Loading...
07-27-2020_CCAgendaPacket1 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. Public Participation: City Hall will be closed to the public until further notice. A live audio of the City Council meeting will available on the City’s website (http://www.rolling-hills.org/). The meeting agenda is on the City’s website (http://www.rolling-hills.org/Archive.aspx?AMID=70). 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 . Access to the Zoom meeting room: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83320318128?pwd=K01LTWJaU0hpTE03a0JsMkFoWENjdz09. 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 (i.e., phone numbers, addresses, etc.) that you do not want to be published. NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 AGENDA Regular Council Meeting CITY COUNCIL Monday, July 27, 2020 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 7:00 PM Next Resolution No. 1258 Next Ordinance No. 365 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Any agenda related information received and distributed to the City Council after the Agenda Packet is printed is included in Supplemental Packets. Supplemental Packets are produced as needed. The Monday Supplemental Packet is ava ilable for public review in the City Clerk Department, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, during normal business hours [main posting location pursuant to the Brown Act, G.C. 54957.5(b)(2)]. Supplemental Packets are available for public review at City Hall, 2 Portugue se Bend Road and on our City’s website: www.rolling-hills.org. Please be advised that communications directed to the City Council are public records and are subject to disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act and Brown Act unless exempt from disclosure under the applicable law. Communications will NOT be edited for redactions; will be printed/posted as submitted. 2 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 take place on any items not on the agenda. 4. 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. 4.A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. 05-11-20CCMinutesv4.docx 05-26-20CCMinutesv5.docx 06-22-20CCDraftMinutesv4.docx 07-13-2020CCMinutes.v2.docx 4.B. PAYMENT OF BILLS. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. Payment of Bills.pdf 4.C. REPUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLING TONNAGE REPORT FOR JUNE 2020. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. Republic Service Tonnage Report June.pdf 4.D. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDING JUNE 30, 2020 RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. Budget Comparative 6-30-20 Preliminary.pdf Budget Comparative General Fund Detail 6-30-20 Preliminary.pdf 5. COMMISSION ITEMS 5.A. VARIANCE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 162 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK LOCATED AT 3 POPPY TRAIL ROAD (JONAS). RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. 3PoppyTrailStaffReport.pdf 3PoppyTrailPC Approved Resolution 2020-04.pdf 3 Poppy Trail Calculations.pdf 3 Poppy Trail Pictures.pdf 3 poppy trail plans.pdf 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6.A. A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND APPROVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PLACEMENT OF SOLID WASTE SERVICE CHARGES OWED TO REPUBLIC SERVICES PURSUANT TO ITS SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE WITH THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ON THE FY 2020-2021 LOS ANGELES COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER'S OFFICE ANNUAL TAX ROLL. 3 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council: 1. Open the public hearing; 2. Receive presentation from staff; 3. Pose questions to staff; 4. Receive comments from the public; 5. Close public hearing; and 6. Approve the Resolution detailing the sums to be levied upon individual real property parcels that receive trash services and direct the same to be submitted to the Los Angeles County Auditor-Controller for placement on the FY 2020-2021 property tax roll. City of Rolling Hills 2020 Tax Roll.pdf Proof of Publication.pdf Report Re Sanitation Charge-c1.pdf Resolution RE Annual Sanitation Charge-c1.pdf City of Rolling Hills Parcel Map 20200724 with Roads.pdf 7. OLD BUSINESS 7.A. RECEIVE AND FILE AN UPDATE TO THE HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT TO PREPARE A COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN (CWPP). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file staff's report on the Hazard Mitigation Grant to prepare a CWPP. 4382-PL0172-25P Rolling Hills, City of, Community Wildfire Protection Plan.pdf 7.B. CONSIDER AND ADOPT THE ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN (CWPP). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council adopt the Rolling Hills CWPP and direct staff to update the plan annually. CWPP_ResponseToComments_2020-07-24.pdf CWPP_comments.pdf REH_PRELIMINARY_SUGGESTIONS_RE_CWPP_Draft_2020-06-12_v13 final draft_7-22-2020_R.Hawkins.docx CWPP_Draft_2020-06-12_v13 final draftRevised_B.Dieringer.docx 8. NEW BUSINESS 8.A. CONSIDER AND APPROVE AN AMENDED AGREEMENT WITH JIMENEZ CONSULTING TO PROVIDE TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT, INCLUDING ENHANCEMENTS TO CITY'S WEBSITE. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve an amended agreement with Jimenez Consulting. Amendment to Agreement with Jimenez- Website Design-c1_rh-c1_2020-07-23.docx 20-06-08 Jimenez Consulting Solutions LLC FINAL.pdf 8.B. CONSIDER AND APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 1259 TO ESTABLISH A FORMAL POLICY TO CONTRIBUTE CITY FUNDS TOWARDS THE COST OF UTILITY POLE REMOVAL AND RESOLUTION NO. 1260 ESTABLISHING AN APPLICATION AND APPEAL FEE RELATING TO UTILITY POLE REMOVAL REIMBURSEMENT APPLICATIONS; AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1241. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council approve Resolutions 4 1259 and 1260. Ad_Hoc_Recommendations_Individual_Utility_Pole_FINAL.docx Resolution_RE_Policy_for_Contribution_to_Utility_Pole_Removal-c1_2020-07-24- 1.v2.doc Fee_Reso._Amended_to_Reflect_Utility_Pole_Removal_Fees-c1_2020-07-24-1v1.docx 9. Supplemental Agenda Packet Relating to Item 9A Posted July 27, 2020 MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS 9.A. DISCUSS LOS ANGELES COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA ITEM ON A BALLOT MEASURE FOR THE NOVEMBER 2020 ELECTION THAT MAY RESULT IN BUDGET CUTS TO SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND COUNTY PROBATION OFFICE (MIRSCH AND DIERINGER). RECOMMENDATION: None. Supplemental Item 9A.pdf 10. MATTERS FROM STAFF SB2 GRANT UPDATE AND LEAP GRANT UPDATE (ORAL). 11. CLOSED SESSION 12. ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Monday, MONTH DAY, YEAR at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California, 90274. 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. 5 Agenda Item No.: 4.A Mtg. Date: 07/27/2020 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CONNIE VIRAMONTES , ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT THRU: ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF MINUTES. DATE: July 27, 2020 BACKGROUND: NONE. DISCUSSION: NONE. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. ATTACHMENTS: 05-11-20CCMinutesv4.docx 05-26-20CCMinutesv5.docx 06-22-20 CCDraftMinutesv4.docx 07-13-2020CCMinutes.v2.docx 6 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, MAY 11, 2020 1. CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Pieper at 7:02p.m. via teleconference. 2. ROLL CALL Councilmembers participating via teleconference: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson. Councilmembers Absent: None. Others participating via teleconference: Elaine Jeng, P.E., City Manager. Meredith Elguira, Planning & Community Services Director. Yohana Coronel, City Clerk. Michael Jenkins, City Attorney. Francesca Wach, 52 Portuguese Bend Road. John Resich. Chris Sarabia, Conservation Director for Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy. Others participating via written email/public comment: Alfred Visco. 3. OPEN AGENDA Alfred Visco thanked the City for following up with the owner of 17 Cinchring Road about the abatement of dead vegetation. He inquired about when the detailed mapping of dead vegetation will be available from Mr. Sarabia. He also suggested that the Land Conservancy should prepare a proposal to clear dead vegetation and Acacias in Paint Brush Canyon along the Rolling Hills and Nature Preserve border. 4. 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. A. MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 10, 2020, REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 24, 2020, REGULAR MEETINF OF MARCH 09, 2020, REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 23, 2020, SPECIAL ME ETING OF MARCH 30, 2020, JOINT STUDY SESSION WITH THE PLANNING -1- 7 COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL APRIL 13, 2020 AND REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 27, 2020. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED B. PAYMENT OF BILLS. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED C. CONSIDER AND APPROVE UPDATED CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED D. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ROLLING HILLS 2020 RELIABILITY REPORT. RECOMMENDATION: STAFF RECOMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RECEIVE AND FILE THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ROLLING HILLS 2020 CIRCUIT RELIABILITY REPORT. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer requested to pull consent items 4A and 4C. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council approve consent items 4B and 4D as presented. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor, Pieper, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: *Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. *Councilmember Black reported to the meeting at 7:12 p.m. due to technical difficulties. Item 4A Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer requested to move the minutes submitted for approval to the May 26, 2020 City Council meeting to allow time for review. Item 4C Mayor Pieper informed the City Council that Councilmember Wilson will be assigned to the Personnel Committee and Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer will serve as an alternate member on the following committees: Los Angeles Sanitation District No. 5, Los Angeles Count y City Selection Committee and Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer requested to serve on committees that address policy and present to the Council. She stated that her preference would be for reappointment to the Fire Fuel Reduction Ad Hoc Subcommittee. Councilmember Wilson was amenable to transferring his appointment to Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -2- Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -3- 8 Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council approve consent item 4C as amended. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Mirsch and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: *Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. *Councilmember Black reported to the meeting at 7:12 p.m. due to technical difficulties. 5. COMMISSION ITEMS A. CONSIDERATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE RESOLUTION NO. 2020-03 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 400 SQUARE-FOOT LAP SWIMMING POOL WITH SPA IN THE FRONT YARD OF AN EXISTING RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD. PCS Director Elguira reported that the project request is for approval to construct a 400 square - foot lap pool with spa in the front yard of an existing residence located at 52 Portuguese Bend Road. She explained that the backyard of the parcel functions as the front entrance to the property due to the irregular shape of the subject lot and geometry of Portuguese Bend Road. The proposed pool and spa are technically located behind the residence but the rear side of the residence faces the front yard and Portuguese Bend Road. The project is categorically exempt under CEQA. It was approved by RHCA on February 19, 2020. PCS Director Elguira said that Mrs. Luna submitted a letter on April 20, 2020 opposing the project due to a potential view impact. Mrs. Luna also mentioned she did not receive the public notification for the Planning Commission meeting. The item was subsequently rescheduled to May 1, 2020 to meet the public noticing requirements. Mrs. Luna and her son attended the on-site field trip to view the location of the proposed pool. Later that day, Mrs. Luna sent an email withdrawing her opposition to the proposed pool citing that it will not be visible from her property. PCS Director Elguira reported that Mr. Charlie Raine submitted a letter urging the City and RHCA to have a plan in place to address the adverse impacts caused by stormwater runoff coming from new projects that increase impermeable surface areas. He also mentioned that the public notice listed the wrong day. To address the notification issue, PCS Director Elguira explained that the Planning Commission meeting that was held on Tuesday, April 21, 2020 was adjourned to Friday, May 1, 2020. The Planning Commission public notice went out announcing the May 1, 2020 meeting. The notice listed Tuesday, May 1, 2020 instead of Friday, May 1, 2020. She informed the Council that the property owner and their representative are present and available for questions. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -4- 9 PCS Director Elguira reminded Councilmember Mirsch that she must recuse herself due to the proximity of her residence from the subject parcel. Councilmember Black commented that he was inclined to receive and file the item but questioned whether proper notification had been provided. Mayor Pieper asked counsel if the City complied with the public notification requirements. City Attorney Jenkins responded that legal obligations were met. The Planning Department consulted with Assistant City Attorney Jane Abzug. The regular Planning Commission meeting was adjourned to May 1st and it was his understanding that the appropriate notice was given. Councilmember Black recommended postponing the item to the next City Council meeting in order to correct the error on the public notice. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. City Attorney Jenkins stated that the Council had three options. 1) remand the item back to the Planning Commission, 2) take jurisdiction over the item or 3) receive and file the item. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. City Attorney Jenkins withdrew his earlier comment and recommended that the Council move the item to the next meeting to give him ample time to review the notice that went out. Mayor Pieper said that the Council did not have a problem with the project. He asked counsel for t he best way to expedite the process. City Attorney Jenkins replied that taking jurisdiction over the item is the quickest way, given staff has enough time to notice the public hearing. PCS Director replied that notices could be sent the following day. Mayor Pieper stated that the Council would take jurisdiction over the item. He thanked John Resich and closed the item from public comment. *Councilmember Black was disconnected from the meeting at 7:43pm due to technical difficulties. Councilmember Wilson withdrew his support for Councilmember Black’s motion. Mayor Pieper made a substitute motion that the City Council direct staff to immediately send public hearing notices and that the Council schedule a meeting as soon as possible to review the project . Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -5- 10 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: *Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mirsch. 6. PUBLIC HEARING NONE. 7. OLD BUSINESS A. CONSIDER AND APPROVE AN ENHANCED PROPOSAL FROM PALOS VERDES PENINSULA LAND CONSERVANCY FOR ADDITIONAL FIRE FUEL ABATEMENT IN THE PRESERVE IN THE AREAS ADJACENT TO THE CITY BORDER. City Manager Jeng reminded the City Council that the item was continued from the April 27. 2020 City Council meeting after additional information was requested regarding the cost of yearly spring mowing and removal of Pine trees. The yearly spring mowing will cost $20,800 per year and the removal of Pine trees will cost $19,250. City Manager Jeng informed the City Council that Cris Sarabia, Director of PVP Land Conservancy, is available for questions. Mayor Pieper asked if there were other Pine trees on the City’s side of the border. Mr. Sarabia replied there are Pine trees on private property. Mayor Pieper clarified that if the Council went back to the original proposal they would be at $50,000 and the ongoing maintenance is $20,800 on top of the $12,000 annual cost from the previous phase. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Mr. Alfred Visco commented via email that the proposal from the Land Conservancy should state “removing” instead of “limbing up” Pine trees. He also said that removing Pine trees is far superior to limbing up because it eliminates the need for future maintenance. He supports the Land Conservancy’s proposal. Mayor Pieper closed the item for public comment and continued with the discussion. Mayor Pieper commented that he was not inclined to spend money on limbing up Pine trees on the Conservancy side until Pine trees on the City’s side are maintained. Councilmember Mirsch agreed with Mayor Pieper’s suggestion but also saw the need to limb up Pine trees. She also stated that Pine trees on private property need to be addressed before spending any resources on removing Pine trees on the Conservancy’s property. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -6- 11 Councilmember Mirsch moved that the City Council approve the Land Conservancy’s proposal of $50,000 one-time work including limbing up Pine trees and approve the annual work for three years. Revisit the issue of removing the Pine trees once there is a plan for the trees on the City’s side. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsc h, and Wilson NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Item 8B (out of order) B. CONSIDER AND APPROVE FINANCE/BUDGET/AUDIT COMMITTEE’S RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO INVESTMENT, FINANCIAL, BUDGET, DEBT AND ASSET CAPITALIZATION POLICIES, AND SCHEDULE OF FEE AND CHARGES. Finance Director Terry Shea gave a summary of the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee’s recommended changes to investment, financial, budget, debt and asset capitalization policies and schedule of fee charges. All policies were approved by the auditors which were then reviewed by the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee. The Committee members suggested changing the cash reserve amount for the refuse fund to the amount of the service fee subsidy absorbed by the general fund. The Committee is in favor of increasing the PARS Pension Rate stabilization fund to $50,000 per year. The Committee proposed adding a fund section for Measure W monies and a section to approve CIP carryovers for unexpended budget appropriations and review it annually with the Finance/Budget/Audit Co mmittee. The Committee did not recommend any changes to the schedule of fees or the multiplier. Councilmember Mirsch wanted to confirm that the Committee recommended paying $50,000 per fiscal year with the understanding that the liability curve increases every year. She asked if the City prepares annual expenditure forecast with a 4 -year outlook. Councilmember Black replied that the City is committed to paying $50,000 every fiscal year with the hope of paying off the debt in two years. Finance Director Shea said the Finance Department conducts a 5 -year cash forecast as part of the budget process which includes the current year plus 4 years and updated yearly. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer asked about the proposal to increase the multiplier. She advised that the Council revisit the issue mid-year and for the Finance Director to return with a mid-year update. Finance Director Shea explained that the proposed increase is strictly based on the level of permit activity which is down compared to this time last year. Councilmember Wilson clarified that the multiplier is for cost recovery not for profit. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -7- 12 Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council approve the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee recommendations. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Item 7B (out of order) 7. OLD BUSINESS B. ACCEPT THE SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY PHASE II AS COMPLETE AND DIRECT STAFF TO PROCEED WITH THE DESIGN OF THE 8" SEWER MAIN ALONG PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD/ROLLING HILLS ROAD. City Manager Jeng reported that the County accepted the Sewer Feasibility Study and that the City can now proceed with the next step. The City achieved two Will-Serve letters. The first letter accepts discharge from the City Hall campus and the second receives discharge from 235 homes within the City of Rolling Hills. The overall cost estimate for the project, which includes design, construction, and management, is $1.1 million dollars; $85,000 is estimated for engineering design. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none he returned to the discussion. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council accept the Sewer Feasibility Study Phase II as complete and direct staff to procure engineering services to proceed with design of the 8" sewer main along Portuguese Bend Road/Rolling Hills Road. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor, Pieper, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Item 8A & 8C (out of order) 8. NEW BUSINESS A. ACCEPT THE FY 2019-2020 TRAFFIC SIGNING, STRIPING, AND PAVEMENT MARKING PROJECT AS COMPLETE AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONTRACT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION TO BE FILED WITH THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -8- 13 City Manager Jeng indicated that on January 13, 2020 City Council awarded a construction contract to PCI for signing and striping streets, horse crossings and two all-way stop intersections. The final project construction cost was $75,384.50. City Manager Jeng recommended that the Council accept the FY 2019-2020 Traffic Signing, Striping, and Pavement Marking Project as complete and in accordance with the contract plans and specifications, file Notice of Completion with the Los Angeles County Recorder's office, and release retention as final payment to PCI after the expiration of the lien period. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none, he returned to the discussion. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council accept the FY 2019 -2020 Traffic Signing, Striping, and Pavement Marking Project as complete and in accordance with the contract plans and specifications, file Notice of Completion with the Los Angeles Cou nty Recorder's office, and release retention as final payment to PCI after the expiration of the lien period. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsc h, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. C. CONSIDER LAYOUT OPTIONS TO BRING EXISTING RESTROOMS AT CITY HALL TO COMPLY WITH ADA CODES, AND SELECT AN OPTION TO CONTINUE THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS. City Manager Jeng presented the layout options prepared by Pacific Architecture and Engineering Inc. (PAE). PAE focused on the restroom improvements. PAE worked with staff to develop several options that addressed compliance with ADA codes, functionality, budgetary constraints, and impact to City Hall operations during construction. PAE w as directed to keep all necessary improvements within the existing building footprint. Five options for consideration with high level construction cost ranking by PAE were presented. Option 1 (Most cost effective) This option would create three separate all gender restrooms in the existing restroom locations, one of which must be ADA compliant. This option would eliminate the closet space holding the water heater, refrigerator, the telephone box/wires, cables and switches for the City's computer network, and the small kitchenette. The uses eliminated by the new restrooms would need to be replaced elsewhere in City Hall. Option 2 This option would keep the men and women's restrooms in the current locations but both sets of restrooms would need to be converted into single use. This option would create an ADA restroom in the current copy room. To access the ADA restroom, the public counter would need to be rotated 90 degrees. This option would reduce the footprint of the existing copy room. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -9- 14 Option 3 The restrooms would be moved to the copy room. The public counter would be rotated 90 degrees to allow a walkway from the front door to the new restrooms. There would be a women's restroom and an all gender restroom. Both sets of restrooms would be ADA compliant. A new copy room, meeting room and storage room will replace the existing restrooms. This option separates the public part of the house from the staff side of the house but reduces considerably the existing office space that needs to house three employees. Option 3.5 This option is a variation of Option 3 with the all gender restroom placed in portions of the lobby rather than the office space. As with Option 3, this layout would allow for the creation of a meeting room and a copy room while preserving the office space for three employees. Option 4 (Most expensive) This option places ADA compliant restrooms in the existing location. As with Option 1, this layout would displace a number of existing uses that need to be relocated somewhere else in City Hall. It would also require the widening of the existing hallway by shrinking the offices located across the restrooms. Mayor Pieper expressed his concerns about having adequate space for staff. He inquired if there was a way to measure the cost difference between Option 1 and 3.5 to help guide the Council’s decision. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer stated that using Option 1 as a baseline could be problematic since the cost is not available. Rewiring City Hall and moving the water heater along with the pipes can be expensive. She was also concerned about reducing the lobby area because it is occasionally used for special events. Councilmember Wilson commented that there could be a lot of potential unintended costs. He noticed that the attic access might no longer be accessible with some of the options presented. He also agreed that more information in pricing is needed before rendering a decision. Councilmember Black asked why City Hall required 3 restrooms and what were the required dimensions for an ADA restroom. City Manager Jeng explained that if there is a male and female restroom then there must be an ADA restroom for each gender. Councilmember Black commented that it was his understanding that there could be a unisex restroom. He suggested having 2 stalls in the female restroom and converting the male restroom to a unisex ADA compliant restroom. City Manager Jeng referred to Option 1 as resembling Dr. Black’s idea. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -10- 15 Mayor Pieper suggested tabling the item for two weeks while he works with the City Manager and finds out more about ADA requirements. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none, he returned to the discussion. *Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer did not vote on the item because she was disconnected from the meeting due to technical difficulties. Mayor Pieper moved that the City Council table the item for two weeks until more information is available about ADA requirements. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: *Dieringer. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 9 & 10 (out of order) 9. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS Councilmember Mirsch stated she attended a webinar that discussed funding issues due to COVID - 19. She was shocked at the investment types and strategies that CalPERS uses. She suggested that the Council consider designating someone to actively monitor the issue with the League. Mayor Pieper replied that he would discuss the matter with City Manager Jeng. He then asked counsel if the City could recruit a representative to participate on the phone calls to better understand the issue. City Attorney Jenkins asked Mayor Pieper if the person would be a consultant, lobbyist or a volunteer. He stated that the Council could have a volunteer attend the meetings and confer with the Council. Councilmember Black inquired when City Hall was going to reopen. Mayor Pieper replied that City Hall was reopening on Monday, May 18, 2020. The delay was partly due to unresolved liability issues. 10. MATTERS FROM STAFF NONE. *Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer rejoined the meeting at 9:14 p.m. 8D (out of order) 16 8. NEW BUSINESS D. CONSIDER AND APPROVE A THREE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN. City Manager Jeng discussed the City’s three year capital improvement plan. Annually in June, the City Council adopts an operating budget with General Fund transfers to capital improvement projects. Because of the one-year cycle, the adopted budget resets at the end of the year and capital improvement projects that are not completed within the year are reevaluated for funding the following year. Typical capital improvement projects span multiple years because they require planning, design, public bidding, a nd construction. To make provisions for all phases of the project, a complete expenditure plan is necessary. She highlighted various capital improvement projects, their order of construction and schedule of completion over three years. She stated that this was her 3-year proposal based on projects in-progress while taking the Council’s priorities under advisement. The plan is to help the Council and staff visualize a particular project with the timeframe and cost. She recommended that the Council approve a 3-year CIP plan. Mayor Pieper stated that the CIP plan lists projects that are feasible and can be accomplished within the proposed timeframe. He advised that adopting the CIP plan means approving a concept and that these projects are pending and are going to be included in the yearly budget review. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none, he returned to the discussion. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council approve the item as a concept and in the order in which the project should be completed. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 11. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Pieper adjourned the meeting at 9:33p.m. to a regular meeting of the City Council scheduled for Tuesday, May 26, 2020 beginning at 7:00p.m. via teleconference. Respectfully submitted, Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -11- 17 City Clerk Approved, Jeff Pieper Mayor Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -12- 18 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, MAY 26, 2020 1. CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Pieper at 7:01p.m. via teleconference. 2. ROLL CALL Councilmembers participating via teleconference: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson. Councilmembers Absent: None. Others participating via teleconference: Elaine Jeng, P.E., City Manager. Meredith Elguira, Planning & Community Services Director. Yohana Coronel, City Clerk. Jane Abzug, Assistant City Attorney. Terry Shea, Finance Director. John Resich. Others participating via written email/public comment: Charlie Raine. Ronald Sommer. Alfred Visco. 3. OPEN AGENDA NONE. 4. 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. A. MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 10, 2020, REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 24, 2020, REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 09, 2020, REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 23, 2020, SPECIAL MEETING OF MARCH 30, 2020, JOINT STUDY SESSION WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL APRIL 13, 2020, REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 27, 2020 AND REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 11, 2020. -1- 19 RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED B. PAYMENT OF BILLS. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED C. CONSIDER AND APPROVE PARTICIPATION IN SUPPORT LOCAL RECOVERY COALITION ENCOURAGED BY THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED Councilmember Black requested to pull consent item 4C. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer requested to pull consent item 4A, except for the corrected minutes of February 10, 2020 and February 24, 2020. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council approve the minutes for the Regular City Council meeting of February10, 2020 and the Regular City Council meeting for February 24, 2020 with amendments and consent item 4B as presented. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor, Pieper, Dieringer, Mirsch, Black, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Item 4C Councilmember Black asked for clarification on whether the report reflected an accura te funding amount of $500 billion for direct and flexible funding for all cities nationwide to support critical local services. City Manager Jeng said the information came from the League of California Cities. Mayor Pieper commented that it was his under standing that the letter was in support of the League’s effort to secure funding for all cities nationwide. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer confirmed that the $500 million was to fund cities nationwide. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council approve consent item 4C. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Black and Mirsch. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-26-20 -2- 20 5. COMMISSION ITEMS A. CONSIDERATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE RESOLUTION NO. 2020-03 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 400 SQUARE-FOOT LAP SWIMMING POOL WITH SPA IN THE FRONT YARD OF AN EXISTING RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD. PCS Director Elguira gave an overview of the project. The Council took the item under jurisdiction to comply with the public noticing requirements. The request is for construction of a 400 square - foot lap pool with spa in the front yard of an existing residence located at 52 Portuguese Bend Road. Due to the irregular shape of the lot and g eometry of Portuguese Bend Road, the backyard of the parcel functions as the front entrance to the property. The proposed pool and spa are technically located behind the residence, however, the back of the residence faces the front yard. PCS Director Elgu ira stated that no additional comments were received with regards to the proposed project. Staff recommends that the Council approve the project as presented. She said that the representative for the project is available to answer any questions. Councilmember Mirsch recused herself due to her residence’s proximity from the subject parcel. Councilmember Wilson asked PCS Director Elguira to confirm that she had addressed Mr. Charlie Raine’s concern about the proposed project. PCS Director Elguira replied that Mr. Raine’s concerns were about potential drainage and erosion problems. She stated Mr. Raine was not specifically concerned with the proposed pool at 52 Portuguese Bend Road. He is mainly concerned about the adverse impacts of more impermeable surface coverage resulting from new projects in the area. She stated that she discussed future project impacts and new hydromodification policies with Mr. Raine. Councilmember Wilson inquired about where the runoff from the site will drain. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Mr. John Resich said that the existing pool to be removed is surrounded by concrete. He explained that the amount of impermeable surface area would actually decrease based on the square footage of the proposed pool. He said that the water would drain down the canyon but the proposed project will not increase the amount of runoff. Councilmember Wilson stated that he was inquiring about drainage because the subject parcel is in a landslide area and residents are concerned about additional runoff. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-26-20 -3- 21 Mayor Pieper closed the item for public comment. Councilmember Black moved that the City Council approve Resolution No. 1252 granting approval for a Variance request to construct a 400 square-foot lap swimming pool with spa in the front yard of a residence located at 52 Portuguese Bend Road. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, and Black. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Wilson. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mirsch. Mr. Charlie Raine submitted a public comment via email at 7:18 p.m. after the public hearing was closed. He stated that the proposed pool is fine, however his continued concerns have to do with any project that does not address the effects of runoff and impermeable surface coverage. 6. PUBLIC HEARING NONE. 7. OLD BUSINESS A. CONSIDER ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION’S REQUEST TO REPLACE THE EXISTING SEPTIC TANK SERVING THE RESTROOM AT MAIN GATE. City Manager Jeng reported that this request was previously presented to the Council for consideration. The Council decided to postpone making a decision until the City received a response from Los Angeles County on the Sewer Feasibility Study. The County has since approved the City’s Sewer Feasibility Study. As a result, the RHCA amended their request to replace the septic tank only if needed and only for an emergency situation in which the existing tank fails and cannot operate any longer between now and the time the City decides to put in the 8-inch sewer main. Mayor Pieper commented that the reasons for the 8-inch sewer line was to avoid having new septic tanks. He asked if the Association is required to receive a permit from the City before they can replace the septic tank. City Manager Jeng explained that if the Council were to grant the Association’s request, the City would have to fill out the permit application through the Department of Public Health. Mayor Pieper noted that his concern was that the Association was potentially going to spend $450,000 on septic tanks that will not be needed once the sewer line is in place. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-26-20 -4- 22 Mayor Pieper suggested discussing the matter with the RHCA President to figure out their intent. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer commented that “emergency” and “emergency situation” have not been clearly defined. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none he returned to the discussion. Mayor Pieper tabled the item for two weeks to discuss the matter with the RHCA President. (8D Out of Order) D. RECOMMENDATION FROM FINANCE/BUDGET/AUDIT COMMITTEE ON PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020/2021. City Manager Jeng reported that on May 18, 2020 the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee reviewed the completed and in progress budget items programmed for FY 2019/2020 and reviewed the proposed FY 2020/2021 budget. Finance Director Terry Shea stated that the General Fund’s proposed revenues are $2,060,400 and proposed expenditures are $2,385,718 resulting in a deficit of $325,318, and after fund transfers the proposed deficit is $478,845. Property Tax Revenue is projected to increase by 4% or $45,845 over the prior year’s budget. Building permits and other fees are projected to decrease by 51.76% down to $301,750. There are two projects under the Utility Fund Budget: Crest Road Undergrounding and Sewer Mainline Extension. The Committee recommended removing the Crest Road Utility Pole Undergrounding and Sewer Mainline Extension Projects from FY 20/21 until the projects are approved or ready for construction. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none he returned to the discussion. Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council receive and file the report as presented. Mayor Pieper seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. (8E Out of Order) E. BUDGET WORKSHOP. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-26-20 -5- 23 Finance Director Shea presented the Council with an overview of the proposed budget for FY 2020/21. The proposed budget projects revenues to be approximately $2,060,400 and expenditures approximately $2,385,718, resulting in a deficit of $325,318 before fu nd transfers and a deficit of $478,845 after fund transfers. The projected FY 2020/21 revenues are from expected property taxes increase equaling to $45,800 and building permits generating approximately $301,750. The City will incur the cost of $132,643 fr om the Refuse Collection. FY 2019/20 proposed expenditures before transfers are $32,118. Councilmember Mirsch asked for an explanation of the Law Enforcement projected increase of 5%, and the overall decrease of $5K. Finance Director Shea explained that in the Cops Fund, the minimal allotment was $100,000, but it grows each year due to inflation. This next year the City will receive $155,000 as opposed to the prior year. There is money available in the Cops Fund from the prior year that was not spent, plus the City is expected to receive an increase in revenues this year, so the City will be able to offset the Sheriffs 5% contract increase by using the Cops Fund. Councilmember Mirsch asked if the $132,000 subsidy cost was included in the projected deficit of $478,845. Finance Director Shea answered…. Councilmember Mirsch asked if Measure A funds can be used for the parking lot project. City Manager Jeng said that landscape changes and site improvements that would add more park features to the City Hall Campus are eligible expenses under Measure A. Councilmember Mirsch asked about the City’s investment strategies. Finance Director Shea replied that the City has three main investments: LAIF, interest checking account and CDs. Finance Director Shea concluded that the City is in good financial standing and should be able to absorb the projected deficit for the year. Councilmember Mirsch inquired if the County continued to fund the City’s trapper. City Manager Jeng stated that Supervisor Hahn’s office will continue to fund the City’s trapper for the next fiscal year. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none he returned to the discussion. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-26-20 -6- 24 Councilmember Mirsch moved that the City Council approve the Committees recommendation on the proposed budget. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 7. OLD BUSINESS B. CONSIDER LAYOUT OPTIONS TO BRING EXISTING RESTROOMS AT CITY HALL TO COMPLY WITH ADA AND RELATED CODES AND SELECT AN OPTION TO CONTINUE THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS. City Manager Jeng reminded the Council that the item has been presented to the m at the previous City Council meeting. She stated one of the questions was with regards to plumbing fixtures. Using building occupancy, plumbing code and type of use, it was determined that City Hall needs 3 toilets, 1 urinal, 2 laboratory, 1 drinking fountain, and a separate sink. Councilmember Black clarified that his question was how many ADA restrooms were required. City Manager Jeng replied that first, the fixture count must be fulfilled and then it depends on how the restroom facilities are assigned. City Manager Jeng gave an overview of the layout options presented to the Council at the last Council meeting. She said that staff tried to stay within the footprint of City Hall to minimize construction cost. She stated that the architect has a set budget for design options but this does not preclude staff from asking the architect to spend more time developing one or more of the presented options. Mayor Pieper stated that it is hard to decide without knowing the actual costs. He would like the architect to provide a budget range for Option 1 and Option 3.5 to help inform the Council’s decision. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer expressed concern about Option 3.5 which requires reducing the lobby area. She stated that there should be layout options that will not impact the lobby. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-26-20 -7- 25 Ronald Sommer commented that the Council should consider the weak economy and delay the ADA remodel. He stated that existing buildings should be “grandfathered” similar to existing business with limited parking. ADA compliance should apply to new construct ion. Mayor Pieper closed the item for public comment. Councilmember Mirsch asked Councilmember Black for his opinion on whether the existing floor plan could accommodate social distancing. Councilmember Black replied that the current lobby and reception area allow for social distancing. Mayor Pieper moved that the City Council push the item to a later time in order to provide the City Manager more time to gather additional information. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 8. NEW BUSINESS A. CONSIDER AND APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC. TO PREPARE THE GENERAL PLAN SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE. PCS Director Elguira reminded the Council that back in 2019 the City received a grant from CalOES to update the Safety Element of the General Plan. The City advertised a Request for Proposal (RFP) to update the Safety Element on April 13, 2020. The City received proposals from Rincon Consultants and CSG. Staff reviewed both proposals and chose R incon to update the element. PCS Director Elguira stated that Rincon’s team met the requirements of the RFP and, based on their vast experience, will be able to deliver a successful project. Rincon’s proposal costs lower than CSG. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer compared both proposals and noticed that CSG has a catch-up plan and a specific department for Fire Services. She commented that Rincon’s proposal did not show a catch-up plan and a wildfire specialist on the team. She also asked about CSG’s quality of work. PCS Director Elguira replied that Rincon is required to provide a schedule that will meet the grantor’s deadline. Rincon submitted a revised proposal which includes a line item for a Wildfire Specialist experienced in preparing CWPPs and Hazard Mitigat ion Plans for other cities. PCS Director Elguira replied that CSG is currently the City’s current on-call planning consultant Minutes City Council Meeting 05-26-20 -8- 26 and their work product has been satisfactory. Councilmember Wilson commented that Rincon is assuming that fire damage and landslides are one issue, and he is not sure that is correct. He also asked why Rincon was laser focused on EMF and if the City has a Safety Element Advisory Committee. PCS Direct or Elguira said that EMF is a new subject a lot of cities are including in their Safety Element. EMF analysis is required by CalOES and FEMA. PCS Director Elguira replied that the City will be forming a Safety Element Committee as part of the update proces s. Councilmember Black asked why the City is hiring a new consultant. PCS Director Elguira replied that Rincon met the qualifications of the RFP and has extensive experience in updating General Plan elements. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none he returned to the discussion. Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council approve the selection of Rincon to prepare the General Plan Safety Element Update. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. B. CONSIDER AND APPROVE SUBSCRIPTION TO IWORQ PERMIT TRACKING SOFTWARE. PCS Director Elguira informed the Council that most of Planning's transactions are conducted in person and manually. Permit filing, property research, plan review and approval are primarily conducted at City Hall. Automating these steps would save time, mo ney and improve productivity. Implementing a permit tracking program will allow applicants to fill out applications and submit plans online, and check on project status and access project history from their computers at home. The iWorQ software will help improve the City's daily operations and customer service. Councilmember Wilson inquired if staff has used iWorQ. He also asked to what degree would the software be available to the residents and would it be retroactive to prior projects. PCS Director Elguira stated that staff has never used iWorQ but that the software is intuitive and iWorQ will be providing unlimited training to staff. Residents will only be able to access their Minutes City Council Meeting 05-26-20 -9- 27 own projects using their unique code assigned by the City. Planning will use the software on new projects but older files will be scanned and be available for public review. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer stated that all proposals should be included in the staff report for comparison. She asked PCS Director Elguira to provide an explanation as to why she chose iWorQ. PCS Director Elguira stated that she would include all proposals in the staff report going forward. She explained that she selected iWorQ because they provide permit tracking features similar to their competitors but at a much lower price. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Mr. Alfred Visco asked how would code enforcement use the system. Would the property owners in the City be able to use the system? PCS Director Elguira replied that iWorQ will be used to track cases. Code Enforcement Officer Aranda will be able to use the software while out in the field via wireless tablet or phone. Staff will also be able to generate reports more easily. Residents with active cases will be able to access the system. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer asked if staff had reached out to other cities t hat currently use the system. PCS Director Elguira replied that she had not however she did test the system herself and was satisfied with the results. Councilmember Mirsch pointed out that May 29, 2020 is the expiration date on the proposal and asked if t he City would be able to meet the deadline. PCS Director Elguira replied that iWorQs was made aware that the item was being brought to the Council for approval and iWorQ agreed to honor their terms. Assistant City Attorney Jane Abzug stated that an agreement will be prepared after the Council approves the scope of work. Mayor Pieper closed the item for public comment. Councilmember Mirsch moved that the City Council approve the subscription to iWorQ permit tracking software. Councilmember Black seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-26-20 -10- 28 ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. C. CONSIDER AND APPROVE SUBSCRIPTION TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY’S GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS). PCS Director Elguira reported that the Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping is another tool that staff can use to process applications and provide information to the public. City staff is currently using obsolete tools to provide customer service and it is inefficient and time consuming. Access to LARIAC and GIS maps will provide staff and the community with information at their fingertips. LARIAC and GIS will be valuable tools for the City, community organizations and other public agencies. The LARIAC system provides the latest aerial views of the City, measuring too ls, contour lines and topographic maps. GIS will provide maps layered with various information consisting of parcel information, zoning, lot boundaries, utility location and more. Councilmember Wilson asked if the system is available for anyone to use at a ny location then why not go there and use the system there. PCS Director Elguira explained that other places will not have information that is pertinent to the City of Rolling Hills. Councilmember Black expressed privacy concerns about the 4-inch resolution LARIAC is capable of providing. City Manager Jeng replied that the Council could direct staff to limit available information to the public unless a Public Records Request is submitted. Councilmember Mirsch commented that she has had two separate conversations with Fire Station 56 regarding horse rescues and accidents of riders. In each discussion the Fire Station staff had indicated to her that the City should have GIS and LARIAC because it helps them locate persons in areas they are not familiar with. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Alfred Visco commented that he was in support of the City subscribing to GIS. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council approve the expenditure for the LA County GIS program for $24,000 for the onetime set up fee and membership to LARIAC. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Minutes City Council Meeting 05-26-20 -11- 29 9. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS Councilmember Black indicated he was dissatisfied with the striping on Lower Blackwater Canyon. He expressed that the contractor needs to stripe the center divider for safety purposes. Mayor Pieper commented that the residents who live on Lower Blackwater Canyon expressed that they prefer the street without the center stripe because it gives the street a country feel. He asked the City Manager if the striping is required. City Manager Jeng replied that the striping design was dictated by the Traffic Engineer and it complies wit h the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) code requirements. Councilmember Wilson stated that his concern was that the street was striped differently from the previous street striping. Councilmember Black requested the item be agendized for a future meeting. Mayor Pieper concurred. Councilmember Mirsch commented that she attended a League webinar regarding the 70 bills that are going before the Legislature. There are some housing issues that will affect the City and inquired if the Council would like to provide their residents with more in-depth information by agendizing the item. Mayor Pieper concurred. 10. MATTERS FROM STAFF NONE. 11. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Pieper adjourned the meeting at 9:25p.m. to a regular meeting of the City Council scheduled for Monday, June 08, 2020 beginning at 7:00p.m. via teleconference. Respectfully submitted, Minutes City Council Meeting 05-26-20 -12- 30 City Clerk Approved, Jeff Pieper Mayor Minutes City Council Meeting 05-26-20 -13- 31 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, JUNE 22, 2020 1. CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Pieper at 7:01p.m. via teleconference. 2. ROLL CALL Councilmembers participating via teleconference: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson. Councilmembers Absent: None. Others participating via teleconference: Elaine Jeng, P.E., City Manager. Meredith Elguira, Planning & Community Services Director Yohana Coronel, City Clerk Jane Abzug, Assistant City Attorney. Others participating via written email/public comment: Arun Bhumitra 3. OPEN AGENDA Arun Bhumitra said that he has been a resident for over 22 years. He expressed concern over the highly flammable vegetation in the community and requested that the Council be proactive and to have residents lace, trim or remove flammable vegetation in order to better protect the City. 4. 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. A. MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 09, 2020, REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 23, 2020, SPECIAL MEETING OF MARCH 30, 2020, JOINT STUDY SESSION WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL APRIL 13, 2020, REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 27, 2020, REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 11, 2020, REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 26, -1- 32 2020, SPECIAL MEETING OF JUNE 04, 2020, AND REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 08, 2020. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED B. PAYMENT OF BILLS. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED. REPUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLING TONNAGE REPORT FOR MAY 2020. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED D. FINANCIAL REPORTS AS OF MAY 31, 2020. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED City Clerk Yohana Coronel requested to pull the minutes for the months of March and April from the agenda. Mayor Pieper suggested to delay action on item 4A until the next City Council meeting. Councilmember Mirsch inquired the reason for continuing to delay action on the minutes. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer said that the minutes are in need of corrections. Councilmember Mirsch said that she appreciates Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer’s work on the minutes but noted that people have different writing styles. While grammatical errors should be corrected, it is more important that the minutes provide accurate records of the discussions. Councilmember Mirsch said that the minutes provided to the Council do provide accurate records of discussions. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer said that she found the minutes to be vague. Councilmember Black moved that the City Council approve consent items 4B, 4C and 4D as presented. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 5. COMMISSION ITEMS Minutes City Council Meeting 06-22-20 -2- 33 NONE. 6. PUBLIC HEARING NONE. 7. OLD BUSINESS NONE 8. NEW BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTIONS PERTAINING TO A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION CONSOLIDATED WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020. City Clerk Yohana Coronel presented an overview of two resolutions relating to the General Municipal Election scheduled on Tuesday, November 3, 2020. The purpose of the Rolling Hills Municipal Election is to fill two (2) seats to the City Council for a 4-year term. The seats are currently held by Mayor Pieper and Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer. City Clerk Coronel briefly outlined certain election milestones and concluded her report. Mayor Pieper asked for public comment. There was no public comment. Councilmember Mirsch moved that the City Council adopt resolution number 1255 and resolution number 1256. Councilmember Black seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. B. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 1257 AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR, AND RECEIPT OF, LOCAL GOVERNMENT PLANNING SUPPORT PROGRAM FUNDS. Planning and Community Services Director Meredith Elguira presented a supplemental resolution with non-substantive changes by the City Attorney. PCS Director Elguira provided an overview of Resolution Number 1257, authorizing staff to apply for the Local Early Action Planning Grant (LEAP) with the State. The City of Rolling Hills is eligible to receive up to $65,000 in grant funds with a Minutes City Council Meeting 06-22-20 -3- 34 minimum award amount of $25,000. The funding can be used to identify suitable sites to rezone for multi-family use, environmental clearance, rezoning process, establish design and development standards, and revamp project review process. Grant funds may also cover the costs of temporary staffing or consultant needs associated with eligible activities. PCS Director Elguira said the grant application is being prepared by internal staff. The deadline to submit the grant is July 01, 2020. Grant award will take place 60 days from July 1, 2020. Councilmember Wilson asked if the $25,000 was guaranteed. PCS Director Elguira said that if the scope of work proposed by the City is eligible per requirements, then the City stands to receive the minimum amount of $25,000. Mayor Pieper asked for public comment. There was no public comment. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council adopt resolution number 1257 with the proposed amendments. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 9. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS NONE. 10. MATTERS FROM STAFF NONE. 11. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Pieper adjourned the meeting at 8:09 p.m. to a regular meeting of the City Council scheduled for Monday, July 13, 2020 beginning at 7:00p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. Minutes City Council Meeting 06-22-20 -4- 35 Respectfully submitted Elaine Jeng, P.E. Acting City Clerk Approved, Jeff Pieper Mayor Minutes City Council Meeting 06-22-20 -5- 36 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, JULY 13, 2020 This meeting is held pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20 issued by Governor Newsom on March 17, 2020. All Councilmembers will participate by teleconference. Public Participation: City Hall will be closed to the public until further notice. A live audio of the City Council meeting will be available on the City's website (https://www.rolling - hills.org/government/agenda/index.php). The meeting agenda is also ava ilable on the City's website (https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php). Members of the public may submit comments in real time by emailing the City Clerk's office at cityclerk@cityofrh.net. Your comments will become a part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name but do not provide any other personal information (i.e., phone numbers, addresses, etc) that you do not want to be published. 1. CALL TO ORDER The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills met in a regular meeting via Zoom Teleconference on the above date at 7:01 p.m. via teleconference. Mayor Pieper presiding. 2. ROLL CALL Present: Council Members Mirsch, Wilson, Black, Dieringer and Mayor Pieper Absent: None. Staff Present: Elaine Jeng, City Manager Michael Jenkins, City Attorney Meredith Elguira, Planning & Community Services Director Connie Viramontes, Administrative Assistant Delia Aranda, Code Enforcement Maria Quinonez, Interim City Clerk 3. OPEN AGENDA – PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME (The complete audio of the City Council and written communications is available in the City Clerk’s office and the City’s website: https://www.rolling- hills.org/government/agenda/index.php ) City Council Members heard public comment from Clint Patterson, Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District Superintendent Dr. Alex Cherniss and Board Member Matthew Brach. 2 Minutes City Council Regular Meeting July 13, 2020 37 4. 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. MOTION: It was moved by Council Member Wilson and seconded by Council Member Black to approve items 4B, 4C, and 4D from the consent calendar. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 03-09-20 City Council Draft Minutes FINALv9 03-23-20 City Council Draft Minutes FINAL v6 03-30-20 City Council Draft Minutes FINAL v6 04-13-20 City Council Draft MinutesFINALv11 04-13-20 City Council Draft Minutes Joint CC and PC FINALv10 04-27-20 City Council Draft Minutes CC FINALv10 06-04-20 City Draft Minutes Special v5 06-08-20 City Council Draft Minutes v6 06-22-20 City Council Draft Minutes v2 MOTION: It was moved by Mayor Pieper and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer to approve all the minutes with the exception of minutes for June 22, 2020. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None B. PAYMENT OF BILLS. ITEM 4B. APPROVED BY CONSENT CALENDAR VOTE. C. CONSIDER AND APPROVE RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 9.44 AND 10.12 ON GATE GUARDS. ITEM 4C. APPROVED BY CONSENT CALENDAR VOTE. D. APPROVE ECS IMAGING, INC. AND FILE KEEPERS, LLC FOR AS NEEDED ON- CALL SERVICES FOR SCANNING DOCUMENTS AND BUILDING PLANS. ITEM 4D. APPROVED BY CONSENT CALENDAR VOTE. 5. COMMISSION ITEMS NONE. 3 Minutes City Council Regular Meeting July 13, 2020 38 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE. 7. OLD BUSINESS A. ACCEPT THE ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN (CWPP) AS COMPLETE, ACCEPT THE A HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT TO PREPARE A CWPP, AND DIRECT STAFF TO SUBMIT THE CWPP TO THE CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND FEMA FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. The following individuals provided written and or email comments regarding the Rolling Hills Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) and were either in support of approving or postponing the City Council action. Approve Postpone Other Comment Rae Walker Cathy Nichols Arun Bhumitra Dorothy Vinter John Dunn Alfred Visco Don Crocker Richard Meyer Diane Montalto Clint Patterson William Hassoldt Ross Smith Donovan Black Arlene Honbo Anne Schneider Abas Goodarzi Carole La Caze Susan Collida Geraldean Belleville Debra Schraeder Roger Hawkins Judith Haenel Carmen Schaye Kay Lupo Margaret Bemis Marcia Schoettle Jim Aichele Verna Balch Members of the City Council heard public comments in support of approving or postponing City Council action regarding this item and discussed concerns at length. MOTION: It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer and seconded by Council Member Black to postpone the decision about the acceptance of the plan until the next meeting, accept the grant and to submit to CalOES. Additionally, recommends that the City put signage abou t the plan on the City’s website. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 4 Minutes City Council Regular Meeting July 13, 2020 39 B. CONSIDER AND APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION. Members of the City Council reviewed and discussed the request to approve an amendment to the lease agreement with the Rolling Hills Community Association. MOTION: It was moved by Council Member Black and seconded by Council Member Mirsch to approve an amendment to the lease agreement with the Rolling Hills Community Association to r educe the rent amount for the period between July 1, 2020 and June 30, 2023. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None C. CONSIDER ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION'S REQUEST TO REPLACE, IN THE EVENT OF FAILURE, THE EXISTING SEPTIC TANK SERVING THE MAIN GATEHOUSE. Members of the City Council reviewed and discussed the request to consider Rolling Hills Community Association request to replace in the event of failure, the existing septic tank serving the main gatehouse. MOTION: It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer and seconded by Mayor Pieper to amend staff’s recommendation to deny the Rolling Hills Community Association's request to replace the existing septic tank and include increasing maintenance frequency of the septic tank to prolong its use and to expedite if there is a problem. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None D. CONSIDER AND APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE PENINSULA CITIES AND THE PALOS VERDES PENINSULA SCHOOL DISTRICT TO CONTINUE TO COST SHARE TWO SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS FOR THREE YEARS COMMENCING ON AUGUST 1, 2020. Members of the City Council reviewed and discussed the consideration to approve an amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding with the Peninsula Cities and the Palos Verdes Peninsula School District to continue to cost share two school resource officers for the three years commencing on August 1, 2020. 5 Minutes City Council Regular Meeting July 13, 2020 40 MOTION: It was moved by Council Member Black and seconded by Council Member Wilson to approve the amended Memorandum of Understanding. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None E. CONSIDER AND APPROVE THE TRANSFER AGREEMENT WITH THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY TO RECEIVE SAFE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM MEASURE W LOCAL RETURNS. After review and discussion, Members of the City Council considered approving the transfer agreement with the Los Angeles County to receive Safe Clean Water Program Measure W local returns. MOTION: It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer and seconded by Council Member Mirsch to approve the transfer agreement with the Los Angeles County to receive Measure W funds and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None F. CONSIDER LAYOUT OPTIONS TO BRING EXISTING RESTROOMS AT CITY HALL TO COMPLY WITH ADA CODES, AND SELECT A DESIGN OPTIONS TO CONTINUE THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS. Members of the City Council reviewed and discussed the layout options to bring existing restrooms at City Hall to comply with ADA codes, and selected a design from options provided. MOTION: It was moved by Council Member Black and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer to approve option 2 and have restrooms reconfigured to have one ADA compliant all gender restroom and two additional all gender restrooms where the current restrooms are located. The electrical room, coffee area and water heater are to be relocated. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 6 Minutes City Council Regular Meeting July 13, 2020 41 8. NEW BUSINESS A. RECEIVE AND FILE CERTIFICATION FOR FUNDING SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE FOR ALLOCATION OF FEDERAL CARES ACT FUNDING THROUGH THE STATE FOR COVID-19 RELATED EXPENSES. Members of the City Council were provided with information on certification for funding submitted to the Department of Finance for allocation of Federal Cares Act funds through the State for Covid-19 related expenses. MOTION: It was moved by Council Member Mirsch and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer to receive and file the certification for funding submitted to the Department of Finance for CARES Act funds to offset COVID-19 related expenses. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None B. RECEIVE AND FILE COVID-19 RELATED ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS; CONSIDER AND APPROVE CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH EXECUTIVE-SUITES FOR JANITORIAL SERVICES TO INCLUDE CLEANING PROTOCOLS AS REQUIRED BY LA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT TO PREVENT THE SPREAD OF COVID-19; AND CONSIDER AND APPROVE AN ON-CALL INDUSTRIAL HYGIENIST TO VALIDATE CLEANING PROTOCOLS WERE IMPLEMENTED PROPERLY. City Council Members were provided with information and discussed janitorial services to include cleaning protocols as required by LA County Health Department to prevent the spread of Covid-19. MOTION: It was moved by Council Member Wilson and seconded by Mayor Pieper to approve items 1 and 2 to receive and file Administrative Regulations dated July 7, 2020 and approve an amendment with Executive-suites to continue to provide janitorial services for City Hall with cleaning protocols required by the LA County Health Department to prevent the spread of COVID-19. Item number 3 was postponed to the next agenda to allow Council Member Black to speak with the industrial hygienist to adjust the scope of service. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 7 Minutes City Council Regular Meeting July 13, 2020 42 9. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer provided information regarding SB 99. Council Member Mirsch provided information regarding fire insurance and assembly bill. 10. MATTERS FROM STAFF A. FIRE FUEL ABATEMENT ENFORCEMENT CASES QUARTERLY REPORT FOR THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2020 (APRIL 1 THROUGH JUNE 30). Members of the City Council were provided with a report on fire fuel abatement cases quarterly report. It was noted that the biggest problem in getting vegetation items closed are due to residents not living on the properties. Additionally, the next quarterly report will be generated from the iWorQ program and may be able to provide more information on actions taken and outstanding items. MOTION: It was moved by Council Member Mirsch and seconded by Mayor Pieper to receive and file report. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None 11. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Pieper adjourned the meeting at 10:24 pm in memory of Pat and Don Mehlig. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled for Monday, July 27, 2020 at 7:00 pm. Respectfully submitted, Maria Quinonez, CMC Interim City Clerk Approved, Jeff Pieper Mayor 43 Agenda Item No.: 4.B Mtg. Date: 07/27/2020 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CONNIE VIRAMONTES , ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT THRU: ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: PAYMENT OF BILLS. DATE: July 27, 2020 BACKGROUND: NONE. DISCUSSION: NONE. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. ATTACHMENTS: Payment of Bills.pdf 44 crrv OF ROLLING HILLS 7/27/20 Check Run B Check No. CheckDate PAYEE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 26519 07/27120 First Call Staffing Inc. Week Ending 6/28120 -Temp Staffing 856.80 26520 07127/20 Southern California Gas Co Gas Usage 6/5/20 to 7fl/20 21.47 26521 07/27/20 Konica Minolta Maintenance Conlract-4/11/20 to 7/10/20 530.31 26522 07/27120 County of LA Dept of Animal Care June 2020 Animal Care Costs 423.03 26523 07127/20 LA County Sheriffs Department June 2020 Law Enforcement and Traffic Enforcement 30,097.93 26524 07127/20 Opus Bank 6/3/20 to 7/3/20 Credit Card Purchases 2,397.71 26525 07127/20 City of Rancho Palos Verdes May 2020 - 7% of ALRP Camera Connectivity 66.52 26526 07'27/20 Willdan Inc. June 2020 Plan Check and Inspection Services 50.00 26527 07/27/20 Abila August 2020 Accounting Software Services 183.75 .26528 07l2.7lJD AmClearl upMasters RecydeRefundahleDeposlt 750.00 26529 07/27/20 Edwards Termite and Pest Management June 2020 lnseci and Gql!M!f Conl'O!·Cltyli, T811111S Coull$ & Picnic Alea 320.00 26530 071'l1120 mean Staffing me. Week Ending 7112120 -Temp Staffing 1;863.20 26531 07/27/20 FORUM INFO-TECH. INC1LEVELCLOUD July 2020 Service • CLOUD HOSTING,onsite wed service and new installa1 2,954.18 26532 07/27/20 Gladwell Records Management and Record Retention 1,430.95 26533 07/27120 Internet Networx 2020/2021 Annual Renewal Website UsUngs 194.00 26534 07127/20 league of California Cities Website job and Wsestem City Magazine Sub 300.00 26535 07/27/20 Municode Online Code Hosting 2020/2021 550.00 26536 07/27/20 PVS Service call - Reset alarm codes 180.00 26537 07/27120 Quadient Equipment Maintenance - 691.56 26538 07/27/20 Southern California Edison Electricity Usage 6/14/20 nlo 7/20/20 497,31 26539 07/27/20 USCM Deferred Compensation 7/17/20 50.00 26540 07/27/20 Vantagepoint Transfer Agents - 306580 Deferred CompensaUon 7/17/20 776.13 26541 08/01/20 Delta Dental August 2020 Dental Insurance 840.18 26542 08/01/20 Standard Insurance Co August 2020 Life Insurance 178.27 26543 08/01/20 Vision Service Plan August 2020 Vision Insurance 126.75 EFT 08/01/20 CALPERS June 2020 Retirement 76.97 EFT 08/01/20 CALPERS June 2020 Retirement 4,014.29 EFT 08!01/20 CALPERS August 2020 Health Insurance 6,768.24 • PR LINK 07117/20 PR LINK· PAYROLL PROCESSING Processing Fee 63.70 • PRLINK 07117120 PR LINK· PAYROLL & PR TAXES Pay Period - July 1, 2020 to July 14, 2020 20,773.04 78,026.29 57,189.55 I. Elaine Jeng, City Mana er of Rolling Hills. California certitY that the above demands are accurate and-there is avaiTablc in the General Funa a balance of $78,026.29 or the payment of above items. 45 Agenda Item No.: 4.C Mtg. Date: 07/27/2020 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 JUNE 2020. DATE: July 27, 2020 BACKGROUND: NONE. DISCUSSION: NONE. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. ATTACHMENTS: Republic Service Tonnage Report June.pdf CITY OF ROLLING HILLS RESIDENTIAL FRANCHISE 2020 Franchise? Y Mth/Yr Overall Commodity Tons Collected Tons Recovered Tons Disposed Diversion % Jan-20 Trash 178.78 38.00 140.78 21.26% Greenwaste 102.61 102.61 - 100.00% Recycle 0.03 0.01 0.02 20.00% Jan-20 Total 281.42 140.62 140.80 49.97% Feb-20 Trash 159.76 32.85 126.91 20.56% Greenwaste 95.32 95.32 - 100.00% Recycle 2.18 0.44 1.74 20.00% Feb-20 Total 257.26 128.61 128.65 49.99% Mar-20 Trash 208.78 60.00 148.78 28.74% Greenwaste 92.55 92.55 - 100.00% Recycle 0.01 0.00 0.01 21.00% Mar-20 Total 301.34 152.55 148.79 50.62% Apr-20 Trash 203.94 61.02 142.92 29.92% Greenwaste 146.90 146.90 - 100.00% Apr-20 Total 350.84 207.92 142.92 59.26% May-20 Trash 286.46 28.62 257.84 9.99% Greenwaste 129.11 129.11 - 100.00% May-20 Total 415.57 157.73 257.84 37.96% Jun-20 Trash 279.97 108.10 171.87 38.61% Greenwaste 95.19 95.19 - 100.00% Jun-20 Total 375.16 203.29 171.87 54.19% Grand Total 1,981.59 990.71 990.88 50.00% Contract Requires 50% Household - 990.71 Page 1 of 2 46 47 Agenda Item No.: 4.D Mtg. Date: 07/27/2020 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: TERRY SHEA, FINANCE DIRECTOR THRU: ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDING JUNE 30, 2020 DATE: July 27, 2020 BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: Preliminary June 2020 Financial Statements before year -end close. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. ATTACHMENTS: Budget Comparative 6-30-20 Preliminary.pdf Budget Comparative General Fund Detail 6-30-20 Preliminary.pdf 48 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE GENERAL FUND FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30 ,2020 Cumulative Year-to-Date Actual Approved Total Adjusted Budget % Total of Budget Used REVENUES Taxes $ 1,398,858 $ 1,417,800 98.66% License and Permits 297,824 624,300 47.71% Fines 12,276 14,300 85.84% Franchise Fees 12,599 19,000 66.31% Investment Earnigs 110,612 100,000 110.61% Other Income 86,710 102,900 84.27% Total Revenues 1,918,878 2,278,300 84.22% EXPENDITURES DEPARTMENTS Administration Salaries and Benefits 473,924 596,400 79.46% Materials and Supplies 97,734 141,000 69.31% Contractual Services 158,800 176,600 89.92% Finance Contractual Services 117,298 119,450 98.20% Planning & Development Salaries and Benefits 280,450 288,200 97.31% Materials and Supplies 2,464 12,600 19.55% Contractual Services 310,585 418,000 74.30% Public Safety Contractual Services 195,560 297,200 65.80% Non-Departmental Materials and Supplies - 25,000 0.00% Contractual Services 19,284 34,900 55.26% Community Promotion 19,326 44,750 43.19% City Properties Contractual Services 60,446 79,500 76.03% Total Expenditures 1,735,871 2,233,600 77.72% Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures 183,008 44,700 409.41% Transfers Transfers In 24,000 24,000 100.00% Transfers Out (107,704) (398,000) 27.06% Total Transfers (83,704) (374,000) 22.38% Excess (Deficit) 99,304 (329,300) -30.16% Fund Balance - Beginning of Year (Audited) 5,795,780 5,795,780 Fund Balance - June 30, 2020 (Before Closing) $ 5,895,084 $ 5,466,480 49 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE COPS FUND FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30 ,2020 Approved Cumulative Total % Total Year-to-Date Adjusted of Budget Actual Budget Used REVENUES COPS Allocation $ 155,948 $ 140,000 111.39% Investment Earnigs - 50 0.00% Total Revenues 155,948 140,050 111.35% EXPENDITURES Contractual Services 161,284 160,000 100.80% Total Expenditures 161,284 160,000 100.80% Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures (5,336) (19,950) 26.75% Fund Balance - Beginning of Year (Audited) 56,098 56,098 Fund Balance - June 30, 2020 (Before Closing) $ 50,762 $ 36,148 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30 ,2020 Cumulative Year-to-Date Actual Approved Total Adjusted Budget % Total of Budget Used REVENUES Fines & Forfeitures $ - $ 50 0.00% Total Revenues - 50 0.00% EXPENDITURES Contractual Services 98,405 54,550 180.39% Total Expenditures 98,405 54,550 180.39% Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures (98,405) (54,500) 180.56% Transfers Transfers in 88,946 54,500 163.20% Excess (Deficit) (9,459) - Fund Balance - Beginning of Year (Audited) - - Fund Balance - June 30, 2020 (Before Closing) $ (9,459) $ - 50 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE PROP A TRANSPORTATION FUND FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30 ,2020 Approved Cumulative Total % Total Year-to-Date Adjusted of Budget Actual Budget Used REVENUES Prop A Revenues $ 37,636 $ 39,300 95.77% Investment Earnigs - 150 0.00% Total Revenues 37,636 39,450 95.40% EXPENDITURES Materials and Supplies - - #DIV/0! Contractual Services ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #DIV/0! Total Expenditures -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #DIV/0! Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures 37,636 39,450 ............ 95.40% Fund Balance - Beginning of Year (Audited) 17,366 17,366 Fund Balance - June 30, 2020 (Before Closing) $ 55,002 $ 56,816 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE PROP C TRANSPORTATION FUND FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30 ,2020 Cumulative Year-to-Date Actual Approved Total Adjusted Budget % Total of Budget Used REVENUES Prop C Revenues $ 31,219 $ 32,600 95.76% Investment Earnigs - 150 0.00% Total Revenues 31,219 32,750 95.33% EXPENDITURES Materials and Supplies - - #DIV/0! Contractual Services ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #DIV/0! Total Expenditures -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #DIV/0! Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures 31,219 32,750 ............ 95.33% Fund Balance - Beginning of Year (Audited) 9,045 9,045 Fund Balance - June 30, 2020 (Before Closing) $ 40,264 $ 41,795 51 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE TRANSIT MEASURE R FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30 ,2020 Approved Cumulative Total % Total Year-to-Date Adjusted of Budget Actual Budget Used REVENUES Measure R Revenues $ 23,381 $ 24,450 95.63% Investment Earnigs - 150 0.00% Total Revenues 23,381 24,600 95.04% EXPENDITURES Materials and Supplies - - #DIV/0! Contractual Services ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #DIV/0! Total Expenditures -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #DIV/0! Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures 23,381 24,600 ............ 95.04% Fund Balance - Beginning of Year (Audited) 57,294 57,294 Fund Balance - June 30, 2020 (Before Closing) $ 80,675 $ 81,894 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE TRANSIT MEASURE M FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30 ,2020 Cumulative Year-to-Date Actual Approved Total Adjusted Budget % Total of Budget Used REVENUES Measure M Revenues $ 26,293 $ 27,700 94.92% Investment Earnigs - 150 0.00% Total Revenues 26,293 27,850 94.41% EXPENDITURES Materials and Supplies - - #DIV/0! Contractual Services ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #DIV/0! Total Expenditures -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #DIV/0! Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures 26,293 27,850 ............ 94.41% Fund Balance - Beginning of Year (Audited) 48,387 48,387 Fund Balance - June 30, 2020 (Before Closing) $ 74,680 $ 76,237 52 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30 ,2020 Cumulative Year-to-Date Actual Approved Total Adjusted Budget % Total of Budget Used REVENUES Other Revenues $ - $ 10,000 0.00% Total Revenues - 10,000 0.00% EXPENDITURES Non-Building Improvements 9,508 320,000 2.97% City Hall Improvements 11,438 30,000 38.13% Total Expenditures 20,946 350,000 5.98% Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures (20,946) (340,000) 6.16% Transfers Transfers in 18,758 340,000 5.52% Excess (Deficit) (2,188) - Fund Balance - Beginning of Year (Audited) - - Fund Balance - June 30, 2020 (Before Closing) $ (2,188) $ - 53 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE REFUSE COLLECTION FUND FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30 ,2020 OPERATING REVENUES Cumulative Year-to-Date Actual Approved Total Adjusted Budget % Total of Budget Used Service Charges $ 762,300 $ 768,900 99.14% Miscellaneous Revenue - 65,000 0.00% Construction & Demo Permits 27,535 7,000 393.36% Total Revenues 789,835 840,900 93.93% OPERATING EXPENSES Refuse Service Contract 827,504 825,089 100.29% Miscellaneous Expense 28,640 65,000 44.06% Total Expenditures 856,144 890,089 96.19% Operating Loss Before Transfers (66,309) (49,189) 134.80% Transfers Out (24,000) (24,000) 100.00% Change in Net Position (90,309) (73,189) 123.39% Net Position - Beginning of Year (Audited) 177,521 177,521 Net Position - May 31, 2020 (Before Closing) $ 111,212 $ 128,332 54 City of Rolling Hills CITY OF ROLLING HILLS BUDGET COMPARISON GENERAL FUND FY 2019-20 JUNE - PRELIMINARY Current Year Page: 1 7/7/2020 As Of: 06/30/20 Fund: 01 - General Fund Revenues Dept: 00 YTD YTD YTD Jun-20 Budget Actual Variance Percentage Actual 401.0 Property Taxes $ 1,144,500 $ 1,120,846.36 $ (23,653.64) 97.93% $ 53,839.85 405.0 Sales Tax 8,000 2,667.88 (5,332.12) 33.35% - 410.0 Real Estate Transfer Tax 41,800 49,310.03 7,510.03 117.97% 4,463.25 420.0 Motor Vehicles in Lieu Tax-VLF 223,500 226,033.50 2,533.50 101.13% - 440.0 Building & Other Permit Fees 583,000 290,561.49 (292,438.51) 49.84% 142,900.50 450.0 Variance, Planning & Zoning 40,000 6,700.00 (33,300.00) 16.75% - 455.0 Animal Control Fees 1,300 562.50 (737.50) 43.27% - 460.0 Franchise Fees 19,000 12,599.07 (6,400.93) 66.31% - 480.0 Fines & Traffic Violations 14,300 12,275.63 (2,024.37) 85.84% 597.28 600.0 City Hall Leasehold RHCA 84,000 83,976.00 (24.00) 99.97% 6,998.00 650.0 PSAF & COPS 800 999.99 199.99 125.00% 69.73 655.0 Burgler Alarm Responses 600 1,400.00 800.00 233.33% 450.00 670.0 Interest Earned 100,000 110,611.73 10,611.73 110.61% 14,409.34 670.0 Interest Earned Section 115 - - - #DIV/0! - 675.0 Miscellaneous Revenue 17,500 334.17 (17,165.83) 1.91% 174.00 699.0 Operating Transfer In 24,000 24,000.00 - 100.00% $ 2,000.00 Total Revenues 2,302,300 1,942,878.35 (359,421.65) 84.39% 225,901.95 Expenditures Dept: 00 999.0 Operating Transfer Out 398,000 107,703.63 290,296.37 27.06% 0.00 Total 00 398,000 107,703.63 290,296.37 27.06% 0.00 Dept: 01 City Administration 702.0 Salaries-Full Time 409,300 320,256.46 89,043.54 78.24% 23,778.21 703.0 Salaries-Part Time 10,500 435.00 10,065.00 4.14% 435.00 710.0 Retirement CalPERS-Employer 63,100 51,500.56 11,599.44 81.62% 2,090.52 715.0 Workers Compensation Insurance 7,800 7,776.24 23.76 99.70% 648.02 716.0 Group Insurance 40,800 39,904.39 895.61 97.80% 3,393.50 717.0 Retiree Medical 28,900 30,049.16 (1,149.16) 103.98% 2,772.29 718.0 Employer Payroll Taxes 33,600 21,702.34 11,897.66 64.59% 1,823.53 719.0 Deferred Compensation - - - #DIV/0! - 720.0 Auto Allowance 2,400 2,300.00 100.00 95.83% 200.00 740.0 Office Supplies & Expense 60,000 24,537.60 35,462.40 40.90% 2,011.12 745.0 Equipment Leasing Costs 4,100 6,545.14 (2,445.14) 159.64% 885.58 750.0 Dues & Subscriptions 11,300 10,969.37 330.63 97.07% 1,027.37 755.0 Conference Expense 10,000 4,975.02 5,024.98 49.75% - 757.0 Meetings Expense 1,500 2,629.74 (1,129.74) 175.32% - 759.0 Training & Education 2,000 3,100.00 (1,100.00) 155.00% - 761.0 Auto Mileage 500 416.18 83.82 83.24% - 765.0 Postage 13,000 13,213.80 (213.80) 101.64% 1,510.00 770.0 Telephone 6,100 6,046.39 53.61 99.12% 384.42 775.0 City Council Expense 10,000 5,180.65 4,819.35 51.81% - 776.0 Miscellaneous Expenses - 184.70 (184.70) #DIV/0! 0.13 780.0 Minutes Clerk Meetings 6,000 4,189.75 1,810.25 69.83% 96.24 785.0 Codification 5,000 10,117.12 (5,117.12) 202.34% 225.00 790.0 Advertising 1,500 - 1,500.00 0.00% - 795.0 Other Gen Admin Expense 10,000 5,414.69 4,585.31 54.15% 114.70 801.0 City Attorney 90,000 73,495.31 16,504.69 81.66% 9,984.00 802.0 Legal Expenses-Other 3,000 3,116.00 (116.00) 103.87% 3,116.00 820.0 Website 6,000 8,068.80 (2,068.80) 134.48% - 850.0 Election Expense City Council - 213.79 (213.79) #DIV/0! - 890.0 Consulting Fees 77,600 74,119.47 3,480.53 95.51% 18,720.12 Total City Administration 914,000 730,457.67 183,542.33 79.92% 73,215.75 55 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS BUDGET COMPARISON GENERAL FUND FY 2019-20 JUNE - PRELIMINARY City of Rolling Hills Current Year Page: 2 7/7/2020 As Of: 06/30/20 Amended YTD YTD YTD Jun-20 Budget Actual Variance Percentage Actual 884.0 Special Project Study & Consul Total Planning & Development Dept: 25 Public Safety 105,000 55,500.00 49,500.00 52.86% 420.00 718,800 593,498.46 125,301.54 82.57% 72,304.81 830.0 Law Enforcement 221,700 180,835.05 40,864.95 81.57% 16,339.55 833.0 Other Law Enforcement Expenses 3,000 645.00 2,355.00 21.50% 133.04 837.0 Wild Life Mgmt & Pest Control 61,500 10,048.22 51,451.78 16.34% 222.82 838.0 Animal Control Expense 11,000 4,032.18 6,967.82 36.66% 0.00 Total Public Safety 297,200 195,560.45 101,639.55 65.80% 16,695.41 Dept: 65 Non-Department 895.0 Insurance & Bond Expense 34,900 19,284.00 15,616.00 55.26% 1,544.50 901.0 South Bay Comm. Organization 4,100 2,600.00 1,500.00 63.41% 0.00 915.0 Community Recognition 11,000 6,935.42 4,064.58 63.05% 0.00 916.0 Civil Defense Expense 650 627.00 23.00 96.46% 0.00 917.0 Emergency Preparedness 29,000 9,163.97 19,836.03 31.60% 0.00 985.0 Contingency 25,000 0.00 25,000.00 0.00% 0.00 Total Non-Department 104,650 38,610.39 66,039.61 36.89% 1,544.50 Dept: 75 City Properties 925.0 Utilities 34,000 28,314.88 5,685.12 83.28% 2,971.09 930.0 Repairs & Maintenance 32,000 21,610.87 10,389.13 67.53% 1,214.50 932.0 Area Landscaping 13,500 10,520.52 2,979.48 77.93% 320.00 Total City Properties 79,500 60,446.27 19,053.73 76.03% 4,505.59 Total Expenditures and Transfers 2,631,600 1,843,574.37 788,025.63 70.06% 188,987 Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures $ (329,300) $ 99,304 $ 428,604 $ 36,915 Expenditures Dept: 05 Finance 750.0 Dues & Subscriptions 650 332.50 317.50 51.15% 0.00 810.0 Annual Audit 17,100 16,780.00 320.00 98.13% 0.00 890.0 Consulting Fees 101,700 100,185.00 1,515.00 98.51% 20,721.25 Total Finance 119,450 117,297.50 2,152.50 98.20% 20,721.25 Dept: 15 Planning & Development 702.0 Salaries-Full Time 193,500 208,607.23 (15,107.23) 107.81% 13,966.46 703.0 Salaries-Part Time 15,750 6,366.27 9,383.73 40.42% 1,033.60 710.0 Retirement CalPERS-Employer 29,800 28,668.30 1,131.70 96.20% 1,250.70 715.0 Workers Compensation Insurance 3,850 3,838.68 11.32 99.71% 319.89 716.0 Group Insurance 19,000 14,227.15 4,772.85 74.88% 1,124.73 718.0 Employer Payroll Taxes 16,750 15,814.72 935.28 94.42% 1,072.70 719.0 Deferred Compensation 7,150 1,102.50 6,047.50 15.42% 0.00 720.0 Auto Allowance 2,400 1,825.00 575.00 76.04% 50.00 750.0 Dues & Subscriptions 600 0.00 600.00 0.00% 0.00 755.0 Conference Expense 5,000 1,177.20 3,822.80 23.54% 0.00 758.0 Planning Commission Meeting 3,000 1,036.38 1,963.62 34.55% 0.00 759.0 Training & Education 2,000 0.00 2,000.00 0.00% 0.00 776.0 Miscellaneous Expenses 2,000 250.23 1,749.77 12.51% 0.00 872.0 Property Development-Legal Exp 47,000 23,606.50 23,393.50 50.23% 0.00 878.0 Build Inspect. LA County/Willd 195,000 120,836.24 74,163.76 61.97% 48,138.91 881.0 Storm Water Management 65,000 103,782.79 (38,782.79) 159.67% 4,793.00 882.0 Variance & CUP Expense 6,000 6,859.27 (859.27) 114.32% 134.82 56 Agenda Item No.: 5.A Mtg. Date: 07/27/2020 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: MEREDITH ELGUIRA, PLANNING DIRECTOR THRU: ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: VARIANCE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 162 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK LOCATED AT 3 POPPY TRAIL ROAD (JONAS). DATE: July 27, 2020 BACKGROUND: The variance request is for the addition of 162 square feet of garage space to an existing attached two - car garage located in the front yard setback. The Planning Commission conducted a morning public hearing at the project site located at 3 Poppy Trail Road and adjourned to the evening meeting on the same day, July 21, 2020, live streamed via teleconference to discuss the proposed project. The Planning Commission concluded that the site topography and limited bui ldable area presented a hardship for the applicant that made it difficult to comply with the City's Municipal Code and enjoy the same rights afforded to other residents in the City. DISCUSSION: All of the development standards are being met except for the requirement that no development occurs in a setback. The 162 square foot garage addition encroaches in its entirety into the front yard setback.The natural slope, location of the building pad and shape of the lot constrain any development on site. The lot has a relatively steep natural downward slope from rear to front. Due to this constraint, the main building pad was originally created at the front of the lot, with a considerable portion of the pad (and 40% of the existing residence) located within the 5 0-foot wide front yard setback. This leaves very little area to build outside of the setback area which is exacerbated by its relatively long frontage (435.5 lineal feet) along Poppy Trail. The net lot area of the lot is 95,160 square feet. The structural lot coverage is proposed at 7,777 square feet or 8.2% of the net lot area, which includes all of the structures, (20% permitted). The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork is 12,456 square feet or 13.17% of the net lot area, (35% permitted). A total of 29,440 square feet of the net lot, or 30.94% is disturbed. No additional disturbance is proposed, (40% max. permitted). The proposed addition will not impact drainage on the lot. No change to the drainage pattern is proposed. 57 In response to justification for the Variance request, the applicant notes that the entire front of the house is in the front setback and they are requesting to further encroach by 5'. Due to the topography of the lot there is no space to co nstruct the garage addition that will not encroach into the front yard setback. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. ATTACHMENTS: 3PoppyTrailStaffReport.pdf 3PoppyTrailPC Approved Resolution 2020-04.pdf 3 Poppy Trail Calculations.pdf 3 Poppy Trail Pictures.pdf 3 poppy trail plans.pdf �ti/,<'� ::1/etld. INCORPORATEDJANUAR Y24,1957 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: BACKGROUND: Agenda Item No.: 8.A Mtg. Date: 07/21/2020 HONORABLE CHAIR AND PLANNING COMMISSIONERS MEREDITH T. ELGUIRA, PLANNING DIRECTOR VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW A PROPOSED 162 SQUARE-FOOT ADDITION TO AN EXISTING TWO-CAR GARAGE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK LOCATED AT 3 POPPY TRAIL ROAD (ZONING CASE NO. 20-03 AND RESOLUTION NO. 2020- 04/JONAS). July 21, 2020 The property is zoned RAS-2 and consists of 2.7 acres (117,612 square feet) gross and 2.18 acres (95,160 sq.ft.) net lot area for development purposes. In November, 2009 the applicant was granted a CUP and a SPR to construct an 800 square foot recreation room and access thereto, that required grading and a retaining wall along the access way. A "No further development" restriction without Planning Commission review was placed on the property. Therefore, any new construction requires a discretionary review by the Planning Commission. In 2016 Planning Commission approved a Site Plan Review for 375 square feet as-built living area, three covered porches totaling 705 square feet, and 5- foot maximum height wall to accommodate a 4-foot wide walkway along the rear of the home and a Variance request to allow a new porch to encroach into the front yard setback. In 2018, a Site Plan Review was approved for two as-built retaining walls that exceeds 3 feet in height and a Variance for a wall that exceeds the maximum 5-foot height. Currently the property is developed with a 3,598 square foot residence, 462 square foot garage, a 720 square foot swimming pool/spa, 802 square foot pool decking, 48 square foot pool equipment, 270 square foot cabana, 660 square foot stable, 96 square foot service yard, and an 800 square foot recreation room and 1,101 square foot attached porches. Over 40% of the existing residence is located in the front yard setback, and is legal non-conforming. At the worst condition, (north-west corner), the house encroaches 37' into the required 50' front yard setback. The proposed 162 square foot addition to the garage would encroach an additional 5' into the front setback and requires a Variance. There will be minor grading that will be balanced on site to provide an access walkway around the new addition. The existing wall will be reconfigured to accommodate the walkway. The new retaining walls will not exceed 3 feet maximum height. 58 DISCUSSION: The Planning Commission held a public hearing in the field on the site earlier in the morning of July 21, 2020 and viewed the silhouette for the proposed addition. The net lot area of the lot is 95,160 square feet. The structural lot coverage is proposed at 7,777 square feet or 8.2% of the net lot area, which includes all of the structures, (20% permitted). The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork is 12,456 square feet or 13.1% of the net lot area, (35% permitted). 29,440 square feet of the net lot, or 30.94% is disturbed. No additional disturbance is proposed. (40% max. permitted). There are 3 building pads on the property. The Zoning Code sets a guideline for each building pad coverage at 30%. The residential pad is 4,480 square feet, outside of setbacks, and will have coverage of 119.5% (due to the fact that over 40% of the house plus the covered porch would be located in the front setback; area of which is not included in the building pad area calculations). The stable pad is 3,360 square feet and has coverage of 19.6%, and the recreation room pad is 3,600 square feet with 31.0% coverage, with allowed deduction. The proposed addition will not impact drainage on the lot. No change to the drainage pattern is proposed. All of the development standards are being met except for the requirement that no development occurs in a setback. The 162 square foot garage addition encroaches in its entirety into the front yard setback. In response to justification for the Variance request the applicant notes that the entire front of the house is in the front setback and they are requesting to further encroach by 5'. Due to the topography of the lot there is no space to construct the garage addition that will not encroach into the front yard setback. CONCLUSION: When reviewing a development application the Planning C ommission should consider whether the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. In addition, the Commission must determine if the project meets the Variance criteria enclosed with this report. In reviewing this application, the Commission should consider the topography of the property, the previously graded pads, the configuration of the exiting development, the general size of the lot and the wide expanse of the property frontage. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Committee will review the project for 59 architectural elements and design at a later date. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES: 1738.50 Required findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings: 1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; 2. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; 3. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; 4. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; 5. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; 6. That the variance is consistent with the portions ofthe County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and 7. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Variance request allowing encroachment into the front yard for the construction of the proposed 162 square foot addition to an existing garage. ATTACHMENTS: 2020-04 3 Poppytrail_VAR.docx 60 1 Resolution 2020-04 3 Poppy Trail Road (Jonas) 61 REVISED RESOLUTION NO. 2020-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE REQUEST TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT SETBACK FOR A 162 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO AN EXISTING GARAGE, IN ZONING CASE NO. 20-03 AT 3 POPPY TRAIL, (LOT 8-PT), ROLLING HILLS, CA (JONAS). THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. Robert Jonas requesting a Variance to locate a 162 square foot addition to an exi sting two-car garage within the front yard setback. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application on July 21, 2020 including a morning field trip and an evening meeting. The applicants were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City staff and the Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The applicants’ representative was in attendance at the public hearings. Section 3. The property is zoned RAS-2 and the gross lot area is 2.7 acres. The net lot area is 2.18 acres or 95,160 square feet. The lot, with the exception of three graded building pads (main home, stable and acccessory recreation room) has a steep descending slope, rear to front. Due to the location of the residential pad within the front setback, over 40% of the residence is nonconforming in that it lies within the front setback. Section 4. In 2009 the applicant was granted a Conditional Use Permit and a Site Plan Review that allowed the construction of an 800 square foot recreation room and access thereto. A “No further development” restriction was imposed on the property, requiring any future structural modifications to be reviewed by the Plan ning Commission in a Site Plan Review public hearing. Section 5. In 2016 Planning Commission granted a Site Plan Review for 375 square feet as-built living area, three covered porches totaling 705 square feet, and 5-foot maximum height wall to accommodate a 4-foot wide walkway along the rear of the home and a Variance request to allow a new porch to encroach into the front yard setback. 2 Resolution 2020-04 3 Poppy Trail Road (Jonas) 62 Section 6. In 2018, a subsequent Site Plan Review was approved for two as-built retaining walls that exceeds 3 feet in height and a Variance for a wall that exceeds the maximum 5-foot height. Section 7. This project is also categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) because it involves minor alteration of or addition to an existing private structure. The project consists of a 162 square foot addition to an existing 462 square foot two-car garage.” Section 8. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance granting relief from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity or zone. In proposing to encroach in the front setback with 162 square feet of addition to an existing garage, a Variance is required to grant relief from Section 17.12.190 of the Zoning Ordinance (setback definitions requiring that setbacks be free of structures). With respect to the aforementioned request for a Variance from Zoning Ordinance Section 17.16.110, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional circumstances and conditions on the subject property, including the natural slope, location of the building pad and the shape of the lot, all of which constrain development. The lot has a relatively steep natural downward slope from rear to front. Due to this constraint, the main building pad was originally created at the front of the lot, with a considerable portion of the pad (and 40% of the existing residence) located within the 50-foot wide front yard setback. This leaves little area to build outside of the setback area which is exacerbated by its relatively long frontage (435.5 lineal feet) along Poppy Trail. B. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to the property in question by strict application of the code. Three car garages are common amenities to residences in Rolling Hills and this approval permits the applicants to enjoy the same amenity. The proposed addition, although in the setback is not intrusive or massive. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the properties or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located in that the increase in nonconformity for the front setback will be relatively minor, being a further encroachment of only five feet. 3 Resolution 2020-04 3 Poppy Trail Road (Jonas) 63 D. In granting of the Variance the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will be observed in that the proposed addition will be orderly, attractive, and will not detrimentally affect the rural character of the community. E. The variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant in that three car garages are common amenities in the City of Rolling Hills enjoyed by many of its residents. F. The Variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low-density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The proposed addition to the garage does not further exceed the encroachment of leading edge of the existing structure and will not alter the existing configuration of the lot, including existing sloped conditions and large amount of open space between structures. G. The Variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. The proposed addition is located in a developed residential lot and will not impact any hazardous waste facilities. Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance in Zoning Case No. 20-03 for 162 square foot addition to an existing garage, subject to the following conditions: A. This approval shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval if construction pursuant to this approval has not commenced within that time period, as required by Sections 17.38.070 and 17.46.080 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, or the approval granted is otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of this section. B. If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by this resolution shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse and upon receipt of written notice from the City, all construction work being performed on the subject property shall immediately cease, other than work determined by the City Manager or his/her designee required to cure the violation. The suspension and stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant cures the violation to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his/her designee. In the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her designee’s determination that a violation exists or disputes how the violation must be cured, the Applicant may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular meeting of the City Council for which the agenda has not yet been posted, the Applicant shall be provided written notice of the hearing. The stop work order shall 4 Resolution 2020-04 3 Poppy Trail Road (Jonas) 64 remain in effect during the pendency of the hearing. The City Council shall make a determination as to whether a violation of this Resolution has occurred. If the Council determines that a violation has not occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the Council will lift the suspension and the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has occurred and has not yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a deadline to cure the violation; no construction work shall be performed on the property until and unless the violation is cured by the deadline, other than work designated by the Council to accomplish the cure. If the violation is not cured by the deadline, the Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant’s request or schedule a hearing for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant to Chapter 17.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC). C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, LA County Building Code and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated July 15, 2020 except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to the Building and Safety Department for issuance of building permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission. F. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. A copy of the conditions of this Resolution shall be printed on plans approved when a building permit is issued and a copy of such approved plans, including conditions of approval, shall be available on the building site a t all times. G. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and including conformance with all of the conditions set forth therein and the City’s Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Further, the person obtaining a building permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. 5 Resolution 2020-04 3 Poppy Trail Road (Jonas) 65 H. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 7,777 square feet, or 8.2% (with allowable deductions). Total lot coverage shall not exceed 13.1% or 12,456 square feet. I. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 32% (of net lot area), which includes the existing stable and corral area. No further disturbance is proposed. J. A minimum of four-foot level path and/or walkway, which does not have to be paved, shall be provided along the rear of the home, to allow passage around the home. A retaining wall is permitted with a maximum of 3 feet height. K. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modification to this project or to the property, which would constitute additional strcutural development, grading, excavation of dirt and any modification including, but not be limited to retaining walls, drainage devices, pad elevation and any other deviation from the approved plan, shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. L. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, stormwater pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors shall be required. M. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site. During construction, to maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car- pool into the City. N. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills. O. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP’s) requirements related to solid waste, drainage and storm water management. P. During construction, all parking shall take place on the project site and, If necessary, any overflow parking shall take place within nearby unimproved roadway easement adjacent to subject site. There shall be no blocking of adjacent driveways or of the roadway easement for passage of pedestrians and equestrians. During construction a flagmen shall be present to direct traffic when it is anticipated that a lane may be impeded. 6 Resolution 2020-04 3 Poppy Trail Road (Jonas) 66 Q. A minimum of 65% of the construction material spoils shall be recycled and diverted. The hauler shall secure a “Construction and Demolition Permit” from the City of Rolling Hills, and provide the required documentation. R. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at: http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard_definitions#FIRE. It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions. Should a red flag warning be declared and if work is to be conducted on the property, the contractor shall have readily available fire distinguisher. S. Prior to finaling of the project, ”as constructed” plans, electronic copy and certifications shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Department to ascertain that the completed project is in compliance with the approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the project during construction, shall be depicted “as built/as graded”. T. Until the applicants execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this approval, the approvals shall not be effective. Such affidavit shall be recorded together with the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 21st DAY OF JULY, 2020. BRAD CHELF, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: CITY CLERK Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. 7 Resolution 2020-04 3 Poppy Trail Road (Jonas) 67 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020-04 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE REQUEST TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT SETBACK FOR A 162 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO AN EXISTING GARAGE, IN ZONING CASE NO. 20-03 AT 3 POPPY TRAIL, (LOT 8-PT), ROLLING HILLS, CA (JONAS). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on July 21, 2020 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. CITY CLERK 68 Calculations Table SITE PLAN REVIEW/VARIANCE EXISTING PROPOSED RA-S-2 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from road easement. line Side: 35 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line SF Residence & accessory structures Addition to existing two car garage STRUCTURES - Site Plan Review required on properties with a Restricted Development Condition & over 3’ high walls. - Variance for structures in setbacks. Residence Garage Pool/spa Cabana Stable Att.porch Rec Room 3598 sq.ft 462 sq.ft 720 sq.ft. 270 sq.ft. 660 sq.ft. 1101 sq.ft 800 sq. ft Residence Garage Pool/spa Cabana Stable Att. porch Rec Room 162 sq ft Total 7,615 sq.ft Total 7,777 sq ft STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) 8.1% of 95,160 sq.ft. net lot area 8.17% TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (35% maximum) 13.1% of 95,160 sq.ft. net lot area 13.17% BUILDING PAD COVERAGE RESIDENTIAL (30% maximum guideline) Residence=122.6% of 4,480 sq.ft. pad (40% of the house plus covered porches in setback which would not be included in building pad calculations) Stable=19.6% of 3,360 sq.ft. pad Rec room=31% of 3,600 sq.ft pad N/A in setback GRADING Site plan review required if grading is triggered N/A N/A DISTURBED AREA (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, and any non-graded area where impervious surfaces exist.) 29,440 sq.ft. – 30.9% of lot 29,440 sq.ft. – 30.9% of lot - was previously disturbed STABLE (minimum 450 sq. ft.) and CORRAL (minimum 550 sq. ft.) 660 sq.ft 1,050 sq.ft. 660 sq. ft. 1,050 sq.ft. STABLE ACCESS From Poppy Trail From Poppy Trail ACCESSWAY Existing from Poppy Trail Existing from Poppy Trail VIEWS N/A N/A PLANTS AND ANIMALS N/A N/A 69 70 " 71 --_J ,\, ' 9,·, ..,,.;. I : i ( I I I I I- PARTIJ:'L TOPOGRAPHIC li I f3 Poppy Traff Road " Rolllng HRfs, Ca. 90274 SURVEY - Robert M. Jonas 13 Poppy TraD Road Rolllng Hllls. Ca. 90274 Bolton Englnaarlng Corp. Cml Engmeenng and Sumy,ng 25834NarbomaAWIN96utla210 l.omrla, Ca 90717 Ph. 31 0-325-5580 Fax S11J.325.6681 · t:01, \). A\ \ J! i-'o•'if 4 u · ·.:t.Jf1Af !-t"T PROlECTION. ------- - MJ STER - -- C) A lr f - HfT ECT FOR ANY MISSING DIMENSIONS OR 5 RJrr6, }t1') LL DIMENSIONS ARE FACE OF 2) INSULATION N t-- $ 1. ,... ...... ·•"",,,. V''<J-e> . .<J .,,.,,_,,,Gv-- \(fc. ....rJ'r- v $ "':o cr""r 181 181 ' 181 31 ) rir . L;,E SH 1 PsE1 NRi i Ji CNH'l:1bli SEE ''N. S) i}ri Ni i £1 ,iG:i !At ftt\ ij\1SiaR 6) SD INDICATES SMOKE DETECTOR. SEE ELECTRICAL PLANS FOR LOCATION. 7) -o<i:.O oO i'l. G <i;. "I. oo'tl< 0 0 © WkK-IN CL SET 1 #----..,.._ ------._- " 16'-Q- B) 9) 10) '-- .....- FAT LEAST WIDE x 24" HIGH LOOR 15 ............ © ............... © l-,*'11 'o "I.'<' Jo<i:. s:.;J;:H I ro<i:.O cf' ,; l © LAUNDRY .0; %a1°4R ◄ :,._lJl 'i7 II J'-6"'x fi FIXED GLASS _ i4l (b l 0 '--- -r --- = ;;; FAMILY ROOM REMC'I: EXISTING GLASS PROVIDE NEW DAUL GLAZED 3'-6"114'-0"'r/YOOO CASEMENT WINDOWS TO MATCl"I EXISTING [ @ r,;:. G,<11t4Gt; Ex1srJ1o1G ;ONCi-t.e,i --I{ II II II II - 'N (M _I .• ------;---- "..... tr; 1 1 : ·- - - - - c:::J z 0...... LL ,I_- . 00 zo :a:s.. 6UJ V) 0er: 0a.. g LL a.. 6 V) .. ...J .......J. I lz9 ..... ...J UJ ..... J uO z er: ,CUJl .w' _ z er: ::s ...J V) ..... <z( I- Q >- b2 8: cwcO a.. QM 0:::'1:1: 4-1"'-:lC I A-2 <( w ... a-zw ..J lz9 w '.:I ..J ..J V)... - a.. cw2 0 ..J <( wa 7 ..,... • <C>cl , _ nv .- n Q u-- n. u,n I I! l .IL I I H II 11 l . CLAS ·A; FLAT. )NGRE "[ r. .E ROOF TO MATCHROOF A. -=- EA-ll""N8UILnNi I - I f l i: g CLASS 'A' FLAT CONGRETE TILE ROOF TO MATCH ROOF AT RECREATION BUILDJ/•,IG >NQl POINT C. 'A' TCCNGRETETll..E ROOF TO MAlCH ROOF,.- RECREATION I UD.. ».G I □ CV) t-- I I BUILT-UPWOOO POST WITH FIRE-RESISTIVE SIDING MATCH RECREATION BLD'G. 9UILT-UP\,\IOOD POST WITH FIRE-RESISTIVE SIDING MATCH RECREATION BLD'G, BUilT-UP \'VOOO POST WITH FIRE-RESISTIVE SIDING MATCH RECREATION BLO'(;_ BUILT-UP WOOD POST wrrn FIRE-RESISTNE SIDINC3 MATCH RECREATION BLD'G. D111 LJ BUILT-UPWOOOPOST WITH FIRE-RESISTI\/E SIDING MATCH RE.CREATION BLO'G. I II '0POSED GARAGf AOOITI1N NOTE; EXISTING RESIDENCE------ -- ---- ---- -- FIRE RESISmVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING TO MATCH EXISTING RECFU!ATION BLO'G. OVER 11.2" STRUCTURAL PLVWOOD PANELS. CLASS 'A' FLA T CONCRETE TILE ROOF ROOF PITCH 3112"·12 EAVE ANO RAKE DETAILS TO MATCH EXISTING RECREATION BUILDING NORTH ELEVATION 1/4 "=1'-0" rOT 1301N CLASS 'A' FlAT CONGRETE TILE ROOt- TO MATCH ROOF AT RFCRFATION BUI!. nlNG Cl.ASS 'A" F AT CONGRETE TllE ROOf TO MATCH ROOF AT RECREATION BUILDI ClASS 'A" FLAT CONGRETE TILE ROOF TO MATCH ROOF AT RECREATION BUILDING ,,,..,, -j 11 n .£.. Ji a - .1: !J.. . • II +-- - - - -l- FIRE RESISITIVE BOARD A"-ID EBXAInSeTNINsG1RDE1NCeRrEoAM1A"N.TBcLHD'G. L h ----''-----'---' - J!. JI- !- . , .ll .JI ----"----- , . " , wr 2-smUcn.JfW.PlVWOOO AMlLV ROOM EXISTING GARAGE PROPQ!!'.E NOlE: FIRE RESIStTIVC BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING TO MATCH EXISTING RECREATION BLD'G_ OVER 1/2" STRUCTURAL PLYWl"V!O PANELS SOUYH ELEVATION 1/4"=1'-0" CLASS "A" FLAT CONGRETE Tll.E ROOF TO MATCH Roar T Recru::.11.,n +I BUUDING Ct ASS 'A' Fl.AT CONGRETE ,.. .I l:J.OOF TO MATCH ROOF AT t)N8l.NLDING I I I I I FIRE RES,SITM. BOARD ANO r==---, J 6x12WOODBEAM 6:11!1 EXPOSED BEAM 2x6 T&G EXPOSED DECKING I ----- 9UILT-UPWOODPOST 'MTH FIRE-RESISTIVE SIDING MATCH RECREATION BLD'G. BATTEN SIDING TO MATCH EXISllNG RE.CREATION BLD'G. 1;: • ....._, t".;;..,.---,.• (::: GARAGE PROPOSE.., GARAGE ADDITION (E)GARAGE NEW - VERED WALK WEST ELEVATION 1/4"=1'-0" TIJ": QO V)- ..J ::I: zuO 0 w V) l wO co a. .6.., I>-- 8: ::i 6 w a. V) w>Oa OZzo - - [==:J I I I [ I C, ABOVE 'HE ROOFBYl'"'l.: MINtMUM D:'""ANCE 0 BE COORr"'-lA.1 :□ WrfH T ARCj-;IE T. ,-IF j$.,':A "rTHESPAr--. E;:VENTILATK>N,?R 1 130 I --- - l - . l_ ROOF PENETRATION ROOFING DATA t-- - AL VENTS AND ROOI STAO:KS TO HAVE A RAIN Pru.,;"ECTION t":AP'-. "UBURN TLE N<.. LIGHT WEIGHT TIL"' ICCEVA UA TIO"! O.il' SR2567 C TY OF .iJS ANGE FILE NI # 24081 1· U.24COMPLIANTC' Rt.,, RATINGC )lM:11 APPROVl'.O Cl.AS A ASSEMBl' or'3CRIPTION 1 LIC l-'TWE IGH'1 'HETILESW.VEAN NSTAL. EDDR'l'WEIGHTOF 1 .8 POl.NOSPER SClUARE FOOT WHCN I":-:. AUE::> WITH A 3" HEAOLAP TIE SIZE .ANO SHAPl: ARE :HE SAM!: AAE '1-E SAME A.So FOR 'Tl-£ REGULAR•WI :JGHT Tl.ES ROOF Sl 'lP ES· ROOF SLOPES FfnROC S-OPc:, rROl.! 21/2: 12T◄ 4112' 1;_ THE ROOF >ECK MUST BF COVERED WITH A Ml"'-IIMUM OF TWO lAYl:RS OF UIIIDERI.AYMENT COMPL G WITH IBC SECTKlN 1!"J7 3. 3 OR S'.':CTION !5.3.3 AS APPllCAEILr FC Roc-;,s ESGRiATERTHAN4 12·:HEROOf OF ONE LAYER OF UNDERlAYM::N1 COMP' .YING wn ASADPI.CABlE i-n.:..>RA.rT STOPS SHAU BCIN::OMPLIANCE WI'™ ALL APPUCABL.·. CODES. iJK1EALAYME>1 1 'IIDC YM:::.-1, YUST ;y>t_y WIYli ... .ADH£S 1VE : THE Al!..:URN CONCnETE ROOi r• :: MAY e! ltfSTAI _£0 v,1·'HA ROOF TLF Ailf-lESM. THAT SS R; .C.-.'. NIZEO 1",I A CURRENJ ICc.-ESEV.ALUA.,.ION REPORTFlm 1.1:". INCONCRF.TE ROOF TILF APPI..ICATIONS.INSTAL ATION r,,;or- ATTIC SPACES SI-W.l NOT EXCEED 1000 SQUARE FEET BElWEE.-.. DRAFT STOPS. OR.Ar- STOP$ SHALL l!IE' CONSTRUCTED Of NOT LESS '1l4AN 11'" G'l'P. BOARD. .118"' WOOD STRt.JCTURAl. PAN1 OR318" TY?f:2-MPARTICALE BOAR..l MID AOECUATEt.Y SI.FPORl ED. ACCESS TQ ALL ATTIC SPACES SHAU BE PRCMDEO BY A MINIMUM 24".K: 6' OPENING. Al OFENINGS "TO HAVE &!lF ClOC" IX>ORSY.1THAUTOMATICLA1 :HES SCRl::EN SA\. KEn .AS Pi;;{ U.B.C. Sl=C 1rai 320{C NO'TE·FORROOI Sl.OFiiS :: 0WlU2:12 iLESAAE.e.:>NSE-'REDOE...)RA'TM::ONlYANOMUS- , M>PllfDO'VER N>PAOVE':I :toC "='C ' "VER!NG,S U&lECTTOTHFLOCA1 BUL'ltNG o= 'ICIAl.'S APPROVAL 'STAL A ION: 1 GENERAL .Al IJ J.:CONCRCTEROOt "'I.':' J MUST BE INSTAl EDIN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTJON 1507,:: ThEIBCOR5.ECTIONRll030FTHERC ASAPPLICABlE,AKJTHEMANUFo\C "URESI MANIJ.4-L THE RI :Pv U ANO TH IMNUFACTU I S NSTRU TIONS MU.: BE AVAILABt.E Ai Tti:C JOB SITF A"' ALL "lME'::; DIJRNG INSTAU.Al ION 2 AUSUR'II CON! RE FR( .,LES MAY-'I. !. Bf ,-i'. l ANO CLAY ROOF TLE IN<.. IAUATION M.WJA.... WHERE THE JANUA Y M U:MPER.-. DOES N OT OCCUR Of TILES USNG HE Q.£ ADH: : "c.7 MUST BE .. ACCORDANCE WllH. HE M>H:=.SIVE ,.,.AMJFACTURfSIC _£) L:.VAJJATTOt,IREPOR'. 1Rf ClASSIFICATION I NEWCONS"'.'RU..."TJ_H WHIN INS',ALlt)INAC :oROMICEWITHTH3RE.:ICR, THEAIJBURNi;;;::.oAARWEIGH"l AND LIGHTWEIGl,,f; CON..:RLTE R00f' T! ·<i; ,t,RE. CLASS•J..:ROOF CC,..rERING IN ACCORDANCE WITH JaC SEmlON S[')S.2 AND IRC SECTION R:902.1. WHEN OOF TllES ARE INST"'LLEO WITH A ROOF Tn_E AO-iESIVE INSTAlLATION P.4U JT BE Ill ACCOROAHC-, WITH ESR- 7011, C.:NDlTIONS OF .... ,E. 1 Tl-IE AUBURN TILE INC. CONCRETE RI IOFINfi 'TILES DESCRIBED IN TI-11$ REPORT COMPLY WITH , OR ARE SUITABLC' ALTERNATIVES TO WHAT IS SPECIF;o 1111 n-msr CODCS I .ISTEO IN SECTIO!II 1.0 OF THIS REPORT UBJECT JO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS A THE Tl.ES MUST SE MANUl=ot.CTURCO ANO ,-,STALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS REPORT THE APPLICABL CODE AND THE MANUFACTURES PUBU t-EO INSTRUCTIONS, If THERE IF THERE IS A CONFLICT SF.TWEE"' TI-ft' PUBUSI-/ED INSTRUC '\QNS, AND THIS REPORT THIS EPOT GC -'ERNS B UtE ROOF FRAMINC AND SHEATHING Ml: ,T BEDESIGNE7 FOR THE APPROPRIATE .OAI :, DETER.MINEO ;N ACCOR; AM wn II.PP .ICABLE CODE, SUS Cl TOAPPROVAI.. -- liE X>DEOFFlC&Al C TI-ICTII as AREMM'VF'ACllJREDATTH!: AUBlJRl'JTILE NC.fA(:].fl'V Ill ONTARIO. CAUi'ORNfA. l1'IOE A. CONTROL PIIDGGRAM WIT!- lrtSPf Tl W., BY ICC El:: .<•x,-.c:• JDS@1S"oc:WITI (1\ ½:51 7i 11 11 -Y I A 6;.12 .X E' " EAMMA 'TCH EX!/ 1 I ti - T'fl :t: GYP BOAR J IIL- FIRE RESISITIVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING TO MATCH OVER 1/2"' STRUCTURAL Pl YWOOO PANE.S. I r- (\ ½:51 CLASS·A' LAI ONCRFETfTI .ERr- PITCH '3'12"-12 CAVE Ar 'IO RAKE OETALS TO MATCH EXl:"TING RZ.--:REATI -N '3UfL'>ING - --- 1---------- -%. ''..:"t,:.,...< ..,. _ ..._:Yv'· I • ·""'c°"" / I j I I £ .,..,. IRE RES/SI "IVE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING TO MATCH EXISTING RECREATION SLO'G. OVER i rn.ucTURAl PLYWC - CLASS' A' F LAT CONGRETE· :: L E ROOF TO IAATCH R:OOF 4T RE ;REANBUl..:MNG 7 :::',c;","-""r,,,,•jx',os,';,.,.",:,J,:,,",,r,i / I I I 7 .,..,/ I I I hfi TA.LFXPOSEDOECK,t.G "l.YWI - SHEA.THING - - - - 'tlSITM: BUA.RD ANL - · - · - -- r- L 1 I ---- ; I I L I I I O', I SIDING TO MATCH ING R£CREATION BLD'G. ir rniJCTURAL PLYWOCO , - ,------- J - -- .J ----------- -- (\ \ A-4. I ---- ---- I --1 a. IL 0 0 1 - . I I I 7 -- 0..... z .I-.... 00 LL. Q ::5 Q z <( 0 0.. 0 LL. 0 0.. tX CY. 0.. 6 U) I .....J.. ..J .z.... (.!) ..J uz O LU ..J .Q ... zLU LU • CY. ti] ::5 CY. ..J U) ..... Q >- 8: LcUO o 0.. <z( I- 1 1 1 OM =I:!: CY. 4-15- -2020 A-4 JI I L I I 75 Agenda Item No.: 6.A Mtg. Date: 07/27/2020 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: TERRY SHEA, FINANCE DIRECTOR THRU: ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND APPROVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PLACEMENT OF SOLID WASTE SERVICE CHARGES OWED TO REPUBLIC SERVICES PURSUANT TO ITS SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE WITH THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ON THE FY 2020- 2021 LOS ANGELES COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER'S OFFICE ANNUAL TAX ROLL.&NBSP; DATE: July 27, 2020 BACKGROUND: Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 8.08 of Title 8 of the City of Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Article 4 of Chapter 6 of Part 3 of Division 5 of the California Health and Safety Code, commencing with Section 5470, the City Council is authorized to levy the annual sanitation service charge and to have such charge collected on the tax roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not separately from, the general taxes of the City. DISCUSSION: The following is a summary of the services and activities associate d with the sanitation charge: To protect public health and safety, Contactor shall provide and maintain all labor, equipment, material, supplies, supervision and all other items necessary for the Collection of all Solid Waste, Recyclable Materials, Green Waste, Bulky Items, and Brush g enerated or accumulated within the City from Residential Premises and City Facilities. The services provided by the Contractor under this Agreement shall be performed in a thorough and professional manner so that all Customers are provided at all times wit h reliable, courteous and high-quality Solid Waste Management Services. Contractor shall collect all properly placed Solid Waste, Recyclable Materials and Organic Waste from the designated collection location of every residential premises in the City twice each week. Each year on two consecutive Saturdays in April or May, and again on a Saturday in September or October, both as determined by the City, Contractor shall collect an unlimited amount of Bulky 76 Items from the designated collection location. In addition to the semi-annual Bulky Item Collection events, Contractor shall provide Customers with on-call Collection for Bulky Items upon request. Contractor shall collect one (1) Bulky Item per calendar year from each Residential Premises at no charge on an on-call basis. Contractor will provide additional services as outlined in the Amended and Restated Agreement for Residential Solid Waste Management Services. For Fiscal Year 2015-2016, the sanitat ion charge in the amount of $1,100 per parcel was established. The sanitation charge has remained unchanged for five years. For Fiscal Year 2020-2021, the cost of providing sanitation services increased to $1,294 per parcel. The increase from the $1,100 per parcel over the last five fiscal years to $1,294 per parcel is that for each fiscal year the rates are recommended to the City by Republic Services based on their actual costs for service, which include adjustments for the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and landfill costs. The Franchise Agreement requires that Republic Services annually provide evidence of the CPI adjustment to the City Manager for review and approval. In April 2020, the City Council took action to absorb the $194 per parcel difference in cost and to continue collecting only $1,100 per parcel. The sanitation service charge for 2020-2021 is the existing sanitation service charge of the City in the amount of $1,100 per parcel. The sanitation charge is based on t he direct cost of providing the service. The enclosed Report contains detailed information about the annual charge and the charge to be applied to the parcels. This public hearing provides an opportunity for the City Council to hear and consider all protests to the annual levy of the sanitation service charge. In the absence of a majority protest by property owners within the City of Rolling Hills, the City Counc il may order implementation of City sanitation service charge on the FY 2020–21 property tax rolls by adopting the enclosed Resolution (Attachment 1), with the attached Report (Attachment 2). Council action on the staff recommendation is required in order to place the annual charge on the tax roll. If Council finds that protest is made by the property owners of a majority of separate parcels of property described in the Report, then the Resolution and Report shall not be adopted and the charges shall be co llected separately from the tax roll, by a method to be determined, and shall not constitute a lien against any parcel or parcels of land. A notice of the July 27, 2020 public hearing was published in the Daily Breeze on July 13, 2020 and July 20, 2020. (Attachment 3.) FISCAL IMPACT: The anticipated total revenue is approximately $753,500 which is included in the 2020 -21 Budget. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council open the public hearing, and: 1. Make a finding that there is no majority protest by property owners within the City of Rolling Hills; and 2. Adopt the enclosed Resolution, with attached Report, and place the sanitation service charge on 77 the annual County of Los Angeles Tax Roll. ATTACHMENTS: City of Rolling Hills 2020 Tax Roll.pdf Proof of Publication.pdf Report Re Sanitation Charge-c1.pdf Resolution RE Annual Sanitation Charge-c1.pdf City of Rolling Hills Parcel Map 20200724 with Roads.pdf 78 Parcel Number Amount 7567001004 1100.00 238.92 7567001006 1100.00 7567001007 1100.00 7567001008 1100.00 7567001010 1100.00 7567001011 1100.00 7567001013 1100.00 7567001014 1100.00 7567001016 1100.00 7567002004 1100.00 7567002005 1100.00 7567002006 1100.00 7567002007 1100.00 7567002008 1100.00 7567002009 1100.00 7567002010 1100.00 7567002011 1100.00 7567002012 1100.00 7567002013 1100.00 7567002014 1100.00 7567002015 1100.00 7567002016 1100.00 7567002017 1100.00 7567002018 1100.00 7567002019 1100.00 7567002020 1100.00 7567002021 1100.00 7567002022 1100.00 7567002023 1100.00 7567002024 1100.00 7567002025 1100.00 7567002026 1100.00 7567002027 1100.00 7567002028 1100.00 7567002029 1100.00 7567002030 1100.00 7567002031 1100.00 7567002033 1100.00 7567002034 1100.00 7567002035 1100.00 7567002036 1100.00 7567003008 1100.00 7567003009 1100.00 79 Parcel Number Amount 7567003010 1100.00 7567003011 1100.00 7567003012 1100.00 7567003013 1100.00 7567003014 1100.00 7567003015 1100.00 7567003016 1100.00 7567003017 1100.00 7567003018 1100.00 7567003019 1100.00 7567003020 1100.00 7567003021 1100.00 7567003022 1100.00 7567003023 1100.00 7567003024 1100.00 7567003025 1100.00 7567003026 1100.00 7567003027 1100.00 7567003028 1100.00 7567003029 1100.00 7567003030 1100.00 7567003031 1100.00 7567003032 1100.00 7567003033 1100.00 7567003034 1100.00 7567003035 1100.00 7567003036 1100.00 7567003037 1100.00 7567003038 1100.00 7567003039 1100.00 7567003040 1100.00 7567003041 1100.00 7567003042 1100.00 7567003043 1100.00 7567003044 1100.00 7567003045 1100.00 7567003046 1100.00 7567003047 1100.00 7567003048 1100.00 7567003049 1100.00 7567003050 1100.00 7567003051 1100.00 7567003052 1100.00 80 Parcel Number Amount 7567004007 1100.00 7567004008 1100.00 7567004009 1100.00 7567004010 1100.00 7567004011 1100.00 7567004013 1100.00 7567004014 1100.00 7567004015 1100.00 7567004016 1100.00 7567004017 1100.00 7567004018 1100.00 7567004019 1100.00 7567004023 1100.00 7567004024 1100.00 7567004025 1100.00 7567004026 1100.00 7567004027 1100.00 7567004028 1100.00 7567004029 1100.00 7567004030 1100.00 7567004031 1100.00 7567004032 1100.00 7567004033 1100.00 7567004034 1100.00 7567004035 1100.00 7567004036 1100.00 7567004037 1100.00 7567004039 1100.00 7567004040 1100.00 7567004041 1100.00 7567005010 1100.00 7567005011 1100.00 7567005012 1100.00 7567005013 1100.00 7567005014 1100.00 7567005015 1100.00 7567005016 1100.00 7567005017 1100.00 7567005018 1100.00 7567005019 1100.00 7567005020 1100.00 7567005021 1100.00 7567005022 1100.00 81 Parcel Number Amount 7567005023 1100.00 7567005024 1100.00 7567005025 1100.00 7567005028 1100.00 7567005029 1100.00 7567005030 1100.00 7567005031 1100.00 7567005032 1100.00 7567005033 1100.00 7567005034 1100.00 7567005035 1100.00 7567005036 1100.00 7567005037 1100.00 7567005038 1100.00 7567005039 1100.00 7567005040 1100.00 7567005041 1100.00 7567006002 1100.00 7567006003 1100.00 7567006008 1100.00 7567006011 1100.00 7567006012 1100.00 7567006013 1100.00 7567006015 1100.00 7567006016 1100.00 7567006017 1100.00 7567006018 1100.00 7567006019 1100.00 7567006020 1100.00 7567006021 1100.00 7567006022 1100.00 7567006023 1100.00 7567006024 1100.00 7567006026 1100.00 7567006027 1100.00 7567006028 1100.00 7567006029 1100.00 7567006030 1100.00 7567006031 1100.00 7567006032 1100.00 7567006033 1100.00 7567006034 1100.00 7567006035 1100.00 82 Parcel Number Amount 7567006036 1100.00 7567006037 1100.00 7567006038 1100.00 7567007003 1100.00 7567007004 1100.00 7567007005 1100.00 7567007006 1100.00 7567007007 1100.00 7567007008 1100.00 7567007009 1100.00 7567007010 1100.00 7567007011 1100.00 7567007012 1100.00 7567007013 1100.00 7567007014 1100.00 7567007015 1100.00 7567007016 1100.00 7567007017 1100.00 7567007018 1100.00 7567007019 1100.00 7567007020 1100.00 7567007021 1100.00 7567007022 1100.00 7567007023 1100.00 7567007024 1100.00 7567007025 1100.00 7567007026 1100.00 7567008007 1100.00 7567008008 1100.00 7567008009 1100.00 7567008010 1100.00 7567008011 1100.00 7567008012 1100.00 7567008014 1100.00 7567008015 1100.00 7567008016 1100.00 7567009005 1100.00 7567009006 1100.00 7567009009 1100.00 7567009010 1100.00 7567009012 1100.00 7567009013 1100.00 7567009014 1100.00 83 Parcel Number Amount 7567009015 1100.00 7567009016 1100.00 7567009017 1100.00 7567009018 1100.00 7567009019 1100.00 7567009020 1100.00 7567009021 1100.00 7567009022 1100.00 7567009023 1100.00 7567009024 1100.00 7567009025 1100.00 7567009026 1100.00 7567009027 1100.00 7567009029 1100.00 7567009030 1100.00 7567009031 1100.00 7567009032 1100.00 7567009033 1100.00 7567009034 1100.00 7567009035 1100.00 7567009036 1100.00 7567009038 1100.00 7567009039 1100.00 7567010009 1100.00 7567010012 1100.00 7567010014 1100.00 7567010016 1100.00 7567010017 1100.00 7567010018 1100.00 7567010019 1100.00 7567010020 1100.00 7567010022 1100.00 7567010023 1100.00 7567010024 1100.00 7567010025 1100.00 7567010026 1100.00 7567010027 1100.00 7567010028 1100.00 7567010029 1100.00 7567010030 1100.00 7567010031 1100.00 7567010032 1100.00 7567010033 1100.00 84 Parcel Number Amount 7567010034 1100.00 7567010035 1100.00 7567010042 1100.00 7567010043 1100.00 7567010045 1100.00 7567010046 1100.00 7567011014 1100.00 7567011015 1100.00 7567011018 1100.00 7567011019 1100.00 7567011021 1100.00 7567011022 1100.00 7567011023 1100.00 7567011024 1100.00 7567011027 1100.00 7567012016 1100.00 7567012017 1100.00 7567012021 1100.00 7567012022 1100.00 7567012023 1100.00 7567012024 1100.00 7567012025 1100.00 7567012026 1100.00 7567012027 1100.00 7567012028 1100.00 7567012029 1100.00 7567012030 1100.00 7567012031 1100.00 7567012032 1100.00 7567012033 1100.00 7567012034 1100.00 7567012037 1100.00 7567012039 1100.00 7567012040 1100.00 7567013006 1100.00 7567013008 1100.00 7567013009 1100.00 7567013010 1100.00 7567013011 1100.00 7567013012 1100.00 7567013013 1100.00 7567014002 1100.00 7567014003 1100.00 85 Parcel Number Amount 7567014004 1100.00 7567014006 1100.00 7567014007 1100.00 7567014008 1100.00 7567014009 1100.00 7567014010 1100.00 7567014012 1100.00 7567014018 1100.00 7567014019 1100.00 7567014021 1100.00 7567014022 1100.00 7567014023 1100.00 7567014024 1100.00 7567014025 1100.00 7567014026 1100.00 7567014027 1100.00 7567014028 1100.00 7567015001 1100.00 7567015002 1100.00 7567015003 1100.00 7567015004 1100.00 7567015005 1100.00 7567015006 1100.00 7567015007 1100.00 7567015008 1100.00 7567015009 1100.00 7567015010 1100.00 7567015011 1100.00 7567015012 1100.00 7567015013 1100.00 7567015014 1100.00 7567015015 1100.00 7567015016 1100.00 7567015017 1100.00 7567015018 1100.00 7567015019 1100.00 7567015020 1100.00 7567015021 1100.00 7567015023 1100.00 7567015026 1100.00 7567015027 1100.00 7567015034 1100.00 7567016010 1100.00 86 Parcel Number Amount 7567016011 1100.00 7567016012 1100.00 7567016013 1100.00 7567016014 1100.00 7567016015 1100.00 7567016016 1100.00 7567016017 1100.00 7567017010 1100.00 7567017011 1100.00 7567017012 1100.00 7567017013 1100.00 7567017016 1100.00 7567017019 1100.00 7567017020 1100.00 7567017021 1100.00 7567017022 1100.00 7567017023 1100.00 7567017027 1100.00 7567017028 1100.00 7567017029 1100.00 7567017030 1100.00 7567017031 1100.00 7567017032 1100.00 7567017033 1100.00 7567017034 1100.00 7567017036 1100.00 7567017037 1100.00 7567017038 1100.00 7567017039 1100.00 7567017040 1100.00 7567017041 1100.00 7567017042 1100.00 7567017043 1100.00 7567017044 1100.00 7567017046 1100.00 7567017047 1100.00 7567017051 1100.00 7567017052 1100.00 7567017900 1100.00 7567018001 1100.00 7567018002 1100.00 7567018003 1100.00 7567018004 1100.00 87 Parcel Number Amount 7567018005 1100.00 7567018006 1100.00 7567018007 1100.00 7567018008 1100.00 7567018009 1100.00 7567018010 1100.00 7567018011 1100.00 7567018012 1100.00 7567018013 1100.00 7567018014 1100.00 7567018015 1100.00 7567018016 1100.00 7567018017 1100.00 7567018018 1100.00 7567018019 1100.00 7567018020 1100.00 7567018021 1100.00 7567018022 1100.00 7567018023 1100.00 7567018024 1100.00 7567018025 1100.00 7567018028 1100.00 7567018029 1100.00 7567018030 1100.00 7567018031 1100.00 7567018032 1100.00 7567018033 1100.00 7567018034 1100.00 7567018036 1100.00 7567018037 1100.00 7569001004 1100.00 7569001005 1100.00 7569001006 1100.00 7569001007 1100.00 7569001008 1100.00 7569001009 1100.00 7569001014 1100.00 7569001015 1100.00 7569001016 1100.00 7569001017 1100.00 7569001018 1100.00 7569001021 1100.00 7569001023 1100.00 88 Parcel Number Amount 7569001024 1100.00 7569001025 1100.00 7569001026 1100.00 7569001027 1100.00 7569001028 1100.00 7569001029 1100.00 7569001030 1100.00 7569001031 1100.00 7569001032 1100.00 7569001033 1100.00 7569001034 1100.00 7569001035 1100.00 7569002002 1100.00 7569002005 1100.00 7569002006 1100.00 7569002007 1100.00 7569002008 1100.00 7569002010 1100.00 7569002011 1100.00 7569002012 1100.00 7569002013 1100.00 7569002014 1100.00 7569002015 1100.00 7569002016 1100.00 7569002017 1100.00 7569002018 1100.00 7569003001 1100.00 7569003002 1100.00 7569003003 1100.00 7569003006 1100.00 7569003007 1100.00 7569003010 1100.00 7569003011 1100.00 7569003013 1100.00 7569004002 1100.00 7569004004 1100.00 7569004005 1100.00 7569004006 1100.00 7569004011 1100.00 7569004012 1100.00 7569004013 1100.00 7569004015 1100.00 7569004017 1100.00 89 Parcel Number Amount 7569004018 1100.00 7569004020 1100.00 7569004021 1100.00 7569004022 1100.00 7569004024 1100.00 7569004025 1100.00 7569005001 1100.00 7569005002 1100.00 7569005003 1100.00 7569005004 1100.00 7569005005 1100.00 7569005006 1100.00 7569005007 1100.00 7569005008 1100.00 7569005010 1100.00 7569005013 1100.00 7569005014 1100.00 7569005015 1100.00 7569005016 1100.00 7569006001 1100.00 7569006006 1100.00 7569006007 1100.00 7569007002 1100.00 7569007003 1100.00 7569007008 1100.00 7569007010 1100.00 7569007011 1100.00 7569007012 1100.00 7569007013 1100.00 7569007014 1100.00 7569007015 1100.00 7569007016 1100.00 7569008002 1100.00 7569008003 1100.00 7569008004 1100.00 7569008005 1100.00 7569008006 1100.00 7569008008 1100.00 7569008009 1100.00 7569009001 1100.00 7569009002 1100.00 7569009004 1100.00 7569009005 1100.00 90 Parcel Number Amount 7569009006 1100.00 7569009007 1100.00 7569009008 1100.00 7569009010 1100.00 7569009011 1100.00 7569010004 1100.00 7569010005 1100.00 7569010006 1100.00 7569010007 1100.00 7569010010 1100.00 7569010011 1100.00 7569010012 1100.00 7569010015 1100.00 7569010016 1100.00 7569010017 1100.00 7569011003 1100.00 7569011012 1100.00 7569011015 1100.00 7569011016 1100.00 7569011022 1100.00 7569011023 1100.00 7569012004 1100.00 7569012007 1100.00 7569012008 1100.00 7569012015 1100.00 7569012016 1100.00 7569012017 1100.00 7569012018 1100.00 7569012019 1100.00 7569012020 1100.00 7569012022 1100.00 7569012026 1100.00 7569012027 1100.00 7569013001 1100.00 7569013003 1100.00 7569013006 1100.00 7569013007 1100.00 7569013010 1100.00 7569013011 1100.00 7569013012 1100.00 7569013013 1100.00 7569013014 1100.00 7569013015 1100.00 91 Parcel Number Amount 7569013016 1100.00 7569013019 1100.00 7569014001 1100.00 7569014002 1100.00 7569014003 1100.00 7569014005 1100.00 7569014006 1100.00 7569014007 1100.00 7569014013 1100.00 7569014014 1100.00 7569014015 1100.00 7569015002 1100.00 7569015003 1100.00 7569015004 1100.00 7569015005 1100.00 7569015006 1100.00 7569015007 1100.00 7569015008 1100.00 7569016001 1100.00 7569016002 1100.00 7569016003 1100.00 7569016004 1100.00 7569016008 1100.00 7569017001 1100.00 7569017002 1100.00 7569017003 1100.00 7569017004 1100.00 7569017005 1100.00 7569017006 1100.00 7569017007 1100.00 7569017008 1100.00 7569018001 1100.00 7569018002 1100.00 7569018003 1100.00 7569018004 1100.00 7569018005 1100.00 7569018006 1100.00 7569018007 1100.00 7569018008 1100.00 7569019001 1100.00 7569019002 1100.00 7569019003 1100.00 7569019004 1100.00 92 Parcel Number Amount 7569020001 1100.00 7569020003 1100.00 7569020005 1100.00 7569020008 1100.00 7569020009 1100.00 7569021004 1100.00 7569021005 1100.00 7569021007 1100.00 7569021008 1100.00 7569021009 1100.00 7569021010 1100.00 7569021011 1100.00 7569021018 1100.00 7569021019 1100.00 7569022004 1100.00 7569022005 1100.00 7569023006 1100.00 7569023011 1100.00 7569023012 1100.00 7569023013 1100.00 7569023014 1100.00 7569023015 1100.00 7569023016 1100.00 7569023017 1100.00 7569023023 1100.00 7569023024 1100.00 7569023025 1100.00 7569023026 1100.00 7569023027 1100.00 7569023028 1100.00 7569023031 1100.00 7569023033 1100.00 7569023034 1100.00 7569024003 1100.00 7569024009 1100.00 7569024012 1100.00 7569024013 1100.00 7569024014 1100.00 7569024015 1100.00 7569024016 1100.00 7569024017 1100.00 7569024019 1100.00 7569024020 1100.00 93 Parcel Number Amount 7569024021 1100.00 7569024022 1100.00 7569024023 1100.00 7569025001 1100.00 7569025002 1100.00 7569025003 1100.00 7569025010 1100.00 7569025014 1100.00 7569026001 1100.00 7569026002 1100.00 7569026003 1100.00 7569026004 1100.00 7569026005 1100.00 7569026006 1100.00 7569026007 1100.00 7569026008 1100.00 7569026009 1100.00 7569026010 1100.00 7569026012 1100.00 7569026013 1100.00 7569026014 1100.00 7569026015 1100.00 7569026016 1100.00 7569026017 1100.00 7570024011 1100.00 7570024017 1100.00 7570025018 1100.00 7570025019 1100.00 7570025020 1100.00 7570025021 1100.00 7570025023 1100.00 7570025024 1100.00 7570025025 1100.00 7570025026 1100.00 7570025027 1100.00 7570025028 1100.00 7570025029 1100.00 7570025030 1100.00 7570025031 1100.00 7570025032 1100.00 753500.00 94 1 r.LP6-12/01/15 Daily Breeze 400 Continental Blvd, Suite 600 El Segundo, CA 90245 310-543-6635 Fax: 310-316-6827 (Space below for use of County Clerk Only) 5007827 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 2 PORTUGUESE BEND PALOS VERDES PENINSU, CA 90274 Legal No. 0011397447 PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Los Angeles I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of THE DAILY BREEZE, a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in the City of Torrance*, County of Los Angeles, and which newspaper has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of County of Los Angeles, State of California, under the date of June 10, 1974, Case Number SWC7146. The notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to wit: 07/13/2020, 07/20/2020 I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Torrance, California On this 21st day of July, 2020. Signature *The Daily Breeze circulation includes the following cities: Carson, Compton, Culver City, El Segundo, Gardena, Harbor City, Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, Inglewood, Lawndale, Lomita, Long Beach, Manhattan Beach, Palos Verdes Peninsula, Palos Verdes, Rancho Palos Verdes, Rancho Palos Verdes Estates, Redondo Beach, San Pedro, Santa Monica, Torrance and Wilmington. 95 2 r.LP6-12/01/15 Invoice Text: City of Rolling Hills NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ANNUAL SANITATION (GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION) SERVICE CHARGE AND THE REPORT PREPARED IN CONNECTION WITH THE ANNUAL SANITATION (GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION) SERVICE CHARGE IN THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS The City of Rolling Hills annually collects sanitation (garbage and refuse collection) service charges ("sanitation c harges") on the tax roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not separately from, the general taxes of the City. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills has caused a written report to be prepared and filed with the City Clerk regarding the City's sanitation charges for fiscal year 2020-2021. Such report contains a description of each parcel of real property receiving sanitation services furnished by the City and the amount of the charge for each parcel for fiscal year 2020-2021 computed in conformity with Chapter 8.08 of Title 8 of the City 's Municipal Code. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that on the 27th day of July, 2020 at 7:00 P.M. the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills will hold a public hearing on the above- described report and levy of the annual sanitation charges. The report is on file in the office of the City Clerk, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, California 90274, and available for public inspection. This meeting is held pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20 issued by Governor Gavin Newsom on March 17, 2020. All City Councilmembers will participate by teleconference. A live audio of the City Council meeting will be available on the City 's website (http://www.rolling-hills.org/). The meeting agenda will be on the City 's website (http://www.rolling-hills.org/government/citycouncil/city_council_agendas.php). Members of the public may submit comments in real time by emailing the City Clerk at cityclerk@cityofrh.net. Your comments will become part of the official meeting record. At the public hearing, the City Council will hear and consider all objections or protests to the report and levy of the annual sanitation charges. In addition, property owners may mail or deliver a written protest against the proposed annual charge to the City Clerk at Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, California 90274. Only one protest per parcel will be counted. Written protests must be received by the City Clerk by the end of the public hearing to be counted. BY ORDER OF the City of Rolling Hills, City Clerk Pub July 13, 20, 2020(2t)DB(11397447) 96 City of Rolling Hills INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 ANNUAL SANITATION (GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION) REPORT Sanitation Service The City of Rolling Hills proposes to collect funds to cover the expenses for the sanitation services provided to each property owner within the City. The following is a summary of the services and activities associated with the charges:  To protect public health and safety, Contactor shall provide and maintain all labor, equipment, material, supplies, supervision and all other items necessary for the Collection of all Solid Waste, Recyclable Materials, Green Waste, Bulky Items, and Brush generated or accumulated within the City from Residential Premises and City Facilities. The services provided by the Contractor under this Agreement shall be performed in a thorough and professional manner so that all Customers are provided at all times with reliable, courteous and high -quality Solid Waste Management Services.  Contractor shall collect all properly placed Solid Waste, Recyclable Materials and Organic Waste from the designated collection location of every residential premises in the City twice each week.  Each year on two consecutive Saturdays in April or May, and again on a Saturday in September or October, both as determined by the City, Contractor shall collect an unlimited amount of Bulky Items from the designated collection location.  In addition to the semi-annual Bulky Item Collection events, Contractor shall provide Customers with on-call Collection for Bulky Items upon request. Contractor shall collect one (1) Bulky Item per calendar year from each Residential Premises at no charge on an on-call basis.  Contractor will provide additional services as outlined in the Amended and Restated Agreement for Residential Solid Waste Management Services. - 1 - 97 The frequency, extent, and/or level of the services identified herein may be modified based on available funding and priorities as determined by the City. Sanitation Service Charge Calculation For Fiscal Year 2015-2016, the sanitation charge in the amount of $1,100 per parcel was established. The sanitation charge has remained unchanged for five years. For Fiscal Year 2020-2021, the cost of providing sanitation services increased to $1,294 per parcel. The increase from the $1,100 per parcel over the last five fiscal years to $1,294 per parcel is that for each fiscal year the rates are recommended to the City by Republic Services based on their actual costs for service, which include adjustments for the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and landfill costs. The Fra nchise Agreement requires that Republic Services annually provide evidence of the CPI adjustment to the City Manager for review and approval. In April 2020, the City Council took action to absorb the $194 per parcel difference in cost and to continue collecting only $1,100 per parcel. The sanitation service charge for 2020-2021 is the existing sanitation service charge of the City in the amount of $1,100 per parcel. The sanitation charge is based on the direct cost of providing the service. Proposition 218 Considerations: Proposition 218, which the voters of the State of California passed on November 5, 1996, contains requirements for the imposition of a fee or charge for property related services. Requirements for fees and charges are contai ned in Section 6 of Article XIII D. Paragraph (b) describes the requirements for new, existing, or increased fees and charges as follows: (1) Revenues shall not exceed the funds required to provide the services. (2) Revenues shall not be used for any other purpose. (3) The amount of the fee or charge imposed upon any parcel or person as an incident of property ownership shall not exceed the proportional cost of the service attributable to the parcel. (4) No fee or charge may be imposed unless the service is actually used by or immediately available to the owner of the property in question. (5) No fee or charge shall be imposed for general governmental services, i.e. police, ambulance, library, where the service is available to the public at large in substantially the same manner as it is to the property owners. This report and recommended charges comply with all five of these requirements: 1. Revenues generated by this charge will not exceed funds required to provide sanitation services and shall not be used for any other purpose, besides what has been described herein. -2- 98 2. The sanitation charge does not exceed the proportional cost of providing service to the parcels in the City and the charge is for actual use by or immediately available to the owner of the property in question. Boundary Diagram The enclosed diagram shows the exterior boundaries of the territory within the City of Rolling Hills subject to the annual sanitation charges, which has the same boundaries of the City of Rolling Hills itself. Parcel identification, the lines and dimensions of each lot, and parcel and subdivision of land within proposed sanitation services boundary described herein are identified and correspond to the Los A ngeles County Assessor’s Parcel Maps for said parcels as they existed at the time this Report was prepared and shall include all subsequent subdivisions, lot-line adjustments, or parcel changes therein. Reference is hereby made to the Los Angeles County Assessor’s map for a detailed description of the lines and dimensions of each lot and parcel of land within the City of Rolling Hills subject to the proposed annual sanitation service charge to be levied o n behalf of the City. List of Assessor’s Parcel Numbers to be levied with the proposed charge amounts Parcel Number Land Use Description Charge See Attached Residential See Attached -3- 99 RESOLUTION NO. 1258 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CONFIRMING THE LEVYING OF AN ANNUAL SANITATION (GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION) SERVICE CHARGE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-2021 PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 8.08 OF TITLE 8 OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 8.08 of Title 8 of the City of Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Article 4 of Chapter 6 of Part 3 of Division 5 of the California Health and Safety Code, commencing with Section 5470, the City Council is authorized to levy the annual sanitation service charge (the "Charge") and to have such Charge collected on the tax roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not separately from, the general taxes of the City. SECTION 2. The City Manager prepared and filed a written report containing a description of each parcel of real property within the City to which the Charge is applicable (the “Identified Parcels”) and the amount of the Charge for each such Identified Parcel for fisc al year 2020-2021 in conformity with Section 8.08.230 of the City of Rolling Hills Municipal Code and approved such Report as filed. SECTION 3. Following notice duly given in accordance with law, the City Council has held a full and fair public hearing regarding the levy and collection of the proposed charge for fiscal year 2020-2021. All interested persons were afforded the opportunity to hear and be heard. The City Council considered all oral statements and all written protests made or filed by any intere sted person. A majority protest does not exist against the annual levy of the sanitation service charge and all oral and written protests to the levy and collection of the proposed charge for fiscal year 2020-2021 are hereby overruled by the City Council. SECTION 4 Based upon its review of the Report, a copy of which has been presented to the City Council and which has been filed with the City Clerk, the City Council hereby finds and determines that (i) each parcel in the City benefits from receiving sanitation service (ii) the net amount to be assessed upon each parcel of real property for fiscal year 2020-2021 in accordance with the Report Resolution No. 1258 -1- Resolution No. 1258 -2- 100 is apportioned by a formula and method that fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits received by each parcel, and (iii) no charge is imposed on any parcel that exceeds the reasonable cost of the be nefits conferred on that parcel. SECTION 5. Parcels that are owned or used by any county, city, city and county, special district or any other local governmental entity, the State of California or the United States shall be charged unless the City demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that such parcels receive no benefit from the proposed service. SECTION 6. As set forth in the Report, the annual sanitation service charge is in compliance with the provisions of the City of Rolling Hills Municipal code and Article XIIID of the California Constitution and the City Council has complied with all laws pertaining to the levy of an annual charge pursuant to the City of Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Article XIIID of the California Constitution. SECTION 7. The annual sanitation service charge is levied without regard to property valuation. SECTION 8. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the cost of the service that is financed by the annual sanitation service charge for fiscal year 202 0-2021 is approximately $886,143. SECTION 9. The City Council hereby determines and imposes the annual sanitation service charge for fiscal year 2020-2021, at the rates set forth in the Report of $1,100 per parcel, which is in compliance with the provisions of the City of Rolling Hills Municipal code and Article XIIID of the California Constitution. SECTION 10. The adoption of this resolution constitutes the levy of an annual sanitation service charge against parcels of property in the City of Rolling Hills for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021. SECTION 11. The County Auditor of Los Angeles County shall enter on the County Assessment Roll opposite each parcel of land the amount of the annual sanitation service charge, and such charge, and each installment of the charge, shall be collected in the same manner, and shall be subject to the same penalties and priority of lien as, other charges and taxes fixed and collected by, or on behalf of the City. After collection by the County, the net amount of the charge, after deduction of any compensation due the County, shall be paid to the Finance Director. Resolution No. 1258 -3- 101 SECTION 12. The Finance Director shall deposit all money representing charges collected by the County to the credit of the Rolling Hills Refuse Fund. SECTION 13. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file the Boundary Diagram and the list of actual Parcel Charges (a listing of the Assessor's Parcel Numbers and the amount to be levied on each parcel) with the County Auditor, together with a certified copy of this Resolution upon its adoption, in addition to any additional information the County Auditor required to collect the charge with the County taxes. SECTION 14. A certified copy of this resolution and a copy of the Report and the actual Parcel Charges (a listing of the Assessor's Parcel Numbers and the amount to be levied on each parcel) shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk and open to public inspection. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 27th day of July 2020. Jeff Pieper Mayor ATTEST: Elaine Jeng, P.E. Acting City Clerk Resolution No. 1258 -4- 102 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) The foregoing Resolution No. 1258 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CONFIRMING THE LEVYING OF AN ANNUAL SANITATION (GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION) SERVICE CHARGE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020- 2021 PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 8.08 OF TITLE 8 OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on July 27, 2020, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Elaine Jeng, P.E. Acting City Clerk 7569-018-001 7569-018-002 7569-018-004 7569-018-005 7569-018-003 7569-017-002 7569-018-006 7569-018-007 7569-017-003 7569-018-008 7569-019-001 7569-019-002 7569-017-004 7569-017-007 7569-017-001 7569-017-005 7569-015-003 7569-015-002 Rolling Rancho Palos Verdes 7569-019-010 7569-019-011 7569-019-006 7569-017-008 7569-016-001 7569-016-004 7569-017-006 7569-016-002 7569-016-003 7569-015-004 7569-015-006 7569-015-007 7569-015-005 7569-015-008 7569-015-900 7569-003-904 7569-003-013 7569-003-006 7569-003-003 Hills Estates 7569-020-010 7569-020-011 7569-016-008 7569-014-004 7569-014-003 7569-003-010 7569-003-002 7569-003-001 7569-002-017 7569-020-003 7569-020-009 7569-014-001 7569-014-005 7569-004-004 7569-004-020 7569-003-011 7569-002-018 7569-002-008 Rolling Hills Estates 7570-024-900 7569-020-001 7569-021-005 7569-020-005 7569-020-004 7569-021-009 7569-014-002 7569-014-006 7569-014-007 7569-014-014 7569-004-005 7569-004-018 7569-004-021 7569-004-006 7569-004-027 7569-004-002 7569-002-007 7569-002-006 7569-001-031 7569-021-010 7569-014-013 7569-004-016 7569-004-017 7569-004-026 7569-002-015 7569-002-005 7569-001-017 7569-001-033 7569-001-005 7569-001-006 7569-001-009 7569-021-007 7569-021-004 Rolling Hills 7569-014-015 7569-004-015 7569-004-025 7569-002-016 7569-002-014 7569-001-018 7569-001-032 7569-001-034 7569-001-029 7569-001-004 7569-001-007 7569-001-008 7569-021-011 7569-021-008 7569-013-003 7569-013-020 7569-013-019 7569-004-010 7569-004-013 7569-004-024 7569-002-002 7569-002-011 7569-002-012 7569-001-016 7569-001-020 7569-001-015 7569-001-027 7569-001-030 7569-001-025 7569-001-036 7569-001-023 7569-001-021 7570-024-015 7570-024-016 7569-021-018 7569-021-019 7569-011-016 7569-013-012 7569-013-013 7569-013-018 7569-013-017 7569-013-001 7569-004-011 7569-005-001 7569-004-012 7569-002-013 7569-005-002 7569-002-010 7569-005-004 7569-005-003 7569-005-005 7569-001-014 7569-001-028 7569-001-026 7569-001-035 7569-001-024 7570-025-028 7570-025-029 7570-024-011 7569-026-900 7569-026-012 7569-011-015 7569-013-010 7569-013-016 7569-013-006 7569-013-007 7569-005-014 7569-005-010 7569-005-006 7569-005-016 7569-005-007 7570-025-027 7570-025-026 7570-025-030 7570-025-031 7570-025-022 7569-026-013 7569-026-014 7569-011-022 7569-011-023 7569-011-003 7569-012-019 7569-012-017 7569-013-011 7569-012-008 7569-013-014 7569-013-015 7569-005-013 7569-005-015 7569-006-001 7569-005-008 7570-025-025 7570-025-032 7570-025-023 7570-025-021 7570-025-020 7569-026-017 7569-026-015 7569-026-016 7569-011-011 7569-011-012 7569-012-020 7569-012-018 7569-012-007 7569-012-004 7569-012-024 7569-012-025 7569-006-007 7569-006-006 7567-001-007 7569-023-026 7569-023-027 7569-023-025 7569-023-024 7569-023-028 7570-025-024 7569-023-023 7570-025-019 7570-025-018 7570-024-017 7570-024-014 7569-026-005 7569-026-004 7569-026-003 7569-026-006 7569-026-007 7569-026-011 7569-011-006 7569-012-027 7569-012-026 7569-012-012 7569-012-016 7569-012-015 7569-012-022 7569-007-002 7567-001-017 7567-001-018 7567-001-904 7567-001-004 7567-001-902 7567-001-010 7569-023-013 7569-023-015 7569-023-033 7569-023-034 7569-023-017 7569-023-011 7569-023-016 7569-024-013 7569-026-002 7569-026-001 7569-026-008 7569-026-009 7569-026-010 7569-010-004 7569-010-011 7569-010-012 7569-010-016 7569-007-011 7569-007-008 7569-007-003 7567-014-013 7567-001-016 7567-001-013 7567-001-008 7567-001-014 7567-006-023 7567-006-022 7567-001-006 7567-001-011 7567-006-013 7574-020-008 7574-020-012 7569-023-012 7569-024-017 7569-024-016 7569-024-012 7569-024-015 7569-010-005 7569-010-017 7569-007-010 7569-007-009 7567-014-031 7567-006-024 7567-006-021 7567-006-020 7567-006-014 7567-006-012 7569-022-006 7569-023-014 7569-023-031 7569-024-020 7569-024-009 7569-024-014 7569-010-006 7569-010-007 7569-007-012 7567-014-012 7567-006-025 7567-014-017 7567-006-026 7567-006-019 7567-006-015 7567-006-011 7569-023-006 7569-024-021 7569-024-003 7569-024-028 7569-024-019 7569-025-015 7569-010-010 7569-010-015 7569-007-013 7569-007-014 7569-007-016 7569-007-015 7567-014-011 7567-014-005 7567-014-018 7567-014-019 7567-014-021 7567-014-025 7567-006-027 7567-006-028 7567-006-029 7567-006-016 7567-006-018 7567-006-017 7567-006-037 7567-002-015 7567-002-016 7569-024-029 7567-014-006 7567-014-010 7567-014-024 7567-014-026 7567-006-030 7567-006-036 7567-006-008 7567-002-014 7567-002-017 7569-022-900 7569-025-014 7569-025-003 7569-009-002 7569-009-001 7569-008-008 7569-008-009 7567-014-004 7567-014-003 7567-014-007 7567-014-022 7567-014-023 7567-015-008 7567-014-027 7567-014-028 7567-006-031 7567-006-032 7567-006-033 7567-006-034 7567-007-023 7567-006-038 7567-006-003 7567-006-002 7567-002-013 7567-002-022 7567-002-023 7567-002-018 7567-002-019 7567-002-021 7567-002-037 7567-002-033 7567-002-035 7569-025-010 7569-025-002 7569-009-004 7569-009-005 7569-008-002 7567-014-002 7567-014-008 7567-014-009 7567-015-039 7567-015-007 7567-007-022 7567-007-020 7567-006-035 7567-007-007 7567-006-001 7567-002-012 7567-002-024 7567-002-020 7567-002-027 7567-002-036 7567-002-034 7569-009-011 7567-015-006 7567-015-040 7567-007-021 7567-007-008 7567-007-011 7567-002-011 7567-002-025 7569-025-001 7569-009-006 7569-008-003 7567-015-005 7567-015-011 7567-015-012 7567-015-017 7567-007-019 7567-007-024 7567-007-009 7567-007-006 7567-002-005 7567-002-006 7567-002-010 7567-002-026 7567-002-028 7569-022-005 7569-009-010 7569-008-004 7567-015-004 7567-015-013 7567-015-016 7567-018-004 7567-007-018 7567-007-025 7567-007-010 7567-007-005 7567-007-004 7567-002-007 7567-002-009 7567-002-029 7569-022-004 7567-017-900 7569-009-007 7569-009-009 7567-017-020 7569-009-008 7569-008-005 7567-015-003 7567-015-027 7567-015-014 7567-015-018 7567-015-019 7567-018-003 7567-018-005 7567-007-017 7567-007-015 7567-007-026 7567-007-014 7567-007-003 7567-002-004 7567-003-027 7567-003-042 7567-002-008 7567-003-041 7567-003-040 7567-002-030 7567-002-031 7567-003-028 7567-017-021 7567-015-002 7567-015-015 7567-015-020 7567-018-002 7567-018-001 7567-018-006 7567-018-007 7567-007-016 7567-007-013 7567-003-023 7567-003-043 7567-003-026 7567-003-039 7567-003-029 7567-017-037 7567-017-019 7567-017-022 7567-017-018 7569-008-006 7567-015-026 7567-015-001 7567-015-035 7567-018-015 7567-018-017 7567-018-018 7567-007-012 7567-003-024 7567-003-044 7567-003-038 7567-003-030 7567-017-038 7567-017-036 7567-017-023 7567-003-011 7567-003-025 7567-003-045 7567-003-031 7567-017-039 7567-017-034 7567-017-035 7567-017-048 7569-008-007 7567-015-034 7567-015-036 7567-018-014 7567-018-016 7567-018-019 7567-018-036 7567-018-037 7567-003-010 7567-003-022 7567-003-021 7567-003-046 7567-003-047 7567-003-037 7567-003-036 7567-003-032 7567-017-040 7567-017-041 7567-017-033 7567-017-032 7567-017-052 7567-011-027 7567-015-037 7567-018-013 7567-018-021 7567-018-025 7567-018-020 7567-003-009 7567-003-008 7567-003-012 7567-003-020 7567-003-048 7567-003-049 7567-003-033 Rancho 7567-017-011 7567-017-010 7567-017-031 7567-017-030 7567-017-051 7567-017-027 7567-011-014 7567-015-024 7567-018-012 7567-018-011 7567-018-022 7567-018-024 7567-018-023 7567-018-028 7567-005-039 7567-005-038 7567-003-013 7567-003-014 7567-003-019 7567-003-018 7567-003-050 7567-003-051 7567-003-052 7567-003-034 7567-003-035 Palos Verdes 7567-017-012 7567-017-047 7567-017-029 7567-017-042 7567-011-015 7567-016-014 7567-016-013 7567-016-011 7567-018-010 7567-018-009 7567-018-029 7567-018-030 7567-005-037 7567-004-018 7567-004-017 7567-003-015 7567-003-016 7567-003-017 7567-004-009 7567-017-013 7567-017-043 7567-017-028 7567-016-012 7567-016-010 7567-018-008 7567-018-031 7567-018-032 7567-005-036 7567-004-019 7567-004-016 7567-004-010 7567-004-007 7567-017-016 7567-017-046 7567-017-044 7567-012-016 7567-011-016 7567-016-015 7567-018-033 7567-018-034 7567-005-035 7567-005-034 7567-005-032 7567-004-020 7567-004-015 7567-004-041 7567-004-013 7567-004-011 7567-004-008 7567-017-045 7567-017-017 7567-012-023 7567-012-041 7567-011-018 7567-011-020 7567-011-023 7567-016-017 7567-005-031 7567-005-030 7567-005-029 7567-005-033 7567-004-024 7567-004-023 7567-004-025 7567-004-029 7567-004-014 7567-004-030 7567-004-012 7567-012-025 7567-012-021 7567-011-017 7567-011-022 7567-009-005 7567-016-016 7567-004-026 7567-004-027 7567-009-036 7567-005-028 7567-004-033 7567-004-028 7567-012-026 7567-012-024 7567-012-022 7567-012-020 7567-011-019 7567-011-024 7567-009-006 7567-009-035 7567-009-020 7567-005-019 7567-005-020 7567-005-021 7567-004-034 7567-004-035 7567-004-031 7567-004-032 7567-012-031 7567-012-027 7567-012-028 7567-012-035 7567-012-036 7567-012-019 7567-011-021 7567-009-007 7567-009-021 7567-009-034 7567-005-027 7567-005-018 7567-005-022 7567-005-025 7567-005-023 7567-004-036 7567-012-032 7567-012-030 7567-012-029 7567-012-034 7567-012-038 7567-009-039 7567-009-019 7567-009-022 7567-009-023 7567-009-033 7567-005-011 7567-005-017 7567-005-010 7567-005-024 7567-004-038 7567-004-037 7567-012-037 7567-012-040 7567-009-010 7567-009-032 7567-005-041 7567-005-016 7567-005-012 7567-004-039 7567-004-040 7567-013-006 7567-013-010 7567-012-033 7567-012-039 7567-010-045 7567-009-038 7567-009-018 7567-009-009 7567-009-017 7567-009-024 7567-009-025 7567-009-031 7567-005-014 7567-005-040 7567-005-013 7567-005-015 7567-008-019 7567-008-018 7567-013-009 7567-013-011 7567-013-008 7567-013-013 7567-010-015 7567-010-046 7567-010-043 7567-010-009 7567-009-016 7567-009-015 7567-009-026 7567-009-027 7567-009-030 7567-008-015 7567-008-007 7567-008-016 7567-013-007 7567-013-012 7567-010-013 7567-010-016 7567-010-014 7567-010-012 7567-010-042 7567-010-032 7567-010-031 7567-009-014 7567-009-013 7567-009-029 7567-009-028 7567-008-014 7567-010-017 7567-010-037 7567-010-030 7567-010-033 7567-009-012 7567-008-008 7567-013-005 7567-010-018 7567-010-036 7567-010-022 7567-010-028 7567-010-034 7567-010-029 7567-010-027 7567-010-035 7567-008-009 7567-008-010 7567-008-020 7567-010-019 7567-010-020 7567-010-023 7567-010-024 7567-008-011 7567-010-025 7567-010-026 City of Rolling Hills Parcel Map Roads Parcel Boundaries Ü Miles City Boundaries 0 0.2 0.4 Map created by Christine Lam (CLam2@isd.lacounty.gov) County of Los Angeles eGIS Group 7/24/2020 103 Crestridge Rd Travis Ln Appaloosa Ln Westvale Rd 104 Agenda Item No.: 7.A Mtg. Date: 07/27/2020 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 AN UPDATE TO THE HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT TO PREPARE A COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN (CWPP). DATE: July 27, 2020 BACKGROUND: In June 2018, the City applied for federal funding from the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program administered by the California Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) to prepare a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). On July 2, 2020, the City received an award of $123,750 of federal funding from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to prepare a CWPP. On July 8, 2020, City staff informed CalOES that the City prepared a CWPP through the Block Captain Program and planned to present the final plan to the City Council on July 13, 2020. In response, CalOES said the City would still be eligible to use some portions of the awarded funds to complete the remaining tasks of the project (submit completed plan to FEMA for review and approval). On July 13, 2020, the City Council received a report from staff summarizing the conversation with CalOES. The City Council accepted the award of funds and directed staff submit required documentations to CalOES. DISCUSSION: On July 16, 2020, City staff was informed by CalOES that the awarded funds will be de-obligated because the preparation of the CWPP commenced prior to the FEMA award date of June 19, 2020. City staff inquired alternatives to de-obligating (returning) the awarded funds and asked for the awarded funds to be applied to other hazard mitigation work in the City. No exception was allowed by FEMA. No action is required for the de-obligation of funds. CalOES will be providing a formal letter in the coming weeks. FISCAL IMPACT: The Block Captains and City staff prepared the CWPP in coordination withe Rolling Hills Community Association, with technical assistance from the Los Angeles County Fire Department and Sheriff's Department. Resources expended for the preparation of the CWP P were a part of the approved budget for Fiscal Year 2019-2020 and Fiscal Year 2020-2021. RECOMMENDATION: 105 Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file staff's report on the Hazard Mitigation Grant to prepare a CWPP. ATTACHMENTS: 4382-PL0172-25P Rolling Hills, City of, Community Wildfire Protection Plan.pdf 106 From: Aguilar, Robert@CalOES To: Meredith Elguira Cc: Elaine Jeng Subject: 4382-PL0172-25P Rolling Hills, City of, Community Wildfire Protection Plan Date: Friday, July 17, 2020 3:11:32 PM Attachments: image001.png Hello Meredith, After reviewing the information that you provided to me stating that the Community Wildfire Protection Plan was started prior to the FEMA award date of 06/19/2020 we unfortunately are required to de-obligate the grant that was awarded. Only eligible pre-award activities are reimbursable expenses prior to awarding of the grant. You will be receiving an official letter from us shortly. Please reply that you have received this email. If you have any questions or concerns please contact me. Thank you. Robert Aguilar, Hazard Mitigation Grants Specialist Southern Unit Recovery - Hazard Mitigation Assistance Branch California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services Office: (916) 845-8474 Mobile: (916) 202-0240 www.caloes.ca.gov/HMGP 107 Agenda Item No.: 7.B Mtg. Date: 07/27/2020 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: ELAINE JENG, CITY MANAGER THRU: ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDER AND ADOPT THE ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN (CWPP).&NBSP;&NBSP; DATE: July 27, 2020 BACKGROUND: At the July 13, 2020 meeting, in response to the community's request for additional revie w time, the City Council delayed taking action on the Rolling Hills Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). The City Council directed staff to bring the item back on July 27, 2020. Following the July 13, 2020 City Council meeting, staff delivered a special edition of the Blue Newsletter providing information on the CWPP and a link to the City's website to get a copy of the CWPP. The same information was placed on the City's website o n the homepage. Additionally, upon entering the City's website, a pop-up box with a link to the CWPP was programmed so the community did not have to navigate the site to locate the plan. Rolling Hills Community Association's (RHCA) assistance was requested to use DwellingLive to dissimenate the same information. Comments were requested by 5pm on Wednesday, July 22, 2020 to allow staff sufficient time to assemble and respond to comments. DISCUSSION: Nineteen comments were received. A copy of the comments are attached to this report. Staff responses to comments are also attached to this report. Two community members submitted edits to the plan. The proposed edits are substantial and they are also attached to this report. There were many comments in support of the CWPP and urged the City Council to adopt the plan. Other comments requested an incentive program to assist the community in managing fire fuel in the canyons. A number of comments were related to fire fuel management standards and the importance o f a public process to get the community's involvement before any regulations are approved. A few comments noted potential impacts to the private status of the community by accepting grant funds from other public entities. There were also suggestions for action such as fuel management in the Nature Preserve and prioritization of mitigation measures. All the comments received were insightful and the comments demonstrated the importance of the fire 108 prevention and wildfire mitigation for the community. Responses to comments included clarification, and expanding on the intent and purpose of a CWPP. Responses to comments also included additional information on the work with the Palos Verdes Peninsula La nd Conservancy in the Nature Preserve to illustrate that the suggested actions are already in progress. Responses to comments also addressed concerns for impacts to private status with the acceptance of grant funds. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to adopting the Rolling Hills CWPP. The adoption of the CWPP better positions the City for grant funds to implement wildfire mitigation measures. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council adopt the Rolling Hills CWPP and direct staff to update t he plan annually. ATTACHMENTS: CWPP_ResponseToComments_2020-07-24.pdf CWPP_comments.pdf REH_PRELIMINARY_SUGGESTIONS_RE_CWPP_Draft_2020-06-12_v13 final draft_7-22- 2020_R.Hawkins.docx CWPP_Draft_2020-06-12_v13 final draftRevised_B.Dieringer.docx Page 1 of 7 109 COMMENTS TO THE ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN (CWPP) JULY, 2020 JULY 2020 DATE TIME FROM ADDRESS COMMENT RESPONSE 1 7/14/2020 3:44 PM Diane Montalto 9 Quail Ridge Road South As Block Captain for Zone 4, Quail Ridge Road South, I am writing to voice my support for the City Council to adopt the CWPP. The City appreciates your support for the CWPP. 2 7/16/2020 6:36PM Verna Balch A correction to my earlier email. I do see that comments can be made up until the 22nd. I mistook the date for this deadline. (send 7/16 @ 6:42pm) I am grateful that the City Council allowed us additional time to review this very long document. When the Newsletters are sent out, with pertinent information about meetings and deadlines, it would be most helpful if they were sent out earlier as our mail delivery is not very fast. For both of the last two Newsletters containing import news of a meeting, and of comments due, my Newsletter arrived at around 5:00 p.m. on the day of the Monday meeting, and at 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, a day after the comments were due. Consequently I was not able to attend the meeting, nor was I able to reply with comments. I do appreciate being informed, but it would be even nicer to be informed before the meetings and comments due, or to move City Council meetings later so we might participate in the discussion. The Blue Newsletter requires creation, copying, folding, stamping and are mailed through USPS. The City has an arrangement with the local post office so they are delivered directly from the local post office without having to be sent to the central office in Downtown LA. Even so, the entire process from inception to delivery requires a minimum of 2 days to complete. The City apologizes for any delay the process may have caused. As an alternative, the City is looking to use the City's website (recently modernized) to get important and timely information out to the community. In addition to the Blue Newsletter, please also visit https://www.rolling-hills.org/ for most current information. 3 7/17/2020 3:32 PM L Brody 2 Georgeff Rolling Hills has a number of senior citizens with deficits ranging from vision,hearing, mobility. Is there a recommendation to identify these persons annually updated to help them if an evacuation occurs? This list changes annually as people may move, become impaired or die. On page 21 of the CWPP, the plan notes that the Rolling Hills Block Captains will identify special needs residents by canvassing their zones and work with RH Senior Committee to identify this population, and their needs. This project will start by end of July 2020. Information collected will be saved on an encrypted server and will only be accessible by city staff and Block Captains. The plan is to continuously update the information through the Block Captains. 4 7/17/2020 3:54 PM Terry and Steve Milam 2 Wagon Lane I would like to let you know that my husband and I are in favor of the adoption of the CWPP and we appreciate your efforts. The City appreciates your suppor for the CWPP. 5 7/17/2020 3:58 PM Dave and Sue Breiholz Dave and I urge you to adopt the final draft of the Community Wildfire Protection Plan. Thank you to all of those who worked to create this document as a blueprint to improve fire safety in our City. The City appreciates your support for the CWPP. 6 7/17/2020 7:42 PM Carole Hoffman 3 Hillside Lane I received the blue newsletter informing of the next RH council mtg discussing this issue. July 27. WHAT TIME WILL THE MEETING BE? And please advise how to "attend" it. Will it be on Zoom; if so, please provide link to get in. See City staff email response from July 22, 2020 noting that the meeting on the July 27, 2020 starts at 7pm and access to Zoom meeting room will be available on the City's website on the day of the meeting. 7 7/19/2020 10:51 AM Larry and Julie Bellagamba 3 Flying Mane Road Overall we find the CWPP an extremely impressive effort to address a very important issue and appreciate the effort to prepare it. A few suggestions follow: 1.1 Infrastructure harding. Regard 2nd bullet - rather than “consider," suggest use "define and require changes for new landscaping guidelines” Regard 5th bullet - this is a very good suggestion, ideally though many homeowners will take advantage of the offer, which could increase demand for contractors beyond the supply preventing getting all the work done in 1 year. Please consider providing for at least 5 years or perhaps permanently for the purpose of reducing fire damage risks. Homes can be made almost fire proof if built that way from the beginning using established standards. Recommend add a built to: "Establish standards for new home construction that render structures fire safe" Incentive programs will be dependent on available funding from the City. Since fire prevention is an on - going effort, it makes sense to have an inventive program beyond one year. Multi-year time horizon for incentive program is a great suggestion and will be presented to City Council. New standards are continuously added to the building code for fire safety. Continued comments from Bellegamba 1.2 Vegetation Management. As you note, the Fire Department already has and enforces to some degree fuel management standards. There appear to be two “difficulties” in Rolling Hills (RH): canyons and roadside easements. By “Canyons” I presume we mean vegetation beyond the 200’ distance from a structure. My understanding is that the LA County regulations do not address such vegetation. If so, please clarify that in an introductory sentence to this section. Annually, the Fire Department evaluates every parcel in Rolling Hills to determine compliance with defensible space requirements within 200 feet of a structure. The Fire Department does not enforce the defensible space requirements beyond the 200 feet radius of structures. The City does have a Fire Fuel Abatement Ordinance that requires the removal of dead vegetation applicable to the entirey of each parcel of property. Page 2 of 7 110 Continued comments from Bellegamba Clearly, this is where the majority of the RH vegetation is. I am unclear about what the CWPP is recommending be done about it. Please clarify. Presumable we are looking for ways to encourage homeowners with canyon’s to control some of that vegetation. If that is the plan, please add a sentence to so state. It may be less expensive in the long run to provide a ways to make it more likely fires in canyons can be fought. For example, in some areas, perhaps piping could be laid between homes or evacuation routes that Fire Department hoses could be connected too to attempt to keep a fire from spreading out of the canyon. 1.3 Electric Power Lines Research of past major fires has shown power lines as the predominate cause. It is not clear to me if the power lines in our canyons even carry power to be a fire hazard. If they are, then strongly recommend burying power lines be a very high priority despite the cost. 2.2.3 Potential Evacuation Routes Given the complexity of the RH situation it will take many years to lesson the fire risk. If a large fire occurs in a high wind environment, evacuation will be the only option remaining. With only 3 exits location, lives will be at high risk, particularly if a large fraction of the hill is on fire and PV Drives North and East and Crenshaw Blvd are full of traffic. Please enable the Crest Road East gate to be used for evacuation ASAP and as practical enable additional exit routes. 3.0 Action Plan Applaud the itemization of efforts given the complexity of the situation. The Rolling Hills Community Association controls all the access points to the city including the Crest Road East gate. In June 2020, the RHCA Board authorized the automation of the Crest Road East gate in response to the community's request to use the Crest Road East gate as an exit in the event evacuations are ordered. Continued comments from Bellegamba Many of the items on the list are already happening and need to continue to happen (ex. Block Captain Program, Neighborhood Zone Meetings, Bridal Trail vegetation management, etc.). Recommend make that clear by subdividing the list into “ongoing actions” and “to be accomplished actions”. Please continue to work with cities and organizations that neighbor RH to help control fire risks. Doing so was very much appreciated. Recommend the following be the first 10 priorities of our CWPP: 1. Motorize Crest Road East for use as an evacuation point 2. Provide information to each homeowner so they know when and where to evacuate. This will also help us determine if we need more than evacuation routes. 3. Conduct an emergency evacuation drill - so we can determine and fix hinderances before the fire starts. 4. Define refugee areas 5. Utility under grounding projects for those that pose a fire risk. Itemize each and prioritize. 6. Define fire safe standards for new home construction and landscaping and impose starting in 2021 or 2022. 7. Selected road easement vegetation management - spot and mitigate the most important areas that help ensure fire trucks can get access and residents can evacuate. Fortunately the LA County regulations already stipulate the requirements. Enforcement requires some judgment as to what’s most beneficial and worth the trouble. 8. Selected fire control or fuel management in areas greater than 200’ from structures. Mitigate where homeowners are willing to participate. Thank you for the suggestion; clarifying statement to identify on-going programs and programs for consideration will be considered. Thank you for putting the priority list together; the list will be shared with the four entities (listed in Section 3 of the CWPP) for consideration and action. Page 3 of 7 111 Continued comments from Bellegamba Clearly more will participate if the cost is offset or if they will realize a homeowner premium reduction. 9. Identify vetted contractors for homeowners to retrofit their structures and landscaping to be more fire safe. This would reduce the first hurdle to enable homeowners to make improvements to their properties. Many home owner insurance firms are already offering inspections to their policy holders. If residents had a ready list of vendors to employee to make the improvements, perhaps many will take the step to do so sooner. 10. Consider a temporary HOA fee increase or city tax to fund the fire risk reduction program. No one likes more taxes, but this is a community issue and we’ll probably get more done faster if we share the cost to make the necessary changes. Items 1 to 3 help save lives if a big fire breaks out. They must be done before that happens. Items 4 to 9 help reduce risk of a large fire or mitigate the damages that may occur roughly in order of benefit. tem 10 may simply be necessary to get things done quickly. See above. 8 7/19/2020 8:45 PM Verna Balch 6 Hackamore My concern with the CWPP document is about how the various requirements for fire fuel maintenance will be enforced. I would hope that residents would first - be duly notified if RHCA finds something on resident's property that is not up to code, and second - resident would have a chance to discuss the situation before any action could take place. Thank you for taking the time necessary to make sure this document is written in such a way so that it is a fair plan for the protection of our City, and also that it thoroughly respects all resident's concerns for their property, wildlife and trees. The City and or the Rolling Hills Community Association could pursue the recommended and or suggested fire fuel management standards. If either entity decides to establish standards, enforcement of the standards would be discussed at that time. The point is well made that a rigorous process for public input is needed. 9 7/22/20202 1:58 PM Roger Hawkins 37 Crest Road West ATTACHED REVISED CWPP DOC VIA EMAIL, along w/LETTER noted: I remain disappointed that additional time wasn't given to residents who would like to review and comment on the CWPP (see e-mail attachment) Given the short fuse, I perused the Plan, coming away with the impression it has more to do with regulating residents, i.e. , clearcutting vegetation and trees, than it does with fire fuel mitigation. The Plan fast forwards past the three most important elements of such a Plan, i.e. , fire prevention; collaborating with the Land Conservancy on ways to minimize the risk of fire; and addressing fire fuel problems in our canyons, which Survey responders identified as our City' s " greatest risk." Due to limited time available, I've tracked some edits to the CWPP, with most of the edits appearing on the first 18 pages, and random edits thereafter. If the Council would, literally, collaborate with the Association in reducing unpermitted, non-resident pedestrian traffic in the community, it would virtually eliminate the risk of fire ignition at, modest cost. If no wildfires affect this community, the cost savings would be enormous savings; no need for considering FEMA grants; nor concerning ourselves with evacuation protocols on roads that already accommodate motor vehicle traffic, including trucks and fire department equipment of many sizes and shapes. This CWPP omits crucial factors from such a plan, telling me there is more, here, than meets the eye. Some factual inaccuracies in the DRAFT should not be tolerated. You should not act without a written opinion from the City Attorney that accepting government grant dollars (FEMA) will not subject this community to any risk of losing our status as a private, gated community. Edits to the CWPP will be presented to the City Council for consideration. See response to Mr. Nunn regarding impacts to the City's private status. Page 4 of 7 112 Cotinued comments from Hawkins IF there is any such risk - no matter how slight -- there should be no application for FEMA dollars. Also, insure residents are alerted that the regulations being discussed - some of which may not have been enacted under the Plan -- could subject them - if targeted for enforcement - to criminal prosecution and , if convicted, could cause imprisonment, in the County Jail, for up to six month s. Let that NOT come as a surprise to any resident. The CWPP is a guidance document. The plan does not enact a list of regulations. Rule making by the City requires specific procedure outlined in the municipal code and state laws. The CWPP is a community based document, produced voluntarily by communites that desire to have such plan. The CWPP is not required by law. See response to Mr. Nunn's comments relating to the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program offering federal grant funds. 10 7/22/2020 3:00 PM Marcia Schoettle I have several comments and concerns about the CWPP document. First of all, it states that it is a “living document”. Doesn’t that mean it can be changed? I am not sure it should be a living document. Does that mean when it is approved, what was approved can change? That makes a big difference, I think. Also page 11. Bridle Trails These must be defined. Are all Bridle Trails marked? With signs? Are all easements qualified to be called Bridle Trails? When being told how to “maintain” Bridle Trails, residents need to know if they actually have Bridle Trails on their property. On page 10, what does “Evaluate the Fire Code requirements for 10’ roadside easement clearance “ mean? That is a bit vague, in my opinion. Living document: The CWPP is a guidance document and thus the adoption or approval of the document does not establish rules. The CWPP is purposed to capture the concerns of the community. Over time, the City could experience climate change, new State regulations, and population turnover that would alter the concerns of the community. To maintain the purpose of the plan over time, the document is intended to be a living document that would get updated annually. Example: if the City continues to fund fire fuel management in the Nature Preserve, this could alleviate the commuity's concern for fire ignition in the areas managed by the Palos Verdes Land Conservancy. The plan update would shift the priorities accordingly. Bridal Trail: The CWPP discusses and provides guidelines to manage common areas within the community. The CWPP does not discuss the responsible party to implement the guidelines. In Section 4 of the CWPP, the plan does identify relevant parties that could be responsible for implementing the suggested practices. Fire Code Requirements: The Fire Department is responsible for enforcing the Fire Code. The enforcer of the Fire Code was not determined in the process of preparing the CWPP but defined in the Fire Code, predating the existence of the Rolling Hills CWPP. Per the Fire Code, the Fire Department would evaluate the 10 foot distance from the edge of roadway to identify potential fire risk that would impede the use of the roadways. Who decides WHICH FUEL LADDERS TO ELIMINATE? I am hoping that residents have the say about what is removed from THEIR property. They need to be notified about any concerns the RHCA has about THEIR property before any action is taken. Again on page 10. “Remove trees underneath power lines that have a MATURE HEIGHT that could interfere” is an extremely ambiguous statement. (There could be many different answers to the question of “mature height”. ( which depends on soil, watering, trimming, location, etc.) Page 11. “Encourage” or “require” property owners to adhere…”. Which is it,,,,”encourage” or “require” ? Power Lines: Utility companies are responsible for trimming vegetation in and around utility infrastructures. The CWPP provided a qualifier to vegetation management in and around utility infrastructures based on practices by the utility companies. For specific vegetation management practices and or regulations in and around utility insfrastructures, utility companies should be consulted. The CWPP is not recommending and or suggesting rules relating to utility infrastructure but recognizing existing practices by utilty companies. Encourage or Require: The CWPP is a guidance document. The plan is recommending that governing body can encoruage or require certain standards to be implemented. 11 7/22/2020 4:41PM John Nunn 1 Crest Road West I am well aware that California leads the Nation in Wildfire threat. I know action is required, but our priority should be to tackle the biggest threat first. I experienced both of the Rolling Hills of Wildfires in 1979 and in 2009. Both of these fires originated in the Rancho Palos Verdes Conservancy. This was no accident. The Conservancy has had plentiful brush and weeds over the years to provide excellent kindling for wildfires. In addition, our Prevailing Westerly Winds mean that most of the time fires that originate in the Conservancy will be blown into Rolling Hills. Conservancy: Through the community survey conducted as a part of the CWPP, residents expressed concerns for the amount fire fuel in the Nature Preserve. In response, the City contacted the Palos Verdes Land Conservancy in the summer 2019 and the Conservancy was commissioned by the City Council to remove Mustard plant and Acacia shrub in the areas closest to the border of Rolling Hills. The City also allocated funding for the Conservancy to continue the maintenace of the removed Mustard and Acacia for three years. The first year of the three year maintenance took place in April 2020. The City Council allocated additional funds for the Conservancy to remove Mustard and Acacia in another area along the border with Rolling Hills and as with the first round of work, the City Council also dedicated funds for three year maintenance of the second area of fire fuel removal. Page 5 of 7 113 Continued comments from Nunn A little known statistic, that was not mentioned anywhere in the CWPP is that 90% of all wildfires are started by people. According to the US Department the Interior as many as 90% of all wildfires are human caused. Campfires, burning debris, downed power lines, discarded cigarettes and intentional arson are all involved. Nationally 10% of wildfires are caused by lightning and lava, but we don’t have either those here very often. We have another problem with YouTube and Facebook publicizing the Conservancy. Every year there are higher and higher numbers of hikers in the Conservancy which magnifies the human caused fire danger. I’m not sure what can be done about the numbers of hikers in the conservancy, but we can certainly do something about reducing the fuel load in the Conservancy. The Conservancy Board of Directors is very concerned about maintaining native plants, so there is an easy solution. Cactus and Succulents can be planted along the North Eastern Boundary of the Conservancy. This will act as a wonderful Natural Native Fire Break. When I was here in 1972 putting water on the roof at 1 Crest Road, I watched the firemen along Crest Road saving the Firehouse. A huge key to their success in saving of the Firehouse was the thick belt of ice plant that surrounded the Firehouse. This kept the flames from getting anywhere near the Firehouse and it was saved. Because of the prevailing wind, pedestrian traffic and plentiful brush, the Conservancy should be your primary focus for keeping Rolling Hills safe from wildfire. Wildfire ignition: There are current laws that prohibit smoking and intentional arson. The California Public Utilities Commission established regulations requiring the utility companies to perform regular maintenace on utility infrastructures. With laws and regulations in place, people's behaviors and actions have proven to be the most difficult to control and predict. The CWPP is a guidance document that focuses on areas that can be controlled such as funding fire fuel removal in the Nature Preserve. The City Council discussed as a follow up measure to the fire fuel removal work in the Nature Preserve, funding the planting of native plants along the border once the Mustard is eradicated. The City Council's actions to date in the areas that they can be impactful are aligned with your suggestions. The City Council's actions in the Nature Preserve and collaboration with the Land Conservancy are briefly outlined in the CWPP. Continued comments from Nunn With some of the language in the CWPP, I’m very concerned that when Pine and Eucalyptus trees are designated as fire hazards our beautiful street trees are going to be targeted, if not now down the road. In the fire hazard evaluation that was commissioned by the city, it was pointed out that maintaining a mature tree canopy is very beneficial in maintaining shade and curtailing growth of weeds and other types of fire fuel. Hopefully included in this plan, will be some restrictions on removing street trees just like there are in almost every other city in the world. In Hawaii the roadside Eucalyptus trees planted by the CCC in 1936 are a big tourist attraction. In Rolling Hills, Eucalyptus trees that A.E. Hanson arranged for the CCC to plant in 1936 seem to be in continual danger of removal. As a member of the view committee once explained to me, “Once it’s gone, you’ll forget about it”. High hazard plants are defined by the Fire Department's Ready! Set! Go! Brochure. The CWPP referenced information from the brochure. The CWPP does not identify existing trees to be removed from the community. The plan does not suggest to target existing trees to be removed from the community. The plan does suggest restricting planting of new trees that are of the species identified by the Fire Department as high hazard. Continued comments from Nunn Another area of concern in this whole process is acceptance of FEMA money. Back in the 1950s before the City of Rolling Hills was founded, members of the Community Association fought very hard to realize Rolling Hills as a private community. The Coun ty resisted strongly to maintain control of the roads in Rolling Hills. We should be very careful accepting government money, especially when road improvements are included. We should be very sure that the private status of Rolling Hills and it’s road system is not jeopardized by accepting government money. Private status: Before applying for funds through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program in 2018 to prepare a CWPP, the City Council inquired the impacts to the City's private status with accepting federal monies. In 2018, staff followed up with the granting agency and verified that if grant funds were to be awarded and accepted by the City of Rolling Hills, the private status of the city would not be impacted. The City is prohibited from using local returns from sales tax measures dedicated for roadway improvements because of the private status. Similarly, the City does not get any gas tax allocation and or SB1 monies from the State dedicated to rehabilitation public streets because of the City's private status. There is a recognition at the State and at the County levels that the City of Rolling Hills is a private community. Page 6 of 7 114 12 7/22/2020 10:14 PM Carmen Schaye 58 Portuguese Bend Rd The CWPP is Unclear. It is our understanding that this document is to be a list of strategies for residents to use but it is internally inconsistent and speaks of implementation such as remove all vegetation and on p. 24 lists RHCA as the one primarily responsible for all vegetation management and for development of fuel management standards. Also pps 27-29 details what RHCA is allowed to do. This document should be one that makes recommendations to homeowners to implement . The homeowner must be the sole entity that Implements. If other entities contemplate suggestions, the homeowner must receive notice and an opportunity to be heard before such implementation. Same for any proposed changes to this “living document.” See comment responses to Ms. Balch and Ms. Schoettle, regarding rigorious public process and "living document". 15 7/21/2020 7:19 AM Don Crocker • Good money was paid for expert advice. It can be implemented with Council’s wise discretion and judgement and with public input in mind, on an incremental basis. • Rolling Hills bears many similarities to the risks face by Paradise and its fire disaster. • A major fire in our City, whether lives are lost or how many homes are damaged or destroyed and how much of the urban forest is reduced to black scarecrows, will destroy property values and availability/cost of fire insurance for all our residents, plus impact the whole Hill. • Following a major fire Not only will property tax assessments be drastically effected for years in the future but enjoyment of our beautiful City will be greatly impaired. • My friends affected by the gigantic recent Ca. fires are going through Hell trying to get rebuilding permitted on damaged older properties and with all the City/County RHCAs’new building requirements, many rejections, costs and frustrations on both side of the counter will result. And Finally • LITIGATION! Count on it like the Flying Triangle and Poppy Trail earth movement lawsuits debacle, affecting all possible deep or insured pockets. With our extremely serious fire mitigation and evacuation challenges, and any personal injuries/death to magnify the awards big time, count on it. So we need a broad professional plan to move forward. Please adopt the Plan (with amendments if necessary) and proceed judiciously but ASAP. Thanks for considering the above from almost 50 year residents who lost our home to the 1973 Wildfire which destroyed 12 RH homes and had fire burning at both the West and East portions of our land in the Wildfire in 2009 and spends hundreds of hours a year trying to mitigate the next one. The City appreciates your support for the CWPP. 16 7/20/2020 4:09 PM Pamela Reis 1 Wagon Lane Dear Elaine and Kristen, I have reviewed the CWPP and am generally in agreement. This appears to be a comprehensive plan, which implemented in all aspects, would greatly reduce the danger of rampant wildfires in Rolling Hills. In my opinion, the biggest obstacle is the recommendation to remove all highly flammable trees and vegetation from an individual's property. As you are well aware, trees (absence or presence of them) elicits very strong feelings among the residents of Rolling Hills. I understand why removing these types of trees is very desirable from a fire protection standpoint. On the other hand, many of these trees provide much needed shade. Others are considered important for the habitat they provide for wildlife, and others are considered important as a focal point for gardens, landscaping plans, etc. It seems to me that providing residents some financial incentive to remove these trees would go a long way in reducing this fuel source. I counted 11 pine and eucalyptus trees on my property. Some are small, and others are huge. My guess is that it would cost me somewhere between $25,000-$50,000 to remove them. Should I choose to replace some with mature trees of an acceptable species (say a 36"box) the cost would skyrocket. In addition to the substantial cost, this will not ensure I will be protected in case of a raging wildfire, if my neighbors do not remove their highly flammable trees and vegetation. All of this is in addition to the cost of annual brush and weed removal on my hillsides and canyon. I have spent $7,000 to get ready for this year's fire season. See repsonse to Mr. and Mrs. Bellagamba regarding incentive program. Page 7 of 7 115 Continued comments from Reis Perhaps the City/RHCA could pay residents a "bounty" for tree removal,say $1000/tree with a limit of X trees. Another idea is to negotiate tree removal contracts with a number of large tree companies and provide preferred rates to residents. If removal prices can be substantially reduced, residents may be more inclined to do so. Finally, it is my understanding there may be some State and Federal government grant money available to assist in wildfire mitigation. The City and RHCA should aggressively pursue such grants and make monies available to the residents. I am sure there are many more great ideas along these lines. I understand there is a consultant with the LACFD who is available to consult with homeowners about ways to harden their homes. I would like to sign up for that service. Will you let me know what I need to do? I appreciate all the work that you and your teams are doing to protect our City and homes from wildfires. In 2018, the City applied for grant funds from the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program for fire prevention including the preparation of a CWPP, undergrounding overhead utility infrastructures, and educational programs for fire fuel management in the canyons. The City intends to apply for grant funds to assist with fire prevention and or wilfire mitigation when feasible. The Fire Department offers site visits to evaluate structures and provide guidance to harden homes. Staff will provide contact information to the relevant Fire Department personnel to schedule a consultation. 17 7/23/2020 8:16 PM Gary & Debra Fournier 30 Crest Road East To: Honorable Mayor & City Council members— We have read through the CWPP Draft and we accept it as written and hope that it will be adopted by the City of Rolling Hills and its residents. The plan is an important step toward lessening the risk of wildfires, thereby protecting lives & property in our community. We extend our gratitude to everyone who gave their time & effort toward compiling this important document. The City appreciates your support for the CWPP. 18 7/23/2020 2:08 AM Bea Dieringer Buggy Whip Drive Hi Elaine, here is my revised CWPP, which includes corrections of grammatical and typographical erros as well as substantive changes to better reflect a document that is intended to be community inspired and implemented. Edits to the CWPP will be presented to the City Council for consideration. 19 7/22/2020 4:00 PM Block Captains: Various Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have The City appreciates your support for the CWPP. Arlene and Gene worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define Honbo; Arun potential actions. We are greatful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co. Fire Bhumitra, Susan Department and LA Co Sheriff's Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as Collida, Pam Crane, complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long - Abas Goodzari, term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. Respectfully Judith Sara Haenel, submitted, (see list to the left) Kathleen Hughes, Lisa Kopenhefer, Kay Lupo, Phil Norman, Bill Ruth, Michael Sherman, Sandy Sherman, Debra Shrader, Ralph Schmoller, Jack Smith, Penni Smith, Ross Smith, Nicole Tangen, Dorothy Vinter, Arvel Witte 116 From: Diane Yowell Montalto To: Connie Viramontes Subject: CWPP Date: Tuesday, July 14, 2020 2:34:06 PM As Block Captain for Zone 4, Quail Ridge Road South, I am writing to voice my support for the City Council to adopt the CWPP. Sincerely, Diane Montalto 9 Quail Ridge Road South 117 From: vernabalch@aol.com To: City Clerk Subject: CWPP Date: Thursday, July 16, 2020 6:36:15 PM Dear City Clerk, I am grateful that the City Council allowed us additional time to review this very long document. When the Newsletters are sent out, with pertinent information about meetings and deadlines, it would be most helpful if they were sent out earlier as our mai l delivery is not very fast. For both of the last two Newsletters containing import news of a meeting, and of comments due, my Newsletter arrived at around 5:00 p.m. on the day of the Monday meeting, and at 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, a day after the comments were due. Consequently I was not able to attend the meeting, nor was I able to reply with comments. I do appreciate being informed, but it would be even nicer to be informed before the meetings and comments due, or to move City Council meetings later so we might participate in the discussion. Thank you, Verna Balch 118 From: vernabalch@aol.com To: City Clerk Subject: CWPP Date: Thursday, July 16, 2020 6:42:29 PM Dear City Clerk, A correction to my earlier email. I do see that comments can be made up until the 22nd. I mistook the date for this deadline. Verna Balch 119 From: torrtrav@aol.com To: City Clerk Subject: A QUESTION REGARDING FIRE PLAN DRAFT Date: Friday, July 17, 2020 3:32:20 PM Rolling Hills has a number of senior citizens with deficits ranging from vision,hearing, mobility. Is there a recommendation to identify these persons annually updated to help them if an evacuation occurs? This list changes annually as people may move, become impaired or die. thanks L Brody 2 Georgeff Community Wildfire Protection Plan on City Coun cil Agenda for July 27 How to submit review comments to the final draft of the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)? In preparation for the July 27, 2020 City Council meeting, comments to the CWPP must be submitted to: cityclerk@cityofrh.net by 5pm on Wednesday, July 22, 2020. Written comments will be accepted and can be submitted to Connie Viramontes at City Hall also by 5pm on Wednesday, July 22, 2020. Comments will be com piled and addressed by City staff and presented to the City Council at the July 27, 2020 City Council meeting. Please call City Hall at 310 277-1521 if you have any questions on comment submission. The final draft of the CWPP can be found on the City's website: https://www.rolling- hills.org/Residents/Block%20Captain%20Program/Draft%20CWPP.pdf 120 From: Terry Milam To: City Clerk Subject: CWPP Date: Friday, July 17, 2020 3:54:24 PM I would like to let you know that my husband and I are in favor of the adoption of the CWPP and we appreciate your efforts. Terry and Steve Milam 9 Wagon Lane 121 From: Sue Breiholz To: City Clerk Subject: CWPP Date: Friday, July 17, 2020 3:58:11 PM Rolling Hills City Council Dave and I urge you to adopt the final draft of the Community Wildfire Protection Plan. Thank you to all of those who worked to create this document as a blueprint to improve fire safety in our City. Sincerely, Dave and Sue Breiholz 122 From: Carole Hoffman To: City Clerk Subject: CWPP matter on RH City Council Agenda Date: Friday, July 17, 2020 7:42:10 PM I received the blue newsletter informing of the next RH council mtg discussing this issue. July 27. WHAT TIME WILL THE MEETING BE? And please advise how to "attend" it. Will it be on Zoom; if so, please provide link to get in. Thank you. Carole Hoffman 3 Hillside Lane Rolling Hills, CA 90274 cell: (310) 994 4070 H: (310) 541 2122 123 From: Laurence Bellagamba To: City Clerk Subject: Comments regard CWPP Date: Sunday, July 19, 2020 10:50:46 AM Please provide for City Council meeting on July 13, 2020 re this subject, thank you. Larry and Julie Bellagamba, 3 Flying Mane Road. Overall we find the CWPP an extremely impressive effort to address a very important issue and appreciate the effort to prepare it. A few suggestions follow: 1.1 Infrastructure harding. Regard 2nd bullet - rather than “consider," suggest use "define and require changes for new landscaping guidelines” Regard 5th bullet - this is a very good suggestion, ideally though many homeowners will take advantage of the offer, which could increase demand for contractors beyond the supply preventing getting all the work done in 1 year. Please consider providing for at least 5 years or perhaps permanently for the purpose of reducing fire damage risks. Homes can be made almost fire proof if built that way from the beginning using established standards. Recommend add a built to: "Establish standards for new home construction that render structures fire safe" 1.2 Vegetation Management. As you note, the Fire Department already has and enforces to some degree fuel management standards. There appear to be two “difficulties” in Rolling Hills (RH): canyons and roadside easements. By “Canyons” I presume we mean vegetation beyond the 200’ distance from a structure. My understanding is that the LA County regulations do not address such vegetation. If so, please clarify that in an introductory sentence to this section. Clearly, this is where the majority of the RH vegetation is. I am unclear about what the CWPP is recommending be done about it. Please clarify. Presumable we are looking for ways to encourage homeowners with canyon’s to control some of that vegetation. If that is the plan, please add a sentence to so state. It may be less expensive in the long run to provide a ways to make it more likely fires in canyons can be fought. For example, in some areas, perhaps piping could be laid between homes or evacuation routes that Fire Department hoses could be connected too to attempt to keep a fire from spreading out of the canyon. 1.3 Electric Power Lines Research of past major fires has shown power lines as the predominate cause. It is not clear to me if the power lines in our canyons even carry power to be a fire hazard. If they are, then strongly recommend burying power lines be a very high priority desp ite the cost. 2.2.3 Potential Evacuation Routes Given the complexity of the RH situation it will take many years to lesson the fire risk. If a large fire occurs in a high wind environment, evacuation will be the only option remaining. With only 3 exits location, lives will be at high risk, particularly if a large fraction of the hill is on fire and PV Drives North and East and Crenshaw Blvd are full of traffic. Please enable the Crest Road East gate to be used for evacuation ASAP and as practical enable additional exit routes. 3.0 Action Plan Applaud the itemization of efforts given the complexity of the situation. 124 Many of the items on the list are already happening and need to continue to happen (ex. Block Captain Program, Neighborhood Zone Meetings, Bridal Trail vegetation management, etc.). Recommend make that clear by subdividing the list into “ongoing actions” and “to be accomplished actions”. Please continue to work with cities and organizations that neighbor RH to help control fire risks. Doing so was very much appreciated. Recommend the following be the first 10 priorities of our CWPP: 1. Motorize Crest Road East for use as an evacuation point 2. Provide information to each homeowner so they know when and where to evacuate. This will also help us determine if we need more than evacuation routes. 3. Conduct an emergency evacuation drill - so we can determine and fix hinderances before the fire starts. 4. Define refugee areas 5. Utility under grounding projects for those that pose a fire risk. Itemize each and prioritize. 6.. Define fire safe standards for new home construction and landscaping and impose starting in 2021 or 2022 7. Selected road easement vegetation management - spot and mitigate the most important areas that help ensure fire trucks can get access and residents can evacuate. Fortunately the LA County regulations already stipulate the requirements. Enforcement requires some judgment as to what’s most beneficial and worth the trouble. 8. Selected fire control or fuel management in areas greater than 200’ from structures. Mitigate where homeowners are willing to participate. Clearly more will participate if the cost is offset or if they will realize a homeowner premium reduction. 9. Identify vetted contractors for homeowners to retrofit their structures and landscaping to be more fire safe. This would reduce the first hurdle to enable homeowners to make improvements to their properties. Many home owner insurance firms are already offering inspections to their policy holders. If residents had a ready list of vendors to employee to make the improvements, perhaps many will take the step to do so sooner. 10. Consider a temporary HOA fee increase or city tax to fund the fire risk reduction program. No one likes more taxes, but this is a community issue and we’ll probably get more done faster if we share the cost to make the necessary changes. Items 1 to 3 help save lives if a big fire breaks out. They must be done before that happens. Items 4 to 9 help reduce risk of a large fire or mitigate the damages that may occur roughly in order of benefit. Item 10 may simply be necessary to get things done quickly. 125 From: Pamela Reis <pamelaprudence@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 20, 2020 4:09 PM To: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net>; Kristen Raig <kraig@rhca.net> Cc: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com>; Gene Honbo <ekhonbo@aol.com>; J Rae Walker, M.D. <jraewalker@aol.com> Subject: Community Wildfire Protection Plan Dear Elaine and Kristen, I have reviewed the CWPP and am generally in agreement. This appears to be a comprehensive plan, which implemented in all aspects, would greatly reduce the danger of rampant wildfires in Rolling Hills. In my opinion, the biggest obstacle is the recommendation to remove all highly flammable trees and vegetation from an individual's property. As you are well aware, trees (absence or presence of them) elicits very strong feelings among the residents of Rolling Hills. I understand why removing these types of trees is very desirable from a fire protection standpoint. On the other hand, many of these trees provide much needed shade. Others are considered important for the habitat they provide for wildlife, and others are considered important as a focal point for gardens, landscaping plans, etc. It seems to me that providing residents some financial incentive to remove these trees would go a long way in reducing this fuel source. I counted 11 pine and eucalyptus trees on my property. Some are small, and others are huge. My guess is that it would cost me somewhere between $25,000-$50,000 to remove them. Should I choose to replace some with mature trees of an acceptable species (say a 36"box) the cost would skyrocket. In addition to the substantial cost, this will not ensure I will be protected in case of a raging wildfire, if my neighbors do not remove their highly flammable trees and vegetation. All of this is in addition to the cost of annual brush and weed removal on my hillsides and canyon. I have spent $7,000 to get ready for this year's fire season. Perhaps the City/RHCA could pay residents a "bounty" for tree removal,say $1000/tree with a limit of X trees. Another idea is to negotiate tree removal contracts with a number of large tree companies and provide preferred rates to residents. If removal prices can be substantially reduced, residents may be more inclined to do so. Finally, it is my understanding there may be some State and Federal government grant money available to assist in wildfire mitigation. The City and RHCA should aggressively pursue such grants and make monies available to the residents. I am sure there are many more great ideas along these lines. I understand there is a co nsultant with the LACFD who is available to consult with homeowners about ways to harden their homes. I would like to sign up for that service. Will you let me know what I need to do? I appreciate all the work that you and your teams are doing to protect our City and homes from wildfires. Respectfully, Pamela P. Reis 1 Wagon Lane 126 From: vernabalch@aol.com To: City Clerk Cc: bertram626@yahoo.com Subject: CWPP Date: Sunday, July 19, 2020 8:45:06 PM Dear City Clerk, My concern with the CWPP document is about how the various requirements for fire fuel maintenance will be enforced. I would hope that residents would first - be duly notified if RHCA finds something on resident's property that is not up to code, and second - resident would have a chance to discuss the situation before any action could take place. Thank you for taking the time necessary to make sure this document is written in such a way so that it is a fair plan for the protection of our City, and also tha t it thoroughly respects all resident's concerns for their property, wildlife and trees. Verna Balch 6 Hackamore Rd. vernabalch@aol.com 127 From: Roger E. Hawkins To: Elaine Jeng Cc: City Clerk; Jim Black; Bea Dieringer; Leah Mirsch; Patrick Wilson; Jeff Pieper; rehawkinslaw@gmail.com Subject: CWPP Date: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 1:58:00 PM Attachments: REH PRELIMINARY SUGGESTIONS RE CWPP_Draft_2020-06-12_v13 final draft.docx 7-22-2020.docx 2020_07_22_13_52_44 Letter to City Council 7 -22-2020 re CWPP.pdf Elaine, et al. The continuance was too short to allow me to complete a review of the CWPP but had time to take a look at the first 18 pages and random other pages, which contain some editorial remarks in red font and draft edits in blue font, so that the edits can be tracked. I found the section 2.1.1. (on p. 17) troubling, due to the apparent assignment of responsibilities to Block Captains that might be better left unsaid. This continues to read like a document designed to micromanage resident’s enjoyment and use of their properties, and very little to do with fire fuel mitigation. A CWPP should address fire prevention and a commitment to priorities in addressing fire fuel where the most problematic, not some dead bush or dead tree on a resident’s property. The Land Conservancy and our canyons have always been the problem. The CWPP makes limited reference to either and, in those respects, is flawed. There was some haste involved in authoring these edits. I remain skeptical and very concerned about talk of a government grant. Roger Roger E. Hawkins, Esq. Russell, Mirkovich & Morrow Law Offices of Roger E. Hawkins PC One World Trade Center Suite 1660 Long Beach, CA 90831-1660 T: (562) 436-9911 F: (562) 436-1897 C: (310) 775-5688 E: rehawkinslaw@gmail.com E: rhawkins@rumlaw.com ==================================================== This e-mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) above. It may contain confidential information that is privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of the e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e -mail in error, please immediately notify the sender at (562) 436-9911 or by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any attachment(s) from your system. Thank you. 128 July 22 2020 VIA ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION City Council City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Attention: Elaine Jen g, City Manager Re: Comm uni ty Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) Dear Council Members: I remain disappointed that additional time was n ' t given to residents who would like to review and comment on the CWPP (see e-mail attachment) Given the short fuse, I perused the Pla n, coming away with the impression it has more to do with regulating residents , i. e., clearcutting vegetation and trees, than it does with fire fuel mi tigat ion. The Plan fast forwards past the three most important e le ments of such a Plan i.e., fire prevent ion; collaborating with the Land Conservancy on ways to minimiz e the risk of fire; a nd addressing fire fuel problems in our canyons , which Survey res ponders identified as our C it y' s " greatest risk." Due to limited time ava i lable, I've tracked some edits to the CWPP, with most of the edits appearing on the first 18 pages , and random edits thereafter. If the Council wou ld, litera lly , collaborate with the Association in reducing unperm it ted, non-resident pedestrian traffic in the community, it would virh1ally eliminate the risk of fire ig nition at, modest cost. Ifno wildfires affect this communit y, the cost savings would be enormous savings; no need for considering FEMA grants; nor concerning ourselves with evacuat ion protocols on roads that alread y accommodate motor vehicle traffic including trucks and fire department equ i pment of many sizes and shapes. This CWPP omits crucial factors from such a plan, telling me there is more , here, than meets the eye. Some factual inaccuracies i n the DRAFT should not be tolerated. You should not act without a written opinion from the Cit y Atto rney that accepting governm ent grant dollars (FEMA) will not s ub ject this comm uni t y to any risk of losing our status as a private, gated community. IF there is any such risk - no matter how slight -- there should be no application for FEMA do lla rs. Also, insure residentsare alerted that the regulations being discussed - some of which may not have been enacted under the Plan -- could subject them - if targeted for enforcement - to criminal prosecut ion and, if convicted , could cause im prisonment, in the County Ja il , for up to six months. Let that NOT come as a surprise to any resident. 37 Crest Road W., Rolling Hills , CA 90274 129 From: Marcia Schoettle To: City Clerk Subject: CWPP Date: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 2:59:39 PM To Whom it may concern: I have several comments and concerns about the CWPP document. First of all, it states that it is a “living document”. Doesn’t that mean it can be changed? I am not sure it should be a living document. Does that mean when it is approved, what was approved can change? That makes a big difference, I think. On page 10, What does “Evaluate the Fire Code requirements for 10’ roadside easement clearance “ mean? That is a bit vague, in my opinion. Who decides WHICH FUEL LADDERS TO ELIMINATE? I am hoping that res idents have the say about what is removed from THEIR property. They need to be notified about any concerns the RHCA has about THEIR property before any action is taken. Again on page 10. “Remove trees underneath power lines that have a MATURE HEIGHT that could interfere” is an extremely ambiguous statement. (There could be many different answers to the question of “mature height”. ( which depends on soil, watering, trimming, location, etc.) Page 11. “Encourage” or “require” property owners to adhere…”. Which is it,,,,”encourage” or “require” ? Also page 11. Bridle Trails These must be defined. Are all Bridle Trails marked? With signs? Are all easements qualified to be called Bridle Trails? When being told how to “maintain” Bridle Trails, residents need to know if they actually have Bridle Trails on their property. Page 28 #13 Entry/Exit Gate Vegetation Mamagement RHCA Board has adopted a policy for roadsides along major roadways in the community to have vegetation cleaned up to 8’ back from the edge of pavement, WHERE PRACTICAL. It might be good to put the last two words in caps. Thank you for your interest in hearing from residents about this important CWPP document. Marcia Schoettle 130 From: John Nunn To: City Clerk Subject: CWPP Date: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 4:41:33 PM Rolling Hills City Council 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 Attention: Elaine Jeng, city manager Subject: Community Wildfire Protection Plan Hearing Dear Ms. Jeng and council members, I am well aware that California leads the Nation in Wildfire threat. I know action is required, but our priority should be to tackle the biggest threat first. I experien ced both of the Rolling Hills of Wildfires in 1979 and in 2009. Both of these fires originated in the Rancho Palos Verdes Conservancy. This was no accident. The Conservancy has had plentiful brush and weeds over the years to provide excellent kindling for wildfires. In addition, our Prevailing Westerly Winds mean that most of the time fires that originate in the Conservancy will be blown into Rolling Hills. A little known statistic, that was not mentioned anywhere in the CWPP is that 90% of all wildfires are started by people. According to the US Department the Interior as many as 90% of all wildfires are human caused. Campfires, burning debris, downed power lines, discarded cigarettes and intentional arson are all involved. Nationally 10% of wildfires are caused by lightning and lava, but we don’t have either those here very often. We have another problem with YouTube and Facebook publicizing the Conservancy. Every year there are higher and higher numbers of hikers in the Conservancy which magnifies the human caused fire danger. I’m not sure what can be done about the numbers of hikers in the conservancy, but we can certainly do something about Reducing the fuel load in the Conservancy. The Conservancy Board of Directors is very concerned about maintaining native plants, so there is an easy solution. Cactus and Succulents can be planted along the North Eastern Boundary of the Conservancy. This will act as a wonderful Natural Native Fire Break. When I was here in 1972 131 putting water on the roof at 1 Crest Road, I watched the firemen along Crest Road saving the Firehouse. A huge key to their success in saving of the Firehouse was the thick belt of ice plant that surrounded the Firehouse. This kept the flames from getting anywhere near the Firehouse and it was saved. Because of the prevailing wind, Pedestrian Traffic and plentiful brush, the Conservancy should be your primary foc us for keeping Rolling Hills safe from wildfire. With some of the language in the CWPP, I’m very concerned that when Pine and Eucalyptus trees are designated as fire Hazards our beautiful street trees are going to be targeted, if not now down the road. I n the fire hazard evaluation that was commissioned by the city, it was pointed out that maintaining a mature tree canopy is very beneficial In maintaining shade and curtailing growth of weeds and other types of fire fuel. Hopefully included in this plan, Will be some restrictions on removing street trees just like there are an almost every other city in the world. In Hawaii the roadside Eucalyptus trees planted by the CCC in 1936 are a big tourist attraction. In Rolling Hills, Eucalyptus trees that A.E. Hanson arranged for the CCC to plant in 1936 seem to be in continual danger of removal. As a member of the view committee once explained to me, “Once it’s gone, you’ll forget about it”. Another area of concern in this whole process is acceptance of FEMA mo ney. Back in the 1950s before the City of Rolling Hills was founded, members of the Community Association fought very hard to realize Rolling Hills as a private community. The County resisted strongly to maintain control of the roads in Rolling Hills. We should be very careful accepting government money, especially when road improvements are included. We should be very sure that the Private status of Rolling Hills and it’s road system is not jeopardized by accepting government money. Sincerely, John and Maureen Nunn 1 Crest Road West Rolling Hills, CA 90274 if 132 From: Carmen Schaye <carmenschaye@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 10:14 PM To: Carmen Schaye <carmenschaye@gmail.com>; Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net> Subject: CWPP Elaine Jeng Rolling Hills City Manager Re: CWPP Elaine, The CWPP is Unclear . It is our understanding that this document is to be a list of strategies for residents to use but it is internally inconsistent and speaks of implementation such as remove all vegetation and on p. 24 lists RHCA as the one primarily responsible for all vegetation management and for development of fuel management standards. Also pps 27 -29 details what RHCA is allowed to do. This document should be one that makes recommendations to homeowners to implement . The homeowner must be the sole entity that Implements . If other entities contemplate suggestions , the homeowner must receive notice and an opportunity to be heard before such implementation. Same for any proposed changes to this “living document.” Sincerely, Drs’ Carmen and Gordon Schaye 58 Portuguese Bend Rd 133 From: Elaine Jeng To: Connie Viramontes Cc: Meredith Elguira Subject: FW: Draft for your review. Support for fire safety plan Date: Thursday, July 23, 2020 1:27:29 AM From: DONALD CROCKER <dwcrocker@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2020 7:19 AM To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com>; Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net> Subject: Re: Support for fire safety plan • Good money was paid for expert advice. It can be implemented with Council’s wise discretion and judgement and with public input in mind, on an incremental basis. • Rolling Hills bears many similarities to the risks face by Paradise and its fire disaster. • A major fire in our City, whether lives are lost or how many homes are damaged or destroyed and how much of the urban forest is reduced to black scarecrows, will destroy property values and availability/cost of fire insurance for all our residents, plus impact the whole Hill. • Following a major fire Not only will property tax assessments be drastically effected for years in the future but enjoyment of our beautiful Cit y will be greatly impaired. • My friends affected by the gigantic recent Ca. fires are going through Hell trying to get rebuilding permitted on damaged older properties and with all the City/County RHCAs’new building requirements, many rejections, costs and frustrations on both side of the counter will result. And Finally LITIGATION! Count on it like the Flying Triangle and Poppy Trail earth movement lawsuits debacle, affecting all possible deep or insured pockets. With our extremely serious fire mitigation a nd evacuation challenges, and any personal injuries/death to magnify the awards big time, count on it. So we need a broad professional plan to move forward. Please adopt the Plan (with amendments if necessary) and proceed judiciously but ASAP. Thanks for considering the above from almost 50 year residents who lost our home to the 1973 Wildfire which destroyed 12 RH homes and had fire burning at both the West and East portions of our land in the Wildfire in 2009 and spends hundreds of hours a year trying to mitigate the next one. Don and Mary Louise Crocker Sent from my iPhone 134 From: Beatriz Dieringer To: Elaine Jeng Subject: FW: Revised CWPP Date: Thursday, July 23, 2020 2:08:25 AM Attachments: CWPP_Draft_2020-06-12_v13 final draftRevised.docx Hi Elaine, Here is my revised CWPP, which includes corrections of grammatical and typographical errors as well as substantive changes to better reflec t a document that is intended to be community inspired and implemented. Thanks, Bea Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Beatriz Dieringer Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 1:56 AM To: ddabea@msn.com Subject: Revised CWPP 135 From: Debra To: Connie Viramontes Subject: Community Wildfire Protection Plan Date: Thursday, July 23, 2020 8:15:52 PM To: Honorable Mayor & City Council members — We have read through the CWPP Draft and we accept it as written and hope that it will be adopted by the City of Rolling Hills and its residents. The plan is an important step toward lessening the risk of wildfires, thereby protecting lives & property in our community. We extend our gratitude to everyone who gave their time & effort toward compiling this important document. Sincerely, Gary & Debra Fournier 30 Crest Road East 136 July 22, 2020 Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriff's Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long -term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. Respectfully submitted, Block Captain Leads Arlene Honbo - 33 Portuguese Bend Road Gene Honbo - 33 Portuguese Bend Road Block Captains Arun Bhumitra - 13 Buggy Whip Drive Susan Collida - 5 Ringbit Road West Pam Crane - 1O Caballeros Road Abas Goodzari - 2 Wrangler Judith Sara Haenel - 31 Eastfield Drive Kathleen Hughes - 13 Caballeros Road Lisa Kopenhefer - 14 Chuckwagon Kay Lupo - 4 Georgeff Road Phil Norman - O Open Brand Bill Ruth - 2 Hummingbird Lane Michael Sherman - 33 Crest Road East Sandy Sherman - 33 Crest Road East Debra Shrader - 54 Saddleback Road Ralph Schmoller - 4 Middleridge Lane South Jack Smith - 12 Johns Canyon Road Penni Smith - 4 Bowie Road Ross Smith - 4 Bowie Road Nicole Tangen - 1O Johns Canyon Road Dorothy Vinter - 9 Reata Lane Arvel Witte - 5 Quail Ridge Road South 137 M Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter ---- -•-• ._,.._.._,..,,,..,_,..n., _.. ,.,_,_,.,._,..,..,..,..u,,,._,_, ,._,..,.,.,.,. •-• H .....,.,.., m-,HH•••-•-~•¥-HHH _ Kay Lupo <kay.lupo@yahoo.com> Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 3:24 PM To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> I approve the finished CW PP, Kay Lupo Block Captain Zone 15A On Sunday, July 19, 2020, 02:42:43 PM PDT, Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> wrote: Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. ) One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid -19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. Thanks for all your support and advocacy. Best, Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads ********************************************** Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriff's Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long- term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. Respectfully submitted, 138 Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter -----..- "•·••··-·-•·········-····-··.........., ............,, ..... ., •... -····· •· , ...•. Jack Smith <smith.b.jack@gmail.com> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Yes please include my name. Jack On Jul 19, 2020, at 2:42 PM, Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> wrote: Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 3:57 PM Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. &) One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid -19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. Thanks for all your support and advocacy. Best, Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads ********************************************** Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriff's Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long- term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. Respectfully submitted, 139 )! M Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> · --·-- ·- •···-.·.- ·- - - - - - - - - --- ·-- --- -·.- CWPP • Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter ·····--· Abas Goodarzi <abas@ushybrid.com> Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 4:07 PM To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Cc: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net>, Kristen Raig - RHCA <kraig@rhca.net>, Abas Goodarzi <abas@ushybrid.com> Hello Arlene, I concur and support your statement , please include my name on the letter. Abas Goodarzi, Ph.D., P.E. President , CEO 445 Maple Ave., Tor r anc e, CA 90503-3807 Tel: 3 10-212-1 200 Ext:111, Fax: 310-212-1102 abas@ushybrid.com , www.ushybrid .com :, •us Hyb r id All Performance and ZERO Emissions When work is a pleasure, life is a joy Confidential Communication - This e-mail and any attachments may contain US Hybrid confidential and privileged material, and are for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the named recipient, or have otherwise received this communication in error. p lease delete it, notify the sender immediately, and do not disclose its r;ontents to any ott1er person, use them for any purpose, or store or copy them in any medium. Thank you. From: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2020 2:43 PM To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Cc: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net>; Kristen Raig - RHCA <kraig@rhca.net> Subject: CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter External Sender Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. ) One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid -19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. 140 M Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> ........... --- ..---·-.·. ·-··-·---- ---------- CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter Ross Smith <rossj1220@gmail.com> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Cc: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net>, Kristen Raig - RHCA <kraig@rhca.net> Hi Arlene, Penni and I would like our names included in the letter, thanks. Best, Ross Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 4:21 PM On Sun, Jul 19, 2020, 2:42 PM Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> wrote: Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. ) One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid -19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. Thanks for all your support and advoca cy. Best, Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads ********************************************** Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriffs Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long-term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. Respectfully submitted, 141 M Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter Kathleen Hughes <kathleen.hughes4@gmail.com> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Cc: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net>, Kristen Raig - RHCA <kraig@rhca.net> Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 3:40 PM Hi Arlene, Please add my signature to the Block Captain letter to the RH City Council supporting the CWPP. Thanks, Kathleen Hughes 13 Caballeros Rd. Rolling Hills 310-377-2163 On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 2:42 PM Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> wrote: Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. ) One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid -19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. Thanks for all your support and advoca cy. Best, Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads ********************************************** Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriffs Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long-term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. Respectfully submitted, 142 M Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> ----------------- ••---•--••••-••• •••• • ••••~-••• _ _.,A, ,,.,.w w CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter --- - - - • •-••••• -• --•• - .,- - ..•--•••.,•-- .,.,.,,,.............,~,..,.., .,,.,m,.,,,..,,,,,..,.,,.,.,.,,.,,,.,..,.,,,,-,.,,.,m,,,..,.,,., ----'"''"'•-••• ....................................,.,.,..,., Debra Shrader <teach2play@gmail.com> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Cc: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net>, Kristen Raig - RHCA <kraig@rhca.net> Please add my name to the letter. Thank you, Arlene. Debra Shrader (424) 242-4438 Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 4:49 PM > On Jul 19, 2020, at 2:42 PM, Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, > Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors.&) > > One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. > > Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid-19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. > > Thanks for all your support and advocacy. > Best, > Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads > > ********************************************** > Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: > > Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriffs Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long- term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. > Respectfully submitted, > > 143 Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter ------------················································---------·····-····.............. Bill Ruth <billyruth@aol.com> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Hi Arlene, Nice letter. Please add my name it. Thank you, Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 5:47 PM Bill Ruth GRI, CREA, CEI, ILS, PVS Broker Associate Keller Williams Palos Verdes Realty Past President Palos Verdes Assoc. of Realtors LUXURY HOMES DIVISION CA DRE 01047519 bill@ruthandraine.com On Jul 19, 2020, at 2:42 PM, Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> wrote: Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid-19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. Thanks for all your support and advocacy. Best, Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads ********************************************** Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriffs Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long -term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. Respectfully submitted, 144 M Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter --- ··-···•..··---· .. ··•--···· --·--··-•··-· ---•-······ ·•-•··-···-···· ···--· .. -····-·· Sandy Sherman <inthepinkmusic@cox.net> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> ----···--·--·-··•-··••·•··-···-···· ... ·························-···--······--··---- Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 6:03 PM Thanks Arlene. Please include our names: Sandy & Michael Sherman, 33 Crest Rd. E From: Arlene Honbo Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2020 2:43 PM To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Cc: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net>; Kristen Raig - RHCA <kraig@rhca.net> Subject: CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. ) One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid-19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. Thanks for all your support and advocacy. Best, Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads ********************************************** Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriffs Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long -term plan to guide our community to lessen wild fire risks and to protect lives and property. Respectfully submitted, 145 M Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter - - - - - - - - - -···-········-·········-·-- ------------------ ----- arun arjay.net <arun@arjay.net> Reply-To: "arun arjay.net" <arun@arjay.net> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Cc: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net>, Kristen Raig - RHCA <kraig@rhca.net> Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 6:05 PM Hi Arlene, Pl include my name in the group letter, as it is a joint effort. Thx for spearheading the effort on CWPP, and congrats to all for putting together a great product. It will be of immense benefit to the residents of the city for years to come. It is also a symbol of co -operation between the city and association staff, first responders, residents and other stake holders. Sincerely, Arun K Bhumitra 13 Buggy Whip Drive Tel:3109947400 > On July 19, 2020 2:42 PM Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, > Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. r'.@) > > One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. > > Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid -19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. > > Thanks for all your support and advocacy. > Best, > Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads > > ********************************************** > Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: > > Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriff's Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long- term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. > Respectfully submitted, > > 146 Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter --- ······-···-·--···-·-····-·· ... Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Please include our names in the group letter to the City Council supporting the CWPP. Arlene and Gene Honbo, Block Captain Leads 33 Portuguese Bend Road Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 6:43 PM On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 2:42 PM Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> wrote: Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes ' time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. ) One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid -19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. Thanks for all your support and advocacy. Best,. Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads ********************************************** Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheritrs Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long-term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. Respectfully submitted, 147 Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter LISA KOPENHEFER <lkopenhef@aol.com> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Looks good! Please add my name to the letter. Lisa Kopenhefer Sent from my iPhone Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 7:37 PM > On Jul 19, 2020, at 2:42 PM, Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, > Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. ) > > One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. > > Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid-19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. > > Thanks for all your support and advocacy. > Best, > Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads > > ********************************************** > Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: > > Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriffs Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long- term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. > Respectfully submitted, > > 148 M Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter ---•u•u-•••U•••u,u,Hn••••-• '"•u•••N.,uuu............••••U'"••••-•U-• , --·••••uum,,.,..,,.,.,.._,, ..,,,. ,..,_,. ,.,..,,,. ,.. u,.,,. u,..,.,u, ••--•••·••· '"'"'"''"'"· ••- -n -• ,,.,. uuou, ""'"",,.. •"SU<••"" ''""'"'"''""""n --- , . ,., .,., ,.,.num, u <'rn .........._... ,.nuu...........•••••••"U ,.,,,,.,...,.,,, ''"" Ralph Schmoller <ralphschmo@verizon.net> Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 9:40 PM To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Arlene, thanks for coming up with this excellent well worded letter letter. Please add my name to it. Thanks and regards ........Ralph Schmoller Sent from my iPad > On Jul 19, 2020, at 2:42 PM, Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> wrote: > > Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, > Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. c1)) > > One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. > > Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid-19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. > > Thanks for all your support and advocacy. > Best, > Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads > > ********************************************** > Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: > > Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriffs Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long- term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. > Respectfully submitted, > > 149 M Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter -----------------------... •·-·· ·-··•-"•··--·--···-· ·--- Phil Norman <phil@normandesigngroup.com> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Cc: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net>, Kristen Raig - RHCA <kraig@rhca.net> Adding my name is great Thanks, Phil Norman, ASID, CID Hillside Village www.normandesigngroup.com 24540 Hawthorne Boulevard Torrance, CA 90505 310-378-1111 X 111 Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 6:49 AM From: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2020 2:42:31 PM To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Cc: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net>; Kristen Raig - RHCA <kraig@rhca.net> Subject: CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter [Quoted text hidden] --- -- - - · ··-···-···· .......... 150 M Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter - - - - - •- ••••dH OHn•n•••• ••- • n o,U ·.. ••··-• •n, H• <·• ••....•..··••••--- Dorothy Vinter <dvinter@aol.com> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 10:50 AM Arlene, I have read the proposed group letter to the RH City Council re the adoption of the CWPP. I agree completely and would appreciate your adding my name to the group signature list. Thanks again to you, Gene, Elaine and the many volunteers who have worked so hard on this plan. Dorothy Vinter Block Captain, Zone 15C Sent from my iPhone > On Jul 19, 2020, at 2:42 PM, Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, > Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. &) > > One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. > > Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid-19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. > > Thanks for all your support and advocacy. > Best, > Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads > > ********************************************** > Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: > > Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriffs Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long- term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. > Respectfully submitted, > > 151 Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter Susan Collida <scollida@gmail.com> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Cc: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net>, Kristen Raig - RHCA <kraig@rhca.net> Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 11:31 AM Please include my name Arlene. Thanks, Susan Callida, Block Captain 17a From: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Date: Sunday, July 19, 2020 at 2:42 PM To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Cc: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net>, Kristen Raig - RHCA <kraig@rhca.net> Subject: CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. ) One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid -19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. Thanks for all your support and advocacy. Best, Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads ********************************************** Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: 152 Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> - - - - -- - - -- - - - - CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter ••• ,ouooH •••.. •••••·•.. •••- - -•- •••m••- - - •- ·- U" <H~- ••"KUU ---- -------............... ....... witteab@aol.com <witteab@aol.com> Reply-To: witteab@aol.com To: "arleneahonbo@gmail.com" <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Arlene Include my name. Arvel ... _ -···-·······-·---··....····- - - - - - - - - - - Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 11:45 AM PS I was thinking about adding something on easements . . . intro to homeowners .. -----Original Message ---- From: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Cc: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net >; Kristen Raig - RHCA <kraig@ r hca.net> Sent: Sun, Jul 19 , 2020 2:42 pm Subject: CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neig hbors. ) One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. Please read the letter below. If you want your name included , email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid -19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesda y, July 22. Thanks for all your support and advocacy. Best, Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads ********************************************** Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH , and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriffs Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long-term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. Respectfully submitted, 153 Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Reply for CWPP - Letter to City Council Request Judith haenel <hayjude31@hotmail.com> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 12:56 PM > > Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: > > Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriffs Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long- term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. > Respectfully submitted, > Judith Sara Haenel > > 154 Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter pamcrrane <pamcrane@cox.net> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 8:38 PM Hi Arlene... I'm totally supportive on the CWPP grant proposal.... And of course please include me on your letter. However, in re- reading your note, I'm a little confused. For your letter to the Council, are you just including Block Captains or do you want us to inclu de others in our zone as well who give permission for their name to be included? Again, thanks for all the great work and time you and Gene have put into this program. Best Regards, Pam From: Arlene Honbo ·[mailto:arleneahonbo@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2020 2:43 PM To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@grnail.com> Cc: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net>; Kristen Raig - RHCA <kraig@rhca.net> Subject: CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. ) One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid-19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. Thanks for all your support and advocacy. Best, Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads 155 M Gmail Arlene Honbo <arleneaho nbo@gmail.com> CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter --- ----·•-··•--..···••····•···•• ..················.. ··········· ........................._..... Nicole Bierens <neecall@hotmail.com> To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> ............................................... ·-··········"---...... _ Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 6:20 PM Hi Arlene, Please include my name to the letter below, Nicole Tangen (10 Johns Canyon Rd.). Best, Nicole From: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Sent: July 19, 2020 9:42 PM To: Arlene Honbo <arleneahonbo@gmail.com> Cc: Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net>; Kristen Raig - RHCA <kraig@rhca.net> Subject: CWPP - Letter to City Council Request: Sign Group Letter Block Captains and Block Captain Support Team, Thanks for being available to take questions from residents on the CWPP. We know education and discussion takes time. (Just got off the phone with one of our neighbors. ) One request from last Friday's call was to have an option to sign a group letter from Block Captains. Of course, you can opt to send an individual letter if you prefer. Please read the letter below. If you want your name included, email your reply to me and your name will be added to the letter. Due to Covid -19 Elaine said a copy of your email asking to include your name will be attached and will suffice instead of a physical signature. Your email reply is due to me by 2 pm Wednesday, July 22. Thanks for all your support and advocacy. Best, Arlene and Gene, Block Captain Leads ********************************************** Dear Honorable Mayor and RH City Councilmembers: Over the past 18 months the Block Captains have worked with neighbors, the City of RH, and the RHCA to identify hazards and risks from wildfire and define potential actions. We are grateful for the endorsement and support of our First Responders - LA Co Fire Department and LA Co Sheriff's Department. We ask the RH City Council to accept and adopt the CWPP as complete so that the City of Rolling Hills can qualify and apply for grant funding. The CWPP is the long- term plan to guide our community to lessen wildfire risks and to protect lives and property. Respectfully submitted, 156 ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN (CWPP) JULY 2020 FINAL DRAFT Page 2 157 The City of Rolling Hills Community Wildfire Protection Plan was developed collaboratively among stakeholders including the community, the City of Rolling Hills, the Rolling Hills Community Association, the Los Angeles County Fire Department, and the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department. The plan includes a prioritized list of hazardous fuel reduction strategies and addresses measures that the community members can take to reduce structural ignitability. The undersigned have reviewed the Rolling Hills CWPP and accept this document as the final draft representing 2020. Leah Mirsch, Councilmember City of Rolling Hills Patrick Wilson, Councilmember City of Rolling Hills Tom Heinsheimer, RHCA Boardmember Rolling Hills Community Association Anne Smith, RHCA Boardmember Rolling Hills Community Association Central Regional Operations Bureau Los Angeles County Fire Department Assistant Fire Chief Scott Hale Lomita Station Captain James Powers Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Page 3 158 We would like to thank the following for individuals for their support efforts: City of Rolling Hills Elaine Jeng, City Manager Connie Viramontes, Administrative Assistant Rolling Hills Community Association Roger Hawkins, past Board member Kristen Raig, RHCA Manager First Responders Assistant Chief J. Lopez, Los Angeles County Fire Department Battalion Chief Alvin Brewer, Los Angeles County Fire Department Fire Station 56, Los Angeles County Fire Department Deputy John Despot, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Deputy Reese Souza, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Deputy Tina McCoy, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Page 4 159 Rolling Hills Residents - Block Captain Program Arlene and Gene Honbo, Lead Block Captains Block Captains as of May, 2020 Abas Goodarzi Alan Stratford Arinze Anakwenze Arun Bhumitra Bill Ruth Charlie Raine Clint Patterson Debra Shrader Diane Gilman Diane Montalto Dorothy Vinter Ed Swart Eddy Delgado Giancarlo Starinieri Jack Smith Jeanette Ruzic Judith Haenel Kathleen Hughes- Bethencourt Kay Lupo Lisa Anakwenze Lisa Koperhofer Marion Ruth Marlen Uhl Michael Sherman Michelle Mottola Nadine Bobit Nicole Tangen Pam Crane Penni Smith Phil Norman Pia Raine Rae Walker Ralph Schmoller Ron Sommer Ross Smith Susan Collida Tanvir Mian Block Captain Support Team as of May, 2020 Anne Smith Arvel Witte Bert Balch Clarisse Shumaker Diane Lesser Jan Ferris Kelly Cook Maureen Hill Nancy Hoffman Sandy Sherman Page 5 160 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN (CWPP) JULY 2020 INTRODUCTION In 2018 was a year of destructive wildfires throughout California taking lives, destroying properties and prompting large-scale emergency evacuations. It was a stark reminder that all the land in Rolling Hills and the Palos Verdes Peninsula were determined as “Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone” by the State of California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Residents were askedRecognizing its wildfire history, the City of Rolling Hills asked residents what actions should be taken to better prepare and protect lives in the event of a wildfire and identified fire fuel in the canyons as the City’s ? What is the greatest risk. Since over 90% of all wildfires are caused by humans, The City and the RHCA will collaborate on ways to restrict non-permitted, pedestrian access to the City, and, since, historically most all of the wildfires have incepted in the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy (Conservancy), which is situated south of Crest Road, the City and the RHCA will make efforts to collaborate with the Conservancy and Rancho Palos Verdes to have the Conservancy it temporarily closed during the extreme fire risk days; when open, to restrict the days and hours of operation; and when open, to make provisions for docent guided nature walks, instead ot unsupervised Page 6 161 access; to encourage the use of Park Rangers to monitor the activities of visitors; to encourage Edison company to maintenance of its power poles consistent with industry practice, inside and outside the Conservancy; and to consider additional parking restrictions on the west and east sides of Crenshaw Boulevard, north from Del Cerro Park to Crest Road, and beyond, to aid in reducing pedestrian and bicycle traffic in the Conservancy. of wildfire for Rolling Hills? The residents responded fire fuel in the canyons. Is there more that the Rolling Hills Community Association and the City should be doing to protect lives and properties in the case of wildfires? The residents responded yes! Would the community be interested in receiving information on the best way to manage the vegetation in the canyons to prevent wildfires? The residents responded yes! How important is it for residents to manage fuel (e.g. trees, brush, etc.) on their property (including canyons located on private property)? The residents expressed, on a scale 1-100 with 100 being very important, 87. All of these efforts to reduce vegetation are critical to our highest priority – protecting the lives of residents and their families. Early 2019 marked the beginnings of a needed collaboration betwe en the residents of Rolling Hills, the City of Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA), Los Angeles County Fire Department and Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (collectively referred to as First Responders). The four entities worked together throughout the year to formulate a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP ). The CWPP for the City of Rolling Hills is an action plan to implement wildfire mitigation measures to address the community’s greatest risks. Residents were offered opportunities to voice their opinions on ways to reduce wildfire threats to their lives and home and overall community. This was accomplished through a series of emergency preparation meetings with First Responders; residents were encouraged to participate in a Wildfire Mitigation survey and 25% of the residents of Rolling Hills submitted their comments. The on-going work and commitment of all four entities produced a prioritized plan that reflects the voices of residents and wildfire mitigation priorities for the City of Rolling Hills. The plan is designed to be a living document, one that the community can refer to suggested fire fuel mitigation measures with for action and as such, the conventional agency (City, RHCA, and First Responders) statistical data , environmental setting including fire history and the process to solicit the community’s feedback on issues relating to wildfire concerns are all relegated to the Appendices of this plan. This plan starts with the tool box of mitigation measures identifie d for Rolling Hills and the plan discusses in detail potential evacuation scenarios. Many mitigation strategies were recommended and prioritized by Carol Rice, Fire Fuel Consultant, priortizing the values as follows: with the highest value being placed on 1) life safety; 2) structural protection; 3) natural resources and habitat. The plan identifies Finally, the plan lists the action items for the next three fiscal years and concludes with a schedule for Page 7 162 periodic evaluation of the effectiveness of the actions performed and updates to the plan. Page 8 163 Table of Contents 1.0 FIRE MITIGATION STRATEGIES FOR ROLLING HILLS ............................................................................ 9 1.1 Infrastructure hardening ................................................................................................................ 9 1.2 Vegetation Management ............................................................................................................. 10 1.3 Electric Power Lines ..................................................................................................................... 13 1.4 Inspections and Enforcement ....................................................................................................... 14 2.0 EVACUATION STRATEGIES................................................................................................................ 16 2.1 Community Preparedness and Education. .................................................................................... 16 2.1.1 Block Captain Program .......................................................................................................... 16 2.1.2 On-going communication and education ............................................................................... 18 2.2 Evacuation during an Actual Emergency ....................................................................................... 19 2.2.1 Evacuation Levels .................................................................................................................. 20 2.2.2 Communication during emergency events ............................................................................ 20 2.2.3 Potential evacuation routes .................................................................................................. 22 2.2.4 Residents Who May Need Special Assistance in an Emergency .............................................. 24 2.2.5 Large animal/horse evacuations ............................................................................................ 25 2.2.6 Re-entry back in to the Community ....................................................................................... 26 3.0 ACTION PLAN ................................................................................................................................... 27 4.0 MONITORING AND UPDATES ........................................................................................................... 31 4.1 Action Plan Performance Measures ............................................................................................. 34 4.2 CWPP updates ............................................................................................................................. 34 APPENDIX A ........................................................................................................................................... 35 APPENDIX Appendix A City Overview and Fire Environment Appendix B Community Survey Appendix C Wildland Res Mgt by Carol Rice, November 1, 2019 Page 9 164 1.0 FIRE MITIGATION STRATEGIES FOR ROLLING HILLS Wildfire threat can be defined as the result of an analysis of potential fire behavior and the likelihood of fire to occur relative to the communities at risk. The Fire Department develops maps showing areas of significant fire hazards using fuels, terrain , weather, and other relevant factors. While the maps are useful in examining fire hazard, high risk areas can be further identified using local perspectives and priorities regarding communities at risk and areas of concern. Appendix A, City Overview and Fire Environment, provides information on the City and the wildfire threats. To develop a DRAFT Critical to the development of the CWPP, a Wildlife Mitigation Survey (Survey) was conducted in 2018, with to obtain the input of the City’s stakeholders, all the residents of Rolling Hills. It was decided the best vehicle to capture input of all residents was through a survey and augment seminars conducted with residents in 2018. The survey was a “grassroots” effort whereby Block Captains helping to educate residents on developed the survey, educated residents on the importance of their participation through Zone meetings and summarized the survey feedback. Block Captains provided feedback on potential solutions and mitigation strategies. The Survey was sent to approximately 1270 residents, with about 25% responding. Appendix B, Community Survey, details areas of concerns and priorities as expressed by the respondentsresidents. Based on the community’s expressed concerns, Firefire mitigation strategies for Rolling Hills were developed from a variety of sources, including recommendations from Fire Fuel Consultant, Carol Rice, enaged by the RHCA. Ms. Rice’s Report, . The Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) engaged Fire Fuel Consultant, Wildland Res Management Ms. Carol Rice to assess Rolling Hills and provide recommendations to the RHCA Board of Directors. The Wildland Res Management Report dated November 1, 2019, is included as Appendix C. Also, the The Los Angeles County Fire Department provided recommendations to the City of Rolling Hills about dealing on options to deal with vegetation management, including the canyons. These recommendations priotized the highest values on All recommendations provided by Wildland Res Management and LA Fire Department are prioritized with the highest value on 1) life safety; 2) structural protection; and 3) natural resources and habitat and . Based on the feedback from the community survey, vegetation management was a most critical element for the residents. Feedback from all these resources was used to formulate the potential mitigation strategies detailed below. 1.1 Infrastructure hardening  Recommend Require that all structures have a class A roof by 2030. Page 10 165  Consider changes to recommended landscaping guidelines to comply with landscape recommendations to reduce the risk of structure ignitability  Create incentive plan or identify special “preferred” contractors who will assist with approvals and installation/alterations to harden homes.  Partner with manufacturers for demonstrations & to identify contractors of vents and equipment to harden homes.  For a specific period of time (to and including December 31, 20051 year) offer discounted permits or incentive for homeowners to make alterations to homes to harden (change out wood siding to hardy board, replace wood shingles, upgrade windows to dual pane, major landscape change)  Feature homes that are compliant with standards in Rolling Hills Living magazine 1.2 Vegetation Management1 Canyons  Fuel Management. The RHCA engaged the servies of consultant, Carol Rice, in 2009 and in 2019, with her reports available on the City’s and RHCA’s sebsites. Consultant Carol Rice provided services to the RHCA in 2009 and her work product the products of her work can be found on the City and RHCA websites. RHCA contracted again with Carol Rice in 2019 for a report recommending steps for the community to mitigate wildfire. Ms. Rice’s “Creating Fire Safe Canyons” guide includes 3 strategies for residents to manage fuel on their property, including area in canyons: o Shaded fuelbreak o Mosaic groupings o Shortened shrubs  Goats. Caveat: I am not certain goat grazing is an option in those areas where herbicides have been applied to the vegetation. Goat grazing can be a cost effective, environmentally sound way to clear combustible vegetation and promote growth of native grasses and beneficial plants, particularly for large areas (10, to 100+ acres) and in steep or difficult terrain. Grazing can efficiently treat areas that are inaccessible or difficult to manage with mowers and weed eaters, areas where prescribed burns are inadvisable, and sensitive areas where the application of herbicides is not appropriate.  Control burns. Los Angeles County Fire Department is dedicated to fire protection and wildfire prevention. One of the Los Angeles County Fire Department’s prevention programs is Vegetation Management (Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 9.8 Chaparral management, Sections 1 Recommendations by Consultant Carol Rice are included in this report to illustrate available wildfire mitigation strategies for Rolling Hills and in no way suggest that the strategies will be adopted by the Rolling Hills Community Association. Page 11 166 1560 to 1569.6). The Vegetation Management Program (VMP) is a cost-share program that focuses on the use of prescribed fire, and some mechanical means, for addressing wildland fire fuel hazards and other resource management issues. The use of prescribed fire mimics natural processes, restores fire to its historic role in wildland ecosystems and provides significant fire hazard reduction benefits that enhance public and firefight safety.  Invasive or noxious plants. Consider the use of herbicide or the manual removal of invasive or noxious plants in the canyons: arundo, bamboo/bamboo- like plants and poison ivy.  Herbicides. The World Health Organization has identified certain herbicides as carcinogeni and, in this community, the use of herbicides on home sites and all common areas, e.g., Roundup, is strongly discouraged. Fire Fuel Management Standards for individual properties A copy of the Fire Fuel Management Standards has been posted on the City’s and RHCA’s websites. Resident’s review of these Standards is recommended by Carol Rice and the Los Angeles County Fire Department. Residents are urged to have their home sites inspected to assess the extent to which their homes meet these recommended guidelines.Fire Fuel Consultant Carol Rice recommended the community adopt Fire Fuel Management Standards as a tool to teach homeowners about fire-wise vegetation management on their private property. The Los Angeles County Fire Department endorsed and supported this recommendation for the city. Ms. Rice also recommende d individual property inspections be conducted to evaluate individual properties in comparison with the Fuel Management Standards with recommendations on how homeowners can meet vegetation management guidelines. Roadside Based on the Wildland Res Management report, the following measures were recommended:  Develop a Community Fuel Management Standard, consistent with the community’s CC&Rs, as a guideline for residents to help mitigate fire fuel conditions on their home sites.  Secure recommendations from the Los Angeles County Fire Department concerning vegetation in the community that (a) interferes with the operaton of Fire Department equipment and personnel during when confronted with a wildfire in the community or (b) unreasonably interferes with evacuation routes for residents during a Fire Department ordered evacuation.Rice’s report also encouraged the development of a community fuel management standards to set measurable standards for vegetation management along roadsid es within the RHCA road easements and other areas allowed in the CC&Rs. Recommended also is removing tree limbs hanging over roadways that are under 18’ in height or as assessed by the fire department. Page 12 167  Evaluate the Fire Code requirements for 10 ‘roadside clearance for easy access and improved evacuation routes. Fire Code Section 325.10 defines clearance requirements.  Remove all vegetation from area immediately adjacent to roadway and install surface that does not promote germination of weeds, i.e. decomposed granite or wood chips. Perform weed management in spring and summer (mowing, weed whacking). The RHCA does not use herbicides in the community except for noxious plants like poison ivy.  Eliminate fuel ladders by removing lower tree branches and limiting the height of shrubs under trees to prevent fire from moving into tree canopies 4 -6’ back from edge of roadway:  Interface with the Southern California Edison Company respecting its responsibiity to comply with any Code requirements related to the clearance of vegetation around the base of a utility poles and such vegetation that may interfere with SCE electrical wires or equipment, coordinating all such activity with the SCE. In all such instances, first identify the person or entity who bears the responsibility for undertaking such clearances. Clear all vegetation within 3’ around the base of a utility pole or fire hydrant. Non-exempt poles require 10’ clearance. SCE is responsible for such clearance.  Remove trees underneath power lines that have a mature height that could interfere with electrical wires or equipment. Always work through SCE for line clearance.  Remove or cut back tree limbs that are within 8’ of electrical wires. Alwa ys work through SCE for line clearance.  Within the roadway easement, remove plants and volunteer trees identified by the fire department as highly flammable (pampas grass, juniper, palm trees, pine trees, eucalyptus trees). Prohibit new planting of these highly flammable plants by changing landscape guidelines.  Encourage or require property owners to adhere to vegetation management within the boundaries of their property to meet the fuel management standards set by the County Fire Department for Very High Fire Hazard Areas and in limited areas, the Association standards for Fuel Management and RHCA landscaping guidelines for new planting. Consistent with the governing documents and CC&Rs, the The RHCA may promulgate require higher standards than the Fire Code.  Rice’s report also encouraged the development of a community fuel management standards to set measurable standards for vegetation management along roadsides within the RHCA road easements and other areas allowed in the CC&Rs. Recommended also is removing tree limbs hanging over roadways that are under 18’ in height or as assessed by the fire department. Bridle trails Page 13 168  Consistent with the condition of the trails, no less than annual mowing and weed whacking on our trails, to reduce fire fuel and minimize the presence of foxtails and other vegetation that could prove harmful to trail users, including their pets and livestock.Annual maintenance mowing and weed whacking along bridle trails.  Periodic vegetation management of our trails, e.g., such as abatement using brush hound, hedge trimmers or heavier equipment on an as-needed basis and as the budget permits.  Manage vegetation to eliminate fuel ladders along bridle trails.  Cut back blackberries and lift and separate plants that currently make up the dense brush in canyons (lemonade berry or toyon).  Remove palm trees and other “high hazard” plants identified by LA Co. Fire  Remove Arunda (bamboo like vegetation) from areas immediately adjacent to bridle trails  Consider all means available for brush clearance, including but not limited to goats, or contract services. Invasive and highly flammable plants  For the benefit of residents, createCreate a list, posted on the City’s and RHCA’s webiste, identifying highly flammable plants and request that the governing bodies prohibit planting of these plants and create a plan for eradication or removal of such plants within the community. Create a list of desirable plants for planting in the community. as an alternative for planting. From tax dollars only, reserve a fund that can be used to incentivize residents to remove highly flammable plants and replace the same, if at all, with desirable plants.Create or obtain funding for an incentive program for removal of such plants 1.3 Electric Power Lines Experts have opined that undergrounding power lines in those areas said that despite the heavy costs, burying power lines in areas most susceptible to winds would provide a huge margin of safety in reducing fire risk for communities. Burying utility lines underground remains, for fire mitigation and cosmetic reasons, in sensitive areas is a potential mitigation strategy for Rolling Hills. Southern California Edison (SCE) periodically has to replace its wood powe r poles as part of its ongoing maintenance program and installs new power poles as needed. SCE has recently started to install power poles constructed of a composite nonflammable material and will begin to wrap its wood power poles with a nonflammable mate rial. Replacement occurs when SCE determines the need on a case by case basis. Page 14 169 1.4 Inspections and Enforcement The City of Rolling Hills (City) enforces its nuisance codes (City Municipal Code Chapter 8.24 Abatement of Nuisance and Chapter 8.30 Fire Fuel Abatement) by City staff and the City Attorney. The City code enforcement official conducts inspections year-round but can only do so from the roads and/or bridle trails unless given permission or obtaining a warrant. City nuisance code enforcement of Chapter 8.24 is rarely invoked. City nuisance code enforcement of Chapter 8.30 is actively enforced by a dedicated City code enforcement official. Said Chapter 8.30, however, is limited by its terms to dead vegetation of any kind, dead or alive tumbleweeds, and dead palm fronds on living palm trees located on the portion of the property that has a slope equal to or less than 50%. The Fire Department has jurisdiction over property with structures an d the Agricultural Commissioner has jurisdiction over the rest. The LA County Fire Department provides fire hazard reduction and safety guidelines to all property owners in Rolling Hills. After a mailed notice, the Fire Department and Agricultural Commiss ioner personnel conduct an annual inspection of all of the properties commencing June 1 for non- compliance with the Fire Code. Fire Department personnel do not have the right to enter through locked gates. Property owners may deny access, at which point, an inspection warrant must be secured. The property may be inspected if it can be seen from a public viewpoint. The Fire Code enforcement, historically, has been limited to removing dead vegetation within 200 feet of residences. even though the Fire Code also requires ten feet of clearance on each side of all roads and driveways. Fire Code Section 325.10 Roadway Clearance: “The fire code official may require removal and clearance of all flammable vegetation or other combustible growth for a minimum of 10’ on each side of every roadway, whether public or private… This section shall not apply to single specimen trees, ornamental shrubbery, or cultivated ground cover such as green grass, ivy, succulents or similar plants used as ground cover, provided that they do not form a means of readily transmitting fire.” The Fire Code does not require ten feet of clearance on each side of all roads and driveways. The Fire Code states that Section 325.10 “may require” and makes no reference to driveways. Also, I am unaware of any legal opinion on whether this Section would apply in a private community, e.g., Rolling Hills. City nuisance code enforcement of Chapter 8.24 is rarely invoked. City nuisance code enforcement of Chapter 8.30 is actively enforced by a dedicated City code enforcement official. Said Chapter 8.30, however, is limited by its terms to dead vegetation of any kind, dead or alive tumbleweeds, and dead palm fronds on living palm trees located on the portion of the property that has a slope equal to or less than 50%. Page 15 170 The LA County Fire Department provides fire hazard reduction and safety guidelines to all property owners in Rolling Hills. After a mailed notice, the Fire Department and Agricultural Commissioner personnel conduct an annual inspection of all of the properties commencing June 1 for non-compliance with the Fire Code. Fire Department personnel do not have the right to enter through locked gates. Property owners may deny access, at which point, an inspection warrant must be secured. The property may be inspected if it can be seen from a public viewpoint. The City code enforcement official conducts inspections year -round but can only do so from the roads and/or bridle trails unless given permission or obtaining a warrant. SCE is responsible for power line clearance and non-exempt poles. The property owner is responsible for all other required clearance in the easement. SCE periodically inspects and reduces the height of trees and brush so they do not encroach into the area of the power lines. Page 16 171 2.0 EVACUATION STRATEGIES 2.1 Community Preparedness and Education The Los Angeles County Fire Department, along with partnering agencies, stand ready to quickly respond to contain wildfires, utilizing firefighting resources from the air and ground to help protect people and property from wildfire. Preparation and prevention go hand-in-hand. LA County Fire’s Ready! Set! Go! Brochure is available for residents and was designed to provide critical information on creating defensible space around a home, retrofitting a home with fire -resistant materials, and informing how and when to safely evacuate well ahead of a wildfire. The City of Rolling Hills partners with the Fire Department to prepare and educate the community on the specifics contained in the Ready! Set! Go! Brochure through the Block Captain Program. A copy of the brochure can be obtained by calling LA County Fire Department Public Information Office at (323) 881-2411 or online at http://fire.lacounty.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Ready-set-go_051420.pdf. 2.1.1 Block Captain Program The City’s volunteer Block Captains are a crucial liaison between residents, first responders and the City’s Emergency Operation Center (EOC) in the event of a large- scale emergency. In this role, the Block Captains are committed to serving and assisting residents of Rolling Hills before, during and after a disaster. The Block Captain program divides the city into 24 zones. Each zone has two to three Block Captains with other residents providing Block Captain support if needed. Each zone has an average of 50 homes. The Block Captain’s primary duties include:  Meet the residents in their zone, greet new homeowners and explain the Rolling Hills Wildfire Community Protection Plan (CWPP) to them.  Keep track of who is living within their zone by maintaining names, telephone, email addresses and other relevant information.  Identify residents with special needs.  Maintain their walkie-talkies to ensure they are charged and in good working condition.  Attend bi-monthly Block Captain meetings.  Attend and encourage residents to attend periodic training programs on wildfire mitigation and disaster planning. Page 17 172  Conduct one to two meetings annually with residents in their zone to distribute, update and exchange information. Convey resident’s concerns to the Lead Block Captain or City Manager.  Participate in annual emergency response drills. In case of a wildfire or any type of disaster, the Block Captain’s first responsibility is to his/her safety and the safety of his/her family and home. Only if there is time, it is the Block Captain’s role to initiate pre-arranged procedures within their neighborhoods, including checking on and assisting special needs neighbors and, disseminating information received from the EOC. Block Captains should be familiar with key documents contained in the “RH Block Captain Master Information File” including: Wil dfire & Earthquake Checklists; the Wildfire & Earthquake Preparation and Evacuation Recommendations, and City emergency procedures. Block Captains play an important role in providing such information to residents about what to do in an emergency, in advance of a wildfire. an evacuation and in preparation for a disaster. Page 18 173 Each Block Captain is in charge of giving specific information summaries to emergency responders through the EOC about the state of residents in a Zone so their response to a disaster can be most effective and efficient. Training programs will teach Block Captains about these responsibilities and teach other useful information, such as how to keep specific supplies accessible for when they are called to respond. They will be taught how to reach out to the residents in their Zone. In short, a Block Captain is a lifesaving leader in times of citywide emergencies. 2.1.2 On-going communication and education Effective communication and education programs are essential to implement and to maintain a successful Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) and will keep residents involved. The Rolling Hills Wildfire Mitigation Survey identified ‘on -going communications and education’ as a critical factor in dealing with wildfire preparedness and evacuation issues. The communication and education program will be jointly sponsored by the City of RH, the RHCA and support of the first responders and the Block Captains. The program will consist of but not be limited to the following items: 1. Rolling Hills Living Magazine in-depth articles on wildfire mitigation 2. Rolling Hill Newsletter and Rolling Hills Community Association News Letter — Meeting announcements, training class schedule, annual exercise schedule, demonstrations, new Block Captain announcement 3. Bi-monthly Block Captain meeting will discuss planning updates, information transfer, first responder inputs 4. One to two annual Block Captain Zone meetings with new and current residents to transfer emergency preparedness information, especially updates from first responders 5. City of Rolling Hills Website www.rolling-hills.org has important information from items 1 thru 4 6. Workshops or seminars to include but not limited to: a. How to create a defensible space on your property b. How to harden your home c. How to improve your landscape with more fire-resistant plants d. How to inspection your home for fire hazards e. Why high hazard plants should be removed f. How to develop an evacuation plan for your family g. How to sign up for the City’s “Notify me”, reverse 911 and subscribe to Alert Southbay. Page 19 174 7. An evaluation of equipment used by Block Captains during an emergency will facilitate communication with the City of Rolling Hills. The goal is to complete the evaluation by the end of 2020. (See section 2.2.2.2.) Equipment will be issued in advance of an emergency so Block Captains can communicate with the Emergency Operation Center (EOC) in the event of land line and cell phone failure. The communication and education process will be continuously monitored to ensure effectiveness and efficiency by evaluating new tools and methods. 2.2 Evacuation during an Actual Emergency The Fire Department and the Sheriff’s Department operate under the Unified Incident Command where representatives from each department and other relevant agencies will set up a command post near the incident to ensure all entities responding to the emergency are communicating. If appropriate and relevant, the City Manager of Rolling Hills will be invited to be at the command post and send information back to the City’s Emergency Operations Center (EOC). The Incident Command System (ICS) is a standardized, on-scene, all-hazard incident management concept. It is a management protocol originally designed in the 1970s for the Fire Service agencies in California and subsequently required through state legislation in 1993 as an element of the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) to cover all California State agencies and its political subdivisions. In 2004, ICS was required to be implemented nationally as an element of the National incident Management System (NIMS) through Presidential Directive (HSPD -5 & 8). ICS is based upon a flexible, scalable emergency response organization providing a common framework within which representatives may be drawn from multiple agencies that do not routinely work together, and ICS is designed to give standard response and operation procedures to reduce the problems and potential for miscommunication on such incidents.1 Responding specifically to wildfires, the Fire Department will take the lead in determining the appropriate response strategies including ordering evacuations. The Sheriff’s Department will take orders from the Fire Department and support the Fire Department in their calls. As an example, if the Fire Department calls for evacuations citywide, the Sheriff’s Department would assist in notifying residents by going to door to door, siren calls in a localized area, and or use available and operable media notifications such as the City’s “notify me,” and or Alert Southbay. The Sheriff’s Department would also deploy personnel to assist with traffic control. Under a citywide evacuation order, to ensure safety, the Sheriff’s Department would also manage the entries back into the community. Page 20 175 2.2.1 Evacuation Levels Depending on the condition of the wildfire, the Fire Department may call for the following:  Citywide evacuation  Partial evacuation – areas defined  Shelter in place In all scenarios, it is imperative that the community has a personal evacuation plan to refer to for expedient actions. It is also imperative that the community prepare for emergencies with a list of important phone numbers, critical items to take with when leaving, a location to go when forced to evacuate, several different routes to safety and flash lights, candles, canned food and water. The READY! SET! GO! brochure published by the Los Angeles County Fire Department is an essential emergency preparation booklet that includes how to prepare a personal Wildfire Action Plan including where and when to evacuate. Residents are asked to formulate a plan and rehearse that plan periodically so that it becomes second nature in the even to an emergency. 2.2.2 Communication during emergency events 2.2.2.1 Emergency Operations Center (EOC) The City of Rolling Hills is currently drafting the Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) that will outline the operations of the Emergency Operations Center (EOC). The EOP will define when and how the EOC will be opened, the players that are a part of the EOC and the functions of each position in the EOC. The EOC will operate using the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) and National Incident Management System (NIMS). Employees of the City of Rolling Hills will be staffing the City’s EOC including a member of the Rolling Hills Community Association. Employees of the City of Rolling Hills are required to take SEMS/NIMS training from the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (CalOES). A division of CalOES called the California Specialized Training Institute (CSTI) provide training to local governments in California to have standardization in the way EOCs are operated in California and nationally. In the event that the employees of the City of Rolling Hills are unable to serve in the EOC du ring an emergency, staff members from other nearby cities can assist provided that they have received training from CSTI. The EOC would be divided into the following sections with one or two people responsible for each of the sections: Page 21 176  Intelligence  Planning  Logistics  Operations  Finance Briefly, the EOC is a centralized location to receive reports from the field, response efforts are planned, operations personnel are deployed and expenditures are tracked. As an example, the First Responders could report that there are three fallen trees along the major arterial of the City blocking vehicular traffic. Upon receiving this report, the EOC could contact appropriate vendors to clear the trees from the road. Expenses relating to the clearing of the tree will be tracked for potential reimbursemen t through federal agencies or State agencies. Rolling Hills Community Association, having control over the easements including the trail and the roads, will play a critical part in the example outlined. The RHCA can deploy their own personnel to conduct the clearing work or engage vendors that they already have relationships with to assist the community in the time of need. 2.2.2.2 Emergency communication methods with residents and Block Captains During an emergency, information is critical to deploy the needed resources. In the time of an emergency, Block Captains are expected to take care of their families and loved ones first. Only if Block Captains are able and available will they be encourage d to report field conditions to the City’s EOC, or to the City Hall. This communication can be done via working cell phones, land -lines, emails, text messages and or walkie- talkies. The City of Rolling Hills is currently evaluating 1) what infrastructure is needed to support emergency communications and 2) which equipment is needed for use by Block Captains and the City to communicate during emergencies. The goal is to have this project completed by the end of 2020. Once equipment is purchased and installed Block Captains should communicate efficiently by answering two questions in each communique:  What do you have?  What do you need? 2.2.2.3 Notifying residents to prepare to evacuate The City of Rolling Hills has multiple ways to communicate with residents during an emergency:  RH website – www.rolling-hills.org Page 22 177  Alert Southbay – emergency notifications  local media  email and phone communication 2.2.3 Potential evacuation routes 2.2.3.1 Main gate, Crest Road gate at Crenshaw and Eastfield gates The number one and two priorities of first responders are life safety and property, in that order. First Responders will determine if an Evacuation Order is needed and will notify the City through the Incident Command Center. If an Evacuation Order is issued by the Incident Command Center, residents will be alerted of an immediate threat to life and property that is within one to two hours. When the order is issued residents should evacuate through one of the main gates and the route chosen is dependent on the location of the fire activity route recommended by first responders. LA County Sheriff and LA County Fire Department have identified potential evacuation routes, which included options for rapid egress from areas within the city threatened by a wildfire.  Main Gate at Rolling Hills Road and Palos Verdes Drive North  Crest Gate at Crest Road near Crenshaw Blvd  Eastfield Gate at Eastfield Drive and Palos Verdes Drive East Potential issues that may affect evacuation include:  Residents may not have established evacuation preparedness plans.  Residents may choose not to evacuate but to stay and defend their homes or decide to shelter in place until the fire danger passes. Some might change their mind late in the evacuation process forcing them to flee when conditions are at their worst. Without fully understanding the effects of their decisions, resident actions can jeopardize their life safety as well as that of firefighters and law enforcement personnel.  Fallen trees or downed powers lines may block roads.  Several streets within Rolling Hills are narrow and could quickly be come congested with traffic. First Responders do not want residents to use bridle trails as potential evacuation routes. In an extreme situation the use of trails as potential evacuation routes may be considered by First Responders on a “case by case” basis. Page 23 178 IMPORTANT NOTE: Wildfires are extremely fluid and complex. An evacuation route may become compromised due to fire activity. The Potential Evacuation Routes map provides suggested evacuation routes that are dependent on the location of the wildfire. It is recommended that residents practice preparing for and evacuating through their primary and secondary exit route. 2.2.3.2 Crest Road East Gate There is a fourth (4th) gate that is locked and closed located at the end of Crest Road East with no guards. There are several holders of the key to unlock the gate including:  LA County Sheriff  LA County Fire Department  All RHCA Gatehouses  RHCA Manager  Maintenance Supervisor and Staff  Gate Supervisor  Architectural Supervisor During a wildfire emergency the Crest Road East gate is considered by First Responders as an option for residents to use to exit the city. Residents should be informed in advance that Crest Road East is an option and is considered as a one-way exit from Rolling Hills into Rancho Palos Verdes towards Palos Verdes Drive East. Once the Crest Road East Gate is opened, no one, including residents, will be allowed entry into the community will not be granted re-entry through this gate. First Responders will determine if an Evacuation Warning and/or Evacuation Order is needed and will notify the City through the Incident Command Center. During a wildfire emergency an Evacuation Warning may be issued by the Incid ent Command Center. Residents will be alerted of a potential threat to life and property that is more than two hours away. If the possibility exists that the gate will need to be opened a RHCA staff person will be stationed at the gate ready to open it. An Evacuation Order may be issued by the Incident Command Center. Residents will be alerted of an immediate threat to life and property that is within one to two hours. RHCA staff person or another designee of the RHCA should be onsite to assist with traffic management if available. Page 24 179 Note: As of the publication date of this plan the RHCA Board of Directors approved the automation of the Crest Road East gate. The installation is scheduled to be completed in August 2020. It is expected that RHCA staff will be able to open the gate remotely upon receiving with an Evacuation Warning or Evacuation Order from First Responders. 2.2.3.3 Traffic Control In the event of an evacuation, the Sheriff’s Department will maintain traffic control based on the level of closure established by the Fire Department. The five evacuation levels are as follows: Level 1: Open to general public Level 2: Open to critical-incident resources and all residents. Level 3: Closed to all traffic except fire, law and critical resources e.g. public works, power, LASD volunteers, etc. Note: escorts may be needed. Level 4: Closed to all traffic except fire-department and law-enforcement personnel. Level 5: Closed to all traffic. 2.2.3.4 Temporary Refuge Area(s) Temporary Refuge Area(s) have been recommended to be identified for the community of Rolling Hills by First Responders and consultant, Ms. Carol Rice. At the time of this publication areas have not been identified. 2.2.4 Residents Who May Need Special Assistance in an Emergency Vulnerable populations have special needs that are critical to address during disasters such as wildfire. These populations may be less likely to respond to, cope with, recover from wildfire, and are less likely to get involved in wildfi re mitigation activities. Age, physical, and mental limitations can restrict mobility making it more difficult to evacuate in a disaster. Language issues can result in communication barriers to evacuation or support services. 15% of survey respondents indi cated that they or family members have special needs. 26% of survey respondents have neighbors with special needs or who may need assistance in an evacuation. The RH Block Captains will identify special needs residents by canvassing their zones and working with the RH Seniors Committee on who they are, where they live and what assistance they may need. Ways to easily identify the homes of these residents is currently being evaluated. The Block Captains along with first responders can provide assistance to these residents in preparing, responding and recovering from a disaster. Page 25 180 Information on special needs residents will be saved on an encrypted server and only accessible by city staff and a Block Captain. A printout of special needs residents will only be distributed to the corresponding zone Block Captains. 2.2.5 Large animal/horse evacuations Rolling Hills is considered an equestrian community. Emergency preparedness is important for all animals, but preparedness can be more difficult for large animals (e.g., horses) because of their size and special transportation needs. Evacuation of horses should occur as soon as an evacuation warning is issued. If owners are unprepared or wait until the last minute, they may have to leave their animals behind. The following provides information for pre-planning evacuation with large animals, including horses:  Contact Los Angeles County Department of Animal Control Equine Response Team (LACDACERT) for evacuation information for large animals. LACDACERT has trained volunteers who are trained in the evacuation and sheltering of horses in wildfire events. LACDACERT has equipment and personnel available for large animal evacuation and billeting. All requests for emergency assistance are channeled through LA County Sheriff’s Dispatch (911).  Even though the County has assistance available, it is strongly encouraged for horse owners to make their own plan for emergency transportation and sheltering for horses. Many designated sheltering sites may become overcrowded or are far from Rolling Hills. Make plans now to house horses with friends, at a commercial stable, or other suitable location out of the danger area. Discuss plans with everyone in the family and keep the contact information and address of emergency animal shelters and driving directions in an emergency kit.  Make a list of emergency contacts. Keep copies in vehicles or trailer as well as in the house.  Take photographs and prepare a written description of each horse or other large animal(s). Put one set in a safe place and another set in an emergency kit.  Have a halter and rope for each horse/large animal. Make sure halters are marked with contact information or write the information on a piece of duct tape and stick it on the halter. Reflective identification collars are available for purchase from Caballeros. If a horse has medical issues or special needs, record this information on a luggage tag and attach it to the halter.  Microchip horses/large animals. This is an easy, inexpensive way to help identify animals.  Have a three-day supply of feed and water (per large animal). This is particularly important if plans are to shelter in place but bring feed (and buckets) if evacuated. Make sure to include any medications the large animal(s) may need. Label all equipment. Page 26 181  Teach your horses how to trailer. Spend time loading and unloading the animals so they are safe and willing to load, consider practicing loading during the day and night. Continue working with the large animals until you are confident that they will load.  Keep trucks, trailers and vans well maintained and ready to move. Keep gas tanks full, check tire pressure, particularly during Red Flag Warning days.  Horse owners who keep their horses on their property are encouraged to have an orange reflector, available from Caballeros, on their house sign to indicate that horses are on the property. If you evacuate your animals, remove or cover the reflector.  Store non-perishable supplies in a portable container such as a clean trashcan, bucket or canvas duffle bag. Potential issues with evacuating large animals and horses include panicked animals may behave unpredictably and may refuse to respond to normal handling approaches. 2.2.6 Re-entry back in to the Community Re-entering an evacuated area requires as much forethought and planning as an evacuation order. The safety of residents and emergency responders is of the utmost concern and must drive the decision of when to repopulate. LA County Fire Department and LA County Sheriff’s Department will determine when it is safe for residents, including those with special needs and large animals to move back into the area. Residents re-entering the city will depend upon the evacuation level. Note: Levels 3, 4 and 5 are closed the city to residents.  Level 1: Open to general public  Level 2: Open to critical-incident resources and all residents.  Level 3: Closed to all traffic except fire, law and critical resources e.g. public works, power, LASD volunteers, etc. Note: escorts may be needed.  Level 4: Closed to all traffic except fire-department and law-enforcement personnel.  Level 5: Closed to all traffic. Page 27 182 3.0 ACTION PLAN The plan below defines the actions needed to lessen the risk of wildfires and to address the community’s greatest risks. The plan lists the action items for each of the four entities – City of Rolling Hills, RH Community Association, RH Residents, LA County Fire Department and LA County Sheriff’s Department. Action Plan (FY2020-2021 to FY2022-2023) City RHCA Residents LACFD LASD 1 Block Captain Program - participate and support program x x XX x x 2 Neighborhood zone meetings x XX x x 3 Emergency communication with residents x x XX x x 4 Evacuation Exercise XX x x x x 5 Workshops and seminars for residents x x XX x x 6 Special needs population x x XX 7 Define communication standards with residents XX x x 8 Define refuge areas x x x XX x 9 City Ordinance Enforcement XX x 10 Fire Department Annual Inspection x XX 11 Evacuation routes (roadside) vegetation management XX x x 12 Bridal trail vegetation management XX x 13 Entry/Exit gates vegetation management XX x 14 Fire Fuel Management in Preserve with Land Conservancy XX x 15 Development of fire fuel management standards XX x x 16 City Ordinance to restrict planting of six high hazard plants per Ready! Set! Go! brochure XX x x x 17 Motorize Crest Road East Gate XX 18 Utility undergrounding projects XX x x 19 Grants for fire fuel management in canyons XX 20 Controlled burns in canyons x x x XX x Legend: XX Primary Responsibility x Secondary Responsibility Page 28 183 Project Descriptions 1. Block Captain Program This project will focus on the recruitment and the training of the Block Captain volunteers. Training programs will focus on teaching Block Captains about responsibilities and other useful information, such as how to keep specific supplies accessible for when they are called to respond. The project will evaluate the best marketing materials to encourage recruitment, best training vehicles, including multi-media, and enhancements needed to the City’s website to support the management of resident contact information while ensuring privacy and confidentiality. Project Leads: Block Captain Leads and City of Rolling Hills working with First Responders and RHCA Timing: 2020/2023 2. Neighborhood Zone Meetings The project will evaluate available educational materials and videos from the Los Angeles County Fire Department, which highlight priorities documented in the Ready! Set! Go! Brochure. The project will evaluate a cost-effective approach to video for replay on the city’s website. Project Leads: Block Captain Leads and City of Rolling Hills with First Responders Timing: 2020/2023 3. Emergency Communication with Residents The City’s volunteer Block Captains are a crucial liaison between residents in the 24 City zones, first responders and the City’s Emergency Operation Center (EOC) in the event of a large-scale emergency. Block Captains have responsibilities in assisting residents of Rolling Hills before, during and after a disaster including:  What to do in an emergency, in advance of an evacuation and in preparation for a disaster.  During an emergency specific information will provided to emergency responders through the EOC about the state of residents in a Zone. In the event that cell phones, landlines and/or email communications are compromised evaluate other equipment options, such as digital radios, satellite phones (with Push -to- Page 29 184 talk capability) or other viable options. Purchase equipment and provide training to Block Captains as necessary. Project Leads: Block Captain Leads and City of Rolling Hills with First Responders and RHCA Timing: 2020/2023 4. Evacuation Exercise It is important to periodically conduct a simulation exercise of an actual emergency evacuation with all entities involved during an emergency: First Responders, residents, City of Rolling Hills and the RHCA, including the gate staff. The goals of the exercise can include but are not limited to evacuation of residents and individuals with special needs, communication between the city’s Emergency Operations Center and Block Captains, and traffic control. Assessment and “lessons learned” should be captured and shared. Project Leads: Block Captain Leads and City of Rolling Hills with First Responders and RHCA Timing: 2020/2023 5. Workshops and Seminars for Residents The project will evaluate available educational materials and local experts in wildfire mitigation who can conduct seminars and workshops for the 2000 residents in Rolling Hills. The project will evaluate a cost-effective approach to video seminars and workshops for replay on the city’s website. Project Leads: Block Captain Leads and City of Rolling Hills Timing: 2020/2023 6. Residents with Special Needs This project will focus on the coordination needed between Block Captains and the RHCA Seniors Committee to identify residents who may have special needs during an emergency. This project will focus on teaching Block Captains how best to assist this group of residents, what useful information and/or supplies should be provided to this group, and what resources are available to them in the event of an emergency. Project Leads: Block Captain Leads, RHCA and City of Rolling Hills Timing: 2020/2023 Page 30 185 7. Define communication standards with residents This project will define the protocols for communicating for the City to communicate with Block Captains and for the Block Captains to communicate with residents during emergencies and wildfire events. This project will include the purchase of communication devices for relevant parties. Project Leads: City staff Timing: 2020/2021 8. Define refuge areas This project requires the Fire Department and the Sheriff’s Department to identify refuge areas within the limits of the City in the event of wildfire event. Project Leads: Fire Department/Sheriff’s Department Timing: 2020/2021 9. City Ordinance Enforcement This project requires city staff to enforce ordinances relating to wildfire mitigation including Chapter 8.30 Fire Fuel Abatement. Project Leads: City staff Timing: currently in progress and on-going 10. Fire Department annual inspections The project requires the Fire Department Brush Clearance Unit to conduct inspection at all parcels within the city limits for compliance with 200’ defensible space around structures. Project Leads: Fire Department Timing: currently in progress and on-going 11. Evacuation routes (roadside) vegetation management This project requires fire fuel and vegetation management along three evacuation routes within the city: Portuguese Bend Road, Eastfield Drive, and Crest Road. Fire Code defines the standard for roadside clearance. Project Leads: RHCA, residents Timing: 2020 Page 31 186 12. Bridle Trail Vegetation Management This project requires RHCA contractors to thin out, remove or otherwise manage vegetation on and adjacent to bridle trails as outlined in the Fire Fuel management Standards to include the following:  Thinning native chapparal  Remove hazardous brush and weeds  Remove lower limbs of trees to create a safe vertical clearance for equestrians and emergency vehicles  Remove non-native species such as palm trees, castor beans, Arundo, and other highly flammable species  Cut back vegetation to provide adequate horizontal clearance on bridle trails as identified in the Fuel Management Stanards Project Leads: RHCA maintenance staff Timing: 2020/2023 13. Entry/exit gate vegetation management RHCA Board has adopted a policy for roadsides along major roadways in the community to have vegetation cleaned up to 8’ back from the edge of pavement, where practical. RHCA also performs periodic maintenance of roadside trees for safety purposes and to ensure there is 16’ vertical clearance along roadways for emergency vehicles and evacuation. Project Leads: RHCA maintenance staff Timing: currently in progress, on-going 14. Fire Fuel management in the Preserve This project requires the Palos Verdes Peninsul a Land Conservancy to remove fire fuel in the Preserve annually. The City has funded two rounds of fuel removal between 2019 and 2020. Project Leads: City and Land Conservancy Timing: currently in progress, on-going 15. Development of fire fuel management standards Page 32 187 This project requires the development of fire fuel management standards for the residents and the community as a whole. Project Lead: RHCA Timing: 2020 16. City Ordinance to restrict planting of six high hazard plants per Ready! Set! Go! brochure In April 2020, the City Council considered restricting the planting of the six high hazard plants but decided not to take action. Instead, the City Council directed staff to discourage applicants seeks permits development or landscaping projects from planting the six high hazard plants. The City Council will reconsider taking action in the near future. Project Lead: City Timing: 2021 17. Motorize Crest Road East Gate See section 2.2.3.2 of this report. Project Leads: RHCA Timing: 2020 18. Utility undergrounding projects This project requires the undergrounding of overhead utilities within the city. The Eastfield Undergrounding Project is underway and undergrounding is te ntatively scheduled for fall 2020. The city provides incentives for residents to form assessment districts for utility undergrounding projects. The city is developing a policy to incentivize single utility pole undergrounding. Project leads: City Timing: currently in progress, on-going 19. Grants for fire fuel management in canyons This project requires collaboration with property owners of the canyon areas and to find innovative ways to remove fire fuels in difficult to reach areas. Once identified, the City can pursue grant funds to implement the solution. Project Leads: City and residents Page 33 188 Timing: 2021 20. Controlled burns in canyons This project requires collaboration with the Fire Department to determine areas within the City suitable for controlled burns. Project Leads: Fire Department Timing: 2023 Page 34 189 4.0 MONITORING AND UPDATES 4.1 Action Plan Performance Measures Performance measures will be develop in future versions of the CWPP. 4.2 CWPP updates The CWPP will be updated on an annual basis. Updates to document shall be noted at the beginning of the document identified by version number. Page 35 190 APPENDIX A CITY OVERVIEW AND FIRE ENVIRONEMNT A1. CITY OVERVIEW A1.1 Information about the City The City of Rolling Hills (Rolling Hills) incorporated in 1957. Rolling Hills is 3.0 square miles and a gated community with private roads and three entry gates on the Palos Verdes Peninsula in the County of Los Angeles. Rolling Hills has a citizen population of 1,860 and 685 single-family one-story homes that are nestled in a rural equestrian community with no traffic lights. There are approximately 80 horses in Rolling Hills with 19 horse trailers. 90% of the housing units (600+) are owner occupied and less than 10% of the housing units are renter occupied. Rolling Hills homes are 20 th century California ranch or Spanish haciendas located on large parcels. As a gated community, Rolling Hills land use pattern was establis hed in 1936 with the sale of parcels around hilly terrain and deep canyons. From its inception in 1936, Rolling Hills created and continues to maintain a residential community that conforms to its unique land form constraints. The City’s minimum lot size r equirements were established in recognition of some relevant physical constraints, which includes the following constraints: 1. Steeply sloping hillsides; Land movement hazards 2. Lack of urban infrastructure such as sewer 3. Danger of wildland fires 4. Sensitive animal habitats and species 5. Geological constraints 6. Fire safety constraints 7. Infrastructure constraints 8. Environmental constraints 9. Topographic constraints In particular, unique features to mention is Rolling Hills geological and topographic constraints which are driven by expansive soil combined with ancient landslide which when it reactivates affects lands shift and landslides from time to time, which in tu rn imposes high repair cost for slope restoration work. A portion of the City is located on severe terrain comprised of steep hills and roads with slope elevations between 25 to 50 percent, deep canyons, and cliffs all surrounded with an abundance of native and non- native vegetation, makes it difficult to meet the zoning requirements for the production of housing development. Furthermore, the California Geological Survey has identified numerous liquefaction zones and areas within city limits that are subje ct to earthquake induced landslides. Page 36 191 Rolling Hills fire safety constraint is driven by the fact that in July 2008, all the land in Rolling Hills was determined “Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone” by the S tate of California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. As a result, more restrictive fire safety and landscape standards were adopted into Rolling Hills building code that resulted in higher design and building cost for all new housing development. Another constraint to note is that the Fire Department’s capability to address normal fire calls, not to mention, address wildfire crisis is limited due to its aging distribution water system that is managed by California Water Company. On June 10, 2019, Rolling Hills City Council adopted the fiscal year 2019/20 budget. The budget serves as the City’s roadmap for allocating resources for the management of public programs and services, achieving city priorities and goals that serve residents and the public. The budget also represents the projections necessary for managing and monitoring annual revenue and expenditures in a fiscally responsible manner. For fiscal year 2019/20, Rolling Hills general fund budget projects $2,278,300 in revenue and $2,233,600 in expenditures. The overall financial position of the City’s General Fund remains strong with a projected year-end fund balance of $4, 947,213 at June 30, 2020. A1.2 Information about the Association The RHCA was established in 1936 by developer A.E. Hanson and the Palos Verdes Corporation to develop the community and to carry out their vision of a private, gated community made up of little ranches and family homes. The entire community is on private property and there is no public property inside the city. All roads are located on Association easements. Both the RHCA office and City Hall are located just outside the Main Gate at 1 & 2 Portuguese Bend Road, respectively. Today, the RHCA’s primary purpose is to maintain the roads and other common areas of the community, uphold the architectural standards of the community, operate the gates and assist the members of the Board, committees and members of the community in upholding and maintaining the community's charm and appeal. RHCA’s primary functions include but are not limited to the following activities:  Maintains files on all properties within Rolling Hills  Reviews plans related to architectural features  Maintains roadway & bridle trails  Gate operations  Controls easements  Sells residence signs  Community clubs operate under the auspices of the RHCA Page 37 192 RHCA places a high value on the privacy and rural character of the community. created by the open space around each residence. This is achieved through both the regulation of the size and style of buildings and the preservation of open easements that surround each property. Other RHCA that warrant mentioning is through the deed restricti ons. Every homeowner has granted control of easements on their property to the RHCA. These easements are used for roadways, bridle trails, utilities and drains. When they are not used for those purposes, easements should remain free of building, planting or other obstructions unless licensed by the RHCA. A1.3 Information about the Residents Rolling Hills has a city population of 1,860 residents, 645 households, and 554 families that reside in 685 housing units within the City. Rolling Hills has a sizable senior population of 513 (27.6%) residents that are 65 years or older. Since Rolling Hills is considered an equestrian community, a large percentage of landowners are also horse owners that engage in horse training, horse care, and horseback riding as part of their quality of life. Rolling Hills landscape does have a lot of vegetation that requires residents to maintain. Rolling Hills does have an ordinance on dead vegetation that requires every person who owns or is in possession of any property, place or area within the boundaries of the City, shall at his or her own expense, maintain the property, place or area free from any dead or alive tumbleweed or dead tree, shrub, palm frond or other plant. Any dead or alive tumbleweed or dead tree, shrub, palm fr ond or other plant located on any property in the City is hereby declared to be a public nuisance. In addition, RHCA by laws impose deed restrictions that require residents to trim or removal trees and shrubs to acceptable levels and that do not create a public health concern and/or become a fire safety violation. Finally, LA County Ordinance that require vegetation removal and that places fuel mitigation plans near existing structures and natural habitats such as trees, shrubs and other vegetation that may be vulnerable to the spreading of brush fire. A1.4 Information about the First Responders A1.4.1 Los Angeles County Fire Department The Los Angeles County Fire Department provides all hazard emergency response services to approximately 4.1 million residents and businesses throughout 58 cities and the incorporated areas of Los Angeles County. The agency provides service to over 2,300 square miles of diverse geography and demographics and approximately 1.23 Page 38 193 million housing units. With a 2017/2018 budget of $1.2 billion, Los Angeles County Fire Department employs approximately 4,700 employees2. The Department is made of three major functional areas: Emergency Operations, Business Operations, and the Leadership and Professional Standards Bureau. Emergency Operations is the arm of the Department responsible for leading and directing emergency response personnel. Emergency Operations is further divided into three geographic Bureaus: North Operations Bureau, Central Operations Bureau, and East Bureau. The three geographically divided operations bureaus of LA County Fire serve 58 cities and unincorporated communities with 22 battalions and nine divisions. An Assistant Chief commands each division and three shift Battalion Chiefs command each battalion. A Community Services Liaison (CSL) and a Secretary support each of the nine Assistant Fire Chiefs. The CSL represents the Department at community and civic events. Rolling Hills participates in the fire district served by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. The fire district assesses the residents of Rolling Hills community through the property tax roll annually. The City of Rolling Hills is served by Fire Station 56. Fire Station 56 is under Battalion 14 serving Lomita, Palos Verdes Peninsula, and Catalina Island. Battalion 14 is a part of Division 1. A1.4.2 Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department employs approximately 18,000 employees including 10,000 sworn and 8,000 non-sworn personnel. The Department is organized into three primary operational areas: Custody Operations, Patrol Operations and Countywide Operations. The Department has approximately $3.2 billion budget. Within Patrol Operations, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department provides service from 23 patrol stations throughout the County. The Lomita Sheriff’s Station at 26123 Narbonne Avenue is located in the City of Lomita serves cities of Rancho Palos Verdes, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Lomita, and pockets of unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County. The Lomita Sheriff’s Station is led by a Captain of the Sheriff’s Department. By law, the County Sheriff’s Department is the mutual aid coordinator for law enforcement in Los Angeles County. To manage operations and resources more efficiently, the 88 cities of Los Angeles County are divided into eight geographical areas: A through H. To ensure continuity of operations, the County Sheriff’s Department and mutual aid partners update mutual aid agreements annually 1. The Peninsula Cities including the City of Rolling Hills is located in Area G. 2 After Action Review of the Woolsey Fire Incident, County of Los Angeles, October 23, 2019 presented by Citygate Associates, LLC Public Safety Services Page 39 194 The City of Rolling Hills contracts with the Los Angele s County Sheriff’s Department for law enforcement. Rolling Hills share the contract with Rancho Palos Verdes and Rolling Hills Estates. A2. FIRE ENVIRONMENT A2.1 Topography Rolling Hills unique topography features places the City at risk from damage and wildfire. Rolling Hills is primarily made up of many steep hillsides with high elevations, landslide hazards, dense vegetation, narrow asphalted private roads, and canyons adjacent to the Palos Verdes Peninsula and the Pacific Ocean. Other features include expansive soils and geological hazard conditions that place constraints on existing housing stock and any potential for new development within the City. Rolling Hills Terrain is comprised of several large and steep canyons that limit and challenge vegetation management and present conditions where a fire can quickly travels up and downslope to nearby homes. The alignment of the canyons makes them more at risk from winds of different directions. LA County Fire has categorized the canyons in the following way: Canyons that would be at higher risk during northeast winds: 1. Georgeff Canyon 2. Purple Canyon 3. Willow Canyon 4. Sepulveda Canyon 5. Blackwater Canyon 6. John’s Canyon 7. Agua Magna Canyon Canyons that would be at risk from fires driven by winds coming from the southwest are: 1. Paint Brush Canyon 2. Portuguese Canyon 3. Altamira Canyon 4. Forrestal Canyon RH lot layout and size places the City at risk from fire. The large lot sizes provide opportunities for dense vegetation to grown between homes, in contrast to smaller lots which are largely occupied with building structures. Some lots span long slopes in steep canyons while others are smaller lots on flatter terrain. The placement of homes within Page 40 195 the lots also contribute to their vulnerability as they are often located at the top of slopes which preheated fuels beneath them can burn intensely. RH provides importing hiking and equestrian access, but are also areas of high fuel load with little access available for management. These lands are interspersed between privately held lots which provides in many locations, places where fire can easily tr avel between and to structures. Furthermore, trails between lots can provide either an area of low fuel, or thus more opportunities for fire containment, or can be areas of high fuel volume as privacy hedges, and thus exacerbate fire spread. Additionally, most of Rolling Hills population live on smaller branch roads and because this is a gated community, access is restricted which hampers egress during a time of emergency. A2.2 Fire History Fires on the Palos Verdes Peninsula have crossed city lines, incl uding Rolling Hills and Rancho Palos Verdes. The Daily Breeze summarized three major fires on the Peninsula on November 7, 2014. Some excerpts are included below: “The blaze started about 2:30 pm on Friday, June 22, 1973. Before it was tamed at 1 a.m. on Saturday, June 23, it had charred about 925 acres, burned 12 homes to the ground, damaged at least 10 others and caused an estimated $2 million in property losses. Somewhat miraculously, no one was seriously injured or killed in the conflagration. Black smoke filled the skies, and hundreds of sightseers clogged nearby roads, including Crenshaw and Hawthorne Boulevards and Highridge, Crest and Crestridge Roads, in an attempt to view the blaze. Luckily, no one was hurt, especially in the early hours of the b laze when bystanders went right up to the edge of the fire area, before perimeters had been established. Houses were destroyed on Cinch Ring, Wrangler, Paint Brush Canyon and Running Brand roads. Three more houses were destroyed as the fire reached the Portuguese Bend area. Three houses at 100 Vanderlip Drive were destroyed. The most recent major brush fire in the South Bay began on Thursday night, Aug. 27, 2009, at the upper ends of Narcissa and Peppertree drives, in the gated Portuguese Bend community near the Portuguese Bend Nature Preserve (now part of the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve) just north of the Trump National Golf Club. It burned 230 acres of brush, threatened dozens of homes and forced 1,200 area residents to evacuate. Page 41 196 No homes were lost and no injuries to residents or firefighters were reported. Its cause was unknown, though it was speculated that an electrical problem at a utility pole in the area may have been the source. 165 of the 230 acres charred in the blaze were part of the relatively new Nature Preserve, which was created in 2005. An earlier fire on July 13, 2005 burned 212 acres of land near Del Cero Park on the Palos Verdes Peninsula, but no homes were lost.” A2.3 Ignition History There has not been significant ignition history in the Rolling Hills Community. The threat of past fires has come from the Conservancy in Rancho Palos Verdes to the south. The Los Angeles County Fire Department has been very efficient in keeping ignitions in the community very small, and holding property damage to a minimum. Page 42 197 APPENDIX B COMMUNITY SURVEY B1 Process of Conducting Survey Critical to the development of the RH’s CWPP was to obtain the input of the City’s stakeholders, all the residents of Rolling Hills. It was decided that the best vehicle to capture input of all the residents was through a survey. Block Captains would assis t in developing the survey, educating residents on the importance of their participation and summarizing the feedback. Block Captains would assist with the development of potential solutions and mitigation strategies. A small group of residents joined representatives from the City of RH, RHCA and Block Captains - Caballeros, Women’s Club, Seniors Club, Tennis Club and developed (35) survey questions. Early notifications of the survey included Block Captains explaining to residents in their zone the purpose of the survey and how the feedback would be analyzed to specify how RH might approach reducing the risk of wildfire. The Wildfire Mitigation Survey was emailed mid -October, 2019 to all RH residents who provided email addresses to either the RHCA or the RH City. For residents who did not have email addresses hard-copy surveys were available at both the RH City Hall and the RHCA. The survey was emailed to 1272 RH residents, which included a small number of duplicates and non-residents (contractors and real estate agents). The survey was open for one month and multiple announcements were made at neighborhood Zone meetings throughout October and in the City and RHCA newsletters. Paper copies were made available at City Hall for those residents who did not h ave email addresses. 258 surveys were completed and submitted by the deadline of November 15, 2019 including all hand-written surveys. Based upon the Rolling Hills profile and elimination of duplicates and non-residents it was estimated the response rate was 25%. B2 Survey Data RH City Staff summarized each survey question utilizing absolute numbers, percentages, graphs and pie charts. It should be noted that three questions, numbers 14, 29 and 32 were “open ended” questions where participants made comments. The Lead Block Captains analyzed the comments made in the open-ended questions and grouped similar comments into major categories. Page 43 198 B3 Insights from Surveys The survey provided valuable information regarding:  the best communication vehicles currently used by residents  the best social media platforms residents currently use  the public alert systems currently used by residents  the degree to which residents want more education and training on emergency preparedness  the role of first responders.  the number of residents who have special needs or have family members or neighbors with special needs The City of RH, the RHCA, and First Responders will use the information to guide what content will be developed and how to communicate with residents. Lead Block Captains were tasked with the preliminary analysis and reviewed the survey results both qualitatively and quantitatively. They grouped survey answers and comments into similar categories. They reviewed their analytical approach with a marketing consultant with expertise in surveys and marketing research who validated the process and provided some additional grouping suggestions. Note: Some of the issues raised by residents occur in multiple categories. An example is the concern of the closed Crest Road East gate was raised in both traffic congestion and evacuation routes. A summary of stakeholder input on wildfire mitigation strategies is below: 1) Residents want more communication, education and training from the City, RHCA and First Responders. The need for communication with residents during an emergency is a major concern. Residents are anxious and want information on: traffic congestion during an evacuation, limited exits routes, excessive and unmanaged growth on private properties, easements and in canyons. 2) Residents want better enforcement and compliance to existing or dinances and regulations from both the City, RHCA and Fire Department. 3) Residents are concerned that traffic congestion, bottlenecks will occur just outside of RH exits. Residents view congestion and inadequate traffic control will impede and slow evacuation from the city. Many residents want access to alternate routes and question how the Crest Road East Gate will be opened in the event of an emergency evacuation. Page 44 199 4) Residents question the adequacy of three main exits of the city as the main evacuation routes. They are concerned about narrow roads, especially Eastfield Drive, the fuel along the exit routes and what happens if a tree or car impedes or prevents evacuation. They want the City of RH and RHCA to proactively identify alternate evacuation routes (unlocking Crest Road East gate or connecting dead -end streets). Residents want help in defining individual evacuation plans and routes. 5) Residents want actions taken to reduce fuel and excessive vegetation on private properties. Residents want hazardous plants and trees removed from easements. Residents want easements along exit routes to be cleared regularly. Dead vegetation and unkempt properties are ranked moderate to high as greatest risk of wildfire. 6) Excessive fuel located in canyons and outside of the RH City limits are perceived by residents as the greatest risk of wildfire. Residents perceive unattended fuel growth in canyons will threaten lives and their properties. 7) Residents with special needs are a small but vulnerable group and may need special support during an emergency or disaster. The elderly may need help in keeping their property safe from wildfire. 8) A small number of residents want utilities moved underground as above-the- ground power lines present a major risk to residents during a fire. Page 45 200 APPENDIX C WILDLAND RES MGT REPORT BY CAROL RICE NOVEMBER 1, 2019 201 ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN (CWPP) JULY 2020 FINAL DRAFT Page 2 202 The City of Rolling Hills Community Wildfire Protection Plan was developed collaboratively among stakeholders including the community, the City of Rolling Hills, the Rolling Hills Community Association, the Los Angeles County Fire Department, and the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department. The plan includes a prioritized list of hazardous fuel reduction strategies and addresses measures that the community members can take to reduce structural ignitability. The undersigned have reviewed the Rolling Hills CWPP and accept this document as the final draft representing 2020. Leah Mirsch, Councilmember City of Rolling Hills Patrick Wilson, Councilmember City of Rolling Hills Tom Heinsheimer, RHCA Boardmember Rolling Hills Community Association Anne Smith, RHCA Boardmember Rolling Hills Community Association Central Regional Operations Bureau Los Angeles County Fire Department Assistant Fire Chief Scott Hale Lomita Station Captain James Powers Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Page 3 203 We would like to thank the following for individuals for their support: City of Rolling Hills Elaine Jeng, City Manager Connie Viramontes, Administrative Assistant Rolling Hills Community Association Roger Hawkins, past Board member Kristen Raig, RHCA Manager First Responders Assistant Chief J. Lopez, Los Angeles County Fire Department Battalion Chief Alvin Brewer, Los Angeles County Fire Department Fire Station 56, Los Angeles County Fire Department Deputy John Despot, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Deputy Reese Souza, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Deputy Tina McCoy, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Page 4 204 Rolling Hills Residents - Block Captain Program Arlene and Gene Honbo, Lead Block Captains Block Captains as of May, 2020 Abas Goodarzi Alan Stratford Arinze Anakwenze Arun Bhumitra Bill Ruth Charlie Raine Clint Patterson Debra Shrader Diane Gilman Diane Montalto Dorothy Vinter Ed Swart Eddy Delgado Giancarlo Starinieri Jack Smith Jeanette Ruzic Judith Haenel Kathleen Hughes- Bethencourt Kay Lupo Lisa Anakwenze Lisa Koperhofer Marion Ruth Marlen Uhl Michael Sherman Michelle Mottola Nadine Bobit Nicole Tangen Pam Crane Penni Smith Phil Norman Pia Raine Rae Walker Ralph Schmoller Ron Sommer Ross Smith Susan Collida Tanvir Mian Block Captain Support Team as of May, 2020 Anne Smith Arvel Witte Bert Balch Clarisse Shumaker Diane Lesser Jan Ferris Kelly Cook Maureen Hill Nancy Hoffman Sandy Sherman Page 5 205 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN (CWPP) JULY 2020 INTRODUCTION 2018 was a year of destructive wildfires throughout California taking lives, destroying properties and prompting large-scale emergency evacuations. It was a stark reminder that all the land in Rolling Hills and in the Palos Verdes Peninsula were was determined to be in the as “Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone” by the State of California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Recognizing its wildfire history, the City of Rolling Hills asked residents what actions should be taken to bett er prepare and protect lives in the event of a wildfire? What is the greatest risk of wildfire for Rolling Hills? The residents ’ response was the responded fire fuel in the canyons. Residents were asked whether there was Is there more that the Rolling Hills Community Association and the City should be doing to protect lives and properties in the case of wildfires? The residents responded yes! Would the community be interested in receiving information on the best way to manage the vegetation in the canyons to prevent wildfires? The residents responded yes! How important is it for residents to manage fuel (e.g. trees, brush, etc.) on their property (including canyons located on private property)? The residents’ collective response, expressed, on a scale 1-100 with 100 being very important, was 87. All of these efforts to Page 6 206 reduce vegetation are critical to our highest priority – protecting the lives of residents and their families. Early 2019 marked the beginnings of a needed collaboration between the residents of Rolling Hills, the City of Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA), Los Angeles County Fire Department and Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (collectively referred to as First Responders). The four entities worked together throughout the year to formulate a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). The CWPP for the City of Rolling Hills is an action plan to implement wildfire mitigation measures to address the community’s greatest risks. Residents were offered opportunities to voice their opinions on ways to reduce wildfire threats to their lives, their and homes and overall community. This was accomplished through a series of emergency preparation meetings with First Responders; residents were encouraged to participate in a Wildfire Mitigation survey and 25% of the residents of Rolling Hills submitted their comments. The on-going work and commitment of all four entities produced a prioritized plan that reflects the voices of residents and wildfire mitigation priorities for the City of Rolling Hills. The plan is designed to be a living document, one that the community homeowners/ residents will be adapting based on the changing needs of the community and to which community members can refer. to for Certain information, such as action and as such, the conventional agency (City, RHCA, and First Responders) certain statistical data, Rolling Hills’ environmental setting including its fire history and the process used to solicit the community’s feedback on issues relating to wildfire concerns are all relegated to the Appendices of this plan. This plan starts with the a tool box of mitigation measures identified for Rolling Hills’ homeowners/residents and the plan discusses in detail potential evacuation scenarios. Many mitigation strategies were recommended and prioritized by Carol Rice, Fire Fuel Consultant, with the highest value being placed on 1) life safety; 2) structural protection; 3) natural resources and habitat. Finally, the plan lists the action items for the next three fiscal years and concludes with a schedule for periodic evaluation of the effectiveness of the actions performed and updates to the plan. Page 7 207 Table of Contents 1.0 FIRE MITIGATION STRATEGIES FOR ROLLING HILLS ............................................................................ 8 1.1 Infrastructure hardening ................................................................................................................ 8 1.2 Vegetation Management ............................................................................................................... 9 1.3 Electric Power Lines ..................................................................................................................... 12 1.4 Inspections and Enforcement ....................................................................................................... 12 2.0 EVACUATION STRATEGIES................................................................................................................ 14 2.1 Community Preparedness and Education. .................................................................................... 14 2.1.1 Block Captain Program .......................................................................................................... 14 2.1.2 On-going communication and education ............................................................................... 16 2.2 Evacuation during an Actual Emergency ....................................................................................... 17 2.2.1 Evacuation Levels .................................................................................................................. 18 2.2.2 Communication during emergency events ............................................................................ 18 2.2.3 Potential evacuation routes .................................................................................................. 20 2.2.4 Residents Who May Need Special Assistance in an Emergency .............................................. 22 2.2.5 Large animal/horse evacuations ............................................................................................ 22 2.2.6 Re-entry back in to the Community ....................................................................................... 24 3.0 ACTION PLAN ................................................................................................................................... 24 4.0 MONITORING AND UPDATES ........................................................................................................... 29 4.1 Action Plan Performance Measures ............................................................................................. 31 4.2 CWPP updates ............................................................................................................................. 31 APPENDIX A ........................................................................................................................................... 32 APPENDIX Appendix A City Overview and Fire Environment Appendix B Community Survey Appendix C Wildland Res Mgt by Carol Rice, November 1, 2019 Page 8 208 1.0 FIRE MITIGATION STRATEGIES FOR ROLLING HILLS Wildfire threat can be defined as the result of an analysis of potential fire behavior and the likelihood of fire to occur relative to the communities at risk. The Fire Department develops maps showing areas of significant fire hazards using fuels, terrain, weather, and other relevant factors. While the maps are useful in examining fire hazard, high risk areas can be further identified using local perspectives and priorities regarding communities at risk and areas of concern. Appendix A, City Overview and Fire Environment, provides information on the City and the wildfire threats. Critical to the development of the CWPP was to obtain the input of the City’s stakeholders, all the residents of Rolling Hills. It was decided that the best vehicle to capture input of all residents was through a survey and to augment seminars conducted with residents in 2018. The survey was a “grassroots” effort whereby Block Captains developed the survey, educated residents on the importance of their participation through Zone meetings and summarized the survey feedback. Block Captains provided feedback on potential solutions and mitigation strategies. The Wildfire Mitigation survey was sent to approximately 1270 residents and the response rate was estimated at 25%. Appendix B, Community Survey, details areas of concerns and priorities as expressed by the residents. Based on the community’s expressed concerns, fire mitigation strategies for Rolling Hills were developed from a variety of sources. The Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) engaged Fire Fuel Consultant, Wildland Res Management Ms. Carol Rice to assess Rolling Hills and provide recommend ations to the RHCA Board of Directors. The Wildland Res Management Report dated November 1, 2019 is included as Appendix C. The Los Angeles County Fire Department provided recommendations to the City of Rolling Hills on options to deal with vegetation management including the canyons. All recommendations provided by Wildland Res Management and LA Fire Department are prioritized with the highest value on 1) life safety; 2) structural protection; and 3) natural resources and habitat. Based on the feedback from the community survey, vegetation management was a most critical element for the residents. Feedback from all these resources was used to formulate the potential mitigation strategies for our residents to utilize, as detailed below. 1.1 Infrastructure hardening  Require Recommend that all structures have a class A roof by 2030.  Consider changes to Provide homeowners with landscaping guidelines to comply with landscape recommendations to reduce structure ignitability.  Create Provide homeowners with an incentive plan to implement home hardening measures or identify with a list of special “preferred” potential contractors who Page 9 209 will can assist them with the building approvals and the installation/alterations needed to harden their homes from fire.  Partner Provide homeowners with manufacturers for demonstrations & to identify contractors of fire resistant eave vents and other equipment used to harden homes and with a list of potential manufacturers/suppliers of such equipment.  For a specific period of time (1 year), offer discounted permits or other incentives for homeowners to make home hardening alterations to their homes to harden (e.g. change out of wood siding to hardy board, replacement of wood shingles, upgrade of windows to dual pane, major landscape change).  Feature homes that are compliant with standards in the Rolling Hills Living magazine. 1.2 Vegetation Management1 Canyons  Fuel Management. Consultant Carol Rice provided services to the RHCA in 2009 and the products of her work can be found on the City and RHCA websites. RHCA contracted again with Carol Rice in 2019 for a report recommending steps for the community to mitigate wildfire. Ms. Rice’s “Creating Fire Safe Canyons” guide includes 3 strategies for residents to manage fuel on their property, including area in canyons: o Shaded fuelbreak o Mosaic groupings o Shortened shrubs  Goats. Goat grazing can be a cost effective, environmentally sound way to clear combustible vegetation and promote growth of native grasses and beneficial plants, particularly for large areas (10, to 100+ acres) and in steep or difficult terrain. Grazing can efficiently treat areas that are inaccessible or difficult to manage with mowers and weed eaters, areas where prescribed burns are inadvisable, and sensitive areas where the application of herbicides is not appropriate.  Control burns. Los Angeles County Fire Department is dedicated to fire protection and wildfire prevention. One of the Los Angeles County Fire Department’s prevention programs is Vegetation Management (Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 9.8 Chaparral management, Sections 1560 to 1569.6). The Vegetation Management Program (VMP) is a cost-share program that focuses on the use of prescribed fire, and some mechanical means, for addressing wildland fire fuel hazards and other resource management issues. 1 Recommendations by Consultant Carol Rice are included in this report to illustrate available wild fire mitigation strategies for Rolling Hills homeowners and in no way suggest that the strategies will be adopted by the Rolling Hills Community Association or the City of Rolling Hills. Page 10 210 The use of prescribed fire mimics natural processes, restores fire to its historic role in wildland ecosystems and provides significant fire hazard reduction benefits that enhance public and firefight safety.  Invasive or noxious plants. Consider the use of herbicide or the manual removal of invasive or noxious plants in the canyons: arundo donax, bamboo/bamboo-like plants and poison ivy. Fire Fuel Management Standards for individual properties Fire Fuel Consultant Carol Rice recommended that the community adopt Fire Fuel Management Standards as a tool to teach homeowners about fire-wise vegetation management on their private property. The Los Angeles County Fire Department endorsed and supported this recommendation for the city. Ms. Rice also recommended that individual property inspections be conducted to evaluate individual properties in comparison with based on the Fuel Management Standards with recommendations on how to homeowners as to how they can meet vegetation management guidelines. Roadside Based on Carol Rice’s the Wildland Res Management report, the following fire fuel management measures were recommended to homeowners for implementation on their properties:  Evaluate the Fire Code requirements for 10 ‘roadside clearance for easy access and improved evacuation routes. Fire Code Section 325.10 defines clearance requirements.  Remove all vegetation from area their property immediately adjacent to the roadway, where practicable, and install a fire retardant surface that does not promote the germination of weeds, i.e. decomposed granite or fire retardant wood chips. Perform weed management in spring and summer (mowing, weed whacking). The RHCA does not use herbicides in the community except for noxious plants like poison ivy.  Remove ladder fuels from their property immediately adjacent to the roadway where practicable. Eliminate fuel ladders. Ladder fuels are those combustible materials (both live and dead) that provide a path for a surface fire to climb up into the crowns of shrubs or trees. Standing dead trees with many limbs near the ground are an example of ladder fuels. Pruning and thinning can remove ladder fuels. The Fire Department can provide advice to homeowners regarding the identification of such ladder fuels and how to remove them. by removing lower tree branches and limiting the height of shrubs under trees to prevent fire from moving into tree canopies 4-6’ back from edge of roadway:  Clear all vegetation within 3’ around the base of a utility pole or fire hydrant. Non- exempt poles require 10’ clearance. Southern California Edison (SCE) is responsible for the such clearance of vegetation around the base of its utility poles and other equipment and for the pruning of trees that interfere with the safe operation of its electrical lines and equipment. Homeowners are encouraged to Page 11 211 contact SCE regarding the execution of its vegetation clearance and tree pruning responsibilities on their property.  Remove trees underneath power lines that have a mature height that could interfere with electrical wires or equipment. Always work through SCE for line clearance.  Remove or cut back tree limbs that are within 8’ of electrical wires. Always work through SCE for line clearance.  Within the roadway easement, remove plants and volunteer trees identified by the fire department as highly flammable (pampas grass, juniper, palm trees, pine trees, eucalyptus trees). Prohibit new planting of these highly flammable plants by changing landscape guidelines.  The Los Angeles County Fire Department has fire fuel management standards for roadside conditions within Very High Fire Hazard Areas. Homeowners are encouraged Encourage or require property owners to adhere to vegetation these fire fuel management standards and those established within these guidelines for the roadside areas within the boundaries of their property. to meet the fuel management standards set by the County Fire Department for Very High Fire Hazard Areas and in limited areas, the Association standards for Fuel Management and RHCA landscaping guidelines for new planting. The RHCA may require higher standards than the Fire Code.  Rice’s report also encouraged the development of a community fuel management standards to set measurable standards for vegetation management along roadsides within the RHCA road easements and other areas allowed in the CC&Rs. Recommended also is removing tree limbs hanging over roadways that are under 18’ in height or as assessed by the fire department. Bridle trails (those designated as bridle trails and usable as such)  Perform aAnnual maintenance mowing and weed whacking along bridle trails.  Perform pPeriodic vegetation management such as abatement using brush hound, hedge trimmers or heavier equipment on an as-needed basis and as the homeowner’s budget permits.  Manage vegetation to eliminate fuel ladders along bridle trails.  Cut back blackberries; and lift and separate plants that constitute currently make up the dense brush in bridle trails canyons (lemonade berry or toyon).  Remove palm trees and other “high fire hazard” plants identified by the LA County Fire Department from bridle trails, where practicable.  Remove Arundoa donax (bamboo like vegetation) from areas within and immediately adjacent to bridle trails.  Consider all means available for brush clearance, including but not limited to goats, or contract services. Invasive and highly flammable plants Page 12 212  Homeowners are encouraged to obtain lists Create a list identifying highly flammable plants from well-researched sources and remove such plants from their property and replace such plants with fire-wise plants whenever practicable. Homeowners are urged to take advantage of any available and request that the governing bodies prohibit planting of these plants and create a plan for eradication or removal of such plants within the community. Create a list of desirable plants as an alternative for planting. Create or obtain funding for an incentive programs for the removal of highly flammable plants and their replacement with firewise plants. 1.3 Electric Power Lines Experts have said that despite the heavy costs, burying power lines in areas most susceptible to winds would provide a huge margin of safety in reducing fire risk for communities. Burying utility lines underground in sensitive areas is a potential mitigation strategy for Rolling Hills. Southern California Edison (SCE) periodically has to replace its wood power poles as part of its ongoing maintenance program and installs new power poles as needed. SCE has recently started to install power poles constructed of a composite nonflammable material and will begin to wrap its wood power poles with a nonflammable material. Replacement occurs when SCE determines the need on a case by case basis. 1.4 Inspections and Enforcement The City of Rolling Hills (City) enforces its nuisance codes (City Municipal Code Chapter 8.24 Abatement of Nuisance and Chapter 8.30 Fire Fuel Abatement) by City staff and the City Attorney. The Fire Department has jurisdiction over property with structures and the Agricultural Commissioner has jurisdiction over the rest. The Fire Code enforcement, historically, has been limited to removing dead vegetation within 200 feet of residences. even though tThe Fire Code also requires ten feet of clearance on each side of all roads and driveways. Fire Code Section 325.10 Roadway Clearance states: “The fire code official may require removal and clearance of all flammable vegetation or other combustible growth for a minimum of 10’ on each side of every roadway, whether public or private… This section shall not apply to single specimen trees, ornamental shrubbery, or cultivated ground cover such as green grass, ivy, succulents or similar plants used as ground cover, provided that they do not form a means of readily transmitting fire.” The City’s nuisance code enforcement of Chapter 8.24 is rarely invoked. The City’s nuisance code enforcement of Chapter 8.30 is actively enforced by a dedicated City code. Such removal of dead vegetation of any kind, dead or alive all tumbleweeds, and dead Page 13 213 palm fronds on living palm trees located on the portion of the property that has a slope equal to or less than 50%. The LA County Fire Department provides fire hazard reduction and safety guidelines to all property owners in Rolling Hills. After a mailed notice, the Fire Department and Agricultural Commissioner personnel conduct an annual inspection of all of the properties commencing June 1 for non-compliance with the Fire Code. Fire Department personnel do not have the right to enter through locked gates. Property owners may deny access, at which point, an inspection warrant must be secured. The property may be inspected if it a code violation can be seen from a place where the public has a right to be viewpoint. The City code enforcement official conducts inspections year-round. Such inspections are based on observations made but can only do so from the roads and/or bridle trails unless the enforcement official has been given permission by a homeowner to make observations from their property or has obtained a court-issued warrant permitting entry onto the property without homeowner consent. SCE is responsible for power line clearance and non-exempt poles. The property owner is responsible for all other required clearance in the easement. SCE periodically inspects and reduces the height of trees and brush so they do not encroach into the area of the power lines. Page 14 214 2.0 EVACUATION STRATEGIES 2.1 Community Preparedness and Education The Los Angeles County Fire Department, along with partnering agencies, stand s ready to quickly respond to contain wildfires, utilizing firefighting resources from the air and ground to help protect people and property from wildfire. Preparation and prevention go hand-in-hand. LA County Fire’s Ready! Set! Go! Brochure is available for residents and was designed to provide critical information on creating defensible space around a home, retrofitting a home with fire-resistant materials, and informing how and when to safely evacuate well ahead of a wildfire. The City of Rolling Hills partners with the Fire Department to in preparing and educating the community on the specifics contained in the Ready! Set! Go! Brochure through the Block Captain Program. A copy of the brochure can be obtained by calling LA County Fi re Department Public Information Office at (323) 881-2411 or online at http://fire.lacounty.gov/wp- content/uploads/2020/05/Ready-set-go_051420.pdf. 2.1.1 Block Captain Program The City’s volunteer Block Captains are a crucial liaison between residents, first responders and the City’s Emergency Operation Center (EOC) in the event of a large- scale emergency. In this role, the Block Captains are committed to serving and assisting residents of Rolling Hills before, during and after a disaster. The Block Captain program divides the city into 24 zones. Each zone has two to three Block Captains with other residents providing Block Captain support if needed. Each zone has an average of 50 homes. The Block Captain’s primary duties include:  Meet the residents in their zone, greet new homeowners and explain the Rolling Hills Wildfire Community Protection Plan (CWPP) to them.  Keep track of who is living within their zone by maintaining names, telephone, email addresses and other relevant information.  Identify residents with special needs.  Maintain their walkie-talkies to ensure they are charged and in good working condition.  Attend bi-monthly Block Captain meetings.  Attend and encourage residents to attend periodic training programs on wildfire mitigation and disaster planning. Page 15 215  Conduct one to two meetings annually with residents in their zone to distribute, update and exchange information. Convey resident’s concerns to the Lead Block Captain or City Manager.  Participate in annual emergency response drills. In case of a wildfire or any type of disaster, the Block Captain’s first responsibility is to his/her safety and the safety of his/her family and home. Only if there is time, it is the Block Captain’s role to initiate pre-arranged procedures within their neighborhoods, including checking on and assisting special needs neighbors and, disseminating information received from the EOC. Block Captains should be familiar with key documents contained in the “RH Block Captain Master Information File” including: Wildfire & Earthquake Checklists; the Wildfire & Earthquake Preparation and Evacuation Recommendations, and City emergency procedures. Block Captains play an important role in providing such information to residents about what to do in an emergency, in advance of an evacuation and in preparation for a disaster. Page 16 216 Each Block Captain is in charge of giving specific information summaries to emergency responders through the EOC about the state of residents in a Zone so their response to a disaster can be most effective and efficient. Training programs will teach Block Captains about these responsibilities and teach other useful information, such as how to keep specific supplies accessible for when they are called to respond. They will be taught how to reach out to the residents in their Zone. In short, a Block Captain is a lifesaving leader in times of citywide emergencies. 2.1.2 On-going communication and education Effective communication and education programs are essential to implement and to maintain a successful Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) and will keep residents involved. The Rolling Hills Wildfire Mitigation Survey identified ‘on -going communications and education’ as a critical factor in dealing with wildfire preparedness and evacuation issues. The communication and education program will be jointly sponsored by the City of RH, the RHCA and support of the first responders and the Block Captains. The program will consist of but not be limited to the following items: 1. Rolling Hills Living Magazine in-depth articles on wildfire mitigation 2. Rolling Hill Newsletter and Rolling Hills Community Association News Letter — Meeting announcements, training class schedule, annual exercise schedule, demonstrations, new Block Captain announcement 3. Bi-monthly Block Captain meeting will discuss planning updates, information transfer, first responder inputs 4. One to two annual Block Captain Zone meetings with new and current residents to transfer emergency preparedness information, especially updates from first responders 5. City of Rolling Hills Website www.rolling-hills.org has important information from items 1 thru 4 6. Workshops or seminars to include but not limited to: a. How to create a defensible space on your property b. How to harden your home c. How to improve your landscape with more fire-resistant plants d. How to inspection your home for fire hazards e. Why high hazard plants should be removed f. How to develop an evacuation plan for your family g. How to sign up for the City’s “Notify me”, reverse 911 and subscribe to Alert Southbay. Page 17 217 7. An evaluation of equipment used by Block Captains during an emergency will facilitate communication with the City of Rolling Hills. The goal is to complete the evaluation by the end of 2020. (See section 2.2.2.2.) Equipment will be issued in advance of an emergency so Block Captains can communicate with the Emergency Operation Center (EOC) in the event of land line and cell phone failure. The communication and education process will be continuously monitored to ensure effectiveness and efficiency by evaluating new tools and methods. 2.2 Evacuation during an Actual Emergency The Fire Department and the Sheriff’s Department operate under the Unified Incident Command where representatives from each department and other relevant agencies will set up a command post near the incident to ensure all entities responding to the emergency are communicating. If appropriate and relevant, the City Manager of Rolling Hills will be invited to be at the command post and send information back to the City’s Emergency Operations Center (EOC). The Incident Command System (ICS) is a standardized, on-scene, all-hazard incident management concept. It is a management protocol originally designed in the 1970s for the Fire Service agencies in California and subsequently required through state legislation in 1993 as an element of the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) to cover all California State agencies and its political subdivisions. In 2004, ICS was required to be implemented nationally as an element of the National incident Management System (NIMS) through Presidential Directive (HSPD-5 & 8). ICS is based upon a flexible, scalable emergency response organization providing a common framework within which representatives may be drawn from multiple agencies that do not routinely work together, and ICS is designed to give standard response and operation procedures to reduce the problems and potential for miscommunication on such incidents.1 Responding specifically to wildfires, the Fire Department will take the lead in determining the appropriate response strategies including ordering evacuations. The Sheriff’s Department will take orders from the Fire Department and support the Fire Department in their calls. As an example, if the Fire Department calls for evacuations citywide, the Sheriff’s Department would assist in notifying residents by going to door to door, utilizing siren calls in a localized area, and/or using available and operable media notifications such as the City’s “notify me,” and or Alert Southbay. The Sheriff’s Department would also deploy personnel to assist with traffic control. Under a citywide evacuation order, to ensure safety, the Sheriff’s Department would also manage the entries back into the community. Page 18 218 2.2.1 Evacuation Levels Depending on the condition of the wildfire, the Fire Department may call for the following:  Citywide evacuation  Partial evacuation – areas defined  Shelter in place In all scenarios, it is imperative that the community has a personal evacuation plan to refer to for expedient actions. It is also imperative that the community prepare for emergencies with a list of important phone numbers, critical items to take with them when leaving, a location to go when forced to evacuate, several different routes to safety and items such as flash lights, candles, canned food and water. The READY! SET! GO! brochure published by the Los Angeles County Fire Department is an essential emergency preparation booklet that includes how to prepare a personal Wildfire Action Plan including where and when to evacuate. Residents are asked to formulate a plan and rehearse that plan periodically so that it becomes second nature in the even to event of an emergency. 2.2.2 Communication during emergency events 2.2.2.1 Emergency Operations Center (EOC) The City of Rolling Hills is currently drafting the Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) that will outline the operations of the Emergency Operations Center (EOC). The EOP will define when and how the EOC will be opened, the players that are a part of the EOC and the functions of each position in the EOC. The EOC will operate using the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) and National Incident Management System (NIMS). Employees of the City of Rolling Hills will be staffing the City’s EOC including with a member of the Rolling Hills Community Association. Employees of the City of Rolling Hills are required to take SEMS/NIMS training from the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (CalOES). A division of CalOES, known as called the California Specialized Training Institute (CSTI), provides training to local governments in California to have so that there will be standardization in the way EOCs are operated in California and nationally. In the event that the employees of the City of Rolling Hills are unable to serve in the EOC during an emergency, staff members from other nearby cities can assist, provided that they have received training from CSTI. The EOC would be divided into the following sections with one or two people responsible for each of the sections: Page 19 219  Intelligence  Planning  Logistics  Operations  Finance Briefly, the EOC is a centralized location to receive from which reports from the field are received, response efforts are planned, operations personnel are deployed and expenditures are tracked. As an example, the First Responders could report that there are three fallen trees along the major arterial of the City blocking vehicular traffic. Upon receiving this report, the EOC could contact appropriate vendors to clear the trees from the road. Expenses relating to the clearing of the tree will be tracked for potential reimbursement through federal agencies or State agencies. Rolling Hills Community Association, having control over the easements including the trail and the roads, will play a critical part in the example outlined. The RHCA can deploy their own personnel to conduct the clearing work or engage vendors that with whom they already have relationships, with to assist the community in the time of need. 2.2.2.2 Emergency communication methods with residents and Block Captains During an emergency, information is critical to deploy the needed resources. In the time of an emergency, Block Captains are expected to take care of their families and loved ones first. Only if Block Captains are able and available will they be encouraged to report field conditions to the City’s EOC, or to the City Hall. This communication can be d one via working cell phones, land-lines, emails, text messages and or walkie-talkies. The City of Rolling Hills is currently evaluating 1) what infrastructure is needed to support emergency communications and 2) which equipment is needed for use by Block Captains and the City to communicate during emergencies. The goal is to have this project completed by the end of 2020. Once equipment is purchased and installed Block Captains should communicate efficiently by answering two questions in each communique:  What do you have?  What do you need? 2.2.2.3 Notifying residents to prepare to evacuate The City of Rolling Hills has multiple ways to communicate with residents during an emergency:  RH website – www.rolling-hills.org  Alert Southbay – emergency notifications Page 20 220  local media  email and phone communication 2.2.3 Potential evacuation routes 2.2.3.1 Main gate, Crest Road gate at Crenshaw and Eastfield gates The number one and two priorities of first responders are life safety and property, in that order. First Responders will determine if an Evacuation Order is needed and will notify the City through the Incident Command Center. If an Evacuation Order is issued by the Incident Command Center, residents will be alerted of an immediate threat to life and property that is within one to two hours. When the order is issued residents should evacuate through one of the main gates. The and the route chosen is dependent on the location of the fire activity route recommended by first responders. The LA County Sheriff and LA County Fire Department have identified potential evacuation routes, which included options for rapid egress from areas within the city threatened by a wildfire:  Main Gate at Rolling Hills Road and Palos Verdes Drive North  Crest Gate at Crest Road near Crenshaw Blvd  Eastfield Gate at Eastfield Drive and Palos Verdes Drive East Potential issues that may affect evacuation include:  Residents may not have established evacuation preparedness plans.  Residents may choose not to evacuate but to stay and defend their homes or decide to shelter in place until the fire danger passes. Some might change their mind late in the evacuation process forcing them to flee when conditions are at their worst. Without fully understanding the effects of their decisions, residents’ actions can jeopardize their life and safety as well as that of firefighters and law enforcement personnel.  Fallen trees or downed powers lines may have blocked roads.  Several streets within Rolling Hills are narrow and could quickly become congested with traffic. First Responders do not want residents to use bridle trails as potential evacuation routes. In an extreme situation the use of trails as potential evacuation routes may be considered by First Responders on a “case by case” basis. IMPORTANT NOTE: Wildfires are extremely fluid and complex. An evacuation route may become compromised due to fire activity. The Potential Evacuation Routes map Page 21 221 provides suggested evacuation routes that are dependent on the location of the wildfire. It is recommended that residents practice preparing for and evacuating through their primary and secondary exit route. 2.2.3.2 Crest Road East Gate There is a fourth (4th) gate that is locked and closed located at the end of Crest Road East with no guards. There are several holders of the key to unlock the gate including:  LA County Sheriff  LA County Fire Department  All RHCA Gatehouses  RHCA Manager  Maintenance Supervisor and Staff  Gate Supervisor  Architectural Supervisor During a wildfire emergency the Crest Road East gate is considered by First Responders as an option for residents to use to exit the city. Residents should be informed in advance that Crest Road East is an option and is considered as a one-way exit from Rolling Hills into Rancho Palos Verdes towards Palos Verdes Drive East. Once the Crest Road East Gate is opened, residents will not be granted re-entry through this gate. First Responders will determine if an Evacuation Warning and/or Evacuation Order is needed and will notify the City through the Incident Command Center. During a wildfire emergency an Evacuation Warning may be issued by the Incident Command Center. Residents will be alerted of a potential threat to life and property that is more than two hours away. If the possibility exists that the gate will need to be opened a RHCA staff person will be stationed at the gate ready to open it. An Evacuation Order may be issued by the Incident Command Center. Residents will be alerted of an immediate threat to life and property that is within one to two hours. A RHCA staff person or another designee of the RHCA should be onsite to assist with traffic management if available. Note: As of the publication date of this plan the RHCA Board of Directors approved the automation of the Crest Road East gate. The installation is scheduled to be completed in August 2020. It is expected that RHCA staff will be able to open the gate remote ly upon receiving with an Evacuation Warning or Evacuation Order from First Responders. 2.2.3.3 Traffic Control Page 22 222 In the event of an evacuation, the Sheriff’s Department will maintain traffic control based on the level of closure established by the Fire Department. The five evacuation levels are as follows: Level 1: Open to general public Level 2: Open to critical-incident resources and all residents. Level 3: Closed to all traffic except fire, law and critical resources e.g. public works, power, LASD volunteers, etc. Note: escorts may be needed. Level 4: Closed to all traffic except fire-department and law-enforcement personnel. Level 5: Closed to all traffic. 2.2.3.4 Temporary Refuge Area(s) First Responders and consultant Carol Rice have recommended that tTemporary Refuge Area(s) have been recommended to be identified for the community of Rolling Hills by First Responders and consultant, Ms. Carol Rice. At the time of this publication such areas have not been identified. 2.2.4 Residents Who May Need Special Assistance in an Emergency Vulnerable populations have special needs that are critical to address during disasters such as wildfire. These populations may be less likely to respond to, cope with, or recover from wildfire, and are less likely to get involved in wildfire mitigation activities. Age, physical, and mental limitations can restrict mobility making it more difficult to evacuate in a disaster. Language issues can result in communication barriers to evacuation or support services. 15% of survey respondents indicated that they or family members have special needs. 26% of survey respondents have neighbors with special needs or neighbors who may need assistance in an evacuation. The RH Block Captains will identify special needs residents by canvassing their zones and working with the RH Seniors Committee on to identify who they are, where they live and what assistance they may need. Ways to easily identify the homes of these residents is are currently being evaluated. The Block Captains along with first responders can provide assistance to these residents in preparing, responding and recovering from a disaster. Information on special needs residents will be saved on an encrypted server and only accessible by city staff and a Block Captain. A printout of special needs residents will only be distributed to the corresponding zone Block Captains. 2.2.5 Large animal/horse evacuations Page 23 223 Rolling Hills is considered an equestrian community. Emergency preparedness is important for all animals, but preparedness can be more difficult for large animals (e.g., horses) because of their size and special transportation needs. Evacuation of horses should occur as soon as an evacuation warning is issued. If owners are unprepared or wait until the last minute, they may have to leave their animals behind. The following provides information for pre-planning an evacuation with large animals, including horses:  Contact Los Angeles County Department of Animal Control Equine Response Team (LACDACERT) for evacuation information for large animals. LACDACERT has trained volunteers who are trained in the evacuation and sheltering of horses in wildfire events. LACDACERT has equipment and personnel available for large animal evacuation and billeting. All requests for emergency assistance are channeled through LA County Sheriff’s Dispatch (911).  Even though the County has assistance available, it is strongly encourag ed for horse owners to make their own plan for emergency transportation and sheltering for their horses. Many designated sheltering sites may become overcrowded or are far from Rolling Hills. Make plans now to house horses with friends, at a commercial sta ble, or other suitable location out of the danger area. Discuss plans with everyone in the family and keep the contact information and address of emergency animal shelters and driving directions in an emergency kit.  Make a list of emergency contacts. Keep copies in vehicles or trailer as well as in the house.  Take photographs and prepare a written description of each horse or other large animal(s). Put one set in a safe place and another set in an emergency kit.  Have a halter and rope for each horse/large animal. Make sure the halters are marked with contact information or write the information on a piece of duct tape and stick it on the halter. Reflective identification collars are available for purchase from Caballeros. If a horse has medical issues or special needs, record this informati on on a luggage tag and attach it to the halter.  Microchip horses/large animals. This is an easy, inexpensive way to help identify animals.  Have a three-day supply of feed and water (per large animal). This is particularly important if plans are to shelter in place but also bring this supply of feed (and buckets) if evacuated. Make sure to include any medications the large animal(s) may need. Label all equipment.  Teach your horses how to trailer. Spend time loading and unloading the animals so they are safe and willing to load; consider practicing loading during the day and night. Continue working with the large animals until you are confident that they will load.  Keep trucks, trailers and vans well maintained and ready to move. Keep gas tanks full, check tire pressure, particularly during Red Flag Warning days. Page 24 224  Horse owners who keep their horses on their property are encouraged to have an orange reflector, available from Caballeros, on their house sign to indicate that horses are on the property. If you evacuate your animals, remove or cover the reflector.  Store non-perishable supplies in a portable container such as a clean trashcan, bucket or canvas duffle bag. Potential issues with evacuating large animals and horses include the fact that panicked animals may behave unpredictably and may refuse to respond to normal handling approaches. 2.2.6 Re-entry back in to the Community Re-entering an evacuated area requires as much forethought and planning as an evacuation order. The safety of residents and emergency responders is of the utmost concern and must drive the decision of when to repopulate. The LA County Fire Department and LA County Sheriff’s Department will determine when it is safe for residents, including those with special needs and large a nimals, to move back into the area. Residents re-entering The ability of residents to re-enter the city will depend upon the evacuation level. Note: Levels 3, 4 and 5 are require the city to remain closed the city to residents.  Level 1: Open to general public  Level 2: Open to critical-incident resources and all residents.  Level 3: Closed to all traffic except fire, law and critical resources e.g. public works, power, LASD volunteers, etc. Note: escorts may be needed.  Level 4: Closed to all traffic except fire-department and law-enforcement personnel.  Level 5: Closed to all traffic. 3.0 ACTION PLAN The plan below defines the actions needed to lessen the risk of wildfires and to address the community’s greatest risks. The plan lists the action items for each of the four entities – City of Rolling Hills, RH Community Association, RH Residents, LA Count y Fire Department and LA County Sheriff’s Department. Any action proposed to be taken on private property by a person or entity who is not the property owner shall require prior notice to the owner and a sufficient opportunity for such owner to be heard be fore such action is implemented. Action Plan (FY2020-2021 to FY2022-2023) City RHCA Residents LACFD LASD 1 Block Captain Program - participate and support program x x XX x x Page 25 225 2 Neighborhood zone meetings x XX x x 3 Emergency communication with residents x x XX x x 4 Evacuation Exercise XX x x x x 5 Workshops and seminars for residents x x XX x x 6 Special needs population x x XX 7 Define communication standards with residents XX x x 8 Define refuge areas x x x XX x 9 City Ordinance Enforcement XX x 10 Fire Department Annual Inspection x XX 11 Evacuation routes (roadside) vegetation management XX xxx x 12 Bridal trail vegetation management xXX xxx 13 Entry/Exit gates vegetation management XX x x 14 Fire Fuel Management in Preserve with Land Conservancy XX x 15 Development of fire fuel management standards x xXX xxx x 16 City Ordinance to restrict planting of six high hazard plants per Ready! Set! Go! brochure XX x x x 17 Motorize Crest Road East Gate XX 18 Utility undergrounding projects XX x x 19 Grants for fire fuel management in canyons XX 20 Controlled burns in canyons x x x XX x Legend: XX Primary Responsibility x Secondary Responsibility Project Descriptions 1. Block Captain Program This project will focus on the recruitment and the training of the Block Captain volunteers. Training programs will focus on teaching Block Captains about responsibilities and other useful information, such as how to keep specific supplies accessible for when they are called to respond. The project will evaluate the best marketing materials to encourage recruitment, best training vehicles, including multi-media, and enhancements needed to the City’s website to support the management of resident contact information while ensuring privacy and confidentiality. Page 26 226 Project Leads: Block Captain Leads and City of Rolling Hills working with First Responders and RHCA Timing: 2020/2023 2. Neighborhood Zone Meetings The project will evaluate available educational materials and videos from the Los Angeles County Fire Department, which highlight priorities documented in the Ready! Set! Go! Brochure. The project will evaluate a cost-effective approach to for video available for replay on the city’s website. Project Leads: Block Captain Leads and City of Rolling Hills with First Responders Timing: 2020/2023 3. Emergency Communication with Residents The City’s volunteer Block Captains are a crucial liaison between residents in the 24 City zones, first responders and the City’s Emergency Operation Center (EOC) in the event of a large-scale emergency. Block Captains have responsibilities in assisting to assist residents of Rolling Hills before, during and after a disaster including:  What to do in an emergency, in advance of an evacuation and in preparation for a disaster.  Providing specific information dDuring an emergency specific information will provided to emergency responders through the EOC about the state of residents in a Zone. In the event that cell phones, landlines and/or email communications are compromised , Block Captains shall evaluate other equipment options, such as digital radios, satellite phones (with Push-to-talk capability) or other viable options. Purchase equipment and provide training to other Block Captains as necessary. Project Leads: Block Captain Leads and City of Rolling Hills with First Responders and RHCA Timing: 2020/2023 4. Evacuation Exercise It is important to periodically conduct a simulation exercise of an actual emergency evacuation with all entities involved during an emergency: First Responders, residents, City of Rolling Hills and the RHCA, including the gate staff. The goals of the exercise can include, but are not limited to, evacuation of residents and individuals with special Page 27 227 needs, communication between the city’s Emergency Operations Center and Block Captains, and traffic control. Assessment and “lessons learned” should be captured and shared. Project Leads: Block Captain Leads and City of Rolling Hills with First Responders and RHCA Timing: 2020/2023 5. Workshops and Seminars for Residents The project will evaluate available educational materials and local experts in wildfire mitigation who can conduct seminars and workshops for the 2000 residents in Rolling Hills. The project will evaluate a cost-effective approach to for videotaping seminars and workshops for replay on the city’s website. Project Leads: Block Captain Leads and City of Rolling Hills Timing: 2020/2023 6. Residents with Special Needs This project will focus on the coordination needed between Block Captains and the RHCA Seniors Committee to identify residents who may have special needs during an emergency. This project will focus on teaching Block Captains how best to assist this group of residents, what providing useful information and/or supplies should be provided to this group, and what supplying available resources are available to them in the event of an emergency. Project Leads: Block Captain Leads, RHCA and City of Rolling Hills Timing: 2020/2023 7. Define communication standards with residents This project will define the protocols for the City in communicating for the City to communicate with Block Captains and for the Block Captains to in communicating with residents during emergencies and wildfire events. This project will include the purchas e of communication devices for relevant parties. Project Leads: City staff Timing: 2020/2021 8. Define refuge areas Page 28 228 This project requires the Fire Department and the Sheriff’s Department to identify refuge areas within the limits of the City in the event of wildfire event. Project Leads: Fire Department/Sheriff’s Department Timing: 2020/2021 9. City Ordinance Enforcement This project requires city staff to enforce ordinances relating to wildfire mitigation including Chapter 8.30 Fire Fuel Abatement. Project Leads: City staff Timing: currently in progress and on-going 10. Fire Department annual inspections The project requires the Fire Department Brush Clearance Unit to conduct an inspection at all parcels within the city limits for compliance with a 200’ defensible space around structures. Project Leads: Fire Department Timing: currently in progress and on-going 11. Evacuation routes (roadside) vegetation management This project requires fire fuel and vegetation management along three evacuation routes within the city: Portuguese Bend Road, Eastfield Drive, and Crest Road. The LA County Fire Code defines the standard for roadside clearance. Project Leads: RHCA, residents Residents with assistance from Fire Department Timing: 2020 12. Bridle Trail Vegetation Management This project requires RHCA contractors to thin out, remove or otherwise residents to manage vegetation on and adjacent to bridle trails located on their property, as outlined in the “Bridle Trails” portion of section 1.2 of this plan related to “Vegetation Management.” the Fire Fuel management Standards to include the following:  Thinning native chapparal  Remove hazardous brush and weeds  Remove lower limbs of trees to create a safe vertical clearance for equestrians and emergency vehicles Page 29 229  Remove non-native species such as palm trees, castor beans, Arundo, and other highly flammable species  Cut back vegetation to provide adequate horizontal clearance on bridle trails as identified in the Fuel Management Stanards Project Leads: Residents with assistance from RHCA maintenance staff Timing: 2020/2023 13. Entry/exit gate vegetation management This project requires RHCA maintenance staff to manage the vegetation at the three entry/exit gates of the city. RHCA Board has adopted a policy for roadsides along major roadways in the community to have vegetation cleaned up to 8’ back from the edge of pavement, where practical. RHCA also performs periodic maintenance of roadside trees for safety purposes and to ensure there is 16’ vertical clearance along roadways for emergency vehicles and evacuation. Project Leads: RHCA maintenance staff Timing: currently in progress, on-going 14. Fire Fuel management in the Preserve This project requires the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy to remove fire fuel in the Preserve annually. The City has funded two rounds of fuel removal between 2019 and 2020. Project Leads: City and Land Conservancy Timing: currently in progress, on-going 15. Development of fire fuel management standards This project requires the development of fire fuel management standards for by the residents and for the community as a whole, based on the input received from the residents/homeowners and after the proposed fire fuel standards have been published and made available to all such residents/homeowners and they have been provided sufficient time to comment on and propose changes to such standards. Project Lead: Residents with assistance from the Fire Department, the City and RHCA Timing: 2020 Page 30 230 16. City Ordinance to restrict planting of six high hazard plants per Ready! Set! Go! brochure In April 2020, the City Council considered restricting the planting of the six high hazard plants but decided not to take action. Instead, the City Council directed staff to discourage applicants seeks permits development or landscaping projects from planting the six high hazard plants. The City Council will reconsider taking action in the near future. Project Lead: City Timing: 2021 17. Motorize Crest Road East Gate See section 2.2.3.2 of this report. Project Leads: RHCA Timing: 2020 18. Utility undergrounding projects This project requires the undergrounding of overhead utilities within the city. The Eastfield Undergrounding Project is underway and undergrounding is tentatively scheduled for fall 2020. The city provides incentives for residents to form assessment districts for utility undergrounding projects. The city is developing a policy to incentivize single utility pole undergrounding. Project leads: City Timing: currently in progress, on-going 19. Grants for fire fuel management in canyons This project requires collaboration with property owners of the canyon areas and to find finding innovative ways to remove fire fuels in difficult to reach areas. Once identified, the City can pursue grant funds to implement the solution. Project Leads: City and residents Timing: 2021 20. Controlled burns in canyons This project requires collaboration with the Fire Department to determine areas within the City suitable for controlled burns. Page 31 231 Project Leads: Fire Department Timing: 2023 4.0 MONITORING AND UPDATES 4.1 Action Plan Performance Measures Performance measures will be developed in future versions of the CWPP. 4.2 CWPP updates The CWPP will be updated on an annual basis based on input received from homeowners/residents. Updates to document shall be noted at the beginning of the document identified by version number. Page 32 232 APPENDIX A CITY OVERVIEW AND FIRE ENVIRONEMNT A1. CITY OVERVIEW A1.1 Information about the City The City of Rolling Hills (Rolling Hills) incorporated in 1957. Rolling Hills is 3.0 square miles and a gated community with private roads and three entry gates on the Pal os Verdes Peninsula in the County of Los Angeles. Rolling Hills has a citizen population of 1,860 and 685 single-family one-story homes that are nestled in a rural equestrian community with no traffic lights. There are approximately 80 horses in Rolling Hills with 19 horse trailers. 90% of the housing units (600+) are owner occupied and less than 10% of the housing units are renter occupied. Rolling Hills homes are 20th century California ranch or Spanish haciendas located on large parcels. As a gated community, Rolling Hills land use pattern was established in 1936 with the sale of parcels around hilly terrain and deep canyons. From its inception in 1936, Rolling Hills created and continues to maintain a residential community that conforms to its unique land form constraints. The City’s minimum lot size requirements were established in recognition of some relevant physical constraints, which includes the following constraints: 1. Steeply sloping hillsides; Land movement hazards 2. Lack of urban infrastructure such as sewer 3. Danger of wildland fires 4. Sensitive animal habitats and species 5. Geological constraints 6. Fire safety constraints 7. Infrastructure constraints 8. Environmental constraints 9. Topographic constraints In particular, unique features to mention is Rolling Hills geological and topographic constraints which are driven by expansive soil combined with ancient landslide which when it reactivates affects lands shift and landslides from time to time, which in tu rn imposes high repair cost for slope restoration work. A portion of the City is located on severe terrain comprised of steep hills and roads with slope elevations between 25 to 50 percent, deep canyons, and cliffs all surrounded with an abundance of native and non- native vegetation, makes it difficult to meet the zoning requirements for the production of housing development. Furthermore, the California Geological Survey has identified numerous liquefaction zones and areas within city limits that are subje ct to earthquake induced landslides. Page 33 233 Rolling Hills fire safety constraint is driven by the fact that in July 2008, all the land in Rolling Hills was determined “Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone” by the State of California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. As a result, more restri ctive fire safety and landscape standards were adopted into Rolling Hills building code that resulted in higher design and building cost for all new housing development. Another constraint to note is that the Fire Department’s capability to address normal fire calls, not to mention, address wildfire crisis is limited due to its aging distribution water system that is managed by California Water Company. On June 10, 2019, Rolling Hills City Council adopted the fiscal year 2019/20 budget. The budget serves as the City’s roadmap for allocating resources for the management of public programs and services, achieving city priorities and goals that serve residents and the public. The budget also represents the projections necessary for managing and monitoring annual revenue and expenditures in a fiscally responsible manner. For fiscal year 2019/20, Rolling Hills general fund budget projects $2,278,300 in revenue and $2,233,600 in expenditures. The overall financial position of the City’s General Fund remains strong with a projected year-end fund balance of $4, 947,213 at June 30, 2020. A1.2 Information about the Association The RHCA was established in 1936 by developer A.E. Hanson and the Palos Verdes Corporation to develop the community and to carry out their vision of a private, gated community made up of little ranches and family homes. The entire community is on private property and there is no public property inside the city. All roads are located on Association easements. Both the RHCA office and City Hall are located just outside the Main Gate at 1 & 2 Portuguese Bend Road, respectively. Today, the RHCA’s primary purpose is to maintain the roads and other common areas of the community, uphold the architectural standards of the community, operate the gates and assist the members of the Board, committees and members of the community in upholding and maintaining the community's charm and appeal. RHCA’s primary functions include but are not limited to the following activities:  Maintains files on all properties within Rolling Hills  Reviews plans related to architectural features  Maintains roadway & bridle trails  Gate operations  Controls easements  Sells residence signs  Community clubs operate under the auspices of the RHCA Page 34 234 RHCA places a high value on the privacy and rural character of the community created by the open space around each residence. This is achieved through both the regulation of the size and style of buildings and the preservation of open easements that surround each property. Other RHCA that warrant mentioning is through the deed restrictions. Every homeowner has granted control of easements on their property to the RHCA. These easements are used for roadways, bridle trails, utilities and drains. When they are not used for those purposes, easements should remain free of building, planting or other obstructions unless licensed by the RHCA. A1.3 Information about the Residents Rolling Hills has a city population of 1,860 residents, 645 households, and 554 families that reside in 685 housing units within the City. Rolling Hills has a sizable senior population of 513 (27.6%) residents that are 65 years or older. Since Rolling Hills is considered an equestrian community, a large percentage of landowners are also horse owners that engage in horse training, horse care, and horseback riding as part of their quality of life. Rolling Hills landscape does have a lot of vegetation that requires residents to maintain. Rolling Hills does have an ordinance on dead vegetation that requires every person who owns or is in possession of any property, place or area within the boundaries of the City, shall at his or her own expense, maintain the property, place or area free from any dead or alive tumbleweed or dead tree, shrub, palm frond or other plant. Any dead or alive tumbleweed or dead tree, shrub, palm frond or other plant located on any property in the City is hereby declared to be a public nuisance. In addition, RHCA by laws impose deed restrictions that require residents to trim or removal trees and shrubs to acceptable levels and that do not create a public health concern and/or become a fire safety violation. Finally, LA County Ordinance that require vegetation removal and that places fuel mitigation plans near existing structures and natural habitats such as trees, shrubs an d other vegetation that may be vulnerable to the spreading of brush fire. A1.4 Information about the First Responders A1.4.1 Los Angeles County Fire Department The Los Angeles County Fire Department provides all hazard emergency response services to approximately 4.1 million residents and businesses throughout 58 cities and the incorporated areas of Los Angeles County. The agency provides service to over 2,300 square miles of diverse geography and demographics and approximately 1.23 million Page 35 235 housing units. With a 2017/2018 budget of $1.2 billion, Los Angeles County Fire Department employs approximately 4,700 employees2. The Department is made of three major functional areas: Emergency Operations, Business Operations, and the Leadership and Professional Standards Bureau. Emergency Operations is the arm of the Department responsible for leading and directing emergency response personnel. Emergency Operations is further divided into three geographic Bureaus: North Operations Bureau, Central Operations Bureau, and East Bureau. The three geographically divided operations bureaus of LA County Fire serve 58 cities and unincorporated communities with 22 battalions and nine divisions. An Assistant Chief commands each division and three shift Battalion Chiefs command each battalion. A Community Services Liaison (CSL) and a Secretary support each of the nine Assistant Fire Chiefs. The CSL represents the Department at community and civic events. Rolling Hills participates in the fire district served by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. The fire district assesses the residents of Rolling Hills community through the property tax roll annually. The City of Rolling Hills is served by Fire Station 56. Fire Station 56 is under Battalion 14 serving Lomita, Palos Verdes Peninsula, and Catalina Island. Battalion 14 is a part of Division 1. A1.4.2 Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department employs approximately 18,000 employees including 10,000 sworn and 8,000 non-sworn personnel. The Department is organized into three primary operational areas: Custody Operations, Patrol Operations an d Countywide Operations. The Department has approximately $3.2 billion budget. Within Patrol Operations, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department provides service from 23 patrol stations throughout the County. The Lomita Sheriff’s Station at 26123 Narbonne Avenue is located in the City of Lomita serves cities of Rancho Palos Verdes, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Lomita, and pockets of unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County. The Lomita Sheriff’s Station is led by a Captain of the Sheriff’s Department. By law, the County Sheriff’s Department is the mutual aid coordinator for law enforcement in Los Angeles County. To manage operations and resources more efficiently, the 88 cities of Los Angeles County are divided into eight geographical areas : A through H. To ensure continuity of operations, the County Sheriff’s Department and mutual aid partners update mutual aid agreements annually1. The Peninsula Cities including the City of Rolling Hills is located in Area G. 2 After Action Review of the Woolsey Fire Incident, County of Los Angeles, October 23, 2019 presented by Citygate Associates, LLC Public Safety Services Page 36 236 The City of Rolling Hills contracts with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department for law enforcement. Rolling Hills share the contract with Rancho Palos Verdes and Rolling Hills Estates. A2. FIRE ENVIRONMENT A2.1 Topography Rolling Hills unique topography features places the City at risk from damage and wildfire. Rolling Hills is primarily made up of many steep hillsides with high elevations, landslide hazards, dense vegetation, narrow asphalted private roads, and canyons adjacent to the Palos Verdes Peninsula and the Pacific Ocean. Other features include expansive soils and geological hazard conditions that place constraints on existing housing stock and any potential for new development within the City. Rolling Hills Terrain is comprised of several large and steep canyons that limit and challenge vegetation management and present conditions where a fire can quickly travels up and downslope to nearby homes. The alignment of the canyons makes them more at risk from winds of different directions. LA County Fire has categorized the canyons in the following way: Canyons that would be at higher risk during northeast winds: 1. Georgeff Canyon 2. Purple Canyon 3. Willow Canyon 4. Sepulveda Canyon 5. Blackwater Canyon 6. John’s Canyon 7. Agua Magna Canyon Canyons that would be at risk from fires driven by winds coming from the southwest are: 1. Paint Brush Canyon 2. Portuguese Canyon 3. Altamira Canyon 4. Forrestal Canyon RH lot layout and size places the City at risk from fire. The large lot sizes provide opportunities for dense vegetation to grown between homes, in contrast to smaller lots which are largely occupied with building structures. Some lots span long slopes in steep canyons while others are smaller lots on flatter terrain. The placement of homes within Page 37 237 the lots also contribute to their vulnerability as they are often located at the top of slopes which preheated fuels beneath them can burn intensely. RH provides importing hiking and equestrian access, but are also areas of high fuel load with little access available for management. These lands are interspersed between privately held lots which provides in many locations, places where fire can easily travel between and to structures. Furthermore, trails between lots can provide either an area of low fuel, or thus more opportunities for fire containment, or can be areas of high fuel volume as privacy hedges, and thus exacerbate fire spread. Additionally, most of Rolling Hills population live on smaller branch roads and because this is a gated community, access is restricted which hampers egress during a time of emergency. A2.2 Fire History Fires on the Palos Verdes Peninsula have crossed city lines, including Rolling Hills and Rancho Palos Verdes. The Daily Breeze summarized three major fires on the Peninsu la on November 7, 2014. Some excerpts are included below: “The blaze started about 2:30 pm on Friday, June 22, 1973. Before it was tamed at 1 a.m. on Saturday, June 23, it had charred about 925 acres, burned 12 homes to the ground, damaged at least 10 others and caused an estimated $2 million in property losses. Somewhat miraculously, no one was seriously injured or killed in the conflagration. Black smoke filled the skies, and hundreds of sightseers clogged nearby roads, including Crenshaw and Hawthorne Boulevards and Highridge, Crest and Crestridge Roads, in an attempt to view the blaze. Luckily, no one was hurt, especially in the early hours of the blaze when bystanders went right up to the edge of the fire area, before perimeters had been established. Houses were destroyed on Cinch Ring, Wrangler, Paint Brush Canyon and Running Brand roads. Three more houses were destroyed as the fire reached the Portuguese Bend area. Three houses at 100 Vanderlip Drive were destroyed. The most recent major brush fire in the South Bay began on Thursday night, Aug. 27, 2009, at the upper ends of Narcissa and Peppertree drives, in the gated Portuguese Bend community near the Portuguese Bend Nature Preserve (now part of the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve) just north of the Trump National Golf Club. It burned 230 acres of brush, threatened dozens of homes and forced 1,200 area residents to evacuate. Page 38 238 No homes were lost and no injuries to residents or firefighters were reported. Its cause was unknown, though it was speculated that an electrical problem at a utility pole in the area may have been the source. 165 of the 230 acres charred in the blaze were part of the relatively new Nature Preserve, which was created in 2005. An earlier fire on July 13, 2005 burned 212 acres of land near Del Cero Park on the Palos Verdes Peninsula, but no homes were lost.” A2.3 Ignition History There has not been significant ignition history in the Rolling Hills Community. The threat of past fires has come from the Conservancy in Rancho Palos Verdes to the south. The Los Angeles County Fire Department has been very efficient in keeping ignitions in the community very small, and holding property damage to a minimum. Page 39 239 APPENDIX B COMMUNITY SURVEY B1 Process of Conducting Survey Critical to the development of the RH’s CWPP was to obtain the input of the City’s stakeholders, all the residents of Rolling Hills. It was decided that the best vehicle to capture input of all the residents was through a survey. Block Captains would assist in developing the survey, educating residents on the importance of thei r participation and summarizing the feedback. Block Captains would assist with the development of potential solutions and mitigation strategies. A small group of residents joined representatives from the City of RH, RHCA and Block Captains - Caballeros, Women’s Club, Seniors Club, Tennis Club and developed (35) survey questions. Early notifications of the survey included Block Captains explaining to residents in their zone the purpose of the survey and how the feedback would be analyzed to specify how RH might approach reducing the risk of wildfire. The Wildfire Mitigation Survey was emailed mid -October, 2019 to all RH residents who provided email addresses to either the RHCA or the RH City. For residents who did not have email addresses hard-copy surveys were available at both the RH City Hall and the RHCA. The survey was emailed to 1272 RH residents, which included a small number of duplicates and non-residents (contractors and real estate agents). The survey was open for one month and multiple announcements were made at neighborhood Zone meetings throughout October and in the City and RHCA newsletters. Paper copies were made available at City Hall for those residents who did not have email addresses. 258 surveys were completed and submitted by the deadline of November 15, 2019 including all hand-written surveys. Based upon the Rolling Hills profile and elimination of duplicates and non-residents it was estimated the response rate was 25%. B2 Survey Data RH City Staff summarized each survey question utilizing absolute numbers, percentages, graphs and pie charts. It should be noted that three questions, numbers 14, 29 and 32 were “open ended” questions where participants made comments. The Lead Block Captains analyz ed the comments made in the open-ended questions and grouped similar comments into major categories. Page 40 240 B3 Insights from Surveys The survey provided valuable information regarding:  the best communication vehicles currently used by residents  the best social media platforms residents currently use  the public alert systems currently used by residents  the degree to which residents want more education and training on emergency preparedness  the role of first responders.  the number of residents who have special needs or have family members or neighbors with special needs The City of RH, the RHCA, and First Responders will use the information to guide what content will be developed and how to communicate with residents. Lead Block Captains were tasked with the preliminary analysis and reviewed the survey results both qualitatively and quantitatively. They grouped survey answers and comments into similar categories. They reviewed their analytical approach with a marketing consultant with expertise in surveys and marketing research who validated the process and provided some additional grouping suggestions. Note: Some of the issues raised by residents occur in multiple categories. An example is the concern of the closed Crest Road East gate was raised in both traffic congestion and evacuation routes. A summary of stakeholder input on wildfire mitigation strategies is below: 1) Residents want more communication, education and training from the City, RHCA and First Responders. The need for communication with residents during an emergency is a major concern. Residents are anxious and want information on: traffic congestion during an evacuation, limited exits routes, excessive and unmanaged growth on private properties, easements and in canyons. 2) Residents want better enforcement and compliance to existing ordinances and regulations from both the City, RHCA and Fire Department. 3) Residents are concerned that traffic congestion, bottlenecks will occur just outside of RH exits. Residents view congestion and inadequate traffic control will impede and slow evacuation from the city. Many residents want access to alternate routes and question how the Crest Road East Gate will be opened in the event of an emergency evacuation. Page 41 241 4) Residents question the adequacy of three main exits of the city as the main evacuation routes. They are concerned about narrow roads, especially Eastfield Drive, the fuel along the exit routes and what happens if a tree or car impedes or prevents evacuation. They want the City of RH and RHCA to proactively identify alternate evacuation routes (unlocking Crest Road East gate or connecting dead-end streets). Residents want help in defining individual evacuation plans and routes. 5) Residents want actions taken to reduce fuel and excessive vegetation on private properties. Residents want hazardous plants and trees removed from easements. Residents want easements along exit routes to be cleared regularly. Dead vegetation and unkempt properties are ranked moderate to high as greatest risk of wildfire. 6) Excessive fuel located in canyons and outside of the RH City limits are perceived by residents as the greatest risk of wildfire. Residents perceive unattended fuel growth in canyons will threaten lives and their properties. 7) Residents with special needs are a small but vulnerable group and may need special support during an emergency or disaster. The elderly may need help in keeping their property safe from wildfire. 8) A small number of residents want utilities moved underground as above-the-ground power lines present a major risk to residents during a fire. Page 42 242 APPENDIX C WILDLAND RES MGT REPORT BY CAROL RICE NOVEMBER 1, 2019 243 Agenda Item No.: 8.A Mtg. Date: 07/27/2020 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: ELAINE JENG, CITY MANAGER THRU: ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDER AND APPROVE AN AMENDED AGREEMENT WITH JIMENEZ CONSULTING TO PROVIDE TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT, INCLUDING ENHANCEMENTS TO CITY'S WEBSITE. DATE: July 27, 2020 BACKGROUND: In 2018, the City had five full time positions but with only four positions filled. In 2019, the City Council authorize an additional full time fire fuel abatement manager/code enforcement officer resulting in six full time positions. Between 2018 and 2020, staffing level at City Hall fluctuated between three and four full time staff. Presently there are four full time staff (City Manager, Planning and Community Services Director, Code Enforcement Officer, and Administrative Assistant) and one part-time staff for the Planning and Community Services Department. The City Attorney and the Finance Department are contracted services. All other types of expertise in a municipal government office are filled by the four internal staff. In addition to performing the core functions of their positions, members of the staff function as follows: Risk managers; IT, troubleshooting workstations, or investigating non-working routers, phones, and applications; Project managers; Public works personnel; Website exp erts; Agenda system technician; Sound engineer Solid waste expert Handyman; Human resource officer; Dog attack case managers Neighbor dispute resolution; Standby generator experts; and Facilities managers; With a small number of staff responsible for wide variety of duties and responsibilities to keep City 244 Hall in operation with friendly, quality and expedient service, staff has used technology to meet demands. The use of technological tools has been helpful thus far to avoid the need for staff augmentation. In January 2020, the City launched the agenda ma nagement system Granicus eliminating manual steps to produce and publish agenda packets. In August 2019, the City migrated to cloud base structure allowing employees to access work files anywhere with an internet connection. In March 2020, the City's new website was launched. As a part of the City's website, the Citizen's Request was launched allowing residents to submit and track complaints, and requests to the City. In May 2020, the City subscribed to Los Angeles County's Geographic Information System (GI S) to produce mapping, to have up to date aerial photography of the city, and to have site measuring tools at the desktop. In June 2020, the City replaced paper records, and manual recording of permits with subscription to iWorq to track zoning permits and code enforcement cases. In June, the City executed a contract to join the Southbay Fiber Network to have business grade broadband services. In July, the City commenced the digitizing of paper files at City Hall to eliminate time needed for staff to searc h the office for records. DISCUSSION: While staff is resourceful and creative in deploying workarounds while working in an area outside of their expertise, after six months of deploying technology tools, the office is needing experts to integrate applications to maximum the investments made in individual applications. For example, iWorq allows applicants for development permits to pull permit status, permit activities remotely anytime. In order to initiate the feature, iWorq needs integration with the City's website. Similarly, to allow residen ts search for development files without having to make a trip to City Hall, the database of digitized records must be linked to the City's website. The City's website becomes a portal for city services and city records. After the launch of the City's webs ite in March 2020, internal staff worked many hours coordinating with the web designer, and contracted IT Department to troubleshoot the NotifyMe feature on the City's website. NotifyMe was not functioning property and did not allow people who opt in to be able to select the types of information they want to be notified of. The Citizen's Request was also experiencing issues where request coming in were not be distributed to the appropriate staff listed in the command. The calendar feature on the website wa s not pulling the correct data from specified sources to display the correct information. In June 2020, the City solicited technology services and hired Jimenez Consulting Solutions (Jimenez). In a short few weeks, problems relating to NotifyMe, Citizen's Request, and the calendar were resolved. Additionally, the blank pages dedicated to the Block Captain pages were designed with a link to the calendar of events to automate RSVPs for ongoing Block Captain meetings. Jimenez has over 30 years in deploying technology to meet operational needs. Jimenez's expertise is to take the client's needs and translate them into technology language and work with industry professionals to integrate programs. Jimenez has assisted a wide array of clients in their efforts to create, sustain, and improve their application of technology. These efforts have ranged in size from one consultant for a few weeks to teams of hundreds of consultants spanning the course of several years. The experience of working with Jimenez in June 2020 showed that company was able to provide highly customized service based on the selected technology already deployed by the City or in the process of being deployed. The experience also demonstrated that Jimenez is nimble, flexible in adjusting to staff's priority of the day and has the ability to communicate with end users in layman's terms. 245 Staff hopes to use the website to provide static services; this would eliminate phone calls, and or visits requesting information, records, and or stat us updates on permits. Instead, staff can use the time gained to apply for grants (SB2 and LEAP grants), conduct more community based work (CWPP and fire prevention) and dedicate attention to complicated issues like utility undergrounding projects, and other utility projects including alternative compliance strategies for the stormwater permit, implementation of the climate action plan strategies, and tackle long range planning policy updates and code clean up. FISCAL IMPACT: Services relating to troubleshooting applications and designing the Block Captain pages with automated calendar features provided by Jimenez in June 2020 was $4,950. To allow flexibility to meet operational needs and for technology support services, staff recommends to have Jimenez on a retainer basis, up to $7,000 per month for six months between July and December 2020. There is sufficient funds in the approved FY 2020-2021 budget for the proposed services. Depending on integration and troubleshooting needs, services provided by Jimenez will be capped at $7,000 per month and overall expenditure will be capped at $42,000. City staff does not anticipate the technology support to be an on-going expense. Once troubleshooting and integration are complete with all the applications deployed in recent months, staff expects to operate independently. Staff projected three months of support but added another three months to the project timeline for contingency. As with all professional services agreement, the service provider can only be compensa ted for actual hours worked. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve an amended agreement with Jimenez Consulting. ATTACHMENTS: Amendment to Agreement with Jimenez- Website Design-c1_rh-c1_2020-07-23.docx 20-06-08 Jimenez Consulting Solutions LLC FINAL.pdf Page 1 of 4 246 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS FIRST AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR WEBSITE DESIGN SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR WEBSITE DESIGN SERVICES (“First Amendment”) is made and entered into on July 27, 2020 by and between the CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, a municipal corporation ("City"), and JIMENEZ CONSULTING SOLUTIONS, L.L.C., a limited liability company (the “Consultant”). R E C I T A L S A. On June 8, 2020, the City entered into a Professional Services Agreement for Website Design with Consultant for website design services to create a site related to the Block Captain program (the “Site”) that links to the City’s official website (the “Agreement”); B. City and Consultant now desire to amend the Agreement to expand the scope of work, extend the term, and increase the cost so that Consultant may provide website design services on a retainer basis (“First Amendment”); C. Consultant is well qualified by reason of education, training, and experience; and D. Consultant is willing to render such services on the terms and conditions as hereinafter defined. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the covenants and agreements set forth below, City and Consultant agree as follows: 1. CITY and CONTRACTOR agree to replace Exhibit A that was attached to the Agreement with Exhibit A that is attached to this First Amendment and incorporated herein by reference. 2. Paragraph 2 (COST) of the Agreement is amended to read as follows: 2. Cost. City agrees to pay Consultant for the services required by this Agreement as set forth in Exhibit A, representing the total cost for all labor, equipment, supplies, expenses, and materials incurred by Consultant. Consultant shall submit invoices in duplicate and addressed to the City Manager, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California 90274 twice a month (at mid - month and month-end) upon completion of the services identified in Exhibit A. City will make payment for all work performed to City’s reasonable satisfaction within 30 days of receipt of an invoice. The Agreement shall not exceed a total amount of $46,950. 3. Paragraph 6 (TERM) of the Agreement is amended to read as follows: 6. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be valid until February 1, 2021. Page 2 of 4 247 4. All terms and conditions of the Agreement not amended by this First Amendment remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this First Agreement on the date and year first above written. CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CONSULTANT ELAINE JENG SUSAN R. JIMENEZ CITY MANAGER PRESIDENT & CEO ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Page 3 of 4 248 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK I. BLOCK CAPTAIN SITE A. Consultant shall furnish all materials and perform all work required for performance of the following Services including, but not limited to, the following: 1. Review City-provided existing documents related to the Block Captain program and the City’s website, including but not limited to design documents, training materials, and other system documentation the City received from its website developer. 2. Discuss by telephone requirements, priorities, and options for functionality of the new Site with City staff, Arlene Honbo (Block Captain Lead), and other individuals identified by the City as appropriate. 3. Participate in up to two City-facilitated Zoom conference meetings with City staff, a City- selected subset of Block Captains (between 5 to 10 Block Captains), and other individuals identified by the City as appropriate to understand input, priorities, and options for design of the Site. 4. Prepare and deliver initial “straw man” design concept for the Site, and review such design with City staff, Arlene Honbo (Block Captain Lead), and other individuals identified by City as appropriate by phone. 5. Revise the design concept up to 5 iterations based on feedback received and approved by the City. 6. Deliver a final design concept. B. The Services identified in Section A, of Title I, above, shall be completed by June 30, 2020. C. The Services identified in Section A, of Title I, above, cost $4,950.00. D. City shall coordinate a telephone or zoom conference between Consultant and its website developer to provide Consultant with the opportunity to ask questions about the functionality of the website for purposes of creating the Site design. E. Consultant will provide all services using remote technology. II. GENERAL ROLLING HILLS WEBSITE A. Consultant shall furnish all materials and perform all work required for performance of the following Services including, but not limited to, the following: Page 4 of 4 249 1. General IT consulting support for the entire City of Rolling Hills website (https://www.rolling-hills.org/) 2. Develop understanding of the features and capabilities of the f ull Revize solution. 3. Work with City staff to define other IT-related requirements, issues, ideas, and problems that need to be addressed to effectively conduct City business. 4. Improve and enhance effectiveness of current technology solution where the City is not currently leveraging any technology tools by implementing new solutions or where the City is using multiple technology solutions by implementing one new solution. 5. Help members of City staff become more familiar and comfortable with the various technology solutions being deployed at the City. 6. Support the City in its relationships and interactions with technology vendors in order to optimize the services that those vendors provide. 7. Assist City with prioritizing IT needs, estimate costs of new initiatives, develop plans for future projects, and execute those plans. 8. Meet with City staff regularly to review and discuss priorities, areas of focus, and progress. 9. Modify work as appropriate to support the changing needs of the City in response to City Manager direction. B. The Services identified in Section A, of Title II, above, which includes 40 hours of support, cost $7,000 per month. Consultant shall perform such Services in July 2020, August 2020, September 2020, October 2020, November 2020, and December 2020. Page 1 of 7 250 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR WEBSITE DESIGN THIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR WEBSITE DESIGN SERVICES ("Agreement") is made and entered into as of _ _ _ _ by and between the CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, a municipal corporation ("City"), and JIMENEZ CONSULTING SOLUTIONS, L.L.C., a limited liability company (the "Consultant"). RECITALS A. City desires to retain Consultant to provide the City with website design services to create a site related to the Block Captain program (the "Site") that links to the City's official website; B. Consultant is well qualified by reason of education, training, and experience; and C. Consultant is willing to render such services on the terms and conditions as hereinafter defined. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the covenants and agreements set forth below, City and Consultant agree as follows: 1. Scope of Work. Consultant shall perform in a manner satisfactory to City the functions and duties set forth in the Scope of Work, att ached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. 2. Cost. City agrees to pay Consultant for the services required by this Agreement $4,950.00, representing the total cost for all labor, equipment, supplies, expenses, and materials incurred by Consultant. Consultant shall submit invoices in duplicate and addressed to the City Manager, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California 90274 upon completion of the services identified in Exhibit A. City will make payment for all work performed to City's reasonable satisfaction within 30 days of receipt of an invoice. The Agreement shall not exceed a total amount of $4,950.00. 3. Commencement of the Work. Consultant shall commence work under this Agreement upon complete execution of this Agreement. 4. Accounting Records. Consultant must maintain accounting records and other evidence pertaining to costs incurred, which records and documents shall be kept available at the Consultant's California office during the contract period and thereafter for three years from the date of final payment. Consultant shall provide the City access to such records for approval, funding, or auditing the project, during normal business hours upon reasonable notice, the reasonable cost of which shall be borne by the City. 5. City Data. City Data includes the City's data that is collected, used, processed, stored, or generated as a result of the use of Consultant's services. City will own all rights in Page 2 of 7 251 and to City Data to the extent allowable by law, and any derivative works of City Data will remain the exclusive property of City. 6. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be valid until July 31, 2020. 7. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated at any time without cause by either party giving ten (10) calendar days' advance written notice of termination to the other party. In the event of a breach or a default in the performance of this Agreement, the non- defaulting party may terminate the Agreement immediately, provided that the defaulting or breaching party has failed to cure or to make reasonable progress towards .curing the default within three (3) calendar days of receipt of notice demanding a cure. If this Agreement is terminated pursuant to any of the provisions contained hereinabove, and if requested to do so in writing by the City, the Consultant shall, within seven (7) calendar days after receipt of such written request, deliver and turn over to the City all of its preparation and work on documents which were done to the date of the receipt of the notice of termination. The terms "preparation" and "work" as used in this paragraph, shall refer to and include all other data and materials of whatever type that have been gathered by the Consultant, and contemplated to be used or actually used, in the preparation of the services identified in Exhibit A. 8. Insurance. A. Without limiting Consultant's obligations arising under Section 10 of this Agreement (Indemnity), Consultant shall not begin work under this Agreement until it obtains policies of insurance required under this section. The insurance shall cover Consultant, its agents, representatives, and employees in connection with the performance of work under this Agreement, and shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement. Insurance coverage shall be as follows: i. Automobile Liability Insurance with minimum coverage of $300,000 for property damage, $300,000 for injury to one person/single occurrence, and $300,000 for injury to more than one person/single occurrence. ii. General Liability Insurance, insuring City, its elected and appointed officers, agents, and employees from claims for damages for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage, including contractual liability and products and completed operations liability, which may arise from Consultant's· actions under this Agreement, whether or not done by Consultant or anyone directly or indirectly employed by Consultant. Such insurance shall have a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000. iii. Worker's Compensation Insurance for all Consultant's employees to the extent required by the State of California. iv. Professional Liability Coverage. The Consultant shall maintain professional errors and omissions liability insurance for protection against claims alleging negligent acts, errors, or omissions which may arise from the Consultant's operations under this Agreement, whether such operations be by the Consultant or by its employees, Page3 of7 252 subconsultants, or subcontractors. The amount of this insurance shall not be less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) on a claims-made annual aggregate basis, or a combined single- limit-per-occurrence basis. B. Deductibility Limits for policies referred to in subparagraphs A(i) through (iii) shall not exceed $5,000 per occurrence. C. Additional Insured. City and its elected and appointed officers, agents, and employees shall be named as additional insureds on policies referred to in subparagraphs A(i) and (ii). D. Primary Insurance. The insurance required in subparagraphs A(i), (ii), and (iv) shall be primary and not excess coverage. E. Evidence of Insurance. Consultant shall furnish City, prior to the execution of this Agreement, satisfactory evidence of the insurance required, issued by an insurer authorized to do business in California, and an endorsement to each such policy of insurance evidencing that each carrier is required to give City at least 30 days prior written notice of the cancellation of any policy during the effective period of the Agreement. All required insurance policies are subject to approval of the City Attorney. Failure on the part of Consultant to procure or maintain said insurance in full force and effect shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement. 9. Indemnity. Consultant shall indemnify, defend with counsel approved by City, and hold harmless City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers from and against all liability, loss, damage, expense, cost (including without limitation reasonable attorney's fees, expert fees, and all other costs and fees of litigation) of every nature arising out of or in connection with and to the extent of Consultant's negligence or other wrongful conduct in Consultant's performance of work hereunder or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in this Agreement, regardless of City's passive negligence, but excepting such loss or damage which is caused by the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. The Consultant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the City (and its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers) covered by this indemnity obligation. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions are intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California and will survive termination of this Agreement. 10. Quality of Work Performed. All work shall be performed to the highest professional standards. 11. Personnel. City has engaged Consultant by virtue of the specialized expertise and reputation in the field of website design for government agencies. Consequently, all work shall be performed by Consultant. Susan Jimenez, President & CEO, will be the primary person performing the Services. 12. Compliance with All Laws. Consultant shall comply with all City, State, and Federal laws in the performance of its services. Page4of7 253 13. Assignment/Subcontracting. Consultant shall not be permitted to subcontract or assign any portion of this Agreement without the express written consent of the City. The performance of either party's duties are also not delegable without the prior written consent of the other party. Any attempted or purported subcontract, assign, or delegation of any of the rights or obligations of either party without the prior written consent of the other shall be void and of no force and effect. 14. Atto rney's Fees. In any action brought to declare the rights granted herein or to enforce any of the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of reasonable attorney's fees in an amount determined by the court. 15. Non-discrimination. Consultant shall not discriminate in the hiring of employees or in the employment of subconsultants on any basis prohibited by law. 16. Inde pendent Contractor. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to City, a wholly independent contractor. Neither City nor any of its agents shall have control of the conduct of Consultant or any of the Consultant's employees, except as herein set forth. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its agents or employees are in any manner agents or employees of the City. Consultant shall be solely responsible for all contributions, payments, or withholdings normally made on behalf of an employee including but not limited to, state and federal income taxes, federal social security contributions, California State disability insurance taxes, and unemployment insurance contributions. City shall issue Consultant a Form 1099 in connection with th e compensation paid hereunder, and Consultant shall pay all required taxes on amounts paid hereunder. 17. Notices. All notices and communications shall be sent to the parties at the following addresses: CITY: CONSULTANT: City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 ATTN.: Elaine Jeng, City Manager Email: ejeng@cityofrh.net Jimenez Consulting Solutions, LLC 6709 East Calle Redondo Scottsdale, Arizona 85251 ATTN.: Susan R. Jimenez, President & CEO Email: susan.jimenez@jimenezconsulting.com Notice shall only be given by personal delivery, e-mail, overnight delivery, or certified or registered mail with return receipt. Notice will be deemed to have been duly given when received if personally delivered; when receipt is electronically confirmed if transmitted by e- mail; the day after it is sent if sent for next day delivery by recognized overnight delivery service; and upon receipt if sent by certified or registered mail with return receipt requested. Page 5 of 7 254 18. Conflict of Interest. Consultant affirms and warrants that she has no financial, contractual, or other interest or obligation that conflicts with or is harmful to the performance of her obligations under this Agreement. Consultant shall not during the term of this Agreement knowingly obtain such an interest or incur such an obligation. 19. Amendment. It is mutually understood and agree that no alteration or variation of the terms of this Agreement, or any subcontract requiring the approval of the City, shall be valid unless made in writing, signed by the parties hereto, and approved by all necessary parties. 20. Authorized Signature. Consultant affirms that the signatures, titles, and seals set forth hereinafter in execution of this Agreement represent all individuals, firm members, partners, joint ventures, and/or corporate officers having a principal interest herein. 21. Entire Agreement:Modification. This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or written, between the parties and contains all of the covenants and agreements between the parties. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein, and that any other agreement, statements or promise not contained in this Agreement shall not be valid or binding. Any modification of this Agreement will be effective only if signed by the party to be charged. The parties acknowledge and agree that their respective obligations under the Agreement have been fully discharged. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year first above written. CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CONSULTANT -12 ' DATE: 00 Io<lli i-o SUSAN R. JIME PRESIDENT & CEO DATE:C9 /t /20 ATTEST: Page6 of7 255 APPROVED AS TO FORM: EXHIBIT A City Attorney Page 7 of 7 256 . ' SCOPE OF WORK A. Consultant shall furnish all materials and perform all work required for performance of the following Services including, but not limited to, the following: 1. Review City-provided existing documents related to the Block Captain program and the City's website, including but not limited to design documents, training materials, and other system documentation the City received from its website developer. 2. Discuss by telephone requirements, priorities, and options for functionality of the new Site with City staff, Arlene Honbo (Block Captain Lead), and other individuals identified by the City as appropriate. 3. Participate in up to two City-facilitated Zoom conference meetings with City staff, a City- selected subset of Block Captains (between 5 to 10 Block Captains), and other individuals identified by the City as appropriate to understand input, priorities, and options for design of the Site. 4. Prepare and deliver initial "straw man" design concept for the Site, and review such design with City staff, Arlene Honbo (Block Captain Lead), and other individuals identified by City as appropriate by phone. 5. Revise the design concept up to 5 iterations based on feedback received and approved by the City. 6. Deliver a final design concept. 8. The Services identified in Section A, above, shall be completed by June 30, 2020. C. City shall coordinate a telephone or zoom conference between Consultant and its website developer to provide Consultant with the opportunity to ask questions about the functionality of the website for purposes of creating the Site design. D. Consultant will provide all services using remote technology. 257 Agenda Item No.: 8.B Mtg. Date: 07/27/2020 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: ELAINE JENG, CITY MANAGER THRU: ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDER AND APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 1259 TO ESTABLISH A FORMAL POLICY TO CONTRIBUTE CITY FUNDS TOWARDS THE COST OF UTILITY POLE REMOVAL AND RESOLUTION NO. 1260 ESTABLISHING AN APPLICATION AND APPEAL FEE RELATING TO UTILITY POLE REMOVAL REIMBURSEMENT APPLICATIONS; AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1241. DATE: July 27, 2020 BACKGROUND: At the March 9, 2020 meeting, the City Council voted to establish an ad hoc committee of the City Council to draft a policy for city contribution towards the undergrounding of overhead utility poles that are not a part of assessment districts. The City Cou ncil appointed Mayor Jeff Pieper and Councilmember Leah Mirsch to the ad hoc committee. The ad hoc committee met three times since March 2020. Attached to this report is report from the ad hoc outlining the committee's considerations in formulating the proposed policy. The ad hoc committee concluded the following: Ad hoc committee desires an easy process for residents (i.e., administratively processed at the staff level); Easy to understand contribution amounts; Projects must demonstrate public benefit; and Establish a procedure for appeals DISCUSSION: Per the recommendation of the ad hoc committee, the City Attorney prepared Resolution 1259 for consideration and approval. 258 Residents desiring city contribution must submit an application with the following: 1. Required application fee of $100; 2. Proof of removal of utility pole(s); 3. Proof of public benefit by way of satisfying one of the three qualifying criteria; and 4. Any other information reasonably determined by the City Manager to assist in the processing of the application The City manager shall issue a written decision on the completed application either approving or denying the application. A denial may be appealed by the property owner to the City Council. Upon approval of a utility pole removal reimbursement application by either the City Manager or the City Council, the City shall contribute funds to the property owner to subsidize the utility pole removal as follows: Tier 1 Removal of One (1) or Two (2) Poles $2,000 per pole or one-third (1/3) of the preliminary design fee, whichever is greater. Tier 2 Removal of Three (3) or More Poles $2,000 per pole or one -half (1/2) of the preliminary design fee, whichever is greater. FISCAL IMPACT: FY 2020-2021 approved budget includes $150,000 for the Utility Fund dedicated to ut ility undergrounding. If the resolutions are approved, city contribution for approved reimbursement applications will be funded by the Utility Fund. In March 2020, the City Council received an application for reimbursement for $2,251 for a pole removal near 5 Ringbit Road. The City Council decided to delay action on the request until a policy is established. If the City Council approves resolutions 1259 and 1260, reimbursement for the pole removed near 5 Ringbit Road will be processed according to the new policy. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council approve Resolutions 1259 and 1260. ATTACHMENTS: Ad_Hoc_Recommendations_Individual_Utility_Pole_FINAL.docx Resolution_RE_Policy_for_Contribution_to_Utility_Pole_Removal-c1_2020-07-24-1.v2.doc Fee_Reso._Amended_to_Reflect_Utility_Pole_Removal_Fees-c1_2020-07-24-1v1.docx 1 259 BACKGROUND INDIVIDUAL UTILITY POLE REMOVAL AD-HOC COMMITTEE REPORT AND REOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL, JULY, 2020 The City of Rolling Hills has a history of supporting the undergrounding of overhead utilities and the removal of utility pol es. This support is based on 1) the belief that unsightly wires and poles detract from the natural beauty of our environment and 2) the involvement of overhead electric utility facilities in wildfires that have impacted our community. Most commonly the support has been in instances when multiple neighbors in an area come together to consider the formation of an Assessment District (AD). In a Utility Undergrounding Assessment District several neighbors agree to cost share the expenses associated with the undergrounding of their overhead utilities and the removal of the vacated poles, as well as the availability of outside financing options (bonds, loans, etc). An early step in this AD process is the engineerin g design required to re- provision services from the providers’ (Edison, Cox, Frontier, etc) overhead facilities. This function also establishes the construction cost estimates for the project. To assist residents with these preliminary costs and encourage utility undergrounding, the City established a policy to fund one third (1/3) of the engineering design cost, not to exceed $50,000 per project, in the formation of an Assessment District. The process of forming an Assessment District can be challenging and lengthy. Some residents wa nting to avoid the hassle of forming an AD (and usually dealing with the removal of an individual pole) self -funded their own projects. Beginning in 2015 the city received several requests from residents who had removed individual poles, asking for contributions to the costs, similar to our policy with Assessment District funding. In each of these cases the Council agreed that we wanted to support the undergrounding efforts, but struggled with a methodology or formula for reimbursement, as each instance was unique. First and foremost, as a public agency we had to ensure that public funds were not used to benefit an individual resident or property owner. If the removal of the pole was deemed to have public benefit we then had to determine what portion of the project cost we would fund. Since the removal of an individual pole does not always require facilities engineering design or fees, the one -third rule wasn’t always applicable. And the cost to remove a pole could vary significantly, based on its location, s ize, etc. The Council deliberated on each project and reimbursed funds for 3 single pole removal projects from 2015-2018. Recently, activity among residents who have removed (or are considering removing) individual poles and requesting partial reimbursement from the city has resurfaced. It is likely the trend will continue, given the challenges of forming an AD. The city council approved the formation of an ad hoc committee to develop recommendations for workable policies and procedures that would enable consistent treatment of these requests. Mayor Pieper and Councilmember Mirsch were appointed to the committee. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION At its first meeting the ad hoc committee discussed and agreed upon the following: 1) Confirmed council’s continued support of undergrounding efforts in the city, within budgetary constraints. 2) Must not make any gift of public funds. Must establish criteria to determine public benefit. 3) “Bang for the Buck” - Contributions towards removal of individual poles vs ADs may have different values to the community. A contribution to an AD has the benefit of possibly impacting a larger geographical area and removing more poles/wires at a time. But the “up-front” contribution policy does not guarantee the project will move forward or that any pole(s) will be removed. On the other hand, contribution towards individual pole projects – after the work has been completed – results in actual reduction of poles and wires. 2 260 4) Not all poles are equal. Impact on community and cost can vary widely, depending on location, number of properties served, type, size, visibility, etc. 5) Recognize the difficulty, length of time, and staff resources required to establish an AD vs. the speed/ease of an individual project. Only willing participants involved – no forced inclusion based on required percentage of votes 6) Policies and criteria should be able to be replicated and applied consistently for all requests. 7) City/RHCA relationship – Historically the RHCA has also contributed to undergrounding projects, in amounts similar to contributions from the city. Although it makes things simpler for residents if City and RHCA policies and procedures are the same; that may not always be possible. Rules pertaining to public funds, as well as differences in philosophies or resources of the respective agencies could cause divergent policies. But it is our intent to seek input from the Association (RHCA Board designated Board member David McKinnie as liaison to our committee) prior to finalizing any recommendation to City Council. Based on the above assumptions, the committee explored the following issues : 1) Funding Eligibility – determine what constitutes a “public benefit”. Can certain benefits - , i.e. fire safety, view/beautification/environment, improved reliability of updated provisioning, etc - of any pole removal be designated as a benefit to the public, applied universally to every property, or must it be determined on a case-by-case basis? 2) Funding Amount – determination of reimbursable amount for eligible costs. Examples of possible methods: Flat cost per pole, percent of design fees (if required), sliding scale incentive, cap amount per project/per year, fiscal impact, etc. 3) Processes and Approvals - administrative processes for reimbursement requests. Keep as simple as possible. Any pre- approval required? All work signed off as complete, receipts, forms, informational handouts, etc. Preliminary Details/ Questions/Findings fo r these 3 major issues: 1) FUNDING ELIGIBILITY – Scenario A or B A) Legal counsel advises that specific defined benefit(s) of any undergrounding and pole removal project (fire safety, view/beautification, etc) constitutes a public benefit to the community. Thi s is the committee’s most desirable scenario. It would eliminate the need to review each project individually for determination of benefit, and the subjective and difficult- to- quantify decision of appropriate reimbursement amount. Standardized methods to determine reimbursements could be applied consistently to each project. (See item 2, Funding Amount.) B) Legal counsel advises that in order to avoid gifting of public funds we must review each request on an individual basis. Could we establish that a project removing at least two (2) poles would qualify as benefiting more than one individual and therefore not constitute a gifting? Could we still use a pre-established amount per pole method, or a percentage of cost formula, not to exceed one-third the cost of any itemized design fees (whichever is greater)? 2) FUNDING AMOUNT City does not have ability to determine “how much” of a benefit to attribute to each project. Too subjective – how much does removal of a pole contribute to fire safety or beautification/environment/view/…... This type of benefit analysis and assignment is performed by experts as part of the AD process. Prefer a fixed cost- per-pole method. A) Suggest using cost data from the recent Eastfield AD Project to establish an average cost. The 14 poles included in this project represent various sizes and locations, providing an averaging component to the calculations. 3 261 Eastfield UAD Cost Information Total Estimated Project Cost: $1,906,500 Number of properties affected: 19 Number of poles removed: 14 Total Engineering/Design Costs: $84, 500 (4.4% of total cost) Design cost per pole: $6,036 City contribution (@ 1/3 design fees) per pole: $2,012 Based on above, $2,000 seems to be a reasonable and justified amount to use in a flat cost-per-pole approach. B) Shown below is information relating to the cost and reimbursement amounts for the 3 “individual” projects previously approved by the city council, as well as 1 pending request: Address # poles Total Project Cost Actual Contribution @$2k per Hackamore Rd 1 $44.7K $9k $2k Meadowlark Ln 1 $33.9 $5.3k ** $2k ** project had actual design fees of $10.7k, reimbursement request and granted for @ 50% of that cost (15% total) Saddleback Rd 1* $32.3 $3.3** $2k * project removed 1 pole and replaced another wood pole with composite ** project had actual design fees of $22.2k, reimbursement made at 10% of total cost Ringbit (pending) 1 $6.7k** $2.2k (requested) $2K **Edison invoice only; no design fees billed C) Consider maximum amounts per project –as with Assessment Districts 3) PROCESSES AND REQUIREMENTS – Development of administrative processes to handle reimbursement requests A) Develop clear informational materials for anyone considering a project so they know what to expect. B) Reimbursement requests can only submitted upon completion of the project, as certified by Edison. C) Copies of all invoices/statements/bills, accompanied by proof of payment(s) must be provided prior to the processing of any request for reimbursement. CONCLUSIONS The above information was provided as background and to indicate a starting point in the ad hoc committee’s efforts. After several meetings and input from legal counsel, it was determined that criteria for attributing a benefit to the community – and therefore not a gifting of public funds – needed to be more specifically defined. Based on those discussions the committee revised some of its thoughts and provides the following recommendations for council’s, and the public’s consideration. 4 262 RECOMMENDATIONS FUNDING ELIGIBILITY - Project must meet at least 1 (one) of the following criteria: 1. The pole must serve more than 1 (one) property, or 2. The pole must be visible from the street, or 3. The pole must be visible from at least 3 (three) properties FUNDING AOUNTS –A hybrid “cost per pole” and/or “design fee based” formula was developed. In addition, a “sliding scale” component was included to recognize larger projects that provide more benefit to the community. It also provides an alternative to the formation of a n Assessment District in certain circumstances. 1. Removal of 1 -2 (one or two) poles: $2,000 per pole OR 1/3 (33.3%) design fees, whichever is greater 2. Removal of 3 (three) or more poles: $2,000 per pole OR 1/2 (50%) design fees, whichever is greater PROCESSES AND REQUIREMENTS – Once the policies have been finalized by the council, staff should be directed to develop the administrative processes that will allow them to process reimbursement requests from the public, without submission to council for approval. The processes and requirements should: 1. Be used consistently for all reimbursement requests 2. Be as simple as possible 3. Develop clear informational material for distribution to applicants 3. Require that all projects must be complete and copies of paid invoices/bills be provided prior to processing 4. Include an Appeal Process 5. Establish guidelines for cases requesting reimbursement to more than one property owner These recommendations are made separate and apart from any current or future policy of the RHCA. A draft of this report was shared with RHCA Board Member David McKinnie several weeks ago, and no comments have been received. Nothing contained in the committee’s recommendations is meant to suggest any agreement with or support of these recommendations by the RHCA, or imply that the RHCA would consider any similar or different policies. We look forward to discussing this issue and answering any questions you may have. Respectfully submitted by Mayor Jeff Pieper and Councilmember Leah Mirsch July 20, 2020 1 263 RESOLUTION NO. 1259 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTABLISHING A FORMAL POLICY TO CONTRIBUTE CITY FUNDS TOWARDS THE COST OF UTILITY POLE REMOVAL WITHIN THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Recitals. A. The City requires all utilities servicing a building on any residential zoned parcel to be installed underground upon the following occurrences: 1) construction of any new primary or accessory building; 2) remodeling of a primary or accessory building which entails enlargement of the structure or alteration of the building footprint; 3) lengthening or adding electrical lines servicing a building or parcel; 4) relocating or increasing the electrical panel servicing a building or parcel; or 5) inclusion of a parcel in an undergrounding utility assessment district. (Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 17.27.030.) B. The City has on occasion contributed funds on a case- by-case basis to property owners who remove utility poles in connection with undergrounding utilities not part of an assessment district when those pole removals provide a public benefit. C. The City Council formed an ad hoc committee to develop a formal policy for the contribution of City funds to encourage and partially subsidize utility pole removal. The ad hoc committee proposed a formal policy to the City Council whereby the City would contribute funds towards utility pole removal when the property owner can establish a public benefit. D. After public comment and deliberation on July 27, 2020, the City Council finds that a public benefit exists warranting contribution of public funds when a property owner can establish one of the following criteria relating to such utility pole removal: (1) more than one property is connected to the removed pole; (2) the removed pole was visible to at least three surrounding properties; or (3) the removed pole was visible from a road. The City Council desires to implement the ad hoc committee’s recommendation and establish a formal policy to contribute funds towards the cost of utility pole removal when a property owner can establish such public benefit. 2 264 Section 2. The City Council hereby creates a program for partial reimbursement of the cost of utility pole removal for property owners not part of an assessment district. A. Submission of a Completed Application: The property owner shall submit to the City a completed application, including the following: (1) required application fee as set forth by resolution of the City Council; (2) proof of removal of the utility pole(s); (3) proof of public benefit by way of satisfying one of the following qualifying criteria: (i) more than one property was connected to the removed pole; (ii) the removed pole was visible to at least three surrounding properties; or (iii) the removed pole was visible from a road; and (4) any other information reasonably determined by the City Manager or designee to assist in the processing of the application, including but not limited to the following: (i) the preliminary design of the undergrounding project that involved removal of the utility pole(s); (ii) proof of the completed undergrounding project; and (iii) receipt for cost of the preliminary design of the undergrounding project. B. Decision on a Completed Application: The utility pole removal reimbursement application shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Manager or designee. Upon acceptance of a complete application, the City Manager or designee shall review the application for conformance with one of the following public benefit criteria: (1) more than one property connected to the removed pole; (2) the removed pole was visible to at least three surrounding properties; or (3) the removed pole was visible from a road. No public hearing on the application shall be required. The City Manager or designee shall issue a written decision on the completed application either approving or denying the application. C. Appeal of City Manager or Designee Denial: A denial may be appealed by the property owner to the City Council. All appeals must be filed on or before the thirtieth calendar day after the City Manager or designee's decision with the required appeal fee as set forth by resolution of the City Council. Upon receiving such an appeal, the City Manager or designee shall set the appeal as an item before the City Council to occur within forty -five days of the filing of the appeal. No public hearing on the appeal shall be required. The review hearing shall be conducted as a de novo hearing. The City Council may act to uphold, overturn, or otherwise modify the City Manager or designee’s original action on the application, or the City Council may remand the application back to the City Manager or designee for further review and direction. D. Reimbursement: Upon approval of a utility pole removal reimbursement application by either the City Manager, designee or the City 3 265 Council, the City shall contribute funds to the property owner to subsidize the utility pole removal as follows: Tier 1 Removal of One (1) or Two (2) Poles $2,000 per pole or one-third (1/3) of the preliminary design fee, whichever is greater. Tier 2 Removal of Three (3) or More Poles $2,000 per pole or one-half (1/2) of the preliminary design fee, whichever is greater. Section 3. On July 27, 2020, the City Council properly reviewed and considered this matter at a public hearing conducted on a publicly available, teleconferenced meeting, conducted in accordance with Governor’s Newsom’s Executive Orders authorizing teleconference meetings during the COVID -19 pandemic. Section 4. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 27th day of July, 2020. JEFF PIEPER MAYOR ATTEST: ELAINE JENG, P.E. ACTING CITY CLERK 4 266 The foregoing Resolution No. 1259 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTABLISHING A FORMAL POLICY TO CONTRIBUTE CITY FUNDS TOWARDS THE COST OF UTILITY POLE REMOVAL WITHIN THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 27th day of July, 2020, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ELAINE JENG, P.E. ACTING CITY CLERK Resolution No. 1260 1 267 RESOLUTION NO. 1260 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MODIFYING ROLLING HILLS FEES BY ESTABLISHING AN APPLICATION AND APPEAL FEE RELATING TO UTILITY POLE REMOVAL REIMBURSEMENT APPLICATIONS; AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1241. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The following fees are established and charged for applications for processing discretionary cases for Planning, Zoning and Subdivisions and shall be paid by the applicant prior to submission for public hearing, pursuant to Title 16 (Subdivision) and Title 17 (Zoning) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code: A. Site Plan Review $ 1,500 B. Conditional Use Permit $ 1,500 C. Variance $ 1,250 D. Variance, Minor $ 750 1. Minor deviation into required yard setback, not exceeding 5’ and attached to main residential structure E. Multiple discretionary reviews; Most expensive fee for the first review and 1/2 fee for second review. No cost for third or more reviews. F. Lighting Ordinance Modification $ 375 G. Outdoor Lighting Audit $ 150 (initiated by resident) H. Time extension $ 200 I. Zone Change $ 2,000 J. General Plan Amendment $ 2,000 K. Zoning/Subdivision Code Amendment $ 2,000 L Discretionary Approval Modification $ 2/3 of original application fee M. Appeal Fee $ 2/3 of original application fee N. City Council and Planning $ 375 Fee to be credited if Commission interpretation results in filing of a formal and miscellaneous reviews application to City Council or Planning Commission O. Environmental Review fees for discretionary permits 1. Preparation and Staff Review $ 200 of Initial Study 2. Preparation of Negative $ 50 (plus fee charged by CA Declaration or Mitigated Department of Fish and Wildlife, Negative Declaration applicable, as adjusted annually) Resolution No. 1260 2 268 P. Environmental Impact Reports Consultant fee plus 10% Q. County Clerk Processing Fee County fee R. Lot Line Adjustment $ 1,500, plus County fee S. Tentative Parcel/Tract Map $ 1,500, plus County fee T. Final Parcel/Tract Map County fee U. Zoning violation and construction $ 1,500 penalty fee 1. Applications for illegal or “as built” grading or construction or non - compliance with approved plans for projects that require Planning Commission review. Fee is charged in addition to the discretionary application review fee. V. Stop work order $ 200 1. Fee charged for each additional “stop work order” that is issued beyond the original stop work order for illegal construction and grading activity. W. Service Request County fee, plus 20% (For services provided by L.A. County not included in the General Services Agreement) X. Appeal of Zone Clearance $ 375 Y. Stable Use Permit $ 375 (For stables under 800 sq ft considered by the Planning Commission) Z. Major Remodel Review $ 375 (For remodels of more than 50% demolition) Section 2. The following fees are established and charged for applications for processing View Impairment, Traffic Commission, and Accessory Dwelling Unit cases: A. View Impairment 1. Review by Committee on Trees and Views Processing fee $ 2,000 2. Environmental Review Fees A. Preparation and Staff Review of Initial Study $ 200 B. Preparation of Negative Declaration or $ 50 Mitigated Negative Declaration (plus fee charged by CA Department of Fish and Wildlife, if applicable, as adjusted annually) B. Traffic Commission Review 1. New driveways or other traffic $ 300 related items C. Accessory Dwelling Unit Resolution No. 1260 3 269 1. Accessory Dwelling Unit or $ 375 Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit Section 3. The following fees are established and charged for General Administration processing: A. General Plan $ 30 B. Zoning Code $ 25 C. Subdivision Code $ 25 D. Budget $ 30 E. Zoning Map $ 3 F. Xeroxed copies, each page $ 0.25 G. False Alarms Fee for 1st incident involving a false alarm is waived 2nd $ 50 3rd $ 100 4th $ 150 5th $ 200 6th $ 250 Section 4. The following fees are established and shall be collected for each permit pursuant to Title 15, (Building and Construction) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code: A. 1. BUILDING PERMIT Two and one-quarter times the amount set forth in the Building Code for each fee, table and schedule therein. 2. PARKS AND RECREATION Each new residential dwelling shall pay 2% of the first $ 100,000 of construction valuation, plus 0.25% of such valuation over $ 100,000. B. PLUMBING PERMIT Two and one-quarter times the amount set forth in the Plumbing Code for each fee, table and schedule therein. C. MECHANICAL PERMIT Two and one-quarter times the amount set forth in the Mechanical Code for each fee, table and schedule therein. D. ELECTRICAL PERMIT Two and one-quarter times the amount set forth in the Electrical Code for each fee, table and schedule therein. E. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, 0.42% of the valuation of the proposed SITE AND PLAN REVIEW structures; however, minimum fee shall be $ 535.00 and the maximum fee shall be $ 3,588.00 F. SOLAR AND PHOTOVOLTAIC The amount set forth in the Los SYSTEMS AND APPURTENANT Angeles County Building and EQUIPMENT Electrical Codes for each fee, table and Resolution No. 1260 4 270 schedule therein, plus $ 60.11 City administrative fee. Section 5. The following fees are established and shall be collected for each permit pursuant to Title 15, (Building and Construction) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code for review conducted by the City’s contract building official, other than Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety: A. BUILDING PERMIT In addition to the provisions of Section 4 A.1 of this resolution, a 25% surcharge on Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety fees shall be charged for the alternative use of the City’s contract building official. B. PLUMBING PERMIT In addition to the provisions of Section 4 B. of this resolution, a 25% surcharge on Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety fees shall be charged for the alternative use of the City’s contract building official. C. MECHANICAL PERMIT In addition to the provisions of Section 4 C. of this resolution, a 25% surcharge on Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety fees shall be charged for the alternative use of the City’s contract building official. D. ELECTRICAL PERMIT In addition to the provisions of Section 4 D. of this resolution, a 25% surcharge on Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety fees shall be charged for the alternative use of the City’s contract building official. E. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, SITE AND PLAN REVIEW In addition to the provisions of Section 4 E. of this resolution, a 25% surcharge on Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety fess shall be charged for the alternative use of the City’s contract building official. F. SOLAR AND PHOTOVOLTAIC In addition to the provision of Section SYSTEMS AND APPURTENANT 4 F. of this resolution, a 25% surcharge EQUIPMENT on Los Angles County Department of Building and Safety fees, plus $60.11 City administrative fee, shall be charged for the alternative use of the City’s contract building official. Section 6. The following fees are established and shall be collected for each permit relating to construction and demolition waste: A. CONSTRUCTION AND $ 100 single project permit plus Resolution No. 1260 5 271 DEMOLITION PERMIT $750 deposit refundable upon submittal of a Certificate of Compliance. Section 7. The following fines are established for issuance of administrative citations relating to a violation of Chapter 9.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code: Administrative Penalty for $ 2,500 1st violation violation of Chapter 9.58 $ 5,000 2nd violation within one year of the 1st violation $ 7,500 Each additional violation within one year of the 1st violation Section 8. The following fees are established and charged for processing landscaping submittals subject to the requirements of the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Review of landscape submittal $1,500 (portion refunded if not spent; package and verification of compliance additional funds may be collected, if needed to complete the review); plus $5,000 deposit refundable upon submittal of a Certificate of Compliance. Section 9. The following fees are established and charged for processing utility pole removal reimbursement applications pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 1259. Review of utility pole removal reimbursement $100 application Appeal of utility pole removal reimbursement $300 decision Section 10. Should the City accept payment of any fee identified in this resolution by means of credit card, an additional 3% surcharge on such fee shall be charged as a convenience fee for processing the payment. When City accepts payment by means of credit card, it shall also accept payment by means of cash or check. Section 11. The fees set forth do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing such services. Section 12. On July 27, 2020, the City Council properly reviewed and considered this matter at a public hearing conducted on a publicly available, teleconferenced meeting, conducted in accordance with Governor’s Newsom’s Executive Orders authorizing teleconference meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic. Section 13. The City Council Resolution No. 1241 is hereby repealed and superseded by Resolution No. 1260. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of , 2020. Jeff Pieper Mayor Resolution No. 1260 6 272 ATTEST: Elaine Jeng, P.E. Acting City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 1260 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MODIFYING ROLLING HILLS FEES BY ESTABLISHING A CONVENIENCE FEE FOR PAYMENTS MADE BY CREDIT CARD; AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1241. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on , 2020 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. ELAINE JENG, P.E. ACTING CITY CLERK 273 Agenda Item No.: 9.A Mtg. Date: 07/27/2020 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: ELAINE JENG, CITY MANAGER THRU: ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: DISCUSS LOS ANGELES COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA ITEM ON A BALLOT MEASURE FOR THE NOVEMBER 2020 ELECTION THAT MAY RESULT IN BUDGET CUTS TO SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND COUNTY PROBATION OFFICE (MIRSCH AND DIERINGER).&NBSP;&NBSP; DATE: July 27, 2020 BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: None. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: None. ATTACHMENTS: Supplemental Item 9A.pdf 274 ROLLING HILLS CITY COUNCIL Supplemental Information Packet Agenda Related Items - Meeting of July 27, 2020 Supplemental Packet Date: July 27, 2020 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): In compliance with the ADA, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting or other services in conjunction with this meeting, please contact the City Clerk Department at (310) 377 -1521. Supplemental Information: Any agenda related public documents received and distributed to a majority of the City Council after the Agenda Packet is printed are included in Supplemental Packets. Supplemental Packets are produced as needed. The Monday Supplemental Packet is available for public inspection in the City Clerk Department, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, during normal business hours (main location pursuant to the Brown Act, G.C. 54957.5(2). The Monday Supplemental Packet is available for public review at City Hall and on the City’s website www.rolling-hils.org. From: Bea Dieringer <bdieringer@cityofrh.net> Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2020 7:01 PM To: Leah Mirsch <lmirsch@cityofrh.net>; Elaine Jeng <ejeng@cityofrh.net> Subject: BOS Agenda item 51-C and agenda item 3 on 7/28/20 agenda TO COUNCIL: 07.27.20 AGENDA ITEM: 9A MEETING DATE: 07.27.20 On Tuesday, July 21, 2020, the Board of Supervisors voted 4 -1 (Supervisor Kathryn Barger voting “No”) to approve a proposed Charter Amendment. If approved by the voters, it will defund public safety to the tune of hundreds of million dollars.  How This Came About The genesis of this was a highly questionable, non-independent poll commissioned by the United Way. The United Way’s survey concluded that “The potential measure enjoys solid support across Los Angeles Supervisorial Districts.” By an amazing coincidence, the United Way is one of the community-based organizations that stands to gain the most from this massive shift in local tax funds. Supervisors Sheila Kuehl and Hilda Solis agendized the Charter amendment in a last-minute Supplemental Agenda under the title of, “Re-Imagine L.A. County.” There were no meaningful prior notices and no public hearings to obtain the input of concerned citizens or other public officials. Shockingly, District Attorney Jackie Lacey—a State Constitutional elected officer and crucial stakeholder on the outcome of this matter—was neither consulted nor even advised that it would be considered by the Supervisors. Although the BOS has not yet published the proposed charter language, the motion said the following: The County’s FY 2020-2021 final approved budget allocates 42% ($3.7 billion) of NCC for law enforcement and legal system uses. This budget allocation does not reflect this Board’s values and priorities, nor does it position the County to robustly and adequately invest in community based counseling and mental health services, youth development programs, small businesses and jobs, or affordable housing. A redistribution of resources is needed. The motion directs County Counsel to do the following: Draft an ordinance, to call a special election to be held on November 3, 2020, for the purpose of voting on an amendment to the Charter of the County of Los Angeles to set a baseline minimum threshold of at least 10%, phased in by 2024, of our locally generated unrestricted revenues in the general fund (“Net County Cost”) to be allocated on an annual basis for the following primary purposes: Direct Community Investment; Alternatives to Incarceration. Ensure that the ordinance containing the proposed charter amendment is clear that the use of any of these earmarked funds for carceral systems and any law enforcement agencies, including the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, L.A. County District Attorney’s Office, L.A. County Superior Courts, or L.A. County Probation Department, including redistribution of funds through these agencies, is strictly forbidden. The 2020-2021 budget referenced above was adopted by the Supervisors a matter of weeks ago. It required that all Departments and Offices absorb an 8% cut in their operations. In the last two weeks, however, the Supervisors have moved to restore full funding for both the Offices of the Public Defen der and Alternate Public Defender. In the meantime, the District Attorney’s Office is left to absorb a $36.3 million gross budget cut, including the loss of 146 positions. So when the motion to amend the charter talks about a “redistribution of resources” from the recently enacted budget, combined with the language that none of the 10% set aside from that budget shall go to the Sheriff Department, District Attorney of Probation Department, it is clear that the “redistribution” will result in further budget cuts to these three departments. 275 276 During the Supervisor’s discussion of the motion, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Sachi Hamai advised the Supervisors that the measure would likely result in layoffs of county employees. County Counsel, Mary W ickham, advised the Supervisors that it would also likely result in lawsuits. During her comments, Supervisor Kuehl opined that the Defund Public Safety Initiative would not result in layoffs for County employees. Doubling down on this, Ms. Kuehl chastised CEO Hamai (who manages the County budget) for making such a claim. It is worth noting that the L.A. Times published an editorial that same day entitled: “L.A. County is floating an irresponsible last-minute. Ballot measure. Again.”  Impact of the Supervisors’ Decision on Public Safety Employees I want to clarify for you what it means if this charter amendment moves forward and is passed in November. As we understand it, this should have minimal impact on the budget through December 31, 2020. However, the real impact—the extent of which is currently unknown—would begin as of January 1, 2021. If this charter amendment is passed by the voters, we can expect:  Additional requests for economic concessions by the Supervisors.  Employee layoffs and/or furloughs not including employees in the Offices of the Public Defender and Alternate Defender. LAYOFFS & FURLOUGHS  CEO Hamai will submit a Supplemental Budget to the Supervisors in the latter part of the summer with refined revenue and expenditure estimates.  CEO Hamai has publicly stated that there will be no layoffs prior to October 1, 2020. Coincidently, October 1st is the date that thousands of union employees will receive another negotiated pay increase. Many believe that the County will implement layoffs (not furloughs), effective October 1, 2020—unless union leaders agree to open their respective MOUs and forgo negotiated raises.  Hopefully, the measures already undertaken by Jackie Lacey to balance the Office budget will be sufficient to carry us through the current fiscal year without layoffs. But no one knows for sure. COUNTY FINANCES  The County has failed in its effort to negotiate a one-year suspension of its matching contributions into the 457 deferred savings plans for employees represented by Service Employees International Union and the Coalition of County Unions. Hence the County will continue to make matching contributions for their tens of thousands of employees.  It is too early to assess the condition of the local economy. But we should not expect local revenues to rebound to pre-Covid-19 levels any time soon. As the state goes back into shut-down mode, it will continue to frustrate economic progress.  Federal economic stimulus legislation could improve the County’s fiscal condition. 277 NEXT STEPS  The County & The Board of Supervisors On Tuesday, July 28th, the Supervisors are expected to introduce ballot language for the Defund Public Safety Initiative. If approved by the Supervisors, the initiative will be placed on the ballot for voter consideration in November. For those who wish to communicate with one or more of the Supervisors, here is the link to their contact information. http://file.lacounty.gov/SDSInter/lac/1031546_BoardContactInformation.pdf https://bos.lacounty.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=GNfO1HN4bXI%3d&portalid=1 http://file.lacounty.gov/SDSInter/bos/supdocs/147386.pdf https://bos.lacounty.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=ZEtWIcFqfV8%3d&portalid=1 AGENDA FOR THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA Board of Supervisors Agenda TUESDAY, JULY 28, 2020 3. Resolution Calling for and Giving Notice of a Special Election to Amend the Charter of the County of Los Angeles Adopt a resolution calling for and giving notice of an election to be held on bos.lacounty.gov MOTION BY SUPERVISORS MARK RIDLEY-THOMAS July 21, 2020 AND JANICE HAHN MOTION BY SUPERVISORS RIDLEY-THOMAS AND HAHN JULY 21, 2020 PAGE 2 wellbeing of communities – including dedicating an unprecedented level of resources to file.lacounty.gov