Loading...
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