05-24-21 CC Agenda Packet_FINAL1.CALL TO ORDER
2.ROLL CALL
3.OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME
This is the appropriate time for members of the public to make comments regarding the items on
the consent calendar or items not listed on this agenda. Pursuant to the Brown Act, no action will
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX (310) 377-7288
AGENDA
Regular Council Meeting
CITY COUNCIL
Monday, May 24, 2021
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
7:00 PM
This meeting is held pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20 issued by Governor Gavin Newsom on
March 17, 2020.
All Councilmembers will participate by teleconference. The meeting agenda is available on the City’s
website. A live audio of the City Council meeting will be available on the City’s website. Both the
agenda and the live audio can be found here: https://www.rolling-
hills.org/government/agenda/index.php.
Members of the public may observe and orally participate in the meeting via Zoom and or submit
written comments in real-time by emailing the City Clerk’s office at cityclerk@cityofrh.net. Your
comments will become part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name, but please
do not provide any other personal information that you do not want to be published.
Zoom access: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87227175757?
pwd=VzNES3Q2NFprRk5BRmdUSktWb0hmUT09
Or dial (669) 900-9128
meeting ID: 872 2717 5757 passcode: 780609
Audio recordings to all the City Council meetings can be found here:
https://cms5.revize.com/revize/rollinghillsca/government/agenda/index.php
While on this page, locate the meeting date of interest then click on AUDIO. Another window will appear. In the
new window, you can select the agenda item of interest and listen to the audio by hitting the play button. Written
Action Minutes to the City Council meetings can be found in the AGENDA, typically under Item 4A Minutes.
Please contact the City Clerk at 310 377-1521 or email at cityclerk@cityofrh.net for assistance.
Next Resolution No. 1276 Next Ordinance No. 371
1
take place on any items not on the agenda.
4.MEETING MINUTES
4.A.REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 10, 2021.
RECOMMENDATION: Present and Approve
5.CONSENT CALENDAR
Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may
request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council
Actions.
5.A.PAYMENTS OF BILLS.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.
5.B.REPUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLING TONNAGE REPORT FOR APRIL 2021.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.
5.C.NV5 FIRST CONTRACT AMENDMENT - SEPULVEDA MONITORING.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
6.PRESENTATION
COMMEND CREST ROAD WEST GATE ATTENDANT DAVID SAEI FOR HIS
ACTIONS ON APRIL 28, 2021 AND FOR HIS SERVICES TO THE COMMUNITY.
7.COMMISSION ITEMS
7.A.ZONING CASE NO. 20-08: RESOLUTION NO. 2021-01 FOR DISCRETIONARY
APPROVAL TO MODIFY PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ENTITLEMENTS REQUIRING
SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR 1) INCREASE TO SIZE OF RESIDENCE BY 1,100
SQUARE FEET; 2) INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF GRADING BY 7,520 CUBIC
YARDS; AND 3) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A NEW CABANA EXCEEDING
200 SQUARE FEET LOCATED AT 20 UPPER BLACKWATER CANYON ROAD (LOT
101-RH), ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (IANNITTI).
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.
2021-05-10_CCMinutes.P.docx
Payment of Bills.pdf
0421 - Rolling Hills YTD Tonnage Report.pdf
Professional_Services_Agreement___1st Amendment to PSA w NV5_v1
05.20.2021.DOCX
First Amendment MS4 Sepulveda Outfall Monitoring 5.5.2021.pdf
NV5_Monitoring_Signed Agreement 2020.pdf
(Revised) Development Table - ZC 2020-08_May 24, 2021.docx
Modification Table - ZC 20-08_May 24, 2021.docx
20 Upper Blackwater Plans.pdf
PC_Resolution_2021-01.pdf
Rendering 1_Cabana from across UBW.png
Rendering 3_Driveway curb.png
Rendering 2_Coral wall behind fence.png
Rendering 4_Upper wall planted.png
2
8.PUBLIC HEARINGS
9.OLD BUSINESS
9.A.RECEIVE AND FILE AN UPDATE TO THE DESIGN OF THE 8" SEWER MAIN
ALONG PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD/ROLLING HILLS ROAD; AND CONSIDER
AND APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WILLDAN TO
STUDY POTENTIAL CONNECTIONS TO THE 8" SEWER MAIN FROM POTENTIAL
SEWERS LINES ALONG MIDDLERIDGE LANE AND WILLIAMSBURG LANE.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.
9.B.REVIEW ASSESSMENT REPORT FROM PACIFIC ARCHITECTURE AND
ENGINEERING, INC. AND CONSIDER OPTIONS TO REPLACE A NON-WORKING
EMERGENCY STANDBY GENERATOR.
R E C O M M E N D AT I O N : Staff recommends that the City Council revisit the
Assessment Report from Pacific Architecture and Engineering, Inc. on the existing
standby generator, including answers to questions City Council had upon the initial
review of this report and consider the options for replacement and permitting, and
provide direction to staff.
9.C.REPORT ON MAY 19, 2021 FIRE FUEL COMMITTEE MEETING.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
10.NEW BUSINESS
10.A.RECEIVE AND FILE ROLLING HILLS HARDENING THE HOME VIDEOS
PRODUCED BY THE WORLD WISE PRODUCTION.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
10.B.REPORT BY BUDGET/AUDIT/FINANCE COMMITTEE ON MEETING HELD ON
MAY 19, 2021.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and File
10.C.CITY COUNCIL FY 21-22 BUDGET WORKSHOP.
RECOMMENDATION: Review the proposed Fiscal Year 2021/22 budget and provide
Rendering 5_Upper wall sheilded by plants.png
Rendering 6_View from Pine Tree.png
NV5_90%CostEstimate.pdf
P21-024R1_21501 RH_Sewer Feasibility Study Ph III-1-27-2021.pdf
2021-04-19 Rolling Hills Generator Report_REV_.pdf
2021.05.10 City Council FeedbackanswersJF.docx
FIRE FUEL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MAY 19.docx
AssetCapitalization_Policy_Resolution No. 953.pdf
Financial_Policies.pdf
Investment_Policy.pdf
Rolling Hills 1 year extension FY 2021.pdf
CIP_3Years_2021-May-16.pdf
2019-2020_Consolidated_Tax_and_Fee_Schedule.pdf
FY_21-22_Proposed_Budget-WKST.pdf
3
staff with comments.
11.MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS
11.A.CONSIDER A PENINSULA CITIES JOINT LETTER EXPRESSING CONCERNS
REGARDING SPECIAL DIRECTIVE POLICIES IMPACTING PUBLIC SAFETY.
(MAYOR DIERINGER)
RECOMMENDATION: Receive a report from Mayor Bea Dieringer on the join letter
and provide direction to staff.
12.MATTERS FROM STAFF
13.CLOSED SESSION
14.ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: Monday, June 14, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. via Teleconference.
Zoom access:
Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87227175757?pwd=VzNES3Q2NFprRk5BRmdUSktWb0hmUT09
Meeting ID: 872 2717 5757
Passcode: 780609
Proposed FY 21-22 Budget.pdf
CIP_3Years_2021-May-16.pdf
PV Peninsula Cities_Gascon Policy Concerns.docx
Notice:
Public Comment is welcome on any item prior to City Council action on the item.
Documents pertaining to an agenda item received after the posting of the agenda are available for review in the City
Clerk's office or at the meeting at which the item will be considered.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting
due to your disability, please contact the City Clerk at (310) 377-1521 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to enable the
City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and accommodation for your review of this agenda and
attendance at this meeting.
4
Agenda Item No.: 4.A
Mtg. Date: 05/24/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:JANELY SANDOVAL, CITY CLERK
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 10, 2021 .
DATE:May 24, 2021
BACKGROUND:
NONE.
DISCUSSION:
NONE.
FISCAL IMPACT:
NONE.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve as presented.
ATTACHMENTS:
2021-05-10_CCMinutes.P.docx
5
MINUTES OF A
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
MONDAY, MAY 10, 2021
1.CALL TO ORDER
The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills met via Zoom Teleconference on the above
date at 7:00 p.m.
Mayor Bea Dieringer presiding.
2.ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, Mirsch and Wilson
Absent: None.
Staff Present:Meredith T. Elguira, Planning & Community Services Director
Michael Jenkins, City Attorney
Alan Palermo, Project Manager
Kristen Raig, Rolling Hills Association Manager
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE BY COUNCILMEMBER PAT WILSON
3.OPEN AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME
Resident Steve Wheeler requested removal of fire hazard poles on his property using
general fund or the City’s FEMA Grant.
4.CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
4A REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 26, 2021.
MOTION:Mayor Dieringer motioned to approve the minutes as amended and
Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pro Tem Black
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
5.CONSENT CALENDAR
5A PAYMENT OF BILLS.
5B REPUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLING TONNAGE REPORT FOR MARCH
2021.
6
Minutes 2
City Council Regular Meeting
May 10, 2021
MOTION:Mayor Pro Tem Black motioned to move Items 5A to 5B, and
Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion.
AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch and Wilson
NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
6. COMMISION ITEMS
NONE.
7.PUBLIC HEARINGS
NONE.
8.OLD BUSINESS
8A RECEIVE THE ASSESSMENT REPORT FROM PACIFIC
ARCHITECTURE AND ENGINEERING, INC. AND CONSIDER OPTIONS
TO REPLACE A NON-WORKING EMERGENCY STANDBY
GENERATOR.
Project Manager Alan Palermo, presented the findings of assessment report and provided
Councilmembers options to replace the standby generator.
Discussion ensued among Councilmembers regarding presented options. Project Manager
was asked to provide responses to questions with additional research.
Rolling Hills Community Association Manager Kristen Raig commented on the reliance
on the emergency generator. The generator allows RHCA to gain access to necessities
during power outages, which occur at least once a year.
Resident Alfred Visco stated that the solar option would provide rebates, reductions to
electrical cost, and additional benefits for the community.
MOTION:Councilmember Pieper motioned to continue the discussion on this item in
two weeks with additional information, and Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion.
AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson
NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
9.NEW BUSINESS
7
Minutes 3
City Council Regular Meeting
May 10, 2021
9A APPROVE A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO FORM CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICTY NO. 1 (CREST ROAD)
AND FIXING THE TIME AND PLACE OF A PUBLIC HEARING
Councilmember Wilson asked about the cost obligations of property owner for this project.
Project Manager Palermo responded that SCE will fund 100 feet on either side of the
mainline.
Discussions ensued among the Councilmembers and staff regarding cost to residents due
to acreage of land owned.
MOTION:Mayor Pro Tem Black motioned to approve the Resolution of Intent to form
the City of Rolling Hills Underground Utility District No. 1 (Crest Road), and
Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion.
AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson
NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
9B APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH
BOLTON ENGINEERS TO FILE CONSTRUCTION PERMITS WITH THE
LOS ANGELES COUNTY BUILDING DEPARTMENT FOR THE ADA
IMPROVEMENTS AT THE TENNIS COURTS.
Planning and Community Service Director Elguira provided the background and the need
for a service agreement with Bolton Engineers.
Mayor Dieringer asked if RHCA’s most recent tennis court plans showed changes and
when did RHCA provide the updated plans to the city.
Planning and Community Service Director Elguira responded that the most recent RHCA
project plans were delivered on the day of the Council meeting and staff did not have the
opportunity to review prior to the meeting.
MOTION:Mayor Pro Tem Black motioned to approve a professional service
agreement with Bolton Engineering to file construction permits with the Los Angeles
County Building Department for the ADA improvements at the tennis courts, and
Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion.
AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson
NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
8
Minutes 4
City Council Regular Meeting
May 10, 2021
ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
10.MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE
REPORTS
10A COMMENDATION FOR CREST ROAD WEST GATE ATTENDANT
(MAYOR DIERINGER)
Mayor Dieringer reported that two men attempted to enter the City on April 28, 2021,
without clear information on the reason for the visit. Gate Attendant David Saei informed
the men that they could not enter. The two men left and the Gate Attendant David Saei
contacted the Sheriff’s Department. Responding to the call, the Sheriff’s Department
located the menand theywere arrested on miscellaneous charges. Mayor Dieringer wanted
to encourage the gate attendants to report suspicious activities to the Sheriff’s Department
to discourage potential offenders from entering the city.
MOTION:Mayor Pro Tem Black motioned to commend Gate Attendant David Saei
for his actions. Councilmember Mirsch proposed an amended motion to include a
certificate for the gate attendant, a letter to the RHCA Board, and recognize the gate
attendant at a City Council meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Black accepted the amendments to
the motion and Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion.
AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson
NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
10B REPORT ON FIRE FUEL COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON MAY 5,
2021.
Councilmember Mirsch provided a report on the committee meeting.
Mayor Pro Tem Black commented more on aggressive application of the dead vegetation
ordinance to address problematic homes within the community. He expressed that
mapping is needed in order to address concerns.
Mayor Dieringer mentioned a new law (SB 85),effectiveon April 13, 2021, provided funds
for fire prevention projects and that the City should pursue that fund.
Planning and Community Services Director Elguira expressed that applying for a grant
requires a grant writer. Planning and Community Services Director Elguira also explained
that grant funds should be administered and spent accordingly to meet criteria for future
applications.
9
Minutes 5
City Council Regular Meeting
May 10, 2021
Resident Alfred Visco asked how residents are being informed of the Fire and Fuel
Committee meetings, and stated that there are trainings for grant writing and applications.
MOTION:Mayor Dieringer motioned to receive and file report and Mayor Pro Tem
Black seconded the motion.
AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson.
NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Mayor Pro Tem Black left the meeting at 8:33 PM.
11.MATTERS FROM STAFF
11A RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT ON INTERESTS IN THE COMMUNITY
FOR SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE (VERBAL REPORT)
Planning and Community Services Director Elguira stated that City Manager Jeng
requested to delay this item to the next City Council meeting on May 24, 2021.
MOTION:Councilmember Black motioned to postpone the item to the May 24, 2021
City Council meeting, and Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion.
AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson
NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pro Tem Black
ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
11B FIRE FUEL ABATEMENT CASES 2021 FIRST QUARTER REPORT.
Councilmember Wilson asked if the depth for 77 Portuguese Bend Road mitigated.
Planning and Community Services DirectorElguira reported that 77 Portuguese Bend Road
mitigated the identified dead vegetation.
Councilmember Mirsch noted that ATVs are licensed vehicles and cannot be on the trails.
Councilmember Mirsch also said there is correlation between the Fire and Fuel Committee
and the Fire Fuel Abatement Cases.
Resident Jim Aichele commented that in California, ATVs are not licensed. Mr. Aichele
asked the City Attorney Mike Jenkins to confirm.
City Attorney Jenkins said that he was not informed of this question before the meeting
and would have to do research. City Attorney Jenkins also said that the item is not on the
agenda and cannot be discussed.
10
Minutes 6
City Council Regular Meeting
May 10, 2021
MOTION:Councilmember Wilson motioned to receive and file the 2021 first quarter
report, and Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion.
AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson
NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pro Tem Black
ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: None
12.CLOSED SESSION
NONE.
13.ADJOURNMENT
Hearing no further business before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 8:42 PM,
in memory of longtime resident Katherine Partridge.
Next regular meeting: Monday, June 14, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. via City's website's link at:
https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php
Zoom access:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87227175757?pwd=VzNES3Q2NFprRk5BRmdUSktWb0hmT
9 or dial (669) 900-9128, meeting ID: 872 2717 5757, passcode: 780609
Respectfully submitted,
____________________________________
Janely Sandoval
City Clerk
Approved,
______________________________________
Bea Dieringer
Mayor
11
Agenda Item No.: 5.A
Mtg. Date: 05/24/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:CONNIE VIRAMONTES , ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:PAYMENTS OF BILLS.
DATE:May 24, 2021
BACKGROUND:
None
DISCUSSION:
None.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve as presented.
ATTACHMENTS:
Payment of Bills.pdf
12
13
Agenda Item No.: 5.B
Mtg. Date: 05/24/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:CONNIE VIRAMONTES , ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:REPUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLING TONNAGE REPORT FOR APRIL
2021.
DATE:May 24, 2021
BACKGROUND:
None.
DISCUSSION:
None.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve as presented.
ATTACHMENTS:
0421 - Rolling Hills YTD Tonnage Report.pdf
14
Franchise?Y
Mth/Yr Overall Commodity Tons Collected Tons Recovered Tons Disposed Diversion %
Jan-21 Trash 235.42 36.03 199.39 15.30%
Greenwaste 49.43 49.43 - 100.00%
Jan-21 Total 284.85 85.46 199.39 30.00%
Feb-21 Trash 206.11 18.38 187.73 8.92%
Greenwaste 62.07 62.07 - 100.00%
Feb-21 Total 268.18 80.45 187.73 30.00%
Mar-21 Trash 231.10 7.19 223.91 3.11%
Recycle 3.64 0.91 2.73 24.95%
Greenwaste 89.04 89.04 - 100.00%
Mar-21 Total 323.78 97.14 226.64 30.00%
Apr-21 Trash 239.29 34.90 204.39 14.58%
Greenwaste 52.70 52.70 - 100.00%
Apr-21 Total 291.99 87.60 204.39 30.00%
Grand Total 1,168.80 350.65 818.15 30.00%
350.65
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS RESIDENTIAL FRANCHISE
2021
Contract Requires 30% Household -
Page 1 of 2
15
Agenda Item No.: 5.C
Mtg. Date: 05/24/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:MEREDITH ELGUIRA, PLANNING DIRECTOR
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:NV5 FIRST CONTRACT AMENDMENT - SEPULVEDA MONITORING.
DATE:May 24, 2021
BACKGROUND:
Given, there has not been sufficient flow to sample a wet weather this past year, the City requested that
NV5 continue monitoring into FY21-22 so that if there are any larger storms that come next year that
produce sampleable flow, the City could potentially obtain water quality data for those events.
DISCUSSION:
The City is interested in continuing with the remote flow monitoring for another rain year to build a
data set to document that the City’s canyons are effectively retaining the 85%, 24-hr runoff event. The
first amendment to the Agreement would allow NV5 to extend their remote flow monitoring and
provide a summary of hydrologic analysis in a technical memo at the end of the two-year wet weather
period, i.e., at the close of April 2022. The technical memo would analyze the hydrologic retentive
capacity of Sepulveda Canyon relative to the 85%, 24-hour runoff event and any other appropriate
greater or lesser relevant storm capture volumes based on the two years of flow and precipitation event
data and also extend/extrapolate this analysis to the other canyons in the City.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact. The proposed changes to the scope of work and time extension will be covered by the
unused funds from FY '20/'21 approved budget for the Sepulveda Monitoring Project.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
ATTACHMENTS:
Professional_Services_Agreement___1st Amendment to PSA w NV5_v1 05.20.2021.DOCX
First Amendment MS4 Sepulveda Outfall Monitoring 5.5.2021.pdf
NV5_Monitoring_Signed Agreement 2020.pdf
16
1
65277.00010\32491513.1
11/6/19
First Amendment to Professional ServicesAgreement
Planning Services
This First Amendment, effective ___, 2021, modifies the Professional Services Agreement
that was executed by the City of Rolling Hills (“City”) and Alta Environmental, L.P. dba NV5
(“Consultant”) on September 14, 2020 (“Agreement”). A copy of the Agreement is attached as
Exhibit A.
BACKGROUND
A.The scope of Consultant’s services under the Agreement was to conduct Canyon
Monitoring for the 2020-2021 monitoring year to identify whether the City's stormwater
discharge is in compliance with stormwater water-quality-based effluent limitations
derived from the Total Maximum Daily Load waste load allocations (“Original Scope of
Services”).
B.The term of the Agreement is until October 15, 2021 (the “Term”).
C.The Original Scope of Services included dry weather and wet weather flows monitoring
(together, “Wet and Dry Weather Flow Monitoring”); however during the 2020-2021
monitoring year, no such weather flows were observed, so no samples could be taken.
D.The City desires for the Consultant to perform the Original Scope of Services for the 2021-
2022 fiscal year, and to use any unexpended amounts for 2020-2021 Wet and Dry Weather
Flow Monitoring (approximately $29,000) (the “Unexpended Funds”) on Wet and Dry
Weather Flow Monitoring for the 2021-2022 monitoring year, as more fully described in
Consultant’s letter dated May 5, 2021, attached hereto as Exhibit B.
E.In the event Wet and Dry Weather Flow Monitoring for the 2021-2022 monitoring year
suffers from the same lack of observable flows as this past year, the City desires for
Consultant to use the Unexpended Funds to conduct a hydrologic analysis of the retentive
capacity of Sepulveda Canyon relative to the 85%, 24-hour runoff event, and extrapolate
the analysis to other canyons within the City as-needed and as the remaining budget allows
(the “Sepulveda Canyon Hydrologic Analysis and Extrapolation”).
F.Paragraph 11 of the Agreement requires the parties to make any changes to the Agreement
in writing and signed by both parties.
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1.Extended Term. Paragraph 8 of the Agreement is hereby deleted and replaced by the
following: “This Agreement shall be valid until June 30, 2022.”
2.Carry-Over of Scope of Services.The Unexpended Funds for 2020-2021 Wet and Dry
Weather Flow Monitoring shall be applied to 2021-2022 Wet and Dry Weather Flow
17
2
65277.00010\32491513.1
11/6/19
Monitoring or to the Sepulveda Canyon Hydrologic Analysis and Extrapolation, as
described more fully in Exhibit B.
3.No Other Change. All other terms of the Agreement remain unchanged by this First
Amendment.
(Signatures on following page)
18
3
65277.00010\32491513.1
11/6/19
CITY
City of Rolling Hills
By:
Elaine Jeng, City Manager
Attest:
By:
Janely Sandoval, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
By:
Michael Jenkins, City Attorney
CONSULTANT
Alta Environmental, L.P. dba NV5
By:
[Name], [Title: Board Chair, President, or Vice
President]
AND
By:
[Name], [Title: Secretary, Asst. Secretary, CFO,
or Asst. Treasurer]
19
4
65277.00010\32491513.1
11/6/19
Exhibit A
Copy of Agreement
(follows this page)
20
5
65277.00010\32491513.1
11/6/19
Exhibit B
Scope of Services
(follows this page)
21
Alta Environmental, an NV5 Company
3777 Long Beach Boulevard Annex Building Long Beach CA 90807 United States of America
T (562) 495 5777 F (562) 495 5877 Toll-free (800) 777-0605 | NV5.com
June 23, 2020, Revised May 5, 2021
City of Rolling Hills
2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Attn: Elaine Jeng, City Manager
Meredith Elguira, Director, Planning and Community Services
RE: Scope of Work and Budget for Canyon Monitoring 2020-2021 and 2021-2022
Dear Ms. Jeng and Ms. Elguira,
Alta Environmental, an NV5 Company (Alta|NV5) is pleased to present the City of Rolling Hills (City)
with this scope of work and cost estimate to conduct Canyon Monitoring for the 2020-2021 and 2021-2022
monitoring year. Alta|NV5, as a key subcontractor to Anchor QEA, has been implementing Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Outfall Monitoring the Palos Verdes Peninsula Coordinated
Integrated Monitoring Program (CIMP) since 2016.
Alta|NV5 is 100% committed to providing the City with exceptional, high quality monitoring and data
processing support. We are eager to support the City with sound technical experience, dedicated customer
service, and strategic recommendations that protect your operational interests, your stakeholder’s concerns,
and the environment. Please do not hesitate to call me with any questions.
For and on behalf of Alta|NV5,
Garth Engelhorn, CPSWQ, QISP/ToR
Water Resources Senior Project Manager
1155 Sportfisher Dr., Suite 202
Oceanside, CA 92054
Phone Number:760-237-2703
Email: Garth.Engelhorn@nv5.com
22
2
1 EXHIBIT A: SCOPE OF WORK
Alta|NV5 will conduct the following tasks to implement the Canyon Monitoring during the 2020-2021 and
2021-2022 monitoring year. The objective of this Canyon Monitoring is to implement a program consistent
with the current MS4 outfall monitoring being conducted as part of the Palos Verdes Peninsula CIMP. The
objective of the Palos Verdes Peninsula CIMP outfall monitoring program is to determine the quality of a
permittee’s discharge relative to municipal action levels, to determine whether a permittee’s discharge is in
compliance with stormwater water-quality-based effluent limitations (WQBELs) derived from the Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) waste load allocations and to determine whether a permittee’s discharge
causes or contributes to an exceedance of receiving water limitations. The 2016 Palos Verdes Peninsula
CIMP Outfall Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP), documents the procedures and methods currently used
for outfall monitoring in accordance with the CIMP. All of the field sampling methods, laboratory analytical
methods, Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC), data management, and reporting described
below will be conducted according the 2016 Palos Verdes Peninsula CIMP Outfall SAP.
Task 1: Project Management and Coordination
Alta|NV5 will routinely coordinate with the City to provide updates and discuss any potential modifications
necessary for the water quality monitoring and reporting activities. This task includes planning and
implementation of the project, coordination with the subcontracting laboratories, relevant meeting
attendance, coordination with the City, budget management, and monthly invoicing/reporting.
Task 2: Dry Weather Monthly TMDL Monitoring
Alta|NV5 will conduct monthly dry weather Machado Lake Nutrients TMDL monitoring at the proposed
monitoring site located at the crossing of Sepulveda Canyon at the south side (upstream) of Middleridge
Road, in coordination with the existing Palos Verdes Peninsula CIMP outfall monitoring program. Based
on an initial field reconnaissance conducted during May 2020, the proposed monitoring location was
observed to be dry and without dry weather flows. This task includes twelve monthly site visits to confirm
presence or absence of flow (July 2020 through June 2021) and document site conditions. If flow is
observed during a monthly site visit, samples will be collected. For budgeting purposes, it was assumed
that up to four monthly sample events will be conducted between July 2020 and June 2021. The sampling
events will likely occur during the winter months when dry weather base flows are elevated. Dry weather
sampling may be conducted any time but only after an antecedent dry period of at least three days has
passed since the last rainfall event (less than 0.1 inch of rainfall each day). Throughout the 2020-2021
monitoring year, no dry weather flows were observed during monthly site visits to confirm presence or
absence of flow, and now dry weather sampling events were conducted. During the 2021-2022 monitoring
year, Alta|NV5 will use the remaining unused funds from the 2020-2021 monitoring year to conduct dry
weather site visits as-needed and as the budget allows, if wet weather flows are observed in the preceding
month.
The dry weather samples will be collected and submitted to an Environmental Laboratory Accreditation
Program (ELAP) certified laboratory for the following constituents:
• Total kjeldahl nitrogen by United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) method
351.2
• Total phosphorous by USEPA method 365.1
• Nitrate/nitrite by Standard Method (SM) 4500 NO3 E
Flow rates will be measured or estimated in accordance with the USEPA NPDES Storm Water Sampling
Guidance Document (USEPA 833-B-92-001). Field measurements taken with an YSI water quality data
sonde or similar device will be calibrated against standards and will follow guidelines from the State of
California’s Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) (MPSL-DFG 2014). The water
quality field measurements will be documented on the field observation form and include the following
parameters:
• pH
23
3
• Temperature
• Specific conductance
• Dissolved Oxygen
Task 3: Wet Weather Monitoring
Alta|NV5 will conduct three wet weather sampling events at the proposed monitoring site located at the
crossing of Sepulveda Canyon at the south side (upstream) of Middleridge Road. Wet weather sampling
will occur three times a year within the wet season (October 1, 2020 through April 30, 2021). The first
significant rain event after October 1, 2020 of will be targeted for wet weather sampling, along with two
subsequent events, in coordination with the existing Palos Verdes Peninsula CIMP outfall monitoring
program. Wet weather events are defined as having a predicted rainfall of at least 0.25 inch with a 70%
probability of rainfall at least 24 hours prior to the event start time. Wet weather sampling events will be
separated by an antecedent dry period (less than 0.1 inch of rain per day) of at least three days. Throughout
the 2020-2021 monitoring year, no wet weather flows were observed by field staff during wet weather
events. The continuous flow data recorded by the on-site flowmeter also confirmed the absence of flow
throughout the 2020-2021 monitoring year. During the 2021-2022 monitoring year, Alta|NV5 will use the
remaining unused funds from the 2020-2021 monitoring year to collect continuous remote flow
measurements and conduct wet weather monitoring events as-needed and as the remaining budget allows.
For each of the three wet weather monitoring events per monitoring year, Alta|NV5 will deploy one team
of two scientists at each of the to ensure the health and safety of field personnel and implementation of
clean sampling techniques. Teams will collect manual grab samples with a swing sampler pole once every
20 minutes over a 3-hour period (or at a frequency equivalent to 10 aliquots over the expected duration of
stormwater discharge) to create composites sample representative of the hydrograph (e.g., rising, peak, or
rise and fall depending on duration of storm). One composite sample comprised of ten individual 1-liter
aliquots will be collected for the water matrix constituents (10-liters total) and one composite sample
comprised of ten individual 10-liter aliquots will be collected for the sediment matrix constituents (100-
liters total). Collection of in situ water quality measurements and fecal indicator bacteria grab samples will
be take near the peak of the hydrograph.
The sediment matrix constituents will be analysed by the laboratory once per monitoring year. It is
estimated that approximately 300-liters of stormwater will need to be filtered to obtain a minimum of 80
grams which is required for the sediment analysis. Following each wet weather monitoring event, Alta|NV5
will submit five 20-liter carboys (100-liters per event) to the laboratory, which will be individually filtered,
preserved, and composited to create a single sediment sample for analysis after the completion of the third
and final monitoring event.
The wet weather samples will be collected and submitted to an ELAP certified laboratory for the following
constituents:
Water Matrix (composite samples) will be analyzed each storm
• Total Kjeldahl nitrogen by USEPA method 351.2
• Total phosphorous by USEPA method 365.1
• Total hardness by SM 2340C
• Total suspended solids by SM 2540D
• Nitrate/nitrite by SM 4500 NO3 E
• Total and dissolved metals by USEPA method 1640 and 7470A (copper, lead, mercury, zinc)
• Organochlorine pesticides by USEPA method 8270C with selective ion monitoring
• Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons by USEPA method 625 SIM
Water Matrix (grab samples) will be analysed each storm
24
4
• Total coliforms, fecal coliforms, Enterococci, and E. Coli by SM 9221B
Sediment Matrix (filtered from water composite samples) will be analysed once per year as a composite
of three wet weather samples.
• Total solids by SM 2540B
• Organochlorine pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyl congeners by USEPA method 8270C
selected ion monitoring
Continuous flow measurements will be collected with portable flow meters and flow rates will be measured
or estimated in accordance with the USEPA NPDES Storm Water Sampling Guidance Document (USEPA
833-B-92-001). Field measurements taken with an YSI water quality data sonde or similar device will be
calibrated against standards and will follow guidelines from the State of California’s SWAMP (MPSL-
DFG 2014). The water quality field measurements will be documented on the field observation form and
include the following parameters:
• pH
• Temperature
• Specific conductance
• Dissolved Oxygen
Task 4. Data QA/QC, Formatting, and Technical Memorandum
Within 15 days of each dry or wet weather sampling event, Alta|NV5 will create an event summary report
including the following information:
• Completed field data sheet
• Copy of the chain of custody;
• Photos of site and conditions;
• A short summary description of field activities.
Following completion of the sampling activities for the 2020-2021 monitoring year, Alta|NV5 will compile
all field observations and analytical chemistry into a format consistent with the California Environmental
Data Exchange Network (CEDEN) management system. Alta|NV5 will use the CEDEN templates provided
in Microsoft Excel (versions 97-2003) format, each template contains multiple worksheets, sample data
submissions, and an associated guidance document. The formatting process includes applying CEDEN
valid values and qualifiers; working with the State Board to make CEDEN updates to valid values; and,
resolving errors identified by data checkers. After the CEDEN compatible data files have successfully
passed the data checkers, Alta|NV5 will provide the City with a summary of exceedance of applicable water
quality-based effluent limits, RWLs, and/or action levels will be identified per sampling date.
Alta|NV5 will prepare a technical memorandum identifying recommendations (e.g., sampling location or
method revisions, analytical method revisions, and additional constituents for analysis based on water
quality priorities) for adaptive management. The technical memorandum will be submitted by September
1, 2021. Due to the absence of both dry weather and wet weather flows during the 2020-2021 monitoring
year, no water quality events were completed. Task 4 will be completed by September 1, 2022 if water
quality events are conducted during the 2021-2022 monitoring year.
Quality Assurance and Quality Control– QA/QC for sampling processes will include proper collection
of the samples to minimize the possibility of contamination. Samples will be collected in laboratory-
supplied, laboratory-certified, contaminant-free sample bottles. Sample processing and handling for water
chemistry will be conducted in accordance with guidance developed in the Quality Assurance Program Plan
for the State of California’s Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) (State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB) 2008). Field staff will ensure sample holding temperatures are
maintained from sample collection through delivery to the laboratory.
25
5
All instruments will be calibrated in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. Calibration of the flow
monitoring and sampling equipment will be conducted immediately prior to deployment or use and will be
field verified during each sample event.
Field QA/QC samples include field duplicates and field blanks following SWAMP guidance. Field QA/QC
are useful in identifying possible problems resulting from sample collection or sample processing in the
field. A field blank will be collected during sample collection and a field duplicate will be collected
immediately following the collection of the original sample and analyzed in the same manner as the original
sample.
Assumptions
• Alta|NV5 assumed that monthly sampling for Task 2 will only be conducted concurrently with the
existing Palos Verdes Peninsula CIMP outfall monitoring program. If for any reason NV5 is no
longer conducting existing Palos Verdes Peninsula CIMP outfall monitoring program, the costs for
NV5 to conduct the monthly monitoring would need to be revised.
• One field duplicate and one field blank will be analysed for dry weather and wet weather sampling
tasks, for a total of four (4) QA/QC samples during the 2020-2021 monitoring year. A field
duplicate and field blank will not be collected and analyzed for the sediment matrix constituents.
QA/QC results from the existing Palos Verdes Peninsula CIMP outfall monitoring program will be
utilized to the extent possible.
• Access agreements may be necessary, but no encroachment permits will be required.
• Traffic control plans will not be necessary. Standard traffic caution procedures will be used as-
needed.
• Alta|NV5 assumed the Canyon site may require confined space entry for installation and removal.
When confined space entry is required, field teams properly trained and certified in confined space
entry will use confined space equipment including use of a tripod, winch, and harness system for
fall protection and emergency egress, four gas monitoring, two-way communication, and air
ventilation as-needed.
• Alta|NV5 will rely on the best available weather forecasts and coordinate with the City to target
storm events meeting the mobilization criteria. Should forecasts change as a storm event is in
progress or if a qualifying storm event does not produce sufficient runoff to conduct sampling,
Alta|NV5 will cease sampling and try to mitigate any unnecessary efforts. The budget for Task 3
includes two false starts and will be billed on a time and materials basis not to exceed $1,250 per
false start and not to exceed a total of $2,500.
References
MPSL-DFW, 2014. SOP for Conducting Field Measurements and Field Collections of Water and Bed
Sediment Samples with Associated Field Measurements and Physical Habitat in California. Version 1.1.
March 2014.
SWRCB (State Water Resources Control Board), 2008. SWRCB, Surface Water Ambient Monitoring
Program Quality Assurance Program Plan (SWAMP). Final Technical Report Version 1. September 2008.
USEPA (U.S Environmental Protection Agency), 1992. NPDES Storm Water Sampling Guidance
Document. EPA 833-B-92-001. Office of Water, USEPA, Washington, DC. July 1992.
26
6
2 EXHIBIT B - COST ESTIMATE
Alta|NV5 has estimated the total cost to complete all tasks described in the scope of work below. The cost
estimate summary for each task and total project cost is provided in Table 1. The budget for Task 3 includes
two false starts and will be billed on a time and materials basis not to exceed $1,250 per false start and not
to exceed a total of $2,500. The detailed cost estimate worksheets including itemized labor costs and
equipment costs for each task are provided in Table 2.
Due to the absence of both dry weather and wet weather flows during the 2020-2021 monitoring year, no
water quality events were completed and approximately 35 percent of the 2020-2021 budget (Table 1 and
Table 2) was expended. During the 2021-2022 monitoring year, Alta|NV5 will use the remaining unused
funds from the 2020-2021 monitoring year (approximately $29,000) to conduct Tasks 1 through 4 of this
scope of work as-needed and as the remaining budget allows. In the event that no water quality events are
conducted during the 2021-2022 monitoring year due to the absence of dry weather and/or wet weather
flows, Alta|NV5 will use the remaining available funds to conduct a hydrologic analysis of the retentive
capacity of Sepulveda Canyon relative to the 85%, 24-hour runoff event, and extrapolate the analysis to
other canyons within the City as-needed and as the remaining budget allows.
Table 1. Cost Estimate Summary
City of Rolling Hills Canyon
Monitoring 2020-2021
Total
Staff
Hours
Total Labor
Costs
Total
Reimbursables
(Other Direct
Costs)
Total Costs
Task 1.Project Management and
Coordination 26 $ 4,160.00 $ 96.60 $ 4,256.60
Task 2.Dry Weather Monthly
TMDL Monitoring (1 site/12 events
per year and 4 sample events)
40 $ 4,800.00 $ 1,770.30 $ 6,570.30
Task 3.Wet Weather Monitoring (1
site/ 3 events per year)100 $ 11,960.00 $ 13,009.50 $ 24,969.50
Task 3. False Starts $ 2,500.00
Task 4. Data QA/QC, Formatting,
and Technical Memorandum 42 $ 6,260.00 $ - $ 6,260.00
27,180.00$ 14,876.40$ 44,556.40$ Total Project Cost
Deleted: ¶
27
7
Table 2. Detailed Cost Estimate
Alta Title Hourly Rate Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost
Principal 200.00$ 4 800.00$ -$ -$ 4 800.00$ 1,600.00$
Senior Project Manager II 180.00$ 12 2,160.00$ 6 1,080.00$ 12 2,160.00$ 12 2,160.00$ 7,560.00$
Senior Project Manager I Jacqueline McMillen 170.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Staff I Matthew Renaud 160.00$ -$ -$ 12 1,920.00$ -$ 1,920.00$
Staff I Michelle Hallack 145.00$ -$ -$ -$ 12 1,740.00$ 1,740.00$
Associate II 120.00$ 10 1,200.00$ 22 2,640.00$ 36 4,320.00$ 10 1,200.00$ 9,360.00$
Specialist III 100.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Specialist II 90.00$ -$ 12 1,080.00$ 32 2,880.00$ 4 360.00$ 4,320.00$
Specialist I 85.00$ -$ -$ 8 680.00$ -$ 680.00$
Financial Analyst II 65.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Labor Fee Costs 26 4,160.00$ 40 4,800.00$ 100 11,960.00$ 42 6,260.00$ 27,180.00$
Notes Unit Cost units Cost units Cost units Cost units Cost Totals
$0.575mile 0.58$ 160 92.00$ 480 276.00$ 800 460.00$ -$ 828.00$
$175/event 175.00$ -$ 4 700.00$ 3 525.00$ -$ 1,225.00$
$325/event 325.00$ -$ -$ 3 975.00$ -$ 975.00$
10-L Glass Sample Bottles $10/event 10.00$ -$ -$ 9 90.00$ -$ 90.00$
$35/event 35.00$ -$ -$ 3 105.00$ -$ 105.00$
$880/sample 880.00$ -$ -$ 5 4,400.00$ -$ 4,400.00$
$465/sample 465.00$ -$ -$ 1 465.00$ -$ 465.00$
$155/20 Liters 155.00$ -$ -$ 15 2,325.00$ -$ 2,325.00$
$384/sample 384.00$ -$ -$ 5 1,920.00$ -$ 1,920.00$
$350/event 350.00$ -$ -$ 3 1,050.00$ -$ 1,050.00$
$115/sample 115.00$ -$ 6 690.00$ -$ -$ 690.00$
$5/bag 5.00$ -$ 4 20.00$ 15 75.00$ -$ 95.00$
5%4.60$ 84.30$ 619.50$ -$ 708.40$
ODCs Cost 96.60$ 1,770.30$ 13,009.50$ -$ 14,876.40$
Total Project
Cost
Total Project
Cost with False
Starts
42,056.40$ 44,556.40$
Wet Weather Sediment Chemistry
24,969.50$ 6,260.00$
Task 1.Project
Management and
Coordination
Task 3.Wet Weather
Monitoring (1 site/ 3
events per year)
Task 4. Data QA/QC,
Formatting, and
Technical
Memorandum
Other Direct Costs
Fee on Subs/ODCs
Total Cost Estimate (Labor and ODCs)
Task 2.Dry Weather
Monthly TMDL
Monitoring (1 site/12
visits per year and 4
sample events)
4,256.60$ 6,570.30$
Wet Weather Water Chemistry
Sediment Filtering
Wet Weather Microbiology
After hours Microbiology
Dry Weather Analytical
Mileage
YSI 6600 Multiparameter Data Sonde
Portable Flowmeter
Swing Sampler Pole/ Depth Integrated
Ice
Austin Kay
Mehak Gupta
Bridgette Reddington
Victoria Hall
Totals
Alta Staff
Dave Renfrew
Garth Engelhorn
City of Rolling Hills Canyon Monitoring 2020-2021
Task 1.Project
Management and
Coordination
Task 2.Dry Weather
Monthly TMDL
Monitoring (1 site/12
visits per year and 4
sample events)
Task 3.Wet Weather
Monitoring (1 site/ 3
events per year)
Task 4. Data QA/QC,
Formatting, and
Technical
Memorandum
Adrian Lopez
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Agenda Item No.: 7.A
Mtg. Date: 05/24/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:STEPHANIE GRANT , ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:ZONING CASE NO. 20-08: RESOLUTION NO. 2021-01 FOR
DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL TO MODIFY PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
ENTITLEMENTS REQUIRING SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR 1) INCREASE
TO SIZE OF RESIDENCE BY 1,100 SQUARE FEET; 2) INCREASE THE
AMOUNT OF GRADING BY 7,520 CUBIC YARDS; AND 3)
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A NEW CABANA EXCEEDING 200
SQUARE FEET LOCATED AT 20 UPPER BLACKWATER CANYON
ROAD (LOT 101-RH), ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (IANNITTI).
DATE:May 24, 2021
BACKGROUND:
On March 16, 2021, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of Zoning Case
No. 20-08 for for the Modification to Zoning Case No. 918, for the Site Plan Review for 1) increase in
size of the residence by 1,100 square feet, 2) increase to the amount of grading by 7,520 cubic yards and
3) Conditional Use Permit for a new cabana exceeding 200 square feet for a revised project located at
20 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road. On April 20, 2021, the Planning Commission unanimously
approved Resolution No. 2021-01. The proposed project is exempt from CEQA. No appeal was filed
against the project.
Previous Approvals
On January 21, 2020, the Planning Commission approved a two-year time extension to comply with the
requirements of Resolution No. 2018-01 and Zoning Case No. 918 to commence construction of the
approved project.
On February 12, 2018, the City Council approved Zoning Case No. 918 and Resolution No. 2018-01.
On January 16, 2018, the Planning Commission approved Zoning Case No. 918 and Resolution No.
2018-01 for Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permits and Variances for the following requests:
construct a new 9,975 square foot residence with a 7,750 square foot basement, new 1,675 square-foot
attached, four-car garage, a 2,775 square-foot, single-story stable, a 10,800 square-foot corral, a 7,500
square-foot riding ring, existing driveway apron widening, altered access pathway to the corral via a 15
foot wide driveway, various outdoor amenities including a new1 ,055 square-foot infinity pool, and
47
33,730 cubic yards of grading.
DISCUSSION:
The property is zoned RAS-2 with a gross lot area of 191,371 square feet (4.39 acres). For development
purposes, the net lot area of the lot is 135,735 square feet (3.11 AC). The lot is currently developed with
4,385 square-foot house, 552 square-foot attached garage, two swimming pools, which collectively
equal 1,328 square feet of water surface, two sheds that total 385 square feet, and 2,012 square feet of
legal non-conforming guest house. The proposed demolition has not changed from the previous
approval under Zoning Case No. 918. The existing 4,385 square foot residence, 552 square foot garage,
505 square foot stable, 194 and 191 square-foot shed structures, and pools will be demolished to
accommodate the proposed project. The existing 2,012 square-foot guest house will remain on the
project site.
The approved overall project is for the construction of a new 11,075 square-foot main residence, 11,075
square-foot basement, 864 square-foot swimming pool, 1,475 square-foot attached garage, 7,500
square-foot riding ring, 9,850 square-foot corral, 2,775 square-foot stable, 450 square-foot cabana,
41,250 cubic yards of grading with export of 320 cubic yards, 3-foot high maximum retaining walls,
outdoor amenities, driveways, patios, pool deck, walkways, landscaping, and decomposed granite
pathway to the stable.
MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE
Site Plan Review
The applicant requested a modified Site Plan Review to increase size of the proposed residence by
1,100 square feet and increase the amount of grading by 7,520 cubic yards. The modified residential
project will consist of a 22,150 square-foot new residence with basement. The proposed retaining walls
along the driveway, riding ring, and stable have been redesigned with a maximum height of 3 feet.
Conditional Use Permit
The applicant requested a modified Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a new 450 square-
foot cabana; the proposed size exceeded the maximum 200 SF allowable by right. The proposed cabana
will be screened with landscaping to minimize view impacts to surrounding homes.
The Planning Commission held a public meeting on site on the morning of February 16, 2021 for
Zoning Case No. 20-08. The Planning Commissioners viewed the silhouettes of the proposed residence,
cabana, grading, garages and overall site. The proposed project was presented later that night at the
Planning Commission Meeting at 6:30 p.m. via Zoom Teleconference. The Planning Commissioners
voted to continue the project to provide the applicant additional time to revise the design of the
proposed retaining wall along the rear driveway. The Planning Commissioners directed staff to work
with the applicant to submit revised plans to mitigate the proposed wall height.
The Planning Commission held a secondary field trip meeting at the site on the morning of March 16,
2021 at 7:30 a.m. The Planning Commission reviewed the walls and the overall project. The proposed
project was presented at the Public Hearing later that night on March 16, 2021 at 6:30 p.m. via Zoom
Teleconference. The Planning Commission voted to approve the project and directed staff to prepare a
resolution for the next meeting on April 20, 2021. Staff prepared Resolution No. 2021-01 and it was
unanimously approved by the Planning Commission at the Public Hearing on April 20, 2021 at 6:30
p.m. via Zoom Teleconference. Zoning Case No. 20-08 and Resolution No. 2021-01 will be presented
48
to the City Council for approval on May 24, 2021 at 6:30 p.m. via Zoom Teleconference.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
ATTACHMENTS:
(Revised) Development Table - ZC 2020-08_May 24, 2021.docx
Modification Table - ZC 20-08_May 24, 2021.docx
20 Upper Blackwater Plans.pdf
PC_Resolution_2021-01.pdf
Rendering 1_Cabana from across UBW.png
Rendering 3_Driveway curb.png
Rendering 2_Coral wall behind fence.png
Rendering 4_Upper wall planted.png
Rendering 5_Upper wall sheilded by plants.png
Rendering 6_View from Pine Tree.png
49
Zoning Case No. 2020-08 (20 Upper Blackwater Canyon Rd.) pg. 1
Development Table Zoning Case No. 2020-08 (20 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road)
Modification to Site Plan
Review, Conditional Use
Permit
EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
RA-S-2 Zone Setbacks
Front: 50 ft. from front easement
line
Side: 35 ft. from side property
line
Rear: 50 ft. from rear easement
line
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
WITH GARAGE, GUEST
HOUSE, 2 POOLS, STABLE, 2
SHEDS
SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR 1)
INCREASE TO SIZE OF THE
RESIDENCE BY 1,100
SQUARE FEET, 2)
INCREASE TO THE
AMOUNT OF GRADING BY
7,520 CUBIC YARDS, 3)
ADDITION OF NEW 5
FOOT MAXIMUM WALLS;
AND REQUIRING
CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR A NEW
CABANA EXCEEDING 200
SQUARE
Net Lot Area 135,735 SF 0 SF 135,735 SF
Residence 4,385 SF 6,690 SF 11,075 SF
Garage 552 SF 923 SF 1,475 SF
Swimming Pool/Spa 1,328 SF -464 SF 864 SF
Pool Equipment 121 SF --25 SF 96 SF
Guest House 2,012 SF 0 SF 2,012 SF
Cabana 0 SF 450 SF 450 SF
Stable 505 SF 2,270 SF 2775 SF
Recreation Court 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Attached Covered Porches,
Entryway, Porte Cochere,
Breezeways
1,235 SF -760 SF 475 SF
Attached Trellis 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
2 Sheds 385 SF -385 SF 0 SF
Lightwell 0 SF 80 SF 80 SF
Service Yard 96 SF 0 SF 96 SF
Basement Area 0 SF 11,075 SF 11,075 SF
Total Structure Area 10,619 SF 9,429 SF 20,048 SF
Depth of Basement 13 FT 13 FT
Structural Coverage 7.82%6.95%14.77%
Total Structures Excluding: up to
5 legal and up to 800 SF detached
structures that are not higher than
12 ft (no more than 120 SF per
structure per deduction, except
for trellis)
10,619 SF 9,429 SF 20,048 SF
Structural Coverage
(20% maximum)7.82%6.95%14.77%
Grading (balanced on site)Unknown 41,250 CY 41,250 CY
50
Zoning Case No. 2020-08 (20 Upper Blackwater Canyon Rd.) pg. 2
Total Lot Coverage
(35% maximum)
26.03%1.90%27.93%
Building Pad Coverage 1
(30%maximum)
21.36 %19.81%37.46%
Building Pad Coverage 2
(30%maximum)
38.00%0%80.20%
Building Pad Coverage 3
(30%maximum)
14.80%10.32%15.19%
Disturbed Area
(40% maximum)
(58.94%) 80,000 CY (20.26%) 27,500 CY (79.20%) 107,500 CY
Stable min. 450 S.F.505 SF 2,270 SF 2,775 SF
Corral min. 550 S.F.N/A 9,850 SF 9,850 SF
Riding Ring N/A 7,500 SF 7,500 SF
Retaining/Garden Wall Maximum 3 ft high Max high 3 ft high Max 3 ft high
Roadway Access Existing driveway approach No change No change
51
Modification 20-08 (20 Upper Blackwater Canyon Rd.)
This table presents the approved changes that required Discretionary Approval for a
Modification to a Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit.
Modification ZC 20-08 (20 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road)
Modification to Site Plan
Review & Conditional
Use Permit
PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED BY
PLANNING
COMMISSION
JANUARY 16,
2018
ZONING CASE
NO. 918
MODIFICAITON
APPROVED BY
PLANNING
COMMISSION
MARCH 1, 2021
MODIFIED
ZONING CASE
NO. 20-08
TOTAL
Residence 9,975 SF 11,075 SF 1,100 FF
Basement 7,750 SF 11,075 SF 3,325 SF
Grading 33,730 CY 41,250 CY 7,520 CY
Cabana (maximum 200 SF)0 450 SF 450 SF
Structural Coverage
(20% maximum)14.77%%6.95%14.77%
Total Lot Coverage
(35% maximum)
28.88%28.14%-.74%
Building Pad Coverage 1
(30%maximum)
38.12%37.02%-1.1%
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
Agenda Item No.: 9.A
Mtg. Date: 05/24/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:ALAN PALERMO, PROJECT MANAGER
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:RECEIVE AND FILE AN UPDATE TO THE DESIGN OF THE 8" SEWER
MAIN ALONG PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD/ROLLING HILLS ROAD;
AND CONSIDER AND APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH WILLDAN TO STUDY POTENTIAL
CONNECTIONS TO THE 8" SEWER MAIN FROM POTENTIAL
SEWERS LINES ALONG MIDDLERIDGE LANE AND WILLIAMSBURG
LANE.
DATE:May 24, 2021
BACKGROUND:
The City Council engaged the services of NV5 to provide engineering design for the 8" sewer main
along Portuguese Bend Road/Rolling Hills Road. Since the commencement of the design work, NV5
has met the 65% design, and the 90% design milestones. The 100% design milestone is anticipated in
mid-June 2021. At each design milestone, the engineering cost estimate is refined with additional
details. The current estimate for construction cost is $1,641,960. The estimate includes the upsizing of
the existing 8" sewer main along Rolling Hills Road required by the Los Angeles County Sanitation and
the City of Torrance, at three different locations. The estimate also includes the construction of the
1,585 linear feet of a new 8" sewer main along Rolling Hills Road into the City of Rolling Hills. The
cost of installing the 1,585 linear feet of new pipe is $665,700 of the total $1,641,960.
In mid-March 2021, two residents expressed interest in construction sewer main lines along
Middleridge and Williamsburg Lane. The residents intend to privately fund the lines and asked for the
City's assistance in conveying discharges to outside of city limits. In response to this inquiry, staff
contacted Willdan Engineering (Willdan) to discuss the request. Willdan has prepared several sewer
feasibility studies for Rolling Hills and has extensive knowledge and data available. Preliminary review
of the residents' request, city staff thought the proposed sewer along Middleridge Lane and
Williamsburg Lane should be sized for future upstream connections and all options for downstream
sewer conveyance need to be evaluated. Preliminary discussions with Willdan included the possibility
of sending the discharges from the potential sewer lines along Middleridge Lane and Williamsburg
Lane be to the City's 8" sewer main along Rolling Hills Road.
DISCUSSION:
107
Willdan submitted a proposal for approximately $14,500 for a Rolling Hills Sewer Service Feasibility
Study – Phase III - Middleridge Lane and Williamsburg Lane. This proposal includes evaluation of
upstream areas that could connect to the proposed sewers in Middleridge Lane and Williamsburg Lane
in the future and evaluate conveyance of sewer flows from Middleridge Lane and Williamsburg Lane to
downstream facilities.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Should the City Council want to move forward with studying the connection between the potential
sewer lines along Middleridge Lane and Williamsburg Lane and the 8" sewer main along Portuguese
Bend Road/Rolling Hills Road, the $14,500 of consulting fee can be funded using the Utility Fund.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve as presented.
ATTACHMENTS:
NV5_90%CostEstimate.pdf
P21-024R1_21501 RH_Sewer Feasibility Study Ph III-1-27-2021.pdf
108
90% SubmittalDescription Unit Cost QuantityAmountItem No. 8-inch Sewer Main Portuguese Bend1Mobilization and Demobilization (@ 5%) 80,000 1 LS $80,0002Temporary Traffic Control Implementation 50,000 1 LS $50,0003Traffic Striping, Legends, Markers & Pavement Restoration100,0001 LS $100,0004 Best Management Practices BMP 25,000 1 LS $25,0005Furnish, Install and Remove of Temporary Bypass Pumping system with pipes and all Appurtenances 30,0001 LS $30,0006 Remove Existing 8” VCP sewer and Replace with 10” VCP sewer 520255 LF $132,6007 Remove Existing 8” VCP sewer and Replace With 12” VCP sewer 550236 LF $129,8008 Connect 12” VCP sewer main to existing manhole and modify the base 10,0002 EA $20,0009 Connect 10” and 12" VCP sewer main to existing manhole and modify the base 10,0002 EA $20,00010 Connect 8” VCP sewer main to existing manhole and modify the base 10,0001 EA $10,00011Construct 8” VCP sewer main4201,585 LF $665,70012 Construct new 48” precast concrete sewer manhole 15,0004 EA $60,00013 Re-connect existing sewer laterals to new main 4,0004 EA $16,00014 Construct a new 4" sewer lateral to City Hall and end cap for future connection 35012 LF $4,20015 CCTV new sewer main 25,0001 LS $25,000Subtotal $1,368,300Contingency $273,660ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST TOTAL 1,641,960$ Engineer's Opinion of Probable Construction Cost20%CITY OF ROLLING HILLS30-Apr-21Portuguese Bend Sewer Main_90% Cost Estimate_04-30-2021.xlsx109
January 27, 2021
Mr. Alan Palermo, PE
City of Rolling Hills
No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Subject: Rolling Hills Sewer Service Feasibility Study – Phase III - Middleridge Lane
and Williamsburg Lane
Dear Mr. Palermo:
Most of the properties within the City of Rolling Hills are not currently connected to a public
sanitary sewer. The City has selected Willdan Engineering to conduct the following studies on
the feasibility of providing sanitary sewer services to properties in the City south of Palos Verdes
Drive North:
City of Rolling Hills Sewer Feasibility Study, September 2008:
This study analyzed gravity sewer systems, low pressure sewer (LPS) systems and
combination gravity/LPS to serve the City.
Sewer Feasibility Study Including City Hall and Tennis Court Site” (Phase I), 2018:
This study conducted concept level research and engineering feasibility evaluation
regarding the potential of connecting the Project Area (City Hall, POA building, and the
tennis court site, and upstream properties) to existing downstream sanitary sewer
systems.
Sewer Feasibility Study Including City Hall and Tennis Court Site” (Phase II), 2020:
This study involved the preparation of a Sewer Area Study and preliminary engineering
plans for the extension of the sewer in Rolling Hills Road to serve the City Hall and Tennis
Court Site. The documents prepared were submitted to and approved by:
City of Rolling Hills Estates
City of Torrance
Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW)
County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (CSD)
The three studies included conceptual level research into the sewer drainage of parcels south of
Palos Verdes Drive North, upstream of City Hall. It was noted in all three studies that providing
sewer service to these properties may require pumps and easements due to topographic
constraints. The 2008 report also studied a LPS to provide sewer service in this area.
Subsequent to the Phase II study, the City contracted with another consultant to produce
construction documents for the extension of the sewer in Rolling Hills Road to serve the City Hall
and Tennis Court site. The City now seeks to study providing sanitary sewer to two streets located
west of City Hall; Middleridge Lane and Williamsburg Lane, and connecting them to the City Hall
sewer, with the understanding that the conveyance may require pumps and easements. The
study will not include an analysis of LPS systems.
110
City of Rolling Hills
Sewer Feasibility Study Phase III
January 27, 2021
Page 2
Willdan has prepared this proposal (Phase III) to provide the necessary professional engineering
services to accomplish the following major tasks:
✓ Review the previous studies to identify relevant information/analyses.
✓ Perform topographic analysis of the area upstream of the City Hall to determine areas
that can feasibly drain to Middleridge Lane and Williamsburg Lane.
✓ Identify locations in the upstream area where pumps and easements may be required
to provide sewer service.
✓ Prepare a report containing text and GIS exhibits.
To accomplish these services, Willdan proposes the following Scope of Work.
SCOPE OF WORK
1. Review Prior Studies
Willdan will review the prior studies to obtain relevant information.
Products Developed: Working Documents
Deliverable to Client: None
2. Develop Working Base Map of the Area
Willdan will utilize available GIS elevation, parcel, and right of way information and prepare a
working map of the project area.
Products Developed: Working Base Map
Deliverable to Client: None
3. Research and Evaluate Available As-Built Information
Willdan will conduct research online to obtain and evaluate available sanitary sewer as-built
information in the project area, specifically, within Palos Verdes Drive North (PVDN) between
Rolling Hills Road and Crenshaw Boulevard.
Products Developed: Library of As-Built Information Obtained
Deliverable to Client: None
4. Perform Sewer Service Feasibility Analysis
Utilizing the information obtained and developed in Tasks 1-3, Willdan will analyze the options of
providing sewer service to Middleridge Lane and Williamsburg Lane. Ideally, the sewer alignment
will be within public right of way. The evaluation will require analysis of the area upstream of
Middleridge Lane and Williamsburg Lane, as well as in the vicinity of the subject streets. Specific
tasks will include:
111
City of Rolling Hills
Sewer Feasibility Study Phase III
January 27, 2021
Page 3
Evaluation of Upstream Areas
a. Determine areas tributary to Middleridge Lane, Williamsburg Lane, and Portuguese
Bend Road.
b. Analyze the topography upstream of Middleridge Lane and Williamsburg Lane to
determine locations where gravity sewer flow within public right of way is not feasible.
At these locations, the sewer will either require pumping to stay within the public right
of way or the alignment will need to proceed along downslope topography in
easements on private properties.
c. Analyze the topography upstream of Middleridge Lane and Williamsburg Lane to
investigate options to convey flow to the Portuguese Bend drainage area. Conveying
additional flow to Portuguese Bend will maximize the utilization of the gravity sewer
line being extended to City Hall.
Evaluation of Middleridge Lane and Williamsburg Lane
d. Analyze the topography of the area to determine flow paths and options for
conveyance of sewer flows in this area. The previous studies determined that
conveyance of sewer flows to existing sewers north of PVDN would require expensive
upgrades to an existing pump station north of PVDN and the City does not want to
further study this conveyance option. Utilizing the information obtained, Willdan will
review the concepts of draining west in existing sewers in PVDN to the existing trunk
sewer on Crenshaw Boulevard, and east to the City Hall sewer.
Products Developed: GIS Exhibits of the area containing:
Right of Way and Parcel Lines
Topographic Contours
Gravity Sewer Alignments
Pump Locations
Easement Alignments
Deliverables to Client: GIS Exhibits (3 copies 24” x 36” hard copy, 11” x 17” digital)
5. Discussion of Findings with the City
Willdan will meet with the City, via teleconference, to discuss the findings of Tasks 1 - 4.
Products Developed: Meeting Notes
Deliverable to Client: None
6. Revise Analyses and Prepare Report
Following the discussion with the City, Willdan will utilize the outcomes of the discussion to provide
additional analyses and prepare a final report.
Products Developed: Final Report
Deliverables to Client: Bound Final Report (3 copies), sealed and signed by a California
registered civil engineer.
112
City of Rolling Hills
Sewer Feasibility Study Phase III
January 27, 2021
Page 4
FEE
We propose to provide the above engineering services for a fixed fee of $14,588. For the Phase
I and II studies, the City authorized a total of $61,257.50 and Willdan invoiced a total of
$43,740.06, leaving a balance of $17,517.44. The fee for the subject Phase III study is less than
the balance of the previously authorized funding.
SCHEDULE
We estimate the Sewer Service – Preliminary Engineering Study will be completed within three
(3) weeks from receipt of the signed proposal and written Notice-to-Proceed. The proposed
schedule is as follows:
Task Weeks Weeks from NTP
1. Review Prior Studies 1 1
2. Develop Working Base Map 1 1
3. Research/Evaluate Available As-Builts 1 1
4. Perform Sewer Feasibility Analysis 1 2
5. Discussion of Findings with City N/A 2
6. Revise Analyses/Prepare Report 1 3
Please indicate the City’s approval and authorization to proceed by either printing out and signing
two originals and returning one hard copy original to our office, or by scanning one signed original
and returning it by e-mail.
Thank you for the opportunity to be of service to the City of Rolling Hills. We recognize the
importance of this preliminary engineering assessment to the City and are committed to
successfully completing it in a timely manner. Should you have any questions regarding this
proposal, please contact Mr. Chris Stone, PE at (702) 289-4247, (702) 280-2381, or Ms. Vanessa
Muñoz PE, TE, PTOE at (562) 368-4848.
Respectfully submitted, Approval and Authorization to Proceed By:
WILLDAN ENGINEERING CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
Vanessa Muñoz, PE, TE, PTOE
Director of Engineering Signature
Date
910005/WW.00.60/P21-024R1_21501
113
Agenda Item No.: 9.B
Mtg. Date: 05/24/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:ALAN PALERMO, PROJECT MANAGER
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:REVIEW ASSESSMENT REPORT FROM PACIFIC ARCHITECTURE
AND ENGINEERING, INC. AND CONSIDER OPTIONS TO REPLACE A
NON-WORKING EMERGENCY STANDBY GENERATOR.
DATE:May 24, 2021
BACKGROUND:
The current emergency standby generator is outdated and no longer functioning properly. Over the past
few years City staff has enlisted several maintenance firms to service the existing generator. The
existing emergency standby generator is at the end of its life cycle and the City is looking to replace the
existing equipment with a new emergency standby generator. Repair activities for the current generator
was presented to the City Council on October 26, 2020. Based on the information provided, the City
Council directed staff to seek professional expertise to assist staff with unit replacement. At the January
11, 2021 City Council meeting, City Council approved an amended agreement with Pacific Architecture
and Engineering Inc. to assess the existing standby generator for the City Hall campus, provide a report
on their findings, and discuss options to replace the existing non-working standby generator.
The draft of the Standby Generator Assessment Report was delivered to the City on April 21, 2021.
Pacific Architecture and Engineering, Inc. met with City staff on April 30, 2021 to review and discuss
the report and findings. The Final Report was updated and submitted to the City on May 5, 2021 and
City Staff presented to City Council on May 10, 2021.
In summary, The report identified the parameters and constraints for the replacement standby
generator/system Based on review of the prior 12 months electric bills, determined the existing 75 kw
could be replaced with an equivalent sized system that would sufficient for the current building loads
(City Hall and Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) Building).
The existing structure housing the generator does not comply with current code requirements for
clearances and has water intrusion with water collecting in the fuel moat with the potential infiltrate into
the electrical system and cause damage. This building would need to be removed, replaced, or repaired
for repurposing.
The report provided 3 Options for consideration and an interim solution:
114
Option 1a: Proposes a new 75 kw Diesel Generator, new code compliant structure, and possible new
electrical components at an estimated total cost of $240,000. This option would replace the existing
facilities in their entirety to comply with all current codes, and would require permitting through
AQMD.
Option 1b: Proposes a new 75 kw Diesel Generator and possible new electrical components at an
estimated total cost of $150,000. This option would place new generator outside and would comply
with all current codes, and would require permitting through AQMD. The existing structure could be
demolished or repurposed. Cost of removing the existing structure or repurposing (storage?) is not
included in the cost estimate.
Option 2: Proposes a Solar PV System with backup battery/storage for use in an emergency at an
estimated total cost of $225,000 (final cost dependent on the size of the PV system and backup
storage/battery). No AQMD permits are required and the Solar PV system would reduce the amount of
the electric bill for City Hall and the RHCA building.
Interim Solution: Implementation of any of the options stated above will take a minimum of 12 months
to design, permit and construct. In the interim, the City could elect to lease a portable generator at a cost
of approximately $1,900 per month. This interim solution would also require improvements to install a
connection switch/disconnect for the portable generator to connect to the building electrical system.
This improvement has an estimated cost of $20,000.
Proposed Immediate Actions:
The existing generator is not functional, it is recommended to remove this generator and either
demolish/remove the existing building or fill in the fuel most to prevent the possibility of further water
intrusion/collection and the potential for water intrusion into the electrical system.
DISCUSSION:
City Council raised numerous questions about the report during the May 10, 2021 meeting and moved
to continue this item to a future meeting pending responses to questions raised. Pacific Architecture and
Engineering Inc. provided responses to the list of questions generated. The questions and responses are
included with this staff report.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The adopted budget for FY20-21 includes $20,000 for contractual services for repairs and maintenance
to City Hall. Some of this budget can be used to address some of the costs that would be incurred for
the Interim Solution and Immediate needs. The selected option for the long term solution would need to
be budgeted for FY21-22.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council revisit the Assessment Report, review the responses from
Pacific Architecture and Engineering Inc. to questions City Council had and provide instructions to
staff on options to replace the existing standby generator.
ATTACHMENTS:
2021-04-19 Rolling Hills Generator Report_REV_.pdf
2021.05.10 City Council FeedbackanswersJF.docx
115
The City of Rolling Hills City Hall
Generator Assessment Report
2 Portuguese Bend Dr. April 19, 2021
Rolling Hills, CA
Prepared by:
Pacific Architecture and Engineering Inc.
116
2
BACKGROUND:
The Engineering Team performed a site survey on April 2, 2021 of the existing generator at the City of
Rolling Hills City Hall. It is assumed this generator serves two existing buildings located at 2
Portuguese Bend Drive in Rolling Hills, California. Record drawings for the current electrical system
were not available, assessment is based on visual observation, as well as Southern California Edison
(SCE) utility bills and limited as-builts. Subject to the visual limitations of such observation, the
following are observations, recommendations, and options for the replacement of the generator.
SUMMARY:
The existing electrical service observed is 600A, 240/120V 3-Phase 4-Wire (delta “high leg”).
According to the SCE utility, the maximum 12-month demand on the 600A service meter was 30 kW.
The current generator is 75 kW and is non-operational. Electrical Engineer assumes that the generator
shall only need to be provided for and connected to the 600A switchboard, as it appears that is how it
is currently connected. This will need to be confirmed during design. A new generator of the same size
will be sufficient for existing building loads per calculations based on the SCE utility bills. If additional
loads are planned to be added in the future, a 75 kW generator will not be sufficient and must be
increased to 250 kW to meet full switchboard load size. In this scenario, the Automatic Transfer
Switch(ATS) would also need to be replaced. It will be assumed that the generator will not be upsized.
Conduit location is not verified, ground penetrating radar was recommended to verify connection to
Community Building. Existing service connections to main switchboard and both buildings should be
confirmed by an electrician tracing all feeder circuits.
The current building where the generator is housed does not meet current California Electrical Code
clearance requirements and is undersized. Any replacement shall require a new structure. Water
intrusion was observed at current structure, waterproofing membrane at Concrete Masonry
Block(CMU) wall has failed and will require replacement. Water ponding was observed in fuel moat.
Current conditions at switchboard do not meet clearance requirements per California Electrical Code
may be resolved with the removal of the generator and new generator may be placed at a new
location or solar panels are installed.
Three Options were considered:
Option 1: REPLACE GENERATOR (SAME SIZE)
Option 2: INSTALL SOLAR SYSTEM WITH SOLAR BACK UP BATTERY
ALTERNATE 1: FOR IMMEDIATE USE IN INTERIM: LEASE PORTABLE GENERATOR
ALERTANTE 2: FOR IMMEDIATE USE IN INTERIM: PURCHASE SMALLER GENERATOR
EXISITING ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:
According to the SCE utility bills received, there are two existing electrical services.
117
3
The existing electrical service observed is 600A of power rated for 240/120V 3-Phase 4-Wire (delta
“high leg”). The service meter switchboard is in a small CMU structure in the parking lot that also
houses the generator and ATS. The existing standby generator inside the structure is 75 kW (93.8 kVA)
at 240/120V 3-Phase 4-Wire. A 400A ATS is located on the back interior wall of the structure adjacent
to the main switchboard. It was not immediately clear how the power is currently fed into the
switchboard from the utility, but Electrical Engineer observed an existing utility pole behind the
structure.
Structure that houses existing generator, utility switchboard/meter, and ATS with utility pole
behind
Inside of structure viewing existing generator with switchboard and ATS behind (ATS not visible in
photo)
118
4
The existing 75 kW standby generator is McGraw-Edison Onan GenSet model number 75.ODYC-
15R/1140K. According to a service log located inside the generator, it was first serviced in November
of 2010 and last serviced in July of 2019. Two service records from February and May of 2019 indicate
“fuel line (still leaking)” and “unable to perform load bank test due to engine internal issues.” The City
stated that the generator has not been operational for some time.
Existing generator markings and nameplate
Per as-builts dated 11/18/1996, the existing structure is 20’ by 11’-4” and contains a 4” fuel moat
around the generator. Observed actual constructed conditions related to equipment placement was
not as shown on as-builts.
The existing main switchboard was manufactured by Siemens, is rated for 600A, and is in a NEMA 3R
rated enclosure. The nameplate on the switchboard indicates 208Y/120V 3-Phase 4-Wire, this label
appears to be inconsistent, as ATS and generator are both labeled for 240/120 3-Phase 4-Wire. A
handwritten note on the gear adjacent to the main breaker in the switchboard reads, “Gen set backs
up entire main 600 amp.” One of the exterior doors on the main switchboard is bent and difficult to
open. Additionally, proper working clearance of at least three feet is not provided for main
switchboard, and there is standing water in a fuel moat directly in front of the switchboard.
The main switchboard contains one 600A main breaker and six branch breakers labeled and rated as
follows: “Lights Outlet” (20A, 1 pole, 1-Phase); “Block Heater” (30A, 1 pole, 1-Phase); “Outside
Lighting” (100A, 2 pole, 1-Phase); “City Hall” (100A, 2 pole, 1-Phase); “AC City Hall” (100A, 3 pole, 3-
Phase); “Assoc.” (200A, 2 pole, 1-Phase).
While the Association building interior was not observed, it is assumed that this 600A main
switchboard serves both the City Hall and Association buildings from meter SCE 259000-037969
(account number 3-013-8772-33). It has not been confirmed where the meter and service for SCE
account 3-048-5137-00 are located or what they are serving. This will need to be confirmed when
circuits are confirmed during design. This report has been prepared under the assumption that the
generator shall only need to be provided for and connected to the 600A meter in this main
119
5
switchboard, as it appears that is how it is currently connected. Per the SCE bills received, the
maximum 12-month demand on this meter was 30 kW. The maximum 12-month demand for the
other, unknown (and not used here) account (3-048-5137-00) was 28.8 kW.
Existing main switchboard enclosure with bent door located behind generator
Main switchboard with doors open, SCE meter, main and branch breakers, and fuel moat
120
6
Main switchboard with doors open, branch breakers, fuel moat, and insufficient working clearance
The existing automatic transfer switch (ATS) for the generator is GE Zenith ZTG, 400A, 240/120V 3-
Phase 4-Wire and is located to the right of the main switchboard.
Existing ATS on back interior wall of structure
Electrical Engineer assumes City Hall building has one branch panel – a 225A, 240/120V 1-Phase 3-
Wire panel in an existing utility/storage closet. However, the breaker in the main switchboard labeled
“City Hall” is only 100A, and an additional 100A breaker in the main switchboard is labeled “AC City
Hall,” although a branch panel for AC load connection was not observed at time of survey.
There is an additional 100A breaker labeled “service disconnect” at the exterior of the back door of
the City Hall building. As-builts dated 9/8/66 that were received by Electrical Engineer indicate an
121
7
additional electrical room to the right of the back exterior door. However, City has stated to
engineering team that the equipment at this location has been abandoned, further investigation is
required to confirm this.
Existing City Hall branch panel exterior, interior, and nameplate
“City Hall” breaker in main switchboard
“AC City Hall” breaker in main switchboard
122
8
“Assoc.” breaker in main switchboard
\
Existing panel and breaker labeled “service disconnect” at back exterior of City Hall building
123
9
During the survey, Electrical engineer observed a large switchboard at the back exterior of the
Community Association building. This switchboard is labeled “Instant Switchboard Model No.
RMSP42-3SNW” and “RUG30W,” was most likely manufactured by Eaton, and is 400A, 240/120V 1-
Phase 3-Wire in a NEMA 3R enclosure. It contains an empty meter socket with no cover and a 200A
branch breaker labeled “community center load center (rest room),” along with several other smaller
branch breakers. The smaller branch breakers were labeled with labels such as “AC,” “garage,”
“sprinkler,” “tool room,” and “bath heater.”
It is not confirmed at the time of survey if this switchboard is operational and will need to be
confirmed during design. It is assumed that it could be fed from the 200A breaker in the main
switchboard shown above. However, an electrician would need to trace the circuit to make a final
determination.
Switchboard behind Association building, interior breakers, abandoned meter socket
OPTIONS:
Option 1a: REPLACE 75kW GENERATOR, REPLACE GENERATOR BUILDING
COST OF GENERATOR $70,000
INSTALLATION $20,000
BUILDING AND ELECTRICAL IMPROVEMENTS: $150,000
TOTAL COST $240,000
Option 1b: REPLACE 75kW GENERATOR AT EXTERIOR WITHOUT BUILDING
COST OF GENERATOR $70,000
INSTALLATION: $20,000
REMOVAL OF GENERATOR AND BUILDING UPGRADES AT SWITCHBOARD: $50,000
124
10
LANDSCAPE SCREENING: $10,000
TOTAL COST: $150,000
1. Existing service connections to main switchboard and both buildings should be confirmed by
an electrician tracing all feeder circuits. Electrician shall provide inclusive existing conditions
single line diagram for both buildings and all pieces of equipment on property.
2. Current generator structure should be replaced to remedy water intrusion issues and
clearance issues.
3. Main switchboard’s bent door should be replaced, NEMA 3R rating shall be confirmed, and
required clearances need to be met.
4. The main switchboard requires a new, larger structure to be built to ensure proper working
clearances for main switchboard and ATS, as well as to maintain generator fuel moat outside
of switchboard clearances. New structure must maintain proper exhaust and clearances for
new generator.
5. A new generator of the same size will only be sufficient for existing building loads. If
additional loads may be added in the future, a 75 kW generator will not be sufficient and must
be increased per item 6 below to meet full switchboard load size.
6. Confirmation is required to determine if existing ATS is listed for use with new generator;
otherwise, also provide a new ATS of equal size to correspond with new generator.
7. If there are new electrical loads planned, the new diesel generator replacement shall be 250
kW, 240/120 3-Phase 4-Wire. New generator may be required to be Tier 4 with sound and
emissions mitigation for use near schools and residences. Generator may also be required to
be provided with particulate filter(s) and noise cancellation devices and options, shall be
South Coast AQMD certified, and shall be from a manufacturer such as Cummins, Caterpillar,
Kohler, or equal.
8. For item 7 above, contractor shall provide new ATS rated for 600A, 240/120 3-Phase 4-Wire.
New ATS shall be listed for use with new generator.
9. Also required is a double wall belly tank system.
10. Environmental Impact: The generator utilizes fossil fuels and creates noise when in use in
proximity to residences and school.
11. These costs assumes only the generator is non-functional.
Option 2: INSTALL SOLAR SYSTEM WITH SOLAR BACK UP BATTERY
COST: $225,000
1. Install Solar PV system (panels, inverters, storage battery cabinets) as an alternate back up
power source. Battery backup of 5kW, upgrade of battery back up of 25kW, and 50kW may
be added at any time in the future. A new Solar PV system of 75 kW will only be sufficient for
existing building loads. If additional loads may be added in the future, a 75 kW generator will
not be sufficient and must be increased to meet full switchboard load size.
125
11
Solar Panel will offset daily peaktime energy use with a reduction in the electric bill.
Consider reducing emergency load by limiting what is powered during an event.(Such as
refrigerators)
2. Environmental benefits include removing the use of fossil fuels from the facility. Solar Power is
a clean renewable power source.
3. The Solar Power option provides continuous daily use in comparison to generator which
would sit idle for long periods of time, at risk of corrosion and failure. This means the solar
panel would provide power on a daily basis and reduce peak load and reduce the electric bill.
4. There may be tax credits and rebates but is not significant.
5. Cost could be reduced by reducing required loads during an event.
ALTERNATE 1: PORTABLE GENERATOR FOR IMMEDIATE USE IN INTERIM
LEASE for 75KW: $1,890 PER MONTH
COST FOR CONNECTION: $20,000
1. Standby power in the form of a portable generator.
2. There is the option to rent at time of a blackout event when a generator is needed, however if
there is a large blackout event a generator to lease may not be available due to demand.
3. The portable generator would need to be placed in a visible area and may not be placed in the
existing building due to ventilation and clearance requirements not being met.
4. Also required: New portable generator connection switch/disconnect located in the parking
lot for temporary generator. Temporary generator shall be same capacity as permanent one
with minimum fuel capacity to support at least 24 hours at full load.
5. There are AQMD requirements for renting or leasing, may only be used during imminent or
actual blackouts, emissions may required to be reported.
ALTERNATE 1: SMALLER PORTABLE GENERATOR FOR IMMEDIATE USE IN INTERIM
PURCHASE: $2,000-$8,000(Battery capacity varies)
1. This option allows for the use of a small number of computer stations to plug into a
standalone generator for computer use but does not allow use of the building systems such as
air conditioning refrigerator, or building lighting. Lamps will need to be plugged into the
generator for lighting during the evening hours. Plug in data low voltage connection will also
need to be configured in case of an event.
FINAL SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The cost to replace obsolete generator CMU building increases the cost of replacing the generator.
Solar panels and battery backup should also be considered at similar cost while also providing daily
energy savings. The existing CMU building is too small to house a new generator with current
requirements for required California Electrical code clearance around equipment. Ventilation
requirements are not met in the current structure per manufacturer’s recommendations and further
increases costs. If the City finds it acceptable that the generator is visible, it may be placed on the
exterior without the cost of a new CMU building with landscape screening.
126
May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting
Emergency Standby Generator Assessment Report – Questions and Comments
1. Clarify the 30 kw demand stated in summary
a. Clarified at meeting demand is 30 + 28.8 kw (RHCA Building) for a total demand
of 58-59 kw
2. Confirm what size Battery was included in Solar Option Cost Estimate (5 kw?)
Yes –14 or 16kwh battery – it would power phone network lifesafety
a.What is the cost if battery capacity be sized to supply 24 hours of power?
During the day the solar produces power so the battery would supply at night
so this battery should be 24 hours. The battery can be cycled. Battery can be
used at peaktime. The battery likes to be used everyday it extends the life of
the battery. Sell battery power or use it to power building. So the generator
sits there costing money while the solar produces power
b. What is the life expectancy for storage batteries (One council member stated is
was 5-10 years, which means 6 years)
10 year warranty
3. What size Solar panel system is included in cost estimate and what reduction in
electrical bill could be expected/estimated?
The solar panel rebate will be $4k
Electric use(and bill) will be reduced by 95%, the solar panels can power both
buildings. See Table below.
Solar panel cost - $120k
Battery Cost $40k
Other costs - reroofing, engineering
127
a.What is the life expectancy for Solar Panels?
25 year warranty
4.Will the existing trees around the buildings impact the Solar option or will they need to
be removed
No, we took a preliminary look and stayed away from trees but some might need to
be cut back a little but they don’t need to be removed. We examined this.
5.What is the expected life span of solar panels?
25 year warranty
6.What impact would a fire (smoke) have on the solar option efficiency?
128
Less production because of smoke but they still are functional
7. What is included in the $10k cost estimate for landscaping around the generator? (One
council member stated, landscaping would $300, and made them question the rest of
the cost estimates).
This is not only landscaping, but the concrete pad, fencing, landscaping, installation of
conduit and AQMD permitting.
8. Any recommendations on Grant Programs for Solar Panels.
See response to Question No. 3 on estimated solar panel rebate
9. Confirm the cost of a 75 kw Diesel generator. A 60 kw gas generator runs about $20k, is
$70k an accurate estimate for the 75 kw diesel generator? If yes, why does the slightly
larger diesel generator cost so much more?
The cost is about the same for both size generators, $20k is installation only. The cost
of both generators is approximately $70k. This price is from the manufacturer directly.
The lease is $1,890 per month on a $70k generator.
10. Are Diesel Generators required to be Tier 4? Can a Diesel Generator operate at less
than a Tier 4?
Yes this is possible, AQMD specialist would confirm this during design.
11. If the generator is outdoors, are there any long term impacts to the generator
a. Clarified at meeting these generators are designed to operate in an outdoor
environment. Housing is for esthetic purposes
12. Are there any legal requirements/restraints (such as the school across the street) that
would require special conditions/AQMD permitting?
Yes notifications are required per AQMD, and the AQMD permitting specialist would
guide this process.
13. The report references several unknowns. Do the cost estimates for each of the options
take into consideration the unknowns or would these unknowns be additional costs? If
not, can range of costs be estimated? City wants to understand the total repair costs.
Any unknowns that are revealed with further investigations would be added to the
cost during the design process.
129
14.Confirming the new ATS cost is included in all the options?
No it is not as it is not confirmed a new ATS is needed.
15. What improvements/work would be required regardless of the option selected?
Recommend removal of generator, fill in moat and fix water intrusion.
16. What are rules for Cities regarding emergency standby generators? Do they have to
abide by all the permitting requirements (assume yes)?
Yes absolutely.
17. What are the interim costs to remove the existing generator and fill in the fuel most?
We estimate $10k
18. If the interim option is moved forward, does the $20k cost for connection reduce the
total cost for the other options or is this cost just for the interim solution?
It is an interim solution and does not reduce the costs of any of the options.
130
Agenda Item No.: 9.C
Mtg. Date: 05/24/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:JANELY SANDOVAL, CITY CLERK
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:REPORT ON MAY 19, 2021 FIRE FUEL COMMITTEE MEETING.
DATE:May 24, 2021
BACKGROUND:
The City Council Fire Fuel Committee met on Wednesday, May 19, 2021 at 7:00 PM. Multiple
members of the public and four Firefighters from the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD)
attended the meeting. The LACFD was invited to answer questions regarding best practices to manage
fire fuel in the canyons. The public provided their comments and suggestions. The Committee met for
nearly two hours and discussed potential city actions to encourage the community to manage
vegetation/ fire fuel in the canyons.
DISCUSSION:
At the May 19, 2021 Committee meeting, the Committee developed the following actions:
1. Staff to generate a map showing locations of canyons and blueline streams.
2. Requested the Fire Department to provide best fire fuel abatement scope of work at Storm Hill
Park.
3. Educate residents about the 40 yard green waste container.
4. Conduct more field trips.
5. Compile the community's suggestions provided at the May 19, 2021 Committee meeting and
present them to the City Council.
The Committee requested the following agenda items to be discussed at the next Committee meeting
scheduled for Wednesday, June 2, 2021 at 6:30pm:
Consider additional regulations on fire fuel management or continue with volunteered actions.
131
Consider city financial incentive program to encourage fire fuel management in the canyons.
Continue discussions on potential programs and projects to encourage fire fuel abatement in the
canyons.
Following the Committee meeting, two members of the community submitted suggestions and those
suggestions were incorporated in the list of suggestions compiled from the May 19, 2021 Committee
meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
ATTACHMENTS:
FIRE FUEL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MAY 19.docx
132
FIRE FUEL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MAY 19, 2021
Speakers Comments
Arlene Honbo • The community must converge and work together to deal with the
canyons,
clearing evacuation routes, clearing 410Bs', and hardening the home, and
working the canyons
• We must at least harden our homes if there is a large amount of
vegetation in the canyons otherwise properties will be "toast"
• More education for residents regarding vegetation in the canyons
because they only think about 410B
• Residents need more awareness, and sense of urgency dealing with
canyons,
• Start small with low hanging fruit and go from there
Gene Honbo • The fire department has looked at canyons and performed an aerial
assessment of the canyons.
• We have to start as soon as possible because we are within 3 square
miles
• Believes the fire department has done a good job and endorses fire
departments approach
Fire Fighter Zimmerman • Question from Jim Black How would you guide the city in mitigating fuel
at storm hill? What’s the best way to use the grant money? How much of a
break is worthwhile?
• Reply: We Based the 3 area plans on typical weather patterns of Rolling
Hills which are south to southwest winds pushing up the canyons and
canyons are in alignment with the wind pattern (biggest area of concern),
Regardless of mitigation/break done a fire could still start, You cannot
anticipate where the fire will come from, You must look at surrounding
area of the city and he believes it could jump the clearance/break done in
that area, The plan is based upon the wind-pattern in the canyons also the
history of fire in Rolling Hills
133
Annie • She Encourages everyone to harden their homes,
her concerns are the embers,
• She believes fire always come from the: 1, 2, 3 area.
• She believes we should listen to the experts (fire department),
• She believes we need foliage around your home as well because that's
apart of hardening your home
Sue Breholz • She believes individuals can do things to reduce vegetation around their
home but not from way down in the canyons attempting to haul it back
up• she believes little steps are important.
Leah Mirsch • The grant is an opportunity to get a group of neighbors together and to
do mitigation together
• It would be helpful if we can get different types of information on how
and where to start mitigation all in one place
• Believes the association has done a good job grooming the trails reducing
vegetation
• Believes association also have done well on publicly owned properties,
and top of storm hill park and trail up to storm hill park
• We must be realistic to start chipping away at it piece by piece and it is
unrealistic that it has to be done to perfection and by "x" day
Bea Dieringer None
Abas Goodrzi • He believes first priority is for each residents to be educated,
• He also believes that residents have to clear surroundings of your
residence and communicate that with their neighbors,
• Clear 15-20 feet around property,
• Clear the bottom of trees that escalate fire,
• He believes residents should take responsibility and take liability for their
residence if they don’t clear it,
• City should not mandate things it will cause conflicts,
• Highly recommend to start with simple tasks that are most affective to
save resident's life and property then prevent or contain the out of control
fires
Alfred Visco • Alfred agrees that it is not impossible to do it on their own and it should
be left to the professionals (fire department, Finley, travers, etc.) to decide
how to meet goals,
• Disturbed by the lack of sense of urgency does not believe we have time
to do a "pilot" project to get others together,
• He believes the City has to determine whether it will be voluntary or by
regulation because if voluntary we have to decide how much participation
is acceptable,
• He endorses the legal approach as well to declaring "dangerous",
• If properties’ vegetation is really bad use Phos-chek in those bad areas
and you can spray it on the vegetation not everywhere but the bad areas
only,
• Believes the canyons will not be ready for peak fire season and the city
should get vendors in with companies that do the phos-chek to help and
partner with fire department to figure out selective prophylactic treatment
134
on areas in the city,
• He believes the wind will cause the embers to jump the break causing
worse issues for the city
Dr. Schaye • Suggests taking care of the chaparral problem by using goats states they
are used in many other communities and wants to have a look into that,
• Believes individuals should not go off on their own regarding this and it
should be owned by fire department and even led by them because their
experience of fighting fire has more precedence
Jim Aichele • The conservancy finally came up and began weed whacking the trail area
and the hillside where the old fire station by the school is.
Arun Bhumitra • Start with the basics: Trees in the city should only be a certain height
because of the breeze in the city the embers would fly all over. By limiting
the trees to the roof ridge line, it can also assist with tree wreckage during
high winds
• Review the vegetation/ view code of our neighboring cities, which appear
to be sufficient for their residents, and then adopt similar codes ourselves.
Richard Colyear • Verify Bolton Engineering’s revised zoning sections provided to the city
and RHCA two years ago, make corrections, and approve for an updated
zoning map. Once finalized, have Bolton create a topo map to show the
canyons and blue line streams.
• Use grants that can be augmented with donations from the members of
the community to fund the Storm Hill projected suggested by Mayor Pro
Tem Black, and to have City Attorney Mike Jenkins set it up.
• For City Manager Elaine to urge the RHCA to distinguish between
easements and common areas. By doing so, it will be clear which
easements are private and must be maintained by owner, and which are
common areas for the City and RHCA to have adequate information
regarding what and how cost wise they will be maintained.
Donald Crocker • He spoke with Mike Jenkins about the city's right to declare problems in
canyons as dangerous conditions making the home-owner liable to cure
the dangerous condition legally
• Paradise has been out of business for years and if we had a bad fire it will
affect property values, the ability to get insurance, etc.
• He believes amount of money it would cost us to greatly reduce the fuel
load is small in comparison to the damage a fire would do to the city
• He encourages the city to explore legal approach to this problem
• He wants to inform the city of where their property lines are and do it as
a group
• Take one canyon as a "pilot" project to outline where the property lines
are
• Hire a contractor to find out what impacts would be made on properties
in the event of a fire
• Says we need fire department to tell us what needs to be removed
around the property so it is more as it goes through the canyon closer to
properties (houses)
• Wants to understand what individuals can do for their property to
minimize highest risk
135
Liz Calpas • Question: She believes most people don't know its 200 ft now, does that
include all structures such as barns?
• Fire department (Trevor) did not know the answer said they would get
further clarification
Roger Hopkins • He Questions the value of up to a $1,000 fine or imprisonment of
residents for not removing their vegetation and believes that instead
money should be used on fire fuel prevention services with most egregious
properties getting the most attention ,
• We should consider Dollar-for-dollar cost sharing approach between city,
residents and association to hire someone to reduce vegetation,
• The County has a frugal program that provides selected inmates from
local custodial businesses to earn a productive trait performing weed
abatement supervised work in canyons and we should look into that,
• Wants to know if mandate of fees and imprisonment came by way of
receiving the grant,
• He believes taking grant money from government entities is a bad idea
and allows them to authorize control over the city
136
Agenda Item No.: 10.A
Mtg. Date: 05/24/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:ELAINE JENG, CITY MANAGER
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:RECEIVE AND FILE ROLLING HILLS HARDENING THE HOME
VIDEOS PRODUCED BY THE WORLD WISE PRODUCTION.
DATE:May 24, 2021
BACKGROUND:
On April 12, 2021, the City Council engaged the services of Worldwise Productions LLC. (Worldwise)
to produce hardening the home education videos. Worldwise shot on location on May 3, 2021 and on
May 13, 2021, the City received the first look at the final product.
DISCUSSION:
The project, led by Lead Block Captain Gene Honbo and Block Captain Educational Chair Debra
Shrader, wrote the script with Los Angeles County Fire Department Forestry Division Pre-Fire
Engineer Trevor Moore was able to finish the shoot on one day. This allowed the project to be on
schedule and within budget. The project leads are working with Worldwise on the finishing touches.
Once finalized, the videos will be placed on the City's website for viewing. The videos will also be
shared with the Block Captains to encourage dissemination. The videos will also be shared with the
Rolling Hills Community Association Board and community clubs.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost to produce the videos was $9,550 and funded using the emergency preparedness account.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
ATTACHMENTS:
137
Agenda Item No.: 10.B
Mtg. Date: 05/24/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:TERRY SHEA, FINANCE DIRECTOR
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:REPORT BY BUDGET/AUDIT/FINANCE COMMITTEE ON MEETING
HELD ON MAY 19, 2021.
DATE:May 24, 2021
BACKGROUND:
The Finance/Budget/Audit Committee meets annually to go over the following items:
Consideration of Updates to the Schedule of Fees and Charges
Investment Policy
Financial, Budget and Debt Policy
Asset Capitalization Policy
Proposed Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget
DISCUSSION:
Consideration of Update to Schedule of Fees and Charges
The City Manager went over the Schedule of Fees and Charges and indicated that Staff is
recommending two changes to the current schedule:
1. Increase Construction and Demolition permit fee from $100 (single project permit) to $150 and
collect a deposit of $1,000 from the applicant at the time of permit issuance, up from the current
deposit amount of $750. The deposit will be returned to the applicant upon the submittal of a
waste diversion report from the applicant.
2. Wire application Fee of $1,000. There is no current fee associated with the Wireless Application,
138
however between staff time, advertising and mailings there is approximately $1,000 of City costs.
The Committee Member ’s discussed the increase in Demolition Permit Fee and deposit and were
concerned if we raised the fee to high the homeowners may find a way to go around the permitting. The
City Manager indicated the fee increase is warranted as the City needs to obtain the diversion
information from the homeowner and the increase in the deposit should help to ensure that the
homeowners comply. The Committee Members were okay with the proposed Staff recommended
increases.
The Committee Members asked about the Wireless Application Fee and who was assessed the Fee. The
City Manager explained how it works and that it was a Fee assessed to the utility company that wanted
to put up a new pole or facility. Both Committee Members were okay with the Staff proposed Wireless
Application Fee of $1,000.
Dr. Black indicated he would like the Review by Committee on Trees and Views Processing Fee be
lowered from $2,000 to $1,000. After some discussion both Committee Members are recommending
the Fee be lowered to $1,000.
Committee Member Pieper asked if the False Alarm fees that were assessed are being collected. The
City Manager indicated the City is billing the residents after the first one but the some of the residents
are not paying. The City Manager indicated the City does not currently have a policy concerning the
nonpayment of Fines. The City Manager indicated if the Sheriff ’s Office responds to a false alarm it
uses some of our allotted hours. Committee Member Pieper indicated he would like to also waive the
2nd false alarm and not bill till the 3 rd false alarm. He wants to include a penalty if the residents do not
pay within a specified time. Both Committee Members were okay with the changes but wanted to get a
consensus from the entire City Council.
There were no other changes discussed.
Review Investment Policy; Financial, Budget and Debt Policy; and Asset Capitalization Policy.
Staff indicated they have reviewed the aforementioned policies as well as the City’s external auditors
and are not recommending any changes to the Investment Policy, the Asset Capitalization Policy and
the Financial, Budget & Debt Policies at this time.
139
In 2019 the Financial, Budget & Debt Policy was amended for the selection of independent external
auditors requiring the City to go out for competitive bidding every six years beginning with the Fiscal
Year 2021-22. However, our current contract with Lance, Soll & Lunghard, LLC expired with the
Fiscal Year 2019-20 audit. Staff would like to extend the Contract for one year for the Fiscal Year
2020-21 audit and then go out for competitive bid in December of 2021. We received a one-year quote
from LSL for $17,623 up from the prior year amount of $17,120.
The Committee Members were in agreement with the Staff’s recommendation.
Review of Fiscal Year 2021-22 Proposed Budget
The Finance Director went over the proposed General Fund Revenues which increased from $2,060,400
to $2,088,400. Property Taes and Motor Vehicle In-lieu were projected 4% higher than the previous
year. All other revenues are in line with the prior year. For FY 21-22 there is no Proposition A
Exchange of $56,250 and Interest Income has been lowered by $20,000 due to the dropping interest
rates.
The proposed General Fund Expenditures are $2,979,081 up from the prior year amount of $2,385,718.
City Administration increased from $981,800 to $1,048,556. Salaries and Benefits increased $35,826.
Dr. Black asked about the increase, and it was explained there was increase in wages and benefits with
the City Manager ’s new contract and we are budgeting the PERS Unfunded Liability differently this
year. The entire amount of $59,025 was budgeted in the Administration Department. Equipment
Leasing costs were increased, which includes $7,100 for Granicus. IT support was up $7,200. Costs
included record management of $45,000. Committee Member Pieper asked if these were one-time
costs.
Finance Department decreased from $122,883 to $117,130. The main difference is the City is not
budgeting for a budget consultant to assist with the Budget development.
Planning & Development Department increased from $824,400 to $1,032,532. Salaries and Benefits
increased $23,240. Costs for Legal Services were increased by $45,000. The biggest increase in the
Storm Water Management costs, which increased by $128,000. The Committee Members discussed the
increase and the total amount that is being spent on the program and the City not actually receiving any
140
benefits from it. Dr. Black wanted to know where the endpoint is and if there is something we can do
about it. Committee Member Pieper indicated we have no choice, and that the entire Council should
look at this.
Law Enforcement Department had a decrease from $291,785 to $279,830 for the General Fund. For
Fiscal Year 2021-22 the COPS Fund would be offsetting the costs for the Sheriff ’s Contract and for the
additional Traffic costs for $160,000.
Nondepartmental Department costs increased from $97,350 to $152,010. It included an increase of
$16,000 in costs for the City’s support of the Caballeros, Women’s Club and the Tennis Court
Maintenance. These items were budgeted out of the Community Facilities Fund in the prior year with a
transfer from the General Fund. For FY 2021-22 they are being budgeted out of the General Fund
directly. The Insurance costs through the CJPIA increased $2,700. The Budget includes an increase of
$20,000 for the Block Captain Training and events. Also included was $10,000 for an Appreciation
Luncheon. Committee Member Pieper inquired as to what that was. The City Manager explained what
it was and Dr. Black explained what it was and where it was held in detail. The Committee Members
did not want to recommend including it in the FY 2021-22 Budget.
City Properties Department costs increased from $67,500 to $349,273. Increased Janitorial costs were
$7,400. Alarm costs were increased by $3,600. Committee Member Pieper asked why the costs were
so high and what was included in the costs. The City Manager explained what was all included with the
alarm system. Landscape costs were increased $15,000 and there was some discussion on the quality of
service being provided by the current vendor. The largest increase is the purchase of a new generator of
$250,000 which is a one-time cost.
The Finance Director went over the proposed Transfers In and Out from the General Fund.
Transfer In of $24,000 from the Refuse Fund for the Staff’s time involved.
Transfer Out of $159,200 to the Refuse Fund for the Rate Subsidy.
Transfer Out of $88,000 to the Capital Projects Fund for the Tennis Court Improvements.
Transfer Out of $850,000 to the Capital Projects Fund for the City Hall ADA Improvements.
There was some discussion on the Tennis Court Project and Committee Member Pieper asked exactly
what the City’s responsibility was for the Project. The City Manager explained what portion of the
Project the City was responsible for. The City had transferred funds last year for the Project and
$212,000 was available and with $88,000 this year the projected costs are $300,000. Both Committee
Members were okay with recommending the $88,000 Transfer and the $300,000 for the Project.
141
Dr. Black indicated the Council did not approve the $850,000 for the City Hall ADA Improvements and
thought they recommended the lower alternative of about $300,000, with the need for some additional
wiring maybe, and $400,000 should be the amount budgeted. Both Committee Members indicated this
should be determined by the entire City Council.
The City Manager then went over the Proposed 3-Year Capital Improvement Plan in detail. The
Committee Members did not want to recommend the $1,700,000 for the 8” Sewer Main Project and
thought it should go to the entire Council.
The Committee Members asked about Vegetation/Fire Fuel Management Grant Project and the City
Manager explained only the first phase for the grant has been approved. The Committee members felt
that the costs for the first phase only should be included then.
There was some discussion on the Crest Road East Utility Undergrounding Grant Project and the City
Manager added that it was grant funded project with the City’s match coming from the City’s Rule 20A
funds.
The Committee Members indicated the CIP Plan should be reviewed and discussed by the City Council
at the City’s Budget Workshop on May 24, 2021.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No Fiscal Impact
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and File
ATTACHMENTS:
AssetCapitalization_Policy_Resolution No. 953.pdf
Financial_Policies.pdf
Investment_Policy.pdf
Rolling Hills 1 year extension FY 2021.pdf
CIP_3Years_2021-May-16.pdf
2019-2020_Consolidated_Tax_and_Fee_Schedule.pdf
FY_21-22_Proposed_Budget-WKST.pdf
142
143
144
FINANCIAL POLICIES 05/11/2020 1
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY/PROCEDURES
FINANCIAL, BUDGET AND DEBT POLICIES
Original Version Effective: 09/24/2007
See end of document for complete policy history.
Current Version Effective: 05/11/2020
Policy Framework:
The purpose of the Financial, Budget and Debt Policies is to guide the City Council and other City
officials in developing sustainable, balanced budgets and managing the City’s finances in a
prudent manner consistent with best practices. The City’s commitment to adopting and operating
within a balanced budget is a core financial value and policy of the City.
The City of Rolling Hills Financial Policies represents the City’s framework for planning and
management of the City’s fiscal resources. Adherence to the Financial Policies promote sound
financial management which can lead to unqualified annual audits, provide assurance to the
taxpayers that tax dollars are being collected and spent per City Council direction and provide a
minimum of unexpected impacts upon taxpayers and users of public services.
The City Council Finance / Budget Committee shall serve as the City’s audit committee for the
purpose of recommending the selection of an auditor to the City Council, meeting with the City
Auditor, reviewing the annual audit and necessary financial statements, responding to conflicts
between management and the auditor and responding to fraudulent activities. The City Council
will conduct a competitive process for the selection of the independent external auditor every 6
years to be in conformance with California Government Code Section 12410.6. (b). commencing
for Fiscal Year 2021-22. Any non- audit work performed by the independent external auditor, if
allowed, will be done under a separate contract approved by the City Council.
The City Manager shall be responsible for developing and, as appropriate, implementing and
managing these policies as well as subsidiary policies that execute the City’s Financial Policies.
The City’s Financial Policies shall be in conformance with all state and federal laws, generally
accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and standards of the Governmental Accounting
Standards Board (GASB) and the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA).
1. Financial Reporting Entity:
The City of Rolling Hills was incorporated in 1957 under the general laws of the State of California.
The City operates under the Council-Manager form of government. The City Council consists of
five members elected at large for overlapping four-year terms. The Mayor and Mayor Pro-Tem
are selected from the City Council members and serve a one-year term. The City Council
appoints a City Manager, City Attorney and City Treasurer. In addition, the City Council appoints
the members of advisory Commissions and Committees.
The City, directly or by contract, provides municipal services as authorized by statute. Services
provided include:
Public safety through the Los Angeles County Sheriff and Fire Department
Refuse collection by contract with a private hauler
Water through California Water Service Company
145
FINANCIAL POLICIES 05/11/2020 2
Sewer through Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts
Recreation
Public improvements
Planning and zoning
General administrative and support services
2. Financial Reporting Policies:
The City’s accounting and financial reporting systems will be maintained in conformance with all
state and federal laws, generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and standards of the
Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and the Government Finance Officers
Association (GFOA). Further, the City will make every attempt to implement all changes to
governmental accounting practices at the earliest practical time.
The financial report should be in conformity with GAAP, demonstrate compliance with
finance related legal and contractual provisions, disclose thoroughly with detail sufficient
to minimize ambiguity and potential for misleading interferences.
An annual audit will be performed by an independent public accounting firm with an audit
opinion to be included with the City’s published Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
The City’s budget should satisfy criteria as a financial and programmatic policy document,
as a comprehensive financial plan, as an operations guide for all organizational units and
as a communications device for all significant budgetary issues, trends, and resource
choices.
The City shall evaluate the fiscal impact of proposed changes in employee benefits to be
provided. Prior to assuming liability for expanded benefits, a viable funding plan with
estimates of long term impacts shall be incorporated into the analysis.
The City shall endeavor to avoid committing to new spending for operating or capital
improvement purposes until an analysis of all current and future cost implications is
completed.
The City shall endeavor to maintain cash reserves sufficient to fully fund the next present
value of accruing liabilities, obligations to employees for vested payroll and benefits and
similar obligations as they are incurred.
The City shall prepare and present to the City Council monthly interim revenue and
expenditure reports and a Mid-Year Review to allow evaluation of potential discrepancies
from budget assumptions.
3. Internal Control Accounting Policies:
To provide a reasonable basis for making management’s required representations concerning the
finances of the City.
Accounting Records – Maintain accounting records in accordance with Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).
Monthly Posting – Post a monthly record, which maintains each month’s activities
separate and distinct from another month’s work. This provides visibility in locating errors
and fixing corrections. Accounting ledgers will be reviewed and reconciled on a monthly
146
FINANCIAL POLICIES 05/11/2020 3
basis to supporting documentation – Cash Receipts, Accounts Payable, Payroll and
Monthly Journal Entries.
Sequential Number – Sequentially numbered instruments will be used for checks and cash
receipts. Pre-numbered receipts are controlled and accounted for by an individual with no
accounting handling responsibilities. The City’s pre-numbered checks and pre-numbered
cash receipts should be safeguarded in the Vault. All copies of voided receipt forms are
retained, accounted for, and documented.
Audit Trail – The City’s accounting records and systems shall provide an audit trail (e.g.
paper document) that allows for the tracing of each transaction from its original document
to completion.
4. Operating Management Policies:
The budget process is intended to weigh all competing requests for City resources within
expected fiscal constraints. Requests for new, on-going programs made outside the budget
process will be discouraged.
Budget development will consider multi-year implications of current decisions and
allocations and use conservative revenue forecasts.
Revenues will not be dedicated for specific purposes, unless required by law or Generally
Accepted Accounting Practices (GAAP). All non-restricted revenues will be deposited in
the General Fund (or other designated fund as approved by the City Manager) and
appropriated by the City Council.
Current revenues will fund current expenditures. City revenues will be managed to protect
programs from short-term fluctuations that impact expenditures.
The City will endeavor to identify entrepreneurial solutions to cover or recover costs of
operating program.
The City shall strive to avoid returning to the City Council for new or expanded
appropriations during the fiscal year. Exceptions may include emergencies, unforeseen
impacts, mid-year adjustments or new opportunities.
Additional personnel will be requested after service needs have been thoroughly
examined and is substantiated for new program initiatives or policy directives.
All non-Enterprise user fees and charges will be evaluated at least every three years to
determine the direct and indirect cost recovery rate. The analysis will be presented to the
City Council.
The City shall endeavor to maintain adequate cash reserves to fund 100% replacement
of capital equipment. Replacement costs will be based upon equipment lifecycle financial
analysis developed by the Finance Director and approved by the City Manager.
Balanced revenue and expenditure forecasts will be prepared to examine the City’s ability
to absorb operating costs due to changes in the economy, service demands, and capital
improvements. The forecast will be updated annually and include a four-year outlook.
147
FINANCIAL POLICIES 05/11/2020 4
Cash and investment programs will be maintained in accordance with the Government
Code and the adopted investment policy will ensure that proper controls and safeguards
are maintained. City funds will be managed in a prudent and diligent manner with an
emphasis on safety of principal, liquidity, and financial return on principal, in that order.
Pursuant to State law, the City, at least annually, revises and the City Council affirms a
detailed investment policy.
5. Capital Management Policies:
Capital improvement projects are defined as infrastructure or equipment purchases or
construction which results in a capitalized asset and having a useful (depreciable) life of
at least one year with a cost of $5,000 or more per the City’s resolution Number 953.
The Finance Department shall utilize the straight-line method of calculating depreciation
over the estimated useful life for all classes of assets.
The capital improvement plan will attempt to include, in addition to current operating
maintenance expenditures, adequate funding to support, repair and replace deteriorating
infrastructure and avoid a significant unfunded liability.
Capital improvement lifecycle costs will be coordinated with the development of the City’s
operating budget. Future operating, maintenance, and replacement costs associated with
new capital improvements will be forecast, matched to available revenue sources and be
included in the operating budget. Capital project contract awards or purchases will include
a fiscal impact statement disclosing the expected operating impact of the project or
acquisition and when such cost is expected to occur.
6. Reserve Policies:
It is the goal of the City to obtain and maintain a General Fund operating reserve (Rainy day fund)
in the form of cash, of at least 40% of prior year audited annual General Fund revenues to cover
normal seasonal cash flow variations, as well as unforeseen emergency or catastrophic impacts
upon the City.
One-time revenue windfalls should be designated as a reserve or used for one-time
expenditures. The funds should not be used for on-going operations. For purposes of
this policy, one-time revenue windfalls shall include:
CalPERS rebates
Tax revenue growth in excess of 10% in a single year
Unexpected revenues (e.g., litigation settlement)
Any other revenues the City Council may elect to designate as extraordinary
All unexpended General Funds from the prior fiscal year will be deposited in the General
Fund Reserve Fund (Rainy Day Fund.)
The City will strive to maintain the Municipal Self-Insurance Fund with a July 1 balance of
$500,000.
The City will strive to transfer $250,000 annually into the Utilities Fund for the purpose of
building up the necessary balance for underground projects.
148
FINANCIAL POLICIES 05/11/2020 5
Enterprise Fund (e.g., for refuse collection) user fees and charges will be examined
annually to ensure that they recover all direct and indirect costs of the service, provide for
capital improvements and maintenance and maintain adequate reserves. Moreover,
maintenance of cash reserves will provide a de facto rate stabilization plan. Rate
increases shall be approved by the City Council following formal noticing and public
hearing. Rate adjustments for enterprise operations will be based on five-year financial
plans unless a conscious decision is made to the contrary. The current cash reserves
shall be adjusted annually and will be equal to the proposed annual General Fund subsidy
to the Refuse Fund and will be budgeted as a Transfer into the Refuse Fund.
The City has established a PARS Pension Rate Stabilization Program Section 115 Trust.
The Trust was created to fund the City’s unfunded PERS Pension Liability and as funds
are available they would be deposited into the Trust in order to maintain adequate
reserves.
7. Budget Policies:
The function of the City of Rolling Hills is primarily administrative.
A. Categories of Funds
The City’s annual budget contains fifteen different funds managed in conformance with
the City’s Fund Balance Policy:
General Fund
Community Facility Fund
Self-Insurance Fund
Refuse Fund
Traffic Fund
Transit Fund - Proposition A
Transit Fund - Proposition C
Transit Fund – Measure R
Transit Fund – Measure M
LA County Measure W
Capital Projects Fund
Citizens Options for Public Safety Fund (COPS) Fund
California Law Enforcement Equipment Program (CLEEP) Fund.
Utility Fund
OPEB (Post-Employment Benefits Other Than Pensions) Fund
Each fund is considered to be a separate accounting entity for budgeting and financial
reporting purposes.
The operations of each fund are accounted for by providing a separate set of self-
balancing accounts which are comprised of each fund’s assets, liabilities, equity,
revenues and expenditures, as appropriate.
The City resources are allocated to and for individual funds based upon the purpose
of the spending activities.
All funds and reserves will be evaluated annually for long-term adequacy and use
requirements in conjunction with development of the City’s long-term budget
assumptions.
149
FINANCIAL POLICIES 05/11/2020 6
For approved capital projects unexpended budget appropriations would be reviewed
annually by the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee for recommendation for carryover to
the following fiscal year.
B. Operating Budget Guidelines
The Budget is detailed - Expenditures are authorized line by line, item by item. Line
items are used to limit precisely the amount and narrowly define what can be spent.
The Budget is annual - The annual budget period is from July 1 to June 30. The time
span of the authority to spend is restricted to one year. Each year the regular cycle of
budgeting is repeated.
The budget is comprehensive – The budget is prepared for all funds expended by the
City.
The City adopts a budget by June 30 of each year.
Comparative Data - Comparative data from the prior year is presented in the annual
budget in order to provide an understanding of changes in the City’s financial position
and operation.
Public Hearing - The City Council reviews a tentative budget and adopts the final
budget. A public hearing is conducted to receive comments prior to adoption.
C. Financial Review
Throughout the fiscal year, monthly financial reports comparing actual amounts with
budgeted amounts are prepared by the Finance Director and submitted to the City
Manager and members of the City Council. As these reports are reviewed, attention is
drawn to variances between budgeted amounts and actual amounts.
D. Budgeted Revenues & Expenditures
The City reviews fees and charges to keep pace with the cost of providing the service.
8. Debt Management Policies:
The City will seek to avoid incurring debt. While the City is disposed to funding capital
improvements and expenditures on a cash basis, the City will consider, and when necessary,
enter into debt financing for citywide public improvement projects such as sewers and utility
undergrounding.
Lease Equipment - Office Equipment has been leased on a monthly basis with the
expense incurred at the time of payment.
Policy Administrative History:
Adopted September 24, 2007
Revised and Adopted March 24, 2008
Revised and Adopted February 23, 2009
Revised and Adopted March 8, 2010
150
FINANCIAL POLICIES 05/11/2020 7
Reviewed and Adopted February 28, 2011
Revised and Adopted May 23, 2011
Reviewed and Adopted May 14, 2012
Reviewed and Adopted April 22, 2013
Revised and Adopted September 9, 2013
Reviewed and Adopted March 24, 2014
Reviewed and Adopted April 27, 2015
Reviewed and Revised April 25, 2016
Reviewed and Adopted April 24, 2017
Reviewed and Adopted April 22, 2019
Reviewed and Adopted May 11, 2020
151
INVESTMENT POLICY 4/24/2017 1
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY/PROCEDURES
INVESTMENT POLICY
Original Version Effective: 09/24/2007
See end of document for complete policy history.
Current Version Effective: 04/09/2018
1.0 Policy
It is the policy of the City of Rolling Hills to protect, preserve and maintain the assets of the City.
It shall invest public funds in a manner that will provide the highest investment return
commensurate with maximum security while meeting the cash flow demands of the City and
conforming to all State and Local statutes governing the investment of public funds.
2.0 Scope
The City follows the practice of pooling cash and investments of all funds, except for funds in
the City’s employee deferred compensation plan. Funds contained in the City’s pool are
designated the “General Portfolio.” These funds are accounted for in the Financial Statements
of the City and include:
The General Fund
All Special Revenue Funds
All Capital Projects Funds
All Enterprise Funds
All Internal Service Funds
All Trust and Agency Funds
The City offers its employees a deferred compensation plan created in accordance with Internal
Revenue Code Section 457. The City’s deferred compensation plans assets are with
Nationwide Retirement Solutions and ICMA Retirement Corporation. The Nationwide
Retirement Solutions and ICMA Retirement Corporation invests employee account assets in
various investment options as directed by the individual employee. Accordingly, these assets
are neither controlled by the City nor subject to this investment policy.
3.0 Prudence
The City holds to the “prudent investor standard” in that all investments shall be made with
judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion
and intelligence exercise the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for
investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be
derived and acting as a fiduciary of the public trust. The prudent investor standard set forth in
Section 53600.3 of the Government Code states: “When investing, reinvesting, purchasing,
acquiring, exchanging, selling or managing public funds, a trustee shall act with care, skills,
prudence and diligence under the circumstances then prevailing, including, but not limited to,
the general economic conditions and the anticipated needs of the agency, that a prudent person
acting in a like capacity and familiarity with those matters would use in the conduct of funds of a
like character and with the like aims to safeguard the principle and maintain the liquidity needs
of the agency.”
152
INVESTMENT POLICY 4/24/2017 2
4.0 Objectives
The primary objectives, in priority order, of the City of Rolling Hills’ investment activities shall be:
4.1. Safety: Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. “Safety”
means that the overall value of City funds shall not be diminished in the process of securing and
investing those funds or over the duration of the investments.
4.2. Liquidity: The City of Rolling Hills’ investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid
to enable the City to meet all operating requirements which might be reasonably anticipated.
The liquidity of each type of investment is included in its description in the “Authorized
Investments” section of this policy.
4.3. Return on Investment (Yield): The City of Rolling Hills investment portfolio shall be
designed with the objective of attaining a rate of return throughout budgetary and economic
cycles, commensurate with the investment risk constraints and the cash flow characteristics of
the portfolio.
In general, the California Government Code limits authorized investments to those classes of
securities which have lower risk (and therefore lower yields) than other higher risk investment
choices. In each investment transaction, the anticipated return on investment is subordinate to
the preceding requirement of credit and investment risk.
5.0 Delegation of Authority
The City Council has the authority to select financial institutions for the City’ investment and
bank accounts. The City Council has designated the City Council Finance / Budget Committee,
the City Manager, and the City Finance Director with the responsibility for decisions and
operations for the following investment and operating bank accounts:
Operating Bank Accounts
Local Agency Fund administered by the Treasurer of the State of California
Money market savings accounts
Checking accounts
Certificates of Deposits/Negotiable Certificates of Deposits or Time Deposits
Certificates of Deposits, Negotiable Certificates of Deposit or Time Deposits with commercial
banks and /or savings and loan associations issued by a nationally or state-chartered bank, a
savings association, or a federal association (as defined by Section 5102 of the Financial
Code), a state or federal credit union with maturities ranging from 30 days to three years.
153
INVESTMENT POLICY 4/24/2017 3
6.0 Ethics and Conflicts of Interest:
Officers and employees involved in the investment process are required by the City of Rolling
Hills’ and State Government Code Section 81000 to disclose annually to the City Council any
material financial interests in financial institutions that conduct business with the City and further
to disclose any large personal financial / investment positions that could be related to the
performance of the City, particularly with regard to the time of purchase and sales, as part of the
City’s conflict of interest reporting requirements. Said employees are also prohibited from
accepting gifts proffered as a direct result of being employees of the City.
7.0 Authorized Financial Dealers, Institutions and Portfolio Managers:
The Finance Director will maintain a list of financial institutions authorized to provide investment
services, including portfolio management. No public deposit shall be made except in a qualified
public depository as established by State law. Financial institutions authorized to provide
investment services to the City, including portfolio management, shall utilize security broker /
dealers who are duly licensed and authorized to provide investment services in the State of
California.
Anyone providing financial services to the City, including portfolio management must adhere to
the City’s investment policies as adopted by the City Council.
8.0 Authorized and Suitable Investments:
The surplus funds of the City may be invested in any of the following list of eligible securities.
Surplus funds are defined as those funds not immediately needed for City operations excepting
those minimum balances required by the City’s banks as compensation for services rendered to
the City, or such other funds as otherwise determined by the Finance Director or City Manager.
The list of eligible securities is drawn from the approved investments contained in the California
Government Code Sections 53600 et seq., limited further by the provisions of this policy.
For eligibility as a City investment, the following restrictions should be added to those contained
in the California Government Code Sections 53601 et seq. They are:
8.1 U.S. Treasury Bonds, Notes & Bills – “Strips” and “Cubes”
The principal and interest portions of U.S. Treasury securities are issued by the Federal
Government. Frequently, broker / dealers make a market in these securities by separating the
principal and interest components and marketing them separately. The principal portions of
their “stripped” securities are marketed at deep discounts. “Strips” and “Cubes” do not provide
income streams during the term of the investment, but rather pay a “par” amount at maturity.
This makes these investments somewhat more volatile than standard U.S. Treasury securities.
The City will not invest in “strips” or “cubes.”
8.2 U.S. Government Agencies
There are numerous government agencies listed which issue debt instruments but many lack
the liquidity necessary to fit the City’s portfolio requirements possibly including, for example, the
issues of Federal Farm Credit Bank, the Federal National Mortgage Association, the Federal
Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, the Federal Home Loan Bank, and the Student Loan
Mortgage Corporation.
The City will not purchase these government agency securities.
154
INVESTMENT POLICY 4/24/2017 4
8.3 Repurchase Agreements
A repurchase agreement is a contractual agreement between a financial institution or dealer
and the City in which the City lends its funds to the financial institution or dealer for a certain
number of days at a stated rate of interest. In return, the City takes title to securities as
collateral until the funds and interest are repaid.
The City will not enter into repurchase agreements.
8.4 Medium Term Corporate Notes
The City will not purchase medium term corporate notes.
8.5 Commercial Paper and Corporate Bonds
The City will not purchase commercial paper or corporate bonds.
8.6 Prohibited Investments
The list of eligible securities contained in the California Government Code is extensive and
includes a number of categories which are not suitable investments for City funds because of
limitations in the liquidity of the instruments or the interest rates obtainable thereon. The
categories in the list which have such limitations are:
The notes or bonds or any obligations of the State of California or of any local agency or district
of the State of California.
Notes, bonds or other obligations issued by any other state or the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico.
The city shall not invest any funds pursuant to Section 53600, et. Seq., in any security that could
result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity.
9.0 Collateralization:
All City of Rolling Hills’ investments shall be collateralized as required by the State Government
Code.
10.0 Maximum Maturities:
To the extent possible, the City of Rolling Hills will match its investments with anticipated cash
flow requirements. Unless matched to a specific cash flow, the City will not directly invest in
securities maturing more than one (3) years from the date of purchase.
11.0 Internal Control:
The City’s external auditor with the support from the Finance Director shall annually conduct an
independent review of the internal controls. Additionally, the City’s external auditor with support
from the Finance Director will annually perform a financial audit. Both may be conducted at the
same time, when the City’s annual financial audit performed. The external auditor will be an
independent certified public accountant who performs his work under generally accepted
auditing standards as adopted by the Auditing Standards Board (ASB) of the American Institute
of Certified Public Accountants.
155
INVESTMENT POLICY 4/24/2017 5
12.0 Performance Standards:
The investment portfolio shall be designated with the objective of obtaining a rate of return
throughout budgetary and economic cycles, commensurate with the investment risk constraints
and the cash flow needs of the City.
13.0 Investment Policy Adoption:
The City Council shall consider and adopt a written Investment Policy annually and accept
quarterly Investment Reports as provided in Government Code Section 53646 et al.
Policy Administrative History:
Adopted September 24, 2007
Revised and Adopted February 23, 2009
Revised and Adopted March 8, 2010
Reviewed and Adopted February 28, 2011
Reviewed and Adopted May 14, 2012
Reviewed and Adopted April 22, 2013
Reviewed and Adopted March 24, 2014
Reviewed and Adopted April 27, 2015
Reviewed and Revised April 25, 2016
Reviewed and Adopted April 24, 2017
Reviewed and Adopted April 09, 2018
156
May 12, 2021
City of Rolling Hills
Terry Shea
2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Lance, Soll & Lunghard, LLP is pleased to respond to your request for an one year extension. As
a leader in the field of governmental accounting and auditing, we appreciate this opportunity given
to us to present to continue our services. For the one-year extension, we will continue to provide
our services with the standard 3% increase to the existing contract. The services and fees of
$17,623 for fiscal year ending June 30, 2021 would be as follows:
Perform a financial audit of the City of Rolling Hills in accordance with Generally Accepted
Government Auditing Standards. A CAFR will be prepared and word processed by LSL.
The CAFR will be in full compliance with all current GASB pronouncements. LSL will
render its auditors’ report on the basic financial statements, which will include both
Government-Wide Financial Statements and Fund Financial Statements. The audit firm
will also apply limited audit procedures to Management’s Discussion and Analysis and
required supplementary information. LSL understands that we will prepare the financial
section of the City’s CAFR. Price: $15,965 (PY price was $15,500)
Perform agreed-upon audit procedures pertaining to the City’s Appropriations Limit
Worksheet and render a letter, annually, to the City regarding compliance. Price: $556
(PY price was $540)
Prepare the City’s State Controller’s Report annually. Price: $1,102 (PY price was $1,070)
Issue a separate “management letter” that includes a report on the City’s internal control
over financial reporting in addition to recommendations for improvements in internal
control, accounting procedures and other significant observations that are considered to
be non-reportable conditions. Price: included with financial audit
LSL will be available for occasional consultation throughout the year as a financial
resource for the City of Rolling Hills and will be available for additional work as required.
203 N. Brea Blvd., Suite 203 Brea, CA 92821 Phone: 714.672.0022
An Association of Independent Accounting Firms
157
This proposal describes the benefits your organization would receive from Lance, Soll &
Lunghard, LLP. We are committed to provide the services presented in our proposal in
accordance with the timetable specified in your request for proposal. This proposal is a firm
and irrevocable offer for a period no less than 90 calendar days from the date of submittal. For
purposes of this proposal, Deborah A. Harper, Partner is authorized to make representations for
our firm. I can be reached at the address below, by phone at (714) 672-0022 or by email at
Deborah.Harper@lslcpas.com.
Deborah. A. Harper, Partner
LANCE, SOLL & LUNGHARD, LLP
203 N. Brea Blvd., Suite 203
Brea, CA 92821
158
PROPOSED 3‐YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN CITY OF ROLLING HILLSFY2020‐2021 TO FY 2022‐2023Year 0 Current Year Year 2 Year 3Project Description FY 2018‐2019 FY 2019‐2020 FY 2020‐2021 FY 2021‐2022 FY 2022‐2023Phase Cost Phase Cost Phase Cost Phase Cost Phase Cost18" Sewer Main along Rolling Hills Road [1] Feasibility Study Phase I $11,391 Feasibility Study Phase II $30,000 Design $81,196 Construction $1,700,0002Tennis Courts ADA Improvements Design $8,000Construction $300,0003City Hall ADA Improvements [2]Design $37,000 Construction $850,0004Crest Road East Utility Undergrounding Grant Project [3]Design Design/Construction $763,638 Construction $763,6385Vegetation/Fire Fuel Management Grant Project [4]Design [6] $0 Environmental/ Construction$975,1446City Hall campus parking lot improvements [5]Design $50,000Total $19,391 $30,000 $118,196 $4,588,782 $813,638[1] Off‐set of general fund ($350,000) using American Rescue Fund[2] Low interest rate financing secured ($300,000) through CJPIA for ADA projects with 5 year repay plan.[3] Grant requires 25% local match. City will use Rule 20A credit for local match.[4] Only phase 1 has been awarded. Phase 2 approval will depend on the completion of phase 1.[5] Eligible to be funded using a combination of accumulated local returns from Measures R and M transportation funds, Measure A County Park fund, and Measure W Clean Water fund. [6] No cost to the City; contribution by the Los Angeles County Fire DepartmentSCHEDULEProject Description FY 2018‐2019 FY 2019‐2020 FY 2020‐2021 FY 2021‐2022 FY 2022‐2023Phase Timeframe Phase Timeframe Phase Timeframe Phase Timeframe Phase Timeframe1 8" Sewer Main along Rolling Hills Road [1] Feasibility Study Phase I Feb 18 ‐ Oct 18Feasibility Study Phase II May 19‐May 20Design Sept '20 ‐ Jun '21Construction Jul '21 ‐ Nov '212 Tennis Courts ADA Improvements DesignConstruction Nov '21 ‐ Apr '223 City Hall ADA Improvements [2]Design Mar '20 ‐ May '21Construction Oct '21 ‐ Feb '224 Crest Road East Utility Undergrounding Grant Project [3]Design Jan '21 ‐ Jun '22Design/Construction Jul '21 ‐Jun '22 Construction Jul'22 ‐ Sept '225 Vegetation/Fire Fuel Management Grant Project [4]Design Dec '20 ‐ Mar '21Environmental/ ConstructionMay '21 ‐ Nov '21; Jan '22 ‐ Apr '226 City Hall campus parking lot improvements [5]Design Jun '22 ‐ Dec '22159
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
CONSOLIDATED TAX, FEE AND FINE SCHEDULE
for FISCAL YEAR 2019/20
ITEM FEES CODE/RESO NO. DATE ADOPTED
TAXES
Real Property Transfer Tax Property value exceeds $100,000 - Ordinance No. 72 December 11, 1967
a tax at the rate of 27.5 cents for
each five hundred dollars or
fractional part thereof.
Cable Television Franchise 2.50% of gross annual receipts Resolution No. 823 July 28, 1997
BUILDING AND SAFETY PERMITS
BUILDING, PLUMBING, MECHANICAL, AND ELECTRICAL PERMITS (LA COUNTY) Resolution No. 496 August 23, 1982
Building Permit Two and one quarter the amount set forth in Resolution No. 1226 July 9, 2018
the LA County Building Code for each fee.
Plumbing Permit Two and one quarter times the amount set forth in
the LA County Plumbing Code for each fee.
Mechanical Permit Two and one quarter times the amount set forth in
the LA County Mechanical Code for each fee.
Electrical Permit Two and one quarter times the amount set forth in
the LA County Electrical Code for each fee.
Park & Recreation Fund Fee New residential dwelling - Resolution No. 1206 May 22, 2017
2% of the first $100,00 of construction
valuation, plus 0.25% of such valuation
over $100,000
Solar and Photovoltaic Systems and The amount set forth in the Los Angeles CounResolution No. 1064 July 13, 2009
Appurtenant Equipment Bulding and Electrical Codes for each fee, table
and schedule therein, plus $60.11 City
administrative fee.
GEOTECHNICAL FEES 0.42% of the valuation of the proposed structuResolution No. 931 April 14, 2003
Minimum charge - $535
Maximum charge - $3,588
PERMITTING PROCESS THROUGH A CITY APPROVED CONSULTANT
Building, Plumbing, Mechanical, and Electrical 25% surcharge on Los Angeles County Resolution No. 1034 February 11, 2008
Department of Building and Safety fees
Solar and Photovoltaic Systems and 25% surcharge on Los Angeles County Resolution No. 1064 July 13, 2009
Appurtenant Equipment Department of Building and Safety fees,
plus $60.11 City administrative fee
PLANNING, ZONING AND SUBDIVISIONS Resolution No. 691 September 28, 1992
Conditional Use Permits $1,500
Site Plan Review $1,500
Variance $1,250
Variance, Minor $750
Discretionary Approval Modification 2/3 of original application fee
Zone Change $2,000
Zoning Amendment $2,000
General Plan Amendment $2,000
Lot Line Adjustment $1,500, plus county fee
Tentative Parcel Map $1,500 and county fees plus 20%
Tentative Tract Map $1,500 and county fees plus 20%
Revised 06/24/19 Page 1 Copy of 2019-2020 Consolidated Tax and Fee Schedule.xlsx
160
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
CONSOLIDATED TAX, FEE AND FINE SCHEDULE
for FISCAL YEAR 2019/20
ITEM FEES CODE/RESO NO. DATE ADOPTED
Appeal Fee 2/3 of original application fee
Appeal of Zone Clerance $375 Resolution No. 1149 July 22, 2013
Environmental Impact Report City consultant fee plus 10% Resolution No. 1206 May 22,2017
Extension of Time $200 Resolution No. 1149 July 22, 2013
Final Parcel or Tract Map County fees Resolution No. 1206 May 22, 2017
County Clerk Processing Fee County fee Resolution No. 1149 July 22, 2013
Multiple Discretionary Reviews Most expensive fee for the first review and Resolution No. 1060 May 11, 2009
1/2 of the fee for the second review. No fee
for third or more reviews
Accessory Dwelling Unit Appl. Processing Fee $375 Resolution No. 2120 February 12, 2018
Stable Use Permit $375 Resolution No. 1149 July 22, 2013
Major Remodel Review $375 Resolution No. 1149 July 22, 2013
Lighting Ordinance Modification $375 Resolution No. 1206 May 22, 2017
Outdoor Lighting Audit $150 Resolution No. 1149 July 22, 2013
City Council and Planning Commission $375 - fee to be credited if results in filing of Resolution No. 1149 July 22, 2013
Intrepretation and Misc. Reviews forml application to the Citry Council or
Planning Commission
Environmental Review fees for Discretionary Permits
Preparation and Staff Review of Initial Study $200 Resolution No. 1119 April 23, 2012
Preparation of Negative Declaration or $50 plus fee charged by the CA Dept. of Fish Resolution No. 1206 May 22, 2017
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Game, if applicable, as adjusted annually
Service Request County fees plus 20% Resolution No. 1119 April 23, 2012
Construction and Demolition Waste Permit
$100 single project permit/ $750 deposit,
refundable upon submittal of Certificate of
Compliance Resolution No. 1060 June 24, 2019
ADDITIONAL PROCESSING FEE Resolution No. 854 January 25, 1999
Planning & Zoning Applications involving illegalAdministrative Fee $1,500 Resolution No. 1206 May 22, 2017
or "as built" structures or grading that require Stop Work Order $200 Resolution No. 1060 May 11, 2009
Planning Commission review.
TRAFFIC COMMISSION REVIEW Resolution No. 691 September 28, 1992
New driveways or other traffic related items $300
VIEW IMPAIRMENT Resolution No. 1119 April 23, 2012
Review by Committee on Trees and Views $2,000
Processing fee
Environmental Review Fees
Preparation and Staff Review of Initial Study $200
Preparation of Negative Declaration or $50 plus fee charged by the CA Dept. of Fish
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Game, if applicable, as adjusted annually
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION - PROCESSING FEES Resolution No. 691 September 28, 1992
General Plan $30
Zoning Code $25
Budget $30
Zoning Map $3
Xeroxed Copies, each page $0.25
Revised 06/24/19 Page 2 Copy of 2019-2020 Consolidated Tax and Fee Schedule.xlsx
161
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
CONSOLIDATED TAX, FEE AND FINE SCHEDULE
for FISCAL YEAR 2019/20
ITEM FEES CODE/RESO NO. DATE ADOPTED
Subdivision Code $25
FALSE ALARM Resolution No. 1119 April 23, 2012
Fee for 1st incident involving a false alarm is waived
2nd $50
3rd $100
4th $150
5th $200
6th $250
BAIL/FINE SCHEDULE FOR VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS Resolution No. 791 August 12, 1996
As set forth in Bail/Fine Schedule for Resolution No. 799 October 28, 1996
Title 10 Violations,. Resolution No. 824 July 28, 1997
Resolution No. 1072 September 14, 2009
Resolution No. 1101 January 10, 2011
PARKING VIOLATION/CITATION PENALTY SCHEDULE Resolution No. 717 November 22, 1993
Pursuant to California Vehicle Code Section Resolution No. 740 May 9, 1994
40203.5 and 40225 Resolution No. 824 July 28, 1997
FINE SCHEDLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS
Social Host Liability (RHMC Chapter 9.58)Resolution No. 1206 May 22,2017
1st Volation $2,500
2nd Violation within one year of first $5,000
Each add'l violation within one year of first $7,500
DOG/CAT LICENSE FEES Resolution No. 527 April 23, 1984
Dog, unaltered $18
Dog, spayed/neutered $9
with Certificate of Sterility
Metallic dog tag $5
Penalty for not renewing license $25
Duplicate dog tag $5
Transfer fee $3
Appeal fee $40
Cat, unaltered, lifetime (optional) $10
Cat, spayed/neutered, lifetime (optional) $5
with Certificate of Sterility
QUIMBY ACT FEES FOR SUBDIVISIONS Park in-lieu fees and/or dedication Municipal Code March 2005
of land when subdividing property. Section 16.28.150
SOLID WASTE COLLECTION FEES FY 2017/18 Annual Fee - $1,100 * Resolution No. 1051 January 12, 2009
PERMITS RELATIVE TO EXTRA LARGE VEHICLES ACCESSING THE CITY Resolution No. 637 March 25, 1991
$75 per vehicle
(The City does not collect this fee.)
* Solid Waste Collection Fee last updated 7/1/14 for FY 14/15 (City absorbed CPI increase for FY15/16, FY16/17, FY17/18, FY 18/19 and FY 19/20)
Revised 06/24/19 Page 3 Copy of 2019-2020 Consolidated Tax and Fee Schedule.xlsx
162
05/19/2021 ** DRAFT**Items Budget MIPBackup AccountInformation Number DEPT FUNDBALANCE Account Description01EMPLOYEE SALARIES7001 Salaries Full Time - CITY ADMINISTRATION Annual Salary Jeng214,600$ Sandoval 72,200 Ball73,500 Viramontes 58,300 Exceptional Pay- Salaries Full Time418,600 01-01-702.0 CASalaries Full TimeSalaries Part-Time 10,500 01-01-703.0 PDSalaries Part-TimeTotal Salaries 429,100 7005 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS Retirement CalPERS - Employer29,000 01-01-710.0 CARetirement CalPERS - EmployerRetirement CalPERS - Employer Unfunded Liability PERS POOL59,026 01-01-710.0 CARetirement CalPERS - Employer Unfunded Liability FY 17/18Retirement CalPERS - Employer Unfunded Liability PERS POOL- 01-01-710.0 CARetirement CalPERS - Employer Unfunded Liability PERS POOLTotal Retirement CalPERS - Employer88,026 Worker's Compensation Insurance7,700 01-01-715.0 CAWorker's Compensation InsuranceGroup Insurance55,000 01-01-716.0 CAGroup InsuranceRetiree Medical30,300 01-01-717.0 CARetiree MedicalEmployer Payroll Taxes28,400 01-01-718.0 CAEmployer Payroll TaxesDeferred Compensation4,300 01-01-719.0 CADeferred CompensationPhone Allowance1,300 XXXXXXX CAPhone AllowanceAuto Allowance 4,800 01-01-720.0 CAAuto AllowanceEmployee Benefits219,826 7500 MATERIALS & SUPPLIESOffice Supplies & Expenses Computer/Hardware support Fund 5,000 Race Communication- Broadband Southbay Fiber Network 12,240 Konica Maintenance Fee $400 per month 4,800 Pitney Bowes Postage $1,500 per month 20,000 Petty Cash4,000 First Bankcard Center - Credit Card - Office Supplies 6,000 Misc. Items5,000 Misc. Subscriptions - LA Times, Daily Breeze & Misc. 1,000 Office Supplies & Expenses 58,040 01-01-740.0 CAOffice Supplies & ExpenseEquipment Leasing CostsKonica Minolta Copier Lease 4,250 Pitney Bowes $600 per month 2,400 Granicus7,100 Neopost1,100 CITY OF ROLLING HILLSEXPENDITURE ACCOUNT DETAIL - GENERAL FUND BUDGET WORKSHEET FY 2021/2022CITY ADMINISTRATIONFY 21-22 Proposed Budget.xlsx15/18/2021 10:23 AM163
05/19/2021 ** DRAFT**Items Budget MIPBackup AccountInformation Number DEPT FUNDBALANCE Account DescriptionCITY OF ROLLING HILLSEXPENDITURE ACCOUNT DETAIL - GENERAL FUND BUDGET WORKSHEET FY 2021/2022Equipment Leasing Costs14,850 01-01-745.0 CAEquipment Leasing CostsDues & SubscriptionsCCMF - City Manager 400 ICMA- City Manager 1,400 Municipal Management Association of Southern California 100 City Clerk's Association of California - City Clerk 90 International Institute of Municipal City Clerks 150 PV Coordinating Council - City 100 League of California Cities - City 1,000 Southern Cal Association of Govern - City 500 League of California Cities - City 1,500 California Contract Cities Association - City 1,500 Southern Calif Assoc - City 500 South Bay Cities Council of Government - City 7,000 Misc. Items1,000 Dues15,240 01-01-750.0 CADues & Subscriptions Conferences City Manager 5,000 01-01-755.0 CAConference Expense City Clerk 2,500 01-01-755.0 CAConference Expense Senior Management Analyst 2,500 01-01-755.0 CAConference Expense Conferences 10,000 Meeting Expense City Manager2,000 01-01-757.0 CAMeetings Expense Training & Education City Manager 1,000 01-01-759.0 CATraining & Education City Clerk 2,000 01-01-759.0 CATraining & Education Senior Management Analyst 2,000 01-01-759.0 CATraining & Education Training & Education 5,000 Auto Mileage Employee (56. cents per mile) 500 01-01-761.0 CAAuto MileageTelephone Nextiva $350 per month 4,200 Remote Satellite 1,500 Other- Telephone5,700 01-01-770.0 CATelephone City Council Expense City Council Expense 10,000$ City Council Expense 10,000 01-01-775.0 CACity Council ExpenseFY 21-22 Proposed Budget.xlsx25/18/2021 10:23 AM164
05/19/2021 ** DRAFT**Items Budget MIPBackup AccountInformation Number DEPT FUNDBALANCE Account DescriptionCITY OF ROLLING HILLSEXPENDITURE ACCOUNT DETAIL - GENERAL FUND BUDGET WORKSHEET FY 2021/2022 Minutes Clerk Meetings 6,000 01-01-780.0 CAMinutes Clerk Meetings Hourly Rate: $43.33 per hour (31 hours - .75 hrs x 22 meetings $ Codification Municode 4,450 On-Line Hosting 550 Codification 5,000 01-01-785.0 CACodification Advertising - Personnel & Misc. 1,000 01-01-790.0 CAAdvertising Other Gen Admin ExpenseDigitizing Records - File Keeper 1,700 Complete Fire Service 150 ADP Processing 2,000 Administration Unfunded Pension Liability Trust - Other 1,050 Other Gen Admin Expense - NON-DEPARTMENT4,900 01-01-795.0 CAOther Gen Admin ExpenseTotal Materials & Supplies 138,230 8000 CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCity Attorney, Legal ($190 per hour) 91,000 01-01-801.0 CAGeneral Legal - City Attorney Litigation from $244 to $250 per hour 20 hours per monthLegal Expenses - Other 3,000 01-01-802.0 CALegal Expenses Other Revize LLC Annual Fee Web Design6,000 - Website 6,000 01-01-820.0 CAWebsite Election, City Council- 01-01-850.0 CAElection Expense City CouncilConsulting Fees Forum Info-Tech $3,700 per month 44,400 Alert Southbay: Social Media 10,000 Records Management 45,000 DAC TRAK Annual Maintenance 2,000 Project Management (CIP Coordination) 45,000 Special Project - Caspio, website database support 15,000 Consulting Fees161,400 01-01-890.0 CAConsulting FeesTotal Contractual Services 261,400 8000 CAPITAL OUTLAYCapital Outlay - Equipment - Disaster Emergency- 01-01-950.0 CACapital Outlay - EquipmentCapital Outlay - City Hall Improvements- 01-01-950.0 CACapital Outlay - City Hall ImprovementsTotal City Administration Capital Improvements - TOTAL CITY ADMINISTRATION 1,048,556$ FY 21-22 Proposed Budget.xlsx35/18/2021 10:23 AM165
05/19/2021 ** DRAFT**Items Budget MIPBackup AccountInformation Number DEPT FUNDBALANCE Account DescriptionCITY OF ROLLING HILLSEXPENDITURE ACCOUNT DETAIL - GENERAL FUND BUDGET WORKSHEET FY 2021/2022057500MATERIALS & SUPPLIESDues & Subscriptions - GFOA 200$ 01-05-750.0 FDDues & Subscriptions8000CONTRACTUAL SERVICESAnnual Audit 17,630 Consulting Fees RAMS (7,708.33 x 12= 92,500) 92,500 GovInvest - pension projections 1,750 Total Compensation - OPEB Actuary 2,850 Abila MIP GL Software $200 per month 2,400 99,500 Total Contractual Services 117,130 01-05-890.0 FD Contractual Services8000 CAPITAL OUTLAYCapital Outlay - Equipment - 01-05-950.0 FD Capital Outlay - EquipmentTOTAL FINANCE 117,330$ FINANCEFY 21-22 Proposed Budget.xlsx45/18/2021 10:23 AM166
05/19/2021 ** DRAFT**Items Budget MIPBackup AccountInformation Number DEPT FUNDBALANCE Account DescriptionCITY OF ROLLING HILLSEXPENDITURE ACCOUNT DETAIL - GENERAL FUND BUDGET WORKSHEET FY 2021/202215EMPLOYEE SALARIES7001 Salaries Full Time Annual Salary Alguira 142,200$ Stephanie Grant 56,000 Salaries Full Time 198,200 01-15-702.0 PDSalaries Full TimeSalaries Part-Time 35,000 01-15-703.0 PDSalaries Part-TimeTotal Salaries 233,200 7005 EMPLOYEE BENEFITSRetirement CalPERS - Employer17,750 01-15-710.0 PDRetirement CalPERS - EmployerRetirement CalPERS - Employer Unfunded Liability FY 19/20- 01-15-711.0 PDRetirement CalPERS - Employer Unfunded Liability FY 17/18Total Retirement CalPERS - Employer17,750 Worker's Compensation Insurance3,800 01-15-715.0 PDWorker's Compensation InsuranceGroup Insurance30,900 01-15-716.0 PDGroup InsuranceEmployer Payroll Taxes18,790 01-15-718.0 PDEmployer Payroll TaxesDeferred Compensation1,200 01-15-719.0 PDDeferred CompensationPhone Allowance600 Auto Allowance 2,400 01-15-720.0 PDAuto AllowanceEmployee Benefits75,440 7500 MATERIALS & SUPPLIESDues & SubscriptionsAmerican Planning Associaation (APA) Membership850 01-15-750.0 PDDues & Subscriptions Conferences Meredith Elguira - APA & UCLA Extension 5,000 5,000 01-15-755.0 PDConference Expense Training & Education Planning & Code Enforcement (Code Enf - Measure W Funds) 1,000 1,000 01-15-759.0 PDTraining & Education Planning Commission Meetings - 01-15-758.0 PDPlanning Commission MeetingPlanning - Misc ExpensesMapping/APN Infor/Radius/Labels 1,000 Reference Materiasl (CEQA/CELSOC/Municipal Code Book) - Lomita Blueprint Service 500 LA County Clerk 500 2,000 01-15-776.0 PDPlanning - Misc ExpensesTotal Materials & Supplies 8,850 8000 CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPLANNING & DEVELOPMENTFY 21-22 Proposed Budget.xlsx55/18/2021 10:23 AM167
05/19/2021 ** DRAFT**Items Budget MIPBackup AccountInformation Number DEPT FUNDBALANCE Account DescriptionCITY OF ROLLING HILLSEXPENDITURE ACCOUNT DETAIL - GENERAL FUND BUDGET WORKSHEET FY 2021/2022Legal Expenses Other - 01-15-802.0 PDLegal Expenses OtherProperty Develop - Legal Exp Legal Expense Land Use75,000 Code Violation/View Dispute25,000 100,000 01-15-872.0 PDProperty Develop - Legal ExpBuilding Inspection LA County/Willdan 150,000 01-15-878.0 PDBuilding Inspection LA County/WilldanStorm Water Management CIMP Monitoring (MOU with RPV as lead)66,146 Monitoring of SepulvedaCanyon20,000 Trash Monitoring7,000 Greater Harbor Toxics Coordinated Monitoring (MOU)7,696 NPDES Permit Fee5,800 MS 4 Permit, Time Schedule Order and OWTS Support75,000 Machado Lake and Harbor Toxics TMDL's Special Study (option 1)70,000 PW Project - Storm water 251,642 01-15-881.0 PDStorm Water ManagementVariance & CUP Expense 7,000 01-15-882.0 PDVariance & CUP ExpenseSpecial Project Study & Consultant 01-15-884.0 Update Safety Element - Rincon Consultant (Cal OES Grant) 20,000 Consultant to Apply for Grants - (Update General Plan Elements)5,000 Planning Consultant (Plan Rev/Inspect/CEQA Housing Element/Code Update)75,000 Landscape Review WELO Compliance3,000 Professional Engineering Services Monitor/Follow up Various PW Projects2,000 Update 6th Cylce Housing Element - Barry Miller Consultant50,000 Arborist10,000 Contingency15,000 180,000 01-15-884.0 PDSpecial Project Study & ConsultantTotal Contractual Services 688,642 8000 CAPITAL OUTLAYCapital Outlay - Equipment Off-Road Vehicle 20,000 iWorq Annual Maintenance Fee 4,000 GIS Subscription 2,400 Total Equipment26,400 01-15-950.0 FDCapital Outlay - EquipmentTOTAL PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 1,032,532$ FY 21-22 Proposed Budget.xlsx65/18/2021 10:23 AM168
05/19/2021 ** DRAFT**Items Budget MIPBackup AccountInformation Number DEPT FUNDBALANCE Account DescriptionCITY OF ROLLING HILLSEXPENDITURE ACCOUNT DETAIL - GENERAL FUND BUDGET WORKSHEET FY 2021/2022258200LAW ENFORCEMENTLaw Enforcement - LA County Sheriff ($18475 x 12)220,380$ 01-25-830.0 PSLaw EnforcementTraffic Enforcement- 01-25-831.0 PSTraffic Enforcement (Fund 10)Parking Citation City of Rancho Palos Verdes - 01-25-832.0 PSParking CitationOther Law Enforcement Expenses 3,000 01-25-833.0 PSOtherGrant Deputies- 01-25-834 PSGrant DeputiesWild Life Mgmt & Pest Control - LA County42,000 PSWild Life Mgmt & Pest ControlPea Fowl Control8,000 Supplemental Coyote Control Management- PSSupplemental Coyote Control ManagementTotal Wild Life, Pest & Coyote Management 50,000 01-25-837.0Animal Control Expense - LA County6,000 01-25-838.0 PSAnimal Control ExpenseTOTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 279,380$ LAW ENFORCEMENTFY 21-22 Proposed Budget.xlsx75/18/2021 10:23 AM169
05/19/2021 ** DRAFT**Items Budget MIPBackup AccountInformation Number DEPT FUNDBALANCE Account DescriptionCITY OF ROLLING HILLSEXPENDITURE ACCOUNT DETAIL - GENERAL FUND BUDGET WORKSHEET FY 2021/2022657500MATERIALS & SUPPLIESSouth Bay Community OrganizationsChamber Orchestra of the South Bay 500$ Peninsula Seniors 2,000 Peninsula Symphony 2,000 South Bay Chamber Music Society600 Caballeros5,000 Tennis Club5,000 Women's Club5,000 20,100 01-65-901.0 NDSouth Bay Community OrganizationsContingency25,000 01-65-985.0 NDContingencyTotal Materials & Supplies 45,100 8000CONTRACTUAL SERVICESInsurance & Bond Expense CJPIA - General Liability Ins. 21,350 CJPIA - Earth Quake Insurance Ins. 4,840 CJPIA - Property Insurance - less Earthquake 1,810 Alliant Crime Insurance 830 Alliant Special Events 100 CJPIA - Pollution 330 Hartford Insurance-Elaine Jeng 400 Other600 Insurance & Bond Expense 30,260 01-65-895.0 NDInsurance & Bond Expense8500COMMUNITY PROMOTIONSCommunity Recognition Open House & Miscellaneous 15,000 Appreciation Lunch & BC Items & Events 10,000 H & H Industries 500 Miscellaneous Items 500 Community Recognition26,000 01-65-915.0 NDCommunity RecognitionCivil Defense Expense 650 01-65-916.0 NDCivil Defense Expense Area G Disaster Services $1,500Emergency Preparedness Events & Block Captain Training35,000 Peninsula Wide Preparedness Staff Member15,000 50,000 01-65-917.0 NDEmergency PreparednessTotal Community Promotions 76,650 TOTAL NON-DEPARTMENT 152,010$ NON-DEPARTMENTFY 21-22 Proposed Budget.xlsx85/18/2021 10:23 AM170
05/19/2021 ** DRAFT**Items Budget MIPBackup AccountInformation Number DEPT FUNDBALANCE Account DescriptionCITY OF ROLLING HILLSEXPENDITURE ACCOUNT DETAIL - GENERAL FUND BUDGET WORKSHEET FY 2021/2022758000CONTRACTUAL SERVICESUtilities So. Calif. Edison: Office 20,000$ Calif. Water Svc. City Hall 12,110 Area Maintenance The Gas Co.1,700 City HallUtilities in CITY PROPERTIES 33,810 01-75-925.0 CPUtilitiesRepair & Maintenance in CITY PROPERTIES Executive Suite Services - Monthly Cleaning Charges $1,360 per month 16,320 GCS - Extra Cleaning Charges 700 Palos Verdes Security 4,320 Septic Tank Yearly Maintenance 600 Edwards Termit/Pest Management ($225x12=$2,700 & $95x12=$1,140) 3,840 File Keepers/Laser fiche Maintenance Contract 1,683 Generator2,400 Electrical Repairs & Chandlers 3,000 Plumbing Repairs 3,000 Repair Front Door Hinge/Paint 1,100 Repair & Maintenance in CITY PROPERTIES 36,963 01-75-930.0 CPRepairs & Maintenance Area Landscaping Bennett Landscaping - Monthly $1,000 12,000 Bennett Landscaping - Additional Work 3,500 Tree Trimming 3,000 Tree Trimming & Special Projects 10,000 Area Landscaping 28,500 01-75-932.0 NDArea LandscapingTotal Contractual Services 99,273 8000 CAPITAL OUTLAYBuilding & Equipment - Generator 250,000 01-75-946.0 FDBuilding & EquipmentTOTAL CITY PROPERTIES 349,273 Total Revenues 2,088,400 Total Expenditures 2,979,081 Net Revenues Before Transfers (890,681) 325,318CITY PROPERTIESFY 21-22 Proposed Budget.xlsx105/18/2021 10:23 AM171
05/19/2021 ** DRAFT**Items Budget MIPBackup AccountInformation Number DEPT FUNDBALANCE Account DescriptionCITY OF ROLLING HILLSEXPENDITURE ACCOUNT DETAIL - GENERAL FUND BUDGET WORKSHEET FY 2021/2022FUND TRANSFER IN/OUT: Traffic Safety Fund01-00-999.0Operating Transfer Out Community Facilities Fund01-00-999.0Operating Transfer Out Underground Utility Fund01-00-999.0Operating Transfer Out Refuse Collection Fund24,000 01-00-699.0Operating Transfer In Refuse Collection Fund - Subsidy(159,200) 01-00-999.0Operating Transfer Out Capital Projects Fund - Tennis Courts(88,000) 01-00-999.0Operating Transfer Out Capital Projects Fund - City Hall ADA Improvements(850,000) 01-00-699.0Operating Transfer In Total Transfers(1,073,200) Net Revenue (Deficit) After Transfers (1,963,881) FY 21/22LA Sheriff's ContractGeneral Fund 01 Law Enforcement 220,380$ COPS 10Law Enforcement 146,800Rolling Hills Portion 367,180$ Traffic Enforcement 13,200 Total Rolling Hills Portion 380,380 Total COPS 160,000$ FY 21-22 Proposed Budget.xlsx115/18/2021 10:23 AM172
Agenda Item No.: 10.C
Mtg. Date: 05/24/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:TERRY SHEA, FINANCE DIRECTOR
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:CITY COUNCIL FY 21-22 BUDGET WORKSHOP.
DATE:May 24, 2021
BACKGROUND:
The City Manager in putting this budget together had the objective of maintaining Rolling Hills’ history
of financial stability with the need for changing the way services are delivered while upgrading systems
and resources necessary to maintain service delivery excellence.
In projecting revenues for fiscal year FY 2021/22 using conservative revenue forecasting, staff
anticipates the continued resurgence of property values and is proposing a 5% increase is Property
Taxes and Motor Vehicle in Lieu Taxes. Staff are projecting an increase in building permit and other
fees of $18,750 over the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Budget. Total projected revenues are down $10,100 from
the Adjusted Fiscal Year 2020-21 Budget. The increase in Property Tax and Motor Vehicle In-Lieu
Revenues is being offset by the decrease of $56,250 of Proposition A Exchange, Interest Income
decrease of $20,000 and CARES Act Revenue of $50,000.
Concurrently, FY 2021/22 proposed expenditures are projected to be $587,363 higher than the Fiscal
Year 2020/21 Adjusted Budget, because of increased costs, one-time expenses for a new generator of
$250,000, an off-road vehicle of $20,000 and proposed increases of $128,000 in Storm Water
Management costs.
DISCUSSION:
GENERAL FUND
173
The FY 2021/22 proposed budget projects $2,100,300 in revenues in relation to $2,973,081 in
expenditures resulting in a deficit of ($872,781) before transfers and a deficit of ($1,105,981) after
transfers in and out. FY 2021/22 revenues are based on the following assumptions.
FY 2021/22 property taxes are projected to be $59,500 or 5.0% higher and building activity will be
$300,000 which is approximately $20,000 more than FY 2020/21. The City will also be providing its
residents a reprieve from the annual increase it imposes each July 1st for its Refuse Collection. This
will equate to a $232.41 savings for each resident in its annual rate and cost the City $159,200 from its
Refuse Collection Fund. The City will include a transfer to the Refuse Fund for the General Fund to
offset this absorbed increase.
FY 2021/22 proposed expenditures before transfers are $587,363 or 24.50% higher than the FY
2020/21 adjusted budget. The highlights of each Department are listed below:
The differences in the City Administration Department are an increase in Salaries, as well as
Benefits due to a change in where the annual PERS unfunded Liability is charged. Also, included
are one-time costs of $45,000 for records management.
For the Finance Department there is a projected decrease of $5,753.
For Planning and Development, the main differences are an increase of $128,000 for Storm Water
Management and $53,000 in legal costs.
For Law Enforcement there is a projected increase of 3%, but an overall decrease of $12,405 to
the General Fund as the additional costs will be offset by the COPS Fund.
For the Non-Departmental Department there is an increase in proposed expenditures of $44,660.
Part of the increase is $16,000 for a change in where the Community Organization support are
being recorded, in prior years they were in the Community Development Fund. Also, an increase
of $20,000 for the Block Captain events and training.
For the City Properties Department there is an increase in proposed expenditures of $281,773.
This is made up of $250,000 for a new generator (one-time cost), $16,963 in increased Repairs
and Maintenance costs and $15,000 in increased Area Landscaping.
174
OTHER FUNDS
The other City Funds are similar to prior years. Of note:
1. Community Facilities Fund - annually, the City asks Caballeros, the Tennis Club and the
Women’s Club if it has programs for which it would like to request City funding. Each club gave
a formal request and for FY 21-22 staff budgeted these requests in the General Fund for the
following: $5,000 (Caballeros), and $5,000 (Women’s Club) for programs and $5,000 for annual
Tennis Maintenance Expense.
2. The Refuse Fund includes a transfer to the General Fund of ($24,000). This transfer includes
($12,000) for the administration of refuse services and ($12,000) to cover staff time and costs
associated with administering the storm water management program. Also, the City will be
providing its residents a reprieve from the annual COLA it imposes each July 1 st for its Refuse
Collection and the annual General Fund subsidy is $159,200.
3. The Traffic Safety Fund includes $10,000 for other work outside of the annual striping. The
General Fund will be budgeting a transfer of $10,000 to the Traffic Safety Fund in FY 2021-22.
4. The COPS Fund revenues are projected to be $160,000. Program Expenditures will be $160,000
to cover a portion of the 2021/22 LA County Sheriff ’s Department law enforcement services and
will cover the supplemental hours for Traffic Enforcement estimated to be $13,200 in FY 2021-
22.
5. The Utility Fund includes $763,638 in design and construction costs for the Crest Road East
Utility Undergrounding Grant Project. The project will be covered by Grant Funds and Rule 20A
Funds from Edison.
6. The Capital Projects Fund will budget $300,000 for Tennis Court Improvements. The General
Fund will be transferring $88,000 to the Capital Projects Fund in FY 2020/21 for this Project.
7. The Transit Funds for Proposition A and for Proposition C are projected to receive $69,500, for
FY 21-22 there is no gifting or exchanging of funds. For Measure R and Measure M there are no
proposed expenditures or gifting as the City is accumulating these funds for the future parking lot
project, estimated revenues are $24,000 and $26,500, respectively.
8. For the Measure W Fund the City is projecting income of $110,000 and we are proposing an
expenditure for Storm Water Management of $38,750.
9. For the Measure A Fund the City is projecting income of $26,100 with no proposed expenditures
for Fiscal Year 2021/22.
In FY2019-2020, the City Council approved a three year Capital Improvement Plan showing the
estimated cost of projects by phase and by fiscal year. The plan also took into consideration critical
paths of all the projects so that they were coordinated. As a part of the workshop for the FY2021-2020
budget, the updated three year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is included as a part of this report. The
updated CIP incorporated two additional projects that will be funded with the Cal OES/FEMA grants.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact will be determined when the Fiscal Year 2021/22 Budget has been adopted.
RECOMMENDATION:
175
The overall financial position of the City’s General Fund remains strong with a projected year-end Fund
Balance of $5,509,300 on June 30, 2021. With the preliminary Proposed Budget, the estimated General
Fund Fund Balance on June 30, 2022 is projected to be $4,403,300. The City staff works diligently on
providing outstanding government services that will keep the quality of life good for the residents of
Rolling Hills. With the Council’s direction, staff will bring the FY 2021/22 Budget and the three-year
CIP to the City Council Meeting for adoption on June 14, 2021.
ATTACHMENTS:
Proposed FY 21-22 Budget.pdf
CIP_3Years_2021-May-16.pdf
176
**PROPOSED 05/24/21**
ADJUSTED Favorable
HISTORICAL ANNUAL (unfavorable) PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
GENERAL FUND REVENUES SUMMARY
BEGINNING FUND BALANCE 5,795,780$ 5,620,298$ 5,620,298$ -$ 5,509,308$
GENERAL FUND REVENUES
TAXES 1,253,224$ 1,228,600$ 1,316,304$ 87,704$ 1,294,800$
OTHER AGENCIES 226,033 282,500 320,127 37,627 266,100
LICENSES & PERMITS 391,035 321,550 308,535 (13,015) 337,900
USE OF PROPERTY & MONEY 284,472 168,000 119,590 (48,410) 148,000
EXCHANGE FUNDS - 56,250 56,250 - -
OTHER REVENUES 17,456 53,500 42,018 (11,482) 53,500
TOTAL REVENUES 2,172,220$ 2,110,400$ 2,162,825$ 52,425$ 2,100,300$
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT
01 CITY ADMINISTRATION
EMPLOYEE SALARIES 333,768$ 435,100$ 301,068$ 134,032$ 429,100$
EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 154,091 190,000 156,694 33,306 219,826
TOTAL PERSONNEL 487,859 625,100 457,762 167,338 648,926
MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 102,922 143,500 95,260 48,240 138,230
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 169,922 213,200 258,215 (45,015) 261,400
CAPITAL OUTLAY - - 3,117 (3,117) -
01 TOTAL CITY ADMINISTRATION 760,703$ 981,800$ 814,356$ 167,444$ 1,048,556$
05 FINANCE
MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 333 2,100 - 2,100 200
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 116,965 120,783 119,024 1,759 117,130
CAPITAL OUTLAY - - - - -
05 TOTAL FINANCE 117,298$ 122,883$ 119,024$ 3,859$ 117,330$
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
GENERAL FUND REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - FY 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUES
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 1 2021-2022 Proposed Budget177
**PROPOSED 05/24/21**
ADJUSTED Favorable
HISTORICAL ANNUAL (unfavorable) PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
GENERAL FUND REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - FY 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
15 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
EMPLOYEE SALARIES 223,819$ 212,450$ 207,638$ 4,812$ 237,200$
EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 66,012 72,950 66,680 6,270 75,440
TOTAL PERSONNEL 289,831 285,400 274,318 11,082 312,640
MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 2,563 12,600 2,174 10,426 8,850
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 517,011 544,400 502,275 42,125 688,642
CAPITAL OUTLAY - 2,000 - 2,000 26,400
15 TOTAL PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 809,405$ 844,400$ 778,767$ 65,633$ 1,036,532$
25 LAW ENFORCEMENT 219,615$ 291,785$ 245,167$ 46,618$ 279,380$
65 NON-DEPARTMENT 33,658$ 97,350$ 54,077$ 43,273$ 142,010$
75 CITY PROPERTIES 68,110$ 67,500$ 73,437$ (5,937)$ 349,273$
2,008,789$ 2,405,718$ 2,084,828$ 320,890$ 2,973,081$
163,431$ (295,318)$ 77,997$ 373,315$ (872,781)$
TRANSFERS (338,913)$ (234,402)$ (188,987)$ 45,415$ (233,200)$
(175,482)$ (529,720)$ (110,990)$ 418,730$ (1,105,981)$
ENDING FUND BALANCE 5,620,298$ 5,090,578$ 5,509,308$ 4,403,327$
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES SUMMARY BY ACCOUNT CATEGORY
ADJUSTED Favorable
HISTORICAL ANNUAL (unfavorable) PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
EMPLOYEE SALARIES 557,587$ 647,550$ 508,706$ 138,844$ 666,300$
EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 220,103 262,950 223,374 39,576 295,266
TOTAL PERSONNEL 777,690 910,500 732,080 178,420 961,566
MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 108,418 187,300 104,934 82,366 192,380
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 891,292 973,483 979,812 (6,329) 1,196,705
LAW ENFORCEMENT 219,615 291,785 245,168 46,617 279,380
COMMUNITY PROMOTIONS 11,774 40,650 19,716 20,934 66,650
CAPITAL OUTLAY - 2,000 3,117 (1,117) 276,400
2,008,788$ 2,405,718$ 2,084,828$ 320,891$ 2,973,081$
NET REVENUE(DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS
NET REVENUES BEFORE TRANSFERS
TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 2 2021-2022 Proposed Budget178
**PROPOSED 05/24/21**
ADJUSTED Favorable
HISTORICAL ANNUAL (unfavorable) PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
GENERAL FUND REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - FY 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
GENERAL FUND REVENUES DETAIL
GENERAL FUND REVENUES
4001 TAXES:
401 Property Taxes 1,201,368$ 1,190,300$ 1,201,183$ 10,883$ 1,249,800$
405 Sales Tax 3,310 4,800 25,226 20,426 4,800
410 Real Estate Transfer Tax 48,546 33,500 89,896 56,396 40,200
4001 Total 1,253,224 1,228,600 1,316,304 87,704 1,294,800
4030 OTHER AGENCIES
505 OES Grants - - 33,401 33,401 20,000
585 CARES ACT - 50,000 50,000 - -
420 Motor Vehicle in Lieu Tax-VLF 226,033 232,500 236,726 4,226 246,100
226,033 282,500 320,127 37,627 266,100
4050 LICENSES & PERMITS
440 Building & Other Permit Fees 369,250 281,250 265,764 (15,486) 300,000
450 Variance, Planning & Zoning Fees 6,700 20,000 27,433 7,433 22,000
455 Animal Control Fees 587 1,300 658 (642) 1,000
460 Franchise Fees 14,498 19,000 14,680 (4,320) 14,900
4050 Total 391,035 321,550 308,535 (13,015) 337,900
4060 FINES & VIOLATIONS
480 Fines & Traffic Violations 14,722 14,300 6,411 (7,889) 14,300
5000 USE OF PROPERTY & MONEY
600 City Hall Leasehold RHCA 83,976 68,000 68,991 991 68,000
670 Interest Earned 200,496 100,000 50,599 (49,401) 80,000
5000 Total 284,472 168,000 119,590 (48,410) 148,000
6500 EXCHANGE FUNDS
620 Proposition A - 56,250 56,250 - -
6700 OTHER REVENUE
650 Public Safety Augmentation Fund 1,000 800 1,007 207 800
655 Burglar Alarm Responses 1,400 600 600 - 600
675 Miscellaneous 334 37,800 34,000 (3,800) 37,800
6700 Total 2,734 39,200 35,607 (3,593) 39,200
TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUES 2,172,220$ 2,110,400$ 2,162,825$ 52,425$ 2,100,300$
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 3 2021-2022 Proposed Budget179
**PROPOSED 05/24/21**
ADJUSTED Favorable
HISTORICAL ANNUAL (unfavorable) PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
GENERAL FUND REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - FY 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES DETAIL BY DEPARTMENT
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
01 CITY ADMINISTRATION
7001 Employee Salaries
702 Salaries Full Time 333,333$ 424,600$ 301,068$ 123,532$ 418,600$
703 Salaries Part Time 435 10,500 - - 10,500
7001 Total 333,768 435,100 301,068 134,032 429,100
7005 Employee Benefits
710 Retirement CalPERS - Employer 51,501 72,400 65,246 7,154 29,000
710 Retirement CalPERS - Employer Unfunded Liab.- - - - 59,026
715 Workers Compensation Insurance 7,776 7,700 7,889 (189) 7,700
716 Group Insurance 39,670 47,600 27,132 20,468 55,000
717 Retiree Medical 30,049 30,300 33,283 (2,983) 30,300
718 Employer Payroll Taxes 22,695 26,800 17,104 9,696 28,400
719 Deferred Compensation - 2,000 1,641 359 4,300
XXX Phone Allowance - - 1,200 (1,200) 1,300
720 Auto Allowance 2,400 3,200 3,200 - 4,800
7005 Total 154,091 190,000 156,694 33,306 219,826
7500 Materials & Supplies
740 Office Supplies & Expense 25,785 60,000 44,667 15,333 38,040
745 Equipment Leasing Costs 7,075 4,100 5,169 (1,069) 14,850
750 Dues & Subscriptions 11,369 11,300 11,105 195 15,240
755 Conference Expense 5,041 10,000 325 9,675 10,000
757 Meeting Expense 2,630 2,000 998 1,002 2,000
759 Training & Education 3,100 2,000 - 2,000 5,000
761 Auto Mileage 416 500 151 349 500
765 Postage 15,258 15,000 16,613 (1,613) 20,000
770 Telephone 6,510 6,100 6,111 (11) 5,700
775 City Council Expense 5,181 10,000 875 9,125 10,000
780 Minutes Clerk Meetings 4,960 6,000 4,562 1,438 6,000
785 Codification 10,117 5,000 1,100 3,900 5,000
790 Advertising - 1,500 825 675 1,000
795 Other General Administrative Expense 5,480 10,000 2,760 7,240 4,900
7500 Total 102,922 143,500 95,260 48,240 138,230
8000 Contractual Services
801 City Attorney 81,950 90,000 88,006 1,994 91,000
802 Legal Expenses - Other - 3,000 1,000 2,000 3,000
820 Website 13,019 6,000 31,408 (25,408) 6,000
850 Election Expense City Council 314 30,000 28,633 1,367 -
890 Consulting Fees 74,639 84,200 109,168 (24,968) 161,400
8000 Total 169,922 213,200 258,215 (45,015) 261,400
9000 Capital Outlay
950 Capital Outlay - Equipment - - 3,117 (3,117) -
9000 Total - - 3,117 (3,117) -
01 TOTAL CITY ADMINISTRATION 760,703$ 981,800$ 814,356$ 167,444$ 1,048,556$
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 4 2021-2022 Proposed Budget180
**PROPOSED 05/24/21**
ADJUSTED Favorable
HISTORICAL ANNUAL (unfavorable) PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
GENERAL FUND REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - FY 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
05 FINANCE
7500 Materials & Supplies
750 Dues & Subscriptions 333$ 2,100$ -$ 2,100$ 200$
7500 Total 333 2,100 - 2,100 200
8000 Contractual Services
810 Annual Audit 16,780 17,100 17,110 (10) 17,630
890 Consulting Fees 100,185 103,683 101,914 1,769 99,500
8000 Total 116,965 120,783 119,024 1,759 117,130
9000 Capital Outlay
950 Capital Outlay - Equipment - - - - -
9000 Total - - - - -
05 TOTAL FINANCE 117,298$ 122,883$ 119,024$ 3,859$ 117,330$
15 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
7001 Employee Salaries
702 Salaries Full Time 215,590$ 196,700$ 175,281$ 21,419$ 202,200$
703 Salaries Part Time 8,229 15,750 32,357 (16,607) 35,000
7001 Total 223,819 212,450 207,638 4,812 237,200
7005 Employee Benefits
710 Retirement CalPERS - Employer 28,668 33,800 33,512 288 17,750
715 Workers Compensation Insurance 3,839 3,800 3,285 515 3,800
716 Group Insurance 14,202 16,200 14,415 1,785 30,900
718 Employer Payroll Taxes 16,350 16,750 14,068 2,682 18,790
719 Deferred Compensation 1,103 - - - 1,200
Phone Allowance - - 600 (600) 600
720 Auto Allowance 1,850 2,400 800 1,600 2,400
7005 Total 66,012 72,950 66,680 6,270 75,440
7500 Materials & Supplies
758 Planning Commission Meeting 1,036 3,000 1,655 1,345 -
776 Miscellaneous Expenses 250 2,000 519 1,481 2,000
750 Dues & Subscriptions - 600 - - 850
755 Conference Expense 1,277 5,000 - - 5,000
759 Training & Education - 2,000 - - 1,000
7500 Total 2,563 12,600 2,174 10,426 8,850
8000 Contractual Services
872 Property Development - Legal Expense 29,017 67,000 67,857 (857) 100,000
878 Build Inspection LA County/Willdan 197,815 150,000 146,506 3,494 150,000
881 Storm Water Management 113,945 124,000 117,753 6,247 251,642
882 Variance & CUP Expense 6,859 7,000 11,387 (4,387) 7,000
884 Special Project Study & Consultant 169,375 196,400 158,772 37,628 180,000
8000 Total 517,011 544,400 502,275 42,125 688,642
9000 Capital Outlay
950 Capital Outlay - Equipment - 2,000 - 2,000 26,400
9000 Total - 2,000 - 2,000 26,400
15 TOTAL PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 809,405$ 844,400$ 778,767$ 65,633$ 1,036,532$
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 5 2021-2022 Proposed Budget181
**PROPOSED 05/24/21**
ADJUSTED Favorable
HISTORICAL ANNUAL (unfavorable) PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
GENERAL FUND REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - FY 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
25 LAW ENFORCEMENT
8200 Law Enforcement
830 Law Enforcement 197,275$ 232,785$ 224,439$ 8,346$ 220,380$
833 Other Law Enforcement Expenses 1,221 3,000 2,272 728 3,000
837 Wild Life Management & Pest Control 16,445 50,000 12,562 37,438 50,000
838 Animal Control Expense 4,674 6,000 5,895 105 6,000
8200 Total 219,615 291,785 245,168 46,617 279,380
25 TOTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 219,615$ 291,785$ 245,167$ 46,618$ 279,380$
65 NON-DEPARTMENT
7500 Materials & Supplies
901 South Bay Community Organization 2,600$ 4,100$ 2,500$ 1,600$ 20,100$
985 Contingency - 25,000 5,000 20,000 25,000
7500 Total 2,600 29,100 7,500 21,600 45,100
8000 Contractual Services
895 Insurance & Bond Expense 19,284 27,600 26,861 739 30,260
8500 Community Promotion
915 Community Recognition 7,154 11,000 581 10,419 16,000
916 Civil Defense Expense 627 650 - 650 650
917 Emergency Preparedness 3,993 29,000 19,135 9,865 50,000
8500 Total 11,774 40,650 19,716 20,934 66,650
65 TOTAL NON-DEPARTMENT 33,658$ 97,350$ 54,077$ 43,273$ 142,010$
75 CITY PROPERTIES
8000 Contractual Services
925 Utilities 29,254$ 34,000$ 33,290$ 710$ 33,810$
930 Repairs & Maintenance 23,637 20,000 20,067 (67) 36,963
932 Area Landscaping 15,219 13,500 20,080 (6,580) 28,500
8000 Total 68,110 67,500 73,437 (5,937) 99,273
9000 Capital Outlay
946 Building & Equipment - - - - 250,000
9000 Total - - - - 250,000
75 TOTAL CITY PROPERTIES 68,110$ 67,500$ 73,437$ (5,937)$ 349,273$
TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES 2,008,789$ 2,405,718$ 2,084,828$ 320,890$ 2,973,081$
NET REVENUES BEFORE TRANSFERS 163,431$ (295,318)$ 77,997$ 373,315$ (872,781)$
699 Fund Transfers (OUT) IN
Traffic Safety Fund (99,285)$ (20,000)$ (5,460) (14,540)$ (10,000)$
Capital Improvement Fund (263,628) (169,875) (150,000) 319,875 (88,000)
Community Facilities Fund - (11,000) - 11,000 -
Refuse Collection Fund - Transfer Out - (57,527) (57,527) 115,054 (159,200)
Refuse Collection Fund - Transfer In 24,000 24,000 24,000 - 24,000
699 Total (338,913)$ (234,402)$ (188,987)$ 431,389$ (233,200)$
(175,482)$ (529,720)$ (110,990)$ 804,704$ (1,105,981)$ NET REVENUE (DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 6 2021-2022 Proposed Budget182
**PROPOSED 05/24/21**
ADJUSTED Favorable
HISTORICAL ANNUAL (unfavorable) PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
GENERAL FUND REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - FY 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
FUND BALANCE
Total to begin 5,795,780$ 5,620,298$ 5,620,298$ 5,509,308$
Total to begin - Adjustment - - - -
Total to end 5,620,298$ 5,090,578$ 5,509,308$ 4,403,327$
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 7 2021-2022 Proposed Budget183
BUDGET 2021-2022 BUDGET BY LINE ITEM
ADJUSTED
HISTORICAL ANNUAL Favorable PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED (unfavorable) BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
12 COMMUNITY FACILITIES FUND
4000 REVENUES
670 Interest Earned 277$ 100$ 100$ -$ -$
Total Revenues 277$ 100$ 100$ -$ -$
7000 EXPENDITURES
933 Equestrian Facilities Maintenance -$ 5,000$ -$ 5,000$ -$
938 Tennis Maintenance Expense - 5,000 5,000 - -
943 Women's Club 2,341 5,000 5,000 - -
Total Expenditures 2,341$ 15,000$ 10,000$ 5,000$ -$
NET REVENUES BEFORE TRANFERS (2,064) (14,900) (9,900) 5,000 -
618 Operating Transfer in/out General Fund - 11,000 11,000 - -
(2,064)$ (3,900)$ 1,100$ 5,000$ -$
3000 FUND BALANCE
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Beginning 11,255$ 9,191$ 9,191$ 10,291$
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending 9,191 5,291 10,291 10,291
Less Reserves:
392 Subdivision Quimby Act - - - -
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending 9,191$ 5,291$ 10,291$ 10,291$
NET REVENUE(DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
**PROPOSED 05-24-21**
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
COMMUNITY FACILITIES FUND
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 8 2021-2022 Proposed Budget 184
ADJUSTED
HISTORICAL ANNUAL Favorable PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED (unfavorable) BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
60 MUNICIPAL SELF INSURANCE FUND
4000 REVENUES
505 Disaster Grants -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
510 Settlements - - - - -
Total Revenues -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
7000 EXPENDITURES
926 Slide Maintenance -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
801 City Attorney - 3,000 - 3,000 -
Total Expenditures -$ 3,000$ -$ 3,000$ -$
NET REVENUES BEFORE TRANFERS - (3,000) - 3,000 -
618 Operating Transfer in/out General Fund - - - - -
-$ (3,000)$ -$ 3,000$ -$
3000 FUND BALANCE
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Beginning 260,374$ 260,374$ 260,374$ 260,374$
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending 260,374$ 257,374$ 260,374$ 260,374$
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
MUNICIPAL SELF INSURANCE FUND
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
NET REVENUE(DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 9 2021-2022 Proposed Budget 185
ADJUSTED
HISTORICAL ANNUAL Favorable PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED (unfavorable) BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
50 REFUSE COLLECTION FUND
4000 REVENUES
665 Service Charges 789,835$ 770,000$ 770,000$ -$ 753,500$
441 Construction & Demo Permits 20,154 7,000 25,000 18,000 24,000
Total Revenues 809,989$ 777,000$ 795,000$ 18,000$ 777,500$
7000 EXPENDITURES
815 Refuse Service Contract 825,084$ 905,548$ 905,548$ -$ 912,700$
776 Miscellaneous Expense 31,060 - - - -
999 Operating Transfer Out - General Fund 24,000 24,000 24,000 - 24,000
Total Expenditures 880,144$ 929,548$ 929,548$ -$ 936,700$
NET REVENUES (DEFICIT) BEFORE TRANSFER (70,155)$ (152,548)$ (134,548)$ 18,000$ (159,200)$
618 Operating Transfer in/out General Fund - 57,527 57,527 - 159,200
NET REVENUE(DEFICIT) AFTER TRAN (70,155) (95,021) (77,021) 18,000 -
3000 FUND BALANCE
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Beginning 177,521$ 107,366$ 107,366$ 30,345$
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending 107,366$ 12,345$ 30,345$ 30,345$
Reserves
392 Committed Fund Balance - - -
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending 107,366$ 12,345$ 30,345$ 30,345$
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
REFUSE COLLECTION FUND
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 10 2021-2022 Proposed Budget 186
ADJUSTED
HISTORICAL ANNUAL Favorable PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED (unfavorable) BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
13 TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND
4000 REVENUES
481 Fines & Forfeitures -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
504 STPL Exchange - LACMTA - - - - -
Total Revenues -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
7000 EXPENDITURES
927 Road Striping - Delineators - Paving 94,155$ 20,000$ 5,460$ 14,540$ 10,000$
928 Traffic Engineering & Survey 5,130 - - - -
929 Road Signs & Miscellaneous Expense - - - - -
Total Expenditures 99,285$ 20,000$ 5,460$ 14,540$ 10,000$
NET REVENUES BEFORE TRANFERS (99,285) (20,000) (5,460) 14,540.00 (10,000)
699 Transfers fr (to) General Fund 99,285 20,000 5,460 (14,540.00) 10,000
699 Transfers fr (to) Capital Projects Fund - - - - -
-$ -$ -$ -$ -$
3000 FUND BALANCE
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Beginning -$ -$ -$ -$
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending -$ -$ -$ -$
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
NET REVENUE(DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS
TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 11 2021-2022 Proposed Budget 187
ADJUSTED
HISTORICAL ANNUAL Favorable PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED (unfavorable) BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
25 TRANSIT FUND - PROPOSITION A
4000 REVENUES
500 Grant Revenue - Proposition A 37,636$ 31,400$ 37,500$ 6,100$ 38,000$
670 Interest Earned 1,088 1,300 1,300 - 600
Total Revenues 38,724$ 32,700$ 38,800$ 6,100$ 38,600$
7000 EXPENDITURES
905 Proposition A Exchange -$ 75,000$ 75,000$ -$ -$
Total Expenditures -$ 75,000$ 75,000$ -$ -$
699 Transfers to General Fund - - - - -
38,724$ (42,300)$ (36,200)$ 6,100$ 38,600$
3000 FUND BALANCE
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Beginning 17,365$ 56,090$ 56,090$ 19,890$
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending 56,090$ 13,790$ 19,890$ 58,490$
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
TRANSIT FUND - PROPOSITION A
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
NET REVENUE(DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 12 2021-2022 Proposed Budget 188
ADJUSTED
HISTORICAL ANNUAL Favorable PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED (unfavorable) BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
26 TRANSIT FUND - PROPOSITION C
4000 REVENUES
501 Grant Revenue - Proposition C 31,219$ 26,100$ 31,000$ 4,900$ 31,500$
670 Interest Earned 751 1,300 1,300 - 650
Total Revenues 31,970$ 27,400$ 32,300$ 4,900$ 32,150$
7000 EXPENDITURES
905 Proposition C Gifted -$ 60,000$ 60,000$ -$ -$
Maintenance & Operation - - - - -
Total Expenditures -$ 60,000$ 60,000$ -$ -$
699 Transfers to General Fund - - - - -
31,970$ (32,600)$ (27,700)$ 4,900$ 32,150$
3000 FUND BALANCE
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Beginning 9,046$ 41,015$ 41,015$ 13,315$
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending 41,015$ 8,415$ 13,315$ 45,465$
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
NET REVENUE(DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
TRANSIT FUND - PROPOSITION C
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 13 2021-2022 Proposed Budget 189
ADJUSTED
HISTORICAL ANNUAL Favorable PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED (unfavorable) BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
27 TRANSIT FUND - MEASURE R
4000 REVENUES
502 Grant Revenue - Measure R 23,381$ 19,500$ 23,300$ 3,800$ 24,000$
670 Interest Earned 1,980 900 900 - 1,100
Total Revenues 25,361$ 20,400$ 24,200$ 3,800$ 25,100$
7000 EXPENDITURES
907 Measure R Gifted -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total Expenditures -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
699 Transfers to Capital Projects Fund - - - - -
25,361$ 20,400$ 24,200$ 3,800$ 25,100$
3000 FUND BALANCE
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Beginning 57,294$ 82,655$ 82,655$ 106,855$
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending 82,655$ 103,055$ 106,855$ 131,955$
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
TRANSIT FUND - MEASURE R
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
NET REVENUE(DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 14 2021-2022 Proposed Budget 190
ADJUSTED
HISTORICAL ANNUAL Favorable PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED (unfavorable) BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
29 TRANSIT FUND - MEASURE M
4000 REVENUES
504 Grant Revenue - Measure M 26,293$ 22,100$ 26,300$ 4,200$ 26,500$
670 Interest Earned 1,533 600 600 - 1,100
Total Revenues 27,826$ 22,700$ 26,900$ 4,200$ 27,600$
7000 EXPENDITURES
909 Measure M Gifted -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total Expenditures -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
699 Transfers to Capital Projects Fund - - - - -
27,826$ 22,700$ 26,900$ 4,200$ 27,600$
3000 FUND BALANCE
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Beginning 48,387$ 76,213$ 76,213$ 103,113$
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending 76,213$ 98,913$ 103,113$ 130,713$
NET REVENUE(DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
TRANSIT FUND - MEASURE M
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - 2019/20
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 15 2021-2022 Proposed Budget 191
ADJUSTED
HISTORICAL ANNUAL Favorable PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED (unfavorable) BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
10 CITIZENS' OPTION FOR PUBLIC
SAFETY (COPS)
4000 REVENUES
570 COPS Allocation 155,948$ 155,000$ 156,727$ 1,727$ 160,000$
670 Interest Earned 2,271 1,500 1,500 - -
Total Revenues 158,219$ 156,500$ 158,227$ 1,727$ 160,000$
7000 EXPENDITURES
840 COPS Program Expenditures 174,499$ 164,898$ 164,898$ -$ 160,000$
776 Miscellaneous Expenses - - - - -
1209 Total expenditures 174,499$ 164,898$ 164,898$ -$ 160,000$
NET REVENUES (DEFICIT) (16,280)$ (8,398)$ (6,671)$ 1,727$ -$
3000 FUND BALANCE
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Beginning 56,098$ 39,818$ 39,818$ 33,147$
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending 39,818$ 31,420$ 33,147$ 33,147$
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
CITIZENS' OPTION FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (COPS)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 16 2021-2022 Proposed Budget 192
ADJUSTED
HISTORICAL ANNUAL Favorable PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED (unfavorable) BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
11 CLEEP
Fund - CLEEP
4000 REVENUES
580 CLEEP - Technology Program -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
670 Interest Earned 349 300 300 - 50
Total Revenues 349$ 300$ 300$ -$ 50$
7000 EXPENDITURES
845 CLEEP - Technology Program 73$ 2,700$ 2,700$ -$ 1,100$
776 Miscellaneous Expenses - - - - -
1209 Total expenditures 73$ 2,700$ 2,700$ -$ 1,100$
NET REVENUES (DEFICIT) 276$ (2,400)$ (2,400)$ -$ (1,050)$
3000 FUND BALANCE
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Beginning 12,433$ 12,709$ 12,709$ 10,309$
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending 12,709$ 10,309$ 10,309$ 9,259$
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
CLEEP FUND
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 17 2021-2022 Proposed Budget 193
ADJUSTED
HISTORICAL ANNUAL Favorable PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED (unfavorable) BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
41 UTILITY FUND
4000 REVENUES
550 Charges for Services 21,757$ -$ -$ -$
550 Rule 20A - Power Utility Grant Project - - - - 763,638
Total Revenues 21,757 - -$ -$ 763,638$
7000 EXPENDITURES
803 Legal 2,573 - - -
883 Sewer Feasability Study 39,091 - 41,905 (41,905)
886 Underground Utility Project 12,948 150,000 4,560 763,638
887 Sewer Design - 85,000
Total expenditures 54,612$ 235,000$ 46,465$ (41,905)$ 763,638$
NET REVENUES BEFORE TRANFERS (32,855) (235,000) (46,465) 41,905 -
699 Transfers fr (to) General Fund - - - - -
(32,855)$ (235,000)$ (46,465)$ 41,905$ -$
41 UTILITY FUND PROPOSED PROPOSED
BUDGET BUDGET
7000 EXPENDITURES FY 22/23 FY 23/24
Crest Road East Utility Undergrounding Grant Project (City match Rule 20A) 763,638$ -$
Total expenditures
3000 FUND BALANCE
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Beginning 1,463,200$ 1,430,345$ 1,430,345$ 1,383,880$
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending 1,430,345$ 1,195,345$ 1,383,880$ 1,383,880$
UTILITY FUND
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
NET REVENUE(DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 18 2021-2022 Proposed Budget 194
ADJUSTED
HISTORICAL ANNUAL Favorable PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED (unfavorable) BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
40 CAPITAL PROJECT FUND
4000 REVENUES -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
7000 EXPENDITURES
947 Non-Building Improvements - Tennis Courts 9,508$ 50,000$ 800$ 49,200$ 300,000$
948 City Hall Improvements- ADA - Design 14,355 7,000 26,701 (19,701)
Acacia Removal - 32,000 - 32,000
Total expenditures 23,863$ 89,000$ 27,501$ 61,499$ 300,000$
NET REVENUES BEFORE TRANFERS (23,863) (89,000) (27,501) 61,499 (300,000)
999 Transfers fr (to) General Fund 263,628 89,000 - (89,000) 88,000
999 Transfers fr (to) Traffic Safety Fund - - - - -
239,765$ -$ (27,501)$ (27,501)$ (212,000)$
40 CAPITAL PROJECT FUND PROPOSED PROPOSED
BUDGET BUDGET
FY 22/23 FY 23/24
947 Non-Building Improvements - Tennis Courts -$ -$
948 City Hall Improvements- ADA - Design -
City Hall Campus Parking lot Improvement
Total expenditures -$ -$
3000 FUND BALANCE
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Beginning -$ 239,765$ 239,765$ 212,264$
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending 239,765$ 239,765$ 212,264$ 264$
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
NET REVENUE(DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - 2019/20
CAPITAL PROJECT FUND
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 19 2021-2022 Proposed Budget 195
ADJUSTED
HISTORICAL ANNUAL Favorable PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED (unfavorable) BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
30 LA COUNTY - MEASURE W
4000 REVENUES
502 Grant Revenue - Measure W -$ 110,000$ -$ (110,000)$ 110,000$
670 Interest Earned - 900 - (900) 900
Total Revenues -$ 110,900$ -$ (110,900)$ 110,900$
7000 EXPENDITURES
907 Storm Water Management -$ 38,750$ -$ 38,750$ 38,750$
Total Expenditures -$ 38,750$ -$ 38,750$ 38,750$
699 Transfers fr (to) General Fund - - - - -
-$ 72,150$ -$ (72,150)$ 72,150$
3000 FUND BALANCE
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Beginning -$ -$ -$ -$
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending -$ 72,150$ -$ 72,150$
NET REVENUE(DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
MEASURE W FUND
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - 2019/20
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 20 2021-2022 Proposed Budget 196
ADJUSTED
HISTORICAL ANNUAL Favorable PROPOSED
ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED (unfavorable) BUDGET
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22
35 LA COUNTY - MEASURE A
4000 REVENUES
502 Grant Revenue - Measure A -$ 26,100$ -$ (26,100)$ 26,100$
670 Interest Earned - 900 - (900) 900
Total Revenues -$ 27,000$ -$ (27,000)$ 27,000$
7000 EXPENDITURES
907 Landscaping/Park Amenities/Lighting -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total Expenditures -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
699 Transfers fr (to) General Fund - - - - -
-$ 27,000$ -$ (27,000)$ 27,000$
3000 FUND BALANCE
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Beginning -$ -$ -$ -$
398 Unassigned Fund Balance Ending -$ 27,000$ -$ 27,000$
NET REVENUE(DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
MEASURE A FUND
HISTORICAL ACTUAL - 2019/20
CURRENT TREND - FY 2020/21
PROPOSED BUDGET - FY 2021/22
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Rolling Hills 21 2021-2022 Proposed Budget 197
PROPOSED 3‐YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN CITY OF ROLLING HILLSFY2020‐2021 TO FY 2022‐2023Year 0 Current Year Year 2 Year 3Project Description FY 2018‐2019 FY 2019‐2020 FY 2020‐2021 FY 2021‐2022 FY 2022‐2023Phase Cost Phase Cost Phase Cost Phase Cost Phase Cost18" Sewer Main along Rolling Hills Road [1] Feasibility Study Phase I $11,391 Feasibility Study Phase II $30,000 Design $81,196 Construction $1,700,0002Tennis Courts ADA Improvements Design $8,000Construction $300,0003City Hall ADA Improvements [2]Design $37,000 Construction $850,0004Crest Road East Utility Undergrounding Grant Project [3]Design Design/Construction $763,638 Construction $763,6385Vegetation/Fire Fuel Management Grant Project [4]Design [6] $0 Environmental/ Construction$975,1446City Hall campus parking lot improvements [5]Design $50,000Total $19,391 $30,000 $118,196 $4,588,782 $813,638[1] Off‐set of general fund ($350,000) using American Rescue Fund[2] Low interest rate financing secured ($300,000) through CJPIA for ADA projects with 5 year repay plan.[3] Grant requires 25% local match. City will use Rule 20A credit for local match.[4] Only phase 1 has been awarded. Phase 2 approval will depend on the completion of phase 1.[5] Eligible to be funded using a combination of accumulated local returns from Measures R and M transportation funds, Measure A County Park fund, and Measure W Clean Water fund. [6] No cost to the City; contribution by the Los Angeles County Fire DepartmentSCHEDULEProject Description FY 2018‐2019 FY 2019‐2020 FY 2020‐2021 FY 2021‐2022 FY 2022‐2023Phase Timeframe Phase Timeframe Phase Timeframe Phase Timeframe Phase Timeframe1 8" Sewer Main along Rolling Hills Road [1] Feasibility Study Phase I Feb 18 ‐ Oct 18Feasibility Study Phase II May 19‐May 20Design Sept '20 ‐ Jun '21Construction Jul '21 ‐ Nov '212 Tennis Courts ADA Improvements DesignConstruction Nov '21 ‐ Apr '223 City Hall ADA Improvements [2]Design Mar '20 ‐ May '21Construction Oct '21 ‐ Feb '224 Crest Road East Utility Undergrounding Grant Project [3]Design Jan '21 ‐ Jun '22Design/Construction Jul '21 ‐Jun '22 Construction Jul'22 ‐ Sept '225 Vegetation/Fire Fuel Management Grant Project [4]Design Dec '20 ‐ Mar '21Environmental/ ConstructionMay '21 ‐ Nov '21; Jan '22 ‐ Apr '226 City Hall campus parking lot improvements [5]Design Jun '22 ‐ Dec '22198
Agenda Item No.: 11.A
Mtg. Date: 05/24/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:ELAINE JENG, CITY MANAGER
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:CONSIDER A PENINSULA CITIES JOINT LETTER EXPRESSING
CONCERNS REGARDING SPECIAL DIRECTIVE POLICIES
IMPACTING PUBLIC SAFETY. (MAYOR DIERINGER)
DATE:May 24, 2021
BACKGROUND:
The mayors of the Peninsula cities conducts a monthly coordination meeting. In coordinating with the
other Peninsula mayors, Mayor Dieringer requested that a joint letter drafted by Rancho Palos Verdes
to be placed on the May 24, 2021 City Council agenda.
DISCUSSION:
Across the Los Angeles County, cities are expressing vote of no confidence for Los Angeles County
District Attorney (DA) George Gascon. News outlets reported on the week of May 17, 2021, nine cities
(Lancaster, La Mirada, Whittier, Beverly Hills, Pico Rivera, Covina, Rosemead and Santa Clarita)
issued vote of no-confidence in DA Gascon.
DA Gascon's policies such as elimination of cash bail for any misdemeanor and the eliminate of
sentence enhancements, are the basis for the vote of no confidence.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive a report from Mayor Bea Dieringer on the join letter and provide direction to staff.
ATTACHMENTS:
PV Peninsula Cities_Gascon Policy Concerns.docx
199
May 21, 2021 Via Email
The Honorable George Gascón
Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office
211 West Temple Street, Suite 1200
Los Angeles, CA 90012
SUBJECT: Peninsula Cities Concerns Regarding Special Directive Policies
Impacting Public Safety
Dear District Attorney Gascón:
We, the four cities on the Palos Verdes Peninsula, firmly joined together by a common
cause, are writing to you today to express our concerns regarding your Special Directive
policies which are negatively impacting public safety.The District Attorney’s Office has
a legal and ethical responsibility to execute laws enacted by voters and the Legislature,
to prevent and prosecute crime,and protect the general public.Your unilaterally-issued
Special Directives undermine the legislative and ballot process and risk the safety of the
general public.
One of the major concerns of our communities is that criminals believe they can commit
certain crimes with impunity under your Special Directives.When deterrence is
undermined, people and businesses are threatened,and their ability to operate and live
within a secure environment is compromised.Moreover, it hinders our public safety
programs with local law enforcement. We ask that you consider the impact of your
policies on the fate of residents, workers, and businesses.
The cities of Rancho Palos Verdes, Palos Verdes Estates, Rolling Hills, and Rolling Hills
Estates value and place the highest priority on public safety, with an emphasis on
deterring crime and crime prevention.The issuance of numerous Special Directives and
two subsequent amendments raised a red flag as these directives pose a serious threat
to the well-being and safety of the residents of Los Angeles County and the residents of
the Palos Verdes Peninsula. These directives included the following:
Special Directive 20-06 eliminates cash bail for any misdemeanor, non-serious
felony, or non-violent felony offense.
Special Directive 20-07 declines or dismisses several misdemeanor charges,
including trespassing, disturbing the peace, criminal threats, drug and
paraphernalia possession, under the influence of controlled substance,public
intoxication, and resisting arrest.
200
District Attorney Gascón
May 21, 2021
Page 2
Special Directive 20-08 eliminates several sentence enhancements, including the
Three Strikes Law, gang enhancements, and violations of bail.
The Special Directives listed undermine the legislative and ballot initiative process and
risk the safety of the general public. It is of the utmost importance for the cities on the
Palos Verdes Peninsula that policies which aim to restructure or amend prosecutorial
directives are consistent with state law and issued with reasonable intent and priority to
enhance public safety to protect the general public and victims’ rights. It is imperative
the District Attorney’s Office uphold its duties and responsibilities to appropriately
prosecute criminals, based on the evidence presented and consistent with state law.
We are supportive of policies that protect public safety through mental health and social
services, but these Special Directives instead undermine the ability for crime deterrence
and prevention.
The cities of Rancho Palos Verdes, Palos Verdes Estates, Rolling Hills, and Rolling Hills
Estates demand that the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office uphold the laws
of the state, whether they were established by the state Legislature or the voters, and
demand no Special Directives be issued which contradict these laws.
Sincerely,
Eric Alegria Michael Kemps
Mayor, City of Rancho Palos Verdes Mayor, City of Palos Verdes Estates
Bea Dieringer Steven Zuckerman
Mayor, City of Rolling Hills Mayor, City of Rolling Hills Estates
cc:L.A. County Board of Supervisors
Jeff Kiernan, League of California Cities
Marcel Rodarte, California Contract Cities Association
Jacki Bacharach, South Bay Cities Council of Governments
Rancho Palos Verdes City Council and City Manager
Palos Verdes Estates City Council and City Manager
Rolling Hills City Council and City Manager
Rolling Hills Estates City Council and City Manager
Captain James Powers, Lomita Station, L.A. County Sheriff’s Department
201
District Attorney Gascón
May 21, 2021
Page 3
Chief Tony Best, Palos Verdes Estates Police Department
Association of Deputy District Attorneys
202