures for block parties on cul-de-sac streets only do not require full street closures. These and similar partial street closures or restrictions are not submitted for similar resolutions in order to reduce or eliminate the administrative impact on City Council and staff time. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs of police services, and for provision, placement, and retrieval of necessary warning and advisory devices by the Temecula Community Services Department and the City Maintenance Division are included in budgetary items. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2001- 2. Location Map 2 r:~gdrpt~O01~O626~star spangled 4th of july, 2001 parade.street closures RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF OLD TOWN FRONT STREET BETWEEN MORENO ROAD AND 2N~ STREET; MAIN STREET FROM THE BRIDGE TO OLD TOWN FRONT STREET; 2ND STREET; 3RD STREET; 4TM STREET; 5TM STREET; AND 6TM STREET FOR THE "STAR SPANGLED 4TM OF JULY PARADE" AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, The California State Vehicular Code provides for the promulgation of rules and regulations for the temporary closure of public streets by local authorities by Resolution; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish rules and regulations for the temporary closure of public streets in the interest of promoting safety and protection; and WHEREAS, The City of Temecula sponsors the annual "Star Spangled 4th of July Parade", for which such temporary street closures promote the safety and protection of persons using or proposing to use that street or streets for the special event; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to facilitate the issuance of permission to temporarily close public streets for this annual "Star Spangled 4th of July Parade; and, NOW, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to authorize the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to approve temporary street closures for the annual "Star Spangled 4th of July Parade", and to establish the general rule that all other proposed temporary street closures shall be reviewed and approved subject to conditions, or disapproved, by the City Council; and THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Temecula, hereby authorizes the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to permit temporary street closures for the annual "Star Spangled 4th of July Parade" on July 4, 2001, and affirms the general rule that all other temporary public street closures shall be approved or denied approval by the City Council. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of June, 2001. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk 3 r:~gdrpt~001~0626~tar spangled 4th of july, 2001 parade.street closures [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2001 - was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecu a at a regular meeting thereof held on the 26th day of June, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNClLMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk 4 r:~agdrpt~2001\O626~tar spangled 4th of july, 2001 parade.street closures ,R ITEM 14 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIREGTOR OF FINANGE CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council f~Villiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 26, 2001 Authorize Temporary Street Closure of Pauba Road between Margarita Road and Ynez Road for the "July 4th, 2001 Fireworks Show" and Delegate Authority to Issue Special Events/Street Closures Permit to Director of Public Works/City Engineer. PREPARED BY: j~Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works (~Clement M. Jimenez, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF PAUBA ROAD BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD FOR THE "JULY 4TM 2001, FIREWORKS SHOW", AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES BACKGROUND: The Annual City-sponsored "July 4th 2001 Fireworks Show" necessitates temporary street closures to protect the participants and facilitate this event. The subject special event requires the closure of a portion of a major City highway and the streets abutting this highway for a period of 11:00 AM until 11:00 PM on July 4, 2001. Under Vehicular Code Section 21101, "Regulation of Highways", local authorities, for those highways under their jurisdiction, may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution for, among other instances, "temporary closing a portion of any street for celebrations, parades, local special events, and other purposes, when, in the opinion of local authorities having jurisdiction, the closing is necessary for the safety and protection of persons who are to use that portion of the street during the temporary closing". The City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-96 on September 10, 1991, which provided standards and procedures for special events on public streets, highways, sidewalks, or public rights-of-way. This resolution set forth processes for staff reviewing applications, denying approval or approving subject to conditions including events requiring changes in normal traffic patterns, and an appeal r:~agdrpt~2001\0626\4~' of July 2001 fireworks.street closure process to the City Manager. However the resolution did not delegate authority to temporarily close streets for these special events. The subject resolution delegates the authority to approve temporary street closures for the specific event, the Temecula Community Services Department sponsored "July 4~ 2001 Fireworks Show" to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. All other special events requiring temporary street closures, construction-related closures, etc, shall remain subject to the approval of the City Council subject to rules and regulations established by the City Council. These rules and regulations shall also be adopted by resolution in accordance with California Vehicular Code Section 21101. Some partial closures, such as limiting lane widths for construction purposes or partial closures for block parties on cul-de-sac streets only do not require full street closures. These and similar partial street closures or restrictions are not submitted for similar resolutions in order to reduce or eliminate the administrative impact on City Council and staff time. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs of police services, and for provision, placement, and retrieval of necessary warning and advisory devices by the Temecula Community Services Department and the City Public Works Maintenance Division are included in budgetary items. A'n'ACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2001- 2. Location Map r:~agdrpt~001~626',At~ of July 2001 fireworks.street closure RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF PAUBA ROAD BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD FOR THE "JULY 4TM 2001 FIREWORKS SHOW", AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, The California State Vehicular Code provides for the promulgation of rules and regulations for the temporary closure of public streets by local authorities by Resolution; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish rules and regulations for the temporary closure of public streets in the interest of promoting safety and protection; and WHEREAS, The City of Temecula sponsors the annual "July 4th 2001 Fireworks Show", for which such temporary street closures promote the safety and protection of persons using or proposing to use that street or streets for the special event; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to facilitate the issuance of permission to temporarily close public streets for this annual "July 4th 2001 Fireworks Show" on July 4~h, 2001; and, NOW, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to authorize the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to approve temporary street closures for annual "July 4~h 2001 Fireworks Show", and to establish the general rule that all other proposed temporary street closures shall be reviewed and approved subject to conditions, or disapproved, by the City Council; and THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Temecula, hereby authorizes the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to permit temporary street closures for the annual "July 4t' 2001 Fireworks Show" on July 4, 2001, and affirms the general rule that all other temporary public street closures shall be approved or denied approval by the City Council. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of June, 2001. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk 3 r:~agdrpt~2001\0626~,~ of July 2001 fireworks.street closure [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2001. - was duly and regularlyth adopted by the City Council of the. C~ty' of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 26 day of June, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: 0 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNClLMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk 4 r:~agdrpt~001\0626~~ of July 2001 fireworks.street closure T,~ m ~q / PAUB,A VALLEY co~2 ce, JULY 4, 200! "FIREWORKS SHOW". ROAD CLOSURE NOTE: MAP NOT TO SCALE ITEM 15 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council /~/~William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 26,2001 Parcel Map No. 29438, Located at Enterprise Circle South PREPARED BY: P~f Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works Mayra L. De La Torre, Assistant Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve 1) Pamel Map No. 29438 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval BACKGROUND: Parcel Map No. 29438 is a division of Parcel 17 of Parcel Map No. 19582-1 whereby 0.988 acres will be subdivided into a one (1) parcel condominium map. Parcel Map No. 29438 consists of one (1) parcel and two (2) units on which the buildings are located. There is an easement in favor of Rancho California Water District and two (2) easements in favor of Southern California Edison that are within the map boundary. Both agencies have provided the City with non-interference letters, which state that they do not object to the recordation of the parcel map. Also, there are two (2) separate easements to be recorded, as separate instruments, concurrently with this parcel map. One easement entitled "Easement Agreement and Reservation of Easement" includes an "Access Easement" and a "Drainage and Utility Easement;" the other is an Exclusive Use Easement. The conditions requiring CC&R's (i.e. condition no. 4(c) and condition no. 17) will be fulfilled through the recordation of these easements. No placement of monuments is associated with this parcel map. All improvements on Enterprise Circle South are complete and all onsite improvements are also complete including the buildings. Therefore, no bonds are required. The Developer, Sullivan Bay, a California General Partnership, has met all of the Conditions of Approval. This parcel map is in conformance with the approved tentative map. The approval of a final subdivision map, which substantially complies with the previously approved tentative map, is a mandatory ministerial act under State law. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 1. Development Fee Checklist 2. Fees & Securities Report 3. Project Vicinity Map 4. Parcel Map No. 29438 r:~agdrpt~001\0522~pm29821 .map CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST CASE NO. PM 29438 This is stated in the note below. CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT PARCEL MAP NO. 29438 DATE: June 26, 2001 IMPROVEMENTS FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE MATERIAL & LABOR MONUMENT SECURITY SECURITY SECURITY Street and Drainage $ 0 $ 0 Water $ 0 $ 0 Sewer $ 0 $ 0 TOTAL $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Note - No placement of monuments is associated with this parcel map and all offsite and onsite improvements have been completed. Therefore, no bonds are required. DEVELOPMENT FEES City Traffic Signing and Striping Costs RCFCD (ADP) Fee Development impact Fee SERVICE FEES Planning Fee Comprehensive Transportation Plan Plan Check Fee Monument Inspection Fee Fees Paid to Date Balance of Fees Due $ N/A $ (Previously Paid) $ (Previously Paid) $ 102.00 $ 8.oo $ 770.00 $. $ 880.00 $ o.oo r:~agdrpt~2001\0522~pm29821 .map ~,. % VlCINITY MA P NOT TO SCALE ITEM 16 J APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER ~;'~l CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: City Manager/City Council ~)William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 26, 2001 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Offer of Dedication - Road Purposes on Western Bypass Corridor and Roick Drive per Tentative Parcel Map No. 28473 Conditions of Approval PREPARED BY: I'[j' Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works ~Clement M. Jimenez, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING AN OFFER OF DEDICATION OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR ROAD AND UTILITY PURPOSES FOR WESTERN BYPASS CORRIDOR AND ROICK DRIVE AS REQUIRED BY THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 28473, PA98-0005, BUT NOT ACCEPTING STREETS INTO THE CITY MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM AT THIS TIME BACKGROUND: Condition Nos. 9a and 9c of the draft conditions of approval for Tentative Parcel Map No. 28473 as stated in a Public Works Memorandum dated January 25, 2001, on file in the Public Works Department, call for the dedication and improvements of Western Bypass Corridor and Roick Drive, respectively. These conditions of approval as well as the tentative pamel map have not been approved as staff is currently reviewing them. Meanwhile, the owner has filed an application for a Lot Line Adjustment (LLA), PA01-0062. LLA PA01-0062 proposes to expand Pamel 4 of Parcel Map No. 28471 to include a portion of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map No. 28473, identified as Parcel 15. Upon the advice of the City Attorney, the City Engineer and the Deputy Director of Public Works have agreed to approve LLA PA01- 0062 upon concurrent submittal and approval of the dedication of right of way for Western Bypass Corridor and Roick Drive for public street and utility purposes. It is important to note that LLA PA01-0062 and Tentative Parcel Map No. 28473 were on hold pending a resolution of whether Parcel 15 of Tentative Parcel Map No. 28473 can be shown as a remainder pamel and/or if Parcel 4 of Pamel Map No. 28471 can be expanded to include Parcel 15 as part of LLA PA01-0062. It was decided that Pamel 15 can be shown as a remainder parcel on Tentative Parcel Map No. 28473. Once the right of way dedication for Western Bypass Corridor and Roick Drive is approved, LLA PA01-0062 will be processed for recordation. R:~agdrpt~01\0522~om28627parce14.m eanderingsidewalkeasementdedication 1 FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2001- 2. Offer of Dedication - Road Purposes with Exhibits "A" and "B" made a part thereof. R:~agdrpt\01\0522~pm28627parce14.meanderingsidewalkeasem entdedication 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING AN OFFER OF DEDICATION OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR ROAD AND UTILITY PURPOSES FOR WESTERN BYPASS CORRIDOR AND ROICK DRIVE AS REQUIRED BY THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 28473, PA98-0005, BUT NOT ACCEPTING STREETS INTO THE CITY MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM AT THIS TIME THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: City Staff has established the requirement for dedication of right of way for street improvements per draft Conditions of Approval, not yet approved as Tentative Parcel Map 28473 is currently under review, as follows: 88 feet of full width street right of way for Western Bypass Corridor improvements 2. 78 feet of full width street right of way for Roick Drive improvements The developer, Westside Business Centre, LLC by Dendy Real Estate & Investments, Co., submitted an offer of dedication for road purposes dedicating right of way for public street and utility purposes for Western Bypass Corridor and Roick Drive; Acceptance of this offer of dedication does not obligate the City to assume responsibility, nor incur liability with respect to the offer of dedication until subject streets have been accepted into the city maintained street system by separate resolution. WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby desires to accept the offer of dedication for road purposes by Westside Business Centre, LLC by Dendy Real Estate & Investments, Co. as attached hereto along with its Exhibits "A" and "B". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby accepts the offer of dedication for road purposes by Westside Business Centre, LLC by Dendy Real Estate & Investments, Co. for Western Bypass Corridor and Roick Drive, but not into the City Maintained Street System at this time. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of June, 2001. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk R:~agdrpt\01\0522~m28627parce14.meanderingsidewelkeasementdedication 3 (SEAL) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2001- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 26t~day of June, 2001 by the following vote: AYES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk R:~agdrpt\01\0522~pm28627parce14.meanderingsidewalkeasementdedication 4 Og'FER OF DEDICATION. ROAD PURPOSES (Corporation) The undersigned, being the present title owner(s) of record of the herein described parcel of land, do hereby make an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City of Temecula, a political subdivision of the State of California, and its successors or assigns, for public street and utility purposes, the real property sitaated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, described in Exhibit 'A" (written description) and shown on Exhibit "B" (plat map) attached hereto, It is understood and agreed that the City of Temecula and its successors or assigns shall incur no liability with respect to such offer of dedication, and shall not assume any responsibility for the offered parcel of land or any improvements thereon or therein, until such offer has been accepted by appropriate action of the City Council, or of the local governing bodies or its successors or assigns. The provisions hereof shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon heirs, successors, assigns, and personal representatives of the respective parties hereto. IN WIT S OF, these pre t have executed this instrument this Print NameanffTcfl~ ' A ~ J STATE OF CALIFORNIA } SS. CO Y OF %rE E On~ff'a. ~'fit ~ , before me the undersigned, ~ ~x / aNotary~blicinandfortheStateofCalifornia, personallyappeared ~)//[ ~J' J )~,~' personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence)to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/ar/~bscribed to the within ~nstmment and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity{Tes), and that by his/her/their signature(s)on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official s Sig ~ _t A EPTAN E ERTIFICATE This is to certify that the interests in real property, as set forth in the attached Offer of Dedication for Road Pm'pose~. dedicated to the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, is hereby accepted for purposes of recordation by order of the City Council on __ with the understanding that the City of Temecula shall incur no liability with respect to such otfer of do~tcanom and shall not assume any responsibility for the real property or any improvements thereon or therein until the Cit) Council accepted these improvements into the City maintained street system by a separate resolution. ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney Dendy Real--Estate & Invest~nts,Co Managing Member By Bill Dendy, President /ff, t B / T' 'A" "Western Bypass Corridor" Right - of - Way Being a portion of Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 28084 as shown by map on file in Book 185 of Parcel Maps, at Pages 51 through 53 thereof, also being a portion of that parcel shown as "Remainder Parcel" on Parcel Map 28471 on file in Book 195 of Parcel Maps, at Pages 7 through 9 thereof, both of records of RiverSide County, California, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the most southerly corner of said Parcel 1; Thence North 45022'27" East, along the southeasterly line of said Parcel 1, a distance of 351.03 feet to the beginning of a non-tangent curve, concave northeasterly, having a radius of 1344.00 feet, the initial radial line bears South 36054'52" West, being the Point of Beginning; Thence northwesterly along said curve, through a central angle of 21°56'19", an arc distance of 514.62 feet; Thence North 31°08'49' West, a distance of 525.19 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve, concave southwesterly, having a radius of 1208.00 feet; Thence northwesterly along said curve, through a central angle of 15°56'58", an arc distance of 335.71 feet; Thence North 47005'47" West, a distance of 528.56 feet to the to the beginning of a tangent curve, concave southwesterly, having a radius of 1156.00 feet; Thence northwesterly along said curve, through a central angle of 04°03'46", an arc distance of 81.97 feet; Thence North 51009'33" West, a distance of 393.21 feet to the northwesterly line of said Parcel 1; Thence North 38050'27" East, along said northwesterly line, a distance of 88.00 feet; Thence South 51°09'33" East, leaving said northwesterly line, a distance of 267.21 feet; Thence North 82°40'18" East, a distance of 34.66 feet; Thence North 38050'27'' East, a distance of 221.63 feet to the westerly line of said Parcel Map 28471; Thence South 51009'33" East, along said westerly line, a distance of 78.00 feet; Thence South 38°50'27" West, leaving said westerly line, a distance of 221.63 feet; Thence South 04°59'249 West, a distance of 34.66 feet to the beginning of a non-tangent curve, concave southwesterly, having a radius of 1244.00 feet, the initial radial line bears North 38050'27" East; Page 1 of 2 EXH I B/ T "A" Thence southeasterly along said curve, through a central angle of 04°03'46", an arc distance of 88.21 feet; Thence South 47°05'47" East, a distance of 528.56 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve, concave southwesterly, having a radius of 1294.00 feet; Thence soatheasterly along said curve, through a central angle of 15°56'58~, an arc distance of 360.21 feet; Thence South 31°08'49" East, a distance of 525.19 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve, concave northeasterly, having a radius of 1256.00 feet; Thence southeasterly along said curve, through a central angle of 22°32'10', an arc distance of 494.02 feet to the southeasterly line of said Parcel 1; Thence South 45022'27" West, along said southeasterly line, a distance of 89.04 feet to the Point of Beginning. The above described parcel of land contains 5.27acres, more or less. All as shown on the plat attached herewith and by reference to, made a part hereof. No. 707,5 Exp. 12/31/02 Darrin P. Ginn, LS 7075 EXP. 12/31/02 Date Prepared for and on behalf of HLC Page 2 of 2 4 5 APN (~ EXHIB/ 2 18 AREA ~ 5.27 ACRES 17 15 14 VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE 8 POC 351.03 PM 161/47-50 DARRIN P. GINN. LS 7075 EXP. 12/31/2002 PREPARED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF HLC ENGINEERING Tm,m~ Cd~lnio g2~O 0 200 400 DATE I "=400' DA TA TABLE NO. ~./t~F-ARING RADIUS LFNGTH 1 21'56'19' 1344.00' 514.62' 2 15'56'5B' 1206.00' 335.71' 3 04'03'46= 1156.00' 81.97' 4 N3B'50'2X'E 88.00' 5 S51'09'33"E -- 26Z21' 6 NB2'40'IB'E 34..66' 7 N38'50'27'E -- 221.63" 8 S51'09"33'E -- 78.00' 9 S04'59'24'E -- 34.66' 10 04'03'46' 1244.00' 11 15'56'58' 1294.00 360.21' 12 22'32'10' 1256.00 4.94.02' 13 S4.5'22'27'W -- B9.04' 14. S38'50'27"W -- 221.53" I WESTEt~BYPASS CORRIDOR SUBJECT: RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION DATE: 6/2001 I DRAWN BY'. DPG I SHT I OF I ITEM 17 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOROF FI NAN CE_._,~2a~__ CITY MANAGER ClTY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council /~William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 26, 2001 Amendment to Professional Services Agreement Inspection Services- Various Projects PREPARED BY: Greg Butler, Senior Engineer - Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Approve Amendment Number 3 to the Professional Inspection Services Agreement with Vali Cooper and Associates, Inc. for an amount equal to $38,500.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment. Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders/amendments not to exceed the contingency amount of $10,626.00, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. BACKGROUND: On October 30, 2000 the City Manager approved a professional services agreement with Vali Cooper and Associates, Inc. to provide an interim Public Works Inspector to cover a vacancy that arose because of an inspector resignation. The recruitment process took longer than anticipated so on December 19, 2000, at staff's request, Council approved amendment number one (1) to Vali Cooper's agreement increasing their contract total. Amendment 2 was approved by Council on May 22, 2001 extending the contract to cover another inspector resignation. The Public Works Department was unable to fill the vacant Public Works Inspector position from the first round of applicants interviewed. Therefore the recruitment period has been extended. In order to bridge this extended recruitment period, a third amendment to Vali Cooper's agreement has been prepared. The requested $38,500 amendment combined with $67,760 of the original amended contract amount exceeds the City Manager's $25,000 approving authority and therefore requires Council approval. FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds are available for this agreement in the Public Works Temporary Help Account, No. 001-165-999-5118. ATTACHMENT: Amendment No. 3 1 R:~agdrpt~2001\0522~ValiCooperAmend2 THIRD AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND VALI COOPER & ASSOCIATES, INC. THIS THIRD AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of June 26, 2001 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation Vati Cooper & Associates, Inc. CConsultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: On October 27, 2000 the City and Consultant entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Consultant Services" ("Agreement"). On December 19, 2000 the City issued Amendment #1 to the odginal agreement. C. On May 22, 2001 the City issued Amendment #2 to the odginal agreement. D. The Agreement as amended shall be referred to as the "Agreement." The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. Section 4, ~PAYMENT", paragraph a, of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit "A3', Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit "A3' other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed One Hundred Six Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Dollars and No Cents ($106,260.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. 3. Exhibit A2, to the Agreement is hereby deleted from the Agreement and in its place a new Exhibit A3 is added to the Agreement as set forth on Attachment "A" to this Amendment, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. 4. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA BY: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: BY: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: BY: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT Vali Cooper & Associates, Inc. 41 Washington Ave. Pt. Richmond, CA 94801 (510) 215-0264 i vali'Cooper, President/CEO (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) C:[WINDOWSIIEMPORARYINTERaVETFILESIOLK62D2iVALICOOPERA3.DO~ Consultant Services Agreement - Amendment 3 Construction Inspection Services - Various Projects Vali Cooper & Associates, Inc. Attachment A EXHIBIT A3 PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE Scope of Services: Provide construction inspection for various CIP Projects Payment Rates: Classification Hourly Rate Inspector $72.00 Vehicle $5.00 Total Estimated Cost: Classification I Total Hours I Hourly Rate Total $ 23,040.00 $ 1,600.00 Original Contract Inspector 320 $72.00 Truck 320 $5.00 Amendment No. 1 Inspector 240 $72.00 Truck 240 $5.00 Odginal Total $ 24,640.00 $ 17,280.00 $ 1,200.00 Amendment 1 Total $ 18,480.00 Amendment No. 2 Inspector $72.00 Truck 320 320 Amendment No. 3 Inspector 500 Truck 500 $5.00 Amendment 2 Total $72.00 $5.00 Amendment 3 Total $ 23,040.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 24,640.00 $ 36,000.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 38,500.00 Revised Contract Total. $ 106,260.00 ITEM 18 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT APPROVAL II CITY ATTORNEY II DIRECTOROF FINAN~;,~:~ II CITY MANAGER II City Manager/City Council .'~/~/~William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 26,2001 Amendment to Professional Engineering Services Agreement Margarita Road Widening - Project Number PW99-01 PREPARED BY: Amer Attar- Senior Engineer, Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Approve Amendment Number 6 to the Professional Engineering Services Agreement with GFB-Friedrich & Associates, inc. for an amount equal to $24,250 and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment. 2. Extend the term of the contract with GFB- Friedrich to December 31,2001. BACKGROUND: On August 24, 1999, the City Council awarded the design contract for the Margarita Road Widening Project to GFB-Friedrich & Associates, Inc. of Riverside, in the amount of $199,700.00. Amendment No. 6 will enable the consultant to complete the design of an interim project to have two lanes in each direction on Margarita Road, Phase Il, Pauba Road to Plo Pico Road. Designing and constructing this interim project will provide motorists with continuous two lanes in each direction on Margarita Road from Winchester to SR 79 South. This will reduce congestion from its current levels, especially during peak hours. A preliminary design for the Margarita Road, Phase II project (Pauba to Plo Pico) has already been completed as part of the original design contract. The design of the interim project will supplement this preliminary design. In addition, this amendment will extend the design contract with GFB- Friedrich to December 31, 2001. The total cost to complete this interim design project is $24,250. Previously approved amendments No.1 through No. 5 were for a total of $13,429.90. The total of all amendments after Amendment No. 6 is $37,679.90. This amount exceeds the $19,970.00 contingency. FISCAL IMPACT: The Margarita Road Improvement Project Phase I is a Capital Improvement Project funded through Development Impact Fees - Street Improvements and Capital Project Reserves. Adequate funds are available in Account No. 210-165-706-5802 for the requested Contract Amendment No. 6 to complete the design for Phase II. ATTACHMENT: Project Location Project Description Amendment No. 6 to the Professional Engineering Services Agreement I R&AGDRPT~2001 ~0626~W99-01Amend6.DOC SIXTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND GFB FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIATES, INC. MARGARITA ROAD IMPROVEMENTS PAUBA ROAD TO HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH PROJECT NO. PW99-01 THIS SIXTH AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of May 30, 2001 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and GFB Friedrich & Associates, Inc. ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: A. On August 24, 2000 the City and Consultant entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Consultant Services" ("Agreement"). B. The Agreement has been amended as follows: Amendment No. 1,2 & 3 on March 28, 2000, Amendment No. 4 on November 29, 2000, Amendment No. 5 on December 11, 2000 and Amendment No. 6 on May 30, 2001. The Agreement as amended shall be referred to as the "Agreement." C. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. Section 1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: TERM.. The term of the Agreement is hereby amended to extend the Agreement and shall commence on June 30, 2001 and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than December 31,2001. 3. Section 4.a. PAYMENT of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Two Hundred Thirty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Seventy Nine Dollars and Ninety Cents ($237,379.90) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. 4. Exhibit A to the Agreement is amended to add the work as set forth on Attachment "A-I" to this Amendment, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full 5. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. R:ICIP~PROJECTS~Pg/99~99-OIIGFBFRID AMEND6 2001.DOC IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OFTEMECULA BY: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: BY: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: BY: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT GFB Friedrich & Associates, Inc. 6529 Riverside Ave., Suite 230 Riverside, CA 92506 (909) 781-0811 /-~ J6tiH ~,. I~ried~fi, -pr~r~id"en~t TITLE: (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) 2 A'I-I'ACHMENT "A-I" 3 R.'ICIPIPROJECTSIP~Y99199-OIIGFBFRID AMEND6 2001.DOC May 3,2001 GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS RECEIVED MAY 0 4 2001 CiTY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Mr. Scott Harvey Project Manager City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Subject: Margarita Road Widening Project: Proposal to Provide Design Engineering Services for an Interim Widening Project Between Plo Pico Road and Pauba Road. (Ref' Project No. PW99-O1). Dear Scott: Attached is the proposal for the subject project as you requested. This cover letter has been prepared to update the City on the financial status &the existing Margarita Road Widening agreement. Below is a recap of the requested fees for the Interim Widening project for Margarita Road. GFB-Friedrich's Office Work $ 9,950.00 RK Engineering (RK Engineering fee + 10% mark-up) 12,870.00 C.H.J., Inc. (8 hours ~ $90.00/hour + 10% mark-up) 836.00 Reimbursable Outside Costs 594.00 Total Fees Requested, This Proposal $ 24,250.00 A portion of the fees for RK Engineering, as well as the reimbursable outside costs, can be applied to the remaining fee items within the existing Margarita Road project budget authorization. A major portion of the GFB-Friedrich and C.H.J. fees will need to be added to the existing authorization. As of May 1st, with the projected April billing removed, the amount of remaining budget in the Margarita Road project is $19,290, of which $3,000 should be reserved for Phase 1 construction phase work. leaving $16,290 to be applied to the Phase II interim project which is the subject of this proposal. Please note that a portion of the $6,335 remaining in the Amendment No. 2 budget authorization was for the relocation of the traffic signal at Santiago Road and Margarita Road. Also note that the Amendment No. 6 request is not factored into this proposal. Please contact us if you have any questions. We look forward to getting started. Sincerely, JAF 6529 RIVERSIDE AVENUE * SUITE 230 · RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92506 1909) 781-0811 * FAX 1909) 781-84-35 E-MAIL: gfb-jaf@pacbell.net GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS May 3, 2001 Mr. Scott Harvey Project Manager City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Subject: Margarita Road Widening Project: Proposal to Provide Design Engineering Services for an Interim Widening Project Between Pio Pico Road and Pauba Road. (Reft Project No. PW99-O1). Dear Scott: Per your request, we have prepared the following proposal to provide engineering services to design the interim widening of Margarita Road. This interim project will provide two lanes of traffic in both directions on Margarita Road until the permanent Phase Il design can be completed in the future. To prepare this proposal, Mike Mueting included a list of issues and comments that will be the basis for our Scope of Work for this interim project. SCOPE OF WORK To determine the services necessary to describe the Scope of Work, we prepared a preliminary striping layout. It appears that there is sufficient pavement width to have four travel lanes and a left turn lane. The signal at Santiago Road will have to be at least partially relocated. It will be necessary to cut into the westerly slope north of Santiago Road by four or five feet. The four-foot bike lane will require even more cut into the existing slope. A key issue is the taper south of the existing shopping center southerly of Pauba Road. A review of the standards for tapers indicates that the revised taper should be much longer based on the current speed limit. It may be necessary to add additional pavement on the shoulder at the existing taper to provide a longer taper at this location. Typical Sections I. The following typical sections are anticipated: Westerly slope, immediately north of Santiago Road, of Margarita Road, Existing driveways on the west side of Margarita Road north of Santiago Road, At MWD facilities, Tie to existing median at shopping center, and South of Santiago Road. temecula~ohas;~p~ RIVERSIDE AVENUE · SUITE 230 · RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92506 (9091 781-0811 · FAX {9091 781-8435 E-MAIL: gfb-jaf@pacbell.net Mr. Scott Harvey May 3, 2001 Page 2 Traffic Eneineering 2. The following items of traffic engineering by RK Engineering are anticipated: Comments on proposed striping layout lane widths and transitions, Prepare striping and signing plan, Prepare traffic signal relocation at Santiago Road, including relocation of traffic loops., and Prepare construction traffic control plan (one phase only). Please refer to attached RK Engineering proposal dated May 2, 2001 Street Plans 3. Prepare street plans for the interim project utilizing the topography that we already possess. These plans will include pavement widening and indicate utility relocations, where necessary. Plans will include existing driveway transitions and design of drainage facilities. MWD 4. Prepare design at MWD crossing, and coordinate the processing of MWD plan checks and permits to approval. Soils Engineering 5. Comments on proposed slope grading by C.H.J., Inc., as necessary. Notes: 1. GFB-Friedrich is not including any retaining wall design within this proposal. 2. C.H.J. was unable to do any testing at the slope north of Santiago Road. If additional geotechnical information regarding the slope is required, it may be necessary to obtain permission from the affected property owner(s) to do geotechnical testing by accessing the slope from the top. Such additional testing will be additional work. Utility Relocations 6. Indicate various utility relocations. We have assumed that the City will coordinate the relocations directly with the affected utility(s). Specifications and Estimate 7. Specifications will be prepared for submittal to the City as part of the plan check process. Estimates of probable construction costs will be prepared at appropriate points during the project. temecula~phas2int.pro Mr. Scott Harvey May 3, 2001 Page 3 Comments 1. We recommend that the City, In conjunction with RK Engineering, document speed limits and transition lengths required throughout the project. It may be necessary to consider reduced speed zones at transition areas. Also consider physical barriers where pavement widths vary. 2. City should review quality of existing street lighting in the project area to determine if additional street lights are necessary. 3. City shall be responsible to notify affected property owners. 4. We will consult with City staffto determine whether to design the curb profile or simply match the existing cross slope. PROJECT SCHEDULE We are prepared to begin work immediately. We estimate that it will take between thirty (30) and sixty (60) working days to complete our work. RK E ' ng neenng s work w I take apprommate y thirty-five (35) working days from the date they are asked to start. PROJECT FEE The estimated fees to provide the time and materials office and subconsultant services described above are as follows: GFB-Friedrich's Office Work RK Engineering (refer to attached proposal dated May 2, 2001) (RK Engineering fee + 10% mark-up) C.H.J., Inc. (8 hours ~ $90.00/hour + 10% mark-up) Reimbursable Outside Costs Total Fees Requested, This Proposal $ 9,950.00 12,870.00 836.00 594.00 $ 24,250.00 All terms and conditions, including the Schedule of Hourly Rates, of the existing Agreement for Professional Design Services (Project No. PW99-01) by and between the City of Temecula and GFB- Friedrich & Assoc., Inc., dated August 24, 1999, are a part of this proposal by reference. temecula~phas2int.pro Mr. Sco~ Harvey May 3, 2001 Page 4 Please contact us if you have any questions. We look forward to getting started. Sincerely, GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. , ~/J_.ohn..A. Friedrich, P.E. President JAF temecula~ohas2int.pro engineering group, inc. May 2, 2001 transpOTt~,tiuI~ planning · traffic en[~ineerin§ acoustical / air quality studies Mr. John Friedrich GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIATES, INC. 6529 Riverside Avenue, Suite 230 Riverside, CA 92506 Subject: Margarita Road Phase II Interim Project Traffic Signal Modification, Signing and Striping Plan, and Traffic Control Plan Dear Mr, Fdedrich: INTRODUCTION RK ENGINEERING GROUP. INC. is pleased to submil this proposed Agreement to provide traffic engineering services for the City of Temecula Margarita Road Phase II Interim Project. The objective of this project is to provide two travel lanes in each direction with left turn lane where necessary and a bike lane on the west side (if possible). The segments of the proposed widening and the limits of signing and striping plan and the construction traffic control plan (one phase only) are between Station 66+00 and Station 76+50; a total of 2,089 linear feet (adjusted for a station equation). SCOPE OF WORK The following Scope of Work is proposed by RK ENGINEERING GROUP. INC. for Ibis study effod: 1. Discuss the project with representatives of GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2. Field review the site to determine existing conditions. 3. Review and comment on the proposed layout and lane widths as provided by GFB- FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIATES, INC. in conjunction with City staff. Prepare a traffic signal modification plan at the intersection of Margarita Road and Santiago Road, including traffic loop detector relocation. Traffic signal plans will be prepared at a scale of 1" = 20' and will be prepared in AutoCAD. 5, Prepare signing and striping plan to be implemented in conjunction wilh the traffic signal modification plan and roadway widening plan. Striping plans will be prepared 1301 dove strc[~t, ,~u{tc .:,70 r~¢wport bench, california ')2660 949474,080~ fax 94%474.0t)0;~ http://www, r ke.§ineer.com Mr. John Friedrich GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIATES, INC. May 2, 2001 Page 2 on a separate plan sheet at a scale of 1" = 40'. Signing and striping plans will be additionally prepared using AutoCAD, {). Prepare traffic control plan for planned improvements. The traffic control plans will be prepared based upon a "single phase" at a scale of 1" = 40'. Traffic control plans will be additionally prepared In AutoCAD. 7. Provide traffic signal details as appropriate for the traffic signal design modification plans, 8. Prepare special provision specifications and an engineer's estimate of probable cost. g. Attend up to two (2) meetings with GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIATES, INC. and the City. 10. Respond to plan check comments/questions. Revised plans and specifications as necessary. PROFESSIONAL FEES The fee for the work outlined in this proposal is based upon personnel charges plus direct expenses as indicated in the attached Exhibit A. The fixed fee to accomplish the above Scope of Work is as follows: ,, Review City's proposed layouts and lane widths Traffic signal modification plan · Signing and striping plans Traffic control plan · Meetinqs with City of Temecula TOTAL = $ ~,000 = $ 6,000 = $ 1,600 = $ 2,000 = $ 1,10o --- $11,70u Plan check submiltal and processing of payment plan check fees and other general coordination are assumed to be performed by GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIATES, INC.. Potholing for traffic signal pole foundations Is not included in this proposal. If an expanded scope of work is required, RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. will provide an ad(titional proposal for that work. The proposed fee does not include attendance at public hearings/meetings, which may be required to secure approval of the project. If these are required and requested, RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. would be pleased to attend these meetings and billing would be based upon the billing rates included in Exhibit A. Mr. John Friedrich GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIATES, INC. May 2, 2001 Page 3 The Client agrees to limit the Design Professional's liability to the Client and to all construction Contractors and Subcontractors on the project, due to the Design Professionars negligent acts, errors, or omissions, such that the total aggregate liability of the Design Professional to all those named shall not exceed $50.000 or the Design Professional's total fee for services rendered on this project, whichever is greater. In the event that a lawsuit is brought for the enforcement of any of the terms of this agreement, the prevailing party should be entitled to attorney fees and costs in addition to any damages. This agreement can be terminated by either party based upon a written request to terminate the work. The client will pay RK ENGINEERING GROUP. INC. for all work completed prior to the determination of the work. TIME SCHEDULE It is estimated that the traffic signal modification, signing and stdping plans, and traffic control plans will take approximalely 35 working days to complete from the date of authorization, and date of receipt of data essential for the study. Additionally, any delays resulting from circumstances beyond our control, such as weather, shall extend the time schedule. QUALIFICATIONS RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. is located in Newport Beach, California and specializes in transportation planning and traffic/acoustical engineering for governmental agencies and the business community. The firm principals and associates have over 50 years of combined engineering and planning experience throughout Southern California at the regional, local and individual project levels, The experience of the firm's personnel in transportation planning and traffic/acoustical engineering provides the special skills necessary for determining practical and meaningful traffic solutions. This letter can serve as a Memorandum of Agreement and our authorization to proceed. Please sign one copy and return it to us for our files. We are looking forward to serving you on this project. This proposal is valid for sixty days, if signed by the client. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please give me a cell at (949) 474-0809. Respectfully submitted .i.ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. ITEM 1 9 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITYATTORNEY DIRECTOR OFFINANCE"~.~.~, CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council /~,/~illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 26, 2001 Award of Construction Contract for the Pavement Management System FY2000-01, Project No. PW00-30 PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Senior Engineer Steven Beswick, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Award a contract for the Pavement Management System - FY2000-01, Project No. PW00-30 to McLaughlin Engineering & Mining for $2,093,991.32 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $209,399.13, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. Approve an acceleration of $735,600.00 in Measure A Funds from FY2002-03 to FY2001-02 for the Pavement Management System Project, Project No. PW00-30. BACKGROUND: On April 24, 2001 Council approved the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorized the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Pavement Management System - FY2000-01, Project No. PW00-30. The approved Annual Pavement Management System Program includes the rehabilitation of pavement by reconstructing roads within the City and the associated pavement striping/legends. The pavement management system for FY2000-2001 is included in the Capital Improvement Program budget. The roads included in this project are as foltows: Rancho California Road, Ynez Road, Winchester Road, Overland Drive, Nicholas Road, Enterprise Circle West and South, Mira Loma Drive, Main Street, County Center Drive, and La Paz Street. Three (3) bids were received and publicly opened on June 13, 2001 and results were as follows: McLaughlin Engineering & Mining ................. $2,093,991.32 J.D. Paving, Inc .............................................. $2,348,187.30 All American Asphalt ...................................... $2,521,154.49 A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the City Engineer's office. Staff has reviewed the bid proposals and found McLaughlin Engineering & Mining of Temecula, I n~agdrpt\O1~O626\pwO0-30.awd/ California to be the lowest responsible bidder for this project. Staff has contacted references and determined that McLaughlin Engineering & Mining has satisfactorily performed similar type of work in the past. The specifications allow sixty (60) working days for completion of this project. The Engineer's estimate for this project was $2,000,000. FISCAL IMPACT: The Pavement Management System - FY2000-01 is a Capital Improvement Project funded through Measure A, AB2928 Funds and Capital Project Reserves. Adequate Measure A, AB2928 Funds are available to cover the costs for the Pavement Management System - FY2000-01. The total construction cost is $2,303,390.45, which includes the contract amount of $2,093,991.32 plus 10% contingency of $209,399.13. ATFACHMENT: 1. Project Location 2. Project Description 3. Contract 2 E~ag d rpt\O 1~0626~pwOO-30.awd/ CiTY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACT FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-30 PA VEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (FY2000-O'I) THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 26th day of June, 2001, by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and McLaughlin Engineering & Mining, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." WITNESSETH: That CITY and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows: CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The complete Contract includes all of the Contract Documents, to wit: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Proposal, Performance Bond, Labor and Materials Bond, Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO. PW00-30, PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (FY2000-01), Insurance Forms, this Contract, and all modifications and amendments thereto, the State of California Depadment of Transportation Standard Specifications (1992 Ed.) where specifically referenced in the Plans and Technical Specifications, and the latest version of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, including all supplements as written and promulgated by the Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the American Associated General Contractors of California (hereinafter, "Standard Specifications") as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW00-30, PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (FY2000-01). Copies of these Standard Specifications are available from the publisher: Building New, Incorporated 3055 Overland Avenue Los Angeles, California 90034 (213) 202-7775 The Standard Specifications will control the general provisions, construction materials, and construction methods for this Contract except as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provision, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW00-30, PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (FY2000-01). In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the other Contract Documents, the other Contract Documents shall take precedence over, and be used in lieu of, such conflicting portions. Where the Contract Documents describe portions of the work in general terms, but not in complete detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed completed and in place and that only the best general practice is to be used. Unless otherwise specified, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and do all the work involved in executing the Contract. CONTRACT CA-1 R:~cip~p rojects~:~v00~30~CONTRACT The Contract Documents are complementary, and what is called for by anyone shall be as binding as if called for by all. Any conflict between this Contract and any other Contract Document shall be resolved in favor of this Contract. SCOPE OF WORK. CONTRACTOR shall perform everything required to be performed, shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required for the following: PROJECT NO. PW00-30, PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (FY2000-01) All of said work to be performed and materials to be furnished shall be in strict accordance with the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract Documents hereinabove enumerated and adopted by CITY. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed under the direction and supervision, and subject to the approval of CITY or its authorized representatives. CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHDULE. The CITY agrees to pay, and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept, in full payment for, the work agreed to be done, the sum of: TWO MILLION NINETY THREE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED NINETY ONE DOLLARS and THIRTY 'rvvo CENTS ($2,093,991.32), the total amount of the base bid. CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed Sixty (60) working days, commencing with delivery of a Notice to Proceed by CITY. Construction shall not commence until bonds and insurance are approved by CITY. CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the City Council, except that the City Manager is hereby authorized by the City Council to make, by written order, changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as established by the City Council. pAYMENTS LUMP SUM BID SCEHDULE: Before submittal of the first payment request, the CONTRACTOR shall submit to the City Engineer a schedule of values allocated to the various portions of the work, prepared in such form and supported by such data to substantiate its accuracy as the City Engineer may require. This schedule, as approved by the City Engineer, shall be used as the basis for reviewing the CONTRACTOR's payment requests. UNIT PRICE BID SCHEDULE: Pursuant to Section 20104.50 of the Public Contract Code, within thirty (30) days after submission of a payment request to the CITY, the CONTRACTOR shall be paid a sum equal to ninety percent (90%) of the value of the work completed according to the bid schedule. Payment request forms shall be submitted on or about the thirtieth (30th) day of each successive month as the work progresses. The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be CONTRACT CA-2 R:\cip~projeds~pw00-30\C ONTRACT made sixty (60) days after acceptance of final payment and the CONTRACTOR filing a one-year Warranty and an Affidavit of Final Release with the CITY on forms provided by the CITY. Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied by a certificate signed by the City Manager, stating that the work for which payment is demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments on the Contract price shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the work. Interest shall be paid on all undisputed payment requests not paid within thirty (30) days pursuant to Public Contracts Code Section 20104.50. Public Contract Code Section 7107 is hereby incorporated by reference. In accordance with Section 9-3.2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and Section 9203 of the Public Contract Code, a reduction in the retention may be requested by the Contractor for review and approval by the Engineer if the progress of the construction has been satisfactory, and the project is more than 50% complete. The Council hereby delegates its authority to reduce the retention to the Engineer. WARRANTY RETENTION. Commencing with the date the Notice of Completion is recorded, the CITY shall retain a portion of the Contract award price, to assure warranty performance and correction of construction deficiencies according to the following schedule: CONTRACT AMOUNT $25,000- $75,000 RETENTION PERIOD RETENTION PERCENTAGE 180 days 3% $75,000- $500,000 180 days $2,250 + 2%ofamountin excess of $75,000 Over $500,000 One Year $10,750 + 1% of amount in excess of $500,000 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES - EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government Code Section 53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to CITY the sum of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) per day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond the time allowed pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed liquidated damages for unforeseeable delays beyond the control of, and without the fault or negligence of, the CONTRACTOR including delays caused by CITY. CONTRACTOR is required to promptly notify CITY of any such delay. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making each request for payment under Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR shall submit to CITY, in writing, all claims for compensation as to work related to the payment. Unless the CONTRACTOR has disputed the amount of the CONTRACT CA-3 R:~cip~p~0jects~:~00-30~C ONT RACT 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. payment, the acceptance by CONTRACTOR of each payment shall constitute a release of all claims against the CITY related to the payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit, release, and indemnity agreement with each claim for payment. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract, from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. CONTRACTOR shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Section 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the CITY, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this contract. INDEMNIFICATION. All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing or delivering materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone. CONTRACTOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of persons (CONTRACTOR's employees included) and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations herein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of the CITY. The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and be responsible for reimbursing the CITY for any and all costs incurred by the CITY as a result of Stop Notices filed against the project. The CITY shall deduct such costs from Progress Payments or final payments due to the CITY. GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to CITY's employees, agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any City officer or employee, or any architect, engineer, or other preparers of the Drawings and Specifications for this project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in its employ has been employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the City Manager, its affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors upon the Project have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the Project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an CONTRACT CA-4 R:~p~projects~00-30\CONTRACT 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California. NOTICE TO CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant information with respect thereto, to CITY. BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records, and plans or such part thereof as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the CITY. INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY and its authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers. CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be made within a reasonable time after completion of the work. DISCRIMINATION. CONTRACTOR represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin, color, sex age, or handicap. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Contractor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Contract and also govern the interpretation of this Contract. Any litigation concerning this Contract shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event of litigation between the parties concerning this Contract, the prevailing party as determined by the Court, shall be entitled to actual and reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs incurred in the litigation. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No member, officer, or employee of the City of Temecula or of a local public body shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in the contract of the proceeds thereof during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. Furthermore, the contractor/consultant covenants and agrees to their knowledge that no board member, officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the contracting party other than the City of Temecula, and that if any such interest comes to the knowledge of either party at any time, a full and complete disclosure of all such information will be made, in writing, to the other party or parties, even if such interest would not be considered a conflict of interest under Article 4 (commencing with Section 1090) or Article 4.6 (commencing with Section 1220) of Division 4 of Title I of the Government Code of the State of California. ADA REQUIREMENTS. By signing this contract, Contractor certifies that the Contractor is in total compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Public Law 101- 336, as amended. CONTRACT CA-5 R:~cip~p rojects\pw00~30~CONTRACT 23. WRITTEN NOTICE. Any written notice required to be given in any part of the Contract Documents shall be performed by depositing the same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, directed to the address of the CONTRACTOR as set forth in the Contract Documents, and to the CITY addressed as follows: Mailing Address: William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92569-9033 Street Address: William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first above written. DATED: CONTRACTOR Mc Laughlin Engineering & Mining, Inc. 41934 Main St, #107 Temecula, CA 92590 909-699-7957 By: Wayne White, Vice President DATED: CITY OFTEMECULA APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk CONTRACT CA~ R:~p\pmjects~0-30~CONTRACT ITEM 20 APPROVAL ClTYATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN~ ClTY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManageflCity Council *~/~William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 26, 2001 Award the Construction Contract for Citywide Asphalt Concrete Repairs for FY2000-01, Project No. PW01-01 PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Senior Engineer Steven Beswick, Associate Engineer That the City Council: Award a construction contract for the Citywide Asphalt Concrete Repairs - FY2000-01, Project No. PW01~01 to Cunningham-Davis Corp for $117,587.20 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $11,758.72, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. BACKGROUND: On April 24, 2001 Council approved the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorized the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the subject project. This Asphalt Repair Project for FY2000-2001 is part of the Annual Street Maintenance Program. The Program involves fixing portions of streets that require minor repairs and the associated pavement striping and legends. The roads included in this project are as follows: Rancho California Road, Winchester Road, Margarita Road, Jefferson Avenue, and Diaz Road. Four (4) bids were received and publicly opened on June 13, 2001 and results were as follows: 2. 3. 4. Cunningham-Davis Corp ................................... $117,587.20 NPG Corporation ............................................... $119,407.70 Holland-Lowe Const .......................................... $129,740.15 McLaughlin Engineering & Mining Corp ...........$167,486.85 A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the City Engineer's office. Staff has reviewed the bid proposals and found Cunningham-Davis Corp. of Calimesa, California to be the lowest responsible bidder for this project. Staff has contacted references and determined that Cunningham-Davis Corp has satisfactorily performed similar type of work in the past. 1 R:~AGDRPT~.001\0626\PW01-01 AWD.DOC The specifications allow Thirty (30) working days for the completion of this project. The Engineer's estimate for this project was $100,000. FISCAL IMPACT: The Citywide Asphalt Concrete Repairs - FY2000-01, Project No. PW01-01 is funded through the Public Works Department, Maintenance Division. Adequate funds are available in the FY2001-02 Account No. 001-164-601-5402 for Routine Street Maintenance. The total construction cost is $129,345.92, which includes the contract amount of $117,587.20 plus 10% contingency of $11,758.72. ATTACHMENT: 1. Project Location 2. Contract 2 R:~AGDRPT~2001\0626~PW01 -O1 AWD,DOC © CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACT FOR PROJECT NO. PW01-01 ClTYWIDE A.C. REPAIRS FY2000-O'I THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 26"' day of June, 2001 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and Cunningham- Davis Corp., hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." WITNESSETH: That CITY and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows: CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The complete Contract includes all of the Contract Documents, to wit: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Proposal, Performance Bond, Labor and Materials Bond, Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO. PW01-01, CITYWIDE A.C. REPAIRS FY2000-01, Insurance Forms, this Contract, and all modifications and amendments thereto, the State of California Depadment of Transportation Standard Specifications (1992 Ed.) where specifically referenced in the Plans and Technical Specifications, and the latest version of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, including all supplements as written and promulgated by the Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the American Associated General Contractors of California (hereinafter, "Standard Specifications") as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW01-01, CITYWIDE A.C. REPAIRS FY2000-01. Copies of these Standard Specifications are available from the publisher: Building New, Incorporated 3055 Overland Avenue Los Angeles, California 90034 (213) 202-7775 The Standard Specifications will control the general provisions, construction materials, and construction methods for this Contract except as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provision, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW01-01, ClTYVVlDE A.C. REPAIRS FY2000-01. In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the other Contract Documents, the other Contract Documents shall take precedence over, and be used in lieu of, such conflicting portions. Where the Contract Documents describe portions of the work in general terms, but not in complete detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed completed and in place and that only the best general practice is to be used. Unless otherwise specified, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and do all the work involved in executing the Contract. CONTRACT CA-1 R:\ClP\PROJECTS\PW01-01\CONTRACT The Contract Documents are complementary, and what is called for by anyone shall be as binding as if called for by all. Any conflict between this Contract and any other Contract Document shall be resolved in favor of this Contract. SCOPE OF WORK. CONTRACTOR shall perform everything required to be performed, shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required for the following: PROJECT NO. PW01-01, CITYVVlDE A.C. REPAIRS FY2000-01 All of said work to be performed and materials to be furnished shall be in strict accordance with the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract Documents hereinabove enumerated and adopted by CITY. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed under the direction and supervision, and subject to the approval of CITY or its authorized representatives. CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHEDULE. The CITY agrees to pay, and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept, in full payment for, the work agreed to be done, the sum of: ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED EIGHTY SEVEN DOLLARS and TWENTY CENTS ($117,587.20), the total amount of the base bid. CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed THIRTY (30) working days, commencing with delivery of a Notice to Proceed by CITY. Construction shall not commence until bonds and insurance are approved by CITY. CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the City Council, except that the City Manager is hereby authorized by the City Council to make, by written order, changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as established by the City Council. PAYMENTS LUMP SUM BID SCHEDULE: Before submittal of the first payment request, the CONTRACTOR shall submit to the City Engineer a schedule of values allocated to the various portions of the work, prepared in such form and supported by such data to substantiate its accuracy as the City Engineer may require. This schedule, as approved by the City Engineer, shall be used as the basis for reviewing the CONTRACTOR's payment requests. UNIT PRICE BID SCHEDULE: Pursuant to Section 20104.50 of the Public Contract Code, within thirty (30) days after submission of a payment request to the CITY, the CONTRACTOR shall be paid a sum equal to ninety percent (90%) of the value of the work completed according to the bid schedule. Payment request forms shall be submitted on or about the thirtieth (30th) day of each successive month as the work progresses. The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be CONTRACT CA-2 R:~CIP~°ROJECTS~PW01 ~)I\CONTRACT made sixty (60) days after acceptance of final payment and the CONTRACTOR filing a one-year Warranty and an Affidavit of Final Release with the CITY on forms provided by the CITY. Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied by a certificate signed by the City Manager, stating that the work for which payment is demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments on the Contract price shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the work. Interest shall be paid on all undisputed payment requests not paid within thirty (30) days pursuant to Public Contracts Code Section 20104.50. Public Contract Code Section 7107 is hereby incorporated by reference. In accordance with Section 9-3.2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and Section 9203 of the Public Contract Code, a reduction in the retention may be requested by the Contractor for review and approval by the Engineer if the progress of the construction has been satisfactory, and the project is more than 50% complete. The Council hereby delegates its authority to reduce the retention to the Engineer. WARRANTY RETENTION. Commencing with the date the Notice of Completion is recorded, the CITY shall retain a portion of the Contract award price, to assure warranty performance and correction of construction deficiencies according to the following schedule: CONTRACT AMOUNT $25,000- $75,000 RETENTION PERIOD RETENTION PERCENTAGE 180 days 3% $75,000- $500,000 180 days $2,250 + 2%ofamountin excess of $75,000 Over $500,000 One Year $10,750 + 1% of amount in excess of $500,000 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES - EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government Code Section 53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to CITY the sum of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) per day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond the time allowed pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed liquidated damages for unforeseeable delays beyond the control of, and without the fault or negligence of, the CONTRACTOR including delays caused by CITY. CONTRACTOR is required to promptly notify CITY of any such delay. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making each request for payment under Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR shall submit to CITY, in writing, all claims for compensation as to work related to the payment. Unless the CONTRACTOR has disputed the amount of the CONTRACT CA-3 R:~CIP~PROJECTS~PW01~I~CONTRACT 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. payment, the acceptance by CONTRACTOR of each payment shall constitute a release of all claims against the CITY related to the payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit, release, and indemnity agreement with each claim for payment. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract, from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. CONTRACTOR shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Section 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the CITY, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this contract. INDEMNIFICATION. All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing or delivering materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone. CONTRACTOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of persons (CONTRACTOR's employees included) and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations herein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of the CITY. The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and be responsible for reimbursing the CITY for any and all costs incurred by the CITY as a result of Stop Notices filed against the project. The CITY shall deduct such costs from Progress Payments or final payments due to the CITY. GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to CITY's employees, agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any City officer or employee, or any architect, engineer, or other preparers of the Drawings and Specifications for this project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in its employ has been employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the City Manager, its affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors upon the Project have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the Project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an CONTRACT CA-4 R:~CIP\PROJECTS~PW01 ~)I~CONTRACT 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California. NOTICE TO CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant information with respect thereto, to CITY. BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records, and plans or such part thereof as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the CITY. INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY and its authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers. CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be made within a reasonable time after completion of the work. DISCRIMINATION. CONTRACTOR represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin, color, sex age, or handicap. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Contractor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Contract and also govern the interpretation of this Contract. Any litigation concerning this Contract shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event of litigation between the padies concerning this Contract, the prevailing party as determined by the Court, shall be entitled to actual and reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs incurred in the litigation. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No member, officer, or employee of the City of Temecula or of a local public body shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in the contract of the proceeds thereof during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. Fudhermore, the contractor/consultant covenants and agrees to their knowledge that no board member, officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the contracting party other than the City of Temecula, and that if any such interest comes to the knowledge of either party at any time, a full and complete disclosure of all such information will be made, in writing, to the other party or parties, even if such interest would not be considered a conflict of interest under Article 4 (commencing with Section 1090) or Article 4.6 (commencing with Section 1220) of Division 4 of Title I of the Government Code of the State of California. ADA REQUIREMENTS. By signing tills contract, Contractor certifies that the Contractor is in total compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Public Law 101- 336, as amended. CONTRACT CA-5 R:~ClP~,°ROJECTS~PW01-01\CONTRACT 23. WRITTEN NOTICE. Any written notice required to be given in any part of the Contract Documents shall be performed by depositing the same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, directed to the address of the CONTRACTOR as set forth in the Contract Documents, and to the CITY addressed as follows: Mailing Address: William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Street Address: William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 CONTRACT CA-6 R:\CIP~PROJECTS~PW01~) 1 ~CONTRACT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first above written. DATED: DATED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR Cunningham-Davis Corp. P.O. Box 729 Calimesa, CA 92320 909-795-5090 By: William E. Davis, Vice President ClTY OFTEMECULA By: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk CONTRACT CA-7 R:\CIP~PROJECTS~PW01-01~CONTRACT ITEM 21 APPROVAL CiTY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OFFINANCE CITY MANAGER ~) TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services June 26, 2001 Acceptance of Median Landscape Bonds and Agreement along Meadows Parkway for Tract No. 24187: Newland Communities, LLC PREPARED BY: Barbara Smith, Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accept the agreement and surety bonds from Newland Communities, LLC, Inc. to the landscaped medians along Meadows Parkway in Paseo del Sol, Specific Plan 219, Tract 24187. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to the conditions of approval the developer is proposing to install and improve a landscaped median along Meadows Parkway south of Sunny Meadows along the westerly side of Tract 24187 To insure that the future landscaped median is constiucted to City standards, the developer is required to post security to improve these areas based upon the approved landscape/irrigation plans and the certified construction cost estimates for the improvements. As a result, Newiand Communities, LLC has entered into an agreement with the City and has provided surety bonds, issued by The American Insurance Company, as follows: Meadows Parkway Landscaped Medians Tract No. 24187: 1. TAlC Faithful Performance Bond No. 111 2748 2377 the amount of $36,622.30. 2. TAlC Labor and Materials Bond No. 111 2748 2377 in the amount of $18,311.15. 3. TAlC Warranty Bond No. 111 2748 2377-M in the amount of $3,662.23. Upon completion and acceptance of the improvements by the City Council, staff will recommend the appropriate release or reduction of the bonds. R:'~mithbXBonfls',StaflRep-Tract 24187 Med Bonds.doc 6t20/2001 FISCAL IMPACT: None. The cost of construction for the landscaped medians will be borne by the developer. A'I-I'ACHMENTS: Agreement/Bonds. R:~smithbkBontlsXStaffRep-Tract 24187 Med Bonds.doc 6/14/2001 Surety Bond Review The attached surety bonds (American Insurance Company) have been reviewed. (Newland Communities, LLC) Bond # 111 2748 2377 111 2748 2377-M tll 2748 2377 $18,311.15 $ 3,662.23 $36,622~30 [~The surety company is an admitted company in the State of California admitted company was verified at www. insurance.ca.gov/docs/fs/admitted.htm [--IThe surety company is not an admitted company in the State of California Surety bond reference is A.M. Best 2000 version 071400 (A++:FSC XV) Verified by: _. G~s~apagolos, Senior Management Analyst Approved As to Form: CITY OF TEMECULA PARKLAND / LANDSCAPE IMPRO~ AGREEMENT DATE OF AGI~g. gTvtF_NT: NAME OF SUBDIVIDER: NEWLAND COMMUNITIES, LLC (l~fcrred to as "SUBDIVIDER") NAME OF SUBDIVISION: Paseo del Sol (Referred to as "SUBDIVIDER") TRACT NO.: Tract 24187 Meadows Parkway Medians TENTATIVE MAP RF_fiOLUTION OF APPROVAL NO.: vesting Tentative Tract Map 24187 (Amendment No. 4) (Referred to as "Rcsoluton of Approval") approved 9/15/99 PARKLAND IMPROVEMENT PLANS NO.: Offsite Tract 24187 Meadows Parkway Medians (Referred to as "Resolution of Approval") ESTIMATED TOTAL COST OF PARKLAND IMPROVEMENTS: $ 36,622.30 COMPLETION DATE: 10/31/02 NAME OF SURETY AND BOND NO. FOR LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND: The American Insurance Company - Bond # 111 2748 2377 NAME OF SURETY AND BOND NO. FOR FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND: The American Insurance Company - Bond # 111 2748 2377 NAME OF SURETY AND BOND NO. FOR WARRANTY BOND: The American Insurance Company - Bond # 111 2748 2377-M This Agreement is made and entered into by and between the City of Temecula, California, a Municipal Corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as CITY, and the SUBDIVIDER. RECITALS A. SUBDIVIDER has presented to CITY for approval and recordation, a final subdivisi6n map of a proposed subdivision pursuant to provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California and the CITY ordinances and regulations relating to the ~ing, approval and recordation of subdivision maps. The Subdivision Map Act and the CITY ordinances and regulations relating to the f'fling, approval and recordation of subdivision maps are collectively referred to in this Agreement as the "Subdivision Laws." B. A tentative map of the SUBDMSION has been approved, subject to the Subdivision Laws and to the requirements and conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval. The Resolution of Approval is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and is incorporated into this Agreement by reference. C. SUBDIVIDER is required as a condition of the approval of the tentative map that the Parkland Improvement plans must be completed, in compliance with City standards, by the Completion Date. The Subdivision Laws establish as a condition precedent to the approval of a final map, that the SUBDIVIDER has entered into a secured Agreement with the CITY to complete the l~arkland/l andscape Improvement Plans within the Completion Date. D. In consideration of approval of a f'mal map for the SUBDIVISION by the City Council, SUBDIVIDER desires to enter into this Agreement, whereby promises to install and complete, at SUBDIVIDER'S own expense, all the parkland/Landscape Improvement work required by City in connection with proposed subdivision. Subdivider has secured this agreement ' by Parkland/landscaping Improvement Security required by the Subdivision Laws and approved by the City Attorney. The term "Parkland" includes landscape areas intended to be maintained by the Temecula Community Services District. E. Complete Parkland/landscape Improvement Plans for the construction, installation and completion of the Parkland Improvements have been prepared by SUBDIVIDER and approved'by the Director of Community Services. The Parkland Improvement Plans numbered as referenced previously in this Agreement axe on file in the Office of the Director of Community Services and are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. All references in this Agreement to the Parkland Improvement Plans shall include reference to any specifications for the Improvements as approved by the Director of Community Services. F. An estimate of the cost for construction of the parkland Improvements according to the Improvement Plans has been made and approved by the Dkector of Community Services. The estimatgd amount is stated on Page 1 of this Agreement. The basis for the estimate is attached as Exhibit "A" to this Agreement. G. The CITY has adopted standards for the construction and installation of Parkland/Landscape Improvements within the CITY. The parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans have been prepared in conformance with the CITY standards, (in effect on the date of approval of the Resolution of Approval). H. SUBDIVIDER recognizes that by approval of the f'mal map for SUBDIVISION, CITY has conferred substamial rights upon SUBDIVIDER, including the right to sell, lease, or finance lots within the SUBDMSION, and has taken the final act necessary to subdivide the property within the SUBDMSION. As a result, CITY will be damaged to the extent of the cost of installation of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements by SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform ' its ~bligations under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, SUBDIVIDER'S obligation to complete construction of Parkland/Landscape Improvements by the Completion Date. CITY shall be entitled to all remedies available to it pursuant to this Agreement and the Subdivision Laws in the event of a default by SUBDIVIDER. It is specifically recognized that the determination of whether a reversion to acreage or rescission of the SUBDMSION constitutes an adeqtmte remedy for default by the SUBDIVIDER shall be within the sole discretion of CITY. NOW, TI-PaP-.I~ORE, in consideration of the approval and recordation by the City Council of the fmal map of the SUBDMSIOlxl, SUBDIVIDER and CITY agree as follows; 1. SUBDIVIDER'S Obligations to Construct Parkland/Landscape Improvements. SUBDIVIDER Shall: a. Comply wkh all the requirements of the Resolution of Approval, and any anaendments thereto, and with the provisions of the Subdivision Laws. b. Complete by the time established in Section 20 of this Agreement and at SUBDIVIDER'S own expense, all the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Work required on the Tentative Map and Resolution of Approval in conformance with the Parkland Improvement Plans and the CITY standards: c. Furnish the necessary materials for completion of the Parkland Improvements in conformity with the Parkland Improvement Plans and CITY standards. d. Except for easements or other interests in real property to be dedicated to the homeowners association of the SUBDMSION, acquire and dedicate, or pay the cost of acquisition by CITY, of all rights-of-way, easements and other interests in real propen'y for construction or installation of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances for the SUBDIVIDER'S obligations with regard to acquisition by CITY of off-site fights-of-way, easements and other interests in real property shall be subject to a separate Agreement between SUBDIVIDER and CITY. Acquisition and Dedication of Easements or Rights-of-Way. If any of the Parkland/landscape Improvements and land development work contemplated by this Agreement are to be constructed or installed on land not owned by SUBDIVIDER, no construction or installation shall be commenced before: a. The offer of dedication to CITY or appropriate rights-of-way, easements or other interest in real property, and appropriate authorization from the proper~ owner to allow construction or installation of the Improvements or work, Or The dedication to, and acceptance by, the CITY of appropriate fights-of-way, easements or other interests in real property, and approved by the Department of Public Works, as determined by the Director of Community Services. c. The issuance by a court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to the State Eminent Domain Law of an order of possession. SUBDIVIDER shall comply in all respects with order of possession. Nothing in this Section 2 shall be construed as authorizing or granting an extension of time to SUBDIVIDER. 3. Security.. SUBDIVIDER shall at all times guarantee SUBDIVIDER'S performance · of ~his Agreement by furnishing to CITY, and mai~[~ining, good and sufficient security as required by the Subdivision Laws on forms approved by CITY for the purposes and in the amounts as follows: a. to assure faithful performance of this Agreement in regard to said improvements in and amount of 100% of the estimated cost of the Parkland/T ~qdscape Improvements; and b. to secure payment to any contractor, subcontractor, persons renting equipment, or furnishing labor materials for Parkland/T~ndscape Improvements required to be consu'ucted or in~alled pursuant to this Agreement in the additional amount of 50 % of the estimated cost of the Improvements; and c. to guarantee or warranty the work done pursuant to this Agreement for a period of one year following acceptance thereof by CITY against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished in the additional amount of 10 % of the estimated cost of the Parkland Improvements. The securities required by this Agreement shall be kept on file with the City Clerk. The terms of the security documents referenced on Page 1 of this Agreement are incorporated into this Agreement by this Reference. If any security is replaced by another approved security, the replacement shall be fded with the City Clerk and, upon filing, shall be deemed to have been made a part of and incorporated into this Agreement. Upon f'ding of a replacement security with the City Clerk, the former security may be released. 4. Alterations to Parkland Improvement Plans. a. Any changes, alterations or additions to the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications or to the improvements, not exceeding 10% of the original estimated cost ff the improvement, which are mutually agreed upon by the CITY and SUBDIVIDER, shall not relieve the improvement security given for faithful performance of this Agreement. In the event such changes, alterations, or additions exceed 10% of the original estimated cost of the improvement, SUBDIVIDER shall provide improvement security for faithful performance as required by Paragraph 3 of this Agreement for 100 % of the total estimated cost of the improvement as changed, altered, or amended, minus any completed partial releases allowed by Paragraph 6 of this Agreement. b. The SUBDIVIDER shall construct the Parkland Improvements in accordance with the CITY Standards in effect at the time of adoption of the Resolution of Approval. CITY reserves the fight to modify the standards applicable to the SUBDMSION and this Agreement, when necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare or comply with applicable State or federal law or CITY zoning ordinances. If SUBDIVIDER requests and is granted an extension of time for completion of the improvements, CITY may apply the standards in effect at the time of the extension. 5. Inspection and Maintenance Period. a. SUBDIVIDER shall obtain City inspection of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements in accordance with the City standards in effect at the time of adoption of the Resolution of Approval. SUBDIXrlDER shall at all times maintain proper facilities and safe access for inspection of the Parkland Improvements by CITY inspectors and to the shops wherein any work is in preparation. Upon completion of the work the SUBDIVIDER may request a final inspection by the Director of Community Services, or the Director of Community ' Service's authorized representative. If the Director of Community Services, or the designated representative, determine that the work has been completed in accordance with this Agreement, then the Director of Community Services shall certify the completion of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements to the Board of Directors. b. SUBDIVIDI~R shall continue to maintain the Parkland/Landscape Improvements for ninety (90) days after they have been certified completed. No improvements shall be finally accepted unless the maintenance period has expired, and all aspects of the work have been inspected and determined to have been completed in accordance with the Parkland/landscape Improvement Plans and CTrY standards. certification. SUBDIVIDER shall bear all costs of inspection and Subject to approval by the Board of Directors of the Community Services District of the CITY, the securities required by this Agreement shall be released as follows: Security given for faithful performance of any act, obligation, work or Agzeement shall be released upon the expiration of the maintenance period and the t~mal completion and acceptance of the act or work, subject to the provisions of subsection (b) hereof. b. The Director of Community Services may release a portion of the security given for faithful performance of improvement work as the Parkland Improvement progresses upon application therefore by the SUBDIVIDER; provided, however, that no such release shall be for an amount less that 25 % of the total Parkland Improvement Security given for faithful performance of the improvement work and that the security shall not be reduced to an amount less than 50 % of the total l~ndscape/Parkland Improvement Security given for faithful performance until expiration of the maintenance period and final completion and acceptance of the improvement work. ~ no event shall the Director of Community Services authorize a release of the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Security which would reduce such security to an amount below that required to guarantee the completion of the improvement work and any other obligation imposed by this Agreement. c. Security given to secure payment to the contractor, his or her subcontractors and to persons furnishing labor, materials or equipment shall, six months after the completion and acceptance of the work, be reduced to an amount equal to the total claimed by all claimants for whom lien have been fred and of which notice has been given to the legislative body, plus an amount reasonably determined by the Director of Community Services to be required to assure the performance of any other obligations secured by the Security. The balance of the security shall be released upon the settlement of all claims and obligations for which the security was given. d. No security given for the guarantee or warranty of work shall be released until the expiration of the warranty period and until any claims filed during the warranty period have been settled. As provided in paragraph 10, the warranty period shall not commence until final acceptance of all work and improvements by the City Council. e. The CITY may retain from any security released, and amount sufficient to cover costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 7. In_Jury to Public Improvements. Public Property. or Public Utilities Facilities. SUBDIVIDER shall replace or have replaced, or repair or have repaired, as the case may be, all public improvements, public utilities facilities and surveying or subdivision monuments which are destroyed or damaged or destroyed by reason of any work done under this Agreement. SUBDIVIDER shall bear the entire cost of replacment or repairs of any and all public property on public utility property damaged or destroyed by reason of any work done. Under this agreement w. hether such property is owned by the United States or any agency thereof, or the State of California, or any agency or political subdivision thereof, or by the CITY or any public or private utility corporation or by any combination or such owners. Any repair or replacement shall be to the satisfaction, and subject to the approval, of the City Engineer. 8. Permits. SUBDIVIDER shall, at SUBDIVIDER"S expense, obtain all necessary permits and licenses for the construction and installation of the improvements, give all necessary notices and pay all fees and taxes required by law. 9. Default of SUBDIVIDER. a. Default of SUBDIVIDER shall include, but not be limited to, SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely commence construction pursuant to this Agreement; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely complete construction of the File: R:~B~CO NTRACTS~[N DSCAFE .AG R 10 Parkland/Landscape Improvements; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to timely cure any defect in the Parkland/Landscape Improvements; SUBDIVIDER'S failure to perform substantial construction work for a period of 20 calendar days after commencement of the work; SUBDIVIDHR'S insolvency, appointment of a receiver, or the filing of any petition in bankruptcy either voluntary or involuntary which SUBDIVIDER fails to discharge within thirty (30) days; the commencement of a foreclosure action against the SUBDMSION or a portion thereof, or any conveyance in lieu or in avoidance of foreclosure; or SUBDIVIDER's failure to perform any other obligation under this Agreement. b. The CITY reserves to itself all remedies available to it at law or in equity for breach of SUBDIVIDER's obligations under this Agreement. The CITY shall have the right, subject to this section, to draw upon or utilize the appropriate security to mitigate CITY damages in event of default by SUBDMDER. The fight of CITY to draw upon or utilize the security is additional to and not in lieu of any other remedy available to CITY. It is specificaJly recognized that the estimated costs and security amounts may not reflect the actual cost of construction or installation of Parkland/Landscape Improvements and, therefore, CrTY damages for SUBDIVIDER'S default shall be measured by the cost of completing the required improvements. The sums provided by the improvement security may be used by CITY for the completion of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements in accordance with the Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans and specifications contained herein. In the event of SUBDIV1DER'S default under this Agreement, SUBDIVIDER authorizes CITY to perform such obligation twenty days after mailing written notice of default to SUBDIVIDI~R and to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety, and agrees to pay the entire cost of such performance by CITY. CITY may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion, by contract or by any other method CTIT may deem advisable, for the account and at the expense of SUBDIVIDER, and SUBDIVIDER'S Surety shall be liable to CITY for any excess cost or damages occasioned CITY thereby; and, in such event, CITY, without liability for so doing, may take possession of, and utilize in completing the work, such materials, appliances, plant and other property belonging to SUBDIVIDER as may be on the site of the work and necessary for performance of the work. c. Failure of SUBDIVIDER to comply with the terms of this Agreement shall constitute consent to the f'ffing by CITY of a notice of violation against all the lots in the SUBDIVISION, or to rescind the approval or otherwise revert the SUBDIVISION to acreage. The remedy provided by this Subsection C is in addition to and not in lieu of other remedies available to CITY. SUBDIVIDER agrees that the choice of remedy or remedies for SUBDIVIDER'S breach shall be in the discretion of CITY. d. In the event that SUBDIVIDER fails to perform any obligation hereunder, SUBDIVIDER agrees to pay all costs and expenses incurred by CITY in securing performance of such obligations, including costs of suit and reasonable attorney' s fees. e. The failure of CITY to take an enforcement action with respect to a default, or to declare a breach, shall not be construexi as a waiver of that default or breach or any subsequent default or breach of SUBDIVIDER. 10. ~Cl~ll~. SUBDIVIDER shall guarantee or warranty the work done pursuant to this Agreement for a period of one year after expiration of the maintenance period and final acceptance by the City Council of the work and improvements against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished. Where Parkland/Landscape Improvements are to be constructed in phases or sections, the one year warranty period shall commence after City acceptance of the last completed improvement. If within the warranty period any work or improvement or part of any work or improvement done, furnished, instal/ed, constructed or caused to be done, furnished, installed or constructed by SUBDIVIDER fails to fulfill any of the ~luirements of thi~ Agreement or the P~rkland/landseape/mprovement Plans and specifications referred to herein, SUBDIVIDER shall without delay and without any cost to CITY, repair or replace or ~construct any defective or otherwise unsatisfactory part or parts of the work or structure. Should SUBDIVIDER fail to act promptly or in accordance with this requirement, SUBDIVIDER hereby authorizes CITY, at CITY option, to perform the work twenty days after mailing written notice of default to SUBDIVIDER and to SUBDMDER's Surety and agrees to pay the cost of such work by CITY. Should CITY determine that an urgency requires repairs or replacements to be made before SUBDIVIDER can be notified, CITY may, in its sole discretion, make the necessary repairs or replacements or perform the necessary work and SUBDIVIDER shall pay to CITY the cost of such repairs. il. SUBDIVIDER Not Agent of C/Ty. Neither SUBDIVIDER nor any of SUBDIVIDER'S agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of CITY in connection with the performance of SUBDIVIDER'S obligations under this Agreement. 12. 111~. Until such time as the Pafidantl/l_,'lndscape Improvements are accepted by CITY, SUBDIVIDER shall be responsible for and bear the risk of loss to any of the improvements constructed or installed. CITY shall not, nor shall any officer or employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause, happening or occurring to the work or improvements specified in this Agreement prior to the completion and acceptance of the work or improvements. All such risks shall be the responsibility of and are hereby assumed by SUBDIVIDER. 13. Other Agreements. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall preclude CITY from expending monies pursuant to agreements concurrently or previously executed between the parties, or from entering into agreement with other subdividers for the apportionment of costs of water and sewer maln.~, or other improvements, pursuant to the provisions of the CITY ordinances providing therefore, nor shall anything in this Agreement commit CITY to any such apportionm.ent. 14. SUBDIVIDER'S Obligation to Warn Public During Constructio~l. Until final acceptance of the Parkland Improvements, SUBDIVIDER shall give good and adequate warning to the public of each and every dangerous condition existent in said improvements, and will take all reasonable actions to protect the public from such dangerous condition. 15. Vesting of Ownership. Upon acceptance of work on behalf of CITY and recordation of the Notice of Completion, ownership of the improvements constructed pursuant to this Agreement shall vest in CITY. 16. Final Acceptance of Work. Acceptance of the work on behalf of CITY shall be made by the City Council upon recommendation of the Director of Community Services after f'mai completion and inspection of all Parkland/Landscape Improvements. The Board of Directors shall ' act upon the Director of Community Services reCOmmendations within thirty (30) days from the date the Din~tor of Community Services certifies that the work has finally completed, as provided in Paragraph 5. Such acceptance shall not constitute a waiver of defects by CITY. 17. Indemnity/Hold Harmless. CITY or any officer or employee thereof shall not be liable fo~ any injury to persons or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions of SUBDIVIDER, its agents or employees in the performance of this Agreement. SUBDIVIDER further agrees to protect and hold harmless CITY, its officials and employees from any and all clakns, demands, muses of action, liability or loss of any sort, because of, or arising out of, acts or omissions or SUBDIVIDER, its agents or employees in the performance of this Agreement, including all claims, demands, causes of action, liability, or loss because of, or arising out of, in whole or in part, the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements. This indemnificafi.'on and Agreement to hold harmless shall extend to injuries to persons and damages or taking of property resulting from the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements as provided herein, and in addition, to adjacent property owners as a consequence of the diversion of waters from the design or construction of public drainage systems, streets and other public improvements. Acceptance of any of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements shall not constitute any assumption by the CITY of any responsibility for any damage or taking covered by this paragraph. CITY shall not be responsible for the design or construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements pursuant to the approved Parkland/Landscape Improvement Plans, regardless of any negligent action or inaction taken by the CITY ia approving the plans, unless the palflcular improvement design was specifically required by CITY over written objection by SUBDIVIDER submitted to the Director of Community Services before approval of the · particular improvement design, which objection indicated that the particular improvement design was dangerous or defective and suggested an alternative safe and feasible design. After acceptance of the Parkland/l. andscape Improvements, the SUBDIVIDER shall remain obligated to eliminate any defect in design or dangerous condition caused by the design or construction defect, however, SUBDIVIDER shall not be responsible for murine maintenance. Provisions of this paragraph shall remain m full force and effect for ten years following the acceptance by the CITY of Parkland/Landscape Improvements. It is the intent of this section that SUBDIVIDER shall be responsible for all liability for design and construction of the Parkland/Landscape Improvements installed or work done pursuant to this Agreement and that CITY shall not be liable for any negligence, nonfeasance, misfeasance or malfeasance in approving, reviewing, checking, or correcting any plans or specifications or in approving, reviewing or inspecting any work or construction. The improvement security shall not be required to cover the provision of this paragraph.. 18. Sale or DL.mosifion of SUBDIVISION. Sale or other disposition of this property will not relieve SUBDIVIDER from the obligations set forth herein. If SUBDIVIDER sells the property or any portion of the property within the SUBDMSION to any other person, the SUBDIVIDER may request a novation of this Agreement and a substitution of security. Upon approval of the novation and substitution of securities, the SUBDIVIDER may request a release or reduction of the securities required by this Agreement. Nothing in the novation shall relieve the SUBDIVIDER of the obligations under Paragraph 17 for the work or improvement done by SUBDIVIDER. 19. 20. Time of the E~sen¢¢ Time is of the essence of this Agreement. Time for Completion of Work Extensions. SUBDIVIDER shall complete ' con~tmction of the improvements required by this Agreement no later than · In the event good cause exists as determined by the City Engineer, and if otherwise permitted under the tentative map condition, the time for completion of the improvements hereunder may be extended. The extension shall be made by writing executed by the Director of Community Services. Any such extension may be granted without notice to SUBDIVIDER'S Surety and shall not affec~ the validity of this Agreement or release *.he Surety or Sureties on any security given for this Agreement. The Director of Community Services shall be the sole and fmal judge as to whether or not good cause has been shown to entitle SUBDIVIDER to an extension. Delay, other than delay in the commencement of work, resulting from an act of CITY, or by an act of God, which SUBDIVIDER could not have reasonably foreseen, or by storm or inclement weather which prevents the conducting of work, or by strikes, boycotts, similar actions by employees or labor organizations, which prevent the conducting or work, and which were not caused by or contributed_to by SUBDIVIDER, shall constitute good cause for an extension of time for completion. As a condition of such extension, the Director of Community Services may require SUBDIVIDER to furnish new security guaranteeing performance of this Agreement as extended in an increased mount as necessary to compensate for any increase in construction costs as determined by the Director of Community Services. 21. ~i~tt.~. Performance by SUBDIVIDER of this Agreement shall not be construed to vest SUBDIVIDER'S rights with respect to any change in any change in any zoning or building law or ordinance. 22. Notic~,S. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by mail, postage prepaid and addressed as provided in this Section. Notice shall be effective on the date it is delivered in person, or, if mailed, on the date of deposit in the United States Mail. Notices shall be addressed as follows unless a written change of address is l'fled with the City: Notice to CITY: City Clerk City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Notice to SUBDIVIDER: Newland Communities, LLC James M. Delhamer 9404 Genesee Avenue, Suite 230 La Jolla, CA 92037 23. ~Y.e, tlhil~. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the mutual consent of the parties. 24. .Calgli0~. The captions of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall not define, explain, modify, limit, exemplify, or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of any provisions of this Agreement. 25. Litigation or Arbitmtioll. In the event that suit or arbitration is brought to enforce the terms of this contract, the prevailing party shall be entitled to litigation costs and reasonable attorney's fees. 26. into the terms of this agreement. :27. ~. Incorporation of Reeitsl.~. The recJtsi~ to this agreement axe hereby incorporated This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter. All modifications, amendments, or waivers of the terms of thi~ Agreement must be in writing and signed by the appropriate representative of the parties. In the ca~e of the CITY, the appropriate party shall be the City Manager. IN WITN~S WI:tlAREOF, this Agreement ia executed by CITY, by and through its Mayor. SUBDIVIDHR Newland Communities, LLC a Delaware limited liability company By: Title: ' ~c,~,c~,~u,~ A ~:~r Name: ~: SR V.P. & TREAS~ER CITY OF TEMECULA y~rnercher°, Mayor (Proper Notari?nfion of SUBDIVIDER'S signature is required and shall be attached) Name: William Hughes City Engineer Director of Community Services APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: ~ Peter Thorsen City Attorney CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of i On ~ 5t '~--~\ , before me, Date personally appeared SS. Name(s) of Slgne~(s) C~..personally known to me [] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that t~/ohe/they executed the same in t'~'s~e r/t heir authorized capacity(les), and that by hbO,er/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Do(,.~j~t (~F' Title or Type of Document: Document Date: ~ ~;~-~'~\~oc~ '~ Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: '~. Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: [] Individual · '~.~rporate Officer--Title(s): ~ '~ ~J~ / ~'~ ~J [] Partner -- [] Limited [] General [] Attorney in Fact [] Trustee [] Guardian or Conservator [] Other: SignerlsRepresenting: J~J~ ~l(}'~m~lh"~ Top of lhurnb here (Attach the basis for the estimate of the cost of improvements.) PASEO DEL SOL Estimated Landscape Costs Tra~t 24187 Meadows Parkway Median Islands Ap~110, 2001 Streetscape Harriscalm Items QUANITY UNIT UNIT COST AMOUNT Hantscape Material C~lored Cencm~e MaJnt Strip Colmed, S~amped Concrete Nosing 2,738 SF $5.00 4,767 SF $7.50 Subtotal Hardscape Items $13,690.00 $35,752.50 Landscape Green Rne~nish Grade & Prep 8,167 SF $0.15 $I,225.05 Aute Irfig~on Groun0co~er Mulch (fiat) Shrubs Rats 5 Ga]. 24' BOX 8,167 SF 8,167 SF $1.50 $12A50.50 $0.25 ........ $2,o41-.7s Subtotal $15,51730 212 EA 1,231 EA $10.50 $2,226.00 $9.00 $11,079.00 Subtotal $1 39 EA $200.00 $7,800.00 Subtotal $7,600.00 Subtotal Landscape Items $38,622.3o Project Grand Total $86064.80 87 TCSD MEDIAN CST EST 3/26 I 5/8~1 PA~,F__..O DP__...,L .~OL F-,E"r" .I'.IA~P~ 1~0 JEC:T ~.~ Bond #111 2748 2377 Premit~u: $146.00 PARIS/LANDSCAPE FAITI~ PERFO~ BOND ~, the City of Temecula, Stol: ofC, alifomia, and ~s~'I~vn COI, i~,llm~TT~.S, LLC (hereinafter desi~nsted as '~incipai") have c~tered into an Al~re~ment whereby Principal a~rces to install and complelz certain Park]and Improvem~ts, which said Al~r~m~n% dat~l July 1.4,. 1998 ~ , and id~lified as Pmjec~ Tract 24187 Meadows ?afl.ay Medians , is hereby referred to and re.d- a part hcrcoi~ and V~, Principal is required under the terms of the Al~'emant to fthmish a bond for ~ ~.~'~ Pezforo]a]lce of ~1.~ A~II; '~e Amexicari and funfly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, in the penal stun of $ 36,622.30 , lawful money of the Uni~d States, for the pal/merit of such sum well and truly to bc made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and adminiat~tors, jointly and sevcrally. The'oandition of th_is oblisation is such that the obligation shall become null and void if the above-bounded Principal, his or its heirs, cxecut~s, administrators, stlccessors, or assi~l.s, shall in all t},i.~ stand ~o, abicle by, well and truly keep, and perform the covenants, co~4itions, and provisions in the Al~reement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept and performed au the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects accordin$ to his or their uu¢ intant and m~;-~, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Tcmccula, its officers, al~ents, and employccs, as r. herein stipulated; otherwise, this obliyation sh~l be and remain ~n full force and ~ffeet. As a pan of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to thc face amounI specified therefor, there shall bc include~l costs and reasonable expenses and fees, includin~ reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by Ci~ in successfully anforcin~ such obligation, all rn be taxed as costs and included in any jud~m~:rcnd~n~d. The sur~ hereby stipulams and al~rees that no chant~e, extension of ti_m_ ~, alteration or addition ~o the t~m~s of'thc Al~rc~rnant or to the work to bc pcrformcd thereunder or rl~ specifications accompanyin~ the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it docs hereby waive nofioe of any such ch~.Ee, extension of time. alteration or addition to ~e terms oldie AIFeement or th~ work or w thc spccificafions. IN WITNESS WI'IBR~OI~, this instnunen~ bss been duly cxecumd by th~ Principal and Stlrgt~ above l~ned, on Flay 14 , 20. 0~ SURETY A~)RNEY-IN-FACT PRINCIPAL a Delaware limited liabili:2 c~mpamy 'VICE CHAIRMAN & PRESIDENT (Tm.a) L~RA C. WE NDIN~/ SR. V.P. & TREASi:JREE (Tm.a) APPROVED AS TO FORM: City A~cmey STATE OF Califcrnia COUNTY OF OrEnge On May 14, 2001 PERSONALLY APPEARED · before me, SS. $~n~n~ Mnnroo: Nnt~ry P~hli~ personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowl- edged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/ her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her[ their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal This areJa for Official Notarial Seal OPTIONAL 'Fnough the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form, CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER [] INDIVIDUAL [] CORPORATE OFFICER 'nTLE(S) [] PARTNER(S) [] LIMITED [] GENERAL [] A'VFORNEY-IN-FACT [] TRUSTEE(S) [] GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR [] OTHER: DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT NUMBER OF PAGES DATE OF DOCUMENT SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAM8 OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(lES) SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE ID'081 ~a~v. 6/9~. ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of On ~ before me, a Name and Title of Officer (e.g., "Jane Cee, NO~ery Public'} personally appeared ~ lC ~ ~ LAIII~, J Name(s) o[ Signer(s) r'~rsonally known to me [] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that hefsf~/they executed the same in t,~,e~r/their authorized capacity(les), and that by h:,;/hor/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Sigr~tare of No[a~ Public OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law. it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of~ ~ ~ _~j~.~ ~ _ ~ ~t. jthis form to another docu~nt. Description of Attached Document . Document Date: ~Jq~ ( Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: J...- J~ (.A..' [] Individual ~:~..orporate Officer -- Title(s): [] Partner-- [] Limited [] General [] Attorney in Fact [] Trustee [] Guardian or Conservator [] Other: Signer Is Representing: ~~ ~')"~["~q'" '"~' ~ ~ ' (- Top of thumb here LC... Bond #111 2748 2377 Premium included in Perf bond PARKLAND/LANDSCAPE LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND WI--I~I~T:~, thc City of Tc~nccu~ State of California, and NEWLAI~ COI~r~TTIES. LLC A~reement whereby Principal afp~s to inslall and complete cerrsin Parklsn,{ Improvements, which said Al~rccman% da~ed July 14. 1998 ,/1~ alLd idellti_q~l as Tract ~-4187 Project Meadows Park~ray Madians ,ishe~byr~for~d~oandm-d_-apaflher~o~and WHERF. AS, under the ~rm of said A~-~n~3% Principal is required hefmre antoring upon thc pcrf~___.-~e of ~he work, to file a ~ood and suffi~i~lt payrmm~ bend with the City of Tcmecula, to secure the claims to which r~f~r~ce is mad~ in Title 15 (¢om~n~ng with 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Cede of the Sta~c of California; and ~.e aerican N. OW, ~OP.~, we the prillcipal and Iusurance Company as Sllrety, are held and firmly bound unto ~he City of Tcmcoula, California, and all contractors, subconuuctors, laborers, nmteriaim~ other persons craployed in lhe performance of the afores.id Agreement and rcferred to in Title 15 of thc Civil Code, in the penal sum of $ ~. 8,311.1 ~ lawful money of the Unir~l Sta~cs, for mar~rials furnished or labor dmreon of any kind, or for amounts duc under thc Uncmploymcnt lnmuance Act with rcspcet to such work or labor, llmt Surety will pay the:same in an amount not cxceedin§ the amount set forth. As a part of the oblil~alion secured hereby and in addition ~o thc face amount specified therefor, there shall be iuclulicd costs and reasonable expenses and fees, incttidin~ reaann~ble attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully cnforcin§ such obli§atlon, all to be taxed as costs and included in any.ied~..raan~ randered. k is hereby expressly slipulated and a~l, eed .that ~ bond shall insure to ~e benefn of any and all pc~on% companies and corporalions entitled to file claims under Title 15 -2- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, ~his instmm~t has b~:n dui), ~umd by the Prim:ipal and Sur~-'zl, abov~pam~l, on Mal, ~4 ,20 0~ (S,m) (S:al) SUlU~TY ATI~RNEY-IN-FAC~ PRINCIPAL I~iWLAND COMMUNITIES, LLC, a Delaware limt:~d liabtlitF company By:. ~O~A K. M~SEES V~E CHAI~AN & PR~I~ ~O. WENDI~ [ / . S~ V.P. & ~EAS~E~ (Name) (~ifle) APPROVI~D AS TO FORM: · ~ALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of personally appeared Name(s) o~ Sigr~r(s) ~LEersonaliy known to me [] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in h+sCher/their authorized capacity(les), and that by hisCn~r/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature of Notan~ Public OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another dqcument. ' Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: ~ ~'/dt Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: L.,,~._~Y"'~ ,.Individual Corporate Officer -- Title(s): Partner--[] Limited [] General [] Attorney in Fact [] Trustee [] Guardian or Conservator [] Other: Top of thumb here STATE OF California COUNTY OF Orange On__ ~ay 1,4, 2001 PERSONALLY APPEARED , before me, SS. Notar_v P.hlim personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowl- edged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/ her/their authorized capacity(les), and that by his/her~ their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Ia/IllNESS my hand and official seal. This at, for Official Notarial Seal OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, R may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER [] INDIVIDUAL [] CORPORATE OFFICER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT 'n'n.E($) [] PARTNER(S) [] LIMITED [] GENERAL [] AI-rORNEY-IN-FACT [] TRUSTEE(S) [] GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR [] OTHER: TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT NUMBER OF PAGES DATE OF DOCUMENT SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME OF PERSON(S) OR Eh"flTY(rE$) SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FIREMAN'S Ko'ND INSURANCE COMPANY NATIONAl, SURETY CORP011ATION ASSOCIATED INDEMiVffY CORPORATION TIlE AMEEICAN INSUEANCE COMPANY A~MERICAN AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPAIkn/ GENEIIAL POWER OF ATI'0RNEY KNOW AIL MEN BY THESE pRESENTS: That FIREMAN'S blJlqD INSURANCE 'COMPANY, a Californla corporation, NATIONAL Nebraska, ASSOCIATi6D INDEMNITY COILk'UIe, JMIU.% a ~..anrorara ~vrlr~auou ................ '' COMPANY, a Missouri c.6rporation, (herein collectively called "the Compaules") does each hereby appoint Janina Monroe, Victoria M. Campbell or Thomas G. Mc Call of Irvine, CA their m~e and lawful Attomey(s)-in-Fact, with full power of authority hereby confetied in their name, place and stead, to execute, seal, acknowledge and deliver any and all bonds, undertakings, recognizances or other wrico obligations in the nature thereof ............ Companies and duly attested by the Compames Secretary, eercoy mt~ang mm connmamg all ttmt me sma.q, vgmeyLs)-m tact may uo m m= pmu~ 'This power of attorney is granted under and by the authority of Article VII of the By-laws of each of the Companies which provisions are now in full force and effect. This power of atWrney is signed and ~ealed under the authority of the following Resolution adopted by the Board of Directors of each of thc Companies at a meeting duly called and held, or by written consent, on the 19th day of March, 1995, and said Resolution ha~ not been ameuded or repealed: ~SOLVF_.D, that the signature of any Vice-President. Assis~mt Secretary, and Resident Assistant Seerctary of the Companies, and the seal of the Compan/es may be afl. ed or printed on any power of attorney, on any revocation of any power of at~rney, or on any certificate relating thereto, by facsimile, and any power of attorney, any revocation of any power of aRorney, or certificate bearing such facsimile signature or facsimile seal shall be valid and binding upon the Companies." IN WITNESS ~OF, thc Companies have caeaed these present~ to be signed by their Vice-President, and their corporate seah to be hereunto. affixed this 1]. dayof ~apt- ~rnh~'r' , 2nOt). STATE OF CALIMORNIA ~ SS. COUNTY oF ~ J FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY NATIONAL SURETY CORPORATION TIiE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY ^gs co o oN c m o o INs coMP Vice-Presidenl On this 11 day of Se temb , 2000, before me personally came Donn R. Kolbeck to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say: that he is a Vice-President of each company, described in and which executed the above instrument; that he knows the seals of the said Companies; that the seals affixed to the said instrument are such company seals; that they were so affixed by order of the Board of Directors of said companies and that he signed his name thereto by ~ike order. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, t have hereunto set rny hand and affixed rny official seal, the day and year herein first above written. STATE OF CALIFO~ ~. SS. COUNTY OF MARIN ~.~..~ Comm~ion # 1163726 ~ ~ Notary Public - California I, the undersigned, Resident Assistant Secretary of each company, DO HEREBY. CERrlI~'f that the foregoing and attached pOWER OF. ATTORNEY remains in full force and has not been revoked; and furthermore that Article VII of the BY-hWS of each company, and the Resoluuon of the Board of Dh'ectors; set forth in the Power of Attorney, are now in force. Signed and sealed at the County of Matin. Dated the 'l 4~:h day of l~"-'-"~ May Rc~d ~111 2748 2377-M Premium included in Perf bond PARKLAND~SCAPE WARRANTY BOND WHERBA$, thc City of Tcmccul~, State of Califomi~ (hereinafter desi~ed as "City"), ~ NEWLAND C0~L~ITIES, LLC (h~_,!._t%or d~signatod as "Principal") have ~mrercd into aa Agreement wharcby Principal agrees ~o install aad complct~ c~mia &signated Parkland Improvements, which said A~em~t, dated July 14, 1998 /w~ , ~nd Tract 24187 identified as Proj¢c~ Meadows Parkway Medians , is hereby referred to and ma~ a p~n hcr:o2 aad WHEREAS, Principal is required ~o warranty th~ work dune under th~ terms of Agreement for a p~iod of o~e (1) y~ar following acceptance thereof by City agsinst any defc~ive work or labor done or d~fectiv~ materials furnished, in the amouni often percent (10%) ofth~ e~i.'msted co~t of tim improvements; Tha American NOW. TH~OI~, v~ the Principal ~ Insurance Company es are held and firmly bound unto th~ City of Tem~ula, California, in the penal sum of $ 3. 662.23 , lawful mun~y of the United -~tams, for the payment of such sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our h~irs, successom, executors and administrators, jointly and severally, The condition of this obligmion is such that the obligation shall become null void if rl~ above-bounded Principal, his or im heL-s, executors, adminisirators, successors, or assigns shall in all things stand te, abide by, well and Iruly keep, and perform the covenants, conditions, and provisions in ~he A~r~ement s_n_d aay altsra*ion thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, t,~ be k~ ~ performed a~ tim thn~ and in the manner th~-4n specified, and in all respects according to his or thair ~ intant and m~.i.g, ~na shall inderanify and save harmless the City of Temeoula, ks offices, a~ts, and employees, as therein stipulated; otherwise, ,hl. obligation shall be and rm~in in ~ forco and As a part o~ fl~e obligation secured hcr~oy and ~ ~ to ~ ~c ~o~ ~ccificd ~ef~, ~ ~ be ~cl~ c~ ~ ~1~ ~cs ~ f~s, ~clud~ ~s~le ~ey's fe~, ~ ~ C~ ~ ~ccess~ly ~g ~ obli~do~ ~ ~ be ~ ~ c~ ~d ~l~cd ~ ~yj~t ~ ~ ~ ~by sg~s ~d a~s ~ no c~gc, ~i~ of ~c, ~ ~ does ~by w~ve nogoc o~ ~y ~ch ~, ~ion of ~ ~ or ~fi~ ~o ~e ~ o~ ~ ~ m.~ w~k ~ m ~ IN WITNESS WH~'REOF, this ~! has b~n duly ex=cut=d by ~ Principal and Sm~ty ~bov¢ named, cn , May ~ 4 ,20 01 ATTORNEY- IN-FACT Crid ) PRINCTPAL NEWLAND COMMUNITIES, LLC, a Delaware lim/ted liability company By: ~1 LaD0k~ K. ¥ONGEE$ WCE CHAIRMAN & PRESIDENT (Name) LAURA C. WENOING SR. V.P. & TREASURER (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California ) County of 6NIDI~O ~ .~ ss. On .~,~::~ ~)~ ~¢'5~, befo re m e, personally appeared Name(s) of Signer(s) C~rsonally known to me [] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) ~/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that helshe/they executed the same in t',i=~;~ dt heir authorized capacity(les), and that by t'6~fl~er/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature of Nota~ Public OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: '~)(~r~,--~''',t'''~ [ t(~-~ k,~'C-bt~ ~ Document Date: ~' /q"~ ~ Number of Pages: '~"~,, Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(les) Cl~.hby Si![~,~.~ Signer's Name: [] Individual q~orporate Officer -- Title(s): [] Partner-- [] Limited [] General [] Attorney in Fact [] Trustee [] Guardian or Conservator [] Other: Signer Is Representing: )'~ ~),~ ~'~O~I'Y%t~L ~ ~' ~ ~ Top of thumb here STATE OF Cm!ifernia COUNTY OF Orange On__May 14~ 2001 PERSONALLY APPEARED SS. personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowl- edged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/ her/their authorized capacity(les), and that by his/her~ their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. This are~ for Official Notarial Seal OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER [] INDIVIDUAL [] CORPORATE OFFICER TITLE(S) [] PARTNER(S) [] LIMITED [] GENERAL [] ATI'ORNEY-IN-FACT [] TRUSTEE(S) [] GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR [] OTHER: DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT NUMBER OF PAGES DATE OF DOCUMENT SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(lES) SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE tD-0S~ ~e~. ~/s4 ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FIREMAN~ FUND INSURANCE COMPANY ASSOCIATED INDEHNI'rY CORPO1LA. TION NATIONAL SURETY CORPORATION /t~MERICAN AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY ~ AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY GENERAL POWER OF ATI'ORNEY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE pRESENTS: That FlYd~MAN*S FUND INSURANCE 'COMPANY, a California corporation, NATIONAL SURETY CORPORATION, an Illinois corporation, THE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, a New Jersey corporation rcdomesticated in Nebraska, ASSOCIATED INDEMNITY CORPORATION, a Caiiforn~a corporation, and AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE ....... the Corn an~es' docs each hereby appoint J~nina ~onr¢ e ~ COMPANY, a M~ssoun con, oration, (hereto collccnvely called p ) Victeri~ M. ¢~mpbell o~ Thomas G. Mc ¢M1 of ~rvine~ CA their true and lawful Attomey(s)-in-Fact, with full power of authority hereby confe~ecl in their name, place and stead, to execute, seal, acknowledge and deliver any and all bonds, undertakings, ~e~ognizances or other wri~u obligations in the unturc thcrnof ............ and to bind the Compares thereby as fully and to the same extent az ff such bonds we~ rogued by the Pres~denk sealed w~th the co.orate seals of the Companies and duly attested by the Companies' Secretary, h~mby'rafifying and confirms§ all that the said AWcrmey(s)-in-Fact may do in the p~mizes. 'This powes of attorney is granted under and by the authority of Article VII of the By-laws of each of the Companies which provisions are now in full forc~ and effect. · wet of attorne is signeA and ~ealcd andes the authority of the following Resolution adopted by the Board of Directors of each of the ~i~mppoa~'es ate me~fi~g duly ealleA and held, or by writ*~n consent, on the 19th day of March, 1995, and said Resolution haz not been amended or repealed: and the seal of the Companies may b~ afiSxed or printetl on any power oI attorney, on any revt~auuu o, ~u~, t..o.,~, ,~. ~,,.,~, s, · ' ereto b facsimile, and any power of attorney, any revocation of any power of attorney, or or on any cem~cate relanng, th. .' Y · · · · ' anies.' certificate beanng such facmaule mgnature or facsimile seal shall be valid and bmdrng upon the Comp IN WITNESS WI-IEP, EOF, the Companies have canseA these presents to be signed by their Vice-President, and their corporate seals to be hereunto affixed this 11 dayof g~p~omhor , 9{1~0 . FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY NATIONAL SURETY CORPORATION ~ic~-Pr~id~nt 2 0 0 0, bofore me personally c~me Dona. R. Kolbeck Outhis 11 dayof Se ~ember _ , wn who be n b me duly sworn d d depose and say: that he is a Vice-President of each company, described in ana wmcn exccute~ to me kno , , g Y . , ~ .,. .., o .....~o~- th.~ the s~a s affixed to the said instrument are such company seals; that the above instrument that he knows me sea~s m mc sm~ ,.,~,~v,~,,-o, .... they wexc so affix~ by order of the Board of Directors of said companies and that he signed his name thereto by like order. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, t have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year herein first above written. '~ ~ Notary Publlc- Cafff~la ~ OF J = .. %%,, _._ TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT APRIL 24, 200'1 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 8:14 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. President Stone presiding. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 5 DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, and Stone ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None Also present were General Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENTCALENDAR I Fourth of July Fireworks Presentation RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Award a contract to Pyro Spectaculars for the preparation and display of the 2001 and 2002 Fourth of July Extravaganza Fireworks Show presentations for an amount not to exceed $25,000 annually. (Pulled for separate discussion.) 2 TCSD Proposed Rates and Charqes for FY 2001-2007 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 01-07 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ACKNOWLEDGING THE FILING OF A REPORT WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED RATES AND CHARGES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002 AND SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION THEREWITH Minutes.csd\042401 1 MOTION: Director Roberts moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 2. The motion was seconded by Director Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS SEPARATELY DISCUSSED 1 Fourth of July Fireworks Presentation RECOMMENDATION: 2.2 Award a contract to Pyro Spectaculars for the preparation and display of the 2001 and 2002 Fourth of July Extravaganza Fireworks Show presentations for an amount not to exceed $25,000 annually. Community Services Director Parker presented an overview of the staff report (as per agenda material). Mr. Harold Provin, 44750 Villa Del Son, relayed his support of this wonderful activity provided by the City. MOTION: Director Roberts moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Director Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT No additional comments. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT No additional input. GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT General Manager Nelson invited the public to the upcoming Fourth of July festivities. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS No comments. Minutes.csd\042401 2 ADJOURNMENT At 8:17 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, May 15, 2001, at 7:00 P.M., for the purpose of a Joint Budget Workshop meeting, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeffrey E. Stone, President ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] Minutes.csd\042401 3 Because the meeting of May 15, 2001, was a joint meeting of the City Council/Community Services District/Redevelopment Agency, the minutes for the Community Services District are the same as those for the City Council meeting (Item No. 2). Separate approval is necessary! MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MAY 22, 2001 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 7:37 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. President Stone presiding. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 3 DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt ABSENT: 2 DIRECTORS: Roberts, Stone Also present were General Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of March 6, 2001. MOTION: Director Comerchero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Director Naggar and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Director Roberts and President Stone who were absent. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT No additional comments. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT No additional input. GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT No additional comments. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS No comments. Minutes.csd\052201 1 ADJOURNMENT At 7:40 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, June 12, 2001, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeffrey E. Stone, President ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] Minutes.csd\052201 2 ITEM 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE,,~ GENERAL MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT General Manager/Board of Directors Herman Parker, Director of Community Services June 26, 2001 Completion and Acceptance of Rancho California Sports Park Field Lighting Project No. PW00-19CSD ! PREPARED BY: q~Nilliam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Brian Guillot, Assistant Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Accept the project "Rancho California Sports Park Field Lighting, Project No. PW00-19CSD" as complete. 2. Authorize the Clerk to file the Notice of Completion. 3. Accept the Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract. BACKGROUND: On November 28, 2000, the Board of Directors awarded the subject project to MacKenzie Electric, Inc. (MEI, Inc.) of Highland, California in the amount of $494,990.00. The project provided for the installation of a new Musco sports lighting system for the athletic fields located at the Rancho California Sports Park. The project expanded the amount of recreational facilities available for night use. The Contractor completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and within the allotted contract time to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The construction retention for this project will be released on, or about, 35 days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded. FISCAL IMPACT: The original contract amount was $494,990.00. Change order number one in the amount of $15,589.00 provided for the replacement of several pole bases incorrectly installed per the consulting engineers direction, and the removal and replacement of sidewalk panels necessary to extend underground conduit. Therefore, the total contract amount is $510,579.00. The Rancho California Sports Park Field Lighting project is funded through Development Impact Fees- Parks and Recreation and Developer Reimbursement. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Notice of Completion 2. Maintenance Bond 3. Contractor's Affidavit 1 R:~AG DRPT~2.001 ~0626~PW00-19~.CC.D O C RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND RETURN TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF TEMECULA P,O. Box 9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 92590. NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described. 2. The full address of the City of Temecula is 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, Califomia 3. A Contract was awarded by the City of Temecula to MacKenzie Electric, Inc. (MEI) to perform the following work of improvement: Rancho California Sports Park Field Lighting Project, Project No. PW00-19CSD 4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of PubIic Works of the City of Temecula and that said work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on June 26, 2001. That upon said contract the Insurance Company of the West was surety for the bond given by the said company as required by law. 5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows: PROJECT NO. PW00-19CSD. 6. The street address of said property is: Rancho Vista Road and Margarita Road. Dated at Temecula, California, this 26TM day of June, 2001. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk I, Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California and do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside by said City Council. Dated at Temecula, California, this 26th day of June, 2001. Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk BOND NO. 171 79 76-M CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORK8 DEPARTMENT MNNTENANCE BOND PROJECT NO. F~/OO-IgCSD RANCHO CALIFORNIA SPORTS PARK FIELD LIOHTING KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT THAT: MACKENZIE ELECTRIC, INC. 7933 PALM AVENUE, HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA 92346 .... NAME* AND ADDRE$~ cON?R,~CTO~'$ e CO~ORATION , hereinafter called Principal, and INSURANCE COM~ANY OF THE WEST 17852 EAST 17TH STREET, #111, TUSTIN, CA. 92780 " NAME ~ND ~'DDRE$$ OF '~Ut~ hereinafter called SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called OWNER, in the penal surn of FOUR HUNDRED NINETY-FOUR THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED NINETY & 00/100 .......... DOLLARSmnd 00/100 CENT~ ($ 494,9~0.** ,, } in IEWfLll money of the United States, said sum being not less than tan (10%) of ~he Conb'act value payable by the said City of Temecula under the tom~s of the Contract, for ,the payment of which, we bind ourselves, successors, and assigns, jointly and seve~elly, f'm"nly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that whereas, the Principal entered into a certain Contract with the OWNER, dated the 28TH clay of NOV]~fl~ER., 2000, a copy of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof for the construction of PROJECT NO. PW00- laCeD, RANCHO CALIFORNIA SPORTS PARK RELD UGH'rING. WHEREAS. saiei Contract provides that the Princtpel will fumish a bond corglltloned lo guara~ee for the period of one ('1) year after approval of the final estimate otl said job, by the OWNER, againJt all defects in workmanship and meter[als whi~ may become apparent during said period; and WHERF..A~, the said Contract has been completed, and was the final estlrnate approved on lb-28 , 2000. NOW,:THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that If within one year from l~e date of approval of the final estimate on said job pursuant to the Contract, the work done under :the term~ of said Contract shall disclose poor workmanship In the execution of said wort., and thb ~rl'yirtg out of the terms of said Contract, or it shall appear that defective materials were furnished thereunder, then this obligation shall remain in full force and virtue, otherwise this instrumeltl shall be void, As a part of thl obligation secured hereby and in addition to the lace amount spedfied, costs and reasonable expenses and fees shell be mctuded, mciud ng reasonable attorney fees incurreci by the CI~ of Ternecula in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any Judgment rendered. The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or acJdltion to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and It does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contf'act, or to the work, or to the Specifications. Signed end sealed this day of .... DECEMBER ,2000. SURETY: (Name) ATTO~k~Y-TN-~ACT ApPROVED A8 TO FORM: Peier M: T~, Cib/Attorney By: (Name) (TlUe) CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of SAN BERNARDINO ss. On 12-4-00 , before me, personally appeared RAMIE BALAN, NOTARY PUBLIC BRAD J. KENNEDY [~ personally known to me [] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence RAMIE BAt.AN SAN BERNARD'NO COUN~ Comm Exp. July 2, 2001 to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/ars subscribed to the within instrument 'and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(les), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) /~ecuted the instrument. /..~~~fficia, seal. Description of Attached Document 'Rtle or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: [] Individual [] Corporate Officer-- Title(s): [] Partner-- [] Limited E] General [] Attorney in Fact [] Trustee [] Guardian or Conservator [] Other: Signer Is Representing: Top of thumb I~ere Insurance Company of the West HOME OFFICE: SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA POWER OF ATTORNEY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST, a California Corporation, does.hereby appoint: BRAD J. KENNEDY ~ tree and lawf~t Attomey(s)*~,3-Fact, with full pOWer arxl authority, to execute, on behalf of the Company, fidelity and sureff bonds, undertakings,..and other contracts .3f suretyship of a similar nature. ' This P(~.v~r cf A[tomey is granteci and is sigr,ed s~d sealed by fa~imile undsr the authod~ of th~ following Resolution adopted by the Board of .Directors on the 23rd day of February, 1.¢=98, which said Resolatian has not been arn~n~led or rescinded and of which the following is s true copy: "RESOLVED, that the Cha rmsn of the Board tbs President, an ExecotiYe Vice President cra Senior Vice President of the Company, and each df them, is hereby sutho~zed to execute Powers cf Attorney qualifying the attorney named in the g~en Power of Attorney to execote on behalf c.f. the Company fide ~(v ar d sure~ bonds undertakir~gs, or other contracts of s~;ratyship of a sin~ilar nature; and to attach thereto the seal of the Company; provided hm~ever, that the absence of tha seal shall not effect the val~lity of the instrument. FURTHER RESOLVED, that the signaturss of such or, ceos and the seal of the Company, and the signatures of any witnesses, .the.signatures and ~eal of any notary, and the signatures of any Officers certif~jin~ the validity of the Power of Affomey, may be affixed by facsimile.~ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST has coused these presents to be signed:by its duly authori~ed~officer~ 8TH day of DECEMBER ~,999. STA'! E OF C,~,LIFORNIA · COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO iNSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST IN WFrNESS V~--IEREOF, the undersigned c~e~tlf'j that they are adults, and have witnessed the signing of this inatr~ment'by tl~ pdnc/pat~or have wit~,essod the principal's acknowledgment of the sigr~ature on the power of attorney, pursuant to Califomia Probate Code ~12~1 a~'.d 4',22.. CERTIFIC~.TE: / Janis Theodore. : ' ' I, John H. Craig, Asaistam Secretary cf INSURANCE CGMPANY OF THE WEST, do heraby cert~' that the original POWER OF AT~'ORNEY, ~. '-" which the foregoing is a tree copy, i.~ still in full force and effect, and that this certificate may be signed by facsimile under the authority, of the above quoted msa~utidn. ' iN W.~TN. ESS WI-IEREOF, I have sub~chbed my name as Assistant Secretary, on this day of · : ' ' ~CW 37 cITYOF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE PROJECT NO. pWOO-19CSD RANCHO CALIFORNIA SPORTS PARK FIELD LIGHTING This is to certify that MacKenzie Electr, i~ere~a~tbr the "CONTRACTOR") declares to the City of Temecula, under oath, that he/she/it ~as paid in full for all materials, supplies, Labor, services, tools, equipment, and all other bills contracted for by the CONTRACTOR or by any of the CONTRACTOR's agents, employees or subcontractors used or in contribution to the execution of it's contract with the City of Temecula, with regard to the building, erection, construction, or repair of that certain work of improvement known as PROJECT NO. PW00- 190SD, RANCHO CALIFORNIA SPORTS PARK FIELD LIGHTING, situated in the City of Temecula, State of California, more particularly described as follows: RANCHO CALIFORNIA sPORTS PARK FIELD LIGHTING RANCHO CALIFORNIA SPORTS PARK FIELD LIGHTING I I ! i IIi The CONTRACTOR declares that it knows of no unpaid debts or claims arising out of said Contract which would constitute grounds for any third party to claim a Stop Notice against of any unpaid sums owing to the CONTRACTOR. Further, in connection with the final payment of the Contract, the CONTRACTOR hereby disputes the following amounts: Description Dollar Amount to Dispute Pursuant to Public Contracts Code §7200, the CONTRACTOR does hereby fully release and acquit the City of Temecula and all agents and employees of the City, and each of them, from any and all claims, debts, demands, or cause of action which exist or might exist in favor of the CONTRACTOR by reason of payment by the City of Temecula of any contract amount which the CONTRACTOR has not disputed above. Dated: 6/18/01 CONTRACTOR: (~ By: Signature Patrick MacKenzie, President Print Name and Title RELEASE ITEM 3 TO: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINA-NCE_~_-II GENEP, AL MANAGER TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT General Manager/Board of Directors FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services June 26, 2001 Award of Construction Contract for the Mary Phillips Senior Center Expansion Project - Project No. PW99-19 PREPARED BY: /~J~/Villiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Steve Charette, Assistant Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Award a contract for the Mary Phillips Senior Center Expansion Project, Project No. PW99-19 to R. Moody Construction, Inc. for $508,500.00, and authori~9 the President to execute the contract. Authorize the General Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $50,850.00, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 3. Approve the Project plans and specifications. BACKGROUND: On May 23, 2000, the Board of Directors authorized the Department of Public Works to release a formal public bid for the Senior Center Expansion Project. This project will provide an additional 3,100 square feet to the existing Senior Center. It will add two additional meeting rooms, a larger billiards room and new restrooms. The current library and craft room will be relocated and renovated. New equipment will also be installed in the kitchen and modifications will be made to the reception area. The Engineer's estimate for this project is $460,000.00. Five (5) bids were received and publicly opened on June 13, 2001 and results are as bllows: 2. 3. 4. 5. R. Moody Construction ................................................................................... $508,500.00 Award Building Services ................................................................................ $509,800.00 Corena Constructors .................................................................................... $511,450.00 Rohm Construction .................................................................................... $557,897.00 J.P LaBarge Construction Mgmt .................................................................... $630,862.00 Staff has reviewed the bid proposals and found R. Moody Construction, Inc. to be the lowest responsible bidder for this project. Staff has contacted references and determined that R. Moody Construction, Inc. has satisfactorily performed similar type of work in the past. The specifications allow one hundred (100) working days for completion of this project. Work is expected to begin in July, 2001 and be completed bythe mid December 2001. A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the City Engineer's office. FISCAL IMPACT: Sufficient funds have been allocated for this project based on the 2001-2002 Capital Improvement Program approved by City Council on June 12, 2001. The total construction cost is $559,350.00, which includes the contract amount of $508,500.00 plus 10% contingency of $50,850.00. ATrACHMENT: 1. Project Location 2. Project Description 3. Contract 2 ~agdrpt~2001\0613\pw99-19.awd/smc TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT CiTY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACT FOR PROJECT NO. PW99-19CSD MARY PHILLIPS SENIOR CENTER EXPANSION THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 26th day of June, 2001, by and between the Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "DISTRICT", and, R. Moody Construction, Inc. hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." WlTNESSETH: That DISTRICT and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows: ,8, CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The complete Contract includes all of the Contract Documents, to wit: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Proposal, Performance Bond, Labor and Materials Bond, Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO. PW99-19CSD, MARY PHILLIPS SENIOR CENTER EXPANSION, Insurance Forms, this Contract, and all modifications and amendments thereto, the State of California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications (1992 Ed.) where specifically referenced in the Plans and Technical Specifications, and the latest version of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, including all supplements as written and promulgated by the Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the American Associated General Contractors of California (hereinafter, "Standard Specifications") as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW99-19CSD, MARY PHILLIPS SENIOR CENTER EXPANSION. Copies of these Standard Specifications are available from the publisher: Building New, Incorporated 3055 Overland Avenue Los Angeles, California 90034 (213) 202-7775 The Standard Specifications will control the general provisions, construction materials, and construction methods for this Contract except as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provision, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW99-19CSD, MARY PHILLIPS SENIOR CENTER EXPANSION. In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the other Contract Documents, the other Contract Documents shall take precedence over, and be used in lieu of, such conflicting portions. Where the Contract Documents describe portions of the work in general terms, but not in complete detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed completed CONTRACT CA-1 R:~cip~projects~:~99-19 CONTRACT and in place and that only the best general practice is to be used. Unless otherwise specified, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and do all the work involved in executing the Contract. The Contract Documents are complementary, and what is called for by anyone shall be as binding as if called for by all. Any conflict between this Contract and any other Contract Document shall be resolved in favor of this Contract. SCOPE OF WORK. CONTRACTOR shall perform everything required to be performed, shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required for the following: PROJECT NO. PW99-19CSD, MARY PHILLIPS SENIOR CENTER EXPANSION All of said work to be performed and materials to be furnished shall be in strict accordance with the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract Documents hereinabove enumerated and adopted by DISTRICT. DISTRICT APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed under the direction and supervision, and subject to the approval of DISTRICT or its authorized representatives. CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHEDULE. The DISTRICT agrees .to pay, and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept, in full payment for, the work agreed to be done, the sum of: FIVE HUNDRED EIGHT THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS and NO CENTS ($508,500.00), the total amount of the base bid. CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed one-hundred (100) working days, commencing with delivery of a Notice to Proceed by DISTRICT. Construction shall not commence until bonds and insurance are approved by DISTRICT. CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the City Council, except that the City Manager is hereby authorized by the City Council to make, by written order, changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as established by the City Council. PAYMENTS LUMP SUM BID SCEHDULE: Before submittal of the first payment request, the CONTRACTOR shall submit to the City Engineer a schedule of values allocated to the various portions of the work, prepared in such form and supported by such data to substantiate its accuracy as the City Engineer may require. This schedule, as approved by the City Engineer, shall be used as the basis for reviewing the CONTRACTOR's payment requests. UNIT PRICE BID SCHEDULE: Pursuant to Section 20104.50 of the Public Contract Code, within thirty (30) days after submission of a payment request to the DISTRICT, the CONTRACTOR shall CONTRACT CA-2 R:~cip~projects~pw99-19CONTRACT be paid a sum equal to ninety percent (90%) of the value of the work completed according to the bid schedule. Payment request forms shall be submitted on or about the thirtieth (30th) day of each successive month as the work progresses. The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be made sixty (60) days after acceptance of final payment and the CONTRACTOR filing a one-year Warranty and an Affidavit of Final Release with the DISTRICT on forms provided by the DISTRICT. Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied by a certificate signed by the General Manager, stating that the work for which payment is demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments on the Contract price shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the work. Interest shall be paid on all undisputed payment requests not paid within thirty (30) days pursuant to Public Contracts Code Section 20104.50. Public Contract Code Section 7107 is hereby incorporated by reference. In accordance with Section 9-3.2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and Section 9203 of the Public Contract Code, a reduction in the retention may be requested by the Contractor for review and approval by the Engineer if the progress of the construction has been satisfactory, and the project is more than 50% complete. The District hereby delegates its authority to reduce the retention to the Engineer. WARRANTY RETENTION. Commencing with the date the Notice of Completion is recorded, the DISTRICT shall retain a portion of the Contract award price, to assure warranty performance and correction of construction deficiencies according to the following schedule: CONTRACT AMOUNT $25,000 0 $75,000 RETENTION PERIOD RETENTION PERCENTAGE 180 days 3% $75,00- $500,000 180 days $2,250 + 2% ofamountin excess of $75,000 Over $500,000 One Year $10,750 + 1% of amount in excess of $500,000 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES - EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government Code Section 53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to DISTRICT the sum of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) per day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond the time allowed pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed liquidated damages for unforeseeable delays beyond the control of, and without the fault or negligence of, the CONTRACTOR including delays caused by DISTRICT. CONTRACTOR is required to promptly notify DISTRICT of any such delay. CONTRACT CA-3 R:~cip~projects~v99-19CONTRACT 10. 11. 12. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making each request for payment under Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR shall submit to DISTRICT, in writing, all claims for compensation as to work related to the payment. Unless the CONTRACTOR has disputed the amount of the payment, the acceptance by CONTRACTOR of each payment shall constitute a release of all claims against the DISTRICT related to the payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit, release, and indemnity agreement with each claim for payment. PREVAILING WAGES. This is a Federal assisted project and Davis-Bacon Fair Labor Standards Act will be enforced. Whenever there is State funding involved, the highest of the two (State and Federal) wage decision prevails. Federal Labor Standards Provisions 4010 of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development is incorporated into this contract and attached. All contractors shall be verified for eligibility through the current HUD List of Debarred, Suspended, or Ineligible Participants, and the General Services Administration's Consolidated List of Debarred, Suspended, and Ineligible Contractors prior to being authorized to participate on this project. Any Sub-tier Contract(s) resulting from this contract must contain the same contractual language as the original contract. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract, from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. CONTRACTOR shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Section 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the CITY, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this contract. INDEMNIFICATION. All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing or delivering materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone. CONTRACTOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend DISTRICT, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of persons (CONTRACTOR's employees included) and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations herein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of the DISTRICT. CONTRACT CA-4 R:~cip\projects~gg- 19CONTRACT 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. CONTRACTOR shall hold the County of Riverside, its officers, agents and employees free and harmless from any liability whatsoever, including wrongful death, based or asserted upon any act or omission of principal, its officers, agents, employees or Subcontractors relating to or in any way connected with or arising from the accomplishment of the work, whether or not such acts or omissions where in furtherance of the work required by the Contract Documents and agrees to defend at his expense, including attorney fees, CITY, County of Riverside, its officers, agents, employees and Independent Architect in any legal action base on any such alleged acts or omissions. The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and be responsible for reimbursing the DISTRICT for any and all costs incurred by the DISTRICT as a result of Stop Notices filed against the project. The DISTRICT shall deduct such costs from Progress Payments or final payments due to the DISTRICT. GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to DISTRICT's employees, agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any District officer or employee, or any architect, engineer, or other preparers of the Drawings and Specifications for this project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in its employ has been employed by the DISTRICT within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the General Manager, its affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors upon the Project have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the Project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California. NOTICE TO CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant information with respect thereto, to CITY. BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records, and plans or such part thereof as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the CITY. INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY and its authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers. CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be made within a reasonable time after completion of the work. CONTRACT CA~5 R:~cip~projects~A,~99-19CONTRACT 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. DISCRIMINATION. CONTRACTOR represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin, color, sex age, or handicap. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Contractor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Contract and also govern the interpretation of this Contract. Any litigation concerning this Contract shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event of litigation between the parties concerning this Contract, the prevailing party as determined by the Court, shall be entitled to actual and reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs incurred in the litigation. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No member, officer, or employee of the City of Temecula or of a local public body shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in the contract of the proceeds thereof during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. Furthermore, the contractor/consultant convenants and agrees to their knowledge that no board member, office or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the contracting party other than the City of Temecula, and that if any such interest comes to the knowledge of either party at any time, a full and complete disclosure of all such information will be made, in writing, to the other party or parties, even if such interest would not be considered a conflict of interest under Article 4 (commencing with Section 1090) or Article 4.6 (commencing with Section 1220) of Division 4 of Title I of the Government Code of the State of California. ADA REQUIREMENTS. By signing this contract, Contractor certifies that the Contractor is in total compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Public Law 101- 336, as amended. WRITTEN NOTICE. Any written notice required to be given in any part of the Contract Documents shall be performed by depositing the same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, directed to the address of the CONTRACTOR as set forth in the Contract Documents, and to the CITY addressed as follows: Mailing Address: William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Street Address: William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 CONTRACT CA-6 R:~cip\projects~0w99-19CONTRACT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first above written. DATED: CONTRACTOR R. Moody Construction, Inc. 39821 Lincoln St. Cherry Valley, CA 92223 909-769-3752 By: Ronald L. Moody, President DATED: CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Jeffrey E. Stone, President Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk CONTRACT CA-7 R:~p~projects~#99-19CONTRACT ITEM 4 APPROVA[~,~ A CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCI~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: Board of Directors D. Parker, Director of Community Service(~? Herman June 26, 2001 SUBJECT: First Amendment to the Restroom Maintenance Services Contract with Selfs Janitorial Service for Fiscal year 2001-02 PREPARED BY: Kevin T. Harrington, Maintenance Superintendent RECOMMENDATION: The Board of Directors: 1. Approve the Restroom Maintenance Services Contract First Amendment with Selfs Janitorial Service to extend the Agreement to June 30, 2002. 2. Authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount of $ 48,720.00 for restroom cleaning services and park gazebo cleaning services. 3. Approve contingency of 10% in the amount of $ 4,872.00 for extra work items. BACKGROUND: The Temecula Community Services Department (TCSD) released a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Park Restroom Maintenance Services in April 1999. The TCSD received six (6) proposals, which were evaluated to determine qualifications and to assess the competitiveness of their pricing. Selfs Janitorial Service was determined to be the lowest qualified bidder for the required services. A two year agreement was awarded to Selfs Janitorial Services on July27, 1999. Thecurrentagreementallowsfortwooneyearrenewals. Staffisrequestingthatthe District exercise the option to extend the agreement for an additional year, through June 30, 2002. Selfs Janitorial Service has provided excellent service to the City and has agreed to maintain their original pricing for restreom maintenance services through June 30, 2002. The Amendment will also allow for the contractor to provide cleaning services of gazebo areas at designated City parks. The contract amount for restroom maintenance and gazebo area cleaning services is 48,720.00 for Fiscal Year 2001-02. FISCAL IMPACT: The amount of the contract for Selfs Janitorial Service for FY 2001-02 is $53,955. Sufficient funds have been included in the TCSD and Public Works Annual Operating Budgets for FY 2001-02 in accounts 190-180, 190-181,190-182, 190-184 and 001-164. Attachments: Original Agreement First Amendment R:X~RRINGKL~G ENDA.R PT~ELFS JANI SERV 01-02 1 ST AMENDMENT.DOC FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETVVEEN CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND SELF'S JANITORIAL SERVICE DATED JULY 27, 1999 FOR RESTROOM MAINTENANCE SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of June 26, 2001 by and between the Temecula Community Services District ("District") and Self's Janitorial Service ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: A. On July 27, 1999 the District and Contractor entered into that certain ag eement entitled C~ty of Temecula Agreement for Professional Services Restroom Maintenance ("Agreement"). Amendment. 2. 3. B. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this The term of the Agreement is extended to June 30, 2002. Section 4. a. of the Agreement is herebyamended to read as follows: The District agrees to pay Contractor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit Bb, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. This amount shall not exceed One Hundred Twenty Nine Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($129,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. Exhibit Aa, Tasks To Be Performed, attached to this First Amendment, is hereby substituted in place of Exhibit A to the Agreement. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. RAHARRINGKbtGREEMNT1SELFS JANITORIAL ,aMEND 1.DOC IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT BY: Jeffrey E. Stone, President ATTEST: BY: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: BY: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney SELF'S JANITORIAL SERVICE BY: NAME: TITLE: BY: NAME: TITLE: (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) 2 EXHIBIT Aa TASKS TO BE PERFORMED SCOPE OF WORK Lock all facilities between 10:00 PM- 11:00 PM Clean and stock all facilities between the hours of 10:00PM and 6:00AM. Record and submit daily maintenance activities, vandalism, and graffiti on Restroom Maintenance Checklist (Exhibit E) form to the City's Maintenance Supervisor or other designated person. Keep and provide records as required by City representative. Provide all necessary equipment, tools, chemicals, supplies, etc. necessaryto perform specified work. City to provide all paper products (toilet paper, seat co,ers, paper towels). Submit request for products weekly. Perform all activities in a safe manner per OSHA's requirements, utilizing all personal safety items required to prevent accidents, illness or injury to maintenance personnel and the public. SPECIFICATIONS FOR CLEANING AND STOCKING FACILITY * Sweep restreoms and remove litter from interior and exterior of building (Includes 6' walkway around restroom building). * Empty interior trash containers and replace liners (washout containers and clean receptacles). * Scrub and sanitize toilets and lavatories. * Wipe down all fixtures, removing water, dirt, stains and anyother incongruous substance. * Remove dirt, stains, or other debris on walls, ceilings, and light fixtures. * Stock all toilet paper, or other paper products. All dispenser to be filed daily. * Remove minor graffiti from building interior. Record on report form both graffiti removed, as well as graffiti that you were unable to remove. ** Wash (hose out) floors. Squeegee excess water out of building and off of hardscape. Remove any paper or other trash accumulated i'om this procedure. *** Pressure wash floors and walls. Task shall be completed by utilizing high-pressure washing machine or steam cleaner. **** Pressure wash designated gazebos, concrete surfacing and picnic tables. Empty adjacent trash containers. FREQUENCY: * Items to be performed daily. (Monday through Sunday) ** Items to be performed Mondays and Fridays *** Items to be performed monthly. **** Items to be performed Saturday and Sunday by 6:00 AM. NOTE: The specifications are minimum requirements for the maintenance of City restroom facilities. The restrooms shall be maintained in a neat, clean, and sanitary condition on a daily basis. Some situations may require additional work to be performed to insure the health and safety of the public. No additional compensation will be given for such work. No unsafe condition shall be left without notification of Ci~s authorized representative. 3 R.' IHARRINGK~4GREEMArI~$ELF~ JANITORIAL AMEND I.DOC EXHIBIT Bb PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE SITE Sam Hicks Monument Park (includes Sat. & Sun. gazebo cleaning service) Butterfleld Stage Park Winchester Creek Park (includes Sat. & Sun. ga~bo cleaning service) Rancho California Sports Park (Rancho Vista Fields) Rancho California Sports Park (North/South Fields) Rancho California Sports Park (Skate Park, includes Sat. & Sun. ga~bo cleaning service) Paloma Del Sol Park Kent Hintergardt Memorial Park Pala Community Park (includes Sat. & Sun. gazebo cleaning service) Margarita Community Park (includes Sat. & Sun. gazebo cleaning service) 6th Street Parking Lot Temecula Elementary School Pool Temecula Duck Pond (includes Fd. & Sat. gaa~bo cleaning service) Temecula Valley High School Restroom Temeku Hills Park (2 Buildings, includes Sat. & Sun. gazebo cleaning service) ADDRESS 41970 Moreno Road 33654 De Portola Road 39950 Margarita Road 30875 Rancho Vista Rd 42775 Margarita Road 42569 Margarita Road 32099 De Portola Road 31465 Via Cordoba 44900 Temecula Lane 29119 Margarita Road 41952 Front Street 41951 Moraga Road 28250 Rancho Calif. Rd. 31555 Rancho Vista Rd. 31367 La Serena Way PRICE PER PRICE PER MQNTH YEAR $310.00 $3,720.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 ' $310.00 $3,720.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $310.00 $3,720.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $310.00 $3,720.00 $310.00 $3,720.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $310.00 $3,720.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $520.00 $6,240.00 TOTAL PRICE $4.060.00 ~J[.Z20J~ Payments shall be made monthlyfor actual services performed in the amount not to exceed: $4,060.00 R:IHARRINGKL4GREEMArI~$ELFS JANITORIAL AMEND I.DOC 4 CITY OF TEMECULA AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RESTROOM MAINTENANCE THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of July 27 ,1999, between the Temecula Community Services District, a municipal corporation ("City") and Self's Janitorial Service ("Contractor'). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on Auqust 1, 1999, and shall remain and continue in effect until June 30 ,2001, with two (2) one year renewals at the sole option of the City, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICES. Contractor shall perform the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Contractor shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit 3. PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PAYMENT. a. The City. agrees to pay Contractor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual services performed. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and the schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Eiqhty Thousand Two Hundred Ei.qhty Dollars and No Cents ($ 80,280.00 ) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Contractor shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager. Contractor shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by City Manager and Contractor at the time City's wdtten authorization is given to Contractor for the performance of said services. The City Manager may approve additional work not to exceed ten percent (10%) of the amount of the Agreement, but in no event shall such sum exceed twenty -five thousand dollars ($25,000.00). Any additional work in excess of this amount shall be approved by the Board of Directors. c. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all nondisputed fees. If the City disputes any of Contractor's fees it shall give written notice to Contractor within 30 days of receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. 5. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSF a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreem?nt, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Contractor the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 4. 6. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR. a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. if such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 7. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. a. Contractor shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Contractor shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Contractor shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the dght to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Contractor. With respect to computer files containing data generated for the work, Contractor shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files. 8. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and ail claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert witness fees, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions arising out of or in any way related to the performance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the negligence of the City. 9. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No. CG 00 01 11 85 or 88. (2) Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 06 92 covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). If the Contractor owns no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of Califomia and Employer's Liability Insurance. If the Contractor has no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Contractor shall execute a declaration that it has no employees. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this projectJlocation or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. (3) Worker's Compensation as required by the State of California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. (4) Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liability for the Consultant's profession. c. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be deciared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. (3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (4) The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. (5) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior wdtten notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements. f. Verification of Coveraqe. Contractor shall furnish the City with origina~ endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Contractor's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 10. 'iNDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Contractor is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection With the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 11. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Contractor shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with ali such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Contractor in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Contractor without City's prior written authorization. Contractor, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Contractor gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Contractor shall promptly notify City should Contractor, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Contractor and/or be present at any deposition, headng or similar proceeding. Contractor agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Contractor. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. 13. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (I) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addres, ses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above. To City: City of Temecula Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Ddve Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Contractor: Self's Janitorial Service 332 W. 2"~ Street Perris, CA 92370 14. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. Upon termination of this Agreement, Contractor's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Contractor. 15. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 16. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Contractor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation conceming this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's judgement, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted. 17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All pdor or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 18. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. ~t~: rc~'~ro'-'~ e, Pr sident As Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR Name: ~_c,,.v ~, _ ! Title: L'~C..JL I ~ ~--- ~.~_ By: Name: Title: (Signatures of two corporate officers required for Corporations) EXHIBIT A TASKS TO BE PERFORMED SCOPE OF WORK Lock all facilities between 10:00 PM - 11:00 PM Clean and stock all facilities between the hours of 10:00PM and 6:00AM. Record and submit daily maintenance activities, vandalism, and graffiti on Restroom Maintenance Checklist (Exhibit E) form to the City's Maintenance Supervisor or other designated person. Keep and provide records as required by City representative. Provide all necessary equipment, tools, chemicals, supplies, etc. necessary to perform specified work. .... City to provide all paper products (toilet paper, seat covers, paper towels), Submit request for products weekly. Perform all activities in a safe manner per OSHA's requirements, utilizing all personal safety items required to prevent accidents, illness or injury to maintenance personnel and the public. SPECIFICATIONS FOR CLEANING AND STOCKING FACILITY * Sweep restrooms and remove litter from interior and exterior of building (6' walkway around restroom building). * Empty interior trash containers and replace liners (washout containers and clean receptacles). * Scrub and sanitize toilets and lavatories. * Wipe down all fixtures, removing water, dirt, stains and any other incongruous substance. ** Wash (hose out) floors. Squeegee excess water out of building and off of hardscape. Remove any paper or other trash accumulated from this procedure. * Remove dirt, stains, or other debris on wall, ceilings, and light fixtures. * Stock all toilet paper, or other paper products. All dispenser to be filled daily. * Remove minor graffiti from building interior. Record on report form both graffiti removed, as well as graffiti that you were unable to remove. *** Pressure wash floors and walls. FREQUENCY: * Items to be performed daily. (Monday through Sunday) ** Items to be performed Mondays and Fridays *** Items to be performed monthly. NOTE: The specifications are minimum requirements for the maintenance of City restroom facilities. The restrooms shall be maintained in a neat, clean, and sanitary condition c~n a daily basis. Some situations may require additional work to be performed to insure the health and safety of the public. No additional compensation will be given for such work. No unsafe condition shall be left without notification of City's authorized representative. EXHIBIT B PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE SITE Sam Hicks Monument Park Butterfield Stage Park Winchester Creek Park Rancho California Sports Park (Rancho Vista fields) Rancho California Sports Park (North/South Fields) Rancho California Sports Park (Skate Park) Paloma Del Sol Park Kent Hintergardt Memorial Park Pala Community Park Margarita Community Park 6~" Street Parking Lot Temecula Elementary School Pool ADDRESS 41970 Moreno Road 33654 De Portola Road 39950 Margarita Road 30875 Rancho Vista Rd 42775 Margarita Road 42569 Margarita Road 32099 De Portola Road 31465 Via Cordoba 44900 Temecula Lane 29119 Margarita Road 41952 Front Street 41951 Moraga Road PRICE PER PRICE PER MONTH YEAR $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 TOTAL PRICE $2,520.00 $30~240.00 ADDITIONAL SITES TO BE ADDED DURING THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT Temecula Duck Pond Temecula Valley High School Restroom Temeku Hills Sports Park (2 restrooms) ADDRESS 28250 Rancho Calif. Rd. 31555 Rancho Vista Rd. La Serena & Meadows PRICE PER PRICE PER MONTH YEAR $210.00 $2,520.00 $210.00 $2,520.00 $420.00 $5,040.00 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Butterfield Stage Park TOTAL PRICE SCOPE OF WORK Maintain holding tank per manufacturer, Clivus Multrum, Inc., see Exhibit D $840.00 ~10,080.00 PRICE PER PRICE PER MONTH YEAR $90.00 $1,080.00 TOTAL PRICE $3,450.00 $41,400.00 Payments shall be made monthly for actual services performed in the amount not to exceed: $3,450.00 ITEM 5 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE._ CITY MANAGER ~/ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Herman Parker, Director of Community Services June 26, 2001 Acceptance of Offers of Dedication from Temeku Hills Properties, LLC and Mc Millin Companies, LLC for Maintenance of Slopes and Perimeter Landscaping within Tract Nos. 23371-9 and 23371-10 PREPARED BY: Barbara Smith, Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: 1. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ACCEPTING THE OFFERS OF DEDICATION FROM TEMEKU HILLS PROPERTIES, LLC AND MCMILLIN COMPANIES, LLC FOR EASEMENTS FOR MAINTENANCE OF SLOPES AND PERIMETER LANDSCAPING IN TRACT NOS: 23371-9 AND 23371-10 BACKGROUND: On August 25, 1998, the City Council approved the Final Map for Tract Map Nos: 23371-9 and 23371-10. On these Final Tract Maps dedications for easements were offered to the TCSD for future slope and landscape maintenance purposes. At the time that these maps were recorded, on September 14, 1998 the TCSD did not accept these easements. Pursuant to an agreement for Temeku Hills, Mc Millin Companies, LLC was required to improve certain slopes and landscaping within Tract Nos. 23371-9, lot 68 and 23371-10, lots 26 and 27 for future transfer into the TCSD Slope Maintenance program. A property owner election was successfully completed for FY 2000-2001, however, due to delays in construction, the actual transfer of the slope maintenance responsibilities has been deferred until FY 2001-2002. Mc Millin Companies has fulfilled this agreement and has completed the perimeter landscaping, which have been inspected and approved by the TCSD Maintenance Superintendent. On June 12, 2001 the City Council, accepted the perimeter slopes into Service Level C effective July 1,2001. The TCSD now needs to accept the offers of dedication of the easements and record these easements with the County of Riverside. R:\s mithb\Easements\Staff Report-Temeku.doc 06/26/01 FISCAL IMPACT: None. The slope and landscaping costs have been accepted into Service Level C, and shall be borne by the residents within the Temeku Hills development. A'I-FACHMENTS: 1. 2. Resolution calling for Acceptance of Easements Copy of Final Maps for Tract Map Nos. 23371-9 and 23371-10 R:\smithb\Easements\Staff Report-Temeku.doc 06/26/01 RESOLUTION NO. CSD 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ACCEPTING THE OFFERS OF DEDICATION FROM TEMEKU HILLS PROPERTIES, LLC AND MCMILLIN COMPANIES, LLC FOR EASEMENTS FOR MAINTENANCE OF SLOPES AND PERIMETER LANDSCAPING IN TRACT NOS: 23371-9 AN D 23371-10 THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Board of Directors does hereby find and determine as follows: A. Temeku Hills Properties, LLC and Mc Millin Companies, LLC has offered to the TCSD, on their Final Maps, dedications of easements for the future maintenance of slopes and perimeter landscaping in Tract Nos: 23371-9 and 23371-10, within the Temeku Hills Development, B. A property owner election was successfully completed by the property owner for FY 2000-2001, however, due to construction delays the transfer of the slope maintenance responsibilities to the TCSD has been deferred to FY 2001-2002. C. The following are lots within each Tract that require easements. Tract 23371-9, an easement over lot 68, and Tract 23371-10, an easement over lots 26 and 27. Recored on September 14, 1998, Book 272, pages 77-83 and Book 272, pages 84-88 subsequently. D. The Board of Directors is the authorized legislative body to accept the offers of dedication for the future TCSD slope and landscape maintenance areas. Section 2. The Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District hereby accepts the offer of said dedication from Temeku Hills Properties, LLC and Mc Millin Companies, LLC, as follows: A. The City Council accepts the offers of dedication for the landscape easements more particularly described in Exhibits "A" and attached hereto and incorporated into this resolution by reference. B. That if the City of Temecula or its governmental entity successors or assigns determine at any time that it is unable, incapable, or unwilling to maintain said easements, then all or any of such easements may be terminated, abandoned and extinguished by appropriate express action and thereafter, upon the giving and recording of notice to the interested parties, maintenance of the slope and landscape areas shall become the responsibility of the then current owners of the respective underlying properties. Section 3. this Resolution. The City Clerk/District Secretary shall certify to the passage and adoption of PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District at a regular meeting held on the 26th of June, 2001. R:\smithb\Easements\Sta ff Repot t-Temeku.doc 06/26/01 Jeffrey E. Stone, President ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. CSD 2001- was duly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District at the regular meeting thereof, held on the 26th day of June, 2001, by the following vote of the Board of Directors: AYES: DIRECTORS NOES: DIRECTORS ABSENT: DIRECTORS R:~smithb~Easemen~s\Staff Report-Temeku.doc 06/26/01 EXHIBIT A CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE The City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereby consents to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer with the understanding that the City does accept the offer of dedication. Dated: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/District Secretary R:~smithb\Easemenls\Staff Report-Temeku.doc 06/26/01 "i Ei rl ITEM 6 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Service,,'~, June 26, 2001 Agreement for Softball Officiating Services PREPARED BY: Julie Crowe-Pelletier, Recreation Superintendent RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors approve the agreement between the City of Temecula and the Margarita Officials Association for providing City softball league officiating services from July 1, 2001 thru July 30, 2005 with a fifth year option to renew. DISCUSSION: The City of Temecula, Community Services Department offers year round adult softball leagues as part of the citywide sports program. The Softball Leagues generally run fourteen weeks in duration, with two (2) seasons per year. The program attracts approximately 150 softball teams per year consisting of 2,400 individual participants. On May 9, 2001, the City of Temecula released a Request for Proposal (RFP) to select a qualified firm to provide officiating services for the City's Adult Softball Program. Officiating services are considered a professional service and are essential to the operation of a successful and well-organized adult sport league/program. Two (2) firms responded to the RFP: Margarita Officials Association and Murrieta Softball Officials. A Review Committee reviewed the proposals and ranked each firm based on references, years of experience, past performance, and the ability to provide officiating services. As a result, the Margarita Officials Association was selected as the highest ranked firm to provide this service. The Association has thirty-three (33) years of softball officiating experience and has been providing this service to the City of Temecula since February 1991. Their performance in providing officiating services to the City of Temeeula for the past nine years has been excellent. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost per official is $25.00 per game, for an annual estimated cost of $23,000. Unencumbered funds exist in account #190-187-999-5250. R:\CROWEJ\AGENDAS\So ftb~ll2001 .doc AGREEMENT BETWEEN MARGARITA OFFICIALS ASSOCIATION AND THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA This Agreement is made and entered into as of July i, 2001 by and between the Temecula Community Services District, Temecula, California CTCSD") and Margarita Officials Association ("Association"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM OF AGREEMENT. The terms of this Agreement shall be in force commencing July 1, 2001, and terminating July 31, 2005, with an option to continue the agreement for a fifth year should both parties agree. This Agreement is subject to prior termination as set forth in paragraph 8 below. 2. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE ASSOCIATION. The Association shall be responsible for assigning Qualified Officials for all scheduled TCSD softball games in accordance with Exhibit A, Scope of Work, and the following provisions: a. "Qualified Officials" are those softball officials who (i) are registered umpires with Amateur Softball Association; and (ii) maintain general liability insurance with a qualified and reputable insurer of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, death and property damage naming the TCSD and the City of Temecula as additional insureds; b. Within five business days of the date of this Agreement, Association shall provide TCSD with a list of the Qualified Officials it will draw from in making assignments and a certificate of insurance from each such official to be approved by the Director of Community Services and Association shall update the list and the certificate of insurance each time a new official is added; c. Association shall assist the TCSD in handling protests including, but not limited to, representing the official(s) at protest meetings, as required; d. When a grievance has been filed with Association, the Association shall notify the TCSD in writing not more than five (5) days after the grievance is filed with the Association and provide a copy of the grievance; and e. Association shall be responsible for providing, maintaining, and repairing the equipment, materials, supplies, and similar items, necessary for the proper conduct of the officiating to be performed. 3. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CSD. a. The TCSD has the right to refuse the services of any Association official, with or without cause, provided the TCSD notifies the Association of its decision and Association shall not assign any such official to TCSD games; b. The TCSD shall provide fields in playable condition and set up necessary equipment for games. R:\CROWEJ\SOFTBALL\Agreement. 1 .doc c. The TCSD is to provide the Association with a copy of all by-laws and rules unique to the conduct of their games. 4. COMPENSATION. The TCSD shall pay to the Association the fees set forth on Exhibit A., Scope of Work. Billing by the Association shall be made to the TCSD monthly, in writing, for all games played the previous month. The fees are payable to the Association no later than thirty (30) working days from receipt of the billing. Association shall be responsible for paying all wages, taxes and other compensation, if any, of the officials and shall defend, protect, indemnify and hold TCSD harmless from any claim for such payments. 5. SCHEDULING. The TCSD shall schedule all games as to the time and location. A complete schedule of games shall be furnished to the Association in sufficient time as to allow for scheduling of officials. When a game is rescheduled or canceled after notification, the Association shall be apprised at least three (3) hours in advance. If this time frame is not met, the TCSD shall pay all fees due as if the game was played. 6. FORFEITURES. Officials shall appear at the game site at least fifteen (15) minutes prior to the scheduled starting time. Should officials fail to appear for a game, when properly notified, the Association shall forfeit the fee in the amount of $30.00 for each official who did not show. Games not played due to the nonappearance of one or both scheduled teams, inclement weather, or other misfortune will be paid for by TCSD at the rate of $25.00 per official, provided an official(s) is present. Should a game in progress be canceled or terminated for any reason, the TCSD shall pay all fees due as if the game was played. 7. PROTESTS. Should an official, for any reason within his/her control, cause a game to be protested, the Association shall submit a verbal report to the TCSD of the circumstances on the following day and a written report shall be provided, if required, within five (5) days. Officials shall be provided by the Association, at no cost to the TCSD for any rescheduled game resulting from a protest that is upheld. 8. TERMINATION. This agreement shall terminate on the prescribed date. Either party retains the right and option to terminate this Agreement prior to such date for any reason upon fifteen (15) days prior written notice to the other. 9. ASSIGNMENT. Neither TCSD nor the Association shall have the right or power to assign or transfer this Agreement, or any interest in it, without the written consent of the other. 10. PERFORMANCE. Association shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Association shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Association hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 11. INDEMNIFICATION. The Association agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Association's negligent or R:\CROWEJ\SOFFBALL\Agreement. 1 .doc wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the negligence of the City. 12. ASSOCIATION INSURANCE. The Association shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Association, its agents, representatives, or employees in an amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) naming the City and the TCSD as additional insureds with policies and insurers acceptable to the Director of Community Services. 13. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Association is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Association shall at all times be under Association's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Association or any of Association's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Association shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Association shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. 14. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Association shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations, which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way, affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Association shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Association to comply with this section. 15. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice: To City: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: Director of Community Services To Association: Margarita Officials Association P.O. Box 1291 Oceanside, California 92051-1291 16. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Association understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. 17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are R:\CROWEJ\SOFTBALL\Agreement. 1 .doc merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 18. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGR1EF. MENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Association warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Association and has the authority to bind Association to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Jeffrey E. Stone President Attest: Susan Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney MARGARITA OFFICIALS ASSOCIATION By: R: \CROWEJ\SOFTBALL\Agreement. 1 .doc ITEM 7 CITY OFTEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor, Councilmembers and Staff Herman Parker, Director of Community Servic~ June 26, 2001 CSD Item 7 Please note that there was a typographical error on Section 9 b. (4) of the agreement with Pela. The Professional Liability coverage should read "one million ($1,000,000) per claim and in aggregate" instead of two million ($2,000,000) dollars. R:~smithb~Pela[Agenda Correction Memo.doc 6/26/01 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCI~ CITY MANAGER ~,/ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services June 26, 2001 Professional Services Agreement for TCSD Landscape Plan Check and Inspection Services PREPARED BY: Barbara Smith, Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Approve a Professional Services Agreement with Pela, a Landscape Architectural Firm, for TCSD landscape plan check and inspection services in the amount of $80,000 and authorize the Board President to execute the agreement. Authorize the General Manager to approve additional services, not to exceed the contingency amount of $8,000, which is equal to 10% of the agreement amount. BACKGROUND: Since 1993, Pela, a Landscape Amhitectural Firm, (Pela) has provided landscape plan check and inspection services to the TCSD to augment the Maintenance and Development Services Divisions of the TCSD. These services are necessary to insure that future developer-constructed City parks and landscape maintenance areas are designed and constructed to TCSD standards. Staff is pleased with the services provided by Pela and no complaints have been received from the development community. The current agreement between Pela and the TCSD expires on June 30, 2001. The proposed agreement is for a term of one year with two (2) one-year extensions. These renewals are at the City's sole option. The following agreement provides for plan check and inspection on developer-constructed projects only. Developers paythe TCSD for the necessary landscape and inspection services. In return, all plan check and inspection revenue collected from the development community offsets the costs for services provided under this contract. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no net fiscal impact to the TCSD. The fees paid to the consultant are offset by the plan check and inspection fees paid by the developers. Sufficient appropriations are in the FY 2001-2002 budget in fund 190-180-999-5248 (Parks and Medians) in the amount of $40,000 and in fund 193-180-999-5248 (Slopes) in the amount of $40,000. ATTACHMENTS: Professional Services Agreement R;~smithb~Pela\01-02 Staff Report.doc 06/26/01 CITY OF TEMECULA AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES TCSD Parks/Landscape Plan Check and Inspection Services THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of July 1,2001, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and PELA, a Landscape Architectural Firm ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on July 1,2001, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2002, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. Contract may be extended by mutual agreement for two (2) one (1) year additional terms. 2. SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A. 3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Eighty Thousand Dollars and no cents ($80,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shatl be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all nondisputed fees. If the City disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within 30 days of receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. 5. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSF. a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. Updated 2/2/01 b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 4. 6. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT. a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 7. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identi- fied and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts there from as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files containing data generated for the work, Consultant shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files. ¢. With respect to the design of public improvements, the Consultant shall not be liable for any injuries or property damage resulting from the reuse of the design at a location other than that specified in Exhibit A without the written consent of the Consultant. Updated 2/2/01 8. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert witness fees, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's neCgent or wrongful acts or omissions arising out of or in any way related to the performance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the negligence of the City. 9. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No. CG 00 01 11 85 or 88. (2) Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 06 92 covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). If the Consultant owns no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. If the Consultant has no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Consultant shall execute a declaration that it has no employees. (4) Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liability for the Consultant's profession. b. Minimum Limits cf Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. (3) (4) Worker's Compensation as required by the State of California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. Professional Liability coverage: Two million ($2,000,000) per claim and in aggregate. Updated 2/2/01 c. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: (1) The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities per[ormed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. (3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (4) The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. (5) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either pady, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VlI, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements. f. Verification of Coveraqe. Consultant shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. Updated 2/2/01 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 11. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. 12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed there under or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. 13. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (I) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above. Updated 2/2/01 To City: City of Temecula Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Consultant: Pela, a Landscape and Architectural Firm Attention: Mike Elliott 637 Arden Drive Encinitas, CA 92024 14. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. Because of the personal natu re of the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, only Mike Elliott shall perform the services described in this Agreement. Mike Elliott may use assistants, under their direct supervision, to perform some of the services under this Agreement. Consultant shall provide City fourteen (14) days' notice prior to the departure of Mike Elliott from Consultant's employ. Should he or she leave Consultant's employ, the City shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement, within three (3) days of the close of said notice period. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Consultant. 15. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 16. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's judgement, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted. 17. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No officer, or employee of the City of Temecula shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, the proceeds thereof, the Contractor, or Contractor's sub-contractors for this project, during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. The Contractor hereby warrrants and represents to the City that no officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the Contractor or Contractor's sub-contractors on this project. Contractor further agrees to notify the City in the event any such interest is discovered whether or not such interest is prohibited by law or this Agreement. 18. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are Updated 2/2/01 merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 19. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. Updated 2/2/01 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OFTEMECULA Jeffrey E. Stone, CSD President Attest: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thomon, City Attorney CONSULTANT Pela, a Landscape Architectural Firm 637 Arden Drive Encinitas, CA 92024 (760) 944-8463 By: Name: Title: Updated 2/2/01 EXHIBIT A TASKS TO BE PERFORMED Updated 2/2/01 ~xH [BIT A June 6, 2001 Ms. Barbara Smith, Management Analyst CITY OF TEMECULA Community Services Department 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92589-9033 City of Temecula, Community Services Depa~iaient Landscape Plan Check & Inspection Services Dear Barbara, Per our conversation, I am sending you our proposed scope of services and fees for landscape plan check and inspection services for the Temecula Community Services Department for the fiscal year of July 2001 through June 2002. Please note that our fees have been changed slightly to keep current with our costs. SCOPE OF SERVICES: ~ A. Upon notification from the Temecula Commumty Services Department (TCSD) that construction plans are ready for review, PELA will pick up plans at the City. Two sets of plans will be required. B. PELA will review the plans verifying consistency with TCSD standards and specifications, map conditions of approval and CC&R's. One set of plans will be red-lined with comments notifying the applicant of necessary revisions to be made to bring the plans into conformance with TCSD standards. Items not addressed in TCSD standards but that are outside of profession norms will also be marked for explanations from the applicant. C. PELA will return plans and plan check comments to TCSD within two (2) weelm of receipt of the first submittal; one (1) week for second and third submittals. Plan check comments will also be provided via e-marl for use by the City. D. Once revisions have been resubmitted by the applicant, PELA will re-check the plans for conformance. Should all revisions have been made and all questions answered, the plans will be ready for approval. If all revisions are not made, one set of plans and the check list will be red-lined again and returned to the applicant a second time for revisions. This process will continue until the plans are brought into conformance with City standards and professional E. Upon request of TCSD, PELA will review and approve construction cost estimates of proposed improvements in order to determine bonding requirements if required for the project. F. Upon request' of TCSD, PELA will provide landscape construction inspection services in order to insure implementation is in conformance with the approved plans. A written report will be provided to the project manager after each inspection. 637 Arden Drive, Encinitas, CA. 92024 - (760) 944-8463 Ms. Barbara Smith Landscape Plan Check & Inspection Services, TCSD June 6, 2001 Page 2 FEES: Plan Check Fees: The following fees are based on reviewing a maximum of 3 submittals fxom the applicant. Should additional reviews be necessaxy they will be charged at the rate of $85.00 per sheet. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROJECT 0 - 10,000 10,001 - 25,000 25,001 - 100,000 100,001 - 135,000 135,001 - 165,000 165,001 - 200,000 200,001 - 250,000 250,001 - 300,000 300,001 - 350,000 350,001 - 400,000 400,001 & up FLAT PLAN CHECKFEE $600(mlnlmumcharge) $860 $1,120 $1,380 $1,620 $1,890 $2,160 $2,430 $2,700 $2,970 $2,970 + .0075foreach sq. R. above400,000 sq. R. Plan checks beyond the 3'a Cheek $85.00/sheet Landscape Inspection Fees: Landscape Inspection FLAT FEE OF $250.00/VISIT Let me know if you need our office project experience list or personnel resumes for review. You should have our latest certificates of insurance that cover our office unffl August of 2001. We will be renewing them at that point and will forward updated documents at that time. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Michael G. Elliott, ASLA Landscape Architect, No. 2011 c:\City of Temecula Plan Checks\TCSD Plan Checks\ Proposal for Landscape Plan Check & Inspection Services.l ITEM 8 A P P R O V A,~.,f./.,)F'"'~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Service~l? June 26, 2001 Naming of the Paseo del Sol Park Site PREPARED BY: Cathy McCarthy, Development Services Administrator RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors approve a name for a 5-acre park site located on Meadows Parkway in the Paseo del Sol Development, 'Meadows Park' as recommended by the Community Services Commission. BACKGROUND: The Paseo del Sol Development is a large project in the easterly portion of the City. As a condition of the Paseo del Sol/Paloma del Sol Specific Plan and Development Agreement, a 5-acre neighborhood park is to be constructed by the developer and dedicated to the City. This park is located on the east side of Meadows Parkway across from Temecula Middle School. The conceptual design of this passive park includes two age appropriate tot lots, parking lot, two picnic shelters, picnic tables, benches, BBQ's, walkways and open turf area. Pursuant to City policy, the Community Services Commission forwards recommendations to the Board of Directors regarding the naming of the City's parks and recreation facilities. At their meeting April 9, 2001, the Commission approved a motion to recommend the name 'Meadows Park' be forwarded to the Board for this site. The Board may approved this name or select another name of their choice. FISCALIMPACT: None ATTACHMENT: Paseo del Sol Park Site Conceptual Design Resolution No. CSD 92-08: Naming Parks and Recreation Facilities R:\McCarthC~Agenda Reports~Paseo del Sol Park Site Naming.doc PASEO DEL SOL T.C.S.D. FIVE-ACRE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK LOT 300 OF TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 24188 136 PARKING TABULATION: BASED UPON COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ORDINANCE 348 FOR PASSIVE PARKJRECREATION OPEN SPACE 5 ACRES + 1 SPACE PER ACRE 5 SPACES REQUIRED (INCLUDING 1 ACCESSIBLE SPACE) 21 SPACES PROVIDED (INCLUDING 1 ACCESSIBLE SPACES) PERIMETER BLOCK WALL MOW STRIP AT BOUNDARY 20' WIDE STORM DRAIN 24' WIDE DRINKING FOUNTAIN PARKING LOT (21 MONUMENT SIGN MEANDERING WALK 173 172 139 140 141 CURB-ADJACENT 171 WALK 8' WIDE MEANDERING WALK 170 --' PERIMETER ~ 6e BLOCK WALL - ~ PICNIC PAD 168 FENCING //,' X'~ - ~-~"<' ' - ' "PREFABRICATED PICNIC STRUCTURES ; WITH TABLE SEATING AND BBQ LOT "F" (2 PLACES) PROTECTED NATIVE AREA -4 PROTECTIVE VIEW FENCING NEWLAND COMMUNITIES RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ADOPTING A POLICY FOR NAMING PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES WItlVREAS, on April 23, 1991, the Board of Directors (the "Board") adopted a policy for naming parks and recreation facilities; and W'H~REAS, the Community Services District and the Parks and Recreation Commission requests that the aforementioned policy be adopted by resolution; NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TE!VIECULA COMMIJNITY SERVICES DISTRICT DOES HEREBY, RESOLVE, DETER1VIINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the policy for naming parks and recreation facilities as set forth on Exhibit '*A" is adopted establishing a uniform policy and procedure that identifies criteria for the naming of parks and recreation facilities. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of September, 1992. A'I~EST: Ronald J. Parks, President ~ne~/Greek, City [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. CSD 92-08 was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 8th day of September 1992 by the following roll call vote. AYES: 5 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Moore, Lindemans, Mufioz Parks, NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None ~.~J~ S. Greek,-~y/Clerk Exhibit "A" TE1VIECULA COMMIYNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Naming Parks and Recreation Facilities PURPOSE To establish a uniform policy and procedure that identifies criteria for the naming of parks and recreation facilities. POLICY The Park and Recreation Commission will be responsible for the selection of names for parks and recreation facilities. Once a name is selected, it will be forwarded to the Board of Directors for ratification. Staff will be responsible for encouraging citizens and community organizations to suggest possible names that will then be forwarded to the Commission for consideration. At a minimum, each park and community building will be designated a name. Naming of specific areas within a park (garden, swimming pool, lake, ballfield, etc.) is acceptable but should be kept to a minimum to avoid confusion. No park shall be given a name which might be perceived as controversial by the community. All names selected shall be acceptable and meaningful to a majority of the neighborhood/community where the park or recreation facility is located. Priority in naming sites shall be given to geographical locations, historic significance or geologic features. No park shall'be named for a person, except where an individual has made a significant financial contribution toward the acquisition and/or development of the park or facility, or has been an outstanding long-time community leader who has supported open space and recreational activities. Ail park and recreation facilities will be designated a formal name within six months of acquisition or construction. Ail parks shall have an entrance sign. Buildings will have an entrance sign and a plaque inside the facility for name identification. The name of a park or recreation facility may be changed only after a hearing is held by the Commission to receive community input and. direction. No name shall be changed unless there is significant justification and support by the community. RESPONSIBILITY Department Parks and Recreation Commission Department ACTION Acquires a new park or recreation facility. Solicits possible names from community'. Forwards suggested names to the Parks and Recreation Commission for consideration. Receives any additional community input. Selects a name for the new park or recreation facility. Forwards name to City Council for ratification. Installs the appropriate naming sign or plaque. ITEM 9 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR ~ CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Service~ June 26, 2001 Naming of'the Temecula Children's Museum PREPARED BY: :~...~ Phyllis L. Ruse, Deputy Director of Community Services RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors approve "Imagination Workshop" as the name for the new Temecula Children's Museum. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to City policy, it is the responsibility of the Community Services Commission to forward recommendations to the Board of Directors concerning the naming of each park and recreational facility operated by the City of Temecula. On December 12, 2000, the Board of Directors awarded a contract to Sparks Exhibits and Environments to provide exhibit design, fabrication and installation at the Temecula Children's Museum. The Children's Museum project design committee has been meeting regularly to discuss design concepts for the interior space plan and exhibit concepts. The project committee met and discussed potential names for the Children's Museum on March 19, 2001. On April 9, 2001, staff brought forward the project committee's recommendation to name the facility the "Imagination Workshop" to the Community Services Commission, The Commission expressed reservations regarding the name of the facility and directed staff to reconvene the children's museum project committee for further consideration of the facility name. Based on comments and discussion by the project committee at the April 23, 2001 Children's Museum Community Workshop and project committee meeting, the project committee amended the recommendation and proposed the name of the facility be "Imagination Workshop, The Temecula Children's Museum". The project committee feels stronglythat the name "Imagination Workshop" depicts the creative, imaginative, and interactiv~ nature of the ultimate facility design and experience. The Community Services Commission considered the project committee's recommendation at their May 14, 2001 meeting and unanimously approved the amended name. The Community Services Board of Directors has the final responsibility of selecting names for City parks and recreational facilities. The Board may approve the name "Imagination Workshop, The Temecula Children's Museum" or may consider and select another name for the facility. FISCAL IMPACT: None Attachment: Resolution No. CSD 92-08: Naming Parks and Recreation Facilities R:\RUSEP~AGENDAS\naming children's museum-bod-06-26-01.doc RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ADOPTING A POLICY FOR NAMING PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES WI:IEREAS, on April 23, 1991, the Board of Directors (the "Board") adopted a policy for naming parks and recreation facilities; and Wtt~REAS, the Community Services District and the Parks and Recreation Commission requests that the aforementioned policy be adopted by resolution; NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT DOES HEREBY, RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the policy for naming parks and recreation facilities as set forth on Exhibit "A" is adopted establishing a uniform policy and procedure that identifies criteria for the naming of parks and recreation facilities. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of September, 1992. Ronald J. Parks, President ATrF__ST: Greek, City Re,om CSD 92-08 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEIvIECULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HERF.1ty DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. CSD 92-08 was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 8th day of September 1992 by the following roll call vote. AYES: 5 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Moore, Lindemans, Mufioz Parks, NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None Exhibit "A" TEMECULA COM2vIUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Naming Parks and Recreation Facilities PURPOSE To establish a uniform policy and procedure that identifies criteria for the naming of parks and recreation facilities. POLICY The Park and Recreation Commission will be responsible for the selection of names for parks and recreation facilities. Once a name is selected, it will be forwarded to the Board of Directors for ratification. Staff will be responsible for encouraging citizens and community organizations to suggest possible names that will then be forwarded to the Commission for consideration. At a minimum, each park and community building will be designated a name. Naming of specific areas within a park (garden, swimming pool, lake, ballfield, etc.) is acceptable but should be kept to a minimum to avoid confusion. No park shall be given a name which might be perceived as controversial by the community. All names selected shall be acceptable and meaningful to a majority of the neighborhood/community where the park or recreation facility is located. Priority in naming sites shall be given to geographical lacations, historic significance or geologic features. No park shall.'be named for a person, except where an individual has made a significant financial contribution toward the acquisition and/or development of the park or facility, or has been an outstanding long-time community leader who has supported open space and recreational activities. Ail park and recreation facilities will be designated a formal name within six months of acquisition or construction. All parks shall have an entrance sign. Buildings will have an entrance sign and a plaque inside the facility for name identification. The name of a park or recreation facility may be changed only after a hearing is held by the Commission to receive community input and direction. No name shall be changed unless there is significant justification and support by the community. RESPONSIBILITY Department Parks and Recreation Commission Department ACTION Acquires a new park or recreation facility. 2. Solicits possible names from community. Forwards suggested names to the Parks and Recreation Commission for consideration. 4. Receives any additional community input. 5. Selects a name for the new park or recreation facility. 6. Forwards name to City Council for ratification. 7. Installs the appropriate naming sign or plaque. ITEM 10 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ,~,~' FINANCE D I R ECTOR__~,~ CITY MANAGER r/~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services/~¢'--~? June 26,2001 Water Park Feasibility Study PREPARED BY: Cathy McCarthy, Development Services Administrator RECOMMENDATION: Park Feasibility Study. That the Board of Directors receive and file the findings of the Water BACKGROUND: As part of the 2000-2001 CIP approval process, the City Council authorized staff to develop a feasibility study for a water park in the City of Temecula. Through a request for qualifications process, the Community Services Department selected the Natelson Company to prepare the feasibility study. Based on a series of steering committee meetings, a community workshop, and an intercept survey, the attached document has been prepared for your review. The document proposes three (3) water park concepts for consideration. Each concept includes a specific number of water slide features and a swimming pool, which is either 25 meters x 25 yards or 50 meters x 25 yards. Aisc included are options for operations, which include publicly owned and operated by the City, a public private partnership or private operation by an outside company. The study provides estimated costs for construction, operations, and revenue projections. It also compares profit and loss of each water park concept. In addition, the study provides information on the operations of other water parks. Mr. Roger Dale of the Nateison Company is here tonight to present the findings and concepts of the water park feasibility study. FISCAL IMPACT: None'at this time. Should the Council direct staff to proceed with a project, funds would need to be identified. R:~vlcOar[hO~Agenda Reports\Water Park Feasibility Study.doc CITY OF TEMECULA WATER PARK FEASIBILITY STUDY May 9, 2001 Prepared for: City of Temecula Community Services Department Prepared by: THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. 24835 E. La Palma Avenue, Suite I Yorba Linda, California 92887 Phone: (714) 692-9596 Fax: (714) 692-9597 Email: infoi~tnci.com TABLE OF CONTENTS PaRe Number I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 I1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................... 4 III. RECOMMENDED PRICING ................................................................................. 10 IV. OPERATIONAL STRUCTURE ............................................................................. 15 V. MARKET AREA DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS ...................................................... 18 VI. POOL COST AND REVENUE ANALYSIS ............................................................ 20 VII. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND TASKS COMPLETED BY CONSULTANT ....... 24 APPENDIX A: APPENDIX B: APPENDIX C: APPENDIX D: APPENDIX E: MARKET AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS MODEL SURVEY OF COMPARABLE FACILITIES COMMUNITY INTERCEPT SURVEY COMMUNITY WORKSHOP SUMMARY KEY OPERATING DATA FROM THE WAVE WATERPARK (CITY OF VISTA) I. INTRODUCTION This report evaluates the market potentials and financial feasibility of a community type water park in the City of Temecuia. Specifically, this analysis measures the potential market support for three facility alternatives and the resulting potential for City revenue generation for each alternative. Based on the projected revenue generation and the likely levels of operating, maintenance, and other expenditures required to support the proposed facilities, the analysis also evaluates the financial feasibility of each facility concept. Finally, the study estimates the potential construction costs for each facility alternative and evaluates the degree to which any operating profit for the facility would be sufficient to support debt service on the initial capital investment. Overview of MethodoloRy Used for Analysis The initial step in this study involved compiling a detailed profile of public and private water parks throughout the state of California to better understand the important operating characteristics of successful water parks (see Appendix B). The second phase of the study examined the community's support and preferences regarding such a facility through a Community Workshop open to the public (see Appendix D) and in- person surveys of Temecula residents and visitors at various locations in the City (see Appendix C). Evaluating the market and revenue generation potentials of the proposed water park involved three major steps: · Identifying the population groups that are potential users of the facility based on their proximity to the site. · Projecting the portion of these potential users (market capture rate) that would actually visit the facility in a given year; and · Projecting potential revenue generation by the proposed facilities based on the projected use levels and likely fee structure. For purposes of this analysis, potential users of the proposed facilities are defined in terms of two geographic market areas: a Primary Market Area (PMA) encompassing the communities in immediate proximity to the site whose residents would provide the core of market support for the facilities, and a Secondary Market Area (SMA) encompassing residential areas somewhat more distant from the site whose residents would likely provide occasional support to the park. The relevant geographic areas for the Temecuia facility are defined in Section 4 of the report. In delineating the market areas, the consultant took into consideration the market draw experiences of other community- scale water parks. Given that the market capture rates of the other surveyed water parks vary significantly, it is not possible to predict with a high degree of certainty an exact market penetration THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecuia Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 1 rate that would apply to Temecula. For this reason, the analysis projects a range of potential attendance levels for a Temecula facility rather than unrealistically attempting to pinpoint the exact number of visitors that would come to the facility on an annual basis. The "low" scenario is relatively conservative and reflects approximately the average of the capture rates achieved by comparable water parks included in our survey. The "high" scenario reflects more aggressive assumptions regarding the facility's potential market draw, but is still within the overall range of the capture rates achieved by the more successful facilities in our sample. As described in the Executive Summary, each of the three facility concepts analyzed in this report includes a community swimming pool. While the two facilities (pool and water park) would likely achieve greater market success if co-located, they would serve distinct functions in many respects. They would also have distinct characteristics in terms of financial performance, with community pools tending to require large operating subsidies and water parks having the potential to generate a positive cash flow. This study therefore evaluates the pool and water park cash flows separately (see Appendix A, Tables A-18 through A-20) so that the financial feasibility of the water park can be determined independently of the pool (which would presumably require, a commitment from the City to provide an ongoing subsidy whether or not it is built as part of the water park complex). This study is primarily concerned with the financial feasibility of a potential water park in Temecula. It does not address engineering and design issues except to the degree necessary to derive preliminary construction cost estimates for purposes of the financial pro forma. Nor is the study site-specific, since no potential sites have been identified at this time. If the City decides to continue the water park planning process based on the results of this initial study, subsequent steps would include site-specific engineering and design work. The indicated dollar amounts for operating revenues and expenses are expressed in inflated dollars to account for future inflation. Per the direction of City staff, it has been assumed that admission fees for the facility would not be raised on an annual basis to keep up with rising operating costs. Based on the City's pricing policy/experience with other recreational facilities, fees tend to be raised only periodically and do not necessarily keep pace with overall inflation. Thus, the analysis assumes different inflation factors for costs and revenues: costs are projected to increase 3% every year, whereas revenues are projected to increase only 4% every three years (i.e., 4% in Year 4, an additional 4% in Year 7 and an additional 4% in Year 10). Although the operational structure (i.e., public versus private) of the proposed water park has not been determined at this time, for purposes of these initial financial forecasts it has been assumed that the park would be publicly operated. A privately operated facility would potentially be somewhat more profitable than the projections indicated in this report since public facilities tend to have higher operating costs due to more expensive payroll/benefits structures THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 2 The remainder of the report is organized as follows: Section 2: Section 3: Section 4: Section 5: Section 6: Section 7: Executive Summary Recommended Pricing Operational Structure Market Area Demographic Analysis Pool Cost and Revenue Analysis Summary of Background Tasks Completed by Consultant THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 3 II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY II-A. Alternative Facility Concepts Based on input provided by the project committee and research of similar community water parks, three facility alternatives have been defined for purposes of this analysis. The three alternatives reflect a range of potential facility sizes and location types, but also contain common facilities/amenities that the project committee deemed integral to a Temecula water park. Concept 1--Small scale water park with competition (25-meter) pool Location: Probably interior location Market: 10 mile radius Size: 4-5 acres Likely facilities: · 4-5 Slides (20 to 40 feet high) · Flow Rider with Lazy River · 25-meter Pool · Zero-Depth Children's PlayArea Primary user groups: Families w/young children, and competition type organizations Concept 2--Small scale water park with Olympic (50-meter) pool Location: Probably interior location Market: 10 mile radius Size: 4-5 acres Likely facilities: · 4-5 Slides (20 to 40 feet high) · Flow Rider with Lazy River · 50-meter Pool · Zero-Depth Children's PlayArea Primary user groups: Families w/young children, and competition type organizations Concept 3--Larger scale water park with Olympic (50-meter) pool Location: Probably freeway location Market: 20 mile radius Size: 6-10 acres Likely facilities: · 8-10 Slides (20 to 40 feet high) · Flow Rider with Lazy River · 50-meter Pool ~ · Zero-Depth Children's PlayArea Demographics: Families w/young children & teenagers, and competition type !organizations THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 4 II-B. Attendance Projections For each facility concept, we have projected use levels for the water park in the first ten years of operation~, taking into consideration a range of potential market capture rates. Table I1-1 shows the projected use levels for each concept. Table I1-1 Projected Use Levels (Water Park Only - Excludes Pool Usage) First Ten Years of Operation 2001 2005 2010 Facility Low High Low High Low High Concept 1 47,364 71,637 57,102 86,359 68,962 104,290 Concept 2 47,364 71,637 57,102 86,359 68,962 104,290 Concept 3 59,573 86,213 71,783 103,864 86,654 125,372 Concept 1 and Concept 2 are projected to draw between 47,364 and 71,637 visitors in Year 1. In Year 10, these two facilities are projected to attract between 68,962 and 104,290 visitors. The projected attendance levels are the same for Concept 1 and Concept 2 since the water park facilities/amenities for the two facility alternatives are identical. Although the analysis does not explicitly quantity it, there will likely be some additional attendance in Concept 2 resulting from a "spill-over" effect from the expected increased pool usage of the 50-meter pool compared to the 25-meter pool proposed under Concept 1. Concept 3, the larger-scale, regional facility is projected to draw betwben 59,573 and 86,213 visitors in Year 1. In Year 10, this larger scale facility is projected to attract between 86,654 and 125,372 visitors. The incremental attendance figures--12,209 - 14,576 in Year 1 and 17,692 - 21,082 in Year 10~for Concept 3 relative to Concepts 1 and 2 are attributable to two factors. First, the larger scale and offerings of the facility would tend to make it more regional in scope, and thereby attract more visitors from beyond the primary market area. Second, the added attractions would also make the park attractive to a broader range of demographic groups (i.e., older teenagers and young adults) in the local market area. In Appendix A, tables A-6 through A-8 illustrate attendance figures for each facility concept broken down by geographic market area and category of visitor (i.e., General Admissions, Group Admissions, etc.) ~ For purposes of this analysis, 2001 is considered Year 1, and 2010 is considered Year 10. Although the 2005 represents a more realistic opening date for a Temecula Water Park, the 2001 benchmark gives the City a "baseline" to see how a water park would perform, if it existed in the current market. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 5 II-C. Revenue Projections For each of the three alternative facilities, we have projected total annual revenues for the first ten years of operation. These projections are also presented as a range between a Iow and a high scenario that corresponds to the projected use levels. Table 11-2 provides the revenue potentials for each alternative. Table 11-2 Revenue Potentials: First Ten Years of Operation 2001 2005 2010 Facility Low Hi.qh Low Hi.qh Low High Concept1 $583,009 $859,717 $717,322 $1,064,107 $922,059 $1,374,894 Concept2 $598,009 $874,717 $732,922 $1,079,707 $938,932 $1,391,767 Concept3 $853,675 $1,215,144 $1,052,974 $1,505,626 $1,356,452 $1,947,245 Concept 1 is projected to generate between $583,009 and $859,717 in Year 1 and between $922,059 and $1,374,894 in Year 10. For Concept 2, projected revenues range from $598,000 to $874,717 in Year 1 and from $938,932 to $1,391,767 in Year 10. Concept 2 is projected to generate slightly more revenue since it would have a 50- meter pool, which is expected to have more programming and, in turn, generate more revenue than a 25-meter pool. Concept 3 is projected to generate between $853,675 and $1,215,144 in year 1 and between $1,356,452 and $1,947,245 in year 10. The incremental revenue potentials between Concept 2 and Concept 3 are attributable to the increased scale and offerings of the water park since both facilities contain a 50- meter pool that would generate the same revenues. Tables A-9 through A-11 in Appendix A provide a detailed breakdown of projected revenues by revenue category (i.e., General Admissions, Equipment Rentals, Merchandise, etc.) II-D. Cost Analysis For each of the three alternatives, we have prepared 3reliminary estimates of development and operating costs. In each of the facilities, the swimming pool (25 meter or 50 meter) is calculated separately since it is expected to operate at a net deficit and, to some extent, be financially subsidized by the water park facilities. Table 11-3 provides the preliminary construction cost analysis for each facility concept? 2 The development costs include an overhead factor for administration (10% of total construction costs) and design/architectural fees (15% of total construction costs), THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 6 Table 11-3 Construction Cost Analysis Development Costs Facility Pool Water Park Total Development Costs Concept 1 $815,000 $5,350,000 $6,165,000 Concept 2 $1,620,000 $5,350,000 $6,970,000 Concept 3 $1,620,000 $6,780,000 $8,400,000 Table A-2 in Appendix A provides a detailed breakdown of development costs by each component of the three facility concepts. Table 11-4 illustrates the total operation and maintenance costs for each facility concept. Table 11-4 Annual Operations & Maintenance Cost Analysis 2001 2005 2010 Facility Low Hi.qh Low High Low Hi.qh Concept1 $1,116,484 $1,199,500 $1,294,098 $1,406,715 $1,553,135 $1,710,781 Concept2 $1,309,484 $1,392,500 $1,511,321 $1,623,938 $1,804,957 $1,962,602 Concept3 $1,351,238 $1,442,347 $1,567,831 $1,691,319 $1,883,906 $2,056,676 The analysis provides a range of expenditures since some operations and maintenance costs will vary based on attendance levels (i.e., higher attendance levels will require more staffing). For Concept 1, total annual expenditures are projected to range between $1,116,484 and $1,199,500 in Year 1 and between $1,553,135 and $1,710,781 in Year 10. Total annual expenditures for Concept 2 are projected to range from $1,309,484 to $1,392,500 in Year 1 and between $1,804,957 and $1,962,602 in Year 10. For Concept 3, total annual expenditures are projected to range between $1,351,238 and $1,442,347 in Year 1 and between $1,883,906 and $2,056,676 in Year 10. The Olympic pool accounts for the additional costs in Concept 2 over Concept 1 while the larger scale water park accounts for the additional costs in Concept 3 over Concept 2. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 7 Tables A-12 through A-17 in Appendix A provide a detailed breakdown of expenditures for the both the pool and the water park separately. II-E. Operating Profits and Losses For each of the three facility concepts, based on the findings from the previous analyses, the consultant has estimated annual profits/losses that each concept is projected to generate. Table 11-5 provides the annual projected profits/losses for the water park facility in the first ten years of operation. Table 11-5 Operating Losses 2001 2005 2010 Facility Low Hi,qh Low H i,qh Low Hi,qh Concept1 ($533,475) ($339,783) ($576,776) ($342,608) ($631,076) ($335,887) Concept2 ($711,475) ($517,783) ($778,399) ($544,231) ($866,024) ($570,835) Concept3 ($497,563) ($227,204) ($514,858) ($185,693) ($527,454) ($109,431) Given the substantial costs of operating a 25-meter or 50-meter pool, each facility concept is projected to generate operating losses through the first ten years of operation. Concept 2 is projected to generate the most losses since the facility has a smaller scale water park, with corresponding lower use levels and admission rates, along with the increased costs of a 50-meter pool. Concept 3, reflecting projected increased use levels and admission rates, is projected to generate the smallest operating loss of all the facility concepts. Tables A-18 through A-20 in Appendix A provide ten-year profit/loss projections for the three facility concepts for the water park and pool components separately. II-F. Estimated Capital Expense/Debt Service As an initial means of determining the capital expense/debt service associated with facility construction, the consultant has assumed that the facility construction costs would be financed over a 20-year period at 5.0% interest. Table 11-6 below provides an estimate of the annual debt service expense associated with each facility concept. THE NATELSON COMPANY, iNC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 8 Table 11-6 Annual Debt Service Expense Concept Water Park Pool Total Concept 1 $429,298 $65,398 $494,696 Concept 2 $429,298 $129,993 $559,291 Concept 3 $544,045 $129,993 $674,038 The above numbers only reflect construction costs--they do not include land acquisition costs. Tables A-1 through A-20 in Appendix A provide the detailed pro forma analysis that is the basis for the key findings summarized above. Appendix A also provides a narrative description of the various assumptions used in the pro forma. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 9 III. RECOMMENDED PRICING In evaluating the potential revenue generation for the three facility concepts, the consultants have relied heavily on current and historic operating data for The Wave Waterpark in the City of Vista. This is appropriate given that the three facility concepts under consideration for Temecula are essentially variations of the Vista model. Moreover, Vista and Temecula are reasonably similar demographically. The consultants believe that The Wave is also an appropriate model for Temecula in terms of admissions pricing. We say this knowing that: Vista's prices are very comparable to what most Temecula residents would be willing to pay for a community water park facility (as indicated by the community intercept survey and community workshop conducted as part of this feasibility study); Many Temecula residents currently visit water parks in other communities (including The Wave) and are therefore well aware of the prevailing market prices for such facilities (in which Vista is actually moderately priced compared to some larger facilities); and The primary market areas (10-mile radii) surrounding Vista and Temecula are very comparable in terms of resident income levels, with both areas having average household incomes in the Iow to mid $60,000's. Although average household incomes in Temecula's extended (15- to 20-mile) market areas are lower than in its 10-mile radius, the primary market area is considered the most important gauge of the area's ability to support this type of facility. Due to the sharp increase in operating costs that The Wave has experienced as a result of rising electricity and natural gas prices, the City is currently proposing to increase its fee structure (with the new rates taking effect in time for the upcoming summer season). Table II1-1 on the following page shows Vista's current and proposed fee structures (General Admission categories only). Table 111-2 simplifies Vista's overall fee structure into seven major admissions categories and shows the average admissions revenue that the City derives per visitor. These average-revenue-per-visitor figures represent the effective average fee in each category after all discounts, etc. have been taken into consideration; these estimates are based on Vista's actual operating data for last year. Table 111-2 also projects the average- revenue-per visitor under the proposed price increases.3 3 The weighted average of Vista's proposed price increases for all categories is approximately 20%. This factor has been applied to each of the admission categories for a Temecula water park. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 10 Table II1-1 Current and Proposed Fee Schedules The Wave (City of Vista) General Admission 42' and Taller Admission Under 42' Admission 2 and Under Admission After 3 p.m. Admission Family Night Admission (4) Family Night (I extra) Family Night Walk*in City Employee Discount Under 42' Group Rate 42" & Taller Group Rate Group Deposit Under 42' 10 Punch Pass (resident) Under 42' 10 Punch Pass (non-resident) 42" & Taller 10 Punch Pass (resident) 42" & Taller 10 Punch Pass (non-resident) Spectator Admission Spectator Refund Consignment Under 42' Consignment 42" & Taller Fundraiser Tickets Current (2000) Proposed (2001) $9,75 $11.50 $6.75 $8,50 Free Free $5.00 $6.00 $12.00 $15,00 $3.50 $5.00 $5.00 $6.00 $7.00 $7.00 $5.50 $6.00 $7.50 $8,00 $25,00 $25.00 $45.00 $55.00 N/A $65.00 $70.00 $80.00 N/A $90.00 $9.75 $10.95 ($7.00) ($7.00) $5.50 $6.00 $7.50 $8.0O $5.00 $6.00 THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 11 Table 111-2 Average Admission Charge per Visitor The Wave (City of Vista) Revenue Cate,qor~ Proposed 2000 Increase Prices For 2001 General Admission $5.50 $6.60 Group Admissions $7.00 $8.40 Birlhdays $12.00 $14.40 Consignment Ticket Sales $7.00 $8.40 Special Programming $4.25 $5.10 Private Rentals* $1,395.00 $1,675.00 Note; *All categories besides Private Rentals are expressed as dollars per visit per person. Private Rentals are expressed as dollars per rental event. Consignment ticket sales are tickets sold at various locations at a discount of the General Admission rate. Special Programming is considered various type "camps" where multiple visits are involved, such as a flow rider camp. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 12 Although it is impossible to predict when and how the current California energy crisis will be resolved, it is reasonable to assume that a future Temecula facility would also operate within the high cost environment that is now facing existing water parks such as The Wave. For that reason, the consultant has utilized the higher price structure (i.e., what Vista is proposing to implement this year) as the basis for the Temecula revenue projections. Since Vista's price increases have not yet been implemented, it is uncertain as to whether or not the higher prices will result in a decrease in attendance. However, we would not expect any attendance decrease to be substantial given that Vista's prices will still be moderate relative to other (mostly larger) water parks in southern California. For Concepts 1 and 2, we have assumed the exact fee structure that is currently proposed in Vista. For Concept 3, we have assumed slightly higher fees (as described in Appendix A of this report) based on the fact that the Concept 3 facility would be significantly larger than The Wave. Table 111-3 below shows the cash flows that would result under the lower fee structure. The comparison is shown for 2005, which is assumed to be a realistic opening date for the facility. Table 111-3 Comparison of Cash Flows Temecula Water Park Facility Options Net Cash Flow in 2005 Net Cash Flow in 2005 Facility Option Low Fee Structure Higher Fee Structure Concept 1-1ow scenario ($685,341 ) ($576,776) Concept 1-high scenario ($508,986) ($342,608) Concept 2-1ow scenario ($886,964) ($778,399) Concept 2-high scenario ($710,609) ($544,231) Concept 3-1ow scenario ($676,769) ($514,858) Concept 3-high scenario /$423,064/ /$185,6931 Regarding Temecula's potential pricing policies, one other issue from Vista's experience is important to note. During the community workshop for the Temecula study, it was suggested that discounted "season passes" would make the facility more attractive to the community. City of Vista staff cautioned against offering a true season pass in that it would tend to significantly reduce the facility's revenue potential. The reason is that community scale water parks rely very heavily on repeat visits during the course of the THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 13 peak season; thus, if multiple visits are significantly discounted on an unlimited basis, much of the financial benefit of this repeat visitation is lost. The preferred approach in Vista has been to offer "lO-punch pass" cards that give repeat customers a meaningful per-visit discount (nearly 30%, if they use all 10 punches), while still putting a reasonable limit on the City's revenue reductions. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 14 IV. OPERATIONAL STRUCTURE This section outlines three major options regarding the potential operational structure of the water park. It should be noted that the methodology utilized for this study assumes that the water park would be operated as a municipally owned facility (i.e., cost increases and admission rate increases are based on city staff assumptions). 1) Public As a public facility the City would build, own, and operate the water park. Thus, the City would either receive a net "profit" or a net "loss" that the facility might generate. The main advantage of this particular structure is that it would give the City total control over the operational aspects of the water park--the particular design of the facility, admission rates, etc. However, since the City would be responsible for every facet of such a facility, this option would also require the most use of City resources~acquiring private property or using public land, maintaining a part-time and full-time staff to handle the marketing and day-to-day operations of the water park, and responsibility for the facility's ongoing financial performance. The Wave Water Park in the City of Vista and The Prewett Family Water Park in the City of Antioch are both publicly owned and operated water parks in California (although the Antioch facility does contract all food related concessions). Both are relatively successful organizations and require little or no public financial subsidy (although the Antioch facility is advantaged by subsidized utility rates, as discussed further in Section VII). 2) Public Land - Private Facility As a joint public/private venture the City would encourage a private operator to construct a water park on public land, such as in a public park, under a long-term lease agreement. Although there exists a range of public/private operational structures, one scenario would be that the City, in exchange for providing the land, would receive a certain percentage of the gross receipts from the privately owned and operated water park. The Mustang Water Slides in Arroyo Grande and The Rapids Water Slide in Pleasanton are two examples of this type of operational structuro both facilities are privately owned and are operated on public land in regional parks. The Mustang Water Slides pays the County 10% of the first $100,000 in gross receipts and 12% thereafter. Under its agreement, the East Bay RegiOnal Parks system receives 3.25% of all concessionaire revenues (admissions, food and beverage sales, etc.) and 2.5% of all other revenues (private rentals, special events, etc.) from The Rapids Water Slide. The major advantage of this type of operational structure is that it involves minimal use of city resources beyond the use of public land in a long-term lease agreement. The possible drawbacks to this operational structure include minimal control over design of the facility and admission rates charged to the public. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 15 3) Private This scenario would involve the City marketing itself to private operators of water parks and encouraging them to establish such a facility in Temecula. This would be the least costly route for the City since it would not be responsible for the development or the operations of the facility. However, there is no guarantee that a private operator would develop a water park in Temecula, leaving the City with no control over when such a facility would be developed in the community. If the City were able to attract a privately owned and operated water park, it still might receive a percentage of some revenues that the park generates. A developer may be willing to give the City a percentage of some revenues in exchange for cutting "red tape", fast-tracking the permitting process, reducing development impact fees, etc. The original Whitewater Canyon water park in Chula Vista provides an example of this type of arrangement. The original developer of this water park received assistance from the City in order to facilitate and reduce its cost of developing and operating the project. Specifically, the City assisted in the following: 1) Assisting Developer with negotiations with other public agencies with the authority to impose impact fees on the project (City of San Diego, School Districts, Water District) to achieve reasonable reductions on such fees. 2) Constructing, at the City's sole cost and expense, certain improvements to a key access road into the project. 3) Adjusting City development impact fees based upon the seasonal nature of the facility and other factors. In exchange for such assistance, the developer agreed to compensate the City by 1) Paying the City 2% of gross receipts from non-sales taxable income (admissions fees, parking fees, equipment and locker rentals, arcade games, etc.) 2) Granting the City access to the Project for Parks and Recreation programs and Police/Fire Department rescue/training exercises during certain off-peak usage periods. The main disadvantage of this strategy is the inherent risk that the City may not be able to attract a private operator of a water park. Essentially, there is no guarantee that the City will be able to "sell" itself and convince a private enterprise to develop a water park in Temecula. Also, the City, as in option 2, would have no control over admission rates, which would likely be higher in a privately owned operation. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 16 The table below provides a brief outline of the potential benefits and drawbacks to each operational structure. Option I - Public Option 2 - Public Land Option 3 - Private .Benefits: Benefits: Benefits: · Control over design of · City receives portion of · No use of city resources facility revenues · Control over all · Minimal use of City · Possible financial operational aspects of resources beyond long- incentives in exchange for facility term land lease City assistance Drawbacks: Drawbacks: Drawbacks: · Requires use of city · Minimal or no control over · No control over design of resoumes design of facility facility · Possible "net" losses · Minimal control over · No control over operational structure operational structure · May be less attractive to · Uncertainty in attracting private operator due to private operator inability to realize · No control over admission appreciation on land rates investment · Minimal or no control over admission rates THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 17 V. MARKET AREA DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS This section identifies the geographic market areas from which the proposed water park would likely draw market support. In order to determine the geographic areas from which the proposed water park would likely draw market support, the consultant conducted interviews with various community water park operators to determine the market areas that constitute the park's existing customer base. The survey revealed that community type water parks tend to draw the bulk of their customers within a 10-mile radius of their location. However, the survey also revealed that some community water parks draw customers from as far away as 30 to 40 miles. Given that there is little competition from entertainment-related facilities in the surrounding area, the relative ease in travel along the Interstate 15 freeway, and the relatively high summer temperatures in the surrounding region, this analysis assumes that a Temecula water park could potentially draw customers from a distance of up to 20 miles. For purposes of this analysis, the geographic market area has been divided into the following three regions: 1 ) Primary Market Area (PMA) - 10 mile radius; 2) Secondary Market Area (SMA) - 15 mile radius (excluding the PMA); 3) Tertiary Market Area (TMA) - 20 mile radius (excluding the PMA and SMA). All of the market areas have been truncated so as not to include any areas within a 10- mile radius of The Wave Water Park in the City of Vista. The future growth in market area population is the primary determinant of future demand for a community water park. Accordingly, a fundamental task of the analysis is to project future population levels within the market areas. For this purpose, the analysis has utilized population forecasts prepared by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and the San Diego County Association of Governments (SANDAG) for the census tracts comprising the Primary and Secondary Market Areas. In the Primary Market Area, the population is expected to grow, in the years 2000 to 2010, by approximately 89,000 residents, representing a 55% increase. In the same time period, the Secondary Market Area is projected to add 88,000 residents, a 48% increase. Both of these geographic areas, as the projections illustrate, will likely experience substantial population growth over the next ten years. Table V-1 provides the population projections in each geographic area for years 2000 through 2010 and years 2015 and 2020. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 18 ~o ~ to o VI. POOL COSTAND REVENUE ANALYSIS VI-A. Overview The project committee has decided that a public swimming pool, either an Olympic pool (50 meters x 25 yards) or what is typically called a "shod course" or "competition" pool (25 meters x 25 yards), should be a definite component of the proposed water park facility. The consultant has conducted an extensive survey of various municipal pool operators to better understand all facets of such facilities--operational costs, operational revenues, programs they offer, etc. The following municipal pool facilities were surveyed: Facility Type of Pool Culver City Municipal Plunge Santa Monica Municipal Swimming Pool Los Angeles City Aquatics AAF Rose Bowl Aquatics Center (Pasadena) Glendale Municipal Pools Cerritos Olympic Swim & Fitness Center Roseville Aquatics Complex Irvine - Heritage Aquatics Complex Mission Viejo - Marguerite Complex Poway Fremont High School The Wave Water Park Whittier- Palm Park Pool Alhambra Various North S.D. County Facilities 1 - 50 meter 1 - 50 meter and 1 - 25 yard Various 2 - 50 meter 3 - 25 Yard 1 - 50 meter 1 - 50 meter, 1 - 7,200 s.f. recreation pool I - 50 meter, I - 33.5 meter, 1 - 25 yard 1 - 50 meter, I - 6,000 s.f. diving pool, 1 - 2,500 s.f. warm-up pool 1 - 50 meter I - 50 meter 1 - 25 Yard 4 - 25 Yard 2 - 25 Yard and 1 - 22 yard 25 yard - 33.5 meter The survey revealed that public pools are usually designed for four specific functions listed as follows: 1) Competitive Pools used for competitive type events are almost always Olympic pools (50 meters x 25 yards) which are typically 2.5 meters deep. Such facilities are.typically used for High School swim meets and other group competition swimming events. Supporters and users of such facilities represent a small segment of the population that is usually very organized in voicing their support for these pools. Water temperature at these pools is usually set at 78 degrees. 2) Recreational Recreational swimming facilities are typically utilized for non-directed activity by the public. However, in many instances these pools are THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 20 "multi-use" in the sense that they are used for competition, classes, and recreation. These pools are usually 25 meters or 25 yards in size. Water temperature is usually set at 80 degrees during the summer and 82 - 84 degrees during the off-season. 3) Educational These facilities are often utilized for different types of lessons given by the operator and are sometimes rented to school districts to run P.E. programs. Water temperature is typically set at 84 degrees for these facilities. 4) Therapeutic These pools are designed with therapeutic considerations. They are typically configured with ramps and lifts to make it easier for people with disabilities to enjoy a public pool. Water temperature is usually kept at 86 degrees since users tend not to move a lot and therefore chill faster. While the above uses for these pools are not strictly mutually exclusive, an overall design of the pool should take the intended use into consideration. For example, it would be difficult to have some educational programs, such as swimming lessons, in a true Olympic size pool since they are relatively deep throughout. However, there are several examples of multi-use 50-meter public pools. The Cerritos Olympic Swim and Fitness Center, Roseville Aquatics Complex, and Culver City Municipal Plunge all host various competition swim meets and provide a number of recreational and educational swimming programs in their 50-meter pools. VI-B. Costs While it is difficult to obtain accurate operational and maintenance cost data broken down by category (many Cities have the costs spread out over various departmental budgets), the survey revealed that the annual expenditures on 50 meter pools range anywhere from $300,000 to $600,000. However, these numbers are subject to adjustment upward based on the current energy crisis facing the State; many of these municipal pool operators have seen their energy costs (electricity and gas costs) increase anywhere from 35% to 75% over the past few months. For 25 meter and 25 yard pools, the survey revealed that annual operations and maintenance costs ranged from $150,000 to $300,000. Again, these figures do not reflect the recent increases in energy costs. Depending on the length of the year and hours the pools operate, operators expect a 25% to 75% increase in energy costs. VI-C. Revenues THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 21 VI-C. Revenues As expected, every one of the aquatic centers surveyed "loses" money each fiscal year. The costs associated with operating a pubic pool--water, chemicals, energy, labor, maintenance, etc.--are too prohibitive to be recouped from the comparatively little revenue they generate. Each of the municipal pool operators viewed their pools as a public service to the community that, to a large extent, is financed by taxpayers. Revenues generated from 25 meter or 25 yard pools ranged from $20,000 to $100,000, depending on the type of activities offered, hours and seasons of operation. For Olympic pools, revenues ranged from $60,000 to $400,000, reflecting varying use levels, types of pool activities, etc. The operators of these aquatics facilities stated that a relatively well-run municipal pool typically generates $.20 cents to $.30 cents in revenue for every dollar in expenditures. Put differently, a municipal pool should expect to recover no more than 20% to 30% of its annual costs. Considering Temecula's existing aquatics program revenues and programs, and based on consultation with city staff, the analysis projects a 25-meter pool to generate $63,500 in annual revenue while a 50-meter pool is projected to generate $78,500 in annual revenue. These two revenue projection figures are conservative estimates. These two pools could generate more revenue depending on how they are marketed and their success in attracting users. Table VI-1 provides a breakdown of these projected revenues by attendance category. Table VI-1 Pool Revenue Analysis Pool Size Attendance Cate.qory 25 - meter 50 - meter Swim Lessons $35,000 $44,000 Lap Swim $3,000 $4,000 Public Swim $20,000 $24,000 Family Night $1,000 $1,300 Pool Rental $400 $4,400 Non-Resident $500 $800 Total $63,500 $78,500 Table VI-2 provides revenue data for selected municipal aquatics throughout California facilities that contain both 50-meter and 25-yard pools. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 22 Table VI-2 Revenue Summary of Selected Aquatics Facilities Facility Pools Revenue Poway 1 - 50 meter $200,180 Culver City Plunge 1 - 50 meter $135,319 Cerritos Olympic Swim and 1 - 50 meter $434,800 Fitness Center Irvine - Heritage Aquatics 1 - 50 meter, 1 - 33.5 $187,000 Complex meter, 1 - 25 yard 1 - 50 meter, 1 - 7,200 SF Roseville Aquatics Complex rec. pool, 150' waterslide, $495,593 Zero-Depth Play Area 1 - 50 meter pool, 1 - 25 San Ramon Aquatics yard pool, Zero-Depth Play $405,000 Complex Area Santa Monica Municipal 1 - 50 meter, 1 - 25 yard $100,000 Swimming Pool San Marcos - Woodland 1 - 25 yard $54,310 San Marcos - Las Posas 1 - 25 yard $40,740 Oceanside - Brooks I - 33.5 meter $36,000 Oceanside - Marshal 1 - 25 yard $33,000 Carlsbad 1 - 25 yard $166,280 Escondido - Grape Day I - 25 yard $60,000 Escondido - Washington 1 - 25 yard $35,000 Whittier - Palm Park Pool 4 - 25 yard $148,000 Alhambra 2 - 25 yard, 1 - 22 yard $107,041 THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 23 VII. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND TASKS COMPLETED BY CONSULTANT This section provides summaries of earlier tasks completed by the consultant as part of the overall feasibility study. The full reports documenting these earlier tasks will be provided as appendices in the final document. VII-A. Survey of Comparable Facilities At the outset of the study process, the consultant conducted an extensive survey of public and private water parks throughout southern and northern California. The findings of the survey are presented in the following matrix format which provides a detailed profile of many of the water parks throughout the State of California. The profiles provide the following information: · Location · Size (acreage) · List of Facilities/Amenities · Date opened · Hours/months/season of operation · Ownership (private, public, concession, etc.) · Staffing requirements · Development costs (land and facilities) · Fee structure · Annual attendance · Annual operating revenues and costs · Demographic profile of clientele · Geographic distribution of clientele The survey yielded a unique mixture of water parks throughout the State of California. Some parks are relatively small in scale; they may have 2 small slides and a modest public swimming pool, with most of the attendees living within a 10 mile radius of the facility. Other parks are much larger in scale; they can cover up to 50 acres, offer 30 to 40 attractions, and attract an audience from a 120+ mile radius. The smaller-scale facilities tend to be owned and operated by municipalities, with the primary focus on providing a recreation/leisure service to the community, and profits or losses only a secondary consideration. The larger-scale facilities are almost exclusively operated and owned by private interests, and are typically designed to 3rovide a "theme park" experience for users in many geographic areas. The survey found there to be four community type, mumcipal water park facilities in southern California. The following communities/entities operate such water parks in southern California: the City of Vista, San Bernardino County Regional Parks, the City of Fontana, and Lake Perris State Park. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 24 The City of Vista's Wave Water Park is the most impressive and successful of community type water parks in southern California. It was completed in 1994 and consists of three acres that includes 4 slides, a "Flow Rider" (a scaled down version of wave pools typically found in larger theme park oriented water parks), a lazy river, a 25- meter competition pool, a children's play area, and picnic areas. The Wave draws 125,000 in annual attendance, and offers everything from general admission to the water park to off-season aquatic programs involving the 25-meter pool. The Wave is modestly profitable with annual revenues approximately $1.3 million and operational costs at $1.1 million. The park is well known among various water park operators in the state, and is generally regarded as successful model for municipal water park/aquatic facilities. San Bernardino County Regional parks operates four water parks in the following cities: Devore, Ontario, Yucaipa, and Crestline. The facilities range in size from 3.5 acres to 6.1 acres and were built between 1977 and 1988. Each of the facilities includes two slides and public swimming facilities and are a section of a larger regional park, which includes lakes that offer fishing and pedal boat rentals, picnic reservation facilities, and camping facilities among others. The average annual attendance at these facilities ranges from 25,000 to 57,300. The four facilities generate between $101,000 and $229,000 in annual revenues, which, on average, is approximately 30% of total revenues for the park. It is difficult to determine the operational and maintenance costs of these facilities since they are part of a larger regional park. However, the four parks combined, for the 1999 - 2000 fiscal year, operated on nearly break-even basis. The City of Fontana's Jurupa Lagoon and Water Park was completed in 1985 and is a relatively smaller scale facility that includes two waterslides, a lagoon for swimming, and a children's play area. The facility is a part of much larger park totaling 1,050 acres. The water park draws approximately 10,000 visitors a year, and has annual operating revenues of $51,000 and costs of $54,000. The Lake Perris State Park facility was constructed in 1984 and includes 3 water slides (all 340 feet in length). The water park, initially a private facility; has been operated by the state park system since 1997. Attendance at the facility has averaged around 9,200 the past four years, while annual revenues have averaged approximately $59,000. Although specific operational costs were not available from the park service, the facility is thought to operate on a small profit. There are a number of privately owned, theme park oriented water park facilities with large-scale attractions throughout southern California. These range from moderate- scale facilities such as Redlands' Pharaoh's Lost Kingdom that is part of larger general theme park to full-blown exclusive water parks such as the 50 acre Raging Waters in the City of San Dimas. These parks tend to draw visitors throughout the entire southern California region, with admission rates at these facilities ranging from $20.00 to $25.00. Outside the southern California region, there are other examples of smaller-scale community water parks. In the Central Coast City of Arroyo Grande, there is Mustang THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 25 Waterslides, which was constructed in 1977 and consists of approximately 3 acres that includes 4 slides (2 at 600 feet in length and 2 for small children), a children's play area, and four hot spas. The water park is operated by a private concessionaire, but is part of the County run Lopez Lake Recreation Area that offers camping, parking, and other lake related activities. The agreement between the County and the operator of the water park calls for the County to receive 10 percent of the first $100,000 in revenues, and 12 percent thereafter. Although exact operational revenues and costs were unavailable, the County estimates annual revenues are between $700,000 and $800,000 based on the share it receives, and that the park generates a considerable profit for its owners. The park attracts users as far away as from the Central Valley cities of Fresno and Bakersfield (approximately 180 miles away). However, these users are primarily there for the camping and lake facilities and decide to use the water slides once in the regional park. The water slide park and the camping facilities have created a synergy where each of the facilities "feeds" off each other. The Rapids Waterslide in Pleasanton is another example of a small-scale privately owned and operated facility in a county run regional park. The facility, developed in 1980, is located in the Shadow Cliffs East Bay Regional Park and includes a 500 ft. long four flumed water slide built into a small hill. The facility draws an estimated 100,000 visitors a year, which includes general admission, special school group functions, and YMCA group events. Although the attendance figure appears high given the limited amenities at the Rapids Waterslide, the park derives the bulk of its attendance from visitors that are already in the popular regional park. The agreement between the operator and the regional park calls for the County to receive 3.25% of concession revenues and 2.5% of all other revenues. Although the operator did not disclose operating revenues and costs, it did indicate that the facility is profitable and is currently under consideration for expansion. The Prewett Family Water Park and Community Center in Antioch was completed in 1996 and is an 1 l-acre facility that includes 5 water slides, 5 separate pools, waterfalls, and a community center. The development costs for the entire facility totaled $13.5 million, which included a 100-acre parcel of land that the 1 l-acre facility is part of. The facility was developed from Mello-Roos funds and is run by the City of Antioch which contracts out the concessions (snack bar and vending machines). Annual attendance has ranged from 67,000 to 83,000 between 1997 and 2000. The facility also offers aquatics programs such as swim lessons, lifeguard training, etc. for the community in addition to the standard water park amenities. In the latest fiscal year operating revenues totaled $960,000 and operating costs totaled $904,000, representing a $54,000 profit for the City. However, much of the park's relative financial success results from subsidized energy costs (approximately 20% below market rates) provided by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).4 The majority of the park's visitors are families with young children who live within a 10-mile radius of the facility. 4 As of June 2001, this program is being phased out. Prewett Water Park staff anticipates a 50% increase in energy costs, due to both the lost subsidy and the general increase in energy prices. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 26 The Big Bear Water Park in Waterford was constructed in 1984 at an initial cost of $500,000 with substantial add-ons since. The privately owned and operated water park draws, on average, 50,000 to 60,000 visitors per year and consists of five waterslides, an inner tube slide, a children's play area, a swimming lake, volleyball courts, and picnic areas. Since the water park is adjacent to a sizeable campground, the geographic distribution of the clientele is relatively dispersed--the market is any~vhere within a 2- hour drive, according to the park operator. Although exact figures were not disclosed, the operator indicated that the water park is modestly profitable. The matrixes in the Appendix B provide the findings from all the facilities that were surveyed. VII-B. Community Intercept Survey As part of the public input process for the City of Temecula water park feasibility study, The Natelson Company, Inc. (TNCI) conducted a community "intercept" survey during the month of November 2000. The survey was designed to gauge the community's interest in a community-type water park, determine the extent to which area residents currently use water parks in other communities, and identify the residents' preferences as to the potential location of a water park in Temecula. TNCI conducted the survey from November 4 to November 18 at a variety of locations throughout the community. This ensured a broad cross-section of the Temecula resident population. Given the types of locations where the survey was conducted, some of the respondents were residents from neighboring communities. A total of 320 surveys were completed. The following is a list of the locations where the survey was conducted: · Rancho California Sports Spark - Soccer League Field (corner of Rancho Vista Road and Margarita Road) · City History Museum (28314 Mercedes Street) · Vons (27471 Ynez Road) · Albertsons (30530 Rancho California Road) · City Library (41000 County Center Drive) · Community Recreation Center (30875 Rancho Vista Road) · City Expo (Chaparral High School, 27215 Nicolas Road) The following provides a brief summary of the key findings from the community intercept survey. 1. Many Temecula residents currently use water parks in other communities. Close to two-thirds (65%) of the respondents answered that either they or members of their family have visited water parks in the past. Many of these attend water parks THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 27 frequently---close to half (45.2%) of those surveyed make multiple (more than one) visits in a year. 2. A community-type water park would be popular with residents of Temecula. Over 90 percent (91.6%) of the respondents stated that they would either strongly approve or approve of a community-type water park being developed in the City of Temecula. More than two thirds (67.2%) responded that they or their family would very likely use a water park in Temecula. A large majority of those surveyed would use such a facility repeatedly; over 90 percent (92.5%) of the respondents that are likely to use a water park stated that they would anticipate making multiple (more than one) visits during a year. Many residents would prefer for the water park to be located near the City's sports complex. Close to half (44.4%) of the respondents selected the City's sports complex when asked where they felt would be the best location for a water park. This was nearly 20 percent higher than the next most popular location: a commercial/industrial area. Temecula residents are willing to pay a reasonable amount of money to use a community water park. Just over half (50.9%) of those surveyed stated that they would be willing to pay $6.00 - $10.00 to use a community water park. This is in line with what similar community type water park facilities charge for a typical all day pass. Nearly a third (32.5%) of the respondents stated they would be willing to pay $11.00 - $15.00 to use a community water park, which is closer to admission rates for larger scale water parks. The demographic characteristics of the respondents fit favorably with a community water park. Forty-four percent of the respondents stated there were 3-4 people in their households, and nearly 30% (29.4%) stated there were 5+ individuals in their households, which, combined, represents close to three-fourths (73.4%) of those surveyed. Well over two- thirds (70.6%) of the respondents indicated that they have children under age 18 in their household, and just over two-thirds (67.5%) of these children are between the ages 6 and 14, the most likely age group to attend a water park. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study - Page 28 IFC. Community Workshop As part of the initial information gathering process for the water park feasibility study, The Natelson Company, Inc. (TNCl) along with City staff facilitated an evening meeting open to the general public on November 27, 2000. The purposes of this meeting were to describe the potential facility to the meeting participants and to solicit their input regarding the levels of interest/demand that may exist for such a facility in Temecula. The meeting was also used to ascertain the community's preferences regarding the size and components of the facility, and potential locations within the City. The community workshop drew 25 City residents who provided valuable input regarding their interest in a community-type water park, the extent to which they currently use water parks in other communities, their preferences regarding the size and components of the facility, and potential locations they would prefer within the City. The 25 participants were divided into three groups to facilitate group discussions and brainstorming. The concept of a community type water park was popular with almost all of the participants, similar to the findings from the community intercept survey. Out of 25 individuals, 24 said they were in favor of a Temecula water park, 23 said themselves or their family would likely attend such a facility, and 22 would make multiple visits (more than one) in a given year. The majority of the participants (68%) stated that they would be willing to pay between $5 and $10 to use a community type water park. The groups did not develop much of a consensus regarding what age groups such a facility should be geared towards. Some felt it should be geared toward ages 12 - 18, others between ages 2 and 17, and some said the facility should be designed to appeal to people of all ages. The participants did develop a consensus about potential locations for a water park: somewhere where it will not adversely impact traffic circulation. All three of the groups expressed support in some fashion for a freeway location since this would keep much of the increased traffic off City streets. The groups also mentioned some specific sites where they would prefer a water park: near a park, the west side of town, the west side of the southbound 79 freeway, and near the City's existing sports complex. At the conclusion of the workshop, those attending participated in a voting scheme to select different facilities/amenities that they would desire in a Temecula water park. A swimming pool received the most votes, followed by steep water slides, a wave pool, and a lazy river. The participants also expressed moderate support for mild water slides and a zero-depth children's play area, two amenities often found in community type water parks. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Pank Feasibility Study - Page 29 APPENDIX A MARKET AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS MODEL Table A-I Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study MARKET PENETRATION RATES BY TYPE OF FACILITY CONCEPT 1 Key Facilities: Size: 4 ~ 5 Slides, Flow Rider W/Lazy River, Zero-Depth Children's Play Area, 25 Meter Pool 4 - 5 acres Market Penetration Rates: ~,nnual Number of Visits per Resident t4arket Radius (miles) Low High 10 0,20 0.30 15 0.10 0.15 20 0.05 0.08 Construction Costs Pool Water Park $650,000 $4,275,000 Low High =dvate ParUes 0.000071 0.000132 CONCEPT 2 Key Facilities: Size: 4 - 5 Slides, Flow Rider wi Lazy River, Zero-Depth Children's Play Area, 50 Meter Pool 4 - 5 acres Market Penetration Rates: Annual Number of Visits per Resident Market Radius (miles) Low High 10 0.20 0.30 15 0.10 O. 15 20 0.05 0.08 Construction Costs Pool Water Park $1,295,000 $4,275,000 Private Parties Low High 0.000071 0.000132 ;ONCEPT 3 Key Facilities: 3ize: 8 - 10 Slides, Flow Rider w/Lazy River, Zero-Depth Children's Play Area, 50 Meter Pool 6 - 10 acres Vlarket Penetration Rates: Annual Number of Visits per Resident Market Radius (miles) Low High 10 0.25 0.35 15 0.15 0.20 20 0.05 0.10 Construction Costs Pool Water Park $1,295,000 $5,430,000 Pdvats Parties Low High 0.000071 0.000132 A-I Table A-2 Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION COSTS Facility/Amenities Site Work Site Utilities Parking Lot Main Building Concession Building Competition Pool Flow Rider Continuous River Waterslides Wet Playground Concept 1 $1,130,000 $150 000 $530 000 $865 000 $265 000 $815 000 $815 000 $670 000 $675,000 $250,000 Conce~ 2 $1,130,000 $150,000 $530,000 $865,000 $265,000 $1,620,000 $815,000 $670,000 $675,000 $250,000 Concept 3 $1,470,000 $200,000 $670,000 $1,040,000 $315,000 $1,620,000 $815,000 $670,000 $1,350,000 $250,000 Total $6,165,000 $6,970,000 $8,400,000 Notes: Costs include overhead costs for Administration (10% of total construction costs) and engineering/design (15% of total construction costs), Main Building (6,975 square feet) includes: Ticket Booth, First Aid Room, Filtration System, Locker Rooms (2), Maintenance Room, Main Office, Merchandise Room, Vault Room. Concession Building (4968 square feet) includes: Pizza Grill, French Fry Grill, Industrial Freezer, Fountain Machines. A-2 Table A-4 Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Attendance Breakdown By Category Attendance Category General Admission Group Admissions Birthdays Consignment Ticket Sales Special Programming Total Factor 70.0% 15.0% 5.0% 2.5% 7.5% 100.0% A-4 Table A-.C, Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Revenue Per Visitor Revenue Category General Admission Group Admissions Birthdays Consignment Ticket Sales Special Programming Pdvate Rentals* Concept 1 Concept 2 Concept 3 $6.60 $6.60 $7,92 $8.40 $8.40 $10.08 $14.40 $14.40 $17.28 $8.40 $8.40 $10.08 $5.10 $5.10 $6.12 $1,675.00 $1,675.00 $2,010.00 Percentage of Water Park General Admission Revenue Food 52.0% 52.0% 52.0% Equipment Rentals 6.8% 6.8% 6.8% Memhandise 7.5% 7.5% 7.5% Sponsorship 2,2% 2,2% 2.2% Notes; *All categories besides Private Rentals are factored as dollars per visit per person. Private Rentals are factored as dollam per rental event. A-5 E ~8[ 88°°88~88o ~ 8~°°° o 8°0888 .~Em ~88~ ~ ~ 8 o~o~o °'~ ~8§§§§88~s© ~ 8°°°°°°°°§§§ 00888 oo§oo§oo§ o ~ oo ~ ~ ~ 88 MARKET AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS MODEL A-L INTRODUCTION Tables A - I through A - 20 provide a systematic analysis of the market potentials and financial feasibility of the proposed Temecula Water Park. There are four primary tasks of the model: Project the total number of visits to a Temecula Water Park on an annual basis. Based on this aggregate total number of visits, break out visits by each attendance category (i.e., General Admission, Private Rentals, etc.). Project total annual revenues that the facility can be expected to generate. Project the composition of total annual revenues by each revenue-generating category (i.e., General Admission, Food and Beverage Sales, etc.). Project annual operations and maintenance costs. As with the attendance figures, break out annual expenditures by individual category (i.e., Labor costs, Energy costs, etc.). 4. Based on the revenue and cost projections, project annual cash flow for the proposed facility. Each one of these tasks is carried out for the three facility concepts. For each task, the model analyzes the water park and the pool separately. Although both the water park and the pool are expected to be co-located, each is a distinct facility with d!fferent operating costs and revenue generating capabilities. A-Il. PROJECTION OF USE LEVELS The first step in projecting the use levels for each facility concept is to establish market penetration rates for each concept. A market penetration rate is the number of visits per person in a defined market area. For example, a market penetration rate of .25 and a population of 10,000 individuals would result in an attendance level of 2,500. This does not imply that 2,500 individuals would visit the facility; only that out of the population of 10,000, there will be 2,500 visits to the facility (i.e., some individuals may make multiple visits). Table A-I illustrates the key facilities/amenities and market penetration rates for all three alternative concepts. The market penetration rates are based on such rates from similar community - type water parks (particular emphasis has been placed on the Prewett Family Waterpark in Antioch and the Wave Waterpark in Vista since both facilities are the most similar to the three concept alternatives examined in this analysis). The analysis utilizes a high and a Iow market penetration rate for each facility concept. The Iow figure is slightly below the average market penetration rates for similar facilities, while the high figure represents the upper bound of these rates found at A-21 similar facilities. The market penetration rates are adjusted downward for the secondary market areas since community - type water parks tend to draw the bulk of their visitors from a 10-mile radius of the facility. However, our survey found that, depending on such factors as local competition, water park offerings, etc., some facilities draw visitors from as far away as 30 miles. Given Temecula's unique setting in south Riverside County that brings little nearby entertainment-related competition, relatively high summer temperatures, and relative ease of travel along Interstate-15, a community type water park would realistically be expected to draw visitors from a 20 mile radius of the facility. The Iow and high market penetration rates should not be viewed as two discrete values that will determine only two exact attendance levels. Rather they should be viewed as determining a range of attendance levels--the Iow market penetration rate representing a Temecula facility that is somewhat average in attracting visitors, and the high market penetration rate representing such a facility that is a relative success in attracting visitors. It may also be useful to view the market penetration rates as increasing towards the high value in each successive year of operation as the facility becomes more well known among the surrounding population. Table A-3 illustrates attendance projections provided by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and the San Diego Association County of Association of Governments (SANDAG) for the years 2001 through 2010 in the Primary and Secondary Market Areas. To derive the Iow and high aggregate attendance levels for each facility concept, the model multiplies the respective market penetration rates by the projected population in each geographic market area. In order to assign the composition of the projected aggregate attendance levels to various categories (i.e., General Admission, Group Admissions, etc.), the analysis has relied on the percentage breakdown of attendance by category from Vista's The Wave Waterpark, illustrated in Table A-4. The analysis relies on these factors to determine attendance by category since the proposed facility concepts are similar in scale and offerings as The Wave Waterpark and, therefore, would likely have similar attendance categories. Tables A-6 through A-8 provide projections of aggregate attendance levels along with the composition of attendance by category for each facility concept. A-Ill. PROJECTION OF REVENUE POTENTIALS The projection of revenue potentials are based on the effective fee schedule illustrated in Table A-5 and the projected attendance levels for each category provided in Tables A-9 through A-11. The effective fee schedule is based on The Wave Waterpark's 2001 rate schedule for each category. The fee schedule for the water park in Concept 3 has been slightly adjusted upward to account for the increased scale and offerings of the facility. Although General Admission rates appear Iow, they factor in small children discounts, senior citizen discounts, afternoon attendance, and various promotional A-22 activities, such as family nights, where a family of four or more receives a discount off the General Admission fee. All of the attendance revenue categories are calculated as revenue per visitor per visit except for private rentals, which are calculated as revenue per rental event. The projected revenue is calculated for each attendance category by multiplying the projected attendance level by the effective fee. Revenue generated from non-attendance categories (Food, Equipment Rentals, Merchandise, Sponsorship) are based on the percentages of Water Park General Admission Revenues listed in Table A-5. These percentages were obtained from revenue data from Vista's The Wave Waterpark. Again, we assume these percentages will roughly apply to the proposed concepts since they are similar in scale and offerings of the Vista facility. Tables A-7-1 through A-7-111 provide the revenue projections for the first ten years of operation for each concept alternative. A-IV. OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE COSTS Since the three facility concepts, to a large extent, emulate Vista's The Wave Waterpark, the analysis utilizes its annual budget as a "base model" to estimate annual expenditures for the proposed Temecula concept alternatives. However, some costs are variable, such as temporary labor salaries and food concession costs, and will fluctuate based on facility usage levels. Other expenditure categories--water, advertising, insurance, etc.--are fixed costs, and would be determined by the scale and offerings of the facility, not on usage levels. For the 50-meter pool, although it is roughly double in size, costs do not increase in the same proportion. There are scale issues with input costs--labor, chemicals, energy, etc.--which do not exactly increase with same proportion as the size of the pool. The pool expenditure numbers (adjusted upward to account for increased energy costs) are in line with data obtained from various municipal pool operators in southern California. This analysis presents a conservative estimate of annual expenditures for each concept alternative, possibly erring on the side of overestimating and not underestimating costs. First, if the usage levels are less than what permanent salaries are based on, the cost projection might be on the "high" side. Perhaps, if attendance levels were lower than Vista's The Wave, the market wage for a permanent water park operator and maintenance supervisor would be somewhat lower. Second, the expenditure analysis has taken into account the recent energy crisis and has factored in the same utility cost increases that Vista currently faces. Although these are the current rates to operate such a water park and public pool, anticipated increased energy supplies in the near future could bring such costs closer to historic levels. However, since these two possibilities are somewhat speculative, they have not been incorporated into the analysis. A-23 Tables A-12 through A-17 provide the projected annual expenditures for each facility concept. A-V, OPERATIONAL CASH FLOW Based on the analysis completed in the previous tasks, the analysis calculates annual operational cash flow (profits or losses) for each concept alternative. Since the pool and the water park are two distinct facilities with different cost structures and revenue- generating capabilities, they are separated to illustrate the difference in annual expenditures and revenues associated with each facility. Tables A-18 through A-20 provide the projected annual cash flow for each facility concept. A-24 APPENDIX B SURVEY OF COMPARABLE FACILITIES 0 I,LI APPENDIX C COMMUNITY INTERCEPT SURVEY CITY OF TEMECULA WATER PARK FEASIBILITY STUDY COMMUNITY INTERCEPT SURVEY November 21, 2000' Prepared for: City of Temecula Community Services Department Prepared by: THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. 24835 E. La Palma Avenue, Suite I Yorba Linda, California 92887 Phone: (7'14) 692-9596 Fax: (714) 692-9597 Email: tnci~,earthlink.com II. III. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Number INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ...................................................................................... 2 DETAILED ANALYSIS OF SURVEY FINDINGS .................................................... 3 I. Introduction As part of the public input process for the City of Temecula water park feasibility study, The Natelson Company, Inc. (TNCI) conducted a community "intercept" survey during the month of November 2000. The survey was designed to gauge the community's interest in a community- type water park, determine the extent to which area residents currently use water parks in other communities, and identify the residents' preferences as to the potential location of a water park in Temecula. TNCl conducted the survey from November 4 to November 18 at a variety of locations throughout the community. This ensured a broad cross-section of the Temecula resident population; given the types of locations where the survey was conducted, some of the respondents were residents from neighboring communities. A total of 320 surveys were completed. The following is a list of the locations where the survey was conducted: · Rancho California Sports Park - Soccer League Field (corner of Rancho Vista Road and Margarita Road) · City History Museum (28314 Memedes Street) · Vons (27471 Ynez Road) · Albertsons (30530 Rancho California Road) · City Library (41000 County Center Drive) · Community Recreation Center (30875 Rancho Vista Road) · City Expo (Chaparral High School, 27215 Nicolas Road) Section II provides a summary of findings. Section III examines the specific findings of the survey in more detail. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Intemept Survey - Page 1 II. Summary of Findings The following provides a brief summary of the key findings from the community intercept survey. 1. Many Temecula residents currently use water parks in other communities. Close to two-thirds (65%) of the respondents answered that either they or members of their family have visited water parks in the past. Many of these attend water parks frequently--close to half (45.2%) of those surveyed make multiple (more than one) visits in a year. 2. A community-type water park would be popular with residents of Temecula. Over 90 percent (91.6%) of the respondents stated that they would either strongly approve or approve of a community-type water park being developed in the City of Temecula. More than two thirds (67.2%) responded that they or their family would very likely use a water park in Temecula. A large majority of those surveyed would use such a facility repeatedly; over 90 percent (92.5%) of the respondents that are likely to use a water park stated that they would anticipate making multiple (more than one) visits during a year. Many residents would prefer for the water park to be located near the City's sports complex. Close to half (44.4%) of the respondents selected the City's sports complex when asked where they felt would be the best location for a water park. This was nearly 20 percent higher than the next most popular location: a commercial/industrial area. Temecula residents are willing to pay a reasonable amount of money to use a community water park. Just over half (50.9%) of those surveyed stated that they would be willing to pay $6.00 - $10.00 to use a community water park. This is in line with what similar community type water park facilities charge for a typical all day pass. Nearly a third (32.5%) of the respondents stated they would be willing to pay $11.00 - $15.00 to use a community water park, which is closer to admission rates for larger scale water parks. The demographic characteristics of the respondents fit favorably with a community water park. Forty-four percent of the respondents stated there were 3-4 people in their households, and nearly 30% (29.4%) stated there were 5+ individuals in their households, which, combined, represents close to three-fourths (73.4%) of those surveyed. Well over two-thirds (70.6%) of the respondents indicated that they have children under age 18 in their household, and just over two-thirds (67.5%) of these children are between the ages 6 and 14, the most likely age group to attend a water park. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Intemept Survey - Page 2 III. Detailed Analysis of Survey Findings Table I provides the responses of those surveyed when asked if they or any member of their family ever visit water parks. A sizeable majority, close to two-thirds (65%), replied yes. Table 1 Do you or your family ever visit water parks Response Percent Yes 65.0% No 35.0% Total 100.0% This is a significant percentage of residents that attend water parks given that there are no facilities in the immediate vicinity of the City. Table la lists the various water parks that these residents visit. Table la If yes, which water parks have you visited in the past three years Parks Percent Raging Waters 49.5% Wild Rivers 22.6% Oasis 20.2% Pharoah's Lost Kingdom 9.1% The Wave 8.7% Other 13.9% The most popular water park among those surveyed is Raging Waters, located in the City of San Dimas, where nearly half (49.5%) of water park users have visited. Wild Rivers (Irvine) and Oasis (Palm Springs) are the next most heavily visited water parks, with 22.6% and 20.2% of the respondents, respectively, visiting those two facilities in the last three years. Approximately nine percent of the respondents have visited both Pharaoh's'Lost Kingdom (Redlands) and The Wave (Vista) in the past three years. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Intercept Survey - Page 3 Table 2 provides the number of visits to water parks that the respondents typically make in a year. Table 2 How many visits do you typically make to water parks in a year Response Percent 1 54.8% 2 - 5 38.5% 6 - 10 3.8% 11 - 20 1.4% 20+ 1.4% Total 100.0% Just under half (45.2%) typically make multiple visits (more than one) to various waters parks during a year. This is a substantial percentage considering the distances from the City of Temecula (50+ miles in some cases) that these individuals must travel to attend the water parks listed in Table la. Table 3 provides the respondents' thoughts on a community-type water park being developed in the City of Temecula. More than half (51.6%) of the respondents said they stron.ql¥ approve, and forty percent said they approve of a water park being developed, representing more than ninety percent of the total respondents. Fewer than ten percent (8.4%) of the respondents stated that they either disapproved or strongly disapproved of the development of such a water park. Table 3 How do you feel about a community-type water-park being developed in the City of Temecula Response Percent Strongly approve 51.6% Approve 40.0% Disapprove 7.5% Strongly disapprove 0.9% Total 100.0% THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Intemept Survey - Page 4 Table 3a provides the responses to this question broken-down by City and non-City residents. Table 3a How do you feel about a community-type water park being developed in the City of Temecula City Non-City Response Residents Residents Strongly approve 52.8% 47.2% Approve 37.5% 48.6% Disapprove 8.5% 4.2% Strongly disapprove 1.2% 0.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% The percentages are roughly similar between City and non-City residents. However, non-City residents are even more in favor of the development of a community water park. More than ninety-five percent (95.8%) stated that they either stron.qly approved or approved of a community-type water park being developed in the City of Temecula compared to just over ninety percent (90.3%) for City residents. Less than five percent of non-City residents (4.2%) disapproved or strongly disapproved of such a water park compared to just under ten percent (9.7%) of City residents. The strong support from non-City residents may result from the fact that they would not experience any negative impacts (i.e., increased traffic) that City residents may face with the development of a water park. Table 4 illustrates the responses to the question of how likely the respondents and their families would use a water park in Temecula. Table 4 How likely would you and your family use a water park in Temecula Response Percent Very likely 67.2% Somewhat likely 19.7% Not likely 6.6% Not at all 6.6% Total 100.0% These responses continue to underscore the community's suppod for a water park facility. More than two-thirds (67.2%) of the respondents said that they would be very likely to visit a water park in Temecula. Close to ninety percent (86.9%) of those surveyed stated that they would very likely or somewhat likely use a water park in Temecula. Only 13.1% of the respondents replied that they would not or not likely use such a water park. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Intercept Survey - Page 5 Table 5 provides the number of visits that the respondents would anticipate making to a water park facility during a year. Table 5 How many visits would you anticipate during a year Response Percent 1 7.5% 2 - 5 49.8% 6 - 10 29.7% 11 - 20 8.2% 20+ 4.7% Total 100.0% The responses here indicate that Temecula residents would make a community water park a recurring part of their leisure activities. More than ninety percent (92.5%) of the respondents would make multiple visits (more than one) to such water park during a year. More than forty percent (42.7%) of the respondents anticipated at least six visits a year to a water park in the City of Temecula. Table 6 provides the specific facilities/amenities that the respor~dents would like to see included in a Temecula water park. Table 6 What specific facilities/amenities would you like to see included in a Temecula water park Options Percent Mild water slides 95.9% Steep water slides 94.1% Inner tube rides 93.1% Lazy river with rafts 93.1% Food concessions 93.1% Picnic area 92.5% Wave Pool 91.6% Beach Area 89.4% Swimming Pool 83.4% The two most popular facilities/amenities for a water park among the respondents were mild and steep water slides with 95.9% and 94.1% of the respondents indicating their support for these two water park attractions. A beach area and swimming pool received the least amount of support among the respondents with 89.4% and 83.4% stating that they would like to see these two facilities included in a Temecula water park. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Intercept Survey - Page 6 Table 7 illustrates the survey respondents' thoughts on what would be the best location for a Temecula water park. Table 7 Where do you feel would be the best location for a water park Locations Percent Near City's sports complex 44.4% Commercial/Industrial area 25.6% Near a freeway 22.5% Near a park 20.0% Near a residential area 1.3% Near a school 0.6% The City's sports complex was clearly the most poputar location for a Temecula water park with more than forty percent (44.4%) of the respondents indicating their support for this location. The next three areas--a commercial/industrial area, near a freeway, and near a park--all received similar support (between 20% - 25%) as possible locations for a water park. The respondents indicated very little support, less than two percent (1.9%), for a residential area and a school as possible sites for the water park. Table 7a provides the responses to this question by City and non-City residents. Table 7a Where do you feel would be the best location for a water park City Non-City Locations Residents Residents Near City's sports complex 46.0% 38.9% Commercial/Industrial area 26.2% 23.6% Near a freeway 21.8% 25.0% Near a park 17.7% 27.8% Near a residential area 1.6% 0.0% Near a school 0.4% 1.4% Again, the preferences of City residents are roughly in line with non-City residents. However, there is less support for the sports complex among non-City residents (38.9%) compared to Temecula residents, where close to half (46.0%) of the respondents indicated that it would be the best location for a water park. Non-city residents also indicated more support for sites near a freeway and a park for the proposed water park. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Intemept Survey - Page 7 Table 8 provides the amount of money that potential visitors would be willing pay to use a Temecula water park. Table 8 How much would you be willing to pay to use a community water park Response Percent $1-5 12.2% $6-10 50.9% $11-15 32.5% $15+ 4.4% Total 100.0% Approximately half (50.9%) of the respondents would be willing to pay $6.00 ~ $10.00 to a use a community water park. This is in line with admission rates at other community water parks in California. Close to a third (32.5%) of the respondents stated they would be willing to pay $11.00 - $15.00 to use a community water park. Table 9 lists the percentage of respondents that live in the City of Temecula. Table 9 Do you live in the City of Temecula Response Percent Yes 77.5% No 22.5% Total 100.0% More than three-fourths (77.5%) of the respondents are Temecula residents. The remainder (22.5%) is residents of various cities that are located throughout the Inland Empire. Well over half (62%) of the respondents who did not live in the City of Temecula are residents of the following communities: Murrieta, Wildomar, and Lake Elsinore. The remaining 38% are residents of various cities and communities throughout the Inland Empire such as Perris, Corona, Menifee, etc. Table 10 lists the residencies~ivided up into four areas in the City---of the respondents who live in the City of Temecula. Table '10 If yes, what part of Temecula Options Percent Area 1 10.1% Area 2 36.3% Area 3 31.0% Area 4 22.6% Total 100.0% THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Intercept Survey - Page 8 Diagram 1 is a map that illustrates the four areas of the City that the respondents were asked to identify as their place of residence. Area I is north of Rancho California Road and west of Margarita Road. Area 2 is north of Long Valley Road and east of Margarita Road. Area 3 is south of Long Valley Road and east of Margarita Road. Area 4 is south of Rancho California Road and west of Margarita Road. DIAGRAM 1. AREA '1-4: CITY OF TEMECULA As expected, more than two thirds (67.3%) of the respondents listed their residencies in either Area 2 or Area 3, the two most densely populated regions in the City. Table 11 provides the number of people in each of the respondents' households. Table 11 How many people are in your household Number Percent 1 5.9% 2 20.6% 3 -4 44.1% 5+ 29.4% Total 100.0% Just under three-fourths (73.4%) of the respondents have at least three persons in their households. A substantial portion of the respondents (29.4%) has five or more persons in their households. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Intercept Survey - Page 9 Table 12 lists the percentage of households with children under age 18. Table 12 Are there any children under age 18 in your household Response Percent Yes 70.6% No 29.4% Total 100.0% Well over two-thirds (70.6%) of the respondents have children under age 18 in their households. This is a favorable finding for a Temecula water park since families with children and young teens are the largest demographic group to attend water parks. Table 12a lists the age group breakdown of children in these households. Table 12a If yes, how many in each age group Age Percent 0 - 5 20.2% 6 - 10 39.3% 11 - 14 28.2% 15 - 17 12.3% Total 100.0% These findings, again, point to the favorable demographic characteristics found in the City of Temecula. More than two-thirds (67.5%) of the children under age 18 in the respondents' households are between ages 6 and 14--the age group most likely to attend water parks. Table 13 lists the percentage of respondents who own or rent their homes. Table 13 Do you own or rent your home Response Percent Own 81.6% Rent 18.4% Total 100.0% The respondents in this survey displayed a high rate of home ownership; well over three-fourths (81.6%) of those surveyed indicated that they owned their home. Table 14 provides the gender breakdown of the survey respondents. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Intercept Survey - Page 10 Table 14 Respondent's gender Gender Percent Male 40.9% Female 59.1% Total 100.0% The survey had a slight bias towards female respondents. Just under sixty percent (59.1%) of the respondents were female, and just over forty percent (40.9%) were male. Table 15 provides the approximate age of the survey respondents. The age group is an approximation made by the surveyor since many respondents would be unwilling to reveal their actual age. Table 15 Respondent's approximate age Age Percent 20's 10.9% 30's 36.9% 40's 32.2% 50's 10.3% 60's 7.2% 70's 2.5% 80's 0.0% Total 100.0% The largest group of respondents, more than two-thirds (36.9%), are in their 30's. Nearly eighty percent (79.4%) of the respondents are between ages 30 and 60. Less than ten percent (9.7%) are over 60, and just over ten percent (10.9%) are in their 20's. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Intercept Survey - Page 11 APPENDIX D COMMUNITY WORKSHOP SUMMARY CITY OF TEMECULA WATER PARK FEASIBILITY STUDY COMMUNITY WORKSHOP SUMMARY December 4, 2000 Prepared for: City of Temecula Community Services Department Prepared by: THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. 24835 E. La Palma Avenue, Suite I Yorba Linda, California 92887 Phone: (714) 692-9596 Fax: (714) 692-9597 Email: tnci~.earthlink.com TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Number I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1 I1. WORKSHOP QUESTIONS ........................................................................................... '1 II. PARTICIPANTS' PREFERENCES REGARDING FACILITIES AND AMENITIES ....... 3 I. INTRODUCTION As part of the initial information gathering process for the water park feasibility study, The Nateison Company, Inc. (TNCI) along with City staff facilitated an evening meeting open to the general public on November 27, 2000. The purposes of this meeting were to describe the potential facility to the meeting participants and to solicit their input regarding the levels of interest/demand that may exist for such a facility in Temecula. The meeting was also used to ascertain the community's preferences regarding the size and components of the facility, and potential locations within the City. Twenty-five (25) residents participated in the meeting. During the discussion segment of the meeting, the participants divided into three groups. I1. WORKSHOP QUESTIONS 1 ) Are you in favor of a water park? Among the throe groups, there was strong support for the development of a water park in the City of Temecula. Out of 25 individuals, 24 said they were in favor of such a water park. Only one person said they were "not sure." However, these 24 individuals did not give an unqualified "yes" in their responses to the question. Many of the participants noted that their "yes" voted depended on certain factors (i.e., who will operate the facility, how much will it cost the taxpayers, what facilities/amenities will it contain, etc.). Yes 24 Maybe 1 2) Would you or your family use a water park in the City of Temecula? Many of those who attended the community workshop would also likely attend a water park facility in Temecula. Only 2 out of the 25 participants said they would not visit such a facility. Yes 23 No 2 3) How often would you visit a water park in the City of Temecula? Many of the workshop participants also would visit a water park frequently. A large majority-- 22 out of the 25 participants (88%)--would make multiple (more than one) visits to a water park in the City. Nearly half of the attendees (12 out of 25) would use such a facility very frequently--more than 6 times a year. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Workshop Summary - Page 1 Visits per year Participants 0-1 3 2-3 10 6+ 12 4) How much would you be willing to pay to use a water park? More than two-thirds--17 out of the 25 participants (68%)--would be willing to pay $5 - $10 to use a water park. This is comparable to admission rates at other community type water parks. More than one-fourth (7, or 28%) of the workshop attendees would be willing to pay $10+ to visit a water park. Pay Participants $0 - 5 1 $5 - 10 17 $10+ 7 5) What age group should the water park be geared towards? Although the groups all placed some emphasis on the facility being geared towards families in general, there was some variation in their preferences. The members of Group I stated that a Temecula water park should be geared primarily to the 12 - 18 age bracket with a secondary emphasis on younger children. Among the participants in Group 2, three of them preferred a facility aimed towards people of all ages, and 5 of the participants felt it should be geared toward the 2 - 17 age group. The participants in Group 3 unanimously favored a facility with a variety of attractions designed for an entire family of all ages. In response to this question, Group 3 noted that the City might want to consider developing a year round "entertainment" facility. Such a facility might include batting cages, a miniature golf course, a video game arcade, etc. This would make the facility a year round family attraction. 6) What site characteristics would make a good (or poor) location for a water park? All three of the groups stated their support for a water park location near a freeway since they felt this location would have the least adverse impact on traffic circulation. The three groups equally preferred the location not to be anywhere that could severely impact traffic circulation, such as a residential area. Group 1 participants favored a location near a park with ample parking. The members of Group 2 favored three types of locations: near a park, the west side of town, and on the west side of the southbound 79 Freeway. Two members of Group 3 expressed their interest in a location near the City's existing sports complex for the water park. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Workshop Summary - Page 2 7) What general concerns do you have regarding this project? The following is a list, positive and negative, of the concerns expressed by the workshop participants. · Liability issues · How is the development paid for--Private vs. Public, or Joint financing · Marketing--Who will promote the water park · Who will manage the operations · Size--Will be there room for future growth · Security--Possibility of increased crime and rowdiness · Development costs to taxpayers · Will this be a community facility that increases the quality of life here in town for the people of Temecula · Traffic circulation · Parking · Community, not regional, emphasis · Facilities/amenities for year round use--Batting cages, video games, etc. The participants' answers to these questions were similar to those of the respondents to the community intercept survey. Both of these groups are generally in favor of the concept of a community water park; both groups' families are likely to use such a facility; many in both groups would make multiple visits per year; and the majority in both groups generally would be willing to pay $5-$10 with a sizeable number willing to pay $10+ to use a water park. The community workshop participants and community intercept survey respondents did diverge in their views for the best location for the water park. A location near a freeway was much more popular with the workshop participants, and the intercept survey respondents much more preferred a location near the City's sports complex. II. PARTICIPANTS' PREFERENCES REGARDING FACILITIES AND AMENITIES The last activity at the workshop involved the participants having four "votes" to place for different facilities/amenities that they would desire in a Temecula water park. The participants were not limited to one vote per selection (i.e., if they wanted they could use all four votes for one option). The following lists the facilities/amenities in order by the number of votes that each one received. Ranking Facility/Amenity Number of Votes 1) Swimming Pool 13 2) Steep Water Slides 12 3) Wave Pool 12 4) Lazy River 11 5) Mild Water Slides 8 6) "Zero Depth" Play 8 Area 7) Picnic Area 6 THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Workshop Summary - Page 3 8) Reservable Party Area 6 9) Enclosed Water Slides 5 10) Year Round Facilities 5 11) Snack Bar 4 The following four facilities/amenities received the strongest support: a swimming pool, steep water slides, a wave pool, and a lazy river. With the exception of the swimming pool, these items are all staples of modern water parks, so it is not surprising that they were the most popular with the workshop participants. The strong support for the swimming pool might suggest that these individuals perceive the need for a city-operated swimming pool with or without the development of a water park. The workshop participants also expressed moderate support for mild water slides and a "zero depth" children's play area, which are both typically found in community type water parks. Somewhat surprisingly, there was little endorsement for enclosed water slides--a popular attraction at many other water parks. The participants also placed less emphasis on the facility containing a snack bar and other year round facilities, such as batting cages. THE NATELSON COMPANY, INC. City of Temecula Water Park Feasibility Study Community Workshop Summary - Page 4 APPENDIX E KEY OPERATING DATA FROM THE WAVE WATERPARK (CITY OF VISTA) City of Vista - The Wave Waterpark: Background Data Architect: Contractor: Pool Contractor: Specialty Vendors: Aquatic Design Group Carlsbad, California FCC Construction San Diego, California Mission Pools Escondido, California Wave Loch (Flow Rider) La Jolla, California Amusement Leisure Equipment (Waterslides) Calgary, Alberta, Canada The SCS Company (Wet Playgrounds) Springfield, Illinois Cost Summary: Site Work Site Utilities Parking Lot Main Building Concession Building Competition Pool Flow Rider Continuous River Waterslides Wet Playground Total $778,000 $100,000 $145,000 $595,000 $182,000 $345,000 $560,000 $460,000 $465,000 $170,000 $3,800,000 Source: City of Vista Facilities/Amenities: Site Parking Main Building Concession Building Competition Pool Flow Rider Continuous River Waterslides Body Flumes Waterslides Inner Tube Flumes Waterslide Receiving Pool Wet Playground 2.9 Acres 126 Spaces 4,968 SF 1 ,O4O SF 6,975 SF N/A 8,444 SF 2 @ 248' average 2 @ 317' average 1,753 SF 1,560 SF Source: City of Vista City of Vista - The Wave Waterpark BUDGET DATA Revenue Category Actual Actual Actual Estimated Estimated Estimated 1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2000/02 2000/03 General Admission Income $453,941 Scuba/Swim Lessons $75,512 Equipment Rentals $36,267 Food and Beverage Income $132,989 Merchandise Income $6,978 Group Sales Income $25.928 Private Rental Income $17,155 Consignment Ticket Sales -- Birthday Party Income $20,555 Sponsorship Income -- Special Programming Income $10,229 $415,585 $421,456 $423,433 $494,987 $508,981 $26,373 $31,388 $33,735 $37,135 $39,135 $17,159 $20,298 $26,736 $29,850 $31,160 $179,828 $207,213 $206,625 $233,507 $233,507 $25,029 $34,649 $31,192 $35,600 $37,600 $72,291 $81,541 $113,810 $123,343 $129,677 $111,021 $54,262 $63,400 $67,892 $71,892 $19,327 $16,783 $11,518 $21,239 $23,700 $55,771 $45,403 $51,541 $60,461 $64,461 $11,318 $5,443 $8,494 $15,800 $20,800 $64,919 $101,219 '$111,926 $150,336 $157,336 Total $779,554 $998,620 $1,019,654 $1,082,409 $1,270,149 $1,318,248 Expense Estimates 2001/02 Increase 2001/02 2002~03 Full-time Salaries Regular-Part time Salades Temp Salaries Benefits Office Supplies Small Tools Chemicals Membership Dues Travel Auto Allowance Clothing Training Special Programs Pool Maintenance Concessions Building Maintenance Advertising Electricity Natural Gas Water Professional Services Capital Equipment Insurance and Surely Bonds - $130,000 $130,000 $54,000 $54,000 $75,818 $352.735 $373,893 $91,114 $91,114 $4,200 $4,200 $1.390 $1.390 $10,031 $37,497 $37,497 -- $550 $550 $179 $2.065 $2,440 -- $1,080 $1,080 $712 $3,176 $6.976 $565 $965 $1.640 $3,850 $14,690 $14,690 $3,100 $20,805 $20,805 -- $133.210 $143,210 - $16.100 $17.000 -$129 $32,503 $35,503 $40,000 $200,000 $200,000 $62,322 $101,281 $101,281 $1.000 $12,000 $12,900 $5,214 $38,200 $40.700 $4,000 $4,000 $10,000 - $125,000 $125,000 To~l $206.662 $1.376,561 $1,425,869 Source: City of Vista City of Vista - Wave Waterpark SUMMER SEASON DATA (MAY - OCTOBER): 1994 - 2000 A~endance Year May Jun Jul Aug Sep 2000 8,888 26,717 36,604 35,228 12,209 1999 6,113 21,189 36,351 32,258 9,379 1998 5,441 30,139 34,629 37,172 12,728 1997 7,844 23,564 25,963 34,090 11,858 1996 3,453 28,306 36,869 37,609 11,172 1995 1,785 17,452 32,700 37,159 12,078 1994 0 0 38,815 43,408 18,739 Oct 6,963 2,900 5,155 N/A 2,023 1,426 5,121 Total 126 609 108 190 125 264 103 319 119 432 102 600 106 083 Total Revenue Year May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Total 2000 60,871 266,338 294,136 284,593 84,817 33,196 $1,023,951 1999 51,004 183,704 282,345 272,195 87,987 21,085 $898,320 1998 39,730 165,214 283,750 324,515 112,148 45,791 $971,148 1997 41,228 173,437 225,734 274,078 69,350 2,450 $786,277 1996 43,450 208,478 289,007 303,163 78,292 900 $923,290 1995 42,542 144,263 285,604 315,230 96,546 4,460 $888,645 1994 0 -- 321,800 347,024 205,054 4,684 $878,562 Total Expenditures Year May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Total 2000 55,789 196,729 112,591 170,595 100,134 64,756 $700,594 1999 63,818 179,844 115,810 140,951 108,024 55,223 $663,670 1998 47,356 164,548 80,303 121,309 152,322 47,767 $613,605 1997 41,643 81,871 65,800 158,567 66,040 -- $413,921 1996 52,726 147,934 82,983 173,988 72,318 -- $529,949 1995 76,007 156,058 128,123 152,348 65,944 - $578,480 1994 0 0 93,362 190,175 203,462 -- $486,989 Notes: Figures for October, 2000 are estimates as of 10/12/00. Source: City of Vista City of Vista - The Wave Waterpark Permanent Positions and Salary Data Full - Time --Operations Manager --Administration Manager --Maintenance Worker Part - Time (3~4 time) *-Office Specialist --Marketing Specialist Total Salary $130,000 $54,000 $184,000 Benefits $91,114 Source: City of Vista City of Vista - The Wave Waterpark Temporary Positions and Salary Data Position TiSe Headguard Lifeguard Cashier/Greeter Cashier/Greeter Concession Specialist Shift Leader Cashiers Concessionaires RecreaUon Prog. Spec. p~31 Aides Pool Aides Pool Aide Lifeguards pdvate Rentals Food & Beverage Pdvata Parlies pool Aides Private Rentals AI~ team members In-seneca Training New Senior Head Lifeguard New Winter and Spdng Holiday Camp Jr. Guard H.LT. Mini Guard H.I.T. Aqua Camp H.I.T. Science Camp H.I.T. Flow Rider Camp H.I.T. Water Polo Scuba Diving & Scout Program Kayak and Tube Water Polo Lap Swim Total Source: C~y of'Vista Duties Provides lifeguard service for waterpark operation and safety Provides entertainment and excitement to the guest a pdvatety run party Provides the community with year round programming Amount Number of Employees Houdy Number of Number of Pay Hours Days $9,046 1 10.28 8 110 $6,013 1 7.67 7 112 $16,355 3 7.08 7 110 $41,580 8 6.75 7 110 $72,994 $5,110 1 7.3 7 100 $13.365 3 6.75 6 110 $5.584 I 8.46 6 110 $18,949 $7,008 10 7.3 3 32 $1,359 2 7.08 3 32 $1,296 2 6.75 3 32 $9,663 $6,075 75 6.75 12 1 $2,628 40 7.3 9 1 $8,703 $23,409 I 13.77 40 36 I 13.77 20 13 $1,305 1 9.32 7 20 $6,599 2 8.46 6 65 $6,599 2 8.46 6 65 $7,106 2 8,46 6 70 $3,914 2 9.32 6 35 $1,417 2 9.32 2 36 $26,985 5 10,28 3 175 $4,567 2 9.32 7 35 $1,118 I 9.32 3 40 $6,990 I 9.32 3 250 $90,009 $352,737 $11,442 $15,593 $27,035 2 7.43 7 110 3 6.75 7 110 $7,176 1 9.32 7 110 $6,838 1 8,88 7 110 $106,260 30 8.05 4 110 $120,274 TCSD DEPARTMENTAL REPORT APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ' DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER ~-'-~ ,./ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Board of Directors FROM: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services DATE: June 26, 2001 SUBJECT: Departmental Report PREPARED BY: Gail L. Zigler, Administrative Secretary On December 1, 1999, staff released a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for a Citywide Multi-Trail System. Interviews were held on February 14, 2000 and the committee selected KTU& Associates as the top ranked firm. The Board of Directors awarded a contract to KTU&A on Mamh 28, 2000. A trails questionnaire was mailed out to the residents in mid-September with approximately 450 responses returned. The project committee will meet again to review the draft document. Staff released a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the design of an aquatic facility to be constructed at Chaparral High School. The Board of Directors approved a Scope of Services Agreement on December 7, 1999, with the number one ranked firm, RJM Design Group. The architect and project design committee has completed the schematic design of the project. The Board of Directors approved the Master Plan on June 27, 2000, and awarded a contract to RJM Design Group on July 11,2000, for the Phase II of the Design Contract. A bid opening is scheduled on July 3, 2001 and staff anticipates a contract going forward to the City Council on July 10, 2001. Staff released a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the design of a sports complex to be constructed in the City. Statements of Qualifications were received on February 16, 2000, and interviews were held of the four top ranked firms on March 28, 2000. A design contract was awarded to RJM Design Group at the May 23, 2000, Board of Directors meeting. The first sub- committee was held on November 7, 2000. With the adoption of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan at the January 23, 2001 City Council meeting, it has been determined the 40 acre sports park will be located in the Wolf Creek development. A community workshop was held on April 7, 2001, and the architect is drafting a plan based on the information compiled from the workshop and the sports league questionnaires. A committee meeting is scheduled for July 10, 2001 to review the final conceptual plan. The Master Plan for the Temecula Public Library was adopted at the September 26, 2000 City Council Meeting. Staff has negotiated a contract with LPA for the final construction documents and specifications for the Temecula Public Library. LPA submitted the construction documents for first plan check and the architect is working on responding to the comments from first plan check. R:~ZI GLE RG~XDEPTEPTx0601 .doe Jtme 20, 2001 On June 15, 2000, staff released an RFQ requesting a Statement of Qualifications to prepare a feasibility study for the development of a Water Park. A contract was awarded to the Natelson Company at the September 27, 2000 City Council Meeting, for the preparation of the Water Park Feasibility Study. A community workshop was held and the consultant completed the intercept surveys. The consultant has compiled the information received from the community workshop and intercept surveys and the draft feasibility study will be presented to the City Council on June 26, 2001. Staff released an RFQ for the children's museum interior space planning, exhibit design, fabrication, construction and installation. Interviews were held of the four top ranked firms on October 17, 2000. Staff began negotiations with the top ranked firm, Sparks Exhibits and Environments. The Agreement and Scope of Services was approved by the City Council on December 12, 2000. The committee has been meeting and has proposed naming the facility "Imagination Workshop, The Temecula Children's Museum". A staff report went fo~vard to the Community Services Commission on May 14, 2001, and they unanimously approved a recommendation to the City Council to name the facility. A meeting is scheduled for July 5, 2001 with staff and the consultant to review the preliminary conceptual plans. The Development Services Division continues to participate in the development review for projects within the City including Wolf Creek, Roripaugh and Harveston, as well as overseeing the development of parks and recreation facilities, and the contract for refuse and recycling and assessment administration. The Maintenance Division continues to oversee the maintenance of parks and recreation facilities, as well as all other City owned public buildings and facilities. In addition, the Maintenance Division assists in all aspects of Citywide special events. The Recreation Division is currently in the planning stages for several citywide special events including the July 1, 2001 Vail Ranch Annexation Celebration, 4t~ of July Parade and Fireworks Program, and the Summer Concert Series. The Summer/Fall issue of the Guide to Leisure Activities was mailed to City residents the first week of June 2001. Currently summer day camp; swim lessons and the S.M.A.R.T. program are underway. The Recreation Division continues to program classes, activities and excursions at all City recreation facilities. R:~ZIGLERGkXDEPTRPT~0601 .doc REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APRIL 24, 2001 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 8:17 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBER: None Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. At this time, the City Council meeting was reconvened. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Formation of Joint Exercise of Powers Authority; Approval of Deposit/Reimbursement A.qreement RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-28 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING FORMATION OF A JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AUTHORITY WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA 1.2 That the Redevelopment Agency adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 01-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING FORMATION OF A JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AUTHORITY WITH THE CITY OF TEMECULA 1.3 That the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency execute the joint exercise of powers agreement creating the Temecula Public Financing Authority. R:\Minutes.rda\042401 1 In response to Agency Member Naggar, Executive Director Nelson advised that it was the subcommittee's, as well as the developer's, recommendation that this matter be continued off calendar until the final parameters of the Roripaugh Ranch project could be discussed by the City Council. For Agency Member Stone, City Attorney Thorson noted that the Agency may recess and discuss this matter after consideration of City Council Business Item No. 15 (Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Processing Schedule). MOTION: Agency Member Stone moved to recess the Agency meeting and discuss Agency Item No. 1 after consideration of City Council Business Item No. 15. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. At 9:06 P.M., the City Council meeting was recessed and the Redevelopment Agency considered Item No. 2. 2 Old Town Community Theater Schematic Desi,qn and Master Site Plan RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the Old Town Community Theater Schematic Design and Master Site Plan; 2.2 Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; 2.3 Provide direction to proceed with design development and construction drawings. Agency Member Stone abstained with regard to this item, Director of Housing and Redevelopment Meyer presented the staff report (of record) and introduced the architects, Mr. Ynez and Mr. Fisher, who, in turn, proceeded, by way of overheads/computerized rendering, with a detailed overview of the site planning concept, elevations, etc., commenting on the following: First level will accommodate 300 seats · Second level will have box seats · Support spaces · Exterior appearance In response to Agency Member Naggar, it was noted by the architects that although some items could be phased, any phasing would impact the operation of the theater, commenting on the following: · Dressing rooms · Orchestra pit · Shop - could be phased but would result in building sets off-site and then shipping them to the theater which would result in shipping costs · Dance studio For Agency Member Pratt, Executive Director Nelson advised that the initially projected budget amount of $2.5 million for the theater did not include the overall cost, noting that the project amount was seed money; that the budget did not double as a result of the design; and that the R:\Minutes.rda\042401 2 initial budget amount did not encompass an architect, parameters, etc. Mr. Nelson advised that the Agency is being requested to approve the Master Plan but not make any funding decisions at this time. Mr. Pratt suggested that this information with regard to reasoning of the increased budget amount be disseminated to the public. Director of Housing and Redevelopment Meyer noted that the Community Theater will be consistent with the Old Town Specific Plan, with the Old Town market analysis, with the City's Cultural Arts Master Plan, and that this project would be a significant contribution to Old Town as well as the entire community. Mr. Bob Burns, 30112 Santiago Road, spoke in support of the Community Theater. Mr. Harry Clark, 41965 Mesa Verdugo, commented on the economic development benefits this theater would have for Old Town as well as the cultural development. Ms. Patti Drew, 45680 Muirt'ield, thanked the City Council for its commitment and continued support of the cultural and performing arts. Mr. Dan Stephenson, 27740 Jefferson Avenue, commented on the efforts that have been put forth as it re~ates to the community theater, advising that the community has committed to raise $1 million toward it; and, as well, extended his appreciation of the City Council's support to proceed with this project. Mr. Ed Dool, Temecula Stage Stop, relayed his support of the Community Theater. Mr. Ray Baxter, 31130 South General Kearny Road, spoke in support of the Community Theater, stating that such a facility would provide local talent a place to per[orm. Ms. Julie Pitruzzello, 32281 Corte Santa Catalina, thanked the City Council for its continued support and noted that, in her opinion, the proposed theater design is not frivolous but does include afl needed amenities. Commenting on his desire to ensure the proposed facility would be relevant to the community/organizations/performing artists utilizing it, Agency Member Comerchero relayed his support of the project. Although he supports the project, Agency Member Naggar expressed concern, in light of the budgeted amount, as to when this facility would actually be constructed. For Mr. Naggar, Executive Director Nelson advised that funds are available (primarily RDA funding) for this facility but that the City Council would need to prioritize this project in relation to all other City Capital Improvement projects. Mr. Nelson advised that the Agency is being requested to determine, this evening, whether or not the proposed facility is what is needed for the City; after the Council's determination, staff would further review the project and would provide a more definitive funding source at the upcoming CIP Workshop. In response to Agency Member Naggar, it was noted by the architects that the plans for the Community Theater could be drawn with deductive and/or add alternate. Mr. Naggar noted that he would not want road improvements to suffer as a result of this project. For Agency Member Naggar, Agency Member Comerchero noted that funding sources for this project would be reviewed during two budget cycles of the CIP, noting that not all funding would be required during this budget cycle. R:\Minutes.rda\042401 3 MOTION: Agency Member Naggar moved to approve the Old Town Community Theater Schematic Design and Master Site Plan along with the budget as identified; that staff review this project in relation to other CIP projects and make a recommendation at the CIP Workshop; to approve staff's recommendation with regard to 2.2 and 2.3. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Comerchero and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Agency Member Stone who abstained. At 1'1:06 P.M., the Redevelopment Agency reconvened in a joint meeting with the City Council to discuss Item No. 1. Formation of Joint Exercise of Powers Authority; Approval of Deposit/Reimbursement Agreement (as per page one) City Attorney Thorson provided clarification with regard to the recommendations after which the following motions were offered: MOTION: Agency Member Stone moved to approve staff recommendation 1.1. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. MOTION: Agency Member Stone moved to approve staff recommendation 1.2. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. At this time, Mayor and President Comerchero signed the necessary agreements. MOTION: Agency Member Stone moved to approve staff recommendation 1.3. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. At this time, the City Council meeting was recessed. DEPARTMENTALL REPORT No additional comments. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT Mr. Nelson thanked the Redevelopment Agency for its support. AGENCY MEMBERS'REPORTS No comment. R:\Minutes.rda\042401 4 ADJOURNMENT At 11:09 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, May 8, 2001, in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Ron Roberts, Chairman ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] R:\Minutes.rda\042401 5 Because the meeting of May 15, 2001, was a joint meeting of the City Council/Community Services District/Redevelopment Agency, the minutes for the Redevelopment Agency are the same as those for the City Council meeting (Item No. 2). Separate approval is necessary! MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MAY 22, 2001 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 7:40 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. ROLLCALL PRESENT: ABSENT: 3 AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Pratt, Naggar 2 AGENCY MEMBER: Stone, Roberts Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of March 6, 2001. MOTION: Agency Member Comerchero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Pratt and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Agency Member Stone and Chairman Roberts who were absent. DEPARTMENTAL L REPORT No additional comments. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No comment. AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS No comment. R:\Minutes.rda\052201 1 ADJOURNMENT At 7:41 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, June 12, 2001, in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Ron Robeds, Chairman ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] R:\Minutes.rda\052201 2 RDA DEPARTMENTAL REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: I APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE.., CITY MANAGER ~:::~ff~',) TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT Executive DirectodRedevelopment Agency Members John Meyer, Redevelopment Director June 26, 2001 Monthly Departmental Report Attached for your information is the monthly report as of June 26, 2001 for the Redevelopment Department. First Time Homebuyers ProRram Funding in the amount of $200,000 is available for FY 00-01. Two loans have closed for $46,400. Residential Improvement Proflrams The program budget for FY 00/01 is $250,000 and $210,000 has been funded. Affordable Housin.q Two projects have been submitted for preliminary review. One project is from the Agency's development partner, the other from a property owner who is also interested in developing affordable housing. Staff is analyzing these proposals. Senior Housin.q Agency staff is negotiating with a development partner to rehab 96 units for affordable senior housing. A senior housing demand study is being conducted. Old Town Communit~ Theater The Redevelopment Agency Board approved the Community Theater's Master Plan at its meeting of April 24, 2001. The Architect has begun the next Phase of the design, which includes design development and construction drawings. R:~SYERSK~IONTHLLY~eport.june01 .doc Facade Improvement/Non-Conforming Sign Pro.qram The following facade improvement/sign projects have recently been completed: · The Health Insurance Agency Signs · The Old Tin Box Signs · Waves of Beau{y Signs The following facade improvements are underway: · M & M Art and Frame Signs · Y's & O's Signs · Old Town Plaza Shopping Center Refinish Extedor and Signs for all units · Chaparral Building Stain Extedor · The Stampede Paint Exterior Old Town PromotionslMarketin.q The Street Painting Festival was held on June 2 & 3 and featured numerous artists displaying their chalk art on the streets of Old Town. The Agency is also sponsoring several other events over the next few months. The events include Summer Nights featuring a vadety of live entertainment, which is scheduled to begin July 6 and run through September 28, 2001, Howl-o-ween in Old Town featuring pumpkin carving contests, a craft fair and live entertainment. R:~SYERSK~MONTHLLY~report.june01 .doc TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY APRIL 24, 2001 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Public Financing Authority was called to order at 11:09 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. ROLLCALL PRESENT: 5 BOARD MEMBERS: Naggar, Pratt, Robeds, Stone, Comerchero ABSENT: 0 BOARD MEMBER: None Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Administrative Matters and Initial Actions relatin,q to Formation of Community Facilities District RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Appoint, by minute order, a Chairperson from among its Board of Directors; 1.2 Adopt resolutions entitled: RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 0t-0'1 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY REGARDING MEETINGS, ESTABLISHING A SEAL FOR THE AUTHORITY, DIRECTING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF FORMATION WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE, AND ESTABLISHING THE RULES FOR ITS PROCEEDINGS RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 01-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY ADOPTING LOCAL GOALS AND POLICIES FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS R:\Minutes.tpfa\042401 1 RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF PETITIONS TO FORM A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO MOTION: Board Member Stone moved to appoint Mayor Comerchero as the Chairman of this Authority. The motion was seconded by Board Member Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. MOTION.: Board Member Stone moved to adopt Resolution TPFA No. 01-01. The motion was seconded by Board Member Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. MOTION: Board Member Stone moved to adopt Resolution No. TPFA 01-02. The motion was seconded by Board Member Roberts and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. MOTION: Board Member Stone moved to continue the adoption of the resolution pertaining to acknowledging receipt of petitions to form a Community Facilities District and authorizing and directing actions with respect thereto to the May 8, 2001, Temecula Public Financing Authority meeting. The motion was seconded by Board Member Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No comment. BOARD MEMBERS' REPORTS No comments. ADJOURNMENT At 11:11 P.M., the Temecula Public Financing Authority meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, May 8, 2001, in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Chairman Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] R:\Minutes.tpfa\042401 2 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY MAY 15, 2001 A special meeting of the City of Temecula Public Financing Authority was called to order at 3:12 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 5 BOARD MEMBERS: Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone, Comerchero ABSENT: 0 BOARD MEMBER: None Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. AUTHORITY BUSINESS 1 Actions relating to Acceptance of a Deposit related to proceedinq for a Community Facilities District for Butterfield StaRe Road RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-30 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING DEPOSIT/REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT 1.2 That the Authority adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 01-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF A DEPOSIT RELATIVE TO THE FORMATION OF A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO Finance Director Roberts provided a brief overview of the staff report (as per agenda material). MOTION: Councilman/Board Member Naggar moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilman/Board Member Pratt and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman/Board Member Stone who was absent. At this time, the City Council meeting was recessed. R:rninutes.tpfa\051501 1 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No comment. AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS No comment. ADJOURNMENT At 3:14 P.M., the Temecula Public Financing Authority meeting was formally adjourned. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Chairman Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] R:minutes.tpfa\051501 2 CITY ATTORNEY DIR.OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA and TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council/Temecula Public Financing Authority Genie Roberts, Director of Finance~f,~ June 26, 2001 Initial Actions Relating to Formation of Community Facilities District for Wolf Creek RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the City Council adopt the resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING DEPOSIT/REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT That the Authority adopt the resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF A DEPOSIT RELATIVE TO THE FORMATION OF A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT, AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO BACKGROUND: S-P Murdy, LLC (the "Developer") has requested that a community facilities district be formed to assist in the financing of public improvements in the Wolf Creek area. The City and the Redevelopment Agency created the Authority, by execution of a joint exercise of CITY OF TEMECULA/TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AGENDA REPORT Subject: Initial Action Related to Formation of Community Facilities District Page 2 powers agreement, to provide an independent governmental entity that could consider the proposed community facilities district financings and act as the issuer of any related bonds. The Authority will consider the adoption of a resolution related to the formation of a community facilities district. The CFD will only include land owned or controlled by the Developer. The Developer has requested that the CFD issue bonds to finance certain public improvements so that development of the land can proceed. The Developer has agreed to pay all City and Authority costs related to the proposed CFD formation and bond issue, and a deposit/reimbursement agreement has been prepared with respect thereto. The bonds would be payable solely from special taxes levied on land in the CFD and collected by the Authority. SPECIFIC ACTIONS: In order to begin the process to consider the formation of the community facilities district and the issuance of the bonds, the City Council will consider adoption of a resolution approving a deposit/reimbursement agreement, and the Authority will then consider adoption of a resolution accepting the Developer's deposit, approving a deposit/reimbursement agreement with the City and the Developer and engaging professionals to assist the City and the Authority in forming the CFD and issuing bonds of the Authority for the CFD. FISCAL IMPACT: The Developer has agreed to pay all out of pocket expenses incurred relative to the proposed financing. Costs of issuance of the proposed bond issue will be paid from the proceeds of the bonds to be issued by the Authority. All annual costs of administering the bond issued will be paid by special taxes levied on the properties in the community facilities district. Any CFD bonds will not be obligations of the City, but will be limited obligations of the Authority, payable solely from special taxes levied on land in the community facilities district. Attachments: Resolutions (2) Deposit/Reimbursement Agreement RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING DEPOSIT/REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WHEREAS, S-P Murdy, LLC (the "Developer") has requested that the Temecula Public Financing Authority (the "Authority") form a community facilities district and has advanced funds to pay costs of the City and the Authority related thereto; and WHEREAS, the City desires to enter into a Deposit/Reimbursement Agreement with the Authority and the Developers (the "Deposit Agreement"), regarding the disposition of funds advanced by the Developer. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Temecula as follows: Section 1. Deposit A.qreement. The City Council hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager to execute and deliver the Deposit Agreement, in the form on file with the City Clerk together with any changes therein deemed advisable by the City Attorney, the approval of such changes to be conclusively evidenced by the execution and delivery by the City of the Deposit Agreement. Section 2. Official Actions. The Mayor, City Manager, City Clerk and all other officers of the City are hereby authorized and directed to take all actions and do all things necessary or desirable hereunder with respect to the implementation of the Deposit Agreement, including but not limited to the execution and delivery of any and all agreements, certificates, instruments and other documents, which they, or any of them, may deem necessary or desirable and not inconsistent with the purposes of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula, at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of June, 2001. A'Fi'EST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 01- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 2'~-day of June, 2001, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk -2- RESOLUTION NO. TPFA 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF A DEPOSIT RELATIVE TO THE FORMATION OF A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT, AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO WHEREAS, S-P Murdy, LLC (the "Developer") has submitted to the Finance Director of the City of Temecula (the "City") monies (the "Deposit") to be used by the City to pay costs of the City and the Temecula Public Financing Authority (the "Authority") in connection with proceedings under Section 53311 et seq. of the California Government Code (the "Act") to create a community facilities district to be designated "Temecula Public Financing Authority Community Facilities District No. 01-3 (Wolf Creek)" (the "CFD"); and WHEREAS, there has also been submitted a Deposit/Reimbursement Agreement (the "Agreement"), among the Developer, the City of Temecula and the Authority, and this Board of Directors now desires to accept the money advanced by the Developer, to authorize the execution and delivery by the Authority of the Agreement, employ certain consultants necessary for the formation of the CFD and the sale of bonds of the Authority for the CFD, and authorize and direct Authority staff to take actions necessary to present to this Board of Directors for approval the documents necessary to form the CFD and issue bonds of the Authority for the CFD. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Public Financing Authority as follows: Section 1. The Director of Finance of the City of Temecula is hereby authorized and directed to accept the Deposit, and to use the Deposit in the manner contemplated by the Agreement. The Executive Director of the Authority is hereby authorized and directed to execute the Agreement for and on behalf of the Authority, and to take all actions necessary, in his discretion, to implement the Agreement. Section 2. City staff, acting for and on behalf of the Authority, are hereby authorized and directed to take all actions necessary or advisable to present to the Board of Directors for its review and approval all proceedings necessary to create the CFD and issue bonds of the Authority therefore. The passage of this Resolution shall in no way obligate this Board of Directors to form the CFD or issue bonds of the Authority for the CFD. Section 3. The firm of Stone & Youngberg LLC is hereby designated as underwriter to the Authority for any bonds to be issued for the CFD. Section 4. The firm of Albert A. Webb Associates is hereby designated as Special Tax Consultant to the Authority for the CFD, the firm of Fieldman, Rolapp & Associates is hereby designated as financial advisor to the Authority for the CFD, and the firm of Quint & Thimmig LLP is hereby designated as Bond Counsel to the Authority for the CFD. The Executive Director is hereby authorized and directed to execute agreements with said firms for their services in connection with the CFD, in form and substance acceptable to the Executive Director. The fees and expenses of such consultants shall be payable solely from the Deposit and/or the proceeds of bonds, if any, issued by the Authority for the CFD. Section 5. The Executive Director is hereby authorized and directed to engage an appraiser to appraise the property subject to the special taxes to be levied within the CFD, and a market absorption consultant to analyze the proposed development in the CFD, on such terms as are acceptable to the Executive Director. The fees and expenses of such consultants shall be payable solely from the Deposit and/or the proceeds of bonds, if any, issued by the Authority for the CFD. Section 6. The Executive Director, Treasurer, Secretary, legal counsel to the Authority and all other officers and agents of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to take all actions necessary or advisable to give effect to the transactions contemplated by this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Public Financing Authority at a meeting held on the 26th day of June, 2001. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Chairperson Susan W. Jones City Clerk/Authority Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan Jones, Secretary of the Temecula Public Financing Authority, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. TPFA 01- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Temecula Public Financing Authority on the 26th day of June, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: BOARDMEMBERS: NOES: BOARDMEMBERS: ABSENT: BOARDMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones Authority Secmtary/City Clerk -2- DEPOSIT/REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT Temecula Public Financing Authority Community Facilities District No. 01-3 (Wolf Creek) THIS DEPOSIT/REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is by and among the City of Temecula (the "City"), the Temecula Public Financing Authority (the "Authority") for itself and on behalf of the proposed Temecula Public Financing Authority Community Facilities District No. 01-3 (Wolf Creek) (the "CFD"), and S-P Murdy, LLC (the "Developer"). RECITALS: WHEREAS, the Developer has requested that the Authority consider the issuance of bonds for the CFD (the "Bonds") under Sections 53311 et seq. of the California Government Code (the "Act"); and WHEREAS, the Developer is willing to deposit funds with the City to ensure payment of the costs of the Authority and the City in forming the Authority and otherwise in connection with the issuance of bonds for the CFD and the proposed expenditure of the proceeds thereof, provided that such funds so advanced are reimbursed to the Developer from the proceeds of any bonds issued by the Authority for the CFD to the extent provided herein; and WHEREAS, the Authority and the Developer now desire to specify the terms of said deposit and reimbursement. AGREEMENT: NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual covenants set forth herein, and for other consideration' the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. The Deposit: Additional Advances. The Developer is, concurrently with its execution of this Agreement, delivering to the City's Finance Director $132,000 (the "Deposit"), to be used by the City to pay the costs in conducting proceedings for the issuance of bonds for the CFD (as more fully described in Section 2(a) below, the "Initial Costs"), said amount being in the form of a check made payable to the "City of Temecula." The City, by its execution hereof, acknowledges receipt by the City of the Deposit. The check representing the Deposit will be cashed by the City, and the Deposit may be commingled with other funds of the City for purposes of investment and safekeeping, but the City shall at all times maintain records as to the expenditure of the Deposit. The Developer hereby agrees to advance any additional amounts necessary to pay any Initial Costs incurred by the City or the Authority, in excess of the amount of the Deposit, promptly upon written demand therefore by the Finance Director of the City; provided that the amount of the Deposit, plus any such additional amounts (the "Additional Deposits" and, collectively with the Deposit, the "Deposits"), shall not exceed $200,000 without the prior written consent of the Developer. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City Manager may direct City and Authority staff and consultants to cease all work related to the issuance of the Bonds and/or the formation of the Authority and the CFD until any additional amounts so demanded has been received by the City. Section 2..Use of Funds. The Deposits shall be administered as follows: (a) The Finance Director of the City may draw upon the Deposits from time to time to pay the Initial Costs, including but not limited to: (i) the fees and expenses of any consultants to the City or the Authority employed in connection with the issuance of the Bonds and the proposed expenditure of the proceeds thereof (such as engineering, legal counsel, including the City Attorney, Bond Counsel and financing and special tax consultants); (ii) the costs of appraisals, market absorption and feasibility studies and other reports necessary or deemed advisable by City staff or consultants in connection with the Bonds; (iii) costs of publication of notices, preparation and mailing of ballots and other costs related to any election with respect to the CFD, the rate and method of apportionment of the special taxes to be levied therein and any bonded indebtedness thereof; (iv) a reasonable charge for City staff time, as determined by the City Manager in his sole discretion, in analyzing the CFD, the Bonds and the expenditure of the proceeds thereof, including a reasonable allocation of City overhead expense related thereto; and (v) any and all other actual costs and expenses incurred by the City or the Authority with respect to the CFD or the Bonds after the date of execution of this Agreement. The Developer hereby acknowledges that, at a minimum, the following amounts will or may be charged against the Deposits, whether or not the CFD is formed and the Bonds are issued: (i) up to $30,000.00 to Albert A. Webb Associates, special tax consultant, (ii) up to $30,000.00 to an appraiser, (iii) up to $12,000.00 to Richards, Watson & Gershon, City Attorney and general counsel to the Authority, (iv) up to $15,000.00 for a market absorption analysis related to the CFD, (v) up to $20,000.00 to Fieldman, Rolapp & Associates for financial advisory services, and (vi) up to $25,000.00 to the City for City Staff time in analyzing the CFD, the Bonds and the expenditure of the proceeds thereof, including a reasonable allocation of City overhead expense related thereto, including all other actual costs and expenses incurred by the City. (b) If the Bonds are issued under the Act by the Authority secured by special taxes levied upon the land within the CFD, the Authority shall provide for reimbursement to the Developer, without interest, of all amounts charged against the Deposits, said reimbursement to be made solely from the proceeds of the Bonds and only to the extent otherwise permitted under the Act. On or within ten (10) business days after the date of issuance and delivery of the Bonds, the Finance Director of the City shall return the then unexpended Deposits to the Developer, without interest, less an amount equal to any costs incurred by the City or the Authority or that the City or the Authority is otherwise committed to pay, which costs would be subject to payment under Section 2(a) above, but have not yet been so paid. (c) If the Bonds are not issued, the Finance Director of the City shall, within ten (10) business days after adoption of the resolution stating the intent of the Authority to terminate proceedings under the Act with respect to the issuance of the Bonds, return the then unexpended Deposits to the Developer, without interest, less an amount equal to any costs incurred by the City or the Authority or that the City or the Authority is otherwise committed to pay, which costs would be subject to payment under Section 2(a) above but have not yet been so paid. Section 3. Reimbursement of Other Developer Costs. Nothing contained herein shall prohibit reimbursement of other costs and expenses of the Developer or any successor in interest thereto with respect to the land in the CFD incurred in connection with the CFD from the -2- proceeds of the Bonds, including, but not limited to fees and expenses of legal counsel to the Developer and/or its successor in interest and special consultant expenses. Any such reimbursement shall be made solely from the proceeds of the Bonds and only to the extent otherwise permitted under the Act and otherwise provided for, at the reasonable discretion of the Authority, in the proceedings for the issuance of the Bonds. Section 4. A.qreement Not Debt or Liability of City or Authority. It is hereby acknowledged and agreed that this Agreement is not a debt or liability of the City or the Authority, as provided in Section 53314.9(b) of the Act. Neither the City nor the Authority shall in any event be liable hereunder other than to return the unexpended and uncommitted portions of the Deposits as provided in Section 2 above and provide an accounting under Section 7 below. Neither the City nor the Authority shall be obligated to advance any of their own funds with respect to the CFD or for any of the other purposes listed in Section 2(a) hereof. No member of the City Council, the Board of Directors of the Authority or officer, employee or agent of the City or the Authority shall to any extent be personally liable hereunder. Section 5. No Obli.qation to Issue Bonds. The provisions of this Agreement shall in no way obligate the City or the Authority to issue any bonds, or to expend any of their own funds in connection with the CFD. Section 6. Severability. If any part of this Agreement is held to be illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement shall be given effect to the fullest extent reasonably possible. Section 7. Accounting. The City Finance Director shall provide the Developer with a written accounting of moneys expended under this Agreement, within ten (10) business days of receipt by the Finance Director of the City of a written request therefor submitted by an authorized officer of the Developer. No more than one accounting will be provided in any calendar month and the cost of providing the accounting shall be charged to the Deposits. Section 8. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. Section 9. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. -3- IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year written alongside their signature line below. DEVELOPER: Executed on: S-P MURDY, LLC, a California limited liability June 26, 2001 company By: Executed on: CITY: June 26, 2001 Managing Director CITY OF TEMECULA By: Shawn D. Nelson, City Manager Executed on: June 26, 2001 AUTHORITY: TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY, for itself and on behalf of the proposed Temecula Public Financing Authority Community Facilities District 01-3 (Wolf Creek) By: Shawn D. Nelson, Executive Director Approved as to form: Executed on: June 26, 2001 By: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney Executed on: June 26, 2001 Attest: By: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk ITEM 22 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council Gary Thomhill, Deputy City Manager June 26, 2001 PA94-0073 (Annexation)- Adoption of Resolution Initiating Annexation Proceedings for a 640-acre portion of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Area as proposed by Ashby Development Company PREPARED BY: Saied Naaseh, Project Planner RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the CityCouncil: 1. ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-__ A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS REORGANIZING THE JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY DESCRIBED AS A 640 ACRE PORTION THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AREATO INCLUDE THIS AREAWITHIN THE CORPORATE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND TO DETACH SAID TERRITORY FROM CSA 143 AND THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATED AS PORTION OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0075 (RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN); Direct staff to prepare and file the annexation application, the Plan of Services, the Fiscal Impact Report, and all other associated materials for the annexation with the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). R:~ANNEXATION\Roripaugh\CC report 6-26-01 reso for annex 2.doc 1 BACKGROUND: On September 12, 2000, the City Council directed staff to proceed with the processing for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan and its annexation. This direction was based on the Ad Hoc Committee's findings that the fiscal impacts to the City's budget from annexing this project would be negligible and the formation of the assessment district for construction of Butterfleld Stage Road, Murrieta Hot Springs Road, and Nicolas Road would be feasible and beneficial to the City. Further, on April 24, 2001, the City Council directed staff to expedite the processing of the Specific Plan and the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Rodpaugh Ranch and directed staffto bring this before the City Council at the meeting on August 14, 2001. Since a 640-acre portion of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan is outside the City Limits, the City Council must first adopt this Resolution in order to initiate the annexation process. After the adoption of the Resolution, staff will file an annexation request with the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) on the behalf of the applicant, Ashby Development Company. The applicant will reimburse the City for all the associated costs with the annexation process through LAFCO. The Annexation will not be final and effective until after the City Council has approved and adopted the Specific Plan, the EIR, and all other related applications. DISCUSSION LAFCO requires submittal of the Plan of Services and the Fiscal Impact Report along with the annexation application. The applicant's consultants, under staff's direction, have prepared these documents. Staff has reviewed these documents and finds them satisfactory. Both these documents are for informational purposes only and do not obligate the City. The Fiscal Impact Report simply projects the fiscal viability of the project at build-out. This report concludes that at the build-out of the annexation area the net fiscal impact on the City's budget will be slightly negative ($22,040). However, at the build-out of the entire Roripaugh Specific Plan the net fiscal impact on the City's Budget will be slightly positive ($17,307). In staff's opinion, these numbers are so iow that the fiscal impact of the project is considered negligible. Furthermore, the Plan of Services demonstrates that a responsible partywill provide the services for the future residents of the area in an efficient manner. By adopting this Resolution, the City Council is endorsing the Fiscal Impact Report and the Plan of Services. Staff anticipates submitting the annexation application to LAFCO immediately after the adoption of the Resolution by the City Council. As a general rule, processing through LAFCO takes approximately three to four months which means that the annexation is likely to be scheduled for a LAFCO hearing in September or October. Since the annexation area is uninhabited with a single property owner, LAFCO does not require a separate City Council Protest Hearing for the finalization of this annexation. The City Council must adopt a separate resolution requesting LAFCO to waive the protest hearing at a later date. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Pursuant to Section 15061 (b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, this project is not subject to the present application of the California Environmental Quality Act because no present or future effect on the environment will result from this decision to proceed with the commencement of the administrative review of this proposed annexation by the Local Agency Formation Commission. An Environmental Impact Report will be prepared and certified for the entire project prior to the decision bythe Local Agency Formation Commission. R:~ANNEXATION\Roripaugh\CC report 6-26-01 reso for annex 2.doc 2 FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact associated with the annexation of the 640-acre area of the Roripaugh Specific Plan has been addressed with the Fiscal Impact Report conducted by the Stanley Hufman and Associates. This report concludes that at the build-out of the annexation area the net fiscal impact on the Ci~s budget will be slightly negative ($22,040). However, at the build- out of the entire Roripaugh Specific Plan the net fiscal impact on the City's Budget will be slightly positive ($17,307). These numbers are so Iow that staff considers the fiscal impact of the project to be negligible. The applicant will be responsible to pay all fees associated with the filing and approval of the annexation application with LAFCO. Attachments: 1. City Council Resolution No. 01 - - Page 4 2. Exhibit "A"- Legal Description of the Annexation Area - Page 8 3. Plan of Services - Page 9 4. Fiscal Impact Report-Page 10 R:~ANNEXATION\Rodpaugh\CC report 6-26-01 reso for annex 2,doc 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 01- R:~ANNEXATION\Rodpaugh\CC report 6-26-01 reso for annex 2.doc 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 01-._ A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS REORGANIZING THE JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY DESCRIBED AS A 640 ACRE PORTION THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AREA TO INCLUDE THIS AREA WITHIN THE CORPORATE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND TO DETACH SAID TERRITORY FROM CSA 143 AND THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATED AS PORTION OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0075 (RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN); WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to request the commencement of proceedings reorganizing the jurisdictional boundaries for the City of Temecula and within the Temecula Community Services District and to detach said territory from County Service Area 143 and County Service Area and the Riverside County Waste Management District pursuant to Part 3 of Division 3 of Title 5 of the California Government Code; WHEREAS, on November 9, 1993, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted a General Plan for the City of Temecula and whereas the analysis within the General Plan includes said areas; WHEREAS, said area is entirely within the City of Temecula's Sphere of Influence and is contiguous to the existing City boundary; WHEREAS, notice of the proposed adoption of this Resolution was posted at City Hall, the County Library - Rancho California Branch, the Temecula Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce, was published in the Californian; WHEREAS, the City Council considered Planning Application No. PA94-0073, on June 26, 2001, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Council approved Planning Application No. PA94-0073; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated R:~ANNEXATION\Rodpaugh\CC report 6-26-01 reso for annex 2.doc 5 Section 2. That the City Council hereby requests the commencement of proceedings be taken pursuant to Part 3 of Division 3 of Title 5 of the California Government Code to reorganize the jurisdictional boundaries of certain inhabited territory described in Exhibit"A", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, and known as Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan area, to include said territory within the corporate boundaries of the City of Temecula and within the Temecula Community Services District and to detach said territory from County Service Area 143 and from the Riverside County Waste Management District. Section 3. Findinqs. That the City Council, in adopting a Resolution requesting the commencement of proceedings to reorganize the jurisdictional boundaries of the territory herein referred to as a portion of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Area to include said territory within the corporate boundaries of the City of Temecula and within the Temecula Community Services District; and the detachment of said territory from County Service Areas (CSA) 143 and the Riverside County Waste Management District (approving Planning Application No. PA94-0073) hereby makes the following findings: 1. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan. 2. Pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines this project is not subject to the present application of the California Environmental Quality Act because no present or future effect on the environment will result from this decision to proceed with the commencement of the administrative review of this proposed annexation by the Local Agency Formation Commission. An environmental impact report will be prepared and certified prior to the decision by the Local Agency Formation Commission regarding its appro~el of this annexation request. 3. The proposed annexation area is entirely within the City of Temecula's Sphere of Influence and is contiguous to the City's corporate boundary. The area is substantially surrounded by the City's existing corporate boundary. 4. The territorywithin the proposed annexation area is within a developing area which will continue to develop. The proposed annexation area is not prime agricultural land (as defined by Section 56064 of the Government Code), and is designated for urban growth by the City of Temecula's General Plan. 5. The project is being proposed on behalf of Ashby Development Company who controls the interest for the entire subject territory in order that the City may provide community services to the residents of said territory in a more responsive and efficient manner. 6. The project will have a negligible fiscal impact on the City budget. 7. The project is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation programs contained in the General Plan. 8. Said findings are supported by the Staff Report analysis, maps, exhibits, and the attachments associated with this application and herein incorporated byreference. Section 5. Environmental Compliance. Pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines this project is not subject to the present application of the California Environmental Quality Act because no present or future effect on the environment will result from this decision to proceed with the commencement of the administrative review of this proposed annexation by the Local Agency Formation Commission. An Environmental Impact Report will be prepared and certified for the entire project prior to the decision bythe Local Agency Formation Commission. R:~ANNEXATION\Rodpaugh\CC report 6-26-01 reso for annex 2.doc 6 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this day of ,2001. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of ,2001, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:~ANNEXATION\Roripaugh\CC report 6-26-01 reso for annex 2.doc 7 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ANNEXATION AREA R:~ANNEXATION\Rodpaugh\CC report 6-26-01 reso for annex 2.doc 8 G-1S-201 11;49AM FROM TKO PLANNING DEPT. 989 G~3 2214 EXHIBIT REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE CONCURKENT ANNEXATION # TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA, & THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT (subsidiary) & SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT (removal) TO VALLEY WIDE RECREATION AND PARKS DISTRICT & CONCURRENT DETACHMENTS FROM VALLEY WIDE RECREATION. AND PARKS DISTRICT & THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY WASTE RESOURCES MANAGEMENT DISTRICT & COUNTY SERVICE AREA 152-NPDES LAFCO 99-XX-3 Section 21, Township 7 South, Range 2 West, San Bemardino Meridian, in the County of Rivexside, State of California, according to the official plat of said land filed in the District Land Office, described as follows: Beginning at the northwest comer of ~aid Section 21; thence along the north line of said Section, North 88°29'37'' East, 5296.39 feet to the northeast comer of said Section; thence along the east line of said Section, South 0059, 15" West, 2664.97 feet to the East quarter comer Of said Section; thence centinuing along said east linc, South 00°21'34" West, 2636.07 feet to the southeast cemer of said Section; thence along the south line of said Section, North 89°39'13'' West, 5282.88 feet to the southwest ~eomer of said Section and the easterly line of the existing City of Temeeula boundary as described in a document recorded December 9, 1994 as Instrument No. 461244 of Official Records in the of:flee of the County Recorder of said county; thence along the west line of said Section and the east l~e of said City of Temeeula Boundary, North 0°33'47" East, 3809.85 feet to the southea.~t comer of the North one-half of the North one-half of Section 20, Township 7 South, Range 2 West, San Bemardino Meridian; thence continuing along said west and east line, North 0°34'31" East, 1319.80 feet to the Point of Beginning. Area contains approximately 791 acres. DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. LS. No, 5022 Expires:12-31-2001 6-1S-201 ll,SOAM FROM TKC PLANNING DEPT· 909 6S3 2214 p. 3 EXHIBIT "A " N APN 958-026-002 5296.59' CORNER SECTION T75, R2W, SBM ~ JO8 NO.; A$~gO00! REORGANIZATION TO [NCLU~£ CONCURRENT ANNEXATION . TO THE CITY OF T£M£CUL~ ~ENDMENT (removoD TO V~LffY W~E RECREATION ~D P~KS ~ST~ICT & CONCUrrENT COUNTY W~TE RESOURSES M~AGEMENT DISTRICT ~ COUNTY EERWCE AREA 1~2-~PDES CITY OF TEMECULA LAFCO 99-XX-3 DATE: 8/18/99 DRAWN: TLK $CAL£: ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PLAN OF SERVICES R:~ANNEXATION\Roripaugh\CC report 6~26-01 reso for annex 2.doc 9 City of Ternecula Annexation of Roripaugh Ranch Plan of Services PLAN OF SERVICES 638 ACRES OF THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AREA PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION TO THE CI'FY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA A. Introduction LAFCO requires a Plan of Service be submitted as the central document for project development proposals that change the organization or reorganization of public services to a given project or area. The following discussion provides documentation of the City of Temecula's plan to provide and/or assure the provision of municipal and other associated services to an area consisting of approximately 636 acres that is generally referred to as the Rodpaugh Ranch. This Plan of Services has been prepared pursuant to Sections 56800 and 56653 of the California Government Code, et: seq. The Plan of Services describes the extent to which the following services will be provided to the 636 acres with the project site. The project will require the following services, including: police protection, fire protection, schools, parks and recreation, libraries, medical services, potable water, waste water, solid waste disposal, electric power, natural gas, telecommunications, public roads, cable, street sweeping, street maintenance, median and slope maintenance, and animal control. B. Project Description The proposed annexation area is bounded by the Temecula's eastern city boundary and a portion of Butterfield Stage Road to the west, the Johnson Ranch area to the north and east, the unincorporated Calle Contento neighborhood to the east, and unincorporated Riverside County land to the south. The annexation area is a portion of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan (SP No. 11) area. The Specific Plan area encompasses 819.7 acres with approximately 183.7 acres currently within the corporate boundaries of the City. The remaining 636 acres are to be annexed to the City. The project consists of 1,721 units on 819.7 acres with a gross density of 2.1 du/ac and a net density of 4.06 du/ac. The project includes 1,286 single family units, 435 multi-family units, 21.3 acres of commercial uses (150,000 sf), 12.4 acres of Professional Office, 5.0 acres of Institutional, 32 acres for 2 school sites (elementary and middle schools), 1.5 acre Fire Station site, 23.6 acres for 2 onsite parks, and 255.3 acres of open space. The Rodpaugh Ranch project is currently owned by Ashby USA, LLC. Three five acre out parcels are located in the Village Core that will remain in pdvate ownership, and may be developed separately from the Rodpaugh Ranch Specific Plan. The City of Temecula will adopt zoning for the entire Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan as specified in chapter 6 of the SP text. The 636 acre portion of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan will be pre: zoned according with the land use categories specified within each of the respective Specific Plans areas (Planning Area). A pre-zone map is included in this document for the affected and adjacent areas. The map depicts the applicable zoning and pre-zoning, and other specific development approvals. N:~31367.000~oc~Annexation~30799998 Revised Plan of Serv Revision 1 .wild 5/4/01 ASHBY USA~ LLC FIGURE 1-4 0 ~o~~°°°°°°~ ~ o 1721 Residential Units Proposed Land Use Plan City of Temecula GENERAL PLAN LAND USE Riverside County GIS This information is made available through the Riverside County Geographic Information System. This information is for reference.purposes only. It is intended to be used as base level ' information only and is not intended to replace any recorded documents or other public records. Contact appropriate County Department or Agency if necessary. Reference to recorded documents and public records may be necessary. GIS inquiry for APN=958260002 MAP=Specific_Zoning RESULT IS ..... · ZONING: A-l-10 · ADDITIONAL ZONING MAY APPLY - SEE PLANNING DEPARTMENT .OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS. · PARCEL ACREAGE: 623.83 ACRES · MAP: NO-SCALE For further information, or questions regarding zoning or land use, please contact ... Riverside County Planning Department (909) 955 - 3200 4080 Lemon Street - 2nd Floor Riverside, CA. 92501 - completed - Cily of Temecula Annexation of Roripaugh Ranch Plan of Services C. Summary of Individual Services Approximately 19 individual services will be affected by the annexation of the 636 acre Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan area. The attached Plan of Services (Table 1) groups services according to the specific service provider. In each case, the current and proposed services for the proposed annexation area are described in summary form, including service/facilities provided, the location from which the services will be provided, description of new facilities required, the cost of each service/facility and the sufficiency of revenues to cover those costs, and existing or new general taxes, special taxes, assessments, or other charges, including the amount of each new tax or charge. D. Conclusions / Statement of Benefits Evaluation of the impacts associated with the proposed annexation include several analyses of public services and facilities conducted by the City. The subject Plan of Services, a Fiscal Impact Analysis(FIR), and an Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Specific Plan area are included in these analysis. The Draft Environmental Impact Report concluded that the project would have a number of significant impacts, including: Land Use Compatibility, French Valley Airport Compatibility, loss of prime agricultural land and locally important agricultural land, traffic level of service, air quality, and aesthetics. Traffic is the only significant service related impact that.the project will have on the City or other service/infrastructure purveyors (an overriding finding will be required). The City currently is capable of meeting the public service demands within the City boundaries and the annexation area. Additional development will add property and future sales taxes to the City. Subsequently, the City will provide services to the annexation area based on the amount of services needed and the general funds available to the City. N:\31367.000~doc~Annexation\30799998 Revised P~n of Ser~ Revision 1 .~:f 5/4/01 Roripaugh Ranch Plan of Services PARK~ MEDIAN~ ARTERIAL STREET LIGHTING AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL SERVICE,e Prior to the recordation of the final map, the City of Temecula (City) will initiate election procedures for the extension of the City's Special Tax for Park, Median, Street Lighting and Traffic Signal Maintenance and Recreational and Human Services. The maximum rate of the Special Tax is currently $74.44 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU). The Special Tax will be levied against all assessable parcels within the annexation area on the property tax rolls. Upon the successful passage of the Special Tax and installation and completion of the prescribed maintenance period for improvements, the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) will accept the maintenance of the public parks, recreational facilities, arterial street lights, traffic signals, and medians. The TCSD will also provide recreational and human services programs to the annexation area in concert with similar programs offered throughout the City of Temecula. RESIDENTIAL STREET LIGHTING AND SLOPE MAINTENANCF Prior to the recordation of the final map, the City of Temecula (City) will initiate election procedures to establish Rates and Charges to provide residential street lighting and slope/parkway maintenance services within the annexation area. The Rates and Charges amounts for these services will be determined at the time the election is initiated and will represent the actual cost to provide the services. The Rates and Charges will be levied against all single-family residential parcels within the annexation area on the property tax rolls. The developer will be required to complete a residential street light application and post advanced energy fees with the TCSD to provide for maintenance costs until the TCSD is able to place the single-family residential parcels on the tax roils. All slope and parkway areas to be accepted by the TCSD for maintenance will be identified and a maintenance easement will be offered on the final map. All landscape improvements must be installed in accordance with TCSD standards and.procedures. The developer will be responsible for maintenance of all landscaped areas until the TCSD is able to place the single-family residential parcels on the tax rolls. CABLE TELEVISION SERVICES Cable television services for the City of Temecula and many of the surrounding areas is provided by Adelphia under a non-exclusive franchise agreement originally approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors. Cable television services will be provided to the annexation area by Adelphia under the same franchise agreement. LIBRARIES The annexation area is currently'within the Riverside County Library System. The City of Temecula is also a part of the Riverside County Library System. Upon annexation, the library district will not change. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL Currently, so[id waste service is being provided in the County by Waste Management of the Inland Valley. Solid waste disposal service within the City limits is provided by CR&R Incorporated (CR&R), which is a privately operated company being contracted by . the City under an exclusive franchise agreement. Upon annexation to the City, solid waste disposal services for the annexation area will by provided by CR&R. Pursuant to California's Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, (the Act) all cities and counties must have a waste stream source reduction plan. The City has such a plan and will implement that plan in the annexed area. Currently, the City is in compliance with the Act. STREET SWEEPING The City's franchised solid waste hauler, CR&R, provides weekly street sweeping services of all public streets. Upon annexation to the City, street sweeping services for the annexation area will by provided by CR&R. ~ o mmic) ILl C) O '~,, ASHBY USA~ LLC FIGURE 1 LLI LEGEND I · I Emergency Services N 0 T T 0 S C A L E Ronpaugli Ranch -'., ASH.~ us~ LLC FIGURE 2 R oripaugl/~ Ranch. ,~, ^sH.¥ uS^,LLC FIGURE 3 I~ oripaugI(~'~ Ranch ' ~ i A~HB~ U~ LLC FIGURE 4 i N 0 T T 0 S C A L ~ R onpat gh R a ch FIGURE 5 Ron'paugli/~Rat~dl FIGURE 6 RonpaugP~Ranch ATTACHMENT NO. 3 FISCAL IMPACT REPORT R:~ANNEXATION\Roripaugh\CC report 6-26-01 reso for annex 2.doc 10 ! ! I I :Fiscal Im. paCtAnalysis Roripaugh RanCh Specific Plan City of Temec'ula t! ! Prepared for: The Keith Companies" 22690 Cactus Avenue, Suite ;300 Moreno Valley, California 9255'3 · (909) 653-0234 June 2001 STAlqLEY R. HOFFMAN 11661 San Vicente Blvd. Suite 306 Los Angeles, CA 90049-511 I p-310-820-2680, f-310-820-8341 - www.stanlewhoffman.com srha~stanleyrhoffman.com I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I CONTENTS Tables ......................................................................................................................... ii Figures ....................................................................................................................... iii Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. iv Chapter 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ........................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Project Description ............................................................................................. 1 1.3 Approach ............................................................................................................. 4 1.4 Overview ............................................................................................................. 4 Chapter2 Fiscal Impact Summary ................................................................................... 5 Chapter 3 3.1 3.2 Project Description ........................................................................................... 10 Land Uses and Projected Development .............................................................. 10 Public Infrastructure and Facilities ..................................................................... 17 Chapter 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Fiscal Analysis of the Total Specific Plan Area ............................................. 21 City General Fund ............................................................................................... 21 Community Services District .............................................................................. 31 Riverside County Assessment District 161 ........................................................ 34 Development Impact Fees .................................................................................. 34 Chapter 5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Fiscal Analysis: Annexation Area ................................................................... 36 City General Fund ............................................................................................... 36 Community Services District .............................................................................. 41 Assessment District 161 (AD161) ...................................................................... 44 Development Impact Fees .................................................................................. 44 Appendix A Land Use and Market Factors .................................................................... 46 Appendix B City of Temecula: Fiscal Factors .................................................................. 49 Appendix C Estimation of In-Tract Local Roads ............................................................ 53 Contacts ................................................................................................................................ 56 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. i Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I i I I I I I I i I I I 2-1 2-2 2-3 TABLES Summary of Recurring Revenues and Costs at Buildout ........................................... 6 Temecula Community Services District Revenue Summary at Buildout .................. 8 Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Summary ................................................ 9 3-1 Total Project Land Use Summary .............................................................................. 11 3-2 Total Specific Land Uses by Density Type ................................................................ 13 3-3 City Land Uses by Density Type .............................................................................. 15 3-4 Annexation Area Land Uses by Density Type ........................................................... 16 3-5 Specific Plan Road Improvement Phasing ................................................................. 19 3-6 Annexation Area Road Improvement Phasing .......................................................... 20 4-1 Property Tax Rate Comparison for City and Unincorporated Areas Before and After Annexation ................................................................................ 22 4-2 Distribution of 1% Property Tax Basic Levy for Portions of City of Temecula & Unincorporated Riverside County ......................................... 23 4-3 Summary of General Fund Recurring Revenues and Costs ....................................... 24 4-4 Estimated Police Protection Costs ............................................................................. 27 4-5 Community Service and Planning Cost Factors ........................................................ 29 4-6A Fire Protection Costs Per Equivalent Dwelling Unit ................................................. 30 4-6B Estimated Total Project Fire Protection Costs .......................................................... 30 4-7 Structural Fire Protection .......................................................................................... 32 4-8 Community Services District Revenue Analysis ....................................................... 33 4-9 Public Facilities Development Impact Fees ............................................................... 35 5-1 Summary of Recurring Revenues and Costs ............................................................. 37 5-2 Structural Fire Protection .......................................................................................... 42 5-3 CSD Revenue Analysis .............................................................................................. 43 5-4 Public Facilities Development Impact Fees ............................................................... 45 A-1 Residential Land Use and Market Factors ................................................................. 47 A-2 Non-Residential Land Use and Market Factors ......................................................... 48 B-1 General Fund Revenue Factors .................................................................................. 50 B-2 General Fund Cost Factors ........................................................................................ 52 C-1 Total Estimated Lineal Feet of In-Tract Roads .......................................................... 54 C-2 Total Estimated Lineal Feet of In-Tract Roads in Annexation Area ......................... 55 Stanley IL Hoffman Associates, Inc. ii Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I ! I I FIGURES 1-1 1-2 Regional Location Map ............................................................................................ 2 Project Vicinity Map .................................................................................................. 3 3-1 3-2 Proposed Land Use Plan ............................................................................................ 12 Conceptual Circulation Master Plan .......................................................................... 18 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. iii Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan .June 2001 Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I i ! I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the projected fiscal impacts of the proposed Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan for the City of Temeeula General Fund and the Temecula Community Services District. One time development impact fees for capital facilities are also estimated. The analysis is shown for both the total Specific Plan area that covers a portion of the City and County unincorporated area, and for the area that is proposed for annexation into the City. Overall the project is fiscally positive, basically breakeven, for the City's General Fund for the total Specific Plan area and slightly negative for the annexation area. The project also generates revenues to the Temecula Community Services District that cover a sizable portion of the cost of services. Additionally, capital infrastructure fees are generated. Project Description The Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan area is about 820 acres in size, and allows for residential and non-residential land uses. The project is forecasted to be built out by about the year 2012. Proposed development within the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan will include 1,721 new residential dwelling units, an estimated 190,000 square feet of commercial facilities, about 23.6 acres of parks and 255.3 acres of open space. Proposed residential land uses include the following four uses: high residential, medium residential, medium low residential, and low residential. Non-residential land uses include neighborhood retail of about 150,000 square feet and 40,000 square feet of office space. Of the 820 total acres comprising the project area, 634 acres are currently under Riverside County jurisdiction while 186 acres, the balance of the total, is located within City of Temecula boundaries. Recurring Fiscal Impacts The fiscal impacts at buildout of Roripaugh Ranch are summarized below. Recurring revenues and costs are projected for the City of Temecula General Fund. Development impact fees and Community Service District recurring revenues are also estimated. City General Fund. At buildout of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, the City of Temecula General Fund is projected to have a net recurring surplus of $21,252, based on projected recurring revenues of $1,119,122 and projected costs of $1,097,870. The revenue/cost ratio is estimated at 1.02, basically breakeven. Measure A sales tax revenue is projected to annually contribute an additional $113,942 at project buildout for road capital improvements. The Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. iv Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Jane 2001 Fiscal.dnalysis I I I I ! I I I I I i I I / i I i General Fund revenues are largely driven by three factors: 1) the estimated 190,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial in the project and additional retail sales estimated to be captured at other retail outlets in the City, 2) estimated motor vehicle license fees, and 3) property tax revenues. For the annexation area separately, the General Fund is projected to be fiscally negative at buildout by a net $18,864. This yields a revenue/cost ratio of 0.98, again basically breakeven. Development Impact Fees. Over the buildout period, the Specific Plan area is estimated to generate about $5,493,332 in development impact or infrastructure fees. Approximately half of this amount, or $2,724,302, is generated by the City's Park and Recreation Improvements fee. Street System Improvement fees are projected at about $1,688,076. The remaining $1,080,954 encompasses Traffic Signals and Control System fees, Corporate Facilities fees, Fire Protection Facilities fees and Library mitigation fees. Total development impact fees for the annexation area, separately are estimated at about $4,077,903. The fees are based on the City's standard development impact fees currently in effect. The developer is currently in the process of negotiating a development agreement with the City, and the ultimate fees to be paid may differ. Community Services District. The City of Temecula Community Services District (CSD) maintains the City's public parks, recreations facilities, recreational and human service programs, median landscaping, arterial streetlights and traffic signals through an agreement with the City of Temecula. Annual revenues accruing to the CSD at buildout are estimated at $720,748. These revenues are generated by parcel charges and collected on the annual property tax bills for residential and non-residential properties. Either property owners or a non-profit corporation will maintain open space. The CSD will not maintain open space. Annual CSD revenues for the annexation area, separately, are estimated at $496,819. The various fee levels are explained in more detail in Chapter 4, Section 4.2. Measure A. Measure A was passed in order to increase funding for capital road improvements in the City of Temecula. At project buildout, revenue from Measure A is estimated to annually total about $113,942 for the Specific Plan area and $82,307 for the annexation area, separately. Riverside County Assessment District 161. Riverside County Assessment District 161 was started in 1994 for the purpose of constructing major access roads. The Panhandle area within the City of Temecula is already within this District. Of the total $1,420,000 existing assessment, $557,400 has already been paid. Stanley IL Hoffman Associates, Inc. v Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal Analysis I I i I i I I I I i I I Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION This report presents the fiscal impact analysis of the proposed development of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan. The fiscal impact analysis projects recurring revenues and costs to the General Fund of the City of Temecula, recurring revenues to the Community Services District and Measure A road improvement revenues. In addition, one-time development impact fees are estimated as well as Assessment District 161 revenues for capital road improvements. This fiscal impact report is based on the latest land use data available and the fiscal model developed for the City of Temecula in 1992 and updated to 2001. Derivation of the revenue and cost factors are based on a detailed analysis of the City of Temecula's 2000-2001 fiscal year budget and interviews with key City staff. 1.1 Background The City of Temecula is located in the Temecula Valley along the I-15 and I-215 freeways near the southern boundary of Riverside County, just north of San Diego County as shown in Figure 1-1. The San Jacinto Mountains are visible to the northeast and east, while the mountains of the Cleveland National Forest are visible to the west. The area surrounding the project site consists of rolling hills and valleys that have been actively fanned since the 1900s. The Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan project is located at the northeastern limits of the City of Temecula as shown In Figure 1-2. The project will establish two distinct neighborhoods comprised of the "Panhandle" area, west of Butterfield stage Road and the "Southern" area south of the central ridge. The 186 acres of the Panhandle area are presently within the City of Temecula boundaries. The remaining 634 acres are proposed for annexation into the City of Temecula. The fiscal analysis is prepared for the total Specific Plan area and for the annexation area separately. 1.2 Project Description The Roripaugh Ranch property is being proposed for development as a residential community. In addition to new homes, the project will also provide supporting land uses including schools, neighborhood commercial, parks and open space. Approximately 255 acres will remain as open space to retain the rural characterization of the area. The open space areas will also preserve significant topographic and drainage features of the site, including the ridgeline in the northeast portion, Santa Gertrudis Creek and Long Valley Creek. A maximum of 1,721 dwelling units are planned over 820 gross acres resulting in an overall estimated density of 2.1 units per acre. Stanley IL Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis PROJECT VICINITY MAP / m PROJECT SITE ..... PROPOSED ROADWAYS ~ ~1~1~ R~D~YS FIGURE 1-2 DEVELOPMENT COMPANY: L.PI ~ N ~I~I~IGi ] ~WG ~C I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I It is expected that the project will be built out over an eleven-year period, beginning in 2001. Non-residential land uses include 190,000 square feet of neighborhood commemial uses, 23.6 acres of parks and 255.3 acres of open space, excluding 6 acres within a drainage area. It is estimated that 28.62 road lane miles will be built for the project as well as five signalized intersections within City boundaries. A portion of the roads will be built off site. 1.3 Approach The fiscal analysis is based on data and assumptions from the following sources: · City revenue and cost factors have been derived from the 2000-2001 City of Temecula fiscal year budget and interviews with key City staff. · Project valuation, market, and phasing information is primarily based on data from the project proponent and The Keith Companies. · The project proponent and the Keith Companies have provided various assumptions for public works and infrastructure improvements. RKJK Associates, Inc. are the transportation consultants. · It is estimated that the level of public services to be provided to the Roripaugh Ranch will be consistent with current service delivery policies in the City of Temecula. · Revenue and cost factors are projected in constant 2001 dollars with no adjustments for possible future inflation in either revenues or costs. 1.4 Overview Chapter 2 details a fiscal impact summary for the City of Temecula for the entire project, assuming the annexation of the approximately 634-acre portion of the project lying outside City of Temecula boundaries. The fiscal impacts are presented separately for the annexation area. Chapter 3 offers a description of the phased land uses, infrastructure facilities and market assumptions. Information is provided for the entire project, including a portion of the project currently in the City and the part within the annexation area. Chapter 4 is a detailed presentation of the fiscal analysis for the City of Temecula's General Fund, net Fire Protection Costs, Community Services District (CSD) and Development Impact Fees. Chapter 5 presents the fiscal analysis for the City of Temecula for these same categories for just the 634-acre annexation portion of the project. Appendix A includes a summary of the City of Temecula residential and non-residential land use and market factors. Appendix B presents revenue and cost factors for the City of Temecula used in preparing this fiscal impact report. Appendix C shows the calculations for estimating local road lineal feet for both the entire project area and the annexation area. Finally, persons contacted in preparing this analysis are presented at the end of the report. Stanley IL Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 Roripaugh Ranch Specific PI.,, Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I i i i I I Chapter 2 FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY This section presents a sununary of the fiscal impacts of the Rofipaugh Ranch Specific Plan after buildout. Fiscal impacts are presented for the City of Temecula's General Fund and the Temecula Community Services District. One time development impact fees and annually recurring Measure A capital revenues are also estimated. Development measures for the Roripaugh Ranch include a total estimated population of 4,722 based on total single-family and multi-family dwelling units of 1,721. Employment for the retail development is projected at 433. There are 150,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial and 40,000 square feet of office development planned for the project at buildout. The employment estimates do not include school employees or maintenance workers within the Specific Plan area. City of Temecula General Fund. The City General Fund is projected to have an estimated recurring annual surplus of $17,307 at buildont as shown in Table 2-1, based on recurring revenues of $1,119,122 and recurring costs of $1,101,815. The revenue cost ratio is 1.02 or roughly breakeven. For the annexation area separately, the General Fund is projected to be fiscally negative at buildout by a net $22,040. The revenue/cost ratio is 0.97, again about breakeven. Riverside Count3' Fire Department. The City contracts with the Riverside County Fire Department for these services. The County of Riverside retains the City of Temecula's fire protection property tax revenues as a credit against total fire protection costs. The difference between total fire protection costs and the property tax credit is the City's net fire protection cost and is paid by the City to the County from other General Fund revenues. At buildont, fire protection costs total $313,358 with $303,173 credited by property tax revenues. The net fire protection cost totals $10,185, which is paid from the City's General Fund as shown in Table 2- 1. For the annexation area separately, the net fire protection cost is estimated at $11,462. Community Services District. The City of Temecula Community Services District (CSD) maintains the City's public parks, recreations facilities, recreational and human service programs, median landscaping, arterial streetlights and traffic signals through an agreement with the City of Temecula. Recurring revenues to the CSD at buildout are estimated at $720,748 for the total Specific Plan area. These revenues are generated by parcel charges and collected on annual property tax bills for residential and non-residential properties. Undeveloped open space will be Stanley IL Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 2-1 CITY OF TEMECULA FISCAL MODEL SUMMARY OF RECURRING REVENUES AND COSTS AT BUILDOUT SCENARIO: ROR1PAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Annexation Plan Percent Area Percent Recurring Revenues: Property tax $207,023 16.8% $135,755 15.5% Transfer tax: New Development $0 0.0% $0 0.0% Turnover $20,152 1.6% $14,586 1.7% Sales/Use Tax: On site $247,500 20.1% $247,500 28.2% Sales/Use Tax: Offsite $199,159 16.2% $70,217 8.0% Transient occupancy tax $0 0.0% $0 0.0% Business License tax $3,529 0.3% $3,529 0.4% Franchises $89,471 7.3% $65,491 7.5% Motor vehicle in-lieu $216,032 17.5% $156,053 17.8% State gasoline tax $81,927 6.6% $59,181 6.8% Measure A sales tax (capital projects) $113,942 9.2% $82,307 9.4% Fines and forfeitures $28,404 2.3% $21,180 2.4% Interest $25,927 2.1% $20,395 2.3% Other $0 0.0% $0 0.0% Subtotal $1,233,064 100.0% $876,194 Net of Measure A sales tax (capital projects) $113.942 $82,307 Total $1,119,122 $793,887 100.0% Recurring Costs: Police protection $548,821 49.8% $403,510 49.5% Net fire cost $10,185 0.9% $11,462 1.4% Animal control $7,036 0.6% $5,082 0.6% Public Works - S~reets $146,746 13.3% $106,961 13.1% Public Works - Other $2,542 0.2% $2,030 0.2% Public Works - Admin. $17,915 1.6% $13,079 1.6% Community ServicesI $114,797 10.4% $85,430 10.5% Planning (Non-Fee Supported) $121,867 11.1% $90,692 11.1% Citywide overhead $131,907 12.0% $97,681 12.0% Total $1,101,815 100.0% $815,927 100.0% Net Recurring Fiscal Impact Recurring Revenue/Cost Ratio $17,307 ($22,040) 1.02 0.97 Note: 1. These are net General Fund costs that are not covered by the CSD parcel charge revenues. Source: Stanley R. Hoffinan Associates, Inc. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 6 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I maintained by the property owners or a non-profit corporation. The CSD will not maintain open space. Recurring revenues to the CSD for the annexation area separately are estimated at $496,819. Table 2-2 shows a summary of these revenues at project buildout by various service categories. The various fee levels are explained in more detail in Chapter 4, Section 4.2. Development Impact Fees. A summary of public facility development impact fees is shown in Table 2-3. Over the buildout period, the project is estimated to generate about $5,493,332 in development impact fees for the Specific Plan. About half or $2,724,302 is generated by the City's Park and Recreation Improvements fee. Street System Improvement fees at $1,688,076 represent 30.7 percent of the total. The remaining $1,080,954 or 19.7 percent is made up of Traffic signals and control System fees, Corporate Facilities fees, Fire Projection Facilities fees and Library mitigation fees. Also shown in Table 2-3 is the estimated total development impact fee of $4,077,903 for the annexation area separately. Measure A. Riverside County voters passed Measure A in order to augment funds for road capital improvements not covered by the General Fund. Annual revenues from Measure A are estimated to total $113,942 at buildout for the Specific Plan area and $82,307 for the annexation area as shown previously in Table 2-1. Assessment District 161. Assessment District 161 was started in 1994 for the purpose of constructing major access roads. The Panhandle area, already within the City of Temecula, is currently within this District. The district would have to be expanded to cover the annexation area. Of the total $1,420,000 existing confirmed assessment, $557,400 has already been paid. About $862,600 remains to be paid. Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I TABLE 2-2 RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN TEMECULA CSD~ REVENUE SUMMARY AT BUILDOUT Parcel Charge Revenue [Specific Plan I Annex. Area Citywide Parks & Recreation Single Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Non-Residential Service Level A2 Single Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Non-Residential Service Level B Single Family Residential Service Level C Single Family Residential Service Level D Single Family Residential $90,148 $60,966 $14,274 $14,274 $14,731 $14,731 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $36,491 $319,725 $245.378 Total Revenues~ Note: Soume: $720,748 1. Community Services District (CSD) 2. This service level is now included with the Citywide Parks and Recreation charges. 3. Numbers may not add exactly due to rounding. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. $24,678 $216,225 $165.945 $496,819 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 200l Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I TABLE 2-3 RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE SUMMARY component I Specific Percent Plan Fees~ ~ of Total I Street System $1,688,076 30.7% Improvements Traffic Signals and $253,849 4.6% Traffic Control Systems Corporate Facilities $373,348 6.8% Fire Protection Facilities $102,058 1.9% Park and Recreation $2,724,302 49.6% Improvements Libraries $351.698 6.4% Total Development $5,493,332 100.0% impact Fee Annexation Area Fees~ $1,336,393 $201,266 $266,251 $75,525 $1,947,114 $251,354 $4,077,903 Percent of Total 32.8% 4.9% 6.5% 1.9% 47.8% 6.2% 100.0% Note: Source: 1. Total impact fees range from $2,216.01 per residential attached unit to $3,077.02 per residential detached unit. The non-residential fee for retail commercial is $3.48 per square foot and $1.258 per square foot for office. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of Temecula 9 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan I Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I Chapter 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION This chapter presents the project description for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan. The project site encompasses approximately 820 gross acres and is proposed for high-density (H) residential, medium-density (M) residential, Iow/medium-density (LM) residential, low-density (L) residential and very-low-density (VL) residential land uses. Non-residential land uses include retail commercial uses, schools, parks and open space. A 634-acre portion of the project site is currently under County of Riverside jurisdiction and is planned to be annexed into the City of Temecula. Table 3-1 presents a summary of land uses for the total project. Land uses to be developed include a total of 1,721 units with 435 multi-family dwelling units and 1,286 single family dwelling units. Additionally, there are 150,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial retail and 40,000 square feet of office space. There will also be 23.6 park acres, 255.3 acres of open space and 32 acres of school facilities. This table also shows estimated average valuations for each type of residential and commercial land use. Population at buildout is estimated at 4,722 persons based on a rate of 2.85 persons per household for single family dwelling traits and 2.43 persons per household for multi-family dwelling units. Commercial employment is estimated at 433 at buildout based on a rate of 500 square feet per commercial employee and 300 square feet per office employee. 3.1 Land Uses and Projected Development The following sections will describe the residential and non-residential land uses of the Roripaugh Ranch project, as shown in the Conceptual Land Use Plan in Figure 3-1. The land uses are projected to be phased over an eleven-year period from 2001 to 2011 as shown in Table 3-2. The first section describes the total 819.7-acre project. The second section describes just the 186-acre Panhandle area of the project, which is currently within City of Temecula boundaries. The f'mal section describes the remaining 634-acre portion of the project, which is proposed for annexation into the City. Total Specific Plan Uses. This section describes the entire Roripangh Ranch Specific Plan residential and non-residential land uses and their projected development over eleven years from 2001 through 2011, as shown in Table 3-2. In addition to new homes, the project will also provide supporting land uses as schools, neighborhood commercial, parks and open space. Approximately 255 acres will remain as open space to retain the rural character of the area, not including six acres within a drainage area. The open space areas will also preserve significant I Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 10 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 3-t RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN TOTAL PROJECT LAND USE SUMMARY Units/Acm I Total UnitalSF Residential Multi-Family Units H 18.52 300 16,2 Multi-Family Units M 11.34 13.~5 11.9 Total Multi-Family Units 435 28.1 Single Family Units LM 4.22 1,043 247.2 Single Family Units L 1.71 241 140,9 Single Family Units VL 0.28 2_ 7.2 Total Single Family Units 1,286 395.3 Sub-Total t,721 423.4 Valuation Non-Residential Retail SF~ 150,000 21.3 Office SF* 40.000 12..~4 Sub-Total Commercial 190,000 33.7 $110,000 $200,000 $275,000 $375,000 $500,000 $118 $115 Institutional 5.0 N/A School Facilities2 32.0 N/A Public Parks 23,6 NIA Open Space 255.3 N/A Fire Station 1.5 N/A Roadways 45,2 NIA Sub-Total Other 362.6 396.3 Sub-Total TOTAL 819.7 Estimated Buildout Development Data Population Employment Acres 4,722 (~ 2.85 per single family unit and 2.43 per mulit-family unit) 433 (~} 500 sf per retail employee & 300 sf per office ernployeet 819.7 TaxabtsSales $22,500,000 Valuation Residential $438,200,000 Non-Residential $21.850.000 Total Valuation $460,050,000 Note: 1. This includes an estimated $1001sq.ff. for secured valuation and $15/sq.fl. for non-residential unsecured valuation. 2. School acres include 20 acres for a Middle School and 12 acres for an Elementary School. Source: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Ashby Development CO., Inc. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 11 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I · I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FIGURE 3-1 Proposed Land Use Plan -1~- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I topographic and drainage features of the site, including the ridgeline in the northeast portion, Santa Gertmdis Creek and Long Valley Creek. A total of 23.6 acres of parkland and a maximum of 1,721 dwelling units are planned. Residential Development. At project buildout, an estimated 300 units are proposed for high density residential, 135 units for medium density residential, 1,043 units for low/medium density residential, 241 units for low density residential and 2 units for very low density residential as shown in Table 3-2. Average estimated residential unit valuations range from a low of $110,000 for high-density multi-family units to a high of $500,000 for very-low-density residential units. Total single-family residential valuation at buildout is estimated at $378,200,000 with an additional $60,000,000 estimated for multi-family units, for total projected residential valuation of $438,200,000 as shown in Table 3-2. Non-residential Development. Non-residential development includes 150,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial retail and 40,000 square feet of office space. The phasing is in two increments. The first 95,000 square feet will be midway through the development period and the second portion by 2011. Commemial space valuation is estimated at $115 per square foot, including secured and unsecured valuation, with total commemial valuation at buildout estimated at $21,850,000. City Land Uses. A portion of the Roripaugh Ranch project is currently located within City boundaries. The proposed land uses for this approximately 186-acre part of the project, known as the Panhandle are shown in Table 3-3. Within this area, approximately 32 acres will remain as open space, with an additional 3 acres of parkland. Proposed dwelling units total 460, all of them low/medium density units, with an average estimated valuation of $275,000. If the annexation is unsuccessful, then the three acres proposed in the "panhandle" portion of the project currently within the City boundary does not satisfy the City's Quimby requirement for parkland dedication. Total single-family residential valuation at buildout for the City area is estimated at $126,500,000. None of the proposed commercial development is in this portion of the project. Annexation Land Uses. Annexation land uses are presented in Table 3-4. This 634-acre portion of the Roripaugh Ranch project is proposed for annexation into the City of Temecula. Within the annexation area, approximately 224 acres will remain as open space to retain the rural characterization of the area. The open space areas will also preserve significant topographic and drainage features of the site, including the ridgeline in the northeast portion, Santa Gertrudis Creek and Long Valley Creek. Parklands of 20.6 acres and a total of 1,261 dwelling units are planned in the annexation area. I Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. ./tote 2001 14 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I ! I I I Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 15 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal ~4nalysis I I I I I I I I I I I ! I ! I I I I 8 Stanley IL Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 16 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Residential Development. At project buildout, an estimated 300 units are proposed for high density residential, 135 for medium density residential, 583 for low/medium density residential, 241 for low density residential and 2 for very low density residential units. Total projected residential valuation within the annexation is estimated at $311,700,000. Non-residential Development. All of the commercial development for the Roripaugh Ranch project is located in the annexation area. Non-residential development includes 150,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial retail and 40,000 square feet of office space. The phasing is in two increments of 95,000 square feet midway through the development and the remainder by 2011. Commercial space valuation is estimated at $115 per square foot, with total project commercial valuation at bulldout estimated at $21,850,000. 3.2 Public Infrastructure and Facilities Approximately 28.62 road lane miles are planned for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan at bulldout as shown in the Conceptual Circulation Master Plan in Figure 3-2. The roads consist of Arterial Highways, Modified Principal Collectors, Modified Collectors and Local Roads. Additionally, five new signalized intersections are planned for the project. The names and locations of these roads as well as their respective lane miles are shown in Table 3-5 for the total Specific Plan area. All of the project road improvements are planned to be completed by 2005. Table 3-6 shows the road improvement phasing within the annexation area only. Within the annexation area, a total of 21.08 lane miles are planned, as well as three and one-half of the signalized intersections. All of the annexation area road improvements are planned for completion by the year 2004 in the annexation area. I Stanley IL Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 17 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I Conceptual Cmrculation Master Plan -18- 888 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 19 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I I ! I I Stanley IL Hoffman Associates, Inc. 20 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal ~lnalysis I i I I I I I I I I 1 I i I i I I I Chapter 4 FISCAL ANALYSIS of the TOTAL SPECIFIC PLAN AREA This chapter presents an analysis of the projected fiscal impacts for the proposed Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan assuming development of residential and non-residential land uses. This analysis focuses on the recurring revenues and costs that impact the City of Temecula General Fund and other funds including the Temecula Community Services District and Development Impact Fees. 4.1 City General Fund Recurring Revenues Property Tax Rates. Revenues accruing to the City General Fund from the increase in properly valuation after annexation are projected using a weighted allocation for the City of 4.50 percent of the basic 1.0 percent property tax levy as derived in Table 4-1. The current breakdown of the 1.0 percent property tax levy for the City of Temecula and the County of Riverside were obtained from the Riverside County Auditor-Controller's Office as shown in Table 4-2. Property Tax Revenues. Table 4-3 presents the detailed recurring revenues and costs to the City of Temecula General Fund. At buildout, recurring revenues are projected at $1,119,122 while recurring costs are projected at $1,101,815. This is net of $113,942 of annually projected Measure A revenues which are for road improvement capital costs. This results in a projected recurring surplus of $17,307 and a revenue/cost ratio of 1.02. Revenues are projected for the Roripaugh Ranch for the years between 2001 and 2012. Recurring revenues to the City of Temecula General Fund include property tax, property transfer tax, sales and use tax, franchise taxes motor vehicle in lieu taxes, state gasoline taxes and other revenue sources. Property tax revenues are based on the assessed valuation of finished lots and completed development. Property tax revenues for the project at buildout are estimated at $207,023 as shown in Table 4-3. Property Transfer Tax. Ongoing property transfer tax is estimated at about $20,152 at buildout. Sales of real property are taxed by the County of Riverside at a rate of $1.10 per $1,000 of property value with 50 percent of this amount allocated to the City. It is estimated that residential development will change ownership at an average rate of about 10.0 percent per year, or that each home changes hands on the average of once every 10 years. A consideration rate of 80.0 percent is applied to the valuation of the residential property that reflects the amount of Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 21 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal.4nalysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Existing Property Tax Rate~ ERAF Reduction2 Upon Annexation3 Weighted Property Tax Rate After Annexation4 TABLE 4-1 RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN PROPERTY TAX RATE COMPARISON FOR CITY & UNINCORPORATED AREAS BEFORE & AFTER ANNEXATION Cit~{Panhandle) c~t~ I I 0.0670 0.0597 0.0597 city I 0.O450 Unincorporated Area County I City ] [ CountyI 0.2392 N/A 0.3209 0.1213 N/A 0.1627 0.1213 0.0407 0.1220 0.1218 Source: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Riverside County Auditor Controller Notes: 1. The initial apportionments of the 1.0% basic property tax levy are shown in Table 4-2. For Temecula, the overall rate includes the sum of two apportionments, 0.0440 and 0.0226. 2. The ERAF (Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund) shift results in the county retaining approximately 50.7% of the initial tax rate with the remainder going to the public schools. The City of Temecula retains about 89.1% of the initial tax rate. 3. Upon annexation, the City/County property tax transfer agreement is that the City receives 25% of the County's property tax rate in the unincorporated area only and the County retains the remaining 75%. 4. After annexation, the City rates and County rates are weighted together for the entire project area based on estimated buildout valuation in the existing City area (22~74%) and the area to be annexed (77.26%). 22 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal~4nalysis I I ! I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 4-2 RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN DISTRIBUTION OF 1% PROPERTY TAX BASIC LEVY FOR PORTIONS OF CITY OF TEMECULA & UNINCORPORATED RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRA 01-3003: City of Temecula I Aportioned% I I District No. I J District Name 0.0000 01-0000 0.2392 01-1001 0.0291 01-1121 0.0628 01-1123 0.0440 02-2900 0.0226 02-2917 0.3682 03-6501 0.0000 03-6520 0.0424 03-9201 0.0775 03-9830 0.0450 03-9896 0.0028 04-1351 0.0176 04-1367 0.0046 04-4045 0.0000 044300 0.0000 04-4371 0.0435 04-5401 0.0000 28-4711 ~ .00 General Purpose General County Free Library County Structure Fire Protection City of Temecula City of Temecula Inc Dispute Temecula Unified Temecula Unified B & I Mt. Jacinto Junior College Elsinore Area Elementary School Fund Riverside County Office of Education Flood Control Administration Flood Control Zone 7 Temecula Public Cemetery Temecula Community Services Valley Health System Hospital District Eastern Municipal Water ELS Murdeta Anza Resource Cons TRA 09-4t76: County of Riverside I Aportioned % I [ District No. ] I Dietriot Name 0.0000 01-0000 0.3209 01-1001 0.0310 01-1121 0.0668 01-1123 0.3926 03-6501 0.0000 03-6520 0.0451 03-9201 0.0466 03-9896 0.0000 04-1030 0.0048 04-1110 0.0030 04-1351 0.0187 04-1367 0.0000 04-1852 0.0049 04-4045 0.0000 04-4371 0.0186 04-4646 0.0463 04-5401 0.0000 28-4711 1.00 General Purpose General County Frae Library County Structure Fire Protection Temecula Unified Temecula Unified B & I Mt. Jacinto Junior College Riverside County Office of Education County Waste Resource Management District Riverside County Regional Park & Open Space Flood Control Administration Flood Control Zone 7 CSA 152 Temecula Public Cemetery Valley Health System Hospital District Valley Wide Recreation and Parks Eastern Municipal Water ELS Murrieta Anza Resource Cons Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc Riverside County Auditor Controller 23 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal.4nalysis I I I I I I I I i I I ! I I I I I I I -24- I I I I I I I i i I I I I I I I I I turnover that is estimated to be charged the property transfer tax. The consideration rate is based on discussion with the County Auditors-Controller's Office. Sales Tax. Sales tax revenues are generated by the neighborhood commercial center. A total of $247,500 in onsite sales tax is projected at buildout of General Fund revenues. Annual taxable sales for the neighborhood retail center are estimated at $150 per square foot. Additionally, it is estimated that eighty percent of off-site retail sales are captured from the Roripaugh Ranch development at retail establishments within the City. This is based on an estimate that household income averages one third of assessed housing valuation and that retail taxable sales are approximately 35 pement of household income. Off-site sales tax is estimated at about $199,159 at buildout net of on-site sales tax. Use Tax. In addition to sales tax, a use tax factor of 10.0 percent is applied to the sales tax. The use tax factor is derived from two major sources. · A use tax rather than a sales tax is paid on construction materials from residential and non- residential development. This tax is counted in the County in which construction takes place, not at the point-of-sale of materials. · A use tax is levied on purchases from out-of-state sellers of goods for use in California. The State Board of Equalization assembles the use tax collections into a number of pools: · County pools developed for each County are based on tax proceeds assigned to a County level. · A statewide pool is developed for tax proceeds that cannot be assigned to individual counties. These pools of use tax proceeds are then distributed to individual cities and counties on a quarterly basis. The distribution percentages to local jurisdictions for the County pool are calculated on the basis of each city and county's share of total Countywide non-sims based sales tax as a percentage of total point-of-sale sales tax. A similar procedure is used in the allocation of the statewide pool. Business License Taxes. These taxes represent a negligible amount, about $3,529, as there is only a small amount of retail and office development on the site. Franchises. Franchise fees are collected for gas, electricity, solid waste disposal and cable television services on a per dwelling unit basis. At project buildout, these revenues are estimated at $89,471. This amount is based on factors of $5.51 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) for the Staaley 1L Itoffman Associates, Inc. 25 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal.4nalysis I I ! i I I I I i I I I I I I I I I Gas Franchise, $16.73 per EDU for the electricity franchise, $17.06 per EDU for solid waste management and $12.83 per EDU for the Cable television franchise. Motor Vehicle In-Lieu. Revenue from motor vehicle license fees is based on a fee of $45.75 per capita. These revenues are estimated at $216,032 at project buildout. Gasoline Taxes. There are three gasoline tax funds that produce revenue for the City of Temecula General Fund. These taxes are estimated on a per capita basis at $81,927 by project buildout. This total is based on factors of $5.70 for Gas Tax Section 2105, $3.97 for Section 2106 and $7.68 for Section 2107. Fines, Forfeitures and Interest Income. Fines and forfeiture revenues are collected on a per capita and per employee basis and are estimated to total $28,404 by project buildout. Interest income is estimated at $25,927 at buildout. Measure A Sales Taxes. Ongoing Measure A sales taxes are estimated on a per capita basis and total $113,942 at project buildout. Revenue from Measure A is used only for road capital improvement projects and is excluded from total General Fund revenues for ongoing operations and maintenance, shown in Table 4-3. Recurring Costs Table 4-3 also presents recurring costs to the City's General Fund over the development phasing period through 2012. At buildout, annual recurring costs are projected at $1,101,815. Recurring costs to the City of Temeeula's General Fund include police protection, net fire protection costs, animal control, public works and Cityw/de overhead. Police Protection. Police protection costs for the City of Temecula are calculated on a per capita and per employee basis. Costs at buildout are estimated at $548,821 as shown in Table 4-3. Police protection costs on a per capita and per employee basis are derived for the City of Temecula as a whole in Table 4-4. The table shows the estimated breakdown of police services costs incurred by the City for residents and employees. Animal Control. Animal control services for Roripaugh Ranch are estimated on a per capita basis at about $7,036 at buildout. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 26 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I I TABLE 4-4 CITY OF TEMECULA ESTIMATED POLICE PROTECTION COSTS Base Number Population Equivalency Factor~ Equivalent Population Resident Population Employment at Place of Work Total/ J Average 53,791 25,140 78,931 1.0000 0.5300 0.8503 53,791 13,324 67,115 1999-2000 Police Budget Percent Distribution $5,962,163 $1,476,847 7,439,010 80.15% 19.85% 100.00% Police Cost Per Equivalent Population Times: population equivalency factor Equals: Police Cost per... Resident Worker $110.84 $110.84 $110.84 1.0000 0.5300 $110.84 $58.74 Note: 1. Police costs for a worker is estimated at 53 percent of police costs for a resident to account for the proportion of workers who are not residents and commute into the City. Source: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of Temecula 2000-2001 Budget Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 27 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal Analysis I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Public Works. Public works for Roripaugh Ranch include street maintenance, traffic signal operations and maintenance, storm drain maintenance and administrative overhead. These recurring costs are estimated to total $163,729 by project buildout. Community Services (non-parcel charge funded). Community services costs over and above those funded by parcel charges are projected to total $114,797 at buildout of the project. Table 4-5 shows the methodology for projecting these costs. The total annual amount of Community Services costs not funded by parcel charges is allocated to residential and non-residential land uses using an equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) distribution. The 69.7 percent of costs attributed to residential land uses is converted to a per capita cost of $22.40 using the City's current population estimate. The 30.3 pement of non-residential costs are converted to a per employee factor of $20.84 using the current employment estimates. Planning Department (non-fee supported). Table 4-3 also shows projected costs for non-fee supported Planning Department costs. These costs are projected to total $121,867 for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan at buildout. Table 4-5 shows the methodology for deriving the projected Planning Department costs. The same EDU distribution is used to allocate the Planning Department costs that are not paid through fees. Per capita ($23.78) and per employee ($22.12) Planning Department costs are used as shown in Table 4-5. Citywide Overhead. Citywide general government costs attributable to Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan are estimated at $131,907 by project buildout. This is based on an overhead rate of 13.6 percent applied against estimated non-general government direct departmental costs. Net Fire Protection Costs The City of Temecula currently receives structural fire protection services through a contract with the Riverside County Fire Department from four fire stations. Stations 12, 73, 83, 84 each have one engine. Station 84 is also equipped with a paramedic team. The City of Temecula is responsible for 100 percent of fire protection costs provided by these stations, but only 50 percent of services provided by Station 83. The County of Riverside is responsible for the balance of services provided by Station 83. Fire protection costs are estimated at $178.45 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU). This fire cost per EDU is derived in Table 4-6A. A factor of 0.5 EDUs per 1,000 square feet of non-rcsidential land uses was applied to the estimated 15.5 million non-residential square feet in the City resulting in 7,759 non-residential EDUs. EDUs for City of Temecula single-family residential units and mobile homes are estimated at 14,815 EDUs. EDUs for multi-family residential units Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 28 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal Analysis I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 4-5 CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES AND PLANNING COST FACTORS Distribution of EDUs for Fiscal Year 2000-2001 EDUs Percent General Fund Community Services Cost Factor Residential EDUs 17,843 69.7% Non-Residential EDUs 7,759 30.3% Total EDUs 25,602 100.0% Amount Percent General Fund Community Services Costs: 2000-2001 (Net of parcel charge funded costs) Residential Cost Allocation Population Estimate~ Community Services Cost Per Capita $1,729,000 $1,205,005 69.7% 53,791 $22.40 Non-Residential Cost Allocation $523,995 30.3% Employment Estimate~ 25,140 Community Services Cost Per Employee $20.84 PlanninQ Department Cost Factor General Fund Planning Department Costs: 2000-2001 (Net of fee supported & General Plan update costs) Residential Allocation Population Estimate~ Per Capita Cost Estimate $1,835,180 $1,279,006 69.7% 53,791 $23.78 Non-Residential Allocation $556,174 30.3% Population Estimate~ 25,140 Planning Cost Per Employee $22.12 1. Population and employment estimates are based on FY 2000-2001 information provided by the City of Temecula. Source: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of Temecula 2000-2001 Budget 29 Stanley 1L Hoffman Associates, Inc. Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal.4nalysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EDU Factor TABLE 4-6A CITY OF TEMECULA FIRE PROTECTION COSTS PER EDU~ Land Use I 0.5 per 1000 sf 1.0 per SF unit 0.8 per MF unit Total EDUe Total Fire Cost= Fire Cost per EDU Note: Non-Residential Single Family Residential Multi Family Residential 1. Use of Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs) is a method of allocating costs between residential and non-residential land uses. 2. This cost estimate for fiscal year 2000-2001 was provided by the City of Temecula. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of Temecula TABLE 4-6B RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT FIRE PROTECTION COSTS Existing I EDUsl I Totals Costa 15, 518,000 7,759 14,815 14,815 3,785 3~028 25,602 $4,568,677 $178.45 I EDU Factor I Land Use I Project Estimated Buildout [ EDUs I c°st per EDU I Total Cost 1.0 per SF unit Single Family Residential 1,421 1,421 0.8 per MF unit Multi Family Residential 300 240 0.5 per 1000 sf Non-Residential 190,000 95 Total Estimated Project Fire Protection Cost Source: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of Temecula $178.45 $253,577 $178.45 $42,828 $178.45 $16.953 $3t3,358 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 30 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I are calculated by applying a factor of 0.8 EDUs per unit, resulting in total EDUs of 3,028. The average cost per EDU was then used to calculate fire protection costs for non-residential, single family and multi family residential land uses in the Roripaugh Ranch area. The results are shown in Table 4-6B, where fire protection costs are estimated to total about $313,358 per year at buildout. The City of Temecula subcontracts its structural fire protection services with the Riverside County Fire Department that subcontracts with the California Department of Forestry. The County of Riverside Fire Department receives property tax revenues for fire protection in the City of Temecula at a rate of 6.59 percent of the basic 1.0 percent levy. However, these funds are not disbursed to the City's General Fund. Instead, they remain with the Riverside County Fire Authority and become a credit for total fire service costs provided to the City. Based on the County Fire Protection contract agreement with the City, total projected structural fire protection costs for Temecula exceed the amount received by the County in fire protection property taxes. Therefore, the difference between total structural fire protection costs and the City's property tax credit for fire protection services is the City's net fire protection cost as shown in Table 4-7. Total project fire tax revenues at buildout are estimated at $303,173, while total fire protection costs at project buildout are estimated at $313,358. The net fire protection cost to the City is estimated at $10,185. The City pays this net cost to the County from other General Fund revenue sources. The estimated overall property tax rate of 6.59 percent of the basic percent levy for fire protection is based on the weighting of the existing rote of 6.68 percent within the County of Riverside Tax Rate Area 094176 and the existing rate of 6.28 percent within the City of Temecula Tax Rate Area 01-3003. This weighting is based on property valuation projections at buildout as shown below: Jurisdiction % Valuation Calculation 09-4176 County 77.70% .7770x.0668 = .0519 01-3003 City 22.30% .2230x .0628 = .0140 Weighted Fire Protection Property Tax .0659 4.2 Community Services District The City of Temecula Community Services District (CSD) maintains the City's public parks, recreations facilities, recreational and human service programs, median landscaping, arterial streetlights and traffic signals through an agreement with the City of Temecula. Table 4-8 presents the ongoing revenues incurred by the CSD special tax at buildout, estimated to I Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 31 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I -32- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I -33- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I total about $720,748. These revenues are generated by various parcel charges and collected on the annual property tax bills for residential and non-residential properties. Either the property owners or a non-profit corporation maintain open space. The CSD will not maintain open space. Table 4-8 also shows revenues for each year of project development according to varying service levels throughout the City. The services are funded through a Special Tax levied against all taxable parcels within the City. The current rate is $63.44 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU). The CSD also provides services for which rotes and charges are levied against those improved single-family (SF) parcels within each service level. Service Level B provides residential street light maintenance and is currently levied at $25.68 per SF parcel. Service Level C provides slope and perimeter landscape maintenance. There are currently seven rate levels throughout the City, and since it is not possible to estimate the exact level of service at this time, the highest service rate level of $225 per SF parcel is used. Service Level D provides for SF residential solid waste and recycling services and street sweeping and the current rate of $172.56 is used. 4.3 Riverside County Assessment District 161 (AD 161) The Roripaugh Ranch properties have contributed approximately $557,400 toward infrastructure improvements through AD 161 (Winchester Properties). The District was formed pursuant to a request and signed petition by the property owners within District's boundaries, including Roripaugh Ranch properties. The signed petition represented a land area comprising more than 75% of the total area of the District. The goal of its formation was to deal with the tremendous infrastructure costs being imposed on the landowners within District boundaries as conditions of approval for development. The Riverside County Board of Supervisors confirmed the District in August 1988. The formal action giving direction for the deletion of specific improvements was adopted on August 1, 1995. The result confmned assessment total of about $1,420,000 for the Roripaugh Ranch properties, of which $862,600 remains to be paid. About $557,400 has already been paid. The Assessment District has enabled the construction of facilities such as bridges, roads, sewers, storm drains, gas lines, flood control channels and water mains. 4.4 Development Impact Fees Over the buildout period, the Specific Plan development is estimated to generate about $5,493,332 in development impact fees for infrastructure as shown in Table 4-9. Approximately $2,724,302 is generated by the City's Park and Recreation Improvements fee. Street System Improvement fees are estimated at $1,688,076. The remaining $1,080,954 is made up of Traffic Signals and Control System fees, Corporate Facilities fees, Fire Protection Facilities fees and Library mitigation fees. Table 4-9 presents estimated development impact fees for public facilities in the City of Temecula by category and by land use. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 34 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan I June 2001 Fiscal Analysis I I I TABLE 4-9 ROR]PAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLIC FACIUTIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES Component I Land Usa I Fee Amount Per Dwelgna Unit or S({ Ft I Dwelling Units or Square Feet Impact Fee I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Street System Residential Attached $535.91 435 Improvements Residential Detached $764.53 1,286 Office $0.938 40,000 Retail Commercial $2.895 150,000 Service Commercial $1.448 0 Business Park/Industrial $0.686 0 Subtotal Traffic Signals and Residential Attached $80.75 435 Traffic Control Systems Residential Detached $114.31 1,286 Office $0.143 40,000 Retail Commercial $0.440 150,000 Service Commercial $0.219 0 Business Parldlndustdal $0.105 0 Subtotal Corporate Facilities Residential Attached $123.75 435 Residential Detached $232.82 1,286 Office $0.049 40,000 Retail Commercial $0.121 150,000 Se~ice Commercial $0.067 0 Business Pa~Jlndustfial $0.040 0 Subtotal Fire Protection Facilities Residential Attached $44.05 435 Residential Detached $57.68 1,286 Office $0.128 40,000 Retail Commercial $0.024 150,000 Service Commercial $0.019 0 Business Paddlndustdal $0.017 0 Subtotal Park and Recreation Residential Attached $1,267.94 435 Improvements Residential Detached $1,689.54 1,286 Office $0,000 40,000 Retail Commercial $0.000 150,000 Service Commercial $0.000 0 Business Park/Indus~al $0.000 0 Subtotal Libraries Residential Attached $163.61 435 Residential Detached $218.14 1,286 Office $0.000 40,000 Retail Commercial $0.000 150,000 Service Commercial $0,000 0 Business Park/Industrial $0.000 0 Subtotal Total Development Residential Attached $2,216.01 435 Impact Fee Per Unit Residential Detached $3,077.02 1,286 Office $1.258 40,000 Retail Commercial $3.480 150,000 Service Commercial $1.753 0 Business Paddlndus~al $0.848 0 Total Notes: 1. Fees for residential development ara calculated per dwelling unit. Fees for non-residential development are celc~Jlated per square foot. Source: Stanley R. Hoff~aan Associates, Inc. City of Temecula $233,121 $983,186 $37,520 $434,250 $o $1,688,076 $35,126 $147,003 $5,720 $66,000 $o $2~3,849 $53,831 $299,407 $1,960 $18,150 $0 $373,348 $19,162 $74,176 $5,120 $3,600 $0 $102,058 $551,554 $2,172,748 $o $o $o $2,724,302 $71,170 $280,528 $0 $0 $0 $351,698 $9631964 $50,320 $522,000 $o $5,493,332 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 35 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan ,lane 2001 Fiscal.4nalysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Chapter 5 FISCAL ANALYSIS: ANNEXATION AREA This chapter presents an analysis of the projected fiscal impacts for the proposed Roripaugh Ranch development within the Annexation Area. This assumes development of residential and non-residential land uses. It focuses on the recurring revenues and costs that impact the City of Temecula General Fund and other funds including the Temecula Community Services District and Development Impact Fees. 5.1 City General Fund Recurring Revenues Property Tax Rates. Revenues accruing to the City General Fund from the increase in property valuation after annexation are projected using an allocation for the City of 4.50 percent of the basic 1.0 percent property tax levy as shown previously in Table 4-1. Upon annexation, the City/County property tax transfer agreement is that the City receives 25% of the County's property tax rate in the unincorporated area and the County retains 75%. Property Tax Revenues. Table 5-1 presents the detailed recurring revenues and costs to the City of Temecula General Fund. At buildout, recurring revenues are projected at $793,887 while recurring costs are projected at $815,927. This results in a projected recurring deficit of $22,040 and a revenue/cost ratio of 0.97. Revenues are projected for the Roripaugh Ranch for the years between 2001 and 2012. Recurring revenues to the City of Temecula General Fund include property tax, property transfer tax, sales and use tax, franchise taxes motor vehicle in lieu taxes, state gasoline taxes and other revenue sources. Property tax revenues are based on the assessed valuation of finished lots and completed development. Property tax revenues for the project at buildout are estimated at $135,755 or about 15.5 percent of total revenues as shown in Table 5-1. Property Transfer Tax. Ongoing property transfer tax is estimated at about $14,586 at buildout. Sales of real property are taxed by the County of Riverside at a rate of $1.10 per $1,000 of property value with 50 percent of this amount allocated to the City. It is estimated that residential development will change ownership at an average rate of about 10.0 percent per year, or that each home changes hands on the average of once every 10 years. I Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 36 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal ~4nalysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 37 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I A consideration rate of 80.0 percent is applied to the valuation of the residential property that reflects the amount of turnover that is estimated to be charged the property transfer tax. The consideration rate is based on discussion with the County Auditors-Controller's Office. Sales Tax. Sales tax revenues are generated by the neighborhood commercial center. A total of $247,500 in onsite sales tax is projected at buildout or 28.2 percent of General Fund revenues. Annual taxable sales for the neighborhood retail center are estimated at $150 per square foot. Additionally, it is estimated that eighty pement of off-site retail sales are captured from the Roripaugh Ranch development at retail establishments within the City. This is based on an estimate that household income averages one third of assessed housing valuation and that retail taxable sales are approximately 35 percent of household income. Off-site sales tax is estimated at about $70,217 at buildout net of on-site sales tax. Use Tax. In addition to sales tax, a use tax factor of 10.0 percent is applied to the sales tax. The use tax factor is derived from two major sources. · A use tax rather than a sales tax is paid on construction materials from residential and non- residential development. This tax is counted in the County in which construction takes place, not at the point-of-sale of materials. · A use tax is levied on purchases from out-of-state sellers of goods for use in California. The State Board of Equalization assembles the use tax collections into a number of pools: · County pools developed for each County are based on tax proceeds assigned to a County level. · A statewide pool is developed for tax proceeds that cannot be assigned to individual counties. The proceeds from these use tax pools are distributed to individual cities and counties on a quarterly basis. Each city and county's share of total Countywide non-sitos based sales tax pool is distributed to local jurisdictions as a percentage of total point-of-sale sales tax. A similar procedure is used in the allocation of the statewide pool. Business License Taxes. These taxes represent a negligible amount, about $3,500, as there is such a small amount of retail development on the site. Franchises. Franchise fees are collected for gas, electricity, solid waste disposal and cable television services on a per dwelling unit basis. At project buildout, these revenues are estimated at $65,491. This amount is based on factors of $5.51 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) for the Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 38 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal Analysis ! I I I I I I I i I I I I I ! I I ! Gas Franchise, $16.73 per EDU for the electricity franchise, $17.06 per EDU for solid waste management and $12.83 per EDU for the Cable television franchise. Motor Vehicle In-Lieu. Revenue from motor vehicle license fees is based on a fee of $45.75 per capita. These revenues are estimated at $156,053 at project buildout. Gasoline Taxes. There are three gasoline tax funds that produce revenue for the City of Temecula General Fund. These taxes are estimated on a per capita basis at $59,181 by project buildout. This total is based on factors of $5.70 for Gas Tax Section 2105, $3.97 for Section 2106 and $7.68 for Section 2107. Fines, Forfeitures and Interest Income. Fines and forfeiture revenues are collected on a per capita and per employee basis and are estimated to total $21,180 by project buildout. Interest income is estimated at $20,395 at bulldout. Measure A Sales Taxes. Ongoing Measure A sales taxes are estimated on a per capita basis. They total $82,307 at project buildout. Revenue from Measure A is used only for road capital improvement projects and is excluded from total General Fund revenues, shown in Table 5-1. Recurring Costs Table 5-1 also presents recurring costs to the City's General Fund over the development phasing period through 2012. At buildout, annual recurring costs are projected at $815,927. Recurring costs to the City of Temecula's General Fund include police protection, net fire protection costs, animal control, public works and Citywide overhead. Police Protection. Police protection costs for the City of Temecula are calculated on a per capita and per employee basis. Costs at buildout are estimated at $403,510 as shown in Table 5-1. Police protection costs are derived for the City of Temecula as a whole as shown previously in Table 44. The table shows the breakdown of police services costs incurred by the City for residents and employees. Animal Control. Animal control services for Roripaugh Ranch are estimated on a per capita basis of $1.49. These costs are estimated at $5,082 at buildout. Public Works. Public works for Roripaugh Ranch include street maintenance, traffic signal operations and maintenance, storm drain maintenance and administrative overhead. These costs are estimated at about $122,070 or 15.0 percent of recurring costs by project buildout. 1 Stanley IL Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 39 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I Communit~ Services (non-parcel charge funded). Community services costs over and above those funded by parcel charges are projected to total $85,430 at buildout of the project. Table 4- 5 shows the methodology for projecting these costs. The total annual amount of Community Services costs not funded by parcel charges is allocated to residential and non-residential land uses using an equivalent dwelling trait (EDU) distribution. The 69.7 percent of costs attributed to residential land uses is converted to a per capita cost using the City's current population estimate. The 30.3 percent of non-residential costs are converted to a per employee factor using the current employment estimates. Planning Department (non-fee supported). Table 5-1 shows projected costs at buildout for non- fee supported Planning Department costs. These costs are projected to total $90,692. Table 4-5 shows the methodology for deriving the projected Planning Department costs. The same EDU distribution is used to allocate the Planning Department costs that are not paid through fees. Per capita and per employee Planning Department costs are used as shown in Table 4-5. Citwdde Overhead. Citywide general government costs attributable to Roripaugh Ranch are estimated at about $97,681 by project buildout. This is based on an overhead rate of 13.6 percent applied against estimated non-general government direct departmental costs. Net Fire Protection Costs The City of Temecula currently receives structural fire protection services through a contract with the Riverside County Fire Department from four fire stations. Stations 12, 73, 83, 84 each have one engine. Station 84 is also equipped with a paramedic team. The City of Temecula is responsible for 100 percent of fire protection costs provided by these stations, but only 50 percent of services provided by Station 83. The County of Riverside is responsible for the balance of services provided by Station 83. Fire protection costs are estimated at $178.45 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU). This fire cost per EDU is derived as shown previously in Table 4-6A. A factor of 0.5 EDUs per 1,000 square feet of non-residential land uses was applied to the estimated 15.5 million non-residential square feet in the City resulting in 7,759 non-residential EDUs. EDUs for City of Temecula single family residential units and mobile homes are estimated at 14,815 EDUs. EDUs for multi family residential units are calculated by applying a factor of 0.8 EDUs per unit, resulting in a total of 3,028. The average cost per EDU was then used to calculate fire protection costs for non- residential, single family and multi family residential land uses in the Roripangh Ranch area. I Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 40 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I ! i I I I I I I I I i 1 I I I The results are shown in Table 5-2, where fire protection costs are estimated to total about $231,271 per year at project buildout for the annexation area. The City of Temecula subcontracts its structural fire protection services with the Riverside County Fire Department, which in mm subcontracts with the California Department of Forestry. The County of Riverside Fire Department receives property tax revenues for fire protection in the City of Temecula at a rate of 6.59 pement of the basic 1.0 pement levy. However, these funds are not disbursed to the City's General Fund. Instead, they remain with the Riverside County Fire Authority and become a credit for total fire service costs provided to the City. Based on the County Fire Protection contract agreement with the City, total structural fire protection costs for Temecula exceed the amount received by the County in fire protection property taxes. Therefore, the difference between total structural fire protection costs and the City's property tax credit for fire protection services is the City's net fire protection cost as shown in Table 5-2. Total project fire tax revenues at buildout are estimated at $219,810, while total fire protection costs at project buildout are estimated at $231,271. At buildout, the City will have an estimated net fire protection cost of $11,462. The estimated overall property tax rate for fire protection is based on the weighting of the existing rate of 6.68 pement within the County of Riverside Tax Rate Area 094176 and the existing rate of 6.28 percent within the City of Temecula Tax Rate Area 01-3003. This weighting is based on property valuation projections at buildout as shown below: Jurisdiction % Valuation Calculation 094176 County 70.70% 01-3003 City 22.30% Weighted Fire Protection Property Tax .7770x.0668 = .0519 .2230x.0628= .0140 .0659 5.2 Community Services District The City of Temecula Community Services District (CSD) maintains the City's public parks and recreation facilities, recreational and human service programs, median landscaping and arterial street lights. Table 5-3 presents the ongoing revenues for the annexation area incurred by the CSD parcel charges at buildout, estimated at $496,819. These revenues are generated by a special tax and collected on the annual property tax bills for residential and non-residential properties. Private property owners or a non-profit corporation will maintain undeveloped open space. The CSD will not maintain open space. I Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 41 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I ! I I I I i I ! I I I I I I I I ! I 42 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 Roripangh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis ! I I I I I Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 43 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal ~4nalysis I ! I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I Table 5-3 also shows revenues for each year of project development according to varying service levels throughout the City. The services are funded through a Special Tax levied agair~st all taxable parcels within the City. The current rate is $63.44 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU). The CSD also provides services for which rates and charges are levied against those improved single-family (SF) parcels within each service level. Service Level B provides residential street light maintenance and is currently levied at $25.68 per SF parcel. Service Level C provides slope and perimeter landscape maintenance. There are currently seven rate levels throughout the City, and since it is not possible to estimate the exact level of service at this time, the highest service rote level of $225 per SF parcel is used. Service Level D provides for SF residential solid waste and recycling services and street sweeping and the current rate of $172.56 is used. 5.3 Riverside County Assessment District 161 (AD 161) The Roripaugh Ranch properties have contributed approximately $557,400 toward infrastructure improvements through AD 161 (Winchester Properties). The District was formed pursuant to a request and signed petition by the property owners within District's boundaries, including Roripaugh Ranch properties. The signed petition represented a land area more than 75% of the total area of the District. The goal of the District formation was to deal with the tremendous infrastructure costs that were being imposed on the landowners within District boundaries as conditions of approval for development. The Riverside County Board of Supervisors confirmed the District in August of 1988. The formal action giving direction for the deletion of specific improvements was adopted on August 1, 1995. The result confirmed assessment total of about $1,420,000 for the Roripaugh Ranch properties, of which $862,600 remains to be paid. About $557,400 has already been paid. The Assessment District has enabled the construction of facilities such as bridges, roads, sewers, storm drains, gas lines, flood control chaimels and water mains. 5.4 Development Impact Fees Over the buildout period, the project in the annexation area is estimated to generate about $4,077,903 in development impact or infrastructure fees as shown in Table 5-4. About half or $1,947,114, is generated by the City's Park and Recreation Improvements fee. Street System Improvement fees at about $1,336,393 represent 32.8 percent of the total. The remaining $794,396, or 19.5 percent, is made up of Traffic Signals and Control System fees, Corporate Facilities fees, Fire Protection Facilities fees and Library mitigation fees. Table 5-4 breaks down development impact fees for public facilities in the City of Temecula by category and land use. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal Analysis I ! I TABLE 6-4 RORIPAUGH RANCHJANNEXATION AREA PUBUC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES FeeAmount Per I Dwelling Unita I Impect I Dwellinu Unit or Sq Ft or Square Feet Fee $535.91 435 $233,121 $764.53 826 $631,502 $0.938 40,000 $37,520 $2.895 150,000 $434,250 $1.448 0 $0 $0.686 0 SCI $1,336,393 I I i I Component Land Use Street System Improvements Subtotal Residential Attached Residential Detached Office Retail Commercial Service Commercial Business Paddlndustdal ! I I I I I i I I I I Traffic Signals and Traffic Dentrol Systems Subtotal Corporate Facilities Subtotal Residential Attached Residential Detached Office Retail Commercial Service Commercial Business PanVJledustdal Residential Attached Residential Detached Office Retail Commercial Service Commercial Business Park/industrial $80.75 435 $35,126 $114.31 826 $94,420 $0.143 40,000 $5,720 $0.440 150,000 $66,000 $0.219 0 $0 $0.105 0 $0 $201,266 $123.75 435 $53,831 $232.82 826 $192,309 $0.049 40,000 $1,960 $0.121 150,000 $18,150 $0.067 0 $0 $0.040 0 SO $266,261 Fire Protection Facilities Subto~l Residential Attached Residential Detached Office Retail Commercial Service Commercial Business Park/IndustAal $44.05 435 $19,162 $57.68 826 $47,644 $0.128 40,000 $5,120 $0.024 150,000 $3,600 $0.019 0 $0 $0.017 0 SO $75,826 Pa~ aedRecreation Impmvementa Subtotal Residential Attached Residential Detached Office Retail Commercial Service Commercial Business PanVJIndust~al $1,267.94 435 $551,554 $1,689.54 826 $1,395,560 $0.000 40,000 $0 $0.000 150,000 $0 $0.000 0 $0 $0.000 0 SO $1,947,114 Libraries Subtotal Residential Attached Residential Detached office Retail Commercial Service Commercial Business Parldlndustdal $163.61 435 $71,170 $218.14 826 $180,184 $0.000 40,000 $0 $0.000 150,000 $0 $0.000 0 $0 $0.000 0 $0 $261,364 Total Development Impact Fee Per Unit Total Residential Attached Residential Detached Office Retail Commercial Service Commercial Business Park/Industrial $2,216.01 435 $963,964 $3,077.02 826 $2,541,619 $1.258 40,000 $50,320 $3.480 150,000 $522,000 $1.753 0 $0 $0.848 0 SO $4,077,903 Source: 1. Fees for residenUal development are calculated per dwelling unit. Fees for non-residential development are calculated per square foot, Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of Temecula Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 45 Roripaugh Ranch Spec~c Plan Jane 2001 Fiscal.4nalysis I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix A Land Use and Market Factors This appendix presems the land use, market and fiscal factors for the Roripaugh Ranch fiscal analysis. These factors apply to land areas currently under City of Temecula as well as County of Riverside jurisdiction. A.1 Land Use and Market Factors Table A-1 shows detailed land use and market assmptions for the Roripaugh Ranch residential development. Table A-2 presents the land use and market assumptions for the non-residential development. 46 Stanley 1L Hoffman Associates, Inc. Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal ~4nalysis I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I TABLE A-1 RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN RESIDENTIAL LAND USE AND MARKET FACTORS (In Constant 2001 Dollam) Factor I Explanation Very Low Density Residential 0.3 $500,000 2.85 Dwelling Units per acre Total average valuation per unit Population per unit Low Density Residential 1.7 $375,000 2.85 Dwelling Units per acre Total average valuation per unit Population per unit Low Medium Density Residential 4.2 $275,000 2.85 Dwelling Units per acre Total average valuation per unit Population per unit Medium Density Residential 11.3 $200,000 2.43 Dwelling Units per acre Total average valuation per unit Population per unit Hiah Density Residential 18.5 $110,000 2.43 Dwelling Units per acre Total average valuation per unit Population per unit Source: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. The Keith Companies, Inc. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 47 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Jane 2001 Fiscal.4nalysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE A-2 RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN NON -RESIDENTIAL LAND USE AND MARKET FACTORS (In Constant 2001 Dollars) IFact°r I Explanation Neiqhborhood Retail 0.23 FLOOR AREA RATIO $100 BUILDING VALUATION PER BLDG SQ FT $15.0 UNSECURED VALUATION PER BLDG SQ FT $150.0 TAXABLE SALES PER SQ FT 500,0 SQ FT PER EMPLOYEE Office 0.40 $100 $15.0 $0.0 300.0 FLOOR AREA RATIO BUILDING VALUATION PER BLDG SQ FT · UNSECURED VALUATION PER BLDG SQ FT TAXABLE SALES PER SQ FT SQ FT PER EMPLOYEE Source: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 48 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal~4nalysis I ! I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix B City of Temecula Fiscal Factors B.1 Revenue Factors Revenue factors are presented in Table B-1 based on the City's 2000-2001 Fiscal Year Budget and discussions with key staff. General Fund Property Tax. Based on information provided by the Auditor/Controller, the Roripaugh Ranch project will receive about 4.50 percent of the 1.0 percent basic levy. Property Transfer Tax. Sales of real property are taxed by the County of Riverside at a rate of $1.10 per $1,000 of property value. Upon annexation 50.0 percent of this tax will be split with the City of Temecula. As presented in Table B-l, it is assumed that residential development will change ownership at an average rate of about 10.0 percent per year, or that each home changes hands on the average of once every 10 years. Use Tax. In addition to sales tax, a use tax factor of 10.0 percent is applied to the sales tax. The use tax factor is derived from two major sources: · A use tax rather than a sales tax is paid on construction materials from residential and non- residential development. This tax is counted in the County where construction takes place, not at the point-of-sale of materials. · A use tax is also levied on purchases from out of state sellers of goods for use in California. The State Board of Equalization assembles the use tax collections into a number of pools. County pools for each County are based on tax proceeds assigned to a County level. A statewide pool is developed for tax proceeds, which cannot be assigned to individual counties. These pools of tax proceeds are then distributed to individual cities and counties on a quarterly basis. The distribution pementages to local jurisdictions for the County pool are calculated on the basis of each City and County's share of total Countywide non-sints based sales tax as a percentage of total point-of-sale sales tax. A similar procedure is used in the allocation of the statewide pool. Other County Revenue Multipliers. The other per capita revenue factors for the City General Fund as shown in Table B-1 are based on the City's Fiscal Model developed in 1992 and updated to 2000-2001 Fiscal Year budget information. Stanley IL Hoffman Associates, Inc. 49 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan June 2001 Fiscal.4nalysis I I I I I I I I I I TABLE B-1 RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC pLAN GENERAL FUND REVENUE FACTORS 53,791 TEMECULA POPULATION FOR CALCULATING MULTIPLIERS (DOF) 25,140 TEMECULA EMPLOYMENT FOR CALCULATING MULTIPLIERS ** LOCAL TAXES ** 0.0100 PROPERTY TAX RATE, TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE PROPERTY TAX ALLOCATION: I I I I I I I ** REVENUE FROM OTHER AGENCIES ** 7.68 STATE GASOLINE TAX-2107 PER CAPITA 3.97 STATE GASOLINE TAX-2106 PER CAPFrA 5.70 STATE GASOLINE TAX-2105 PER CAPITA 45.75 MOTOR VEHICLE LICENSE FEES PER CAPITA 24.13 MEASURE A PER CAPITA (for capital projects) ** OTHER REVENUES ** 5.51 FINF~ AND FORFEITURES p~r capita and employe~ 0.029 INTEREST FACTOR **CSD PARCEL CHARGES** - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - 63,44 CITYWIDE PARKS/RFC, 0.00 A. ARTL STR. LTG./MED. (included under Citywide factor) 25.68 B. RESIDENTIAL STREET LIGHTING 225.00 C. PERIMETER LANDSCAPING 172.68 D. RES. REFUSE/RECYCLING Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 5O Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I Riverside County Fire Authority The Riverside County Fire Authority will receive about 6.59 percent of the 1.0 percent basic property tax levy for the Roripaugh Ranch project area. B.2 Cost Factors Table B-2 presents the cost factors used for projecting recurring costs for Roripaugh Ranch. These cost factors are based on the City's 2000-2001 Fiscal Year Budget and discussions with key City staff. General Fund General Fund costs include Citywide costs as shown in Table B-2. These factors are shown on a per capita and per employee basis for many of the cost categories. For public works, the factors tend to be on a per lane mile, per curb mile or per signalized intersection basis for transportation facilities; for parks and open'space they are on a per acre basis. I Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 51 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE B-2 RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN GENERAL FUND COST FACTORS ** POLICE PROTECTION** 102.45 POLICE PATROL COSTS PER CAPITA 61.47 POLICE PATROL COSTS PER EMPLOYEE ** FIRE PROTECTION ** 191.00 FIRE PROTECTION PER RESIDENTIAL EDU 191.00 FIRE PROTECTION PER NON-RESIDENTIAL EDU ** ANIMAL CONTROL ** 1.12 ANIMAL CONTROL COST PER CAPITA ** CSD - CITYWIDE SERVICES ** 17.53 COMMUNITY SERVICES COST PER CAPITA 23.56 COMMUNITY SERVICES COST PER EMPLOYEE ** PUBLIC WORKS/PARK MAINTENANCE ** 3,900 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PER LANE MILE 780 STREET SWEEPING PER CURB MILE - ALL STREETS 5,500 TRAFFIC SIGNAL O & M PER INTERSECTION 900 STORM DRAIN MAINTENANCE PER LINEAL MILE 1,500 BRIDGE MAINTENANCE PER BRIDGE 7,000 PARK MAINTENANCE PER ACRE 200 OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE PER ACRE 0.12 PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATIVE OYERHEAD ** PLANNING 15.40 20.69 DEPARTMENT ** PLANNING COST PER CAPITA (non-fee supported) PLANNING COST PER EMPLOYEE (non-fee supported) ** CITYWIDE OVERHEAD ** 0.12 CITYWIDE GENERAL GOVERNMENT ADMIN. RATE **EDU CALCULATION** 1.0 per single family residential unit 0.8 per multi family residential unit 0.5 per 1,000 non-residential sq. fl. Source: Stanley R. Hoffrnan Associates, Inc. City of Temecula Fiscal Model Stanley 1L Hoffman Associates, Inc. .lune 2001 52 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix C Estimation Of In-Tract Local Roads Estimation of lane feet and lineal feet for in-tract local roads is shown in Table C-1 for the total Specific Plan area. The estimation is based on the average local road front footage by residential density type. The average front footage per unit generally increases as density decreases. The front footage is then increased by an average of twenty percent to account for common areas, such as intersections and sections of the road that may be un-developable due to terrain conditions or public uses. The front footage per unit is then multiplied by the number of units by density category to estimate the total in-tract lane feet. The total road lineal feet are then estimated by dividing lane feet in half assuming two lanes per local road. As shown in Table C-l, the estimated lane feet are 97,368 or 56.6 lane feet per unit. The lineal feet are estimated at half this amount or 48,684. Table C-2 presents a similar calculation for the annexation area. As shown, the estimated lane feet are 69,768 or 55.3 lane feet per unit with the lineal feet estimated at 34,884. 53 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. .lune 2001 Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE C-1 RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN TOTAL ESTIMATED LINEAL FEET OF IN-TRACT ROADS Product Estimated Lot Estimated Estimated Density I Total Front Footage In-Tract Front In-Tract Road TypeI UnitelSF Unit Avera~le Footage~ Lane Feet Estimated In-Tract Road Lineal Feet 2 Multi-Family Units H 300 30 36 10,800 5,400 Multi-Family Units M 135 40 48 6,480 3,240 Total Multi-Family Units 435 17,280 8,640 Single Family Units LM 1,043 50 60 62,580 31,290 Single Family Units L 241 60 72 17,352 8,676 Single Family Units VL 2 65 78 156 7--8 Total Single Family Units 1,286 80,088 40,044 Sub-Total t,721 97,368 48,684 1) This includes a 20% increase to account for common in-tract road areas such as intersections, 2) Lane feet are converted to lineal feet by dividing by 2. Source: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. The Keith Companies, Inc. I Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 54 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE C-2 RORiPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN ESTIMATED LINEAL FEET OF IN-TRACT ROADS iN ANNEXATION AREA Product Density Total Type UnltelSF Estimated Lot Estimated Estimated Estimated Froot Footage In-Tract Front In-Tract Road In-Tract Road Unit Avera~le Foote~le~ Lane Feet Linea Feet = Multi-Family Units H 300 30 36 10,800 5,400 Multi-Family Units M 135 40 48 6.480 3,240 Total Multi-Family Units 435 17,280 8,640 Single Family Units LM 583 50 60 34,980 17,490 Single Family Units L 241 60 72 17,352 8,676 Single Family Units VL 2 65 78 156 78 Total Single Family Units 826 52,488 26,244 Sub-Totel 1,26t 69,768 34,884 1) This includes a 20% increase to account for common in-tract road areas such as intersections. 2) Lane feet are converted to lineal feet by dividing by 2. Source: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, inc. The Keith Companies, Inc. Stanley IL Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 55 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Contacts Ashby Development Company Richard Ashby, Principal, Ashby Development Company. 909-898-1692 Wes Hylen, Project Manager, 909-244-8833. The Keith Companies Kent Norton, Project Director, 909-653-0234. Kevin Everett, Director of Planning Services, 909-653-0234. City of Temecula Tim McDermott, Assistant Finance Director, City of Temecula. 909-694-6430 Ron Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works, City of Temecula. 909-694-6411 Genie Roberts, Director of Finance, City of Temecula. 909-694-6430 Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager, City of Temecula. 909-694-6400 Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager, City of Temecula. 909-694-6400 Beryl Yasinosky, Development Services Analyst, City of Temecula. 909-694-6480 Phyllis Ruse, Deputy Director of Community Services, 909-964-6480 County of Riverside Walter Andrews, Administrative Services Officer, Riverside County Fire Department. 909-940-6900 Gary Christmas, Riverside County Head Librarian. 909-955-1111 John Johnson, Administrative Manager, County Executive Office, County of Riverside. 909-955-1111 LAFCO George Spiliotis, Executive Director, Riverside County LAFCO, 909-369-0631 RKJK Associates, Inc John Kain, RKJK Associates, Inc. 949-474-0809 I Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. June 2001 56 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Fiscal .'lnalysis ITEM 23 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/Ci~ Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning June 26, 2001 Environmental Assessment for the Date Street Crossings (EA-82) RECOMMENDATION: Continue this matter to the July 10, 2001 City Council meeting. BACKGROUND: This Item was originally been scheduled for the June 26th City Council Meeting. However, because of the nature of the ongoing discussions with the property owner and representatives from the County of Riverside, staff is requesting that this matter be continued to the July 10, 2001 City Council meeting. R:~EA~EA82'aND Staff Report CC.DOC 1 ITEM 24 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN~_..,,_,~j~__ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council Susan W. Jones City Clerk/Director of Support Services June 26, 2001 Planning Commission Appointments PREPARED BY: Cheryl Domenoe, Administrative Secretary RECOMMENDATION: Appoint two ap¢cants to serve on the Planning Commission for full three- year terms through June 4, 2004. BACKGROUND: The terms of Commissioner Telesio and Commissioner Webster expired on June 4, 2001. The City Clerk's office has followed the Council's established procedure for filling a Commission vacancy by advertising the opening in two different local publications. When the deadline was reached for receiving applications, the applications were forwarded to the subcommittee comprised of Mayor Comemhem and Councilmember Naggar for review and recommendation. Mayor Comerchero has recommended the reappointment of John Telesio and the appointment of either Greg Morrison or Mary Jane OIhasso. Councilmember Naggar has recommended his top five choices in order of preference; John Telesio, Charles Coe, Darrell Connerton, Mary Jane Olhasso and Ed Dool. All applicants are registered voters and live within the city limits of Temecula. These terms are through June 4, 2004. Attached are copies of the applications that were received by the filing deadline of May 17, 2001. ATTACHMENTS: Ten (10) Copies of Applications for Appointment. Agenda Reports/Appointment Planning Commission 1 City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 05-!?-01P01:58 Commission Appointment cation IECEIVED · · For proper, cons~derat]on;jyou must:currenfly~ bey~,~'eg]de~nt of~e ~,' uAv ~ ? ~nn~C~ty of~Temecula and a Remstered Voter in the (~tty of~emecula , · 't Please Check One: ~ Planning __ Community Services __ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 2,~rl O Are you a City Registered Voter? ADDRESS: ;~,"1~¢_),.~ I~)~ff/~., DAYTIME PHONE: ,¢ ,¢~ EMPLOYER NAME: ~ i~ EMPLOYER ADDRESS: 3i3F 3 Educational Background/Degrees: List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I understand that any or aH information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public information purposes. Signature: ~(~ff~,~}7]J} :~,~/~/~L//ff~g~,tO ~ff-) Date: Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE I DJSC I Deborah J. Sabol Christensen 32255 Comte IIIora ~ Temecula, Cafifornia 92592 Home Phoee (909) 302-7332 ~ Email CHRISTENSEN3~rmn.c~m May 16, 200] City of Temecula Application for Appointment to Planning Commission BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU ~rlSH TO SERVE ON THIS COM/gIISSION AND WHY YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALWIED FOR THE POSITION, BE SPECIFIC. As a current resident of Temecula, I feel I have a vested interest in the developmem and direction of my community. I want to make a difference in the future development and economic prosperity of Temecula. I take pride in being a resident of this distinguished conununity and feel that my background can be viewed as a valuable asset. I feel I am qualified for this position because of my professional experience and college background. I understand the legalities and importance of effectively planning a young and growing city. I have two years of comprehensive research and experience in conducting Environmental Impact Reports and Environmental Impact Statements (EIR/EIS); specifically relating to housing, population and employment significance. My enthusiasm and dedication, love for Temecula and my professional integrity and high standards; not to mention; my professional background, can only benefit the Temecula Planning Commission. City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 .... ,? ~1r02:54 Commission Appointment Application F~r: pr?per..con.s!deratlon, .you must c~enfly~ be:a: res!de, nt'.of ~lae' · C~ty of.T~emeyula aqd a R~eg~st~re.d.Voter iq the Cit~!of~T~mecul/~"~ I Please Check One: ~ Planning __ Community Services __ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident ? Are you a City Registered Voter? NAME: L~//~,~'~__~ ADDRESS: ,~ 5-'~/--~ OCCUPATION: DAYTIME PHONE: ~/~ EMPLOYER NAME: EVENING PHONE: E-MAIL ~ Educational Background/Degrees: List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) _ PLEASE 5E AWA~E OF THE A~ERTISED ~EA~LINE City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 NAY i 200t Commission Appointment Application city of TemecUla and ~ Re~ist~red:Vo/er in th~'Cit~ of TemeCUla' '.'" Please Check One: XX Planning __ Community Services __ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 7 y r sAre you a City Registered Voter? Y e s NAME: Darrell L. Connerton ADDRESS: 31618 Corec Rosari.o OCCUPATION: Consultant Temecula, CA 92592 DAYTIME PHONE:(909) 693-91 03 EMPLOYER NAME: DL C C o n s u I t i n a EMPLOYER ADDRESS: 31 618 Core e EVENING PHONE:(909) 693-1994 & Construction Management Rosa ri o E-MAIL d l c37@ao l. corn Educational Background/Degrees: High School and Trade Schools associated with Construction I have a California Contractor's "B" License List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) ol service: I am now serving on the Temecula Traffic & Safety Commission List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) American Society of Professional Estimators (ASPE) Lincoln Club of Riverside County Temecula Valley Congress of Republicans State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) SEE ATTACHED SHEET. I understand, t~i~t any or all inforyflation on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of thi~ ~/lforr~affi-~j~f ~o ~lic infoiiiiation purposes. Signature: .~,.~_~ Date: Ma~ 14! 2001 Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE DARRELL L. CONNERTON MAY 14, 2001 I wish to serve on the Planning Commission to help continue the direction and quality of growth the City of Temecula has experienced in the past 11 years. I feel I am qualified because I am a 2nd generation construction person who has built or has managed many residential, commercial, industrial. and office building type construction projects. I have been involved in many aspects of governmental agencies during the processing of new construction, rehabilitation of buildings which includes historical types of buildings. I am a Consultant in the construction industry for construction defect litigation support and have served as an expert witness in over 200 cases involving residential, commercial and office types of construction representing approximately $350 million in claims. Please see attached resume' for additional information. Project Manaqer Over 25 years of experience in managing construction projects with hands on experience in superintending, estimating, cost management, value engineering and litigation support for construction claims. Responsibilities include scheduling, developing bid packages, preparation and negotiation of construction contracts and project management operations. Projects range in size up to $18,000,000 including renovations of Iow and high-rise buildings including alltenantimprovement. Othertypicalprojectsincludeshopping centers, industrial buildings and residential condominiums. Construction Manaqer Extensive experience in both on site and off site infrastructure improvements including building stabilization. Hot and cold water repiping, irrigation and fire sprinkler systems. Management responsibilities include purchase orders, project procurement, change order log and tracking and claims analysis. As director of engineering responsibilities include all off site purchases and management of construction for over 300 residential units. Environmental Manaqement Responsibilities include management of hazardous waste mitigation services including asbestos and contaminated soil. Mr. Connerton has worked with the City of Los Angeles and helped author "Regulation 68" which is the procedure used by contractors for asbestos removal and work in the subcommittee in the City of Los Angeles dealing with hi-rise residential fire sprinkler retrof"~t. He also has worked with the SCAQMD relating to their Rule 1403, dealing with construction and related asbestos removal. DARRELL L, CONNERTON CONSULTING & CONSTRUCTION MANAGEME~ CALIFORNIA OFFICE 3161 $ COMTE ROSA~O TEMEC~JL~ CA 92592-6478 1909) 693-1994 OFFICE (909) 693-1943 FAX Email: dlc37~aol.com www. dlcconsult, com NEVADA OFFICE 1405 V(~ SUNSET, #103 HENDERSON, NV 890 ~ 4 1702~ 547-1021 OFF~CE {702~ 54-7-6233 FAX PROFESSIONAL LICENSE I AFFILIATIONS California Contractors License -"B" EPA Certification for Asbestos ICBO - Professional Member American Society of Professional Estimators HUD 203 K Certified Consultant, Plan Reviewer, and Inspector BACKGROUND EXPERIENCE DLC, Consulting and Construction Management Lee Saylor, Inc. PM Realty Group Patscheck Development Mountain Meadows Development Kaufman & Broad Heritage Development Department of Defense Connerton Construction Company BACKGROUND QUALIFICATIONS Responsible for daily management of operations and supervision of field staff and subcontracting trades on specific job sites. Provide estimating, scheduling, value engineering, claims preparation and contract negotiations on a wide range of projects. Expert Witness Extensive experience in Construction Defect Litigation Support. Mr Connerton has assembled teams of Architects, Structural Engineers, Mechanical Engineers, Geologist, Soils Engineers and Roofing Specialist or has worked on an assembled team to evaluate construction defect report and repair recommendations and prepare a report on repairing and cost for repoded defects. He has been associated with over 125 cases amounting to in excess of $250 million in construction defect claims. Governmental Was employed by the Department of Defense, traveling to various governmental contractors, insuring compliance with contractual requirements. With Connerton Construction Company, acted as a superintendent and Project Manager on construction sites for structural steel buildings, commercial centers and single family homes. PROJECTS ( Partial List) Residential New Construction Monte Vista Townhomes Palm Terrace Townhomes Old Chapman Road Townhomes Rialto Meadows ..... Mountain Meadows - Daly Homes Victory Woods 45 Condos 32 Condos 72 Condos 67 Single Family 280 Single Family 274 Condos 328 Condos 3 Hi.qh Rise Office and Residential Asbestos removal, sprinkler retrofit, tenant improvements and renovation Todd Towers Bunker Hill Towers Executive One Westwood Plaza Citi-National Bank Bldg. 11 Floors, Office 32 Floors, Residential 25 Floors / 8 Floors Office 10 Floors Office & Retail 25 Floors Office Remodel (Stabilization, rehab and repair) Quail Ridge La Sierra Manor Parsonage House 2617 7th Street 5611 Walter Street 5415 Walter Street 10661 Burton Street 10594 Burton Street Williams Building La Sierra II 10590 Burton Street 1789 7th Street 8957-8897 Indiana Ave (In Process) 3527 Main Steet 3350 Mulberry Street (In Process) 3441 Mulberry Street (In Process) 144 Condos 105 Apartments Historical Restoration Historical Restoration Rehab, Single Family Rehab, Single Family Rehab, Multi Family Rehab, Multi Family Historical Restoration 40 Unit Apartment, Rehab 16 Unit Apartment, Rehab 27 Unit Apartment, Rehab 13, 4-Plex bldgs Rehab Restaurant Renovation Single Family New Infill Single Family New Infill .32_45 Orange Street 3227 Orange Street (In Process) 3207 Orange Street 3275 Lime Street 3299 Lime Street (In Process) 3362 Mulberry Street 3382 Mulberry Street Single Family Rehab Single Family Rehab Single Family Rehab Single Family Rehab Single Family Rehab Single Family Rehab Single Family Rehab Historical Historical Historical Historical Historical Historical Historical 4 3406 Mulberry Street Single Family Rehab, Historical 3428 Mulberry Street Single Family Rehab, Historical 4250 Brockton Ave Single Family Rehab, to Office Historical 3848 Fourth Street (In Process) House Move, Single Family Rehab, Historical Welty Building, Temecula (In process) Commercial Rehab, Historical Have worked with the City of Riverside and Riverside Housing Development Corporation on the Home and CDBG Programs as a Construction Manager and Inspector on more than 300 homes. Have also worked as a Construction Manager for the City of Riverside on other types of programs, including Hazmat problems which include Asbestos, Lead Base Paint and soil contamination. wpwin~:cc~resume3.new 5 City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application For proper consideration} .yi~ must cdrrently be ~ r~'ident,of the City of Temecula and a Registered V~ter in. .the Cit~' of Teme~:Ula Please Check One: ~/~ Planning __ Community Services __ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident ~ Are you a City Registered Voter? ~'~.% RECEIVED Educational Background/Degrees:..-.., List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: -'-'-c-- -~List any orga~izationsi to which, you~,~j;: belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to ~erve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a, separate sheet of paper if necessary.) , ,-, ~ unoerst~dthat ~ ~J ~nzormatzon on thzs zo~may De refineD, z consen[ [o the release of this info~atJon ~ubH~formation pu~oses. Signature: ~5~ :~~ Date: ~-x~-~ [ Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Ddve (909) 694-6444 (OR) MaE to: P.O. Box 903& Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application , . For proper consideration, you ~st currently be a resJident of the .. City.o.f Tem ecula;ald a R~is~red VoW ', tha city ~' Teme,c,la. CEIVED : GITY CLERKS DEPT. __ Community Services __ Public Traffic Safety Number of years asa City of Temecula Resident / 4_ Are you a City Registered Voter? Y~:~'~ ADDRESS: d,~ 5/*~ DAYTIME PHONE: EMPLOYER NAME: OCCUPATION: /~"-//~-___'~ /C/~ rGZ u L-- EVENING PHONE: EMPLOYER ADDRESS: E-MAIL Educational Background/Degrees: D List any city or County Board, committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to se~e on this ~mmission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessa~.) - -I under.nd that any or all information on this ~o~ m~y be-verified. I consent to the ~lease of ~is information for Pie;se ret~n to: Ci~ CI;~s ~43200 Business Pa~ Drive (909{69~(OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the adveKis~ deadline .°/ease Check One: F5-!5-O!PO3'2R City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Corem/salon Appointment pplJcatJon · .For proper consideration, you must currently be a resident of the City of Temecula and a Registered Voter in the City of Temecuia RECEIVED IHAY 1 6 200 CITY CLERKS DEPT. ~--~Planning ~ Community Services r'~ Public"TrafRc Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 5.5 Are you a City Registered Voter?. Yes__ NAME: Paul Jacobs OCCUPATION: ADDRESS: 32370 Corte Zamora Temecula, CA 92592-6368 Licensed Psychiatric Technician DAYTIME PHONE: 909-676-1950 EVENING PHONE: 909-676-1950 EMPLOYER NAME: Fairview Developmental Center / State of California EMPLOYER ADDRESS: 2501 Harbor Blvd. Costa Mesa, CA 92626 E-MAIL TemeculaPaul@aol.com Educational Background/Degrees: I completed two years of college in 1980 in the field of health care and passed the state board examination for Psychiatric Technician. List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: I served on the Temecula-Murrieta Traffic Awareness Now Committee in eady 2000. List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): I am a member of the California Association of Psychiatric Technicians. I currently serve as vice president of the Vintage Hills Planned Community Association after my first year on the board and have served on the Architectural Committee for 5 years. State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I thoroughly enjoy contributing to the community I am grateful to live in. I will provide an independent, impartial and reasoned point of view. While I admittedly lack expertise in the areas of construction and city planning, I have experience dealing with community aesthetics within our homeowners association and recognize the value of preplanning to maintain and enhance the appearance of the city. As a half-time state employee, I am able to dedicate the time required to serve on the Planning Commission. I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public inform~..n purposes. Signature:~"~',~ ~-~/~' ~/~-,~'--,- Date: ~r~/~'/~' Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application ..... ;', .-.... ,~' ..... , . :- t MAY - 7 2001 Fgr:Pr°per-c°nSiderah°ni'yi~U must Cdr-i'~fitl~y be-'~r~denti'°f'~ ,' '" 'il cit~ of Tem~ciJia and a Re,~ist~r~d;V~t~r in th6*~it~of~Teme~ifi' ~ CLE~$ DE~ Plea~heck One: V' Planning __ Community Services Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident I/i' __ Public Traffic Safety Are you a City Registered Voter? ~ ADDRESS: DAYTIME PHONE ~.~- ~.~ ~ ~ EVENING PHONE: EMPLOYER NAME: ~/' OCCUPATION: EMPLOYER ADDRESS: E-MAIL Educational Background/Degrees: ~ ~-"~,t. ~ ¢.~,~-'(~'~ ~ ~- List any City or County Board, Committe_e 9r Commission on whicl~ you have served and the year(s) of service: cH~,~,,~ V,'$Tt~ -- ~_'jrg\~.~& ~.~n,~ ,,~ ,~ ~ - ~~ ~ List any ,organizations to which you, belong Jprofessional, ?chnical, community service): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I unde~gtand that any//r all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public information purposes. Signature: ~, ~. ~ Date: ~- 2.- · ! P/ease return to: City~k's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE LaZare, Burton (Bud) L. 858/ 455-1662 u.$.c. 1951-53 C.C.C. 1953-57 graduated with honors American Home Products 3 years, thru 1960 detailing pharmaceuticals Kaufman and Broad 2 years thru 1962 marketing; homes and condos Leavitt (ITT)Corporation 2 years thru 1964 Vice Pres. Marketing; homes, so. My Own Business ( Private Practice )thru 1989 Dr. Chiropractor, ovaaer oa. During years of private practice - I was a partner in construction of homes, condos and apartments. Truly Yours, 3~-i?-0/A11:i6 RCVC~ City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application RECEIVED CI I"F CLERKS DEFT, Please Check One: [--~'~Planning-- ~ Community Services l----"] Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident 6 Are you a City Registered Voter? ¥ e s NAME: Gre~ A. Morrison OCCUPATIONDi~, Of Le~/Comm. Aff~j ADDRESS:30727 Loma Linda Road Temecula DAYTIMEPHONE: 909-674-3146 ext. 229 EVENINGPHONE: 909-693-9570 EMPLOYERNAME:Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District EMPLOYERADDRESS: 31315 Chaney Street Lake Elsinore E.MNLgmorrison@evmwd.dst.ca.us rs EducationalBackground/Degrees: BA in Political Science List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: None List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): Temecula and Murri~ta Chambers of Commerce. Murrie t a/-Temecula Group. State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (¥ou_may_attach_a separate sheet_of_paper if necessary.) See Attached I understand that an~(or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for /Please re~.~C'~Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694s6444 (OR) ~ // Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 P' Please be aware of the advertised deadline May 17, 2001 Supplement to application for appointment to Boards, Committees, and Commissions. I have lived in southern California my entire life. I grew up in the City of San Marcos and saw it grow from a small dairy town into a prosperous city that provided me with many opportunities. Yet, I never felt I had the opportunity to give anything back. I have worked and lived in Temecula with my wife and three sons for over seven years. I do not want to pass up an opportunity to give something back to our beautiful community and participate in the successful future planning of Temecula. By the nature of my career and past governmental experience, I believe I am highly qualified for the position of Temecula Planning Commissioner. I have spent a great deal of time working in the Temecula Valley and had the distinct pleasure of working with Temecula City officials on several occasions. I am familiar with the demands facing our expanding city, as well as, local land use, zoning and planning issues. I have been working in some aspect of government and public affairs for over eleven years. I feel this, coupled with my knowledge of local issues, would add to the backgrounds of those currently serving our great City. Also included for your review are letters of support from Supervisor Bob Buster and State Senator Ray Haynes. Their support clearly demonstrates my ability to work with a diverse group of individuals, while maintaining objectivity and encouraging consensus. 4080 Lemon Street, 14th Floor P.O. Box 1527 Riverside, CA 9~02-1527 (909) 955-1010 Fax (909) 955-1019 Mafia Bro~ Robed CaHva SUPERVISOR BOB BUSTER FIRST DISTR~CT TEMECOLA/M UPmmTA OFFICE: 41002 County Center Drive, Suite 205 Temeeula, CA 92591 (909) 600-6250 Fax (909) 600-6260 Jane Bouchard Wendy Kolk May 17, 2001 Mayor Jeff Comerchero Temecula City Council 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92~9Q Dear M~o: I would appreciate your consideration for appointing Greg Morrison to the City of Temecula Planning Commission. I have known Mr. Morrison for a number of years and know that he is an extremely capable individual who has been deeply involved in the community. He would bring a great deal of experience and knowledge to the Planning Commission and will prove to be of tremendous benefit to the City of Temecula. Mr. Morrison is a bright, reasonable individual who has the ability to evaluate the issues, identify problems and work towards finding solutions. His experience in working with the public on sensitive issues will be a valuable asset to the Commission. I believe Mr. Morrison's experience and abilities will make him an excellent choice and I would urge you to give your utmost consideration ol~Greg Morrison for an appointment. Thank you for your consideration. -- Sincerely, Bob Buster Supervisor, 1st District ( alifornia enate SENATOR RAYMOND N. HAYNES THIRTY-SIXTH SENATORIAL DISTRICT REPUBLICAN WHIP May 15, 2001 Mayor left Comerchero Temecula City Council 43200 Business Park Drive Tcmecula, CA 92590 Dear Mayor Comerchero: This letter is written on behalf of Greg Morrison, who is currently applying fer an appointment to the City of Temecula's Planning Commission. I have known Grog for a number of years, and I have alway~ been impressed with his knowledge, cxpericace, and qualifications i~ government and the community. I fred him to be extremely knowledgeable and he possesses outstanding leadership qualities. I strongly recommend that you consider him for this appoin~nent. Greg has been actively involved within his community, and especially within the Temecula Chamber of Commerce, He has served, and continues to serve, as the Chairman of the Government Action Committee for the Chamber of Commerce and has been involved in a number of other conummity-related issues. C_n'eg is extremely dedicated, public minded and a hard working individual. He would add a great deal to the Planning Commission and as his friend and someone who has worked closely with Cu'eg, I wholeheartedly endorse his appointment for this important position, RNH:'rs Thank you for your consideration and should you need any further information, please feel frcc to contact me. Employment GREG A, MORRISON 30727 Lome Uncle Road, Teme<~le, CA 92592 (9O9) monison_gmg~hotmail.com Feb. 2001 Present June 2000 Feb. 2001 Feb, 1998 June 2000 DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATIVE & COMMUNITY AFFAIRS Elsinora Vatley Municipal Weter District Lake Elsinors, CA · Develop end implement distdntwkJe Government end Community Relations pmgrems. · Represent the District's views end interests in Washington DC end Sacramento. · Sawe as D~rict liaison with key federal and state elected representatives end business leaders. · Monitor end recommend Dlst~ct positions on lagL~aticn end policies promulgated by federal and state government am] other public agencies. · Anange for testimony by Dlstrlnt Board members or management team before federal, state, end local lagidative bodies. · Coordinate communication bet'.~'~.cn the District end federal, state, and local legislative representatives. · Participate in hiring, supervL~ng, training, end evaluating assigned staff. · Develop and administer department program budget: forecast edditlooal funds for staffing, equipment, materiels, and suppJias. · Negotiate end admin~er consulting end other outside contracts for assigned GOVERNMENT RELATIONS OFFICER Westem Municipal Water Dletdct Riverside, CA · Senior member of the Public Affeirs management team. · Develop end implement d~dctwide Govemmont Relations strategic vision end long range plan. · Represent the DL1tdct'$ views end interests in Washington DC end Sacramento, · Serve as District liaison with key federal end state elected rslXesentatives end business leaders. · Monitor legislation end policies promulgated by federal end state government and other public agencies. · An'ange for testimony by Dlstrint Board members or menagement teem before federal, state, end local legislative bodies. · Coordinate communication between the District end federal, state, end local legislative representatives. ACCOUNT SUPERVISOR Stoorza Communicatione Riverside, CA Provide senior counsel on ecoounts. Complete annual team business plan. Participate in performance end salary reviews, promotions, recruiting end orientation. Review all client billings prior to distribution. Senior member of e full service communication firm, managing client accounts end serving as senior agency contact. Develop and administer client services while maintaining strict project budgetary guidelines and providing a monthly budget review and status report. Provide strategy development, dns~gn and implementation of public affairs and public communication programs for · diverse client base. Act as media contact and spokesperson for clients and provide ciionts with media training and crisis management. Establish and maintain relationshipa with media, business leaders, and elected officials. Apr. 1997 Mar. 1998 May 1994 Apr. 1997 Hey.1992 Apr. 1994 Educa~on MANAGER GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS Sharp HealthCare ·an Diego, CA Member of the executive team for Sharp HealthCare Corporste Communications. Developed and implemented · Government and Public Affairs Strategic Plan and managed multiple public information programs throughout the Sharp HealthCare system. · Developed and maintained departmental budget. · Act as in-house legislative advocate, legislative analyst and media spokesperson. · Briefed community and legislative organizations on current public policy end legislative issues. · Consult and suppo~l healthcare system CEOs In their planning and evaluation of individual public information pmgmrns to meet corporate business goals and objectives. · CoonJinated with Sharp HealthCare media relations on placement and content of news releases. FIELD REPREeENTATIVE Colifomie Stets Legieietum Riverside, CA State Senator Raymond N. Haynes · Act as spukasperson for Senator Haynes at community events, meetings and special functions. · Ccontinated district-wide informational Ixngrams, organized community outreach pmgrarns; prepared and accompanied Senator Haynes at public appuara~_~_~ and forums. · Production management for the Senator's local cable television program. · Composed news releases, Issue briefs and constituent correspondence. · Briefed community and legislative organizations on cunent public policy end legislative Issues. United States House of Reprsesntetlvee Congressman Randy 'Duke" Cuoningham Escondido. CA Managed district office, policies end procedures. Accountable for Congressmon~ schedule dudng district visits. Represented Congressman at district governmental meetings; prepared and accompanied Congressman at public appearances end forums. Composed issue briefs, constituent correspondence and news releases. Briefed community and legislative organizations on current public policy and legislative Issues. Cal/forn&t State Unlversily at San Diego Bachelor of Arts, Political $cience/Amedcen Government Personal Married. Willing to travel and/or relocate. Strong written end verbal communication skills. Cheimen of TemeculaJMurriete Chamber of Commerce Governmental Action Committee, Past Executive V.P. Riverside Chapter Building Industry Ascociaticn, Member of the MurrietafTemeculs Group. City of Temecula: 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.ci.temecula.ca.us (909) 694-6444 IJCommission Appointment Application RECEIVED F°r proper consideration, you must currently be a resident of the /Ij~¥, ? 2001 . City of Temecula and a Registered Voter in th~ City of Temecula ~[i~ CLERKS 10j~.n~ Pleye Check One: v Planning __ Community Se~vices~ Public Traffic Safe~y Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident / Are you a City Registered Voter?~ DA ,M EMPLOYER NAME: EMPLOYER ADDRESS: :~o2o ~".'--'~ O-~I E-MNL I'Y~-~L'~o.-'3,~::)('~.. ~. ~. Edu~tiona, Bac~/~grees:~ ~ ~ List any Ci~ or Coun~ Board, CommiEee or Commission on which you have se~ed and the year(s) of List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): State Why you wish to serve on this commission, and Why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I understand, that any or all information o~ this form may be verified. I consent to the release o f?~nform,a~ fo.~r public ~ation purposes. '/ l Signature: }~/ ~/t~/~ [.~_/~["~c/~,O ~Date: ~'~//~/~ / ' Ploase rot~r~.'City~lerks Office, 4~200 Business Park Drive (g09/694-6444 (OR) '~/ Maffl to: P.O. Box 9033, Temocula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecuta.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application .For proper c~ns derat on you .m, us~ currently b~ a resident of the, City of TemecUla and a Registere, d Voter in the City of Temeculs RECEIVED f.Ay OOl Please Check One: ~--] Planning Number of years as a City of Temecula F~es dent 21 ~ CLERKS DEFT. r'----~Community Services r-~ Public Traffic Safety ___ Are you a City Registered Voter2 Yes NAME: John H. Telesio ADDRESS: 31760 Via Telesio, Temecula, CA 92592 OCCUPATION: Insurance Inspector DAYTIME PHONE: 909-676-3187 EMPLOYER NAME: Self EVENING PHONE: same EMPLOYER ADDRESS: E-MAlE jtelesio(~nctimes.net Educational Background/Degrees: BA, CSU, Los Angeles - Social Studies, MS, University of Southern California - Systems Management MPA, CSU, San Bernardino, Public Administration List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: Charter Member, Riverside County Code Enforcement Task Force, 1986-1992 Commissioner/Past Chairman, Temecula City Public Safety/Traffic Commission, 1997-2000 Commissioner, Temecula City Planning Commission, 2000-present List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): Air Force Association Retired Officer's Association American Military Association American Society of Public Administration State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I wish to continue serving the people of Temecula as a Planning Commissioner. As such, I will work to continue making informed, objective and independent decisions. I consider it my obligation to be present and prepared for each meeting. I have no personal, political or professional affiliations or conflicts of interest which could interfere with my full, open and objective participation in this important process. I do have the interest, experience, education, ability and desire to do the job effectively. Based on my record, I respectfully request reappointment. I un~lerstand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public in formationj~urposes. Signature: ~ - Date: 05/15/01 Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6'!.~,~. -(OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Ternecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline ITEM 25 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR.OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City_Council Debbie Ubnoske~ector of Planning June 26, 2001 Roripaugh Specific Plan - Status Report PREPARED BY: RECOMMENDATION: Saied Naaseh, Project Planner Provide direction to staff on increasing the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) public review period from 30 days to 45 days. DISCUSSION: Staff and the applicant continue to work on various documents such as the Specific Plan, the "A" map, the tentative tract map for the "panhandle", Plan of Services, and the Fiscal Impact Report for the project in an attempt to schedule the project for the August 1, 2001 Planning Commission hearing and the August 15, 2001 City Council hearing. Prior to these hearings, staff will schedule a Joint Planning Commission and City Council Workshop for July 17th. Staff intends to present as complete of a package as possible for this Workshop. The DEIR has been finalized with the 30-day public review period starting on June 12, 2001 and ending on July 11, 2001. Furthermore, the fiscal Impact Report has been finalized. Staff has provided comments on the Specific Plan and the Plan of Services and is waiting for the applicant to re-submit them. Significant changes are required for the Specific Plan to make it consistent with the DEiR and to provide for a level of detail and quality that staff expects. Therefore, it has taken the applicant longer than originally anticipated for in the project schedule. The Specific Plan and the Plan of Services were both due on June 18th at 9:00 AM. The applicant has indicated that they will be submitted sometimes in the afternoon ofthe19th. Theapplicanthasalsoindicatedthattheyare still working on the Specific Plan Design Guidelines Section and it will not be submitted on the 19th. Staff had directed the applicant to rewrite the Design Guidelines Section over six months ago. Staff is concerned about the delays in submittal of the Specific Plan since it reduces staff's ability to adequately review it. The Subcommittee met on June 12th and will be meeting again on June 26th. They have recommended increasing the EIR review period from 30 to 45 days in order to give adequate time for the surrounding residents to adequately access the impacts of this project. Staff had originally requested a shortened EIR review process from 45 to 30 days from the State of California Office of Planning and Research (OPR) in order to meet the timelines for this project. Staff's request was R:~S P~Roripaugh Ranch SP~new\CC staius Report June 26.doc approved by OPR on June 12th (Attachment 1). If the City Council desires to increase the review period from 30 to 45 days, the City Council needs to direct staff to make this request to OPR. This direction needs to come prior to closing of the 30-day review period which is July 11th. If the City requests it after this date, OPR may direct the City to re-circulated the EIR for 45 additional days. Staff anticipates that OPR will grant the City's request to increase the review period to 45 days. However, this increase in the review period will eliminate staffs ability to meet previous City Council direction to bring this project forward for action on August 14th. Therefore, staff requests the City Council to provide direction on increasing the public review period from 30 days to 45 days. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: 1. Letter from OPR - Page 3 R:kS P~Roripaugh Ranch SP~new\CC status Report June 26.doc 2 ATTACHMENT NO. t LETTER FROM OPR R:~S P~Roripaugh Ranch SP~new\CC status Report June 26.doc 3 Gray l)avis June 12, 2001 STA'I E OF CAL i 1:O RN IA Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse Steve Nissen Mr. Saied Naaseh-Shabry City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA, 92590 RE: Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, E[R, SCH#1997121030 Dear Mr. Naaseh-Shab~: We have reviewed your shortened review request and have determined that it is consistent with the criteria set forth in the written guidelines of the Office of Planning and Research for shortened reviews, and Section 21091 of the Public Resources Code. The shortened review period for an EIR shall not be less than 30 days. The review process for the referenced project will start on 6/12/2001 and end on 7/11/2001. If you have any questions, please contact Scott Morgan at (916) 445-0613. Sincerely, Ten'y Roberts Senior Planner cc: file ITEM 26 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Cou n~yx Grant Y~I~, Assistant to the City Manager June 26, 2001 League of California Cities Grassroots Campaign RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council consider voting for the ballot measure that would establish and fund the proposed Grassroots Network. If this ballot is approved by 2/3rds of the general membership of the League of California Cities, Temecula's dues will increase a total of $5,103 annually. BACKGROUND: The League of California Cities is considering implementing a Grassroots Network program with the goal of significantly expanding the League's legislative influence. The proposed network would provide 14 new staff members, and reallocate 3 existing staff members in 10 field offices statewide to support the League's 16 regional divisions and 476 cities in advancing legislation that benefits cities. These staff members would be available to assist City officials and the League's regional divisions to work more closely with legislators, legislative district staff, news media, and community groups to form coalitions that will help protect City revenues and local control. This increase will allow for two Legislative Coordinators to work with Riverside County Cities. The Coordinators main areas of responsibility include: Arrange meetings for City Officials with Legislators, plan news conferences, Organize letter writing and media campaigns, and coordinate grassroots efforts with community groups with similar agendas. Support Mayors, Council Members and City Managers in drafting sample letters and train City staff on understanding and accessing the legislative process. Provide regular presentations on legislative developments and insight into the political influencing of legislation. Meet regularly with legislative staff, media representatives and community groups about the League's legislative priorities. rn order for the Grassroots Network to be approved, an amendment to the League by-laws will be required. This requires a member election with at least 2/3rds approval. The total cost of the Grassroots Network is 1.6 million dollars and the City of Temecula must return the ballot by July 6, 2001. FISCAL IMPACT: If approved by 2/3rds of the general membership of League of California Cities, the City's dues would increase by $5,103 annually. This increase can be funded within the FY 2001- 02 operating budget or at mid-year. Grassroots Network Overview Purpose City officials have experienced deep frustration in recent years as the state government has amassed more resoumes and power at the expense of local government services. The League has a solid reputation as an advocate of city interests,'but in the new era of term limits, traditional lobbying methods are often a poor match for grassroots campaigns and financial contributions by other competing interests. Many organizations have already responded to the new political reality in Sacra- mento by investing in a stronger grassroots organization, including the powerful education lobby, which recently launched a new, high profile and well-funded gressrcots organization called EdVoice. The League now has to respond in kind to this new climate by building a solid grassroots network to coordinate city officials' efforts locally to influence legislators, their staff, potentially helpful community groups, and the news media. Major Elements The Network would consist of 10 field offices that would be staffed by 14 new and 3 existing staff (15 coordinators/2 support). The coordinators would work with city officials and the regional divisions of the League to promote key League legislative priorities with legislators, distdct staff, local media and other supporting community groups. They would arrange meetings, plan news conferences, organize letter wdting and media campaigns, and coordinate grassroots efforts with community groups with similar agendas. In short, they would increase the impact of the League's 16 regional divisions and the already busy city officials in each division on the state legislature's and govemor's decisions affecting cities. Cost The Network would cost cities an additional $1.6 million each year in dues. This is the equivalent of four one hundredths of one percent (0.04%) of the $3.8 billion cities collect each year in sales and use taxes, and about one tenth of one percent of the $1.57 billion cities receive each year in VLF revenues. Most observers believe both revenue sources could become victims of legislative raids in the next recession. IndMdual city costs for the Network will vary depending on city population. For example, a city of 50,001 to 60,000 population woutd pay an additional $4,643. Such a dues increase will require amendment of the League bylaws approved by no less than 2/3 of the voting League membership. Membership Review The idea of the Grassroots Network originated with the City Managers Department and was more fully developed by a special Task Force appointed by the League board of directors. Information on the program was developed and disseminated to the full League leadership ( board, dMsions, departments, policy committees and caucuses), as well as to every city manager. Dozens of presentations on the proposal were made to each League dMsion, many departments, and to most of the area city manager groups throughout the state. Accountability to the Membership Based upon membership input, the Task Fome recommended, and the board adopted, significant changes to the original proposal. These include: establishing long-term goals, annual program objectives, and regular reports to the membership; an unbiased, professional evaluation three times dudng the first five years; and a vote of the membership after five years to continue the program. Under the League's current bylaws, the board may also vote to discontinue the Grassroots Network at any time. Next Steps Cities are now asked to vote to approve the addition of article XVI to the League's bylaws relating to the establishment of the Grassroots Network, along with a new increased dues schedule to pay for the program. A ballot will be sent to each city. Ballots retumed to the League must be postmarked no later than July 6, 2001. Revised 0~/07/01 Grassroots Network Frequently lskeal Questions What is the Grassroots Coordinator Network? The Grassroots Coordinator Network would consist of 10 field offices staffed by 14 new and 3 existing staff who would serve as grassroots coordinators. Their job would be to work with city officials and the regional divisions of the League to aggressively promote key League legislative priorities with legislators, district staff, local media and other supporting community groups. Why do we need a Grassroots Network? The Network proposal was developed by a task force (see page 4 for a list of task force members) authorized by the League Board of Directors as part of its strategic planning process. It responds to the deep frustration of many local officials about the cities' loss of political clout, compared with other, better-positioned interest groups that contribute millions of dollars to campaigns. The concept of establishing local field offices is used very successfully by political campaigns, as well as by teach- ers, labor and other statewide membership organizations. These groups find that a network of field offices is a well- tested means to communicate with a dispersed membership, and to mobilize local support for the organization's causes. A recent survey by researchers at Wake Forest University found that key congressional staff, as well as government and public affairs executives, ranked grassroots activities as more effective in influencing the outcome of legislation than corporate or contract lobbying, campaign contributions or advocacy advertising. California's powerful education lobby must agree: they recently launched a new, high profile and welt-funded grassroots organization called EdVoice. These are the interests against which the League must compete in Sacramento. How will cities benefit from this proposal? The goal of the Grassroots Network is to focus on major issues of concern to all cities, such as fiscal reform, increased funding for transportation and local control. Cities wilt benefit from the increased visibility of city issues in local and statewide media, and by holding legislators accountable back home for the votes they cast in Sacramento. The potential payback for this investment is enormous. For example, on a statewide basis the proposed $1.6 million dues increase needed to pay for the network is equivalent to only four one hundredths of one percent (0.04%) of the annual $3.8 million cities receive in sales and use taxes. It is one tenth of one percent of the $1.57 billion cities receive each year in VLF revenues. Portions of both VLF and sales and use tax revenues are at risk from legislative raids if the state suffers another recession. The costs are also relatively small when compared to the expenditures made by organizations that compete with cities and the League for the allocation of dollars in Sacramento. For example, the 1999-2000 legislative session just two of the statewide public employee unions~ that sponsored or lobbied for SB 402 (the binding arbitration bill) reported spending about $3.1 million in campaign contributions to legislators, candidates for statewide office or Page 2 of 4 current statewide office holders, in addition to their expenditures for in-house or contract lobbying. During the same period, the California Teachers Association, which competes very effectively for funding in Sacramento, reported spending approximately $2.7 million on lobbying expenses on education issues. In the same period, the CTA also spent approximately $6.3 million on campaign contributions to legislators, candidates for statewide office and current statewide office holders, and $35.2 million on initiative campaigns to further advance their policy agenda. What would the grassroots coordinators do? The coordinator's role is to increase the impact of the League's 16 regional divisions, by helping busy city officials focus strategic attention on state legislators' and the governor's decisions affecting cities. The coordinators will work to build relationships with local elected and appointed officials, local media, and other individuals and organizations in the region who might be called upon to be part of a local coalition on a particular League initiative or pending legislation. The coordinators' would: Arrange meetings for city officials with legislators, plan news conferences, organize letter writing and media campaigns, and coordinate grassroots efforts with community groups with similar agendas. , Support mayors, council members and city managers in drafting sample letters from cities; and train city staff on understanding and accessing the legislative process. · Provide regular presentations on legislative developments and insight into the political dynamics influencing legislative developments. · Meet regularly with legislative staff, media representatives and community groups about the League's legislative priorities. What kind of person will be hired to staff the Network? Everyone associated with this project has concluded that the best way to make this Network effective is to hire seasoned, professional, political organizers, not policy analysts or technical people right out of college. The budget provides an attractive salary and benefit package to do this. In addition to reassigning some League staff, we expect to recruit savvy political people who have worked on legislative or local elections, staffed legislative offices, or worked in public affairs or campaign consulting firms. Where will the field offices be located? The 10 field offices would be located around the state to ensure that coordinators are available to serve each Of the League's 16 geographic divisions, while still balancing the need to maintain close contact with legislative districts and to be accessible to all cities. A map of the distribution by region is available in the information packet developed by the League. The League will send out Requests for Proposals (RFPs) to solicit interest by cities in hosting a coordinator. The goal will be to achieve the highest impact on League lobbying and greatest visibility among mem- bers, while still keeping expenses as Iow as possible. How does the Network relate to the ABC effort? Page 3 of 4 Action for Better Cities was created to make expenditures and engage in "political" activities such as statewide initiative campaigns. Recently, through in-kind contributions of staff time and strategic counsel, ABC was able to play a major role in helping to defeat Proposition 37, the initiative that would have severely limited cities' abilities to impose fees to support local regulatory activities and provide services. While both the proposed Network and ABC share a similar objective, namely to gain more political clout for cities, the Network coordinators will focus on organizing local activities in support of League legislative positions. ABC will lead any initiative effort in support of fiscal stability and similar objectives. Our city already pays a lobbyist. Why do we need this network too? The Network doesn't replace the ongoing need to have a strong lobbying presence in Sacramento. (In fact, part of the task force recommendation which has been approved by the League Board of Directors is to set aside at least $50,000/year in the budget to hire contract lobbyists in Sacramento to assist League staff at strategic times on some key issues.) Cities that currently have their own contract or in-house lobbyist will probably continue to find that having their own representation makes sense, for two reasons. First, the League's lobbying program represents the interests of all 476 cities. It lobbies the legislature on matters of statewide importance to cities, and cannot provide the representation needed to address the individual needs of cities or even a single region. Second, the greassreots coordinators will be networking and organizing people, not lobbyists. This work will support and enhance the efforts of all city lobbyists, regardless of whether they are con- tractors or in-house staff. Several prominent contract lobbyists who represent individual cities have commented that they see the network proposal as complementary to their ability to represent their clients. What criteria will be used to measure the Network's effectiveness? The League board specified that, if the Network were approved by the membership, the board would set both long- term goals and annualized objectives for the program and report them to the membership. The board also required that the League engage the services of a consultant to conduct a professional membership survey that establishes a base line of information about city officials' perceptions of the effectiveness of the League's legislative advocacy efforts and the relative level of involvement of city officials in support of that advocacy work. The board's intention is to repeat that survey at the end of year three and following year five, comparing changing attitudes and levels of efforts. How will the League be held accountable for the Network's success or failure? In addition to the survey to assess members' perceptions and actual involvement in grassroots activities, the board also directed the staff to (1) establish a separate Grassroots Network account in the League budget, so that mem- bers can track Network expenses; (2) publish an annual legislative voting records report, including a ranking of legislators and the Governor on key city issues; (3) report board goals and annual legislative and policy objectives to the membership; (4) provide regular reports at the Executive Forum, Annual Conference and League department and division meetings; and (5) provide periodic reports to the membership. Will this new program have a sunset date? On or before the end of the sixth year of the program (December 31,2007), the board will ask the membership to vote on the question of continuing the program. If the membership votes against the program continuation, the Network would be shut down, and cease operations by no later than the end of the seventh year (December 31, 2008). Page 4 of 4 What will it cost? The estimated annualized cost is $1.6 million, spread among all member cities. This estimate is based upon the following assumptions: Several current League staff members will be reassigned. Approximately 14 new staff will be hired. Much of the cost for the individual offices will be subsidized by the cities where the office is located, for ex- ample, by making office space and support staff available within a city facility. How will costs be distributed? Costs would be distributed among all cities based upon the League's dues structure, which is based on population. Some small cities pay only a few hundred dollars, while the largest cities pay tens of thousands of dollars. The median dues statewide are currently about $4,930. The Network would increase median dues by approximately $2,588.2 When would a dues increase start? If the membership votes to approve the bylaw amendment the proposed dues increase would be effective on July 1, 2001. Grassroots Lobbying Task Force Harriet Miller, Mayor, Santa Barbara - Chair John Thompson, City Manager, Vacaville, and President of the City Managers'Department- Vice Chair Eileen Ansari, Council Member, Diamond Bar Harry Armstrong, Council Member, Clovis Lee Ann Gamia, Council Member, Grand Terrace Tom Haas, City Attorney, Walnut Creek Jim Marshall, City Manager, Merced Patsy Marshall, Council Member, Buena Park Dave Mora, City Manager, Salinas Kevin O'Rourke, City Manager, Fairfield Susan Peppier, Council Member, Redlands Greg Pettis, Council Member, Cathedral City Mike Siminski, Council Member, Lompoc Armour Smith, Vice Mayor, Modesto Anne Solem, Council Member, Mill Valley Richard Tefank, Former Chief of Police, Buena Park Ruth Vreeland, Council Member, Monterey Endnote The California Professional Firefighters Association and the Police Officers Research Association of California. 2 For purposes of establishing the grassroots network, the $5,000 dues cap in League bylaws article IV. section 2, is would be suspended for the years 2001 and 2002. Ti3e dues cap will apply to base dues without interruption and will apply to total dues in year 2003 and years following. Grassroots Network Proposed Distribution of Staff Among League Divisions D I Legislative Coordinator 2 Legislative Coordinators 3 Legislative Coordinators 16 3 Regional Divisions 1. Redwood Empire 2. Sacramento Valley 3. Central Valley 4. South San Joaquin Valley 5. Desert-Mountain 6. Inland Empire 7. Riverside County 8. Imperial County 9. San Diego County 10. Orange County 11. Los Angeles County 12. Channel Counties 13. Monterey Bay 14. Peninsula 15. East Bay 16. North Bay 4 12 9 Grassroots Coordinator Network Proposed Staff Assignments: Cities and Legislative Districts DIVISION # STAFF # CITIES #LEG. DIST. North Bay & Redwood Empire 1 46 6 Sacramento Valley 1 58 8 South San ]oaquin 1 37 7 Central Valley I 26 4 Riverside, Inland Empire, Desert Mtn. 2 54 13 Orange County I 34 10 Los Angeles County 3 86 33 Channel Counties i 24 6 Peninsula, East Bay, Monterey Bay 3 86 23 San Diego, Imperial County 1 25 10 League of California Cities Ballot on Grassroots Network City of Does your city vote to approve the addition of article XVI to the League's bylaws relating to the establishment of a League Grassroots Network (attached as Attachment A and incorporated by reference in this ballot), along with the dues schedule (attached as Attachment B and also incorporated by reference in this ballot)? [ '] Yes [ ] No Ballot returned by: City Official Name City Official Title Ballots must be returned by First Class Mail and postmarked no later than July 6, 2001. Return ballots to: League of California Cities 1400 K Street, 4th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Attention: Counting Committee Attachment A: Proposed Addition to League Bylaws Article XVI: Establishment and Financing of Grassroots Network Section 1: Enhancement of Advocacy Efforts. To enhance the League's advocacy efforts on behalf of cities, the League hereby establishes a Grassroots Network. The Grassroots Network consists of a series of field offices throughout California, responsible for coordinating city advocacy efforts and promoting statewide League policy priorities. Section 2: Dues Increase (a) Initial Financing. The dues increase approved concurrently with the addition of Article XVI shall finance the League's Grassroots Network for the second half of 2001 and for 2002. The increase shall be used exclusively to finance the Grassroots Network. (b) Continued Financing. Any subsequent dues increases shall occur in accordance with Article Section 3: Accountability (a) Annual Goal-Setting and Performance Assessment. The League Board shall set long-term goals and annual objectives for the League's Grassroots Network. The League Board shall periodically report to the League's Member Cities on the Grassroots Network's performance in meeting those goals and objectives. (b) Board Discontinuance. If at any time the League Board finds the Grassroots Network is not meeting its objectives on behalf of cities, the League Board may discontinue the Grassroots Network. (c) Membership Vote on Program Continuation. On or before December 31, 2007, the Board shall ask Member Cities to vote on whether to continue the Grassroots Network beyond December 31, 2008.2 ~ Explanatory Note: "Article IV" is the existing section of the League's bylaws, which provide for 1) a two-thirds vote of approval by the League board for alt dues increases as well as 2) division ratification of dues increases in excess of the Consumer Price Index. Article IV also caps individual city dues increases at $5,000 per year. 2 The League's bylaws provide that a majority of votes cast is necessary for decision on League votes. See Article Xli, § 4. Attachment B: Proposed Dues to Establish the Grassroots Network (A) ~!~(B) ~t~: (C) . ~ ~ (E) ~ i ?~ ~i~ ~'~?i;~ i~ ~;~ ~n~ual To~l Dues :~a~onal Base :~,:Du~r~ Including Base ~Du~[~ Dues for ~G~ Gmssroom Dues [G~ss~;~ 2002 ~N~ Ne~o~ Paid in :~;~ ~ : ~:.~st;haff2 (Esi) 72~)~ 2002 (ESL) For cities having a population of: 2001 Of;200~~ IA + 4%] 1 tO 500 . . . $37 $~0 $39 ~;~ ;:;:? :: ~:$20 $59 501 to 600 ... 99 ~ ~. ~.~26~ 103 ~ ~? ;~ ~: 157 601 tO 700 ... 197 205 312 70~ to 800 216 . . . 225 ~2 801 tO 900 259 269 ~?~ :~: 410 901 to 1,000 ... 317 3~: 330 ~:~ h;; ~3~ 503 1,001 tO 1,250 4~ ~ :~-~ ~3~;;~ 514 784 1,251 to 1,500 ... 611 635 969 1,501 tO 1,750 727 '~%* ~*" ~:~ ~, ~'~9~ 756 ; *; ~;~397~ 1,152 1,751 to 2,000 ... 865 ::. ~:* 7~z/ 900 ::; ;-;~;~ ;:;~3:~ 1,373 2,001 to 2,250 921 . · . 958 503 1,461 2,251 to 2,550 1,020 : ,. ,;268, 1,061 1,618 2,501 to 2,750 ... 1,078 1,122 1,710 2,751 to 3,000 1,176 1,223 1,865 3,001 to 4,000... 1,316 1,369 ' * :'~;: ~7.19¢ 2,088 4,001 to 5,000 1,570 : :~ .¢~ '~ ~2 1,633 2,490 5,001 to 7,500 ... 2,~ + :; :{ 536i; 2,125 3,241 7,501 to 10,000 ... 2,359 6~9~ 2,453 :;~ ~ ~288 3,741 10,001 to 15,000 ... 2,~8 F~; ;;~4~ 2,961 ¢15~5,~ 4,516 15,001 to 20,000 ... 3,279 ..... 3,411 ~ ~9t; 5,201 20,001 to 25,000... 4,105 ~:-~ ¢0~8~ 4,269 ~ ~¢ ;~ **~,~7.., 6,511 25,001 to 30,000 ... 4,930 : ~2~ 5,127 ,: : 2692¢ 7,818 30,001 to 40,000 6,068 ,, ~ 593;, 6,311 ,, :~3 3~3 9,624 40,001 to 50,000 .. 7,382 -; 1938 7,677 11,708 50,001 to 60,000. .. 8,504 :?' ~2 ~32 8,~ :*~ 13,487 60,001 to 70,000 ... 9,~6 ,;~ ~53 9,720 ~;;5~3;:~ 14,823 70,001 to 80,000 ... 9,817 10,210 15,570 80,001 to 90,000 ... 10,4~ ': 2~4~ 10,883 16,597 90,001 to 100,000 ... 11,4~ -:~;¢;:~:~9::'* 11,923 ¢:~6260 18,182 100,001 to 125,000 ... 13,075 13,598 ~ 39 20,737 14,968 22,826 125,00~ to ~50,000 ~4,392 to 200,000 ... e,357 200,001 to 500,000 Plus 17,176819 17,863852 27,2411,299 per each full 10,000 of population over 200,001 500,001 tO 640,000 41,693 43,361 I I per each furl 10,000 of population over 500,001 Over ~0,000 51,950 54,028 I 82,393 For purposes of establishing the grassroots network, the $5,000 dues cap in League bylaws article IV, section 2, is suspended for the years 2001 and 2002. The dues cap will apply to base dues without interruption and will apply to total dues in year 2003 and years following. The League board will consider in September whether a cost-of-living adjustment for dues will be needed in 2002. This table shows 2002 dues with a cost-of-living adjustment of 4%. ITEM 27 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FIN--'~.CE CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council Shawn Nelson, City Manager June 26, 2001 Morgan Hill Mitigation Agreement RECOMMENDATION: Approve mitigation agreement for the Morgan Hill Specific Plan. BACKGROUND: This report will be forwarded under separate cover. R:~agenda~pt Blue sheet I JUN-25-2001 16:27 BEST BEST & KRIEGEL Lb° 909 686 308~ P.02 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP a california limited liabllit~ parW, ershJp Includ;r~ Professional cor~oraUons WILLIAM R. DeWOLFI', LAWYERS PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION June 25, 2001 No. 24955.00000 VIA FACSlMIL£ A}VO U.S..MAIL Peter M. Thorson Richards, Watson & Gershon 333 South Hope Street Los Angeles, CA 90071-1469 Re: Temecula Morgan Hill Project Mitigation Agreemem Dear Peter: Thank you for preparing the drMt Mitigation Ag~ cement for the Morgan Frill Project. My client looks forward to developing an Agreement with the City that is mutually acceptable to all of the parties. Towards that end, we have prepared revised language for several of the paragraphs for incorporation into the Mitigation Agreement. I. Recitals, Paragraph "g" - While we would not have objected if the County had zequir, ed traffic impact mitigation fees as a condition of approval ofthis project, no such condition was ever unposcd by the County. Instead, my client agreed to the payment merely as a good faith contribution in order to garner the City's support for the Project. My client also does not believe that the additional contn'bntion is in fact required by the California Environmental Quality Act CCEQA"). We therefore would revise the last sentence of that paragraph as follows: "As a result of the City's objections, and prior to the zeduction in density by the County Board of Supervisors, Developer agreed to a contribution of $1.5 million to be held by the County and earmarked for specific improvements to State Route 79S within the City of Temecula." 2. Recitals, Paragraph "h" - As noted above, the voluntary contribution from my client to the County, for the bcncfit of thc City, was never a condition of approval for the County entitlements. Rather, my c]ient agreed to this payment merely in a good faith effo~q to address the City's concerns. Thus~ th~s paragraph needs to bc revised to eliminate the last portion of the sentence JUN-25-2~l 16:28 BEST BEST & KRIEGEL LLP t~w OmCES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP Peter M. ThorsOn Richards, Watson & Gershon June 9_5, 2001 Page 2 909 686 3083 P. 03 beginning with "... eliminated the $1.5 comribution to the City of Temecula to mitigate traffic impacts..." 3. Recitals, Paragraph "i" - We do not believe the City's objections were "ignored" by the Board of Supervisors, but rather the County did not believe that the City's comments required additional environmental analysis or mitigation under CEQA. In fact, given the significantly r~uced density, any Project impacts that could occur have been significantly decreased. Therefore,: this paragraph should be revised to instead merely state that the Board of Supervisors approved the Morgan ~I1 Project. 4. Recitals, Paragraphs "k" and "1" - As set forth previously, we believe that the Project's traffic impacts have already been mitigated in full compliance with CEQA as a result of the mitigation measures and conditions that the County aid .impos~. Therefore, the second sentence of Paragraph k should be revised as follows: "As a result of these discussions, the City and developer desire to enter into this Agreement in a good faith effort to address the City's concerns about the Morgan Hill Project..." The language of paragraph 'T' should be similarly revised to read: "Completion of Developer's obligations under this Agreement will address the City's concerns about potential impacts of the Morgan Hill Project upon the SR 79S corridor within the City of Temeeula." 5. Paragraph 2, subparagraphs "W'- "e" - As you know, the County reduceA the Project's density by approximately twenty-one percent (21%), in large part, we believe, due to the efforts of the City. This density reduction reduced all Project impacts, including but not limited to, traffic impacts which were the City's prima%, objections. However, this density reduction did not reduce any of the on-site improvements needed, thereby resulting in substantial increased costs per lot for my client. Therefore, they are not in the same situation as when the payment to the City was originally discussed. We acknowledge that the City has prorated the payment to reflect the reduced density; however, the amount discussed was $1,1'/6,000 not $1,276,000 as set forth in the draft Mitigation Agreement, which we believe to be a typographic error. Moreover, when the payment was originally discussed, the City required that the payment be made as building permits were pulled, versus paymem ortho emke amount up front. My client, in an act of good faith, suggested making the payment up fi.ont. My client will agree to pay $1,176,000 on ox before the issuance of the first building permit. However, as a result of the ~eduction in the Project's density and the consequent cost impacts discussed above, we propose to separate the mitigation fee structure into two components: the SR 79 / I-15 interchange and the widening of SR 79 fi om Pain Road to I-15. Based on the City's own calculations previously discussed with us, the interchange was approximately sixty percent (60%) of the mitigation fee and the widerdng of SR 79 was approximately forty percent (40%). The mitigation fee for the SR 79 ~oad widening would be kept in a separate, interest beating account to bc used only for that purpose. If no! completely used for this specific purpose within fifteen (15) years, including interest at the statuloty rate, all remaining dollar amounts will be returned to my JUN-25-2001 16:29 BEST BEST I KRIEGEL LLP [.AW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP Peter M. Thorsen Richards, Watson & Gershon June 2.5, 2001 Page 3 909 686 3083 P.04 client. Alternatively, ffthe City can make a finding that the improvements to SR 79 road can be accomplished through the restriping ofex~sting traffic lanes rather than road widening, any unused portion of my client's contribution shall be used by the City for the construction o£a pedestrian over~ossing to be built at SR79 North and a location to be selected by the City. The overcrossing shall be named the Sam Prau Bridge. 6. Paragraph 3 - Although my client appreciates the City's suggestions for settlement, they do not believe there is a nexus that would requi~e them to pay for a fi~lly equipped paramedic squad vehicle at a cost we understand to exceed $100,000. My client therefore rejects Paragraph 3. 7. Paragraph 4 - My client will not agree to the posting of a performance bond. However, my client would agree to record a memorandum of agreement or other document against the property, agreeing to perform pursuant to the terms ofthis agreement. 8. Paragraph 5 - We believe that the City, in this paragraph, is asking to have the text. ofthis Mitigation Agreement incorporated or attached as a condition of County approval for the zoning ordinanc4:. Given the County's opinions concerning the payment of this fee, we believe this condition would be impossible to implement and therefore cannot accept it. 9. Finally, we need the City's suPPort in the event any litigation is filed challenging any of the Project's entitlements, including but not limited to the County's General Plan Amendment. We therefore ~equest the following fang--ge be added to the Agreement: "Upon request, the City will provide appropriate support to the Developer and the County in defending, or seeking the Developer's release flora, any lawsuits arising out of the County's approval of the Project." My client has reviewed drafts of this letter and is generally in agreemem with the terms. In order to meet your time deadlines, we submit this letter as our coumer offer with the understanding that my client has not reviewed the final draft and reserves the right to make minor language tweaks, if necessary. Please send us a copy of the revised Mitigation Agreement as soon as possible. We appreciate your patience and my client looks fo~vard to amicably resolving this matter with the City. Please call me or my associate, Jennifer T. Buckman, if you have any questions or comments. Very truly yours, ~ Michelle Oucllette of BEST BEST & K1LIEGER LLP I.AW OFFICE6 OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP Peter M. ThorsOn Richards, Watson & Gershon June 25, 2001 Page 4 MO:cws cc: Stevcn Vliss, President, Highpointe Communities Steve Ludwig, Senior Vice President, tlighpointe Communities TOTPt_ P. (~5 AGREEMENT FOR MITIGATION OF IMPACTS OF MORGAN HILL SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 313 THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of June 26, 2001 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City"), and Morgan Hill Associates, LLC, a California limited liability company ("Developer"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Recitals. This Agreement is made with respect to the following facts and purposes which the parties agree are true and correct: a. Developer is the owner of certain real property in the unincorporated area of Riverside County consisting of 478.3 acres, generally located north of Monte Verde Road, south of Highway 79 and Nighthawk Pass, east of El Chimisal Road, and west of Anza Road, which is more particularly described and depicted on Exhibit A to this Agreement ("Property"). b. On June 5, 2001, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Riverside certified Environmental Impact Report No. 412, approved Resolution No. 2001-172 adopting Specific Plan No. 313 (Morgan Hill) and approved Resolution No.2001-135 amending the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan, which resolution includes the adoption of Comprehensive General Plan Amendment No. 475, the General Plan Amendment for Morgan Hill. The Board deferred adoption of the zoning ordinance for Specific Plan No. 313, Zone Case No. 6397. c. Specific Plan No. 313 is a 478.3 acre master planned community. The Specific Plan proposes construction of 1,126 dwelling units on 338.1 acres, 11.1 acres for parks, 12.3 acres for an elementary school, 89.9 acres for open space, 2.2 acres for paseos (trails), and 24.8 acres for major roads. d. Specific Plan No. 313 is associated with Comprehensive General Plan Amendment No. 475 which: (1) Changes the Open Space and Conservation Map designation from "Agriculture" to "Adopted Specific Plan No. 313;" (2) changes the Southwest Area Community Plan Land Use Allocation Map designation from "Agricultural 10 ac. Min." to "Morgan Hill SP No. 313;" (3) changes the SWAP Growth Management Concept Plan to reflect the entire Property as "Urban Area;" and (4) changes the Land Use Element of the General Plan. e. Specific Plan No. 313 is also associated with Change of Zone Case 6397 which proposes to change the existing zoning classifications of Light Agricultural, 10- acre minimum, (A-l-10), Light Agricultural, 20-acre minimum (A-l-10)[??? A-1-2071, and R-R (Rural Residential) to SP (Specific Plan). The SP zoning designation would also I 1086\0006\657424.1 -1- 6/14/01 f. For the purposes of this Agreement, Environmental Impact Report No. 412, as certified by Resolution No. 2001- [???], Specific Plan 313 as approved by Resolution No. 2001-172, Comprehensive General Plan as approved by Resolution No. 2001-135, and Zone Case No. 6397 as proposed to the Board of Supervisors on June 5, 2001 shall collectively constitute and be known as the "Morgan Hill Project" g. As originally proposed, Specific Plan No. 313 would have included 1,436 residential units. The City objected to the proposal on the ground that it would have caused significant traffic impacts within the City. As a result of the City's objections,' Developer agreed to a condition of approval which would have required Developer to contribute $1.5 million to the City of Temecula as its share of the costs of road improvements to Winchester Road (SR 79S) within the City of Temecula necessary to mitigate the impacts of the proposed SP 313 on the City of Temecula.. h. On April 17, 2001, the Board of Supervisors gave tentative approval to a substantial revision to the proposed Specific Plan No. 313 in which the residential units were reduced from 1,436 units to 1,126 units, eliminated the $1.5 million contribution to the City of Temecula to mitigate traffic impacts, eliminated park fees, and'revised the land use plan. i. City objected to the revised proposal on the same grounds as its objections to the prior proposal and on the added grounds that the new proposal required a subsequent environmental review pursuant to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines and new public hearings before the County Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. j. The City's objections were ignored by the Board of Supervisors and the Morgan Hill Project was approved by the Board as described in subparagraph b. of this section. k. City and Developer have discussed the impacts of the Morgan Hill Project ' upon the City and mitigation for these impact. As a result of these discussions, the City and Developer desire to enter into this Agreement in order to provided mitigation for the impacts of the Morgan Hill Project on the City and in lieu of litigation over the Morgan · Hill Project. 1. Completion of Developer's obligations under this'Agreement will mitigate the impacts of the Morgan Hill Project upon the SR 79S corridor within the City of Temecula. 11086\0006\657424.1 -2- a. Developer shall pay to the City of Temecula the sum of one million two hundred sevent~ six thousand dollars ($1,276,000-00) (,,Mitigation Fee"). · · -' Fee for the design and construction of Ci shall use the Mlug_a_t!.on_ ~ _ ~'^ad tSR 79S) between Butterfield roadwaY'and tragic improvements on .Wmcnestej__v-,~o ;~ d construction of the Stage Road and the I-15/SR 79S interchange or ~m ,, ..... i,~n an . . · .... Ci~,, shall determine, in ~ts sole d~,s. cr, e~n°~, · ements to the I-15/SR 79S m}e, rc~ang~':ch ~e Mitigation Fee shall be appneo lmprov .... :o~*s within this corridor to w}u .... ._A,:~ Fee shall be apphed to such the specmc ~r~J~n its sole discretion, when me Mlngauu shall determm,- --- - uses· - - ,:-:~*;on Fee from · · which may accrue on me Cl shall retain any .mter.e. st ....... ~,,n oved use and may use the C. 'ty -~-~ ~';~,, ,,nt'l anDhcanoI~ tu ~, ~vrr the time of payment to tn~ ',.~,,J ,.- 1 interest for any purpose, r shall pay the Mitigation Fee to the City on or before the ed. Develop. e . . . .,._ x a^~o~n ill Project· issuanc of the first building permit tot m~, ....~_. H asonable relationship exists between the d Developer agree that a r~ A '~., ,n e Mitt ation Fee designed e. City an~ --',, '-~ect unon th~ Cl,j ~.d th g impacts of the Morgan tam r,,~j ,- further agree that the traffic costs to assist in alleviating those impacts. The City and Developer Mitigation Fee represents the Morgan Hill Project's proportionate fair share of the of making the improvements based upon the Project's contribution to the traffic problems e SR 79 Corridor ..... along th ~ · ~hall ,,ay for the purchase of a · · ' of Fire Servicelm acts· L~eve~oper~. v. . 3 ~ssary paramedic eqmpment, as specifically - i edparame q .. _ · orated herein by th's ref. erenc.,e__a~s~:t~h~i?set fully equ p.P · - ached t~ereto and lncorp , ..: .... as aescrmcu ,,, "',~ ' described m E~xh~b~t B, a~ttl,_~ ~oramedic squad vehicle and eqml forth in full. I ne cost .ox u~ v~-:,.. ~., or before October 5, 2001· ,,ragraph shall be paid to me c~ty 4. Performance Bo. nd.I On or'before June 28.2001, Developer shall file with the a face amount of one million four hundred thousand dollars ($1,499,000.00) from a surety Cit~ Clerk a performance bond guarantying Developer's performance under thiI Agreement with admitted in the State of California and in the form attached hereto as Exhibit B The Surety shall have a current A.M. Best Rating of "A minus" or better and a financial size of"VII" or better. Provided the bond described in Section 2.d. and effect and Developer is m full compliance with the terms of this Agreement, 5. ~ following actions or is in full force ' City agrees not to file anY legal action which challenges the validity of the 11086\0006\657424-1 -3- seeks to have such actions declared illegal: (1) The Environmental Impact Report No. 412, as certified by Resolution No. 2001- [??]; (2) Specific Plan No. 31-3, as approved by Resolution No. 2001-172; (3) Comprehensive General Plan Amendment No. 475, as approved by Resolution No. 2001-135; and (4) Zone Change 6375, provided, however, that Zone Change 6375 is ultimately adopted by the Board of Supervisors with the text and exhibits attached or incorporated into the ordinance as proposed to the Board of Supervisors on June 5, 2001. 6. Representations and Warranties. The parties, and each of them, represent and warrant to and agree with each other as follows: a. The parties have each receive~t independent legal advice from attorneys of their choice with respect to the advisability of making the settlement and release provided herein and of executing this Agreement. Prior to the execution of this Agreement by each party, each party's artomeys have reviewed this Agre(fi~ent at length. b. Except as expressly stated in this Agreement, none of the parties has made any statement or representation to any other regarding any fact that is relied upon in entering into this Agreement. No party to this Agreement relies upon any statement, representation or promise of any other party not contained herein in executing this Agreement or in making the settlement provided for herein. c. Each party, and its attorney, has made such investigation of the facts pertaining to the underlyi~3g dispute and this Agreement, and all of the matters pertaining thereto, as they deem necessary. d. The {erms of this Agreement are contractual, and are the result of negotiations among the parties to settle the City's objections to the Morgan Hill Project and to forego litigation. e. City acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement constitutes a legal, valid and binding agreement of the City enforceable against the City in accordance with its terms. f. Developer acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement constitutes a legal, valid and binding agreement of the Developer enforceable against the Developer in accordance with its terms. g. This Agreement has been carefully read by each of the parties and the contents hereto are known to and understood by each of the parties. It is signed freely by each party executing this Agreement. h. Each person executing the Agreement in a representative capacity expressly warrants and represents that the party on whose behalf they are signing has duly 11086\0006\657424.1 -4- approved this Agreement and has authorized such person to execute this Agreement on behalf of the party, and agrees to indemnify, including reasonable attorneys' fees, all other parties hereto against any claim that the party did not approve the Agreement or that such person is not so authorized. 7. Integration. This Agreement constitutes a single, integrated contract expressing the entire agreement of the parties hereto relative to the subject matter hereof. No covenants, agreements, representations or warranties of any kind whatsoever have been made by any party hereto, except as specifically set forth in this Agx;~ement. All prior discussions and negotiations have been and are merged and integrated into, and are superseded by, this Agreement. This Agreement may be amended only in writing, signed by the City and the Developer. 8. Assignment. This agreement may not be assigned, in whole or in part, by either party except through a written amendment of this Agreement duly approved and executed b~i"City, Developer and assignee. Neither party shall unreasonably withhold approval of'an assignment if the assignee is financially capable of completing the terms of this Agreement and can obtain the bond described in section 2 prior to the effective date of the assignment. 9. No Liabili~. It is understood and agreed that this settlement is the compromise of disputed claims, and that the terms and conditions recited herein are not to be construed as an admission of liability of the part of the parties hereby released, and that said parties deny liability therefore and intend merely to avoid litigation. 10. Waiver of Civil Code Section 1542. The City and the Developer acknowledge that Section 1542 of the Civil Code of California provides as follows: "A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him must have materially affected his settlement with the debtor." Notwithstanding Section 1542, this Agreement constitutes a full release in accordance with its terms, and the City and the Developer knowingly and voluntarily waive the provisions of Section 1542. 1 I. Waiver of Civil Code Section 1654. This Agreement has been negotiated at arms' length between persons knowledgeable in the matters dealt with herein. In addition, each party has been represented by experienced and knowledgeable legal counsel. Accordingly, any rule of law, including, but not limited to, Section 1654 of the Civil Code of California, or any other statutes, legal decisions, or common law principles of similar effect, that would require interpretation of any ambiguities in this Agreement against the party that has drafted it is of no application and is hereby expressly waived. 11086\0006\657424.1 -5- 12. Notices. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the . other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the United States Mail as provided above. To City: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, Ca. 92589-9033 Attention: City Manager To Developer: Morgan Hill Associates, LLC c/o High Pointe Communities 17341 Irvine BI., Suite 200 Tustin, Ca. 92780 Attention: Managing Member 13. Governing Law; Litigation; Attorney Fees. The City and Developer understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's judgment, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted. 14. Authority to Execute this Agreement The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IIII IIII 086\0006\657424.1 -6- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Jeffery Comerchero Mayor Attest: Susan Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney 11086\0006\657424.1 -7- MORGAN HILL ASSOCIATES, LLC, a California limited liability company By: Name: Title: By: Name: Title: l 1086\0006\657424.1 -8- EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION OF MORGAN HILL PROJECT PROPERTY 11086\0006\657424,1 -9- EXHIBIT B FORM OF PERFORMANCE BOND [standard subdivision performance bond formJ 11086\0006\657424.1 - 10- .9' MODE = MEMORY TRANSMISSION FILE START-JUN-14 18:44 STN NO. COM ABBR NO. STATION NAMExTEL.NO. PAGES DURATION END=JUN-id 11:80 RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION DA'rt.: JUh~ 14,2001 To: Michclle Ouelleae, Esq. Shawn Nelson, City Maria8er Gary Thomhill, Deputy City Manater Bill Hughes, Dire¢lor of Publlc Wot '1~ USERNO. 0148 FRO,M: pETER M. THORSON PtiOb~ NO. F~.xNo. 909/686-3083 909/686.1450 909/694-6499 909/694-6416 909/694.6477 909/694-6400 909/694-6475 909/694-6411 FIL~ NO.: 11086-0006 DOCUMENT D£SCRIPTION: ( 1 ) lener to Michelle Ouelett¢ (2) Mifga6on Agttemem REliaNCE: Morgan Hill Project Propcrt)' Number of Pages (incladlag cover): 12 V0U A~E NOT THE D:TE/':DED RECTPI~NT, OR ~ £MPLOYE£ D~SRSE,~rN^TiO~, DiSTILt~UT1ON. OR COP'~qa Or THIS RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON A~-TORNEYS AT LAW THIRTY-EIGHTH FLOOR 333 SOUTH HOPE STREET ]?ACSIMILE TRANSMISSION DATE: JU~E 14, 2001 TO: Michelle Ouellette, Esq. Shawn Nelson, City Manager Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works ]?ROM: PETER M, THORSON FAX NO. 909/686-3083 909/694-6499 909/694-6477 909/694-6475 USER NO. 0148 Pno~vi~ No. 909/686-1450 909/694-6416 909/694-6400 909/694-6411 Frae No.: 11086-0006 R~i~NCE: Morgan Hill Project Property DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: (1) letter to Michelle Ouelette (2) Mitigation Agreemem Number of Pages (including cover): 12 THIS INFORMATION IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. Lg YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOP. DELIVERING IT TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNqCATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMIvlEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE {COLLECT), AND RETURN THE FAX TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS V1A THE U.S. POSTAL SERV1CE. IF YOIJ DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES, PLEASE PHONE (21:}) 626-8484 AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. 11086~0006\657921.1 RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON ATTORNEYS AT LAW A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION THIRTY*EIGHtH FLOOR 333 SOUTH HOPE STREET LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 9007 I'1469 (213) 626-8484 fACSIMILe (2t3) 626-0078 OFFICE$1N LOS ANGELES SAN FRANCISCO ORANGE COUNTY June 13, 2001 Via Facsimile No. (909) 686-3083 Michelle Ouellette, Esq. Best, Best, & Kfieger LLP 3750 University Avenue Post Office Box 1028 Riverside, CA 92502 Re: City of Temecula Morgan Hill Project Mitigation Agreement Dear Michelle: Enclosed please fred the June 13, 2001 draft of the Mitigation Agreement between the City and Morgan Hill Associates, LLC, which we understand to be the entity owning the Morgan Hill Project Property and the applicant for Specific Plan 313. I have included the terms which we discussed in our meeting on Tuesday. I look forward to your comments on this draft. The City Council is scheduled to approve the Agreement on June 26, 2001. We will need your comments by Monday June 18, 2001 so that we can meet the agenda deadlines. I will also need two signed originals of the Agreement no later than 5:00 p.m. on June 26, 2001. Thank you for your assistance in th/s matter. Very truly yours, Peter M. Thorsor/ .cc: Shawn Nelson Gary Thornhill Bill Hughes 11086X0006\657905.1 DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN~ CITY MANAGER Y~Y' CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 26, 2001 Department of Public Works Monthly Activity Report RECOMMENDATION: Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Department of Public Works' Monthly Activity Reports for the month of May, 2001. MOACTRPT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Monthly Activity Report April / May 2001 Prepared By: Amer Attar Submitted by: William G. Hughes Date: May 22, 2001 PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION 1. First Street Bridge This project will construct First Street from Pujol Street to Old Town Front Street, including the construction of a bridge over Murrieta Creek and the realignment of Santiago Road. The bridge dedication ceremony was held on May 1,2001.Channel grading and final punch list items remain. Contractor is scheduled to complete channel grading and miscellaneous items by the end of the month. Constraction of the EMWD lift station continues. 2. Old Town Parking Lot This project will rehabilitate the Stampede parking lot. It includes resurfacing, landscaping, and Old Town Series lights. Construction of the project is complete with only 90 day landscape maintenance remaining. The parking lot dedication ceremony was held on May 1, 2001. 3. Pala Road Bridge Environmental Restoration/Median and Parkway Landscape Improvements This proj eot will install landscape improvements along Pala Road and Cupeno Lane and restore the wetlands in the construction zone. It includes the installation of an irrigation system, planting, and hydroseeding. Median & Parkway work is complete. Restoration work contract was suspended. Plant materials for restoration were not mature enough to plant. Plant cuttings should be installed by end of June. 4. Pala Road Bridge Environmental Mitigation The wetlands creation site located approximately 1 ½ mile east of the bridge project has been planted. The 120-day plant establishment period is complete. The five-year maintenance program continues. 5. Pala Road Soundwalls Work on this project includes the construction of masonry block Soundwalls on Pala Road from west of Rainbow Canyon Road to east of Club House Drive. The wall averages 14' in height. The sound wall is complete. Landscaping and other miscellaneous repairs should be completed by the end of May. 6. Rancho California Sports Park Field Lighting Under this project, new lights will be installed in all fields. The project is essentially complete. Adjustment of the direction and retrofitting the fixtures remain. Field repairs are underway. R:\MonthlyActivityRepor t\CIP~2001 \April .doc 7. Murrieta Creek Crossing Between Winchester and Rancho California Road - Low-flow Crossing at Via Montezuma This project will construct a low-flow crossing of Murrieta Creek connecting Diaz and Del Rio at Via Montezuma. In addition, this project will rehabilitate the street of Via Montezuma. At the February 13,2001 meeting, the City Council awarded the construction contract to Terra-Cai Construction for the amount of $404,587.70 The contractor started work on 4/2/01 and poured the bottom of the channel with concrete the week of May 14. Paving the remaining portion of the rehabilitation on Via Montezuma will be done the week of the 21 st of May. The entire project is expected to be completed by mid June 2001. 8. City Maintenance Facility Alterations, Phase IH This project will modify the existing two story masonry block binlding to accommodate a new second floor of office space over the existing two-story maintenance bay, including the installation of an elevator, and two new second floor rcstrooms. Construction modifications include a single story office space addition. Contractor has completed most of the concrete removals and poured the interior footings. Work will continue on the new grade beams and elevator shell. 9. Margarita Road Widening, Pauba Road to Dartolo Road This project will widen Margarita Road from Pio Pico to Dartolo Road and re-landscape the medians from De Portola to SR 79 South. Included with this project is the pavement rehabilitation of Phase II (Pauba Road to Pio Pico). City Council awarded the project on 3/6/01 to R.J. Noble with a bid amount of $1,266,140.80. The contractor started work on 4/30/01 and started the first of three phases by doing the private property and widening the road near De Portola Road. The construction portion of the project is expected to be completed late September with a plant maintenance period to end by the end of this year. 10. Rancho California Sports Park Culvert Modification In this project, the existing culvert will need to be modified to eliminate a slope erosion problem. City Council awarded the project on March 27, 2001, to KEC Engineering. Wingwalls, footings, and structural backfill were completed. Irrigation and landscaping is scheduled to be completed by 5/25/01. 11. Light Emitting Diode (LED) Traffic Signal Conversion Program A grant award in the amount of $140,870.00 was obtained to replace incandescent traffic signal lamps with Light Emitting Diode (LED) lamps. Under this program, all traffic signal lamps in the City of Temecula will be replaced with the energy efficient, long lasting LED units. Caltrans installed most of the LEDs in their intersection. City's contractor continues his installation. Installation of all LED units will be completed by June 1, 2001. 12. Traffic Signal installation at Stonewood and Margarita A traffic signal will be installed at the intersection of Margarita Road and Stonewood Drive. City Council awarded the construction contract to DBX, Inc. on April 10, 2001, in the amount of $132,000. A pre- construction meeting was held on Mayl0. The poles for this project are expected to be delivered in July. Installation will start at that time and it will be done in August. 2 R:\MontlflyActivityReport\CIP\2001\April.doc 13. Pavement Management System, Jefferson Avenue This project will rehabilitate Jefferson Avenue from the northerly City limits to Overland Drive. City Council awarded the contract to PU Noble at the April 240' meeting. The pre-construction meeting was held on May 10 and the contractor expects to start working the week of May 29 and be completed by the end of July. PROJECTS BEING ADVERTISED FOR BIDS 1. Senior Center Expansion The expansion will include an addition of 3000 square feet to the existing building. The expansion will be for recreational, office, and meeting purposes. Plan check review is complete and the project was advertised for bids. Bid opening is scheduled for the June 13, 2001. PROJECTS IN DESIGN 2. Diaz Road Realignment Under this project, Diaz Road will be realigned to Vincent Moraga Road at Rancho California Road. Business Park Drive will be a T-intersection at Diaz. In response to additional design cost requests by the designer, City staff has elected to complete the design in-house. Anticipated design completion is scheduled for July 2001. 3. Pala Road Improvements - Phase II (79 South to Pechanga Road) This project will widen Pala Road to its ultimate width from the Pala Road Bridge to Pechanga road. Plan check comments (70% Submittal) were returned to the consultant. Work is proceeding on the remainder of the design. Thc approval of Wolf Creek Drainage Basin Study by RCFC & WCD has been delayed about a month because hydrology studies upstream of Wolf Creek require prior approval. Staff will be using an appraiser to assist in the preparation of the real estate appraisal report. The project is funded for design only at this time. 4. Rancho California Road Median Modifications at Town Center and The project will include the closing of the two median openings on Rancho California Road in front of the Town Center, while lengthening the left turn lanes at Ynez Road, Town Center Drive, and Via Los Colinas to improve traffic circulation. The design is 90% complete with the exception of the landscaping. A Landscape Architect will be hired to do the landscaping design work. 5. Rancho California Road Widening at Ynez Road (Add right turn lane to westbound lanes) This project will add a right turn lane on westbound Rancho California Road at Ynez Road. Right of way acquisition at thc northeast corner of Rancho California and Ynez will be required. In-house design is 90% complete. 3 R:\MonthlyActivityReport\CIPE2001 ~April ,doc 6. Pauba Road Improvements - Phase II (Margarita Road to Showalter Road) This project will widen Pauba Road from Showalter to just west of Margarita Road to its ultimate width. Thc project is in design and the work is being coordinated with design of thc library project. All utility issues are being addressed. 90% design plans were submitted to the City for review. Plans and specs were reviewed by staff and returned to Consultant for final design plans. 7. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Over Murrieta Creek This 'project will widen Rancho California Bridge over Murrieta Creek to provide additional traffic lanes. Design of the project began in September 2000. The bridge widening will include four additional lanes. Provisions for a trail route across thc bridge are also being considered. Staff has reviewed 30% drawings and 70% design plans is currently underway. 8. Chaparral High School Swimming Pool The design committee decided upon the layout of the 25-yard x 25-meter pool at Chaparral High School. The facility will include a smaller recreation pool component and a bathhouse with locker room facilities, rcsttooms and showers. Spray-type play equipment will be included as an element in the base construction bid. Thc City and TVUSD are reviewing final design plans. Bid opening is tentatively set for June 21, 2001. The project requires Division of State Architect (DSA) review and approval. The project is scheduled to begin this July pending DSA approval. 9. Starlight Ridge Southern Cross Road Sidewalk Project This Project will install approximately one mile of sidewalk on the northwest side of Southern Cross Road. Preliminary design is complete. Preliminary design completed. Plans have been submitted to utilities. 1st plan check and constmctability review have been completed. The review comments are being incorporated. Utility relocation is underway. 10. Pavement Management System- Citywide This project will involve rehabilitating the pavement of various streets in the City for FY 2000-0l. A list of streets has been selected and staff is currently preparing the contract specifications. Additionally, the consultant will update thc Pavement Management System Program (PMS) for the City. The scope of services includes the evaluation of certain roads that need rehabilitation. A geotcchnical consultant has been selected and will be boring on selected streets the week of May 14. The scope of work includes the evaluation of thc certain roads, which need rehabilitation. 11. Margarita Road/Winchester Road Intersection Improvements Under this project, an additional left turn from eastbound Winchester to northbound Margarita will be added in order to accommodate increasing traffic volumes. Design is 30% complete. Project will be processed as a Caltrans Encroachment Permit. 12. 1-15 Northbound On-Ramp Widening at Winchester Road This project will re-stripe westbound Winchester Road from Ynez Road to I-15 northbound on-ramp to allow for a better flow of traffic. The City applied for an Encroachment Permit from Caltrans to do the striping and comments were received. The consultant is addressing Caltrans comments for resubmittal. 13. Overland Drive ExtensionfMurrieta Creek Bridge 4 R:\MonthlyActivityReport\ClP~2001 \April .doc This project will entail alignment studies and the design of an extension of Overland Drive, westerly to Diaz Road, which includes a new bridge over Murrieta Creek. The project includes the widening of Overland Drive from Jefferson Avenue to Commerce Center Drive, and the extension of Overland Dhve across Mumeta Creek to Diaz Road. Project Design Consultant (PDC), the designer, should complete the alignment study this month. 14. Winchester Road Widening Between Enterprise Circle md Jefferson This project will add a right turn lane fi.om Eastbound Winchester to Southbound Jefferson, starting at Enterprise Circle. Preliminary utility research and data gathering is underway. O'Malley Engineering Corporation has provided the design survey data. The design is underway. 15. Alignment Study for Murrieta Creek Bridge Between Winchester Road and Temecula's City Limits and Diaz Road Extension This study will determine the alignment and location of the Murrieta Creek crossing between Winchester Road to the northern City Limits. In addition, the study will be combined with the Diaz Road Extension alignment study and design. Coordination with the City of Mumeta, Flood Control and Army Corps of Engineers is necessary. Staff awarded the contract to Kimley-Horn and Associates on March 27, 2001 council meeting. The study is currently underway. 16. AC Street Repairs - FY2001 This project will rehabilitate and reconstruct selected City streets during 2001. A list of streets has been selected and staff is currently preparing the contract documents. 17. Landscaping and Sidewalk On 79 South (Front Street to Pala Road) The project consists of the design and conslruction of new sidewalk, landscaping, and irrigation along the south side of State Highway 79 South between Pala Road and Old Town Front Street. A design consultant has been selected and a contract negotiation is underway. 18. Temecula Library A full service library, approximately 34,000 square feet in area, will be designed and built on Pauba Road, just west of Fire Station #84. This project will provide the community with library resources and services. The design is progressing on schedule. The architect started on the final drawings after the committee completed its design and development meetings. The State Librarian is holding Public Hearings that include all agencies to develop the guidelines for the approved Bond measure. Letters were sent to all the utilities requesting service information. Utility services construction is being coordinated with Pauba Road, Phase II project. 19. Street Name Sign Replacement This project will entail removing the existing wooden signs in the La Serena area and replacing them with plastic signs selected by the Public Traffic Safety Commission. Plans and specifications are 95% complete. 20. Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvements - Phase II This project will complete the knuckle at the intersection of Sixth Street and Felix Valdez. Data gathering, concept review, preliminary layout is underway. 21. Traffic Signals Design at Pala Road and Loma Linda, and at Pala Road and Wolf Valley 5 R:\Month]yActivityReport\C1P~2001 \April .doc Two new traffic signals will be installed on Pala Road, one at Loma Linda and the other at WolffValley. The plans and specifications are complete. The project is being coordinated with Pechanga Development Corporation sewer project. This project is on hold due to environmental constraints. 22. Pala Road Interim Improvements - (Widening to accommodate four lanes from Loma Linda Bridge to Wolf Valley) Pala Road Interim Improvements (58 feet in width) will be completed with the second phase of construction of the Pala Road Trunk Sewer (Pechanga Development Corporation project). An encroachment permit was issued for the construction of the trunk sewer and the interim street improvements. Traffic signal and striping plans are complete. The construction of Pala Road Trunk Sewer (Phase Two) by the Pechanga Development Corporation from Clubhouse Drive to the new Pechanga Casino Driveway (600 feet southeast of Wolf Valley Road) started November 6, 2000 and the approximate completion date is Spring 2001. The interim project is on hold due to environmental constraints. 23. Santa Gertrudis Bridge Widening at 1-15 This is Phase II of the Southbound Auxiliary Lane project at the southbound exit ramp for Winchester Road. This project will widen the 1-15 southbound exit-ramp at the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bridge to provide an additional lane on the exit ramp just north of Winchester Road. Staff is revisiting the merits of this project in light of the proposed Project Study Report for Cherry Street Interchange. The study shows that this bridge may have to be removed in the future to accommodate the Cherry Street Interchange. 24. Santiago Road/Ynez Road Intersection Improvements This project will widen, realign, and adjust the traffic signal timing of the existing intersection. This project has been delayed indefinitely. The Traffic Division completed some minor striping and signal adjustments that improved traffic movement through the intersection. 6 R:\MonfldyActivityReport\CIP\2001 \April.doc I*- Z LU 0 .-I I,- Z 0 O. .-I I-- Z U.I o n .-I 13. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Monthly Activity Report May/June 2001 Prepared By: Amer Attar Submitted by: William G. Hughes Date: June 26, 2001 PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION 1. First Street Bridge This project will construct First Street from Pujol Street to Old Town Front Street, including the construction ora bridge over Murrieta Creek and the realignment of Santiago Road. The bridge dedication ceremony was held on May 1, 2001.Channel grading and final punch list items remain. Contractor has finished the final punch list items on the street portion of the work. Construction of the EMWD lift station continues. 2. Old Town Parking Lot This project will rehabilitate the Stampede parking lot. It includes resurfacing, landscaping, and Old Town Series lights. Construction of the project is complete. The Project is complete. Notice of Completion is scheduled for the July 24, 2001 Council meeting. 3. Pala Road Bridge Environmental Restoration/Median and Parkway Landscape Improvements This project will install landscape improvements along Pala Road and Cupeno Lane and restore the wetlands in the construction zone. It includes the installation of an irrigation system, planting, and hydroseeding. Median & Parkway work is complete. Restoration work contract was suspended. Plant materials for restoration were not mature enough to plant. Plant cuttings should be installed by end of June. 4. Pala Road Soundwalls Work on this project includes the construction of masonry block Soundwalls on Pala Road from west of Rainbow Canyon Road to east of Club House Drive. The wall averages 14' in height. The sound wall is complete. Plant Establishment Period will end in July. 5. Rancho California Sports Park Field Lighting Under this project, new lights will be installed in all fields. The project is complete. It is being accepted by the City Council at the June 26, 2001 meeting and the Notice of Completion is being filed. 6. Murrieta Creek Crossing Between Winchester and Rancho California Road_ Low.flow Crossing at Via Montezuma This project will construct a low-flow crossing of Murrieta Creek connecting Diaz and Del Rio at Via Montezuma. In addition, this project will rehabilitate the street of Via Montezuma. This project is complete. The road was opened to thru traffic on Friday, June 15, 2001. R:\MonthlyActivityReport\CIP~2001 \May.doc 7. City Maintenance Facility Alterations, Phase HI This project will modify the existing two story masonry block building to accommodate a new second floor of office space over the existing two-story maintenance bay, including the installation of an elevator, and two new second floor restrooms. Construction modifications include a single story office space addition. Work will continue on new grade beams and elevator shell. Fire Riser supply line has been relocated. 8. Margarita Road Widening, Pauba Road to Dartolo Road This project will widen Margarita Road from Pio Pico to Dartolo Road and re-landscape the medians from De Portola to SR 79 South. Included with this project is the pavement rehabilitation of Phase 1I (Pauba Road to Pio Pico. The contractor started work on 4/30/01 and has completed the first of three phases. The traffic has been shifted to the west side of Margarita Road. The construction portion of the project is expected to be completed late September with a plant maintenance period to end by the end of this year. 9. Rancho California Sports Park Culvert Modification In this project, the existing culvert will need to be modified to eliminate a slope erosion problem. Construction of thc project is complete with only 90 day landscape maintenance remaining. 10. Light Emitting Diode (LED) Traffic Signal Conversion Program A grant award in the amount of $140,870.00 was obtained to replace incandescent traffic signal lamps with Light Emitting Diode (LED) lamps. Under this program, all traffic signal lamps in the City of Temecula will be replaced with the energy efficient, long lasting LED units. All LED units (City's and Caltrans' intersections) were installed prior to the California Energy Commission deadline of June 1,2001. 11. Traffic Signal installation at Stonewood and Margarita A traffic signal will be installed at the intersection of Margarita Road and Stonewood Drive. City Council awarded the construction contract to DBX, Inc. on April 10, 2001, in the amount of $132,000. A pre- construction meeting was held on Mayl0. The poles for this project are expected to be delivered in July. Installation will start at that time and it will be done in August. 12. Pavement Management System, Jefferson Avenue This project will rehabilitate Jefferson Avenue fi'om the northerly City limits to Overland Drive. City Council awarded the contract to RJ Noble at the April 24* meeting. The contractor expects to complete the first phase the week of June 18. Phase 2 will shift the traffic to the west side of Jefferson Ave. both north and south of the intersection of Winchester Road. The work is expected to be completed by the end of July. 13. Senior Center Expansion The expansion will include an addition of 3000 square feet to the existing building. The expansion will be for recreational, office, and meeting purposes. Bids were opened on June 13, 2001. An award of contract by Council to R. Moody Construction for $508,500 is scheduled for June 26. 14. Pavement Management System - Citywide This project will involve rehabilitating the pavement of various streets in the City for FY 2000-01. A list of streets has been selected and staff is currently preparing the contract specifications. Additionally, the consultant will update the Pavement Management System Program (PMS) for the City. The scope of services 2 R:\MonthlyActivityReport\CIPk2001 \May.doc includes the evaluation of certain roads that need rehabilitation. The Geoteehnical report for the project will be delivered to the City the week of June 18. Bids were opened On June 13,2001. McLaughlin is the apparent low bidder with a bid amount of $2,093,991.32. Contract is scheduled to be awarded by the City Council at the June 26, 2001 meeting. Construction will begin in the month of July. 15. AC Street Repairs - FY2001 This project will rehabilitate and reconstruct selected City streets during 2001. Bids were opened On June 13, 2001. Cunningham Davis is the apparent low bidder with a bid amount of $117,587.20. Contract is scheduled to be awarded by the City Council at the June 26, 2001 meeting. Construction will begin in the month of July. 16. Street Name Sign Replacement This project will entail removing the existing wooden signs in the La Serena area and replacing them with plastic signs selected by the Public Traffic Safety Commission. The signs have been purchased and City forces will start installing the new signs shortly. PROJECTS BEING ADVERTISED FOR BIDS 1. Starlight Ridge Southern Cross Road Sidewalk Project This Project will install approximately one half mile of sidewalk along the northwest side of Southern Cross Road. Final design is complete. This project is being advertised for construction bids and bid Opening is scheduled for July 1 I, 2001. 2. Chaparral High School Swimming Pool The design committee decided upon the layout of the 25-yard x 25-meter pool at Chaparral High School. The facility will include a smaller recreation pool component and a bathhouse with locker room facilities, restrooms and showers. Spray-type play equipment will be included as an element in the base construction bid. This project is being advertised for construction bids and bid opening is set for July 3, 2001. The project requires Division of State Architect (DSA) review and approval. The project is scheduled to begin this July pending DSA approval. PROJECTS IN DESIGN 1. Diaz Road Realignment Under this project, Diaz Road will be realigned to Vincent Moraga Road at Rancho Califomia Road. Business Park Drive will be a T-intersection at Diaz. In response to additional design cost requests by the designer, City staff has elected to complete the design in-house. Anticipated design completion is scheduled for September 2001. 3 R:\MonddyActivityReport\CIP~2001 \May.doc 2. Pala Road Improvements - Phase II (79 South to Pechanga Road) This project will widen Pala Road to its ultimate width from the Pala Road Bridge to Pechanga road. Plan check comments (70% Submittal) were returned to the consultant. Work is proceeding on the remainder of the design. The approval of Wolf Creek Drainage Basin Study by RCFC & WCD has been delayed about a month because hydrology studies upstream of Wolf Creek require prior approval. Staff will be using an appraiser to assist in the preparation of the real estate appraisal report. The project is funded for design only at this time. 3. Rancho California Road Median Modifications at Town Center The project will include the closing of the two median openings on Rancho California Road in front of the Town Center, while lengthening the left turn lanes at Ynez Road, Town Center Drive, and Via Los Colinas to improve traffic circulation. The design is 90% complete with the exception of the landscaping. A Landscape Architect will be hired to do the landscaping design work. 4. Rancho California Road Widening at Ynez Road (Add right turn lane to westbound lanes) This project will add a right turn lane on westbound Rancho California Road at Ynez Road. Right of way acquisition at the northeast corner of Rancho California and Ynez will be required. In-house design is 90% complete. 5. Pauba Road Improvements - Phase II (Margarita Road to Showalter Road) This project will widen Pauba Road from Showalter to just west of Margarita Road to its ultimate width. The project is in design and the work is being coordinated with design of the library project. All utility issues are being addressed. 90% design plans were submitted to the City for review. Plans and specs were reviewed by staff and returned to Consultant for final design plans. 6. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Over Murrieta Creek This project will widen Rancho California Bridge over Murrieta Creek to provide additional traffic lanes. The bridge widening will include four additional lanes. 70% drawings have been submitted by the consultant and are presently under review by staff. 7. Margarita Road/Winchester Road Intersection Improvements Under this project, an additional left turn from eastbound Winchester to northbound Margarita will be added in order to accommodate increasing traffic volumes. Design is 40% complete. Project will be processed as a Caltrans Encroachment Permit. 8. 1-15 Northbound On-Ramp Widening at Winchester Road This project will re-stripe westbound Winchester Road from Ynez Road to I-15 northbound on-ramp to allow for a better flow of traffic. The City applied for an Encroachment Permit from Caltrans to do the striping and comments were received. The consultant is addressing Caltrans comments for resubmittal. Plans will be resubmitted to Caltrans the week of June 25,2001. 9. Overland Drive Extension/Murrieta Creek Bridge This project will entail alignment studies and the design of an extension of Overland Drive, westerly to Diaz Road, which includes a new bridge over Murrieta Creek. The project includes the widening of Overland Drive 4 R:\MonfillyAcfivityReport\CIPL2001 \May.doc from Jefferson Avenue to Commerce Center Drive, and the extension of Overland Drive across Murrieta Creek to Diaz Road. Project Design Consultant (PDC), the designer, should complete the alignment study this month. 10. Alignment Study for Murrieta Creek Bridge Between Winchester Road and Temeeula's City Limits and Diaz Road Extension This study will deternUne the alignment and location of the Murrieta Creek crossing between Winchester Road to the northern City Limits. In addition, the study will be combined with the Diaz Road Extension alignm6nt study and design. Coordination with the City of Murrieta, Flood Control and Army Corps of Engineers is necessary. Staff awarded the contract to Kimley-Hom and Associates on March 27, 2001 council meeting. The study is currently underway. 11. Landscaping and Sidewalk On 79 South (Front Street to Pala Road) The project consists of the design and construction of new sidewall landscaping, and irrigation along the south side of State Highway 79 South between Pala Road and Old Town Front Street. A design consultant has been selected and a contract negotiation is underway. The design will begin in the month of July. 12. Temecula Sports Complex A new 40+ Acres sports complex will be built on Pala Road at Wolf Valley. A soils report is being finalized. On May 22, 2001, a meeting was held to review the preliminary design resulting from the Workshop. Staff gave additional input during this meeting. The consultant, RJM Design is finishing up the preliminary master plan of the sports complex and a follow-up meeting is scheduled for July 10,2001. Staff visited other parks in southern Califomia 13. Temecula Library A full service library, approximately 34,000 square feet in area, will be designed and built on Pauba Road, just west of Fire Station #84. This project will provide the community with library resources and services. Thc design is progressing on schedule. Utility services construction is being coordinated with Pauba Road, Phase II project. Comments on the plans by City staff were returned to the consultant. 14. Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvements - Phase II This project will complete the knuckle at the intersection of Sixth Street and Felix Valdez. Data gathering, concept review, preliminary layout is underway. 15. Winchester Road Widening Between Enterprise Circle md Jefferson This project will add a right turn lane from Eastbound Winchester to Southbound Jefferson, starting at Enterprise Circle. O'Malley Engineering Corporation has provided the design survey data. Project is on hold. 16. Traffic Signals Design at Pala Road and Loma Linda, and at Pala Road and Wolf Valley Two new traffic signals will be installed on Pala Road, one at Loma Linda and the other at Wolff Valley. The plans and specifications are complete. The project is being coordinated with Pechanga Development Corporation sewer project. This project is on hold due to environmental constraints. 5 R:\MonthlyActivityReport\ClP\2001 \May.doc 17. Pala Road Interim Improvements - (Widening to accommodate four lanes from Loma Linda Bridge to Wolf Valley) Pala Road Interim Improvements (5 8 feet in width) will be completed with the second phase of construction of the Pala Road Trunk Sewer (Pechanga Development Corporation project). An encroachment permit was issued for the construction of the trunk sewer and the interim street improvements. Traffic signal and striping plans are complete. The construction of Pala Road Trunk Sewer (Phase Two) by the Pechanga Development Corporation from Clubhouse Drive to the new Pechanga Casino Driveway (600 feet southeast of Wolf Valley Road) started November 6, 2000 and the approximate completion date is Spring 2001. The interim project is on hold due to environmental constraints. 18. Santa Gertrudis Bridge Widening at 1-15 This is Phase 1I of the Southbound Auxiliary Lane project at the southbound exit ramp for Winchester Road. This project will widen the 1-15 southbound exit-ramp at the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bridge to provide an additional lane on the exit ramp just northofWinchester Road. Staffisrevisitingthe merits ofthisproject in light of the proposed Project Study Report for Cherry Street Interchange. The study shows that this bridge may have to be removed in the future to accommodate the Cherry Street Interchange. 19. Santiago Road/Ynez Road Intersection Improvements This project will widen, realign, and adjust the traffic signal timing of the existing intersection. This project has been delayed indefinitely. The Traffic Division completed some minor striping and signal adjustments that improved traffic movement through the intersection. 6 R:\MonthlyActivityReport\CIP\2001 \May.doc ,,oo I-- Z ILl ILl (:3 --I ~E LU Z UJ LU 0 ~.~ I*- Z Ltl 0 D. .-I I*- I- Z I.U ILl 0 n I-- TO: FROM: DATE: MEMORANDUM Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent June 4, 2001 SUBJECT: Monthly Activity Report - May, 2001 The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in-house personnel for the month of May, 2001: I. SIGNS A. Total signs replaced 89 B. Total signs installed 14 C. Total signs repaired 6 I1. TREES A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns 7 IlL ASPHALT REPAIRS A. Total square feet of A. C. repairs B. Total Tons 3,(308 55 IV. CATCH BASINS A. Total catch basins cleaned 93 RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement 1,840 VI. VII. GRAFFITI REMOVAL A. Total locations B. Total S.F. STENCILING A. 83 New and repainted legends B. 26,083 L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping 31. 795 Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 39 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 27 service order requests for the month of April, 2001. The Maintenance Crew has also put in 112 events and response to street emergencies. hours of overtime which includes standby time, special The total cost for Street Maintenance performed by Contractors for the month of May, 2001 was ~; 45,355 compared to ~; 98,477 for the month of April~ 2001. Account No. 5402 $ - 0 - Account No. 5401 $ 44,375.00 Account No. 999-5402 $ 980.00 Ron Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works Ali Moghadam, Senior Engineer - (CIP/Treffic) Greg Butler, Senior Engineer (Capital Improvements) Amer Attar, Senior Engineer (Capital Improvements) Jerry Alegda, Senior Engineer - (Land Development) STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of May, 2001 DATE DESCRIPTION TOTAL COST ACCOUNT STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE OF WORK SIZE CONTRACTOR: RENE'S COMMERCIAL MANAGEMENT Date: MAY, 2001 VIA LOBO CHANNEL WEED SPRAYING, WEED ABATEMENT OVERLAND CHANNEL AND DEBRIS, TRASH PICK-UP # 5401 DEL REY/PI~{A COLADA CHANNEL TOTAL COST $14,375.00 CONTRACTOR: MONTELEONE EXCAVATING Date: MAY, 2001 SANTIAGO ROAD REMOVAL OF ALL SILT AND DEBRIS MARGARITA CHANNEL FROM CHANNELS # 5401 TOTAL COST $30,000.00 Date: 05/22/01 SERVICE LEVEL "R" GRADED ALL DIRT ROADS # 999-5402 TOTAL COST $980.00 Date: .# TOTAL COST TOTAL COST ACCOUNT g5401 $ 44~375.00 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT g5402 -0- TOTAL COST ACCOUNT 609-5402 $ 980.00 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG MONTH OF MAY, 2001 DATE LOCATION REQUEST DATE WORK RECEIVED COMPLETED 05/01/01 29836 VILLA ALTURAS TREE TRIMMING 05/01/01 05/O1A)l 41844 FOURTH STREET DEBRIS CLF. aM'q-UP 05/01/01 05~01101 10537 MILKY WAY DRIVE SPRAYING OF TREES 05/01/01 05/02/01 31895 CORTE ALGETE SLIME ON ROAD 05/02/01 05/03/01 32225 PIO PICO ROAD DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/03/01 05/03/01 MARGARITA AT VIA RIO SIGN DOWN 05/03/01 05/03/01 WINCHESTER WEST OF DIAZ SINKHOLE 05/04/01 05,'B4/01 MARGARITA ROAD AT CHESTNUT WEED ABATEMENT 05104/01 05/07K)1 30537 MILKY WAY DRIVE BUGS 1N TREES 05/07/01 05/07/01 NO. GENERAL KEARNEY AT SIERRA MADRE OIL SPILL 05/07/01 05/09/01 41194 PROMENADE CHARDONNAY BUGS IN TREES 05/10/01 05/09/01 29990 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD TREE REMOVAL 05/09/01 05/09/01 31160 CP, H ~ ARAGON ROOT PRUNING 05/09/01 05/09/01 42100 TEA TREE DEAD TREE 05/14/01 05/10101 "LITTLE BITS" OLD TOWN TARP ON ROOF 05/10/01 05/10/01 31300 CORTE ALHAMBRA OIL SPKL 05/10/01 05/11/01 SPARKMAN SCHOOL SANDBAGS ON SIDEWALK 05/14/01 05/11/01 42030 FRONT STREET WOODEN TRASH BARREL MISSING 05/11/01 05/14/01 SANTIAGO ROAD AT JOHN WARNER GRADING DIRT ROAD 05/14/01 05/14/01 30119 SANTA CECILIA OPEN TRENCH 05/14/01 05/15/01 30127 CORTE PLATA OIL SPILL 05/15/01 05/15/01 29960 DEL REY PICK-UP R-I FROM YARD 05/15/01 05/15/01 32474 GALANTINA STREET A.C. SOFT 05/1501 DATE LOCATION REQUEST DATE WORK RECEIVED COMPLETED 05/17/01 44140 LA PAZ ROAD MISSPELLED S.N.S. 05/18/01 05/17/01 32290 CORTE PALACIO ROOT PRUNE 05/19/01 05/17/01 39790 KlqOLL RIDGE DRIVE WEED ABATEMENT 05/17/01 05/17/01 32290 CORTE PALACIO ROOT PRUNE · 05/17/01 05/21/01 29681 AVENIDA DEL SOL SIGN IN YARD 05/21101 05/21/01 27096 WINCHESTER CREEK TREE TRIMMING 05/21/01 05/21/01 30206 VIA CORSICA POTHOLE 05/22/01 05/21/01 45033 CORTE ZORITA SLURRY SEAL PROGRAM 05/30/01 05/22/01 45747 JERONIMO STREET WAX ON SIDEWLK 05/22/01 05/22/01 30693 EAST LOMALINDA ROOT PRUNE 05/22/01 05/23/01 qICOLAS ROAD MISSING LEGENDS 05/23/01 05/29/01 41511 ZINFENDEL POTHOLE 05/29/01 05/29/01 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT MEADOWS POTHOLE 05/29/01 05/30/01 38733 VIA MONTEZUMA SPILLED CEMEMT 05/30/01 05/30/01 32016 CORTE SOLIDAD DRAINAGE CONCERN 05/30/01 05/31/01 30680 SANTIAGO ROAD PERMIT REQUEST 05/31/01 TOTAL SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS 39 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DMSION CATCH BASIN MAINTENANCE MONTH OF MAY, 2001 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/10/01 OVE~ DRIVE & MALL CLEANED & CHECKED 21 CATCH BASINS 05/14/01 ~d~EAS #1 & #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 13 CATCHBASINS 05/15/01 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 26 CATCH BASINS 05/16~)1 AREA ~ CLEANED & CHECKED 21 CATCH BASINS 05/22~)1 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 12 CATCH BASINS TOTAL CATCH BASINS CLEANED & CHECKED 9~3 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY TREE TRIMMING MONTH OF MAY, 2001 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/14K)1 PAUBA AT VIA RAMI TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 05/15/01 VALLE OLVERA TRIMMED 3 R.O.W. TREES 05/17/01 FELIX VALDEZ AT VIiqCENT MORAGA TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES TOTAL ILO.W. TREES TRIMMED 7 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT MONTH OF MAY, 2001 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/04/01 PAUBA, YNF~ AND RANCHO VISTA ABATED 8,000 S.F. R.O.W. WEEDS 05/21/01 DIAZ NORTH OF WINCHESTER ABATED 10,000 S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS 05/25/01 DIAZ NORTH OF WINCHESTER ABATED 40 S.F.R.O.W. WEEDS TOTAL S,F, R-O-W WEEDS ABATED 18,040 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION GRAFFITI REMOVAL MONTH OF MAY, 2001 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/02/01 CALLE MEDUSA AT ENi~.kELD REMOVED 8 S.F. OF GRAFFITI ! 05/02/01 MARGARITA AT DE PORTOLA REMOVED 34 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/02/01 SUNNY MEADOWS AT McCABE REMOVED 70 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/02/01 SLrNNY MEADOWS AT ASTI REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/03/01 SOLANA AT YNEZ REMOVED 90 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/03/01 PAUBA AT MEADOWS (14 LOCATIONS) REMOVED 181 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/07/01 HWY 79 SO. AT I-15 FWY REMOVED 30 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/07/01 28822 FRONT STREET REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/07/01 31510 VIA CORDOBA REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/08/01 MARGARITA AT SOLANA REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI I 05/10/01 VISTA PAI2qT AT 1-15 REMOVED 60 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/10/01 RUSTIC GLEN AT MARGARITA REMOVED 62 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/10/01 WINCHESTER CREEK PARK REMOVED 22 S.F. OF GRAFFITI )5/10/01 42400 WINCHESTER REMOVED 20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/22/01 40971 WINCHESTER REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/22/01 27560 JEFFERSON REMOVED 124 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/24/01 JEFFERSON REMOVED 64 S.F. OF GRAFFITI , 05/29/01 29210 STONEWOOD REMOVED 20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI TOTAL S.F. GRAFFITI REMOVED 795 TOTAL LOCATIONS 31 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z Z CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION STENCILS / STRIPING MONTH OF MAY, 2001 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/01/01 AREAS #1 &2 REPAINT YELLOW BULL NOSES 817 LF. 05/02/01 AREAS #2 & #3 REPAINT YELLOW BULL NOSES 1,125 LF. 05/03/01 AREAS #3 & ~4 REPAINT YELLOW BULL NOSES 1.265 LF. 05/07/01 AREA #1 ~EPAINT 5,953 L.F, OF RED CURB 05/08/01 ~d~,EA #1 ~EPAINT 3,467 L.F. OF RED CURB 05/15/01 AREA #2 REPAINT 2,324 L.F. OF RED CURB 05/16/01 AREA #2 REPAINT 6,103 L.F. OF RED CURB 05/17/01 AREA #2 REPAINT 1,017 L.F. OF RED CURB 05/17/01 OVERLAND AT COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE REPAINTED 4 LEGENDS 05/23/01 AREA #3 REPAINTED 13 LEGENDS 05/23/01 OVERLAND DRIVE INSTALLED 65 L.F. OF RED CURB 05/25/01 41200 PROMENADE INSTAI,I,~D 3 LEGENDS 05/29/01 NICOLAS ROAD INSTALLED 11 LEGENDS 05/29/01 AREA #3 REPAINTED 847 L.F. RED CURB 05/30/01 TEMEKU HILLS REPAINTED 52 LEGENDS 05/31/01 AREA #3 REPAINTED 1,880 L.F. RED CURB 05/31/01 TEMEKU Iqll.l ~S REPAINTED 1.220 LF. YELLOW BULL NOSE TOTAL NEW & REPAINTED LEGENDS 26.083 NEW & REPAINTED RED CURB &STRIPING L.F. 83 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DMSION ASPHALT (POTHOLES) REPAIRS MONTH OF MAY, 2001 DATE LOCATION SCOPE OF WORK S.F. TOTAL TONS 05/01/01 LA PAZ AT VALLEHO AVENUE R&R A.C. 100 2.5 05/02/01 42188 RIO NEDO REPAIR POTHOLES 18 TEMP A.C. 05/07/01 LA SERENA AT MARGARITA R&R A.C. 45 5.5 05/08/01 JEFFERSON AVENUE REPAIR POTHOLES 44 TEMP A.C. 05/08/01 .IE~'I~k~RSON AVENUE R & R A.C. 199 6.5 05/09/01 OLD TOWN FRONT STREET AT DEL RIO PLAZA ?~&R A.C, 74 3.0 05/10/01 YNEZ AT VALLEJO REPAIR A.C. FLOW LINE 120 3.0 05/14/01 28915 CALLE OLVERA REPAIR A.C. FLOW LINE 410 3.5 05/I 5/01 29775 CALLE OLVERA REPAIR A.C. FLOW LINE 276 2.5 05/16/01 WINCHESTER WEST OF JEFi~'I~RSON R & R A.C. 160 6 05/17/01 OVERLAND AT COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE OVERLAY A,C. 750 3.5 05/21/01 28165 JEFFERSON R&R A.C. 425 6 05/22/01 28165 JEFFERSON R & R A.C. 175 6.5 05/29/01 MAIN STREET A.C. OVERLAY 167 2 05/30/01 OVERLAND AT COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE A.C. OVERLAY 624 3 05/31/01 VIA CORSICA R&R A.C. 21 1.5 TOTAL S.F. OF REPAIRS 3~608 TOTAL TONS 55 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DMSION SIGNS MONTH OF MAY, 2001 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/01/01 KAHWEA AT NOB COURT REPLACED R-I "MISSING" 05/04/0 1 33030 VALENCE COURT INSTALLED W-53 05/04/01 VIA BANDE AT CORTE ARGENTO REPLACED R-1 FADED 05/04/01 KAWEA AT NOB COURT INSTALLED S.N.S. 05/07/01 VIA CORDOBA AT VIA DE[, CORONADO REPLACED R- 1 FADED 05/08/01 OVERLAND DRIVE AT COMMERCE REPLACED R-2 35 05/08/01 KAHWEA AT CALLE MEDUSA REPI~CED R-I FADED 05/08/01 CORTE CASTRO / VIA AZALEA REPLACED R-1 FADED 05/09/01 PALrBA AT CORTE VILLOSA REPLACED R-I FADED 5/10/01 HWY 79 SO. AT FRONT STREET REPLACED DELINEATOR 05/17/01 MARGARITA AT JEDEDIAH SMITH INSTALLED S.N.S. 05/18/01 NICOLAS AT VIA LOBO REPLACED W-57 & "lq" 05/18/01 NOCOI~S AT VILLA VENECIA REPLACED W-57 & "lq" 05/18/01 PUJOL AT 6TM STREET INSTALLED 2 "CRIME FREE HOUSING" 05/22101 FRONT AT HWY 79 SO. REPLACED DELINEATOR 05/22/01 PUJOL AT 6TM INSTALLED "CRIME FREE HOUSING" 05/23/01 PROMENADE CHARDONNAY HILLS INSTALLED 7 R2 "25" 05/24/01 MARGARITA AT LOWE'S REPLACED R-1 &R-17 05/24/01 PASEO DE LAS OLAS REPLACED R-1 05/24/01 CORTE SALINAS REPLACED R-I 05/25/01 PUJOL AT SIXTH STREET REPLACED TYPE N 05/25/01 41200 PROMENADE INSTA[`I.F.D 2 R-2 "25" 05/29/01 29540 YNEZ REPLACED DELINEATOR 05/29/01 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT MARGARITA REPLACED 2 DELINEATORS 05/29/01 AREA #3 REPLACED 10 S.N.S. DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/30/~1 MAIN STREET AT MERCEDES REPI~CED R-1 05/30/01 TEMEKU HILLS REPIakCED R-7 & K MARKER 05/30/01 AREA #3 REPLACED 34 S.NS. 05/31/01 AREA #3 REPI~CED 20 S.N.S. TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED 89 TOTAL SIGNS ]NSTALLEO 14 TOTAL SIGNS REPAIRED APPROVAL CItY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Jim Domenoe, Chief of Police(~ June 26, 2001 Monthly Departmental Report The following report reflects special teams, traffic enforcement and miscellaneous activity occurring during May of 2001. Part One crime statistics are displayed by reporting district within the City, providing stable parameters for monitoring criminal activity, and aiding in planning police resource deployment. The Police Department responded to twenty-nine "priority one" calls for service during the month of May, with an average response time of approximately 6.1 minutes. A total of 3,184 calls for police service were generated in the City of Temecula dudng the month. During the month of May, the Temecula Police Department's Town Center storefront served a total of 194 customers. Fingerprinting services for this month showed fiffy-five prints taken, thirty-six people filed police reports, eighteen people had citations signed off and seven oversized vehicle permits were issued. Crime Prevention Officer Lynn Fanene participated in a number of special events and community oriented programs during the month. Officer Fanene completed several presentations on alcohol safety for new businesses opening with alcohol licenses. He also assisted in the planning for the upcoming annual "Sister City--Taste of the World" event, which will be held du ring the month of June. Officer Fanene conducted twenty-two residential security visits and seven business visits during the month. He conducted twenty-four visits to businesses for crime follow-up information. Officer Fanene completed his article for the Valley Business Journal titled "Weapon Safety for Shopkeepers." The POP Team continued to work on the "Crime Free Multi Housing" project. At this time there is 70% compliance with this program across the City and they are working with two complexes, which are in the final stages of certification. They are also in the process of working to re-certify four complexes that are continuing with the program. During the month a meeting was held with the property managers to update them about the program and other activities. The team continued their Warrant Apprehension Program during the month, which resulted in four misdemeanor warrant arrests and eight citations. Monthly Departmental Report Page 2 The team also continued with the Juvenile Decoy Program involving businesses that sell aleohol and ensuring that they do not sell to minors. During the program, approximately twenty locations were visited and all were found to be in compliance. The team continued their Crime Free Parks program with frequent patrol checks. No violations were observed during the month. They also conducted a "Bar Action Response" program and noted no violations. The T.A.G. program for the month was held with six volunteers assisting. No reportable violations were observed. The team also worked the continuing "Homeless Assistance" program, which resulted in contacting one subject who was offered and refused assistance. An off road vehicle program was held during the month with five warnings given for violators. A property owner was contacted and advised to post "No Trespassing" signs on their property. The Old Town Storefront serves as an office for the POP team and a location to assist the public with police services. This has greatly increased their availability to serve the Old Town area. This month the Old Town storefront served 109 customers, ten fingerprints were taken, eighteen police reports were written and three citations were signed off. The traffic team reported that during the month of May there were 601 citations issued for hazardous violations, 104 citations were issued for non-hazardous violations and ninety-eight parking citations were issued. During the month there was one fatal collision, fifteen injury traffic collisions, thirty- eight non-injury collisions were repealed and thirty-seven drivers were arrested for DUI. The monthly ERACIT program this month led to the arrest of. two subjects for DUI. The Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET) program resulted in 122 citations being issued. This program addresses traffic concerns in residential neighborhoods with a dedicated motor officer. During the month of May, the POP officers assigned to the Promenade Mall handled a total of 191 calls for service. The predominant number of these calls were for shoplifting investigations. These calls resulted in the criminal arrest and filings on twelve misdemeanors and two felony cases for various offenses. Eleven citations were also issued. Officers Robles and Rupe will be providing training to security staff employees on "Radio and Reporting Procedures." The mall officers are also working with mall merchants on an inkless check system. The school resource officers continue to remain active in their schools. During the past month, the officers conducted presentations in areas such as "Gateway Drugs, Drug Awareness, Bicycle/Skating safety, School Violence, Stranger Danger," and other topics. They also conducted counseling sessions with students. Four arrests were made at Chaparral High School. The JOLT program (Juvenile Offender Law Enforcement Program) continues to be a success in part through its youth court program. Deputy Sherry Ads, ms went to a training class this month with her probation officer counterpart regarding juvenile violence. They also conducted the sixty-sixth youth court session. The JOLT officer assisted at other schools with truancy meetings and follow up with parents of juveniles in the JOLT program. Deputy Adams continued to work with "At Risk" juveniles throughout the month and also conducted counseling sessions with their parents. One arrest was made during the month for a juvenile with an outstanding warrant and another juvenile was sent for a mental health evaluation. Deputy Adams was also involved with a molestation case during the month, which led to the arrest of the suspect. Deputy Adams conducted follow-up investigation and prepared a bail enhancement due to the suspects flight risk. As a result of this, the suspect was held in jail pending trial. During the month of May, the Special Enforcement Team of Officers Rich Holder and John Morin handled a total of twelve cases. These cases resulted in nine misdemeanor and five felony arrests, primarily for narcotics violations. They also issued nine citations for various violations. This team Monthly Departmental Report Page 3 continues to work street level narcotics and specialty patrol within the city on a pro-active basis. During this month the team recovered a large amount of stolen property and checks from suspects who were staying in a local motel. This case involved multiple victims who had not realized they had property taken from their mailboxes. The team also assisted with a search of a gang-related suspect's residence for evidence related to an assault with a deadly weapon case. Volunteers from the community continue to be an integral part of the Temecula Police Department's staff. Under the guidance of volunteer coordinator Gayle Gerrish, the Police Department's volunteer staff contributed 507 hours of service in May. Volunteer assignments include computer data input, logistics support, special event assistance, and telePhone answering duties. The reserve officer program and mounted posse are additional valuable volunteer resources available to the police department. The police department utilizes reserve officers to assist with patrol, traffic enforcement, crime prevention, off road vehicle enforcement and a variety of special functions. Reserve police officers worked a total of 333 hours during the month (200 hours were specifically spent on patrol in Temecula). The posse contributed 216 hours during the month. APPROVAL CITYATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE/~/ ClTY MANAGER CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council/City Manager Anthony J. Elmo, Chief Building Official June 26, 2001 Departmental Report May 2001 PREPARED BY: Carol Brockmeier, Administrative Secretary TOTAL NUMBER OF PERMITS ISSUED ................................................................... 325 NSFR ................................................................................................................ 142 NCOM ................................................................................................................... 3 TOTAL VALUATION ..................................................................................... $22,670,692 TOTAL NUMBER OF INSPECTIONS PERFORMED .............................................................................. 3824 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVal CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF F1NANCL CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager June 26, 2001 Economic Development Monthly Departmental Report Prepared by: Gloda Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator The following are the recent highlights for the Economic Development Department for the month of May 2001. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Leads & Inquiries In the month of May, the City received 7 leads and 5 inquiries. The leads included two semi- conductor plants, hospital, hotel, wellness center, entertainment center, equestrian country club and a financial group. In the month of May, the Southwest Riverside County Alliance responded to 5 leads from the Inland Empire Economic Partnership (IEEP) on behalf of the City of Temecula., The Alliance received 14 inquiries from Outlook and Expansion Management magazines. 87 calls and/or attempts were made to follow-up on recent and past leads. Attached is a copy of their activity report. Film Leads & Hi.qhli,qhts In the month of May, the Film Council received 46 phone calls regarding the Film Festival, 60 calls regarding Talent Showcase and 22 calls regarding locations information requests. Filmin,q in Temecula Living History Productions filmed in Temecula and southem areas for a documentary video on the Butterfield Stage. A copy of the video will be presented to the Temecula Valley Museum in the near future. Huell Howser filmed an episode of California Gold at the Temecula Valley Museum and at the old Erie Stanley Gardner Ranch on Pala Road. The episode will air this summer. Elysium Productions, based in Hollywood, has now opened a small production company in Temecula. Their film Rock Creek has been submitted to the Film Festival. They are presently taping a documentary about the serval cat and tiger habitatJreserve in De Luz. C ITYMGR\WOLNICKGkMAY' 01 DEPT. REPT. DOC 1 Please refer to the attached Film Council report for additional activities. Media/Outreach Materials Staff wrote an article for the Chamber of Commerce monthly newsletter titled "City of Temecula Welcomes Vail Ranch Residents." The article highlights the many City services and programs that the residents will receive upon annexation including enhanced Police, Fire and Emergency Services. The planned annexation welcome celebration was also highlighted. The City of Temecula Community Reference Guide has been updated. The Guide is designed to acquaint residents with the services and recreational amenities offered by Temecula city government as well as the many special events available in the community. It also provides the most frequently used phone numbers for City services, utilities, emergency services, transportation, general school information and business assistance & support contacts. A copy was sent to each of the Councilmembers. The Temecula Profile - Quick Facts marketing brochure was finalized. It will be ready for distribution at the end of June. The Profile gives an overview of the City and will be distributed at business trade shows, via EDC and included in the City's business kit. Grand Re-Opening Ceremony Mayor Comerchero spoke at the Temecula Valley Days Inn Grand Re-Opening celebration on May 17th. Staff also attended this function. Meetings Staff attended the EDC of Southwest Riverside County's Business Relations Committee Meeting on May 3rd. Company contact reports were given which included: Ddveline Specialties and Machine, Carbro Corporation, Binaca Products, Transducers Techniques, Spenco Machine & Manufacturing and Interventional Technologies. Staff met with the Forest City construction personnel and RBF on May 3~ regarding the Promenade Mall expansion. Staff attended the Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County's Board of Directors Meeting on May 17th. Items discussed included the energy issue, the Chamber's Talk of the Town Breakfast with Dr. John Husing, French Valley Airport runway extension, and the upcoming Alliance Broker's Breakfast. The EDC hopes to have its next quarterly lunch at the Diamond Stadium and have Padre/Storm players there. Staff attended numerous meetings in May regarding the Harveston and Roripaugh developments. Staff also provided assistance with Reimbursement Agreements for the Scotts project needs and opportunities. Staff met with Ken Woolfey on May 9th to discuss organizational commuting needs and opportunities. On May 11th, staff attended the Temecula CONNECT Meeting. Ed Keyes with Business Jazz Network was the guest speaker. He spoke on "Selling to VITO - The Very Important Top Officer" which is a curriculum that teaches salespeople proven, tactical, "how-to" methods for getting appointments with difficult to reach top decision makers. C1TYMGR\WOLNIC KGkMAY' 01 DEPT.REPT. DOC 2 On May 14th, staff met with representatives from BreezeCOM, 3ra Pipe Communications and Pacific Arepco regarding potential broadband services in Temecula. Staff attended the Southwest Riverside County Manufacturers' Council Quarterly Luncheon on May 18th. Topics covered included ~lndustry Cluster Business", a new innovative program geared toward improving the manufacturing community. Temecula, Murdeta and Lake Elsinore presented "State of the Cities". Also, energy industry consultants discussed how alternative measures could assist manufacturing dudng California's current energy situation. On May 24th, Mayor Comerchero, Councilman Pratt, and staff attended a tour of the Guidant facilities and lunch. Susan Norton gave an informative presentation on Guidant's history, products and services, and spoke of their community involvement. Staff attended the Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance monthly meeting on May 9th. Marketing items discussed included the CD-Rom, GIS website for the region, SWRC Economic Profile and the Broker Breakfast which will be held on June 20~h. Diane Sessions, of the EDC, Mary Williams, with the Workforce Development Center (WDC) and staff met with Sarah Hankins, HR Consultant for Scott's. Sarah was given a tour of the facility and informed of the services that the WDC provides. Staff provided her with City information and materials to forward to Scott's employees. On May 8th, staff attended a follow-up meeting regarding the recant Southwest Riverside County Career and Manufacturing Expo. The planning committee met and discussed the successful event. There were 285 attendees that responded to a survey, which is approximately 28% of the total number of those in attendanca at the event. The greatest number of attendees were from the following areas: Temecula - 25.6%, Murdeta - 18.2%, Hemet - 9.8%, Riverside - 6.0%, W~ldomar - 5.3%, Lake Elsinore - 4.2%, Perris - 3.5% and Corona 3.2%. A copy of the survey results is available by contacting the City's Economic Development Department. TOURISM Media/Outreach Materials The recent Temecula FAM Tour consisting of concierges from San Diego and Orange County was featured in the May 1 - 15, 2001 edition of San Diego This Week (see attached). Advertising was placed in the following toudsm visitor guides: · San Diego North CONVIS Travel Planning & Conference Guide. · San Diego CONVIS Visitor Guide · Anaheim CONVIS Visitor Guide These publications target the business traveler, vacationer and meeting planner, which reaffirms the goals that the marketing committee has made to gain a larger share of the toudsm industry. Meetin.qs Staff attended the Chamber Tourism Committee Meeting on May 3~. Updates were given on the upcoming travel wdters FAM tour, Balloon & W~ne Festival City/Chamber booth, and vadous reports were given as well as the Chamber Board update. Staff gave a media report which included advertising in The San Diegan and Sign on San Diego website as well as editorial placaments in Association News and Korean Central Daily. Staff also gave an update on the CITYMGR\WOLNICKGLMAY'01 DEPT.REPT.DOC 3 Toudsm CD Rom RFP and Huell Howser's filming of the Gardner ranch and museum for his California Gold sedes. Staff is the chairperson for the Chamber of Commerce FAM Tour Committee. The FAM Tour Committee Meeting was held on May 22"a. The event is scheduled for October 20 - 21, which will tie in with the opening of the Temecula Creek Inn expansion celebration. The celebration will include entertainment, food, and tours of the facility. Temecula Creek Inn will be including additional media representatives as well as their corporate clients to the opening. The travel wdters will experience a wide-variety of toudsm and recreation opportunities dudng the two-day FAM. Staff met with a representative from Touch Screen Marketing on May 4th. The company provides advertising on electronic kiosks, which are found at vadous hotel locations throughout San Diego. Touch Screen Marketing also made a presentation to the Winegrowers Association and to other toudsm groups in Temecula. After reviewing the benefits, staff as well as the other groups felt that it was not the dght time to pursue this further. Staff held a San Diego and Orange County Concierges FAM Tour Follow-up Meeting on May 10~h. All of the toudsm entities that participated with the FAM were invited to evaluate the event and discuss further follow-up opportunities with the concierges. As a follow-up to the concierges visit, the group expressed interest in developing a co-op ad for Where Magazine. This publication is found in the upscale hotel rooms in Orange County and is used by the concierges. The City will pursue co-op partners. Staff met several times with the Chamber, Festival organizers and Joanne's Fabdcs dudng the month to discuss the City/Chamber information booth at the Balloon & Wine Festival. City and Chamber staff worked together on developing the visitor's survey, booth d6cor, materials, signage, staffing, giveaway and booth set-up. City and Chamber staff met on May 29th to interview the vendors that responded to the Tourism CD Rom RFP. At that time they were given an opportunity to make a presentation. The vendors were evaluated on creative and technical qualifications as well as cost. Group 1 Productions was awarded the project. ATTACHMENTS Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Activities Report Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside Activities Report Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance Activities Report Inland Empire Economic Partnership Activities Report Temecula Valley Film Council Activities Report San Diego This Week Article County C1TYMGR\WOLNICKG~vI_AY'01 DEPT.REPT.DOC 4 27450 Ynez Road, Suite 124 Temecula, CA 92591 Phone (909) 676-5090 · Fax (909) 694-0201 June 8, 2001 Shawn Nelson, City Manager City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecuta, CA 92590 Dear Sham, Attached please find the Monthly Activity Report provided as per our contract with the City of Temecula. This is the month of May at a glance: Business Inquiry Highlights: In the month of May, 14 businesses requested information on starting or relocating their business in Temecula. They received a business packet, which includes a copy of the City of Temecula demographic, relocation, housing, rentals, maps, organizations, etc. Committee Highlights: Tourism & Visitors Council: The City of Temecula and Tourism & Visitors Council Balloon & Wine Festival volunteers have been confirm and attended a Temecula Tourism Booth orientation. Volunteers are looking forward to promoting and distributing Temecula tourism information at the event. Visitors of the booth will be given a special gift when they fill out the TVCC's Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival Visitors Survey. FPuM Tour Task Force leaders have met several times to discuss the upcoming FAM Tour. A comprehensive list of Travel Writers has been compiled and will be reviewed to create an invitation list. A fall date has been established due to availability of rooms. Task Force leaders are currently updating the "Big Business" presentation statistics. The purpose of the presentation is to educate the community on the importance and impact tourism has on the community. Education Committee: The Temecula Valley Youth Job Fair held at The Promenade in Temecula on May 19, 2001 was a huge success. Over lbrty-five employers participated, accepted job applications and interviewed on-the-spot. 530 students/youth registered and attended the job thir in hopes for summer and alter-school employment. Statistics are currently being calculated by EDD and EDA's Hire-A-Youth Program to find out how many employment posihous have been tilled through the job fair. Ways & Means Committee: "Talk of the Town" Economic Realities for the Temecula Valley, Thursday, June 14, 2001, 7:30am at Temecula Creek Inn. Economist, John E. Husing, Ph.D will be the t~atured speaker. Husing will be focusing his presentation towards the economic growth and the future of the Temecula Valley. Over 219 guests have confirmed their reservation. Congressman Ron Packard will be presented an award for his contribution to the Temecula Valley. Local Business Promotions Committee: Shop Temecula First campaign runs from June l through July 2, 2001. There are 76 businesses participating. The committee is working on the Success Seminar Series. Business of the month for June is Eastern Municipal Water District and Temecula Valley Insurance. The Mystery Shopper for June is Procraft and the Chamber Spotlight business is Chirospa. Government Action Committee: The Government Action Committee and Board members are in the process of organizing a Pro-Business Campaign Task Force. Chamber representatives attended the 2001 Volunteer Leaders Conference in Sacramento, hosted by the Western Association of Chamber Executives and the California Chamber of Commerce. Good-Morning Sacramento is scheduled for August, 2001 and Good-Morning Washington is scheduled for September 200 I. Membership Committee: Chamber staff and Ambassadors attended 13 P6bbon Cuttings in the month of May. A very successful Mixer was held at Rancho California Vlsi · · . . . on Center on May 16 , 2001 w~th over 200 guests m attendance. "Membership ~s Everybody's Business" a year long drive, encourages everyone to participate, and receive prizes. Next mixer will be on June 20, 2001 hosted by Arizona Tile. The Membership Committee held a Special Topic Breakfast in May, the Energy Crisis Discussion. A survey will be place in the August Temecula Today Newsletter. Tourism Highlights (Bulk brochure distribution) · 2,600 Temecula Brnchures and 225 Visitor Guides to Southwest Soccer Club for distribution to tournament attendees. · 1,500 Temecula Brochures and 150 Visitor Guides to the Temecula Valley Film Council for distribution at the Show Biz Trade Show in Los Angeles. · 250 Winery Brochures and 100 Visitor Guides to Outdoor Resorts for distribution to guests. · 200 Temecula Brochures to Desert Hills Premium Outlet's for distribution to visitor's of the outlet. · 175 Winery Brochures to Bridget Marnane for distribution to wedding guests. · 100 Temecula Brochures, 50 Winery Brochures and 50 Balloon & Wine Festival Flyers to Temeku Hill for distribution to clients. · 100 Temecula Brochures, 100 Visitor Guides and 100 Winery Brochures to Embassy Suites for distribut on to guests. · 100 Temecula Brochures, 100 Winery Brochures and 25 Visitor Guides to the Institute of Management Accountants for distribution at an International Conference. · 100 Temecula Brochures to McMillin Relocations for distribution to clients. · 75 Winery Brochures to Robert Caropino Custom Cabinets [br distribution at a Fire Department Charity Bar-b-que. · 50 Winery Brochures to Regents Park Place [br distribution in relocation packets. · 50 Winery Brochures to Pierson's Country Place tbr distribution to guests. · 50 Temecula Brochures, 50 Winery Brochures and 20 Visit ~ ' , [ssa office tbr distribution at the Washington DC location, or Guides to Congressman Darrell · 411 Vis tot Guides to the Seniors of First Lutheran Temple City Church lbr distribution at a Temecula tour in May. 2 · 30 Visitor Guides, 30 Relocation Guides to Intervention Technologies for distribution to clients. · 30 Visitor Guides and 30 Winery Brochures to Guest House Inn for distribution to guests. · 20 City Maps, 20 Temecula Brochures, 20 Winery Brochures and l0 Visitor Guides to Rancho Temecula Realty for distribution to clients. Activity Report: · Total Tourism calls were up 12 percent in May. · Total Phone calls were up 3 percent in May. · Total Walk-ins were up 63 percent in May. · Total Mailings were 248 in May. · E-mail requests were up 10.36 pement in May. Also attached are the meeting minutes for the Tourism and Visitors Council, Education, Ways & Means, Membership and Marketing Committee, Local Business Promotions, Government Actions and a June edition of Temecula Today! If you have any questions regarding this information, please call me at (909) 676-5090. Thank you. President/CEO Mayor Jeff Comerchero Mayor Pro Tern Ron Roberts Councilman JeffStone Councilman Sam Pratt Councilman Mike Naggar Shawn Nelson, City Managee Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager Gary Thomhill, Deputy City Manager Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator TVCC Board of Directors 3 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT FOR MAY, 2001 PHONE CALLS TOURISM TOURISM REFERRALS Calendar of Events Special Events General Information TOTAL TOURISM CALLS Chamber Vis. Center This Month This Month 441 186 361 1,344 2,332 RELOCATION DEMOGRAPHICS CHAMBER MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL PHONE CALLS * CHAMBER REFERRALS 238 78 1,347 207 4,202 N/A WALK-INS TOURISM CALENDAR OF EVENTS SPECIAL EVENTS GENERAL INFORMATION RELOCATION DEMOGRAPHICS CHAMBER MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL WALK-INS 374 177 97 1,154 264 93 998 216 3,373 175 11 24 229 5 0 1 2 447 MAILINGS TOURISM RELOCATION DEMOGRAPHICS TOTAL MAILINGS 99 89 6O 248 E-MAIL TOURISM RELOCATION MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL E-MAIL WEB PAGE USER SESSIONS 45 42 126 213 N/A GRAND TOTALS PHONE CALLS WALK-INS MAILINGS E-MAIL THIS MONTH 4,202 3,820 248 213 Total Year-To-Date 1,821 922 1,474 5,697 9,914 1,068 361 6,777 946 19,066 N/A 2,112 863 512 5,925 1,208 418 4,527 910 16,475 631 545 4O9 1,585 231 197 565 993 N/A YEAR-TO-DATE 19,066 16,475 1,585 993 CHAMBER REFERRALS N/A ANNUAL VOLUME COMPARISONS ' Chamber Chamber May, 2000 May, 2001 PHONE CALLS TOURISM Tourism Referrals 372 441 Calendar of Events 162 186 Special Events 482 361 General Information 1,062 1,344 TOTAL TOURISM CALLS 2,078 2,332 RELOCATION 157 238 DEMOGRAPHICS 45 78 CHAMBER 1,543 1,347 MISCELLANEOUS 260 207 TOTAL PHONE CALLS 4,083 4,202 CHAMBER REFERRALS N/A N/A Percentage Increase 19 15 -25 27 12 52 73 -13 -20 3 N/A WALK-INS TOURISM 160 374 134 CALENDAR OF EVENTS 101 177 75 SPECIAL EVENTS 84 97 15 GENERAL INFORMATION 663 1,154 74 RELOCATION 107 264 147 DEMOGRAPHICS 66 93 41 CHAMBER 708 998 41 MISCELLANEOUS 134 216 61 VISITOR CENTER WALK-INS 315 447 42 TOTAL WALK-INS 2,338 3,820 63 MAILINGS TOURISM 138 99 -28.26 RELOCATION 117 89 -23.93 DEMOGRAPHICS 102 60 -41.18 TOTAL MAILINGS 357 248 -30.53 E-MAIL TOURISM 28 45 60.71 RELOCATION 58 42 -27.59 MISCELLANEOUS 107 126 17.76 TOTAL E-MAIL 193 213 10.36 * Chamber referrals reflects faxes, walk-ins and phone calls ECONOMIC ALLIANCE TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Madene Best Assistant City Manager City of Lake Elsinore Jim O'Grady Assistant City Manager City of Temecula Lod Moss Assistant City Manager City of Murdeta Stevie Hirdler Marketing Coordinator June 8,2001 SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY MONTHLY MARKETING UPDATE Dear Partners: Please consider this an update on the marketing activities for the Alliance as required in the Southwest Riverside County Marketing for Business Attraction Agreement. Leads: The Alliance had 19 leads in May. Of these leads, five were from IEEP, three from Outlook magazine and eleven from Expansion Management Magazine. 87 cells and/or attempts were made to follow-up on recent and past leads. As a result of Alliance efforts, X-treme Wireless, a wireless DSL service provider is expanding to the City of Murdeta. X-treme will be located in the Y3K Decal Graphixs office on Reagan dudng start-up and will move into an office suite later this year. X-treme Wireless will be able to provide wireless service to a majority of the Murrieta and Temecula area. The Alliance also assisted Leisure Living, a sporting goods superstore, with their employment and training needs. Leisure Living was having difficulties in hiring employees and I put them in touch with the Workforce Development Center Job Developer. Interviews and training started in the Temecula WDC this past week. ConsultinR Mr. Nater responded to the letter sent on behalf of the Alliance, which formally accepted his fee for consulting services, and asked that he provide a list as to what type of expenses he is likely to incur; i.e. travel, meals, etc. He responded by letter and fax stating that he is very excited to start this partnership, unfortunately he will be unable to start until the end of June. However, he stated that he is willing to provide limited consulting from now until the end of June at no charge. A lunch meeting was scheduled for May 16th to discuss in detail the scope of work, extra expenses and the current Alliance direction. Mr. Nater stated that his expenses would be in line of regular expenses incurred by travel, phone etc. A more detailed update will be provided at the Partner meeting on June 13th. CD-ROM An updated scdpt, incorporating all changes and a new timeline was provided at the May gth meeting. It was originally stated that a copy of the CD-ROM would be provided to each Partner for review/comments, however Cutting Edge Marketing has requested that the Partners view the CD-ROM as a group so to better understand the graphics and animation that is being used. The viewing will be scheduled dudng the Alliance meeting on June 13th. Samples of CD-ROM jacket cover will be provided at the June meeting. Trade Shows As of this date, the Alliance has committed to the following trade shows, which I will attend: · BIO 2001, June 25-27, San Diego · Wescon, Oct. 16-18, San Jose, CA Web-site Information was obtained from Anatalio Ubalde, CO0 of GIS Planning in Berkeley for the Alliance web-site. Anatolio will be joining us via conference call at the Alliance meeting on June 13th. A meeting is also scheduled with Kathy Thomas at the Riverside County EDA to learn more about the County owned GIS system and its capabilities. A report of findings will also be provided at the regular meeting. Economic Profile Report I am currently working with Pasqual Guardado, from the Riverside office, obtaining information for the SWRC Economic Profile . Our goal is to have the information, 30th.rep°rt similar to John Husings report, by June Printing and graphic estimates have been obtained and a finished report should be supplied to each Partner by mid to late July. Broker Breakfast The Alliance will host the second broker breakfast on June 20th, from 8 am- 9am at Bear Creek County Club. Updates will be provided from each partner as well as an .Alliance update. 85 invitations were mailed out to local Real Estate professionals and devdlbpers. At the regular partner meeting in May, it was decided that we would charge $10.00 p~r guest to attend. On an ongoing basis I attend the following meetings: Manufacturer's Council Business Relations Committee EDC IEEP Partner meetings Economic Development meetings concerning the Southwest Riverside County region. If you need any additional information or have any questions, please contact me at (909) 600-6066. Sincerely, Stevie Hirdier Economic Development & Marketing Coordinator Copy: Brad Hudson Robin Zimpfer Sarah Mundy Robert Moran Teresa Gallavan INLAND EMPIRE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP · Comments · Public Speaking Engagements 4 21 · Community Outreach 18 116 · Membership Events 1 17 SBAAwards Luncheon · Public Policy Events 1 1 Energy Issues Forum · Committee Meetings 2 14 · Member Visits & Calls / e-mail 2 79 / 4 · Potential Member Meetings 8 52 · Potential Member Letters & Calls 125 473 · New Members 2 14 DPR, Metropolitan Water District · Corporate Marketing · Mailings 4 6 VIP Breakfast · Press Releases 0 0 · Tradeshows 0 2 · Print Advertising Placements 1 10 The Business Press · Other 0 4 · Grants Submitted 6 7 · Economic Impact - Grants Received $0 $0 · Activities I 1 Golf Tournament · Direct Mail I 3 (5,000) Site Selectors · Pdnt Advertising Placements 3 6* · Tradeshows/Trade Associations 0 / 1 6 / ~ · Press Releases 0 2* · Professional Articles 0 1 · Media Relations 0 1 · Television 0 8* Endeavors program (Jan - Apr) · Other 0 0 · Prospect Missions 0 3 · Site Selector Outreach 0 4 · Foreign Attraction Activities 0 0 · Total Leads - 8 - - 37 - i Lead Sources: · Magazines 3 9 · Tradeshows 0 5 · Brokers/Site Selectors 2 7 · Web 0 3 · CATAC 0 5 · Phone 3 6 · IEEP 0 2 · Total Inquiries - 62 - - 1,095 - o Inquiries/Tradeshows 0 / 0 664 / 5 Page 1 of I Last Revision June 4, 2001 INLAND EMPIRE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP Cumulative Comments o Inquiries PrintAds 51 384 o Inquiries - misc. 11 58 · Prospects/Tradeshows 0 11 · Site Tours 1 7 · Attractions 0 1 o Jobs Created 0 500 · Retentions 1 1 o Jobs Retained 0 0 · Financial Investment 0 $24,672,000 · Relocation/Expansion Assists 1 1 · Bio TeclVHigh Tech o Marketing 3 6 TechNews o Inquiries 0 1 o Leads 0 0 o Other 5 16 · School Enrichment StndAwards $129,958 $129,958 · "Callpoint" 800 line: o Employees Requested 5 80* o Training Requests 0 0 o Business Referral Requests 0 1 o Other 1 1 Request for more brochures. · Marketing o Direct Mail 0 1 o Print Advertising Placements 3 8 o Press Releases 1 2 o Television 2 10 KVCR (2X:15) o Tradeshows 1 4 · Other · Jobs Created/Jobs Retained 1 / 0 71 / 39 · Total Economic Impact ~ SBDC and $52,616.31 $8,742,831.31 Export actions combined · Client Activity 217 1,186 · Client Hours 1031.75 4,203.75 · Training Events 15 87 · Training Hours 590 3,477.50 · Training Attendees 200 2,059 · Inland Empire Trade: o Export Actions 0 5 o Financial Impact 0 $4,431,212 · Public Speaking Engagements 0 43 i Quarterly report · Outreach Activity 0 110 Quarterly report Page 2 of 2 Last Revision June 4, 2001 INLAND EMPIRE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP o Inquiries PdntAds 51 384 o Inquiries- misc. 11 58 · Prospects / Tradeshows 0 11 · Site Tours 1 7 · Attractions 0 1 o Jobs Created 0 500 · Retentions 1 1 o Jobs Retained 0 0 · Financial Investment 0 $24,672,000 · Relocation/Expansion Assists 1 1 · Bio Tech/High Tech o Marketing 3 6 TechNews o Inquiries 0 1 o Leads 0 0 o Other 5 16 · School Enrichment StndAwards $129,958 $129,958 · "Callpoint" 800 line: o Employees Requested 5 80* o Training Requests 0 0 o Business Referral Requests 0 1 o Other 1 1 Request for more brochures. · Marketing o Direct Mail 0 1 o Print Advertising Placements 3 8 o Press Releases 1 2 o Television 2 10 KVCR (2X:15) o Tradeshows 1 4 · Other · Jobs Created/Jobs Retained 1 / 0 71 / 39 · Total Economic Impact- SBDC and $52,616.31 $8,742,831.31 Export actions combined · Client Activity 217 1,186 · Client Hours 1031.75 4,203.75 · Training Events 15 87 · Training Hours 590 3,477.50 · Training Attendees 200 2,059 I · Inland Empire Trade: ~ o Export Actions 0 5 o Financial Impact 0 $4,431,212 · Public Speaking Engagements 0 43 Quarterly report · Outreach Activity 0 110 Quarterly report Page 2 of 2 Last Revision June 4, 2001 INLAND EMPIRE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP May Cumulative Comments · Industry Outreach 2 9 · Requests for Locations 187 978 · Permits: San Bernardino/Riverside 13 /; 74 / 22 · Permits: BLM/US Forest Svc 20 71 · Production Days 115 742 · Filming Credits 0 0 · Economic Impact $2,947,100 $20,778,100 · Total Filming Activity - 82 - - 296 - o Features 2 13 o Television 2 11 o Commercials 17 87 o Stills 21 128 o Music Videos 1 4 o Student Films 2 21 o Documentary/Industry 7 32 Videos · Industry Outreach 0 0 · Marketing Activity o E-Newsletter 1 I (Approximately: 450) · Tradeshows 2 6 · Non-Mailed Promotional Materials Distributed at Trade shows o Visitor Guides 1,250 3,510 and Chamber pick-ups o Rack Brochure 0 200 · Mailings Box out to CBU, CPP, LLU, · Visitor Guides 1,944 4,671 and Lewis Operating Corp. · I E Rack Brochures 3 231 · Ads 0 0 · Member Visits 0 0 · Leads 15 1,170 · New Member Prospects 0 1 · New Members 0 0 · Tourism Events 0 0 ~ges made to past reports. Page 3 of 3 Last Revision June 4, 2001 TEMECULA VALLEY FILM COUNCIL ACTIVITIES REPORT May 2001 Members of the Temecula Valley Film Council are Maggi Allen, President; Sunny Thomas, Vice-President; Steve Phelps, Secretary/Treasurer; Pat Marfinez, Judi Staats, Eve Craig, Joe Hohenberger, Patty Slaton and Ellen Watkins The Business of the Film Council · This month we received 158 phone calls; 46 - Film Festival, 22=_ locations information requests, 60- Talent Showcase, 30- council business. · The TVFC web site. www. temeculafilm.org has received 901 "hits" since it opened on September 4, 2000. Photo and link updates are a continuous process. · Temecula Talent Showcase 2001 was performed on May 19th at the CRC. Mayor Comerchero was one of 5 guest judges. 25 Southern California Dance and Song acts performed to an audience of over 500 in the Amphitheater. The event was part of the Arts Festival produced by the Film Council and was considered one of the Highlights of the Festival. · TVFC participated in Variety's "ShowBiz Expo 2001" which was held May 31-Jane 2 in the LA Convention Center. A recent eMail to the Council included pictures and description of this event We distributed local locations photos and filming information. Information about the Film Festival, wineries and the Balloon and Wine Festival was also distributed. Through drawing entries for a Temecula Basket, over 100 additional names will be added to our mailing list. We will be following up on requests for specific locations available in our area. · Production meetings for the Temecula Valley Film and Music "Fest 2001" are continuing on a monthly basis. Film and Music applications are being received daily as well as many inquiry phone calls. Sponsorship procurement is continuing. From information gathered at ShowBiz Expo, the Festival is being reco~ized in the Hollywood community. Jo Moulton was invited to attend and accredited for participation at the Cannes Film Festival and represented the Temecula community in the American Pavillion. Filming in Temecula · Taping of the Temecula Students of the Month was continued in May. This will be a student program at Chaparral High School and continue through the 2001-2002 school year. Details for television are being worked out with City staff. · Living History Productions filmed in Temecula and southern areas for a documentary video on the ButterfieM Stage. A copy of the video will be presented to the Temecula Valley Museum in the near future. · Huell Howser filmed an episode of California Gold at the Temecula Valley Museum and at the old Erle Stanley Gardner Ranch on Pala Road. The episode will air this Summer (we will be notified in advance) and was about Erle Stanley Gardner including interviews with his wife and secretaries. · Elysium Productions, based in Hollywood, has now opened a small production company in Temecula. Their film Rock Creek has been submitted to the Film Festival. They are presently taping a documentary about the serval cat and tiger habitat/reserve in DeLuz. We will continue to support the daily management of filmmaker's requests, and encourage the growing awareness of the industry in this community. It is our goal to generate a higher awareness of the Temecula Area within the context of filmmaking activities, and to present the opportunities and benefits of this production to local merchants and businesses. Respectfully, Maggi Allen President, TVFC Colorful Bazaar del MundO~in ~ IN THE AIR Coastal Balloons. 858-481-9122, 1-800~164. 9122. Fly with FAA-cern- fled pilots over historic ON LAND Beach Club. 704 Yentua Place, Idis$ion Beach. 858-488-5050. 1~is rides everything you need for play, from bike~ br the boardwaJk to surlimarth and wet suits for the ocean. You can rent by the h~r, da}, or week. Baa& Oub is easy to lind; look for the osfle a the beach near the i4itsion Bay UTT'LE 1-800-974-8885 Make your reservations online l~si~aed by Studio M at www. cloud 9shut t le.com ~.,a, .... ~< Son Diego This Week ]9 IEDC " l Southuest Riverside Countyl June 15, 2001 Jim O'Grady City of Temecula PO Box 9033 Temceula, CA 92589 RE: Activity Summary - May 2001 Activities of the EDC for the month of May were as follows: Business Development Staff received the following five business development leads for the month of May: · An in-person visit with Karm Rowe, Director of Franchise Services for Arlington Hospitality, Inc. in Illinois. Ms. Rowe was scouting Southwest Riverside County for oppommities to build a hotel. She had questions about tourism and the area's growth and hospitality needs. Staff provided a broad packet of information on area demographics, Diamond Valley Lake, Lake Elsinore's Albcrhill project, and the business park listings in the region. · A phone inquiry fi.om Caroline Toth who works in a family-owned and operated Mexican restaurant in San Diego. Ms. Toth lives in Temceula and was interested in starting a new business to produce and bottle salsa for consumer consumption. Staff sent a packet of information to help initiate the business process and a referral list of other similar businesses in the area that use mass production/bottling tcehnology and distribution services. Ms. Toth may require a production site once it is determined to mass produce or to out source the product to an established company. · A phone inquiry fi.om Susie Musard who is starting a new skin care business and needed information on production technology of body lotions, soaps, etc. Staff sent a packet of requested information and provided referrals to the Small Business Development Corp. for funding and business plan inquiries, and to Banana Boat in Lake Elsinore for technology inquiries. · A phone inquiry fi.om Rick $ohansen of Hudson RCI to assist Graham Eves who owns Temecula Radiator. Mr. Eves requested assistance with expediting a postponed public hearing with the City of Temecula Planning Department to obtain his grading permit to build his new facility. Staff contacted Knute Noland in the Planning Department to follow-up with Mr. Graham's request. · Staff contacted Vicky Wallace of Totally Themed of Lake Elsinore and provided information on the Diamond Venture Forum program. Ms. Wallace was very interested in submitting an application. Staff provided the application and several referrals fi.om last year's finalist for research purposes. Marketing Outreach Staff attended the following meetings/events: May 2, 2001 - Workforce Development Center Orientation - Staff made an EDC presentation at the annual orientation of the Workforce Development Center in Temecula. The orientation is designed to inform WDC partners what organizations and services are available to the general public. Jim O'Grady City of Temecula Activity Summary - May 2001 Page 2 of 2 · May 3, 2001 - Meeting with Sarah Hankins of Scotts - Staff met with Sarah Haakins of Scotts who is facilitating the hiring of Scotts' employees. Staff and Mary Williams of the EDD provided a tour of the Workforee Development Center. Ms. Hankins has agreed to use the WDC for interviews and orientations. · May 9, 2001 - SWRC Economic Alliance Meeting - Staffattended the monthly Economic Alliance meeting. · May 10, 2001 - Lake Elsinore Valley EDC Connections Luncheon - Staff attended the monthly luncheon at the Diamond Stadium in Lake Elsinore. The program featured the City of Lake Elsinore Economic Gardening Program. Keynote speakers included owners of three Lake Elsinore firms that have successfully grown their businesses through the program. · May 18, 2001 - United Way Steering Conunittee - Staff sits on the 2001 United Way Steering Committee and will continue participation during the annual fundralsing campaign. · May 18, 2001 - SWRC Manufacturers' Council Quarterly Luncheon - "Energy - To Have or Have Not" was the featured topic presented by keynote speakers Paul O'Neal, Energy Consultant, and Jack Sherman of Southern California Edison. Other topics included regional updates in Southwest Riverside County and the Riverside County EDA Industry Clustering Program. · May 30, 2001 - Connectory Presentation and Planning Meeting - Staff met with a group of individuals from various cities and EDCs in the lnland Empire to preview an innovative business-to-business Interact database project created by the East County Economic Development Council. The ECEDC has agreed to help launch a similar project with the Inland Empire partners. Project interest and participation will continue throughout a search for various funding sources. Business Relations · May 3, 2001 - Staff attended the EDC Business Relations Committee Meeting. details.) (See meeting minutes for Administration/Organization · May 8, 2001 - SWRC Career & Manufacturers' Expo - Staff attended the wrap-up meeting for the event. It was determined the event had no less than 1,500 attendees and was deemed very successful by the exhibitor businesses. · May 17, 2001 EDC Board of Directors Meeting held in the Workforee Development Center in Temecula. (See meeting minutes for details.) · May 29, 2001 - Woridorce Development Center Ali-Staff Meeting was held at the Temeeula Center. Topics included mutual issues and interests relative to each agency in the Center. · May 29, 2001 - Workforce Development Center Safety Team Meeting - Staff is a team member of the Temecula WDC Safety Team. Policies and protocol for workplace violence were discussed · Administration - During the month of May, staff managed the daily operations of the EDC office and coordinated details for the annual golf tournament scheduled for June 11. This concludes the activity summary for May 2001. Should you have questions or need further detail, please call me at 600-6064. Sincerely, Diane Sessions EDC of Southwest Riverside County ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOARD OF DIRECTORS GENERAL MEETING Thursday, May 17, 2001 - 9:00 a.m. Workforce Development Center 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, CA BOARD MEMBERS EDC STAFF MEMBERS AND GUESTS Marlene Best, City of Lake Elsinore Ron Bradley, Temecula Connect Dennis Frank, UCR Ron Holliday, City of Murrieta Keith Johnson, Mission Oaks National Bank Dick Kurtz, CDM Group, Inc. Rob Moran, Riverside County EDA Rex Oliver, Murdeta Chamber of Commerce David Rosenthal, SWRC Manufacturers' Council A1 Sabsevitz, Verizon Lorie Schulenberg, California Bank & Trust Gary Youmans, Community National Bank Diane Sessions Joan Pagliai Grant Yates, City of Temecula CALL TO ORDER · Board Vice President David Phares called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. MINUTES · The Board reviewed the minutes of the April 19, 2001 Board of Directors Meeting. Motion was made by Dick Kurtz, seconded by Dennis Frank and carded unanimously to approve the minutes of the April 19, 2001 Board of Directors Meeting as presented. FINANCIAL REPORT * The Board reviewed the April 30, 2001 Financial Report that showed total monthly revenues of $1,924, total expenses of $4,384, and total cash-in-bank of $71,089. Diane Sessions reported unfavorable variances year- to-date in Total Revenues of $2,659 and favorable variances year-to-date in Total Expenses of $6,024. Motion was made by Gary Youmans, seconded by Dennis Frank and carded unanimously to approve the April 30, 2001 Financial Report as presented. · Quarterly Lunch Reconciliation: The Board reviewed the reconciliation report for the April 26, 2001 quarterly lunch, which showed a deficit of revenues over expenses of $134.54. NEW BUSINESSS · Approve Slate of Nominees for 2001 Director Elections: The Board reviewed the slate of thirteen director nominees submitted by the Nominating Committee. Motion was made by Gary Youmans, seconded by Ron Bradley and carried unanimously to approve the slate of nominees for the 2001 Director Elections as presented. Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Board of Directors Meeting - May 17, 2001 Minutes - Page 2 of 4 Approve Official Election Ballot: The Board reviewed the drafic election ballot for the 2001 Director Elections. Motion was made by Al Sabsevitz, seconded by David Rosenthal and carded unanimously to approve the official election ballot for the 2001 Director Elections as presented. Appoint Inspectors of Election: Diane Sessions reported the bylaws required three individuals to serve as Inspectors of Election to certify a quorum of membership and tabulate the votes for board elections. Rex Oliver, Joan Pagliai and Diane Sessions volunteered to serve as inspectors. Motion was made by Dennis Frank, seconded by David Rosenthal and carried unanimously to appoint Rex Oliver, Joan Pagliai and Diane Sessions as Inspectors of Election for the 2001 Director Elections. CONTINUING BUSINESS · Murrieta Chamber Proposal to Request County Redistricting: Ron Holliday reported that appropriate language was pending to create a resolution that would be jointly adopted by Murrieta Chamber of Commerce and Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce relative to the county redistricting. He further stated the effort may be mute, although representation on the issue should reflect in a resolution and be given to Riverside County Board of Supervisors. · Career & Manufacturers' Career Expo Results: Diane Session reported the event was a great success. It was estimated there were no less than 1,500 attendees. Exhibitor businesses were pleased and provided very positive comments on the event surveys. Ms. Sessions provided the Board with copies of the results. · Honorary Member: Gary Youmans reported his conversation with Bob Lopez of Southern California Edison relative to Mr. Lopez's previous director resignation. Mr. Lopez had since rescinded his resignation and agreed to maintain an advisory role with the EDC. Motion was made by Gary Youmans, seconded by Dennis Frank and carried unanimously to appoint the acting district manager of Southern California Edison as honorary EDC member, with the exclusion of voting privileges. · Golf Tournament Update: Gary Youmans reported there were 105 golfers registered to date and all major sponsors and hole sponsors were secured. He asked board members for goody bag donations and raffle prizes. OPEN DISCUSSION · EDC Administrative Update: The Board reviewed the April 2001 EDC Monthly Activity Report submitted by Diane Sessions. · City, County and Chamber Updates: City ofMurrieta - Rex Oliver reported that detours would begin in May for the Jefferson Corridor project; aH lanes on Murrieta Hot Springs were now opened; the Nutmeg Bridge project would cause temporary lane closures on the 1-15 freeway in the evenings of June 5, 6 and 7, with a completion date in December 2001; the Jefferson Corridor project was targeted for completion within 2 years due to a lengthy process of moving previously laid fiber optic cables; the City would attend the ICSC in Las Vegas; construction had begun on the new police station; discussions continued on various corridors proposed for habitat preservation in the RCIP; and the County may not use arbitration to acquire the property for habitat preservation; City of Lake Elsinore - Marlene Best reported the City Council awarded the contract to build the new fire station; budget study sessions were in process; a public hearing was scheduled for construction ora 30,000 sq. ft. site near Collier Avenue and would go to Council next week; the brineline was connected and runs up Railroad Canyon Road to the 1-215 freeway; Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Board of Directors Meeting - May 17, 2001 Minutes - Page 3 of 4 Lake Street construction and rehabilitation was in process, and Mission Trail improvements should be completed within several months; Lake Elsinore EDC Connections lunch was scheduled for June 14 and would feature business management techniques; Highway 74 would be repaved and widened beginning in early summer; and the City's RCIP team and project consultants had met, as well as county staff and consultants who met with land owners, although no resolution was made to change the RCIP habitat proposal. City of Temeeala - Grant Yates reported and energy forum breakfast was scheduled at the Embassy Suites to discuss energy issues; work with Caltrans on major intersections to install battery back-up systems for traffic signals would begin; a Council workshop on capital funding was held last week and the results were positive; First Street bridge was opened; and warning signs were placed at major intersections as part of a study to consider traffic cameras. County ofRiverslde EDA - Rob Moran reported the County would relocate businesses in the French Valley region to the Eastside. SWRC Economic Alliance - Rob Moran reported the next quarterly brokers' breakfast was scheduled for June 20 at Bear Creek Golf Course at 8:00 a.m. Murrieta Chamber of Commerce - Rex Oliver reported results for Chamber elections would take place tomorrow; the installation dinner was scheduled for June 23 at Pala Mesa Resort and would include the awards ceremony for Business and Citizen of the Year; scheduled business luncheons would begin May 23; the annual golf tournament was scheduled for August 24; and the next Mixer was scheduled for June 7 at Munieta Oaks Nursery and sponsored by Lennar Homes. Lake Elsinore Valley Chamber of Commerce - Marlene Best reported that Chris McColley was recently appointed as executive director of the Chamber; the next Mixer was scheduled for May 24; and the City would host a dedication celebration on May 23 at 3:00 p.m. for the new city facility. Temecula Valley Chamber of Co--ce - Ron Bradley reported "Talk of the Town" breakfast was scheduled for June 14 at Temecula Creek Inn at 7:30 a.m. The event would launch a positive pro-business campaign throughout the year to educate the community on the positive economic benefits of business development, and the importance of voting in the November elections; the Chamber will honor Congressman Ron Packard at the event; the golf tournament was a success and had over 200 golfers; the Chamber's new building project is in progress; a youth job fair is scheduled for May 19 from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. at The Promenade, and will offer 700 available jobs and provide workshops to teach teens about resumes and interviews. SWRC Manufacturers' Council - David Rosenthal reported the Council's next luncheon was scheduled for May 18 at 11:30 a.m. at the Hungry Hunter restaurant, with topics on regional updates and energy issues; the Council would adopt a scholarship program for students taking ROP manufacturing courses at local high schools. Mr. Rosenthal suggested a master event calendar be created to include various organization and chamber events. The Board discussed adding links to the EDC website from the various organization website event calendars. Mr. Rosenthal requested that discussion of a calendar project be placed on the June agenda. EI)C Business Relations Committee Update - Michael Lewin reported that visits were on target. He suggested that a program be created to advise manufacturing companies in the region of rolling blackouts as they are reported by Edison. The Board discussed the method Edison would use to warn of power outages using a numbered grid system that would be incorporated on power bills. Grant Yates suggested the City of Temecula forward any warnings of power outages to EDC staff, who could then send emall notices to those companies participating in the proposed program. The Board agreed to place a recurring item on the agenda to discuss power issues and such a program. Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Board of Directors Meeting - May 17, 2001 Minutes - Page 4 of 4 ADJOURNMENT At 10:24 a.m., motion was made Ron Holliday, seconded by Dick Kurtz and carded unanimously to adjourn the board meeting. Respectively submitted by: Diane Sessions Phil Oberhansley Recording Secretary Board Secretary ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY BUSINESS RELATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 9:00 a.m. Workforce Development Center, Executive Board Room 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, CA Committee Members Present: Aaron Adams, City of Temecula Lisa Garcia-Gleissner, Riverside County EDA Keith Johnson, Missions Oaks National Bank Dick Kurtz, CDM Group, Inc. Michael Lewin, Mirau, Edwards, Cannon, Harter & Lewin Mark O'Connor, Lee & Associates Rex Oliver, Murrieta Chamber of Commerce David Rosenthal, SWRC Manufacturers' Council Robert Ryan, Keeton Construction Diane Sessions, EDC Staff Alice Sullivan, Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Gary Youmans, Community National Bank Also In Attendance: Ann Burgner, AFLAC Michelle Steele, Foothill Independent Bank Karen Schneider, Foothill Independent Bank Call To Order · Committee Chair Michael Lewin called the meeting to order at 9:08 a.n~ Welcome · Self introductions were made. Michael Lewin welcomed guests Michelle Steele and Karen Schneider of Foothill Independent Bank and thanked all for attending. Follow-up Action Reports · Waterstone - At the February 2001 meeting, Mark O'Connor reported details of a visit and indicated the business owner's desire to market the company. Diane Sessions reported she would provide several local marketing firms to Lori Moss for follow up. Follow-up is pending. · Theraquip, Inc./Hesseo - Diane Sessions reported that Tracy Picquelle of Manpower Temporary Services followed up with owner Doug Schultz and there were no current employment needs. · Prime EDM - At the December 2000 meeting, Alice Sullivan reported the owner was looking to occupy 1,500 sq. It. of office space. Dick Kurtz reported the company moved to a 1,400 sq. t~. office on Hobie Circle in Murrieta. · North Star Tool, Inc. - At the December 2000 meeting, Alice Sullivan reported the owner was looking to expand their existing building on Winchester and required approval for occupancy. Ms. Sullivan referred the owner to the Knute Noland, City of Temecula Plann/ng Department. Follow up was completed and the issue was closed. · Apex Manufacturing - Owner's m~ajor concern was lack of local affordable housing for employees. It was suggested that Jim O'Grady provide information on the city's First Time Home Buyer's Program. No follow up was reported and the item would be carried until the June 7 meeting. Business Relations Committee Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2001 Page 2 of 5 Company Contact Reports · Driveline Specialties and Machine - Pam Migliozzi reported she had secured an appointment with owner Alfred Noffsinger but it was canceled. She would mail the survey to Mr. Noffsinger for his response. · Carbro Corporation - Keith Johnson reported a phone interview with Andres Plano who is the owner's son. The company manufactures carbide rotary tools used for metal cutting. The business has been in operation for 30 years and 2 years in SW Riverside County. The local company is an offi'shoot of it's parent company located in Lawndale, CA. There are a total of 50 employees at both sites, with six employees at the Murrieta location. Primary customers are aircraft and machine shops, and primary competitors are small shops. The company is self-ranked as medium in its industry. Sales are stable and the economy is ranked as getting better. Principal suppliers are carbide and steel manufacturers. There are no plans to expand the site, although the company foresees increasing the employee base by two. Mr. Piano indicated he was happy in the current location and complimented the City of Murrieta for their assistance in setting up the business. · Binaca Products - Keith Johnson reported an in-person visit with owner Paul Gupta of Binaca Products, a company that manufactures ah'pumps for the biomedical industry. The privately-held corporation was founded in 1987 in New Jersey and relocated to Temeeula in 1993. The reason for relocation was due to a solid customer base on the West Coast and the preferred climate. Binaca was self-ranked small with five employees. Primary customers are in medical-related industries, and primary competitors are located in Georgia and New Jersey. Principal suppliers were reported in the injection molding fields located in Corona, CA. Sales were reported up in the last year due to a new application of products used in a new instrument. The company would increase the number of employees within the foreseeable future. There were no plans to expand the plant. No issues were reported, and the owner was happy doing business locally. · Transducers Techniques - Lisa Garcia-Gleissner reported she contacted owner Gary Baker and he would schedule a visit in the near future. Mr. Baker was relocating the business and could not meet at the present time. · Spenco Machine & Manufacturing - Lisa Garcia-Gleissner reported an in-person visit with owner Bob Spencer. The sole-proprietor company is a machine shop that works in metals, stainless steel and aluminum, and produces parts to small and commercial aerospace, close tolerance industries. In operations for 27 years, Spenco has been in SW Riverside County since March 1993. The company relocated bom Los Angeles County due to family that resides locally. Primary customers are located in Tucson, AZ, and San Diego and Los Angeles, CA. Primary competitors are located outside California within the U.S. The company is self-ranked small with 12 employees. Employees live in the Murrieta/Temecula areas (60%) and in Hemet/Lake Elsinore (30%). Sales were reported down in the past year due to decreased industry demand for manufactured equipment. Principal suppliers are located in Los Angeles, Fontana, Yucalpa and Poway, and provide sheet metal, steel and aluminum. There were no plans to increase or decrease the employee base or to expand the site. Business Relations Committee Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2001 Page 3 of 5 The owner had concerns about energy issues that could increase production costs and gas prices that could cause his workforce to look for jobs closer to home. Power outages were also a concern. The recent energy crisis had caused the owner's major supplier, Rancho Dominguez Equipment, to relocate to New Jersey. Mr. Spencer requested information on the SWRC Manufacturers' Council and the ACCESS Manufacturing Training Center in Hemet. Ms. Garcia-Gleissner provided the information during the visit. David Rosenthal suggested the survey include questions to address altemative power and how the energy crisis would affect business operations. Aaron Adams reported the City of Temecula had a meeting with Edison regarding rolling blackouts. Mr. Adams stated a conservative estimate by Edison of 34 days of possible blackouts was anticipated for the summer months. He further stated the blackouts could last fi.om 60 to 90 minutes per occurrence. The Committee discussed the possibility of notifying businesses when an outage would be reported by Edison. Alice Sullivan reported a meeting would take place in June on energy issues and businesses would receive a survey soon regarding the same. Interventional Technologies - Alice Sullivan reported a phone inquiry with Interveutional Technologies, a local company that was recently purchased by Boston Scientific. The company is a competitor to Guidant in the medical industry. It was further reported that staffing was good and expansion plans to occupy the remaining spaces within a French Valley business park were being considered. Diane Sessions reported she contacted a company principal and sent a package/letter of introduction and requested a site visit. Goal Pr~ Michael Lewin announced that visits and phone interviews in the temh month of the fiscal year were slightly behind as follows: YTD VISIT PHONE Actual 18 18 Goal 20 30 Annual Goal: 27 visits ~ 3 points each + 33 phone interviews ~ 1 points each = 60 visits/calls ~114 points YTD VISIT PHONE POINTS Actual 18 18 72 Goal 27 33 114 Variance - 9 -15 -42 Business Relations Committee Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2001 Page 4 of 5 New Committee Assignments · Point persons assigned for May 2001 were Lisa Garcia-Gleissner - blue binder #1, Gary Yotunans - green binder #4, and Lori Moss - blue binder #3. Michael Lewin returned blue binder #1, Keith Johnson returned green binder #3, Alice Sullivan retained blue binder #5, and Dennis Frank retained green binder #2. · Strategic Visits - Parkside Products - Lori Moss; Top Line Industr'ml Products - Gary Youmans; and ACI Distribution. - Lisa Garcia Gleissner. · Revised Survey - Aaron Adams provided a revised survey that included questions regarding the company's willingness to be a contact to new businesses relocating to the region. Mr. Adams would add the previously discussed item regarding alternative energy sources. The Committee agreed to place a confidentiality discla'lmer on the survey. EDC News and Other Information · EDC Board Update - Gary Youmans reported he and Diane Sessions met with the City of Temecula Budget Sub-Committee to request funding for FY 2001-02. He stated the meeting went well and funding appeared favorable. Diane Sessions requested funding from the Cities of Lake Elsinore, Murrieta and Riverside County as well. Guidant would join the EDC and director elections were in process. Staff would work on a program to increase membership. Plans for the golf tournament were under way and sponsorships were secured. He requested donations for goodie bag items. · City, County & Chamber Updates - City of Temecula - Aaron Adams reported there would be no Council meeting on the 22ha; the Front Street Bridge dedication was held on May 2 and the bridge would see approximately 5,000 cars per day, which would significantly alleviate traffic in the Diaz Road area; plans for the Stay America Hotel were approved; and Hank's Hardware expand. City of Murrieta - Rex Oliver reported the Annual Firemen's Barbecue was held the previous weekend and was a success; the Town Center Ad Hoc Committee would meet to work with citizens and businesses in the downtown area; engineering for the new police department was slightly delayed; the City budget would go before the Council this month; Assemblyman Dennis Hollingsworth and Senator Ray Haynes were working on a refund for the City's overpayment of taxes; Jefferson Corridor project was in progress; 900 acres of eommereial/industrial properties were targeted for fast-track; the City would attend the International Shopping Convention in Las Vegas this month; a 45-day moratorium on development was implemented for properties adjacent to the Murrieta Creek due to zoning issues with a property owner; and the City would register two golf teams at the EDC golf tournament. Murrieta Chamber of Commerce - Rex Oliver reported Chamber representatives traveled to Sacramento for lobby activities; the first Chamber business luncheon was scheduled for May 22 at Bear Creek Golf Course; the Chamber Installation Dinner would be held the end of June; the Chamber golf tournament was scheduled for August 24; and election ballots for Chamber directors would be mailed next week. City of Lake Elsinore - No report available. Riverside County EDA - No report available. Temecula }'alley Chamber of Commerce - Alice Sullivan reported the Chamber would host an energy crisis discussion on May 23; the Education Committee was working on a job fair; "Talk of the Town" would feature Dr. John Husing and would include a State of the Chamber; the trip to Sacramento was very interesting and provided an opportunity to meet with Business Relations Committee Meeting Minutes - May 3, 2001 Page 5 of 5 Assemblymen Hahn and Pacheco about the tax refund; the Chamber would implement a pro-business campaign through year's end to educate the citizens on business development and the importance of voting at the upcoming elections; and the Chamber would host a candidate forum prior to the Council elections in November. · SWRC Manufacturers' Council - David Rosenthal reported the SWRC Career & Manufacturers' Expo was a great success; Maria D'Avanzo would be leaving The Press-Enterprise and a lunch was planned in her honor for May 9 at 11:30 a.m. at Temecula Creek Inn; the next Council luncheon would be on May 18 at 11:30 a.m. at Hungry Hunter Restaurant in Temecula and would feature a State-of-the-Region update, a County project on industry clustering, and energy crisis issues; and the Council would discuss a scholarship campaign for students enrolled in ROP manufacturing courses at local high schools. · SWRC Economic Alliance - No report available. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:15 a.m. APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Howard Windsor, City Fire Chief June 26, 2001 Monthly Departmental Report RECOMMENDATION: Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Fire Department's Monthly Activity Report for the month of May, 2001. Response Statistics for May, 2001 Structure Fire 5 3 6 2 16 125 Vegetation Fire 10 4 1 1 16 46 Vehicle Fire 0 3 11 51 Fire - Other 1 5 9 61 Medical Aid 46 83 238 1290 Traffic Collisions 4 8 65 334 4 1 13 Fire Menace Standby Public Service Hazmat Ringing Alarm Responses Outside of the Cit TOTAL 4 4 1 2 54 55 23 30 3 5 4 2 1 0 27 29 32 39 173 59 4 5 15 103 0 0 1 N/A 6 2 64 473 57 63 191 N/A 164 129 173 639 2542 Medic Squad 84 Response Statistics Medic Squad 84 Time Statistics Medical Aids 180 850 Traffic Collisions 41 188 Public Service Assists I 1 29 Fire Menace Standby's 3 8 Structure Fires Ringing Alarm Vegetation Fire Vehicle Fire 24 Refuse Fire Hazmat TOTAL 268 2 38 123 1 4 2 6 2 7 2 4 1257 20 min Average Response Time 5.16 N/A Longest Response Time N/A Medic Squad Cancelled Prior to Patient Contact 77 429 Average Wait Time for 4.4 AMR min N/A Medic Squad on Scene Prior to AMR- Medical Aids and Traffic Collisions 119 446 Performed *ALS prior to AMR's Arrival 52 197 *ALS - Advanced Life Suppo~ Medic Squad Comments: · On six occasions the Medic Squad was on scene greater than 10 minutes before the arrival of AMR. The longest wait was 14 minutes. · Medic Squad 84 had 8 response times over 10 minutes, two of which were 20 minutes. These extended response times were due to mechanical problems and a dispatch error. Personnel 1 - Battalion Chief/Fire Marshal 3 - Fire Safety Specialist Fire Prevention 1 - Captain/Deputy Fire Marshal 2- Fire System Inspectors 1 - Office Technician HI Fire Plan Check Statistics Fire Plan Check Building TI Fire Plan Check Building Fire Plan Check Misc. 22 113 20 72 18 143 Fire Under Ground Water Plan Check 7 43 Fire Over or Under Ground Tank Plan Check 0 4 Fire Sprinkler NCOM Plan Check 6 45 Fire Sprinkler TI Plan Check 16 46 Fire Hood Duct Plan Check 3 14 Fire Spray Booth Plan Check Fire Special Suppression Plan Check Fire Alarm Plan Check Planning Case Plan Review Fire Code Permits 1 2 0 0 10 46 19 0 104 4 TOTAL 122 6~6 Fire Prevention (Continued) Fire Inspection Statistics Fire Prevention Final 22 97 Fire Prevention Shell Fire-Underground Hydro Fire Thrust Block Fire Over Head Hydro Fire Flow Fire Flush Fire Sprinkler Final Fire Weld Inspection Fire Hood Duct Final Fire Pre- Wire Fire Alarm Final Fire Spray Booth Final Fire Safety Inspection Fire State Mandated Inspection Fire Special Evems Inspection Fire Piping Hydro Fire Shear Valves Fire Over/Under Tank Final Fire Special Suppression System Fire Special Project Investigations Fire Administrative - Meetings etc... 5 57 3 18 1 20 7 46 0 2 2 18 20 63 4 17 1 4 9 28 14 66 0 3 7 48 0 13 12 24 0 1 0 0 1 5 0 1 0 0 0 8 0 9 0 3 108 Fire Misc. Inspections Engine Co. Follow Up Enforcement TOTAL APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: ClTY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager June 26, 2001 Monthly Report The following are the recent highlights for the Planning Division of the Community Development Department in the month of May 2001. CURRENT PLANNING ACTIVITIES New Cases The Division received 4.~7 new applications for administrative, other minor cases, and home occupations and 10 applications for public hearings during the month of May. The new public hearing cases are as follows: Development Plan Conditional Use Permit 8 2 Status of Major Projects Staff is working with project applicants to address any remaining issues and prepare the following cases for public hearing before the Planning Director or Planning Commission: The Villages of Temecula - The design and construction of a 160-unit, 2-story apartment complex w/clubhouse and pool, on the south side of Rancho California Road, between Cosmic Drive and south extension of Moraga, east of the proposed Temecula Ridge Apartments; and a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to Planned Development Overlay for an office/retail component along Rancho California Road. The community meeting with adjacent property owners and homeowners' associations was held on February 8, 2001. The applicant is preparing additional information in response to questions and concerns raised at the community meeting. Harveston (Formerly known as Sweetwater - Lennar Communities) Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment and Development Agreement- located north of Santa Gertrudis Creek and west of ChapparaJ High School. The response to comments on the draft EIR is currently being prepared and the Development Agreement deal points are currently being negotiated with the applicant. R:~MONTH LY.R PT~2001 ~May 2001 .doc 1 Roripaugh Ranch Annexation, Specific Plan, Environmental Impact Report and Development Agreement: Staff has made comments on the draft Specific Plan. The Environmental Impact Report will be recirculated. The Development Agreement deal points are being negotiated with the applicant. Bel-Villaggio Retail Center- This 116,000 square foot retail center on 18 acres is located in the Regional Center Specific Plan on Margarita Road. The Planning Commission approved the project on January 31,2001. Meadowview Golf Course -On June 7, 2000, the Planning Commission continued the case off calendar at the request of the applicant. The applicant is preparing a focused EIR, anticipated to be completed in June, 2001. Hilton Garden Hotel - To construct a 100-room hotel on 1.38 acres located on the west side of Rancho Highland Drive, west of Ynez Road. The accompanying General Plan Amendment is on hold with the City Council. Palomar Hotel - Remodel of the existing Palomar Hotel to the Palomar Inn (a bed and breakfast) located on the northeast corner of Front and Fifth Streets. DRC meeting was held en January 27, 2000. Staff is awaiting re-submittal. Southern California Storage - Planning application to build a 65,000 self-storage facility intending to serve the commemial and industrial businesses. Located on Winchester Road west of Diaz Road. Plans were resubmitted for review on May 31,2000. A meeting was held with the applicant on August 16, 2000. A third submittal was turned in for review November 22, 2000. The project was approved by the Planning Commission on February 21,2001. Waltz Industrial Building - A 9,000 concrete tilt-up facility for N/C Industries located on the Southside of Roick Drive and west of Winchester Road. The applicant resubmitted on May 17, 2001 and a DRC meeting was held June 4, 2001. Margarita Medical - A proposal for 12,319 square foot medical office complex on the southeast corner of N. General Kearney and Margarita Road. A DRC meeting was held November 30, 2000. Planning Commission approved the project April 4, 2001. Accel/Gentek Industrial Building - A proposal to build two attached tilt-up industrial buildings totaling 33,527 square feet on two one acre lots on the south side of Winchester Road and west of Diaz Road. A DRC meeting was held November 30, 2000. Planning Commission approved the project April 18, 2001. Sunridge Community Church - An 88,918 square foot religious facility in two phases for worship, programs, Sunday school, weddings and funerals, consisting of a single-story, 1,500-seat auditorium with nursery; a two-story, 21-room education facility for elementary through junior high grades; a single-story, 9,840 square foot multi-purpose building with kitchen, lockers and assembly room; a two-story, 10,622 square foot administration and Sunday school building; a single-story, 6,163 square foot youth center building; and a single-story, 1,040 square foot storage and maintenance building. The proposed site is on the west side of the extension of Butterfield Stage Road, 1,400 feet north of Rancho California Road. A community meeting was held on January 11,2001. Staff has requested a supplemental EIR, redesign of the project and another community meeting. R :',M O NTH LY. R P'~2.00 l'vM ay 2001.doc 2 Etco Plaza - The design and construction of two speculative buildings, each at 23,500 square feet, on two lots. The lots are located on the east side of Madison Avenue at the end of Sanborn Avenue. The project went to DRC on November 30, 2000 and is scheduled for Planning Commission review. This project was continued off calendar on March 28, 2001 for redesign. AT&T Wireless Services Facility- Proposal to install a 67' high mono-pole on a 1' high base with six (6) cellular antennas (1 'X 8' high panels). The supporting equipment will be enclosed within an AT&T Wireless equipment shelter. The prefabricated enclosure will be enclosed within a retaining wall. Located at 44501 Rainbow Canyon Drive near the Temecula Creek Inn and adjacent to Interstate 15. DRC comments were issued on December 28, 2000, waiting for applicant to re-submit. Target Store - Planning Application to design and construct 6,627 square foot expansion that will provide additional stock room and retail space. Located at 29676 Rancho California Road in the Rancho California Town Center. Project has been approved and is in plan check. Rancho Community Church - Application to design, construct and operate a church and school campus on a 39-acre site. The overall proposal will include 279,967 square feet of religious and school facilities and a 477,449 four story parking structure. The site will be developed in a number of phases beginning with a 1,500 seat interim sanctuary with assembly room and a nursery; a four story, 42,716 square foot administration building, 15 modular classroom buildings, a 9,695 square foot preschool, a 300 seat, 5,858 square foot chapel, two field house buildings totaling 10,000 square feet, and lighted athletic fields. Future phases include permanent first through twelfth grade classroom facilities, a gymnasium, a 3,500 seat, 43,727 square foot worship center, and a parking structure. This project is located on the north side of State Highway 79 South east of Jedidiah Smith Road. DRC meeting was held on December 14, 2000, and staff is awaiting resubmittal. Margarita Medical Condo Development - A request to divide a 3.09 acre parcel into two (2) lots. Located on the southeast corner of Margarita and North General Kearny Roads. One of the two lots has a Development Plan proposal under review at this time, PA00-0417, for the development of a 12,319 square foot medical office complex capable of being converted to medical office condo units. This is within Campos Verdes Specific Plan. This item went to DRC December 7, 2000. This project was approved at Directors Hearing on April 15, 2001. La Paz Commercial Center - Planning Application to design and construct four office buildings ranging in size from 10,200 square feet to 11,500 square feet on approximately 3.76 acres of vacant land. Located at the corner of State Highway 79, La Paz Street, and Vallejo Avenue. DRC for this project was held on December 7, 2000. We are waiting for the applicant to resubmit. Overland Self-Storage - A Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for the design, construction and operation of a 43,174 square foot mini-self storage facility with office, resident manager's quarters and R.V. storage spaces. Located approximately 155 feet north of the intersection of Commerce Center Drive and Overland Drive. This item went to DRC on December 7, 2000. Staff is awaiting resubmittal. R :',iv10 N TH LY. R PT~?.00 l'Wlay 2001.doc 3 Temecula Valley RV - To gain feedback for future expansion of Temecula Valley RV. This expansion would include the following uses: RV sales and rentals, RV and Boat storage, and truck rentals. This project is located on Old Front Street south of the existing Temecula RV. Pre-application DRC was held on December 7, 2000. Applicant submitted CUP on March 2, 2001. Norm Reeves Acura - Planning Application to design and construct a new 7,675 square foot building, on approximately 2.0 acres of improved land along the "Ynez Corridor Car Dealership" area. The site requires demolition of asphalt and various curb and landscape areas. Located on the west side of Ynez Road, one lot north of the centerline intersection of Solana Road and Ynez Road. Applicant re-submitted on February 7, 2001. Sent incomplete letter for re-submittal on February 28, 2001. Staff is anticipating a July Directors Hearing. Norm Reeves Honda - Planning Application to renovate an existing 10,156 square foot building. Design and construct a new additional 10,156 square foot building, ultimately proposing a 20,795 square foot Honda Dealership on 2.63 acres of improved land along the "Ynez Corridor Car Dealership" area. Located on the west side of Ynez Road, one lot south of the centerline intersection of Solana Rd and Ynez Road. This project, was approved at Director's Hearing on April 26, 2001. Kinder Care Day Care - Planning Application to design and construct a 10,000 square foot day care center within the Winchester Meadows Shopping Center. This project is waiting to be scheduled for Planning Commission pending submittal requirements. Scott Electric Building - A 15,300 square foot industrial building on a 1.198-acre site located at 42142 Roick Drive. Located on the north side of Roick (third pad) east of Winchester Road. Approved at Planning Commission on February 21,2001. Promenade Pad "H" Retail Buildings - To design, construct and operate a 14,200 square foot retail building for multiple tenants. South side of Winchester Road (State Highway 79 North), east of Ynez Road, on Outlot "H" along the Ring Road of the Promenade Mall. This was first seen as PR00-0019 in August. Second review received on December 20, 2000. Second comment letter was sent on January 25, 2001. The project was approved on April 13, 2001. Alpine Gardens East - Extension of Time for PA 97-0420 Located on the northwest corner of Loma Linda and Pala Roads. We are waiting for the applicant to resubmit. Tentative Parcel Map No. 29822 - Planning Application to subdivide 5.0 vacant acres of property within the Very Low Density Residential (VL) zone into 2 parcels. (2.5 net acres each). Located on Liefer Road. This project went to DRC on October 19, 2000. The Applicant is revising his proposal and has not resubmitted. · Tentative Parcel Map No. 29949. The location is south east of Lolita Road and West of Calle De Velardo. Map was approved at Director's Hearing on March 8, 2001. Extended Stay America - To design and construct a 3 story building approximately 48,000 square feet (104 units) located on the northeast corner of Jefferson and Overland. Applicant has submitted CUP. DRC scheduled for February 8, 2001and comments were mailed, waiting for re-submittal. Planning Commission approved this project on May 2, 2001. · Margarita Village South - An 8,700 square foot one-story office building; 10,000 square foot one-story office building; 20,000 square foot two-story office building; an 8,000 square foot restaurant; a 150 + room hotel; and a future 7,400 square foot office located at the northeast R:~VlONTH LY.R PT',2001',May 2001.doc 4 corner of Overland Drive and Margarita Road. The DRC meeting has been held and comments given to the applicant. We are awaiting resubmittal. Western Bypass Tract - A Tentative Tract Map 28473 to subdivide 39.94 acres of Light Industrial (LI) zoned property into 13 lots. The property is accessible from Roick Drive west of Winchester Road. An initial study is underway and the project may be scheduled for Planning Commission in mid March. Hampton Inn Suites - Application to design, and construct a 4-story, 75-room hotel building approximately 41,100 square feet. Located on the northeast corner of Jefferson Avenue and Winchester Road Adjacent to the 1-15 off-ramp. DRC meeting was held on January 11,2001. Staff is awaiting resubmittal. Vail Ranch Center Phase III - Design and construct 3 new pad buildings for retail activity totaling approximately 25,000 square feet to include an 18,000 square foot Powerhouse Gym architecture design is approved and awaiting final landscape plans and grading plan submittal prior to building permit issuance. Landscape inspections expected to be completed June 2001. Burger King - Conditional Use Permit Application to design and construct a 4,691 square foot drive thru fast food restaurant on Pamel 2, PM 29431, Paseo del Sol. This project is still within its first 30-day review period. Inland Terrace Investment Group - Development Plan to design and construct a 55,897 square foot office building located on the Western Bypass Parcel 4 of PM 28473. The project was discussed at DRC on May 31,2001. Chamber of Commerce - Development Plan Application to design and construct a 6,910 square foot office building for the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce located on the northeast corner of Ynez Court, east of Ynez Road. The project will be discussed at DRC on June 14, 2001. Tentative Tract Map - Tentative Tract Planning Application to subdivide planning areas 1,2, 5, 6 and 9 of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan into 631 dwelling units. The project is still under the first 30-day review period. Tarbell Realtor- Administrative Development Plan to design and construct a 6,100 square foot office building on Parcel 4 of PM 25431, Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan. Planning Staff approved the project on May 21,2001. Temecula Radiator and Auto Repair- Development Plan application to design and construct a 20,000 square foot two-story automotive and RV repair facility on a 1.8 acre vacant parcel on Rancho Way between Diaz Road and Business Park Drive. The project was discussed at DRC on February 8, 2001 and approved by Planning Commission on June 4, 2001. Hank's Hardware and Lumber Supply- Development Plan application to design and construct a 20, 000 square foot two-story retail hardware and lumber supply building on 1.1 acre vacant parcel on Enterprise Circle South west of Jefferson Avenue and south of Winchester Road. The proposed project was discussed at the February 15, 2001 DRC meeting and is awaiting plan revisions. · Southwest Traders - Development Plan application to design and construct a 64,630 square foot building for the purpose of expanding the existing Southwest Traders business. The project was approved at Planning Commission on June 6, 2001. R :~VlONT H LY. R P'r~?.001 ~la y 2001 .doc 5 Intense Cycles, Inc. - Development Plan application to design and construct a new 13, 000 square foot bicycle manufacturing and distribution building on a vacant 1.25 acre parcel at the northwest corner of Ridge Park Drive and Vincent Moraga Drive. The proposed project was reviewed at the March 22, 2001 DRC meeting. Staff is awaiting resubmittal. Villages at Pasco del Sol Bassett Furniture Building H - Administrative Development Plan to design and construct a 30,000 square foot retail home furniture store as part of a phased development plan commercial center located at the northwest corner of Campanula Way and Camino del Sol. The proposed project was reviewed at the May 3, 2001 DRC meeting. The applicant resubmitted plans on May 25, 2001 based on the DRC comments. Staff is awaiting formal approval of the center design guidelines and landscape plan prior to final project approval. Castle Pines at Temeku Hills - Product Review application of single family home design for 85 lots with nine individual floor plans and exterior designs located on Royal Oaks Drive at Meadows Parkway. The proposed project was submitted on May 30, 2001. Small Business Assistance Rhythm and Brews: Staff helped the owner of this proposed brewpub apply for redevelopment funds under the Fa(;ade Improvement Program to help him with construction of his firewall, ADA bathroom requirements and signs. The plumbing, electrical and mechanical and structural permits for this project have been issued and building inspections are progressing. An April opening is anticipated. M and M Art & Frame: Planning Staff worked with the designer of new signs for this business located in Old Town and helped him obtain approval from the Old Town Local Review Beard and funding through the Facade Improvement program. · Waves of Beauty: Helped owner of this existing business obtain approvals for signs at a new location in Old Town Temecula. · Old Tin Box: Met with owner regarding the design and approval of signs for this new business in Old Town. · X's and O's: Staff met with the owners of this new business in Old Town and helped them develop artwork and obtain approvals for new signs. · James Jewelers: Expedited the approval for a new sign for this business located in the Old Town Temecula Emporium Building. · Times of Our Lives Antiques: Staff helped the owners of this new Old Town business obtain approval and funding for signs through the Fagade Improvement Program. Special Events Permits · Taste of the World, Tower Plaza, June 17, 2001 R:~vIONTH LY.R PT~20OI'Wlay 2001 .doc 6 Massaqe Establishment Permits · Tracy and Kelly's Massage: Accepted an application for this proposed business to be located at 30630 Rancho California Road, Suite F-502. Special Projects & Lon.q Ranqe Planning Activitie,~ The Division also commits work efforts toward larger scale and longer time frame projects for both private and public purposes. These activities can range from a relatively simple ordinance or environmental review to a new specific plan or a general plan amendment. Some of the major special projects and long range planning activities are as follows: Housing Element Update: The City has received the comments of the State Department of Housing and Community Development and is preparing the draft Element for the Planning Commission's consideration. · Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the City Redevelopment Plan: This activity is on hold pending the update of a General Plan Circulation Analysis. Comprehensive General Plan Update: The consultant selection committee has recommended that Cotton Bridges & Associates be hired for this project. Staff is in the process of working with the General Plan Subcommittee to finalize the scope of work. The contract was presented to the Council in March. Traditional Neighborhood Development Ordinance: Final changes are being made prior to scheduling this item for a Planning Commission workshop in the fall of 2000. This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. Vail Ranch Annexation: LAFCO approved the annexation on November 16, 2000. City Council conducted a protest hearing and approved rates and charges on February 13, 2001, no protests were received. Staff is coordinating with the County for the transfer of services by July 1,2001. Surface Mining Ordinance: The staff and City Attorney had been making final changes based upon feedback from the State prior to submitting this item to the Council for their consideration. This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. Application Fee Study: Staff has provided information to the consultant and Finance Department about changes to our current fee schedule and is currently awaiting revised information. · Hillside Development Policy: The policies are being examined for integration into the draft- grading ordinance. This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. Multi-species Habitat Conservation Planning Efforts for Western Riverside County: Councilman Naggar and Planning Staff are attending committee meetings and monitoring the process of determining conservation reserve needs. Comments regarding these meetings are presented during Council Business on the last meeting of the month. City Council comments have been provided to the County on the project alternatives. Large Family Day Care Home Facility Ordinance: The Planning Commission considered this Ordinance amendment at their February 2, 2000 meeting. In the review process targeted for the April 4, 2001 Planning Commission meeting. R:~VlONTH LY. RPT~200 l'W1ay 2001 .doc 7 · Citywide Sign Inventory: The process of inventorying signs is pending additional staff resources. County Project Reviews: Staff continues to allocate significant resources to review projects within the County and other local jurisdictions that could affect the City of Temecula. Information regarding these projects will be forwarded under separate cover labeled Projects of Concern. · Helium Balloon Ordinance Amendment: Scheduled for March 28.2001 Planning Commission meeting. General Plan Annual Report: The City Council approved the report on February 13, 2001. Staff is currently preparing a submittal to the State Department of Housing and Community Development. · Southside Specific Plan: This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. · Development Code Amendment: Is currently being developed by staff and will include reconsideration of the current compact parking space requirements. · Paloma de Sol Specific Plan, General Plan, and Tentative Tract Map Amendments to relocate commercial and residential areas within the project boundaries. Villages at Paseo del Sol - Staples Office Supplies (Building G) -Administrative Development Plan to design and construct a 23,942 square foot retail store as part of a phased development plan commercial center located at the northwest corner of Campanula Way and Camino del Sol. The proposed project was reviewed at the May 3, 2001 DRC meeting. The applicant resubmitted plans on May 25, 2001 based on the DRC comments. Staff is awaiting formal approval of the center design guidelines and landscape plan prior to final project approval. Tentative Parcel Map 30208 - A commercial subdivision creating 23 lots on 30.14 acres for the project area located along the northeast corner of Margarita Road and Overland Drive at the Promenade Mall. · Tentative Parcel Map 30107 - A commercial subdivision of 40.09 acres into 5 lots on the southeast corner of Overland Drive and Margarita Road. General Plan Amendments · Rancho Highlands Drive. Awaiting City Council hearing date. A request to reduce the size of Via Industria (Western Bypass Corridor) north of Avenida Alvarado has been submitted and has been on hold pending the approval of a revised Circulation Element. Geoqraphic Information System (GIS) Activities In light of performance issues relating to Fire Department's MaxResponder routing and pre-plan system Staff has simultaneously begun testing an alternative program from Plant Equipment. Testing of these programs will lead to the ultimate implementation of a GIS based routing and pre-plan system on all Fire response units. Live testing on the mobile fire units using both R:~IONTH LY.RPT~?.001 Wlay 2001 .doc 8 competing systems is currently underway. Recent mapping products include: CIP location maps for Finance Department Banner location map for City Manager/Public Works Vacant land map for City Manager CFD 88-12 map for Finance Department Street name sign replacement map for Public Works Vicinity, zoning and land use maps for Planning Conflict of Interest map for Commissioner Chiniaeff Old Town vicinity maps for Redevelopment Signal location maps for Public Works Interconnect Infrastructures map for Public Works Commercial property status map for Council Member Indian lands location map for Planning Sphere of Influence map for Fire Department Vicinity aerial map for Assistant City Manager Vail Ranch Annexation median maintenance map for TCSD Vicinity map for Human Resources Webpage map request for Planning Rod Run map for Fire/Planning Departments · Staff continues with ongoing data layer development and maintenance. R:~vIONTH LY.R PT~2001'Wlay 2001 .doc 9