Agenda - City of Santa Monica

AGENDA CITY OF SANTA MONICA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 1685 MAIN STREET TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, 2014

MEETING BEGINS AT 5:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL (Please note that Agenda Items may be reordered during the Council meeting at the discretion of the City Council.) 1. CLOSED SESSIONS: 1-A:

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): City of Santa Monica v. United States of America, Federal Aviation Administration and Michael P. Huerta, in his Official Capacity as Administrator of the FAA, United States District Court Case Number 2:31-CV 8046 JFW (VBKx)

1-B:

Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: Anticipate significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(2) – 1 case

1-C:

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) – Kim v. City of Santa Monica and Santa Monica Police Department Officer Buus, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. SC 117306

1-D:

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) – Lexion v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 453353

The following is the order of business for items to be heard no earlier than 6:30 p.m.

1

January 14, 2014

3. CONSENT CALENDAR: (All items will be considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion.) 3-A:

Approval of minutes of November 26, 2013, December 10, 2013, and December 17, 2013 City Council meetings.

3-B:

Agreement for Interim Management Assistance and Management Consulting Services – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Professional Services Agreements with Management Partners in an amount not to exceed $98,600 for interim management assistance, and a Professional Services Agreement in an amount not to exceed $39,500 for an organization review in Office of Sustainability and the Environment.

3-C:

Business License Tax Modernization Review Services – recommendation that City Council direct staff to research options for modernizing the business license tax program with a focus on improving customer service while maintaining revenue neutrality.

3-D:

Agreement with Gillig LLC to Purchase 40-foot Buses – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Gillig LLC, to furnish and deliver 40-foot, low floor, Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) powered transit buses for the next five years at the guaranteed pricing established through a joint procurement consortium of 22 transit agencies led by Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (CCCTA), in Concord, California.

3-E:

Award Contract for Third Street Promenade and Wilshire Boulevard Pilot Project – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with AD/S Companies, in an amount not to exceed $96,811 for the fabrication and installation of two map cases and one wayfinding pylon at the north-end of the Third Street Promenade near Wilshire Boulevard, as part of a pilot project, and approve any necessary change orders to complete additional work within budget authority.

3-F:

Application for California Housing-Related Parks Program Grant – recommendation that City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the application for grant funds from the State of California Housing-Related Parks Program, 2013 Funding Round, for the Buffer Park Project, and authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to apply for the grant and accept the grant if awarded.

3-G:

Modification of Agreement with PCR Services Corporation to Provide Historic Resource Analysis – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a modification to professional services Agreement 2579 with PCR Services Corporation, in the amount of $40,000 to provide professional services in the field of historic preservation, resulting in a 4 year contract for a total of $105,000.

2

January 14, 2014

3-H:

Purchase Order Modification for Traffic Signal Upgrade Equipment – recommendation to approve a modification to purchase order #331163-000-P in the amount of $36,734 with C.T. & F., Inc., to include additional traffic signal upgrade equipment, resulting in a revised purchase order total not to exceed $766,734.

3-I:

Revision to Council Rules to Donating Time to Other Public Speakers – recommendation that the City Council adopt a resolution amending the Council Rules to allow members of the public to donate two minutes per agenda item to another speaker, remove Rule 24 Adjournment timing, clean-up language, and repeal Resolution Number 10643 (CCS); and, direct staff to monitor the number of donations and the amount of time spent on public comment for a period of one year.

3-J:

Construction Contract for the Real-Time Beach Parking Project – recommendation to: authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with Select Electric, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $1,503,754 for the construction of the Real-Time Beach Parking Project; to issue any necessary change orders to complete additional work within contract authority; and, appropriate the budget increases.

3-K:

Professional Services Agreement Modification for Pico Library Furniture Procurement – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to Professional Services Agreement No. 9783 (CCS) in the amount of $41,345 with Interior Office Solutions to provide additional furniture procurement services to complete the Pico Branch Library Project, resulting in an amended agreement total not to exceed $197,542.

3-L:

Purchase Order Increase and Bid Award for Passenger and Light Duty Vehicle Tires – recommendation to approve a change order to Purchase Order No. 22854 in the amount of $40,000 with Byron Woodley Tire Company, Inc. to cover outstanding invoices for the purchase and delivery of passenger and light duty vehicle tires and provision of related services for the first half of FY 2013-14, resulting in a revised purchase order total not to exceed $45,428; and award Bid No. 4119 for the purchase and delivery of passenger and light duty vehicle tires and provision of related services to Byron Woodley Tire Company, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $40,000 for the remainder of FY 2013-14, with two one-year options for $85,000 per year to renew at the same price, terms, and conditions, for a total award amount not to exceed $210,000 over a three-year period, with future funding contingent on Council budget approval.

3-M:

Bid Award for Water Feature Maintenance and Repairs – recommendation to award Bid #F4114 to Advanced Aquatic Technology, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $80,000 for the remainder of FY 2013-14 to provide water feature maintenance services and repairs beyond the warranty at Tongva Park and Ken Genser Square, with two additional one-year renewal options in the amount of $156,900 for the second year and a 3% increase for the third year, for a total amount not to exceed $398,507 over a threeyear period, with funding contingent upon Council budget approval.

3

January 14, 2014

3-N:

Auditing Services for the City of Santa Monica – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a second modification to Professional Services Agreement #9373 (CCS) in the amount of $40,000 with Macias Gini & O’Connell to provide financial auditing services, resulting in a five-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $793,281, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

Staff will request that the Council remove this item from the agenda. 3-O:

Memorandum of Understanding with California Teamsters Local 911 Public, Professional & Medical Employees Union – recommendation that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an individual Memorandum of Understanding with the California Teamsters Local 911 Public, Professional & Medical Employees Union.

3-P:

Purchase New Parking Access and Revenue Control System – recommendation that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with DataPark USA Inc. in an amount not to exceed $5,000,000 for the purchase, installation, and up to 10 years of maintenance of the Parking Access and Revenue Control System with License Plate Recognition (LPR) for the downtown parking structures, Main Library parking structure, Civic Center parking facilities, Ken Edwards Center, and Pier Deck parking lot, with future year maintenance funding contingent on Council approval.

7. ORDINANCES: (Public comment is permitted on ordinances for introduction and first reading. No public discussion is permitted on ordinances for second reading and adoption.) 7-A:

Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance Prohibiting Agreements That Limit Tenant Participation in the Public Process.

7-B:

Second Reading and Adoption of an Interim Ordinance Extending Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 2439 (CCS), Which Established Interim Development Procedures Pending Implementation of the LUCE.

8. STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS: 8-A:

Resource Recovery & Recycling Rate Study and Adoption of Zero Waste Strategic Plan - recommendation to adopt the Zero Waste Strategic Plan to achieve 95% diversion from the landfill by 2030; approve a three year plan to increase Resource Recovery & Recycling rates and approve the establishment of a 5% operating reserve; and approve the setting of a public hearing in April 2014, in accordance with Proposition 218, to adopt Resource Recovery & Recycling rate increases.

4

January 14, 2014

8-B:

Framework for the 2014 Twilight Concert Series – recommendation that the City Council review and comment on modifications to the Twilight Concert Series’ (TCS) framework to reposition the TCS as a community-focused Pier event, with minimal beach overflow, and direct staff to continue to work with the Pier Corporation to rightsize the event, ensure public safety, and conform to existing law; approve gap funding to the Pier Corporation in an amount not to exceed $200,000 for the 2014 TCS; and authorize budget changes. SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT FOR ITEM 8-B 8-C:

Adopt Amendments to the Sustainable City Plan – recommendation to establish indicators and targets for the Arts and Culture Goal Area, add a Sustainability Bill of Rights Guiding Principle; and adopt an updated Sustainable City Plan with indicators and targets for 2020.

8-D:

Community Civic Engagement Strategy – recommendation that the City Council approve the Community Civic Engagement Strategy (CCES) and direct staff to implement the initiative. 13. COUNCILMEMBER DISCUSSION ITEMS: 13-A: Appointment to one unscheduled vacancy on the Commission on the Status of Women for a term ending on June 30, 2015. 13-B: Request of Councilmember McKeown that the Council, in the interest of public safety and greater certainty on upcoming development issues, urge the Governor and state legislature to fund timely completion of scheduled mapping of the Santa Monica Fault. 14. PUBLIC INPUT: (Public comment is permitted only on items not on the agenda that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City. State law prohibits the City Council from taking any action on items not listed on the agenda, including issues raised under this agenda item.) ADJOURNMENT. Any documents produced by the City and distributed to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available at the City Clerk's Counter located at City Hall, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, and at the City’s public libraries during normal business hours. Documents are also available at http://www.smgov.net/departments/clerk/agendas.aspx. For a free subscription to City Council Agendas sign up at http://www01.smgov.net/win or call the City Clerk’s Office at (310) 458-8211. Any member of the public unable to attend a meeting but wishing to comment on an item(s) listed on the agenda may submit written comments prior to the meeting by mailing them to: City Clerk, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401. Comments may also be e-mailed to: [email protected] 5

January 14, 2014

Si desea comunicarse con alguien en español, llame a nuestra oficina al (310) 458-8211 y pida hablar con Esterlina Lugo. City Hall and the Council Chamber is wheelchair accessible. If you require any special disability related accommodations (i.e. sign language interpreting, access to an amplified sound system, etc.), please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (310) 458-8211 or TDD: (310) 917-6626 at least 3 days prior to the scheduled meeting. This agenda is available in alternate format upon request by calling the City Clerk’s Office. Parking is available in front of City Hall and on Olympic Drive and in the Civic Center Parking Structure (validation free).

6

January 14, 2014

Item 3-A December 17, 2013 (NOT APPROVED) CITY OF SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 17, 2013 A special meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor O’Connor at 5:32 p.m., on Tuesday, December 17, 2013, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street. Roll Call:

Present:

Also Present:

Mayor Pam O’Connor Mayor Pro Tem Terry O’Day Councilmember Gleam Davis Councilmember Robert T. Holbrook Councilmember Kevin McKeown Councilmember Tony Vazquez (arrived at 5:38 p.m.) Councilmember Ted Winterer City Manager Rod Gould City Attorney Marsha Jones Moutrie City Clerk Sarah P. Gorman

CONVENE/PLEDGE

On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 5:34 p.m., with Councilmember Vazquez absent. Councilmember Winterer led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance.

CLOSED SESSIONS

There was no one present for public comment on closed sessions.

Councilmember Vazquez arrived at 5:38 p.m.

On order of the Mayor, the City Council recessed at 5:37 p.m., to consider closed sessions and returned at 6:40 p.m., with all members present, to report the following: 1-A: Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: Anticipate significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(2) – 1 case: Claim of Dunn and Robhana The City Attorney advised this matter was heard and no reportable action was taken. 1-B: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) – Lee v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles 1

December 17, 2013

Superior Court Case Number SC 119369 The City Attorney recommended Settlement No. 9845 (CCS) in the amount of $150,000 for a bicycle accident case that resulted in injuries. Motion by Councilmember Holbrook, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to approve settlement. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers McKeown, Winterer, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor O’Connor NOES: None ABSENT: None CONSENT CALENDAR:

All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion. Member of the public Denise Barton commented on various Consent Calendar items. Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Winterer, to approve the Consent Calendar, reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, Winterer, McKeown, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor O’Connor NOES: None ABSENT: None MINUTES

3-A: The minutes of November 12, 2013, City Council meeting, were approved.

BID FOR DUAL COMPACTOR CONTAINERS

3-B: Bid Award for Big Belly/Smart Belly Dual Compactor – recommendation to award Bid #4103 to Waxie Sanitary Supply, in an amount not to exceed $100,000 for FY 2013-14, for the purchase of Big Belly/ Smart Belly dual compactors with two one-year options to renew, for a total award amount not to exceed $300,000 over a three-year period, was approved.

BID FOR FLOORING CONTRACTOR SERVICE

3-C: Purchase Order and Bid Award Increases for Carpet and Flooring Contractor Services - recommendation to approve a change order to purchase order 22371-OF with HM Carpet, in the amount of $15,000 for carpet and flooring contractor services for the remainder of FY 2013-14, resulting in a revised purchase order total not to exceed $190,000 through June 30, 2014; approve an increase with HM Carpet (primary contractor) in the amount of $100,000 and Elite Floorcovering (secondary contractor) for carpet and flooring contractor services from July 1, 2014

2

December 17, 2013

through June 30, 2016, for a new three-year total not to exceed $950,000, was approved. WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT

3-D: Professional Services for Annual Water Main Replacement/Upgrade Project - recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute professional services Agreement No. 9846 (CCS) with Cannon Corporation in an amount not to exceed $264,820 to provide engineering design services, develop construction documents and provide engineering support during construction phase of the Annual Water Main Replacement/Upgrade Project; and authorize any necessary changes to complete the work within budget authority, was approved.

1731-1733 20th STREET

3-E: Disposition of City-Owned Property at 1731-1733 20th Streetrecommendation that the City Council authorize: 1) final sale and terms of purchase for the remnant parcel located at 1731-1733 20th Street; 2) Authorize the City Manager to enter into 20-year option Agreement No. 9847 (CCS) with Crossroads School of the Arts & Sciences (“Crossroads) to acquire an easement for a bicycle and pedestrian path along the northerly edge of 1748 21st Street; 3) Grant an easement that would allow Crossroads to build an 8 foot perimeter fence across 20th Court in the event that the City exercises the option to acquire the 21st Street Bike Path Easement; and, appropriate budget changes, was approved.

NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTIONS

3-F: Professional Services Agreement with Nationwide Retirement Solutions, Inc. for Deferred Compensation Plan Administrator Services – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute no-cost Contract No. 9848 (CCS) with Nationwide Retirement Solutions, Inc., for deferred compensation plan administrator services for five years, with two additional one-year renewal options, was approved.

1122 22nd STREET

3-G: Approval of Final Sale of City-Owned Real Property at 1122 22nd Street – recommendation that the City Council adopt Resolution No. (CCS) 10788 (CCS) entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA APPROVING THE FINAL SALE OF CITY-OWNED REAL PROPERTY AT 1122 22ND STREET”; and, authorize the City Manager to negotiate and amend the Purchase and Sale Agreement with Pezhman Firoozfam in the amount of $1.067 million, was approved.

ADMIN. PROCEEDINGS: 1410 3rd STREET PROMENADE

6-A: Appeal of a Conditional Use Permit to allow conversion of a portion of an existing restaurant to general retail at 1410 3rd Street Promenade – recommendation that the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s approval of Conditional Use Permit 13002 to allow conversion of a portion of an existing restaurant to general retail at 1410 Third Street Promenade based on the findings and conditions.

3

December 17, 2013

The Appeal was withdrawn at request of Appellant. ORDINANCES: INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE

7-A: Introduction and First Reading of an Interim Ordinance Extending Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 2439 (CCS); Update on the Status of Pending Development Agreement Applications; Modification of the Development Agreement Float-Up Process for Limited Types of Projects; and, Affirm development of new affordable housing units as a priority item to be considered during community benefit negotiations for proposed mixed-use housing projects, was presented. Member of the public Jerry Rubin spoke in favor of the recommended action. Member of the public Denise Barton spoke in opposition to the recommended action. Discussion ensued on topics including affordable housing and prioritization of Development Agreements. Motion by Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to introduce and hold first reading of the ordinance reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof, to review the status of pending Development Agreement applications filed since LUCE adoption in July 2010, modifying the Development Agreement process to exempt limited types of projects from Planning Commission and City Council early conceptual review (float-up) discussions and maintain the requirements for a Community Meeting and an Architectural Review Board float-up discussion prior to initiating project negotiations between staff and the applicant, and affirming development of new affordable housing units as a priority item to be considered during community benefit negotiations for a proposed mixed-use housing projects subject to a Development Agreement. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers McKeown, Winterer, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor O’Connor NOES: None ABSENT: None STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS: FIRE STATION NO. 3

8-A: Financing Options for Construction of a New Fire Station No. 1, the Fire Station No. 3 Seismic Retrofit, and Interim Replacement of the Fire Training Facility – recommendation that the City Council approve the proposal to finance the construction of a new Fire Station No. 1, the seismic retrofit of Fire Station No. 3, and an interim fire training facility through a $35 million lease revenue bond and direct staff to: continue with the design of a new Fire Station No. 1, proceed with the

4

December 17, 2013

construction document and bidding phases of the Fire Station No. 3 seismic retrofit, proceed with the design of the interim replacement of a Fire Training Facility, and return to Council for authorization to issue a lease revenue bond, was presented. Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to prepayment of bonds, lease revenue bonds, and Fire Station 1 design. Motion by Councilmember Holbrook, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, Winterer, McKeown, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor O’Connor NOES: None ABSENT: None 1122 22nd STREET

8-B: Approval of Final Sale of City-Owned Real Property at 1122 22nd Street – recommendation that the City Council: adopt a resolution to approve the final sale of 1122 22nd Street; and, authorize the City Manager to negotiate and amend the Purchase and Sale Agreement with Pezhman Firoozfam in the amount of $1.067 million, was approved. This item moved to the consent calendar.

CIVIC AUDITORIUM

8-C: Resolutions Establishing Interim Uses and Interim Rental Fees for the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium – recommendation that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 10791 (CCS) entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ESTABLISHING INTERIM USES FOR THE SANTA MONICA CIVIC AUDITORIUM”; adopt Resolution No. 10792 (CCS) entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ESTABLISHING INTERIM RENTAL FEES TO BE CHARGED FOR INTERIM USE OF THE SANTA MONICA CIVIC AUDITORIUM”; and rescind Resolution No. 3579, was presented. Member of the public Jerry Rubin spoke in support of the recommended action. Member of the public Denise Barton spoke in opposition to the recommended action. Motion by Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to adopt the resolutions, reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof, and the staff recommendation. The motion was approved by the following vote:

5

December 17, 2013

AYES:

Councilmembers McKeown, Winterer, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor O’Connor NOES: None ABSENT: None ADJOURNMENT

On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting was adjourned at 7:54 p.m. ATTEST:

APPROVED:

Sarah P. Gorman City Clerk

Pam O’Connor Mayor

6

December 17, 2013

Item 3-A December 10, 2013 (NOT APPROVED) CITY OF SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 10, 2013 A regular meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Councilmember McKeown at 5:30 p.m., on Tuesday, December 10, 2013, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street. Roll Call:

Present:

Absent: Also Present:

Mayor Pam O’Connor (arrived at 7:37 p.m.) Councilmember Gleam Davis Councilmember Robert T. Holbrook Councilmember Kevin McKeown Councilmember Tony Vazquez Councilmember Ted Winterer (arrived at 5:34 p.m.) Mayor Pro Tem Terry O’Day City Manager Rod Gould City Attorney Marsha Jones Moutrie City Clerk Sarah P. Gorman

CONVENE/PLEDGE

The Council appointed Councilmember McKeown as Acting Chair. On order of the Acting Chair, the City Council convened at 5:31 p.m., with Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, and Councilmember Winterer absent. City Manager Rod Gould led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance.

CLOSED SESSIONS

Member of the public Stanley Epstein commented on closed sessions.

Councilmember Winterer arrived at 5:34 p.m.

On order of the Acting Chair, the City Council recessed at 5:34 p.m., to consider closed sessions and returned at 6:37 p.m., with Mayor O’Connor and Mayor Pro Tem O’Day absent, to report the following: 1-A: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): McKnight v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court Case Number BC 450336 The City Attorney advised this matter was heard and no reportable action was taken.

1

December 10, 2013

1-B: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): Lexion v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court Case Number BC 463353 The City Attorney advised this matter was heard and no reportable action was taken. 1-C: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): Piturro v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court Case Number SC 116 489 The City Attorney advised this matter was heard and no reportable action was taken. 1-D: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): City of Santa Monica v. United States of America, Federal Aviation Administration and Michael P. Huerta, in his Official Capacity as Administrator of the FAA, United States District Court Case Number 2:31-CV 8046 JFW (VBKx) The City Attorney advised this matter was heard and no reportable action was taken. 1-E: Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation – Anticipate significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(2): 1 case The City Attorney advised this matter was heard and no reportable action was taken. 1-F: Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation: Consideration of whether to initiate litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(4): 1040 Fourth Street, #108 The City Attorney advised this relates to a dispute in the Dorchester, and recommended Settlement No. 9842 (CCS) between the City and Ms. Wilson wherein if Ms. Wilson were to rent her unit, the unit would be restricted and could only be rented as an affordable unit. Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Vazquez, to approve settlement. The motion was approved by the following vote:

2

December 10, 2013

AYES:

Councilmembers Winterer, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Acting Chair McKeown NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day CONSENT CALENDAR:

All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion. No members of the public commented on the Consent Calendar. Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Holbrook, to approve the Consent Calendar. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Winterer, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Acting Chair McKeown NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day MINUTES

3-A: The minutes of October 22, 2013, City Council meeting, were approved.

CHILD CARE LINKAGE PROGRAM

3-B: Annual Report on the City’s Child Care Linkage Program – recommendation that the City Council receive the Child Care Linkage Program Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2012-13, was approved.

PICO BRANCH LIBRARY

3-C: Professional Services Agreement Modification for Design Services for Pico Branch Library – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a seventh modification to Professional Services Agreement No. 9180 (CCS) in the amount of $28,215 with Koning Eizenberg Architects (KEA), to provide additional construction administration and design services to complete the Pico Branch Library Project, resulting in a new agreement in the amount of $996,153, was approved.

REFUSE BIN REPAIR

3-D: Bid Award for Refuse Bin Repair – recommendation to award Bid #4104 for refuse bin repair (welding and fabrication services) to Weldworx, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $60,000 for FY 2013-14, with two one-year options to renew at the same price, terms, and conditions, for a total award amount not to exceed $180,000 over a three-year period, was approved.

3

December 10, 2013

FLEET WASHING SERVICES

3-E: Bid Award for Fleet Washing Services – recommendation to award Bid #4102 for fleet washing services for refuse and recycling collection and street sweeping vehicles to Qualified Mobile, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $56,000 for FY 2013-14, with two one-year options to renew at the same price, terms, and conditions, for a total award amount not to exceed $176,000 over a three-year period, was approved.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ABATEMENT CONTRACTOR SERVICES

3-F: Purchase Order and Bid Award Increases for Asbestos and Hazardous Materials Abatement Contractor Services – recommendation to: 1) approve a change order to purchase order 21994-OF in the amount of $100,000 with Castlerock Environmental, for asbestos and hazardous materials abatement at various City facilities for the remainder of FY 2013-14. This would result in a revised purchase order total not to exceed $150,000 through June 30, 2014; and, 2) approve an increase in the amount of $100,000 to the bid award to Castlerock Environmental for asbestos and hazardous materials abatement from July 1, 2014 through January 8, 2016 for a new three-year amended agreement total not to exceed $350,000, was approved.

CNG TRUCK-MOUNTED LOADER

3-G: Reject Bid for the Purchase of One CNG Truck-Mounted Loader – recommendation to reject all bids received on October 7, 2013 for the purchase and delivery of one new compressed natural gas (CNG) truck-mounted loader; and, direct staff to reissue a bid in order to obtain the best bidder for the purchase and delivery of one new CNG truck-mounted loader, was approved.

UTILITY TRUCK

3-H: Purchase of One Air/Light/ Rescue Utility Truck – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Contract No. 9843 (CCS) with Emergency Vehicle Group, Inc. a California based company, in an amount not to exceed $720,000 for the purchase of a Rescue Utility truck, was approved.

ORDINANCES: FINANCE DIRECTOR AUTHORITY

7-A: Second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 2450 (CCS) entitled, “ A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING THE SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.12.260 GRANTING LIMITED AUTHORITY TO THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO WAIVE DEBTS AND TAXES WHEN DEEMED UNCOLLECTABLE AND MAKE AVAILABLE AS A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD A LIST OF THE LARGEST TAX AND LICENSE DELINQUENCIES”, was presented. Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Acting Chair McKeown, to adopt the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, Winterer,

4

December 10, 2013

Acting Chair McKeown NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day STREET PERFORMANCE 7-B: Second reading and adoption of Ordinance 2451 (CCS) entitled, “ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PERMITS SANTA MONICA AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 6.112 CLARIFYING STREET PERFORMANCE PERMIT REGULATIONS AND RULES GOVERNING THE STREET PERFORMANCE LOTTERY SYSTEM FOR THE PIER”, was presented. Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Holbrook, to adopt the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Winterer, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Acting Chair McKeown NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day TENANT PARTICIPATION

7-C: Introduction and first reading of an Ordinance prohibiting agreements that limit tenant participation in the public process, was presented. Member of the public Zoe Muntaner spoke in favor of the recommended action. Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to introduce and hold first reading of the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof, adding “and” after “rental housing” and before “any rental housing agreement” to Section 4.36.085 of the ordinance, and adding “and/or” before “employees of any subject to Section 4.36.085(a). The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, Winterer, Acting Chair McKeown NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS: HOUSING ELEMENT

8-A: Adoption of the 2013-2021 Housing Element of the City’s General Plan and a Negative Declaration in Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) – recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 10789 (CCS) entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE 2013-2021 HOUSING ELEMENT”, and Resolution No. 10790 (CCS) entitled, “A

5

December 10, 2013

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO ADOPT THE 2013-2021 HOUSING ELEMENT”, was presented. Members of the public Denise Barton, Nancy Morse, Zina Josephs, Catherine Eldridge, and Zoe Muntaner spoke generally in opposition to the recommended action. Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to, the nature of the report and senior housing. Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Vazquez, to adopt Resolution No. 10789 (CCS), reading resolution by title only and waiving further reading thereof, the Initial Study/Negative Declaration, prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which concludes that the project will not result in any significant impact on the environment. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Winterer, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Acting Chair McKeown NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Winterer, to adopt Resolution No. 10790 (CCS), reading resolution by title only and waiving further reading thereof, the 2013-2021 Housing Element as part of the City’s General Plan. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, Winterer, Acting Chair McKeown NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day  4TH/5TH AND ARIZONA Mayor O’Connor arrived at 7:34 p.m. and commenced Chairing the meeting.

8-B: 4th/5th and Arizona Exclusive Negotiating Agreement – recommendation that the City Council: 1) authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) No. 9844 (CCS) with the team led by Metropolitan Pacific Capital, Clarett West, and DLJ West Capital (“Metro Pacific team”) to develop the City-owned property between 4th and 5th Streets, south of Arizona Avenue, was presented. Members of the public Francis Englier, Ken Robin, Jerry Rubin, Ken Robin, Gabriella Roscoe, Edith Garcia, Barbara Bryan, Kathleen Rawson, Julee Brooks, Bruria Finkel, John Warfel, Yossi G., Rodney Freeman, and Jeff Jarow spoke generally in favor of the recommended action.

6

December 10, 2013

Members of the public Denise Barton, Bill Witte, Laura Wilson, Zina Josephs, and Christel Andersen spoke generally in opposition to the recommended action. Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to the timeline for the exclusive negotiation agreement, the parameters of the agreement, project height, shared public parking, time limits for the negotiating agreement, open space design, working with Community Corps, and affordable housing. Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Vazquez, to approve the staff recommendation with a design study of what an 84 foot maximum height building looks like and direct staff to enter into a maximum negotiating period of one year with a possible three month extension at the behest of the City Manager, with regular, at a minimum, six month updates to Council via information item. Motion to amend by Councilmember McKeown, to add direction to developer to seek an operator early and bring the operator into the community dialogue. The motion was accepted as friendly by the maker and seconder. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, Winterer, McKeown, Mayor O’Connor NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem O’Day COUNCILMEMBER DISCUSSION ITEMS: CLEAN BEACHES & OCEAN PARCEL TAX CITIZENS OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE

13-A: Annual Appointment to two positions on the Clean Beaches & Ocean Parcel Tax Citizens Oversight Committee for terms ending on December 31, 2015, was presented. There were no members of the public present for public comment. On order of the Mayor, the floor was opened for nominations. Councilmember Winterer, nominated David Fetterman and Tom Ford. The nomination was seconded by Councilmember McKeown. David Fetterman was appointed by acclamation with a unanimous voice vote in his favor, with Mayor Pro Tem O’Day absent. Tom Ford was appointed by acclamation with a unanimous voice vote in his favor, with Mayor Pro Tem O’Day absent.

7

December 10, 2013

L.A. COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT

13-B: Annual Appointment to one position on the L.A. County Vector Control District for a term ending on December 31, 2017, was presented. There were no members of the public present for public comment. On order of the Mayor, the floor was opened for nominations. Councilmember McKeown nominated Nancy Greenstein. The nomination was seconded by Councilmember Davis. Nancy Greenstein was appointed by acclamation with a unanimous voice vote in her favor, with Mayor Pro Tem O’Day absent.

SAMOHI ORCHESTRA

13-C: Request of Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day and Councilmember McKeown that the Council support the non-profit Samohi Orchestra Parents Association with a $25,000 matching grant from the Council discretionary funds, to assist in scholarships for students from lower-income families to participate in the Santa Monica Symphony Orchestra European performance and cultural tour, including Vienna, Prague, and Baden-Baden, in April of 2014, was presented. Members of the public Ava Pomeranz, Skyler Young, Kimberlea Daggy, and Nancy Cohen spoke generally in favor of the recommended action. Motion by Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Councilmember Vazquez, to adopt the staff recommendation. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, Winterer, McKeown, Mayor O’Connor NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem O’Day PUBLIC INPUT:

Members of the public Brad Keimach, Kathy Bingham, Steve Persky, Babak Naderi, Denise Barton, Josef Davidman, Kathleen Dantini, Noah Edelson, Jane Gross, Zoe Muntaner, Jessica Tracy, Jonathan Foster, Christel Andersen and Lauren Linnett commented on various local issues.

ADJOURNMENT

On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting was adjourned at 10:04 p.m. in memory of Willis Ware and Nelson Mandela. ATTEST:

APPROVED:

8

December 10, 2013

Sarah P. Gorman City Clerk

Pam O’Connor Mayor

9

December 10, 2013

Item 3-A November 26, 2013 (NOT APPROVED) CITY OF SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 26, 2013 A regular meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor O’Connor at 5:30 p.m., on Tuesday, November 26, 2013, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street. Roll Call:

Present:

Mayor Pam O’Connor Councilmember Gleam Davis Councilmember Robert T. Holbrook Councilmember Kevin McKeown Councilmember Tony Vazquez

Absent:

Councilmember Ted Winterer Mayor Pro Tem Terry O’Day

Also Present:

City Manager Rod Gould Assistant City Attorney Joe Lawrence City Clerk Sarah P. Gorman

CONVENE/PLEDGE

On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 5:30 p.m., with Councilmember Winterer and Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, absent. Councilmember Davis led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance.

CLOSED SESSIONS

There was no one present for public comment on closed sessions. On order of the Mayor, the City Council recessed at 5:32 p.m., to consider closed sessions and returned at 6:35 p.m., with Councilmember Winterer and Mayor Pro Tem O’Day absent, to report the following: 1-A: Conference with Legal – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) – Hopkins v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. SC 115737 The Assistant City Attorney Joe Lawrence recommended settlement of $96,920 in a bus accident matter.

1

November 26, 2013

Motion by Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to approve Settlement No. 9838 (CCS), related to a bus accident matter, in the amount of $96,920. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT:

Councilmembers McKeown, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Mayor O’Connor None Councilmember Winterer, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day

1-B: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) – Lee v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court Case Number SC 119369 The Assistant City Attorney Joe Lawrence advised this matter was heard and no reportable action was taken. CONSENT CALENDAR:

All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion. Member of the public Denise Barton commented on various Consent Calendar items. Motion by Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Councilmember Holbrook, to approve the Consent Calendar, reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT:

Councilmembers McKeown, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Mayor O’Connor None Councilmember Winterer, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day

MINUTES

3-A:

The minutes of October 8, 2013, City Council meeting, were approved.

MEETING CANCELLATION

3-B: Cancellation of a regular Council meeting scheduled for Tuesday, December 24, 2013, was approved

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION

3-C: Adopt Resolution No. 10785 (CCS) entitled: “AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM PLANNING GRANT PROGRAM FOR FUNDING IN FISCAL YEAR 2013-14 AND THE EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM”, was adopted.

2

November 26, 2013

STREET LIGHTING SUPPLIES

3-D: Purchase Order Modification for Electrical and Street Lighting Supplies – recommendation that City Council approve a change order to Purchase Order 22785-OF with Electric Supply Connection, in the amount of $45,000 to cover purchases of electrical and street lighting supplies for the remainder of FY 2013-14, resulting in a revised purchase order total not to exceed $127,250, was approved.

2433 MAIN STREET

3-E: Approve Statement of Official Action for a Conditional Use Permit (13CUP004) and Parking Variance (13VAR005) to allow the operation of an exercise facility, and to allow a parking variance to satisfy off-street parking requirements associated with the proposed use at 2433 Main Street, with revised findings and conditions as approved on October 22, 2013, was approved.

SANTA MONICA HISTORICAL SOCIETY MUSEUM

3-F: Modification to Santa Monica Historical Society Museum Lease – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to: negotiate and execute a first modification of Lease Agreement No. 7895 with the Santa Monica Historical Society Museum, to permit alcohol to be served on Museum premises for two fundraising events per calendar year; and to update the Museum’s insurance requirements, was approved.

PROPOSITION 1B

3-G: Proposition 1B Transit Security Grant Funds Application – recommendation that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 10786 (CCS) entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT A GRANT APPLICATION AND TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS IN FUTHERANCE OF TRANSIT SECURITY PROJECTS FOR THE BIG BLUE BUS”; and, authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to apply for the grant, if awarded, and accept all grant renewals, if awarded, and authorize budget changes, was approved.

REAL-TIME BEACH PARKING

3-H: Reject Bids for the Real-Time Beach Parking Project recommendation to reject all bids received for the Real-Time Beach Parking Project, and direct staff to reissue a bid in order to obtain the best bidder for the Real-Time Beach Parking Project, was approved.

PIER LUMBER

3-I: Purchase Order Modification and Bid Award for Pier Lumber – recommendation that City Council approve a change order to purchase order 21995- OF with Gemini Forest Products, in the amount of $40,000 for purchase and delivery of lumber to the Santa Monica Pier, resulting in a revised purchase order total not to exceed $80,000 through June 30, 2014; and approve an increase to the bid award to Gemini Forest Products in the amount of $40,000 to the bid award for purchase and delivery of lumber to the Santa Monica Pier from July 1, 2014 through October 23, 2015 for a new three-year amended agreement total amount not to exceed $195,000, was approved.

3

November 26, 2013

COLD MILLING MACHINE

3-J: Bid Award for Purchase of Cold Milling Machine - recommendation that the City Council award Bid #4108 to Nixon-Egli Equipment Co. in the amount of $144,484, for the purchase and delivery of one Wirtgen compact cold milling machine, was approved.

IRRIGATION TRUCK

3-K: Amend Purchase Order for One Additional Irrigation Truck – recommendation to approve a change order to Purchase Order No. 360797 with Thorson Motor Center, in the amount of $61,047 for the purchase and delivery of one additional compressed natural gas (CNG) special body irrigation truck, resulting in an amended purchase order with a new total amount not to exceed $179,097, and appropriate budget increases, was approved.

GREEN BIKE LANES

3-L: Award Construction Contract for Green Bike Lanes on Main Street and Broadway - recommendation that the City Manager negotiate and execute construction Contract No. 9839 (CCS) with Chrisp Company in an amount not to exceed $523,852 for the installation of Green Bike Lanes on Main Street and Broadway, and authorize any necessary changes, was approved.

SUCCESSOR AGENCY MEETING CANCELLED

REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT SUCESSOR AGENCY 3-M: Cancelled, no business to consider.

ORDINANCES: PURCHASING SYSTEM

7-A: Second reading and Adoption of Ordinance 2447 (CCS), entitled “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING PORTIONS OF MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 2.24 TO INCREASE THE THRESHOLD DOLLAR LIMITS FOR CONVENIENCE PURCHASE ORDERS, FORMAL BIDDING PROCEDURES, AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTS APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER; ESTABLISH STANDARD BIDDING PROCEDURES FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTS; DELEGATE CERTAIN AUTHORITY TO THE PURCHASING AGENT; AND ESTABLISH A STANDARD PROTEST PROCEDURE FOR CERTAIN PURCHASES”, was presented. Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Holbrook, to adopt the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT:

501 COLORADO AVENUE

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, McKeown, Mayor O’Connor None Councilmember Winterer, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day

7-B: Second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 2448 (CCS) entitled: “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA

4

November 26, 2013

MONICA APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PALMETTO HOSPITALITY OF SANTA MONICA II, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND 501 COLORADO INVESTORS LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY” approving the Proposed Development Agreement No. 9840 (CCS) (11DEV-009), was presented. Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Holbrook, to adopt the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 1554 5TH STREET

Councilmembers McKeown, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Mayor O’Connor None Councilmember Winterer, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day

7-C: Second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 2449 (CCS) entitled: “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PALMETTO HOSPITALITY OF SANTA MONICA I, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND 1550 5TH STREET LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY”, approving the Proposed Development Agreement No. 9841 (CCS) (11DEV-010), was presented. Motion by Councilmember Holbrook, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to adopt the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT:

FINANCE DIRECTOR AUTHORITY

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, McKeown, Mayor O’Connor None Councilmember Winterer, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day

7-D: Introduction and first reading of an ordinance amending Section 2.12.260 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code Granting Limited Authority to the Finance Director to Waive Debts and Taxes Deemed Uncollectable and Make Available as a Matter of Public Record a List of the Largest Tax Delinquencies, was presented. There was no one present for public comment on this item. Motion by Councilmember Vazquez, seconded by Councilmember Holbrook, to introduce and hold first reading of the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following

5

November 26, 2013

vote:

AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PIER STREET PERFORMANCE

Councilmembers McKeown, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Mayor O’Connor None Councilmember Winterer, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day

7-E: Introduction and first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 6.12 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code clarifying conditions for suspension, denial or revocation of street performance permits, and authorizing staff to promulgate official regulations governing the Pier street performance lottery system in order to prohibit certain disruptive behaviors, including but not limited to, the selling or giving away of performance space awarded by the lottery, was presented. Member of the public Stephen Bradford spoke generally in favor of the recommended action. Member of the public Edward Lundin spoke generally in opposition to the recommended action. Motion by Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to introduce and hold first reading of the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof, with revised section 7-E, getting input from street performers and Mr. Bradford, and direction to the City Manager that the “one and done” regulations not include items like noise violations or leaving one’s belongings while leaving the site briefly to go to the restroom. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT:

STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS: PIER BRIDGE REPLACEMENT

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, McKeown, Mayor O’Connor None Councilmember Winterer, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day

8-A: Pier Bridge Replacement Project Status - recommendation that the City Council review and comment on the proposed conceptual alternatives for the Pier Bridge Replacement Project; direct staff to move forward with the NEPA and CEQA environmental review phase of the Project considering the proposed conceptual alternative number 1 and alternative number 4; and authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a third modification to Professional Services Agreement No. 9642 (CCS), with T. Y. Lin International in the amount of $400,000 to provide additional public outreach, NEPA and CEQA environmental review documentation and preliminary design development, resulting in an amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $1,250,000, was presented.

6

November 26, 2013

Members of the public Jerry Rubin, Judy Abdo, Roger Genser, and Heather Doyle spoke generally in favor of the recommended action. Members of the public Christine Rohde, Duncan Moran, Tom Moran, and Martin Mink spoke generally in opposition to the recommended action. Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to construction of the bridge location, ADA compliance, and bicycle safety. Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Holbrook, to approve the staff recommendation as amended, including alternatives 1A and 1B as described by staff and consultants, and alternative 4, and provide staff direction to pay attention to view impacts at Moss Avenue bridge and to consider impacts on entire Oceanfront Walk area. Motion to amend by Councilmember McKeown, to provide additional direction to staff to make an exceptional effort to engage businesses, residents and other interested persons and focus on the bicycle experience. The amendment was considered friendly to the maker and the seconder. Motion to amend by Mayor O’Connor, to include staff direction to look seriously at the ADA experience. The amendment was considered friendly to the maker and seconder. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: FOOD TRUCK

Councilmembers McKeown, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Mayor O’Connor None Councilmember Winterer, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day 

8-B: Food Truck Venues in the Main Street Commercial District – recommendation that the City Council: review the survey data from the Main Street businesses and food truck patrons; and, direct staff to include in the updated Zoning Ordinance standards to permit off-street food truck venues in the Main Street area, for a period of three years with the potential for permit renewal, was presented. Members of the public Gary Gordon and Tobi Smith spoke generally in favor of the recommended action. Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to regulations of food trucks, timeline and method of implementation. Motion by Councilmember Vazquez, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to

7

November 26, 2013

adopt the staff recommendation with staff direction to include updated zoning ordinance standards to promote the off-street food truck venues in the Main Street area for a period of three years with a potential for permit renewal. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: WOODLAWN CEMETERY

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, McKeown, Mayor O’Connor None Councilmember Winterer, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day

8-C: Commemoration of Santa Monica’s War Dead at Woodlawn Cemetery, Mortuary, and Mausoleum (Woodlawn) – recommendation that the City Council review and comment on the proposed design for a commemorative wall at Woodlawn honoring Santa Monica residents who have fought and died in war; and, approve the proposed design, cost and timeline, was presented. Members of the public Jerry Rubin and David Whatley spoke generally in favor of the recommended action. Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to of criteria of persons for inclusion in the memorial and contributions to the memorial. Motion by Councilmember Holbrook, seconded by Councilmember Vazquez, with request that the City guarantee funding, including City employees that served and died in time of war, and liberal inclusions of Santa Monicans in criteria. Motion to amend by Councilmember Holbrook, to include the criteria suggested, and to include persons who listed their hometowns as Santa Monica when enlisted. The motion to amend was friendly to the seconder. Motion to amend by Councilmember Davis, to have flexibility to consider persons who gave their life in service, but not in connection with a specifically recognized war or foreign conflict. The motion to amend was friendly to the maker and seconder. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT:

Councilmembers McKeown, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Mayor O’Connor None Councilmember Winterer, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day

8

November 26, 2013

RESOLUTIONS: CITY BOARDS TERM LIMITS

11-A: Modification to City Policy on Term Limits for City Boards and Commissions – recommendation that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 10787 (CCS), entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ESTABLISHING POLICIES FOR CITY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND REGIONAL ADVISORY BOARDS,” modifying the City's policy on term limits for City Boards and Commissions, was presented. Member of the public Denise Barton spoke generally in opposition to the recommended action. Motion by Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to adopt the resolution, reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT:

COUNCILMEMBER DISCUSSION ITEMS: LANDMARKS COMMISSION

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, McKeown, Mayor O’Connor None Councilmember Winterer, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day

13-A: Boards and Commissions Annual Appointments (Continued from 9/10/13) Board/Commission No. of Appts. Term Ending Landmarks Commission 1 6/30/2017 There was no one present for public comment. On order of the Mayor, the floor was opened for nominations. Councilmember McKeown nominated John Berley. John Berley was appointed by acclamation, with a unanimous vote in his favor, with Councilmember Winterer and Mayor Pro Tem O’Day absent.

COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN

13-B: Recommendation to accept Melissa Dagodag’s resignation from the Commission on the Status of Women and authorize the City Clerk to publish the vacancy, was presented. There was no one present for public comment. Motion by Mayor O’Connor, seconded by Councilmember McKeown, to approve the recommendation with regrets. The motion was unanimously approved by voice vote, with Councilmember Winterer and Mayor Pro Tem O’Day absent.

9

November 26, 2013

PUBLIC INPUT:

Members of the public Denise Barton and Rose Mary Regalbuto commented on various local issues.

ADJOURNMENT

On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:49 p.m. ATTEST:

APPROVED:

Sarah P. Gorman City Clerk

Pam O’Connor Mayor

10

November 26, 2013

(NOT APPROVED) CITY OF SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 10, 2013 A regular meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Councilmember McKeown at 5:30 p.m., on Tuesday, December 10, 2013, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street. Roll Call:

Present:

Absent: Also Present:

Mayor Pam O’Connor (arrived at 7:37 p.m.) Councilmember Gleam Davis Councilmember Robert T. Holbrook Councilmember Kevin McKeown Councilmember Tony Vazquez Councilmember Ted Winterer (arrived at 5:34 p.m.) Mayor Pro Tem Terry O’Day City Manager Rod Gould City Attorney Marsha Jones Moutrie City Clerk Sarah P. Gorman

CONVENE/PLEDGE

The Council appointed Councilmember McKeown as Acting Chair. On order of the Acting Chair, the City Council convened at 5:31 p.m., with Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, and Councilmember Winterer absent. City Manager Rod Gould led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance.

CLOSED SESSIONS

Member of the public Stanley Epstein commented on closed sessions.

Councilmember Winterer arrived at 5:34 p.m.

On order of the Acting Chair, the City Council recessed at 5:34 p.m., to consider closed sessions and returned at 6:37 p.m., with Mayor O’Connor and Mayor Pro Tem O’Day absent, to report the following: 1-A: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): McKnight v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court Case Number BC 450336 The City Attorney advised this matter was heard and no reportable action was taken. 1-B: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code

1

December 10, 2013

Section 54956.9(d)(1): Lexion v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court Case Number BC 463353 The City Attorney advised this matter was heard and no reportable action was taken. 1-C: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): Piturro v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court Case Number SC 116 489 The City Attorney advised this matter was heard and no reportable action was taken. 1-D: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): City of Santa Monica v. United States of America, Federal Aviation Administration and Michael P. Huerta, in his Official Capacity as Administrator of the FAA, United States District Court Case Number 2:31-CV 8046 JFW (VBKx) The City Attorney advised this matter was heard and no reportable action was taken. 1-E: Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation – Anticipate significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(2): 1 case The City Attorney advised this matter was heard and no reportable action was taken. 1-F: Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation: Consideration of whether to initiate litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(4): 1040 Fourth Street, #108 The City Attorney advised this relates to a dispute in the Dorchester, and recommended Settlement No. 9842 (CCS) between the City and Ms. Wilson wherein if Ms. Wilson were to rent her unit, the unit would be restricted and could only be rented as an affordable unit. Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Vazquez, to approve settlement. The motion was approved by the following vote:

2

December 10, 2013

AYES:

Councilmembers Winterer, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Acting Chair McKeown NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day CONSENT CALENDAR:

All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion. No members of the public commented on the Consent Calendar. Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Holbrook, to approve the Consent Calendar. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Winterer, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Acting Chair McKeown NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day MINUTES

3-A: The minutes of October 22, 2013, City Council meeting, were approved.

CHILD CARE LINKAGE PROGRAM

3-B: Annual Report on the City’s Child Care Linkage Program – recommendation that the City Council receive the Child Care Linkage Program Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2012-13, was approved.

PICO BRANCH LIBRARY

3-C: Professional Services Agreement Modification for Design Services for Pico Branch Library – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a seventh modification to Professional Services Agreement No. 9180 (CCS) in the amount of $28,215 with Koning Eizenberg Architects (KEA), to provide additional construction administration and design services to complete the Pico Branch Library Project, resulting in a new agreement in the amount of $996,153, was approved.

REFUSE BIN REPAIR

3-D: Bid Award for Refuse Bin Repair – recommendation to award Bid #4104 for refuse bin repair (welding and fabrication services) to Weldworx, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $60,000 for FY 2013-14, with two one-year options to renew at the same price, terms, and conditions, for a total award amount not to exceed $180,000 over a three-year period, was approved.

FLEET WASHING SERVICES

3-E: Bid Award for Fleet Washing Services – recommendation to award Bid #4102 for fleet washing services for refuse and recycling collection and street sweeping vehicles to Qualified Mobile, Inc., in an

3

December 10, 2013

amount not to exceed $56,000 for FY 2013-14, with two one-year options to renew at the same price, terms, and conditions, for a total award amount not to exceed $176,000 over a three-year period, was approved. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ABATEMENT CONTRACTOR SERVICES

3-F: Purchase Order and Bid Award Increases for Asbestos and Hazardous Materials Abatement Contractor Services – recommendation to: 1) approve a change order to purchase order 21994-OF in the amount of $100,000 with Castlerock Environmental, for asbestos and hazardous materials abatement at various City facilities for the remainder of FY 2013-14. This would result in a revised purchase order total not to exceed $150,000 through June 30, 2014; and, 2) approve an increase in the amount of $100,000 to the bid award to Castlerock Environmental for asbestos and hazardous materials abatement from July 1, 2014 through January 8, 2016 for a new three-year amended agreement total not to exceed $350,000, was approved.

CNG TRUCK-MOUNTED LOADER

3-G: Reject Bid for the Purchase of One CNG Truck-Mounted Loader – recommendation to reject all bids received on October 7, 2013 for the purchase and delivery of one new compressed natural gas (CNG) truck-mounted loader; and, direct staff to reissue a bid in order to obtain the best bidder for the purchase and delivery of one new CNG truck-mounted loader, was approved.

UTILITY TRUCK

3-H: Purchase of One Air/Light/ Rescue Utility Truck – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Contract No. 9843 (CCS) with Emergency Vehicle Group, Inc. a California based company, in an amount not to exceed $720,000 for the purchase of a Rescue Utility truck, was approved.

ORDINANCES: FINANCE DIRECTOR AUTHORITY

7-A: Second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 2450 (CCS) entitled, “ A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING THE SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.12.260 GRANTING LIMITED AUTHORITY TO THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO WAIVE DEBTS AND TAXES WHEN DEEMED UNCOLLECTABLE AND MAKE AVAILABLE AS A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD A LIST OF THE LARGEST TAX AND LICENSE DELINQUENCIES”, was presented. Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Acting Chair McKeown, to adopt the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, Winterer, Acting Chair McKeown NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day

4

December 10, 2013

STREET PERFORMANCE 7-B: Second reading and adoption of Ordinance 2451 (CCS) entitled, “ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PERMITS SANTA MONICA AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 6.112 CLARIFYING STREET PERFORMANCE PERMIT REGULATIONS AND RULES GOVERNING THE STREET PERFORMANCE LOTTERY SYSTEM FOR THE PIER”, was presented. Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Holbrook, to adopt the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Winterer, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Acting Chair McKeown NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day TENANT PARTICIPATION

7-C: Introduction and first reading of an Ordinance prohibiting agreements that limit tenant participation in the public process, was presented. Member of the public Zoe Muntaner spoke in favor of the recommended action. Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to introduce and hold first reading of the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof, adding “and” after “rental housing” and before “any rental housing agreement” to Section 4.36.085 of the ordinance, and adding “and/or” before “employees of any subject to Section 4.36.085(a). The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, Winterer, Acting Chair McKeown NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS: HOUSING ELEMENT

8-A: Adoption of the 2013-2021 Housing Element of the City’s General Plan and a Negative Declaration in Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) – recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 10789 (CCS) entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE 2013-2021 HOUSING ELEMENT”, and Resolution No. 10790 (CCS) entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO ADOPT THE 2013-2021 HOUSING ELEMENT”, was presented.

5

December 10, 2013

Members of the public Denise Barton, Nancy Morse, Zina Josephs, Catherine Eldridge, and Zoe Muntaner spoke generally in opposition to the recommended action. Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to, the nature of the report and senior housing. Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Vazquez, to adopt Resolution No. 10789 (CCS), reading resolution by title only and waiving further reading thereof, the Initial Study/Negative Declaration, prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which concludes that the project will not result in any significant impact on the environment. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Winterer, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Acting Chair McKeown NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Winterer, to adopt Resolution No. 10790 (CCS), reading resolution by title only and waiving further reading thereof, the 2013-2021 Housing Element as part of the City’s General Plan. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, Winterer, Acting Chair McKeown NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day 4TH/5TH AND ARIZONA Mayor O’Connor arrived at 7:34 p.m. and commenced Chairing the meeting.

8-B: 4th/5th and Arizona Exclusive Negotiating Agreement – recommendation that the City Council: 1) authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) No. 9844 (CCS) with the team led by Metropolitan Pacific Capital, Clarett West, and DLJ West Capital (“Metro Pacific team”) to develop the City-owned property between 4th and 5th Streets, south of Arizona Avenue, was presented. Members of the public Francis Englier, Ken Robin, Jerry Rubin, Ken Robin, Gabriella Roscoe, Edith Garcia, Barbara Bryan, Kathleen Rawson, Julee Brooks, Bruria Finkel, John Warfel, Yossi G., Rodney Freeman, and Jeff Jarow spoke generally in favor of the recommended action. Members of the public Denise Barton, Bill Witte, Laura Wilson, Zina Josephs, and Christel Andersen spoke generally in opposition to the

6

December 10, 2013

recommended action. Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to the timeline for the exclusive negotiation agreement, the parameters of the agreement, project height, shared public parking, time limits for the negotiating agreement, open space design, working with Community Corps, and affordable housing. Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Vazquez, to approve the staff recommendation with a design study of what an 84 foot maximum height building looks like and direct staff to enter into a maximum negotiating period of one year with a possible three month extension at the behest of the City Manager, with regular, at a minimum, six month updates to Council via information item. Motion to amend by Councilmember McKeown, to add direction to developer to seek an operator early and bring the operator into the community dialogue. The motion was accepted as friendly by the maker and seconder. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, Winterer, McKeown, Mayor O’Connor NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem O’Day COUNCILMEMBER DISCUSSION ITEMS: CLEAN BEACHES & OCEAN PARCEL TAX CITIZENS OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE

13-A: Annual Appointment to two positions on the Clean Beaches & Ocean Parcel Tax Citizens Oversight Committee for terms ending on December 31, 2015, was presented. There were no members of the public present for public comment. On order of the Mayor, the floor was opened for nominations. Councilmember Winterer, nominated David Fetterman and Tom Ford. The nomination was seconded by Councilmember McKeown. David Fetterman was appointed by acclamation with a unanimous voice vote in his favor, with Mayor Pro Tem O’Day absent. Tom Ford was appointed by acclamation with a unanimous voice vote in his favor, with Mayor Pro Tem O’Day absent.

L.A. COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT

13-B: Annual Appointment to one position on the L.A. County Vector Control District for a term ending on December 31, 2017, was

7

December 10, 2013

presented. There were no members of the public present for public comment. On order of the Mayor, the floor was opened for nominations. Councilmember McKeown nominated Nancy Greenstein. The nomination was seconded by Councilmember Davis. Nancy Greenstein was appointed by acclamation with a unanimous voice vote in her favor, with Mayor Pro Tem O’Day absent. SAMOHI ORCHESTRA

13-C: Request of Mayor O’Connor, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day and Councilmember McKeown that the Council support the non-profit Samohi Orchestra Parents Association with a $25,000 matching grant from the Council discretionary funds, to assist in scholarships for students from lower-income families to participate in the Santa Monica Symphony Orchestra European performance and cultural tour, including Vienna, Prague, and Baden-Baden, in April of 2014, was presented. Members of the public Ava Pomeranz, Skyler Young, Kimberlea Daggy, and Nancy Cohen spoke generally in favor of the recommended action. Motion by Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Councilmember Vazquez, to adopt the staff recommendation. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, Winterer, McKeown, Mayor O’Connor NOES: None ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem O’Day PUBLIC INPUT:

Members of the public Brad Keimach, Kathy Bingham, Steve Persky, Babak Naderi, Denise Barton, Josef Davidman, Kathleen Dantini, Noah Edelson, Jane Gross, Zoe Muntaner, Jessica Tracy, Jonathan Foster, Christel Andersen and Lauren Linnett commented on various local issues.

ADJOURNMENT

On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting was adjourned at 10:04 p.m. in memory of Willis Ware and Nelson Mandela. ATTEST:

APPROVED:

Sarah P. Gorman City Clerk

Pam O’Connor Mayor

8

December 10, 2013

9

December 10, 2013

(NOT APPROVED) CITY OF SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 17, 2013 A special meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor O’Connor at 5:32 p.m., on Tuesday, December 17, 2013, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street. Roll Call:

Present:

Also Present:

Mayor Pam O’Connor Mayor Pro Tem Terry O’Day Councilmember Gleam Davis Councilmember Robert T. Holbrook Councilmember Kevin McKeown Councilmember Tony Vazquez (arrived at 5:38 p.m.) Councilmember Ted Winterer City Manager Rod Gould City Attorney Marsha Jones Moutrie City Clerk Sarah P. Gorman

CONVENE/PLEDGE

On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 5:34 p.m., with Councilmember Vazquez absent. Councilmember Winterer led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance.

CLOSED SESSIONS

There was no one present for public comment on closed sessions.

Councilmember Vazquez arrived at 5:38 p.m.

On order of the Mayor, the City Council recessed at 5:37 p.m., to consider closed sessions and returned at 6:40 p.m., with all members present, to report the following: 1-A: Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: Anticipate significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(2) – 1 case: Claim of Dunn and Robhana The City Attorney advised this matter was heard and no reportable action was taken. 1-B: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) – Lee v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court Case Number SC 119369 The City Attorney recommended Settlement No. 9845 (CCS) in the amount

1

December 17, 2013

of $150,000 for a bicycle accident case that resulted in injuries. Motion by Councilmember Holbrook, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to approve settlement. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers McKeown, Winterer, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor O’Connor NOES: None ABSENT: None CONSENT CALENDAR:

All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion. Member of the public Denise Barton commented on various Consent Calendar items. Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Winterer, to approve the Consent Calendar, reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, Winterer, McKeown, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor O’Connor NOES: None ABSENT: None MINUTES

3-A: The minutes of November 12, 2013, City Council meeting, were approved.

BID FOR DUAL COMPACTOR CONTAINERS

3-B: Bid Award for Big Belly/Smart Belly Dual Compactor – recommendation to award Bid #4103 to Waxie Sanitary Supply, in an amount not to exceed $100,000 for FY 2013-14, for the purchase of Big Belly/ Smart Belly dual compactors with two one-year options to renew, for a total award amount not to exceed $300,000 over a three-year period, was approved.

BID FOR FLOORING CONTRACTOR SERVICE

3-C: Purchase Order and Bid Award Increases for Carpet and Flooring Contractor Services - recommendation to approve a change order to purchase order 22371-OF with HM Carpet, in the amount of $15,000 for carpet and flooring contractor services for the remainder of FY 2013-14, resulting in a revised purchase order total not to exceed $190,000 through June 30, 2014; approve an increase with HM Carpet (primary contractor) in the amount of $100,000 and Elite Floorcovering (secondary contractor) for carpet and flooring contractor services from July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2016, for a new three-year total not to exceed $950,000, was approved.

2

December 17, 2013

WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT

3-D: Professional Services for Annual Water Main Replacement/Upgrade Project - recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute professional services Agreement No. 9846 (CCS) with Cannon Corporation in an amount not to exceed $264,820 to provide engineering design services, develop construction documents and provide engineering support during construction phase of the Annual Water Main Replacement/Upgrade Project; and authorize any necessary changes to complete the work within budget authority, was approved.

1731-1733 20th STREET

3-E: Disposition of City-Owned Property at 1731-1733 20th Streetrecommendation that the City Council authorize: 1) final sale and terms of purchase for the remnant parcel located at 1731-1733 20th Street; 2) Authorize the City Manager to enter into 20-year option Agreement No. 9847 (CCS) with Crossroads School of the Arts & Sciences (“Crossroads) to acquire an easement for a bicycle and pedestrian path along the northerly edge of 1748 21st Street; 3) Grant an easement that would allow Crossroads to build an 8 foot perimeter fence across 20th Court in the event that the City exercises the option to acquire the 21st Street Bike Path Easement; and, appropriate budget changes, was approved.

NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTIONS

3-F: Professional Services Agreement with Nationwide Retirement Solutions, Inc. for Deferred Compensation Plan Administrator Services – recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute no-cost Contract No. 9848 (CCS) with Nationwide Retirement Solutions, Inc., for deferred compensation plan administrator services for five years, with two additional one-year renewal options, was approved.

1122 22nd STREET

3-G: Approval of Final Sale of City-Owned Real Property at 1122 22nd Street – recommendation that the City Council adopt Resolution No. (CCS) 10788 (CCS) entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA APPROVING THE FINAL SALE OF CITY-OWNED REAL PROPERTY AT 1122 22ND STREET”; and, authorize the City Manager to negotiate and amend the Purchase and Sale Agreement with Pezhman Firoozfam in the amount of $1.067 million, was approved.

ADMIN. PROCEEDINGS: 1410 3rd STREET PROMENADE

6-A: Appeal of a Conditional Use Permit to allow conversion of a portion of an existing restaurant to general retail at 1410 3rd Street Promenade – recommendation that the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s approval of Conditional Use Permit 13002 to allow conversion of a portion of an existing restaurant to general retail at 1410 Third Street Promenade based on the findings and conditions. The Appeal was withdrawn at request of Appellant.

3

December 17, 2013

ORDINANCES: INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE

7-A: Introduction and First Reading of an Interim Ordinance Extending Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 2439 (CCS); Update on the Status of Pending Development Agreement Applications; Modification of the Development Agreement Float-Up Process for Limited Types of Projects; and, Affirm development of new affordable housing units as a priority item to be considered during community benefit negotiations for proposed mixed-use housing projects, was presented. Member of the public Jerry Rubin spoke in favor of the recommended action. Member of the public Denise Barton spoke in opposition to the recommended action. Discussion ensued on topics including affordable housing and prioritization of Development Agreements. Motion by Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to introduce and hold first reading of the ordinance reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof, to review the status of pending Development Agreement applications filed since LUCE adoption in July 2010, modifying the Development Agreement process to exempt limited types of projects from Planning Commission and City Council early conceptual review (float-up) discussions and maintain the requirements for a Community Meeting and an Architectural Review Board float-up discussion prior to initiating project negotiations between staff and the applicant, and affirming development of new affordable housing units as a priority item to be considered during community benefit negotiations for a proposed mixed-use housing projects subject to a Development Agreement. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers McKeown, Winterer, Holbrook, Davis, Vazquez, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor O’Connor NOES: None ABSENT: None STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS: FIRE STATION NO. 3

8-A: Financing Options for Construction of a New Fire Station No. 1, the Fire Station No. 3 Seismic Retrofit, and Interim Replacement of the Fire Training Facility – recommendation that the City Council approve the proposal to finance the construction of a new Fire Station No. 1, the seismic retrofit of Fire Station No. 3, and an interim fire training facility through a $35 million lease revenue bond and direct staff to: continue with the design of a new Fire Station No. 1, proceed with the construction document and bidding phases of the Fire Station No. 3 seismic retrofit, proceed with the design of the interim replacement of a Fire

4

December 17, 2013

Training Facility, and return to Council for authorization to issue a lease revenue bond, was presented. Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to prepayment of bonds, lease revenue bonds, and Fire Station 1 design. Motion by Councilmember Holbrook, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers Vazquez, Davis, Holbrook, Winterer, McKeown, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor O’Connor NOES: None ABSENT: None 1122 22nd STREET

8-B: Approval of Final Sale of City-Owned Real Property at 1122 22nd Street – recommendation that the City Council: adopt a resolution to approve the final sale of 1122 22nd Street; and, authorize the City Manager to negotiate and amend the Purchase and Sale Agreement with Pezhman Firoozfam in the amount of $1.067 million, was approved. This item moved to the consent calendar.

CIVIC AUDITORIUM

8-C: Resolutions Establishing Interim Uses and Interim Rental Fees for the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium – recommendation that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 10791 (CCS) entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ESTABLISHING INTERIM USES FOR THE SANTA MONICA CIVIC AUDITORIUM”; adopt Resolution No. 10792 (CCS) entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ESTABLISHING INTERIM RENTAL FEES TO BE CHARGED FOR INTERIM USE OF THE SANTA MONICA CIVIC AUDITORIUM”; and rescind Resolution No. 3579, was presented. Member of the public Jerry Rubin spoke in support of the recommended action. Member of the public Denise Barton spoke in opposition to the recommended action. Motion by Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to adopt the resolutions, reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof, and the staff recommendation. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES:

Councilmembers McKeown, Winterer, Holbrook, Davis,

5

December 17, 2013

Vazquez, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor O’Connor NOES: None ABSENT: None ADJOURNMENT

On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting was adjourned at 7:54 p.m. ATTEST:

APPROVED:

Sarah P. Gorman City Clerk

Pam O’Connor Mayor

6

December 17, 2013

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 3-B To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Rod Gould, City Manager David Martin, Planning and Community Development Director

Subject:

Agreement with Management Partners

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a professional services agreement with Management Partners, California- based company, in an amount not to exceed $98,600, for interim management assistance with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval. 2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a professional services agreement with Management Partners, California- based company, in an amount not to exceed $39,500, for an organization review with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

Executive Summary Two City operations, the Planning and Community Development Department (PCD) and the Office of Sustainability and the Environment (OSE), seek the services of an experienced public sector management consultant. Staff recommends Management Partners for both. Management Partners would offer interim management assistance to PCD at a cost not to exceed $98,600 and conduct an organization review of OSE at a cost not to exceed $39,500. The projects would be detailed in separate agreements.

Background The PCD Assistant Director retired at the end of 2013. The job specification has been revised and recruitment for a full-time replacement has begun. Staff anticipates that the position will be filled in three to four months. In the meantime, staff recommends filling the position on a limited-term basis with an experienced planning professional who can 1

provide interim management services and assist the Department in advancing its many efforts, including development agreements and revisions to the zoning code.

The Office of Sustainability and the Environment has evolved over time. First a division of the Public Works Department, the Office became a division of the City Manager’s Department in 2008. Since that time, the Office’s role has expanded and its impact now reaches into the majority of City departments.

Over the past year, OSE has

implemented a reorganization plan and transferred operational responsibilities and staff to the Public Works and Planning and Community Development Departments. In early 2014 the 15 remaining staff members will for the first time be located in the same offices, a LEED-certified space at 1717 4th Street. The reorganization and associated realignment of work groups plus the consolidation and move mark a new phase in OSE’s life cycle. An organization review of the Office’s systems, processes, procedures, work load, capacity, alignment within and across the organization, and future is timely and is therefore recommended.

Discussion There are a number of national and local consulting firms who routinely provide publicsector organizations with interim management, organizational analysis, and process and operational improvement assistance. Such firms are generally staffed by full- and part-time professionals who are experienced public service managers, consultants, and recently retired government staff members. Specialists as well as generalists are usually available.

The Department of Planning and Community Development and the Office of Sustainability and the Environment needs’ for consulting services are different, however they are occurring concurrently.

Staff recommends contracting with the same

organization, Management Partners, for the two distinct scopes of work.

2

Management Partners has performed similar work for the City of Santa Monica over the past few years; over the last three years in particular, this work has cost $119,000. Currently, Management Partners is conducting a program review at the request of the City Attorney’s Office, at a cost not to exceed $50,000. Staff is requesting Council authorization for two additional agreements, one of which is below the usual $80,000 threshold for Council approval, because of the cumulative total of the City’s recent and recommended work with the firm.

Consultant Selection Under the Santa Monica Municipal Code, the City Manager has the authority to solicit proposals for professional services and proceed in a manner that serves the best interest of the City. The City Manager exercised that authority and sought proposals from Management Partners for these two projects under Municipal Code 2.24.073 (d), which was in effect while the selection process was underway.

Subsequent to the

selection of Management Partners, the City’s Purchasing Ordinance was updated.

Management Partners is a national consulting firm founded in 1994 with offices in Costa Mesa and San Jose, California, and Cincinnati, Ohio whose emphasis is working with local governments and is familiar with all of the services provided by cities, counties, and special districts at the local level. Staff includes leaders and managers with practical experience in all aspects of local government operations.

PCD’s need for interim management assistance would be filled by Jay Trevino. Mr. Trevino is a Special Advisor to Management Partners who has extensive public sector experience in land use planning and regulation, urban design, transit oriented development, environmental analysis, and community outreach. During his 31 years in local government, Mr. Trevino served in a variety of planning positions in four cities, including Santa Monica, where he held the position of Planning Manager. His most recent position was as executive director of the Planning and Building Agency of the City of Santa Ana, from which he recently retired. Mr. Trevino would work in PCD four 3

days a week at the direction of Management Partners, and continue to use his own cell phone and Management Partners’ email address, reflective of his employment by the firm, until the new permanent Assistant Director is in place. Staff estimates a three- to four-month engagement at an hourly rate of $140, the total cost of which would not exceed $98,600. Should the hiring process take longer, staff would return to Council to request additional authorization to continue the arrangement.

Management Partner’s assessment and analysis of the Office of Sustainability and the Environment would include an inventory of the division’s approach to work and its work plan, how OSE’s efforts align with that of other departments and divisions and within the organizational structure, the capacity of the division to complete current and projected assignments, and opportunities for organizational development. Recommendations and the key steps necessary for implementation would be developed in conjunction with staff and presented in an action plan. This endeavor is anticipated to take approximately three months and cost no more than $39,500. It would be conducted by a team of Management Partners staff members experienced in public services and management systems, and organizational, policy, and financial analysis.

Financial Impacts and Budget Actions The agreement to be awarded to Management Partners for interim management assistance is for an amount not to exceed $98,600. Funds are available in the FY 201314 budget in division 01265. The agreement will be charged to account 01265.555060.

4

The agreement to be awarded to Management Partners for an organizational review is for an amount not to exceed $39,500. Funds are available in the FY 2013-14 budget in division 01202. The agreement will be charged to account 01202.555060.

Prepared by: Danielle Noble, Assistant to the City Manager

Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Rod Gould City Manager

Rod Gould City Manager

David Martin Director, Planning Development

and

Community

5

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 3-C

To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Gigi Decavalles-Hughes, Director or Finance

Subject:

Business License Tax Modernization Review Services

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council direct staff to research options for modernizing the business license tax program with a focus on improving customer service while maintaining revenue neutrality.

Executive Summary In recent years, businesses have informally provided feedback to staff during routine interactions on areas that would assist with making the business license tax program more business friendly. However, some of the changes could have a negative impact on revenues; staff is seeking to conduct a thorough review to determine how best to draft potential changes to ensure that there are no financial impacts to tax revenues. Additionally, some changes could require voter approval to achieve this goal. Staff is requesting that Council direct staff to review potential changes with a focus on improving customer service while maintaining revenue neutrality.

Background The City of Santa Monica adopted the existing business license tax code on May 8, 1990. Since this time, new business types have emerged that would not have been considered at the time the law was adopted, particularly eCommerce and other Internet based business models. These types of business are now common in Santa Monica, and are thriving. In fact the area has been dubbed “Silicon Beach” for this growing sector.

1

On November 5, 1996, California voters passed Proposition 218 which added articles XIIC and XIIID to the California Constitution.

Among other things, Proposition 218

established the requirement that “general taxes,” defined as taxes that are used for general government purposes, obtain approval from a majority of the electorate. An example of a general tax is the City’s business license tax. As a result, any material changes to the business license tax structure since this time would likely require approval by registered Santa Monica voters.

Except to account for other changes to the code, the business license tax code has not been amended in any material way since the passage of Proposition 218. For example, in 1996 the Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) was modified to add regulation of community or special events; in 2003 the SMMC was amended to add a business license application processing fee; in 2004, taxicab owner and driver permits were addressed; and in 2005, Council approved a modification to create a small business tax exemption.

In 2009 and 2010, minor changes were made to account for the

implementation of the taxicab franchise program.

Since 1990, the changes to the

business license tax code have not impacted the broader business license tax classifications, rates, and structure.

Discussion In recent years, businesses have provided informal feedback to staff during routine interactions on areas that would assist with making the administration of the program more business friendly and in some cases more equitable. Staff has addressed some issues through policy. For example, on July 5, 2013, the Finance Director issued an administrative policy on “place of business” for the purpose of requiring a second business license. The policy provides staff with guidance on what constitutes a single “place of business” that would then require a business to obtain only one business license instead of two. Currently only auto dealers are explicitly provided an exemption from obtaining a business license for each location.

2

Examples of areas for review include: 1) the threshold for the small business exemption; 2) licensing requirements for real estate agents and brokers; 3) taxing of pass-through entities; 4) business classification categories; 5) apportionment; 6) related entities and combined returns; and 7) di minimis business activity requiring a business license, such as conducting a 2 day meeting in the City or providing services at a special event of 5 days or less.

The list provided above is only an example of the types of issues that a review would address. The objective of the review would be to determine what potential changes could be considered, as well as research on how other California cities with gross receipts tax address these issues. To assist with this review, HdL Companies1 (HdL) would provide information services to include analysis and comparative services. Using the data compiled from the registration analysis in the HdL business license tax software, as well as data compiled from other sources such as neighboring cities, HdL would prepare a report comparing the City of Santa Monica’s proposed changes and the best practices to those of neighboring cities. The report would provide a series of possible business tax re-structuring options for City consideration. These options would include proposed structures and policy changes designed to increase efficiencies, and other best practices that the City may choose to explore, and to ensure net revenue neutrality.

Staff would also seek more formal input from key stakeholders, including members of the business community, that would be included in the review and modeling services that HdL would provide.

3

Time is of the essence in performing this review, due to the fact that changes could likely require voter approval. The time frame to present recommendations to Council would require enough time to also meet the November 4, 2014 ballot deadline.

Vendor Selection HdL was founded in 1983 and provides revenue management and economic data analysis to over 360 agencies in six states. Services provided by the company include business license, sales tax, and property tax audits, analytical services, and software products.

The City currently has three contracts with HdL, including property tax information, audit, and consulting services; sales and use tax audit and information services; and centralized business tax management software.

These services assist the City in

identifying strategies to preserve and enhance tax collections; preparing tax forecasts and collection reports; and managing business license tax accounts and records.

The Sales and Use Tax Audit & Information services agreement is for an amount not to exceed $9,000, plus 15% of recovered sales and use tax for a five year term and a request for proposals was issued on May 10, 2010;the Property Tax Audit & Information services agreement is for an amount not to exceed $225,500 for a five year term and a request for qualifications was issued on September 28, 2012; and the Business Tax Software services agreement is for an amount not to exceed $209,275 for a term of 5 years and a request for proposal was issued on November 5, 2012.

HdL is the only company that is positioned to effectively provide the modeling of financial impacts from potential changes within the timeframe required to prepare for a November 4, 2014, ballot initiative, due to its extensive experience with the City’s business license program, its experience performing sales tax information and analysis for the City, and its business license experience with other California cities.

The

contract is being awarding in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.24.073(d) of 4

the SMMC; the selection process was completed prior to 12/26/2013, when amendments to Chapter 2.24 of the SMMC, adopted by the Council at its November 26, 2013 meeting, were in effect.

Financial Impacts & Budget Actions The contract to be awarded to HdL Companies is for an amount not to exceed $15,000. Funds are available in the FY 2013-14 budget in division 224; the contract will be charged to account 01224.555060. 1

HdL Companies includes Hinderliter, de Llamas & Associates, HdL Coren & Cone, and HdL Software.

Prepared by: Salvador M. Valles, Business & Revenue Operations Manager Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Gigi Decavalles-Hughes Director of Finance

Rod Gould City Manager

5

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 3D To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Edward F. King, Director of Transit Services

Subject:

Contract with Gillig LLC to Purchase 40-foot Buses

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with Gillig LLC, a California-based company, established through a joint procurement consortium of 22 transit agencies led by Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (CCCTA), in Concord, California. It would guarantee the pricing to furnish and deliver 40-foot, low floor, Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) powered transit buses for the next five years. Executive Summary Santa Monica’s Big Blue Bus (BBB), along with 21 other transit agencies, participated in a joint procurement to purchase buses. Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (CCCTA), in Concord, California, the lead agency, issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the production and delivery of 30, 35, and 40-foot heavy-duty low floor transit buses. CCCTA determined Gillig LLC was the best bidder. Staff recommends entering into a contract with Gillig LLC to guarantee the pricing as proposed, with the understanding that Council approval would be obtained separately through the term of the contract to authorize the purchase of buses in quantities and configurations to be specified, in conformance with the contract documents. A maximum of 99 buses would be purchased under this contract contingent on funding availability.

Background BBB has a total of 189 buses as of the beginning of FY2013-14, 99 of which are LNG buses purchased between 2002 and 2006 (37 NABI buses purchased in 2002, 52 New Flyer buses purchased in 2004, and 10 purchased in 2006). The FTA guidelines set the useful life of a transit vehicle at 12 years of age or 500,000 miles. BBB has a capital improvement program to replace aging buses as they approach the end of their useful 1

service. These 99 buses have been identified for replacement over the next five years. The contract with Gillig LLC for the purchase of up to 99 40-foot CNG powered buses in the next five years would ensure that the vehicles would be replaced in a timely manner and would establish bus fuel type, fleet consistency and standardization. With the replacement of these vehicles, more than 95 percent of the Big Blue Bus fleet would be powered by CNG. In November and December 2011, staff evaluated four 40-foot buses by different manufacturers. The evaluation allowed Motor Coach Operators to drive the buses. Maintenance technicians evaluated vehicle components. Motor Coach Cleaners inspected buses and put them through the service lane and fuel island. All employees who participated in this cross functional process provided feedback using a technical rating sheet to score their pros/cons of the vehicle. It was determined that the Gillig LLC bus best fit the needs of the BBB.

On June 12, 2012, Council awarded a contract to Gillig LLC exercising options to procure up to 58 40-foot CNG buses from the State of Minnesota contract. To date, BBB has received and placed into revenue service 45 of these buses. The Gillig buses with their distinct styling and color scheme are engineered and manufactured to be both aesthetically pleasing and exceptionally reliable, and BBB has received positive feedback from both employees and customers.

In May 2013, the lead agency of the joint procurement, CCCTA, received two proposals. CCCTA determined that Gillig LLC was the most responsive bidder to the RFP requirements. The joint procurement enables the City to purchase buses for the next five years at predetermined base prices and an adjustment tied to the Producers Price Index.

2

Discussion

In accordance with FTA requirements, CCCTA conducted a comprehensive price/cost analysis of Gillig LLC’s proposal and determined that the proposed pricing was fair and reasonable over a five-year contract term. FTA has concurred that the pricing is fair and reasonable. The joint procurement consortium complies with Santa Monica Municipal Code 2.24.080 (Exceptions to Competitive Bidding) as competitive bid procedures have already been utilized by the lead agency, Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (CCCTA) of the consortium.

Federal purchasing regulations allow transit properties to procure vehicles and equipment by “piggybacking” on another agency’s purchase. Piggybacking is the postaward use of a contractual process that allows an agency that was not involved in the original competitive procurement to purchase the same supplies/equipment through that original process. The remaining 13 buses from the previous piggybacking agreement have been ordered and are scheduled to be delivered February 2014. BBB plans to begin the replacement of the 99 LNG buses in FY2015-16 contingent on availability of capital grand funding from Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 Formula Funds.

Staff requests authorization to enter into a contract with Gillig LLC to secure buses for future bus procurements with the associated cost pricing at the time the procurement is authorized by City Council. A maximum of 99 buses may be purchased over a five-year period with this agreement pending availability of funding.

Financial Impacts & Budget Actions There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. Staff will return to Council if specific budget actions are required in the future. BBB plans to begin the purchase of up to 99 CNG buses in FY 2015-16; bus purchases will be contingent on the availability of federal and local funding. 3

Prepared by:

Enny Chung Graham, Senior Administrative Analyst Getty Modica, Transit Maintenance Officer

Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Edward F. King Director of Transit Services

Rod Gould City Manager

4

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 3-E To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Martin Pastucha, Director of Public Works

Subject:

Award Contract for Third Street Promenade and Wilshire Boulevard Pilot Project

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with AD/S Companies, a California-based company, in an amount not to exceed $96,811 (includes a 10% contingency) for the fabrication and installation of two map cases and one wayfinding pylon at the north-end of the Third Street Promenade near Wilshire Boulevard, as part of a pilot project. 2. Authorize the Director of Public Works to issue any necessary change orders to complete additional work within budget authority. Executive Summary This pilot project would install two custom designed and fabricated map cases, and one 32-foot tall way-finding pylon at the north-end of the Third Street Promenade near Wilshire Boulevard as part of a pilot project comprised of new signs, map directories, news racks and updated light poles that would serve as a template for a larger makeover to create a more uniform look for Downtown. The Santa Monica-based design firm Suisman Urban Design was hired by Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. (DTSM) to develop the final design which was presented to the Architectural Review Board (ARB) on October 16, 2013. The City solicited proposals for the fabrication and installation of map cases and pylon at the Third Street Promenade. Staff recommends AD/S Companies as the best qualified firm to implement the pilot project at a cost not to exceed $96,811.

Background In November 2011, Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. (DTSM) hired the Santa Monicabased design firm, Suisman Urban Design, to assess the existing infrastructure in Downtown and re-envision the Downtown streetscape and street furnishings with a 1

contemporary design that provides a unified visual identity making the City’s vibrant center more attractive and easy to navigate. The final design, developed by Suisman Urban Design and presented to the ARB on October 16, 2013, creates a visual language that ties together the various street furnishings such as map directories, signs, street lights, news racks, benches, planters and two new proposed elements: wayfinding kiosks and pylons. The proposed design replaces disparate elements over-laid over the past 30 years and integrates new signage systems so visitors who come on foot, bus, bike or car can easily find their way around to the parking, shops and cultural destinations.

In addition to the map cases and pylon planned for installation under this pilot project, the City has contracted traffic signal and street light modifications at Third Street Promenade and Wilshire Boulevard to Dynalectric, Inc. under a separate purchase order in an amount not to exceed $20,500.

Discussion Staff is currently working with DTSM and Suisman Urban Design to develop design and bidding documents for other components of the pilot project focused on upgrading two promenade light poles at Third Street Promenade and Wilshire Boulevard with contemporary looking energy-efficient LED fixtures; repainting the poles; and implementing improved mounting, wiring and data communication systems for the security cameras, cables, spot-lights, and seasonal lighting outlets currently attached to most poles. Also included in these design discussions for the pilot project are custom designed news rack condos that would group and organize the variety of existing news racks within a single container with a consistent visual branding.

Contractor Selection On September 13, 2013, the City published a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the fabrication and installation of map cases and a pylon at the Third Street Promenade in accordance with City specifications. The RFP was posted on the City’s online bidding site in accordance with City Charter and Municipal Code provisions. A total of 31 firms 2

obtained the RFP package. The City received three sealed proposals on October 17, 2013. Proposals were reviewed by DTSM, Suisman Urban Design, Planning, ISD and Public Works staff and evaluated on understanding of the project’s scope, direct experience on similar projects including the firms’ project portfolio, approach to the work, technical capabilities, qualifications of the proposed staff, cost of services, and the ability to meet the desired time frames. All three firms were invited for interviews on November 4, 2013 where they could present their portfolio, discuss their qualifications and answer questions from the review panel. Ampersand Signing Group, the firm with the highest base-bid, declined the invitation.

Based on the selection criteria, AD/S Companies, located in Corona, CA, is recommended as the best qualified firm to implement this pilot project. AD/S provided the City with a portfolio of the highest caliber representing projects for clients including major big-box stores, Westfield Corporation in Century City, the Shore Hotel in Santa Monica, the City of Redondo Beach, Universal Studios, the Port of Los Angeles, the City of Upland, City Center Las Vegas, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, McCarran Airport Las Vegas, and many more. During the interview AD/S demonstrated their capability, knowledge and ability to work collaboratively by discussing the proposed map case and pylon design in detail and suggesting alternative materials and optional design approaches to achieve the City’s objective in a cost-effective manner. Staff also verified with the Contractor’s State License Board that AD/S Companies’ license is current, active, and in good standing.

Construction Management and Public Outreach Construction management and public outreach for this project would be provided by City staff. Construction management would include inspecting the contractor’s work during construction, verifying and documenting field changes and unforeseen conditions, monitoring and mitigating impacts as a result of the construction activities, attending contractor’s safety meetings, attending periodic progress meetings, and maintaining all necessary inspection documentation relevant to the work conducted during construction. Public outreach would include notifications distributed to adjacent 3

properties and the surrounding community on the scope of the project, potential impacts including possible night work, and schedule of additional periodic updates, weekly updates on the City’s “Know Before You Go” (KBUG) website and in the Santa Monica Daily Press.

Construction Schedule Upon completion of final design and approval of contractor submitted shop drawings, fabrication for the map cases and pylon is anticipated to begin in March 2014 with installation planned for May 2014.

Financial Impacts & Budget Actions The contract to be awarded to AD/S Companies is for an amount not to exceed $96,811 (includes a 10% contingency).

Funds are available in the FY 2013-14 Capital

Improvement Program budget in account C010834.589100 for the fabrication and installation of two map cases and one way-finding pylon.

Prepared by: Allan Sheth, Civil Engineering Associate

Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Martin Pastucha Director of Public Works

Rod Gould City Manager

Attachment: 1 – Pilot Project Overview

4

Third @ Wilshire Pilot Project

06.24.2013

Suisman Urban Design

Pilot Overview

DOWNTOWN SANTA MONICA • SUISMAN URBAN DESIGN • 06/24/2013

Text

DOWNTOWN SANTA MONICA • SUISMAN URBAN DESIGN • 06/24/2013

Map Cases

06.24.2013

Suisman Urban Design

DOWNTOWN SANTA MONICA • SUISMAN URBAN DESIGN • 6/24/2013

Existing Map Cases Wilshire @ Third

DOWNTOWN SANTA MONICA • SUISMAN URBAN DESIGN • 6/24/2013

Proposed Map Case Wilshire @ Third

DOWNTOWN SANTA MONICA • SUISMAN URBAN DESIGN • 6/24/2013

06.24.2013

Suisman Urban Design

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 3-F To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Karen Ginsberg, Director, Community and Cultural Services

Subject:

Application for California Housing-Related Parks Program Grant

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Adopt the attached resolution authorizing the application for grant funds from the State of California Housing-Related Parks Program, 2013 Funding Round, for the Buffer Park Project 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to apply for the grant and accept the grant if awarded. Executive Summary The California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing-Related Parks (HRP) Program designed to provide cities that develop new residential housing affordable to very low and low-income households with non-competitive grant funding for parks and community recreation facilities that benefit the community and add to the quality of life. The attached resolution would authorize an application for the 2013 Funding Round. Awarded grant funding would be used for the construction of the Buffer Park project. Discussion The HRP Program is funded through Proposition 1C and is administered by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, Division of Housing Policy Development. According to the application package, the “…program is an innovative program designed to reward local governments that approve housing for lower-income households and are in compliance with State Housing Element law with grant funds to create or rehabilitate parks.” To be eligible under this grant, building permits for eligible units must have been issued between January 1, 2010 and June 30, 2013.

Grant amounts are awarded by formula and consider factors including the

number of bedrooms and affordability levels of the units. The grant application requires applicants to identify how the grant funds will be used. Staff is recommending that 1

awarded grant funds be targeted towards the construction of Buffer Park, a 2.3 acre linear park that is planned for Exposition Boulevard between Stewart Street and Yorkshire Blvd. Hard construction costs for Buffer Park are estimated at $3.5 million with construction anticipated to commence in spring 2015.

It is expected that grant

awards will be announced by June, 2014 and pursuant to the grant guidelines funds must be expended within three years of the award. Based upon a preliminary analysis of potentially eligible units, staff estimates that the City could receive an award of several hundred thousand dollars.

Financial Impacts & Budget Actions There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. If the HRP awards the grant, revenue and expenditure budgets will be established and included in the FY15-16 Capital Improvement Program budget for the awarded grant amount. Prepared by: Karen Ginsberg, Director Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Karen Ginsberg Director, Community and Cultural Services

Rod Gould City Manager

Attachments: Resolution

2

Attachment 1 Council Meeting: January 14, 2014

Santa Monica, California

RESOLUTION NO. _____ (CCS)

(City Council Series)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT A GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE STATE HOUSING-RELATED PARKS GRANT PROGRAM, AND TO EXECUTE ALL GRANT DOCUMENTS

WHEREAS, the State of California, Department of Housing and Community Development has issued a Notice of Funding Availability dated October 2, 2013 (NOFA) under its Housing-Related Parks (HRP) Program; and

WHEREAS, the procedures outlined in the grant application materials require a resolution certifying approval of applications by the applicant’s governing board within 30 days of submittal of the grant application; and

WHEREAS, the applicant, if selected will enter into agreements with the State of California, Department of Housing and Community Development to carry out the HRP Program; and

WHEREAS, the grant funding will assist the City in implementing the Buffer Park project; and

1

WHEREAS, this resolution certifies the City Council’s approval of the City’s application for grant funding and to enter into any grant documents for the HRP Program.

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Monica hereby approves the filing of an application for grant funds to the Department of Housing and Community Development for the HRP Program released October 2013 for the 2013 Designated Program Year to cover costs associated with the development of Buffer Park.

SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Santa Monica authorizes the City Manager or his designee to submit the grant application and if funding is awarded, to enter into, execute and submit all HRP grant documents as required by the Department of Housing and Community Development for participation in the HRP Program.

SECTION 3. The City Council of the City of Santa Monica agrees to use the funds for eligible capital asset(s) in the manner presented in the grant application as approved by the Department of Housing and Community Development and in accordance with the NOFA, Program Guidelines and Application Package.

SECTION 4. The City Council of the City of Santa Monica appoints the City Manager as agent to execute and submit all documents including, but not limited to applications, agreements, and payment requests as required by the Department of Housing and Community 2

Development for participation in the HRP Program.

SECTION 5.

The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and

thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.

APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________ Marsha Jones Moutrie City Attorney

3

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 3-G To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

David Martin, Director of Planning and Community Development

Subject:

Modification of Agreement with PCR Services Corporation to provide historic resource analysis

Recommended Action Staff recommends that City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a third modification to professional services agreement #2579 in the amount of $40,000 with PCR Services Corporation, a California-based company, to provide professional services in the field of historic preservation. This will result in a four year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $105,000, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval. Executive Summary This report explains the need to increase the City’s existing contract with PCR Services Corporation to provide professional services in the field of historic preservation, including evaluation of a property’s eligibility when a structure of merit, landmark, or historic district application is filed as well as analysis of proposed alterations to designated historic structures. This work is necessary to continue to support the City’s Historic Preservation Program and Goals and Policies of the City Historic Preservation Element. The $40,000 modification would bring the total contract amount to $105,000. Background On November 20, 2012, the City and PCR Services entered into Agreement Number 2579 in the amount of $30,000 to provide professional services in the field of historic resource analysis.

These services include analysis of proposed alterations to

designated Landmark structures and non-designated structures that are considered to be historic resources when a discretionary permit application is involved; evaluation of a property’s eligibility when a landmark, structure of merit or historic district application is filed and, other research projects as required when requested by the Landmarks Commission or staff. On February 19, 2013, a First Modification was entered into in 1

order to include additional services to be performed by Consultant and to increase the total contract price by $15,000. On April 4, 2013, due to the volume of work to support the City’s Historic Preservation Program, a Second Modification was entered into to increase the contract price by $20,000 to reflect the cost of providing the additional services. At these points, the agreement was below the Council approval threshold. Discussion The City Council and the community have identified protection of neighborhoods as one of the City’s highest priorities.

The City’s Landmarks Commission and Historic

Preservation Program actively support this mission through the evaluation of properties for protection and designation as structures of merit, landmarks, or historic district contributors.

Further, alterations to designated properties require careful review to

ensure compliance with the Secretary of Interior Standards for Historic Preservation. Additionally, historic resource evaluation is frequently required during the development review process to ensure potential resources are carefully evaluated and are appropriately protected or incorporated into new development projects as necessary to minimize impact to the City’s historic and architectural framework.

PCR Services Corporation has provided the City with thorough and timely analysis on historic resources issues. Given the firm’s experience and knowledge of the City’s historic fabric and existing scope of work, staff recommends modifying the agreement to allow for additional historic preservation services. The $40,000 modification will result in a contract for a total of $105,000. No further modifications are anticipated this fiscal year.

Contractor/Consultant Selection In June 2012, an RFQ was sent to seven firms that specialize in historic resource evaluation.

Responses were received from six qualified firms: PCR Services

Corporation; ICF International; Historic Resources Group; Architectural Resources Group; Galvin Preservation Associates; and, Ostashay and Associates. PCR Services Corporation was one of the firms selected based on their familiarity with Santa Monica’s 2

unique culture,

resources and contexts, past practice in developing and preparing

thorough and complete reports, experience in evaluating proposed designs affecting historic buildings and structures, and its ability to commit professional staff and resources to serve the City’s needs.

Financial Impacts & Budget Actions The agreement modification to be awarded to PCR Services is $40,000, for an amended agreement total not to exceed $105,000. Funds are available in the FY 201314 budget in division 01266; the agreement will be charged to 01266.555060.

Prepared by: Scott Albright, Senior Planner

Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

David Martin, Director Planning & Community Development

Rod Gould City Manager

3

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 3-H To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

David Martin, Director of Planning and Community Development

Subject:

Purchase Order Modification for Traffic Signal Upgrade Equipment

Recommended Action Staff recommends that City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to purchase order #331163-000-P in the amount of $36,734 with C.T. & F., Inc., a California-based company to provide additional traffic signal upgrade equipment. This will result in a 2-year amended purchase order with a new total amount not to exceed $766,734. Executive Summary Throughout 2012 C.T. & F., Inc. provided traffic signal upgrade services to the City. During the close-out of the project in early 2013, staff identified a discrepancy in the final invoice. For most of the 2013 calendar year, staff attempted to work with C.T. & F., Inc. to address the discrepancy. It was mutually determined that additional field change orders were issued during the course of C.T. & F., Inc. completing the project, and the final invoice was revised to highlight the costs of these additional field change orders. Unfortunately, these costs exceeded the Council authorized budget. Therefore, staff is requesting a modification to the original purchase order. Background C.T. & F., Inc. has been providing traffic signal upgrade services at various intersections outside the City’s Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS) project scope. The current purchase order has provided upgrades to many of the traffic signals and associated equipment that were installed over 50 years ago. In January 2013, the City became aware that the project exceeded the total purchase order amount. This was due to lumping field change orders into the final invoice. The change order items were identified as upgrades that were not included in the original scope due to unforeseen conditions. This purchase order amendment is for $36,734 to purchase and install

1

additional traffic signal equipment and poles at the same per unit cost as the original purchase order.

Previous Council Actions On December 13, 2011 Council awarded Bid #3066 in the amount not to exceed $730,000 to C.T. & F., Inc. for the purchase and installation of traffic signal equipment.

Discussion The City’s Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS) is currently 90% complete. It provides centralized control of the traffic signal controllers and all other Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) devices used to manage traffic such as detection systems, transit priority system, emergency vehicle preemption system, variable message signs, and traffic monitoring cameras, on one integrated system. Implementation of the ATMS necessitated a major upgrade of the City’s traffic signal control system, including installation of fiber optic communication and other equipment to facilitate detection, communication, coordinate traffic and accommodate remote management.

Most of the ATMS phases were Metro grant funded and only allow for communications installation and connection to the City’s central management system. Replacement of old and aging infrastructure such as poles, conduit, and signal cabinets were not included with the previous phases. Therefore, this work was assigned to C.T. & F., Inc.. The original purchase order with C.T. & F., Inc. allowed for the purchase and installation a total of 36 new traffic signal poles, more than 500 feet of new conduit, and replace 22 traffic signal controller cabinets at various locations within the City.

In early 2013, the City became aware that the project exceeded the total purchase order amount. This was due to a discrepancy where several field change orders were lumped into the final invoice. For most of the 2013 calendar year, staff attempted to work with C.T. & F., Inc. to address the discrepancy.

It was mutually determined that the

additional field change orders were issued during the course of C.T. & F., Inc. 2

completing the project, and the final invoice was revised to highlight the costs of these additional field change orders. The change order items were identified as upgrades that were not included in the original scope due to unforeseen conditions, such as abandoned underground foundations, abandoned utility lines, and errors on the bid documents. The additional items include one traffic signal cabinet, three traffic signal poles, 200 feet of conduit, and five traffic signal indications. Financial Impacts & Budget Actions The purchase order modification to be awarded to C.T. & F., Inc. is $36,734, for an amended purchases total not to exceed $766,734. Funds are available in the FY 201314 Capital Improvement Project budget at account C040407.589202.

Prepared by: Andrew Maximous, P.E., T.E., Transportation Engineer

Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

David Martin, Director Planning and Community Development

Rod Gould City Manager

3

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 3-I To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Sarah P. Gorman, Records & Election Services Director

Subject:

Resolution Amending the Rules of Order and Procedure for the Conduct of Council Meetings, Including Allowing Donating Time to Another Public Speaker

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Adopt the attached resolution amending the Council Rules: to allow members of the public to donate two minutes per agenda item to another speaker; remove Rule 24 Adjournment timing; clean-up some of the language, and repeal Resolution Number 10643 (CCS); 2. Direct staff to monitor the number of donations and the amount of time spent on public comment for a period of one year.

Executive Summary Currently the City Council Rules do not permit donation of time to another public speaker. At this year’s City Council retreat, the City Council expressed their desire to allow members of the public to give an additional two minutes of speaking time to a representative who may better express their views. Another matter decided at the retreat was the elimination of Rule 24, which states no new items can be called after 11:00 p.m. other than Public Input. This report complies with Council’s direction to staff to return with a resolution amending the rules to permit donation of public speaking time, elimination of Rule 24, and a clean-up of language in the resolution, including updating the Agenda and Packet delivery to the Public and Council to the Wednesday preceding the Tuesday City Council meeting.

Background At the August 13, 2013 Council meeting, the Council temporarily allowed public speakers to donate one minute of speaking time to another speaker on one item and directed staff to return with information on possibly amending the Council rules to allow for time donation. At the October 26, 2013 City Council retreat, staff returned to Council with information on public speaking policies adopted by the Planning Commission and 1

other municipalities and best practices regarding contribution of time.

Although

donation time is not practiced in most cities, some cities allow it at the Mayor’s discretion and fewer cities established formal policies.

For example, the cities of

Berkeley and Culver City allow speakers to yield one minute to one other speaker and Berkeley upholds a total time limit of four minutes per speaker for each meeting. The City’s Planning Commission permits designated speakers to receive one extra minute from a maximum of five speakers and maintain a limit of eight minutes per speaker per meeting.

Another matter discussed and decided at the Council retreat was the need to eliminate the Rule to take a vote to continue past 11:00 p.m..

Discussion In order to empower citizens to be better heard, elevate the quality of debate and make efficient use of meeting time, the Council voted in favor of the following Council changes to Council rules:

Allow Donation of Time A one-year pilot program similar to Berkeley’s where members of the public may donate two minutes per agenda item to another speaker.

The attached resolution further

proposes that a speaker may only accept one such donation from another per agenda item.

The speaker and the person donating time must turn in their speaker cards

together, notify the City Clerk of the donation, and be present at the podium together at the time of public comment. The speaker must state both of their names and state that he or she is speaking for both. The total time limit for public testimony of six minutes per meeting would remain for all speakers. As part of the pilot program, the City Clerk will track the number of people who donate time to another public speaker and the time devoted to public comment for one calendar year. That information will be provided to Council so that the new public testimony process can be reviewed.

2

Elimination of Rule 24 In 2008, this rule was added which states “No new items, other than Public Input, shall be considered after 11:00 p.m., unless consideration is approved by a two-thirds of the Councilmembers present.” The current Councilmembers agreed that there should not be a set stop time and that this rule can interrupt the discussion during a meeting, therefore it should be eliminated.

Other language clean-ups include: a change to Rule 5(b) the Agenda and all supporting documents shall be delivered to Councilmembers on the Wednesday preceding the Tuesday City Council meeting, and corrections to a few boards and commission name changes.

The proposed rule changes will become effective immediately upon adoption of the attached resolution.

Alternatives

The Council could modify the language that staff is proposing or maintain the rules in their current form.

3

Financial Impacts & Budget Actions There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. Prepared by: Sarah P. Gorman, City Clerk

Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Sarah P. Gorman Director, Records & Election Services

Rod Gould City Manager

Attachments: 1. Resolution Amending the Council Rules of Order and Procedure for the Conduct of City Council Meetings and Repealing Resolution Number 10643 (CCS)

4

City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014

Santa Monica, California

RESOLUTION NO.

(CCS)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING THE RULES OF ORDER AND PROCEDURE FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NUMBER 1054110643(CCS)

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council Rules of Order and Procedure are hereby established as follows: RULES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS

RULE 1.

RULES OF ORDER.

Except as otherwise provided by these rules, the City Charter, the Municipal Code, or applicable provisions of state law, the procedures of the City Council shall be governed by the latest revised edition of Roberts Rules of Order. The City Council rules, or any one thereof, may be suspended by a vote of twothirds (2/3) of the Councilmembers present. RULE 2.

TIME AND PLACE FOR HOLDING REGULAR MEETINGS.

Pursuant to the provisions of Section 611 of the Santa Monica City Charter, the City Council establishes the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month as the days for holding regular meetings of the City Council. The regular meeting shall commence at 5:30 p.m., for the Closed Session. It is the intention of the City Council that all other

1

agenda items shall commence at 6:30 p.m., following the Closed Session. If any such Tuesday falls on any day designated by law by the City Council as a day for public feast, Thanksgiving or holiday, such regular meeting shall be held on the date of the regular meeting next following said Tuesday at the hour heretofore fixed or at such other day as may be fixed. The City Council Chamber in City Hall is established as the place for holding its regular meetings. RULE 3.

QUORUM AND ACTION

In accordance with Section 614 of the Santa Monica City Charter, four Councilmembers shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Except as otherwise provided in the Charter, or other law or these rules action shall be taken by a majority vote of the entire membership of the City Council. However, in the case of a quasi-judicial hearing, if only four Councilmembers are participating, the applicant or appellant shall be entitled to request and receive a continuance of the hearing, until such time as five Councilmembers are participating. Whenever any Councilmember questions the presence of a quorum, the presiding officer shall forthwith direct the City Clerk to call the roll, each Councilmember shall respond when his or her name is called and the Clerk shall announce the result. Such proceedings shall be without debate, but no Councilmember who is speaking may be interrupted by a question as to the presence of a quorum. The Council may also establish standing subcommittees of its members to address designated areas of City business on the Council's behalf and may establish ad hoc committees to formulate reports or recommendations on particular matters. RULE 4.

MEETINGS TO BE PUBLIC - EXCEPTION FOR CLOSED

SESSIONS. As required by the Ralph M. Brown Act (the “Brown Act”), California Government Code Sections 54950, et seq all regular, adjourned regular and special meetings of the City Council shall be public, provided, however, the City Council may meet in a Closed

2

Session from which the public is excluded, for those purposes authorized by the Brown Act. No Councilmember, employee of the City, or any other person present during a Closed Session of the City Council shall disclose to any person the content or substance of any communication which took place during the Closed Session unless the City Council specifically authorizes the disclosure by majority vote or unless the disclosure is required by law. RULE 5.

AGENDA.

The City Clerk shall prepare the Agenda under the direction of the City Manager as follows: (a)

The City Manager shall consult with the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore in

the preparation of the Agenda. (b)

The Agenda and all available supporting documents shall be delivered to

Councilmembers on the Thursday Wednesday preceding the Tuesday City Council meeting to which it pertains or as soon thereafter as possible. (c)

Any Councilmember or the City Manager may direct that any matter within

the City Council’s jurisdiction be placed upon the Agenda. Councilmembers should endeavor to submit agenda items by 3:00 p.m. on Thursday in order to ensure that matters will be agendized for the following Tuesday.

Subject to Brown Act

requirements, items submitted after 3:00 p.m. Thursday will be agendized for the following Tuesday if possible. Councilmember items may only be combined with other items on the agenda by a vote of the Council. A Councilmember who wishes to combine his or her item with another item on the agenda may direct that the following language be included with the agenda item: “This item may be considered with Item

.”

The City Manager may

combine staff items on the agenda in order to ensure that the public’s business is handled efficiently and conveniently.

3

(d)

The City Clerk shall post the Agenda as required by the Brown Act.

Copies of the Agenda shall be posted in the City Clerk’s office and in the lobby of the Police Department. The City Clerk shall maintain on file in his or her office declarations establishing compliance with the posting requirements. (e)

No action shall be taken on any item not appearing on the posted Agenda

unless the item is added to the Agenda in the manner required by the Brown Act. (f)

Matters directed to be placed on the Agenda at the direction of

Councilmembers shall be listed on the Agenda in the order of receipt by the City Clerk. (g)

Written requests to the City Council shall be received and opened by the

City Clerk and referred to the City Manager or his or her designee and either shall be transmitted to the appropriate board, commission or staff member or shall be placed on the Agenda if City Council consideration is deemed appropriate by the Mayor or City Manager.

Written requests being agendized shall be scheduled for Council

consideration at the earliest convenient meeting, taking into consideration the length and content of meeting agendas. Members of the public submitting written requests shall be advised of how their request is being handled. Councilmembers shall receive copies of those written requests which are not agendized. Agendized communications shall be listed on the Agenda in order of receipt. No communication shall be placed on an Agenda if it contains material that: (1)

Is profane.

(2)

Is potentially slanderous or libelous.

(3)

Advocates or opposes the candidacy of any person or party for any

elective office. (4)

Is primarily an advertisement or promotion or has as a substantial

purpose, the advancement of any cause the major benefit of which is private and not public.

4

Members of the public submitting written requests to the Council are encouraged to limit their submissions to one per meeting. RULE 6.

CATEGORIES AND ORDER OF BUSINESS.

The business of the City Council shall be conducted in the order and manner specified below. The order may be changed by a majority vote of those present. The following is the order of business: (a)

Call to Order.

(b)

Salute to the Flag.

(c)

Roll Call.

(d)

Closed Session.

(e)

Inspiration.

(f)

Special Ceremonial Agenda Items.

This item includes proclamations,

commendations, introductions of special guests, special meetings, and presentations and reports by other non-City public entities or legislative bodies. (g)

Consent Calendar. The consent calendar shall consist of the approval of

minutes of previous meetings and those other items such as contracts and routine resolution which do not necessitate a separate public hearing and which are determined in the Agenda preparation process to be relatively non-controversial. Ordinances for second reading and adoption may be placed on the consent calendar if all members of the City Council were present when the vote for first reading and introduction took place and this vote was unanimous. The consent calendar shall be considered as one item regardless of the number of matters appearing on it and may be approved by a single vote. The title to the individual consent items need not be read unless a request to do so is made by any Councilmember. Members of the public shall have no more than one opportunity to address the City Council concerning any and all items on the consent calendar. Members of the public shall be heard prior to City Council consideration of 5

the consent calendar.

Councilmembers may request to have individual matters

removed from the consent calendar so that they may be heard on those matters. All matters remaining on the consent calendar may be approved by a single vote. Any items removed from the consent calendar shall be considered separately in the order of their appearance on the Agenda. Removed items may be heard immediately following the consent calendar or may be heard after the City Council concludes Closed Session or Study Session. (h)

Study Session.

During Study Sessions staff will present information

regarding a complex matter that will be subject to Council deliberation and decisions in the future.

No Council action will be recommended or taken as part of the Study

Session. (i)

Continued Items. This item includes agendized items of a previous City

Council meeting not considered at such meeting. The City Council may vote by a majority of its members to have a carry-over item placed on a subsequent agenda as a continued item. (j)

Administrative Proceedings. This item includes proceedings requiring the

City Council to make a quasi-judicial decision concerning an individual application or appeal. (k)

Ordinances.

(1) Second Reading and Adoption.

No public discussion is permitted on

second readings. (2) Introduction and First Reading. (l)

Staff Administrative Items. This category will include policy matters to be

considered by the City Council or at joint meetings of the City Council, Parking Authority, Housing Authority, the Public Financing Authority and/or Redevelopment Agency.

6

(m)

Public Hearings.

This item consists of public hearings required by

specific provisions of law. (n)

Reports of Boards and Commissions. Boards and commissions who may

present reports under this item include, but are not limited to, all City boards and commissions and the boards of the Santa Monica Pier Restoration Corporation and the Bayside District Corporation. Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. (o)

Resolutions.

A resolution will be considered under this item only if it

substance makes extensive public input advisable, or if it should be considered after another item on the Agenda, otherwise the resolution will be considered on the Consent Calendar. (p)

Written Communication. This item allows the Council to consider issues

raised by written submissions from the public. (q)

Councilmember Discussion Items. Staff items as deemed necessary

(r)

Public Input. This item allows members of the public to address the City

Council on matters that are within the Council’s subject matter jurisdiction. No formal action may be taken on any matter under this item unless the item is specifically agendized. RULE 7.

PREPARATION OF MINUTES.

The City Clerk shall have exclusive responsibility for preparation of the Minutes, and any directions for corrections in the Minutes shall be made only by majority vote of the City Council. RULE 8.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES.

Minutes of a City Council meeting may be approved without reading if the City Clerk has previously furnished each Councilmember with a copy and unless a reading is ordered by a majority vote of the Council.

7

RULE 9.

PRESIDING OFFICER.

The Mayor shall be the Presiding Officer at all meetings of the City Council. In the absence of the Mayor, the Mayor Pro Tempore shall preside. In the absence of both the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore, the City Clerk shall call the City Council to order and a temporary Presiding Officer shall be elected by the Councilmembers present to serve until the arrival of the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tempore or until adjournment. RULE 10.

POWERS AND DUTIES OF PRESIDING OFFICER.

(a) Participation. The Presiding Officer may move, second, and debate from the chair, subject only to such limitations of debate as are imposed upon Councilmembers by these rules, and shall not be deprived of any of the rights or privileges of a Councilmember by reason of his or her acting as the Presiding Officer. (b) Duties. The Presiding Officer shall (1) preserve order at all meetings of the City Council, (2) state (or cause to be stated) each question coming before the City Council (3) announce the decisions of the City Council on all subjects; (4) decide all questions of order subject to the right to appeal rulings on questions of order to the entire City Council and (5) encourage all persons present at the meeting to conform their conduct to the City's Civility Policy. RULE 11.

SWORN TESTIMONY AND SUBPOENA POWER.

Any Councilmember may request that anyone appearing before the City Council on any matter shall be sworn. On receipt of such a request, all proceedings shall be suspended and the City Council will immediately vote on whether the individual should be sworn. A majority vote of the Councilmembers present shall determine whether the speaker shall be placed under oath. All oaths will be administered by the City Clerk. The City Council shall have the power to issue subpoenas as provided in City Charter Section 614.

8

RULE 12. (a)

RULES OF DEBATE.

Getting the Floor.

A Councilmember desiring to speak shall gain

recognition by the Presiding Officer. (b)

Questions to Staff. Every Councilmember desiring to question City staff

shall address his or her questions to the City Manager, the City Attorney, the City Clerk or designated staff. Members of the City staff, after recognition by the Presiding Officer shall hold the floor until completion of their remarks or until recognition is withdrawn by the Presiding Officer. (c)

Interruptions.

A Councilmember who has the floor shall not be

interrupted when speaking unless he or she is called to order by the Presiding Officer, a point of order or a personal privilege is raised by another Councilmember or the speaker chooses to yield to a question by another Councilmember. If a Councilmember is called to order, he or she shall cease speaking until the question of order is determined. (d)

Points of Order.

The Presiding Officer shall determine all points of

order subject to the right of any Councilmember to appeal to the City Council. If an appeal is taken, the question shall be: “Shall the decision of the Presiding Officer be sustained?”

The Presiding Officer's decision may be overruled by a two-thirds vote of

the Councilmembers then present. (e)

Point of Personal Privilege.

The

right

of

a

Councilmember

to

address the City Council on a question of personal privilege shall be limited to cases in which the Councilmember’s integrity, character, or motives are questioned or where the safety or welfare of the City Council is concerned. (f)

Privilege of Final Comment.

The

Councilmember

moving

the

introduction or adoption of an ordinance, resolution, or motion, shall have the privilege of speaking last on the matter after all other Councilmembers have been given an opportunity to speak.

9

(g)

Motion to Reconsider Legislative Actions.

A motion to reconsider any

legislative action taken by the City Council may be made only by one of the Councilmembers on the prevailing side and may be seconded by any Councilmember. Such motion may be made at any time and shall be debatable. A motion by a nonprevailing Councilmember or a request by a member of the public for reconsideration may be made only if one year has passed since the action was taken. (h)

Calling for the Question.

A question may be called by majority vote of

those present. However, neither the moving party nor the party seconding any motion may call for the question, each Councilmember shall be afforded one opportunity to speak on each item before the question is called, and a question may not be called to interrupt or cut off a particular speaker. (i)

Limitation of Debate.

Councilmembers shall limit their remarks to the

subject under debate. No Councilmember shall be allowed to speak more than once upon any particular subject until every other Councilmember desiring to do so has spoken. Prior to beginning deliberation, the Council may, by a two-thirds vote of those present, limit the amount of time that each Councilmember may spend stating his or her views on a particular agenda item. RULE 13.

PROTEST AGAINST CITY COUNCIL ACTION.

Any Councilmember shall have the right to have the reasons for his or her opposition to any action of the City Council entered in the Minutes. Such opposition shall be made in the following manner:

“I would like the Minutes to reflect that I

opposed this action for the following reasons…” RULE 14. (a)

PUBLIC TESTIMONY.

Pursuant to the Brown Act, public testimony is permitted on all agenda

items, except ordinances for second reading, and the public shall have an opportunity to comment on any matter which is not on the Agenda but is within the Council’s jurisdiction. However, members of the public do not have the right to give testimony outside the scope of or unrelated to the agenda item under consideration. Additionally, 10

members of the public should strive to avoid unduly reiterating their own or others’ testimony. (b)

Registration.

Any member of the public wishing to address the City

Council regarding any item on the Agenda for public discussion shall register with the City Clerk prior to the start of the meeting, if possible, but no later than prior to the public hearing on that item.

Any request received after the start of the hearing shall be

considered late and may only be heard with Council approval. (c)

Manner of Addressing the City Council. After being recognized by the

Presiding Officer, each member of the public addressing the City Council shall go to the podium, state his or her name and whom he or she is representing, if he or she represents an organization or other person. Each member of the public is encouraged, but not required, to also state his or her address, neighborhood, or city of residence. All remarks shall be addressed to the City Council as a whole and not to any individual member thereof. After a public hearing has been closed, no member of the public shall address the City Council on the matter under consideration without first securing Council approval. (d)

Time Limits. Except on Written Communication, members of the public

shall limit their remarks to two minutes per agenda item unless the City Council grants additional time by majority vote. For purposes of these Rules, the consent calendar shall be considered one item. Persons speaking on another’s written communication and persons submitting late chits, who receive permission to speak shall be limited to one minute. On Written Communication, those speaking on another’s item may speak only if the person raising the matter appears and testifies. If the person who raises the item does not appear and testify, the matter shall be received and filed and persons wishing to speak on the matter may give their testimony during Public Input. A member of the public wishing to speak on more than one item shall limit his or her remarks to a total of six minutes per meeting unless the Council grants additional time by majority vote. A member of the public may allocate time between items in one minute increments up to two minutes. Testimony given as an applicant or appellant does not count toward

11

the six minute maximum. A Board or Commission member reporting to the City Council on behalf of a Board or Commission shall not be subject to these rules on time limits; however, Council may limit the duration of such reports. (e)

Special Time Limits for Applicants and Appellants.

Applicants and

appellants on administrative items shall limit their remarks to ten minutes and may reserve some of their time for use for rebuttal at the conclusion of the public hearing. The appellant shall have the opportunity to address the City Council first and last. (f)

Special Assistance for Those Who Cannot Wait to Speak. Members of

the public, including those with special needs, who cannot wait to speak on an agenda item may request assistance from the City Clerk, and a member of the Clerk's office will provide assistance in preparing a written statement of testimony for distribution to the Council. (g)

Donating Time to Another Speaker. A member of the public may donate

two minutes per agenda item to another speaker, and a speaker may accept one such donation from another per agenda item. The speaker and the person donating time shall turn in their chits together, notify the clerk of the donation, and go to the podium together.

The speaker shall state both of their names and state that he or she is

speaking for both. Donated time shall not increase an individual speaker’s total time limit of six minutes per meeting. RULE 15.

RULES OF CONDUCT AND SAFETY.

When the City Council is in session, all persons present must preserve safety and order and should strive to conform their conduct to the City's Civility Policy. Members of the public should sit in the audience seating area, unless addressing the Council or entering or leaving the Council Chambers, should not block the aisles with personal belongings and should not bring audible equipment into the Council Chambers including cellular telephones or pagers. Members of the public may not, except when testifying on or participating in an agenda item, enter the well area, which is the open

12

area directly in front of the dais and extending outward from it to a line running between the points on the Clerk's desk and the podium nearest to the audience. Any person who disrupts the meeting shall be called to order by the Presiding Officer. Disruption shall include but not be limited to, blocking the audience or camera view of the proceedings. If such conduct continues, the Presiding Officer may request the Sergeant at Arms to remove the person from Council chambers. The Chief of Police or such member or members of the Police Department as he or she may designate, shall be Sergeant At Arms of the City Council and shall carry out all orders given by the Presiding Officer through the City Manager for the purpose of maintaining order at City Council meetings. Any Councilmember may move to require the Presiding Officer to enforce the rules, and the affirmative vote of a majority of the City Council shall require him or her to do so. RULE 16.

SEATING ORDER.

After each municipal election, the City Clerk shall determine City Council member seating order by drawing lots. RULE 17.

ENTITLEMENT TO VOTE AND FAILURE TO VOTE.

Every Councilmember is entitled to vote unless disqualified by reason of a conflict of interest. A Councilmember who abstains from voting consents to the decision made by the voting Councilmembers. RULE 18.

VOTING PROCEDURE.

Any vote of the City Council, including a roll call vote, may be registered by the members answering “Yes” for an affirmative vote or “No” for a negative vote upon his or her name being called by the City Clerk. Voting order shall be based on seating order with each roll call vote beginning at alternating ends of the dais and the Mayor voting last.

13

RULE 19.

DISQUALIFICATION FOR CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

Any Councilmember who is disqualified from voting on a particular matter by reason of a conflict of interest shall publicly state or have the Presiding Officer state the nature of such disqualification and shall leave the dais prior to Council consideration of the matter. A Councilmember stating such disqualification shall not be counted as part of a quorum and shall be considered absent for the purpose of determining the outcome of any vote on such matter. RULE 20.

TIE VOTE.

Tie votes shall be lost motions. RULE 21.

CHANGING VOTE.

The vote of a Councilmember may be changed only if he or she makes a timely request to do so immediately following the announcement of the vote by the City Clerk or the Presiding Officer and prior to the time that the next item in the order of business is taken up. RULE 22.

PROCEDURE ON AGENDA ITEMS REQUIRING A MOTION.

The following procedure shall be followed in connection with any Agenda item requiring a motion: (a)

City Clerk reads the title.

(b)

Presiding Officer calls for a staff report.

(c)

Councilmembers question City staff.

(d)

Council conducts Public hearing.

(e)

Council deliberates.

14

(f)

A Councilmember makes a motion, another Councilmember seconds the

motion, and the Council debates it, with the maker of the motion having the opportunity to speak last. (g)

The Presiding Officer or City Clerk restates the motion.

(h)

The Council votes on the motion.

(i)

The Presiding Officer or City Clerk announces result.

RULE 23.

PRESENCE OF CITY STAFF AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS.

The City Manager, City Clerk, and City Attorney, or, in their absence, their authorized representatives, shall attend and be present during all City Council meetings and give necessary service and advice. RULE 24.

ADJOURMENT.

No new items, other than Public Input, shall be considered after 11:00p.m., unless consideration is approved by a two-thirds of the Councilmembers present. RULE 254.

RECORD OF MEETINGS.

All public meetings of the City Council shall be recorded by tape recorder. The recording shall be made by the City Clerk and retained in accordance with the City’s record retention schedule.

The use of other recording or television equipment is

permitted so long as it is not disruptive of the meeting. RULE 265.

INTERPRETATION AND MODIFICATION OF THESE RULES.

These rules shall be interpreted liberally in order to provide for the optimum in the free interchange of information and public debate without an unnecessary waste of time or duplication of effort. These rules may be amended by resolution.

15

RULE 276.

FAILURE TO OBSERVE RULES OF ORDER.

These rules of order and procedures govern the conduct of City Council meetings. These rules are intended to expedite the transaction of the business of the City Council in an orderly fashion and are deemed to be procedural only. Failure to strictly observe these rules shall not affect the jurisdiction of the City Council or invalidate any action taken at a meeting that otherwise conforms to law. SECTION 2. Resolution Number 1054110643(CCS) and all other resolutions adopting, amending, or relating to City Council Rules of Order, are hereby repealed in their entirety. SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

________________________________ Marsha Moutrie City Attorney

16

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 3-J To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

David Martin, Director of Planning and Community Development

Subject:

Construction Contract for the Real-Time Beach Parking Project

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with Select Electric, Inc., a California-based company, in an amount not to exceed $1,503,754 (including a 10% contingency) for the construction of the Real-Time Beach Parking Project; 2. Authorize the Director of Public Works to issue any necessary change orders to complete additional work within contract authority. 3. Appropriate the budget increases and authorize the budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts and Budget Actions section of this report. Executive Summary This project would construct real time parking and travel information signs for motorists traveling to Santa Monica beach parking lots adjacent to the Pier, on Ocean Avenue and Palisades Beach Road. Signs placed near the Santa Monica Freeway off-ramps would also display parking information for garages in the Downtown area. All signs would display clear and concise parking information at the entrance to each parking lot and at key gateways to the city. When central parking lots fill up, the signs would help to distribute traffic, increase the efficiency of existing parking resources, and reduce traffic congestion. The City received permit approval from the California Department of Transportation in January 2013 and from the California Coastal Commission in June 2013. Select Electric, Inc. is recommended for the construction of the project at a cost not to exceed $1,503,754.

1

Background The City received a $533,000 grant from the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) to install signs that would display real-time parking information available to motorists destined for Santa Monica beach parking lots. The grant specifies that the $533,000 comes from the federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program and an additional $286,000 must be provided through City local match funds. The grant funds are from the Federal CMAQ program. Additionally, $346,500 in State of California Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) funds were secured for the project.

Additional City federal Surface Transportation

Program Local (STPL) funds were submitted to Metro for authorization and approved in December 2013.

In January 2013, the City received the authorization to proceed with construction activities from Caltrans. In June 2013, the City received a construction permit approval from the California Coastal Commission. Previous Council Actions On November 27, 2007 Council authorized acceptance of a Real-Time Beach Parking grant through the 2007 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Call for Projects

On December 14, 2010 Council authorized a contract with Kimley-Horn for an amount not to exceed $110,000 to provide project design services for the preparation of plans, specifications and estimates for the installation of the Real-Time Beach Parking project.

On August 9, 2011 a contract amendment was executed with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., (Contract #9303) for an amount not to exceed $25,000, for a total of amount of $135,000 to prepare of construction documents for 11 real time parking and travel information signs for motorists traveling to Santa Monica beach parking lots adjacent to the Pier, on Ocean Avenue and Palisades Beach Road.

2

On July 9, 2013 Council reviewed and approved the final design of the Real-Time Beach Parking Project.

This included a review and approval of the signs and the

specific installation locations. The staff report contains images of the approved sign designs and a list of the locations where the signs would be installed.

On November 26, 2013 Council rejected all bids received on October 30, 2013 and directed staff to reissue a bid in order to obtain the best bidder.

Discussion The project is designed to provide real-time parking and travel information for motorists traveling to Santa Monica beach parking lots. Signs placed near the Santa Monica Freeway off-ramps would also display parking information for garages in the Downtown area. The signs would be connected with the City’s Traffic Management Center so information can be managed as part of the larger circulation network. The Real-Time Beach Parking project is the first step towards implementing a comprehensive real-time congestion management system in the Downtown that will also include a web-based and mobile ”app” component funded by a more recent Metro grant. These tools are key to achieving congestion management goals (T15) identified in the City’s Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) where real-time signage is also called out as a specific “Action”.

This project is eligible to utilize the City’s available Surface Transportation Program Local (STPL) funds since the project is already using federal funds, and it is ready for construction. To ensure City STPL funds do not lapse, changes to the project’s funding schedule were submitted to Metro and approved in December 2013.

3

Contractor Selection On November 27 and 30, 2013, the City published a Notice Inviting Bids in the Santa Monica Daily Press. system.

The bid documents were posted on the City’s online bidding

More than 30 contractors requested the bid documents. The City Clerk’s

Office received two formal bids that were publicly opened by the Deputy City Clerk on December 17, 2013. The bid results are as follows: Bidder

Bid Amount

Select Electric, Inc.

$1,367,049

KDC, Inc., dba Dynalectric

$1,435,630

City Estimate

$1,400,000

All bids were evaluated on competitive pricing, understanding of the project’s scope, direct experience on similar projects, approach to the work, technical competence, compliance with federal requirements, and the ability to meet the required time frames. Other criteria considered for contractor selection included consistent accuracy in bidding, volume of projects that involve traffic signal and fiber optic improvements, and positive reference responses. Staff recommends Select Electric, Inc. based on price, quality of services offered, and experience with similar projects. Select Electric, Inc.’s price is within the City’s estimate. Select Electric, Inc.’s experience on similar projects is extensive and includes prior projects with the City of Santa Monica involving the installation of traffic signals and fiber optics.

Staff contacted the reference agencies and all respondents reported that Select Electric, Inc.’s work was completed in a timely and cost-efficient manner while maintaining consistent quality. The Center for Contract Compliance verified that Select Electric, Inc. is in good standing and capable of handling labor compliance issues.

The State

Contractors' License Board confirmed that Select Electric, Inc.’s license is current, active, and in good standing. 4

Financial Impacts & Budget Actions The contract to be awarded to Select Electric, Inc. is for an amount not to exceed $1,503,754. Funds in the amount of $1,503,754 are available in the FY 2013-14 Capital Improvement Program budget in the following accounts: C207005.589000 – Metro Grant

$533,000

C207005.589100 – State ITS Grant

$346,500

C207005.589200 – STPL Fund

$498,005

C017005.589000 – Local Match

$126,249

TOTAL

$1,503,754

Award of the contract requires the following FY 2013-14 budget changes: 1. Establish revenue budget at account 20416.40839Y in the amount of $498,005. 2. Appropriate the following expenditures to reflect receipt of the STPL grant: $498,005 at account C207005.589200. Prepared by: Andrew Maximous, P.E., T.E., Transportation Engineer

Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

David Martin, Director Planning and Community Development

Rod Gould City Manager

5

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 3-K To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Martin Pastucha, Director of Public Works

Subject:

Professional Services Agreement Modification for Pico Branch Library Furniture Procurement

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to Professional Services Agreement No. 9783 (CCS) in the amount of $41,345 (includes a 10% contingency) with Interior Office Solutions, a California-based company, to provide additional furniture procurement services to complete the Pico Branch Library Project. This would result in an amended agreement total not to exceed $197,542.

Executive Summary On August 13, 2013, Council approved a professional services agreement with Interior Office Solutions to provide furniture procurement services for the Pico Branch Library. Additional procurement services in the amount of $41,345 are necessary due to modifications to the selected furniture to improve integration with the library design and the addition of book display cases. The project is expected to be completed in early 2014. Background On May 12, 2009, Council approved construction of a new branch library at Virginia Avenue Park. Following Council action, staff solicited firms to provide design services for the new Pico Branch Library. On February 23, 2010, Council awarded a design contract to Koning Eizenberg Architects. On May 22, 2012, Council approved a construction contract with R.C. Construction Services, Inc. for the Pico Branch Library Project. Construction began in August 2012 and is anticipated to be complete in early 2014.

1

On August 13, 2013, Council approved a professional services agreement with Interior Office Solutions for $156,197 for the purchase, procurement, assessment, planning, inventory analysis, warehousing, delivery and installation of furniture for the Pico Branch Library.

Discussion During a review of the library furniture specifications, staff determined that modifications to the original furniture selection were necessary in order to improve integration with the current design, material and color palette of the library. The furniture manufacturer utilized by Interior Office Solutions was changed to match other furniture lines in the library. Four highly complicated book displays consistent with current library practice were determined to be necessary for library operations and have been added to the project. This modification would allow the furniture selection to be finalized and integrated into the furniture purchase. The project is estimated to be completed by early 2014. Financial Impacts & Budget Actions The agreement modification to be awarded to Interior Office Solutions is $41,345 for an amended agreement total not to exceed $197,542. Funds are available in the FY 201314 Capital Improvement Program budget in account C014032.589000, Pico Branch Library. Prepared by: Tom Afschar, Architect Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Martin Pastucha Director of Public Works

Rod Gould City Manager

2

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 3-L To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Martin Pastucha, Director of Public Works

Subject:

Purchase Order Increase and Bid Award for Passenger and Light Duty Vehicle Tires

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Approve a change order to Purchase Order No. 22854 in the amount of $40,000 with Byron Woodley Tire Company, Inc., a California-based company, to cover outstanding invoices for the purchase and delivery of passenger and light duty vehicle tires and provision of related services for the first half of FY 2013-14. This would result in a revised purchase order total not to exceed $45,428. 2. Award Bid No. 4119 for the purchase and delivery of passenger and light duty vehicle tires and provision of related services to Byron Woodley Tire Company, Inc., a California-based company, in an amount not to exceed $40,000 for the remainder of FY 2013-14, with two one-year options for $85,000 per year to renew at the same price, terms, and conditions, for a total award amount not to exceed $210,000 over a three-year period, with future funding contingent on Council budget approval. Executive Summary The City purchases tires for light-duty and passenger vehicles as part of the City’s tire replacement program. Interim Purchase Order No. 22854 was issued to Byron Woodley Tire Company, Inc. in FY 2013-14 until a formal bid could be conducted. Staff recommends Council approve a change order to Purchase Order No. 22854 for $40,000 to cover outstanding invoices for the first half of FY 2013-14. In September 2013, the City solicited bids for the purchase and delivery of passenger and light duty vehicle tires. No bids were received. In October 2013, the City again solicited bids for the purchase and delivery of passenger and light duty vehicle tires and provision of related services. Two bids were received. Staff recommends award of Bid No. 4119 bid to Byron Woodley Tire Company, Inc. in the amount of $40,000 for the remainder of FY 2013-14, with two one-year renewal options for subsequent years. The total amount of the interim purchase order and bid award for FY2013-14 would be $85,428.

1

Discussion The City purchases tires for light duty and passenger vehicles as part of its tire replacement program. Most of the passenger vehicles tires purchased are to replace tires on police pursuit vehicles. Light duty vehicles include pickup trucks and vans.

On February 28, 2012, Council awarded Bid No. 3073 for the purchase, delivery, and repair of light duty and passenger vehicle tires to Byron Woodley Tire Company, Inc. for the remainder of FY 2011-12 and FY 2012-13.

At the beginning of FY 2013-14, interim Purchase Order No. 22854 was issued to Byron Woodley Tire Company, Inc. in the amount of $5,428 while staff conducted a formal bid. The interim purchase order amount was exceeded by $40,000 during the formal bid period due in part to rebidding in October, and due to additional tires purchased for 41 fire vehicles now maintained by Fleet Management as of July 1, 2013.

Vendor Selection In September and October 2013, the City published Notices Inviting Bids to furnish and deliver tires for passenger and light duty vehicles and provide related services as required by Fleet Management. The bid was posted on the City’s on-line bidding site, and notices were advertised in the Santa Monica Daily Press in accordance with City Charter and Municipal Code provisions. No bids were received in September. Two bids were received and publicly opened on October 22, 2013, per Attachment A. Bids were evaluated on price, product availability, selection, quality of material, and compliance with City specifications. Byron Woodley Tire Company, Inc. was the lowest bidder, based upon historical and projected use of various tire sizes and the prices for each tire size as listed in Attachment A; provided all of the requested tire types and services such as flat repairs; and has a history of satisfactory performance with the City. Based on these criteria, Byron Woodley Tire Company, Inc. is recommended as the best bidder for the purchase and delivery of passenger and light duty vehicle tires and provision of related services.

2

Financial Impacts & Budget Actions The change order to be awarded to Byron Woodley Tire Company, Inc. is $40,000 for purchases for the first half of FY 2013-14, for an amended purchase order total not to exceed $45,428. The purchase order to be awarded to Byron Woodley Tire Company, Inc. is $40,000 for purchases for the second half of FY 2013-14. Funds in the amount of $80,000 are available in the FY 2013-14 budget in division 459; the purchase orders will be charged to account 54459.522930. Budget authority for subsequent years will be requested in each budget for Council approval. Future funding is contingent upon Council approval and budget adoption. Prepared by: Thomas Bullers, Administrative Analyst Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Martin Pastucha Director of Public Works

Rod Gould City Manager

Attachment: A – Bid Summary

3

Bid No. 4119 Bid Description: Furnish and deliver tires for passanger and light duty vehicles and provide related services as required by Fleet Management.  Bid Closing Date: October 22, 2013 ASAP TIRE Santa Fe Springs, CA Item Response Tread Life Remaining % of Credit Offered to the City of Santa Monica 100%‐80% 79%‐60% 59%‐40% 39%‐20% 19%‐0% Pricing Response Item Part Number

1

Unit Price for Listed Tire Brand

Annual Usage

Unit Price for Listed Tire Brand

Byron Woodley Tire Co Santa Monica, CA Response % of Credit Offered to the City of Santa Monica 100% 100% 100% 40% 19% Response * State of California Bid Prices Annual Usage

Unit Price

Extended 

Recap Pricing

Other Goodyear  Wrangler AT S  6ply* Goodyear  Wrangler RT S  10ply* Goodyear  Wrangler HT  10ply* Goodyear  Wrangler AT  IS 8ply* Goodyear  Wrangler RT  S* Goodyear  Ultra Grip* Goodyear  Wrangler RT S  10ply*

2

LT275/65R18

20

$129.97

$2,599.40

Capitol H/T

$230.99

$4,619.80

Michelin LTX  M/52

20

$180.63

$3,612.60

3

LT215/85R16

10

$94.96

$949.60

Capitol A/T

$192.99

$1,929.90

Michelin LTX  M/52

10

$120.79

$1,207.90

4

LT225/75R16

20

$92.55

$1,851.00

Capitol A/T

$195.44

$3,908.80

Michelin LTX  M/52 GRNX

20

$130.65

$2,613.00

5

LT235/75R15

20

$90.35

$1,807.00

Capitol A/T

$150.32

$3,006.40

Michelin A/T 2  LTX

20

$94.33

$1,886.60

6

LT245/75R16

100

$103.76

$10,376.00

Capitol A/T

$198.03

$19,803.00

Michelin LTX  M/S2

100

$99.02

$9,902.00

7

P155/80R13

50

$53.96

$2,698.00

Uniroyal AWP  II T/PAW

$53.96

$2,698.00

Uniroyal AWP II  T/PAW

50

$42.18

$2,109.00

8

LT235/85R16

10

$105.43

$1,054.30

Capitol A/T

$187.99

$1,879.90

Michelin LTX  M/S2 GRNX

10

$122.76

$1,227.60

10

$153.99

$1,539.90

$153.99

$1,539.90

10

$151.00

$1,510.00

Goodyear*

10

$35.33

$353.30

$76.21

$762.10

10

$59.30

$593.00

Goodyear*

$109.87

$1,098.70

10

$58.62

$586.20

Goodyear*

$149.87

$7,493.50

50

$97.73

$4,886.50

Goodyear*

$231.39

$46,278.00

200

$116.76

$23,352.00

Goodyear*

10

P195/80R16‐ Bridgestone for  Electric Toyota Rav‐4 P175/70R13

11

P215/70R15

10

$56.99

$569.90

12

P225/60R16RSA

50

$149.87

$7,493.50

13

P235/55R17RSA

200

$231.39

9

$46,278.00

Capitol Sport Goodyear  Integrity Goodyear  Eagle RSA P Goodyear  Eagle RSA P

$77,569.90 Item 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

24

25

Labor and Services Valve Stems Disposal Dismount and Mount Wheel Balance Flat Repair Road Call‐ Hourly Rate: Normal  Business Hours (Monday‐ Friday) Road Call‐ Hourly Rate: After  Hours (Monday‐Friday) Road Call‐ Hourly Rate:  Saturdays Road Call‐ Hourly Rate:  Sundays/Holidays Please indicate the response  time for emergency service  requests: Please indicate if 24/7  emergency service availability  is offered: Please describe any additional  fees and charges not indicated  in the Bid Section:

Supplemental Questions Do you come onto  City of  Santa Monica property to  26 perform your service? Do you deliver parts and/or  products in your own company  27 vehicle? If applicable, will you be able to  comply with the business  28 license and insurance  requirements? Please indicate the warranty  29 offered for new tires.  Description Item Payment Terms 30 31

Renewal

Period 2 Period 3

$95,018.00 Comments No Charge Per Tire Per Wheel/Tire Per Wheel

Unit Price $2.50 $20.00 $5.00

$53,486.40 Unit Price $3.00 $2.00 $10.00 $5.00 $25.00

Comments

Repair and Balance

1 Hour 

No

No

Delivery Fee $20 Response

Response Yes

Yes

Can comply

Response Net 30

Response 90 Same price, terms, and condition offered. State of California Bid Same price, terms, and condition offered. State of California Bid

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 3-M To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Martin Pastucha, Director of Public Works

Subject:

Bid Award for Water Feature Maintenance and Repairs

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council award Bid #F4114 to Advanced Aquatic Technology, Inc., a California-based company, in an amount not to exceed $80,000 for the remainder of FY 2013-14 to provide water feature maintenance services and repairs beyond the warranty at Tongva Park and Ken Genser Square, with two additional oneyear renewal options in the amount of $156,900 for the second year and a 3% increase for the third year, for a total amount not to exceed $398,507 over a three-year period, with funding contingent upon Council budget approval. Executive Summary The City opened Tongva Park and Ken Genser Square in September 2013. Both parks have water features that require routine maintenance. In October 2013, the City solicited bids for the maintenance of these water features and repairs beyond the warranty. After reviewing the two bids received, staff recommends Advanced Aquatic Technology, Inc. as the best bidder for a total not to exceed amount of $398,507. Discussion The Tongva Park and Ken Genser Square water features are elements of the parks’ approved final design, and routine maintenance is required for optimal performance and to preserve design aesthetics. The Tongva Park water feature is operating and has a one-year warranty effective September 2013. The Ken Genser Square water feature maintenance and one-year warranty would begin once the water feature is confirmed fully operational. The City would be responsible to pay for repairs, which the contractor would perform, due to vandalism or damages outside the scope of the warranties. Vendor Selection In October 2013, the City published Notices Inviting Bids to provide water feature maintenance services to Tongva Park and Ken Genser Square in accordance with City specifications. The bid was posted on the City’s online bidding site and notices were 1

advertised in the Santa Monica Daily Press in accordance with the City Charter and Municipal Code provisions. A total of 162 vendors were notified and 14 vendors downloaded the bid. Two bids were received and publicly opened on October 25, 2013 per Attachment A.

Bids were evaluated on price, completeness of bid response, past experience, and the ability to provide maintenance services. Advanced Aquatic Technology, Inc. was the lowest bidder, has the required licenses, received positive references, and currently provides exemplary maintenance of the Douglas Park pond. Based on these criteria, Advance Aquatic Technology, Inc. is recommended as the best bidder to provide maintenance and repairs beyond the warranty to the Tongva Park and Ken Genser Square water features. Financial Impacts & Budget Actions The purchase order to be awarded to Advanced Aquatic Technology, Inc. is for an amount not to exceed $398,507. Funds are available in the FY 2013-14 budget in division 4982 and division 4523. The purchase order will be charged to these accounts: 014982.544010

$ 40,000

014523.533227

$ 40,000

TOTAL

$ 80,000

Budget authority for subsequent budget years will be requested in each budget for Council approval. Future funding is contingent upon Council approval and budget adoption. Prepared by: Carlos Collard, Senior Administrative Analyst Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Martin Pastucha Director of Public Works

Rod Gould City Manager

Attachment: A – Bid Summary 2

Attachment A ‐ Bid Summary Bid No. 4114 Bid Description:  Provide Bi‐Weekly maintenance services and repairs and annual water feature maintenance at Tongva Park and Ken Genser Town  Square as required by Public Landscape Division.  Bid Closing Date:  October 21, 2013

Pricing Description

Advanced Aquatic Technology Inc. 

Water Fountain Guy

Orange, California Response Monthly Price Extended Price

Palos Verdes, California  Response Monthly Price Extended Price

Bi‐Weekly water feature maintenance (twice  per week) at Tongva Park. Price should include  bi‐weekly maintenance labor fees, materials,  chemicals, equipment, supervision, disposal  fees, delivery charges and sales tax.

$1,450/ per month

$17,400/ per year

$3,334/ per month

$40,014/ per year

Bi‐Weekly water feature maintenance (twice  per week) at Ken Genser Town Square. Price  should include bi‐weekly maintenance labor  fees, materials, chemicals, equipment,  supervision, disposal fees, delivery charges and  sales tax.  

$1,045/ per month

$12,540/ per year

$1,276.17/ per month

$15,314/ per year

Annual water feature maintenance (once per  year) at Tongva Park.

$14,450/ per year

$3,450/ per year

Annual water feature maintenance (once per  year) at Ken Genser Town Square

$5,800/ per year

$1,660/ per year

$50,190.00

$60,438.00

Bid Option 1A: Should the City decide to require  water feature maintenance three times per  week at Tongva Park, please indicate the  monthly price. Price should include weekly  maintenance labor fees, materials, chemicals,  equipment, supervision, disposal fees, delivery  charges and sales tax.

$1,955/ per month  $23,460/ per year

$4,446/ per month $53,352/ per year

Bid Option 1B: Should the City decide to require  water feature maintenance three times per  week at Ken Genser Town, please indicate the  monthly price. Price should include weekly  maintenance labor fees, materials, chemicals,  equipment, supervision, disposal fees, delivery  charges and sales tax.

$1,380/ per month $16,560/ per year

$1667.25/ per month $20,007/ per year

Bid Option 2: Should the City decide to require  preventative maintenance services to be  performed (in addition to bi‐weekly water  feature maintenance), please indicate the  regular hourly rate as well as overtime rate.

Supervisor $60 Laborer $40/ labor rate per hour Supervisor $80  Laborer $55/

$95/ labor rate per hour $142.50/ labor overtime rate per hour

Repair parts and materials‐ percentage discount  off manufacture's price list. 

Billed at a cost + 10%

10.00%

Licenses

Response

Response

B‐General/ Contractor

1. C53 #983052 Contractors Board. 2. T5563 Los Angeles  Department of Health Services. 3. EIT 106006 California Board of  Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors.

Do your employees have a current Los Angeles  County Department of Health Services License?

No

Yes # T5563

Experience

Response

Response

In addition to providing references as requested  above, please describe experience including  maintaining and servicing similar types or  fountains/water features for similar customers.

Advanced Aquatic Technology Inc. has been performing  maintenance on similar projects since 1989 (24 years)

"Water Fountain Guy" works ONLY on Fountain/Water features.  We are NOT a company that tries to do all sorts of pools and  fountains. As a result of specializing in Fountain/water features  for the commercial and public industry, we have worked on a  variety of fountain/water features. All fountains/water features  are unique and exposure to many types is necessary to work  efficiently on a fountain/ water feature. We are NOT part of a  larger diversified company that has a group working on  fountain/water features. We are a company dedicated to working  on only one thing‐ fountains/water features.

Description

Response

Response

Other: (If applicable, please explain) Annual Total:

Please provide a list of current licenses that  your company/employees have. 

Payment Terms Renewal

Net 30

Net 45

Period 2

Same price, terms, and conditions offered

Same price, terms, and conditions offered (maximum 1 one‐year  renewal period form date of expiration. 

Period 3

3% Increase of previous year's price for all areas or options.        

1.5% Increase of previous year's price for all areas or options.

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 3-N To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Gigi Decavalles-Hughes, Director of Finance

Subject:

Auditing Services for the City of Santa Monica

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a second modification to Professional Services Agreement #9373 in the amount of $40,000 with Macias Gini & O’Connell, a California-based company, to provide financial auditing services. This will result in a five-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $793,281, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

Executive Summary The City of Santa Monica engages an independent auditing firm to audit its financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and to perform agreed-upon procedures in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. In 2011, the firm of Macias, Gini and O’Connell was selected through a competitive process to provide these services for up to a five-year term. Since that time, the dissolution of Redevelopment and implementation of new Governmental Accounting Standards Board standards has necessitated additional work. Staff recommends modifying the agreement to include that work. This would result in a new five-year not to exceed amount of $793,281.

Background The City engages an independent auditing firm to perform an examination of the City’s basic financial statements as well as an examination of the City’s Redevelopment Agency financial statements, the City’s Big Blue Bus Fund financial statements, the City’s Air Quality Improvement Program, and the City’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Single Audit). The Auditor also performs agreed-upon procedures to test and report on the City’s GANN appropriation limit calculation. At its May 10, 2011 1

meeting, Council awarded a contract with Macias Gini & O’Connell in a five-year amount of $675,000 to perform these services.

On November 13, 2012, Council authorized a modification to the agreement in the amount of $78,281 to perform due diligence reviews for the Successor Agency.

Discussion The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) has implemented changes that affect the City’s auditing process and therefore require additional work by Macias Gini & O’Connell: 1. GASB 65 – Establishes accounting standards that reclassify certain items previously classified as assets and liabilities. This will require additional review to ensure that the City is compliant with the new standards. 2. GASB 68 – Modifies that reporting of pension obligations.

In addition to ensuring compliance with the new GASB requirements, Macias Gini & O’Connell was requested to re-test the National Transit Database Agreed Upon Procedures for the BBB as a result of discrepancies within the Transit Master System utilized by the Big Blue Bus.

This additional work is necessary to ensure that City remains in compliance with GASB standards and is necessary to complete the annual audit process. The additional work outlined above would increase the five-year agreement by an amount not to exceed $40,000.

2

Financial Impacts & Budget Actions The agreement modification to be awarded to Macias Gini & O’Connell is $40,000, for an amended agreement total not to exceed $793,281. Funds are available in the FY 2013-14 budget in division 01222; the contract will be charged to account 01222.577040.

Prepared by: Donald Patterson, Assistant Director - Finance Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Gigi Decavalles-Hughes Director of Finance

Rod Gould City Manager

3

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 3-P To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Gigi Decavalles-Hughes, Director of Finance

Subject:

Purchase New Parking Access and Revenue Control System

Recommended Action Staff recommends that City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with DataPark USA Inc., a Delaware-based company, in an amount not to exceed $5,000,000 for the purchase, installation, and up to ten years of maintenance of the Parking Access and Revenue Control System with License Plate Recognition (LPR) for the downtown parking structures, Main Library parking structure, Civic Center parking facilities, Ken Edwards Center, and Pier Deck parking lot, with future year maintenance funding contingent on Council approval. Executive Summary The Parking Access and Revenue Control System (PARCS) replacement project is one of the approved Capital Improvement Projects for fiscal year 2013/14. As the result of a competitive procurement process, DataPark USA Inc. is recommended as the best bidder to provide the new PARCS system. The contract would include purchase and installation of new parking equipment for 14 parking facilities for an amount not to exceed $3,400,000, and provide ongoing maintenance service for seven years with an option to extend for three additional years for a total ten-year amount not to exceed $5,000,000. An agreement to cover up to 10 years of maintenance is recommended as the average life expectancy of parking equipment is seven to ten years. Background The City first installed the current Skidata PARCS equipment 13 years ago in seven downtown parking structures. Since then, five additional facilities have been added, as well as 37 pay–on-foot machines to fully automate the parking system.

This has

provided for the full automation of 13 facilities in Downtown and the Civic Center. The average lifespan of parking equipment is seven to ten years.

1

The centralized parking system is operated by one system control panel located in Downtown Parking Structure 5 and processes approximately nine million transactions annually. The use of the centralized parking system provides Parking Operations staff the ability to consolidate reporting and revenue control functions and implement related operations. The current PARCS in the City’s gated parking facilities has outlived its lifespan and experiences frequent operating difficulties. It needs replacement and infrastructure upgrades. Most recently, the SkiData system was offline for several hours on Saturday, December 28 and Monday, December 31 which resulted in significantly increased staffing cost, lost revenue and a negative customer experience through delays and increased traffic.

In October 2012, staff received a letter from Sentry Control, the City’s current PARCS service provider, outlining a series of serious deficiencies in the City’s PARCS that included a series of recommended changes and upgrades to the network, replacing servers, and other hardware and software changes needed to stabilize the system and ensure credit card security standards are met (Attachment A).

On November 2, 2012, the City received a notice of the end of support for a significant portion of the City’s current system, including the inability to have availability of parts for certain components (Attachment B). The City is also operating on Version 19 of the software and cannot upgrade to the current Version 23 because the existing equipment is not compatible with the current software or future software upgrades that would enhance PCI (credit card compliance) and PA/DSS (payment application and data security standards).

The combination of obsolete equipment and outdated software that cannot be upgraded resulted in the City reviewing its current parking equipment and submitting a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) funding request for FY 2012-13. That request was not funded. During FY 2012/13, the PARCS equipment continued to experience increased problems. The increased incidents of failure and the end of support for a portion of the

2

City’s equipment resulted in the Council authorization of CIP funding for new or upgraded equipment as part of the FY 2013-14 CIP budget.

Upon approval of the Capital Improvement Project of replacing the PARCS equipment, the City issued a Request of Proposals in May 2013. A vendor was recommended by the selection committee. After the recommendation of the award became public, Sentry Control informed Council that one of the selection committee members from LA DOT has a family member employed by the selected vendor.

In order to retain highest

procurement objectivity and integrity, Council rejected all proposals and directed staff to complete a new bidding process on August 27, 2013.

Following rejection of the bids, the City contracted with Walker Parking Consultants to assist with the Request for Proposals process. In October 2013, the City issued a new RFP that included additional technical specifications and sought additional details related to proposer’s finances and customer service standards. The original selection committee was dismissed and replaced by a new selection committee with new representatives from the Information System and Finance Departments. The committee also included a representative from Macerich, the City of West Hollywood, and Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. All selection committee members disclosed that they had no conflicts of interest.

Parking Structure 6 opened to the public on December 19, 2013. In order to avoid any delay of the operation, the City issued a Request for Quotes in September 2013 for temporary leasing of a standalone PARC System for the new facility. The City received quotes from DataPark and WPS as well as a “No Bid” form from Sentry Systems. DataPark was selected based on providing the lowest cost to meet all required specifications. The system was delivered and installed successfully with short notice supporting the grand opening of Parking Structure 6.

3

Discussion Equipment failure negatively affects the customer’s parking experience and causes significant lost revenue and increased staffing costs. Failure causes delays at the exits, which create traffic congestion and increased emissions from vehicles. In situations when equipment fails, the parking operator needs to deploy additional staff to manually facilitate the exit process, which results in increased labor costs. The replacement PARCS equipment would be able to perform reliably, reducing delays. It would also enable additional functions and reporting capabilities, such as developing an integrated value pass with the City’s transit system. The replacement PARCS equipment would enhance the overall parking experience.

To further enhance the current parking

program, staff also recommends including all gated parking facilities, including the Pier Deck parking lot, the new Parking Structure 6, and Ken Edwards Center into the PARCS. With these additional facilities, the new system is anticipated to handle over 11 million transactions annually.

Vendor Selection On August 27, 2013, Council directed staff to complete a new procurement process. The City retained the Services of Walker Parking Consultants to provide technical review of the RFP and to develop tools to evaluate the responses. On October 17, 2013, the City issued a new RFP via the City’s online bidding site in accordance with the City Charter and Municipal Code provision that require competitive bidding for this project. During the new procurement process, more information was required from the bidders, such as three years of financial data and additional information on maintenance service levels. A new selection committee comprised of staff from the Finance and Information System Departments, City of West Hollywood Parking Operations, Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. and Macerich reviewed all four proposals received. Walker Parking Consultants also reviewed all the proposals and provided neutral comments without any recommendations for the selection committee.

The selection committee met twice and had extensive discussions on all evaluation criteria, including but not limited to pricing, proposed solutions, capacity of service

4

performance, ongoing operating costs, financial and inventory resources, and system compliance levels. Only two companies proposed a License Plate Recognition (LPR) system option in their proposals and included it in their pricing. Below is a 7- and 10year total cost (installation and maintenance) comparison of all four proposals:

Company

7 Year Cost

10 Year Cost

DataPark (with LPR system)

$4,315,777

$4,951,616

WPS (with LPR system)

$3,950,499

$4,655,623

Sentry (without LPR system)

$3,994,894

$4,532,914

Zeag (without LPR system)

$4,752,029

$5,464,641

Although not the lowest bidder, the selection committee recommends DataPark USA Inc. as the best bidder because they complied with all requested items in the RFP offering the best purchase and installation costs. DataPark also demonstrated a proven License Plate Recognition (LPR) and transit keycards interface solution that is currently performing in high volume domestic locations. Specifically, •

DataPark has the strongest financial and inventory resources for the project.

•

DataPark has solutions that comply with all the RFP requested items.

•

Information Systems Department strongly suggested retaining a Windowsbased operating system that DataPark provides. It will benefit the operation, maintenance support and data processing.

•

DataPark provided the best report samples.

•

DataPark proposed the most comprehensive solution to minimize vehicles tailgating out of structures to avoid payment including license plate recognition technology and a quicker gate system.

•

DataPark has proven that they can interface with the City’s merchant account processing credit card transactions without any gateway costs. The Payment Card Industry (PCI) compliance system has been certified by the City’s merchant account provider and currently processes Parking Structure 6’s credit card transactions without utilizing a third party gateway which currently

5

costs the City approximately $80,000 per year. This cost is paid under a separate contract. •

DataPark has the lowest purchase and installation price.

The pricing

proposal from DataPark is also the most detailed and itemized.

All

components were listed and broken down by location. •

DataPark has integrated solutions in multiple domestic locations with parking keycard solutions. Their system already has a solution developed to support the Big Blue Bus fare interface development.

•

DataPark is the only company that provided detailed information for how to accommodate alternative sized gate arms with detailed pricing and specifications.

•

DataPark has committed to the 24-hour availability with four-hour response time and next day repair requirement.

•

DataPark’s

operating

system

has

accounting

and

monthly

parking

management functions included as part of its features. Based on these factors, the selection committee recommended DataPark USA as the best bidder.

This recommendation was ranked consistently by all five selection

committee members. The results of the evaluation (based on a maximum average score of 10) for all four companies were: DataPark

8.19

WPS

7.44

Sentry

6.53

Zeag

6.28

6

Financial Impacts & Budget Actions The contract to be awarded to DataPark USA Inc. is for an amount not to exceed $5,000,000. Funds in the amount of $3,200,000 are included in the FY 2013-14 Capital Improvement Program budget in account C010715.589000 (Parking Access and Revenue Control System) and $400,000 budget in account C014049.589000 (Parking Structure 6 Construction). Funds in the amount of $200,000 for FY 2014-15 expenses are included in the FY 2014-15 budgets in account 01225.555010. Future year funding is contingent on Council budget approval.

No maintenance or service costs are

anticipated during the first two years.

Prepared by: Frank Ching, Parking Administrator Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Gigi Decavalles-Hughes Director of Finance

Rod Gould City Manager

Attachments: A. October 10, 2012 Letter from Sentry Control Systems B. November 2, 2012 Notice of SKIDATA change in software support

7

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 7-A To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Marsha Jones Moutrie, City Attorney

Subject:

Ordinance Adding Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.36.085 and Amending Section 4.36.090 Prohibiting Agreements That Limit Tenants From Engaging In Public Process

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance. Executive Summary At its meeting on December 10, 2013, the City Council introduced for first reading an ordinance adding Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.36.085 and amending Section 4.36.090 prohibiting agreements that limit tenants from engaging in public process. The ordinance is now presented to the City Council for adoption.

Prepared by:

Marsha Jones Moutrie, City Attorney

Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Marsha Jones Moutrie City Attorney

Rod Gould City Manager

1

City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014

Santa Monica, California

ORDINANCE NUMBER _________ (CCS) (City Council Series)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ADDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 4.36.085 AND AMENDING SECTION 4.36.090 PROHIBITING AGREEMENTS THAT LIMIT TENANTS FROM ENGAGING IN PUBLIC PROCESS

WHEREAS, participatory democracy is a hallmark of the City Of Santa Monica; and WHEREAS, the City accordingly has a firm and long-standing commitment to protecting the rights of all community members to participate in their government; and WHEREAS, the City has an equally strong commitment to protecting the rights of tenants; and WHEREAS, the combination of Santa Monica's prime location, state-mandated vacancy decontrol, rising rents, low interest rates, and increasing real estate values have created huge incentives for landlords to displace long-time tenants and redevelop properties; and

1

WHEREAS, in recent years, landlords have attempted to condition relocation payments and other contractual benefits to tenants' agreement to give up their right to petition their government for relief or to comment publicly on proposed projects; and WHEREAS, such conditions are contrary to public policy because they abrogate tenants' First Amendment rights and undermine the democratic process in Santa Monica; and WHEREAS, in order to effectuate the City's core values of participatory democracy and tenant protection and thereby promote the public welfare, the City Council hereby finds that the Municipal Code should be amended to prohibit landlords from requiring such conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.36.085 is hereby added to read as follows: 4.36.085 Prohibition against agreements limiting public participation. No landlord shall, with respect to property used as rental housing, any rental housing agreement or other tenancy or estate at will, however created, do any of the following: a)

Enter into an agreement with a tenant which prohibits

or limits the tenant from participating in the City's public process, including

2

speaking at a meeting of the City Council or any City Commission, submitting written comments to the City, or otherwise communicating with City elected officials, appointed officials, and employees on any subject. b)

Attempt to enforce an agreement such as described

in subsection (a). c)

Withhold deposit of relocation fees into escrow or

withhold payment of such fees or other payments otherwise owed to the tenant in an attempt to induce a tenant to enter into an agreement such as described in subsection (a). SECTION 2. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.36.090 is hereby amended as follows: 4.36.090 Remedies. (a)

In any action by a landlord to recover possession of a

rental housing unit for one of the reasons set forth in Section 4.36.020, the landlord shall allege and prove compliance with this Chapter. (b)

Any landlord who fails to provide relocation assistance

as required by Sections 4.36.040, 4.36.050, 4.36.070 and 4.36.100 or who violates Section 4.36.085 of this Chapter shall be liable in a civil action to the tenant to whom such assistance is due for damages in the amount of the relocation fee the landlord has failed to pay, a civil penalty in the amount of five hundred dollars and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs

3

as determined by the court. The court may also award punitive damages in a proper case as defined by Civil Code Section 3294. Any person, including the City, may enforce the provisions of this Chapter by means of a civil action. (c) Any person violating any of the provisions of or failing to comply with the requirements of this Chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine of not greater than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail for not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. (d)

No landlord shall attempt to secure from a tenant any

waiver of any provision of this Chapter. Any agreement, whether written or oral, whereby any provision of this Chapter is waived, shall be deemed against public policy and shall be void. (e)

Any contractual term which violates Section 4.36.085

of this Chapter, whether written or oral, shall be deemed against public policy and shall be void. (f)

Nonexclusive Remedies and Penalties. The remedies

provided in this Chapter are not exclusive, and nothing in this Chapter shall preclude any person from seeking any other remedies, penalties or procedures provided by law.

4

SECTION 3. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance. SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 5. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. effective 30 days from its adoption.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_________________________ MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE City Attorney

5

This Ordinance shall become

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 7-B To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Marsha Jones Moutrie, City Attorney

Subject:

Interim Ordinance Extending Interim Ordinance Number 2439 to May 31, 2014, Which Established Interim Development Procedures Pending Implementation of the LUCE

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance. Executive Summary At its meeting on December 17, 2013, the City Council introduced for first reading an interim ordinance extending Interim Ordinance 2439 to May 31, 2014, which established interim development procedures pending implementation of the LUCE. The ordinance is now presented to the City Council for adoption.

Prepared by:

Marsha Jones Moutrie, City Attorney

Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Marsha Jones Moutrie City Attorney

Rod Gould City Manager

1

City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014

Santa Monica, California

ORDINANCE NUMBER _________ (CCS) (City Council Series)

AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA EXTENDING INTERIM ORDINANCE NUMBER 2439 (CCS), WHICH ESTABLISHED INTERIM DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES PENDING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LUCE, INCLUDING MODIFICATIONS ADDRESSING ORDINANCE APPLICABILITY, CM DISTRICT NON-CONFORMING USES, SHARED PARKING AND FAR CALCULATIONS IN THE DOWNTOWN, EXEMPTIONS FOR CITY PROJECTS, PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE PERMITTED NUMBER OF RESTAURANTS IN THE CM DISTRICT, THE REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING PUBLIC PARKING SPACES WITHIN PUBLIC PARKING STRUCTURES IN BSC-2 AND C3-C ZONING DISTRICTS, AUTHORIZED EXISTING NONCONFORMING AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP USES AND MINOR EXPANSIONS THERETO IN RESIDENTIAL AND "A" OFF-STREET PARKING OVERLAY ZONES, MODIFIED THE REQUIREMENTS FOR MINISTERIAL PROCESSING OF 100% AFFORDABLE HOUSING OF 50 OR FEWER UNITS, MODIFIED FLOOR AREA RATIO CALCULATIONS IN THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT FOR OUTDOOR DINING, PROVIDED AN INTERIM USE PERMIT APPROVAL PROCESS FOR THE BERGAMOT PLANNING AREA AND CLARIFIED THAT THE BERGAMOT AREA PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR TIER 1 PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZED USES SUPERSEDE THE REQUIREMENT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO THE EXTENT OF ANY INCONSISTENCY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Findings and Purpose. The Council finds and declares: (a) The City adopted a new Land Use and Circulation Element of the General Plan of the City of Santa Monica ("LUCE") on July 6, 2010 but has not yet adopted

1

amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinance reflecting the LUCE's policies, goals and standards. (b)

The adoption of the LUCE was the culmination of a multi-year planning

process that commenced in 2004. (c) The LUCE encompasses the community's vision of the City's future and is designed to maintain the City's character, protect the City's neighborhoods, manage its transportation systems, and encourage additional housing in a sustainable manner that ensures a high quality of life for the City's residents. (d) The LUCE implements the community's core values through its focus on community character and neighborhood conservation, future trip reduction, vibrant and walkable villages, integrated land use and transportation, local land uses and housing, jobs tied to housing and transit, promotion of social and fiscal health and diversity, sustainability, community benefits, open space, and implementation, phasing and monitoring. (e) The LUCE goals and policies are predicated on the integration of land use and transportation including a focus on the type of land uses, the location of land uses, the quality of projects, the amount of developmental change, and the pace of this change. (f)

The LUCE was prepared with the general purpose of guiding and

accomplishing coordinated and harmonious development of the City which, in accordance with existing and future needs, best promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare, as well as efficiency and economy in the process of development.

2

(g)

The LUCE substantially revises the City's land use policies, goals, and

standards. (h)

The City's planning and zoning regulations are presently under

comprehensive review and revision in order to ensure that such regulations are consistent with the General Plan as amended and consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare. This comprehensive revision of the City's Zoning Ordinance is a substantial project which is crucial to the community's long-term welfare as reflected in the goals, policies, and standards of the LUCE. Major elements of the comprehensive revision of the Zoning Ordinance are currently under public review and discussion at the Planning Commission and scheduled for review and adoption by City Council during the second quarter of 2014. (i) Certain critical areas of conflict between the LUCE and the existing Zoning Ordinance have been identified by the City's Planning and Community Development Department as it has reviewed pending applications subsequent to the adoption of the LUCE. (j)

Zoning Ordinance Part 9.04.20.28 establishes the applicability and

procedures for issuance of administrative approvals which provide for the ministerial administrative review and assessment of proposed developments subject to explicit standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. (k) The administrative approval process is premised on the assumption that the explicit standards in the Zoning Ordinance have been adopted to ensure that a completed project is in harmony with existing or potential development in the area and is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan.

3

(l) However, this premise underlying the administrative approval process is no longer applicable given the significant ways in which the LUCE differs from the prior Land Use and Circulation elements including, but not limited to, the direct linkage between land use and transportation policies and programs and the establishment of new development policies and standards which ensure that quality development contributes to the character of the City. (m) Additionally, the LUCE establishes a base height for each land use as a baseline.

Proposed development which seeks additional height above the base is

subject to discretionary review and must meet additional requirements consistent with the community's broader social, environmental, and circulation goals. This approach is defined in three tiers. (n) Under the LUCE, Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects must provide community benefits for the City and the neighborhood. More specifically, a developer seeking to develop a Tier 2 or Tier 3 project must include certain preferred uses, beneficial project design features, and provide critical amenities or meet other development standards that address the community's core needs—it's social, cultural, physical, transportation and environmental goals. (o)

The LUCE identifies five priority categories of community benefits—new

affordable and workforce housing, GHG emission and congestion reduction, physical improvements to create connections and open space, social and cultural facilities, and historic preservation. (p)

The existing Zoning Ordinance does not currently incorporate this tier

structure or establish a mechanism to prioritize and necessitate that projects participate 4

in the community benefit tier structure, which is the basis by which much of the LUCE vision, goals, and policies will be achieved. (q) Additionally, the LUCE establishes 17 distinct land use designations. One of these land use designations is the Downtown Core. The purpose of this designation is to maintain and enhance the downtown area as the heart of the City and as a thriving, mixed use urban environment. Unlike the other land use designations, the LUCE does not establish new height and FAR development parameters, but instead provides that the height and FAR along with other development standards shall be determined through a specific plan process. (r)

At the time the initial interim ordinance was adopted, there were

approximately 700,000 square feet of administrative and development review projects, not including development agreements, pending planning review.

Of the 700,000

square feet, approximately 500,000 square feet was located within the Downtown Core. Approximately half of the projects in the Downtown Core were Administrative Approvals that did not require public review and need only comply with objective standards in the existing Zoning Ordinance.

Within the Downtown, bringing forward approximately

200,000 square feet of new development outside of the development agreement process before the completion of the Downtown Specific Plan meant that nearly a quarter of the growth anticipated in the Downtown could be constructed inconsistent with the yet to be adopted Specific Plan. The Downtown Specific Plan will include a circulation framework that will address the integration of Expo light rail into the Downtown system, freeway access, direct parking structure access, and congestion; establishing the foundation for future land use and transportation decisions. If these

5

Administrative Approvals had proceeded in a piecemeal fashion without these components, it would have undermined the community vision set forth in the Downtown District goals and policies, as well as the Downtown Specific Plan process underway and would have detrimentally affected the City’s ability to implement LUCE goals and policies, particularly with respect to: providing open spaces, trip reduction, coordinating with adjacent sites, congestion management, and achieving community goals through community benefits and quality urban design. (s) Additionally, transit-oriented districts in the City’s transitioning industrial areas are not reflected in the current zoning ordinance, which allows uses that would now be considered undesirable and inconsistent with the LUCE. (t) Pending completion of the comprehensive update to the Zoning Ordinance, it is essential that development be consistent with the General Plan so that the goals and values of the community, as reflected in the LUCE, are not significantly undercut. Adjusting the development standards as provided in this Ordinance will ensure that the quality of life, the environment, the ability to move around the City, and the efficacy of the ongoing planning process are preserved. (u) Adoption of this ordinance would not prohibit any development, but would instead provide an alternate process by which development is reviewed and approved so as to ensure consistency with and appropriate implementation of the LUCE. (v)

Adoption of this ordinance would also not materially alter the City's

substantial incentives for residential or mixed use development in non-residential zoning districts. These incentives would be preserved in local law and policy. For example,

6

residential development in all of the City's commercial districts would remain authorized. Thus, residential development could still occur in over 80% of the City. (w) After the adoption of the initial interim ordinance, issues were raised relating to the processing of projects that were in the pipeline prior to the effective date of the initial interim ordinance which require the City to expeditiously consider and adjust the applicability provisions of the interim ordinance to ensure fairness to project applicants while preserving the City's ability to effectuate the goals and policies of the LUCE. (x)

After the interim ordinance was extended on April 26, 2011, it became

apparent that allowing two restaurants per block on the east side of Main Street north of Ocean Park Boulevard will promote the general welfare by encouraging additional investment in that neighborhood and strengthening the connection between Main Street and the Civic Center. (y) As detailed above and in the LUCE, the City's downtown is a thriving, mixeduse urban environment for people to live, work, be entertained, and be culturally enriched. (z) This area has the greatest concentration of activity in the City, anchored by the core commercial district, including the Third Street Promenade and Santa Monica Place. (aa) The City’s publically owned parking structures in the BSC-2 and C3-C zone districts are essential to a vibrant, economically viable downtown area, providing parking for the offices, restaurants, theaters, and residences.

7

(bb) The vast majority of the City's residents regularly visit downtown and use its parking resources. (cc) The importance of the City's publically-owned parking infrastructure in the City's downtown is reflected in the numerous studies and reports over the past dozen years, including but not limited to the 2000 Downtown Parking Management Program, the 2002 Downtown Parking Task Force strategic plan, the 2006 Downtown Parking Program, and the 2009 Walker Parking Study. (dd) These centrally located parking structures enable their users to park once and then walk to multiple destinations. (ee)

This "Park Once" philosophy contributes to the Downtown's pedestrian

character and is a major underpinning of its success. (ff) These parking structures are also operated in a manner to meet the City’s LUCE, transportation and economic goals. (gg)

The LUCE calls for a parking management approach which utilizes a

shared pool of parking resources creating a true shared parking district. (hh) Given these fundamental goals, it is essential that these parking structures be protected as precious resources to ensure that adequate parking is available and that easy access is provided to the core of the Downtown thereby promoting its vitality. (ii) The City has spent millions of dollars retrofitting and maintaining many of these structures.

8

(jj)

In April 26, 2011, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in

California Redevelopment Association v. Ana Matosantos, affirming AB 1X26 which provides for the dissolution of redevelopment agencies. (kk) In AB 1X26, the State legislature incorporated provisions that purport to require properties formerly owned by the City’s Redevelopment Agency to be sold so that the proceeds can be transferred to the County auditor-controller for distribution to taxing entities as property tax proceeds. (ll) In such event, to ensure replacement parking essential for the economic viability of the City’s downtown, there is a need for a development standard that requires an owner to first obtain a final permit for a project providing replacement public parking within the same district before an owner may remove, redevelop or convert a parking structure in a manner that results in the removal of public parking spaces. (mm) On April 11, 2006, the City Council adopted Interim Ordinance Number 2179 (CCS), after lengthy public outreach, environmental review, and hearings, modifying auto dealership standards in various commercial and residential zoning districts in the City to better balance the need for auto dealerships to expand and develop a more urban format within a context of limited land availability and close proximity to sensitive residential uses. This Ordinance was extended several times, but expired August 8, 2010. (nn) Consistent with LUCE goals and policies, it has and continues to be contemplated that the provisions of the auto dealership interim ordinance would be included in the Zoning Ordinance Update that is currently under preparation.

9

(oo) More specifically, Goal E8 of the LUCE states: “Allow for the expansion and improved performance of automobile dealers in Santa Monica, recognizing their contribution to the local economy and the revenue base of the General Fund.” Further, LUCE Policy E8.3 states: “Allow automobile dealers to reasonably expand in their current locations and otherwise respond to likely global changes in the automobile industry as long as their redevelopment is in the urban auto dealership format and incorporates mitigations to reduce any negative impacts on the surrounding residential and nonresidential uses.

The expansion may occur on existing parcels used for

automobile dealerships and on adjacent or proximate parcels.” (pp)

Auto dealerships are important to the economic vitality of the City, and

readopting, with modification, certain of the auto dealership interim ordinance provisions would encourage the retention of these dealerships by enabling these dealerships to expand and modernize their operations in order to remain competitive in the industry while ensuring that changes or improvements made on existing automobile dealer lots are sensitive to and in keeping with the character of adjacent residential areas. (qq) The dissolution of the City's Redevelopment Agency and the associated loss of the City's primary funding source for affordable housing have significantly impacted the City's ability to produce housing for the lowest household income categories. Historically, the City's Housing Division invested approximately $15 million of Housing Trust Funds annually to finance affordable housing through loans and grants to non-profit housing developers. With the dissolution of redevelopment, the majority of the Housing Trust Funds' dollars, as well as the City's ability to leverage these monies with outside funding has been eliminated.

10

(rr) The LUCE identifies the production of affordable housing as one of the City's highest priorities and many of the LUCE policies are targeted at the production of affordable housing.

For instance, LUCE Policy H1.2 provides that the City should

"maintain programs to require and encourage the production of affordable housing for very low-, low- and moderate income households," "seek additional opportunities to increase the percentage of affordable housing as a component of for-sale and qualifying rental residential and mixed-use housing projects," and "incentivize affordable housing projects." LUCE Policy H1.3 provides that the City should "incentivize the creation of new affordable housing opportunities." (ss) The City is in the process of updating its Housing Element. The City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) includes four hundred twenty-eight (428) very low income housing units and two hundred sixty-three (263) low income housing units. (tt) The loss of redevelopment monies and the City's future affordable housing goals as reflected in the RHNA necessitates that the City strengthen its incentives for the production of housing which provide a greater mix in housing affordability levels and address the City's need for low, very low and extremely low affordable housing units. The proposed revision to the standards for the ministerial processing of 100% affordable housing projects of 50 or fewer units directly addresses this effort. (uu) Encouraging ground floor outdoor dining is an important goal expressed in the LUCE.

Excluding such dining from the calculation of floor area ratio can help

incentivize this use and create opportunities for adaptive reuse in existing structures that would not presently be possible.

Such ground floor outdoor dining does not

11

contribute to a building’s mass and density, and therefore its exclusion from FAR is appropriate. However, ground floor outdoor dining would still be considered floor area so that its potential impacts on such areas as parking and traffic would still be calculated. (vv) The Bergamot Area Plan has been adopted to provide both the goals and policies of the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element for that geographic area and to provide area-specific development standards that will apply to create a new transit-oriented neighborhood in proximity to the Exposition Line Bergamot Station. The Plan's provisions are comprehensive, and in order to ensure the intended outcomes, the Bergamot Area Plan requires that all projects be consistent with its policies, guidelines, and development standards. In order to ensure proper implementation of the Plan as intended, amendment of the Interim Zoning Ordinance is necessary so that in cases of conflict between the Bergamot Area Plan and Zoning Ordinance pertaining to any development standard for a Tier 1 project or any authorized use, the Bergamot Area Plan shall control. In addition, while the Bergamot Area Plan requires a Minor Use Permit for certain uses within the Plan area, the Minor Use Permit, a proposed innovation in future revisions to the Zoning Ordinance update, has not yet been established as a process. Amendment of the Interim Zoning Ordinance is necessary to establish an interim process by which staff can process requests for those uses that require a Minor Use Permit under the Bergamot Area Plan. (ww)

In light of the above-detailed concerns, on February 8, 2011, the City

Council adopted Interim Ordinance Number 2345 (CCS) establishing interim development procedures pending implementation of the LUCE through a revised Zoning

12

Ordinance; on April 26, 2011, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2356(CCS) extending and amending Ordinance Number 2345 (CCS); on February 28, 2012, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2394 (CCS), further extending and amending Ordinance Number 2345 (CCS), on August 28, 2012, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2407 (CCS) additionally extending and amending Ordinance Number 2345 (CCS), on February 26, 2013, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2417 (CCS) amending Ordinance Number 2345 (CCS) to address ministerial processing of 100% affordable housing projects of 50 or fewer units, on June 25, 2013, City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2428 (CCS), further extending and amending Ordinance Number 2345 (CCS) to exempt ground floor outdoor dining on private property from a Floor Area Ratio Calculation in the Downtown District, and on September 24, 2013, City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2439 (CCS), clarifying that the Bergamot Area Plan standards apply when provisions are in conflict with the current Zoning Ordinance and establishing a Use Permit process in lieu of the Minor Use Permit identified in the Bergamot Area Plan until adoption of the Zoning Ordinance. (xx)

Pending completion of the City's review of its planning and zoning

regulations, it is necessary on an interim basis to modify the Zoning Ordinance as set forth in Section 2, Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of this Ordinance. (yy) As detailed above and in the January 25, 2011, April 26, 2011, February 14, 2012, August 14, 2012, February 12, 2013, June 11, 2013, September 24, 2013, and December 17, 2013 City Council staff reports, there continues to exist a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare should the interim zoning ordinance and necessary amendments not be adopted and development of projects

13

inconsistent with the LUCE be allowed to proceed through the issuance of Administrative Approvals or Development Review Permits which are not consistent with the explicit standards of the LUCE or with the tier structure and the provision of community benefits. SECTION 2. Interim Zoning Regulations Notwithstanding any provision of the City's Zoning Ordinance to the contrary, the issuance or extension of permits for either a new development project or for the expansion of an existing development project that exceeds 7500 square feet ("development project") that does not comply with the interim zoning standards set forth in Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, or Section 6 of this Ordinance is hereby prohibited and no zoning permits or approvals, subdivision maps, building permits, or other land use permit shall be approved, issued, or extended for a development project in contravention of Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, or Section 6, during the pendency of this Ordinance or any extension thereof. SECTION 3. Interim Zoning. (a)

Administrative Approvals.

No development project shall be approved

pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.28.020 [Administrative Approvals] unless all of the following findings are made: (1) The proposed development does not require discretionary review or approval as established in the Zoning Ordinance, the LUCE, or this Interim Ordinance.

14

(2)

The proposed development conforms precisely to the development

standards contained in both the Zoning Ordinance and in the LUCE for the zoning district and land use designation in which the development is located. (3) In the case of any inconsistency between the Zoning Ordinance and the LUCE pertaining to any objective development standard or permitted use, the proposed development conforms to the more restrictive development standard and is a permitted use authorized by the LUCE. (4)

Additionally, notwithstanding subsection (c) of this Section, any pending

Administrative Approval application filed on or before March 11, 2011 for a housing development project must meet the following Transportation Demand Management requirements: (i) Prior to the issuance of building permits, the property owner shall prepare, implement, and maintain a Transportation Demand Management plan, to the satisfaction of the City, including physical, operating and leasing conditions that will be reasonably likely to result in attainment of a 1.50 a.m. and p.m. AVR among employees at the development within three years and continued achievement and maintenance of the AVR targets thereafter. The following measures shall be included in the developer’s TDM plan: (A)

Transportation Information: Developer (and its successors and assignees)

shall provide, to the satisfaction of the City, bulletin boards, display cases, or kiosks, displaying transportation information located where the greatest number of residents and employees are likely to see them. This information shall also be provided annually

15

and upon signing of any lease, to residents and commercial tenants. Information shall include, but is not limited to, the following: 

Current maps, routes, fare information, and schedules for public transit routes serving the site.



Telephone numbers and website links for referrals on transportation information including numbers for the regional ridesharing agency and local transit operators.



Ridesharing

promotional

material

supplied

by

commuter-oriented

organizations. 

Bicycle route and facility information, including regional/local bicycle maps and bicycle safety information.



A list of facilities available for carpoolers, vanpoolers, bicyclists, transit riders, and pedestrians at the site.



Walking maps and information about local services, restaurants, movie theaters, and recreational activities within walking distance of the project.

(B)

Motorcycle Parking: Developer (and its successors and assignees) shall

provide two motorcycle parking spaces allocated in the commercial subterranean parking level, if commercial parking is provided on-site. (C)

Bicycle Parking: Developer (or successors and assignees) shall provide

and maintain long-term, secure bicycle parking, such as a locked room or cage, for commercial tenant employees at a rate of one space for each 5,000 sq. ft. of commercial area, with a minimum of two spaces in City-approved locations. Long-term

16

secure bicycle parking for the residential component shall be one space per bedroom and shall be provided in an enclosed, secure space (e.g. bike room, bike lockers). Short-term bicycle parking for the residential component shall be 0.2 spaces/unit with a minimum of 4 spaces. (D)

Bicycle, Vanpool, and Carpool Parking Spaces: Developer (or successors

and assignees) shall provide parking space in accordance with SMMC 9.04.10.08.050. Preferential parking within the parking garage shall be provided for project employees who carpool or vanpool to work. The charge for such parking spaces will be at a reduced rate. (E)

Showers: A minimum of one women’s and one men’s shower and locker

facility shall be provided for employees of commercial uses on site who bicycle or use another active means, powered by human propulsion, of getting to work or who exercise during the day. (F)

Unbundling of Parking Spaces: If the City adopts an ordinance or other

legal mechanism which authorizes the unbundling of parking, the Applicant (or Applicant’s successors and assigns) shall in all leases it executes as landlord of residential units within the Project provide residential tenants with the option of leasing parking space(s) separately from the residential unit. Any parking spaces not leased by project residential tenants may be leased to any lessee on a month to month basis, whether or not the lessee otherwise occupies or works at the project, provided project residential tenants are given first priority to lease such spaces. (G)

Transportation Management Organization:

Developer shall agree to

participate in a Transportation Management Organization serving its area and require

17

same of its tenants. If the City adopts a requirement that a Transportation Management Organization be formed for the project’s geographic area, property owner and tenants shall participate in any specific strategies that may be implemented, including but not limited to, support for transit use, shared parking, car sharing opportunity, and pedestrian and bicycle improvements. (b) Tier 2 and Tier 3 Development Projects. Notwithstanding the development standards specified in the Zoning Ordinance, no development project which would constitute a Tier 2 or Tier 3 project as established pursuant to LUCE Chapter 2.1 shall be approved except City projects or projects developed pursuant to a development agreement adopted pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.48.

City

projects are defined as City public works projects and City community facilities (e.g. libraries, public parking structures, recycling centers, and community centers), not including public/private partnerships, and City projects shall be deemed to meet the community benefit requirements of Tier 2 and Tier 3 development projects. (c)

Downtown Core. Notwithstanding the development standards specified in

the Zoning Ordinance, no development project in the Downtown Core as delineated in the Land Use Designation Map approved by the City Council on July 6, 2010 shall exceed 32 feet in height except City projects or projects developed pursuant to a development agreement adopted pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.48. However, development projects located entirely within the BSC1 Zoning District shall not be subject to these interim standards provided that the development project is less than the height and floor area of the existing building.

18

(d) 100% Affordable Housing Projects. Notwithstanding subsection (b) and (c) of this Section, affordable housing projects with 50 units or less will continue to be processed ministerially if a minimum of twenty-five percent (25%) of the housing units are deed-restricted or restricted by an agreement approved by the City for occupancy by households with income of sixty percent (60%) of Area Median Income or less and the remainder of the housing units are deed-restricted or restricted by an agreement approved by the City for occupancy by households with incomes of eighty percent (80%) of median income or less. Such affordable housing projects may also include non-residential uses, as long as such uses do not exceed a maximum percentage of 33% of the total floor area. Notwithstanding Section 7, affordable housing projects with 50 units or less which are being developed pursuant to a settlement agreement with the City or which received their Administrative Approval prior to January 8, 2013 shall continue to be processed in accordance with Ordinance Number 2407 (CCS). (e) Shared Parking. The following administrative process is hereby established authorizing property owners and tenants to request shared parking in the Downtown Core, except for projects that are processed through a development agreement. A shared parking permit is intended to permit the owners of parking facilities to rent or lease underutilized parking that is available in their facility to nearby residents, workers or businesses while reserving sufficient parking supply needed for on-site uses. (1)

Permit Required.

A shared parking permit, approved by the Planning Director, or his/her designee, shall be required and shall be issued prior to the commencement of a shared parking 19

use of any private parking facility that is otherwise limited to on-site users. The Planning Director, or his/her designee, may establish additional conditions to further the intent of this subsection (e) and ensure that parking spaces needed for the primary onsite uses will be available during the hours needed for their use. A public hearing shall not be required for issuance of a shared parking permit. (2)

Application.

Application for a shared parking permit shall be filed in a manner consistent with the requirements contained in Municipal Code Part 9.04.20.20. (3)

Findings.

The Planning Director, or his/her designee, or Planning Commission on appeal, may approve a shared parking permit application, in whole or in part, with or without conditions, only when all of the following findings are made in an affirmative manner: (i)

The operation of the requested shared parking permit at the location

proposed and within the time period specified will not adversely impact the primary use of the parking facility for its intended on-site users, or otherwise endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare. (ii)

The shared parking permit sets forth the maximum number of shared

parking spaces that are being approved for use by off-site users that will be available during peak and off-peak parking demand periods so as to ensure that a sufficient number of spaces will be provided to meet the greater parking demand of the anticipated users.

20

(iii)

Additional requirements, restrictions or agreements, as deemed necessary

by the Planning Director, or his/her designee, are included as a requirement(s) of the shared parking permit to ensure that parking spaces needed for the primary on-site uses will be available during the hours needed for their use. The Planning Director, or his/her designee shall prepare a written decision which shall contain the findings of fact upon which such decision is based and all required conditions, if approved. The decision shall be mailed to the applicant and to property owners and residents of parcels adjacent to the parcel for which the Shared Parking Permit is requested. Copies of the decision shall also be provided to the Planning Commission. (4)

Term of Permit.

A shared parking permit shall be valid for a one-year period from the date of issuance unless a different period is set by the Planning Director, or his/her designee, or the Planning Commission on appeal, as a condition of granting the shared parking permit. The permit shall renew automatically for additional one-year periods unless the permit is modified or revoked in accordance with subsection (6) of this Section. (5)

Monitoring.

The permit holder shall grant City staff access to the parking facility for the purpose of verifying parking availability prior to issuing the permit as well as to allow random monitoring after the permit is issued. (6)

Modification or Revocation.

21

The City may modify or revoke an approved shared parking permit in accordance with the following procedures: (i)

If the Planning Director designee receives evidence that the conditions of

the permit have not been met, or the permit granted is being or has recently been exercised contrary to the terms of the approval or in violation of a specific statute, ordinance, law, or regulation, the Planning Director designee shall serve notice of these violations, either in person or by registered mail, on the owner of the property and on the permit holder and shall provide the permit holder with a reasonable opportunity to cure the violation(s). (ii)

If the permit holder or property owner has not responded to the notice

within 10 days or the Planning Director designee determines that the permit holder has failed to cure the violation, the Planning Director designee may refer the matter to the Zoning Administrator for a revocation hearing. Notice of hearing shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City and shall be served either in person or by registered mail on the owner of the property and on the permit holder at least ten days prior to such hearing. The notice of hearing shall contain a statement of the specific reasons for revocation. (iii)

After the hearing, a shared parking permit may be revoked by the Zoning

Administrator or by the Planning Commission on appeal or review if any one of the following findings is made: (A)

That the Shared Parking Permit was obtained by misrepresentation or

fraud

22

(B)

That the conditions of the permit have not been met, or the permit granted

is being or has recently been exercised contrary to the terms of the approval or in violation of a specific statute, ordinance, law, or regulation. A written determination of modification or revocation of the shared parking permit shall be mailed to the property owner and the permit holder within ten days of such determination. (7)

Appeals.

Any person may appeal the approval, conditions of approval, denial, modification or revocation of a shared parking permit to the Planning Commission if filed within fourteen consecutive calendar days of the date the decision is made in the manner provided in Municipal Code Part 9.04.20.24, Sections 9.04.20.24.020 through 9.04.20.24.040. (f) Floor Area Ratio Calculations in the Downtown Core. In the Downtown Core, below-grade floor area shall not be included when calculating a project's floor area ratio (FAR). However, such below-grade floor area shall be counted as floor area for all other purposes. (g) Floor Area Ratio Calculations in the Downtown District. In the Downtown District, as defined in the LUCE, ground floor outdoor dining in buildings on private property shall not be included when calculating a project's floor area ratio (FAR) provided the dining area has no more than a 42 inch high barrier surrounding the dining area and is visible from the public right of way. However, such ground floor outdoor dining shall be counted as floor area for all other purposes.

23

(h) Non-conforming Uses in CM District. An existing use in the CM District shall be considered no longer existing if that use is changed to another type of use or if for a period of one year such use has not been in regular operation. Regular operation shall be considered being open for business to the general public during such use's customary business hours. (i) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 9.04.08.28.070 of the Zoning Code, two restaurants per block shall be allowed on the east side of Main Street north of Ocean Park Boulevard and south of Pico Boulevard. (j) No removal, redevelopment or conversion of a parking structure in BSC-2 and C3-C zone districts, publically owned as of February 14, 2012, which results in the loss of parking spaces above the ground floor shall be permitted unless the final permit to commence construction for a project providing the one-to-one replacement of this parking has been issued in the same zoning district and this replacement parking will be offered to the public at rates comparable to the most recent rates offered to the public for the removed parking spaces. (k)

Notwithstanding subsection (a)(3), within the Bergamot Area Plan

boundaries, in the case of any inconsistency between the Zoning Ordinance and the Bergamot Area Plan pertaining to any development standard for a Tier 1 project or any authorized use, the provisions in the Bergamot Area Plan shall control and be applied. Until the adoption of a revised Zoning Ordinance which includes a process for the issuance of Minor Use Permits (MUP), an application for any land use for which Bergamot Area Plan Table 5.02 (Land Use Regulations) requires an MUP shall be processed as a Use Permit, subject to the provisions of SMMC Section 9.04.20.11.

24

SECTION 4. Automobile Dealerships in Residential and “A” Off-Street Parking Overlay Zones: Lots designated (“A”) Off-Street Parking Overlay District, Low Density MultipleFamily Residential District (R2), or Medium Density Multiple Family Residential District (R3) that are contiguous to and were used legally in conjunction with an automobile dealership in operation on August 14, 2012, which automobile dealership uses have not subsequently been abandoned (“Qualifying Lots”), may be developed as an automobile storage structure or parking structure provided these uses are operated in conjunction with an automobile dealership on the associated and adjacent commercial lot and the development is undertaken pursuant to subsections (a) through (l) of this Section. The expansion of automobile dealership support areas shall be authorized if undertaken pursuant to subsection (m) of this Section: (a)

Maximum Parcel Coverage: 50% of residential parcel area.

(b)

Maximum Building Height:

(c)

(1)

R2 Zone: 23 feet, excluding four feet of the required parapet.

(2)

R3 Zone: 28 feet, excluding four feet of the required parapet.

Setbacks: (1)

A minimum 20 foot setback from the property line adjacent to a

(2)

A minimum 15 foot setback shall be provided from the property line

public street.

opposite the street facing property line. Where an alley is present, this distance may be measured from the alley centerline.

25

(3)

Except when subsection (c)(2) of this Section applies, a minimum 8

foot setback shall be provided between any above grade structure and a property line that is shared with an adjacent residential property that is not used as part of an automobile dealership. (d)

Inventory Storage on Surface Lots.

A qualifying lot may be used for

surface inventory storage only if the following conditions are met: (1)

Any displaced required parking shall be relocated to another off-

street location that is: (A)

Located within 750 feet of the qualifying lot, or

(B)

Located within 300 feet of a public transit line that connects

the off-street location with the dealership and the dealership provides free bus passes to its employees, or (C)

Serviced by a dealership-provided shuttle between the off-

street location and the qualifying lot which has been approved by the City’s Director of Planning. (2)

The displaced parking shall be returned to the qualifying lot if the

criteria of subsection (d)(1) are no longer met. (e)

Prohibited Uses. No portion of a residentially zoned parcel may be used

for auto repair work, rental car use, automobile washing, outdoor display of vehicles, commercial signage, storage tanks, inventory storage on surface lots (except as provided in subsection (d) of this Section), or any other use not specifically identified in this Section 4.

26

(f)

Rooftop Parking:

Rooftop parking is permitted subject to the special

standards set forth in Section 5. (g)

Exemption from additional multi-family development standards: Except as

set forth or modified herein, the property development standards of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.08.06.060 and Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.08.06.070 shall not apply in order to accommodate the specific structural and design requirements of parking and automobile storage structures. (h)

Approval Process:

A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Development

Review (DR) Permit shall be required for the development of any parking structure or automobile storage lot. The CUP shall be subject to the standards set forth in Section 6. The DR Permit shall be subject to Santa Monica Municipal Code Part 9.04.20.14. (i)

ARB Review: All new construction, new additions to existing buildings and

any other exterior improvements that require issuance of a building permit shall be subject to architectural review pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 9.32 of this Chapter. (j)

Design Standards. Parking structures constructed under these provisions

shall be subject to the design standards set forth in Section 5. (k)

Use to revert to residential: Structures constructed under these provisions

on residential parcels without an “A” Off-street Parking Overlay designation shall be permitted to remain only when operated in conjunction with an automobile dealership on the adjacent commercial lot. If the automobile dealership use is abandoned, the parking

27

structure shall be removed or incorporated into a residential project on the residential parcel(s) within 3 years. (l)

Housing Impact Fee:

Parking structures and automobile storage lots

constructed on parcels designated as Low Density Multiple-Family Residential (R2) and Medium Density Multiple Family Residential (R3), without an “A” Off-Street Parking Overlay designation, may be subject to an Affordable Housing Fee established by resolution of the City Council to mitigate the impact of the loss of the potential development of affordable housing on these sites. (m)

A floor area expansion of existing automobile dealerships in the

Residential and A Off-Street Parking Overlay Zones that is less than 750 square feet shall be permitted by-right provided that: 1)

The expanded floor area is utilized for an ancillary support function,

including, but not limited to, customer waiting area, offices, vehicle parts storage or vehicle parts display; 2)

The height of the expansion shall be no more than 1 story and shall

not exceed 23 feet; 3)

None of the expanded area is utilized for auto repair activities,

including but not limited to service bays, body work, oil change and lubrication, or radio, stereo, or phone installation; 4)

The square footage expansion may maintain the existing building

lines adjacent to public rights of way, subject to Architectural Review Board approval.

28

SECTION 5. Special Standards for Parking Structures and Automobile Storage Lots Associated with Automobile Dealerships. Parking structures and automobile storage lots associated with an automobile dealership shall comply with the following special project design standards: (a) Design Standards: (1) Except for emergency-only pedestrian exists required by the Building Officer, parking structure walls facing property lines that are adjacent to a residential use shall be solid and decorative subject to the approval of the ARB. Openings may be permitted adjacent to a public street or commercially zoned property. (2) Non-skid or other similar surface treatment on both floors and ramps of the parking structure shall be required to prevent tire squeals. This material shall be subject to the review and approval of the Director of Planning and Community Development. (3) Light sources shall be designed to contain direct and diffuse lighting and glare on the subject property. (4) Rooftop parking on parcels that directly abut or are separated by an alley from a residential district is only permitted if the parking structure provides a 6 foot parapet on the side of the parking structure closest to the residential district. This parapet shall be solid and have a surface density of 4 pounds per square foot. (5) In order to minimize noise and air impacts, exhaust vents and other mechanical equipment associated with a parking structure shall be located as far from

29

residential uses as feasible consistent with the Chapter 8 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. (6) Floor area dedicated to employee and customer parking and vehicle storage shall not apply to refuse and recycling requirements in Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.10.02.150 and Section 9.04.10.02.151 unless otherwise required by the Director of Environmental and Public Works Management or his/her designee in order to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. (7) Parking structures developed in lots designated Parking (“A”) Overlay, Low Density Multiple-Family Residential (R2), or Medium Density Multiple Family Residential (R3) shall also comply with the following additional requirements: (A) Ingress and egress shall be from the adjacent commercial lot. The Planning Commission may approve an alternative access plan that minimizes impacts to adjacent residential uses if it determines that access from the commercial lot is precluded by existing commercial development. (B) At least 10% of the parking spaces within a structure shall be maintained and designated for employee parking only, unless the Planning Commission determines based on an employee parking demand analysis that sufficient parking is otherwise provided either on-site or at an acceptable off-site location. (C) If the structure is developed in conjunction with development on adjacent commercial lots, the project shall be designed so that building mass increases toward the commercial street and architectural elements that are permitted to exceed height limits are located away from adjacent residential uses to the greatest extent feasible.

30

(D) Notwithstanding Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.10.02.170, a four foot unexcavated area shall be provided along the entire length of a property line shared by an automobile dealership and an adjacent residentially zoned property. Fifty percent of the required yard area adjacent to a public street shall remain unexcavated. (E) Notwithstanding Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.10.02.170, a landscaped buffer of minimum five-foot width shall be required along the property line adjacent to a residential use. The buffer shall include a hedge to be maintained up to 12 feet in height where adjacent to a residential side yard and 42 inches in height where adjacent to a residential front yard. The Planning Commission may reduce or waive any part of this requirement if such reduction or waiver is consistent with the public health, safety, and general welfare. (F) At least fifty percent of the required yard area set forth in subsection (c)(1) of Section 4 adjacent to a public street shall be landscaped pursuant to the provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Part 9.04.10.04. Fifty percent of the unexcavated area within this required yard shall be landscaped. SECTION 6. Performance Standards Permit and Conditional Use Permit Requirements: Automobile dealerships, automobile storage lots, and parking structures subject to a performance standards permit or a conditional use permit shall comply with the following standards: (a)

Parking and Vehicle Storage. On-site employee and customer parking

shall be provided at no charge. Employee and inventory parking may be provided as tandem and shall not be subject to Santa Monica Municipal Code Part 9.04.20.26.

31

Except as otherwise provided in this Section, parking shall comply with Santa Monica Municipal Code Part 9.04.10.08. Areas designated for employee and customer parking shall not be used for vehicle storage or display. Non-skid or other treatment shall be applied to the surface of the parking structure utilized by vehicles to avoid tire squeals. (b)

Landscaping. Screening of outdoor display and non-display areas shall

comply with the provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Part 9.04.10.04.

A

minimum two-foot landscape and decorative curb strip, where feasible, shall be provided along the street frontage perimeter of all outdoor vehicle display areas. Landscape materials shall be designed to provide an opaque visual buffer at least twelve inches in height.

Applicable setback requirements shall be expanded as

necessary to require a minimum five-foot landscaped area adjacent to any abutting residential property not used as part of the dealership operation. Final design treatment shall be subject to review and approval by the Architectural Review Board. All surface parking areas not used for vehicle display shall be subject to the parking lot screening requirements of Santa Monica Municipal Code Part 9.04.10.04. (c)

Lighting.

All lighting shall comply with Santa Monica Municipal Code

Sections 9.04.10.02.270 and 9.04.10.02.280. (d)

Loading and Unloading of Vehicles. Loading and unloading of vehicles is

permitted only in accordance with this subsection. The dealership operator shall be responsible and liable for any activities of a common carrier, operator, or other person

32

controlling such loading or unloading activities to the extent any such activities violate the provisions of this subsection (d). (1)

Loading and unloading of vehicles is limited to the hours of eight

a.m. to five p.m. Monday through Saturday.

Loading and unloading of vehicles is

prohibited on Sunday and legal holidays. (2)

Vehicle off-loading shall not be permitted in the public right of way

or residential area and shall occur on site or off-site. The applicant shall prepare and submit to the Transportation Management Division for approval a plan that complies with all requirements of this subsection (d) to be included in a form prepared by Transportation Management Division. (e)

Storage of Vehicles. No automobile dealership owner, operator, or

employee, for any period of time on any public street or alley, shall park or store vehicles for sale, to be repaired, that have been repaired, or that are part of an automobile rental operation associated with the dealership. (f)

Repair of Vehicles. The repair and service facility portion of an automobile

dealership shall comply with the provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.14.050. (g)

Queuing of Vehicles. An adequate on-site queuing area for service

customers shall be provided. On-site driveways may be used for queuing but may not interfere with access to required parking spaces. Required parking spaces may not double as queuing spaces.

33

(h)

Test Driving. Test driving shall not be done on residential streets or alleys.

For the purposes of this subsection, streets which are designated by the City as major collector streets shall be permissible areas for test driving. Each dealership operator shall have an affirmative obligation to inform all its personnel of this requirement and to ensure compliance with it. The applicant shall prepare and submit to the Transportation Management Division for approval a plan that complies with all requirements of this subsection (h) to be included in a form prepared by Transportation Management Division. Existing dealerships shall submit plans to the Transportation Management Division for approval that satisfy the requirements of this subsection if such plans are not already on file. (i)

Control of Alley Traffic. Notwithstanding the prohibition of alley use for test

driving, each dealership operator shall present to the Transportation Management Division, at the same time of the filing of an application for a permit for a new dealership or substantial remodeling, plans for slowing traffic flow in alleys adjacent to their uses, with the objective of minimizing dangers to pedestrians and neighboring vehicle operations, and of minimizing noise and other environmental incursions into the neighborhood. Such plans shall be designed to limit the maximum speed to fifteen miles per hour and may include measures such as speed bumps or dips, one-way traffic patterns, increased signage, parking and loading prohibitions and similar measures. (j)

Circulation. The location of entries and exits from automobile dealerships,

automobile centers, and automobile storage lots shall be located as far away from adjacent residential properties as is reasonably feasible and shall be directed to

34

commercial streets and away from residential areas by means of signage and design. The interior circulation system between levels shall be internal to the building and shall not require use of public ways or of externally visible or uncovered ramps, driveways or parking areas. No arrangement shall be permitted which requires vehicles to back into an alley or other public way. Compliance with this subsection (j) shall be subject to review by the Transportation Management Division. (k)

Noise Control. (1)

There shall be no outdoor loudspeakers. Interior loudspeakers shall

produce no more than forty-five dba at a boundary abutting or adjacent to a residential parcel, under normal operating conditions (e.g., with windows open if they are likely to be opened). (2)

All noise generating equipment exposed to the exterior shall be

muffled with sound absorbing materials to minimize noise impacts on adjacent properties and shall not be operated before eight a.m. or after six p.m. if reasonably likely to cause annoyance to abutting or adjacent residences and shall at all times be in compliance with the City’s Noise Ordinance. (3)

Rooftop storage areas shall be screened with landscaping and/or

noise absorbing materials to minimize noise impacts on adjacent properties. (l)

Toxic Storage and Disposal. (1)

Gasoline storage tanks shall be constructed and maintained under

the same conditions and standards that apply for service stations.

35

(2)

There shall be full compliance with the terms and conditions of all

applicable federal, state, and local laws relating to the storage and disposal of toxic chemicals and hazardous wastes. (m)

Air Quality. (1)

Use of brake washers shall be required in service stalls or areas

which perform service on brakes employing asbestos or other materials known to be harmful when dispersed in the air. (2)

All mechanical ventilating equipment shall be directed to top story

exhaust vents which face away from abutting or adjacent residential properties. (3)

Exhaust systems

shall

be equipped

with

appropriate and

reasonably available control technology to minimize or eliminate noxious pollutants which would otherwise be emitted. (n)

Hours of Operation. Unless otherwise approved by the Planning

Commission, if the dealership is within one hundred feet of a residential district, operation of the dealership shall be prohibited between the hours of ten p.m. and seven a.m. (o)

Vehicle Stacking Equipment: Vehicle-stacking equipment shall be

permitted within parking structures and on surface lots for employee parking and vehicle storage when screened with an eight-foot high solid masonry wall. The wall shall be set back from the property line at least two feet so that a landscaped buffer of up to two feet in width can be provided. Parking spaces in lifts shall not be applicable in calculating a dealership’s parking requirement. If the structure is located in an R2, R3 or A lot, the

36

spaces provided on lifts shall not be included in the base used for calculating the required 10% provision of employee parking spaces.

In addition, these spaces shall

not count toward fulfilling the 10% employee parking requirement.

Vertical spaces

above employee parking shall be used for employee parking; spaces above inventory shall be used for inventory. The Planning Commission may reduce the wall height requirement to a minimum of six feet and may reduce or waive the landscaped setback area if such reduction or waiver is consistent with the public health, safety, and general welfare. All facilities shall comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance. (p)

Accessory Automobile Rental Agency Requirements.

The following

special standards shall apply to accessory automobile rental agencies located within automobile dealerships: (1)

No more than ten percent of the total interior floor area of the

automobile repair or automobile painting facility or a maximum of seven hundred fifty square feet, whichever is less, shall be devoted to the accessory automobile rental agency operation; (2)

The accessory automobile rental agency shall only operate during

the hours of operation of the automobile repair or automobile painting facility; (3)

Vehicles may only be rented to customers of the automobile repair

or automobile painting facility; (4)

No exterior signage shall be permitted for the accessory automobile

rental agency; and

37

(5)

The accessory automobile rental agency shall not be advertised or

marketed as an independent automobile rental agency. (q)

Plan Verification. All dealerships shall submit a letter annually in June

affirming their continued use of their test-driving, vehicle off-loading, and alley traffic control plans.

Any changes to approved plans shall require approval of the

Transportation Management Division. SECTION 7.

Applicability.

Except for subsections (e) through (k) of Section 3 which shall be applicable to existing and future development, this Ordinance shall apply to any development project which has not received its discretionary planning entitlements (e.g., development review permit, variance, architectural review permit, conditional use permit) or has not filed any requested extension to these planning entitlements as of March 11, 2011 unless the development project has otherwise obtained a vested right to proceed.

Discretionary project applications that were filed prior to the effective date

of Ordinance Number 2345 (CCS) and which are subject to its provisions and any extension thereto shall automatically be converted to a development agreement with fees already paid to be applied towards the development agreement deposit. SECTION 8.

Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or

appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance.

38

SECTION 9. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 10. This Ordinance shall be of no further force or effect after May 31, 2014, unless prior to that date, after a public hearing, noticed pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.22.050, the City Council, by majority vote, extends this interim ordinance. SECTION 11. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days after its adoption.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_________________________ MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE City Attorney

39

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 8-A To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Martin Pastucha, Director of Public Works

Subject:

Resource Recovery & Recycling Rate Study and Adoption of Zero Waste Strategic Plan

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Adopt the Zero Waste Strategic Plan to achieve 95% diversion from the landfill by 2030. 2. Approve a three year plan to increase Resource Recovery & Recycling service rates and the establishment of a 5% operating reserve 3. Approve the setting of a public hearing in April 2014, in accordance with Proposition 218, to adopt Resource Recovery & Recycling rate increases. Executive Summary At a Council study session on March 19, 2013, staff presented the draft Zero Waste Strategic Plan which included various policies, programs, projected waste diversion percentages and estimated costs which would affect existing rates if the recommended programs were implemented over the next fifteen years. Council directed staff to communicate the Zero Waste Plan to all facets of the community and incorporate findings into the final plan. At the FY 2006-07 Council Budget Study Session on June 20, 2006, Council approved a resolution to increase solid waste rates by 7% and by a factor equal to the difference in the Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County Consumer Price Index (CPI) for Wage Earners and Clerical Workers annually thereafter. No additional rate increases have been requested to recover full costs for Resource Recovery & Recycling services since that time. Staff recommends that Council adopt the Zero Waste Strategic Plan to achieve 95 percent waste diversion by 2030, approve a plan to increase service rates to establish a five percent operating reserve and set a public hearing in April 2014 to adopt the resource recovery and recycling rate increases.

1

Background On June 23, 2009, Council directed staff to develop a Zero Waste Strategic Plan. The City began a Zero Waste Strategic Planning process to identify the new policies, programs and infrastructure that would enable the City to reach its Zero Waste goal of 95% diversion by 2030, or a per capita disposal rate of 1.1 pounds per person per day. The Zero Waste Strategic Plan will help the City strengthen its existing diversion operations while addressing significant fiscal challenges and emerging trends and technologies. The Plan will serve as a broad environmental and policy framework and will guide the future development of the City’s Resource Recovery and Recycling policies, programs, and infrastructure.

The Resource Recovery & Recycling Division (RRR) is the exclusive provider of solid waste collection services to residential and commercial customers. RRR recovers its cost of operations through solid waste rate charges to customers. On June 20, 2006 Council approved a five year rate adjustment plan providing that customer rates would only be adjusted by the Consumer Price Index, (CPI) or the Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) whichever is higher. If an extraordinary adjustment was necessary within the five year period, such as unanticipated landfill disposal fee increases, the RRR Division used its fund balance to cover the cost of the adjustment. The Resource Recovery & Recycling rates have not been increased, except by CPI/COLA since FY 2006-07. Since that time the City has expanded its waste diversion programs, seen increased costs in disposal fees, new organics processing fees, transportation fees, salaries and benefits increases, vehicle purchases price increases, maintenance and fuel increases, all requiring RRR to continue to reduce its existing reserves.

The State of California enacted AB 939 legislation in 1989 which required that all municipalities divert 50% of waste from the landfill by 2010 and 75% by the year 2020. This sparked the increase in blue cart recycling programs at the municipal and county 2

levels throughout the late 1990’s and the early 2000’s. This legislation also led to development of additional opportunities for waste diversion, green carts for yard clippings, and food scraps composting programs to meet the mandatory state diversion requirements, all without additional state or federal funding to absorb costs for these new collection programs. In 2012, the State of California enacted AB 341 which mandates that all multi-family buildings with five or more units must implement a recycling program for its tenants, and all commercial entities generating four yards of trash weekly must also implement a recycling program for employees and clients/customers. The expenditures for outreach, marketing, collections, hauling and processing of these additional materials through this new mandate are currently being absorbed through a rate structure approved almost a decade ago.

Operational issues have also had an impact on the cost of RRR programs. On October 31, 2013 Puente Hills Landfill, owned and operated by the Los Angeles County Sanitation District, maximized its lifetime capacity for waste disposal and officially closed. This closure has resulted in the City seeking out and disposing of waste at landfills at a further distance and a higher cost due to market demand for landfill space. Landfill disposal and waste to energy fees increase annually between 1.2% and 6.4%, whereas the revenues received from rate payers for all services increase by CPI/COLA. The rate adjustments have been as low as 2.0% and as high as 3.7%, an average of 2.8% over the last seven years.

The existing fees collected by the City pay for more than just refuse collections and disposal. A variety of programs tailored to increase diversion opportunities for residents and businesses are funded by fees. The fees pay for collection and processing of recyclables, food scraps, yard debris and bulky items, as well as equipment, infrastructure, container replacements, support services, alternative technology studies, education, marketing, outreach, public litter collection, household hazardous waste collection, and street sweeping services.

Fees also pay for the monthly community 3

events which include paper shredding, compost give away, textile recycling, electronics recycling, costume swap, and other activities offered to all residents.

The following chart shows that operational expenditures have been exceeding revenues regularly since FY 2009/10. Operational expenditures for salaries and wages, supplies and expenses, and Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) are listed as columns with the revenues graphed to demonstrate the comparison for past and future projections.

Expenditure to Revenue Comparison 30,000,000 25,000,000 CIP

20,000,000

Supplies/Expenses Salaries/Benefits

15,000,000

Revenue 10,000,000 5,000,000 FY07/08 FY08/09 FY09/10 FY10/11 FY11/12 FY12/13 FY13/14 FY14/15 FY15/16 FY16/17

City staff has monitored expenditures and implemented cost saving measures in daily operations for all line items that are not affected by outside increases such as landfill disposal costs. Table 1 below shows the operational savings in several line items since 2008.

4

Table 1 Five Year Operational Savings Fiscal Year

Budget

Actual

Savings

Percent

FY 2008-09

$ 19,533,791

$ 18,573,876

$

959,915

4.9%

FY 2009-10

$ 19,822,435

$ 19,192,745

$

629,690

3.2%

FY 2010-11

$ 19,839,367

$ 18,787,512

$ 1,051,855

5.3%

FY 2011-12

$ 20,826,803

$ 20,497,057

$

329,746

1.6%

FY 2012-13

$ 21,690,342

$ 19,594,491

$ 2,095,851

9.7%

In spite of these efforts, the cost of Resource Recovery & Recycling operations continues to exceed the revenue received. There will be a fund deficit by FY2016-17 if a structural adjustment to rates is not implemented. Unrestricted cash reserves have been used to offset the increased costs for services. Table 2 shows the reserve levels since FY 2009-10 through to the projected deficit in FY 2016-17.

Table 2 Changes in the Cash Reserve Fund

CASH RESERVES Actual

Actual

Actual

Actual

Budget

FY 2009-10

FY 2010 -11

FY 2011-12

FY 2012-13

FY 2013-14

FY 2014-15

FY 2015-16

FY 2016-17

BEGINNING CASH BALANCE

4,062,138

3,773,868

3,882,791

2,211,677

3,593,135

1,286,161

982,434

566,562

ENDING CASH BALANCE

3,773,868

3,882,791

2,211,677

3,593,135

1,286,161

982,434

566,562

(275,727)

288,270

(108,923)

1,671,114

(1,381,458)

2,306,974

303,727

415,872

842,289

Decrease/(Increase) in Cash Reserve

The decreases in the reserve fund are the result of several unscheduled events during past budgeted years and projections for the next three fiscal years.

The reserve

decrease in FY 2009-10 was a result of one time funding needed for the design of the Resource Recovery Facility. Funds were spent in FY 2011-12 for the initial start-up of the bulky item collection crew and the purchase of several additional vehicles to perform 5

collection services including the new organics collection program.

In FY 2012-13,

operational procedures were implemented to achieve ongoing staffing and equipment savings and a one time savings in construction and demolition planning programs.

Beginning in FY 2013-14, the decrease in the reserve is a projection because the actual bottom line savings will not be known until the close of the Fiscal Year. All future fiscal year projections are based upon an estimated CPI of 2.5%.

Discussion Zero Waste Strategic Plan In order to gather input from the public on the proposed Zero Waste Plan staff initiated a number of efforts to reach out to system users for their input on the Plan. Community members and stakeholders were provided the opportunity to complete a survey regarding the City’s proposed Zero Waste Strategic Plan. The Zero Waste survey solicited input on the potential policies, programs, and infrastructure options identified in the Plan.

Separate surveys were provided for single-family residents, multi-family

residents, and businesses, to collect input specific to the interests of these individual stakeholders. The City initially made the survey available at the annual Santa Monica Festival, and used interns to canvas the Farmer’s Markets. Postcards were placed at all public counters and coffee shops around the City, and an email blast was sent out to over 4,000 businesses and residents. The City also reached out to the neighborhood associations, the Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce and the City’s Rent Control Board to place ads in their newsletters. To obtain as many responses to the Zero Waste Strategic Plan survey as possible, staff provided incentives for the completion of the surveys within a specific timeframe. Single family residents received a free container cleaning service; multi-family residents received kitchen pails. Commercial businesses could attend one free paper shred event with volume limitations.

6

The surveys included a series of questions; responders were asked to indicate whether they Strongly Agreed, Agreed, were Neutral, Disagreed or Strongly Disagreed with each question or statement.

The survey questions and responses to the surveys are

summarized below: Single-Family Survey The Single-Family Survey asked for input on 22 ideas for possible policies, programs, and infrastructure included in the Zero Waste Strategic Plan. A total of 1,034 surveys were viewed online with 238 surveys completed. Overall, residents strongly support the City’s adoption of Zero Waste, and the policies, programs, and infrastructure options that will help the City to achieve Zero Waste. Eighteen of the 22 questions received a response of Strongly Agree or Agree from 75% or more of the responders. One third of the questions received a response of Strongly Agree or Agree from 90% or more of the responders. More than eighty percent (80%) of single family residents who completed the survey were in favor of food waste recycling, additional public recycling containers citywide, additional education and outreach for new recycling programs and a two container collection system.

7

Single Family - 238 Responses Received 6% agree or strongly agree

12%

neutral disagree or strongly disagree

82%

Multi-Family Survey The Multi-Family Survey asked for input on 15 ideas for possible policies, programs, and infrastructure included in the Zero Waste Strategic Plan. Although 602 web users viewed the multi - family survey online, only 113 surveys were completed. Overall, multi-family residents strongly support the City’s adoption of Zero Waste, and the policies, programs, and infrastructure options that will help the City to achieve Zero Waste. Twelve of the 15 questions received a response of Strongly Agree or Agree from 75% or more of the responders. Residents acknowledged that they wanted to improve current recycling processes and future programs to divert hazardous items from landfills.

Multi-Family - 113 Responses Received 4% 11%

agree or strongly agree

8 84%

neutral disagree or strongly disagree

Commercial Survey The Commercial Survey asked for input on 19 ideas for possible policies, programs, and infrastructure included in the Zero Waste Strategic Plan. A total of 84 surveys were completed out of 525 online views and 700 personal visits to businesses by summer interns. Overall, the responders indicated strong support for the City’s adoption of Zero Waste, and the policies, programs, and infrastructure options that will help the City to achieve Zero Waste. Twelve of the 19 questions received a response of Strongly Agree or Agree from 75% or more of the responders. One fourth of the questions received a response of Strongly Agree or Agree from 90% or more of the responders.

Commercial - 84 Responses Received 6% agree or strongly agree

15%

neutral disagree or strongly disagree

79%

Responders to the survey supported additional recycling programs for their businesses and incentives for employees to reduce waste and reuse materials. Many were also in favor of manufacturer take-back programs.

The results of the surveys and comments received from the public at these numerous venues were very positive and supportive of the City’s proposed Zero Waste goals. As a result, these comments were included into the Zero Waste Strategic Plan for final adoption. The survey questions and results were added to the Zero Waste Strategic Plan as Appendix I and are attached. 9

Rate Study In May 2011, staff issued a RFP for a consultant to assist with the development of the Zero Waste Strategic Plan.

On November 22, 2011 Council approved HDR

Engineering and HF&H Consultants to assist with the Plan. HF&H Consultants conducted the financial analysis on the Plan and the anticipated impact on rates for the proposed programs listed in the Zero Waste Plan. As a result of the analysis on the proposed programs and rates, HF&H was retained by the City in March 2013 to perform a more in depth rate study including an evaluation of the current rate structure.

The rate study evaluated projected revenues, expenditures and the fund balance for a five year period, assuming continuation of the existing services and the existing rate structure. The rate study included an analysis of the alignment of current rate revenue with the cost of service for single family, multi-family and commercial customers; these are referenced in the report as service sectors. The objectives of the solid waste rate study are to: •

Evaluate the adequacy of existing rates to reasonably fund current services and maintain target reserves

•

Compare existing rate revenues by service sector (residential, multi-family and commercial) to the cost of service.

Operational costs for waste collection services are increasing annually. Unrestricted cash fund reserves are being used to continue to perform on-going services.

The

reserve fund is established as just that, reserve. The reserve fund should be used on a limited basis as a result of loss due to a catastrophic event or unscheduled events including unanticipated increases in landfill disposal fees, organics waste processing fees, or a substantial decrease in revenue.

The rate study determined that a 5%

reserve of the total revenue generated for the enterprise fund is sufficient. Additional waste management services to enhance diversion programs would not be implemented if rates are increased by only the CPI/COLA. Without an additional rate increase, the 10

reserve fund will be expended by FY 2016-17 and the General Fund will become the lending agency to fund the ongoing waste management.

Based on the data that RRR staff provided, the consultant developed scenarios based on rate adjustment recommendations for a three year period beginning July 1, 2014:

Table 3 illustrates the current rate structure and calculates the unrestricted cash balance by adjusting customer rates by 2.5% annually starting in FY 2014-15 as the assumed CPI/COLA adjustment percentage. As shown in the table, if customer rates for all sectors are only adjusted by the City’s projections for CPI/COLA for the five year period, the City will have an unrestricted cash balance of $ (247,250) for FY 2016-17.

Table3 Current Rates with CPI/COLA Adjustment Actual 2012‐ 13

Projected 2013‐ 14

Projected 2014‐ 15

Projected 2015‐ 16

Projected 2016‐ 17

CUSTOMER RATE ADJUSTMENT ASSUMPTIONS Single Family

3.00%

2.40%

2.50%

2.50%

2.50%

Multi‐Family Commercial

3.00% 3.00%

2.40% 2.40%

2.50% 2.50%

2.50% 2.50%

2.50% 2.50%

NET REVENUE/(EXPENSE) AS A % OF SECTOR REVENUE Single Family Multi‐Family Commercial

‐3% 19% ‐28%

‐10% 13% ‐34%

-5% 17% -30%

-5% 17% -31%

-7% 16% -33%

CASH BALANCE Year‐End Unrestricted Cash

$

3,108,800 $

Ending Unrestricted Cash Balance As A % of Total Expenditures

13%

1,680,286 $ 7%

1,220,116 $ 5%

684,184 $ 3%

(247,250) -1%

Scenario 1: Sector Service Rates and a 5% Unrestricted Cash Balance The goal of Scenario 1 is to maintain an unrestricted cash balance of 5% of total expenditures in FY 2016-17 and to align rate revenues with the cost of service among customer sectors (residential, multi-family and commercial). Each sector was analyzed to determine actual operating expenditures for services performed, rates required to 11

perform these services, and rates required to increase the reserve fund. This scenario provides for a 5% unrestricted cash balance by FY 2016-17, and aligns rate revenues with the cost of service in each sector by the end of FY 2016 – 17. Table 4 Sector Service Rates Maintaining 5% Reserve Actual 2012‐ 13

Projected 2013‐ 14

Projected 2014‐ 15

Projected 2015‐ 16

Projected 2016‐ 17

CUSTOMER RATE ADJUSTMENT ASSUMPTIONS Single Family

3.00%

2.40%

3.85%

3.85%

3.85%

Multi‐Family Commercial

3.00% 3.00%

2.40% 2.40%

1.00% 7.25%

1.00% 7.25%

1.00% 7.25%

NET REVENUE/(EXPENSE) AS A % OF SECTOR REVENUE Single Family Multi‐Family Commercial

‐3% 19% ‐28%

‐10% 13% ‐34%

-4% 15% -25%

-3% 15% -20%

-2.9% 12% -17%

CASH BALANCE Year‐End Unrestricted Cash

$

3,108,800 $

Ending Unrestricted Cash Balance As A % of Total Expenditures

13%

1,680,286 $ 7%

1,450,573 $ 6%

1,409,334 $

1,281,491

5%

5%

Tables 5 through 7 illustrate the customer rate impacts of each scenario over the projection period. Rates used in the projections are the most commonly used service level rates based on the data provided for FY 2011-12. In addition to the CPI/COLA, single family proposed rates increase slightly, multi-family proposed rates decrease and commercial proposed rates increase as well. All of these sector rates include waste, recycling and food waste collection services, bulky item and household hazardous waste collection programs, street sweeping services, public litter/recycling collection services, education and outreach materials and monthly reuse and recycling events.

12

Table 5 Single Family Rate Impact (One 95-gallon refuse cart)

Single Family

CPI/COLA Scenario 1: includes (2.5% CPI/COLA, plus 1.35%)

Percentage Increase (July 1, 2014)

Current 2013‐14 Rates Bi‐Monthly Rate

2.50% $ 3.85% $

88.34 88.34

Projected 2014‐15

Monthly Rate

Monthly Rate

$ $

$ $

44.17 44.17

Increase

45.27 $ 45.87 $

Adjusted Monthly Rate Projected 2015‐16 Monthly Rate

1.10 $ 1.70 $

Increase

46.41 $ 47.64 $

1.14 1.77

Projected 2016‐17 Monthly Rate $ $

Increase

47.57 $ 49.47 $

1.16 1.83

Table 6 Multi-Family Rate Impact (2 cubic yard bin collected twice per week)

Multi-Family

CPI/COLA Scenario 1

Percentage Increase (July 1, 2014)

Current 2013‐14 Rates Bi‐Monthly Rate

2.50% $ 1.00% $

324.93 324.93

Projected 2014‐15

Adjusted Monthly Rate Projected 2015‐16

Projected 2016‐17

Monthly Rate

Monthly Rate

Increase

Monthly Rate

Increase

Monthly Rate

Increase

$ 162.47 $ 162.47

$ 166.53 $ 164.09

$ $

$ 170.69 $ 165.73

$ $

$ 174.96 $ 167.39

$ $

4.06 1.62

4.16 1.64

4.27 1.66

Table 7 Commercial Rate Impact (2 cubic yard bin collected twice per week)

Commercial

CPI/COLA Scenario 1: includes (2.5% CPI/COLA, plus 4.75%)

Percentage Increase (July 1, 2014)

Current 2013‐14 Rates Bi‐Monthly Rate

2.50% $ 7.25% $

233.72 233.72

Projected 2014‐15

Adjusted Monthly Rate Projected 2015‐16

Projected 2016‐17

Monthly Rate

Monthly Rate

Increase

Monthly Rate

Increase

Monthly Rate

Increase

$ 116.86 $ 116.86

$ 119.78 $ 125.33

$ $

$ 122.78 $ 134.42

$ $

$ 125.85 $ 144.16

$ $

2.92 8.47

3.00 9.09

3.07 9.74

Solid Waste Rate Comparison with Neighboring Communities Tables 8 - 9 summarize monthly solid waste rates under the City of Santa Monica’s proposed solid waste rates for all scenarios and the current solid waste rates of several neighboring communities.

The proposed monthly rate compares favorably with the

other communities surveyed. 13

Table 8 FY 2013-14 - Current Rates City Beverly Hills Burbank Culver City

Los Angeles Pasadena Santa Monica

Single Family (95) .0104 per square foot lot size $ 49.13 $ 41.86 (64 gallon container) $ 36.32 $ 40.99 $ 44.17

Multi- Family $ 18.31 per unit

Commercial (2yd) $ 105.40

$ 138.09 < 4 units use single family rate; >4 units use commercial rate $ 24.33 per unit $ 50.44/96gallon $ 162.47

$ 247. 91 $ 186.13

NA $ 157.34 $ 116.86

Table 9 Sector Service Rate with a 5% Unrestricted Cash Balance City Beverly Hills Burbank Culver City

Los Angeles Pasadena Santa Monica

Single Family (95) .0104 per square foot lot size $ 49.13 $ 41.86 (64 gallon container) $ 36.32 $ 40.99 $ 45.87

Multi- Family $ 18.31 per unit

Commercial (2yd) $ 105.40

$ 138.09 < 4 units use single family rate; >4 units use commercial rate $ 24.33 per unit $ 50.44/96gallon $ 164.09

$ 247. 91 $ 186.13

NA $ 157.34 $ 125.33

As stated earlier, the Zero Waste Strategic plan identifies new policies, programs and infrastructure that will enable the City to reach its Zero Waste goal of 95% diversion by 2030, or a per capita disposal rate of 1.1 pounds per person per day. These programs will also affect existing rates from FY 2014 -15 through FY 2029 -2030.

For each selected program, the incremental change in the annual cost for the program and the cost per ton diverted was estimated. The cost estimates provide a reasonable basis for understanding the potential cost impacts and how costs between programs compare to one another. The estimates presented are not intended to calculate the 14

precise results of each program. The tables present a “low” and “high” estimate of the incremental change in the Division’s cost associated with the implementation of these programs. The range of costs is reflective of the range experienced in other communities that have implemented these or similar programs.

Table 10 presents the

incremental annual change in program costs, the estimated tons diverted by program, and the cost/(savings) per diverted ton for each of the selected programs. Table 10

PROGRAM

PHASE

INCREMENTAL ANNUAL PROGRAM COST/(SAVINGS)

Residential

Low

PROGRAM TONS DIVERTED

INCREMENTAL ANNUAL PROGRAM COST/(SAVINGS) PER TON

High

Low

Midpoint

High

Food Scraps Collection

Short

$

90,346 $

132,755

1,124 $

80 $

99 $

118

Behavior Change Marketing

Short

$

28,582 $

60,418

410 $

70 $

109 $

147

Weekly Organics and Recyclables Collection; Bi-Weekly Refuse Collection

Short-Med

$

(157,402) $

(137,671)

504 $

(312) $

(292) $

(273)

Wet/Dry Collection

Med-Long

$

(295,135) $

(252,622)

562 $

(525) $

(487) $

(449)

Residuals Processing

Long

$

10,716 $

13,211

1,248 $

9 $

10 $

11

Behavior Change Marketing

Short

$

211,746 $

375,609

1,549 $

137 $

190 $

242

Bulky Item Collection; Move-In/Move-Out Program

Short-Med

$

160,896 $

230,483

176 $

916 $

1,114 $

1,312

Weekly Organics and Recyclables Collection; Bi-Weekly Refuse Collection

Short-Med

$

(229,434) $

(201,057)

2,694 $

(85) $

(80) $

(75)

Food Scraps Collection - Cart Customers

Medium

$

39,381 $

58,132

476 $

83 $

102 $

122

Food Scraps Collection - Bin Customers

Medium

$

130,258 $

300,681

463 $

281 $

465 $

649

Wet/Dry Collection

Med-Long

$

(94,878) $

(81,319)

1,615 $

(59) $

(55) $

(50)

Residuals Processing

Long

$

29,006 $

35,760

3,377 $

9 $

10 $

11

Multi-Family

Low

Commercial

Low

High

Low

High

Low

Midpoint

Midpoint

High

High

Behavior Change Marketing

Short

$

(101,132) $

(44,065)

2,831 $

(36) $

(26) $

(16)

Food Scraps Collection

Medium

$

456,964 $

615,261

3,975 $

115 $

135 $

155

Wet/Dry Collection

Med-Long

$

(210,325) $

(185,492)

2,620 $

(80) $

(76) $

(71)

Expansion of Mandatory Commercial Recycling Long

$

214,645 $

355,382

906 $

237 $

315 $

392

Residuals Processing

$

41,976 $

51,750

4,887 $

9 $

10 $

11

Long

Using the cost analysis data, the percentage impact on existing customer rates for each of the selected program options was calculated. The rate impacts for each selected program are cumulative. The rate impacts are based on fiscal year 2013 budget data 15

and cumulative future tonnage diversion assumptions. An average change of the “Low” and “High” rate impacts are illustrated in Table 11. Table 11

The most cost effective programs are those that result in net cost savings. These programs are illustrated in Table 12. Table 12 Single Family

Multi-family

Program

phase

rate chg.

Food Collection - carts

short

3.8%

Behavior Change

short

1.5%

Commercial

phase

rate chg.

phase

rate chg.

short

-0.8%

short

3.9%

short -med

2.6%

short -med

-7.3%

Food Collection - carts

medium

1.7%

Food Collection - bins

medium

2.5%

medium

6.1%

med - long

-1.2%

med - long

-2.3%

long

3.3%

long

0.5%

Bulky Move In-Out Weekly Organics/Recycling & Bi-Weekly Refuse Service

Wet/ Dry Collection

short - med

med - long

-0.5%

-9.3%

Mandatory Recycling Residual Processing Total Rate Impact from 20122030 Total Rate Impact from 20122030

long

0.4% -4.5%

long

0.4% -0.3% 0.5%

16

6.8%

Rate Adjustment Alternatives

As stated previously, there will be a fund deficit by FY2016-17 if existing rates remain with only an annual CPI/COLA increase. If a rate adjustment is not implemented, staff would continue to analyze existing operations to streamline programs to seek additional savings. Streamlining existing services may include a reduction in the daily bulky item (illegal dumping) collection program, elimination of the commercial food waste collection program, and implementing monthly, rather than weekly residential street sweeping services. Council may also determine that the proposed five percent cash reserve be decreased which would lessen the proposed rate adjustment. Lowering the proposed five percent cash reserve would not ensure available funds for extraordinary events such as unanticipated landfill disposal fees, additional state and federal recycling mandates, or increased organics processing fees.

An Integrated Waste Management System is essential to the infrastructure of trash collections as we know it today. Landfills are closing; programs, policies and alternative technologies need to be further developed in order to sustain waste generation and waste processing operations. The City will continue to evaluate the efficacy of each strategy, and modify the Plan as necessary to meet the zero waste goals and objectives, and to adjust to the changing social, environmental, and economic conditions within the City. Next Steps If directed by Council to proceed with the rate adjustment and the establishment of a 5% operating reserve, staff will initiate the Proposition 218 requirements for public noticing of the proposed changes to affected property owners.

Proposition 218 created a

category of fees known as “property-related fees.” Such fees may not be imposed or increased unless a local government conducts a majority-protest proceeding. A 45 day notice/response period will be in effect from the date notices are distributed. At the end of the protest period the final tally of voters will be presented to Council at a public 17

hearing. If no majority protest is received, Council would then be able to adopt the rates for implementation on July 1, 2014. Financial Impacts & Budget Actions There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of adopting the Zero Waste Strategic Plan. Staff will return to Council if specific budget actions are required in the future for implantation of program initiatives.

There is no budget impact from authorizing staff to proceed with Proposition 218 noticing. If Council decides to approve the proposed sector service rates after the protest period, there will be an increase to the FY2014/15 Garbage/Refuse Collection revenue. The amount of the rate impact will be presented to Council with the rate adoption staff report. Future year increases will be reflected in the proposed budgets.

Prepared by: Kim Braun, Resource Recovery and Recycling Manager Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Martin Pastucha Director of Public Works

Rod Gould City Manager

Attachments: Attachment: Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan Appendix I – Zero Waste Survey

18

cit y of sant a m on ica zero wast e st rat egic op erat ion s pl an

app endix I

Appendix I Zero Waste Surveys

I-1

cit y of sant a m on ica zero wast e st rat egic op erat ion s pl an

app endix I

Zero Waste Surveys In order to gather input from the public, interested community members and stakeholders were given the opportunity to complete a survey regarding the City’s proposed Zero Waste Strategic Plan. The Zero

Waste survey solicited input on the potential policies, programs, and infrastructure options identified in the Plan. Separate surveys were provided for single-family residents, multi-family residents, and businesses, to enable input specific to the interests of these individual stakeholders. To get the word out, the City initially made the survey available at the annual Santa Monica Clover Park Festival, and used interns to canvas the Farmer’s Markets. The City created postcards that were placed at all the public counters and coffee shops around the City, and an email blast was sent out to over 4,000 businesses and residents. The City also reached out to the neighborhood associations and to the Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce to place ads in their newsletters. The surveys included a series of questions, and responders were asked to indicate whether they Strongly Agreed, Agreed, were Neutral, Disagreed or Strongly Disagreed with each question or statement. The survey questions and responses to the surveys are summarized below, and copies of the surveys are included at the end of this Appendix.

Single-Family Survey The Single-Family Survey asked for input on 22 ideas for possible policies, programs, and infrastructure included in the Zero Waste Strategic Plan. A total of 238 surveys were completed. Overall, residents strongly support the City’s adoption of Zero Waste, and the policies, programs, and infrastructure options that will help the City to achieve Zero Waste. Seventeen of the 22 questions received a response of Strongly Agree or Agree from 75% or more of the responders. One third of the questions received a response of Strongly Agree or Agree from 90% or more of the responders. Programs that received lower support included enforcing anti-scavenging, curbside textile recycling, and document shredding. The results are tabulated below. Policy Options Single-family residents were asked whether they support the following policy options: 1. Formal commitment to achieving Zero Waste by 2030. Strongly Agree or Agree: 88% Neutral: 8% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 4%

I-2

cit y of sant a m on ica zero wast e st rat egic op erat ion s pl an

app endix I

2. Expansion of recycling efforts at City facilities. Strongly Agree or Agree: 95% Neutral: 4% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 1% 3. Evaluate and identify improvements to residential curbside recycling program and incorporate rate structure incentives. Strongly Agree or Agree: 94% Neutral: 4% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 2% 4. Require manufacturers to take back their products. Strongly Agree or Agree: 74% Neutral: 17% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 9% 5. City educating residents about sustainable purchasing practices. Strongly Agree or Agree: 87% Neutral: 11% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 2% 6. Increasing enforcement of anti-scavenging ordinance for curbside recycling containers. Strongly Agree or Agree: 39% Neutral: 24% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 37% 7. Bans on hard to recycle materials, such as plastic bags and Styrofoam food packaging. Strongly Agree or Agree: 74% Neutral: 16% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 10% Program Options Single-family residents were asked whether they support the following program options: 8. Residential food waste recycling Strongly Agree or Agree: 82% Neutral: 12% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 6%

I-3

cit y of sant a m on ica zero wast e st rat egic op erat ion s pl an

app endix I

9. Business food waste recycling program Strongly Agree or Agree: 94% Neutral: 4% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 2% 10. Two container weekly collection program (organics and recycling) Strongly Agree or Agree: 73% Neutral: 16% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 11% 11. Increased educational outreach, with regular updates, circulation, and announcements. Strongly Agree or Agree: 86% Neutral: 10% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 4% 12. Free technical assistance to businesses Strongly Agree or Agree: 88% Neutral: 9% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 3% 13. Online service to reduce/stop junk mail Strongly Agree or Agree: 90% Neutral: 7% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 3% 14. School recycling programs Strongly Agree or Agree: 96% Neutral: 3% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 1% 15. Curbside textile recycling program Strongly Agree or Agree: 65% Neutral: 29% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 6% 16. Re-Use programs, such as Citywide Yard Sale Strongly Agree or Agree: 79% Neutral: 19% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 2% I-4

cit y of sant a m on ica zero wast e st rat egic op erat ion s pl an

app endix I

17. Recycling collection containers in public places Strongly Agree or Agree: 96% Neutral: 4% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 0% Infrastructure Options Single-family residents were asked whether they support the following infrastructure options: 18. Development of regional organics composting facilities in partnership with neighboring cities. Strongly Agree or Agree: 82% Neutral: 14% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 4% 19. Development of residual waste recycling facilities in partnership with neighboring cities Strongly Agree or Agree: 85% Neutral: 10% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 5% 20. Development of self-haul facility to recycle furniture, mattresses and white goods. Strongly Agree or Agree: 77% Neutral: 17% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 6% 21. Establishment of a permanent household hazardous waste collection program within City limits. Strongly Agree or Agree: 92% Neutral: 7% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 1% 22. Regular document shredding services. Strongly Agree or Agree: 53% Neutral: 36% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 11%

I-5

cit y of sant a m on ica zero wast e st rat egic op erat ion s pl an

app endix I

Multi-Family Survey The Multi-Family Survey asked for input on 15 ideas for possible policies, programs, and infrastructure included in the Zero Waste Strategic Plan. A total of 113 surveys were completed. Overall, multi-family residents strongly support the City’s adoption of Zero Waste, and the policies, programs, and infrastructure options that will help the City to achieve Zero Waste. Twelve of the 15 questions received a response of Strongly Agree or Agree from 75% or more of the responders. Questions that received lower support included satisfaction with their current recycling processes and satisfaction with current work to divert hazardous items from landfills. The results are tabulated for each question below. Policy Options Multi-family residents were asked whether they support the following policy options: 1. Formal commitment to achieving Zero Waste by 2030. Strongly Agree or Agree: 93% Neutral: 6% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 1% 2. Evaluate and identify improvements to recycling program and incorporate rate structure incentives. Strongly Agree or Agree: 94% Neutral: 3% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 3% 3. Satisfaction with your building’s current recycling processes Strongly Agree or Agree: 34% Neutral: 23% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 43% 4. City educating residents about sustainable purchasing practices Strongly Agree or Agree: 89% Neutral: 8% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 3% 5. Require manufacturers to take back their products. Strongly Agree or Agree: 71% Neutral: 20% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 8%

I-6

cit y of sant a m on ica zero wast e st rat egic op erat ion s pl an

app endix I

6. Bans on hard to recycle materials, such as plastic bags and Styrofoam food packaging. Strongly Agree or Agree: 77% Neutral: 15% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 8% Program Options Multi-family residents were asked whether they support the following program options: 7. Residential food waste recycling. Strongly Agree or Agree: 85% Neutral: 9% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 6% 8. Increased educational outreach with regular updates, circulation, and announcements. Strongly Agree or Agree: 89% Neutral: 9% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 2% 9. Curbside textile recycling collection. Strongly Agree or Agree: 75% Neutral: 20% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 5% 10. ReUse program, such as Citywide Yard Sale. Strongly Agree or Agree: 86% Neutral: 13% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 1% 11. Recycling collection containers in public places. Strongly Agree or Agree: 95% Neutral: 5% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 0% Infrastructure Options Multi-family residents were asked whether they support the following infrastructure options: 12. Development of regional organics composting facilities in partnership with neighboring cities. Strongly Agree or Agree: 91% Neutral: 6% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 3% I-7

cit y of sant a m on ica zero wast e st rat egic op erat ion s pl an

app endix I

13. Does your building currently work to divert hazardous items from landfills, such as batteries, ink, paint, and other E-Waste? Strongly Agree or Agree: 25% Neutral: 14% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 61% 14. Use of posters, signs, decals or promotional materials to help neighbors recycle. Strongly Agree or Agree: 79% Neutral: 16% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 5% 15. Development of self-haul facility to recycle furniture, mattresses and white goods. Strongly Agree or Agree: 79% Neutral: 17% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 4%

Commercial Survey The Commercial Survey asked for input on 19 ideas for possible policies, programs, and infrastructure included in the Zero Waste Strategic Plan. A total of 84 surveys were completed. Overall, the responders indicated strong support for the City’s adoption of Zero Waste, and the policies, programs, and infrastructure options that will help the City to achieve Zero Waste. Thirteen of the 19 questions received a response of Strongly Agree or Agree from 75% or more of the responders. One fourth of the questions received a response of Strongly Agree or Agree from 90% or more of the responders. The results are tabulated for each question below. Policy Options Commercial businesses were asked whether they support the following policy options: 1. Business policies for waste reduction. Strongly Agree or Agree: 96% Neutral: 1% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 3% 2. Business recycling Strongly Agree or Agree: 98% Neutral: 1% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 1%

I-8

cit y of sant a m on ica zero wast e st rat egic op erat ion s pl an

app endix I

3. Satisfaction with current recycling program. Strongly Agree or Agree: 68% Neutral: 14% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 18% 4. Staff responsible to ensure recycling. Strongly Agree or Agree: 76% Neutral: 13% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 11% 5. Employee incentives to reduce, reuse, and recycle. Strongly Agree or Agree: 72% Neutral: 21% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 7% 6. Require manufacturers to take back their products. Strongly Agree or Agree: 61% Neutral: 28% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 11% Program Options Commercial businesses were asked whether they support the following program options: 7. Weekly collection program that separates wet waste (organics) from dry waste (recycling). Strongly Agree or Agree: 81% Neutral: 13% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 6% 8. Increased education outreach, with regular updates, circulation, and announcements. Strongly Agree or Agree: 88% Neutral: 7% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 5% 9. Facilities for compostable materials. Strongly Agree or Agree: 90% Neutral: 6% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 4%

I-9

cit y of sant a m on ica zero wast e st rat egic op erat ion s pl an

app endix I

10. Native or low water, low maintenance plans to reduce trimmings and water use. Strongly Agree or Agree: 60% Neutral: 33% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 7% 11. Recycling of hazardous items, such as batteries, ink, paint, and other E-waste. Strongly Agree or Agree: 84% Neutral: 8% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 8% 12. Use of recyclable or compostable packaging material. Strongly Agree or Agree: 95% Neutral: 4% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 1% 13. Use of reusable shipping containers. Strongly Agree or Agree: 93% Neutral: 6% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 1% 14. Use of returnable pallets. Strongly Agree or Agree: 83% Neutral: 17% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 0% 15. Use of posters, signs, decals, or promotional materials to help employees recycle. Strongly Agree or Agree: 70% Neutral: 22% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 8% 16. Support Santa Monica’s Green Business Certification Program. Strongly Agree or Agree: 79% Neutral: 17% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 4% 17. Procurement of recyclable products for your business operations. Strongly Agree or Agree: 93% Neutral: 5% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 2% I-10

cit y of sant a m on ica zero wast e st rat egic op erat ion s pl an

app endix I

18. Desire to receive more information on Green Business Certification Program. Strongly Agree or Agree: 59% Neutral: 32% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 9% 19. Interest in learning more about Zero Waste. Strongly Agree or Agree: 75% Neutral: 19% Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 6%

I-11

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 8-B To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Rod Gould, City Manager

Subject:

Framework for 2014 Twilight Concert Series

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Review and comment on modifications to the Twilight Concert Series’ (TCS) framework to reposition the TCS as a community-focused Pier event, with minimal beach overflow, and direct staff to continue to work with the Pier Corporation to right-size the event, ensure public safety, and conform to existing law. 2. Approve gap funding to the Pier Corporation in an amount not to exceed $200,000 for the 2014 TCS. 3. Authorize the budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts and Budget Actions section of this report. Executive Summary The Pier Corporation has been successful in its recent efforts to enliven and activate the Pier through new community events, locally-focused programming, and a sponsorshipbased funding model. The Twilight Concert Series has grown significantly over the past few years, as have the attendant public safety issues. Staff proposes that a new event framework be applied during a year-long pilot period. This framework would apply to the 2014 TCS, other Pier Corporation-produced events, as well as events produced by the City, private promoters, community organizations, and those that are handled through the City’s event permitting process. The framework sets the capacity for the Pier deck and a standard layout for events, refocuses talent and marketing to support a community-based event, ensures that signage conforms to existing law, suggests that some concerts occur without the jumbotron and beach speakers, and offers a revised layout for the beach overflow area. Gap funding in the amount of $200,000 to the Pier Corporation is recommended to mitigate some of the impacts of the framework. The City would likely incur additional public safety costs, depending on the scalable event plan. 1

Background In November 1983, Council created the Pier Restoration Corporation (PRC) to oversee the reconstruction and revitalization of the Santa Monica Pier following severe storm damage during the preceding winter. In 1985 the Santa Monica Arts Commission budgeted $7,000 for a seven-week free concert series as part of an ongoing effort to keep the public aware that the Pier was still open despite the devastation of the 1983 winter storms. The evening event was named The Twilight Dance Series and was an immediate success, expanding quickly to a ten-week series and drawing larger crowds year-by-year. By 1989 the budget increased significantly through soliciting funds from corporate sponsors, allowing the series to draw more popular acts, both local and international. As the series grew in popularity, crowds on the Pier increased. By 2007 small groups of people began congregating on the beach, enjoying picnic dinners while listening to the music despite poor viewing opportunities. Gradually throughout that season more and more people gathered on the beach, and speakers were placed on the Pier facing the beach specifically to enhance the beach experience. For the final concert of that year, featuring the Los Angeles based band “Los Lobos”, an estimated 15,000 spectators gathered on the beach. From that time on, the series consistently drew substantial crowds to the beach. In 2008 and 2009, attempts were made to turn the stage and speakers away from beach in order to draw people onto the Pier, but public pressure returned the concert setup to continue including the beach. In 2011 the jumbotron was added to the TCS as a way to enhance the concert experience for those on the beach. On March 9, 2010, the Council allocated $35,000 in Council Discretionary funds to save the 2010 Twilight Dance Series, which was projected to operate at a significant deficit due to shortfalls in sponsorship, as the 2009 series had. New sponsorships and a robust development plan were required. Private fundraising efforts, led by the PRC and community members, helped to fill the gap. Following that, on March 23, 2010, Council approved an increase in Carousel rates to generate financial support for the 2010 TDS. 2

In 2011, the PRC Board’s size and composition were modified, and the group was renamed to the Pier Corporation to reflect the fact that the restoration work was complete. The Pier Corporation became responsible for marketing, sponsorship, community event production, special event management, filming, street performer monitoring, community outreach and education. On February 28, 2012, a new Pier Board was appointed and the City and Pier Corporation’s Services Agreement was updated. 2013 TCS The 2013 TCS was the 29th annual event. Ten concerts over 10 weeks (July 11 – September 12) were staged, each with two musical acts. Sponsorships from MySpace and approximately 40 other local and regional brands including media outlets, banks, hotels, grocery stores, restaurants, transit, entertainment and community partners generated $450,000, which made the series financially self-sufficient. Performances were telecast on a jumbotron directed towards the beach south of the Pier and broadcast on a powerful sound system. People arrived hours before the event and set up sometimes elaborate picnic areas around a grid style walk-way system. So many people biked to the event that the bike valet could not accommodate the demand. Downtown streets, sidewalks, and the Pier Bridge were congested with people traveling to and from the event. Attendance at the 2012 TCS was estimated to be 119,000 people over the 10 concerts, with approximately 3,000 – 5,000 people on the Pier deck during each concert and the remainder on the beach south of the Pier. These attendance numbers were used to generate 2013 sponsorship and marketing packages. The 2013 TCS sponsorship packages offered presenting, featured, and supporting sponsors multiple branding and marketing opportunities. Sponsors were provided with booths to display and provide samples of their merchandise, naming rights to the backstage VIP area, and signage on light poles, the stage header, banners, and jumbotron. Sponsorship packages also included visibility in print, digital, radio, TV, and 3

theatrical releases. Off-premises signs were a significant component of sponsorship packages. Conflicts with Existing Law The current operation of the Pier concerts conflicts, or may conflict with, existing law in several ways. The Community Events Law and regulatory system do not authorize concerts on the beach; and the distinction between a concert on the Pier with spillover on the beach becomes harder to support when the bulk of those attending are on the beach viewing the concert on a jumbotron, which faces the beach audience. And, many of those on the beach drink alcohol or smoke, both of which are legally prohibited. Additionally, the business model developed by the Pier Corporation depends on illegal signage for revenue generation. The Santa Monica Municipal Code Sign Code (SMMC 9.52.150(a) & (f)) prohibits “off premises signs”, which is “a commercial sign which displays any message directing attention to a business, product, service, profession, commodity, activity, event person, institution, or other commercial message which is generally conducted, sold, manufactured, produced, offered or occurs elsewhere than on the premises where such sign is located.”

Thus, the sale of advertising on the

jumbotron is legally problematic. There is a general exception to the sign code prohibitions that effectively authorizes temporary signage allowed by a Community Event Permit. The Community Events Law allows for “temporary event signage”, which consists of “non-permanent sign(s) identifying or pertaining to the community event” that are installed within the event site as defined by the permit. At event sites, other than the beach or parks, the logo of a commercial sponsor or vendor may be displayed on such signs but “shall not exceed thirty percent of the banner area, provided the sign(s) are internally oriented to the extent possible.” (SMMC 4.68.130.) Also, the temporary signs must face inward, toward the event to the extent possible.

4

Therefore, TCS’ sponsors and vendors could have signs on the Pier identifying the event. Signs would need to face inward towards the event; no more than thirty percent of such signs could be taken up with corporate logos. Beach Events The TCS was established to enliven the Pier. Over time the crowd has expanded from the Pier to the beach area south of the Pier. In 2013, the crowd on the beach stretched past the lifeguard tower parallel to Chess Park. While many people experience the TCS from the beach, it is not a beach event. The City’s Community Events Administrative Instruction defines a beach event as one that includes a beach-related activity as a predominant component of the event. Beach-related activities include beach sports or ceremonies or services integral to the beach (e.g., baptisms, beach clean-ups, etc.). Music or other amplified sound is only permitted as an incidental component of the event. Impact of the TCS As the spillover crowds from the TCS grew in size on Santa Monica State Beach, so did the related public safety and maintenance issues. Concert budgets included additional private security and a limited number of Police Officers to manage the crowds on the beach. As the numbers averaged about 15,000 per event in 2013, with single events as high as 20,000 to 30,000, and approximately 2/3 of concert attendees on the beach south of the Pier, it became apparent that more public safety personnel and more infrastructure was needed. Existing beach restrooms were overwhelmed by the crowds so portable restrooms were brought to the beach on Thursday and removed after the concerts. Additional Police and Fire Safety Officers were deployed for crowd management. The Beach Fund absorbed $15,000 of these costs, which were not included in the 2013 TCS budget. In addition, the Beach Fund paid for Beach Maintenance staff time each Friday morning to

5

clean up the considerable amount of trash left on the beach and to groom the sand area for public use. The primary economic impact of the Twilight Concert Series on businesses at the Pier (and by inference those in the vicinity of the Pier) has been a consistent and substantial increase in food sales on TCS Thursdays over other weekdays and in particular prior Wednesdays and following Fridays. Over the 10 week period of the 2013 TCS series, Pier restaurants reported an average increase in Thursday sales over Wednesdays and Fridays by more than 80 and 30 percent respectively.

It is also likely that other

businesses, especially restaurants on Ocean Avenue, Ocean Front Walk, Main Street and in other areas of Downtown, experienced a spike in sales on TCS Thursdays. Given the number of people who attended the events, parking revenue probably increased on TCS Thursdays. Public Safety Any large scale event presents safety personnel with significant challenges. Crowding impacts circulation, blocks public ingress and egress, impairs access by safety personnel, and poses risks to both the civilians in the crowd and to enforcement personnel who may be required to force their way through the crowd to address emergencies. Recent evidence of the risks related to large-scale events includes the bombing at the Boston Marathon and the riots at the Huntington Beach surfing contest. In recognition of the special risks posed by large-scale events, Los Angeles County has recently adopted special standards for all "mass gatherings" of more than 5,000 people. These standards require that local agencies prepare medical action and event plans in advance of such events. As an example, for last year's Jimmy Cliff concert on the Pier, the county standards would have required two paramedic teams for the beach, a bike paramedic team on the Pier, three fire safety officers and one fire supervisor. This is a total of 10 Fire Department personnel to staff one concert.

6

The risks attendant upon any mass event are exacerbated at the Pier concert series by the physical environment of the Pier and circumstances that have developed on the beach. The Pier is a wooden, and therefore flammable, structure situated thirty feet above the sand and water. Ingress and egress are very limited. Unlike a typical large concert venue, it is simply not designed to meet the needs of the public and safety personnel in the event of an emergency. Thus, if there were a major emergency, such as a fire or shooting on the Pier (both of which have occurred in the past), and this emergency arose during a concert, thousands of people would likely attempt to swarm off the Pier at the same time as emergency personnel were attempting to move personnel and equipment onto the Pier. The beach, which is open space, does not have the same limits on ingress and egress. However, other safety issues have arisen there.

Crowds have become huge,

sometimes approaching thirty thousand and stretching past Tower 16. And, the crowds are often very compact, with people laying out blankets, coolers and other belongings, edge to edge, with no pathways between. Also, the beach is dark. In the event of a safety emergency and sudden mass exodus, members of the public would have difficulty seeing what was happening and avoiding falling over other people and their gear. The darkness also impacts safety personnel's ability to assess situations and otherwise do their work. Additionally, many who attend the concerts on the beach drink alcohol or smoke during the performances. This behavior is illegal on the beach, as it is on the Pier. But, on the beach, because of the density of crowds, it is very difficult for police personnel to control it. And, the behavior increases safety risks and enforcement challenges on the beach because it impacts the judgment of individuals and groups, particularly in their interactions with police or in time of emergency. Moreover, safety risks created resulting from large-scale concerts on the Pier and beach are not limited to those immediate areas. When huge numbers attend the concerts, traffic impacts are very significant. The Downtown is particularly impacted, 7

sometimes to the point of gridlock. As a result, additional safety personnel must be deployed to the Downtown to keep intersections open and protect access for emergency personnel and vehicles. Moreover, when tens of thousands attend the concerts, safety personnel must be diverted from the rest of the City. This means that the residential neighborhoods to the north, east and south, will either experience diminished services or be served through mutual aid, which is not a good option because the City must bear the full cost of mutual aid provided in conjunction with a planned event.

Discussion The Pier Corporation has been successful in its recent efforts to enliven and activate the Pier through new community events, locally-focused programming, and a sponsorshipbased funding model. In addition, privately produced yoga festivals and fitness events, charity walks, music festivals, pep rallies, paddleboard races, and more have taken place on the Pier. There have also been events, such as Festival Supreme, which overtaxed the Pier and City resources and were not successful. New events, coupled with the popularity of the Pier and its attractions among visitors and locals, have made the Pier a year-round destination. Now that the Pier has reached a new level of visibility, popularity and vitality, it is an appropriate time to assess the impact of the changes and establish a sustainable framework for events. This fiscal year, the City will grant the Pier Corporation $481,983 in support of the Corporation's required service agreement activities, including event production and Pier promotional activities. Over the past two years, the Pier Corporation has grown its annual revenue base by approximately $500,000, to $1.5M, through new programming and the establishment of a visitor’s center. Additional funding has been generated from event deck rental and carousel rental (which are split 50/50 with the City), film permits, corporate promotions, visitor center and merchandise sales, new event-driven opportunities and program sponsorships including $450,000 from 2013 Twilight Concert Series sponsorship. 8

The growth in TCS attendance has created serious public safety concerns; the funding model relies on illegal off-premises signage. These issues must be addressed and remedied. Following the 2013 TCS season, an interdepartmental group from the City Manager’s Office, City Attorney’s Office, Police Department, Fire Department, Community and Cultural Services Department, as well as Pier Corporation staff and board members and a representative from the Pier tenant’s association developed the following operational framework for the 2014 TCS. New Framework The following changes for Pier events could be implemented during a year-long pilot, with additional changes to follow, informed by the implementation of the pilot. The framework is proposed for the 2014 TCS, other Pier Corporation-produced events, as well as events produced by the City, private promoters, community organizations, and those that are handled through the City’s event permitting process. The impact of the recommended changes on non-TCS events is yet to be determined. The reduced deck capacity, modified layout, absence of the jumbotron at some events, and changes to sponsorship packages detailed below could have significant impacts on the ability of any event to generate sufficient sponsorship and/or ticket revenue. In addition, the new layout increases the Pier deck rental fee for ticketed events because all events would be charged the full, not half-deck, price. It also reduces available Pier deck parking. Additional parking, which could be secured in the 1550 Beach lot, would be a new cost. It is likely that events that were previously self-sustaining or provided revenue that was redirected to free community events would not be able to adhere to this framework and break even. Event promoters would choose to move to another venue or discontinue the event. 1. Revised Capacity and Layout: The Fire Department reviewed the capacity of the Pier in its entirety and the parking deck space used for events. The Fire Marshall determined no more than 8,020 people can be accommodated on the entire Pier. The site’s capacity is determined in large part by the limited of number of exits. 9

The Fire Department and Pier Corporation staff reviewed various event site plans in an effort to identify a proposed layout for future events. Attachment A details the proposed site plan, Plan A. This configuration relocates the stage approximately 50 feet to the east, reconfigures temporary fencing to allow for two new emergency exits and would require the relocation of electrical vehicle charging stations. Additionally, the Pier deck parking spaces for production, Pier tenant and disabled parking would be reduced from 99 to 21, necessitating paying for 78 spaces in the 1550 Beach lot for these purposes on TCS evenings.

Plan A locates the TCS stage in area 4, which is able to bear the weight of a seven ton vehicle. (See Attachment B: Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study.) Some of the vehicles that may be used to load and unload TCS equipment may exceed seven tons. When that is the case, sound, staging, or other equipment must be unloaded within area 6, which has been reinforced to accommodate 15 – 20 ton vehicles, and carted or rolled over a plywood path 60 feet to the stage area. This process was successfully employed during a December 2013 Stanford University pep rally.

If the proposed Moss Avenue Bridge were to be approved as a part of the development of the new Pier Bridge, fortification of the Pier deck drive aisle substructures in areas 2 and 4 would be required.

Therefore, if the revised

layout and stage placement becomes the standard for all Pier events, heavy trucks could eventually be able to load and unload in area 4, adjacent to the stage.

The Fire Department has determined that the gross area occupant load for the TCS’ proposed layout is 4,742 persons. (See Attachment C) This number would be decreased based on the inclusion of food/concession tents, displays, and/or a beer garden. The gross square footage includes the area of the guard shack and 10

vehicle turnaround and the Police/Fire Department parking area adjacent to the guard shack. The occupant load was determined based on 12 square feet per person which includes persons with chairs, blankets, and those standing.

For non-TCS events (i.e. ticketed events), the largest capacity for the Plan A layout for the gross area occupant load was calculated at 6000 persons, standing room only. This requires dedicated and clear exit aisles and cross aisles, plus lighted exit signs and exit pathway lighting. An exiting plan and security plan would also be required with the event plan submission. This number does not include ancillary items such as concessions, bathrooms, or wine/beer gardens, which would reduce the total net number of persons accordingly.

The strict

counting of occupants entering the venue to ensure the number is maintained would be required.

The Office of the Fire Marshal has final determination of occupant load approval for an event based not only on layout, but also based on event type and events and activities occurring elsewhere on the Pier that may affect total occupant load of the entire Pier. Any event, including TCS, may be closed or shutdown to additional occupants if conditions exist that do not allow for the safety of the occupants due to overcrowding, crowding the stage or other similar factors that would elicit unsafe conditions for public safety and the occupants within.

2. Emerging Talent, Marketing to Locals, and Public Education: One way to bring locals to the Pier and create a sense of community is to create programming with a local interest. Booking emerging local talent, rather than a performer with established name recognition or a regional, national, or international fan base, would reinforce the TCS as a community-based event and likely draw a crowd that could mostly fit within the revised deck capacity. Targeting marketing efforts to Santa Monica and Westside-based communities and outlets would help draw people who live and work in the area. Enhanced public education and messaging 11

may reinforce principles like leaving no trace and laws that prohibit smoking and alcohol use, and promote self-correcting behaviors. 3. No Off-Premises Signs:

In order to conform with the City’s sign code, off-

premises signs would not be allowed. This change would eliminate many of the promotional messaging opportunities from the various sponsorship packages. Coupled with the reduced capacity on the Pier and a gradual drop in overall attendance by those who watch the event from the beach, this change would significantly impact the amount of sponsorship revenue that could be raised. Pier Corporation staff estimates that TCS sponsorship revenue would be cut in half.

4. Pilot Removal of the Jumbotron and Beach Speakers for Some Concerts: On March 22, 2011, Council directed staff to modify policy to allow for the installation of video screens and/or speakers for concerts on the Pier intended to entertain those on the beach. Since that time, the TCS has included a jumbotron directed at the beach. Pier Corporation staff estimates a base attendance of approximately 8,000 people per concert, regardless of the line-up. Many of these people experience the event from the beach. Following the 2013 season, the Police and Fire Departments recommended removing the jumbotron from some of the 2014 concerts to redirect the event from the beach to the Pier and allow the working group to gauge the beach overflow crowd size, with and without the jumbotron. While removal of the jumbotron for some of the TCS may not immediately and completely eliminate the beach overflow, removing it may reinforce the desired redirection of the event to the Pier, and doing so would provide important feedback for long-term changes. Over time it is expected that this pilot would cause event

attendance to shrink.

However,

until

that

is

repeatedly

demonstrated, the appropriate Police and Fire resources, including beach-based medical carts and paramedics, would be allocated to the events per existing

12

guidelines for planned, large-scale events, and the appropriate action plans and response plans would be put in place.

The level of public safety resources necessary would be continually assessed based on the evening’s talent, trends in crowd size, and other factors, and modified as necessary. Staffing may include resources gained through mutual aid, depending on the date and time of the concerts, and the availability of City personnel. The cost for public safety resources beyond the levels employed for the 2013 TCS would be funded with City resources, and would be scalable.

The Pier Corporation representatives on the working group feel strongly that the jumbotron and beach-directed speakers are an integral part of the event and create opportunities for a Pier and beach-based community experience. Removal of the jumbotron would also reduce messaging and sponsorship platforms and significantly revise sponsorship packages.

5. Revised Beach Configuration: The 2013 TCS elevated the Pier’s status and made it a Thursday-night destination. While the changes in talent and marketing will likely reduce the number of attendees, new measures are proposed to deal with people who experience the event from the beach. Open spaces are difficult to control. Therefore, SMPD and SMFD have recommended a new layout for the beach that creates six areas and maintains wide access lanes for better control of the beach crowd. More portable restrooms would be installed on the sand and removed each week, as well as sand fencing under the Pier to discourage bathroom activity. Private security staff would set up and maintain access lane cones and monitor the congested bike path.

13

Long-Term Additional Changes to Consider There are likely other changes that the Pier Corporation could make to the TCS to create a more sustainable and community-based event and address public safety concerns. In addition to the items noted above, additional changes could be applied during one, some, or all of the concerts, and evaluated for impacts on crowd size, fundraising, or other elements. These items have not been included in the 2014 framework because of operational challenges and timing issues.

Rather they are

suggested as items for the Pier Corporation to consider. The additional information gathered from strategies like the ones noted below or others would further advance efforts to identify a sustainable long-term framework. 1. Shoulder Season Events: The TCS was originally intended to enliven the Pier. Since that time, Santa Monica’s beachfront has become a destination for regional, national, and international visitors, especially during the summer months. Scheduling more or all of the TCS after the Labor Day weekend when public safety resources are less taxed and the city is less impacted by visitors would help to refocus the events as attractions for local residents. This change would also reduce the need to call back additional public safety personnel or rely on mutual aid to staff the concerts, as most personnel would be redeployed rather than added.

2. Time of Day/Day of Week: Scheduling changes could also be considered. Starting concerts later in the evening or scheduling on a different day may impact attendance. 3. Reduction in TCS Length: Fewer events would mean less costs associated with talent, public safety personnel, and other event-specific costs. However, since sponsor dollars are based on attendance numbers, a decrease in the number of concerts would decrease sponsorship revenue.

14

4. Ticket Model: It may be possible to generate additional revenue for the TCS by asking for a donation or charging a nominal fee (less than $5) to watch an event from the Pier deck.

Collecting fees from concert-goers presents staffing

challenges and introduces a cash-handling function to the event. One alternative is to move to an electronic ticketing model, with all transactions occurring prior to the event. More investigation would be needed to determine if this could be implemented for the 2014 season and the associated start-up costs.

5. Private Fundraising: Additionally, revenue could be generated by engaging community members to form a “Friends of the Pier” fundraising group to solicit private donations, securing grants, or developing a way to donate by text. These, too, would require an investment of energy from Pier Corporation staff. 6. Seating Areas: Some of the people who experience the TCS from the beach do so because it is more comfortable to sit, rather than stand, through the event. It may be possible to recreate this experience on the Pier by designating specific areas of the deck for seating in chairs (both low chairs and high chairs). Aisles and access points would be created, as well as access for disabled persons. However, any seating area would reduce the capacity on the Pier Deck and the purchase or rental of chairs would be a new cost for the Pier Corporation. 6. Volunteers: Volunteers could supplement an enhanced public education effort by reinforcing principles like leaving no trace and laws that prohibit smoking and alcohol use.

2014 Budget The proposed framework would result in new one-time City costs for relocating the EV chargers ($5,000).

15

Changes to the TCS’ fixed costs would include a small reduction in equipment rental costs due to loss of the jumbotron for some of the concerts, a new cost of $28,080 to pay for the 78 parking spaces in the 1550 lot, and additional costs for private security, sand fencing, and portable restrooms on the beach (estimated at $13,200). The budgets for talent and marketing would be reduced.

Public safety personnel would be

determined based on anticipated crowd size. Costs beyond the 2013 amount of approximately $55,000 for Police, Fire, and Harbor Patrol would be absorbed by the City. With these changes, the 2014 TCS budget would be approximately $400,000. The Pier Corporation has estimated that under the new framework, sponsorship revenue would at least be cut in half, to $225,000, and possibly much less than this. It is difficult to accurately estimate the projected budget deficit at this time, as the new framework would necessitate a significant change to the sponsorship assets and therefore the revenue generated from partners. It is also not possible to estimate crowd size absent a lineup and certainty about the event schedule. Nor is it possible to estimate how much revenue might be garnered from ticket sales or donations, should the Pier Corporation move forward with those ideas. Therefore, staff recommends that the Council approve gap funding in an amount not to exceed $200,000, which is half of the 2014 TCS budget, to support the 2014 TCS and direct staff to continue to work with the Pier Corporation to right-size the event to ensure public safety and conform to existing law. In order to implement the new framework, gap funding to the Pier Corporation in an amount not to exceed $200,000 for the 2014 TCS and additional City costs for relocating EV chargers and public safety personnel as necessary depending on the scalable event plan, would be incurred. Next Steps Should Council approve the proposed framework, the Pier Corporation would begin to develop sponsorship packages, secure talent, calendar and market the event, and 16

develop public education messaging. The Pier Corporation would also submit a FY14/15 work plan and budget that reflects the Council-approved framework. City staff would relocate the EV charging stations. The working group would assess the impact of the new event framework on the sustainability of the TCS and other Pier-based events and provide a report to Council and associated recommendations, if any. Alternatives As an alternative to staff’s recommendation, the Council could: 1. Direct staff to return with modifications to the City’s sign code to allow offpremises signs. This would assist the existing sponsorship model but would not address public safety. 2. Provide an ongoing subsidy to the Pier Corporation to support future TCS 3. Not approve gap funding for the 2014 TCS and direct the Pier Corporation to develop a self-sufficient business model or indicate if that is not possible 4. Make additional changes to the event framework 5. Prioritize some elements of the framework over others 6. Direct the Pier Corporation to implement a ticket or donation model for Pier events 7. Cancel the 2014 TCS and give direction to significantly change the event and bring it back in 2015 8. Cancel the TCS completely and direct the Pier Corporation to focus on community events that can be contained on the Pier deck, if feasible Pier Corporation Board of Directors Three members of the Pier Corporation’s Board of Directors, as well as Pier Corporation staff, participated in the working group. The Pier Corporation Board will discuss the framework for the 2014 TCS and applicability to other Pier events at its January 7, 2014 17

meeting.

Members of the Board will provide a verbal report to Council during the

January 14, 2014 meeting and the Board’s recommendations and alternatives. Financial Impacts & Budget Actions Implementing modifications to the Twilight Concert Series framework will result in additional immediate costs of $205,000, and in the City incurring additional unbudgeted costs for Police and Fire Department personnel. An appropriation totaling $200,000 to account 30209.577300 for FY 2013-14 is requested to implement the Twilight Concert Series framework modification. Public Works staff will relocate the EV chargers. Funds will come from the Pier Fund balance. Future year costs will be determined based on information from the pilot year. Staff will return to Council if specific budget actions are required in the future; appropriations in future years are contingent on Council approval.

Prepared by: Danielle Noble, Assistant to the City Manager

Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Rod Gould City Manager

Rod Gould City Manager

Attachments: A. Pier Deck Event Layout – Plan A B. Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study C. TCS Max Gross Occupancy Load

18

20'x60'

STAGE

Area 10: 175psf 7 Ton Truck

Twilight Concert Series Layout Gross Occupant Load

355

595

150

3675

Total Gross Area Occupant Load: 4,742 persons Requires 80 feet of exiting width in event area.

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2014 Agenda Item: 8-C To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Dean Kubani, Sustainability Manager,

Office of Sustainability and the

Environment Subject:

Recommendation to Adopt Amendments to the Sustainable City Plan

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Establish indicators and targets for the Arts and Culture Goal Area 2. Add a Sustainability Bill of Rights Guiding Principle 3. Adopt an updated Sustainable City Plan with indicators and targets for 2020

Executive Summary The Sustainable City Plan (SCP) was created in 1994 to enhance community resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well-being of the community for the sake of current and future generations. Updates to the SCP were adopted by City Council in 2003 and 2006. Staff is recommending a number of new changes to the SCP in order to update the timeline for indicators and establish targets for 2020, revise language to capture changes in the current discussion of municipal sustainability, and revise or replace indicators and targets for which data is not currently available or to reflect new data and community priorities. This report provides recommendations from City staff, the Task Force on the Environment and the Arts Commission to update the SCP indicators with targets for 2020, establish indicators and targets for the Arts and Culture Goal Area, and add a Sustainability Bill of Rights Guiding Principle. Background In September 1994 Council adopted the Santa Monica Sustainable City Program which set long-term internal and Citywide goals to enhance resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well-being of the community for the sake of current and future generations. On February 11, 2003, Council adopted the Santa Monica Sustainable City Plan which provided a comprehensive update and expansion of the Sustainable City Program. 24, 2006,

On October

Council updated the Sustainable City Plan guiding principles, goals, 1

indicators and targets. On May 8, 2012, Council approved the addition of an Arts and Culture Goal Area in the Sustainable City Plan. On January 24, 2012 Council adopted a resolution declaring the City's Commitment to Sustainable Rights.

When Council adopted the SCP in 1994 it included four goal areas: 1) Resource Conservation; 2) Transportation; 3) Pollution Prevention and Public Health Protection; and 4) Community and Economic Development. When the SCP was updated in 2003 Council approved changes that resulted in eight goal areas: 1) Resource Conservation; 2) Environmental and Public Health; 3) Transportation; 4) Economic Development; 5) Open Space and Land Use; 6) Housing; 7) Community Education and Civic Participation; and 8) Human Dignity. In 2006, Council adopted a number of revisions to the SCP to update the indicators and establish targets for 2010. During the 2006 revision the number of Goal Areas remained consistent. In 2012, Council adopted a resolution declaring the City's Commitment to Sustainable Rights with direction to incorporate the commitment in the SCP. Additionally in 2012, Council approved the addition of a ninth Goal Area, Arts and Culture, and directed staff to develop indicators and targets for the newly created goal area. Discussion Updating Existing Sustainable City Plan Goal Areas, Indicators and Targets The Office of Sustainability and the Environment (OSE) has overseen SCP monitoring, reporting and implementation since adoption of the Sustainable City Program in 1994. With the adoption of the updated SCP in 2003, and the revisions in 2006, the number of indicators increased from 18 to 66.

Staff has successfully identified data sources,

collected data, and reported on the majority of these indicators; however, data for some of the indicators has been difficult, and sometimes impossible, to obtain. Also, at the time the most recent SCP was adopted, some of the new indicators and targets had not been completely defined.

2

Staff is recommending a number of changes to the SCP in order to: 1) update the timeline for indicators and establish targets for 2020; 2) revise language to capture changes in the current discussion of municipal sustainability; and 3) revise or replace indicators and targets for which data is not currently available or to reflect new data and community priorities.

The process to update the indicators and targets for which data is not currently available or to reflect new data and community priorities was multifaceted and included: 1) a review of peer city sustainability plans, 2) analysis by Sustainable Measures, a sustainable city indicators consulting firm, 3) input from the Task Force on the Environment and the Arts Commission, 4) review of the STAR Community Rating System reporting requirements, and 5) input from City of Santa Monica staff from all relevant departments.

The review of peer city sustainability plans included reviewing sustainability plans from communities that are similar to Santa Monica in terms of size, demographic or national leadership on sustainable city issues. The cities include Berkeley, CA, Austin, TX, Minneapolis, MN, Philadelphia, PA, Oakland, CA, San Francisco, CA, Seattle, WA, Chicago, IL, New York City, NY and Vancouver, Canada.

The analysis by Sustainable Measures was done because a number of the indicators had become increasingly less able to fulfill the main functions of indicators, raise awareness, engage stakeholders, inform decisions or measure progress. This analysis resulted in a number of indicators being proposed for removal in the update of the SCP. The proposed removal of these indicators reflects a lack of available data or poor data quality that compromised the indicator and the associated reporting. Additionally, the analysis from Sustainable Measures resulted in a number of indicators being revised, eliminated and/or replaced. The affected indicators were either: 1) no longer measuring a useable sustainability goal; 2) not clear or actionable; or 3) no longer relevant or useful as a decision making tool. 3

The Task Force on the Environment received reports from staff on the peer city review and the Sustainable Measures findings. They provided input into the updated goals, indicators and targets for the Resource Conservation, Environmental and Public Health, Transportation, and Economic Development Goal Areas. Additionally, they reviewed the indicators and targets for all the Goal Areas to ensure relevance and consistency with the overall objectives of the SCP.

The STAR Community Rating System is a national framework for sustainable communities that helps cities and counties achieve meaningful sustainability outcomes by participating in the first national framework for local community efforts.

Santa

Monica has been involved in the creation of the STAR Community Rating System since its inception. The performance metrics in the STAR Community Rating System were used to inform the update of the SCP and the updated SCP indicators and targets now align with the STAR Community Rating System reporting requirements. There were some areas of the STAR Communities Rating System where national performance measures exceed the practices in place in Santa Monica. There were other areas where Santa Monica’s current policies and practices exceed those established in the national framework.

Finally, staff from OSE worked with staff from the City Clerk’s Office, Office of Emergency Management, Office of Pier Management, Community & Cultural Services Department, Housing and Economic Development Department, Information Systems Department, Planning & Community Development Department, Police Department, and Public Works Department to review historical indicators and targets, review data quality and availability, and propose appropriate updated indicators and targets that set aggressive but achievable targets for 2020.

The process to update the indicators and targets for which data is not currently available or to reflect new data and community priorities resulted in a series of proposed changes. The proposed changes included removing indicators that are no longer useful, 4

adding new indicators that provide relevant information, renaming goal areas and indicators to more accurately reflect what is being measured, and moving indicators to goal areas that are more consistent with the goals they reflect.

There were 10

indicators that were removed, 8 indicators that were added, 9 indicators and one goal area that were renamed, and two indicators that were moved to a more appropriate goal area. A summary of the proposed changes is included in Table 1 below:

Table 1 Action Indicator Removed (10) Removed Removed Removed Removed Removed

Indicator

Goal Area

Sustainable Procurement Wastewater Toxic Air Contaminant Restaurant Produce Purchases Business Reinvestment

Removed

Empowerment

Removed

Volunteering

Removed Removed Removed Indicator Added (8) Added Added Added Added Added

Basic Needs- Health Care Incidents of Discrimination Basic Needs- Economic Opportunity

Resource Conservation Environmental and Public Health Environmental and Public Health Environmental and Public Health Sustainable Local Economy (Changed from Economic Development) Community Education and Civic Participation Community Education and Civic Participation Human Dignity Human Dignity Human Dignity

Added

Sustainable Business Community

Added

Resident Satisfaction

Added Indicator Renamed (9) Renamed

Production of Affordable Housing

Renamed Renamed

Marine Debris Community Gardens Pedestrian Facilities Vehicle Miles Traveled Economic Health

City Purchase of Sustainable Products (Formerly Hazardous Materials) Bike Facilities (Formerly Bicycle Lanes and Paths) Transit Service (Formerly Bus Ridership)

5

Environmental and Public Health Environmental and Public Health Transportation Transportation Sustainable Local Economy (Name Change from Economic Development) Sustainable Local Economy (Name Change from Economic Development) Community Education and Civic Participation Housing Environmental and Public Health Transportation Transportation

Renamed Renamed Renamed Renamed Renamed Renamed Goal Area Renamed (1) Renamed

Travel Volumes (Formerly Traffic Congestion) Street Safety (Formerly Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety) Vehicle Use (Formerly Vehicle Ownership) Income Diversity (Formerly Income Disparity) Homelessness (Formerly Basic Needs – Shelter) Public Safety (Formerly Basic NeedsPublic Safety)

Transportation Transportation Transportation Sustainable Local Economy (Name Change from Economic Development) Human Dignity Human Dignity

Sustainable Local Economy (Formerly Economic Development)

Indicator Moved (2) Moved Goal Areas

Vehicle Miles Traveled

Moved Goal Area

Participation in Cultural Events

Moved from Environmental and Public Health to Transportation Goal Area Moved from Community Education and Civic Participation to Arts and Culture Goal Area

The changes noted above can be seen in the context of their associated Goal Areas in Attachment 1.

In addition to updating the existing SCP Goal Areas, Indicators and Targets, staff is recommending that

Council formally adopt indicators and targets for the Arts and

Culture Goal Area and add a Sustainability Bill of Rights Guiding Principle. Establishing Indicators and Targets for the Arts and Culture Goal Area The proposed Arts and Culture goals, indicators and targets developed by City staff and approved by the Arts Commission on July 15, 2013 can be found in Table 2 below. The Arts and Culture Goal Area language was developed with input from the Arts Commission and is consistent with definitions used in the City’s adopted cultural plan, Creative Capital.

6

Table 2 Arts and Culture Goal Area Adopted Goals: 1. Retain and nurture Santa Monica’s arts community and resources 2. Increase cultural participation and provide greater access to a diversity of cultural programs for all ages 3. Enhance the long-term sustainability of SM creative sector

Indicators Presence of Artists Creative Sector Activity • People employed in the creative sector • Number businesses • Revenue produced Presence of Opportunities for Cultural Participation • Number of non-profit cultural organizations • Number of retail arts venues • Classes for life-long learning in the arts Support for the Arts • Financial support for city arts grants • Charitable giving in the arts • Square footage of city property leased for cultural uses at below market rates Attendance and Participation • Number of families in SM who subscribe, buy tickets, etc. to cultural events (LA Stage Alliance data/study) • Participation at city or city funded cultural events • Participation at non city funded cultural events

7

Targets for 2020 Presence of Artists • No net loss Creative Sector Activity • # Employed: Annual Increase • # Businesses: No net loss • No net loss Presence of Opportunities for Cultural Participation • Annual Increase (blended)

Support for the Arts • Annual Increase (blended)

Attendance and Participation • Number of families: At least 50% of adults attend a live performance annually and at least 30% attend a museum annually • Annual increase

Adding Sustainability Bill of Rights Guiding Principle On January 24, 2012, Council adopted a resolution declaring the City's Commitment to Sustainable Rights and directed staff to incorporate the commitment in the update of the SCP. The proposed Sustainability Bill of Rights Guiding Principle language is pulled directly from the resolution passed by Council. The proposed 11th Guiding Principle would read:

Santa Monica is Committed to Sustainable Rights for its Residents, Natural Communities and Ecosystems. The Sustainability Bill of Rights codifies the commitments made in the Sustainable City Plan and asserts the fundamental rights of all Santa Monica residents regarding sustainability. It establishes the rights of natural communities and ecosystems to exist and flourish in Santa Monica and asserts the rights of residents to enforce those rights on behalf of the environment.

Taken together, the amendments to the Sustainable City Plan that update the indicators and targets for 2020, establish indicators and targets for the Arts and Culture Goal Area, and add a Sustainability Bill of Rights Guiding Principle represent a broad, forward looking vision for a Sustainable Santa Monica. The 2014 updated Sustainable City Plan which reflects all of the changes described in this report is included as Attachment 2.

When Council approved the Sustainability Bill of Rights ordinance it included a requirement that “City staff prepare a biennial written report for presentation to Council at a public hearing on the state of the local environment and the City’s progress in implementing and enforcing the Sustainable City Plan and the provisions of the ordinance.” Should Council approve the proposed amendments to the SCP, staff would collect and analyze data on the indicators and targets and deliver the Sustainable City Report Card along with a discussion of findings at a City Council meeting in September 2014.

The purpose of the Sustainable City Report Card is to communicate indicator

data to the Council, City staff and community members in a way that is accessible and 8

actionable. The biennial reporting provides an opportunity to identify successes and challenges and make appropriate decisions to affect community outcomes and drive change towards a more sustainable Santa Monica.

Board and Commission Action Recent actions taken by the Arts Commission related to the recommendations presented in this staff report include: •

July 15, 2013 - Approved the Arts and Culture Goal Area Indicators and Targets.

Recent actions taken by the Task Force on the Environment related to the recommendations presented in this staff report include: •

October 21, 2013 - Recommended that City Council adopt amendments to the Sustainable City Plan that update the indicators and targets, establish indicators and targets for the Arts and Culture Goal Area, and add a Sustainability Bill of Rights Guiding Principle.

The Wellbeing Project In 2013, the City won $1M from Bloomberg Philanthropies to define, measure, and actively improve wellbeing at the community level. The core deliverable of The Wellbeing Project is the development of the Local Wellbeing Index, a dynamic metric that will measure community wellbeing using data from objective and subjective sources. RAND Corporation in partnership with the New Economics Foundation were selected to lead development of the index in November 2013, including building out the backend system needed to manage data, interpreting findings, and working with City staff to pilot strategies for use of the findings. Indicators identified through a panel of experts process will be grouped in five domains (economic vitality; social relationships and community; physical and mental health; education and care; and local context). The conceptual and practical link between sustainability and wellbeing has emerged in various forums, both nationally and internationally. While there may be some areas of eventual overlap between wellbeing indicators and the Sustainable City Plan, the relationship between the two frameworks is essentially symbiotic and mutually beneficial. For example, the Sustainable City Plan and Report Card have and will 9

continue to provide important lessons learned in terms of data collection and use in policymaking and resource allocation. The Wellbeing Project will result in new standards, systems, and platform that will make data collection efforts easier and augment the work done by staff for the Sustainable City Plan and Report Card. Identification of wellbeing indicators will occur during the first half of 2014, with a hard delivery date of October 2014 for the Local Wellbeing Index. While the timing for the Local Wellbeing Index will be out of sync with the timeline for the 2014 Sustainable City Report Card, the 2016 Sustainable City Report Card will likely be enhanced by the availability of data from the Local Wellbeing Index, as well as the new management standards and systems developed to support the project. Additionally, 2016 indicators and 2020 targets may be informed by the Local Wellbeing Index findings. OSE staff have been and will continue to be active participants in the interdepartmental advisory team for The Wellbeing Project. The Task Force on the Environment will receive regular updates on The Wellbeing Project, and be invited to engage at key points in the project.

10

Financial Impacts & Budget Actions There are no financial impacts or budget actions associated with adopting amendments to the Sustainable City Plan that update the indicators and targets, establish indicators and targets for the Arts and Culture Goal Area, and add a Sustainability Bill of Rights Guiding Principle.

Implementation of any future efforts that address the goals, indicators and targets of the Sustainable City Plan may have budgetary and financial impacts; however, when individual programs, projects and policies related to the Sustainable City Plan are advanced, Council will be presented with a full assessment of budget and financial impacts of those activities as part of the approval process.

Prepared by: Shannon Parry, Principal Sustainability Analyst

Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Dean Kubani Sustainability Manager, Office of Sustainability and the Environment

Rod Gould City Manager

Attachments: 1) 2)

SCP Goal Area Changes Updated Sustainable City Plan

11

Attachment 1 Proposed Updated Goal Areas Showing Changes Resource Conservation Goal Area Adopted Goals: 1. Significantly decrease overall community consumption, specifically the consumption of nonlocal, non-renewable, non-recyclable and non-recycled materials, water, and energy and fuels. 2. The City should take a leadership role in encouraging sustainable procurement, extended producer responsibility and should model innovative strategies to become a zero waste city. 3. Within renewable limits, encourage the use of local, non-polluting, renewable and recycled resources (water, energy, and material resources)

Indicators Solid Waste • Generation • Landfilled • Diversion Water Use • Total citywide use (Self Sufficiency) • Total citywide use (Per Capita) • Percent local vs. imported • Potable vs. non-potable

Energy Use • Total municipal use • Total citywide use • Efficiency • Efficiency

Renewable Energy Use • Total use • Total use from clean distributed generation in SM

Targets for 2020 Solid Waste • Generation- Do not exceed year 2000 levels • Generation- Reduce per capita generation to 2.4 lbs/person/day • Diverted- Achieve 85% diversion rate Water Use • Total citywide use (Self-Sufficiency)Reduce water demand by 1,300,000 GPD • Total citywide use (Per Capita)- Reduce per capita use to 123 GPCD (500,000 GPD) • Percent local vs. imported- Increase to 100% local • Potable vs. non-potable- Upward trend in non-potable use Energy Use • Total municipal use- Reduce use 10% • Total citywide use- Reduce use 10% • Efficiency- Demonstrate incremental progress towards achieving reduction in energy use intensity • Efficiency- Increase efficiency in existing buildings to achieve reductions of 1million kWh annually Renewable Energy Use • Total use- At least 50% of all electricity should come from renewable sources • Total use from clean distributed generation in SM- Install 7.5MW of solar citywide • Total use from clean distributed generation in SM – Install 1 MW of solar on City

Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Community • Corporate Ecological Footprint Sustainable Procurement Green Construction • New Construction • O&M • Residential • Non-Residential

operated facilities Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Community- Reduce community GHG emissions 20% below 1990 levels • Corporate- Reduce corporate GHG emissions 30% below 1990 levels • No net increase REMOVED Green Construction • New Construction- 100% of new municipal buildings achieving LEED GOLD certification • O&M- Demonstrate 100% of existing municipal buildings achieving LEED GOLD certification • Residential- Demonstrate incremental increase in the percentage of residential buildings achieving energy efficiency and green construction certifications • Non-Residential- Demonstrate incremental increase in the percentage of nonresidential buildings achieving energy efficiency and green construction certifications

Environmental and Public Health Goal Area Adopted Goals: • Protect and enhance environmental health and public health by minimizing and where possible eliminating: o The use of hazardous or toxic materials by residents, businesses and City operations; o The levels of pollutants entering the air, soil and water; and o The risks that environmental problems pose to human and ecological health. • Ensure that no one geographic or socioeconomic group in the City is being unfairly impacted by environmental pollution. • Increase consumption of fresh, locally produced, organic produce to promote public health and to minimize resource consumption and negative environmental impacts. Indicators Santa Monica Bay Health • Wet weather: No rain • Wet weather: Rain event • Dry weather Marine Debris (NEW) • Trash: Presence of cigarettes, plastic packaging, single use bags, lids and straws Wastewater Vehicle Miles Traveled Air Quality • # Days ambient air quality standards exceeded Residential Household Hazardous Waste • Total volume collected • Number and percent of households participating • Cumulative number of participants City Purchase of Sustainable Products (NEW NAME) • Proportion of procurement budget spent on sustainable products annually TAC Releases Urban Runoff Reduction • Effective impervious area • Total acreage treated • Gallons polluted runoff treated

Targets for 2020 Santa Monica Bay Health • Wet weather: No rain- 3 days • Wet weather: Rain event- 17 days • Dry weather: 0 days Marine Debris (NEW) • Trash- 0 trash (cigarettes, plastic packaging, single use bags, lids and straws) REMOVED MOVED TO TRANSPORTATION GOAL AREA Air Quality • 0 days Residential Household Hazardous Waste • Total volume- No target • Number and percent of households participating- Upward trend • Cumulative number of participants50% cumulative participation City Purchase of Sustainable Products (NEW NAME) • Upward trend REMOVED Urban Runoff Reduction • Effective impervious area- annual reduction • Total acreage treated- annual increase • Gallons polluted runoff treatedannual increase

Fresh, Local, Organic Produce • Percent of fresh, local, organic produce served at City facilities • Percent fresh, local, organic produce served at community institutions: (SMMUSD, SMC, Hospitals) • Sustainable food commitment

Farmers Markets • Total sales • Percent organic • Percent low chemical • Percent conventional Restaurant Produce Purchase Food Choices • Residential reduction in meat and dairy consumption Community Gardens (NEW) • Number of people participating • Average wait time for plot • Number of gardens connected

Fresh, Local, Organic Produce • Percent of fresh, local, organic produce served at City facilities15% of total • Percent fresh, local, organic produce served at community institutions- 15% of total • 100% of City food purchases comply with Santa Monica Sustainable Food Commitment Farmers Markets • Total sales- annual increase • Percent organic- annual increase • Percent low chemical- annual increase • Percent conventional- No target REMOVED Food Choices • Residential reduction in meat and dairy consumption- 15% reduction Community Gardens (NEW) • Number of people participating • Average wait time for plot- Annual decrease • Number of gardens connectedAnnual increase

Transportation Goal Area Adopted Goals: • Create a multi-modal transportation system that minimizes and, where possible, eliminates pollution and motor vehicle congestion while ensuring safe mobility and access for all without compromising our ability to protect public health and safety. • Facilitate a reduction in automobile dependency in favor of affordable alternative, sustainable modes of travel. Indicators Modal Split • Number of trips by type, citywide • Average vehicle ridership (AVR) of Santa Monica businesses with more than 50 employees • Pedestrian travel volumes • Bike traffic volumes

Vehicle Miles Traveled (MOVED) • Total • Total per capita Residential Use of Sustainable Transportation • Percent of residents who have intentionally not used their car but have instead used a sustainable mode of transportation in the past month Sufficiency of Transportation Options • Percent of households with high quality transit service within ½ and ¼ mile Pedestrian Facilities (NEW) • Complete sidewalks • Public/private pathways • Crosswalk enhancements • Signal Timing enhancements Bike Facilities (NEW NAME) • Percent of bike network completed • Total miles of bike lanes and paths installed or upgraded • Total Bikeshare usage • Number of bikes parked by bike valet

Targets for 2020 Modal Split • An upward trend in the use of sustainable (bus, bike, pedestrian, rail) modes of transportationDrive alone max: 60%, Bike + Walk + Transit minimum: 25%, Bike + Walk: 15% • AVR: 2 for Santa Monica businesses with more than 50 employees • Pedestrian Volume: Annual increase • Bike Volume: Annual increase Vehicle Miles Traveled (MOVED) • Total- Downward trend • Total per capita- Downward trend Residential Use of Sustainable Transportation • Upward trend Sufficiency of Transportation Options • 100% of households within ½ mile Pedestrian Facilities (NEW) • Annual increase

Bike Facilities (NEW NAME) • Percent of bike network completed- 100% • Annual increase

Vehicle Use (NEW NAME) • Total number of automobiles maintained per person • Percent of total automobiles that are qualified ZEV/PZEV or better • Total Carshare usage Transit Service (NEW NAME) • Annual ridership on Santa Monica Big Blue Bus (BBB) • Percent of residents who have ridden the BBB in the past year • Annual ridership on MTA routes originating in Santa Monica • Annual Expo light rail ridership Alternative Fueled Vehicles • Percent of the City fleet vehicles using alternative fuels Travel Volumes (NEW NAME) • Auto corridor travel times • Peak Hour Trips • Signal Timing • Bus travel time

Street Safety (NEW NAME) • Number of collisions o Vehicle-Vehicle o Vehicle-Pedestrian o Vehicle-Bicyclist o Bicyclist-Pedestrian o Bicyclist-Bicyclist Traffic Impacts to Emergency Response Average emergency response times for public safety vehicles • Police • Fire

Vehicle Use (NEW NAME) • Total number of automobiles- 10% reduction • Percent of total automobiles that are qualified ZEV/PZEV or better - Annual percentage increase • Carshare- Annual increase Transit Service (NEW NAME) • BBB ridership- Annual increase • % residents BBB- Annual increase • MTA ridership- Annual increase • Expo ridership- Annual increase

Alternative Fueled Vehicles • Percent of the City fleet vehicles using alternative fuels - 80% of fleet Travel Volumes (NEW NAME) • Auto corridor travel times- no increase • Peak Hour Trips- no net new PM trips • Signal Timing- 100% completion • Bus travel time- no increase Street Safety (NEW NAME) • Downward trend

Traffic Impacts to Emergency Response • Police- No increase • Fire- No increase

Sustainable Local Economy Goal Area (NEW NAME) Adopted Goals: • Nurture a diverse, stable, local economy that supports basic needs of all segments of the community. • Businesses, organizations and local government agencies within Santa Monica continue to increase the efficiency of their use of resources through the adoption of sustainable business practices. Indicators Economic Diversity • Percent of total economic activity/output by business sector (expressed as a percent of total wages)

Business Reinvestment in the Community (RENAMED) Jobs/Housing Balance • Ratio of the number of jobs in Santa Monica to the amount of housing • Percent of Santa Monica employees who reside in Santa Monica Cost of Living • Median household income in relation to cost of living • Median household income in relation to living wage standard • Percent of tenants rent-burdened Quality Job Creation • Percent of new jobs created in Santa Monica that pay greater than or equal to the cost of living Income Diversity (NEW NAME) • Percent of Santa Monica households earning less than $35,000/year • Percent of households earning more than $100,000/year Economic Health • Number of businesses • Number of employees • Annual payroll Resource Efficiency of Local Business • Ratio of energy use to total economic activity by business sector • Ratio of total water use to total economic activity by business sector

Targets for 2020 Economic Diversity • No single sector shall be greater than 25% of total economic activity/output; and the top three sectors shall not be greater than 50% of total economic activity/output Business Reinvestment in the Community (RENAMED) Jobs/Housing Balance • Ratio should approach 1 • Upward trend Cost of Living • No target • 90% of median household incomes meet or exceed the living wage standard • No target Quality Job Creation • Upward trend Income Diversity (NEW NAME) • No target

Economic Health • Number of businesses- No net loss • Number of employees- No net loss • Annual payroll- Increasing trend Resource Efficiency of Local Business • Downward trend

Local Employment of City Staff • Percent of City employees who live in SM • Distance City employees travel to work Sustainable Business Community (NEW) • Number Certified Green Businesses • Number Business Greening Program participants • Number Buy Local business participants • Number Sustainable Quality Award winning businesses • Number of Santa Monica Alliance events

Local Employment of City Staff • No target Sustainable Business Community (NEW) • Number Certified Green Businesses- 200 total • Number Business Greening Program participants- 200 total • Number Buy Local business participants- 10% Annual increase • Number Sustainable Quality Award winning businesses- No target • Number of Santa Monica Alliance events- 5 % Annual increase

Open Space and Land Use Goal Area Adopted Goals: • Develop and maintain a sufficient open space system so that it is diverse in uses and opportunities and includes natural function/wildlife habitat as well as passive and active recreation with an equitable distribution of parks, trees and pathways throughout the community. • Implement land use and transportation planning and policies to create compact, mixed-use projects, forming urban villages designed to maximize affordable housing and encourage walking, bicycling and the use of existing and future public transit systems. • Residents recognize that they share the local ecosystem with other living things that warrant respect and responsible stewardship. Indicators Targets for 2020 Open Space Open Space • Number of acres of public open space by type • Upward trend (including beaches, parks, public gathering places, • Upward trend gardens, and other public lands utilized as open space) • Percent of open space that is permeable Trees Trees • Total tress planted • Total tress planted- 2,000 total • Net tree gain trees • Percent of tree canopy coverage by neighborhood • Net tree gain- 750 total trees • Percent of tree canopy coverage by neighborhood- Upward trend Park Accessibility Park Accessibility • Percent of residents within ¼ and ½ mile of a park • Percent of residents within ½ - 95% by neighborhood of residents • Percent of residents within ¼ - 90% of residents Land Use and Development Land Use and Development • Percent of residential, mixed-use projects that are • Upward trend within ¼ mile of transit nodes and are otherwise consistent with Sustainable City Program goals Regionally Appropriate vegetation Regionally Appropriate vegetation • Percent of new or replaced, non-turf, public • 80% of new or replaced, non-turf, landscaped area and non-recreational turf area public landscaped area and nonplanted with regionally appropriate plants recreational turf area

Housing Goal Area Adopted Goal: • Achieve and maintain a mix of affordable, livable and green housing types throughout the city for people of all socioeconomic/cultural/household groups (including seniors, families, singles, and disabled). Indicators Production of Affordable Housing (NEW) • Number of new housing units produced in Santa Monica affordable to: o Very low income households o Low income households o Moderate o Market rate Availability of Affordable Housing • Percent of existing housing in Santa Monica affordable to: o Very low income households o Low income households o Moderate income households o Upper income households Distribution of Affordable Housing • Distribution of low income housing by neighborhood Affordable Housing for Special Needs • Number of new or rehabilitated affordable housing units for families, seniors, the disabled and other special needs groups as a percentage of all new or rehabilitated affordable housing development Production of “Livable” Housing • Percent of new units within ¼ mile of: o transit stop o open space o grocery store Production of Green Housing • Percent of new and substantially-rehabilitated housing that achieves LEED certification at LEED Silver or higher

Targets Production of Affordable Housing (NEW) • Number of new housing units in Santa Monica affordable to: o Very low income households- At least 428 o Low income households- At least 263 o Moderate- At least 283 o Market rate - At least 700 Availability of Affordable Housing • No target

Distribution of Affordable Housing • No target Affordable Housing for Special Needs • Upward trend

Production of “Livable” Housing • Upward trend

Production of Green Housing • Upward trend

Community Education & Civic Participation Goal Area Adopted Goal: 1. Community members of all ages participate actively and effectively in civic affairs and community improvement efforts. 2. Community members of all ages understand the basic principles of sustainability and use them to guide their decisions and actions - both personal and collective. Indicators Voter Participation • Percent of registered Santa Monica voters who vote in scheduled elections. Participation in Civic Affairs • Attendance at a city-sponsored meeting of any kind in the past year, including City Council meetings, City Commission meetings, or special-topic workshops Empowerment (REMOVED) • Percent of Santa Monica residents who feel that they have the opportunity to voice their concerns in the city on major community decisions that affect their lives Resident Satisfaction • Percent of Santa Monica Residents who are positive about the City as a place to live

Targets FOR 2020 Voter Participation • Increase to 68% in off year elections

Participation in Cultural Events (MOVED TO ARTS AND CULTURE GOAL AREA) • Percent of Santa Monica residents who attend community events such as the Santa Monica Festival, Alt Car, Alt Build, Twilight Concert, an event at Virginia Avenue Park, a neighborhood block party, a weekly farmers’ market Volunteering (REMOVED) • Percent of Santa Monica residents volunteering at select nonprofit and human service agencies • Total hours volunteered at select nonprofit and human service agencies Participation in Neighborhood Organizations • Percent of Santa Monica residents that are represented by an active neighborhood organizations Sustainable Community Involvement • Number of residents who participate Residential Greening Program • Number of Santa Monica College students who participate in Student Greening Program • Number of residents who participate in Community Sustainability Programs

Participation in Cultural Events (MOVED TO ARTS AND CULTURE GOAL AREA) • Upward trend

Participation in Civic Affairs • Upward trend Empowerment (REMOVED) • Upward trend

Resident Satisfaction • 95% of residents surveyed

Volunteering (REMOVED) • Upward trend • Upward trend Participation in Neighborhood Organizations • Upward trend Sustainable Community Involvement • Residential Greening Program- 1,500 residents • Student Greening Program- 3,000 students • Community Sustainability Program1,000 residents

Human Dignity Goal Area

Adopted Goal: 1. Community members are able to meet their basic needs and are empowered to enhance the quality of their lives; and 2. There is access among community members to housing, health services, education, economic opportunity, and cultural and recreational resources; and 3. There is respect for and appreciation of the value added to the community by differences among its members in race, religion, gender, age, economic status, sexual orientation, disabilities, immigration status, language and other special needs Indicators Homelessness (NEW NAME) • Number of homeless living in Santa Monica • Number of homeless served by city shelters • Number of previously homeless individuals assisted by Project Homecoming Basic Needs – Health Care (REMOVED) • Percent of residents with health insurance • Capacity of local health service providers to meet the basic health care needs of Santa Monica residents Basic Needs – Economic Opportunity (REMOVED) • Percent of Santa Monica residents who work more than 40 hours per week in order to meet their basic needs Public Safety (NEW NAME) • Crime rate per capita – report by district and by type (property, violent, hate) Residents’ Perception of Safety • Percent of Santa Monica Residents who are satisfied with City efforts to reduce crime and protect public safety Incidents of Abuse • Number of incidents of abuse (domestic, child, youth and elder abuse) Incidents of Discrimination (REMOVED) • Number of reports regarding employment and housing discrimination • Number of cases prosecuted

Targets for 2020 Homelessness (NEW NAME) • No target • Upward trend • Upward trend Basic Needs – Health Care (REMOVED) • Upward trend • Upward trend Basic Needs – Economic Opportunity (REMOVED) • Downward trend Public Safety (NEW NAME) • Downward trend Residents’ Perception of Safety • Upward trend Incidents of Abuse • Downward trend Incidents of Discrimination (REMOVED) • Downward trend •

Upward trend

Youth Education • Grade 3 students proficient in language arts • SMMUSD student graduation rate • SMMUSD student suspension rates • Percent of SMMUSD students who attend school daily • Percent of SMMUSD students who feel safe at school • Percent of SMMUSD students that complete college admission requirements • Percent of SMMUSD students that receive environmental education consistent with the Education and the Environment Initiative Empowerment • Women, minorities and people with disabilities in leadership positions

Youth Education • At least 85% • At least 91% • No to exceed 4.4% • At least 87% • At least 67% • At least 77%

Ability to Meet Basic Needs • Percent of Santa Monica Residents who are satisfied with services for: o Emergency services o Affordable housing o Services for seniors o Services for youth o Public transportation o Mobility

Ability to Meet Basic Needs • Percent of Santa Monica Residents who are satisfied with services for: o Emergency services- Upward trend o Affordable housing- Upward trend o Services for seniors- Upward trend o Services for youth- Upward trend o Public transportation- Upward trend o Mobility- Upward trend

•

At least 50%, per grade

Empowerment • Upward trend

Arts and Culture Goal Area Adopted Goals: 4. Retain and nurture Santa Monica’s arts community and resources 5. Increase cultural participation and provide greater access to a diversity of cultural programs for all ages 6. Enhance the long-term sustainability of SM creative sector

Indicators Presence of artists Creative Sector Activity • People employed in the creative sector • Number businesses • Revenue produced Presence of opportunities for cultural participation • Number of non-profit cultural • Number of retail arts venues • Classes for life-long learning in the arts Support for the arts • Financial support for city arts grants • Charitable giving in the arts • Square footage of city property leased for cultural uses at below market rates Attendance and participation • Number of families in SM who subscribe, buy tickets, etc. to cultural events (LA Stage Alliance data/study) • Participation at city or city funded cultural events • Participation at non city funded cultural events

Targets for 2020 Presence of artists • No net loss Creative Sector Activity • # Employed: Annual Increase • # Businesses: No net loss • No net loss Presence of opportunities for cultural participation • Annual Increase (blended) Support for the arts • Annual Increase (blended)

Attendance and participation • Number of families: At least 50% of adults attend a live performance annually and at least 30% attend a museum annually • Annual increase

Attachment 2 Proposed Updated SCP SANTA MONICA SUSTAINABLE CITY PLAN Adopted September 20, 1994 Update Adopted February 11, 2003 Revised October 24, 2006 Proposed Update January 14, 2014

Introduction We live in a time in which increased population growth, high levels of consumption and the desire to feed growing economies have created escalating demands on our resources - natural, human and social - on a local, regional, and global scale. These demands negatively impact the natural environment, our communities and the quality of our lives. In the face of these challenges, people worldwide have developed a growing concern for the environment and a desire to live sustainably. In 1994 the Santa Monica City Council took steps to address these pressures locally by adopting the Santa Monica Sustainable City Program. The Sustainable City Program was initially proposed in 1992 by the City’s Task Force on the Environment to ensure that Santa Monica can continue to meet its current needs – environmental, economic and social - without compromising the ability of future generations to do the same. It is designed to help us as a community begin to think, plan and act more sustainably – to help us address the root causes of problems rather than the symptoms of those problems, and to provide criteria for evaluating the long-term rather than the short-term impacts of our decisions – in short, to help us think about the future when we are making decisions about the present. The program includes goals and strategies, for the City government and all sectors of the community, to conserve and enhance our local resources, safeguard human health and the environment, maintain a healthy and diverse economy, and improve the livability and quality of life for all community members in Santa Monica. To check our progress toward meeting these goals, numerical indicators were developed and specific targets were set for the city to achieve by the year 2000 in four goal areas – 1) Resource Conservation, 2) Transportation, 3) Pollution Prevention and Public Health Protection, and 4) Community and Economic Development. 1

In reviewing the progress made since the 1994 adoption of the program, the Task Force on the Environment recognized the need to update and expand the Sustainable City goals and indicators to provide a more complete picture of community sustain­ability, and to develop new indicator targets for 2010. The Task Force felt that a compre­hensive update would allow Santa Monica to build on its initial success and to better address the challenges to sustainability that remain. The update process began in July 2001 with the formation of the Sustainable City Working Group - a large group of community stakeholders that included elected and appointed officials, City staff, and representatives of neighborhood organizations, schools, the business community and other community groups. The Working Group met numerous times over the course of 15 months to discuss the myriad issues related to the sustainability of the community. They evaluated the long-term sustainability of Santa Monica using a framework comprised of three forms of community capital that need to be managed with care in order to ensure that the community does not deteriorate. These include natural capital – the natural environment and natural resources of the community; human and social capital – the connectedness among peo­ple in the community and the education, skills and health of the population; and financial and built capital – manufactured goods, buildings, infrastructure, information resources, credit and debt. The group proposed significant changes to the initial Sustainable City goals and indicators, and assisted with the creation of new indicator targets. Early drafts of the proposed update were revised based on a large amount of public input received during the summer of 2002. The result of this process is this updated Santa Monica Sustainable City Plan, which represents the community’s vision of Santa Monica as a sustainable city. The change in name from Sustainable City Program to Sustainable City Plan was made to better reflect the long-term comprehensive nature of Santa Monica’s vision and the community’s efforts to become a sustainable city. Since its inception, the Santa Monica Sustainable City Program has achieved much success. Many of the initial targets have been met or exceeded and Santa Monica is now recognized as worldwide role model for sustainability. However, we are not “there” yet. While we have made progress in the right direction, Santa Monica’s economy and the activities of its residents, businesses, institutions and visitors continue to negatively impact human health and the environment. And our community does not yet provide for the basic needs of all its members. Many challenges remain before Santa Monica can truly call itself a Sustainable City. The Sustainable City Program is a call to action for all of us to work together as a community and create change that will realize a Sustainable Santa Monica.

2

Leadership, Guidance and Implementation of the Sustainable City Plan The City’s Task Force on the Environment (ETF) assumed the initial leadership role on behalf of the community for the Sustainable City Plan (SCP). With the update and expansion of the SCP into new and more diverse goal areas, the ETF recommended the creation of a Sustainable City Task Force (SCTF) that includes broad representation from community stakeholders with expertise in all of the SCP goal areas The SCTF was created in 2003 to provide leadership and guidance for implementation of the SCP. In 2009, the SCTF sunset and this role was again assumed by the ETF. At the City staff level, an interdepartmental Sustainability Advisory Team (SAT) was created to coordinate existing City activities so they are consistent with the Sustainable City goals and facilitate the future implementation of innovative programs and policies to achieve the goals. Members of this group serve as Sustainable City liaisons to their respective departments. Between them, the ETF and the Office of Sustainability, the SAT, and the ETF are responsible for developing a comprehensive implementation plan for meeting Sustainable City goals and targets, and for coordinating implementation, both interdepartmentally and between the City and community stakeholder groups. Reporting Following the City Council adoption of the Sustainable City Plan, the ETF, SAT and city staff presented Council with a baseline indicators report. Subsequently, the city developed two reporting tools. The tools are intended to provide useful information to City Council, City staff, and community members on progress being made toward meeting goals and targets of the Plan, and will provide a basis for decisionmaking about policies and actions that influence the City’s ability to meet the goals and targets. The first tool is the Sustainable City Progress Report. The second tool is the Sustainable City Report Card. • The Sustainable City Progress Report is a web based tool that provides current, detailed analysis of the data for each indicator in the Santa Monica Sustainable City Plan. Visit www.sustainablesm.org/scpr • The Sustainable City Report Card is a summary document that provides an overview of our progress towards, and challenges to, becoming a sustainable community. The Report Card presents goal area summaries and grades based on the specific indicator data. Together, these two tools are the definitive resource for community decision makers. In order to become a sustainable community all community members must be educated and empowered to achieve our sustainability goals.

3

Sustainable City Plan Structure GOAL AREAS: The Santa Monica Sustainable City Plan is organized into nine Goal Areas: 1. Resource Conservation 2. Environmental and Public Health 3. Transportation 4. Economic Development 5. Open Space and Land Use 6. Housing 7. Community Education and Civic Participation 8. Human Dignity 9. Arts and Culture GOALS: Within each Goal Area are specific Goals which comprise the core of the community vision and represent what Santa Monica must achieve in order become a sustainable city. INDICATORS: For each goal area specific indicators have been developed to measure progress toward meeting the goals. Indicators are tools that help to determine the condition of a system, or the impact of a program, policy or action. When tracked over time indicators tell us if we are moving toward sustainability and provide us with useful information to assist with decision-making. Two types of indicators are tracked as part of the Sustainable City Plan. System level indicators measure the state, condition or pressures on a community-wide basis for each respective goal area. Program level indicators measure the performance or effectiveness of specific programs, policies or actions taken by the City government or other stakeholders in the community. Many of the goals and indicators measure more than one area of sustainability. A Goal/Indicator Matrix has been included to demonstrate the linkages between these areas. The amount of overlap shown by the matrix demonstrates the interconnectedness of our community and the far ranging impact of our decisions across environmental, economic and social boundaries. Specific Targets have been created for many of the indicators. The targets represent aggressive yet achievable milestones for the community. Unless otherwise noted, the targets are for the year 2020 using 2010 as a baseline. For some indicators no specific numerical targets have been assigned. This was done where develop­ment of a numerical target was determined to be not feasible or where limits on data type and availability made it difficult to set a numerical target. In many of these cases a trend direction was substituted for a numerical target. Terms throughout this document that may be unfamiliar to the general reader are defined in the Glossary.

4

Sustainable City Plan Guidance GUIDING PRINCIPLES: The Santa Monica Sustainable City Plan is founded on eleven Guiding Principles that provide the basis from which effective and sustainable decisions can be made. These Guiding Principles have been revised and updated from the versions initially adopted in 1994. 1. The Concept of Sustainability Guides City Policy Santa Monica is committed to meeting its existing needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The long-term impacts of policy choices will be considered to ensure a sustainable legacy. 2. Protection, Preservation, and Restoration of the Natural Environment is a High Priority of the City Santa Monica is committed to protecting, preserving and restoring the natural environment. City decision-making will be guided by a mandate to maximize environmental benefits and reduce or eliminate negative environmental impacts. The City will lead by example and encourage other community stakeholders to make a similar commitment to the environment. 3. Environmental Quality, Economic Health and Social Equity are Mutually Dependent Sustainability requires that our collective decisions as a city allow our economy and community members to continue to thrive without destroying the natural environment upon which we all depend. A healthy environment is integral to the city’s long-term economic and societal interests. In achieving a healthy environment, we must ensure that inequitable burdens are not placed on any one geographic or socioeconomic sector of the population and that the benefits of a sustainable community are accessible to all members of the community. 4. All Decisions Have Implications to the Long-term Sustainability of Santa Monica The City will ensure that each of its policy decisions and programs are interconnected through the common bond of sustainability as expressed in these guiding principles. The policy and decision-making processes of the City will reflect our sustainability objectives. The City will lead by example and encourage other community stakeholders to use sustainability principles to guide their decisions and actions.

5

5. Community Awareness, Responsibility, Participation and Education are Key Elements of a Sustainable Community All community members, including individual citizens, community-based groups, businesses, schools and other institutions must be aware of their impacts on the environmental, economic and social health of Santa Monica, must take responsibility for reducing or eliminating those impacts, and must take an active part in community efforts to address sustainability concerns. The City will therefore be a leader in the creation and sponsorship of education opportunities to support community awareness, responsibility and participation in cooperation with schools, colleges and other organizations in the community. 6. Santa Monica Recognizes Its Linkage with the Regional, National, and Global Community Local environmental, economic and social issues cannot be separated from their broader context. This relationship between local issues and regional, national and global issues will be recognized and acted upon in the City’s programs and policies. The City’s programs and policies should therefore be developed as models that can be emulated by other communities. The City will also act as a strong advocate for the development and implementation of model programs and innovative approaches by regional, state and federal government that embody the goals of sustainability. 7. Those Sustainability Issues Most Important to the Community Will be Addressed First, and the Most Cost-Effective Programs and Policies Will be Selected The financial and human resources which are available to the City are limited. The City and the community will reevaluate its priorities and its programs and policies annually to ensure that the best possible investments in the future are being made. The evaluation of a program’s costeffectiveness will be based on a complete analysis of the associated costs and benefits, including environmental and social costs and benefits. 8. The City is Committed to Procurement Decisions which Minimize Negative Environmental and Social Impacts The procurement of products and services by the City and Santa Monica residents, businesses and institutions results in environmental, social and economic impacts both in this country and in other areas of the world. The City will develop and abide by an environmentally and socially responsible procurement policy that emphasizes long-term values and will become a model for other public as well as private organizations. The City will advocate for and assist other local agencies, businesses and residents in adopting sustainable purchasing practices. 6

9. Cross-sector Partnerships Are Necessary to Achieve Sustainable Goals Threats to the long-term sustainability of Santa Monica are multi-sector in their causes and require multi-sector solutions. Partnerships among the City government, businesses, residents and all community stakeholders are necessary to achieve a sustainable community.

10. The Precautionary Principle Provides a Complimentary Framework to Help Guide City Decision-Makers in the Pursuit of Sustainability The Precautionary Principle requires a thorough exploration and careful analysis of a wide range of alternatives, and a full cost accounting beyond short-term and monetary transaction costs. Based on the best available science, the Precautionary Principle requires the selection of alternatives that present the least potential threat to human health and the City’s natural systems. Where threats of serious or irreversible damage to people or nature exist, lack of full scientific certainty about cause and effect shall not be viewed as sufficient reason for the City to not adopt mitigating measures to prevent the degradation of the environment or protect the health of its citizens. Public participation and an open and transparent decision making process are critical to finding and selecting alternatives. 11. Santa Monica is Committed to Sustainable Rights for its Residents, Natural Communities and Ecosystems The Sustainability Bill of Rights codifies the commitments made in the Sustainable City Plan and asserts the fundamental rights of all Santa Monica residents regarding sustainability. It establishes the rights of natural communities and ecosystems to exist and flourish in Santa Monica and asserts the rights of residents to enforce those rights on behalf of the environment.

7

Resource Conservation Goal Area Adopted Goals: 1. Significantly decrease overall community consumption, specifically the consumption of nonlocal, non-renewable, non-recyclable and non-recycled materials, water, and energy and fuels. 2. The City should take a leadership role in encouraging sustainable procurement, extended producer responsibility and should model innovative strategies to become a zero waste city. 3. Within renewable limits, encourage the use of local, non-polluting, renewable and recycled resources (water, energy, and material resources) Indicators Solid Waste • Generation • Landfilled • Diversion Water Use • Total citywide use (Self Sufficiency) • Total citywide use (Per Capita) • Percent local vs. imported • Potable vs. non-potable

Energy use • Total municipal use • Total citywide use • Efficiency • Efficiency

Renewable Energy Use • Total use • Total use from clean distributed generation in SM

Targets for 2020 Solid Waste • Generation- Do not exceed year 2000 levels • Generation- Reduce per capita generation to 2.4 lbs/person/day • Diverted- Achieve 85% diversion rate Water Use • Total citywide use (Self-Sufficiency)Reduce water demand by 1,300,000 GPD • Total citywide use (Per Capita)- Reduce per capita use to 123 GPCD (500,000 GPD) • Percent local vs. imported- Increase to 100% local • Potable vs. non-potable- Upward trend in non-potable use Energy use • Total municipal use- Reduce use 10% • Total citywide use- Reduce use 10% • Efficiency- Demonstrate incremental progress towards achieving reduction in energy use intensity • Efficiency- Increase efficiency in existing buildings to achieve reductions of 1million kWh annually Renewable Energy Use • Total use- At least 50% of all electricity should come from renewable sources • Total use from clean distributed generation in SM- Install 7.5MW of solar citywide • Total use from clean distributed generation in SM – Install 1 MW of solar on City operated facilities

8

Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Community • Corporate Ecological Footprint Green Construction • New Construction • O&M • Residential • Non-Residential

Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Community- Reduce community GHG emissions 20% below 1990 levels • Corporate- Reduce corporate GHG emissions 30% below 1990 levels Ecological Footprint • No net increase Green Construction • New Construction- 100% of new municipal buildings achieving LEED GOLD certification • O&M- Demonstrate 100% of existing municipal buildings achieving LEED GOLD certification • Residential- Demonstrate incremental increase in the percentage of residential buildings achieving energy efficiency and green construction certifications • Non-Residential- Demonstrate incremental increase in the percentage of nonresidential buildings achieving energy efficiency and green construction certifications

9

Environmental and Public Health Goal Area Adopted Goals: • Protect and enhance environmental health and public health by minimizing and where possible eliminating: o The use of hazardous or toxic materials by residents, businesses and City operations; o The levels of pollutants entering the air, soil and water; and o The risks that environmental problems pose to human and ecological health. • Ensure that no one geographic or socioeconomic group in the City is being unfairly impacted by environmental pollution. • Increase consumption of fresh, locally produced, organic produce to promote public health and to minimize resource consumption and negative environmental impacts. Indicators Santa Monica Bay Health • Wet weather: No rain • Wet weather: Rain event • Dry weather Marine Debris • Trash: Presence of cigarettes, plastic packaging, single use bags, lids and straws Air Quality • # Days ambient air quality standards exceeded Residential Household Hazardous Waste • Total volume collected • Number and percent of households participating • Cumulative number of participants City Purchase of Sustainable Products • Proportion of procurement budget spent on sustainable products annually Urban Runoff Reduction • Effective impervious area • Total acreage treated • Gallons polluted runoff treated

Targets for 2020 Santa Monica Bay Health • Wet weather: No rain- 3 days • Wet weather: Rain event- 17 days • Dry weather: 0 days Marine Debris • Trash- 0 trash (cigarettes, plastic packaging, single use bags, lids and straws) Air Quality • 0 days Residential Household Hazardous Waste • Total volume- No target • Number and percent of households participating- Upward trend • Cumulative number of participants50% cumulative participation City Purchase of Sustainable Products • Upward trend Urban Runoff Reduction • Effective impervious area- annual reduction • Total acreage treated- annual increase • Gallons polluted runoff treatedannual increase

10

Fresh, Local, Organic Produce • Percent of fresh, local, organic produce served at City facilities • Percent fresh, local, organic produce served at community institutions: (SMMUSD, SMC, Hospitals) • Sustainable food commitment

Farmers Markets • Total sales • Percent organic • Percent low chemical • Percent conventional Food Choices • Residential reduction in meat and dairy consumption Community Gardens • Number of people participating • Average wait time for plot • Number of gardens connected

Fresh, Local, Organic Produce • Percent of fresh, local, organic produce served at City facilities15% of total • Percent fresh, local, organic produce served at community institutions- 15% of total • 100% of City food purchases comply with Santa Monica Sustainable Food Commitment Farmers Markets • Total sales- annual increase • Percent organic- annual increase • Percent low chemical- annual increase • Percent conventional- No target Food Choices • Residential reduction in meat and dairy consumption- 15% reduction Community Gardens • Number of people participating • Average wait time for plot- Annual decrease • Number of gardens connectedAnnual increase

11

Transportation Goal Area Adopted Goals: • Create a multi-modal transportation system that minimizes and, where possible, eliminates pollution and motor vehicle congestion while ensuring safe mobility and access for all without compromising our ability to protect public health and safety. • Facilitate a reduction in automobile dependency in favor of affordable alternative, sustainable modes of travel. Indicators Modal Split • Number of trips by type, citywide • Average vehicle ridership (AVR) of Santa Monica businesses with more than 50 employees • Pedestrian travel volumes • Bike traffic volumes

Vehicle Miles Traveled • Total • Total per capita Residential Use of Sustainable Transportation • Percent of residents who have intentionally not used their car but have instead used a sustainable mode of transportation in the past month Sufficiency of Transportation Options • Percent of households with high quality transit service within ½ and ¼ mile Pedestrian Facilities • Complete sidewalks • Public/private pathways • Crosswalk enhancements • Signal Timing enhancements Bike Facilities • Percent of bike network completed • Total miles of bike lanes and paths installed or upgraded • Total Bikeshare usage • Number of bikes parked by bike valet

Targets for 2020 Modal Split • An upward trend in the use of sustainable (bus, bike, pedestrian, rail) modes of transportationDrive alone max: 60%, Bike + Walk + Transit minimum: 25%, Bike + Walk: 15% • AVR: 2 for Santa Monica businesses with more than 50 employees • Pedestrian Volume: Annual increase • Bike Volume: Annual increase Vehicle Miles Traveled • Total- Downward trend • Total per capita- Downward trend Residential Use of Sustainable Transportation • Upward trend Sufficiency of Transportation Options • 100% of households within ½ mile Pedestrian Facilities • Annual increase

Bike Facilities • Percent of bike network completed- 100% • Annual increase

12

Vehicle Use • Total number of automobiles maintained per person • Percent of total automobiles that are qualified ZEV/PZEV or better • Total Carshare usage Transit Service • Annual ridership on Santa Monica Big Blue Bus (BBB) • Percent of residents who have ridden the BBB in the past year • Annual ridership on MTA routes originating in Santa Monica • Annual Expo light rail ridership Alternative Fueled Vehicles • Percent of the City fleet vehicles using alternative fuels Travel Volumes • Auto corridor travel times • Peak Hour Trips • Signal Timing • Bus travel time

Street Safety • Number of collisions o Vehicle-Vehicle o Vehicle-Pedestrian o Vehicle-Bicyclist o Bicyclist-Pedestrian o Bicyclist-Bicyclist Traffic Impacts to Emergency Response Average emergency response times for public safety vehicles • Police • Fire

Vehicle Use • Total number of automobiles- 10% reduction • Percent of total automobiles that are qualified ZEV/PZEV or better - Annual percentage increase • Carshare- Annual increase Transit Service • BBB ridership- Annual increase • % residents BBB- Annual increase • MTA ridership- Annual increase • Expo ridership- Annual increase

Alternative Fueled Vehicles • Percent of the City fleet vehicles using alternative fuels - 80% of fleet Travel Volumes • Auto corridor travel times- no increase • Peak Hour Trips- no net new PM trips • Signal Timing- 100% completion • Bus travel time- no increase Street Safety • Downward trend

Traffic Impacts to Emergency Response • Police- No increase • Fire- No increase

13

Sustainable Local Economy Goal Area Adopted Goals: • Nurture a diverse, stable, local economy that supports basic needs of all segments of the community. • Businesses, organizations and local government agencies within Santa Monica continue to increase the efficiency of their use of resources through the adoption of sustainable business practices. Indicators Economic Diversity • Percent of total economic activity/output by business sector (expressed as a percent of total wages)

Jobs/Housing Balance • Ratio of the number of jobs in Santa Monica to the amount of housing • Percent of Santa Monica employees who reside in Santa Monica Cost of Living • Median household income in relation to cost of living • Median household income in relation to living wage standard • Percent of tenants rent-burdened Quality Job Creation • Percent of new jobs created in Santa Monica that pay greater than or equal to the cost of living Income Diversity • Percent of Santa Monica households earning less than $35,000/year • Percent of households earning more than $100,000/year Economic Health • Number of businesses • Number of employees • Annual payroll Resource Efficiency of Local Business • Ratio of energy use to total economic activity by business sector • Ratio of total water use to total economic activity by business sector

Targets for 2020 Economic Diversity • No single sector shall be greater than 25% of total economic activity/output; and the top three sectors shall not be greater than 50% of total economic activity/output Jobs/Housing Balance • Ratio should approach 1 • Upward trend Cost of Living • No target • 90% of median household incomes meet or exceed the living wage standard Quality Job Creation • Upward trend Income Diversity • No target

Economic Health • Number of businesses- No net loss • Number of employees- No net loss • Annual payroll- Increasing trend Resource efficiency of Local Business • Downward trend

14

Local Employment of City Staff • Percent of City employees who live in SM • Distance City employees travel to work Sustainable Business Community • Number Certified Green Businesses • Number Business Greening Program participants • Number Buy Local business participants • Number Sustainable Quality Award winning businesses • Number of Santa Monica Alliance events

Local Employment of City Staff • No target Sustainable Business Community • Number Certified Green Businesses- 200 total • Number Business Greening Program participants- 200 total • Number Buy Local business participants- 10% Annual increase • Number Sustainable Quality Award winning businesses- No target • Number of Santa Monica Alliance events- 5 % Annual increase

15

Open Space and Land Use Goal Area Adopted Goals: • Develop and maintain a sufficient open space system so that it is diverse in uses and opportunities and includes natural function/wildlife habitat as well as passive and active recreation with an equitable distribution of parks, trees and pathways throughout the community. • Implement land use and transportation planning and policies to create compact, mixed-use projects, forming urban villages designed to maximize affordable housing and encourage walking, bicycling and the use of existing and future public transit systems. • Residents recognize that they share the local ecosystem with other living things that warrant respect and responsible stewardship. Indicators Targets for 2020 Open Space Open Space • Number of acres of public open space by type • Upward trend (including beaches, parks, public gathering places, • Upward trend gardens, and other public lands utilized as open space) • Percent of open space that is permeable Trees Trees • Total tress planted • Total tress planted- 2,000 total • Net tree gain trees • Percent of tree canopy coverage by neighborhood • Net tree gain- 750 total trees • Percent of tree canopy coverage by neighborhood- Upward trend Park Accessibility Park Accessibility • Percent of residents within ¼ and ½ mile of a park • Percent of residents within ½ - 95% by neighborhood of residents • Percent of residents within ¼ - 90% of residents Land Use and Development Land Use and Development • Percent of residential, mixed-use projects that are • Upward trend within ¼ mile of transit nodes and are otherwise consistent with Sustainable City Program goals Regionally Appropriate vegetation Regionally Appropriate vegetation • Percent of new or replaced, non-turf, public • 80% of new or replaced, non-turf, landscaped area and non-recreational turf area public landscaped area and nonplanted with regionally appropriate plants recreational turf area

16

Housing Goal Area Adopted Goal: • Achieve and maintain a mix of affordable, livable and green housing types throughout the city for people of all socioeconomic/cultural/household groups (including seniors, families, singles, and disabled). Indicators Production of Affordable Housing • Number of new housing units produced in Santa Monica affordable to: o Very low income households o Low income households o Moderate o Market rate Availability of Affordable Housing • Percent of existing housing in Santa Monica affordable to: o Very low income households o Low income households o Moderate income households o Upper income households Distribution of Affordable Housing • Distribution of low income housing by neighborhood Affordable Housing for Special Needs • Number of new or rehabilitated affordable housing units for families, seniors, the disabled and other special needs groups as a percentage of all new or rehabilitated affordable housing development Production of “Livable” Housing • Percent of new units within ¼ mile of: o transit stop o open space o grocery store Production of Green Housing • Percent of new and substantially-rehabilitated housing that achieves LEED certification at LEED Silver or higher

Targets Production of Affordable Housing • Number of new housing units in Santa Monica affordable to: o Very low income households- At least 428 o Low income households- At least 263 o Moderate- At least 283 o Market rate - At least 700 Availability of Affordable Housing • No target

Distribution of Affordable Housing • No target Affordable Housing for Special Needs • Upward trend

Production of “Livable” Housing • Upward trend

Production of Green Housing • Upward trend

17

Community Education & Civic Participation Goal Area Adopted Goal: 1. Community members of all ages participate actively and effectively in civic affairs and community improvement efforts. 2. Community members of all ages understand the basic principles of sustainability and use them to guide their decisions and actions - both personal and collective. Indicators Voter Participation • Percent of registered Santa Monica voters who vote in scheduled elections. Participation in Civic Affairs • Attendance at a city-sponsored meeting of any kind in the past year, including City Council meetings, City Commission meetings, or specialtopic workshops Resident Satisfaction • Percent of Santa Monica Residents who are positive about the City as a place to live Participation in Neighborhood Organizations • Percent of Santa Monica residents that are represented by an active neighborhood organizations Sustainable Community Involvement • Number of residents who participate in Residential Greening Program • Number of Santa Monica College students who participate in Student Greening Program • Number of residents who participate in Community Sustainability Programs

Targets for 2020 Voter Participation • Increase to 68% in off year elections Participation in Civic Affairs • Upward trend

Resident Satisfaction • 95% of residents surveyed Participation in Neighborhood Organizations • Upward trend Sustainable Community Involvement • Residential Greening Program1,500 residents • Student Greening Program- 3,000 students • Community Sustainability Program1,000 residents

18

Human Dignity Goal Area Adopted Goal: 1. Community members are able to meet their basic needs and are empowered to enhance the quality of their lives; and 2. There is access among community members to housing, health services, education, economic opportunity, and cultural and recreational resources; and 3. There is respect for and appreciation of the value added to the community by differences among its members in race, religion, gender, age, economic status, sexual orientation, disabilities, immigration status, language and other special needs Indicators Homelessness • Number of homeless living in Santa Monica • Number of homeless served by city shelters • Number of previously homeless individuals assisted by Project Homecoming Public Safety • Crime rate per capita – report by district and by type (property, violent, hate) Residents’ Perception of Safety • Percent of Santa Monica Residents who are satisfied with City efforts to reduce crime and protect public safety Incidents of Abuse • Number of incidents of abuse (domestic, child, youth and elder abuse) Youth Education • Grade 3 students proficient in language arts • SMMUSD student graduation rate • SMMUSD student suspension rates • Percent of SMMUSD students who attend school daily • Percent of SMMUSD students who feel safe at school • Percent of SMMUSD students that complete college admission requirements • Percent of SMMUSD students that receive environmental education consistent with the Education and the Environment Initiative Empowerment • Women, minorities and people with disabilities in leadership positions

Targets for 2020 Homelessness • No target • Upward trend • Upward trend Public Safety • Downward trend Residents’ Perception of Safety • Upward trend Incidents of Abuse • Downward trend Youth Education • At least 85% • At least 91% • No to exceed 4.4% • At least 87% • At least 67% • At least 77% •

At least 50%, per grade

Empowerment • Upward trend

19

Ability to Meet Basic Needs • Percent of Santa Monica Residents who are satisfied with services for: o Emergency services o Affordable housing o Services for seniors o Services for youth o Public transportation o Mobility

Ability to Meet Basic Needs • Percent of Santa Monica Residents who are satisfied with services for: o Emergency services- Upward trend o Affordable housing- Upward trend o Services for seniors- Upward trend o Services for youth- Upward trend o Public transportation- Upward trend o Mobility- Upward trend

20

Arts and Culture Goal Area

Adopted Goals: 1. Retain and nurture Santa Monica’s arts community and resources 2. Increase cultural participation and provide greater access to a diversity of cultural programs for all ages 3. Enhance the long-term sustainability of SM creative sector Indicators Presence of artists Creative Sector Activity • People employed in the creative sector • Number businesses • Revenue produced Presence of opportunities for cultural participation • Number of non-profit cultural • Number of retail arts venues • Classes for life-long learning in the arts Support for the arts • Financial support for city arts grants • Charitable giving in the arts • Square footage of city property leased for cultural uses at below market rates Attendance and participation • Number of families in SM who subscribe, buy tickets, etc. to cultural events (LA Stage Alliance data/study) • Participation at city or city funded cultural events • Participation at non city funded cultural events

Targets for 2020 Presence of artists • No net loss Creative Sector Activity • # Employed: Annual Increase • # Businesses: No net loss • No net loss Presence of opportunities for cultural participation • Annual Increase (blended) Support for the arts • Annual Increase (blended)

Attendance and participation • Number of families: At least 50% of adults attend a live performance annually and at least 30% attend a museum annually • Annual increase

21

Glossary active recreation: recreational opportunities including sports and other activities that typically require playing fields, facilities or equipment. affordable housing: any housing that is deed restricted for, and occupied by, households earning less than 120% of the Los Angeles County median family income. alternative fuel vehicles: vehicles that operate on fuels other than gasoline or diesel in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and pollution. Alternative fuel vehicles include those that operate using compressed natural gas (CNG), liquid natural gas (LNG), propane, electricity, hybrid of gasoline and electricity, and hydrogen. active (and/or sustainable) modes of transportation: transportation by public transit (bus or rail), bicycle or walking. average vehicle ridership (AVR): a measurement of vehicle occupancy indicating the average number of persons traveling in a measured number of vehicles. AVR is an indicator of the effectiveness of and participation in ridesharing programs. bike lane/path/route/sharrow: As defined in the City’s Bike Action Plan, a bike lane is a signed and striped lane along a roadway for use by bicycles. Other types of bicycle ways in the city are bike paths and bike routes. A bike path is a dedicated bicycle way that completely separates bicycles from motor vehicles. Bike routes are signed routes which bicyclists share with motor vehicles. Bike routes differ from bike lanes in that routes do not include any striping on the roadway - they are only designated by signage. Sharrows are a pavement marking consisting of a directional arrow or "chevron," and a bicycle symbol similar to those seen in bicycle lanes. Sharrows demonstrate that bicyclists should "take the lane" by directing them into safe, shared-lane positioning. business greening: program that involves consultation and implementation of measures to reduce energy and water use and waste, purchase environmentally preferable products, and educate staff and customers. community: for the purpose of this document, whenever the term community is used it is meant to include the following groups: individuals of all ages, races and abilities; organizations; government agencies; businesses; employers; employees; residents; property owners; renters; visitors; schools; students; public and private service agencies; faith communities; and local media. clean distributed generation: distributed generation refers to generation of electricity at or near the location where that electricity will be used. This differs from traditional electricity generation, which occurs at centralized power plants and is distributed over hundreds of miles to millions of customers through the electricity “grid”. For the purpose of this document, clean distributed generation (in order of preferred technology type) refers to 1) renewable distributed generation, including electricity generated by solar photovoltaic systems, fuel cells (powered by hydrogen generated from solar, wind, or other non-fossil fuel, renewable energy technologies), and small wind generators; 2) electricity generated by high efficiency (i.e., meeting or exceeding efficiency of large natural gas power plants) natural gas generators and fuel cells using hydrogen generated through a natural gas catalyst; and 3) medium scale, high-efficiency co-generation systems (powered by natural gas) serving many properties located within close proximity of each other. Clean distributed generation does not include electricity generated by gasoline or diesel powered generators. diversion: in reference to solid waste, diversion refers to all waste that is kept out of a landfill through recycling, beneficial reuse, composting, or other means. ecological footprint: The ecological footprint is a tool to help measure human impacts on local and global ecosystems. The ecological footprint of a given population (household, community, country) is the total area of ecologically productive land and water used exclusively to produce all the resources (including food, fuel, and fiber) consumed and to assimilate all the wastes generated by that population. 22

Since we use resources from all over the world and affect faraway places with our wastes, the footprint is a sum of these ecological areas — wherever that land and water may be on the planet. Thus the ecological footprint of Santa Monica is that area of productive land inside and outside its borders that is appropriated for its resource consumption or waste assimilation. There is a finite area of ecologically productive land and water on the Earth, which must be shared among 7 billion people as well as all of the planet’s other species. The amount of ecologically productive land available globally at today’s current population is approximately 5 acres per person. The ecological footprint of the average American is approximately 25 acres, far exceeding the “fair earthshare”. The ecological footprint is an excellent tool for illustrating the magnitude of the change necessary for our world to become sustainable. It is also useful for evaluating and comparing the total environmental impact of specific activities and in this way, helpful for decision-making. environmentally preferable: a product, service, activity or process that has a lesser or reduced effect on human health and the environment when compared to other products, services, activities or processes that serve the same purpose. extended producer responsibility: responsibility of producers or manufacturers across the entire life cycle of their products, particularly to the post-consumer stage (after products are discarded and become waste). Typically once a product is sold to a consumer the responsibility of disposing of that product becomes the responsibility of the consumer. Extended producer responsibility requires that the producer of the product maintain responsibility for recycling or proper disposal of the product once it has surpassed its useful life. green: for the purpose of this document, green is used as shorthand to refer to any environmentally preferable product, activity, service or process. (certified) green business: Santa Monica businesses that have met a higher standard of environmental performance, verified by SustainableWorks and the City of Santa Monica. Businesses must complete mandatory and additional measures in areas concerning staff education, waste reduction, energy efficiency, water efficiency, pollution prevention, sustainable procurement and transportation. green housing: housing that meets or exceeds the requirements of the City’s Green Building Standards Code. greenhouse gas (GHG): greenhouse gases are natural and man-made gases in the earth’s atmosphere that allow incoming solar radiation to pass through the atmosphere and warm the earth but trap radiant heat given off by the earth. The radiant heat absorbed by these gases heats the atmosphere. This is a natural process known as the “greenhouse effect” that keeps the earth habitable. The four primary greenhouse gases are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O) and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). Since the industrial period, human activities have lead to sharp increases in the levels of GHGs in the atmosphere, enhancing the greenhouse effect and contributing to rising global temperatures. hazardous material: a material that, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment. hazardous waste: a waste or combination of wastes which, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics, may cause or significantly contribute to an increase in serious, irreversible, or incapacitating reversible illness or pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health, safety, welfare or to the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, used or disposed of, or otherwise managed. household hazardous waste (HHW): hazardous waste that is generated by residents through the use of hazardous or potentially hazardous products in the home. Typical household hazardous wastes include spent batteries, cleaning products, pesticides, paints and solvents. 23

HHW programs: refers to City operated programs to reduce use of hazardous materials and safely collect and dispose of community-generated HHW. These programs include the HHW Center, which was permanently closed in 2013, home collection services, used oil collection, pharmaceutical disposal, sharps collection and establishment of local drop-off sites. income levels: With respect to the indicators of housing affordability the following are definitions of the income levels mentioned in this document: • Very low income: annual earnings between 0 and 50% of the Los Angeles County • Median Family income (MFI) • Low income: annual earnings between 51 and 80% MFI • Moderate income: annual earnings between 81 and 120% MFI • Upper income: annual earnings above 120% MFI LEEDTM Certification (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design): A rating system developed by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) that sets definitive standards for what constitutes a green or environmentally preferable building. The certification system is self-assessing and is designed for rating new and existing commercial, institutional, and high-rise residential buildings. It evaluates environmental performance of the entire building over the building’s life cycle. LEED certifications are awarded at various levels (certified, silver, gold, and platinum) according to a point-based scoring system. livable housing: housing that is within close proximity to neighborhood serving commercial areas, transit stops and community resources such as parks and open space. local: the term local has different definitions depending upon the context in which it is used in this document. These are described below: 1) Where local is used in reference to the economy (“local economy” or “local businesses”) it refers to Santa Monica’s economy or businesses located within Santa Monica. 2) Local government agencies refer to any agencies or departments of the Santa Monica city government. 3) Where local refers to food production (“locally produced”) it refers to food grown in the southern half of the state of California. 4) Where local refers to resources, it refers to resources obtained or impacted within a 500-mile radius of Santa Monica. mixed-use projects: developments which incorporate both residential and commercial uses. modal split: the split in use of various transportation modes including: single passenger vehicles; carpools of more than one passenger; bus; rail; bicycle; and pedestrian modes. multi-modal transportation system: a transportation system that includes affordable, alternative modes of transportation such as public transit, and infrastructure and access for alternative fueled vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians, in addition to standard vehicular transportation. native species: plant or animal species native to the southern California bioregion. natural function/wildlife habitat: geographic areas that provide life-supportive functions associated with atmospheric, biological, biochemical and hydrological processes that keep our air and water clean, process waste and support survival and reproduction of plant and animal life. non-renewable resources: natural resources that have a finite availability worldwide. Examples include coal, oil and other petroleum products. open space: for the purpose of this document open space refers to all land uses defined as open space in the Open Space Element of the City of Santa Monica’s General Plan. These include beaches, parks, public gathering places, usable green open space in street medians, scenic highway corridors, gardens, and other publicly accessible land. 24

passive recreation: recreational opportunities that occur in a natural setting which require minimal development or facilities, and the importance of the environment or setting for the activities is greater than in developed or active recreation settings. PBTs (persistent bioaccumulative toxics): chemicals that are toxic, persist in the environment and bioaccumulate in food chains and, thus, pose risks to human health and the environment. The term PBT is used primarily by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as part of its preparation of a list of such chemicals that will receive special regulatory emphasis in the United States. POPs (persistent organic pollutants): Organic chemical substances that persist in the environment and bioaccumulate in food chains and pose a risk of causing adverse effects to human health and the environment. The term POPs is commonly used in the context of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and are subject to international negotiations aiming toward their global elimination. Note: The primary difference between the PBTs and POPs is that the list of PBTs includes non-organic toxins that are not included on the list of POPs. potable: suitable for drinking qualified low emission / alternative fuel vehicles: Vehicles recognized by the State of California as being low emission and/or alternative fuel vehicles. These vehicles exceed the basic standards all new vehicles must meet to be sold in California and include low emission vehicles (LEVs), ultra low emission vehicles (ULEVs), super ultra low emission vehicles (SULEVs) and zero emission vehicles (ZEVs). rainy day: for the purpose of this document, a rainy day is any day with recorded precipitation greater than .1” in 24 hours. recognized neighborhood organization: Tax-exempt, non-profit organization representing a commonly recognized neighborhood in Santa Monica. regionally appropriate vegetation: plant and tree species that are environmentally appropriate for the Southern California region and that do not negatively impact native plants or animals. rehabilitated housing: rehabilitation that increases by 25% or more the after-rehab value of the property; or a rehabilitation in which at least fifty percent of exterior walls have been removed or relocated for any duration of time. renewable limits: harvesting resources within renewable limits refers to harvesting a renewable resource at a rate that is lower than the rate the resource can replace itself (e.g. catching fish at a rate that will allow the fish population to be maintained over time. If too many fish are caught, exceeding renewable limits, the fish population will decline). The terms renewable limits and sustainable limits are synonymous. renewable resources: natural resources that have an unlimited supply (such as solar radiation) or that can be renewed indefinitely if ecosystem health is maintained (e.g. fisheries or forests). rent-burdened: households that spend more than 30 percent of gross income on rent routine: for the purpose of this document, routine, when describing generation of hazardous waste by City government operations, refers to regular and consistent operational practices such as vehicle maintenance, regular cleaning procedures, etc. Non-routine refers to hazardous waste generated during unanticipated events such as chemical spills or leaks. significant emissions source: sources of toxic air contaminants and other air emissions that pose a threat to human health and the environment. SMMUSD: Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District special needs groups: with respect to affordable housing, special needs groups refers to the elderly, disabled persons, large families, female-headed families, and the homeless. sustainable: sustainable can mean slightly different things depending on the context in which it is used. For the purpose of this document, the following definitions are used:

25

sustainable (in reference to resource use): a method of harvesting or using a resource so that resource is not depleted or permanently damaged. sustainable business: for the purpose of this document, sustainable business refers to a business that provides goods and services, and/or has incorporated into its daily operations practices that result in cleaner air and water, less waste and pollution, conservation of energy and natural resources, less traffic, improved quality of life for residents and workers, and contribute to a strong and viable local economy. sustainable community/city: a community or city that meets its present needs without sacrificing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. More specifically, a sustainable community is one that improves and enhances its natural, social and economic resources in ways that allow current and future members of the community to lead healthy, productive and satisfying lives. sustainable modes of transportation/travel: same as active modes of transportation above. sustainable procurement: procurement of environmentally preferable goods and services in a way that also takes into consideration social responsibility and sustainable economic development issues in the manufacture, transportation, sale and use of those goods and services. Sustainable Quality Awards (SQAs): The SQA is an annual event that promotes the efforts of local businesses that have made significant achievements in the areas of sustainable economic development, social responsibility, and stewardship of the natural environment. By recognizing these achievements, this awards program educates and inspires other businesses to adopt their own sustainable practices, thus helping Santa Monica become a model sustainable community, providing its residents and visitors with a healthy economy and environment. toxic material: a substance that causes illness, injury or death by chemical means. A poison. toxic air contaminants (TACs): air pollutants which may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. transit node: a station for public transportation along a regional transit corridor (usually rail or rapid bus) with access routes for buses, taxis, automobiles, bicycles and pedestrians. urban villages: mixed-use developments in walkable, livable and transit-oriented districts that balance the need for sufficient density to support convenient, high-frequency transit service within the scale of the adjacent community. vehicle miles traveled (VMT): one vehicle traveling one mile constitutes a vehicle mile. VMT is primarily an indicator of automobile use. Increasing VMT typically corresponds with increases in traffic and vehicle-related pollution. zero emissions vehicle (ZEV): motor vehicle that produces neither tailpipe nor evaporative pollutant emissions. zero waste: recycling or reusing over 90% of all natural and man-made materials back into nature or the marketplace rather than sending those materials landfills or similar disposal options.

26

City Council Report City Council Meeting: January 14, 2013 Agenda Item: 8-D To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Rod Gould, City Manager

Subject:

Community Civic Engagement Strategy

Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Community Civic Engagement Strategy and direct staff to implement the initiative. Executive Summary In today’s fast-paced world, attention spans have shortened and people’s free time is limited. Information, both accurate and inaccurate, proliferates quickly. There is a generational gap of people who participate in local government. In order to maintain transparency and ensure that all voices have an opportunity to be heard, it is incumbent upon government to go to people. Civic engagement is an integral component of community life. Yet, local government has been slow to make use of emerging methods of connecting with citizens and promoting participation. Reliance on old models of engagement may mean that some segments of the population are left out of the process. The Community Civic Engagement Strategy (CCES) is a new and comprehensive initiative to experiment with ways to connect with and solicit input from a broad spectrum of the community. The CCES involves assessing the City’s current efforts to engage community members; developing a two-year calendar of community activities that complement each other and inform the two-year budget process; providing different opportunities for community members to express their ideas and follow community issues; and designing tools and programs that maximize available resources and are replicable in other cities. The CCES would yield a platform that includes in-person, web-based, social and information media that sustains broad and diverse community involvement in civic affairs. When appropriate, staff would partner with local organizations. With more people informed about city and community issues, greater trust and confidence develops in local decision-making. The work of local governance is then more likely to be successfully completed. Staff would report back to Council with an evaluation of activities and outcomes. 1

Background Over the past four months, staff evaluated interactions between citizens and local government in Santa Monica, researched emerging developments in civic engagement, and best practices for educating, involving, and providing ways for community members to express themselves.

Municipalities around the country are experimenting with ways to engage new people in local government. The Institute for Local Government devotes significant resources to collaborative civic engagement research and initiatives as part of their ongoing efforts to promote public confidence in local government. The International City/ County Management Association provides resources and a forum to develop, share and improve civic engagement information and practices. Research indicates civic collaboration not only helps build community, it brings new and more people into civic affairs. With more people informed about city and community issues, greater trust and confidence develops in local decision-making. The work of local governance is then more likely to be successfully completed.

A civic engagement strategy should include a range of approaches with different opportunities to connect with as many community partners as possible. It is best practice to develop an integrated platform of in-person, web-based, social and information media that uses the public’s ideas and knowledge in appropriate ways given the issues at hand. For example, a civic campaign that involved community partnerships, online resources, workshops and new technology coalesced to reimagine Philadelphia’s primary waterfront on the Delaware River. The Citizens League, an independent non-partisan organization that works to effect change in Minnesota public policy, partners with local organizations to host Policy and a Pint – monthly conversations about policy in Minnesota over food and beer. Boston residents volunteer time and energy by shoveling out fire hydrants after major snow storms with the adopt a hydrant app. Candy Chang, a popular Taiwanese-American artist, placed fill-in-theblank stickers that said “I wish this was ____” on vacant store fronts as part of a temporary interactive art installation for residents to reimagine their community. 2

Depending on the community need and the desired outcome, a plan that includes varied opportunities to share knowledge and ideas helps to identify the most acceptable solution to the issue at hand.

Santa Monica is well positioned for greater civic engagement. There is high voter turnout. Of the 60,909 registered voters in Santa Monica, 78 percent voted in the November 2012 elections – clear evidence that an interest in civic affairs exists among community members. Attendance at community meetings is generally good and new community groups are able to enter into the public discourse. The City provides people with information about proposed programs and plans, and regularly seeks their input.

Staff has begun experimenting with new types of civic engagement. One recent example is MANGo, an interactive community workshop featuring temporary installations of potential Michigan Avenue Greenway improvements. The workshop included help from partnering organizations, complementary lunch, live music, bilingual services and activities for kids. Over 400 people attended the event, learned about the greenway, provided input, and weighed trade-offs.

Pop-Up MANGo incorporated new elements to community workshops that successfully encouraged a broad spectrum of participation. However, the majority of the City’s civic engagement relies heavily on one-way communication through well-worn channels. This typically requires citizens to seek out information from disparate City-related sources.

During a “listening tour” staff met with residents and business owners in fall 2013, people expressed concern that public information is difficult to follow or too cumbersome to read. Some community members noted that they do not become more involved because they do not see a correlation between their participation and outcomes. For example, City Council meetings are a main component of Santa Monica’s current civic engagement strategy. In order to provide input on key decisions, individuals wait sometimes two to four hours to address the Council for two minutes. 3

Many people do not regularly have that amount of time available. Voices not physically present at meetings may not have the same impact as those in attendance, which makes overall community sentiment difficult to gauge.

Discussion In today’s fast-paced world, attention spans have shortened and people’s free time is limited. Information, both accurate and inaccurate, proliferates quickly. In order to maintain transparency and ensure that all voices have an opportunity to be heard, it is incumbent upon government to go to people. The old model of civic engagement where people bring their issues, questions and concerns to government does not make it easy for people to become aware of larger community issues or encourage a culture of being civically involved. It creates an unnecessary barrier between citizens and local government, which may result in misunderstanding and negativity.

Recognizing the availability of new tools for connecting and communicating with the public, staff is proposing to explore new ways to improve access between community members and their local government. The CCES aims to increase current levels of civic participation to include a broad spectrum of community members, and better inform staff and Council of community sentiment, questions and trends. Staff would work with local organizations like the Jaycees, Santa Monica Spoke, the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District, Young Santa Monica, Santa Monica Next, the Chamber of Commerce, Zocalo and other community partners. Monthly meetings with the Neighborhood Council and the Planning and Community Development Department leadership would continue. Over the next two years the CCES would involve developing and evaluating new tools and programs that create access to learn about what is going on via casual, meaningful ways to be civically engaged, including:

4

A Civic Engagement Team Under the leadership of the City Manager’s Office, a team of city employees would work together to shape, prioritize, and direct the development of CCES projects. This interdepartmental team would obtain public feedback to ensure that tools and programs are useful and accomplishing CCES goals. Specifically, the team would: •

Evaluate the City’s current efforts to engage community members

•

Develop a two-year calendar of community activities that complement each other and align with the organization’s two-year budget cycle

•

Assess ways to improve current City communication and social media strategies

•

Provide community members different opportunities to express their ideas and follow community issues

•

Design tools and programs that maximize available resources and are replicable in other cities

•

Report to City Council and City leadership on progress

Pilot projects would be evaluated based on effectiveness and the ability to be sustained by staff. Once projects launch, the group would transition to training staff, managing, measuring and improving the ongoing programs.

While civic engagement is rich with information and resources and is a growing area of research, it is not always clear what government can and should do in this regard and what will resonate in Santa Monica. Some projects will be successful. Other projects may not. Staff would work in partnership with residents and community organizations to ensure appropriate and effective civic engagement initiatives.

Ways to Bridge the Gap According to 2010 census data, 49 percent of Santa Monica residents are 20 – 50 years old (25 percent 20-35 years old, 24 percent 35-50 years old). Millennials and Generation X are an active part of Santa Monica. They bring entrepreneurial spirit and are a major force in the local economy. Generation Xers have families with children in 5

the school system. However people in these age ranges generally do not visibly participate in civic affairs.

Similar to the Citizens League’s Policy and a Pint program, the CCES would look to create similar programs that would bring civic affairs to places where people gather. Once a month, at various locations, community members would be encouraged to participate in an informal discussion about what is happening in the city. Topics would vary based on current events. Through casual conversation new people would connect, learn about what is going on and discuss decisions facing the community in an informal setting. Civic leaders would be encouraged to attend.

Inter-generational events and programs for residents who speak English as a second language would also be explored to bridge the gap between people and local government. These could include roundtable series, policy tours, and happy hours. In turn, people all ages would become part of a culture of being aware and potentially involved in what is happening in their city.

A Biennial Santa Monica Talks Formerly called "Can We Talk?", the original community meeting series kicked off public outreach to determine community needs and priorities for the annual City budget. Later called Santa Monica Talks, the community meeting series was revamped and offered residents the opportunity to meet face-to-face with City staff from all City departments.

Because the City transitioned to a biennial budget process, Santa Monica Talks would be held in the second year of the City’s two year budget and continue to serve as initial public outreach. At the meetings, staff would discuss what is happening in the city and take questions from the audience. Community members would learn about city services, quality-of-life issues, and provide first-hand information about their concerns and ideas to inform the biennial budget.

6

Staff would improve the community meeting series and build upon lessons learned from previous years. Time and resources to conduct the community meeting series in the first year of the biennial budget would be used on other CCES projects and programs, such as the Citizen Academy.

A Citizen Academy On May 7, 2013 staff outlined plans for a Citizens Academy to educate residents about their local government and encourage participation in local public policy making. The Academy would provide participants with an in-depth understanding of how local government operates and ways local government collaborates with community, civic and non-profit institutions. Coordinated by the City Manager’s Office, the Academy would entail a series of six classes held on weekday evenings. Department Heads would be tasked with teaching the classes. For example, Big Blue Bus, Planning and Community Development and Finance would collaborate on a class covering mobility and land use.

The Academy would be open to community members of all ages and backgrounds, with priority for Santa Monica residents. Individuals considering serving in leadership roles in the community, or who are curious as to how the City and its partners make decisions, allocate resources, and get things done would be encouraged to complete an online application available in February 2014. Staff would select the students. Those who participate in the Academy would gain a fuller understanding of City departments, current projects, and the public decision making process.

A Technology Platform Emerging technology has the potential to broaden civic access and opportunity. New technology to amplify collaboration, create new avenues for participation, inform and promote participation in community discussions would be explored as part of the CCES.

7

The interdepartmental team would work with other City staff, community partners, and experts in the field to research best practices and evaluate tools and strategies to: •

Develop the City’s use of social media

•

Make policy and financial information easier to find and understand

•

Improve access to local government by providing push notifications in real time when topics of interest are heard during Council meetings

•

Create two-way communication approach with constituents where appropriate

Social media is a communication tool the City uses to provide information for the public. The CCES would look to incorporate best practices into current efforts to ensure social media is used efficiently and effectively.

City Council meetings are a main component of Santa Monica’s current civic engagement strategy. Staff reports are full of information on complex issues facing the community. A majority of community members do not regularly participate in the meetings, even when issues facing Council are of great interest. Staff would investigate ways for people to track specific issues on a Council agenda. A simplified Council meeting agenda where issues were briefly summarized could encourage more people to participate in meetings. Also, when Council is about to discuss an agenda item in real time, people could self-register to receive a push notification or email with a link to follow and stream live video or audio of Council’s discussion of the topic at hand.

Staff would also explore new ways for people to participate in the public decisionmaking process. For example, once Council agendas are publicly available, a likert scale would accompany each agenda item for people to rank the recommended actions of the staff report. A text box could also be available for people to comment on the report. Council would be provided with a summary of the rankings and comments prior to the Council meeting to inform their deliberation on the respective topic.

8

At present these are only ideas and require vetting and further development. However a simplified Council agenda, push notifications, and ways for people to rate and comment on staff reports create access to Council and the public decision-making process. This access would be significant for a resident unable to attend a Council meeting or wait to speak on an item discussed late in the evening.

A technological platform would complement, not supplant, other non-technology-based ways to connect community members with staff and Elected Officials. Focus would be to provide a well-rounded set of civic engagement strategies so local government remains accessible to a broad range of community members. Foster Civic Pride To cultivate and sustain new civic participation, a component of the CCES would focus on providing creative opportunities for people to share their personal experiences and why they choose to live in Santa Monica. Activities would be made available to the public at community events such as the Santa Monica Festival, planning workshops, and Santa Monica Talks. Projects may include temporary art installations, “share your story” audio recordings, and other interactive activities.

With time and partnership, the CCES would modernize civic engagement, improve access between people and government, and create a culture of democratic participation in everyday life.

Alternatives If Council has a specific area of interest regarding civic engagement, Council could direct staff to investigate that area in greater detail. Council could also direct staff to focus on specific areas of the community civic engagement strategy. Or, Council could choose not to move forward with the CCES initiative.

9

Next Steps Based on Council’s direction, the interdepartmental civic engagement staff team would be assembled, the citizen academy would move forward as proposed, and a comprehensive strategy to research and test new engagement tools would be further developed. The timeline for this work would span the organization’s next two-year budget cycle.

Pilot projects would be developed, implemented and evaluated by staff. Some projects will be successful. Other projects may not. Staff would report back to Council with an evaluation of activities and outcomes.

Financial Impacts & Budget Actions There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. Staff would return to Council if specific budget actions are required in the future. Staff anticipates including funding to implement the technological platform component of the Community Civic Engagement Strategy in the FY 2014-15 proposed budget.

Prepared by: Matthew Mornick, Principal Administrative Analyst

Approved:

Forwarded to Council:

Rod Gould City Manager

Rod Gould City Manager

10

13-B January 14, 2014

CITY CLERK’S OFFICE - MEMORANDUM

To:

Mayor and City Council

From:

Councilmember McKeown

Date:

January 14, 2013

13-B: Request of Councilmember McKeown that the Council, in the interest of public safety and greater certainty on upcoming development issues, urge the Governor and state legislature to fund timely completion of scheduled mapping of the Santa Monica Fault.

13-B January 14, 2014

New state fault maps show higher earthquake risks in Hollywood - latimes.com

Page 1 of 3

latimes.com/local/la-me-0109-hollywood-fault-20140109,0,5699276.story

latimes.com New state fault maps show higher earthquake risks in Hollywood Newly released data tracing the location of the active Hollywood fault will lead to additional curbs on development in the rapidly growing area. By Rong-Gong Lin II, Rosanna Xia and Doug Smith 7:02 PM PST, January 8, 2014 New state geological maps released Wednesday show several major developments planned in Hollywood are much closer to an active earthquake fault than Los Angeles city officials initially said.

advertisement

The maps chart the course of the Hollywood fault, which runs from Atwater Village and Los Feliz, through central Hollywood and west along the Sunset Strip. The state accelerated completion of the maps last fall amid controversy over the Los Angeles City Council approving a skyscraper development on or near the fault. Interactive map: Do you live or work in the Hollywood fault zone? The maps create a zone of generally 500 feet on both sides of the fault, and state law requires any new development within the zone to receive extensive underground seismic testing to determine whether the fault runs under it. The law prohibits building on top of faults. The rules, which will take effect when the maps are finalized this summer, will restrict future development in two fast-growing areas: Hollywood north of Hollywood Boulevard and West Hollywood along Sunset Boulevard. Both areas have seen a surge in new development in the last decade, with more projects planned. The state law has not been in force on the Hollywood fault because the state geologist had not completed the fault zone. A Times investigation last month found that Los Angeles approved at least 14 projects along the Hollywood and Santa Monica faults without ordering the kind of underground digging needed to determine exactly where the fissures run. Among those projects is a sprawling $200 -million complex, known as Blvd6200, now under construction on Hollywood Boulevard. Map: The Hollywood fault and developments L.A. officials acknowledged in November they have been using outdated fault maps when reviewing projects. They didn't realize their error until Times reporters pointed it out to them, and they have since begun using newer maps.

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-0109-hollywood-fault-20140109,0,415205,print.story

1/9/2014

New state fault maps show higher earthquake risks in Hollywood - latimes.com

Page 2 of 3

Luke Zamperini, a spokesman for the city Department of Building and Safety, said the agency is in the process of including Wednesday's map in its automated permitting system. All new projects within the fault zone will require a full fault study, while previously approved projects that have not begun construction will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, he said. The state's new map shows that three prominent Hollywood developments — the proposed Millennium Hollywood skyscraper project, the Blvd6200 development and a planned apartment complex on Yucca Street — are within the roughly 500-foot fault zone. More coverage: L.A.'s Hidden Dangers State geologist John Parrish said the state's fault line goes underneath both Millennium and Blvd6200. "We feel very confident about where we drew that line, within maybe a 50-foot accuracy back and forth. But we're very confident it's there," Parrish told reporters at a downtown Los Angeles news conference. "Surface rupture is very dangerous. In fact, it's calamitous to structures that are built across of the surface trace of an active fault." The only definitive way to determine if the fault is actually underneath the property is an intensive underground investigation, such as digging a trench, Parrish added. Los Angeles officials did not order trenching for any of the three projects before the City Council approved those projects. The city later asked the developers of Millennium to dig an underground trench, but that work has not started yet. Philip Aarons, one of the founders of Millennium Partners, said in a statement that the state's map is not a substitute for underground investigation. Aarons said the geological tests performed so far at the site showed no evidence of an active earthquake fault on the property but he has agreed to complete the trenching work. The Millennium project would bring 1 million square feet of retail, residential and office space to Hollywood, and 39- and 35-story towers flanking the Capitol Records tower. The new map shows the fault running under the historic tower. Reports filed by the developers to the city for all three projects indicated the fault was much farther away than the new state map indicates. The developers of Millennium said the fault was about 0.4 miles away; Blvd6200 0.5 miles away; and the residential complex at 6230 Yucca St., 0.3 miles away. David Jordon, owner of the Yucca Street project, emphasized that the state map is still a draft. "Safety is of paramount importance to us. There will be further fault investigations on the site. We're working with the city of Los Angeles to determine what those studies will be," Jordon said. The developers of Blvd6200 did not respond to a request for comment on Wednesday. But in the past, they have said they don't believe the fault runs under the project and that a geologist on site during construction saw no evidence of the fault. The release of the maps was highly anticipated, in part because of their potential impact on new development in the area. Leron Gubler, the head of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce, said he welcomed the state's release of the map.

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-0109-hollywood-fault-20140109,0,415205,print.story

1/9/2014

New state fault maps show higher earthquake risks in Hollywood - latimes.com

Page 3 of 3

"It has eliminated a lot of the uncertainties in the last six months on where the Hollywood fault zone is," Gubler said. "This is a positive development for Hollywood because this is now a zone defined." City councilman Mitch O'Farrell, who represents Hollywood, agreed, adding: "This information provides a clear map for development in the heart of Hollywood." California lawmakers banned construction over faults a year after the 1971 Sylmar earthquake, after homes on top of the San Fernando fault were ripped apart when one side of the fault slid past the other. That movement split the foundations of buildings in half, destroying them. For two decades after the Sylmar quake, the state zoned numerous faults around California. But starting in the 1990s, budget cuts stalled new fault mapping — including the Hollywood fault. There are about 2,000 miles of faults still to zone. Opponents of more Hollywood development said they were pleased the state produced the Hollywood fault zone. "We feel completely vindicated by the state map," said Robert P. Silverstein, attorney for community groups who have sued to block the Millennium project. State officials also released a draft map of the Sierra Madre and Duarte fault zones in the foothill cities of Monrovia, Duarte, Azusa and Glendora in eastern Los Angeles County. Schools that are in or partially within the draft fault zones include Charles H. Lee Elementary School in Azusa and Citrus College in Glendora. State geology officials will now begin a 90-day public comment period and hold a public hearing. A final map is expected to be published by July 8. The next fault to be zoned is the Santa Monica fault and the western end of the Hollywood fault, but Parrish said his department only has enough funds to have one person work on the mapping for the first half of the year, and there are no funds after June 30. It's unclear whether mapping the Santa Monica fault can be finished within that timeframe, Parrish said. Some state lawmakers have urged the governor's office to commit more funding to complete the zoning of earthquake faults. The governor's office will release its proposed budget Friday. [email protected] Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-0109-hollywood-fault-20140109,0,415205,print.story

1/9/2014

Mapping the Hollywood fault - Data Desk - latimes.com

Page 1 of 2

(http://www.latimes.com) LOCAL (HTTP://WWW.LATIMES.COM/NEWS/LOCAL)

U.S. (HTTP://LATIMES.COM/NEWS/NATIONWORLD/NATION)

WORLD (HTTP://LATIMES.COM/NEWS/NATIONWORLD/WORLD) SPORTS (HTTP://WWW.LATIMES.COM/SPORTS)

ENTERTAINMENT (HTTP://WWW.LATIMES.COM/ENTERTAINMENT/NEWS)

HEALTH (HTTP://WWW.LATIMES.COM/HEALTH) TRAVEL (HTTP://WWW.LATIMES.COM/TRAVEL/)

New Rule in Santa Monica, CA

The End of Obama?

BUSINESS (HTTP://WWW.LATIMES.COM/BUSINESS)

LIVING (HTTP://WWW.LATIMES.COM/FEATURES) OPINION (HTTP://WWW.LATIMES.COM/NEWS/OPINION)

How Cruise Lines Fill Unsold Cabins?

Public Santa Monica Arrest Records

Homeowners Are In For A Big Surprise...

INTERACTIVE

Mapping the Hollywood fault Tweet

27

Recommend

1.3k

The California Geological Survey has released a draft map of the Hollywood fault and drew a zone around it. When the so-called Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone map is finalized, any developer seeking to construct a new building in the zone will be required to conduct an intensive investigation to determine if a fault is underneath the property. State law bans building on top of faults in these mapped zones. Search the map by entering an address, including the city. Return to story (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-hollywood-developments-straddle-quake-fault-maps-20140108,0,4483475.story) Last updated: Jan 08 2014, 10:33 a.m.

Key:

Approximate fault lines

Fault zone

Areas of uncertainty

+

-

Leaflet | © OpenStreetMap contributors

Sources: California Geological Survey; Times reporting Credits: Graphics reporting by Rong-Gong Lin; map by Raoul Ranoa and Matt Moody ad v e rt is e me nt

http://graphics.latimes.com/responsivemap-la-me-earthquake-fault/

1/9/2014

Map of the Hollywood fault and proposed developments - latimes.com

Like

729k

Member Center

Alerts & Newsletters

Jobs

Cars

Page 1 of 3

Real Estate

Rentals

Weekly Circulars

TRAVEL

OPINION

Local Directory Place Ad

LOCAL LOCAL L.A. NOW

U.S.

WORLD POLITICS

TRENDING NOW

BUSINESS CRIME

STATE BUDGET

SPORTS EDUCATION

JAHI MCMATH

ENTERTAINMENT O.C.

HEALTH

WESTSIDE

MCDONALD'S

STYLE

NEIGHBORHOODS

CHRIS CHRISTIE

ENVIRONMENT

COACHELLA

Return to story

Map of the Hollywood fault and proposed developments

SHOP

CES

DATA & MAPS

SHARE IT NOW

LOCAL PLUS Search

Connect Recommended on Facebook Sign Up

Like

729k

Create an account or Log In to see what your friends

recommend. At least 50 scalded by boiling-tofrozen water trick 14,206 people recommend this.

VIDEOS ad v e r t ise me nt

Car dealers accused of deception settle with FTC ( Los Angeles Times / January 8, 2014 ) New draft maps released by the California Geological Survey shows several major Hollywood developments much closer to an active earthquake fault than city officials have said.

E-mail

Twitter

Facebook

StumbleUpon

Comments (0)

Share

Expert: Jahi McMath's body will deteriorate

Add comments | Discussion FAQ Opinion: How grim is L.A.'s future?

Currently there are no comments. Be the first to comment!

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-hollywood-fault-map-20140108,0,5494703.graphic

1/9/2014