Loading...
2010/08/10 City Council Agenda Packet Judy Hauff City Clerk City Hall City of Rohnert Park + 130 Avram Avenue + Rohnert Park, California 94928 PHONE: (707) 588-2227+ FAX: (707) 588-2274 +, WEB: www.rpcitv.ore: ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL Community Development Commission Rohnert Park Financing Authority JOINT REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, August 10,2010 Joint Regular Meeting - Open Session: 7:00 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBER 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California The Rohnert Park City Council welcomes your attendance, interest and participation at its regular city meetings scheduled on the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays of each month at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. City CouncillCDC/RPFA Agendas and Minutes may be viewed at the City's website: www.rpcitv.orf! Council/CDC/RPFA may discuss and/or take action on any or all of the items listed on this agenda. If you challenge decisions of the City Council, the Community Development Commission, or the Rohnert Park Financing Authority of the City of Rohnert Park in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at public hearing(s) described in this Agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City ofRohnert Park at, or prior to the public hearing(s). DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability which requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this City Council meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Office at (707) 588-2225 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation by the City. Please make sure the City Clerk's Office is notified as soon as possible if you have a visual impairment requiring meeting materials to be produced in another format (Braille, audio-tape, etc.) PUBLIC COMMENTS: For public comment on items listed or not listed on the agenda, or on agenda items if unable to speak at the scheduled time (limited to three minutes per appearance and a 30 minute total time limit, or allocation of time based on number of speaker cards submitted) -' PLEASE FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD PRIOR TO SPEAKING - *SEE NOTE ON LAST PAGE OF THIS AGENDA Copies of all staff reports and documents subject to disclosure that relate to each item of business referred to on the agenda are available for public inspection Thursday before each regularly scheduled City Council meeting at City Hall, located at 130 A vram A venue. Any writings or documents subject to disclosure that are provided to all, or a majority of all, of the members of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda after the agenda has been distributed will also be made available for inspection at City Hall during regular business hours. 7:00 p.m. 1. CITY COUNCIL, CDC & RPFA JOINT REGULAR MEETING - Call to Order/Roll Call (Belforte _ Breeze_Callinan _ Mackenzie_Stafford ~ 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Led by Kieran Keaney, 2nd Grade Student, Penngrove School 3. INTRODUCTION of NEW CITY MANAGER Gabriel "Gabe" Gonzalez 4. PRESENTATIONS A. Presentation for Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation & Open Space District by Bill Keene 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS 6. CONSENT CALENDAR All items on the consent calendar will be considered together by one action of the City Council, the Community Development Commission, and/or the Rohnert Park Financing Authority, whichever is applicable, with ROLL CALL VOTE due to an Ordinance listed for adoption, unless any Council Member or anyone else interested in a consent calendar item has a question about the item. A. Approval of Minutes for: 1. City-CDC-RPFA Joint Regular Meeting - July 27,2010 B. Acceptance of Reports for: I. City Bills/Demands for Payment 2. CDC Bills/Demands for Payment 3. City Cash/Investments Report for Month Ending June 30, 2010 C. City Council Resolutions for Adoption: 1. 2010-86 Adopting a Schedule of Civil Fines Imposed Pursuant to Rphnert Park Municipal Code Section 9.48.050 2. 2010-87 Approving Street Name Change of Portion of Wilfred Avenue to Golf Course Drive D. Ordinance for Adoption: 1. No. 822 Repealing and Replacing Chapter 9.48 of the Rohnert Park Municipal Code (Alcohol Offense/Loud Parties ~ Loud and Unruly Gatherings) 7. STANDING COMMITTEE / AD HOC COMMITTEE / LIAISON REPORTS A. Standing Committee Reports, if any B. Liaison Reports 1. Russian River Watershed Association, 7/29/1 0 mtg. (JM/PS) 2. Water Advisory Committee/Technical Advisory Committee, 8/2/1 0 mtg. (JM) C. Other Reports, if any ? l NOTE: Time shown for any particular matter on the agenda is an estimate only. Matters may be considered earlier or later than the time indicated depending on the pace at which the meeting proceeds. If you wish to speak on an item under discussion by the Council which appears on this agenda, after receiving recognition from the Mayor, please walk to the rostrum and state your name and address for the record. - PLEASE FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD PRIOR TO SPEAKING - Any item raised by a member of the public which is not agendized and may require Council action shall be automatically referred to staff for investigation and disposition which may include placing on a future agenda. If the item is deemed to be an emergency or the need to take action arose after posting of the agenda within the meaning of Government Code Section 54954.2(b), Council is entitled to discuss the matter to determine if it is an emergency item under said Government Code and may take action thereon. 8. COMMUNICATIONS Copies of communications have been provided to Council for review prior to this meeting. Council Members desiring to read or discuss any communication may do so at this time. No action may be taken except to place a particular item on a future agenda for Council consideration. 9. MATTERS FROMIFOR COUNCIL A. Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation & Open Space District matter - Council consideration of direction to extend the term for grant funds from one to five years 1. Council discussion/direction/action B. Takanbou Yabuuchi, Student Ambassador from Hashimoto, 8/4/1 0 visit (PS/GB) C. Calendar of Events D. Other informational items, if any 10. PUBLIC COMMENTS 11. ADJOURNMENT of City Council-CDC-RPFA Joint Regular Meeting CERTIFICA TION OF POSTING OF AGENDA I, Terri Griffin, Deputy City Clerk for the City of Rohnert Park, declare that the foregoing agenda for the August 10, 2010, Joint Regular Meeting of the Rohnert Park City Council/CDC/RPFA was posted and available .for review on August 5, 2010, at Rohnert Park City Hall, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California 94928. The agenda is also available on the City web site at www.rpcitv.orl!, Signed this 5th day of August, 2010, at Rohnert Park, California. ? 0810] 0 AGENDA-Jt.Regualr Mtg.-RPCity Council-CDC-RPF Adoc COURTESY AGENDA 8/10/10 cc: J. Hauff, City Clerk (2) T. Griffin, Deputy City Clerk Connie Bolmeier Rohnert Park-Cotati Regional Library 6250 Lynne Conde Way Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Bill Keene, General Manager Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation & Open Space District 747 Mendocino Ave, Ste 100 Santa Rosa, CA 95401 NOTE: Place marker on agenda for each individual recipient. Kieran Keaney 7199 Circle Drive Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Wulff Reinhold Public Safety Technical Advisor ? Griffin. Terri From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Griffin, Terri Wednesday, August 04,20102:38 PM Hauff,Judy Lidster, Seth August 10th Pledge Leader Judy, Pam just called to let us know that Kieran Keaney, 2nd Grade Student at penngrove School, will be leading the Pledge of Allegiance at the August 10th meeting. (He was listed on the June 22nd agenda, but his mom forgot.) Terri Terri A. Griffin, CMC Deputy City Clerk CITY OF ROHNERT PARK 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 " (707) 588-2225 ~ (707) 792-1876 i:8J tgriffin@rpcitv.org - Please note that City Hall is open Monday through Thursday, 8 am - 5 pm, and is closed on Friday.- ? 1 ~,;. 07/25/2010 11:20 707-5657359 OPEN SPACE DISl 8/10/10 City Council Agenda L~ ITEM NO.4 & ITEM NO. 9.A "~.f'-tL._, ~~"-",'.5'"'-:.il \/ SON 0 MAC O' U N T Y AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION AND OPEN SPACE DISTR.ICT ,~!;' ?~' .',,' " i: 747 Mendocino Avenue. Suite 100, Santa Rosa, CA 95401-4850 Tel: (707) 565-7360 Fax: (707) 565-7359 wVvw.sonOIII.a{)penSo3ce.org ~ FACSI~!ILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET -= ~:-:: --: TO: FROM: De Ccv-..'^--A ~ V\A-.t.?.Q r G-'V. DI...-~ '^-- CO MPAi'N: 5CA.pDSO FAX NUMBER: t?"Cot?- /569 PHONE NUMBER: DATE: 7- 2. ~ ~ ( 0 TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: --r RE: l:>t.S fYlc+ 5 fA €< t?:- b( :J DFOR REVIEW SENDER'S REFERENCE NUMBER: r? Co c? - -, 2. <.a \...0 6 ~vt f P ~5-.r&( VV\ DURGENT DpLEASE REPLY OF.Y.l. NOTES/COMMENTS: Q:ftCt ck..Q. d t's ~ Q... P 1.0 poS" c:a--Q ~ C."-t:J '"15 ~",l~ a.Vld C.~( ~~~s- Ct~soc. ~ ~~ r05~)R.. F I Lc<--(A'j' OV,/ a {(e...,. c::k VI = 0.1 ~e. ~~N>re ffi hIe. L.-LCLj" di'5;(:..Ns;y<.d- -=r-.ee-t ~ e u-l 0U/1 '-f {JULSl1~. &! CONFIDENTI.ALSTATEMENT J .' . This confidential information in ili1s communicadon is intended for the l.lse of the addJ:essee only (ot' . by othct;$ who have been authorized to receive it). This communication may contain info.cmation that is eubiect to the attort1ey/dlent privilege, ~nd exempt from disclosure under applica.ble l~w. If you are not the intended tedpient, or uyou are: not the agent responsible for ddivedng this ttansmittal to the .intended recipient, you are hereby notified thar any dissemination, distribution. or reproduction of this communication is pt:ohibited. If j"OU have received this communication in error, please notify .the 5cndcr immediately by ern ail, by telepbone or by facsim.ile. and dC5UOY aU eo pies of this communication. Th~ you. toivu- ~j M~T'r S l>~~.fr\cfs $GIo i'1A l rte. e1 ? 07/2G/2010 11:20 707-5557359 OPEN SPACE DISTRICT PAGE 02/07 ~- ~~. CITY OF C L 0 V E ~D ALE September 10, 2009 Sonoma County Mayors aod Council Members Association Attn: Susan Gorin, Chair At the August 13,2009 Sonoma County Mayors and Council Members Association meeting, the City of Cloverdale described a proposal to present to the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District (OSD). The proposal would increase the flexibility of the OSD's Matching Grant Program by allowing for multi-year grant awards, and orges the OSD Board to increase funding for the program. Cloverdale brought this proposal to the Association because these changes would benefit applications from any jurisdiction. The Program would remain competitive, sothe project applications considered by the OSD Board to be the most compelling would still prevail. However, by increasing the flexibility, projects would not be: tU~~E;!d away simply because oftheir cost. The City of Cloverdale respectfully requests the Association's consideration of this proposal and, if approved, to relay that position to the Open Space District Board. I am including a copy of the handout Cloverdale distributed at the August 13 meeting, as well as the Resolution approved by the Cloverdale City Council on August 26, 2.009. Sincerely, Joseph J. Palla, Mayor City of Cloverdale \ P.O. Box 217. 124 North Cloverdalt= Blvd. . Clova-dale. CA 95425-0217. Telephone (707) 894.2521 - FAX (707) 894-3451 ? 07/2S/2010 11:20 707-5557359 OPEN SPACE DISTRICT PAGE 03/07 ~ - ~......~~~ CiTY 0 f CLOVE~DALE SONOMA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Matching Grant Program Proposed Revisions The Open Space District (OSD) Matching Grant Program provides funding for land acquisition, development of recreational amenities, and restoration of open space within or near urban areas. The Program is highly valuable to cities because it is instrumental in setting aside areas that preserve our natural settings. These areas are becoming more and more scarce in the face of development. Background The Matching Grant Program is an important component of OSD's mission to permanently protect the diverse agricultural, natural resource, and scenic open space lands of Sonoma County for future generations. The grant awards have declined each year for the past few years, going from $10 million in 2007 to $6 million in 2008. In 2009, the Program is anticipated to provide up to $2 million in grants. Although it's true that sales tax and other revenues are decreasing, at least temporarily, it is also true that crucial pieces of land should be preserved while they are still available. Position The City of Cloverdale supports two revisions to the Matching Grant Program: . provide flexibility by aI/owing multi-year awards. There may be opportunities to set aside larger parcels of lands, or lands of particular significance. However, their purchase i$likely to exceed the amount of available annual funds. By allowing multi-year awards, the lands could be secured immediately but paid for over a longer period of time, e.g., two to five years. This would allow OSD to invest in larger, high-priority projects that it would otherwise have to decline. Increase the amount available for the Matching Grant Program. The Program is an essential tool for preselVing important lands in and around communities. The City of Cloverdale urges the OSD to provide additional funds for matching grants. , ~- j..~M.-J . . . ~ .-.J~ u- 'I, (Y'..r- For additional information, please contact Nina Regor at (707) 894-1710 or nre~or@ci.c1overdale.ca.us P.O. Box. 217. 124 North Cloverdale Blvd. . Cloverdale, CA 95425-0217 . Telephone (707) 894-2521 . FAX (707) 894-3451 2- 07/2S/2010 11:20 707-5557359 OPEN SPACE DISTRICT PAGE 04/07 . " ., " , I ...:"~' , . , \ ~ :-~:. ~ . . ..CITY OF 'CLOVERDALE ., CITY COUNCil. RESOLUTION' 052-2009 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CIll" OF ClOVERDAlE PROPOSIN~ NECESSARY REVISIONS TO THE SONOMA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Open Space District (OSD) Matching Grant Program provides funding for land acquisition, development of recreational amenities, and restoration of open space .,^!ithln or near urban areas; and WHEREAS, the Program .is highly v~h,la.l:!.l~ to.. cities because it is instrumental in setting .aside areas that preserve our naturalsettings;.and ..;, WHEREAS, these areas are becoming more and more scarce in the face of development; and WHEREAS, the Matching Grant Program is an important component of OSD's mission to permanently protect the diverse agricultural, natural resource, and scenic open space lands of Sonoma County for future generations; and WHEREAS, OSD has experienced, at least temporarily, a decrease ,in sales tax and other revenues; and WHEREAS, the grant awards have declined each year for the past few years, going from, $10 million in 2007 to $6 million in Z008; and WHEREAS) in 2009, the program is anticipated to provide up to $2 million in grants, an 80% reduction in funding over the prior two years; and WHEREAS, although it is true that OSD revenues are decreasing, at least temporarily, it is also true that crudal pieces of land should be preserved while they are. still available, and that the acquisition of said lands should be viewed as an investment in what is becoming a fjnite resource. NOW. THEREFORE,.BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Cloverdale as follows: Section 1. The City of Cloverdale supports two revisions to the Matching Grant Program. Section 2. The City Council strongly urges the OSD to provide flexibility by allowing multi-year awards, which would allow larger parcels of lands, or lands of particular significance, to be secured immediately but paid for over a longer period of time, allowing the 050 to invest in larger, high-priority projects that it would otherwise have to decline. Section 3. The City Council strongly urges the OSD to increase the amount available for the Matching Grant program, which is an essential tool for preserving important lands in and around communities. Section 4. The City shall send copies of this Resolution to the Open Space District and Sonoma County Fourth District Supervisor Paul Kelley. ? 3 07/25/2010 11:20 707-5557359 OPEN SPACE DISTRICT <,' ~ " . ; l It is hereby certified that the foregoing Resolution No 052-2009 was duly introduced and legally adopted by the City Council ofthe City of Cloverdale at its regular meeting held on this 26 day of August 2009 by the following roll call vote: (XX-XX) AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: APPROVED: ATIESTED: Joseph J. Palla, Mayor Nina D. Regor, City Clerk ? PAGE 05/07 , ' ~ SONOfv\A COUNTY !-\c~n ICULTijR/\t PR.ESt RV;\T!C)f".l ,i\i'<D C)PF(J (~F;\Cr: {)\S R1C'1 J'1111.1'11-<r 1 ') )1',1'" ..:- , _\: } _.~, _V..v Nlayor Pam Stafford City of Rohnett Park 6750 Commerce Boulevard Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Dear Ivbyor Stafford: As a follow up to the executive comrninee meeting of the Sonoma County Mayors' and Councilmembers' Association on October 8,2009, the Sonoma County A.gliculnll'al Preservation and Open Space District (District) is providing the history and current status of its Nlatching Grant Program, Ihis request \'vas prompted by a resolution adopted by the City of C10verdale requesting that the District 1) consider multiple-year awards as p<lrt of the program, and 2) increase the funding allocation for thi:~ program, which is currently budgeted at $2 million for FY 09-10. Both Ivleasures C and F, approved by the voters in 1990 and 2006, respectively, provide for a Matching Grant Program. Since 1994, the District has administered and based funding for this program on availablcsales Ox revenues. Follcnving reauthorization of the sales tax in November 2006,'the District sold revenue bonds bOlTowed against future revenues that enabled ir to pursue imponam conservarion opponunities through its city', county. and non-profit p,utners. The bond proceeds allowed the District to approve sizeable grants tOtaling $10 million in 20e7 and $6.5 million in 2008. l\.swith all public agencies in Sonoma County and throughout the State, the Distlict is experiencing a reduction in revenue and partner resources. 'n1C recession and adverse state budget irnp,Kts have affected our revenues, the resources of our non-profit panners, and our c<1pacilY and abilit.,,! to lever~lge those resources. Despite the reduction of Disuier iunding, we continue to supporT a robust land conservation prograrn. 'To date, ne,lrly S2B million in marching grams luve been selected for funding. Attached is the historical activity and current status of the prograrn. Evaluation of projects is based on Clitclia identified in the matching grant guidelines approved by the District Bo,ml of Directors. \'x::e continue lO refine and improve our program and \vill consider the effects of multi-ye,lr aWMds on future program cycles. As always, we welcome your suggestions. ~~, .:."j(/"j.}: ;;\,! r-. ,-( :> ~> i:' !i(c:.n!::~ ')~)< ,;j !=,y! t-,/:c;" d-:.:).:.". ? 1\Lwor Pam Stafford January 13, 2010 P'age 1 SONOMA COUNTY ;.\GFUCULTUHAL PRESERVATIOI',1 .AND OPE!'-.) SPACE DISTRICT If you and your council would be interested in leaming more about the Matching Gram Program, please contact lvlisti 1\1ias, Conservation Program Manager, TO schedule a presentation from the District at a future council meeting or to schedule a meeting with your city manager and staff. Sincerely, if; Ii . .,- I Ii V (\ ,,! I 1/1 J It i ) I' j ~A/,jV Ct'":'^_.~_ I ..~ / William J. Keene c;,'ll<,rr;/ A/aI1IWT ,:. fJ//t'rili! CI!r,\{aJ/i{gtF Dal!iel J(b}!/d!~~: 747 i'.;\endocino i\venuc:. Suite lOG '. Santa Rosa. California 9':AOl.218:;O /07.561:>.7:"160 t, FaJ 707.:'65.7359 ~ ? 5 r ffi Distkt Completed and Active Matching Grant Projects al N .. . ..... ... rt ■ Completed Matching Grant srL top! F"ark ... . Active Matching Grant k)yu arm eS' Highway Lipaa kxpisznn f Pldq: & Rwino' River eu ur , Completed and Active Matching Grant Projects ti ;*' 1st District al N rt ■ Completed Matching Grant F"ark ... . Active Matching Grant . .... iVp eS' Highway f Pldq: & Rwino' River eu ur , Ils rvisorial District UNI ti ;*' 1st District al rt Urb,: n Growth Boundary Incorporated City Land P f UNI .... ........ C I � I L"'� 2nd Mulct it p Ili SO N 0 A i x C 0 u x T y AGIUCULIUKAL 1IRLS 11WAVO'.4 AND OPEN SPACE WSIPUCI City of Rohnert Park 8/10/10 CITY-CDC-RPFA JOINT REGULAR MEETING ....,. AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.A FOR 7/27/10 Jt. Regular Meeting Minutes ITEM TO FOLLOW ? MINUTES OF THE JOINT REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK City Council Community Development Commission Rohnert Park Financing Authority Tuesday, July 27, 2010 Rohnert Park City Hall, Council Chamber 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California 1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL The Joint Regular Meeting of the Rohnert Park City Council, Community Development Commission of the City of Rohnert Park, and Rohnert Park Financing Authority was called to order by Mayor Stafford at 5:02 p.m. Present: Pam Stafford, Mayor Gina Belforte, Vice Mayor Jake Mackenzie, Council Member Late: Arnie Breeze, Council Member (Arrival time signified later in these minutes) Joseph T. Callinan, Council Member (Arrival time signified later in these minutes) Staff and/or consultant participants: John Dunn, Interim City Manager; Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney; Sandy Lipitz, Director of Administrative Services; Cathy Orme, Accounting Manager; Gene Abravaya, PAC Theater Manager; Linda Babonis, Housing & Redevelopment Manager; Brian Masterson, Director of Public Safety; Wulff Reinhold, Public Safety Technical Advisor; Darrin Jenkins, Director of Development Services/City Engineer; and Judy Hauff, City Clerk. Community Media Center staff present for the recording and televised production of this meeting: Video Technicians Josh Jacobsen and Josh Cimino. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - The following Boy Scouts of Rohnert Park Troop led the Pledge of Allegiance: Danny Luna, Analy High School; James Fike, Lawrence Jones Middle School; and Jacob Austring, Technology High School. Council Members Breeze and Callinan arrived at this meeting at 5:04 p.m. 3. PRESENTATIONS A. Mayor's Presentation of Certificate and A ward of Financial Reporting Achievement for Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009 from Government Finance Officers Association Mayor Stafford shared comments commending efforts of the Finance Department for receiving this prestigious award and made the presentation to Sandy Lipitz, Director of Administrative Services, and Cathy Orme, Accounting Manager. B. Mayor's Presentation of Proclamation Proclaiming that an Award of Recognition for Outstanding Community Service be Pi-.esented to Chamber of Commerce Member, Mary's Pizza Shack Mayor Stafford shared contents of this Proclamation and made the presentation to Cully Williamson, Owner, Mary's Pizza Shack. PUBLIC COMMENTS - Mayor Stafford invited public comments at 5:08 p.m. Jim Stevens, Rohnert Park, shared concerns and made recommendations about parking for Sonoma State University and M Section. 4. RECESS TO CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION IN CONFERENCE ROOM 2A Mayor Stafford recessed the meeting at 5:12 p.m. to'City Council Closed Session to consider: A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED UTIGA TION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Government Code ~54956.9 B. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government, Code ~54957.6) Agency designated representative: John Dunn, Interim City Manager Employee organizations: Service Employees' International Union (S.E.I.U.) Local 1021 Rohnert Park Public Safety Officers' Association (RPPSOA) Rohnert Park Public Safety Managers' Association (RPPSMA) 5. RECONVENE JOINT REGULAR MEETING OPEN SESSION IN COUNCIL CHAMBER Mayor Stafford reconvened the joint regular meeting open session at 6:25 p.m. 6. MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION (Government Code ~ 54957.1) Mayor Stafford advised Council met in closed session to discuss items listed on the agenda regarding anticipated litigation and conferred on discussions about the Employee MOU's listed on the agenda. There was no reportable action from closed session. 7. CITY MANAGER / CITY ATTORNEY / DEPARTMENT HEAD BRIEFINGS A. Outside Arrangements for Walmart Public Hearing on July 29, 2010 John Dunn, Interim City Manager, explained preparations for outside arrangements for the Walmart Public Hearing on July 29, 2010. 8. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Stafford invited public comments at 6:30 p.m. No one responded. ? 9. CONSENT CALENDAR Interim City Manager Dunn called attention to Item C.3 for Resolution No. 2010-78 and confirmed the revisions prepared for this item were as reviewed in closed session with Council earlier this evening. Council Member Callinan pulled Item D, 2nd Quarterly Report on Council Travel Expenditures. Vice Mayor Belforte pulled Item B.1, City Bills. A. Approval of Minutes for: 1. City-CDC-RPF A Joint Regular Meeting - July 13,2010 B. Acceptance of Reports for: 2. CDC Bills/Demands for Payment 3. CDC CashlInvestments Report for Month Ending June 30, 2010 4. RPF A Cash/Investments Report for Month Ending June 30, 2010 C. City Council Resolutions for Adoption: 1. 2010-76 Rejecting the Insufficient Claim of Olisaemeka Eze (re: alleged violation of civic rights) 2. 2010-77 Approving and Adopting the Memorandum of Agreement with the Service Employees International Union (S.E.I.U.) Local 1021 3. 2010-78 Approving and Adopting the Memorandum of Agreement with the Rohnert Park Public Safety Officers' Association (RPPSOA) 4. 2010-79 Approving and Adopting the Memorandum of Agreement with the Rohnert Park Public Safety Managers' Association (RPPSMA) 5. 2010-80 Awarding the Contract for the Parks LED Street Lights Project to Hannibal's Electric (City Project No. PWCS 2010-01) ACTION: Moved (Mackenzie), seconded (Breeze), and carried unanimously to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item B.1, City Bills, and Item D, 2nd Quarterly Report on Council Travel Expenditures. Items Removed from Consent Calendar: B. Acceptance of Reports for: 1. City BillslDemands for Payment City Attorney Kenyon responded to Vice Mayor Belforte's request for feedback on the City Attorney payment listed on page 23 and reviewed various City Attorney billing reductions made for the past fiscal year. D. Acceptance of 2nd Quarterly Report on City Council Trav~l Expenditures Director of Administrative Services Lipitz responded to Council questions on this item. ACTION: Moved (Mackenzie), seconded (Callinan), and carried unanimously to accept Item B.1, City Bills, and Item D, 2nd Quarterly Report on Council Travel Expenditures.? '" 10. CITY/CDC - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT, 7/14/10 mtg. (GBIPS) A. N2 Holdings Freeway Sign Proposal/Request - Consideration of concurrent approval I. Economic Development Committee Report - Handled via staff report. 2. Staff Report - Interim City Manager Dunn and Director of Administrative Services Lipitz reviewed the staff report provided for this item. 3. Presentation by N2 Holdings, Inc., representatives Chris Miller, Chief Legal Officer & Chief Marketing Officer & Clark Heister, Chief Operating Officer, via power point presentation. N2 Holdings Representatives Miller and Heister, Director of Administrative Services Lipitz, Director of Development Services Jenkins, and PAC Theater Manager Abravaya responded to Council questions on this item. Interim City Manager Dunn explained tonight's preliminary process for this item. 4. Public Comments Mayor Stafford invited public comments at 7:35 p.m. No one responded. 5. ACTION: Moved (Mackenzie), seconded (Belforte), and carried unanimously to approve moving forward with the conceptual concept for the freeway sign program as reviewed in the staff report provided for this item. B. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FUNDING REQUEST: Consideration of CDC funding request from the Rohnert Park Chamber of Commerce 1. Economic Development Committee Report - Handled via staff report. 2. Staff Report - Interim City Manager Dunn provided preliminary comments and Housing & Redevelopment Manager Babonis reviewed the staff report for this item. 3. Public Comments Mayor Stafford invited public comments at 7:40 p.m. No one responded. 4. CDC Resolution for Adoption: a. 2010-14 Authorizing and Approving an Agreement with the Rohnert Park Chamber of Commerce for Professional Services Associated with Chamber Operations ACTION: Moved (Mackenzie), seconded (Belforte), and carried unanimously to adopt above-titled CDC Resolution No. 2010-14 as submitted. ? 11. PLANNING FEE SCHEDULE UPDATE - Council consideration of approving the Modified Planning Fee Schedule A. Staff Report - Interim City Manager Dunn provided preliminary comments and Director of Development Services Jenkins reviewed the staff report for this item via power point presentation and responded to Council questions. City Attorney Kenyon also responded to Council questions on this item. B. PUBLlC HEARING - Continued from June 22, 2010 Mayor Stafford continued this public hearing at 8:08 p.m. 1. Wulff Reinhold, Santa Rosa, as President of the Rotary Club of Rohnert ParklCotati and on behalf of the Education Foundation as an Advisory Board Member, commented on overhead expenditures for non-profits and requested consideration of waiver for these fees for local non-profits. 2. Joe Ripple, Santa Rosa, The Construction Coalition, representing North Coast Builders Exchange and the Building Industry Association, referred to his letter distributed to Council for this item and shared comments expressing opposition to any fee increases associated with the construction industry during the current severe economic downturn. Mayor Stafford closed the public hearing at 8:14 p.m. City Attorney Kenyon responded to further Council questions on this item. C. Resolution for Adoption: 1. 2010-81 Approving the Modified Planning Fee Schedule ACTION: Moved (Mackenzie) to adopt above-titled Resolution No. 201 0-81 with the understanding noted in the record that the City Council has the ability to waive or adjust fees per the City's existing ordinance. City Attorney Kenyon responded to Council question on the above motion that she would add into the resolution language that said, notwithstanding the foregoing, the Council has the authority upon request by any applicant to waive any of the fees. Motion on the floor died for lack of a second. ACTION: Moved (Belforte), seconded (Breeze), with regards to the percent of cost recovery with the current fees, to see what it lool\s like, have staff come back with the fees that are under 100% be increased to at least 25% to 50%, and revisit these fees on an annual basis until the cost recovery is up to 100% in a heightened economy. Friendly amendment (Callinan) to the motion on the floor was made to cut in half all the fees listed at 100% to 50% and avoid having to go back to staff to rework this again:>" Discussion ensued including clarification by Vice Mayor Belforte that with acceptance of the friendly amendment, the smaller percentages on the fees would be ok. Director of Community Services Jenkins requested clarification that the motion is referring to flat fees and not the proposed fee column with dollar amounts. He cautioned Council not to include the time and material fees in the proposed fee column and gave the example of an annexation fee at $500,000, with the percentage of cost recovery cut in half from 100% to 50%, would inadvertently be subsidizing $250,000, which he did not think was the intent of the motion. Vice Mayor Belforte, maker of the motion, agreed with this clarification. As recommended by City Attorney Kenyon, Council confirmed each item that was to be changed on the Planning Fee Schedule affected by the motion on the floor, with concluding review by Director of Development Services Jenkins of the list of fees with cost recovery going from 100% to 50% as follows: #4 - Assignment of Address #5 - Assignment of Temporary Power Pole Address #8 - Condition Modification/Waiver-Administrative #12 - Filing & Notice of Categorical Exemption #23 - Notice of Determination The friendly amendment on the floor (Callinan), as reviewed abpve, was accepted by the maker of the motion on the floor (Bel forte) and the seconder (Breeze). Friendly amendment (Mackenzie) to review this item in twelve months. Maker of the motion on the floor (Belforte) clarified that the annual review of this item was part of the original motion. Council Member Mackenzie withdrew his friendly amendment. The motion and friendly amendment on the floor carried unanimously adopting Resolution No. 2010-81 approving the Modified Planning Fee Schedule with direction to revisit these fees on an annual basis until the cost recovery is up to 100% in a heightened economy, and approving changes to Attachment A for the above-reviewed list of fees reducing the percentage of cost recovery from 100% to 50% for Nos. 4, 5, 8, 1~ and 23. 12. ALCOHOL OFFENSE/LOUD PARTY ORDINANCE - Consideration of proposed amendments to Rohnert Park Municipal Code Chapter 9.48, Alcohol Offense/Loud Parties, and imposition of a fine for initial response A. Staff Report - Wulff Reinhold, Public Safety Technical Advisor, reviewed the staff report for this item via power point presentation and responded to Council question. B. PUBLIC HEARING - Mayor Stafford opened the public hearing for this item at 9:05 p.m. 1. Michael Bosler, Rohnert Park, expressed concern about the first fine at $250 with preference that the warning be free and, secondly, that fining everybody seemed exceSSIve. Mayor Stafford closed this public he:;lring at 9:08 p.m. ? C. Ordinance for Introduction: Waive Further Reading and Introduce Ordinance by Reading Title: - 1. No. 822 Repealing and Replacing Chapter 9.48 of the Rohnert Park Municipal Code, (Alcohol OffenselLoud Parties) ACTION: Moved (Belforte), seconded (Mackenzie) to introduce above-title Ordinance No. 822 as amended to include language that posting shall be on the premises for 180 days. Friendly amendment (Breeze) indicating she was in favor of the 15\ 2nd and last bullet points on page 3 of 3 of the staff recommendations, but not the 3rd, 4th and 5th bullet points and, with reference to the time limit that the responsible person is subject to additional penalties for subsequent responses, instead of the 180 days indicated in this 4th bullet point, recommended 90 days for a gradual increase before getting to the 180 days. Discussion ensued including response to the friendly amendment (Breeze) by the maker of the motion (Belforte) that she could agree with no fine on the initial response but shared reasons why she preferred to retain the 180 day time limit, so could not accept the friendly amendment. The initial motion on the floor, via roll call vote, failed 2 - 3 dissenting (Breeze, Callinan and Stafford). ACTION: Moved (Callinan), seconded (Mackenzie) to introduce Ordinance No. 822 with a couple of changes: to keep the change from "party" to "loud and unruly gathering"; keep the number of persons forming a gathering at 10; give a warning instead of a $250 fine the first time; and increase the time from two months (60 days) to four months (120 days), via roll call vote, failed 2- 3 dissenting (Belforte, Mackenzie and Stafford). ACTION: Moved (Belforte), seconded (Mackenzie) to introduce Ordinance No. 822 with the following changes: keep #1 to change "party" to "loud and unruly gathering" and change the gathering from 10 to 6; keep #2; change #3 to $100 fine; change #4 to 120 days; and #5 and #6 stay as is, via roll call vote; failed 2 - 3 dissenting (Breeze, Callinan and Stafford). ACTION: Moved (Mackenzie), seconded (Callinan) to introduce Ordinance No. 822 with the following changes: on the change for the reference from "party" to "loud and unruly gathering" that the number of persons remain at 10; go along with recommendation #2; add the fine level for initial response at $100 level; and increase the time limit from 60 to 120 days, with friendly amendment (Stafford) to make the first response a warning accepted by the maker and seconder of the motion, the motion on the floor, via roll call vote, carried unanimously, and Ordinance No. 822 was introduced as amended herein. ? 13. DEMOLITION OF FORMER SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD FIRE STATION Consideration of directing demolition of the Former Southwest Boulevard Fire Station located at 435 Southwest Boulevard and authorizing staff to solicit bids for this demolition A. Staff Report - Interim City Manager Dunn reviewed the staff report provided for this item and responded to Council questions. B. Public Comments Mayor Stafford invited public comments at 9:31 p.m. No one responded. C. City Council discussion/direction/action - Council expressed agreement with the need for this demolition, as reviewed in the staff report, and also agreed the history of this facility should be memorialized in an appropriate manner. ACTION: Moved (Belforte), seconded (Breeze), and carried unanimously, to proceed with this agenda item #13 for demolition of the former Southwest Boulevard Fire Station with the understanding that it will come back to Council no matter what the cost. 14. STANDING COMMITTEE / AD HOC COMMITTEE / LIAISON REPORTS A. Standing Committee Reports - None B. Liaison Reports 1. Library Advisory Committee, 7/20/10 mtg. (AB) Council Member Breeze reported on this meeting. C. Other Reports 1. Sonoma County/City Solid Waste Advisory Group, 7/15110 mtg. (PS) Mayor Stafford reported on this meeting. 2. Local Agency Formation Committee (LAFCO), 7/21/10 mtg. (PS) Mayor Stafford reported on this meeting. 15. COMMUNICATIONS Council Member Breeze referred to the Rancho Cotate High School dunk tank fundraiser that she and Council Member Callinan were participants last Friday at the Farmers Market and that earlier that evening the Walmart Manager advised her that Walmart would like to make a donation to make up the difference from the fundraiser and fill the gap for the funds needed for the homecoming parade. Council Member Callinan noted the amount would be about $3,000. Both commented on the success of this dunk tank fundraiser. 16. MATTERS FROMIFOR COUNCIL A. City Council Protocols - Consideration of placing revisions to the City Council Protocols on a future agenda (PS) - Interim City Manager Dum1 referred to the memorandum from City Clerk Hauff provided for this item and advised the item was listed on this agenda to schedule consideration of revisions to the City Council Protocols on a future agenda. City Attorney Kenyon responded to Council questions on this item. 1. Council discussion/direction/action-Discussion concluded in Council concurrence to move forward with the procedure for consideration of revisions to the City Council ? Protocols on one of the regular meeting agendas in September 2010. B. Calendar of Events I. Vice Mayor Belforte commended aspects of recent LaCrosse games including really great teams; parents booked rooms at hotels for great economic development; great week end for all; Jacob McIntyre got high praise; and Rohnert Park came in 3rd place. 2. Mayor Stafford called attention to the continued success of the Farmers Market on Friday evenings in Rohnert Park. Council Member Mackenzie commended the music provided at the Farmers Market and noted there's only two music events left for the next two Farmers Market events. C. Sonoma Mountain Village Project - Consideration of scheduling time at a City Council regular or special meeting for consideration of the Sonoma Mountain Village Project Interim City Manager Dunn explained the memo provided for this item from Director of Development Services/City Engineer Jenkins. 1. Council discussion/direction/action - Discussion concluded in Council concurrence to schedule the Sonoma Mountain Village Project on the regular Council meeting of August 24, 2010. Public Comments - Mayor Stafford invited public comments on this item at 9:55 p.m. Richard Pope of Sonoma Mountain Village commented on the encouragement they received for this project at the Planning Commission meeting last Thursday. He reviewed reasons why they would like to go through the process as soon as possible. D. Other informational items - None. 17. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Stafford invited public comments at 9:57 p.m. No one responded. OTHER MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS: Mayor Stafford extended congratulations to Director of Public Safety, Brian Masterson, and his wife, Sharon, on their 25th wedding anniversary today. MOMENTS OF RECOGNITION: Council Member Callinan shared that Mr. Grosse passed away recently and acknowledged that he was a big part of this community for many years. Vice Mayor Belforte shared that Steve Roberts also passed away recently and acknowledged that he was one of the founding members of SCA YD and also served on the School District for many years. 18. ADJOURNMENT of City Council-CDC-RPFA Joint Regular Meeting Mayor Stafford adjourned this meeting at 9:59 p.m. {]~~rJjCL ~ t7'Judy auff, City ~e City of Rohnert Park Pam Stafford, Mayor City of Rohnert Park ? Accounts Payable Checks for Approval User: cledbetter� ;' Printed: 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount 193912 07/23/2010 General Fund Pac /Concessions CA Alcohol Beverage Control 50.00 Check Total: 50.00 193913 07/27/2010 General Fund Del Patton 356.00 Check Total: 356.00 193914 07/27/2010 General Fund Aflac Payable AFLAC 515.06 193914 07/27/2010 General Fund Aflac Payable AFLAC 556.26 193915 07/27/2010 General Fund 193915 07/27/2010 General Fund 193916 07/27/2010 General Fund 193916 07/27/2010 General Fund 193917 07/27/2010 General Fund N 193918 07/27/2010 General Fund Emplyee Benfits /Health InsBl Blue Cross W/H Payable Blue Cross W/H Payable Emplyee Benfits /Health Ins/Bl ANTHEM BLUE CROSS ANTHEM BLUE CROSS ANTHEM BLUE CROSS ANTHEM BLUE CROSS Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Court Order Payable CA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Check Total: Emplyee Benfits /Health Ins/Bl HARTFORD LIFE INS 1,071.32 49,787.09 35,163.62 84,950.71 35,163.62 49,787.09 84,950.71 75.00 75.00 15,625.22 AP -Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4 :38 PM) Page 1 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount Check Total: 15,625.22 193919 07/27/2010 General Fund Blue Cross W/H Payable HSA Bank 100.00 Check Total: 100.00 193920 07/27/2010 General Fund Standard Ins Payable LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INS CO 933.00 Check Total: 933.00 193921 07/27/2010 General Fund Def Comp Payable -Gw NATIONAL DEFERRED COMPENSATIO 3,137.31 Check Total: 3,137.31 193922 07/27/2010 General Fund Def Comp Payable -Gw NATIONAL DEFERRED COMPENSATIO 3,032.47 Check Total: 3,032.47 193923 07/27/2010 General Fund Rpea Dues CITY OF ROHNERT PARK 15.00 Check Total: 15.00 193924 07/27/2010 General Fund Scope Dues Payable SEIU Local 1021 1,034.82 193924 07/27/2010 General Fund Scope Dues Payable SEIU Local 1021 15.22 Check Total: 1,050.04 193925 07/27/2010 General Fund United Way Payable UNITED WAY 85,00 . Check Total: 85.00 193926 07/27/2010 General Fund Eye CareNSP/Payables Vision Service Plan - (CA) 805.42 Check Total: 805.42 N 193927 07/27/2010 General Fund Emplyee Benfits /Eye Care Vision Service Plan - (CA) 611.91 Check Total: 611.91 193928 07/27/2010 General Fund Emplyee Benfits /Eye Care- Vision Service Plan - (CA) 26.15 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4 :38 PM) Page 2 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount Check Total: 26.15 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund P E R S Payable CALPERS 343,972.99 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Pers- Survivorship CALPERS 368.00 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Pers Redeposit Payable CALPERS 2,349.16 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund City Manager /Pers/Employee CALPERS 145.71 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund City Manager /Pers/Employer CALPERS 295.24 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Finance /Pers/Employee CALPERS 362.24 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Finance /Pers/Employer CALPERS 733.85 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Data Processing /Pers/Employee CALPERS 65.82 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Data Processing /Pers/Employer CALPERS 133.36 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Planning /Pers/Employee CALPERS 470.32 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Planning /Pers/Employer CALPERS 952.91 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Personnel /Pers/Employee CALPERS 85.37 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Personnel /Pers/Employer CALPERS 172.96 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Rent Appeals Bd /Pers/Employee CALPERS 48.91 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Rent Appeals Bd /Pers/Employer CALPERS 99.10 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund P/S Personnel /Pers/Employee CALPERS 4,710.37 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund P/S Personnel /Pers/Employer CALPERS 16,358.88 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Animal Control /Pers/Employee CALPERS 92.56 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Animal Control /Pers/Employer CALPERS 187.52 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Pers/Employee CALPERS 1,005.35 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Pers/Employer CALPERS 2,037.07 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Commission /Pers Employee CALPERS 83.34 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Recreation Adm /Pers/Employer CALPERS 168.86 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Theatre /Pers/Employee CALPERS 50.47 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund Theatre /Pers/Employer CALPERS 102.26 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund PAC Sign/Pers- Employee CALPERS 27.70 193929 07/27/2010 General Fund PAC Sign / PERS % Employer CALPERS 56.12 Check Total: 375,136.44 193930 07/28/2010 General Fund Finance /Contractual S Accountemps 879.20 Check Total: 879.20 193931 07/28/2010 General Fund Animal Control/Medications Aeris DBA Matheson Tri -Gas, In 25.50 Check Total: 25.50 193932 07/28/2010 General Fund Non - Department /Self - Insured Alexander's Computer Ergonomic 15.93 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 3 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name. Vendor Name Amount Check Total: 15.93 193933 07/28/2010 General Fund John Anglin 579.00 Check Total: 579.00 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund Benecia Pool /Telephone AT &T 15.67 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund Pac /Telephone AT &T 43.18 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT &T 158.70 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Telephone AT &T 46.32 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Telephone AT &T 11.58 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund Library /Contractual S AT &T 29.98 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund Center /Telephone AT &T 79.89 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Telephone AT &T 33.93 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Telephone AT &T 15.65 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund Data Processing /Telephone AT &T 184.64 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT &T 66.30 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT &T 108.32 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT &T 75.76 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT &T 75.76 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT &T 7 5.76 193934 07/28/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT &T 94.45 Check Total: 1,115.89 193935 07/28/2010 General Fund Data Processing/Cellular Phone AT &T Internet Services 750.00 Check Total: 750.00 193936 07/28/2010 General Fund Planning /Cellular Phone AT &T MOBILITY 66.20 193936 07/28/2010 General Fund Finance /Cellular Phone AT &T MOBILITY 125.23 193936 07/28/2010 General Fund Data Processing/Cellular Phone AT &T MOBILITY 144.43 193936 07/28/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station/Cellular Phone AT &T MOBILITY 1,450.18 193936 07/28/2010 General Fund Planning /Cellular Phone AT &T MOBILITY 185.88 193936 07/28/2010 General Fund Planning /Cellular Phone AT &T MOBILITY 62.21 193936 07/28/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Cellular Phone AT &T MOBILITY 355.30 19936 07/28/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Cellular Phone AT &T MOBILITY 125.61 193936 07/28/2010 General Fund Mini Bus /Cellular Phone AT &T MOBILITY 56.94 193936 07/28/2010 General Fund Sports Center /Cellular Phone AT &T MOBILITY 28.47 193936 07/28/2010 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Cellular Phone AT &T MOBILITY 67.21 193936 07/28/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station/Cellular Phone AT &T MOBILITY -4.48 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 4 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount Check Total: 2,663.18 193937 07/28/2010 General Fund Streets & Bike /Spec. Departm The Barricade Company 332.45 Check Total: 332.45 193938 07/28/2010 General Fund Jerry Bick 135.60 Check Total: 135.60 193939 07/28/2010 General Fund R.P. Gymnasium Bldg/Facilty BK Upholstery 40.00 Check Total: 40.00 193940 07/28/2010 General Fund Dr. James E. Bruns 150.00 Check Total: 150.00 193941 07/28/2010 General Fund R.P. Gymnasium Bldg/Facilty Buchanan Food Service 1,113.96 193941 07/28/2010 General Fund City Hall Bldg/Facilty Buchanan Food Service 116.10 Check Total: 1,230.06 193942 07/28/2010 General Fund Fire /Spec Dept Equ Buck's Saw Service Inc 29.58 Check Total: 29.58 193943 07/28/2010 General Fund Non -Dept Leases/Transfer Out CitiCapital 7,734.42 Check Total: 7,734.42 193944 07/28/2010 General Fund Police /Uniforms The Cobbler 196.09 Check Total: 196.09 N 193945 07/28/2010 General Fund Animal Control /Advertising/P The Community Voice 500.00 Check Total: 500.00 193946 07/28/2010 General Fund Data Processing/Equipment Leas Dell Financial Services 1,427.18 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 5 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount 193946 07/28/2010 General Fund Police /Equipment Leas Dell Financial Services 4,132.59 193946 07/28/2010 General Fund Data Processing/Equipment Leas Dell Financial Services 9,814.89 Check Total: 1.5,374.66 193947 07/28/2010 General Fund Animal Control /Spay/Neuter E Cheryl Dunn 35.00 Check Total: 35.00 193948 07/28/2010 General Fund City Manager /Contractual Se John Dunn 8,950.00 Check Total: 8,950.00 193949 07/28/2010 General Fund Fire /Spec Dept Equ Emergency Equipment Management 59.00 Check Total: 59.00 193950 07/28/2010 General Fund Tress & Parkways/Landscape Sup Farm Plan 158.05 193950 07/28/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Landscape Sup Farm Plan 28.62 Check Total: 186.67 193951 .07/28/2010 General Fund City Hall Bldg/Facilty First Alarm Sercurities Servic 39.00 Check Total: 39.00 193952 07/28/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 15.37 193952 07/28/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. -21.88 193952 07/28/2010 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 204.44 193952 07/28/2010 General Fund Police/I.D. Grainger, Inc. 5.40 Check Total: 203.33 193953 07/28/2010 General Fund AARON HALL 131.05 N Check Total: 131.05 193954 07/28/2010 General Fund Streets & Bike /Spec. Departm Hawkins Mechanical Service 1,265.68 Check Total: 1,265.68 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 6 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount 193955 07/28/2010 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr Bldg/Facilty The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 60.00 193955 07/28/2010 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Fac Maint/Non- The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 85.00 Check Total: 145.00 193956 07/28/2010 General Fund P/S Bldg -North Bldg/Facilty Home Depot -33.57 193956 07/28/2010 General Fund Pac Nehicle Repai Home Depot -8.69 193956 07/28/2010 General Fund Pac Nehicle Repai Home Depot 7.60 193956 07/28/2010 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Home Depot 163.79 193956 07/28/2010 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Home Depot 100.02 193956 07/28/2010 General Fund R.P. Gymnasium Bldg/Facilty Home Depot 94.62 193956 07/28/2010 General Fund R.P. Gymnasium Bldg/Facilty Home Depot 24.14 193956 07/28/2010 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Fac Maint/Non- Home Depot 103.74 193956 07/28/2010 General Fund Pac Nehicle Repai Home Depot 119.89 193956 07/28/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Landscape Sup Home Depot 11.51 Check Total: 583.05 193957 07/28/2010 General Fund Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M Horizon Distribution Inc. 91.66 193957 07/28/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Landscape Sup Horizon Distribution Inc. 65.19 193957 07/28/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Landscape Sup Horizon Distribution Inc. 22.43 193957 07/28/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Landscape Sup Horizon Distribution Inc. 147.15 193957 07/28/2010 General Fund Tress & Parkways/Landscape Sup Horizon Distribution Inc. 255.33 193957 07/28/2010 General Fund Tress & Parkways/Landscape Sup Horizon Distribution Inc. 73.60 Check Total: 655.36 193958 07/28/2010 General Fund Community Event/Spec. Dep Innovative Screen Printing 497.04 Check Total: 497.04 193959 07/28/2010 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Honor Jackson 400.00 Check Total: 400.00 193960 07/28/2010 General Fund Non - Department /Miscellaneous Ann Jensen 22.00 v Check Total: 22.00 193961 07/28/2010 General Fund Cherie Jones 25.00 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 7 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount Check Total: 25.00 193962 07/28/2010 General Fund Non- Department /Miscellaneous Raquel Kilmartin 22.00 Check Total: 22.00 193963 07/28/2010 General Fund Rec Ref Clearing Earl King 400.00 193963 07/28/2010 General Fund Rec Ref Clearing Earl King 67.50 Check Total: 467.50 193964 07/28/2010 General Fund John Mackenzie 180.00 Check Total: 180.00 193965 07/28/2010 General Fund Pac /City Events /Contractual S Brian Mc Carthy 112.46 Check Total: 112.46 193966 07/28/2010 General Fund Rec Ref Clearing Robin Meyer 35.00 Check Total: 35.00 193967 07/28/2010 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Clare Moore 276.90 Check Total: 276.90 193968 07/28/2010 General Fund Public Safety Services Lisa Neuson 10.00 Check Total: 10.00 193969 07/28/2010 General Fund City Hall /Office Supplie Office Depot -75.08 193969 07/28/2010 General Fund Fire /Office Supplie Office Depot 8.63 193969 07/28/2010 General Fund Police /Office Supplie Office Depot 554.36 IV Check Total: 487.91 193970 07/28/2010 General Fund Benecia Pool /Bldg/Facilty Pace Supply 03410 -00 148.78 AP - Checks for Approval (08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 8 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount Check Total: 148.78 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Alicia Park /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 411.52 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Benecia Park /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 314.69 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Caterpillr Park /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 927 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund ColegioN Park /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 132.44 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Dorotea Park /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 60.85 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Eagle Park /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 308.34 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Golis Park /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 860.93 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Honeybee Park /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 221.85 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Ladybug Park Heat/Light/Powe Pacific Gas & Electric 350.74 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Sunrise Park /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 309.29 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund M Park /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 1,028.23 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Rainbow Park /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 28.89 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Center /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 1,632.82 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Alicia Pool /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 85.88 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Benecia Pool /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 1,511.12 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Ladybug Pool /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 8.93 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund H Pool /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 1,446.45 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund City Hall Annex /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 1,258.99 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Non - Department /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric . 13.30 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Animal Shelter /Heat/Light/Pow Pacific Gas & Electric 1,522.41 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 11,337.91 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 848.20 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 279.01 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 75.88 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Trees & Parkwys /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 677.61 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund School Grounds /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 57.09 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Street Lighting /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 12,286.30 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund PW- Traffic Signals /Heat/Light Pacific Gas & Electric 2,825.49 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund City Hall /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 285.67 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Magnolia Pool /Heat/Light/Pow Pacific Gas & Electric 474.66 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund R.P. Gymnasium /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 1,855.59 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 2,827.40 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 284.74 193971 07/28/2010 General Fund Pac /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 5,248.82 1939,71 07/28/2010 General Fund Sign/Heat Light & Power Pacific Gas & Electric 825.62 Check Total: 51,706.93 193972 07/28/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Landscape Sup Park Avenue Turf, Inc. 359.04 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 9 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 193973 07/28/2010 General Fund 193974 07/28/2010 General Fund 193975 07/28/2010 General Fund 193975 07/28/2010 General Fund 193975 07/28/2010 General Fund 193975 07/28/2010 General Fund 193976 07/28/2010 General Fund 193977 07/28/2010 General Fund 193977 07/28/2010 General Fund 193977 07/28/2010 General Fund 193978 07/28/2010 General Fund 193978 07/28/2010 General Fund 193979 07/28/2010 General Fund IV Check Total: 215.59 193980 07/28/2010 General Fund 193980 07/28/2010 General Fund AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM ) Account Name Vendor Name Amount Page 10 Check Total: 359.04 R.P. Gymnasium /Concession Pu Pepsi -Cola 215.59 Check Total: 215.59 Rec Ref Clearing Diana Prince 87.00 Check Total: 87.00 Police /Gas & Oil Redwood Coast Petroleum 498.29 Publ Works Gen /Gas & Oil Redwood Coast Petroleum 721.65 Police /Gas & Oil Redwood Coast Petroleum 672.41 Publ Works Gen /Gas & Oil Redwood Coast Petroleum 1,436.09 Check Total: 3,328.44 Police /Vehicle Repai Redwood Lock & Key 9.81 Check Total: 9.81 Travel/Mtgs- Mackenzie Rohnert Park Chamber of Commer 25.00 T &E - City Represesentation Rohnert Park Chamber of Commer 25.00 Non - Department /Travels & Mee Rohnert Park Chamber of Commer 50.00 Check Total: 100.00 Rec Ref Clearing Selina Rojo 400.00 Rec Ref Clearing Selina Rojo -10.00 Check Total: 390.00 City Manager /Travels & Mee City of Santa Rosa 100.00 Check Total: 100.00 Streets & Bike /Spec. Departm Shamrock Materials 116.63 Streets & Bike /Spec. Departm Shamrock Materials 96.30 Page 10 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount AP - Checks. for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 11 Check Total: 212.93 193981 07/28/2010 General Fund Paul Skanchy 195.00 Check Total: 195.00 193982 07/28/2010 General Fund Rec Ref Clearing Christina Soiland 55.00 Check Total: 55.00 193983 07/28/2010 General Fund Linda Spiro 293.24 Check Total: 293.24 193984 07/28/2010 General Fund Recreation Adm /Publicity Gary Sugiyama 560.00 Check Total: 560.00 193985 07/28/2010 General Fund Animal Control /Spec. Departm Target Bank 62.10 Check Total: 62.10 193986 07/28/2010 General Fund Fire Prevention/Books/Pamphle Thomson Reuters/Barclays 128.00 Check Total: 128.00 193987 07/28/2010 General Fund City Hall /Bldg/Facilty ThyssenKrupp Elevator Corporat 270.00 Check Total: 270.00 193988 07/28/2010 General Fund Animal Control/Medications VCA Animal Care Center of Sono 50.00 193988 07/28/2010 General Fund Animal Control/Medications VCA Animal Care Center of Sono 50.00 193988 07/28/2010 General Fund Animal Control/Medications VCA Animal Care Center of Sono 35.00 a Check Total: 135.00 193989 07/28/2010 General Fund Robert H. Williams 325.62 Check Total: 325.62 AP - Checks. for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 11 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount 193990 07/28/2010 General Fund Cotati- RP /SSU AlcoholCoalition Community Action Resource Exch Check Total: 193991 07/28/2010 Special Enforcement Unit South Seus/Federal Seiz Expen United States Marshals Service Check Total: 193992 07/28/2010 General Fund Dr. James E. Bruns 193992 07/28/2010 General Fund Dr. James E. Bruns Check Total: 193993 07/28/2010 General Fund Mandated Cost Reimb. Centration, Inc. Check Total: 193994 07/28/2010 General Fund Non - Department /Training & Edu Brian Davis Check Total: 193995 07/28/2010 General Fund Fire /Spec Dept Equ Emergency Equipment Management Check Total: 193996 07/28/2010 General Fund Recreation Adm /Special Event Innovative Screen Printing Check Total: 193997 07/28/2010 General Fund Police /Contractual S Language Line Services Check Total: 193998 07/28/2010 General Fund ROBERT LANKFORD v Check Total: 193999. 07/28/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Contractual S Local Government Services Check Total: AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM ) 13,120.66 13,120.66 1,213.00 1,213.00 150.00 150.00 300.00 2,321.70 2,321.70 326.00 326.00 186.05 186.05 763.00 763.00 44.99 44.99 150.00 150.00 12,323.40 12,323.40 Page 12 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount 194000 07/28/2010 General Fund Non- Department /Audit Fees Odenberg Ullakko Muranishi & C 2,500.00 Check Total: 2,500.00 194001 07/28/2010 General Fund Non - Department /W.C. /Self -Ins Redwood Empire Municipal Insur 500.10 Check Total: 500.10 194002 07/28/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Contractual S Regional Government Services 12,144.80 Check Total: 12,144.80 194003 07/28/2010 General Fund Police Nehicle Repai Rohnert Park Towing 65.00 Check Total: 65.00 194004 07/28/2010 General Fund Fire /Spec Dept Equ Sign A Rama 51.88 Check Total: 51.88 194005 07/28/2010 General Fund Police /Contractual S So Co Auditor Controller Treas 1,712.00 Check Total: 1,712.00 194006 07/28/2010 General Fund Police /Training & Ed Sonoma County Airport 10.00 Check Total: 10.00 194007 07/28/2010 General Fund Park Maint Books/Pamphle Your Other Office, Inc. 14.77 194007 07/28/2010 Capital Projects Fund LED Street Light Conversion Your Other Office, Inc. 32.70 194007 07/28/2010 Capital Projects Fund LED Street Light Conversion Your Other Office, Inc. 16.35 Check Total: 63.82 194008 07/28/2010 General Fund Non - Department /Training & Edu MICKEY ZELDES 3.00 N Check Total: 3.00 194009 07/28/2010 General Fund Ref Deposit -Liab. Insur HUB International 1,500.00 194009 07/28/2010 General Fund Refundable Deposits HUB International - 148.99 194009 07/28/2010 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Rp Community HUB International - 148.99 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 13 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount 194009 07/28/2010 General Fund Cash HUB International 148.99 Check Total: 1,351.01 194010 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Telephone AT &T 13.34 194010 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Telephone AT &T 15.65 Check Total: 28.99 1940.11 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Sewer /Cell Phone AT &T MOBILITY 166.42 Check Total: 166.42 194012 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. Bldg/Facilty The Community Voice 660.00 Check Total: 660.00 194013 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. Bldg/Facilty First Alarm Sercurities Servic 124.50 Check Total: 124.50 194014 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec. Deparhn Kelly -Moore Paint Company, Inc 234.02 194014 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec. Departm Kelly -Moore Paint Company, Inc 13.42 Check Total: 247.44 194015 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 5,243.63 Check Total: 5,243.63 194016 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. Bldg/Facilty Redwood Lock & Key 16.35 Check Total: 16.35 194017 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Miscellaneous Underground Service. Alert 331.50 IV Check Total: 331.50 194018 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Telephone AT &T 28.94 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 14 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 15 Check Total: 28.94 194019 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water /Cell Phone AT &T MOBILITY 369.35 Check Total: 369.35 194020 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. Bldg/Facilty First Alarm Sercurities Servic 124.50 Check Total: 124.50 194021 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Grainger, Inc. 55.58 194021 07/28/2010 Utility Fund. Water Entr. /Small Tools Grainger, Inc. 62.03 194021 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water EntlDistrib SystemRepair Grainger, Inc. 14.19 194021 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Ent/Distrib SystemRepair Grainger, Inc. 92.06 194021 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec. Departm Grainger, Inc. 53.13 194021 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec. Departm Grainger, Inc. 30.67 Check Total: 307.66 194022 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Ent/Distrib SystemRepair Groeniger & Company 244.19 Check Total: 244.19 194023 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Pace Supply 03410 -00 289.08 Check Total: 289.08 194024 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 33,263.43 Check Total: 33,263.43 194025 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec. Departm Pep Boys 16.87 Check Total: 16.87 194(26 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Ent/Distrib SystemRepair Praxair Distribution Inc. - 19 73.63 Check Total: 73.63 194027 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Ryan Herco Products Corp. 521.24 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 15 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount Check Total: 521.24 194028 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Ryan Process Inc. 1,134.84 Check Total: 1,134.84 194029 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water /Clothing Allowance Sunset Linen Service 55.75 Check Total: 55.75 194030 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Ent/Distrib SystemRepair Syar Industries, Inc. 271.54 Check Total: 271.54 194031 07/28/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Miscellaneous Underground Service Alert 331.50 Check Total: 331.50 194032 07/29/2010 Special Enforcement Unit South State Seizure Payable So Co District Attorney's Offi 2,036.00 Check Total: 2,036.00 .194033 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Armand Bas 54.87 194033 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Armand Bas 49.07 194033 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Armand Bas 36.76 Check Total: 140.70 194034 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Kristin Edwards 4.72 194034 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Kristin Edwards 0.27 194034 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Kristin Edwards 4.77 Check Total: 9.76 19035 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Anthony Keeler 432.42 194035 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Anthony Keeler 150.99 194035 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Anthony Keeler 55.26 Check Total: 638.67 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 16 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount 194036 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Jenna Kovacevich 6.23 194036 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Jenna Kovacevich 6.24 194036 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable . Jenna Kovacevich 25.93 Check Total: 38.40 194037 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Doug Lewis 34.16 194037 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Doug Lewis 48.28 194037 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Doug Lewis 17.56 Check Total: 100.00 194038 07/30/2010 Utility Fund Accounts Payable Abraham Magana 41.52 Check Total: 41.52 194039 08/02/2010 General Fund Court Order Payable Cynthia Loeffler 550.00 Check Total: 550.00 194040 08/04/2010 General Fund PW- Traffic Signals /Contractua CA Signals & Lighting - Cashie 734.84 Check Total: 734.84 194041 08/04/2010 General Fund Mandated Cost Reimb. Centration, Inc. 9,678.30 Check Total: 9,678.30 194042 08/04/2010 General Fund H Pool Bldg/Facilty Commerical Pool Systems, Inc. 17.54 Check Total: 17.54 194043 08/04/2010 General Fund Non - Department /Training & Edu Aaron Johnson 1,749.18 Check Total: 1,749.18 194(144 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Vehicle Repai Santa Rosa Auto Parts 40.71 Check Total: 40.71 194045 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Small Tools West County Tool & Equipment 30.06 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:35 PM) Page 17 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4 :38 PM) Page 18 Check Total: 30.06 194046 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Miscellaneous CA Public Heath Department 793.60 Check Total: 793.60 194047 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Conservation Measures Baudelia Gallo 75.00 Check Total: 75.00 194048 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Conservation Measures Reading Cinemas 150.00 Check Total: 150.00 194049 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Conservation Measures John Lelia 75.00 Check Total: 75.00 194050 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Conservation Measures Shawn Lorenzen 150.00 Check Total: 150.00 194051 08/04/2010 General Fund Police /Spec. Departm Attn: Pat Moffitt So Co DSA K -9 Trials 70.00 Check Total: 70.00 194052 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Conservation Measures William R. Brown 64.61 Check Total: 64.61 194053 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Emr. /Miscellaneous BUSINESS CARD 66.06 194053 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ BUSINESS CARD 383.99 194053 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Equipment Ren BUSINESS CARD 73.03 IV Check Total: 523.08 194054 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Friedman's 62.98 194054 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec. Departm Friedman's 13.73 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4 :38 PM) Page 18 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 19 Check Total: 76.71 194055 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Grainger, Inc. 50.28 194055 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec. Departm Grainger, Inc. 10.59 194055 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Grainger, Inc. 500.31 194055 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec. Departm Grainger, Inc. 85.37 194055 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Grainger, Inc. 81.58 Check Total: 728.13 194056 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Ent/Distrib SystemRepair Groeniger & Company 637.52 194056 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Ent/Distrib SystemRepair Groeniger & Company 284.85 Check Total: 922.37 194057 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec. Departm Home Depot 15.23 194057 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec. Departm Home Depot 6.51 194057 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec. Departm Home Depot 45.35 194057 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Small Tools Home Depot 430.18 194057 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec. Departm Home Depot 7.91 194057 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec. Departm Home Depot 43.59 194057 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Small Tools Home Depot 272.03 Check Total: 820.80 194058 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Conservation Measures Meri Melani 37.50 Check Total: 37.50 194059 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 2,811.01 Check Total: 2,811.01 194060 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Miscellaneous PETRO TECH 475.00 IV Check Total: 475.00 194061 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Ent/Distrib SystemRepair Shamrock Materials 192.60 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 19 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Victory Auto Plaza Amount Check Total: 194067 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Ent/Distrib SystemRepair White Cap Construction Supply Check Total: 192.60 194062 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water /Clothing Allowance Sunset Linen Service 55.75 194062 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water /Clothing Allowance Sunset Linen Service 08/04/2010 55.75 Animal Control/Medications Aeris DBA Matheson Tri -Gas, In Check Total: 111.50 194063 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec. Departm SUNSET MAGAZINE City Hall Bldg/Facilty 289.82 IV Check Total: 289.82 194064 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Ent/Distrib SystemRepair Syar Industries, Inc. Check Total: 209.54 08/04/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station/Fac Maint/Non- Electrical Equipment Company, Check Total: 209.54 194065 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Ent/Distrib SystemRepair United Rentals Northwest, Inc. 346.79 194065 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Miscellaneous United Rentals Northwest, Inc. 3,700.58 Check Total: 194066 08/04/2010 Utility Fund WaterNehicle Repairs Victory Auto Plaza Check Total: 194067 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Ent/Distrib SystemRepair White Cap Construction Supply 194067 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ White Cap Construction Supply Check Total: 194068 08/04/2010 General Fund Animal Control/Medications Aeris DBA Matheson Tri -Gas, In Check Total: 194069 08/04/2010 General Fund City Hall Bldg/Facilty Aramark Uniform Services IV Check Total: 194070 08/04/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station/Fac Maint/Non- Electrical Equipment Company, AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM ) 4,047.37 174.29 174.29 1,065.52 1,177.65 2,243.17 19.02 19.02 44.50 Page 20 44.50 379.82 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 194071 08/04/2010 General Fund 194072 08/04/2010 General Fund 194073 08/04/2010 General Fund 194074 08/04/2010 General Fund 194075 08/04/2010 General Fund 194076 08/04/2010 General Fund Account Name Vendor Name Amount City Hall Bldg/Facilty City Hall Bldg/Facilty Planning Books/Pamphle Check Total: First Alarm Sercurities Servic Check Total: The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control Check Total: International Code Council, In R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Honor Jackson Non - Department /Training & Edu Raquel Kilmartin Nicolas LaBonte Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: 379.82 99.10 99.10 60.00 60.00 166.19 166.19 280.00 280.00 1,842.87 1,842.87 150.00 Check Total: 150.00 194077 08/04/2010 General Fund General Sales Tax MuniServices, LLC 500.00 Check Total: 500.00 194078 08/04/2010 General Fund City Hall /Office Supplie Office Depot 757.48 194078 08/04/2010 General Fund City Hall /Office Supplie Office Depot 99.31 194078 08/04/2010 General Fund City Hall /Office Supplie Office Depot 73.36 194078 08/04/2010 General Fund City Hall /Office Supplie Office Depot 103.22 N Check Total: 1,033.37 194079. 08/04/2010 General Fund Data Processing /Spec. Departm Petty Cash 10.89 194079 08/04/2010 General Fund City Hall Bldg/Facilty Petty Cash 38.20 194079 08/04/2010 General Fund City Hall /Office Supplie Petty Cash 3.26 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 21 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount 194079 08/04/2010 General Fund City Hall /Office Supplie Petty Cash 23.97 Check Total: 76.32 194080 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Spec. Departm Red Wing Shoes 132.73 Check Total: 132.73 194081 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Gas & Oil Redwood Coast Petroleum 494.65 Check Total: 494.65 194082 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Spec. Deparhn Santa Rosa Shoes 284.05 Check Total: 284.05 194083 08/04/2010 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Ap 120.07 194083 08/04/2010 General Fund Fire /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Ap 220.47 194083 08/04/2010 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Ap 170.64 Check Total: 511.18 194084 08/04/2010 General Fund Fire /Spec Dept Equ Sign A Rama 51.88 Check Total: 51.88 194085 08/04/2010 General Fund Finance /Auto Allowanc Angela D. Smith 14.95 Check Total: 14.95 194086 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Clothing Allo Sunset Linen Service 105.00 Check Total: 105.00 194087 08/04/2010 General Fund City Hall Bldg/Facilty Universal Building Services 1,150.00 IV Check Total: 1,150.00 194088 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Conservation Measures William R. Brown 64.62 AP -Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 22 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount Check Total: 64.62 194089 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Miscellaneous BUSINESS CARD 567.07 Check Total: 567.07 194090 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Emr. /Spec. Departm Grainger, Inc. 25.26 194090 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 18.84 Check Total: 44.10 194091 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec. Departm Kelly -Moore Paint Company, Inc 42.44 Check Total: 42.44 194092 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Water Conservation Measures Meri Melani 37.50 Check Total: 37.50 194093 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric 206.10 Check Total: 206.10 194094 08/04/2010 N Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Fac Maint/Non- Platt 150.00 Check Total: 150.00 194095 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Bldg/Facilty Power Industries 75.12 Check Total: 75.12 194096 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. Nehicle Repair Sewer Equipment Company of Ame 307.88 Check Total: 307.88 N 194097 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec. Departm Alhambra& Sierra Springs 73.50 Check Total: 73.50 194098 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Clothing Allow Sunset Linen Service 45.00 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 23 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount 194098 08/04/2010 Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Clothing Allow Sunset Linen Service 45.00 Check Total: 90.00 194099 08/04/2010 General Fund City Hall Annex Bldg/Facilty ABM Janitorial Services - Nort 74.00 194099 08/04/2010 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty ABM Janitorial Services - Nort 1,831.75 194099 08/04/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station Bldg/Facilty ABM Janitorial Services - Nort 1,624.00 194099 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen Bldg/Facilty ABM Janitorial Services - Nort 213.00 194099 08/04/2010 General Fund Ladybug Rec Bld Bldg/Facilty ABM Janitorial Services - Nort 64.70 194099 08/04/2010 General Fund Center Bldg/Facilty ABM Janitorial Services - Nort 388.58 194099 08/04/2010 General Fund Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M ABM Janitorial Services - Nort 583.00 194099 08/04/2010 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty ABM Janitorial Services - Nort 360.00 194099 08/04/2010 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr Bldg/Facilty ABM Janitorial Services - Nort 360.00 Check Total: 5,499.03 194100 08/04/2010 General Fund Finance /Contractual S Accountemps 439.60 194101 08/04/2010 General Fund 194102 08/04/2010 General Fund 194102 08/04/2010 General Fund 194103 08/04/2010 General Fund 194104 .08/04/2010 General Fund N 194105 08/04/2010 General Fund Ceramics Studio /Supplies Allemand Electric Supply Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M Aramark Uniform Services Publ Works Gen Nehicle Repai Aramark Uniform Services H Pool /Lessons Streets & Bike /Spec. Departm H Pool /Lessons Gretchen Ball The Barricade Company Raizelah Bayen Check Total: Check.Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 24 439.60 298.39 298.39 32.00 25.00 57.00 40.00 40.00 604.95 604.95 62.00 62.00 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 194106 08/04/2010 General Fund 194106 08/04/2010 General Fund 194107 08/04/2010 General Fund 194108 08/04/2010 General Fund 194109 08/04/2010 General Fund 194109 08/04/2010 General Fund 194109 08/04/2010 General Fund 194109 08/04/2010 General Fund 194110 08/04/2010 General Fund 194111 08/04/2010 General Fund 194111 08/04/2010 General Fund 194112 08/04/2010 General Fund 194112 08/04/2010 General Fund 194113 08/04/2010 General Fund 194113 08/04/2010 General Fund 194113 08/04/2010 General Fund 194113 08/04/2010 General Fund 194113 08/04/2010 General Fund 194113 08/04/2010 General Fund Account Name Vendor Name Amount Animal Control/Medications Bayer Health Care LLC Animal Control/Medications Bayer Health Care LLC R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Harvey Bell Police /Vehicle Repai BIG O TIRES Center Bldg/Facilty Buchanan Food Service R.P. Gymnasium Bldg/Facilty Buchanan Food Service R.P. Gymnasium Bldg/Facilty Buchanan Food Service Ps Main Station Bldg/Facilty Buchanan Food Service H Pool /Lessons Liz Burch City Hall /Office Supplie BUSINESS CARD Non - Department Books/Pamphle BUSINESS CARD Police /Uniforms Business Card Police /Travels & Mee Business Card Codding Center /Office Supplie Codding Center /Excursions Center /Spec. Departm Recreation Adm /Dues & Subscr Recreation Adm /Publicity Sports Center /Publicity BUSINESS CARD BUSINESS CARD BUSINESS CARD BUSINESS CARD BUSINESS CARD BUSINESS CARD AP - Checks for Approval ( 68/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 25 340.91 78.13 Check Total: 419.04 764.40 Check Total: 764.40 69.91 Check Total: 69.91 47.65 863.93 381.91 408.27 Check Total: 1,701.76 55.00 Check Total: 55.00 25.05 22.84 Check Total: 47.89 21.84 24.30 Check Total: 46.14 103.00 330.00 102.71 135.00 19.00 0.31 AP - Checks for Approval ( 68/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 25 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount Check Total: 690.02 194114 08/04/2010 General Fund Police / Facility Maintenance BUSINESS CARD 63.09 194114 08/04/2010 General Fund H Pool Bldg/Facilty BUSINESS CARD 699.68 194114 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen Bldg/Facilty BUSINESS CARD 63.09 194115 08/04/2010 General Fund 194116 08/04/2010 General Fund 194116 08/04/2010 General Fund 194117 08/04/2010 General Fund 194117 08/04/2010 General Fund 194117 08/04/2010 General Fund 194117 08/04/2010 General Fund 194117 08/04/2010 General Fund 194118 08/04/2010 General Fund 194118 08/04/2010 General Fund 194118 08/04/2010 General Fund 194118 08/04/2010 General Fund 194118 08/04/2010 General Fund 194118 08/04/2010 General Fund 194118 08/04/2010 General Fund 194119 08/04/2010 General Fund 194120 08/04/2010 General Fund 194120 08/04/2010 General Fund AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM ) Park Maint /Landscape Sup Business Card Pers'L & Purch /Recruitment/G BUSINESS CARD Pers'L & Purch /Recruitment/A BUSINESS CARD Animal Control/Medications Butler Schein Animal Health Su Animal Control/Medications Butler Schein Animal Health Su Animal Control/Medications Butler Schein Animal Health Su Animal Control/Medications Butler Schein Animal Health Su Animal Control/Medications Butler Schein Animal Health Su City Hall /Rent/Lease/Ta Police /Equipment Leas Animal Control / Eqpt Lease Publ Works Gen /Rent/Lease/Ta Center /Rent/Lease/Ta Sports Center /Rent/Lease/Tax Pac /Admin /Rent/Lease/Tax CIT Technology Fin Service, In CIT Technology Fin Service, In CIT Technology Fin Service, In CIT Technology Fin Service, In CIT Technology Fin Service, In CIT Technology Fin Service, In CIT Technology Fin Service, In Park Maint /Landscape Sup CNH Capital H Pool Bldg/Facilty Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: 825.86 220.39 220.39 75.00 75.00 150.00 369.57 243.73 409.21 48.50 157.22 1,228.23 2,350.02 2,106.40 83.95 219.96 83.95 547.92 83.96 5,476.16 36.78 Check Total: 36.78 Commerical Pool Systems, Inc. 22.89 Commerical Pool Systems, Inc. 305.20 Page 26 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount 194120 08/04/2010 General Fund H Pool Bldg/Facilty Commerical Pool Systems, Inc. 305.20 194120 08/04/2010 General Fund Magnolia Pool /Fac Maintenanc Commerical Pool Systems, Inc. 377.53 Check Total: 1,010.82 194121 08/04/2010 General Fund Animal Control /Advertising/P The Community Voice 400.00 Check Total: 400.00 .194122 08/04/2010 General Fund Benecia Pool /Concession Pu Costco Wholesale 647.07 194122 08/04/2010 General Fund H Pool /Concession Pu Costco Wholesale 647.07 194122 08/04/2010 General Fund R.P. Gymnasium /Concession Pu Costco Wholesale 87.44 194122 08/04/2010 General Fund Pac /Concessions Costco Wholesale 247.66 194122 08/04/2010 General Fund Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M Costco Wholesale 84.39 194122 08/04/2010 General Fund Center /Spec. Departm Costco Wholesale 103.21 194122 08/04/2010 General Fund Codding Center /Special Event Costco Wholesale 195.35 Check Total: 2,012.19 194123 08/04/2010 General Fund Non - Department /Self - Insured Electrical Equipment Company, 2,120.39 Check Total: 2,120.39 194124 08/04/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Spec. Departm Farm Plan 91.18 194124 08/04/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Landscape Sup Farm Plan 28.61 194124 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Spec. Departm Farm Plan 166.96 194124 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Spec. Departm Farm Plan 19.42 Check Total: 306.17 194125 08/04/2010 General Fund Animal Control /Spec. Departm Frizelle Enos 65.92 194125 08/04/2010 General Fund Animal Control/Shelter Food Frizelle Enos 206.39 Check Total: 272.31 194126 08/04/2010 General Fund Steve Gossage 473.23 N Check Total: 473.23 194127 08/04/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station/Fac Maint/Non- Grainger, Inc. 12.89 194127 08/04/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station/Fac Maint/Non- Grainger, Inc. 12.89 194127 08/04/2010 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr/Fac Maint/Non- Grainger, Inc. 10.95 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 27 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount 194127 08/04/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Spec. Departm Grainger, Inc. 8.31 194127 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Small Tools Grainger, Inc. 8.70 194127 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Spec. Departm Grainger, Inc. 27.62 194127 08/04/2010 General Fund Tress & Parkways/Landscape Sup Grainger, Inc. 24.33 194127 08/04/2010 General Fund City Hall Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 29.53 194127 08/04/2010 General Fund Street Lighting /Spec. Departm Grainger, Inc. 30.48 194127 08/04/2010 General Fund Trees & Parkwys /Spec. Departm . Grainger, Inc. 14.03 194127 08/04/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station/Fac Maint/Non- Grainger, Inc. 101.24 194127 08/04/2010 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr/Fac Maint/Non- Grainger, Inc. 3.05 194127 08/04/2010 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 19.36 194127 08/04/2010 General Fund R.P. Gymnasium Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 101.96 Check Total: 405.34 194128 08/04/2010 General Fund Police /Vehicle Repai Hansel Ford 530.54 194128 08/04/2010 General Fund Police /Vehicle Repai Hansel Ford 1,732.71 Check Total: 2,263.25 194129 08/04/2010 General Fund Animal Control/Shelter Food Hill's Pet Nutrition Sales, In 60.66 194129 08/04/2010 General Fund Animal Control/Shelter Food Hill's Pet Nutrition Sales, In 30.52 Check Total: 91.18 194130 08/04/2010 General Fund Center Bldg/Facilty The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 60.00 194130 08/04/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station Bldg/Facilty The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 60.00 194130 08/04/2010 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Fac Maint/Non- The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 35.00 Check Total: 155.00 194131 08/04/2010 General Fund Streets & Bike /Spec. Departm Home Depot 6.87 194131 08/04/2010 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr/Fac Maint/Non- Home Depot 18.40 194131 08/04/2010 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr/Fac Maint/Non- Home Depot 47.87 194131 08/04/2010 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr/Fac Maint/Non- Home Depot 49.91 194131 08/04/2010 General Fund Ceramics Studio /Supplies Home Depot 97.78 194131 08/04/2010 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr/Fac Maint/Non- Home Depot 13.47 194131 08/04/2010 General Fund Ceramics Studio /Supplies Home Depot -56.45 194131 08/04/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Landscape Sup Home Depot 20.60 194131 08/04/2010 General Fund Ceramics Studio /Supplies Home Depot 22.50 Check Total: 220.95 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 28 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount Check Total: 551.76 194133 08/04/2010 General Fund 194132 08/04/2010 General Fund Tress & Parkways/Landscape Sup Horizon Distribution Inc. 117.50 194132 08/04/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Landscape Sup Horizon Distribution Inc. 35.99 194132 08/04/2010 General Fund Tress & Parkways/Landscape Sup Horizon Distribution Inc. 85.66 194132 08/04/2010 General Fund Tress & Parkways/Landscape Sup Horizon Distribution Inc. 292.33 194132 08/04/2010 General Fund Tress & Parkways/Landscape Sup Horizon Distribution Inc. 20.28 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 29 Check Total: 551.76 194133 08/04/2010 General Fund Rec Ref Clearing Sharon Hurst 52.00 Check Total: 52.00 194134 08/04/2010 General Fund Fire /Uniforms Innovative Screen Printing 1,393.02 Check Total: 1,393.02 194135 08/04/2010 General Fund Non - Department /Self - Insured Kelly -Moore Paint Company, Inc 8.68 194135 08/04/2010 General Fund Non - Department /Self - Insured Kelly -Moore Paint Company, Inc 140.30 Check Total: 148.98 194136 08/04/2010 General Fund Animal Control /Contractual S Barbara Leach, D.V.M. 1,835.00 Check Total: 1,835.00 194137 08/04/2010 General Fund Pac /City Events /Contractual S Brian Mc Carthy 132.30 194137 08/04/2010 General Fund Pac /City Events /Contractual S Brian Mc Carthy 265.72 194137 08/04/2010 General Fund Pac /City Events /Contractual S Brian Mc Carthy 131.25 Check Total: 529.27 194138 08/04/2010 General Fund Pac/Rental /Admissions Music To My Ears 4,773.00 194138 08/04/2010 General Fund PacBox Office Fees/Misc Music To My Ears - 477.30 194138 08/04/2010 General Fund Pac/Rental /Rentals Music To My Ears - 3,869.00 Check Total: 426.70 N 194139 08/04/2010 General Fund Police /Equipment Leas CBS Newcal, Inc. 738.48 194139 08/04/2010 General Fund City Hall /Rent/Lease/Ta CBS Newcal, Inc. 740.27 194139 08/04/2010 General Fund Recreation Adm /Rent/Lease/Tax CBS Newcal, Inc. 75.47 194139 08/04/2010 General Fund Center /Rent/Lease/Ta CBS Newcal, Inc. 75.47 194139 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Rent/Lease/Ta CBS Newcal, Inc. 75.47 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 29 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 194139 08/04/2010 General Fund 194139 08/04/2010 General Fund 194139 08/04/2010 General Fund 194140 08/04/2010 General Fund 194141 08/04/2010 General Fund 194141 08/04/2010 General Fund 194142 08/04/2010 General Fund 194143 08/04/2010 General Fund 194144 08/04/2010 General Fund 194144 08/04/2010 General Fund 194144 08/04/2010 General Fund 194144 08/04/2010 General Fund 194144 08/04/2010 General Fund 194144 08/04/2010 General Fund 194144 -08/04/2010 General Fund 194145 08/04/2010 General Fund N 194146 08/04/2010 General Fund Account Name Vendor Name Amount Animal Control / Eqpt Lease CBS Newcal, Inc. Sports Center /Rent/Lease/Tax CBS Newcal, Inc. Pac /Admin /Rent/Lease/Tax CBS Newcal, Inc. Sean O'Donnell PW- Traffic Signals /Heat/Light Pacific Gas & Electric City Hall /Heat/Light/Po Pacific Gas & Electric Animal Shelter Fees Lauren Pevey Publ Works Gen /Spec Dept Equ Power Industries Police /Gas & Oil Redwood Coast Petroleum Police /Gas & Oil Redwood Coast Petroleum Police /Gas & Oil Redwood Coast Petroleum Publ Works Gen /Gas & Oil Redwood Coast Petroleum Police /Gas & Oil Redwood Coast Petroleum Police /Gas & Oil Redwood Coast Petroleum Police /Gas & Oil Redwood Coast Petroleum Publ Works Gen /Vehicle Repai Redwood Lock & Key Police /Spec. Departm Redwood Veterinary Clinic Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: 75.47 75.47 75.47 1,931.57 213.99 213.99 55.98 2,937.98 2,993.96 95.00 95.00 8.58 8.58 893.47 1,673.66 797.83 1,998.78 781.87 1,015.19 606.35 7,767.15 5.45 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 30 5.45 129.30 129.30 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount 194147 08/04/2010 General Fund Sunrise Park Bldg/Facilty Roto- Rooter Plumbers 140.00 194147 08/04/2010 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr Bldg/Facilty Roto- Rooter Plumbers 140.00 194147 08/04/2010 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Roto- Rooter Plumbers 560.00 194147 08/04/2010 General Fund Center Bldg/Facilty Roto- Rooter Plumbers 140.00 Check Total: 980.00 194148 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Haz Materials Safety -Kleen Systems, Inc. 307.66 Check Total: 307.66 194149 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen Nehicle Repai Santa Rosa Auto Parts -88.37 194149 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen Nehicle Repai Santa Rosa Auto Parts 29.74 194149 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen Nehicle Repai Santa Rosa Auto Parts -29.74 194149 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen Nehicle Repai Santa Rosa Auto Parts -7.09 194149 08/04/2010 General Fund Police Nehicle Repai Santa Rosa Auto Parts - 348.28 194149 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen Nehicle Repai Santa Rosa Auto Parts 29.29 194149 08/04/2010 .. General Fund Police Nehicle Repai Santa Rosa Auto Parts 2.38 194149 08/04/2010 General Fund Police Nehicle Repai Santa Rosa Auto Parts 126.75 194149 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen Nehicle Repai Santa Rosa Auto Parts 58.84 194149 08/04/2010 General Fund Police Nehicle Repai Santa Rosa Auto Parts 63.88 194149 08/04/2010 General Fund Police Nehicle Repai Santa Rosa Auto Parts 60.76 194149 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Small Tools Santa Rosa Auto Parts 236.41 Check Total: 134.57 194150 08/04/2010 General Fund Mark Sharp 195.00 Check Total: 195.00 194151 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen Nehicle Repai Smothers -4.10 194151 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen Nehicle Repai Smothers 12.77 194151 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen Nehicle Repai Smothers 92.63 Check Total: 101.30 194152 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Clothing Allo Sunset Linen Service 105.00 Check Total: 105.00 194153 08/04/2010 General Fund Community Event.Contracts Dennis Tatman 1,704.38 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 31 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount Check Total: 1,704.38 194154 08/04/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Spec. Departm TDS - Tire Distribution System 40.25 194154 08/04/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Spec. Departm TDS - Tire Distribution System 143.25. Check Total: 183.50 194155 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen Nehicle Repai Traction of Santa Rosa 4.53 Check Total: 4.53 194156 08/04/2010 General Fund Ps Main Station Bidg/Facilty Wal -Mart Community/GEMB 47:19 194156 08/04/2010 General Fund P/S Bldg -North Bldg/Facilty Wal -Mart Community/GEMB 118.48 194156 08/04/2010 General Fund P/S Bldg -South Bldg/Facilty Wal -Mart Community/GEMB 30.50 Check Total: 196.17 194157 08/04/2010 General Fund Plan Check Fees Wells Construction 35.00 Check Total: 35.00 194,158 08/04/2010 General Fund Park Maint . /Landscape Sup West Coast Graphics 78.13 Check Total: 78.13 194159 08/04/2010 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Small Tools West County Tool & Equipment 36.79 Check Total: 36.79 194160 08/04/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Spec. Departm White Cap Construction Supply -0.53 194160 08/04/2010 General Fund R.P. Gymnasium Bldg/Facilty White Cap Construction Supply 47.84 Check Total: 47.31 194161 08/04/2010 General Fund Park Maint /Landscape Sup Wyatt Irrigation Supply Inc. 418.59 Check Total: 418.59 194162 08/04/2010 General Fund Non - Department /Miscellaneous Jeffery Nicks 132.00 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 32 Check Number Check Date Fund Name IV Account Name Vendor Name Amount Check Total: 132.00 Report Total: 861,342.23 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:38 PM) Page 33 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION BILLS FOR APPROVAL August 10, 2010 5595 -5602 Dated July 23, 2010 to August 4, 2010 $34,060.76 TOTAL $34,060.76 Accounts Payable Checks for Approval User: cledbetter Printed: 08/04/2010 - 4:36 PM Check Number Check Date . Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount 5595 07/28/2010 Low & Moderate Income Housing SW Blvd Affordable Housing. The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 3,950.00 5595 07/28/2010 Low & Moderate Income Housing SW Blvd Affordable Housing The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 410.00 5595 07/28/2010 Low & Moderate Income Housing SW Blvd Affordable Housing The Hitmen Termite & Pest Control 35.00 Check Total: 4,395.00 5596 07/28/2010 Low & Moderate Income Housing Heat, Light and Power Pacific Gas & Electric 414.10 Check Total: 414.10 5597 07/28/2010 Low & Moderate Income Housing Contractual Services SO CO ADULT & YOUTH DEV. 26,650.00 Check Total: 26,650.00 5598 07/28/2010 Redevelopment General Fund Contractual Services Foxtail Golf Club 1,810.42 Check Total: 1,810.42 5599 08/04/2010 Redevelopment General Fund Contractual Services Union Bank, N.A. 61.00 Check Total: 61.00 5600 08/04/2016 Redevelopment General Fund Contractual Services Huppe Landscape Company, Inc. 100.00 N Check Total: 100.00 5601 08/04/2010 Low & Moderate Income Housing Contractual Services Huppe Landscape Company, Inc. 200.00 Check Total: 200.00 AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:36 PM) Page 1 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Amount 5602 08/04/2010 Low & Moderate Income Housing Heat, Light and Power N AP - Checks for Approval ( 08/04/2010 - 4:36 PM ) Pacific Gas & Electric 430.24 Check Total: 430.24 Report Total: 34,060.76 Page 2 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK To: The Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council From: Sandra M. Lipitz Interim City Manager John Dunn Dir. Of Admin. Services Date: August 3, 2010 " CASH REPORT CASH BALANCES AS OF JUNE 30.2010- PRELIMINARY General Fund ($5,185,132.50) Traffic Safety Fund 733,043.37 Motor Vehicle License Fees 0.00 R.E.MJ.F. (23,666.72) ($4,475,755.85) Per Acre For Development Fee Fund 30,480.49 Sewer Service Connection Fee Fund 506,189.97 Sewer CapacityCharge Fund 1,191,099.70 Water/Wastewater Fee Fund(Spec. Sewer Conn. Fund) 208,150.81 Water Utility Fund 3,637,122.03 Water Utility -Rate Stabilization Fund 800,000.00 Water Utility -Meter Replacement Fund 300,000.00 Water Utility - Capital ProjectsFund 500,000.00 Sewer Utility Fund 6,256,838.41 Garbage Utility Fund 280,703.20 Garbage Utility Fund -Rate Stabilization 380,096.10 Garbage Utility Fund - Diversion /Education Set -aside Fund 328,251.14 General Fund - Refundable Deposits 465,592.58 Sewer Connection Fund - Refundable Deposits 328,951.00 Utility Fund - Refundable Deposits 185,556.12 Improvement Project Fund 786,333.63 Gas Tax Fund: Sec. 2107 Maint. / Const. $2,833.31 Sec. 2107.5 Engineering 0.00 Sec. 2106 Maint.Const. 110,009.14 Sec. 2105 Maint. / Const. 48,281.45 SB 140 3,607.83 164,731.73 Capital Outlay Fund 215,062.39 Supplemental Law Enforcement Services (SLESF) Fund 88,435.94 Fire Benefit Assessment(Measure M) Fund 0.00 Measure M Streets Fund 124,099.89 F.I.G.R. Fund 250,000.00 Annexation Fees Fund 59,296.42 Rent Appeals Board Fund 40,727.98 Traffic Signals Fund 1,842,713.25 Traffic Congestion AB2928(Prop 42) 72,417.73 Prop 1 B Fund 771,187.22 Vehicle Abatement Fund 138,857.66 Performing Arts Center Endowment Fund 1,265,851.00 Petty Cash 3,825.00 Dental Self- insurance Fund 229,256.76 Spay /Neuter Forfeiture Cash Fund 47,519.72 Crime Prevention Donations Fund 9,425.13 K -9 Donations Fund 3,925.00 Animal Shelter Donations Fund 11,136.03 D.A.R.E. Donations Fund 1,486.07 Y &FS Donations Fund 18,274.77 Senior Center Donations Fund 119,543.59 PAC Gifts /Donations 47,759.15 Sonoma Co. Explorer Advisory Funs 4,383.93 Public Safety Explorer Fund 3,931.14 Alcohol Education Fee Fund 52,363.05 Cotati- RP /SSU Alcohol Coalition 62,220.41 Federal JAG PS Grant 0.00 Public Facilities Finance Fee Fund 935,402.41 Assessment Redemption Fund 50.00 General Fund Reserve 1,295,972.00 General Plan Maintenance Fee Fund 255,997.11 General Fund Endowment Reserve 1,754,165.36 Reserve For Self- Insured Losses 1,212,110.00 Reserve For Retired Employee Medical 3,665,094.00 Reserve For Technology Equipment 38,845.99 Reserve For Infrastructure Maintenance 282,385.00 Reserve For Capital Projects 618,176.00 Reserve For P.E.R.S. Costs - Miscellaneous Employees 350,000.00 Reserve for Dev. of Add'I Rec. Facilities 30,094.56 Miscellaneous Reserve(CDC Loan Principal Repayment) 533,000.00 Reserve For Housing Programs 614,627.00 Sub -Total Operating Cash 28,943,959.72 Special Enforcement Unit -South 120,414.64 Cash with Fiscal Agent B of A Acquisition #129661 Cash with Fiscal Agent (2002C Water/Wastewater Revenue Bonds) Cash with Fiscal Agent (2005A CSCDA Water/Wastewater Revenue Bonds) Sub -Total Fiscal Agent Cash TOTAL CASH 0.00 0.05 1,420,291.16 1,420,291.21 $30,484,665.57 CASH DISTRIBUTION:AS OF JUN'E,30 2010 Petty Cash $3,825.00 Payroll Checking Account - Exchange Bank 0.00 General Checking Account - Exchange Bank @ 0.050% 2,410,345.38 Recreation Checking Account - Exchange Bank @ 0.050% 30,633.46 Subtotal of Petty. Cash and Checking Accounts 2,444,803.84 Credit Card Payment'Savings Accounts: Finance Department 14,794.51 Subtotal of Cash In Credit Card Savings Accounts 14,794.51 Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) 19,994,779.22 Sonoma County Investment Pool (SCIP) 142,575.57 Exchange Bank Savings Passbook 97,413.17 Union Bank - Sweep Account 8.05 Union Bank - Trust for Medium Term Notes 3,000,000.00 Certificates of Deposit 3;370,000.00 Revenue Bonds 1,420,291.21 Investment Accounts -See Schedule of Investments Attached 28,025,067.22 Cash With Fiscal Agent- Energy Conservation Lease @ 0.200% 0.00 Subtotal of Cash With Fiscal Agent 0.00 Total Cash Distribution JUNE 30, 2010 $30,484,665.57 Investment Yield for June 2010 1.098% INVESTMENT POLICY 8r SUFFICIENT FUNDS DISCLOSURES The investments above are in compliance with the investment policy of the City of Rohnert Park as outlined in the City of Rohnert Park City Council Resolution #2006 -105, adopted April 25, 2006. The City currently has sufficient idle funds to meet it's expenditure requirements for the next six months. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS -JUNE 30, 2010 # of Invmnts % Of Portfolio Avg. YTM Maturity % Investment Investment Valuation Bank Name Type Date Int. Par Value Market Value Source Exchange Bk Savings Svgs NIA 0.200% $97,413.17 $97,413.17 Note (1) Union Bank Sweep Account Svgs NIA 0.150% $8.05 $8.05 Note (2) First Bank of Puerto Rico C.D. 08115110 4.250% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Inland Northwest Bank C.D. 10130110 5.100% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Citizen's Bank C.D. 11123110 3.702% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Prime Alliance Bank of Utah C.D. 11/26/10 4.100% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) National Republic Bank of Chica C.D. 01111/11 1.710% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Bay National Bank C.D. 01/19111 3.150% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Synovus Bank of Jacksonville C.D. 02107/11 2.750% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) The Coastal Bank C.D. 02/19/11 4.500% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Innovation Bank C.D. 03/13/11 2.250% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Cascade Bank C.D. 04/04/11 3.340% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Mutual of Omaha Bank C.D. 04125111 2.570% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) First Financial Bank C.D. 05/26111 4.000% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Sovereign Bank C.D. 07/31111 3.630% 100,000.00 100,000.00 Note (1) First Commerical Bank C.D. 12114/11 2.670% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) First Community Bank - Whitehall C.D. 12/22111 2.500% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Equity Bank C.D. 03112/12 2.650% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) First Federal S & L -San Rafael C.D. 03122/12• 2.900% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Frontier State Bank C.D. 04/30112 5.290% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Coastal Community Bank C.D. 05/03112 1.600% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Bank of Nashville C.D. 08/06/12 4.000% 99,000.00 99,006.00 Note (1) Plaza Bank C.D. 07131112 2.713% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Business Bank of Fox River Valli C.D. 10219/12 2.500% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) First California Bank C.D. 11/10112 2.050% 100,000.00 100;000.00 Note (1) First California Bank C.D. 12123112 2.050% 100,000.00 100,000.00 Note (1) Heritage Bank C.D. 01/11113 2.650% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) American Bank C.D. 04127/13 3.200% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Capital One Bank C.D. 07/08/13 4.880% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Merchantile Trust C.D. 07/10/13 4.850% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Central Progressive Bank C.D. 08/29/13 5.100% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) World's Foremost Bank C.D. 09/20/13 5.250% 100,000.00 100,000.00 Note (1) Discover Bank C.D. 10/20/13 5.110% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) McFarland State Bank C.D. 10/28/13 4.940% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) Columbia River Bank C.D. 04/24114 3.520% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (1) The Cowlitz bank C.D. 07/20/14 3.400% 99,000.00 99,000.00 Note (7) Total C.D.s 3.496% $3,370,000.00 $3,370,000.00 FFCB MTN #3128X83X8 M.T.N. 01114113 2.500% 1,000,000.00 1,000,610.00 Note (2) FHLB MTN #3133XXYB7 M.T.N. 04/30/14 2.750% 1,000,000.00 1,001,560.00 Note (2) FNMA MTN#3136FMVB7 M.T.N. 06/10115 1.500% 1,000,000.00 1,002,190.00 Note (2) Total Medium Term Notes 2.247% $3,000,000.00 3,004,360.00 State of Calif. -LAIF Pooled NIA 0.528% $19,994,779.22 $20,027,646.16 Note (3) So. Co. Investmt. Pool Pooled NIA 0.794% 142,575.57 142,575.57 Note (4) Total Managed Pools 0.529% $20,137,354.79 $20,170,221.73 Subtotai(See Investment Summary below) 1.098% $26,604,776.01 $26,642,002.95 2002C WNW Revenue Bonds Project Acct. 0.000% 0.00 0.00 Note (5) 2002C W/WW Revenue Bonds Inst Pmt Acct. 0.030% 0.05 0.05 Note (5) 2005A CSCDA W/W Rev Bonds- Clearing A/C 0.000% 0.00 0.00 Note (5) 2005A CSCDA W/W Rev Bonds - Revenue A/C 0.000% 0.00 0.00 Note (5) 2006A CSCDA W/W Rev Bonds- Interest Fund 0.000% 0.00 0.00 Note (5) 2005A CSCDA W/W Rev Bonds - Principal Fd. 0.000% 0.00 0.00 Note (5) 2005A CSCDA W/W Rev Bonds -COI Acct. 0.000% 0.00 0.00 Note (5) 2005A CSCDA W/W Rev Bonds - installment Fd 0.000% 0.15 0.15 Note (5) 2005A CSCDA W/W Rev Bonds - Project Acct. 0.030% 1,420,291.01 1,420,291.01 Note (5) Revenue Bond Totals 0.030% $1,420,291.21 $1,420,291.21 Totals $28,025,067.22 $28,062,294.16 Note (1) These are investments in Certificates of Deposit. Current Market Value and Par Value are typically equal as interest is received monthly. Note (2) Union Bank current market values as of June 30, 2010 are presented. Note (3) These are funds invested in the Local Agency Investment Fund, State of California. Current Market and Par Value are typically equal. Interest is received quarterly and the Par Value remains the same. Note (4) These are funds invested in the Sonoma County Investment Pool. Current Market Value and Par Value are typically equal. Interest is received quarterly and the Par Value remains the same. Note (5) These funds are being held by Union Bank of California acting as a Trustee and Agent for the City of Rohnert Park. The current market values and interest rates are from the monthly statements from Union Bank. INVESTMENT SUMMARY BY TYPE June 30, 2010 Investment Type # of Invmnts % Of Portfolio Avg. YTM Par Value Market Value Average Days TM Passbook Svgs- M.M.A.'s 1.00 0.37% 0.200% $ 97,413 $ 97,413 1 Union Bank Sweep 1.00. 0.00% 0.150% 8 8 1 CD's -Banks 34.00 12.67% 3.496% 3,370,000 3,370,000 660 Managed Pools(LAIF /SCIP) 2.00 75.69% 0.529% 20,137,355 20,170,222 1 Medium Term Notes 3.00 11.28% 2.247% 3,000,000 3,004,360 1,805 39.00 100.00% 26,604,776 26,642,003 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FUND Fiscal Year 2009/2010 Summary of Revenue & Expenditures As of June 30, 2010 Balance @ Current Fiscal Year Balance @ Project No. and Description 30- Jun -09 Revenue Expenditures 30- Jun -10 2003 -11 Parallel Sewer Interceptor 18,958.28 0.00 0.00 18,958.28 2003 -12 Booster Pumps -Tanks 1,2 &3 0.00 21.75 21.75 0.00 2004 -03 Comm Meter Install.-Phase 11 (3,874.81) 0.00 14,023.51 (17,898.32) 2004 -05 Eastside Sewer Project 1,214,374.92 0.00 616,284.36 598,090.56 2004 -08 Water Storage Tanks 1, 2 & 3 189,533.00 0.00 87.00 .189,446.00 2004 -09 Playgrd Fall Mat'l Replacement 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2004 -12 Canon Manor Sewer Project 0.00 88,735.36 88,735.36 0.00 2004 -15 University Dist. Specific Plan 2,841.97 0.00 (20,999.36) 23,841.33 2004 -16 Northeast District Specific Plan (31,857.48) 91,965.28 25,778.64 34,329.16 2004 -17 Southeast District Specific Plan (40,926.34) 25,385.74 44,419.49 (59,960.09) 2004 -18 Northwest District Specific Plan (6,671.74) 0.00 4,056.14 (10,727.88) 2004 -19 Wilfred /Dowdell Dist. Spec. Plan (166,134.36) 0.00 6,447.50 (172,581.86) 2004 -20 Public Facs.Finance Spec. Plan (6,944.55) 0.00 80,092.07 (87,036.62) 2004 -21 Water Supply Assmt. Project (26,120.16) 14,401.67 (18,749.71) 7,031.22 2004 -22 Bond District Formation 88.26 0.00 130.50 (42.24) 2004 -25 Stadium Lands Specific Plan (37,473.69) 0.00 51,438.97 (88,912.66) 2004 -33 City Hall Acquisition /Renovation 328,436.33 177,100.94 146,916.33 358,620.94 2004 -34 Energy Efficiency Program 52,358.85 0.00 108.75 52,250:10 2005 -01 Cathodic Protection -Tanks 3 &4 0.00 0.00 26,243.73 (26,243.73) 2005 -02 R.P. Expressway Maintenance 6,364.04 0.00 1,369.75 4,994.29 2005 -03 Recycle Wtr Sys Expansion 0.00 1,248.00 1,248.00 0.00 2005 -07 Coleman Creek Drain Ext. 57,461.38 0.00 744.25 56,717.13 2005 -10 RPX Widening -East 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2006 -04 Copeland Creek Drainage Facility 59,577.71 0.00 235.50 59,342.21 2006 -08 2007 Streets Rehab Project (465,615.82) 454,700.00 945.25 (11,861.07) 2006 -09 Water Tank#8 Project (1,759.83) 0.00 21.75 (1,781.58) 2006 -11 Copeland Creek Bike Path 0.00 21.75 21.75 0.00 2006 -14 Sonoma Mtn Village Development (14,077.82) 0.00 105,048.25 (119,126.07) 2006 -17 101lWilfred Wtr Vault Relocation (52,343.75) 0.00 630.75 (52,974.50) 2007 -02 Eastside Trunk Sewer Proj -Phase 2 0.00 3,827.25 3,827.25 0.00 2007 -03 Snyder Ln /Bridge Widening 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2007 -12 Inflow /Infiltration Reduction 0.00 1,274.00 1,274.00 0.00 2007 -13 08 Various Street Surface Repair 0.00 89,267.40 89,267.40 0.00 2007 -14 Overlay /Reconstr- Lancaster Dr. 41,995.95 67,427.20 109,423.15 0.00 2007 -15 Adrian Dr Underground Phase II (2,479.06) 0.00 199.50 (2,678.56) 2007 -18 Manhole Repair & I Program 0.00 0.00 (1,557.86) 1,557.86 2007 -19 Trail to Crane Creek Park (867.29) 0.00 21.75 (889.04) 2008 -02 2009 Street Surface Repairs (4,969.68) 319,390.37 314,420.69 0.00 2008 -03 Tanks 1,3 & 4 Exterior Recoat (16.29) 0.00 0.00 (16.29) 2009 -01 American Recov Act St Maint 22,145.48 312,503.19 334,648.67 0.00 2009 -02 2009 Sewer Main Rehabilitation 0.00 186,134.54 186,134.54 0.00 2009 -05 Bicycle Detection Symbols 0.00 65.25 65.25 0.00 2010.01 2010 Jobs Act- Street Maintenance 0.00 35,969.50 35,969.50 0.00 2010 -05 Wilfred Widening 0.00 0.00 3,873.50 (3,873.50) 2010 -07 Arlen Dr & E. Cotati Av Overlays 0.00 1,322.75 1,322.75 0.00 2010 -08 Copeland Crk Bike Path Reconstr. 0.00 4,061.50 4,061.50 0.00 2010 -09 2011 Various Streets Overlays 0.00 817.00 817.00 0.00 Sub -total $1,132,003.50 $1,875,640.44 $2,259,068.87 $748,575.07 Accounts payable $0.00 $69,680.10 $69,680.10 Accounts Receivable ($248,795.79) $216,874.25 ($31,921.54) Total Improvement Project Fund 883,20711 $786,333.63 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FUND Fiscal Year 2009/2010 Recap of Project Expenditures As of June 30, 2010 Est. Total Current Mo. Fiscal Year Expenditures Project Project No. and Description: Expenditures Expenditures Total Expenditures 2003 -11 Parallel Sewer Interceptor 0.00 0.00 10,217,864.40 10,300,000 2003 -12 Booster Pumps -Tanks 1,2 & 3 0.00 21.75 619,926.32 110,000 2004 -03 Comm Meter Install.-Phase II 4,304.00 14,023.51 2,725,437.58 1,600,000 2004 -05 Eastside Sewer Project 21.75 616,284.36 13,850,939.95 6,558,600 2004 -08 Water Storage Tanks 1,2 &3 0.00 87.00 161,671.54 2,235,300 2004 -09 Playground Fall Mat[ Replcmnt 0.00 0.00 81,290.02 137,336 2004 -12 Canon Manor Sewer Project 238.13 88,735.36 693,619.38 2,000,000 2004 -15 University District Specific Plan 18,371.50 (20,999.36) 402,007.17 TBD 2004 -16 Northeast District Specific Plan 11,399.62 25,778.64 112,765.94 TBD 2004 -17 Southeast District Specific Plan 27,476.26 44,419.49 199,938.85 250,000 2004 -18 Northwest District Specific Plan 21.75 4,056.14 15,358.49 400,000 2004 -19 WilfredlDowdell Dist. Spec Plan 601.50 6,447.50 172,581.86 TBD 2004 -20 Public Facs.Finance Spec. Plan 22,125.00 80,092.07 232,457.88 TBD 2004 -21 Water Supply Assmt. Project 0.00 (18,749.71) 1,321,770.17 1,232,000 2004 -22 Bond District Formation 21.75 130.50 33,628.88 TBD 2004 -25 Stadium Lands Specific Plan 217.50 51,438.97 109,867.21 100,000 2004 -33 City Hall Acq. /Renovation 0.00 146,916.33 8,682,081.18 8,200,000 2004 -34 Energy Efficiency Program 0.00 108.75 1,140,118.61 1,176,000 2005 -01 Cathodic Protection -Tanks 3 &4 0.00 26,243.73 300,758.12 450,000 2005 -02 R.P. Expressway Maintenance 81.25 1,369.75 1,764,749.64 1,670,000 2005 -03 Recycle Wtr Sys Expansion 1,248.00 1,248.00 11,393.16 12,750,000 2005 -07 Coleman Creek Drain Ext. 222.00 744.25 545,904.81 532,000 2005 -10 RPX Widening -East 0.00 0.00 35,045.22 9,302,170 2006 -04 Copeland Creek Drainage Facility (6,552.00) 235.50 5,143.18 4,065,000 2006 -08 2007 Streets Rehab Project 132.75 945.25 1,501,358.34 1,267,280 2006 -09 Water Tank #8 Project 0.00 21.75 38,889.84 4,646,471 2006 -11 Copeland Creek Bike Path 21.75 21.75 421,141.99 511,000 2006 -14 Sonoma Mtn Village Development 110,109.14 105,048.25 119,126.07 400,000 2006 -17 101/Wilfred Wtr Vault Relocation 0.00 630.75 175,722.84 233,195 2007 -02 Eastside Trunk Swr Proj -Phase 2 234.00 3,827.25 24,112.61 11,207,817 2007 -03 Snyder Lane /Bridge Widening 0.00 0.00 52,938.89 4,680,118 2007 -12 Inflow /Infiltration Reduction 0.00 1,274.00 88,639.13 500,000 2007 -13 08 Various Street Surface Repair 0.00 89,267.40 626,928.11 860,547 2007 -14 Overlay /Reconstr- Lancaster Dr. 21.75 109,423.15 594,122.33 1,344,089 2007 -15 Adrian Dr Underground. Phase II 0.00 199.50 2,678.56 831,900 2007 -18 Manhole Repair I & 1 Program 0.00 (1,557.86) 110,139.83 100,000 2007 -19 Trail to Crane Creek Park 0.00 21.75 889.04 711,270 2008 -02 2009 Street Surface Repairs 65.25 314,420.69 431,411.31 295,131 2008 -03 Tanks 1,3 & 4 Exterior Recoat 0.00 0.00 16.29 662,416 2009 -01 American Recov Act St Maint 217,642.50 334,648.67 357,503.19 1,900,000 2009 -02 2009 Sewer Main Rehabilitation 324.00 186,134.54 243,280.57 600,000 2009 -05 Bicycle Detection Symbols 0.00 65.25 3,965.25 7,000 2010 -01 2010 Jobs Act - Street Maintenance 21.75 35,969.50 35,969.50 100,000 2010 -05 Wilfred Widening 43.50 3,873.50 3,873.50 0.00 2010 -07 Arlen Dr & E. Cotati Av Overlays 430.25 1,322.75 1,322.75 1,114,700.00 2010 -08 Copeland Crk Bike Path Reconstr. 3,823.50 4,061.50 4,061.50 746,675.00 2010 -09 2011 Various Streets Overlays 430.25 817.00 817.00 1,079,000.00 TOTALS $413,098.40 $2,259,068.87 $48,275,228.00 $96,867,015.00 CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND Fiscal Year 2009/2010 Summary of Revenue and Expenditures June 30, 2010 Balance @ Current Fiscal Year Balance @ CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND: June 30, 2009 Revenue Expenditures June 30, 2010 Residential $212,273.74 $0.00 $0.00 212,273.74 Community Facilities 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00. Open Space 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Capital Outlay Fund $212,273.74 $0.00 $0.00 $212,273.74 {This sectionfor City Clerk Use Only} Agenda Packet Preparation TIMELINES for Regular City Council Meetings held on the 2nd & 4th Tuesdays of each month: . Resolutions (other than standard formats for authorizations and approvals), Ordinances & Agreements to Assistant City Attorney via email for review and approval as to form DUE no later than NOON Three (3) Mondays prior to Council meeting date · Agenda items to City Manager via email for his review and responding ..email authorization", synchronized with above timeframe of Assistant City Attorney review, and an email copy to the City Clerk for drafting agendas . Agenda Items with attachments via email and a total of twenty (20) complete hard copy sets with 2 sets single-sided & 18 sets double-sided/stapled to City Clerk DUE no later than NOON Two (2) Fridays prior to Council meeting date . Agenda Draft review by Mayor, City Manager, Assistant City Attorney, City Clerk no later than Tuesday morning One (1) week prior to Council meeting date · Agenda Packets distributed to City Council and Agendas posted/distributed/mailed on Thursday afternoon One (1) week prior to Council meeting date in compliance with Rohnert Park Municipal Code Section 2.08.020 and related Resolution No. 2008-173 8/10/10 City Council Agenda ITEM NO. 6.C.l RESOLUTION NO. 2010-86 ITEM NO. 6.D ORDINANCE NO. 822 (ADOPTION) CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL REPORT Meeting Date: August 10, 2010 Department: Public Safety Submitted By: Wulff Reinhold, Technical Advisor Submittal Date: July 29, 2010 Agenda Title: Ordinance Amendment Second Reading Requested Council Action: Second Reading of Ordinance amendment to chapter 9.48, dealing with "Loud and Unruly Gatherings." Summary: These changes to the existing Rohnert Park Municipal Code Chapter 9.48, dealing with "Loud and Unruly Gatherings," are needed to help contain a resurging problem with neighborhood disturbances and to free up valuable police patrolresources. This revision includes changes as directed by City Council during the first reading on July 27,2010. CITY ATTORNEY'S REVIEW: Relevant documents for this agenda item have been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: (X) Consent Item (X) Approval ( ) Public Hearing Required ' ( ) Not Recommended ( ) Submitted with Comment ( ) Policy Determination by Council ( ) City Comments: ( ) Regular Time Per Interim City Manager's review and direction for distribution of this agenda item. ? RESOLUTION NO. 2010-86 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK ADOPTING A SCHEDULE OF CIVIL FINES IMPOSED PURSUANT TO ROHNERT P ARK MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 9.48.050 WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park, pursuant to the police powers delegated to it by the California Constitution, has the authority to enact laws that promote the public health, safety and general welfare of its residents; WHEREAS, the occurrence of loud or unruly gatherings on private property is a threat to the public health, safety, general welfare, and quietenjoyment of residential property and property owners; WHEREAS, law enforcement responses to loud and unruly gatherings cause a drain of law enforcement resources and, in some cases, leave other areas of the City with inadequate law enforcement protection; WHEREAS, responses to loud and unruly gatherings result in a disproportionate expenditure of public safety resources, which are Underwritten by general taxes paid to the City by its taxpayers and residents; WHEREAS, the City has reviewed the effectiveness of its Alcohol Offense/Loud Parties ordinance during the past five years and finds that changes to the schedule of fines imposed pursuant to that ordinance will make the ordinance more effective; WHEREAS, at its July 27, 2010 regular meeting, the City Council introduced a revised Alcohol OffenselLoud Parties ordinance - Ordinance No. 822 -- ("Ordinance"), re-titled Loud and Unruly Gatherings, that permits the City Council to establish by resolution the amount of fines, including any late payment penalties, fora violation of the Ordinance; and WHEREAS, sections 53069.4, 54988, 36900, 36901, and 38771 et seq. of the California Government Code, together with Ordinance No. 822, provide the authority for the City Council to establish by resolution the amount of fines, including any late payment penalties, for a fine imposed pursuant to the Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Rohnert Park City Council as follows: Section 1. Findings. The above recitations are true and correct. Section 2. Amount of Fine. fines: Any person found to be in violation of the Ordinance shall be subject to the following ? 10f2 1326286v1 80078/0012 a. $500 for a second violation of the same ordinance within 120 days from the date of the first violation; b. $750 for a third violation ofthe same ordinance within 120 days from the date of the first violation; and c. $1,000 for each additional violation of the same ordinance within 120 days from the date of the first violation. If the posted Notice of Violation is removed or defaced during the 120 day posting period, the responsible person( s) shall be subj ect to an additional penalty of $1 00 for each reposting. If full payment of the fine is not received within the time period set forth in the Ordinance, the responsible person(s) shall be subject to a late payment penalty of$100. Section 3. Environmental Clearance. The adoption of this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the establishment of fines and penalties is not a "project." Specifically, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4), the creation of government funding mechanisms that do not involve any commitment to any specific project that may cause a significant effect on the environment is not deemed to be a "project" under CEQA. Section 4. Severability . If any action, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Resolution or the fees established by this Resolution shall be held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution or the fees established by this Resolution that can be given effect without the invalid provisions. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 10th day of August, 2010. CITY OF ROHNERl' PARK Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk ? 20f2 1326286vl 80078/0012 ORDINANCE NO. 822 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER 9.48 OF THE ROHNERT PARK MUNICIPAL CODE (ALCOHOL OFFENSEILOUD PARTIES - LOUD AND UNRULY GATHERINGS) WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park, pursuant to the police powers delegated to it by the California Constitution, has the authority to enact laws that promote.the public health, safety and general welfare of its residents; WHEREAS, the occurrence of loud or unruly gatherings on private property is a threat to the public health, safety, general welfare, and quiet enjoyment of residential property and constitutes a public nuisance; WHEREAS, law enforcement responses to loud and unruly gatherings cause a drain of law enforcement resources and, in some cases, leave other areas of the City with inadequate law , , enforcement protection; WHEREAS, responses to loud and unruly gatherings result in a disproportionate expenditure of public safety resources, which are underwritten by general taxes paid to the City by its taxpayers and residents; WHEREAS, persons held responsible for abetting or allowing loud or unruly gatherings will be more likely to properly supervise or stop such gatherings held on property in their possession or under their control; WHEREAS, problems associated with loud or unruly gatherings are difficult to prevent or deter unless law enforcement has the additional legal authority to impose. civil fines; WHEREAS, Government Code sections 5306904, 54988, and 38771 et seq. authorize the City to impose civil fines for violations of City ordinances and recover the costs associated with abating public nuisances; WHEREAS, the intent of this chapter is to protect the public health, safety, general welfare, and quiet enjoyment of residential property rather than to punish; WHEREAS, persons who actively or passively aid, abet, or allow loud or unruly gatherings should be held liable for the nuisances created by such gatherings including, without limitation, the imposition of civil fines; and WHEREAS, the City has reviewed the effectiveness of its Alcohol Offense/Loud Parties ordinance during the past five years and finds that changes to the ordinance will make it more effective. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park ordains as follows: ? 1326436v5 80078/0012 Ord. No. 822 Page 1 of? SECTION 1. Chapter 9.48, entitled "Alcohol OffenselLoud Parties," is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: Sections: 9.48.010 9.48.020 9.48.030 9.48.040 9.48.050 9.48.060 9.48.070 9.48.080 9.48.090 9.48.100 9.48.010 9.48.020 Chapter 9.48. LOUD AND UNRULY GATHERINGS Title. Definitions. Loud or Unruly Gathering - Public NuisancelPenalty. Notice of Loud or Unruly Gathering - Posting, mail. Violation - Civil Fine. Notice of Violation. Payment of Fine. Administrative Hearing, Appeal. Collection of Delinquent Costs. Cumulative Remedies. Title. The title of this chapter shall be "Loud and Unruly Gatherings." Definitions. For the purpose of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply: A. "Loud or Unruly Gathering" means a gathering of ten or more persons on any private property for a social occasion or other activity upon which loud or unruly conduct occurs and results in a public nuisance and/or threat to the public health, safety, general welfare, or quiet enjoyment of residential property or nearby public property. Loud or unruly conduct includes without limitation any or all ofthe following: peace; and 1. excessive noise or traffic; 2. obstruction of public streets by crowds or vehicles; 3. public drunkenness; 4. the service of alcohol to minors; 5. possession and/or consumption of alcohol by minors; 6. assaults, batteries, fights, domestic violence or other disturbances of the 7. vandalism and litter. ? 1326436v580078/0012 Ord. No. 822 Page 2 on Loud or unruly conduct does not include any activity: (1) protected by Article 1, Section 4 of the California Constitution; (2) protected by the First or Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution; or (3) regulated by the California Alcoholic Beverage Control Act. B. "Responsible Person" means and includes without limitation: (1) any person(s) who owns, rents, leases, or otherwise has control of the premises where a Loud or Unruly Gathering occurs; (2) any person(s) in charge of the premises where a Loud or Unruly Gathering occurs; (3) any person(s) who organized or sponsored a Loud or Unruly Gathering; and/or (4) any'person(s) who attends a Loud or Unruly Gathering and engages in loud or unruly conduct. If the Responsible Person is ajuvenile, then the parent(s) or guardian(s) of that juvenile shall also be considered a Responsible Person. c. "Juvenile" means and includes any person under the age of eighteen years old. D. "Minor" means and includes any person under the age of twenty-one years old. 9.48.030 Loud or Unruly Gathering - Public NuisancelPenalty. It shall be unlawful and constitute a public nuisance for any Responsible Person to conduct, aid, organize, permit, or host a Loud or Unruly Gathering. A violation of this chapter shall constitute a misdemeanor unless the citing officer, in his or her discretion, charges the violation as an infraction. Any person violating any provision of this chapter shall also be subject toa civil fine in an amount established by resolution of the City Council. 9.48.040 Notice of Loud or Unruly Gathering - Posting, mail. A. Posting of Premises.. When public safety personnel intervene at a Loud or Unruly Gathering, the premises on which the Loud or Unruly Gathering occurs shall be posted with a notice stating (1) that the intervention was necessary as a result of a public nuisance caused by a Loud or Unruly Gathering, (2) the date of the intervention, and (3) that any subsequent Loud or Unruly Gathering within 120 days from the date of a prior gathering may result in additional civil fines for all Responsible Person(s). Such notice shall remain posted for the entire 120 day period. Any cited Responsible Person who resides on the premises shall be responsible for ensuring that such notice is not removed or defaced. If the notice is removed or defaced, the Responsible Person(s) shall be liable for a civil fine in an amount established by resolution of the City Council in addition to any other fines or penalties that may be imposed under this chapter; provided, however, that public safety personnel first consult with the Responsible Person(s) as to the location in which the notice is posted to ensure its security and prominent display. . B. Mailing of Notice to Property Owner. Notice ofthe Loud or Unruly Gathering shall be mailed to any property owner, if different from the Responsible Person, at the address shown on Sonoma County's last equalized property tax assessment roll, or the supplemental roll, whichever is more current. The notice shall advise the property owner that any subsequent Loud or Unruly Gathering on the same premises within 120 days of the Loud or Unruly Gathering that is the subject of the notice may result in additional civil fines as established by this chapter. ? 1326436v580078/0012 Ord. No. 822 Page 3 00 hearing, thatthe person charged with the fine was not responsible for the violation or that there was no violation as charged. B. Any aggrieved person may obtain review of the administrative decision by filing (1) an appeal with the Sonoma County Superior Court in accordance with Government Code section 53069.4, or (2) a petition for writ of mandate in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure sections 1094.5 and 1094.6. 9.48.090 Collection of Delinquent Costs. A. The amount of any civil fine imposed pursuant to this chapter shall be deemed a debt owed to the City by the Responsible Person and, if that person is a juvenile, by his or her parent or guardian. B. At its discretion, the City may pursue any and all legal and equitable remedies to collect unpaid fines imposed pursuant to this chapter. Pursuit of one remedy does not preclude the pursuit of any other remedy. It is intended that persons causing, maintaining, and/or permitting the violation, and not the taxpayers, bear the finaIicial burden of the City's enforcement efforts. Remedies available to the City to collect unpaid fines and costs include the , following without limitation: 1. Referring the delinquent account to a collection agency; 2. Authorizing a lien to be recorded on the property; and/or 3. Authorizing a special assessment upon the property. C. The City shall be entitled to recover all costs related to enforcing any violations of this chapter that are recoverable under Government Code sections 54988, 38771 et seq., or any other local, state or federal law. Before invoking any of the procedures described in this section, the City shall provide notice to the property owner (if different from the Responsible Person) based on Sonoma County's last equalized property tax assessment roll, or the supplemental roll, whichever is more current. D. Any person who fails to pay any fine shall be liable in any proceeding brought by the City for the costs incurred in securing payment of the unpaid amount, including without limitation, administrative costs and attorneys' fees. Such ,collection costs shall be in addition to any penalties, interest, and/or late charges imposed upon the unpaid fine. 9.48.100 Cumulative Remedies. The remedies provided under this chapter are cumulative, and shall not restrict the City's ability to pursue any other remedy to which it is entitled under law or equity. Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed to preclude the imposition of any ,criminal penalty, nor shall anything in this chapter be deemed to conflict with any penalty or provision under state law, or prohibit any conduct authorized by the state or federal constitutions. ? 1326436v580078/0012 Ord. No. 822 Page 6 of7 SECTION 2. Co mpliance with the California Environmental Quality Act The City Council finds that this Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the creation of government funding mechanisms or other government fiscal activities which do not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment is not deemed to be a project under section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines. Moreover, the adoption of this ordinance has no potential to result in a physical change to the environment, either directly or indirectly, and therefore is exempt from CEQA review. SECTION 3. Severability If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction or preempted by state legislation, such decision or legislation 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 hereof not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to any such decision or preemptive legislation. SECTION 4. Effective Date and Publication This ordinance shall be in full force and effect 30 days after its final passage and adoption and shall be published and posted as required by law. This ordinance was introduced on the 27th day of July, 2010, and DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this _ day of ,2010, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Mayor ATTEST: , City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Assistant City Attorney ? 1326436v5 8007~/0012 Ord. No. 822 Page 7 of7 ro Agenda Packet Preparation TlMELINES for Regular City Council Meetings held on the 2nd & 4th Tuesdays of each month: · Resolutions (other than standard formats for authorizations and approvals), Ordinances & Agreements to Assistant City Attorney via email for review and approval as to form DUE no later than NOON Three (3) Mondays prior to Council meeting date · Agenda items to City Manager via email for his review and responding ..email authorization", synchronized with above timeframe of Assistant City Attorney review, and an email copy to the City Clerk for drafting agendas · Agenda Items with attachments via email and a total of twenty (20) complete hard copy sets with 2 sets single-sided & 18 sets double-sided/stapled to City Clerk DUE no later than NOON Two (2) Fridays prior to Council meeting date ' , · Agenda Draft review by Mayor, City Manager, Assistant City Attorney, City Clerk no later than Tuesday morning One (1) week prior to Council meeting date · Agenda Packets distributed to City Council and Agendas posted/distributed/mailed on Thursday afternoon One (1) week prior to Council meeting date in compliance with Rohnert Park Municipal Code Section 2.08.020 and related Resolution No. 2008-173 {This sectionfor City Clerk Use Only} 8/10/10 City Council Agenda Item No. 6.C(2) Resolution No. 2010-87 Meeting Date: Department: Submitted By: Submittal Date: CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL REPORT August 10, 2010 Development Services Richard F. Pedroncelli, Senior Engip.eenng Technician Agenda (Subject Only) Title: August 5, 2010 Resolution changing a portion of Wilfred Ave. to Golf Course Dr. and extending Golf Course Dr. underneath the freeway (US-l 0 1) Requested Council Action: Adopt Resolution Summary: Development Services staff have reviewed the current Caltrans, Wilfred Interchange project plans. The review is focused on the east-west roadway that will serve asa cross town connection to and from US-lOl once the freeway project is complete. The plans show Wilfred Ave. ending its' easterly terminus at the proposed southbound ramps and Golf Course Dr. ending its westerly terminus at Commerce Blvd thereby leaving a gap of unnamed street. See exhibits attached. The plans do not indicate a street name for the portion of new street segment underneath US-l 01, between the southbound ramps and Commerce Blvd. In the interest of consistency and clarification; staff recommends changing the street name of Wilfred Ave. to Golf Course Drive, within the present City limits, which is from Dowdell Ave. easterly to Redwood Dr. Staff also recommends naming the new street underneath US-l 0 1 as Golf Course Dr. Therefore the entire length of street within the present City limits, from Dowdell Ave. on the west to the easterly end of Golf Course Drive, would be named Golf Course Drive. There are three (3) properties affected by the proposed street name change, one of which has a residence on it and the other two are vacant land. All three property owners, including the residence occupant, have been notified in writing of the proposed street name change and scheduled city council meeting date. Addressing currently starts at the east end of Wilfred and address numbers increase to the west. Golf Course Dr. address numbers increase towards the east, therefore Golf Course Drive West should be considered west of the freeway as to not require changing the numbering system. Rohnert Park Expressway West uses the suggested approach. Enclosures: exhibit CITY ATTORNEY'S REVIEW: Relevant documents for this agenda item have been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: ( ) Consent Item ( ) Approval ( ) Public Hearing Requited ( ) Not Recommended ( ) Submitted with Comment ( ) Policy Determination by Council ( ) City Comments: ( ) Regular Item Per Interim City Manager's review and direction for distribution of this agenda item. ? (Revised 031309) JH:TG-S:05-b Yf SAnt 4 y 124il '`yf YA'jT1d F HAM Z- I�I ,y w r r' irk rx� s 56 r, Yf SAnt 4 y 124il '`yf YA'jT1d F HAM II I�I r' rx� s RESOLUTION NO. 2010-87 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK APPROVING STREET NAME CHANGE OF PORTION OF WILFRED AVENUE TO GOLF COURSE DR. WHEREAS, Wilfred Avenue and Golf Course Drive are described as east-west roadways which serve as connections to and from the freeway (US-1OI); WHEREAS, Wilfred Avenue currently ends its easterly terminus at Redwood Drive; WHEREAS, Golf Course Drive currently ends its westerly terminus at Commerce Boulevard; WHEREAS, Wilfred Avenue and Golf Course Drive are connecting each other as part of the Caltrans, Wilfred Interchange project via a new east-west street segment constructed underneath US-lO 1; WHEREAS, the new street segment is unnamed between Redwood Drive and Commerce Boulevard; WHEREAS, that portion of Wilfred Avenue is within the City of Rohnert Park described as between Dowdell Avenue to Redwood Drive; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it does hereby authorize and approve changing Wilfred Avenue, between Dowdell Avenue and Redwood Drive to Golf Course Drive West. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it does hereby authorize and approve naming the street segment between Redwood Drive and Commerce Blvd underneath US-1 0 1 as Golf Course Drive. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute documents pertaining to same for and on behalf of the City of Rohnert Park. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this day of ,20 . CITY OF ROHNERT PARK ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk 'lli-S:05-d 8/10/10 City Council Agenda ITEM NO.7.B RUSSIAN RIVER WATERSHED ASSO<'n,", II\J.... MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS July 29th, 2010, 9:00 AM Windsor Town Council Chambers 9291 Old Redwood Highway, Windsor, CA 95492 R. USSI AN ,R.I V E R WATERSHED ASS.OCIATlON AGENDA A. Call to Order and Introductions B. Approval of the Agenda C. Approval of Standing Items . Minutes: May 20, 2010 Board of Directors Meeting D. Guest Speaker Presentation - Member Agency Project Summaries . City of Healdsburg - Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades (Mike Kim) . City of Santa Rosa - Urban Water Recycling Project (Jennifer Burke) · City of Rohnert Park - Phase II Stormwater Inspection (Eydie Tacata) E. BOD Business . IRWMP Update . Review of 2009-201 0 Achievements . Highlights of 2010-2011 Work Plan o Outreach to Eligible Entities o Stormwater Permit Support o Russian River Friendly Landscape Guidelines o Creek Week o Safe Medicines Disposal · Recent and on-goingRRWA advocacy items . Update from July 15th RWQCB Meeting o General Construction Stormwater Permit o TMDL Development":" Russian River and Laguna de Santa' Rosa ' · Agenda for August1ih meeting with. RWQCB EO and staff C. Schedule and agenda items for next RRWA Board meeting · Currently scheduled date: September 23, 2010 , , F. Working Group Activities A. Working Group Activities Next meetina: August 10, 2010 G. Items of Interest H. Public Comment I. Adjourn The Russian River Watershed AssQCiation complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. '" Please contact Phoebe Grow at (707) 833-2553 with any questions. FOR ACCESSIBLE . (I MEETING INFORMATION ... . CALL: (707) 543-3350 ADD: (707) 543-3031 WATER ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MONDAY: AUGUST 2,2010 Laguna Treatment Plant 4300 Llano Road, Santa Rosa, CA 9:00 a.m. (Estuary I Wetlands Conference Room) This is a combined WAC and TACmeeting. Links to supporting information for specific agenda items are included where possible to save paper. 1. Check In 2. Public Comment 3. Recap from the May 3,.2010 WACffAC Meeting and Approval of Minutes 4. Recap from the July 12, 2010 WAC Meeting and Approval of Minutes 5. Draft SCWA Water Supply Strategy Action Plan Comments htto :lIwww.scwa.ca.aov/water-suoolv-strateav/ 6. UWMP 2010 Status/Long Range Financial Model Update 7. Temporary Urgency Change Order & Water Contractor Statistics htto :lIwww.scwa.ca.aov/oublic-notices/ 8. Meetings with SCWA BOD members 9. Water Supply Coordinating Council 10. Biological Opinion Status Update 11. Items for next agenda 12. Check Out ? C:lOocumenls and Settings~r1\Local SellingslTamporary Intemet FilaslContentoOuUook\3B23B7TDlWAC T AC Agenda 080210 (3)odoc Calendar of Events Next Council Meeting August 10, 2010 Saturday. 7/31- 8/11 Student arrives from Hashimoto City, Japan Takanbou Yabuuchi, Student Ambassador from Hashimoto Sister Cities Student Exchange Program 8/4 at 4pm City Hall tour (PS) Thursday. 8/12 Mayors & Council members 6 p.m. 450 West Spain Street, Sonoma 95476 Tuesday. 8/17 Joint EOC Operations Meeting 1:30-4:30 p.m. 500 City Center Drive, 2nd Floor Tuesday. 8117 Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors meeting (PS) Saturday. 8/21 RP Public Safety Explorer Post #500 Pancake Breakfast & Open House 8-11:30am 5200 Country Club Dr. $6/adult $4/child Sunday. 8129 Jewish Community Free Clinic Fundraising event 1-5 p.m. September 7-10 CAJPA (CA Association of Joint Powers Authorities) South Lake Tahoe (JC) Friday. lOll Dr. Chris Thornberg - CA Outlook 2011 7-9am. Hyatt Vineyard Creek Hotel ThursdaylFriday 10/7-10/8 2010 Town-Gown Conference UC Riverside 0 Tuesdav.10/19 Library Advisory Board meeting 6:30pm Library City of Rohnert Park 08/10/10 City Council Agenda Item No. 9C ? Judy Hauff City Clerk City Hall City of Rohnert Park+ 130 Avram Avenue+Rohnert Park, California 94928 Phone: (707) S88-222S+FAX: (707) 792-1876+ WEB: www.rpcitv.orl! ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JOINT SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a JOINT SPECIAL MEETING of the ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL and the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION of the CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, will be held on Tuesday, August 10,2010, at 1:00 p.m. at the Rohnert Park City Hall - Council Chamber 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California Said special meeting shall be for the purpose of the following: 1:00 p.m. 1. CITY COUNCIL/CDC JOINT SPECIAL MEETING - Call to Order/Roll Call (Belforte _ Breeze_Callinan _ Mackenzie_Stafford ~ 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS 3. CITY COUNCIL/CDC WORKSHOP regard City's Financial Situation and Providing Long-Term Direction on Improving City's Financial Condition A. Review of City/CDC Budgets as follows: 1. City's Financial Position (General Fund) at a Glance a. Fiscal Year 2010-11 b. Preliminary 6- Year Budget Projection 2. Measure E Results 3. Budget Targets to Produce a "Livable" Budget for the Year 4. The City's Cost of Doing Business (2010111 Budget) 5. Long Term Requirements (that may not be possible to address in the short term) a. Reserves b. Unfunded Liabilities c. Longer Term Capital Replacement Needs 6. City General Fund Expenditures by Function (201011 1 Budget) and City's Labor Costs 7. City General Fund Revenues (2009110 Budget) 8. Proposed Additional Revenues 9. Staffing Constraints - Practical Impacts 10. City "Entrepreneurial" Programs - Creative ideas about how to help programs become more self supporting 11. Identifying True Costs and Expenditures at City Facilities ? 12. Proposed Changes (substantial) in the Budget 13. Requested New Position, Classification, and Pay Adjustments 14. Code Enforcement Officer 15. Layoffs, Attrition, Freezes and Chills 16. Potential Sale of Stadium or Other Property 17. Ideas on How to Further Reduce the Budget, if necessary 18. Budget Cuts and Council Advisory Committees 19. Economic Development Plan 20. Human Resources 21. Labor Relations 22. City Use of Consultants 23. Council Policies 24. Longer-Term City Strategic Plan 25. Condition of City's Special Funds 26. Potential Impact of Sewer Rates on the General Fund Budget 27. CDC Budget a. Operating Budget (both Redevelopment and Housing) b. Capital Projects c. Funding Availability 28. The Need for Focus in the Years Ahead 29. Other Matters as raised in the discussion B. Conclusions/Council Comments/Direction 4. ADJOURNMENT of City Council Special Meeting DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability which requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this City Council meeting, please contact the City Offices at (707) 588-2225 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation by the City. Please make sure the City Manager's office is notified as soon as possible if you have a visual impairment requiring meeting materials to be produced in another format (Braille, audio-tape, etc.) PUBLIC COMMENTS: For public comment on items listed on the agenda or on agenda items if unable to speak at the scheduled time (limited to three minutes per appearance and a 30 minute total time limit, or allocation of time based on number of speaker cards submitted) - PLEASE FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD PRIOR TO SPEAKING - JH-081010 Agenda-JI Snecial MIl! ofRPCilyCouncil & CDC Au!!ust 10.2010 ... THE CITY I CDC BUDGETS Interim City Manager Outline For Conversation with City Council THE CITY BUDGET - General Fund 1. City's Financial Position (General Fund) at a Glance a. Where are we next fiscal year? 2009/10 actual Expenditures $26,869,692 Revenues 19,486,971 Reduction in deficit in last two years (ATTACHMENT lal) Note: these figures do not include the sale. of surplus property or transftrs from reserves or other funds. 2010/11 Budget $24,759,903 20,876,800 % diff -8% 7% b. Preliminary 6-year Budget Projection (ATTACHMENT Ibl) Updated 6-year Budget Projection to be provided in February 2011 Chart illustrating General Fund Reserve balance (ATTACHMENT Ib2) Chart illustrating Revenue/Expenditure Gap (ATTACHMENT Ib3) 2. Measure E If it had failed - Budget Shortfall - Thankfully it passed - Budget Shortfall Need to remember - it sunsets in 5 years At that time City revenues will be reduced by an estimated $3,000,000/year. $4,000,000 $2,400,000 3. Budget Targets (what do we need to do?) to produce a "livable" budget for the year? a. Expenditures (reduce by $2,000,000) b. Revenues (increase by $300,000) [not counting Measure E] 4. The City's cost of doing business (2010/11 Budget) % age a. Personnel * $22,171,810 78 b. Other Operations Expense 5,331,123 19 c. Capital 236,200 1 d. Debt Repayment 605.770 .2 TOTAL: $ 28,344,903 100 e. Breakdown of Personnel Costs (ATTACHMENT 4e) * Includes professional contract services for City Attorney and Human Resources Officer 5. Things that must be done for the long-term (which we may not be able to address in the short-term)? a. Increase Reserves (see Ib2) b. Set aside money for Unfunded liabilities (ATTACHMENT 5b) ... 1 6. CHART: City General Fund Expenditures by Function (ATTACHMENT 6a) CHART: Number of City Employees FYs 2010-2011 (ATTACHMENT 6b) CHART: Staffing Level over past five years (ATTACHMENT 6e) CHART: Staffmg level broken out between sworn and non-sworn (ATTACHMENT 6el) CHART: Cost of Retirement Plans, Retiree Health, FY 2006-2011 (ATTACHENT 6d) CHART: Total compensation per Employee (ATTACHMENT 6e) CHART: Average Wage per Employee (ATTACHMENT 6f) CHART: PERS Annual Pension Cost (ATTACHMENT 6g) PERS Annual Pension Cost over last five years (graph - A TT ACHMENT 6h) 7. City General Fund Revenues (2009110 Budget) - (ATTACHMENT 7) 8. Proposed Additional Revenues - (ATTACHMENT 8) 9. Staffing constraints - the practical impacts (of what departments are able to do, or not able to do, or do as rapidly as they or others would like) a. Administrative Services (SL) b. Development Services (oJ) c. Public Works / Community Services (1M) d. Public Safety (BM) 10. City "Entrepreneurial" Programs Creative ideas about how to help programs become more self supporting (or even make money) a. Senior Discount Book (1M) b. City Freeway Sign (SL) c. "Cooperative Agreements" at PAC (SL) d. Callinan Sports Center (1M) e. Farmer's Market (1M) f. Special Events (September bicycle race, as one example) (1M) 11. Identifying our true costs aild expenditures at City facilities - A TT ACHMENTS, (cost centers and cost accounting approach) a. Community Center (1M) (ATTACHMENT lIa) b. Sports Center (1M) (ATTACHMENT lIb) c. Senior Center (1M) (ATTACHMENT lIe) d. Performing Arts Center (SL) (ATTACHMENT lId) e. Pools (1M) (ATTACHMENT lIe) 12. Proposed Changes (substantial) in the Budget a. Public Safety staffmg (BM) (ATTACHMENT 12a) b. Other reasons for budget reductions 1) Impact of previous cuts (SL) (ATTACHMENT 12b1) a. Furloughs b. Position cuts ... 2 2) Cost control by Departments (ill) 3) Authorized but unfilled or frozen positions (ill) (ATTACHMENT 12b3) 4) Closed or reduced service facilities (1M) (ATTACHMENT12b4) 13. Requested new positions, classification and pay adjustments Previously agendized and postponed a. Director of Public Works & Community Services - reclass (1M) (ATTACHMENT 13a) b. General Services Supervisor - reclass (1M) (ATTACHMENT 13b) New Proposals c. Revenue and Utilities Supervisor (Finance) - reclass (SL) (ATTACHMENT 13e) d. Performing Arts Specialist to PAC Theater Manager - reclass (SL) e. Deputy Chief building Official to Building Inspector (Code Enforcement Officer) 14. Code Enforcement OffiCer-(ATTACHMENT 14) a. Need for function (DJ and BM) b. Alternatives ~ have program/not have program c. Net effect on General Fund 15. Layoffs, Attrition, Freezes and Chills a. Layoff --employee is laid off and position is eliminated from budget b. Attrition -'-an employee retires or resigns and position is not filled c. Freeze - vacant position authorization is eliminated from budget d. Chill - when employee leaves, position is not filled unless approved by City Manager, after all alternatives to rehiring are explored by Department Head e. The point is to reduce positions when the Cityhas the opportunity to do so (without lay~ offs) in order to reduce costs (attempting to minimize reductions in City services). f. While "doing the same with less" sounds like good management in.difficult times, it has to be recognized that this puts additional work load on remaining employees. g. City Manager Recommendation: For past several months City.has been using attrition, for balance of budget period, a "chill" is to be used. 16. Potential sale of Stadium or other Property a. Memo - (ATTACHMENT 16) 17. Ideas for further discussion on how to further reduce the budget, if necessary a. Designate further staff j.service reductions b. Council direct analysis oftotal payroll costs and benefits, in particular 1) Costs of retirement programs (CHART) (see 6d) 2) Costs of employee health care, including retiree health ( CHART) (see 6d) 3) Other benefits, not in line with prevailing practices and job marketplace c. Consider elimination of certain services (what do we do that we don't need to do?) d. Consider contracting out certain services e. Any Specific ideas? ... 3 18. Budget Cuts and Council Advisory Committees (ill) (ATTACHMENT 18) a. Some positions which have previously provided staff assistance to Council Advisory Committees have been cut. b. In these reduced staff situations, this staffmg function has been replaced with part-time hourly help. c. This leaves the City with three alternatives: 1) Designate staff to do the previously performed functions (downside, positions are either not there or this reduces their time to work on other tasks). 2) Have the CAC's perform these functions themselves 3) Consider, in this situation, whether all CAC's perform necessary Council advisory functions. d. Council discussion 19. Economic Development Plan - (ill) (ATTACHMENT 19) a. The City has not had an Economic Development program for some years. The 2007 Economic Development Plan, due to when it was done in 2007, has some incorrect assumptions and projections. b. The City has been severely impacted by the current recession resulting in the loss of jobs for our citizens, in the failure of some of our businesses, in higher commercial vacancy rates, and loss of revenue for the City. c. Economic Development is one of the significant job duties listed for the Assistant City Manager, but the position has been vacant for almost three years. d. The City and region could be on the threshold of a period of economic recovery. e. It is timely and important that the City be properly positioned with an B.D. Plan, and that some staff resources be devoted to it. f. As part of the budget process, a local. resource based, minimum cost, Economic Development Plan has been developed for the City, with input from the Department Heads and the City Council, and is recommended for adoption by the City Council. g. The ED Plan is designed as a. Preliminary Plan, to be further refined as we work with others in the business community and as we gain further experience with it. h. . The Plan has very practical purposes, to. increase the number of higher paying jobs in the City, to assist our businesses attain greater success, to fill existing corumercial space vacancies, to increase the. potential of our business environment, and to increase revenue to the City of Rohnert Park. 20. Human Resources (ill) a. In the opinion of many, the City has suffered because it has not had consistent high-level Human Resources management for the past several years. b. Because of this we presently have a backlog of unresolved grievances and personnel issues, and personnel rules and procedures (and a grievance procedure) needing updating and legal compliance. c. The personnel function for a City is essentially "a service agency for a service agency," with an organization choosing either control/regulation/compliance or a . customer relations/assistance/user-friendlyapproach. My belief is that the City needs to move a bit from the former more towards the latter. The City's technical HR staff is very competent and has kept their particular function afloat during tough times. Leadership is ... 4 needed to change the service model with the hoped-for result that all managers and supervisors will ultimately make better decisions, reduce liability, and increase productivity. d. Due to the City's financial situation, I am recommending a minimalist approach: retention of the present contractor, Local Government Services representative Sophia Selivanoff, as the City's Human Resource Director for two days a week (40% position). I believe this is necessary for the organization, as Sophia has been helpful and productive in resolving the many issues placed before her. e. I also believe the retention of the present status quo is desirable in that it will give the new City Manager an opportunity to examine the situation, and to later make his suggestions for retention or change. f. Lastly, the temporary situation defers the question as to what is the optimum long-term arrangement for the organization's Human Resources management, whether by part- time contract or with a full-time Director. 21. Labor Relations (ill) a. The number one fact of life for cities is that the costs of labor, paying the employees who provide the services, is overwhelmingly the largest cost of doing business for municipal government. b. The City Council recently approved six Memoranda of Understanding with the City's recognized employee/labor groups c. The process of negotiation of these contracts took over a year, required numerous meetings of the City Council to provide guidance to the process,. took an enormous amount of time of the (previous) Interim City Manager and the Administrative Services Director, utilized the services of an outside labor relations specialist, and, for our employees, many potentially productive work hours were lost to this process. I'll leave it to others to assess what each of the parties "won" or "lost" in the process; whatever one may think of the outcome, tremendous organizational resources were used to achieve it. . d. It is commonly said that the labor relations process has become more difficult over the years, and this is particularly true in a period of declining resources, w:hen employee groups seek to retain what they. have gained over the years, and "management" tries valiantly to control or reduce the costs to the City. e. As the City goes further into this more difficult future, the City Council will increasingly have to forthrightly answer the questions of "what do we want?" and "how do we achieve that?" The days are gone when we can casually wander into the negotiation room, and listen as the other side demands more and we only respond to their requests. It will take time and effort and discipline to develop a proactive stance, and a seasoned professional negotiator who is simpatico with the Council's objectives. f. My experience indicates that the City Manager should not be a member of the negotiating process, but should manage the process, which can be done more rationally and objectively ifhe is not at the bargaining table. g. If the "cost of labor" is a concern to.the Council, and a balanced budget an ultimate goal, then the right approach is to be more involved, more prepared, and more proactive in the . "City's labor relations process. ... 5 h. In the spring of 2009 the City conducted an internal audit service for Rohnert Park, and concluded: "It is the opinion of Urban Futures, Inc. that all employees, including public safety, are going to have to share the responsibility of addressing and solving Rohnert Park's fiscal crisis. 22. City's use of Consultants (ill) a. I realize that "consultant" has become almost a bad word in these times of severe financial constraint. Seemingly, the City pays out big money for a consultant, they come, they go, they leave a report, which mayor may not be acted upon, and, as they say, leave a report which "gathers dust." b. While this listing is not intended to be all inclusive, there are at least four areas where failure to use the highest quality (best qualified and best experienced) consultants would result in negligence of a high order as millions of dollars are at stake. Two of these . areas are where there is the greatest remaining potential for cost reduction (labor costs: benefits analysis and labor relations consultant), and the other two are in the area of the two greatest unfundedJiabilities: retiree health costs and employee retirement costs. The era of job reduction and resulting service reductions is largely over if it is the City Council's intent to keep Rohnert Park as a vital, full-service City, and to avoid the descent into the "Maywood Model" of doing away with all City employees and contracting out for a f~w vital services. If the present model of offering vital and selected services is to be retained, then the City has to be continuously committed to looking into all comers for cost reductions, and these four identified areas are the essential core of fundamental financial stewardship on behalf of our citizens. 23. Council Policies a. How does the City Council want to move towards long-term fiscal health (policy direction)? Continue to cut personnel/services? Maintain staffing/services as much as possible but reduce labor costs? Increase Reserves Increase Revenues (What? How?) Reduce unfunded liabilities Some combination of above Other b. Compensation / benefits policy Pay options and choices 1) Maintain status quo 2) Study/survey pay (other agencies, other?) 3) ConsiderCity's ability to pay ... 6 Benefits 1) Retain present benefits (with growing associated costs) 2) Attempt to reduce costs of benefits 3) Identify benefits which are out of synch with the market place, or beyond the City's ability to pay c. Council fiscal policies 1) Continue present policies (are they explicit, comprehensive?) 2) Develop new policies and study for adoption? (Urban Futures Recommendation) 24. Longer-term City Strategic Plan Again, from the Urban Futures Report dated May 6, 2009: "The City Council should develop a Strategic Plan for the City of Rohnert Park. The Plan will include the Council's priorities and associatedtimelines... We particularly believe that an adopted Fiscal Policy is critical.. . The Strategic Plan should also include Council's goals with regards to expenditure reductions/revenue enhancement measures." I would agree that the City over the years has largely engaged in incremental decision making without taking the time and effort to create a vision for its long-term direction. Such devices as are used in other cities as two-year budgets, four-year Capital improvement programs, five-year financial projections give a longer-term dimension to decision making. This is a topic for Council discussion and decision. 25; Condition of City's Special Funds - (not General Fund) a. Brief description of Water, Sewer Operations (1M) - (A TT ACHMENT 25) b. Water Fund (OJ) c. Sewer Fund (DJ) (ATTACHMENT 25t) d. Requested new positions - SewerlWater (ATTACHMENT 25d) e. Transportation / Streets (ATTACHMENT 25e) 26. Potential Impact of Sewer Rates on the General Fund Budget a. Background description (ill) (ATTACHMENT 26A) 27. The CDC Budget The CDC is really two budgets (CHART) a. Operating budget (both Redevelopment and housing) (LB) (ATTACHMENT 27a) b. Capital Projects c. Public facilities / infrastructure projects housing 1) Proposed Community facilities program (ill) (ATTACHMENT 27el) 2) Request.ofSonoma Mountain Village (LB) (ATACHMENT27C2) d. CHART - CDC Fund Availability (LB) (ATTACHMENT 27d) e. Housing Trust Fund Board (ATTACHMENT 27e) ... 7 Issues to consider 1) The remaining funds and the purposes of the funds 2) How some CDC funds can be used to the advantage of the City 28. The need for Focus City government is a whirlwind of services, policies, fmances, ideas, politics, competing interests, and personalities. It is easy to get lost in the noise, competition, and distractions. The City of Rohnert Park is at a crossroads, as our resources decline and tough decisions have to be made. As tough as the present situation is, it also presents an opportunity to transcend the trivial and to focus on the basics: After observing the City, albeit for only a few months, I've formed some ideas on what these basics are, on what our focus as a City should be. These are set forth with the realization that others will see the world, and these basics, differently but, what the heck, here goes: The Big Five: a. Focus on our citizens' needs. What do they want and need? Some guesses: 1) A good place to live 2) A nice neighborhood 3) A feeling of safety and security 4) A good job (orjobs) 5) A good education for their children 6) Affordability 7) A place to enjoy and to renew their spirit b. Focus on getting our City's fmancial house in order 1) Concentrate primarily on high cost areas, and how to reduce these costs 2) Constantly re-examine services, their necessity and desirability, their effectiveness, and efficiency 3) Constantly examine all expenditures, to reduce costs 4) Constantly look for revenue opportunity 5) Replenish reserves to desired levels 6) Watch (and cure) those unfunded liabilities 7) Sustain and support our City's work force because these employees are the ones who provide our City services c. Focus on the City's land and facilities 1) Are these receiving good use? 2) ~e they (some of them) bringing in good revenues? 3) Are they properly maintained? 4) Is money being set aside for future rehabilitation and replacement? 5) If not used or under-utilized, how do we increase use (or consider alternatives)? 6) Count our blessings for our abundant and attractive public areas. ... 8 d. Focus on the City's economy, and what the City can do to make it better 1) Have and pursue an Economic Development Plan. 2) Work with the business community and property owners to upgrade commercial areas, reduce vacancies and increase attractiveness. 3) Work to increase jobs, particUlarly higher paying jobs, by supporting and working with Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster (incubator) and by retaining our present and attracting new businesses. 4) Approve the right kind of quality development that will increase revenues. e. Focus on the long-term future of our City 1) Adopt Specific Area plans and implement Public Facilities Financing Plan 2) Protect and enhance our neighborhoods. 3) Protect and enhance our City revenue sources, our shopping centers and commercial and industrial areas west of the freeway. 4) Develop a plan for the area adjacent to the freeway after freeway improvements completion (for that's how most people form their image of Rohnert Park). 5) Answer the question, what do we want to do or become? A . City budget is ultimately about how the City uses limited resources to accomplish what it needs to do on behalf of its citizens and visitors. Lastly, I would like to thank Sandy Lipitz, and her staff for their outstanding work in putting together the City budget, the Department Heads and their personnel who assisted them in their departmental budgets, and Linda Babonis for her work on the CDC budgets. I want to thank the City Council in advance for your careful deliberation on the ideas expressed above. Good success to all of us. H:JD/City.CDC Budgets ... 9 b4 ~JDf/O ~ Paul Libeu 33 Fredrick Drive Robnert Park CA 94928 plibeu@sonic.net 584-8268 August 9, 2010 Honorable Mayor Pam Stafford City of Robnert Park City Hall 130 A vram Avenue, Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Dear Mayor Stafford: RE: Citizens' Sewer Rate Study Group If a sewer rate study group is formed, I ask that I be appointed to serve on the group, Both Jobn Dunn and John McArthur have proposed formation of a "citizens advocacy" or "stakeholder" group to study the need for new sewer rates. I believe such a group is necessary if the city is to win public support for an increase in rates. I say this as a citizen who attended all the city council meetings when the effects of Measure L were discussed, heard all the staff presentations, and read all the material posted on the city's website. I was able to persuade rnyselfto vote against the measure, but didn't feel I had enough information to persuade others to do the same. The issues are complex, and it will take a lot of explaining to convince the citizens of Rohnert Park to support an increase in sewer rates, particularly now when the economy is so.fragile. I am the treasurer for Mountain Shadows Square Owners' Association. We are one.ofthe largest wastewater customers in Rohnert Park. See enclosed. (Whether we make the top ten list depends on whether the compiler knew to add together our two accounts. Note that we were in second position after SSU in 2006 but missing altogether from the 2007 list. I have penned in the missing amount.) Sewer costs are our largest, single expense. In 2006, 55 percent of all our assessment income (dues) was used to pay for sewer (see enclosed table and chart). Because of the combined effects of Measure L and dues increases, sewer dropped to 25 percent in 2009. An increase in sewer rates could necessitate another increase in dues, an action that will be unpopular in Mountain Shadows Square, and more than unpopular without ironclad data to support the increase. Sincerely, fJod Paul Libeu Treasurer, Mountain Shadows Square Owners' Association ... LU:rl,~ ~~ G~hVfl,J 4{L~ b~J\fiNL )&~ k:fu~v PLOffiI1~ ... F. Top Ten Wastewater Customera Juno 30. 2006 Amount HIRed Ita of June 30 2008 $557.398 1750606 145.041 115.502 95.<449 93,074 86.049 84.836 83.534 79870 Rohnert P8t1l 2006I2007 Dlsclosrn Info RIIC/UNt J Amount Billed As of June 30 2007 710 329 224 388 214913 184 850 154 018 139 586 137002 110764 105 536 97 122 Pel'C8ntage of Total SlI'MII' 8 Revenue ~.e-~ 1.8% 1.5% 1.2% 1.0% 0.9% O.go~ 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 6V "CI..rh< iN s1.v. J. 0 vJS j ;7 rbl 7qb < Percentage of Total 9Hltr S r.m Revenue 5.9% 1.87o/c 1. 79"~ 1.3 1.28% 1.16% 1.14% O.~~ 0.88% 0:81% P8(Jfl6 ... N Utility Payments\Utility Payments Historical\Prncts of Dues Mountain Shadows Square Owners' Association Utility Payments 2003 -2009 Sewer Water Refuse Total Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Dues Year As Of Sewer Dues Water Dues Refuse Dues Dues Dues Increase 2009 12/31/2009 $138,704.75 25% $ 72,658.27 13% $ 45,763.52 8% 47% $551 448.00 5% 2008 12/31/2008 $ 210,740.70 40% $ 79,050.79 15% $ 45,234.72 9% 64% $ 527,472.00 20% 2007 12/31/2007 $ 221,880.65 50% $ 74,498.09 17% $ 44,502.02 10% 78% $ 439,560.00 20% 2006 12/31/2006 $ 203,175.00 55% $ 85,010.00 23% $39,260.00 11% 89% $ 367,632.00 20% 2005 12/31/2005 $143,406.66 47% $63,859.00 21% $ 35,036.60 11% 79% $ 306,360.00 20% 2004 12/31/2004 $ 77,654.60 30% $ 55,431.19 22% $ 33,126.95 13% 65% $ 255,744.00 2% 2003 12/31/2003 $ 54,152.91 22% $62,712.07 25% $27,182.81 11% 58% $250,416.00 Mountain Shadows Square Owners' Association Annual Sewer Costs as Percents of Dues 60% _ 50% 40% .. 30% 20% 10% . 0% - _...._.... __ _... . 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 N Utility Payments\Utility Payments Historical\Prncts of Dues THE OFFICE OF THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER .<:.:.. ~_... .:,<:. .. .' .. .' .."'- .' . , :,:_-" City of Rohnert Park. 130 Avram Avenue. Rohnert Park, CA 94928. [707] 588-2226 . Fax: [707] 792-1876 DATE: AUGUST 4, 2010 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: JOHN DUNN Cc: DEPARTMENT HEADS, CITY MANAGER, EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION PRESIDENTS, LINDA BABONIS RE: THE PROPOSED CITY BUDGET I made the decision shortly after I came here that it would be a disservice to the City Council if I were to simply place a proposed budget in front of you and say "review, modify as you desire, and adopt." The City's fiscal situation is too severe for that; Budget numbers alone don't tell the whole story. What I'm hoping for, particularly at our August 10th budget workshop is a "good conversation" about the City's fiscal condition, some of its causeSj and guidance about a future direction for improving our situation. There is no instant "cure" for the City's financial situation. Though massive lay-offs and reduction in services would further alleviate the City's negative fiscal slope, even those would not provide a total cure. We will win not by a single victory in this war, but by a sustained and committed and continuing series of battles that bring us closer to victory. The route chosen by the City staff is a moderate but ground-gaining path. We have' eliminated over two million dollars from the City's budget. In the ideal this would be accompanied by growth in our revenues but,except for Measure E revenue (for some of the year), this has not yet happened. Essentially, revenues remain flat, and several new/increased revenues are recommended to you. It is not enough to look at a City's fiscal situation for a one-year period. We have done a six- year projection which is obviously only as valid as the assumptions subsequently turn out to be true. What it essentially shows, particularly with the five-year sunset of Measure E, is that the City's deficit will continue to increase unless the City continues to cut the budget and increase our revenues over the next several years. ... This turnip has already been squeezed and the staff is very confident that there is no waste or fat. Further staff reductions cannot be made without concomitant service reductions. So how do we turn a dismal situation into a brighter one for the City and its citizens. There's really only one answer, to look thoroughly at the City's single largest cost of doing business, our labor costs. The General Fund is that fund which supports almost all of the City's services; about 78% of the City's General Fund expenditures are employee salary and benefit costs. Of course, these employees are the ones who provide the City'sessential and desired services. Most of the General Fund cost savings in this proposed budget has been accomplished by reducing labor costs, not by layoffs as was necessitated last year, but by attrition and to-a- lesser-degree leaving authorized positions unfilled. This year, an even more important task than "approving a budget" is to aim in a direction for future years which will attack the City's "structural deficit, the tremendous growth differential over the last five years between the City's revenues and expenditures. That task, if it is to be done, will probably be done less from the Council dais and more at the negotiation table. Ultimately we have to realize that Rohnert Park is essentially a residential City, and an excellent one; it is not as much a producer of income at this present time (property tax, sales tax, transient occupancy tax) as most of us would desire. Like it is in our family life, it may be less about what we want and more about what we can afford. Some salient features of the proposed budget are: 1. As a City, our fiscal situation may look a small fraction brighter this year than it has for the past two years. .2. I would describe our fiscal situation as "very serious" rather than devastating. 3. That does not mean that we are out of the woods; it means that we must continue to work hard for the next several years to get us on a sustainable course for the long term. 4. The basic problem that continues isthe"structural deficit," the difference between our expenditures and our income. 5. We project that we would have to cut expenditures and/or raise revenues by $1,000,000 per year for each of the next six years in order to get our General Fund Reserves back to the present level of almost four million dollars. 6. One of the problems on the immediate horizon is the condition of the Sewer Fund which, because of Measure l approved by the voters in November 2008, is projected to deplete the City's Sewer Fund reserve in 2011-12, there is no other source to bail out the Sewer Fund except the General Fund, which is already highly vulnerable. ... 7. In this year's budget we have cut expenses by over $2,000,000 which was helped by the reductions that have been made over the past two years. 8. At this point we are not recommending any layoffs; our personnel costs have been cut by over $1,000,000 which is largely due to attrition, with most of that taking place in the Public Safety Department. 9. However, if further budget cuts were deemed necessary to further improve the City's financial situation, then layoffs and service reductions would be necessary as our other budget categories are at rock bottom - contracts and all forms of supplies, capital improvements, debt repayment, and reserves. 10. The primary reason that things are not worse than they are is that our residents approved Measure E on June 8th; the City will get about two-thirds of these sales tax proceeds this year, and the full amount of about $2,800,000 for each of the next four years. 11. This gives us four more years to completely get our financial house in order. 12. In summary, times will remain tough, but because of Measure E, attrition, and hard work on the part of many, we have a budget with a slowed down rate of decline. With'some recovery in the economy, and some work on our Economic Development Plan, and our continuing efforts to cut expenses and increase income, our collective task is "very difficult, with a ray of hope." '" Lastly, a budget is much more than a financial document. It is the City's fiscal plan for the forthcoming year. It is a policy statement as to how the resources of the City (people, money, and facilities) are to be used for the benefit of the City's citizens. It is a planning document that sets forth the plan to be executed. It should answer the policy maker and the citizen question, "what is the City planning to do with our money." What will be the advantage to the City and its citizens for the money to be spent in this way. The budget is, or should be, a public statement and a communications document, setting forth the policies, priorities, resources which will guide and sustain the organization and cause it to achieve its purposeful plan. Many thanks to many staff members who assisted in the budget preparation and assembly of the supportive materials for Council discussion. In particular I would like to thank the four Department Heads, those in the Departments who supported them, Linda Babonis, Sandy Lipitz for her outstanding work, and Beth Lidster for her patience and assistance to me. With this preamble, I'm hoping for a good conversation about the realities of our City's fiscal life. ... H:JD!proposed city budget cover letter NOTE: DOES NOT INCLUDE SALE OF SURPLUS ASSETS AND ONE -TIME TRANSFER FROM TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND a A S �D 3 rF N N REVENUES Property Tax Sales Tax TOT MVLF Franchise Fees Interest /Rents Charges for Services Recreation /PAC Other TOTAL REVENUES EXPENDITURES Salaries & Benefits Other Operating Expenses Capital Equipment Debt Payments . TOTAL EXPENDITURES TRANSFERS FROM OTHERFUNDS GEN FUND RECHARGES SHORTFALL GENERAL FUND - 6 YEAR PROJECTION FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 2,735,000 2,735,000 2,735,000 2,789,700 2,845,494 2,902,404 7,484,790 8,709,639 8,888,790 9,105,032 9,323,598 7,947,364- 1,600,000 1,632,000 1,664, 640 1,697,933 1,731,891 1,766,529 2,842,000 2,842,000 2,842,000 2,898,840 2,956,817 3,015,953 1,415,000 1,429,150 1,443,442 1,457,876 1,472,455 1,487,179 1,140,995 1,146,700 1,152,433 1,163,958 1,175,597 1,187,353 746,200 761,124 776,346 791,873 807,711 823,865 1,369,400 1,396, 788 1,424,724 1,453,218 1,482,283 1,511,928 1,543,415 1,543,415 1,543,415 1,543,415 1,543,415 1,543,415 20,876,800 22,195,816 22,470,790 22,901,845 23,339,261 22,185,992 21,666,810 21,991,812 22,321,689 22,656,515 22,996,362 23,341,308 5,836,123 5,894,484 5,953,429 6,012,963 6,073,093 6,133,824 236,200 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 605,770 537,154 537,154 455,548 455,548 455,548 28,344,903 28,673,450 29,062,272 2,049,502 1,614,000 1,614,000 29,375,026 29,775,003 1,614,000 1,614,000 30,180,680 1,614,000 3,585,000 3,626,554 3,675,731 3,715,288 3,765,876 3,817,185 (1,833,601) (1,237,080) (1,301,751) (1,143,893) (1,055,867) (2,563,503) BEGINNING RESERVES (est) 5,039,277 3,703,676 2,977,821 2,202,613 1,600,676 1,102,276 Reserve Transfers 415,000 421,225 427,543 433,957 440,466 447,073 Reserve Transfers 83,000 90,000 ,99,000 108,000 117,000 128,000 ENDING RESERVES 3,703,676 2,977,821 - 2,202,613 1,600,676 1,102,276 (886,155) IV ASSUMPTIONS Flat two years, then 2% increase MBIA estimate 2% increase each year Flat two years, then 2% increase 1% increase each year .5% for first two years, then 1% thereafter 2% increase each year 2% increase each year Flat for all years 1.5% increase each year for medical & PERS 1% increase each year Flat for five years Debt payment schedule - no new GF debt Flat - excludes one -time transfer of Traffic Safety Fund ($534,400) in 2011 Water /Sewer Retiree Medical Contribution CDC loan payment r+ r+ r+ A 7' M r+ I—& Cr I-A BLUE - AT 2011 STAFF SIZE AND COMPENSATION GREEN - REDUCING COSTS AND /OR INCREASING REVENUES BY $1M EACH YEAR- D r+ A fD rh N c- N I35,000,000 30,000,000 1 25,000,000 1 20,000,000 1 15,000,000 10,000,000 REVENUE & EXPENDITURES FY 2003 -2011 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 T NOTE: EXPENDITURE INCREASE FROM FY 2005 - 2008 ATTRIBUTABLE TO: 1. INCREASED EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION 2. ENHANCED PERS PLANS 3. NEW HIRES Expenditures at 2006 Level ($25.1M) Revenues at 2005 Level ($21.2M) Revenues below 2003 Level $19.6M) Revenues Revenues /with Measure E Expenditures 2010 2011 n 3 r� a w PERSONNEL COSTS OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK FISCAL YEAR 2010 -11 Paid for by Paid for by General Fund* Special Funds General (Sewer /Water) Non - Safety Employees Safety Employees PAYROLL $1,242,032 $6,260,471 ** . $7,359,820 Unallocated Personnel Costs N/A HEALTH $140,709 736,960 732,708 $1,327,000 RETIREMENT $259,981 $1,355,023 $2,961,624 N/A OTHER BENEFITS $171,695 $357,909 $377,476 $702,819 TOTAL COMPENSATION $1,814,417 $8,710,363 $11,431,628 $2,029,819 General Fund Personnel Costs General Fund Capital, Supplies, Other Total General Fund Personnel Costs as % of General Fund $ 22,171,810 $ 6,173,093 $28,344,903 78% *Does not include Sewer, Water, Transporation, Special Funds, nor Community Development Commission Funds * *Includes contractual labor costs for legal and human resource services ($505,000) IV A S M rF M RETIREE MEDICAL Normal Cost: Unfunded Cost: Total Annual Cost: Pay -as- you -go 2011 Balance Unfunded: $1,441,000 2,792,000 $4,233,000 (1,518,000) $2,715,000 UNFUNDED LIABILITIES NOTE: City should be setting aside an additional $2.7 to $2.8M each year for 30 years to fully fund retiree medical INFRASTRUCTURE AND EQUIPMENT Infrastructure Equipment Total Annual Depreciation (In millions) 3.1 0.7 3.8 NOTE: City should be setting aside $3.8- million each year to fund replacement of infrastructure and equipment N D rt rF Z 3 M 3 r* Ln Cr Attachment 6a GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION 2010-11 PROPOSED BUDGET NET OF CATEGORY AMOUNT PERCENT RECHARGE PERCENT General Government $ 1,792,976 6.4% $ 1,203,492 4.8% City Council 90,818 0.3% 68,114 0.3% City Manager 770,162 2.7% 385,081 1.5% City Attorney 425,000 1.5% 420,750 1.7% City Hall Building 506,996 1.8% 329,547 1.3% Support Services $ 4,027,748 14.3% $ 2,072,894 8.3% Finance 1,147,900 4.1% 344,370 1.4% IT 557,384 2.0% 362,300 1.5% Human Resource 345,500 1.2% 259,125 1.0% Insurance/Other 1,976,964 7.0% 1,107,100 4.4% Retiree Medical $ 1,518,128 5.4% 1,518,128 6.1% Development Services $ 1,104,429 3.9% 662,657 2.7% Public Safety* $ 15,510,000 55.0% $ 15,510,000 62.1% Personnel* 13,292,156 47.1% 13,292,156 53.2% Police Operations 1,269,100 4.5% 1,269,100 5.1% Fire Operations 198,700 0.7% 198,700 0.8% Animal Shelter 500,444 1.8% 500,444 2.0% Buildings 249,600 0.9% 249,600 1.0% Public Works/Parks $ 2,226,786 7.9% 2,004,107 8.0% Recreation $ 1,617,411 5.7% 1,617,411 6.5% Performing Arts Center $ 396,513 1.4% 396,513 1.6% Total Expenditures $28,193,991 100% $ 24,985,203 100% *These costs, while the largest elements of the City's budget, are substantially lower than two years ago - $18,935,577 (18%) ... . Attachment6b AUTHORIZED POSITIONS IN 2010-11 BUDGET Regular * Changes from Part-time Full-time previous year CITY MANAGER . City Manager 3 . City Clerk 2 . CDC/RedevelopmentfHousing* * 1 -1 . Human Resources 1.25 1 CITY AlTORNEY Contract ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES . Accounting .75 5 -1.25 . Utility Billing 4 . Data Processing 2 . Performing Arts Center 2 -2 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES . Engineering 5 -1 . Planning 3 . Building 3 PUBLIC WORKS/COMMUNITY SERVICES . Public Works 14 -2 . Water/Sewer Maintenance** 21 ***3 . Recreation 2 . PUBLIC SAFETY . Police Patrol/Fire Safety .75 80 -8 . Animal Shelter 2 TOTAL 2.75 150 -11.25 - * Part-time employee with benefits ** Not General Fund: Sewer Fund, Water Fund, CDC ***Recommended for implementation only after water and sewer rates are increased H::JD Budget attachment 6b ... D r+ a� A 3 fD 7 r+ 01 A 1. 2010 HAD TWO VACANCIES (ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER AND DISPATCHER) 2. 2011 INCLUDES THREE NEW POSITIONS IN WATER /SEWER ONLY WHEN WATER /SEWER RATES ARE INCREASED iz rr A S fD r+ A N COST OF PENSION & RETIREE HEALTH FISCAL YEARS 2006 -2011 6,000,000 5,487,434 5,000,000 - /777777 74,459 4,316,647 4,000,000 - 3,507,174 3,000,000 1 PERS RETIREE HEALTH 2,000,000 1,518,128 09 1,000,000 6;903 03 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 IV D r+ r+ A S 3 m r+ of c. �� D A S fD 3 r+ 01 fD D �+ A fD ei� �!s PERS ANNUAL PENSION COST FISCAL YEAR 2010 -11 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN SAFETY PLAN TOTAL ANNUAL PENSION COST PERCENT OF PERCENT OF PERSABLE PAY PERSABLE PAY Normal Cost: $ 1,069,754 11.7% Normal Cost: $ 1,351,704 15.7% Normal Cost: $ 2,421,458 Unfunded Cost: 529,151 5.8% Unfunded Cost: 1,586,455 18.4% Unfunded Cost: 2,115,606 Total Annual Cost: $ 1,598,905 17.5% Total Annual Cost: $ 2,938,159 34.1% Total Annual Cost: $ 4,537,064 NOTE: THE ANNUAL UNFUNDED COST OF $2,115,606 IS INCLUDED IN THE PERS RATE. THE UNFUNDED COST IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO PERS LOSSES IN THE MARKET, AS WELL AS THE COST OF THE ENHANCED PLANS. IV r+ r+ r+ 01 M 3 M 7 r+ 01 IV D n T �D 3 City of Rohnert Park General Fund Revenues - Simplified Revenues above $200,000 (the Big Nineteen) (from pages 13-15) Budget 2009/10 Attachment .7 Revenue Top General Fund Revenues: 1. Sales and Use Tax 2. Property Tax in lieu ofVLF (State) (Triple Flip) 3. Property taxes 4. Transient Occupancy Tax 5. Reimbursement from Water Operation 6. Sale of Land/Buildings (from $10,600,000 in 2008/09) (from $1,600,000 in 2009/10) 7. Reimbursement from Sewer Operation 8. Investment Earnings 9. Reimbursement from CDC - Projects 10. Reimbursement from CDC-Housing II. Refuse (franchise fee) 12. Cable TV (franchisefee) 13. Performing Arts Center 14. Sports Center 15. PG&E (franchise fee) 16. Reimbursement from Refuse Enterprise Fund 17. CDC Land Leases 18. Leasing: Main Station Cell Towers 19. Public Safety Augmentation Fund (State) % of General Fund $ 5,663,321 2,841,000 2,828,500 1,650,000 1,395,600 1,253,000 26.0% 13.0% 13.0% 7.6% 6.4% 5.7% 930,400 750,000 734,000 576,000 570,000 480,000 439,500 396,000 360,000 300,000 241,000 200,000 200,000 4.3% 3.4% 3.3% 2.6% 2.6% 2.2% 2.1% 1.8% 1.7%. 1.4% 1.1% 0.9% 0.9% Total Revenues: $ 21.808.321 Out of total General Fund Revenues of $19,486,771 These revenue sources as % of General Fund Revenue (note: different from $19,486,771) 100.0% ... H:JD/General Fund Revenue - Simplified IV ROHNERT PARK Historical Sales Tax Per Capita by Benchmark Year 2001Q1 2002Q2 2003Q1 2004Q1 2005Q1 $136 $131 $139 $152 $159 2006Q1 $164 2007Q1 2008Q1 $165 $156 2009Q1 $142 2010Q1 $127 General Retail Food Products ■ Transportation Construction 100 Business To Business a Miscellaneous MUNISERIVCES D v A 3 M 3 r+ V Ol Attachment 8 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK IDEAS FOR INCREASING REVENUE PREFATORY COMMENTS The "Big Three" of Rohnert Park Municipal Revenues are Sales Tax, Property Tax, and Transient Occupancy Tax. It is generally considered best, and usually easier, to increase existing major revenue sources rather than to initiate new ones. This would argue that it is highly desirable to have a collaborative working relationship with our business community, and to develop and pursue a well thought out Economic Development Plan, particularly as that would coincide with a recovering economy. Cities, pre-1978, used to have the property tax as a primary source of revenue. That source, under Proposition 13, has been commandeered by the State. Today the environment for cities to raise revenues is severely restricted, property taxes by Proposition 13 and ensuing State legislation, Proposition 4 controlling the process for enacting/increasing fees and charges for services, and proposition 218 requiring that new or increased taxes be subject to voter approval. Nevertheless, when a City has a severe financial situation, no stone should be left unturned, and all potential revenue sources should be examined even if some, upon further reflection, might be deemed inappropriate. Persons preparing and reviewing City budgets often tend to focus on expenditures and to give lesser attention to revenues. The starting point for any discussion is that our City's finances and revenue are inadequate in relationship to our present program of City services and personnel-related costs. The cause of the present situation is at least three-fold: 1. As strongly pointed out by the Urban Futures study, the City has a large "structural deficit." This simply means that the City is chronically (year after year) living beyond our means, with expenditures exceeding income. As families know, this can go on for a while, but can't go on indefinitely; the piper must ultimately be paid. Otherwise the City is facing some form of municipal bankruptcy, with presently-unknown but obviously severe consequences. 2. This situation is greatly abetted and intensified by "the worst recession since the great depression" which didn't stop the upward movement of expenses, but resulted in a dramatic drop in revenues, further increasing the revenue/expenses imbalance. ? BUSINESS LICENSE TAX: Last review/updated in 1992. The City's Business License Tax is based on number of employees, unlike most other Cities' ordinances where fees are based on gross revenue. Changing these fees is a big job and often controversial. Re-examination of this fee should be with the involvement and assistance of the business community. Process necessary for Adoption: meet Proposition 218 requirements (voter approved) Annual Revenue Potential: Staff Recommendation: Recommend Council authorize proceeding. The next step would. be for the staff to draw up a process for proceeding. Use of a specialized consultant is usually advisable in meeting with business representatives and in devising a fair tax. Since voter approval is required; we would probably have to go through a process similar to Measure E. No current estimate of revenue, but could be substantial. REFUSE FRANCHISE FEE: Newly adopted agreement allows City 1% increase. Process necessary for Adoption: Annual Financial Potential: $60,000 Staff Recommendation: Council has taken action which would allow for a 1% increase in rates, which will be before the Council for adoption at the time that Refuse Rates are adjusted. The R3 Firm would perform study at no cost to the City. City would have to follow Prop 218 public hearing and protest process procedures. REFUSE CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION: Newly adopted agreement allows City 1% increase. Process necessary for Adoption: Annual Financial Potential: $60,000 Staff Recommendation: Council has taken action which would allow for a 1% increase in rates, which will be before the Council for adoption at the time that Refuse Rates are adjusted. The R3 Firm would perform study at no cost to the City. City would have to follow Prop 218 public hearing and protest process procedures. ADMISSION FEE: The City has a cluster of visitor attractive facilities which could provide a broad basis for this' fee. These facilities and the customers attracted to them do place extra strain on the City's infrastructure and services. Facilities for such activities as paintball, go carts, miniature golf, bowling alleys, roller skating, motion picture theatres, Performing Arts Center, etc. could collect a moderate charge - Admission fee - for the City, which in the collective, would assist the City in its public safety, streets and park maintenance, and recreation programs. Process nec;essary for Adoption: Annual Financial Potential: ? Staff Recommendation: Council should authorize proceeding on analysis. What is being proposed is a very moderate fee (perhaps in the $ .10 to $ .25 per admission ticket) or it could be an .equivalent percentage similar to the way sales tax is handled. Similar to the proposal for the Business License Tax, this would require working closely with the businesses involved and would probably require approval by our voters. FINES AND FORFITURES: Stronger parking and code enforcement could result in improvement of conditions in the City's neighborhoods. The goal would be to make these programs as self-supporting as possible. Other California cities have seen the necessity to adopt these fees. Process necessary for Adoption: Council action to authorize the Director of Public Safety to analyze the adequacy or deficiency of the present fine structure, and bring back to the City Council a recommended fee structure. These fees should have a demonstrated relationship with the City's cost of enforcement. Annual Financial Potential: STREET CUT FEES: Other cities have done this based on their experience. that these street cuts reduce the life of the street surface and increase the City's future costs for street rehabilitation and replacement. Process necessary for Adoption: Council should authorize the Director of Public Works to investigate what other California Cities have done in this respect and the true long-term costs of thee street cuts in relation to subsequently required rehabilitation/replacement efforts. These results would then be prepared in recommendation for Council review and action. Annual Financial Potential: Little increase in immediate revenue; the new fees recognize the reduction in street life, and help to finance the necessary future street repairs and replacement. 2. Mil!ht be further considered: CELL TELEPHONE TOWER LEASES: Cell telephone/communications companies pay private-property-owners relatively high amounts . for sites for cell telephone towers. The City as the property owner, could also obtain greater design control. Longer-term ground leases are the preferred way to go. Sale of land gives you today's land prices, with the City forever giving up the property; with a long-term ground lease, the City retains the property and adjusts the lease amounts every few years to reflect the then prevailing market rates. While the City is already doing this, we should seek opportunities to expand this activity, assuming the companies meet the City's established standards. ? 3. Further adding to the above, the State continues in the greatest fiscal crisis it has known, and, in big-fish-eat-the-Iittle-fish fashion, it has turned on the cities to help them deal with their fiscal shortfall producing State takeaways which further intensify the City's problems. To summarize, we have no collective choice but to look carefully at revenue possibilities; the alternatives are to either cut personnel and services to our citizens, or to push the City further into an even-more-dire financial situation. Sources of additional City revenues that should be considered are listed in three categories. 1. Ideas for further Dursuit at this time: PLANNING FEES: This matter is currently before the City Council for review and action. This may have presently limited revenue potential but with economic recovery, the upside potential could be considerable. The greater these fees cover the cost of providing these services, the less the General Fund is asked to subsidize this deficit. Specific Plans all have reimbursement agreements whereby they pay the City's actual cost. Process necessary for Adoption: meet Proposition 4 requirements (Done) Annual Revenue Potential: Staff Recommendation: Council has taken action on this matter. BUILDING FEES: Last adjusted in 2001. Same comment as above. Process necessary for Adoption: meet Proposition 4 requirements (analysis) Annual Revenue Potential: Staff Recommendation: Council should authorize proceeding. Need to complete cost of service study, currently in progress, estimate complete by the 4th quarter of this calendar year. For these fees, usually, full cost recovery is sought. Currently subsidized by General Fund. Could be a revenue increase of $75,000. PLAYING FIELD USE FEES: Last reviewed in ~ it's timely for review. Process necessary for Adoption: meet Proposition 4 requirements (analysis) Annual Revenue Potential: Staff Recommendation: Recommend Council authorize proceeding. Fees are currently too low. Department Head is currently preparing analysis for presentation to the Commission after which time it would be presented to the City Council. There is no estimated revenue increase at present. ? SALE OF STADIUM LANDS: Sale of this land by the City to the CDC would give the City sale proceeds to invest and to use the interest for General Fund purposes. In a worst-case-scenario the City may have no alternative. This would also use CDC funds which would not be available for other community benefit purposes. The City-contracted Urban Futures study warned against the repeated sale of City property to offset growth in operational expenditures. With a sale of this City-owned land, the City loses the property and its future revenue potential. This topic is more thoroughly discussed in a separate analysis. CREATE CITY-WIDE OR DISTRICT LANDSCAPING AND/OR STREET LIGHTING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS: Though much easier said than done, other cities have done this with the result that benefiting property own~rs pay, freeing up the City's General Fund for other purposes. 3. Ideas not recommended for further Dursuit at this time: RECREATION FEES: Just recently updated in April: no further action presently contemplated. TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX: The City is presently at the highest prevailing rate of 12%, with an additional 2% going to the Sonoma County TOurism Bureau. Of the City's seven hotels/motels, perhaps only three of them are well positioned for better economic times. No further action proposed at this time. State Law Impact: Conform to Proposition 218 (voter approved) Annual Financial Potential: (through growth in revenue of existing units) GOLF COURSES: Explore ideas to increase revenue from the two City-owned golf courses, probably a difficult thing to do in this environment. Because of the time involved in this review process, it should be pursued separately from the budget process. UTILITY USERS FEE: This has been previously proposed and rejected by the voters of the community, and was not favored in the most recent poll. FEES OR TAXES ON MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES: This was recently proposed (and decided against) in Sebastopol. There is an initiative on the State's November ballot which, if approved, would legalize marijuana. The Initiative, as I understand it, doesn't speak to State taxation. While this idea drew mixed reaction from the staff briefly discussing it, all ideas are being placed on the table for thought. I'm certain that the above listing is not exhaustive, but it should stimulate some thinking as we move towards a recommended budget. '.,. Community Center 2008-09 2009-10 ACTUAL PROJECTED REVENUES Activities Classes (staffed) 42,000 $32,000 Contract Classes 18,000 75,000 Special Events 37,025 25,000 misc 7,810 10,000 Rentals Facility 88,979 75,000 TOTAL REVENUES $193,814 $217,000 EXPENSES Labor 167,000 115,000 Utilities 50,500 45,000 Contracted Services Classes/Programs 13,487 20,000 Professional/Construction 15,000 15,000 Janitorial 25,000 25,000 Marketing/Publication 4,300 10,000 Communication 3,500 3,500 Supplies Administrative/Office 10,000 8,500 Equipment 3,450 4,000 Repair Parts 22,000 22,000 Maintenance Supplies 23,000 20,000 Fleet Fuel 2,000 1,100 Vehicle Maintenance 6,000 4,500 Capital Outlay TOTAL EXPENSES $ 345,237 $ 293,600 RESULTING GAIN (LOSS) (151,423) (76,600) 2010-11 BUDGET 40,000 135,000 25,000 10,000 140,000 $350,000 121,000 45,000 97,000 10,000 25,000 10,000 1,700 5,500 4,000 24,000 20,000 750 1,500 10,000 $ 375,450 (25,450) Attachment lla DIFFERENCE FROM % PROJECTED DIFFERENCE 8,000 60,000 25.0% 80.0% 65,000 86.7% $133,000 38.0% 6,000 5.2% * 77,000 385.0% (5,000) -33.3% (1,800) -51.4 % (3,000) -35.3% 2,000 9.1% 1,500 33.3% $ 76,700 26.1% * Shift expense from REC ADMINISTRA TlON to COMMUNNITY CENTER ? Sports Center 2008-09 2009-10 ACTUAL Projected REVENUES Memberships 277,664 370,000 Activities Contract Classes 52,184 52,000 Adult Sports 34,025 12,000 Open Gym 21,555 20,000 Child Care 1,336 1,750 Misc 7,810 7,000 Rentals Equipment 420 400 Facility 11,340 7,000 Sales Resident Cards 5,109 4,000 Pro Shop 4,300 2,000 TOTAL REVENUES $415,743 $476,150 EXPENSES Labor 269,500 255,000 Utilities 48,125 45,000 Contracted Services Sports Classes 13,487 11,000 Professional/Construction 41,200 42,000 Janitorial 14,500 15,000 Marketing/Publication 4,300 5,300 Equipment Lease 7,360 8,000 Communication 1,332 2,500 Supplies Administrative/Office 1,500 1,500 Sports Exercise Equipment 3,450 4,000 Tools/Equipment/Parts 47,500 40,000 Maintenance Supplies 4,800 5,000 Pro Shop 3,163 2,000 Fleet Fuel 500 Vehicle Maintenance 1,500 Capital Outlay $ 30,915 18,000 TOTAL EXPENSES $ 491,132 $456,300 RESULTING GAIN (LOSS) from operatio (75,389) 19,850 Transfer to SC Capital Reserves 19,850 2010-11 Budaet 390,000 58,000 20,000 21,000 2,500 8,000 500 8,000 5,000 2,000 $515,000 265,000 37,000 11,000 44,000 15,000 8,000 8,000 2,500 4,000 4,000 40,000 5,000 2,000 350 600 $ 446,450 68,550 68,550 DIFFERENCE FROM PROJECTED Attachment llb % DIFFERENCE 20,000 5.4% 6,000 11.5% 8,000 66.7% 1,000 5.0% 750 11.5% 1,000 66.7% 5.0% 100 42.9% 1,000 14.3% 1,000 25.0% $38,850 7.5% 10,000 (8,000) 2,000 2,700 2,500 (150) (900) (18,00~) 3.9% -17.8% 4.8% 50.9% 166.7% -30.0% -60.0% -100.0% $ (9,850) -2.2% ? 2010-2011 CaDital Project EXDenditure Plan SC Reserve Fund Summary (S' Project Cost (S) Treadmills purchase/lea 25,000 Beginning Balanc 88,400 Ventilation Improvement 15,000 Total 2010- 11 Projects 58,000 Exterior Paint 8,000 Ending Balance 30,400 Misc. Equipmen'10,OOO I otal 2U1 U- 11 Projects 158,000 ? Senior Center 2010-11 BUDGET 6,000 11,000 5,000 2,500 2,100 8,000 25,000 3,000 $62.600 80,000 17,000 500 5,000 200 1,500 2,000 150 4,200 3,500 1,000 500 $ 115 550 (52,950\ Senior Center Capital Reserve (101-0037) : S119,000 Attachment llc DIFFERENCE FROM % Budget DIFFERENCE 2,500 71.4% 3,000 37.5% 1,200 31.6% 700 38.9% 0.0% 2,200 37.9% 3,000 13.6% $12,600 20.1% 3,000 3.9% (1,OOO) (700) -58.3% (2,800) 0.0% 500 33.3% 50 50.0% (300) -6.7% (500) -12.5% $ (1,750) -1.5% ? CITY OF ROHNERT PARK FISCAL YEAR 2011 BUDGET PERFORMING ARTS CENTER r+ r+ r+ A M rt F-� I-� C. 2008 -09 2009 -10 2010 -11 COMPARISON PERCENT ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET TO FY 2010 VARIANCE REVENUES: Admissions $177,829 $131,696 $1,500 ($130,196) -98.9% Fundraising 66,420 505 0 (505) - 100.0% Facility Rentals 112,081 101,820 157,000 55,180 54.2% Concessions 14,751 20,266 8,500 (11,766) -58.1% Sign Income 116,403 116,936 125,000 8,064 6.9% Interest Earned 36,137 18,352 15,000 (3,352) - 18.3% Miscellaneous 27,908 15,660 17,000 1,340 8.6% TOTAL REVENUES $551,529 $405,235 $324,000 ($81,235) -20.0% EXPENDITURES: Salaries -FT Employees $256,034 $173,661 $124,976 ($48,685) - 28.0% Part Time Labor 99,724 79,849 61,200 (18,649) -23.4% Employee Benefits 117,916 136,305 63,347 (72,958) -53.5% Public Works Recharge 6,030 2,167 4,840 2,673 123.4% Sub -total employee services $479,704 $391,982 $254,363 ($137,619) -35.1% Supplies & other expenditures: Box Office Supplies $1,765 $1,120 $1,500 $380 33.9% Office Supplies 1,094 1,515 1,000 (515) -34.0% Bank Charges 5,626 5,595 1,500 (4,095) -73.2% Postage 7,425 7,505 1,000 (6,505) -86.7% Spec Dept Supplies 2,930. 1,908 2,200 292 15.3% Heat/Light/Power 53,540 39,350 42,100 2,750 7.0% Telephone 2,892 2,077 2,400 323 15.6% Advertising /Publications 60,468 46,638 0 (46,638) - 100.0% Vehicle Gas & Oil 550 410 500 90 22.0% Concessions 8,072 8,328 6,800 (1,528) -18.3% Facility R & M /Routine 29,659 23,019 22,000 (1,019) -4.4% Facility R & M /Non - Routine 440 2,369 1,000 (1,369) - 57.8% Vehicle R & M 55 57 100 43 75.4% Spec Dept Equip R & M 15,564 10,851 10,500 (351) -3.2% Contractual Services 81,320 40,465 43,750 3,285 8.1% Equipment Leases 3,645 1,962 2,000 38 1.9% Travel & Meetings 83 61 - 0 (61) - 100.0% Programming 85,442 59,065 3,300 (55,765) -94.4% Promotions /FOH 853 491 500 9 1.8% Sub -total supplies & other exp. $36-1,423 $252,786 $142,150 ($110,636) - 43.8% ti Capital Equipment $0 $11,756 $0 ($11,756) - 100.0% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $841,127 $656,524 $396,513 ($260,011) - 39.6% CITY SUBSIDY ($289,598) ($251,289) ($72,513) $178,776 - 71.1% r+ r+ r+ A M rt F-� I-� C. Honeybee Pool 2008-09 2009-10 ACTUAL PROJECTED REVENUES Admissions 39,000 32,000 Lessons 36,000 25,000 Rentals 2,700 5,900 Concessions 6,000 5,000 Swim Team 19,900 15,000 TOTAL REVENUES $103,600 $82,900 EXPENSES Labor 140,000 142,000 Utilities 48,500 45,000 Concessions 5,900 5,800 Communication 300 300 Supplies General Maintenance 12,000 10,000 Chemicals 3,000 3,000 Tools/Equipment/Parts 60,000 27,000 Capital Outlay TOTAL EXPENSES $ 269,700 $ 233,100 RESULTING GAIN (LOSS) (166,100) (150,200) 2010-11 BUDGET 38,000 40,000 2,100 6,000 20,000 $106,100 135,000 40,000 6,000 500 8,000 3,500 5,000 5,000 $ 203,000 (96,900' Attachment lle DIFFERENCE FROM % PROJECTED DIFFERENCE 6,000 18.8% 15,000 60.0% (3,800) -64.4 % 1,000 20.0% 5,000 $23,200 21.9% (7,000) -4.9% (5,000) -11.1% 200 3.4% 200 66.7% (2,000) -20.0% 500 16.7% (22,000) -81.5% 5,000 $ (30,100) -12.9% '? Benecia Pool 2008-09 2009-10 ACTUAL PROJECTED REVENUES Admissions 15,500 12,000 Lessons 3,500 3,500 Rentals 3,180 2,900 Concessions 5,700 4,500 TOTAL REVENUES $27,880 $22,900 EXPENSES Labor 83,000 79,000 Utilities 17,500 18,000 Concessions 3,700 4,000 Communication 100 100 Supplies General Maintenance 11,000 10,000 Chemicals 1,000 1,500 Tools/Equipment/Parts 17,000 20,000 Capital Outlay 15,350 TOTAL EXPENSES $ 133,300 $ 147,950 RESULTING GAIN (LOSS) (105,420) (125,050) 2010-11 BUDGET 15,000 16,000 2,500 5,000 $38,500 50,000 18,000 4,000 100 12,000 1,500 16,500 50,000 $ 152,100 {113,600' Attachment lle DIFFERENCE FROM % PROJECTED DIFFERENCE 3,000 25.0% 12,500 357.1% (400) -13.8% 500 11.1% $15,600 40.5% (29,000) 2,000 * (3,500) 34,650 $ 4,150 * New Roof -36.7% 20.0% -17.5% 225.7% 2.8% ? Attachment 12a .....-~, "';"" ~wc-r< J, p~ ~ ,,:>, .~'" "?' /-...." I".,;,>'..~"."''''" ,,"- /';"4~'i' ' \ "l,'I'''>A,~ ,I :iiQ.__,~c, . ~-\:.y --'-:~<~:~"- /.,~~ CITY OF ROHNERT PARK DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES Brian Masterson. Director DATE: July 20, 2010 TO: Gabe Gonzalez, Cjty Manager John Dunn, Interjm Cjty Manager FROM: Brjan Masterson, Director of Public Safety SUBJECT: SALARY SAVINGS FOR 2010-2011 FROM PUBLIC SAFETY In the last fiscal year, 2009-2010 the Department of Public Safety lost the followjng officers to other agencies through attrjtjon: . Officer Chrjs Medina . Officer Jon Kempf . Officer Ben Fernandez Fjscal year 2009-2010 also saw the retirement of Sergeant Wulff Rejnhold. To reduce our expenses jn Publjc Safety, we djsbanded our Specjal Enforcement Unit (SEU) and transferred Sergeant Justice to backfill the positjon jn patrol that was prevjously held by Sergeant Rejnhold. I do not plan at thjs tjme to promote another sergeant and we will work down one sergeant position. We also transferred detective Pat Fahy to the Computer Forensic Task Force and they will rejmburse up to $80,000 of hjs salary while assjgned to thjs unit. The loss of these three officers jn Publjc Safety and the retjrement of Sergeant Rejnhold reduced our salaries and employee benefjts by approxjmately $555,000 wjth new revenue of $80,000. In the new fjscal year, 2010-2011 we have lost Officer Jared Malec through attrition, We also have jnformatjon that we will be losjng four more officers by the mjddleof September. When these four officers leave for employment wjth other agencjes along wjth the resignatjon of Jared Malec, we will have reduced our salary and employee benefits by approxjmately $625,000.in the current fiscal year. Reductjon jn 2009-2010 budget through attrjtion and retjrement: $555,000 Reductjon jn 2010-2011 budget through attritjon: $625.000 Total Reduction in Salary & Benefits $1,180,000 ? 500 CITY CENTER DRIVE - ROHNERT PARK, CALIFORNIA - 94928-2118 Phone: (707) 584-2600 fax: (707) 584-2683 MEASURES ALREADYTAKEN TO SAVE MONEY as of 4/27/2010 • SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN COMMUNITY SERVICE PROVIDERS — 34 POSITIONS ELIMINATED — 18% REDUCTION IN WORKFORCE — INCLUDES EIGHT (8) OFFICERS &FIREFIGHTERS — ANNUAL SAVINGS OF $2.7 MILLION N n f+ A S N N C' I" VOLUNTARY STAFF CONCESSIONS • SALARIES - REDUCTION IN PAY OF 3.85% TO 9% - ANNUAL SAVINGS OF APPROXIMATELY $870,000 OR AVERAGE OF $5,500 PER EMPLOYEE • BENEFITS - 20% CONTRIBUTION TO HEALTH PLAN • ANNUAL SAVINGS $310,000 • REDUCTION IN RETIREE MEDICAL BENEFIT - PLAN CHANGES SAVED THE CITY $7.7M IN FUTURE LIABILITY N 2010 -11 BUDGET COST SAVING SERVICE REDUCTION MEASURES • REDUCE OPERATIONAL EXPENSES • REASSIGN OFFICER TO COMPUTER TASK • PERFORM STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE IN- HOUSE • CLOSE A & L POOLS AND TEMPORARILY CLOSE M POOL N 2010 -11 BUDGET COST SAVING SERVICE REDUCTION MEASURES • ELIMINATE MORNING LAP SWIM AT H POOL • TURN OFF COURT LIGHTING • DECOMISSION SPAS AT SPORTS CENTER • CLOSE PARK BATHROOMS AND REPLACE WITH PORT -O- POTTIES • REDUCE STAFF THROUGH ATTRITION IV Attachment 12b3 Positions Authorized (funded) - currentlv vacant: 1 Assistant City Manager 1 Dispatcher New Positions Proposed 1 Dispatch Supervisor (upgrade from Supervisor) 1 Maintenance Workers (Sewer and Water Funds)* 1 Instrumentation Technician (Sewer and Water)* *These positions are to be filled only if there is an increase in the Sewer Fund and Water Fund H:JD!Positions ? Attachment 12b4 Facility Changes FY 09/10 Facility Action Status A-Pool decommissioned demolished l-Pool decommissioned demolished M-Pool closed future action pending further consideration S C Spas closed future action pending further consideration Park Restrooms closed pending Community Center Annex, STE B re-designed fountain area leased to OADS open for public use - rental occupancy in process Corp. Yard re-establish warehouse pending further consideration ? Attachment 13a CITY OF ROHNERT PARK OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK NOTICE OF COUNCIL/CDC/RPFA ACTION M..', ee. ,.tingFoUo.w-upNotice , . . . '. , /6~t~'"Qfijptj~iE7"-';';1 _ 4/~~~~~_o.",__.._.._... ~~.':I'lt<lc::t: " ,I .~~~.~,~hv:arz~~nt~~~~~ity_~anag~~...____...__..._..___ [p~i:iif~~ili:'_..---.~~"l ~ministration _,....._____. /lIneetll1'g(Date:1I [ C' d I ,~~~:~~~_~________ ,AQehtj"a-iFI.7:.~_~.___.._._ ! ." ,~I~h'ar; t~~~~:~~.._.,...-._.,._ [Ag~hija\fitI~:--"'::' "., CONSE~!.~~~_ENp',~~.._,_."",.__,,__.._,_....___.._____..__._..__."'....'.""'.._._..,____,...__.._."'.__...__.,..",. IC9Yfl,clltP[)~/RP~ ,,5.ouncil _____..__ [iiemt~ _~.!!'~~~<:n_.-..._-.__,._. [Ttemjj:..I,~~~.~_~~~_~._..._..., ~teIJlTj~I~: ",I Approving a Job Description and Salary Range for Public Works and Community ..~~!y'ic::,~~."I?!':~c::~~.~",C'l~.c!"A~!~2..r.:!~J':1jJ.!\.EP.2.intmer.!t!.Q the Po~~~C?.n...,"'_"_,....._.._.____......_.. /Actio.,:. ..', 'I Voided & Deferred ". --_._...^..~..."...,.._"_.~,..y_...~,-~-,-,,._~-_.~-~,,~-.. I'V.--f?!. ~:..--_..... I ".., _......._.....-....,..,.,...-.,.,.....,..,..........."............_~'M,...., !!'tt~~ItOO~~t~:];~ .......______.__..'....-,_,....._..________.___"'.., ""'_____ _._._....._..._____...,., l[dfu~1ii~r.D,._,;..Xl Item pulled by Interim City Manager Schwarz for consideration during FY 2010-11 ._~.':!~~~,!~.._-,----,_.~.._,......,....,,,.......,' ...., '.............................-.. ....................'......'.....'-----..--,....-... ..,.. ...., "'.',, ...........,.. ...., .....,'......, ........ ....,. IFut:4r,~IJ~r'ri:,.',..l TaD ____._.....................,....._.... ...___.....__.._....._."..........,..._...,.,...... ...""..."".. ,.." 1~9l?y,;Jp;..'; ",',.', ;^" ;(~ lFllei{$));':" ~~Z""":7f SUB~~.~r..FILE: Human Resourc~~...:: p()~j!!P..n..2.!~.~~!f1.~~J~.!'~!R.~c:!~,!!-'!l.~!!!~__......_..._, ..~.Y.~~E~.T.. Fl!::~_ Bud9~,,~.!:!~c!l.!.Y...!lar ~.Q_1 0.2011,..__,..........._,.._.........,.._......._....__.. Council Agenda Chron ~.._._-~........._~~~_"~_~~'~..~n..~.. ..'........... ....... ...._.........._.._...._~_,_.~,__ If:JI~{~iJ>>~q:: ",.,c, >1 IAnt)i.t~i,Rfj..nirt~, TERRI GRIFFIN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK for JUDY HAUFF, CITY CLERK It~C~lV~" 4p/? .2 u Cl7y Of: 9 2010 IiUI1/1 I?O/-JIV~ ' "rv I?J::o t::1?,. .....SOU P-4f?1( 'l?Cl2s ? Agenda Packet Preparation TIMELlNES for Regular City Council Meetings {This see/ion for City Clerk Use Only} held on the 2nd & 4'11 Tuesdays of each month: · Resolutions (other than standard fomlats for authorizations and approvals), Ordinances & Agreements to Assistant City Attorney via email for review and approval as to fonn DUE no later than NOON Three (3) Mondays prior to Council meeting date 4/27/10 City Council Agenda · Agenda items to City Manager via email for his review and responding ..email authorization", synchronized with above timeframe of Assistant City Attorney review, and an email copy to ITEM NO. 7.C the City Clerk for drafting agendas · Agenda Items with attachments via email and a total oftwelllY (20) complete hard copy sets wi,th 2 sets single-sided & 18 sets double-sided/stapled to City Clerk DUE 110 later than RESOLUTION NO. 2010-38 NOON Two (2) Fridays prior to Council meeting date · Agenda Draft review by Mayor, City Manager, Assistant City Attorney, City Clerk no later than TueSday morning One (1) week prior to Council meeting date · Agenda Packets distributed to City Council and 'Agendas posted/distributed/mailed on Thursday afternoon One (1) week prior to Council meeting date in compliance with Rohnerl Park Municioal Code Section 2.08.020 and related Resolution No. 2008-173 CITY OF ROHNERT })ARK COUNCIL' AGENDA ITE~ TRANSMITI'AL REPORT Meeting Date: . April 23, 2010 Department: , Administration' Submitted By: Dan Schwarz. Interim City Manager Submittal Date: April 27, 2010 Agenda Title: Approving Job Description and Salary Range fOi'DirectorofPublic Works and Community Services Requested Council Actioll: Approve attached resolution. Summary: In FY09-10, the Recreation Services Division was combined with the Public Works Department to create the. Department of Public Works and Community Services. John McArthur, the Utilities/General Service Manager was given the interim assignment of director of the new department. , The FY09- I 0 Included funding for this interim assignment. 'The new departmental strllcture has been quite helpful in capturing'efficiencies in operations - particuJa'r in the management and maintenance of parks. It is anticipated that the combined department will be part of the FY I 0-11 budget. Staff recommends permanent status for the Director of Public Works aod Community Selvices position. The attached resolution and job description fonnalizes the position. The proposed salary range is the 'same , range for the""Directors of Administrative Services and Development Services. Alignment to this salary range will result in an increase of $4,07 I for FY10-11 as compared to tlie interim allocation in the FY09- 10 budget. The General Fund bears 35% of the cost of this position, meaning the General Fund impact for FYlO-JI fOl'thisaction is $1,425. ' Enclosures: Resolution CITY ATTORNEY'S'REVIEW: Relevant documents for this agenda item have been reviewed and approved as to fonn by the City Attorney. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: (X) Consent Item (X) Approval ( ) Public Headng Required ( ) Not Recommended ( ) Submitted with Comment ( ) Policy Determinatiun by Council ( ) City Comments: ( ) Regular Time Per Interim City Manager'STeview and direction for distribution ofthis agenda item. ? RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -38 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK APPROVING A JOB DESCRIPTION & SALARY RANGE FOR PUBLIC WORKS AND COMMUNITY SERVlCES DIRECTOR AND AUTHORIZING APPOINTMENT TO THE POSITION WHEREAS, over the last six months, management oversight of the Public Works and Recreation Departments has been consolidated under one management position, the Utiliti~s/GeIleral Selvices Director, in an effort to realize cost-savings and improve efficiencies; WHEREAS, this time period has proven sufficient for the City Ma~ilger (Personnel Officer) to detennine this arrangement has been providing positive results; WHEREAS, staff has developed a new job description for Public<;Works, & Community Services Director that appropriately describes this consolidation and recoml1'iends the position be placed at the same 'salary range level as Director of Development Selvices for. intemal equity purposes as follows: Position Public Works & Community Selvices Director , Ralll!e 100M Monthlv Salarv $9,350-$11,364 WHEREAS, the City Manager (Personnel Officer) re(:ommends that the incumbent management employee be reclassified and appointed to this position and that the Utilities/General Services Director position be retained in the salary s~~edule should this position be required in the future. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park approves the job description and salaIY nmgefor Public Works & Community Services Director, authorizes the City Manager to direct staff to reclassify the incumbent management employee to the new position and retain the Utilities/General Selvices Director position in the salary schedule as recommended. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park this 271h day of Ap,ril, 2010. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk ? City of Rohnert Park PUBLIC WORKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR DEFINITION . Plans, directs, coordinates, establishes, participates in, organizes, and oversees all programs and activities of the Public Works and Community Services Department. Provides and aids the City Manager in formulating and administering organization policies, providing professional assistance to City management staff on Public Works and Community Services matters. Provides support to the City Manager and City Council in all assigned areas; coordinates activities with other departments and outside agencies; performs other work as required. DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS The Public Works and Community Services Director oversees, directs" and participates in all activiites of the Public Works and Community Services Department, including short and long-term planning, development and administration of departmental policies, procedures, and services. ,This class provides assistance, collaborates with, and acts as a liaison to the City Manager in a variety of administrative and analytical capacities. The Public Works and Community Services Director is expected to be knowledgeable regarding applicable laws, codes, and standards regUlating department activities. ' SUPERVISION RECEIVED/EXERCISED Policy direction is provided by the City Council ,and administrative direction is provided by the City Manager. The Public Works and COfTlmunity Services Director provides direct and indirect supervision of technical and professional staff and provides administrative oversight of all department functions. ESSENTIAL JOB DUTIES · Plans, organizes, supervises, arid coordinates all department activities · Develops, reviews, updates, and implements various mandates, programs, a,nd other City policies . · Reviews and comments on specific plans, environmental impact reports, water supply assessments, development proposals., development agreements, and preliminary plans · Prepares. and administers departmental operating budget, including revenue , generation. and expenditures controls · Provides recommendations to the City Manager and City Council regarding public works, utilities, and recreation activities · Prepares and reviews agenda items, resolutions, and ordinances · Represents .the Department and the City and serves as liaison to committees, boards, commissions, and other governmental agencies . ? City of Rohnert Park Public Works and Communitl Services Director Page 2of4 · Researches, analyzes, recommends policy approaches, and communicates with legislative staff regarding legislation · Formulates, implements, and evaluates department operating policies and procedures · Oversees and prepares a variety of reports and studies · Plans, directs, monitors, and evaluates recreation services operations, facilities, programs, objectives, service levels, community needs, and revenue generation · Coordinates recreation function~ and programs with the activities of. other City departments · Meets with individuals and community organizations concerning the Public Works and Community Services functions. · Responds to inquiries and complaints regarding departmental functions · Selects, supervises, trains, and evaluates staff · Serves as a Disaster Service Worker during emergencies and is part of the management team for the Em~rgency Operations Center · May represent the City in legal proceedings, settlement negotiations, arbitrations, m~diations, arid depositions QUALlFICA TIONS EducationlT rainino/Experience: Sufficient education, training, and experience in Public Works and Community Services activities to direct, manage, and perform required duties ,in an efficient and cost- effective manner. A typical way of obtaining the required qualifications is: · Possession of a Bachelor's Degree from an accredited college or university in Public or Business Administration, Recreation Management, Civil Engineering, or a closely-related field. · Five years' experience related to utility administration and/or recre~tion administration, including at least two years in a management or supervisory capacity · A Master's Degree in Public Administration, Business Administration, Recreation Management, or a closely related field is highly desirable, but not required. ' License/Certificate: · Possession of a Class C California driver's license by date of appointment City of Rohnert Park Public Works and Community Services Director ? Page 3 of4 KnowledQe of: · Comprehensive knowledge of administrative principles and practices, including goal-setting, program development, implementation and evaluation · Methods of preparing designs, plans, specifications, estimates, and acquiring funding for the development of public works facilities and bUilding construction · Thorough knowledge of methods, equipment, materials, and safe work practices involved in public works, streets, street drainage, and water facilities · Types and level of maintenance and repair functions generally performed in pUblic works and water system operations and maintenance · Recreational, park, and facility needs of the local community · Techniques for planning and organizing varied recreational activities · Philosophy, principles, and techniques of providing comprehensive public recreation programs · Development and maintenance of community recreation facilities · Considerable knowledge of utility systems and procedures · Occupational hazards and standard safety precautions · Principles of personnel selection, personnel management, supervision, training, and public administration · Design and legal, requirements of water and wastewater systems · Principles of public financing, contracting, administration, and budgeting · Local, ,state, and federal laws and re-gulations impacting public infrastructure · TeChniques for effectively representing the City in contracts with govenlmental agencies, community groups, and professional, educational, regulatory, and legislative organizations Skill to: · Effectively use spreadsheets and word processing software applications · Prepare and organize comprehensive and concise technical reports and documents Abilitv to: · Plan, organize, direct, coordinate, perform and evaluate the Public Works and Community Services functions of the City · Provide supervision and training to assigned staff · Formulate, evaluate, and make recommendations on policies and procedures affecting the services and functions of the department · Administer and track contracts and projects · Provide clear, concise, and professionally sound consultation to the City Council, City Manager, and other interested parties on Public Works and Community Services issues City of Rohnert Park Public Works and Community Services Director ? Page 4 of4 · Prepare and administer grant applications and programs · Conduct effective negotiations · Evaluate alternatives and make sound recommendations · Make effective public presentations · Communicate professionally and effectively orally and in writing · Establish and maintain cooperative working relationships · Learn, utilize, and apply new technology · Meet deadlines and legal requirements WorkinQ Conditions: Position requires prolonged sitting, standing, walking, reaching, twisting, turning, kneeling, bending, squatting, and stooping in the performance of daily activities. It requires grasping, repetitive hand movement, and fine coordination in preparing and reviewing construction plans, statistical reports and data, and using a computer key board. Additionally, the position requires near, far, and color vision in reading reports, reviewing plans <;ind blueprints, and using the computer. Hearing and speaking are required in communicating with individuals and groups. When visiting construction sites, the incumb~nt may be required to walk on uneven and slippery surfaces, be exposed to all weather conditions, dust and pollen, noise, and mechanical hazards such as construction equipment. The incumbent typically works in an office environment, subject to interruptions and work deadlines. J j ! ! FlSA: Employee Unit: Approv~d By: Date Approved: Exempt ' Management Unit City Council "April 26, 2010 ? City of Rohnert Park General Services Supervisor Page 2 of 4 Pages · Prepares and revjews reports and memoranda to staff and regulatory agencjes on operatjonal events and compliance wjth permits, licenses, and other qualjty control parameters. · Determjnes and recommends equjpment, materjals, staffing, and safety needs, devices, and/or equipment for assigned operatio majntenance, and jmprovement projects. . Inspects and evaluates work jn progress and upon, hours calls for emergency servjce. . Interprets, jmplements, and enforces Memorandums of Understandjng, City ad and procedures. . Reads and interprets maps, djagra '. ' work orders. ,;.:' ". , . Troubleshoots and djagnoses problems, a" effectjve solutjons. , . Assists with the coordjnatjon ';1'- Parks and Recreatjon. . Understands and ensures adhe ,'. gujdelines relatjng to general seN:' . May be assigne, ork as a &.". emergency or " " . , .;'\'~~.~.\'. '. ::;:.\\ proVf$;.lons .tf~trati"e and ..-. \~ ermits, licenses, rtmental policjes ~ -;~"), eprjnt~1 schematics,'\~mo,tfacts, and .ff~t" ~~f:fP: ":'~~~a'~'a implement$' efficjent and equjvalent to that of a License/Certifica The fOllowjng licenses and certificates are requjred by the date of appojntment: . Class C California drjver's license The fOllowjng certjficatjon is desjrable: · Grade 2 Water Djstributjon Operator Certjficate jssued by the State of Caljfornja Department of Public Health '? City of Rohnert Park General Services Supervisor Page 3 of 4 Pages KnowledGe of: . Methods, equjpment, materjals, and safe work practjces involved in the operatjon, majntenance, repajr, and jmprovement of General Servjces actjvities. . Generally-accepted practjces associated with streets, bujldjngs, parks, playground construction, maintenance and repair ^f~~~::c, . Applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulatjo'1i'pari'th:.policjes governjng parks, streets, buildings, pools, and fleet actjvjtjes ' . Methods of estjmatjng tjme, costs, resources!,<" ,jpment necessary to "'" . d rk ,.~'" '-. " pellorm asslgne wo 00, "~. .%~~'" . Safe and efficient work practices, principkJ'j}%i.qVd\, procedtf"~l:,..of occupatjonal safety and hygjene jn keepjng wjth OSH , .<" d CitY standards '-::,r:'~" , .. . Principles and practices of effective s-"'~: sion, iqpludjng trajni :}formance evaluatjon, and djscipline <P' 4r~i:'\ . Customer servjee and response technjques' f,otocbl . Operate the approprjate too quipment ' Department and General Servjcel~' " · Implement jnnovatjve technjques i\re~,~:,,;: problems '&,:" ",-.::,':' ~, ~~~," , 0 . ~Jy and in writjng pe rking relationshjps m ' d exhjbjt proactjve decisjon makjng skills essjn' . ems ,organize, p . e, a ~. n, djrect, review and oversee the work of others . Prj " organize,. ';':' ordinate, and follow up on projects within established tjmeli" " , . Prepare ~ . ain!i1rl records and reports wjth the use of computer programs . Communjc" ?Iy and concjsely, both orally and jn wrjtjng, jn English . Exercise sou. udgment in response to operatjonal problems ..i(;.,. . Use jnjtiative'i'-and jndependent judgment within established gujdelines . Learn and utilize new technology ,',in the Public Works Skill to: t....::-""" tianjcal and electrical 'I" :::~. . . . " WorkinG Conditions: Positjon requires sittjng, standjng, walking on level and slippery surfaces, reaching, twjstjng, turnjng, kneeljng, bendjng, stoopjng, squatting, crouching, graspjng and makjng repetjtjve hand movement jn the performance of daily dutjes. The use of a sense of smell and hearjng js neededjn detectjng toxic gas and equipment problems. ,? City of Rohnert Park General Services Supervisor Page 4 of 4 Pages The posjtion also requjres both near and far vjsjon when jnspectjng work, readjng reports' and meters, conducting laboratory analysjs, and overseejng personnel. The need to lift, carry, and push tools, equipment, and supplies wejghjng 25 pounds or more js also requjred. Addjtjonally, the jncumbent jn thjs outdoor posjtjon works jn all weather condjtions includjng rajn, heat and cold. Dutjes require sufficj~nt mobility to work in a typical office setting and use standard office equjpment, in. :~:;lnb.\a computer, visjon sufficjent to read prjnted materials and a VDT screen, hea. . and speech sufficient to communicate jn person and over the telephone. In addjti; '"bents require strength and stamina to walk for extended periods of time in va terr~ -', d the ability to work outdoors in a variety of weather and topograp . ";';"..\~(>n , jtjons :;'." exposure to the elements. Incumbents are exposed to traffic no' , nCf"auditory w. devices such as back up bells on equipment. Must be,. . ,"g to Y.fork weeken" '. \.'..2!!,pays and overtime as needed. May also be require< ',ork rtaltts, other un't("'al shjfts jn emergency conditions, and may be required to se <, Jll%sfhdby rotatjornS'" ,.-. ~ '.>;- FLSA Status: Employee Unit: Approved By: Date Approved: . pt\\/ iY wf ~ ,Ioyees' Int~p'ational Union (SEIU) . "\~;\$r:f ,~!!:p:.:1-' ? Attachment 13b City of Rohnert Park GENERAL SERVICES SUPERVISOR DEFINITION Supervises the operation, majntenance, and repajr actjvitjes of the City's parks, streets, public pools, and internal service functjons of buildjng and fleet majntenance. Under general direction, plans, organizes, coordinates, directs and supervises staff jn activjties related to the Public Works General Services Divisjon; pe . ':UT1s other dutjes as assigned. , " "."~<c,' -'~' " DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS /,;J.!{l" "\' ~':.':-:' The General Services Supervisor is a supervjsory cl ,. -,-, 'n the 's Public Works and Community Servjces Department. The General".~.i,:;;_, Supe _ engaged in the operatjon, majntenance and r~.gjlr of the Cjty's p " . streets, publjc pools, City buildjngs and fleet. This cia' distinSlJished from',' upervjsjng Maintenance Worker by requiring greater i . \,"udgnftg~, autonomy, .', 'discretion relevant to the plannjng, organizjng, and reviewl "!::'@lQhed majntenance activitjes and personnel. This class reports to the Djrecto blic Works and Communjty Services and works cooperatjvely WI .ther Cjty depa ts jn servjng the Cjty. request ,~ ponds to cjtj uestl ""servjce requests and complaints, , supervjse ains,., valuates and djscipljnes assigned staff. · Ins -,and perfi s constructjon and maintenance tasks related to parks, streets '. s, buil ' s, and fleet. . Collects, '. nj::, and analyzes data, jnjtjates and approves project expend jtu re authorjze payment of departmental invojces and expendjtures · Supervjses tl}';;' operation, maintenance, repajr, and replacement of the facilitjes and equjpment employed jn the City's General Servjces Divisjon. · Assjsts in administerjng and plannjng the annual operatjons and capital budgets. · Analyzes department performance, and trends, performs a varjety of operatjonal tests and calculations, and adjusts operating equjpment and methods to ensure compliance wjth local, State and Federal requirements. · Schedules and conducts training and safety meetjngs for assjgned personnel. and and SUPERVISION RECEIVED/EXERCIS Supervjsory responsibilitjes entail dai maintenance personnel, der the dir Community Services. ~' \-:."-:. \$.'''<~' mple; p~,~ron assjgnments may vary) ESSENTIAL DU1;1 (These duties are a re ? Attachment 13c CITY OF ROHNERT PARK . ~ City of Rohnert Park, 130 Avram Avenue. Rohnert Park, CA 94928. [707] 588-2226 , Fax: [707] 792-1876 DATE: AUGUST 4, 2010 TO: GABE GONZALEZ, CITY MANAGER CC: JOHN DUNN, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER FROM: SANDY L1PITZ, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SUBJECT: REORGANIZATION OF THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT In 2008, the Interim City Manager, Dan Schwarz, began a review of the Utility Billing Supervisor position, as the position had expanded with additional responsibilities and scope as a result of the increasing complexities and issues related to water and sewer. A salary survey was done to compare the duties with comparable cities; however, the review and reclassification were never finalized. The salary survey clearly indicated that a revised job description and increased pay were warranted. At the end of June, 2010, the Utility Billing Supervisor resigned to accept a promotional position with the Town of Windsor. The position is currently being filled by the Accounting Services Supervisor in an acting capacity through a reorganization of the Finance Department. The primary function of the Accounting Services Supervisor is payroll. The Accounting Specialist-Accounts Payable employee was assigned the payroll function in an acting capacity. The accounts payable function is being filled by a temporary person from an outside employment agency, The vacancy has created an opportunity in the Finance Department to reorganize the front counter supervision from two supervisors to one supervisor, removing the supervisory task from the payroll function. This reorganization will accomplish the following: 1, Improve communication between counter staff and promote a team effort, 2. Provide for cross-training on all Accounting Specialist's desks, 3. Provide for smooth reassignment of work to fill absences. 4. Allow payroll position to focus only on payroll. 5. Provide fully, cross-trained, back-up person for payroll. 6. Expand scope and responsibilities of Utility Billing Supervisor position to assist with tasks currently being performed by Accounting Manager and Director of Administrative Services, as follows: a. Oversight of all revenue operations, including development of policies and procedures and internal controls. b. Assist in preparation of rate analyses and financial studies. c, Review fees and make recommendations of new fees. ? 1 d. Assist with preparation of staff reports, resolutions and public hearing notices and make oral presentations to City Council or outside groups, e. Attend Water Conservation regional meetings and implement conservation measures, f. Assist with development of public information material on water and sewer, The Human Resource Department has reviewed the proposed position and conducted a salary survey. Based on the analysis, the proposed position title is Utility Billing and Revenue Supervisor, with a salary range of 87X ($5,669 - $6,890). The new job description is attached to the memo, as well as the job description for the Payroll Specialist, the current organization chart and the proposed organization chart. Upon approval of the new position, the existing Accounting Services Supervisor (80-CF) position will be removed and replaced with the Payroll Specialist Position (76-CF), the former position of the Accounting Services Supervisor, The monthly top step of the Utility Billing Supervisor is $5,952; the monthly top step of the Accounting Services Supervisor is $5,955 and the monthly top step of the Payroll is $5,271. The cost of the reorganization for the combined positions is $12,161/month at step E. This equates to an additional cost of $254 per month, or $3,048 annually at Step E. For fiscal year 2010-11, the monthly cost would be $10,589, as neither position would be at Step E (The Payroll position is budgeted at Step A and the Utility Billing and Revenue Supervisor position is budgeted at Step C). Thus, the reorganization would provide for an initial salary savings of $1,318 per month of $15,816 for fiscal year 2010- 11. While I strongly recommend the reorganization of the Finance Department, it is essential that at minimum, the existing vacancy of the Utility Billing Supervisor be filled as soon as possible as the duties cannot be absorbed by existing Finance staff. This position is a key position in the City as the position is responsible for all financial aspects of the utility operation, including the bi-monthly billing and collections, customer account analyses, customer service, meter operations, water conservation program, utility policies and regulations, assistance with rate studies and public hearing notices, production of public information literature and supervision of utility staff. I respectfully request that the reorganization of the Finance Department be approved. ? 2 N CURRENT ORGANIZATION CHART Director of Administrative Performing Arts Finance Information Systems And Business (' Licensing Cash Receipts Accounts Payable L' Utility Billing Purchasing Supervisor Agent Utility Billing/ Account Analysis/ Customer Service Meter Operations/ Vater Conservation/ Rate Studies/ Financial Analysis/ Policies/Regulations Accounting Manager N PROPOSED ORGANIZATION CHART Director -of Administrative Performing Arts Finance Utility Billing and Revenue` Supervisor Information Systems Part -Time Purchasing Accountant I I Payroll Specialist I I Agent Utility and Revenue Functions And Business I Licensing Cash Receipts Accounts Payable City of Rohnert Park UTILITY BilliNG AND REVENUE SUPERVISOR DEFINITION Under djrection, plans, organizes, directs and partjcipates jn actjvjtjes related to utility billing and revenue collection; oversees all aspects of bjlling, payment collection, cash balancing and customer relatjons; coordjnates activities wjth other Cjty departments and the public; supervjses the work of assigned department clerical and technjcal staff, includjng accounts payable; performs other related dutjes as required. DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS The Utility Billing & Revenue Supervisor js responsible for efficiently overseeing the City's utility bjlling operatjons, revenue collection and accounts payable actjvjties. The incumbent must organjze, delegate and coordjnate work to meet the needs of customers and the Cjty's revenue collectjon goals. When dealing wjth delinquent payers, the Utility Billing and Revenue Supervisor has djscretjon to determjne a course of action varyjng from negotjating a deferred payment plan to shutting off the customer's water. Thjs posjtjon has the overall responsjbility for preparing utility bills, resolvjng utility billing problems, and supervjsjng the various billing functjons in additjon to overseejng busjness and anjmal license, permjts, other fee collectjon activjties and accounts payable. SUPERVISION RECEIVED/EXERCISED Under djrectjon of the Director of Administratjve Services. The positjon provides direct supervjsion of staff performing utility billjng functjons, accounts payable and business and anjmallicenses, and coordjnates the assjgnments and work of Public Works sta.ff performing meter readjng/technician activjtjes. ESSENTIAL JOB DUTIES (These dutjes are a representative sample; posjtjon assignments may vary) · Plans, organizes, djrects and partjcjpates in the activjtjes related to utility bjlling, payment/revenue collections, and customer relatjons · Manages metered water accounts, includjng makjng necessary changes to specialized software database · Reviews and approves adjustments to customer accounts · Negotjates payments agreements and makes adjustments to accounts in non- routine cases · Majntajns and updates automated utility bjlling system and uses system to prepare utility bills, billing registers and reports · Prepares rate analyses and financial studies for utility funds; recommends changes jn Cjty fees and charges · Revjews and provides jnformatjon to City offjcials regarding water use ? City of Rohnert Park Utility Billing & Revenue Supervisor Page 2 of 5 Pages · Supervjses and particjpates jn the processjng of applicatjons and payments for water, sewer and trash services from the public · Calculates and accepts pro-rated fees and deposjts · Posts and balances deposjts, payments and adjustments to proper accounts · Analyzes djstribution reports to ensure correct postjng to the General Ledger · Assjsts with reconciliation of utility billjng system to the General Ledger · Interprets error messages and corrects errors; responds to customer questjons and complajnts · Researches and solves problems and makes necessary adjustments · Majntains the electronjc fund transfer (ACH) functions and records · Coordjnates meter readjng functions and analyzes meter reading input · Coordjnates and delegates meter reading' servjce requests, repajrs, replacements, and audits; evaluates unpajd accounts · Contacts delinquent customers to negotjate and majntain payment plans · Produces month-end reports and balances to jnputs to automated financial system · Plans, coordinates and supervises the collection of various fees and taxes for business licenses, anjmal licenses, permits, parkjng vjolatjons, and other miscellaneous accounts recejvable · Develops and revjses policjes and procedures related to revenue and collections · Oversees and performs special account research and analysis for the department, City staff and the public · Oversees the coordination of collectjon activjties wjth those of other City departments · Directs such revenue and cash collection functjons as accounts receivables, property and transient taxes, business license fees and charges, utility bjlling, parking cjtations, fines and grants · Verjfjes jncoming monjes from varjous Cjty departments and other agencies; prepares deposjt forms as requjred; codes and inputs revenues into the online computer system · Reconciles bank statements; researches discrepancies and makes correcting entrjes as requjred · Performs daily bank account majntenance functjons · Analyzes and ensures effectjve audjt controls of various revenue programs · Monitors revenue levels from varjous fee and tax programs and prepares reports · Supervjses the preparatjon of documents necessary for collectjng delinquent accounts through collection agencies, small claims and bankruptcy courts · Oversees accounts payable functjon · Responds to customer inquiries and problems ? City of Rohnert Park Utility Billing & Revenue Supervisor Page 3 of 5 Pages · Selects, supervjses, trains, evaluates and coordjnates the work of assigned Finance Dept staff; resolves problems for staff · Identjfies and suggests methods by whjch Cjty can collect additjonal revenue and improve efficiency of utility billjng operations · Perjodically revjews various fee schedules and makes recommendatjons for fee changes or new fees · Assists with preparation of departmental staff reports, resolutjons and public hearing notjces · Trajns new users on the use of applicable areas of the software package · Prepares correspondence and operates offjce equjpment · May make oral presentatjons representing the department and/or City · May trajn end;..usersjn the use of specialized software applicatjon programs · May review and implement new revenue collectjon programs wjth other City departments · May act as a djsaster service worker jn the event of a djsasteror emergency QUALIFICATIONS EducatjonlTrajnino/Experjence: Sufficient education, training and experjence to oversee the Cjty's utility bjlling operatjons, accounts payable and revenue collections. A typical way of obtajnjng the required qualifjcations is to possess: · A Bachelor's Degree jn accountjng, fjnance or business administration or related fjeld is desjrable and may be substjtuted for years of experience · Equivalent of sjx (6) years of increasjngly responsible experience in billing, accounts payable and revenue collectjons accounting, including four (4) years of supervisory experience, preferably in a public agency < License Reaujrements: · Possessjon of a Class C Californja drjver's license by date of appointment Knowledoe of: · Considerable knowledge of accountjng, bookkeeping and financjal record- keeping methods related to utility billing, accounts payable and revenue collection · Municipal utility regulations and practjces, billing and payment methods and meter-reading systems · Manual and automated billing and financjal record-keeping systems · Applicable federal; state and local laws, codes or regulations related to billjng and collection of a City water system, public jnformation and prjvacy protection ? City of Rohnert Park Utility Billing & Revenue Supervisor Page 4 of 5 Pages · Accounts payable policies and procedures for a public agency · Public relatjons technjques and procedures · Prjncjples and practjces of supervjsjon and performance management · Modern office practices, procedures and equjpment jncludjng a computer and applicable financial, statjstical, database and billing and payment software Skill to: · Perform accurate data entry at a speed acceptable to complete work assignments jn a tjmely manner, i.e. not less than 40 net w.p.m. · Perform 10-key by touch · Utilize specialized computer software programs and jmplement system software changes Ability to: · Plan, assjgn, supervjse and partjcipate jn the work of staff involved jn utility bjlling, accounts payable and collectjons actjvities · Analyze and jnterpret accounting records · Prepare and present reports related to bjlling operations and financjal condition · Prepare comprehensjve, clear and concjse accountjng, statjstjcal, cost and administratjve reports · Analyze complex jssues, evaluate alternatjves and reach sound conclusions · Make adjustments to operatjng procedures as necessary to improve organizatjonal effectjveness · Interpret, apply and explajn a variety of rules, policjes and procedures · Ability to select, trajn, supervise, evaluate and mentor assigned staff · Communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and jn wrjtjng · Establish and majntain cooperative workjng relationshjps · Communjcate effectjvely and deal djplomatjcally with jrate persons and jn djfficult sjtuations · Perform detailed numerical work wjth speed and accuracy and detect record- keepjng and data entry errors · Compile and majntain accurate information, records, and fjles . Learn and utilize new technology Workino Conditjons: Posjtjon requjres prolonged sittjng, standing, walkjng, reaching, twistjng, turning, kneeling, bendjng, squattjng, and stooping jn the performance of daily office activities, The posjtjon also requjres graspjng, repetitjve hand movement, and fine coordjnatjon in preparing statjstical reports and data using a computer keyboard and 10-key calculator. Additionally, the posjtion requjres near and color vision in readjng correspondence, ? City of Rohnert Park Utility Billing & Revenue Supervisor Page 4 of 5 Pages statistjcal data, and uSjng the computer, and hearjng js required when providjng phone and face-to-face customer servjce. The need to lift, drag, and push files, paper, and documents wejghjng up to 25 pounds in also required. Incumbent works in an office envjronment under the pressure of a varjety of non-negotjable deadlines, js subject to frequent jnterruptjons and may be required to jnteract with irate customers. FLSA Status: Employee Unit: Approved By: Date Approved: Exempt Rohnert Park Employees' Association (RPEA) Cjty Councjl ? City of Rohnert Park , ,PAYROLL SPECIALIST DEFINITION Performs accounting and statjstical record keepjng assjgnments related to the prepara- tjon and majntenance of fjscal reports, records, and processjng of the Cjty's payroll; performs a variety of accountjng activitjes related to the Cjty's fringe benefit and retire- ment programs; performs confidential employee relations-related research as required; performs other dutjes as assigned, DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS The Payroll Specialist is an advanced workjng level class in the Finance Department. Incumbents perform detailed account and statjstjcal record keepjng assignments re- lated to the processjng of the Cjty's payroll, fringe benefit programs and employee rela- tions-related projects . SUPERVISION RECEIVED/EXERCISED General supervjsjon is provjded by the Djrector of Adminjstrative Services. The Payroll Specialist js expected to work with a great deal of independence jn performing functions related to payroll and fringe benefjts. ESSENTIAL JOB DUTIES (These duties are a representatjve sample; posjtion assjgnments may vary) · Recejves, revjews, verifies and processes payroll-related records and documen- tation · Calculates, revjews and processes the Cjty's payroll . Audits and reconciles the payroll regjster · Prepares accounting records and reports such as State and Federal Income Tax and CalPERS Reports · Audjts records for completeness, accuracy and conformance with policies and procedures · Implements changes jn the payroll computer system involvjng the jmplementa- tjon of labor agreements and major changes in salarjes, benefits, and/or the cal- culatjon of payroll checks · Works djrectly with the Human Resources Dept. to solve problems and imple- ment payroll and benefjts changes · Works djrectly with the Informatjon Services Dept. to maintain accuracy of the payroll computer system and documents changes and erros and tests new pay- roll system updates . Assjsts auditors City of Rohnert Park Payroll Specialist ? Page 2 of 4 Pages · Researches and answer questions regarding payroll and benefits' records, poli- cies and procedures · Follows laws regardjng the release of jnformation regarding personal, confiden- tial, financial employee jnformatjon · Compiles payroll data for use jn budget preparation and employee negotjations . Calculates taxes and prepare W-2's · Inputs data jnto specialized data base software system to produce payroll · Checks computer prjntouts for accuracy of informatjon · Distrjbutes payroll to Dept Heads, Supervisors and employees , · Computes, adjusts and djstributes requjred monthly, semi-monthly, quarterly and yearly reports · Djsburses payments to benefit providers · Checks, adjusts, and makes all correctjng journal entries for payroll and fringe benefit data, deductions, and jnsurance funds · Performs a varjety of account and statjstical record keeping work related to the Cjty's retjrement program · Assjsts employees and retirees wjth their CalPERS retjrement questions · Implements directjves jn employee bargaining unit Memoradums of Agreement and Outlines of Benefits · Receives and processes a varjety of pa'yroll information and data · Operates a varjety of offjce equjpment and specialized computer software sys- tems · Majntains confidentiality of a varjety of informatjon · Responds to a varjety of requests for jnformation from financial jnstitutions and the courts regardjng the City's payroll functions · May be assjgned as a disaster service worker in the event of a disaster or emer- gency QUALIFICATIONS EducationlTrajnjna/Exoerience: Sufficjent education, trainjng and experjence to successfully perform the dutjes of a Payroll Specialist. A typjcal way of obtainjng the required qualificatjons js to: · An Associate's Degree jn Accounting or related fjeld, and · The equjvalent of three (3) years of progressively responsible experience in fj- nancial and statistjcal recordkeepjng work involved in the processing of a public agency payroll of a jurjsdjctjon of a comparable sjze to the City of Rohnert Park · Certjfied Payroll Professjonal Certjfjcation is desirable City of Rohnert Park Payroll Specialist Page 3 of 4 Pages ? Knowledae of: · Thorough knowledge of methods and practices of public financial and statjstical recordkeepjng, includjng payroll and benefit functions · Laws and regulatjons governjng the majntenance and destruction of records re- lating to a public agency payroll, fringe benefits, employee, financjal and retjre- ment program records · Cjty's Budget, Classification and Compensation Schedule, Personnel Rules & Regulations, Memorandums of Agreement and Outlines of Benefits for the bar- gajnjng Unjts · Terminology used jn financjal and statistical recordkeepjng . Research methodology · Principles of basic mathematjcs, accountjng princjples, practjces, and proce- dures, and basjc statjstics . Bankjng procedures · Modem office methods, procedures, and practices · Proper business Engljsh usage, spelling, grammar, and punctuation Skill to: · Perform data entry qujckly and accurately in order to meet work deadlines and requjrements, i.e. mjnjmum 40 net w.p.m. . Perform 10-key by touch · Use specjalized computer software programs · Apply applicable Federal, State and/or local laws, rules & regulations . Perform basjc mathematjcal calculatjons . Maintain requjred records Abilitv to: · Prepare and maintajn accurate and up-to-date payroll information, files & records · Process and calculate a variety of payroll actions includjng wage garlljshments, benefjts, deductjons, wjthholdings, retroactjve pay, and overtjme calculations · Meet legal deadlines for the payroll · Balance and prepare payroll taxes for State and Federal quarterly and annual re- turns · Research and reconcile errors and issues that may arjse and develop jnternal control systems · Evaluate, develop and install complex payroll systems and procedures · Be sensitjve to political jssues that arise wjthjn the context of payroll · Develop effectjve poljcies and procedures to meet payroll requirements City of Rohnert Park Payroll Specialist Page 4 of 4 Pages ? · Communicate effectjvely and professionally (verbally and in writing) with internal and external customers · Perform djfficult and detailed accounting work under deadlines · Handle confidential tasks such as payroll with the utmost privacy and decorum · Prepare, process, and manage multjple payroll activitjes · Apply contract provisions, laws, rules, and regulations pertaining to payroll and special projects · Prepare and maintain a variety of payroll-related fiscal and accountjng records and reports · Analyze sjtuatjons accurately arid adopt an effective course of actjon · Exercise good judgment and act withjn the scope of authority in the position · Keep supervjsor jnformed of potentjal issues and problems · Post data and make mathematical calculations wjth speed and accuracy · Operate office machines, including computerized payroll systems, personal computer, typewriters, copiers, faxes and calculators · Establish and majntain cooperatjve workjng relationships · Learn and utilize new technology Workino Conditions: Position requires prolonged sitting, standing, walking, reaching, twisting, turning, kneel- jng, bending, squattjng, and stooping in the performance of daily office activities. The positjon also requires grasping, repetjtive hand movement, and fine coordination in pre- paring statistjcal reports and data using a computer keyboard. The position requires near, far, and color visjon jn readjng correspondence, statistical data and using a com- puter, and hearing js, required when providjng phone and fact-to-face customer service. The need to lift, drag, and push files, paper, and documents weighing up to 25 pounds is also requjred. The jncumbent juggles multjple tasks, works under pressure of dead- Ijnes, frequent interruptions and is exposed to common offjce environment nojse. The position may be required to work weekends and evenings to meeting deadlines, FLSA Status: Employee Unit: Approved By: Date Approved: Non-exempt Confidential Cjty Council ? Attachment 14 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES Brian Masterson. Director DATE: August 3, 2010 TO: Gabe Gonzalez, Cjty Manager John Dunn, Interjm Cjty Manager FROM: Brjan Masterson, Djrector of Public Safety c. SUBJECT: NEIGHBORHOOD ENFOREMENT OFFICER ^ SCOPE OF PROBLEM: Currently the City of Rohnert Park recejves on-gojng complajnts regardjng abatement of vehicles, weeds, graffitj, garbage cans left on sidewalks and basketball courts on cjty streets. Many of these complajnts jn the past would have been handled by a Communjty Service Officer but those posjtions were elimjnated from the budget jn 2009. Today, these low priorjty calls are assjgned to patrol and are done as time allows. Many of these violatjons could best be descrjbed as qualjty of life issues, SOLUTION: We would recommend that a Community Servjce Officer position be budgeted jn thjs fiscal year on a part tjme basis to work two days a week at the hourly medjan range of $25 an hour at 20 hours per week for a yearly cost of $26,000 a year, Half of this cost could come from vehjcle abatement money and the other half could be from funds in the garbage contract. PERFORMANCE BASED REPORTING: The Community Servjce officer would be assigned to a patrol sergeant and Public Safety would provjde a quarterly report that would go to the City Manager and to Cjty Councjl outljnjng the work bejng performed by this Communjty Servjce Officer. A quarterly report of work done by thjs unjt could provjde an effectjve tool to evaluate the success of the program and jf any changes were needed for improved servjce to the Communjty, TOTAL COST FOR NEIGHBORHOOD ENFORCEMENT TEAM. The total estimated cost of the part time Communjty Service Employee to be approximately $26,000 and none of thjs money would come from the General Fund, ? 500 CITY CENTER DRIVE - ROHNERT PARK, CALIFORNIA - 94928-2118 Phone: (707) 584-2600 fax: (707) 584-2683 Attachment 16 Thoughts regarding Sale of Stadium Lands Much has been said and written about the Stadium Lands of the City. In 2003, the City entered into an agreement with Redwood Equities for the sale and reuse of the former baseball stadium site and two wastewater holding ponds. In 2009, Redwood Equities exercised options on a portion of the property (i.e., wastewater ponds) with the result that the baseball stadium parcel is now fully in the hands of the City. There is still a dispute being argued by the attorneys for both parties as to how much of the option payments paid by the developer toward the stadium parcel can be applied to the wastewater ponds parcels. The land is presently zoned for Planned Development, adjacent to land zoned for Regional Commercial. Due to the size and location of the baseball stadium parcel, it has excellent future development potential. So the question is not so much if the parcel should be marketed for appropriate development but more a question of when. The commercial and residential real estate markets are currently substantially depressed from their 2007/2008 highs. Borrowing money for this type of development is more difficult, perhaps extremely difficult. Instead of the City selling the land to a developer-considering the difficult market conditions at present and the time the sales and the Planned Development Approval processes would take-another idea is for the CDC to purchase the property from the City, thereby assisting the City's General Fund with its current problems. While this idea has some merit, there are at least two downsides. One is that the Urban Futures Study, performed for the City in 2009, made these comments in two separate parts of their report: The City of Rohnert Park has a serious structural challenge. Expenditures exceed revenues by some'$8 million, approximately 26% ofthe budget. ? Two primary factors are at the root of this structural challenge. The first is that the City has relied and continues to rely on one time revenues from land sales which have been used to fund increasing, on-going expenditures, including staff costs. The second factor is that compensation and benefits have increased 33% ($3.7 million) in the last six years. The City of Rohnert Park has ominous structural problems in that operational costs exceed revenues. In the past, land sales have filled this gap. This stop gap measure has limits as there is only so much land that the City owns and/or is willing to sell. Selling City/CDC land may well prove to be short-sighted. This land could, with a Specific Plan in place, generate long term revenue. The second issue is with the current availability of CDC funding. There are two funding sources available at present to the CDC. They are the Redevelopment Fund and the 2007 Redevelopment Tax Allocation Bond proceeds. The Redevelopment Fund has a cash-flow problem due to the $4.1 million State take-away this June, and a further (although lesser) take-away next year. It will be several years before sufficient funds exist to support project/property related expenditures. The CDC cannot use the 2007 Redevelopment Tax Allocation Bond proceeds to acquire a property that it would later sell to a private party. Doing so would risk the tax-exempt status of the bonds. The CDC would have to issue new taxable debt in order to acquire the stadium parcel with bond proceeds. Given the Redevelopment Fund cash-flow problem, the issuance of new debt would necessarily be delayed for several years. Considering all of the above, the City's proposed budget for 2010-11 does not include income from the sale of the Stadium Lands, although it is recognized that this is ultimately a matter of Council/CDC determination. However, when our economy and market conditions improve, and that is our hope for the next five years, this matter should be re-examined. The Council may have questions on this matter, wish to discuss this matter further or may provide guidance to staff. H:JD/Stadium Land thou~hts ? Attachment 18 July 2,2010 City of Rohnert Park Finance Department P.O. Box 1489 Rohnert Park, CA 94927 Attention: Sandy Lipitz Dear Sandy, On behalf of the Rohnert Park Sister Cities Committee, I am requesting that the city consider supplementing some of our expenses. Please find attached a copy of our Sister Cities International membership renewal for $510.00. Also attached is a copy of the receipt for an airline ticket to Japan to be used by our Student Ambassador at a cost of $1907.80. Total cost for these expenses is $2417.80. The committee is aware of the city's fmancial situation, but we are hoping that you will consider giving us some financial support. Without this support, our committee will have difficulty in the future participating in cultural exchanges with our sister city, Hashimoto. Please contact me if you have questions or need further information. Thank you for consideration of our request. Very truly yours, -J~~ Susan Harrow Treasurer ? ,~, - SISTER CITIES INTERNATIONAL sel Fed Tax ID #52-0859021 Rohnert Park Sister Cities Committee Rohnert Park Sister Cities Committee Attn: Susan Harrow Rohnert Park Sister Cities Com 5748 Dexter Circle Rohnert Park, CA 94928 RENEWAL NOTICE Remit Payment to: Sister Cities International 1301 Pennsylvania Ave, NW Suite 850 Washington, DC 20004 202-347-8630 www.sister-cities.org Customer ID: 749 Invoice Date:5/25/201O Due Date: 7/1/2010 TOTAL DUE 510.00 Please include remittance form with payment PROGAM INFORMATION Please complete or update program information: Customer ID: 749 Chief Elected Official: Arnie Breeze Primary Contact: Program Name: Rohnert Park Sister Cities Committee Phone: (707) 584-4851 Fax: Email: SUMMARY AMOUNT $510.00 Membership Renewal Dues Payment Method o Check (Payable to Sister Cities International) o Wire Transfer (Please call for instructions) o Visa 0 MC 0 AMEX 0 Discover Card No. Name on Card Expiration Date Security Code Signature ? G~ lACE TRAVEL RECEIPT 940 Saratoga Ave, Suite 106 San Jose, CA 95129 www.iace-usa.com Customer SJC Sale Invoice No: 538647 Date Issued: 6/5/2010 Agent: SugiyamalYukako Locator: 3QX03F Passenger Department Depart Date Retum Date Remarks Type Ticket/Conf No AirlineNendor Itin Total Fare From To Flight AIL Depart Arrive Miller/Kevin.Daniel 8/11/2010 8/23/2010 Inti Air 8606262648 United Airlines SFO/KIXlSFO 1 ,907,80 SFO San Francisco KIX Osaka 885 UA 8/11/201012:05:00 PM 8/12/20103:30:00 PM KIX Osaka SFO San Francisco 886 UA 8/23/20105:25:00 PM 8/23/2010 11 :21 :00 AM Payments Applied To This Invoice AX 37-XXXX-1005 Received 6/5/2010 Pymt For Inv #538647 -1,907.80 -1,907.80 'V~. Gjyojlo Q\.-W- 5~3 Invoice Total: Payment Total: Balance Due: 1,907.80 -1,907.80 0.00 Thank you for your business with us. New York, Boston, Washington D.C., Chicago, Arlington Hights, Orlando, Atlanta, Columbus, Detroit, Dallas, Seattle, Los Angeles, West L.A., Orange County, San Diego, San Jose, Las Vegas, Honolulu, Vancouver, Toronto, Reservation Center ~ Attachment 19 A Beginning, Common Sense, Local Resource Based Economic Development I Job Creation Prof!ram for the City of Rohnert Park Prepared by John Dunn with assistance from City Council members, Department Heads, and Linda Babonis August 2010 Obiective The Rohnert Park Economic Development Plan objective is to create a beginning program to get some things going quickly, utilizing local resources in a "do it yourself' mode and minimizing expense. Definition: What Economic Development means to Rohnert Park, that: a) our citizens have jobs so that they can properly care for themselves and their families, b) our business people and their businesses prosper, c) we eliminate vacancies in our commercial and industrial areas and keep these areas vital and attractive, d) we retain and help our existing businesses grow, e) we attract the right kind of businesses to our City, f) our citizens and visitors have a full range of services-products and facilities available to them within the City and g) as a result of these actions, that the City itself prospers because of solid and consistent benefits from its property, sales and transient occupancy taxes. Overview: While all parts of the program are important in the long term, the initial priority should be on forthright assessment of our current situation and needs - getting a good reading on the City's economic development landscape and taking necessary short-term actions. These are the first items 2 through 9: PrORram 1. Have an "evergreen Economic Development Plan" a. Review the City's Economic Development Plan once a year and make refinements as necessary for current conditions. b. City Council review and adoption is necessary; an unadopted plan has no status or force. c. Commit resources to implement the adopted plan; an adopted plan with no commitment of resources does not get implemented. d. Be specific, deliberate and current on assignment of responsibilities e. While City Manager has overall responsibility for the program, his overall City responsibilities will allow some but not a great, amount of direct participation in the program. 2. Interview CEO/owners of top ten non-public agency employers in Rohnert Park. a. Determine status of Chamber of Commerce Interviews. b. Acquire and analyze results of past Chamber interviews and determine if follow-up interview is needed. ? 1 c. Develop interview questions for employers not previously interviewed or follow-up questions for those who have. d. To speed up process and involve more people, consider "roundtable" discussions e. Record results of each interview (individual comments are confidential). f. Prepare summary report. g. Develop follow-up action plan. h. Later, supplement above survey with interviews of ten (10) owners/managers of small businesses. 3. Work with Chamber's Economic Development Committee. a. Determine what their present goals are. b. Determine what process they will use to pursue economic development. c. Determine who from the Chamber the City should be working with, develop schedule for meetings and objectives to be pursued. d. Ideas: Chamber sponsorship of small business workshops to assist local businesses and increase overnight stays of visitors already coming to SSU related events and community events. e. Develop and implement contract for the performance of specified responsibilities. 4. Work with the Sonoma County Tourism Bureau to promote tourism, specifically overnight visitors to the City of Rohnert Park. a. Provide funding in support of Rohnert Park marketing effort. b. Develop contract for services with specific actions/deliverables. c. Establish regular meeting schedule to review progress. 5. Work with leading commercial/industrial real estate firms to determine the major obstacles or hindrances to the sale or leasing of land in Rohnert Park and how the City might in some way be a creative partner with them. 6. Meet with large commercial property owners to determine their current or planned strategy for addressing vacancies. a. What are they looking for, doing? b. Where do they anticipate success, obstacles? c. Maintain dialogue with property owners to explore areas of mutual benefit. 7. Examine the CDC facilities/infrastructure plan to see: a. How much money is available for spending? b. Whether certain projects could have a short-term (construction) and a continuing positive revenue impact. c. Examine whether there is the possibility of using CDC funds to leverage or supplement certain beneficial private sector development activities. .,. 2 8. Assess schedule and economic development opportunities of all planned specific-plan developments. More specifically: a. Sonoma Mountain Village (General Plan Amendment), because of its mixed land uses, has the greatest economic development potential of the three plans coming before the City in the shorter term, particularly given that it will have commercial and industrial uses and that each residential unit will pay a fee to the City for economic development purposes. b. The Southeast Plan, the Northeast Plan, and the University District Plan (the latter already approved) while primarily residential, offer three economic enhancements, their construction activities, the fees they will pay for City services and in some cases limited retail. 9. Re-examine our own development/project review process to determine, while upholding adopted City standards, if we can be more helpful/speed up the process. a. Address problem of "first-time business person" who "signs lease first, asks questions later" vs. professional property agents (who most often know the City's rules). b. We do have an "expedited building plan review process" which works for those willing to pay extra. c. Continue present practice of "early" meetings with prospective developers in order to iron out issues and to set them on a productive path. d. The State's new Green Building Code goes in affect on January 1, 2011. The City may want to consider replacing our Green Building Ordinance so that our regulations are more consistent with other cities codes. The City has been and continues to be a leader in energy conservation and "green" building and should preserve this position. 10. Re-invent Rohnert Park as a youth sports, recreation, and cultural center. a. What would work well? b. How much would it cost and what would be the funding source? c. Examine and evaluate role of community and City events, festivals, etc.,' toward this objective. d. Evaluate role of larger sports events, such as tournaments and races, to attract outside visitors. e. Evaluate role of all-weather fields and a spray park to better serve local residents and attract visitors. f. Evaluate role of commercial recreation ventures as a part ofthe above. g. The success of the community's business ventures will cause greater support for the above efforts. h. Define role of "magnet" (special purpose) facilities? .,. 3 11. Examine all major community amenities and assets (Sonoma State University, Sonoma Mountain Village, Green Music Center, Performing Arts Center, Sports Center, parks, trail system, hotel-motels (tourism - regional conferences), wineries (tourism, restaurants), golf courses, pools, Farmer's market, etc. for their increased economic development/job creation potential. a. What actions or resources are necessary to better utilize these community resources to attract visitor usage and pursue economic development activities? b. What's a successful economic future for Sonoma County, and what is the best opportunity "niche" for Rohnert Park? 12. Revisit and update two City Plans for their economic development potential and to add to the "enticing and attractive" qualities of our community. a. Review the City Center Concept Plan (adopted) for current relevance, perhaps pulling out certain elements for further review and implementation. b. Review the Commerce Boulevard Corridor Plan (not adopted), select those elements which have current relevance, revise as necessary and consider for adoption and implementation. 13. Job creation for our residents would be established as a primary goal of the program - particular emphasis should be placed on higher income "head of household" jobs such as managerial and professional jobs (professional services, managers, finance, insurance, teaching, medical, etc.) a. At the present time the greatest potential for higher-level job creation in Rohnert Park lies with supporting and assisting Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster;... a company incubation program. b. Work with appropriate private sector land owners, commercial property agents to arrange receptor sites for graduates of Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster. c. Retail jobs are jobs, but a City goal must be for economic diversification to support greater variety of job types (and better protection from economic downturns). 14. A major goal of the City is to fill vacancies in our existing commercial and industrial areas and buildings. a. Maintain an inventory of major vacancies in existing commercial and industrial sites, including owners, agent, zoning, square footage and major site conditions. b. Develop listing and plan to work with owners/agents of the above properties, to make them aware of the City's interest and support. c. Look at the success of other communities at converting outmoded shopping centers and transforming them into attractive modern centers (example, Petaluma-McDowell Blvd. at East Washington). d. Examine vacant or under-utilized sites in Rohnert Park (old Yard Birds, as an example) and work with property owners encouraging development of a re-use plan. .,. 4 15. Keep a watchful eye on the Westside (yes, all areas of the community are important). a. The Westside collectively is the greatest producer of sales tax. b. It has the greatest amount of undeveloped commercial space. c. It has two larger parcels in particular that have great economic development potential (Stadium .lands and "Northwest Specific Plan"). d. The completion of the freeway improvements will increase access to and attractiveness of this area. e. This area, largely, is a collection of individual centers and separate stores which creates a disparate image; opportunities for increased attractiveness, cohesiveness and unity could be explored. f. Upon completion of the freeway improvements, both sides of the freeway should be evaluated for their visual qualities and appeal as the view from the freeway is how most people form their image of Rohnert Park. 16. Small business (in particular) need financial support a. City government (with some exceptions) will not be the source of that support. b. - Communicate with bank and savings institutions so they know what the City is seeking. c. Investigate Cloverdale and other area's micro-loan programs. 17. Create inter-departmental team to establish shared understanding of economic development priorities and how each team member/department can contribute to the success of the City ED Plan. a. This is a direct responsibility of the ACM; b. However, for maximum effectiveness it requires a proper attitude and assistance on everyone's part. c. It requires mobilization, organization, assigned effort, and "team spirit." d. Develop a visible tracking mechanism for performance measurement. 18. Establish initial City Economic Development priorities a. Usual approach of cities is to, first, retain existing businesses; secondly, attract new businesses. b. Because of the City's high vacancy rates in commercial/industrial properties, we may need to develop a set of customized priorities. 19. Over time, assess Rohnert Park's "branding, image, identity" to see if effort needs to be expended in improving this area. a. Some believe that the present image is largely residential, probably too diffuse or undifferentiated for attracting visitors. b. Done right, the 50th birthday celebration/parade could re-invigorate community pride. " .,. 5 c. If desiring to become a destination City, what should our special attraction "niche", special appeal or "sense of place" be? d. Re-examine historic City seal to determine if it conjures up desired image? e. Consistent and continuous wins over creative but sporadic. 20. Develop close working relationship with others a. Chamber of Commerce b. Sonoma State University c. Sonoma County Economic Development Board d. Major commercial/industrial property owners/agents e. Others who can contribute to the City's Economic Development goals. "Especially if the present is tough, one has no choice but to pursue a brighter future." Anonymous H:JD/Economic Development plan notes. .,. 6 Attachment 25 PUBLIC WORKS & COMMUNITY SERVICES Utilities Division The Public Works Department is responsible for the operation, maintenance, inspection, and repair of most of the City's infrastructure including the potable water and wastewater utilities. In addition to performing regularly assigned duties, staff responds to over 5,000 citizen requests each year and responds to a variety of system problems and emergencies 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. Most functions in potable water and sewer operation and maintenance are mandated and non- discretionary in nature - meaning that they directly affect public health, could have an adverse affect on the environment and are strictly enforced by multiple regulatory agencies. This division is staffed at a minimum of five days a week but is also monitored 24-7 through the City's computer controlled wireless network: Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system. The Utilities Division is comprised of four primary subdivisions as follows: Water Production & Treatment The potable water production and treatment group is staffed by seven FTE's and is responsible for the operations, maintenance and repair of the City's potable water system. This includes 29 groundwater production wells, 7 potable water storage tanks, and multiple chemical treatment systems. Daily activities include: routine water sampling, pump operation, preventative maintenance, customer service, and overall system operation. Staff members also perform water meter reading, meter replacement, and meter calibration. Water Distribution The water distribution group is staffed with four FTE's and is responsible for the repair and maintenance of the City's vast network of underground water piping - nearly 100 miles of water mains, and over 8,900 water service connections. On an almost daily basis, this group is dedicated to replacing failed water services. This labor-intensive activity involves cutting the street, excavation, installation of a new water service, and reconstructing the street. Staff currently replaces 200 failed water services per year. This group also performs other mandated functions including: water main flushing, backtlow installation and repair, water leak detection and monitoring services, and maintenance of 1200 fire hydrants. ' Utility Administration The utilities administration group is staffed by one FTE who is responsible for the general administration of a variety of mandated water and wastewater programs including: the cross connection control program, sewer system management plan, and the water quality sampling and monitoring program. This position also prepares a variety of mandated reports to regulatory agencies as well as correspondence to neighboring and adjoining utility districts. Wastewater The wastewater group is staffed with four FTE's and is responsible for the operation, maintenance, and repair of the City's sewer collection system. The sewer collection system is comprised of 90 miles of gravity sewer mains and three large sewer pump stations. On a daily basis, this group performs sewer main cleaning - this activity now falls within a State mandated program - the Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP). Typically, sewer staff maintains (flushing and debris removal) 3 miles of sewer main per week. .,. Lidster, Beth From: Sent: To: Subject: Lidster, Beth Friday, August 06, 2010 2:52 PM o City Council Budget Binder Please pull Attachment 25c from your binder delivered to you yesterday for the budget meetings. This is a preliminary spreadsheet included in error and will not be discussed at the meeting. Beth Lidster Administration 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 707588-2226 707792-1876 Uax] blidster@rpcitv.org City Hall is open to the public Monday through Thursday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and closed on Fridays and authorized holidays. ".,. 1 Attachment 25d CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Department of Public Works & Community Service 600 Enterprise Drive Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Phone (707) 588-3300 MEMORANDUM Subject: July 7, 2010 John Dunn, Interim City Manager John McArthur, Director of Public Works and Community Services Utility Staff Recommendation 7/Vt'~ Date: To: From: I am recommending adding two new utility positions (2 fte) to be included in the FY 2010/2011 operating budget. The basis for this recommendation includes: compliance with new mandates, cost savings, improved system reliability, reduced risk from administrative enforcement action and third party lawsuits. Specifically, I recommend adding the following Public Works positions: 1. One Maintenance Worker (lfte) in Sewer; and 2. One Instrument Technician (lfte - new technical classification) 50% Water and 50% Sewer. The following parag1:aphs will hopefully depict the department's current staffing needs, potential risks, and proposed funding for these two recommended positions. Maintenance Worker - Sewer An additional Maintenance Worker is needed to fulfill the new and ongoing requirements of the City's Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP). The SSMP is a State mandated prog1:am that ~damentally regulates how sewer collection systems are operated and maintained. Mandate In 2006, State Water Resources Control Board Order 2006-0003-DWQ, mandated that all California sewer districts develop and adopt a comprehensive SSMP by August 2,2009. The City has fulfilled this . mandate (ju!J 7, 2009 agenda transmittal, attached) and now must implement this prog1:am. Failure to implement this program could result in enforcement action from the SWRCB including minimum fines and penalties as well as heightened exposure to third party lawsuits from citizen groups. Program Requirements - Staffing Needs The SSMP is comprised of several elements; the most significant and labor intensive is the collection system operation and maintenance plan. This prog1:am element requires that all of Rohnett Park's 100 miles of sewer collections system, be "maintained" on a standard preventative basis. .,. DepartInent of Public Works and Community Services . Page 2 Based on our analysis, which includes previously established minimum labor requirements per section of sewer collection SSJfP O&M Plen- Ltro{}!' &i1I~ireme'fl$ C1l;T4 f..d hrwea: 4[,.C*) IH'J ltC'0 J4,C7J lS"Q(i Tt-;ra} Wbr.k JiOHr; {O&JJl 1)500 rn TABLE 1 - SSMP LABOR SUMMARY .;"C(i hr~i'ear 2.0S'J DO 20B 00 W4DO hr/t't~~.k 55.(;;) ]O.'C~J Jlk~ JO.CO 14J)J JS,C~J j:. . Ei) 2.72 hr~rill 2.&50.0(; 520.0(< s.(~ 416,00 ~~lu;'Df5ri! br :)'~ar . '780 (~J .31l.C~ .m~'~ .312J'J .1DSC;J O~'J .520.0'J .104l~ OvD . :j.ig .(~J O.f~~ system, we estimate that implementing this SSMP mandate will reqUlte an additional 2,500 work-hours per year. Table 1 summarizes these new labor requirements by staff hours per year, and by total fte's. 2,C<! (t~J ~',wJ 0,(Hj 0.00 ;75\10 000 ';')300 j(~.00 6.((i .k((l 311.tH) 2GB.OO .J..lJ In addition to complying with this new State mandate, our program is designed to minimize cost by extending maintenance intervals as long as reasonably possible without assuming too great of a risk. For example, areas that are required to be maintained on a monthly and quarterly basis are generally considered problematic and high risk - ideally the sewer system would not need this degree of frequent maintenance work. Through ongoing corrective action including system improvements, repairs, and control of illicit discharges, we hope to minimize the areas maintained monthly and quarterly and extend their maintenance interval to six-months or longer. This approach provides the best possible service, is cost effective, and reduces the City's risk and exposure to a sanitary sewer overflow. Based on our recent success rate, I am confident that with various system improvements and with careful management oversight, we can fulfill these new requirements with minimum staffing levels. I am therefore recommending only adding one additional Maintenance Worker at this time. ....)1-',.. 93' (Hj .;. S'cSOit 676.00' 520.m) 72S)}0 4.((, 203.00 Instrumentation Technician - Water/Sewer 936.0)) c' i84 no Hi! An Instrumentation Technician position is needed to cost-effectively operate, program, calibrate, and maintain the City's many water and wastewater electrical components and computer control systems. The most significant need is related to the utility computer control systems; however, other significant needs are related to various electronic controllers, instruments and meters used to operate and control modem utilities. SCADA The City utilizes a computer control system to monitor, control, and alarm the potable water and wastewater utilities. This system, commonly referred to as the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System (SCADA), monitors and controls the City's utilities twenty four hours per day. The SCADA system consists of an industrial software program, a wireless communication network, and a variety of .,. . Page 3 individual controller and communications. devices spread throughout each utility. Without the SCADA system in operation, the system would have to be run manually. In this scenario, many individual locations would have to be staffed or frequently checked each day on a 24 hour basis- this is not a feasible alternative. Vulnerability The SCADA system is the most critical component of the City's utility system - it is essentially the "brains" of each utility system. Currently, none of our staff members or position classifications are capable of working on the SCADA system and its support components - there is no institutional knowledge of this most important system and we are therefore 100% reliant on outside contractors to program and troubleshoot this system. This arrangement is risky, costly, and inefficient; the City is continually vulnerable to: . System failures - potential public health risks and enforcement action . Cost overruns - excessive costs associated with contracted services . Delays in service - repairs are dependent upon contractor availability . Inefficient use of staff time - valuable staff time is wasted in manually redirecting utility systems and escorting contractors Costs Since 2004, the City has spent an average of $140,000/year on various consultants and contractors perfonning duties that could appropriately be performed by an in-house technician. These costs reflect only direct cost to the contractor and do not include administrative or opportunity costs. Based on a consistent historical spending pattern, and an increasing use (dependency) of the City's potable water production facilities, I expect these costs to remain the same or perhaps increase. A preliminary salary survey of neighboring utilities for a position comparable to what is being proposed revealed an average weighted salary of $120,000/ year. In addition to improved system reliability, reduced risk of failure and enforcement action, it appears that the Instrumentation Technician would lower the overall operating cost of each utility. Other Possible Benefits A core competency envisioned for the Instrumentation Technician is programmable logic controllers. This proposed position could also assume traffic signal maintenance duties. This function is currently contracted out at a cost of $70,000/year for the General Fund. This function would take 20% of the Instrumentation Technician's time at a cost of $25,000/year. This represents a $45,000/year savings to the General Fund. .,. . Page 4 Total Costs Summary of Added Positions I propose funding the two recommended positions as follows: . New Maintenance Worker - 100% Sewer . New Instrumentation Technician - 50% Water and 50% Sewer Funding the recommended positions would eliminate the City's reliance on the contractors and consultants currently used. Under this scenario, the total net cost to the sewer utility would be $75,000/year, and no net cost to the water utility - adding the Instrument Technician position could represent a net savings. The following table details the total burden represented by the two recommended positions. New Positions - Projected Net Financial Impact \'{i ~l ter ($! n) Sewer (S/yr) Total (S/yr) Maintenance Worker 85,000 85,000 IilStftUnentat10n Technician 60.000 60,000 120,000 Subtotal new positions 60 000 145.000 205 000 Eliminated Contracts - 70,000 -70,000 -140,000 Net Costs ($iyr) -10;000 75,000 65,000 Note: SSMP Jufy 7, 2009 agenda transmittal pro/eaed $120,000 - $140,000 year in added costs in sewer To recap, adding the two recommended positions would improve efficiency and reliability, save money, and help meet new mandates. I am looking forward to the opportunity to discuss my recommendations with you further. In the meantime, if you are interested, I could provide more detailed information for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions. Thanks. Attachment July 7, 2009 SSMP Agenda Transmittal .,. -:- Agenda Packet Preparation TIMELINES for Regular City Council Meetings {This section for City Clerk Use Only} held on the 2nd & 4th Tuesdays of each month: · Resolutions (other than standard formats for authorizations and approvals), Ordinances & Agreements to Assistant City Attorney via email for review and approval as to form DUE no later than NOON Three (3) Mondays prior to Council meeting date · Agenda items to City Manager via email for his review and responding ..email authorization", synchronized with above timeframe of Assistant City Attorney review, and an email copy to the City Clerk for drafting agendas · Agenda Items with attachments via email and a total of twenty (20) complete hard copy sets with 2 sets single-sided & 18 sets double-sided/stapled to City Clerk DUE no later than NOON Two (2) Fridays prior to Council meeting date · Agenda Draft review by Mayor, City Manager, Assistant City Attorney, City Clerk no later than Tuesday morning One (1) week prior to Council meeting date · Agenda Packets distributed to City Council and Agendas posted/distributed/mailed on Thursday afternoon One (1) week prior to Council meeting date in compliance with Rohner! Park Municipal Code Section 2.08.020 and related Resolution No. 2008-173 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL REPORT Meeting Date: July 14, 2009 Department: Public Works Submitted By: (Name & Title) " Submittal Date: John McArthur, Director of Utilities & General Services July 7, 2009 Agenda (Subject Only) Title: Adopt a Resolution Approving the Adoption and Certification of the Sewer System Management Plan Requested Council Action: Approve the Attached Resolution The Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) is a comprehensive plan that details the activities and strategies the City will use to manage its sewer collection system effectively. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) defines specific goals and objectives of an SSMP including: 1. Maintaining and improving the condition of the collection system infrastructure in order to provide reliable service into the future; 2. Cost-effectively minimizing inflow and infiltration (III) and providing adequate sewer capacity to accommodate design storm flows; and 3. Minimizing the number and impact of sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) that occur. The City has completed all required elements of the SSMP within the State Water Resources Control Board Order 2006-0003-DWQ mandated time period of August 2, 2009, and the final plan is now ready for adoption and certification. Background Following the SWRCB's adoption of the Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirement (GWDR) on May 2, 2006, sewer collection systems became the last major component of the State's wastewater management system to be regulated. Treatment plants, including pretreatment programs, have been regulated for many years. The GWDR mandates that all public sewer collection system agencies (Wastewater Collection Agencies) in California that own or operate sewer collection systems comprised of more than one mile of pipe or sewer lines that convey untreated wastewater to a publicly owned treatment facility prepare an SSMP. The City of Rohnert Park's wastewater collection system falls within the minimum defined criteria in the GWDR for a publicly owned sewer system and for the purposes of the GWDR, is defined as a Wastewater Collection Agency. The City is therefore mandated to complete a comprehensive SSMP that is adopted and certified by its governing body by August 2,2009. The SSMP is comprised of several elements that must be adopted incrementally over a multi- year period: The process in preparing the City's SSMP actually began in October 2007 where the City adopted Resolution 2007-174 which certified the development plan and schedule for the SSMP. The adopted development plan and schedule laid the timeline and milestones for complying with the State's GWDR incremental SSMP completion schedule. The City has met all SSMP development milestones; the adoption and certification of the SSMP is the final step to full compliance with the GWDR. SSMP Elements The SSMP is comprised of several elements including: 1. Goals - overall goals of the program 2. Organization - City organizatioi1/department roles and responsibilities 3. Legal Authority - City code defining use and restrictions 4. Operation and Maintenance Program - Preventative maintenance, repair and replacement plan, video inspection (CCTV), and capital improvement plan 5. Design and Performance Provisions - City design and construction standards 6. Overflow and Emergency Response Plans - Spill containment, -notification, mitigation, and service restoration procedures 7. Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG) Control Program - Public education and control over illicit discharges into the public sewer 8. System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan - Hydraulic and III Analysis 9. Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modification - Program performance metrics, communication feedback loops, and mechanisms for program modifications/adjustments 10. SSMP Audits - Periodic internal audits to evaluate program effectiveness and compliance with the GWDR 11. Communication Plan - Public outreach and input on SSMP performance Impacts For many wastewater collection agencies, implementing the SSMP will be extremely difficult and costly, since many communities do not have establish maintenance programs and practices in place and are basically starting from scratch. These same communities have been prone to frequent sanitary sewer overflows and were the primary nexus for the State to adopt the GWDR. Fortunately, through established best management techniques and a well managed asset management and III program, the. City has already implemented many of the elements of the SSMP and is significantly ahead of most wastewater collection agencies in the State. The impacts of implementing the SSMP have, in many regards, already been borne; however, there are significant initial "one-time" costs as well as additional ongoing expenses that will need to be planned for via the Sewer Enterprise budget process. The most significant one-time task associated with the SSMP is performing a baseline video inspection and evaluation of the entire gravity Sewer system. Preliminary estimates indi~ate that this task will cost nearly $400,000/year for five years. It is further estimated that the ongoing operation and maintenance (O&M) cost will increase by appl;'oximately $120,000 to 145,000 per year. This 'increase represents an 8-10% annual operating expenditure increase. The additional O&M expenses are primarily related to deploying a more aggressive hydro-flushing and sewer main maintenance program. Both one-time and ongoing additional costs would need to be paid out of the Sewer Operation Fund and financed by ongoing sewer service charges. Summary The SWRCB mandates that the SSMP be adopted and certified by August 2, 2009. Once implemented, this program is estimated to increase Sewer Enterprise operating expenses by as . much as 10% per year; however, through a shift to an increasingly proactive (preventative) maintenance strategy, the City will significantly reduce its exposure to sanitary sewer overflows and resulting NPDES violations and third party lawsuits. Over time, similar to other preventive maintenance techniques, the SSMP will most likely help the City realize a net reduction in overall operating expenses while improving sewer service to the citizens of Rohnert Park. Enclosures: Resolution CITY ATTORNEY'S REVIEW: Relevant documents for this agenda item have been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: (X) Consent Item ( ) Approval ( ) Public Hearing Required ( ) Not Recommended ( ) Submitted with Comment ( ) Policy Determination by Council ( ) City Comments: ( ) Regular Time Per Interim City Manager's review and direction for distribution of this agenda item. (Revised 031309) JH:TG-S:05-b .,. Revised Attachment 25d CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Department of Public WOlKS & Community Service 600 Enterprise Drive Rohnen Park, CA 94928 Phone (707) 588-3300 MEMORANDUM Date: To: August 6, 2010 Gabe Gonzalez, Oty Manager John Dunn, Interim Assistant Oty Manager John McArthur, Director of Public Works and Community Services /..-"'V'1 ,.. ~ Utility Staff Recommendation From: Subject: I am recommending adding three new utility positions (3 he's) to be included in the FY 2010/2011 operating budget. The basis for this recommendation includes: compliance with new mandates, increased labor requirements from aging infrastructure, cost savings, improved system reliability, reduced risk from administrative enforcement action and third party lawsuits. Specifically, I recommend adding the following Public Works positions: 1. One :Maintenance Worker (lhe) in Sewer; 2. One :Maintenance Worker (lhe) in Water; and 3. One Instrument Technician (lfte - new technical classification) 50% Water and 50% Sewer. Maintenance Worker - Sewer An additional :Maintenance Worker is needed to fulfill the new and ongoing requirements of the Oty's Sewer System l\1anagement Plan (SS:MP). The SSMP is a State mandated program that fundamentally regulates how sewer collection systems are operated and maintained l\1andate In "2006, State Water Resources Control Board Order 2006-0003-DWQ, mandated that all California sewer districts develop and adopt a comprehensive SS:MP by August 2, 2009. The Oty has fulfilled this mandate (July 7, 2009 ag:nda transrrittal, attaJxd) and now must implement this program Failure to implement this program could result in enforcement action from the SWRCB including minimum fines and penalties as well as heightened exposure to third party lawsuits from citizen groups. e. .,. Department of Public Wooo and Community Services . Page 2 Program Requirements - Staffing Needs , MinimlUn Waste\valer System Labor Requirements The SSMP is comprised of several elements; the most sigrllficant and labor intensive is the collection system operation and maintenance plan. This program element requires that all of Robnett Park's 100 miles of sewer collections system, be "maintained" on a standard preventative basis. MOlltlily hydr~ietting Quarterly hydrn}ettin)' Annual hydrojerring 5-year hydl'Oj"lting Sypholls Inspections Routine Video Routine Cleaning SSl\1P i Training Rewrd>i AdmillislraliOll hr/week 40.00 4.00 2.00 0,00 2.00 13.00 0.00 14.00 2.00 18.00 95.00 Total Work Hours (O&M) m Current hr/year 2,080.00 208.00 104.00 0.00 104.00 676.00 0.00 728.00 104.00 936.00 4.940.00 2.78 hr/week 55,00 10.00 8.00 6,00 4,00 13.00 10.00 . 14.00 4,00 18,00 142.00 ReqUired hr/year 2,860.00 520.00 416.00 312.00 208.00 676"00 520.00 728_00 208.00 936.00 7.384.00 4.16 Surplus/Deficit hrlyear - 780.00 -312.00 -312.00 -312.00 -104.00 0.00 -520.00 0.00 -104.00 0.00 -2,444.00 -1.38 Based on our analysis, which includes previously established minimum labor requirements per section of sewer collection system, we estimate that implementing this SSMP mandate will require an additional 2,500 work- hours per year. In addition to complying with this new State mandate, our program is designed to minimize cost by extending maintenance intervals as long as reasonably possible without assuming too great of a risk For example, areas that are required to be maintained on a monthly and quarterly basis are generally considered problematic and high risk - ideally the sewer system would not need this degree of frequent maintenance work 1hrough ongoing corrective action including system improvements, repairs, and control of illicit discharges, we hope to minimize the areas maintained monthly and quarterly and extend their maintenance interval to six-months, or 10Ilger., This approach provides the best possible, service, is cost effective, and reduces the Oty's risk and exposure to a sanitalysewer overflow. Based on our recent success rate, I am confident that with ongoing system improvements and with careful management oversight, we can fulfill these new requirements with minimum staffing levels. I ~ therefore recommending only adding one additional Maintenance Worker at this time. Maintenance Worker - Water An additional Maintenance Worker is needed to keep pace with the ongoing demand of failed water service replacements and backflow device testing and repair. Both functions are essential and are either part of a mandated program or have strictly enforced mandated procedures. Water Service Replacements For the second consecutive year, Public Works is on pace to replace approXimately 200 failed water services in the Oty's water distnbution system The amount of failed service repairs over these past two years is a sigrllficant increase from previous years; however, it is not a reason for alarm and is more or less attributable to the matunltion of the Oty's infrastructure. The design life of a water service and most underground infrastructure is :pproximately 50 years. Considering that the Oty is approaching its 50th .,. . Page 3 anniversary; and that there are about 9000 water service connections in Robnett Park, we should expect about 200 water service failures per year. Approximately 140 wotk- hours/weeks are needed to keep pace with this ongoing demand 1his equates to about 3 to 3.5 employees or 85% of the current total water clistnbution staff. Since these failed water service replacements cannot be postponed or rescheduled, and because this group of four employees has other essential or mandated functions, employees from other groups in the department (parks, buildings. . .) are frequendypulled off their assignment to assist. Long-term, the department cannot sustain this approach and must adequately staff this activity. Backflow Testing and Repairs Although, not as labor intensive as water service replacements, backflow device testing and repair is a mandated function and cannot be overlooked Gurendy, due to other more "urgent" service demands, coupled with existing staffing constraints, this function is at a standstill and is several years behind schedule. Fortunately, the State has been very patient on this matter; however, if we do not start making progress on this program, we will receive enforcement action. CUlTent Minimmn Water System Labor ReQuirements Required Surplus/Deficit hrfyear -416.00 -104.00 416.00 -416.00 -260.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -208.00 -1,820.00 -1,02 Distribution Repairs Equipment Maintenance Valve Exercising Uni-Directional F!ushing Pumps! PRV! Site Checks! Mainl Hydrant Meters! Install Customer Service Plan Review! Meeting Contractor. Backflow Testing & Repairs Subtotal Work Hours HE hr/week 130.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 137.00 hrfyear 6,760.00 104.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 52.00 104.00 104.00 0.00 7.124.00 4.01 hr/week 138.00 4.00 8.00 8.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 172.00 hrfyear 7,176.00 208.00 416.00 416.00 260.00 52.00 104.00 104.00 208.00 8.944.00 5.04 Instrumentation Technician - Water/Sewer An Instrumentation Technician position is needed to cost-effectively operate, program, calibrate, and maintain the Gty's many water and wastewater electrical components and computer control systems. The most significant need is related to the utility computer control systems; however, other significant needs are related to various electronic controllers, instruments and meters used to operate and control modem utilities. SCADA The Gty utilizes a computer control system to monitor, control, and alarm the potable water and wastewater utilities. 1his system, commonly referred to as the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System (SCADA), monitors and controls the Gty's utilities twenty-four hours per day. The SCADA system consists of an industrial software program, a wireless communication network, and a variety of individual controller and communications devices spread throughout each utility. Without the SCADA system in operation, the system would have to be nm manually. In this scenario, many individual .,. . Page 4 locations would have to be staffed or frequently checked each day on a 24 hour basis- this is not a feasible alternative. Vulnernbility The SCADA system is the most critical component of the Gty's utility system - it is essentiaIly the "bra,ins" of each utility system G.urently, none of our staff members or position classifications are capable of working on the SCADA system and its support components - there is no institutional knowledge of this most important system and we are therefore 100% reliant on outside contractors to program and troubleshoot this system This arrangement is risky, costly, and inefficient; the Gty is continuallyvulnernble to: · System failures - potential public health risks and enforcement action · Cost overruns - excessive costs associated with contrncted services , · Delays in service - repairs are dependent upon contrnctor availability · Inefficient use of staff time - valuable staff time is wasted in manually redirecting utility systems and escorting contractors Costs Since 2004, the Gty has spent an average of $140,000/year on various consultants and contractors performing duties that could appropriately be performed by an in-house technician. These costs reflect only direct cost to the contractor and do not include administrative or opportunity costs. Based on a consistent historical spending pattern, and an increasing use (dependeng.? of the Gty's potable water production facilities, I expect these costs to remain the same or pemaps increase. A preliminaty salaty survey of neighboring utilities for a position comparable to what is being proposed revealed an average weighted salary of $120,000/ year. In addition to improved system reliability, reduced risk of failure and enforcement action, it appears that the Instrumentation Technician would lower the overall opernting cost of each utility. Other Possible Benefits A core competency envisioned for the Instrumentation Technician is troubleshooting "programmable logic controllers" that are used in I-NAC systems, utility systems, and also traffic signal controllers. This proposed position could also assume traffic signal maintenance duties. This function is currently contracted out at a cost of $70,000/year to the General Fund Traffic signal maintenance duties would take 20% of the Instrumentation Technician's time at a cost of $25,000/year - this represents a $45,000/year savings to the General Fund .,. . Page 5 Total Costs Summary of Added Positions I propose funding the three recommended positions as follows: · One New Maintenance Wotker-100% Sewer · One new Maintenance Wotker- 100% Water · New Instrumentation Technician - 50% Water and 50% Sewer New Positions - Projected Net Fin'U1cial Impact Wate!: (S!y!:) Sewer (Siyr) Maintenllllce \V'orker 85,000 1.faimenance \V'orker 85,000 Illtrumellilltion T echnicial 60,000 60,000 Subtotaln€w positions 145,000 145000 Eliminated Contracts -70,000 -70,000 Net Costs (Sly!) 75,000 75,000 Total (Sly!) 85,000 85,000 120,000 290.000 -140,000 150,000 Note: SSMP July 7, 2009 ag:nia tramrittal prrjrrtal $120,000 - $140,000 y:m in addrl ~ts inseoo- Funding the recommended positions would eliminate the Oty's reliance on the contractors and consultants currently used. Under this scenario, the total net cost to the sewer utility would be $75,000/year, and $65,000/yearto the water utility. The following table details the total burden represented by the two recommended poSlUons. To recap, adding the three recommended positions would improve efficiency and reliability, save money, and help satisfy State mandates in each utility. Additionally, the added position would help stabilize the department's operation where the workload is manageable and staff is not always functioning in an emergency or reactionary mode. I am looking fotward to the opportunity to discuss my recommendations with you further. In the meantime, if you are interested, I could provide more detailed information for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions. Thanks. Attachment: July 7, 2009 SS:MP Agenda Transmittal .,. Agenda Packet Preparation TIMELINES for Regular City Council Meetings " held on the 2nd & 4th Tuesdays of each month: · Resolutions (other than standard formats for authorizations and approvals), Ordinances & Agreements to Assistant City Attorney via email for review and approval as to form DUE no. later than NOON Three (3) Mondays prior to Council meeting date · Agenda items to City Manager via email for his review and responding ..email authorization", synchronized with above timeframe of Assistant City Attorney review, and an email copy to the City Clerk for drafting agendas · Agenda Items with attachments via email and a total of twenty (20) complete hard copy sets with 2 sets single-sided & 18 sets double-sided/stapled to City Clerk DUE no later than NOON Two (2) Fridays prior to Council meeting date · Agenda Draft review by Mayor, City Manager, Assistant City Attorney, City Clerk no later than Tuesday morning One (1) week prior to Council meeting date · Agenda Packets distributed to City Council and Agendas posted/distributed/mailed on Thursday afternoon One (1) week prior to Council meeting date in compliance with Robnert Park Municipal Code Section 2.08.020 and related Resolution No. 2008-173 {This section for City Clerk Use Only} 7/14/09 City Council Agenda ITEM NO.6 for RESOLUTION NO. 2009-70 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL REPORT Meeting Date: July 14,2009 Department: Public Works Submitted By: (Name & Title) Submittal Date: John McArthur, Director of Utilities & General Services July 7, 2009 Agenda (Subject Only) Title: Adopt a Resolution Approving the Adoption and Certification of the Sewer System Management Plan Requested Council Action: Approve the Attached Resolution The Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) is a comprehensive plan that details the activities and strategies the City will use to manage its sewer collection system effectively. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) defines specific goals and objectives of an SSMP including: 1. Maintaining and improving the condition of the collection system infrastructure in order to provide reliable service into the future; 2. Cost-effectively minimizing inflow and infiltration (III) and providing adequate sewer capacity to accommodate design storm flows; and 3. Minimizing the number and impact of sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) that occur. The City has completed all required elements of the SSMP within the State Water Resources Control Board Order 2006-0003-DWQ mandated time period of August 2, 2009, and the final plan is now ready for adoption and certification. Background Following the SWRCB's adoption of the Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirement (GWDR) on May 2, 2006, sewer collection systems became the last major component of the State's wastewater management system to be regulated. Treatment plants, including pretreatment programs, have been regulated for many years. The GWDR mandates that all public sewer collection system agencies (Wastewater Collection Agencies) in California that own or operate sewer collection systems comprised of more than one mile of pipe or sewer lines that convey untreated wastewater to a publicly owned treatment facility prepare an SSMP.'" The City of Rohnert Park's wastewater collection system falls within the minimum defined criteria in the GWDR for a publicly owned sewer system and for the purposes of the GWDR, is defined as a Wastewater Collection Agency. The City is. therefore mandated to complete a comprehensive SSMP that is adopted and certified by its governing body by August 2,2009. The SSMP is comprised of several elements that must be adopted incrementally over a multi- year period: The process in preparing the City's SSMP actually began in October 2007 where the City adopted Resolution 2007-174 which certified the development plan and schedule for the SSMP. The adopted development plan and schedule laid the timeline and milestones for complying with the State's GWDR incremental SSMP completion schedule. The City has met all SSMP development milestones; the adoption and certification of the SSMP is the final step to full compliance with the GWDR. SSMP Elements The SSMP is comprised of several elements including: 1. Goals - overall goals of the program 2. Organization - City organization/department roles and responsibilities 3. Legal Authority - City code defining use and restrictions 4. Operation and Maintenance Program - Preventative maintenance, repair and replacement plan, video inspection (CCTV), and capital improvement plan 5. Design and Performance Provisions - City design and construction standards 6. Overflow and Emergency Response Plans - Spill containment, notification, mitigation, and service restoration procedures 7. Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG) Control Program - Public education and control over illicit discharges into the public sewer 8. System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan - Hydraulic and III Analysis 9. Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modification - Program performance metrics, communication feedback loops, and mechanisms for program modifications/adjustments 10. SSMP Audits - Periodic internal audits to evaluate program effectiveness and compliance with the GWDR 11. Communication Plan - Public outreach and input on SSMP performance Impacts For many wastewater collection agencies, implementing the SSMP will be extremely difficult and costly, since many communities do not have establish maintenance programs and practices in place and are basically starting from scratch. These same communities have been prone to frequent sanitary sewer overflows and were the primary nexus for the State to adopt the GWDR. Fortunately, through established best management techniques and a well managed asset management and 1/1 program, the City has already implemented many of the elements of the SSMP and is significantly ahead of most wastewater collection agencies in the State. The impacts of implementing the SSMP have, in many regards, already been borne; however, there are significant initial "one-time" costs as well as additional ongoing expenses that will need to be planned for via the Sewer Enterprise budget process. The most significant one-time task associated with the SSMP is performing a baseline video inspection and evaluation of the entire gravity sewer.~ystem. Preliminary estimates indicate that this task will cost nearly $400,000/year for five years. . It is further estimated that the ongoing operation and maintenance (O&M) cost will increase by approximately $120,000 to 145,000 per year. This increase represents an 8-10% annual operating expenditure increase. The additional O&M expenses are primarily related to deploying a niore aggressive hydro-flushing and sewer main maintenance program. Both one-time and ongoing additional costs would need to be paid out of the Sewer Operation Fund and financed by ongoing sewer service charges. Summary The SWRCB mandates that the SSMP be adopted and certified by August 2, 2009. Once implemented, this program is estimated to increase Sewer Enterprise operating expenses by as much as 10% per year; however, through a shift to an increasingly proactive (preventative) maintenance strategy, the City will significantly reduce its exposure to sanitary sewer overflows and resulting NPDES violations and third party lawsuits. Over time, similar to other preventative maintenance techniques, the SSMP will most likely help the City realize a net reduction in overall operating expenses while improving sewer service to the citizens of Rohnert Park. Enclosures: Resolution SWRCB Order No. 2006-0003 Fact Sheet SWRCB Order No. 2006-0003 Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) CITY ATTORNEY'S REVIEW: Relevant documents for this agenda item have been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: ( ) Consent Item ( ) Approval ( ) Public Hearing Required ( ) Not Recommended ( ) Submitted with Comment (. ) Policy Determination by Council ( ) City Comments: (X) Regular Tiine Per Interim City Manager's review and direction for distribution of this agenda item. (Revised 031309) JH:TG-S:05-b .,. Attachment 25e Rohnert Park Street Maintenance The city does not currently fund street maintenance from the General Fund-only restricted funds dedicated to street maintenance are used. This is a policy decision that the Council can revisit at any time. Funding for street maintenance comes from the federal government, state government, and a local special sales tax measure. Over the last several years, Rohnert Park received the following funds for street maintenance projects (per year average): Federal Funds: Gas Tax Prop. 42 Measure M Total: $486,000 $470,000 $ 70,000 $240.000 $1,266,000 . Rohnert Park's overall average Pavement Condition Index is rated as "Good" . The majority (61 %) of streets are rated "Excellent" or "Very Good" . About 19% of Rohnert Park's streets are rated Poor and Very Poor . There is a current deferred pavement maintenance cost of $32 million . To maintain the current pavement condition, $3.2 million per year is needed (see figure below) PavementCMdltlonlMexb:v AMualFul'lding Level El<<;Elllenl 90 as 76 AnlUUlIFul1dlil9 ao : !E ~ oi g VeJyGooo 70 Co) .. I c. -$Ull MWi!)n. El/Peellad Annuall'ludgef ~$:;t2 Millwll . Tomalntam Currem PCI ___ $4,4 MilIiIln . five Pom I ine in PCI 60 -+- $6,3 Million. Need$ Average 5S Good 50" 2GOO 2G09 Q010 201 \ 1Cl12 1Cl13 2014 2015 2(l11l Q(}l1 AnalYlIlllYtlllf The annual pavement maintenance funding shortfall is approximately $2 million. Preventative maintenance if done early, often, and on appropriate streets is more cost effective than waiting until streets fail. Some streets in Rohnert Park are past the preventative maintenance portion of their life. At current funding levels, more streets will fall in the category of replacement rather than rehabilitation. Replacement is many times more expensive than maintaining what we have. While not explicitly studied, it is reasonable to estimate that there is at least an equal annual cost to maintain and replace the curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lights along the streets. That would mean a total street shortfall-pavement and adiacent non-pavement elements-of over $5 million annually. .,. Attachment 26a THE OFFICE OF THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER ....".. ~.. City of Rohnert Park. 130 Avram Avenue. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 . [707] 588.2226 . Fax: [707] 792.1876 MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: CC: JUNE 24, 2010 CITY COUNCIL JOHN DUNN CITY ATTORNEY DEPARTMENT HEADS, CITY CLERK CONSIDERATION OF SEWER RATE ADJUSTMENTS RE: Bet you have been waiting for this memo! In November of 2008 the citizens of Rohnert Park approved Measure l, a citizen-group proposed Initiative, which was approved by 52.8 to 47.2% of the vote, which Measure provided for a 40% rollback in sewer rates and pulled the rates back to 2006 levels. Since that time the rates for sewer service have not been adequate to pay for the service. Essentially the sewer service rates produced $ll.5M in income in 2007-2008 and about $7,200,000 in 2009-10. The City then attempted to make up for the sewer rate revenue loss by use of the Rate Stabilization Reserve which was at $6,450,000 in 07-08, and will be depleted next fiscal year, 2011-12. In short, the City has a very dangerous and unsustainable situation in its Sewer Fund, which will not only deplete the Fund but, to continue present sewer service, would compel an enormous drain on the City's General Fund, which is also not sustainable. Most City officials appreciate that water and sewer services are largely taken for granted, certainly as long as water comes out of the faucet and the toilet flushes. These services, unlike parks and recreation service and public safety, are largely "out of sight, out of mind," expected to work, and expected to be economical. We also know that the actual cost of providing these services, with all the requirements and mandates placed on us by the State and Federal governments, continue to grow year after year. .,. Historically, this hasn't always been the case, when, at the turn of the century (1900), The Shame of the Cities (a book by Lincoln Steffens) was about (in part) unreliable and unsafe water supplies and sewage flowing in the streets. In the 50's and 60's California cities were desperately trying to "catch up" in their water and sewer needs with great citizen support because of the neglect to them during the Depression and World War II years. In Rohnert Park currently the Sewer Fund situation is so dire and in need of remediation that the staff, rate consultant and, more importantly, our bond trustee and bond holders, are expressing serious concerns, with the latter two asking for corrective measures, that is, substantial rate increases sufficient to correct the projected shortfall and to restore the Fund to fiscal health. In the last few weeks our staff Ad Hoc sewer rate group (Sandy, Darrin, John M. and. myself) has been at work framing the issue and gathering information for subsequent presentation to the City Council (hopefully late July). We have been collecting information for our rate consultant, looking at mandates placed on the City, manpower needs in this function in the near future, producing "status quo" and "what is necessary" financial projections, and examining related issues. However, the paramount issue is that, last time around, some citizens of our community took great issue with the proposed sewer rate increases and not only killed the proposed increases, but set the rates back to a lower level. As stated, this has had a very harmful effect on the City's ability to pay for this service but, in the minds of some has produced a legal question "given what happened with Measure l, can we move forward on sewer rate increases?" Our answer is, "yes, we must as a matter of great civic necessity move forward, consistent with the requirement of State law regarding such rate increases (Proposition 4)." The City Attorney, at the appropriate point, will be asked to assist the City in this respect. However, we also recognize that the days may be gone when a City CounCil/City staff can unilaterally determine what they believe is best for the City. Similar to Measure E, we must find ways for our citizens and business people to recognize that there is a .,. problem and assist in devising a solution to the problem, and to act as advocates in promoting the solution to their fellow citizens. In other words] given the history of this particular issue] some program of citizen involvement] communication] and education will undoubtedly have to be developed in order for our Sewer Fund to be restored to longer-term sustainability. Obviously] this is a complex financial and technical issue] and many more points could be made and will be made in discussing this issue subsequently with the Council. However] I thought it important to discuss the "threshold issue'] of citizen involvement] acceptance, and agreement with what has to be done. I am asking each of you to give thought to this issue] as the staff will continue to do, so that we can work together to develop an approach most likely to succeed. Thank you. .,. Attachment 26a THE OFFICE OF THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER - City of Rohnert Park. 130 Avram Avenue. Rohnert Park, CA 94928. [707] 588-2226 . Fax: [707] 792-1876 MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: RE: JUNE 30, 2010 CITY COUNCIL, DEPARTMENT HEADS JOHN DUNN FUTURE SEWER RATE ADJUSTMENTS On June 25th (dated June 24th) I sent you a memo on the absolute necessity for considering sewer rate increases in the near future, as the Sewer Fund is in a rapid down-hill spiral. The strong implication of this memo was that if we did what we did before, raised rates, that we very well might get the same results, lose in the court of public opinion. I suggested some form of necessary public education, information process which would hopefully get us some public support on the issue, through citizen understanding of the issues involved. Attached are two idea papers, independently produced and different, though with a common understanding, the need for working with our community's citizens to gain their support. 1. My paper entitled, "What Should the City Do to Gain Citizen Support and Reduce Opposition to the Sewer Rate Increases" 2. John McArthur's paper entitled, "Proposed Sewer Rate Stakeholder Group" These should help you cure any bouts of insomnia you have during the Fourth of July weekend. Happy Holiday. H:JohnDunn/cover memo JD & JM Future Sewer Rate Adjustments .,. WHAT SHOULD THECITV DO TO GAIN CITIZEN SUPPORT AND REDUCE OPPOSITION TO THE SEWER RATE INCREASES (for Discussion and Refinement PurDoses): Generally: 1. We have to make an "iron dad" case to our citizens. 2. We have to enlist this support. 3. We need an advocacy group of citizens, residents and business community members. 4. We need objective, straight-forward education materials. 5. We should speak before as many community groups as possible. 6. We must aim for the support of the Sonoma Press Democrat and the Community Voice. 7. The "organizational team" will largely be the City Council and the City Manager, Department Heads, recruited volunteers, and City employee groups. Even more so than Measure E, since part of this informational campaign will take place during the election season, internal Council unity is essential to help prevent a successful initiative/referendum against the new sewer rates. 8. Bottom line: As far as protecting the General Fund and preventing lay-offs and service cuts, the sewer rate increase is at least as important as Measure E (Measure E is projected to bring in $2.8 million per year, the sewer fund (without an increase) would have to be subsidized by over $3M per year). Reminder: We cannot use City resources for advocacy purposes; we can for education and informative purposes. Reminder No.2: Materials produced should not look cheap, neither should they be overly professional looking. Reminder No.3: Keep the message simple and consistent. TASKS TO GAIN CITIZEN SUPPORT FOR A SEWER RATE INCREASE:' I. Mobilize citizen volunteers for an advocacy group A. Solicit 3 names each from each City Councilmember and Department Head (the Committee candidates). B. Prepare and send i-page fact sheet to those serious about the need for sewer rate increases, saying the email will be followed up with phone call asking them to serve on a citizens' committee. C. Phone and ask them to serve. D. Invite those who volunteered to serve to a meeting, keep an e-mail contact with those who couldn't make meeting. E. Since their purpose is advocacy, ask them to be independent, to select their own leaders, to raise money as necessary for their activities. Their task basically is to let our citizens know of the critical need for a sewer rate increase and to gain citizen support to supplement the City's educational efforts. "? 2. Gain the support of the two newspapers A. Mayor and City Manager meet with Sandy, Darrin and John M. to prepare and review fact sheet and other preparation materials. B. Mayor and City Manager make appointments with newspaper representatives, discuss importance of issue to City, and ask for their support. 3. Prepare public information materials A. Prepare information for sending out with sewer/water bills. B. Prepare information for public presentations. C. Prepare "hand out" educational materials for City Hall, all of City Centers and other public and private locations. 4. Speak to Community Groups A. Staff to organize lists of Community groups B. Organize internal "speakers bureau." C. Call them up, ask to speak to them at next meeting. . 5. Consider door-to-door informational distribution (very labor intensive, but effective). 6. Phone Calls A. Some consider intrusive. B. Citizens Committee might use effectively by focusing on opinion leaders, heads of organizations, etc. 7. Paid Advertising A. If used, would probably be done by Citizen Committee B. If used, keep it simple 8. Other (?) Basic question: Is this approach overly elaborate, should it be simplified (remembering Dunn's law- it's better to do too much, than too little). H:John Dunn/citizen support for sewer rate increase .,. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Department of Public Works" & Community Service 600 Entetprise Drive . Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Phone (107) 588-3300 . MEMORANDUM Subject: June 29, 2010 J obn Dunn, Interim City MM1ager Jobn.McArthur, Director of Public Works and Community Services ~r~ Proposed Sewer Rate Stakeholder Group Date: To: From: I have few thoughtS and suggestions to share with you regarding the pending sewer rate adjustment that could help this process move forward as smoothly as possible. I suggest creating a focus group of key stakeholders to study this issue and build as much consensus as possible, prior to proceeding with the other legal steps involved with rate adjustments. The issue of sewer rates is very complicated and has been the source of contention and heated emotions throughout Sonoma County - Robnett Park being no exception to this. Adjusting sewer rates involves much more than achieving a bottom line target revenue. The rate" structure itself is in itself very complex and confusing to those that are "in the business" let alone the public who would have no concept of these issues, other than the bottom line out of pocket costs. The stakeholder group could include city staff, sewer rate consultant, local business representatives, citizens, contractors,. seniors, developers, local ine~ and others that are. known to oppose utility rate changes (MeasureL sponsors). The stakeholder group could meet regularly to study the problem and wresde the more complex iss.ue of how to distribute the costs (who pays). I "believe the advantages of this approach are many, including: 1. Creating an opportUnity to educate and raise pu1;>lic awareness 2. . Minimizing the opposition early in the process 3. Developjng early consensus 4. Creating credibility' and trust within the community S. Receiving and incorporating community input 6. Minimizing politics The disadvantages of this approach include: 1. Additional strain on staff - this will create a burden on staff, and 2. An overall longer rate adjustment process - this process may take three to six months. .,. Department of Public Works and Community Services . Page 2 I have participated in a similar process with my previous employer and the. found that it was worth the effort.. The srnkeholder group was created as an adhoc committee and fonned by staff. The city council did not take fonnalaction in creating this committee, but.did provide input on the committee participants. Staff reported regularly on the progress of the committees and disbanded it once the objectives of the " " committee were met. I also did a brief internet query on the formation of such a committee; it appears that many districts have fonned similar committees, but committee formation process varied substantially from district to. district. I hope you find this information useful. Please let me know if ~nu need more information or want to discuss further. Thanks. .,. Community Development Commission of the City of Rohnert Park Cash Flow Statement 2010/11 Estimated Budget Cash Balance, July 1, 2010 Cash from tax increment Intere~t earned cash - tax increment ANTICIPATED SOURCES OF CASH Property Tax Increment Housing set-aside Operating Reserve (5%)<Cds> 2007R TABs interest earnings for debt service 2007H TABs interest earnings for debt service Total Anticipated Sources of Cash ANTICIPATED USES OF CASH Dues & Subscriptions Advertising/Publications Travel & Meetings Contractual services: Trustee fees/bond issues County property tax admin fee Auditing Fees Legal expense Consultant Fees Homeless Services $CCDC - 2009 Homeless Count Shared Living Homes COTS Emergency Repairs/Maintenance Proposed Housing Programs (non-bond) Proposed Capital Improvement Projects (non-bond) Golf Course CIP Fund Contribution Payments to City of Rohnert Park: Administration fee-City general fund Allocation for Housing & Redevelopment Salaries Debt Service Payments: GF loan interest payments GF loan principal payments Land lease payments (Community Center Complex) 1991 TARBs 1999 TABs 2001 TARBs 2003 LRBs 2007R TABs 2007H TABs Shift of RDA Funds to ERAF Total Anticipated Uses of Cash Cash Balance, June 30, 2011, Estimated Attachment 27a Redevelopment Fund $1,831,596 $568,134 $7,357,920 ($2,225,384) ($379,000) $973,918 $8,127,184 Attachment 27a . Low & Moderate Housing Fund $91,218 $0 $2,225,384 $0 $100,000 $2,416,602 $3,600 $5,000 $1,000 $5,000 $130,000 $4,000 $20,000 $50,000 $0 $20,000 $675,000 $53,801 $194,220 $83,000 $241,000 $464,000 $395,000 $310,934 $442,016 $973,918 $894,000 $4,965,489 $3 l~,f,~ I .'$ $4,500 $5,000 $3,000 $30,000 $4,000 $40,000 $50,000 $2,194 $10,000 $0 $526,000 $53,801 $116,000 $77,734 $855,694 $1,777,923 $C$~1!I,''79 .,. Attachment 27c1 THE OFFICE OF THE INTERIM ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER .m... .~ City of Rohnert Park. 130 Avram Avenue. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 . [707] 588.2226 . Fax: [707] 792.1876 MEMORANDUM DATE: AUGUST 4, 2010 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: JOHN DUNN RE: CDC BUDGET -Community Facilities Projects Very Important Note: With recent changes in the State Redevelopment Law, particularly Senate bill 93, it is important to keep these five things in mind as we further consider CDC funding for Rohnert Park projects: 1. Items in the budget must be included in the CDC's approved five-year implementation plan. 2. CDC funds can be used for project construction. They cannot be used for operation or maintenance; that would fall to the City's General Fund. 3. With the exception of housing, projects must be within the defined project boundaries. If projects are not located within the project area, the legislative body must make certain findings based on substantial evidence of record. 4. Projects must provide their primary benefit to the project area. 5. Caused primarily by the State "take-aways" of Redevelopment Funds, the CDC budget now has cash flow issues which may influence the expenditure program. LISTED IN APPROXIMATE ORDER OF PRIORITY, FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES: 1. Demolition of former Southwest Boulevard Fire Station This building has been thoroughly discussed in the memo of July 13, 2010 and previously, after the cessation of the NOAH food distribution program, the rodent extermination, and the relocation of public safety equipment. The building currently sets empty. The City Council has subsequently made the decision to commence the process for demolition. The approved reuse is for low and moderate income housing, this project would probably occur at the same time as the larger housing project on Commerce and Avram. Estimated cost: Demolition process currently being worked on by Engineering staff, and the demolition would be paid for using CDC housing funds. .,. 1 2. Studv for SDrav Park and All-Weather Plav Fields. In the thinking of the staff, doing the preliminary work toward the establishment of one or both of these facilities is very important. However, we don't want to be guilty of "construct first, ask questions later." Issues that have been raised include: a. Should these facilities be primarily for the use/benefit of our own residents, or should they be planned as an attractor to address community economic development goals. b. Related, should these facilities be neighborhood, community, or regional, which would have an effect on selecting the appropriate location and in this case of the play fields, would they be used to attract larger tournaments. c. CDC funds can be used for development (if meeting certain criteria); they cannot be used for operation and maintenance. Therefore ,a major question is the impact of such facilities on the General Fund over the long term. d. "If they were built, would they come?" Community facilities here and elsewhere have been built on the belief or hope that they would be beneficial and have a sustaining revenue source. Sometimes it hasn't worked out as planned. e. It is conceivable, if the question is posed differently, that the answer could be a bit different than the one we currently anticipate. "What could we do in Rohnert Park to greatly solidify our position as a sports and recreational opportunity center, to the greatest advantage of our residents, our community image, and our General Fund?" For these and other reasons, the staff believes it is prudent, before moving ahead on a "project," that we retain the proper type of recreational facility feasibility and market analysis firm, and get a professional evaluation of what would best move us forward in this area. John McArthur's concept and Darrin/Pat's "Spray Park Option" papers are attached. As a point of information a single all-weather field is under discussion for inclusion in the Sonoma Mountain Village Specific Plan. Cost of these facilities currently unknown and depends on type, size, amenities, but potentially $2,000,000 or more for facilities; the cost of study is estimated at $40,000 plus. 3. Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster The City has received a letter request of Michael Newell, Ph.D., Executive Director of the 5MBC, which essentially asks for $888,000 to be granted to them to enable them to pay off their loan to Codding Enterprises for tenant improvements. The letter also spells out the efforts and benefits of the 5MBC program. The City recently received the "2011 City of Rohnert Park Local Economic Report" published by the Economic Development Board of Sonoma County, in conjunction with the Workforce Investment Board and our local Chamber of Commerce. Our .,. 2 unemployment rate in the City is presently 11.2%, and the number of jobs in the City has gone from about 27,004 in 2007/08 to 22,100 in 2010, its lowest level in 10 years. It can be said that the creation of jobs and the reduction of unemployment is one of the basic tasks ofthe City on behalf of our citizens. The City is working on its own community-resource based Economic Development Plan but unless there is sufficient staff to devote to this task, it will probably make slow progress. Therefore, at the present time, and before there is substantial economic recovery, probably our best chance of creating jobs is through the program of the Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster. If this grant is made to them it should be structured in such a way as to provide maximum benefit to the City and its residents. Cost: $888,000 if the full request were to be granted, or $444,000 each year over 2 years. 4. Avram Affordable HousinR: Feasibilitv Studv In 2008, the CDC acquired three parcels located at 6750 Commerce Boulevard, 100 and 120 Avram Avenue to develop affordable housing. Housing Bond proceeds were utilized to acquire these sites. The CDC needs to move forward with development of these sites in order to eliminate the blighted conditions that exist and meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation ("RHNA") for 2007 through 2014. A Request for Proposals ("RFP") solicitation process in 2008 did not result in the selection of a qualified developer. Prior to initiating another RFP process, a feasibility study should be performed to determine the highest and best use for the properties, to analyze the pros and cons of developing for rent versus for sale property, and to explore the market potential of these sites and impact on City revenues. A feasibility study would drive the process forward based on Council input. Once the Council has established its vision for the Avram properties, an architect could work with Council to establish drawings that illustrate preferred architectural styles. This would provide developers and staff with the capacity to bring proposals forward that clearly reflect Council's vision. The estimated cost for the feasibility study would be $12,000-$15,000, the source of funding would be Redevelopment Bond proceeds. 5. Commercial BuildinR: Improvement ProR:ram This type of program is often referred to as a Fa~ade Improvement program but it can be more than that. The basic idea is to improve the attractiveness/function of a commercial area by upgrading the facilities, eliminating vacancies, upgrading tenants, and restoring vitality. Done right, it would require an enthusiastic, cooperative and 3 capable property owner, willing to put up their own money, preferably on a matching fund basis. Excellent criteria for program participation would have to be developed so that true community economic development takes place. Questions of grant, loan, forgivable loan, bond of taxable debt vs taxable debt, etc. would have to be resolved. The usual payback to the City would be from property sales and TOT taxes and assistance to surrounding areas. Cost: Unknown at present; would have to be negotiated with property owner. 6. limited Community SiI:m ProJ;tram This idea is a component of the Corridor Plan developed by the City, but is thought to have merit on its own. We are all familiar with signing programs that are extensive, elaborate and expensive. What we're thinking of here would be limited to major streets and major attractions, and attractive/functional rather than fancy. The sign could point to community facilities only, or could also include private-sector draws and major retail and major private recreation facilities, Sonoma Mountain Village, being one example. The basic idea is that if we desire to move from a primarily residential City to an economic development "attractor," and gain more outside visitation, we need to provide some "good neighbor" assistance to our visitors in getting them around the City. Rohnert Park has a good number of desired community facilities and we need to do a better job of promoting our own facilities. Cost: Unknown at present: program would be limited in scope to limit cost. 7. ProvidinJ;t Incentives for Certain HiJ;thly Beneficial DeveloDments There may be opportunities to facilitate development by constructing public improvements using redevelopment funds. Certain developments can increase property values, generate general fund revenue, and create jobs. One example would be the addition of a major brand-name hotel. Such a project could generate up to $200,000 per year in general fund revenue through transient occupancy taxes and property taxes. Some agencies develop policies regarding use of redevelopment funds to facilitate projects. For instance, a policy requiring a six-year payback period on redevelopment funds yields an investment of up to $1.2 million in this example. The $1.2 million could be used as a loan to the City's infrastructure financing program (Public Facilities Financing Fee Program) to construct nearby infrastructure such as streets and traffic signals. Eventually the CDC would be paid back its principal investment. .,. 4 There may be other means of incentivizing general fund revenue generating development project. We recommend reserving a portion of the CDC capacity for such projects. 8. Ener~ Savin~s Improvements to Communitv Center Complex (Community Center, Sports Center) With the PAC needing a new roof, and with other changes/rehabilitations needed, is it timely to consider long-term reduction of costs through the development of energy savings improvements. Further staff analysis is being done on this. It would make sense to proceed on this only if there are real cost savings and a reasonable pay-back period. Summary: The above listing of potential projects is the result of staff meetings on this topic. City Council/CDC members may wish to suggest others for further analysis. In considering these projects it is good to keep two principles in mind: the first is that we should use accumulated CDC funds for the benefit of the community as facilities that either benefit our own residents, or that prevent blight or aid in the City's economic development efforts. The second is that, particularly given State take-aways, we should spend wisely and reserve sufficient funding in our CDC accounts so that we can face any community contingency. Special thanks to Linda and Darrin for their assistance in the above. H:JD/ CDC BUDGET -<:ommunity Facilities Projects .,. 5 Revised Attachment 27cl THE OFFICE OF THE INTERIM ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER City of Rohnert Park. 130 Avram Avenue. Rohnert Park, CA 94928. [707] 588-2226 . Fax: [707] 792.1876 MEMORANDUM (New annotated version citing potential funding source and availability) DATE: AUGUST 4,2010 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: JOHN DUNN RE: CDC BUDGET -Community Facilities Projects Very Important Note: With recent changes in the State Redevelopment Law, particularly Senate bill 93, it is important to keep these five things in mind as we further consider CDC funding for Rohnert Park projects: 1. Items in the budget must be included in the CDC's approved five-year implementation plan. 2. CDC funds can be used for project construction. They cannot be used for operation or maintenance; that would fall to the City's General Fund. 3. With the exception of housing, projects must be within the defined project boundaries. If projects are not located within the project area, the legislative body must make certain findings based on substantial evidence of record. 4. Projects must provide their primary benefit to the project area. 5. Caused primarily by the State "take-aways" of Redevelopment Funds, the CDC budget . now has cash flow issues which may influence the expenditure program. LISTED IN APPROXIMATE ORDER OF PRIORITY, FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES: 1. Demolition of former Southwest Boulevard Fire Station This building has. been thoroughly discussed in the memo of July 13, 2010 and previously, after the cessation of the NOAH food distribution program, the rodent extermination, and the relocation of public safety equipment. The building currently sets empty. The City Co.uncil has subsequently made the decision to commence the process for demolition. The approved reuse is for low and moderate income housing, this project would probably .occur at the sarne time as the larger housing project on Commerce and Avram. Estimated cost: Demolition process currently being worked on by Engineering staff, and the demolition would be paid for using CDC housingfunds. .,. 1 Funding Source: 2007 Housing Tax Allocation Bonds Funds Available: $13,129,823 Sufficient availability of funds to fully fund demolition 2. Study for Spray Park and All-Weather Play Fields. In the thinking of the staff, doing the preliminary work toward the establishment of one or both of these facilities is very important. However, we don't want to be guilty of "construct first, ask questions later." Issues that have been raised include: a. Should these facilities be primarily for the use/benefit of our own residents, or should they be planned as an attractor to address community economic development goals. b. Related, should these facilities be neighborhood, community, or regional, which would have an effect on selecting the appropriate location and in this case of the play fields, would they be used to attract larger tournaments. c. CDC funds can be used for development (if meeting certain criteria); they cannot be used for operation and maintenance. Therefore a major question is the impact of such facilities on the General Fund over the long term. d. "If they were built, would they come?" Community facilities here and elsewhere have been built on the belief or hope that they would be beneficial and have a sustaining revenue source. Sometimes it hasn't worked out as planned. e. It is conceivable, if the question is posed differently, that the answer could be a bit different than the one we currently anticipate. "What could we do in Rohnert Park to greatly solidify our position as a sports and recreational opportunity center, to the greatest advantage of our residents, our community image, and our General Fund?" For these and other reasons, the staff believes it is prudent, before moving ahead on a "project," that we retain the proper type of recreational facility feasibility and market analysis firm, and get a professional evaluation of what would best move us forward in this area. John McArthur's concept and Darrin/Pat's "Spray Park Option" papers are attached. As a point of information a single all-weather field is under discussion for inclusion in the Sonoma Mountain Village Specific Plan. Cost of these facilities currently unknown and depends on type, size, amenities, but potentially $2,000,000 or more for facilities; the cost of study is estimated at $40,000 plus. Funding Source: 2007 Redevelopment Tax Allocation Bonds Funds Available: $4,795,443 Funding Source: 1999 Tax Allocation Bonds Funds Available: $627,354 Availability of funds subject to Council prioritization .,. 2 3. Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster The City has received a letter request of Michael Newell, Ph.D., Executive Director of the 5MBC, which essentially asks for $888,000 to be granted tothemto enable them to pay off their loan to Codding Enterprises for tenant improvements. The letter also spells out the efforts and benefits of the 5MBC program. The City recently received the 1f2011 City of Rohnert Park Local Economic Report" published by the Economic Development Board of Sonoma County, in conjunction with the Workforce Investment Board and our local Chamber of Commerce. Our unemployment rate in the City is presently 11.2%, and the number of jobs in the City has gone from about 27,004 in 2007/08 to 22,100 in 2010, its lowest level in 10 years. It can be said that the creation of jobs and the reduction of unemployment is one of the basic tasks of the City on behalf of our citizens. The City is working on its own community-resource based Economic Development Plan but unless there is sufficient staff to devote to this task, it will probably make slow progress. Therefore, at the present time, and before there is substantial economic recovery, probably our best chance of creating jobs is through the program of the Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster. If this grant is made to them it should be structured in such a way as to provide maximum benefitto the City and its residents. Cost: $888,000 if the full request were to be granted, or $444,000 each year over 2 years. Funding Source: 2007 Redevelopment Tax Allocation Bonds Funds Available: $4,795,443 Funding Source: 1999 Tax Allocation Bonds Funds Available: $627,354 Availability of funds subject to Council prioritization 4. Avram Affordable Housing Feasibilitv Study In 2008, the CDC acquired three parcels located at 6750 Commerce Boulevard, 100 and 120 Avram Avenue to develop affordable housing. Housing Bond proceeds were utilized to acquire these sites. The CDC needs to move forward with development of these sites in order to eliminate the blighted conditions that exist and meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (IfRHNA") for 2007 through 2014. A Request for Proposals (IfRFP") solicitation process in 2008 did not result in the selection of a qualified developer. Prior to initiating another RFP process, a feasibility study should be performed to determine the highest and best use for the properties, to analyze the pros and cons of developing .,. 3 for rent versus for sale property, and to explore the market potential of these sites and impact on City revenues. A feasibility study would drive the process forward based on Council input. Once the Council has established its vision for the Avram properties, an architect could work with Council to establish drawings that illustrate preferred architectural styles. This would provide developers and staff with the capacity to bring proposals forward that clearly reflect Council's vision. The estimated cost for the feasibility study would be $12,000-$15,000; the source of funding would be Redevelopment Bond proceeds. Funding Source: 2007 Housing Tax Allocation Bonds Funds Available: $13,129,823 Sufficient availability of funds to fully fund feasibility study 5. Commercial Building Improvement Program This type of program is often referred to as a Fa~ade Improvement program but it can be more than that. The basic idea is to improve the attractiveness/function of a commercial area by upgrading the facilities, eliminating vacancies, upgrading tenants, and restoring vitality. Done right, it would require an enthusiastic, cooperative and capable property owner, willing to put up their own money, preferably on a matching fund basis. Excellent criteria for program participation would have to be developed so that true community economic development takes place. Questions of grant, loan, forgivable loan, bond of taxable debt vs taxable debt, etc. would have to be resolved. The usual payback to the City would be from property sales and TOT taxes and assistance to surrounding areas. Cost: Unknown at present; would have to be negotiated with property owner. FundingSource: 2007 Redevelopment Tax Allocation Bonds Funds Available: $4,795,443 Funding Source: 1999 Tax Allocation Bonds Funds Available: $627,354 Availability of funds subject to Council prioritization 6. Limited Community Sign Program This idea is a component of the Corridor Plan developed by the City, but is thought to have merit on its own. We are all familiar with signing programs that are extensive, elaborate and expensive. What we're thinking of here would be limited to major streets and major attractions, and attractive/functional rather than fancy. The sign could point to community facilities only, or could also include private-sector draws and major retail and major private recreation facilities, Sonoma Mountain Village, being one example. .,. 4 The basic idea is that if we desire to move from a primarily residential City to an economic development "attractor," and gain more outside visitation, we need to provide some "good neighbor" assistance to our visitors in getting them around the City. Rohnert Park has a good number of desired community facilities and we need to do a better job of promoting our own facilities. Cost: Unknown at present: program would be limited in scope to limit cost. Funding Source: 2007 Redevelopment Tax Allocation Bonds Funds Available: $4,795,443 Funding Source: 1999 Tax Allocation Bonds Funds Available: $627,354 Availability of funds subject to Council prioritization 7. Providing Incentives for Certain Highlv Beneficial Developments There may be opportunities to facilitate development by constructing public improvements using redevelopment funds. Certain developments can increase property values, generate general fund revenue, and create jobs. One example would be the addition of a major brand-name hotel. Such a project could generate up to $200,000 per year in general fund revenue through transient occupancy taxes and property taxes. Some agencies develop policies regarding use of redevelopment funds to. facilitate projects. For instance, a policy requiring a six-year payback period on redevelopment funds yields an investment of up to $1.2 million in this example. The $1.2 miUion could be used as a loan to" the City's infrastructure financing program (Public Facilities Financing Fee Program) to construct nearby infrastructure such as streets and traffic signals. Eventually the CDC would be paid back its principal investment. There may be other means of incentivizing general fund revenue' generating development project. We recommend reserving a portion of the CDC capacity for such projects. Funding Source: 2007 Redevelopment Tax Allocation Bonds Funds Available: $4,795,443 Funding Source: 1999 Tax Allocation Bonds Funds Available: $627,354 Availability of funds subject to Council prioritization .,. 5 8. Energy Savings Improvements to Community Center Complex (Community Center, Sports Center) With the PAC needing a new roof, and with other changes/rehabilitations needed, is it timely to consider long-term reduction of costs through the development of energy savings improvements. Further staff analysis is being done on this. It would make sense to proceed on this only if there are real cost savings and a reasonable pay-back period. Funding Source: 2007 Redevelopment Tax Allocation Bonds Funds Available: $4,795,443 Funding Source: 1999 Tax Allocation Bonds Funds Available: $627,354 Availability of funds subject to Council prioritization Summary: The above listing of potential projects is the result of staff meetings on this topic. City Council/CDC members may wish to suggest others for further analysis. In considering these projects it is good to keep two principles in mind: the first is that we should use accumulated CDC funds for the benefit of the community as facilities that either benefit our own residents, or that prevent blight or aid in the City's economic development efforts. The second is that, particularly given State take-aways, we should spend wisely and reserve sufficient funding in our CDC accounts so that we can face any community contingency. Special thanks to Linda and Darrin for their assistance in the above. H:JDI CDC BUDGET -Comm~nity Facilities Projects .,. 6 Attachment 27cl CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Department of Public Works & Community Service MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Subject: July 19,2010 John Dunn, Interim City Manager John McArthur, Director of Public Works & Community Services 7"" ~ Recreation Amenities - Preliminaty Discussion The following discussion briefly summarizes recreational facility alternatives that may have the potential to not only be financially self-sustaining, but to also generate significant income to the City. Several recreational facilities have been discussed in various forums in the past, but have not been previously analyzed through the lens of revenue generation and economic development. At first glance, it appears that large-scale spray parks, all weather fields, and indoor pools have the greatest revenue-generating potential. TIlls initial observation is based upon the following: . Staff experience; . Observations in other communities; . Community feedback; . New trends in recreation - perhaps reflective of changillg demographics; and . Feasibility in Rohnett Park . As a qualifier to the following discussion - these thoughts are preliminary at best and have not been fully developed. If there is any merit to these thoughts and ideas, a more in-depth analysis will be needed to select a project offering the greatest community benefit. The issues of what to build, where to locate it, and what supplemental facilities should accompany it, as well as regional appeal and revenue capacity are beyond staffs expertise. As a first step, I suggest deferring this matter to a professional consultant to perform a comprehensive recreation amenity feasibility study. Spray Parks Compared to traditional swimming pools, spray parks have the advantage of lower operational costs with the ability to generate the same amount of income. Revenue-generating capability is an important consideration to avoid creating a future burden on the General Fund. Sprayparks can be designed so that they are freely accessible to the public as part of a park, or can be constructed with perimeter fencing and charged admission. Either way, staffing and heating costs would be significantly lower than a pool. Spray park revenue generating capability would seem to be reliant on a number of things - all related to facilitating large scale public use. Ideally, a spray park would be: . Accessible and convenient to all residents; . Marketable as a regional attraction - tap the outside market; . Big enough to accommodate large crowds/groups; and . Incorporate a variety of features to attract all age groups. .,. 600 Enterprise Drive, Rohnert Park CA 94928, 707588-3300 . Page 2 Small-Scale Neighborhood Spray Parks During the 2009 Alicia and Ladybug Pool community workshops, there was a clear public desire to see sprayparks installed at both pool sites. The reuse of these locations will soon be discussed with the Parks and Rec. Commission. However, for purposes of this discussion on revenue generation, creating two small neighborhood spray parks does not appear to carry a significant enough revenue-generating capacity to warrant further consideration.. The reason for this is location - difficult access for outsiders, not marketable as a regional attraction, too isolated to attract large crowds, and too small of an area to build a significant multi-use facility. The small water feature in the new Civic Center Plaza has been a big hit for families during major events. However, as popular as this mini-spray park is, it is not significant enough. to ever become a regional attraction or stand alone as a revenue generator. Although located in a highly accessible area, this type of mini-spray park serves as a complementary feature to other events on the plaza, but is not substantial enough to attract large crowds or be a self-sustaining amenity. Large-Scale Neighborhood Spray Parks Incorporating a large-scale water feature into the Community Center Complex would create an exciting amenity that would make the entire complex a destination place for many families on hot days. An important design element of the water feature would be the ability to turn it off when necessary allowing for other activities to be held in the courtyard. This concept could generate enough revenue to at least be self sustaining while enhancing the other facilities' bottom line. For example; the City of San Jose's Chavez Plaza has a large multi-use spray feature that attracts hundreds of bathers on hot days and has created a vibrant, active recreational component into what was once a passive-use facility. Bringing more families into the Community Center complex would give much greater exposUre to the Perfonning Arts Center, Community Center and Sports & Fitness Center. The increased public awareness of these facilities could also result in increased revenue for all three facilities. All-Weather Sport Fields Organized sports for youth and adults are evolving from seasonal play to year-round activities. In addition to the traditional sports of baseball, soccer, and football; field sports such as lacrosse, rugby, ultimate Frisbee, and cricket are growing in popularity thereby increasing the demand on public parks' (fields) infrastructure. TIlls increased demand is a product of a broader scope of athletic ac;tivities and a change from seasonal to year-round demand. To meet the increasing demand for sports teams and tournaments, many communities are installing year-round multi-use sports turf that can readily accommodate multiple activities and attract tournaments. Existing Infrastructure and Lost Opportunity There are multiple fields located throughout Rohnert Park; some City-owned, and others located within the school district. City of Rohnert Park owns seven soccer fields; four with lights. The City does not own an all-weather field; however, within the next few years a single all-weather field is planned as part of the Sonoma Mountain Village Specific Plan. Also, the school district owns one all-weather field (at the high school) - this field has not been used for City functions but is reasonably close to Sunrise Park and the Community Center. There are thousands of participants using the City's turf fields. It appears that the City does not have enough fields to accommodate current demand - particularly with soccer and football. Furthermore, the City does not have the capability to host major tournaments - a lost revenue opportunity. The demand for fields is no longer just a seasonal demand; many of the sports leagues and programs have extended their seasons into the winter; and new sports, such as lacrosse and rugby, are now played yeaJ; round. Consequently, not only are we not able to meet the current demand for field use, our existing fields are . Page 3 being overused and are beginning to deteriorate. In particular, the increased winter use is a source of significant turf damage (a major cost). As previously mentioned, other Sonoma County cities are gradually transitioning from turf to all weather fields. With a growing demand for year-round athletic fields, and neighboring cities offering better recreational facilities, we may find ourselves in an unfavorable position in what appears to be a growing competitive market. All-Weather Fields - options/ costs/revenues Lighted, multi-use (multi-sport) fields appear to provide the maximum utility and benefit. Building these fields in tandem (two or more) also appear to be a required element to attract tournaments. Revenue generated from tournaments includes direct use fees, TOT income, and other sales tax. According to recent Chamber of Commerce figures, the average visitor spends $290/night. Considering the fact that sports tournaments can attract several thousand visitors for multiple nights - the revenue potential from a major tournament is significant. Other benefits of all weather fields include: . Reduced water consumption; . Lower O&M costs; . Year round use; and . Relief of wear and tear on existing turf fields While the day-to-day O&M costs of all-weather fields appear to be lower compared to traditional turf fields, it is important to consider all other expenses when making this comparison. Based on Engineering's preliminary analysis (attached), the City should anticipate nearly $40,OOO/year/field in costs associated with all-weather fields. The most significant cost is depreciation - the field material is very expensive and has an eight year life expectancy. Location and Configurations Ideally, all-weather fields would be constructed in tandem or located reasonably close to another single field. This arrangement would facilitate tournaments which have the greatest revenue-generating potential. Other considerations with field locations include accessibility and utilization of existing lighted fields. Possible configurations could be: 1. Two new fields at Magnolia Park; 2. One new field at Magnolia Park - could work in tandem with the new field at SMV; 3. One new field at Sunrise Park - could work in tandem with the high school field; or 4. Two or more new fields west of the freeway. Indoor Lap Swim Pool at the Callinan Sports & Fitness Center Lap swimming is one of the most popular recreational activities in the country. Water aerobics classes are also growing in popularity. The original master plan for the Callinan Sports & Fitness Center includes an indoor lap swim pool Nearly every Sports Center customer has inquired about a swimming pool - indoor swimming pools are an attractive amenity with most private sports and fitness centers. We believe-the addition of a small indoor pool would be a great addition to the Sports Center and would significantly increase our membership base and revenue. While the cost of constructing an indoor pool can be significant, careful planning and design considerations could reduce construction and operational costs. For example, the pool could be designed with only four or five lanes with a shallow depth, thus reducing the construction, heating and ventilation costs. The pool enclosure could be constructed of a steel frame and fiberglass panels with g~ss doors opening to a sun deck at a relative modest cost compared to conventional construction methods. . Page 4 The Sports Center locker rooms were designed with wall knock-outs so that they could also serve as restrooms and changing facilities for the originally planned pool Finally, the whirlpool spas that were recendy closed at the Sports Center could be relocated into a single coed spa on the pool deck. Costs and Revenue Considerations A detailed analysis is needed to fully explore this option. In the meantime, the following are a few preliminary thoughts: . High capital costs . High O&M costs . High revenue-generating capability - would eventually realize a positive cash flow (npv) . Beneficial to all three facilities (Sports Center, PAC, Community Center) . Feasible - sports center was originally conceived with a pool . Host swim meets and tournaments - a major revenue source . Allow for year-round swim lessons - masters and aqua-aerobic programs . Increase the City's competitive edge in the sports and fitness market Recommendation The thoughts and ideas I have discussed are ideas at best and are not fully developed or complete. There could be other worthwhile amenities that I have not considered in this discussion. The hope is that whatever amenity is chosen, that over its life cycle, it does not create a long-term burden on the General Fund. Ideally, this new feature would not only sustain itself, but bring supplemental revenue to the City in the form of user fees, TOT, and sales tax. From an initial glance, all of these options appear to be promising investments. However, this issue is both multi-faceted and complex. Before pursuing any option, many questions will have to be answered including: 1. What (if anything)to build, 2. Where to locate it, 3. What will this market ~bcal and regionally) support, 4. How to integrate with other City and local amenities, and 5. When (if ever) will it generate positive cash flow. Staff does not have the ability to fully answer these and other remaining questions. I recommend securing the services of an expert and perform a comprehensive recreation amenity study. 1bis study may serve as a strategic planning document that fully integrates recreation and development planning for these and future projects. Please let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss this further. Thanks. .,. Attachment: All weather field cost summary All Weather Field Cost Summary Dimensions Length Width Area Fence Perimeter Capital Costs Grading ADA Access to Site Field Bleachers Fence Lighting Misc /Contingency Total Construction Cost Design, CM & Admin Total Cost Operatinq Costs Sweeping 2 Times a Month Misc. Maintenance Replacement of Fabric Rental Management Lighting (Power) Lighting ( Maintenance) Total Annual Cost of Ownership Round To IV 121 Yds 71 Yds 8,400 Sq Yds 500 Yds Unit Cost 0.6 10,000 $8 $3, 105 $20 $300,000 Cost $80 $5,000 $226,800 $1,920 $1,500 $300 360 Ft 210 Ft 75,600 Ft 1,500 Ft Unit CY LS SF Each LF LS Years 1 8 1 1 1 Quantity 2,800 1 75,600 20 1,500 1 25% 36% Annual Cost $1,920 $5,000 $28,350 $1,920 $1,500 $300 $38,990 $40,000 Cost $1,680 $10,000 $604,800 $62,100 $30,000 $300,000 $252,145 $1,260,725 $453,861 $1,714,586 Comments Comments 30 Ft 3 Tier 6 Ft High Commercial $40 /Hour $40 /Hour 4 hours /Month Could be much greater depending on lighting type June 30, 2010 The Hon. Mayor Stafford City ofRohnert Park 130 A vram Avenue Rohnert Park CA 94928 SONOMA MOUNTAIN BUSINESS CLUSTER Dear Honorable Mayor Stafford and City Council Members Belforte, Breeze, Callinan and Mackenzie, As you know, the Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster (SMBC) has made a grant request to the Community Development Commission (CDC) in the amount of $888,000. This project is included in the CDC's five year plan as eligible for consideration for funding. The purpose of this letter is to make a formal request to consider this project for funding in the context of the City's 2010/11 budget currently being formulated. 5MBC is the North Bay's first and only business incubator, located here in Rohnert Park - at Sonoma Mountain Village. Weare an independent 501 c3 non-profit organization. Our mission is to create high value jobs by enabling and accelerating the success of technology startups and emerging growth companies. We are living through some very tough economic times right now, with unemployment higher than 11 %. Naturally people are concerned about job creation. 5MBC is Rohnert Park's job creation engine, with a goal of assisting at least 100 startups and creating more than 2000 jobs over the next 10 years. But, we need your help to achieve these goals. The benefits ofSMBC's continued growth and success to the City of Rohnert Park and its businesses are compelling. 5MBC is becoming THE HUB for startup and emerging growth companies for the whole North Bay region. This is attracting entrepreneurs and technology companies to Rohnert Park, and it is these innovators that will lead us out of the recession. Technology workers earn 80% more than the average worker in California, and by promoting innovative technology businesses, it helps to create and grow a knowledge-based economy here in the North Bay. These startup and growth companies will help to fill Rohnert Park's vacant commercial real estate, and contract with service and support businesses in Rohnert Park. Additionally, their employees will buy homes and shop at Rohnert Park's retail stores. In turn, this will result in increased property taxes and retail sales taxes. In terms of hard numbers, we project that the companies emerging from our program will generate $350M in cumulative payroll over the next 10 years, which will generate an estimated $3.5M increase in sales tax revenues for the City of Rohnert Park. We believe this makes 5MBC the highest impact job creation program in the North Bay region, and a good investment for the CDC's precious redevelopment dollars. We project a compound return on investment for the CDC of 15% per annum, returned via incremental sales tax revenues. Furthermore, business incubation has been shown to be the most cost effective means of creating jobs. A recent study published in 2009 by the Dept. of Commerce's Economic Development Administration shows business incubation to be up to twenty times (20X) more cost effective at creating job~ than any 1300 Valley House Drive . Suite 100 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 other mechanism. Business incubation has also proven to be extremely effective at local economic development with 84% of companies locating within 5 miles of the incubator facility after graduating from an incubator program. Clearly, the City of Rohnert Park stands to benefit enormously. If granted, the funds will be used to payoff the principle of the loan against the leasehold improvements that were performed to build our incubator facility (in the amount of $888,000). The impact of this is huge for 5MBC. Currently, we have a leasehold improvements loan on our books (principal of$888,726), accruing interest to the balance sheet at a rate of 6.0% annually. In order to pay off the principal by 2018 (the term of the loan), 5MBC needs to make annual payments of approximately $111,000. Interest charges are currently an additional $50,000 per year. So, operationally this grant would remove annual expenses of$161,000, and would remove an $888,000 liability from 5MBC's balance sheet. As discussed previously with you, 5MBC would welcome a "dollar-for-dollar" matching requirement for receiving this grant. This would allow the City confidence in knowing 5MBC is leveraging the CDC grant, but would also provide 5MBC additional leverage to raise other money. Currently, 5MBC has an additional liability of more than $800,000 on its balance sheet in unpaid rent. Our Board of Directors would use the CDC grant as leverage to remove this liability from our balance sheet. So, the total net benefit of this grant would be to remove $1.776M from 5MBC's balance sheet, and annual expenses of$161,000 from its operating budget. This has a hugely positive impact on 5MBC's viability and success moving forward. Furthermore, it makes 5MBC better able to attract donations . from foundations, corporations or other donors, when these liabilities are removed from our balance sheet. Without this kind of financial assistance from the CDC, 5MBC's Board of Directors has some very tough decisions in front of it. These liabilities cannot just be forgiven or received as a donation from the note holders without 5MBC losing its 50 I c3 non-profit status. Options to be considered by the board will include cutting staff and programs, restructuring its business model, or perhaps even closing the doors. Make no mistake; it is not all doom and gloom. Since opening to clients in 2007, 5MBC has posted many successful milestones. But we need the CDC's financial assistance to continue on this path of success. We have assisted more than 30 companies, and currently house 17 companies who in turn employ more than 70 people. A couple of our companies are poised to break out. For example, Pix20 have just made their first sale of a large screen LED digital display, and their product is being extremely well received. Their projections call for them to achieve $40M in annual sales within 3 years, and more than $100M in annual sales within 5 years. Exciting growth, I think you will agree!! Recently, 5MBC was named as the coordinator of the North Bay Innovation Hub (iHub), one of only six iHubs in the State of California. The iHub program is a California State initiative from the Governor's Office of Economic Development (or GOED). The purpose of the iHub program is to stimulate job creation in the State of California through regional collaboration and commercialization of technology. 5MBC is positioned to receive $200,000 in operational funding through the iHub program over the next year, and perhaps higher levels of funding in future years. More details of the iHub program are enclosed as an attachment. '" 1300 Valley House Drive Suite 1 00 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 We have just signed an agreement with a Venture Capital firm who will invest in companies here in the North Bay using 5MBC to generate deal flow. 5MBC has also attracted the federal support of Congresswoman Lynne Woolsey and Congressman Mike Thompson, who have made federal appropriations requests on behalf of 5MBC for a total of $11.5M to establish a world class center of excellence for laser research and applications. 5MBC has also established an endowment fund with the Sonoma Community Foundation, and is taking an equity stake in the companies being incubated. As these companies achieve success, this equity will convert to cash and the endowment fund will grow. The fund will grow to the point where it can support the activities of the incubator without any outside donations or financial support. So, in summary, 5MBC is on a path toward operational success and self-sufficiency, but we need the CDC's help to get there. I ask that you consider granting $888,000 to the Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster in the form of a grant or forgivable loan. Phasing the grant over a 2 year period would be acceptable to 5MBC if this is advantageous to the CDC. In return, over a 10 year period, 5MBC will create more than 2000 jobs, increase payrolls by more than $350M, return an estimated $3.5M to the Rohnert Park general fund, and provide the focus for job creation activity in the North Bay region. Please help us to continue to revitalize Rohnert Park's business and jobs base. Sincerely, ~0~ Michael P. Newell, PhD Executive Director Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster Tel: (707) 794-1240 Fax: (707) 794-0440 Emai1: michaeln@somobc.org '" 1300 Valley House Drive Suite 1 00 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Attachment 1 - North Bay iHub Summary Name North Bay iHub Certifying Body The iHub program is a California State initiative from the Governors Office of Economic Development (GOED). Purpose The purpose of the iHub program is to promote regional collaboration and commercialization of technology in order to stimulate job creation in the State of California. iHubs will achieve this by stimulating partnerships between non-profit economic development organizations, government entities, universities, businesses and investment networks to accelerate investment and economic development around research clusters. The North Bay iHub is one of only 6 iHubs approved by the State of California. The North Bay iHub will promote regional collaboration for the purpose of creating a continuum of support for young innovative growing technology companies throughout Sonoma Marin and Napa counties. Geographic region Served Sonoma, Marin and Napa counties. iHub Collaborators The regional organizations that have committed to collaborating as part of the North Bay iHub so far include: . · Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster (Coordinator) · Sonoma State University (SSU) · City of Rohnert Park · Rohnert Park Chamber of Commerce · City of Santa Rosa · Santa Rosa Chamber of Commerce · Sonoma County Economic Development Board · Marin Economic Forum · The North Bay Angels (Angel Investor Group) · SBDC at Santa Rosa Junior College Benefits of the iHub The designation as an iHub is expected to benefit Rohnert Park in the following ways: . Operational funding for 5MBC for activities supporting start-up and growth companies o $200,000 over the next 12 months, perhaps more in the future o Other opportunities to collaborate as a iHub group to attract funding . Referrals from GOED of companies looking to relocate to California . Enhanced partnership opportunities, national and international exposure, and increased marketing opportunities for companies within the iHub area . Connectivity to the most senior levels of government, business and universities through GOED . Sharing of best practices with other iHubs . Future collaborative activities could include statewide business plan competition, direct funding for companies, and others '" 1300 Valley House Drive Suite 1 00 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 July 13, 2010 Mr. John Dunn Ms. Linda Babonis City of Rohnert Park 130 A vram Avenue Rohnert Park CA 94928 SONOMA MOUNTAIN BUSINESS CLUSTER . Dear John and Linda, As you know, the Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster (SMBC) has made a grant request to the Community Development Commission (CDC) in the amount of $888,000. This project is included in the CDC's five year plan as eligible for consideration for funding. As the Economic Development Sub- committee and the Community Development Commission (CDC) meet to consider 5MBC's funding request, I thought it might be helpful to provide you some updated information. 5MBC is the North Bay's first and only business incubator, located here in Rohnert Park - at Sonoma Mountain Village. We are an independent 501 c3 non-profit organization. Our mission is to create high value jobs by enabling and accelerating the success of technology startups and emerging growth companies. We opened the doors to clients in July 2007, and in the ensuing 3 years 5MBC has begun to deliver on its goals. These were outlined in a recent letter to the Mayor and City Council, but can be summarized as: · 'Become THE HUB for startup and emerging growth companies for the whole North Bay region . Assist> 100 startups over 10 years . Create> 2000 jobs over 10 years · Help to fill Rohnert Park's vacant commercial real estate . Support Rohnert Park's service and retail businesses . Increase the City's sales tax and property tax revenues The incubation process takes approximately 3 years on average before the companies graduate. Weare now at the 3 year mark, and I would like to point to 3 concrete examples of the success we have achieved to date with the City's help: Pix2o, West Coast Solar and Escape. Pix20 are a current client of 5MBC, and their business is to make and sell large LED digital video screens. When they came to 5MBC in late 2008, the company consisted of just the two founders. Pix20 has enjoyed rapid growth since that time, and now employs approximately 20 people. Furthermore, their business is poised to expand rapidly. In June 2010 they sold their first production system, they have received their next production order, and are receiving rave reviews everywhere their system is displayed. Their systems sell for between $250,000 and $2,000,000 each. They are currently closing a round of investment, and once completed, are projecting their business will grow to $40M revenue within 3 years, and perhaps $100M within 5 years. Escape is the new company formed by Jon and Anthony Bergland. Their business is an indoor paintball and entertainment facility, and it now occupies the old Levitz building on Redwood Drive in Rohnert Park. This building is a large space (45,000 square feet) and was vacant since Levitz closed in 2008. Jon and Anthony participated in 5MBC's incubation program, and made many valuable contacts 1300 Valley House Drive Suite 100 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 during their tenure at 5MBC. The California Business Development group at 5MBC helped them develop their business plan for Escape, and assisted them in leasing the Levitz building. West Coast Solar are the fastest growing solar company in Sonoma county, and were a client of 5MBC until graduating recently. They joined the incubation program in 2009, and grew rapidly from just 2 founders to a workforce of approximately 20 people. In one year, they have grown from zero revenue to become a multi-million dollar revenue company. These are some specific examples that 5MBC is working diligently to deliver on its promises, and is . already demonstrating success. I also wanted to expand on the use of the funds s,hould 5MBC receive them. As you kno~, the $888,000 would be applied to the investment made in building out our incubator facility. Currently, 5MBC has a loan from Sonoma Mountain Village with a principle amount of $888,000. As the CDC considers our proposal, it's important to note that this will be a triple win for the City of Rohnert Park. Firstly, it will allow 5MBC to payoff the loan principle, . and continue on its mission to create jobs. Secondly, the "dollar for dollar" matching requirement we have discussed means that the city gets maximum leverage for their investment in 5MBC - attracting an additional $888,000 investment in 5MBC and Rohnert Park. Thirdly, we have obtained confirmation from Sonoma Mountain Village that the funds received from 5MBC would be re-deployed within Rohnert Park's redevelopment district- to continue making SMV a vital aspect of Rohnert Park's redevelopment. More specifically, Sonoma Mountain Village has agreed that the funds would be restricted for use only at Sonoma Mountain Village for the following purposes: [J Capital improvements to the property [J Investment in attracting new tenants and jobs at Sonoma Mountain Village [J Routine operating expenses of the property [J Costs of in-place bank financing that was used to improve the property (including 5MBC's leasehold improvements) and to help build-out space for existing tenants The funds would not be used for purposes of distributions to SMV's partners or payment of compensation to any Codding employees. 5MBC and SMV are committed to helping the CDC enhance job growth and redevelopment; the CDC's investment of the $888,000 in 5MBC will help our organization and SMV to continue supporting CDC's goals of local job growth and investment activity. Thanks again for the City's continued support of the Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster. I think our continued progress is a true testament to the partnership that we've built with the city. Sincerely, /l1i0 /~ Michael P. Newell, PhD Executive Director Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster Tel: (707) 794-1240 Fax: (707) 794-0440 Email: michaeln@somobc.org '" 1300 Valley House Drive Suite 100 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Benefits to Rohnert Park, its Businesses and Residents 1. The Leading Job & Business Creation Program . Assist> 100 startups over the next 10 years . Create >2000 jobs over the next 10 years. 2. Financial Benefits to City of Rohnert Park over 10 years . >$350M in cumulative payroll from incubator companies . $3.5M increase in projected sales tax revenues to City . Projected ROI of 15% per year 3. Effective Local Economic Development Method . Assist> 100 startups over the next 10 years . 84% of graduating companies locate <5 miles from incubator facility . Graduating companies will fill vacant real estate (commercial & industrial) . Create $350M in cumulative payroll over the next 10 years . Incubator businesses will contract with local service and support businesses . Employees will buy homes increasing property taxes · Employees will shop at local retail stores increasing retail sales & sales taxes. 4. Validated Model for Economic Development of Cities . Approximately 1500 business incubators in North America . Approximately 1 in 3 incubators are sponsored by government or economic development entities . Business incubation is twenty times (20X) more cost effective at creating jobs than any other method (per 2009 study by EDAlUS Dept. of Commerce) . San Jose is a good example o San Jose Redevelopment Agency has invested >$19M in incubators overthe past 10 years o The incubators have assisted >240 companies o Attracted >$500M in investment capital o Created >4000 jobs . o Generated> $12M in sales tax revenues 5. Triple Win for Rohnert Park through Financial Leverage · $888,000 allows 5MBC to concentrate resources on programs after paying off Tenant Improvements . Additional $888,000 attracted to 5MBC and Rohnert because of dollar for dollar matching requirement . $888,000 paid to Sonoma Mountain Village (note holder) is guaranteed to be re-invested within Rohnert Park 6. 5MBC is Coordinator of North Bay iHub · iHub Program is the State of California's main program for job creation through support of innovation, entrepreneurship and growth companies . We are one of only 7 iHubs in California · Administered through GOED (Governor's Office of Economic Dev.elopment) · Operational funding for 5MBC for activities supporting start-up and growth companies '" o $200,000 over the next 12 months, perhaps more in the future o Other opportunities to collaborate as a iHub group to attract funding . Referrals from GOED of companies looking to relocate to California . Enhanced partnership opportunities,. national and international exposure, and increased marketing opportunities for companies within the iHub area . Connectivity to the most senior levels of government, business and universities through GOED . Future collaborative activities could include statewide business plan competition, direct funding for companies, and others 7. Focal Point for Attracting Funding to Region . Goal is to attract >$1 OOM over the next 10 years . Venture Capital firm, Wavepoint Ventures, will invest in companies in the North Bay using 5MBC to generate the deal flow . Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey and Congressman Mike Thompson have made federal appropriations requests on behalf of 5MBC for a total of $11.5M to es~blish a world class center of excellence for laser research and applications. . iHubs have applied for $IM grant from the Federal EDA (i6 grant, to be split among the fIrst 6 iHubs) . Other opportunities for government funding will present themselves, particularly now we have the iHub designation 8. Growing partnership with SSU . Increased collaboration with School of Business in areas of entrepreneurship education, innovation, technology commercialization and economic development '" Community Development Commission ( "CDC ") Funding FY 2010/11' Source of Funds Tax Increment Housing Set -Aside 2007R TABS 2007H TABS 1999 TABS Used to fund: Operations, Used to fund: Operations, debt service and projects debt service and housing and programs. Can be used related projects and Used to fund: Capital Used to fund capital to fund housing. programs. Project/program projects and programs both projects and programs for Bond proceeds can be used Purpose of Funds Project /program funding is spending is typically non - on the Redevelopment & housing related projects to,fund capital projects. typically non-capital, but capital, but once substantial Housing Side. and programs only. once sustantial balances are balances are accrued can be accrued can be used to fund used to fund capital capital proiects /programs. proiects /programs. Economic Development Assistance to Community- Recreational and Community Facilities Existing City Hall Site Reuue, Downtown In -Fill Projects, Types of Expenditures Funds Can Programs, Community Based Organizations, Vida ary Improvments, Temporary. Existing Southwest Fire 'Be Used For Center Complex Land Lease Nueva Contractual Fire Station Facility, Station Reuse, Susidfes for Beautification Program, Payments, Sonoma Obligation, CourseCo Lease Commercial Building Non- Profit Housing Landscape Program. Mountain Business Cluster. Agteement. Improvement Program. Development. Funds must be used to fund Cannot derive income from Cannot derive income from Income restricted to 5% of Must be of Primary Benefit housing & housing related use of these funds. Must be use of these funds. Must be proceeds. Must be of to Redevelopment Area. projects. Must be of Primary - of Primary Benefit to of Primary Benefit to Primary Benefit to Restrictions on Use of Funds Must be contemplated in Benefit to Redevelopment Redevelopment Area. Must Redevelopment Area. Must Redevelopment Area. Must Redevelopment Plan and Area. Must be contemplated be contemplated in be contemplated in be contemplated in Implementation Plan. in Redevelopment Plan and Redevelopment Plan and Redevelopment Plan and Redevelopment Plan and Implementation Plan. Implementation Plan. Implementation Plan. Implementation Plan. How much money is available? 0 0 4,795,443 13,129,823 627,354 If Tax Increment continues If Tax Increment continues to Potential for loss of Potential for Future Potential impacts to decline or remains stagnant, the CDC may have decline or remains stagnant, g $550,000 in City Ctr Plaza Defeasance if tax increment continues to decline or does None anticipated to reduce funding for the CDC may have to reduce TLC Grant Funds. CDC not rise as projected at funding for programs. would pay. bond issuance. programs. v initially, 5% of prior year's Five year projection of ending tax increment. Review each fund balances reveals not N/A N/A N/A Reserve Policy year and enough set -aside to.justify consider /recommend incremental increase. reserves. f+ rr+ iy A S M 3 r+ N V O. Community Development Commission of the City of Rohnert Park Cash Flow Statement 2010/11 Budget Estimated Budget Cash Balance, July 1, 2010 Cash from tax increment Interest earned cash - tax increment ANTICIPATED SOURCES OF CASH Property Tax Increment Housing set-aside Operating Reserve (5%) 2007R TABs interest earnings for debt service 2007H TABs interest earnings for debt service Total Anticipated Sources of Cash ANTICIPATED USES OF CASH Dues & Subscriptions Advertising/Publications Travel & Meetings Contractual services: Trustee fees/bond issues County property tax admin fee Auditing Fees Legal expense Consultant Fees Homeless Services SCCDC - 2009 Homeless Count Shared Living Homes COTS Emergency Repairs/Maintenance Proposed Housing Programs (non-bond) Proposed Capital Improvement Projects (non-bond) Golf Course CIP Fund Contribution Payments to City of Rohnert Park: Administration fee-City general fund Allocation for Housing & Redevelopment Salaries Debt Service Payments: GF loan interest payments GF loan principal payments Land lease payments (Community Center Complex) 1991 TARBs 1999 TABs 2001 TARBs 2003 LRBs 2007R TABs 2007H TABs Shift of RDA Funds to ERAF Total Anticipated Uses of Cash Cash Balance, June 30, 2011, Estimated Redevelopment Fund $1,831,596 $568,134 $7,357,920 ($2,225,384) ($379,000) $973,918 $8,127,184 Attachment 27d Low & Moderate Housing Fund $91,218 $0 $2,225,384 $0 $100,000 $2,416,602 Attachment 27a $3,600 $5,000 $1,000 $5,000 $130,000 $4,000 $20,000 $50,000 $0 $20,000 $675,000 $53,801 $194,220 $83,000 $241,000 $464,000 $395,000 $310,934 $442,016 $973,918 $894,000 $4,965,489 $3,~.1.,'9' $4,500 $5,000 $3,000 $30,000 $4,000 $40,000 $50,000 $2,194 $10,000 $0 $526,000 . $53,801 $116,000 $77,734 $855,694 $1,777,923 $'38,&79 '" Attachment 27e CITY OF ROHNERT PARK OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK DATE: August 4, 2010 TO: Gabriel Gonzalez, City Manager John Dunn, Interim Assistant City Manager FROM: Linda Babonis, Housing & Redevelopment Manager RE: Housing Trust Fund Available Funds as of 6/30/10 $614,627.00 On March 26, 2002, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 677 adding Municipal Code Chapter 17.70, Housirig Trust Fund and InclusionarylIn-Lieu Fee Requirements. The City's Housing Trust Fund and InclusionarylIn--Lieu Fee Requirement Ordinance (Section 17.70.040A) require that at least 15% of all new dwelling units in a residential development of five or more units be affordable and, if it is a rental project, the affordable units shall be affordable to very-low (50%) and low-income (50%) households. Section 17. 70.040C allows for the developer to propose meeting the above requirements by an alternative equivalent action, subject to review and approval by the City Council. In-Lieu of providing the required units, a developer may make a contribution to the Housing Trust Fund to be used by the City to help facilitate a future affordable project. Ordinance 677 (Section 17:07.020 N.3.) establishes a Housing Trust Fund Board. The City Council serves as the Board. The Board's role, as envisioned by this Ordinance, is to meet biannually to develop a Housing Assistance Plan Program and financing strategy to further define and prioritize the uses of the monies in the Housing Trust Fund. The plan must be consistent with the City's Housing Element. The Housing Trust Fund is administered by the City Manager or hislher designee. . The purposes and uses of the funds are as follows: Monies deposited in the housing fund along with any interest earnings on such monies shall be used solely to increase and improve the supply of housing affordable to households of moderate-, low- and very low-income households; including, but not limited to: (i) Acquisition of property and property rights; (ii) Cost of construction including costs associated with planning, administration, and design, as well as actual building or installation, as well as any other costs associated with the construction or financing of affordable housing; (iii) Reimbursement to the city for such costs if funds were advanced by the city from other sources; and, (iv) Reimbursement of developers or property owners who have been required or permitted to"'install facilities which are beyond that which can be attributed to a specific development. Monies may also be used to cover reasonable administrative expenses not reimbursed through processing fees, including reasonable consultant and legal expenses related to the establishment and/or administration of the housing fuild and reasonable expenses for administering the process of calculating, collecting, and accounting for inclusionary fees and any deferred city fees authorized by this section. No portion of the housing fund may be diverted to other purposes by way of loan or otherwise. (2) Monies in the housing fund shall be used in accordance with the priorities identified by the housing assistance plan program and financing strategy to construct, acquire, rehabilitate or subsidize very low-, low- and moderate-income housing and/or to assist other governmental entities, private organizations or individuals in the construction and rehabilitation of very low- low-, and moderate-income housing. To the extent possible as determined by the council, monies shall be targeted to benefit households at or below sixty percent of median income in Rohnert Park. Monies in the housing fund may be disbursed, hypothecated, collateralized or otherwise employed for these purposes from time to time as the city council determines is appropriate to accomplish the purposes of the housing fund. These uses include, but are not limited to, assistance to housing development corporations, equity participation loans, grants, pre-home ownership co-investment, pre-development loan funds, participation leases,. or other public/private partnership arrangements. The housing fund monies may be extended for the benefit of rental or owner occupied housing or housing services. (3) Expenditures by the city manager from the housing fund shall be by contract and controlled, authorized and paid in accordance with general city budgetary policies. According to Ron Bendorff, the past Community Development Director, he was not sure as to whether or not the biannual assistance plan program and financing strategy had been done. Staff consulted Legal Counsel and inquired as to whether or not the CDC Five Year Implementation Plan could serve to meet the requirement for developing a Housing Assistance Plan Program and financing strategy. Staff was advised that it could not. In order to utilize these funds, the provisions contained in the Ordinance must be implemented. . The City Council would convene as the Housing Trust Fund Board and review and approve a Housing Assistance Plan Program and fmancing strategy developed and brought forward by staff. The Council would then meet biannually to further define and prioritize the uses of the monies in the Housing Trust Fund. An Alternative to implementing the Ordinance in its current form would be to amend the Ordinance and develop new provisions. Specifically, the Ordinance could be amended to establish the CDC Five Year Implementation Plan as the HOUSIng Assistance Plan Program and financing strategy document. Moreover, the Ordinance could be aniended to establish an annual meeting of the Board that coincides with the Annual Redevelopment Report to the legislative body required by Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California, Health and Safety Code Section 33080.1. In consideration of the time demands on City Council, staff is recommending that the Council authorize staff to explore and bring back details regarding an amendment to Ordinance No. 677, Section 17.07.020 N.3., containing the alternative provisions proposed above. '" 2 May 6, 2009 Ad Hoc Budget Committee Amie Breeze, Mayor Gina Belforte, Vice Mayor RE: Final Report - Temporary Internal Audit Service Dear Mayor Breeze and Members of the City Council: Attached to this letter is the final report regarding the temporary internal audit service you hired Urban Futures, Inc. to conduct. It is clear that the City is facing some very critical decisions as it weathers these difficult economic times. The report reviews the City finances, investment policies, audits, fiscal policies, budgets, staffing labor agreements, etc. It offers a variety of strategies for the City Council and Staff to use to survive these financial times and emerge as a stronger city operation. There are tough policy decisions that need to be made by the City Council. Services to the community will be impacted as well as staffing. By following UFl's recommendations such as establishing Basic, Enhanced and Optimal levels of service the decision making process should be more clear to all involved especially the community and city employees. Also by setting a policy requiring a five year financial forecast should better prepare the City to face changes in a turbulent economy. It has been an honor for Urban Futures to work with Council and Staff on this very important assignment. We look forward to the opportunity to serve you in the future. Sincerely Yours, URBAN FUTURES INC. // C! j(2-tA~' ~ Kevin O'Rourke Managing Principal .'.=.. .'.~~~ '#&:~ 3111 N, Tustin, Suite 230 Orange, CA 92865-1753. (714) 283-9334 Business. (714) 283-5465 FAX '" May 6, 2009 Ad Hoc Budget Committee Arnie Breeze, Mayor Gina Belforte, Vice Mayor Committee Members, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Rohnert Park has a serious structural challenge. Expenditures exceed revenues by some $8 million, approximately 26% of the budget. Two primary factors are at the root of this structural challenge. The first is that the City has relied and continues to rely on one time revenues from land sales which have been used to fund increasing, on-going expenditures, including staff costs. The second factor is that compensation and benefits have increased 33% ($3.7 million) in the last six years. Indeed, projected reserves of $7.9 million at the end of Fiscal Year 2009-10 assume $6 million in revenue from the sale of the Stadium Land and the Wetland Parcel. Should these land sales not occur, Rohnert Park will have $2.9 million in reserves to fund a projected $8 million deficit. In other words, in the next fiscal year, Rohnert Park could be in the position of having no reserves and a $5.1 million shortfall. Urban Futures, Inc. (UFI) was retained to assist the City of Rohnert Park in reviewing and analyzing conditions and mechanisms which affect the current and future financial performance of the City. The engagement consisted of two phases--the first was the S.W.O.T. (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis and the second was the preparation of a budget implementation plan. A draft memo, dated April 2, 2009 was reviewed with the Mayor and Vice Mayor, as the Ad Hoc Budget Committee. Meetings were held with individual members of council the following week and on April 14th, where this draft memo was reviewed. On April 14th, the contents of the draft report were presented at a Study Session of the City Council. Included in the final report are alternatives for further expenditure reductions, revenue enhancements, operational efficiencies and a suggested Fiscal Policy. Urban Futures, Inc. has also identified the need for Strategic Long Term Planning, as Rohnert Park's challenges are not going to be solved over night. Urban Futures, Inc. strongly believes that Rohnert Park must move from its current practice of budgeting year to year to a practice of budgeting using a five year projection model. ~. ~ '" 3111 N. Tustin, Suite 230 Orange, CA 92865-1753. (714) 283-9334 Business. (714) 283-9319 FAX ."'ii'''''' It~ Solving Rohnert Park's current fiscal crisis is going to require community participation, looking a new and different ways of providing municipal services and a series of difficult decisions. It is the opinion of Urban Futures, Inc. that all employees, including public safety, are going to have to share the responsibility of addressing and solving Rohnert Park's fiscal crisis. Urban Futures, Inc. remains available to assist the City of Rohnert Park in identifying alternatives and implementing solutions to resolve the very real crisis facing the City. Any such additional. assistance would be done under a new contact. PHASE ONE (S.W.O.T.) Strengths: . Staff continues to deliver services despite the operational deficit . Strong retail economy and high per capita sales tax considering relatively small population . Green Music Center - planned regional performing arts center with regional draw and strong economic multipliers . Good, stable top employers - not significantly susceptible to economic downturns/recessions . Older stable residential neighborhoods - may not be greatly impacted by reduced property assessments/values as a result of the recession . Recreation system and opportunities are considered assets in the community . The COC is a viable financial arm of the City Weaknesses: . General Fund budgetary shortfall of approximately $8 million which represents 26% of the budget . The public safety (police and fire) budget represents 85% of 2008/09 projected General Fund revenues - to fund other General Fund operations additional revenues must be "recharged" to the General Fund from other sources (COC, Sewer, etc) . Community is relatively "built-out" - minimal growth potential . Inadequate number of "sit-down" restaurants and national chain boutique retail establishments to support community preferences . Past land use decisions along the freeway corridor limit future "big box" opportunities . Per capita income is below average for the region (but is also more stable) . Unrealistic reliance on land sales to continue balancing annual budgets Opportunities: . Annexation of land within the sphere of influence could add to future economic development opportunities . Surplus land should be sold improving cash flow for the General Fund concurrently with budget reductions/enhancements 1I.;ifr!~.. t?"lJj.[Ji$i' L~ ,.. 2 .B~ . Investment opportunities to place idle Bond Reserve Funds into Guaranteed Investment Contracts (GICs) and/or Certificate of Deposits 9CDs) will generate new revenue . The Economic Development Action Plan indicates possible future growth potential and available sites for high-technology and professional services . The City has a signed Agreement with the Graton Rancheria Resort and Casino which, once operational, could result in significant new operating revenues . A Voluntary Separation Program should be considered to reduce the number of FTE's allowing for a restructuring of operations with minimal implementation costs . Pursuit of a Golden Handshake process which could cut the $8 million deficit in half - some potential adverse impact on service . Possible general tax - measure could be placed before the voters . Possible % cent sales tax for public safety assistance could be placed before the voters - would raise approximately $2 million . Possible Benefit Assessment District - measure could be placed. before property owners . Fee studies have been completed for Building and Planning Threats: . The City operates without Council approved Fiscal Policies . Cutting costs cannot realistically be achieved without an impact to public safety, thus creating potential public controversy and adverse reactions . Retail sector in the City has been relatively "optimized" with little room for future large sales tax generators in the current economy . Possible continued effects of international economic downturn . CALPERS Portfolio losses may further exacerbate the high employer rate condition . Public Safety stipend costs may create additional budgetary concerns in the future . Reinvestment risk with idle cash will reduce revenues available to the General and Restricted Funds . Capital facilities funded by the COC have become difficult to operate and maintain by the General Fund Review of City Financials - Key Issues: . Personnel costs have increased by 33%, or $3.7 million since 2003/04 . Retirement costs (PERS) have tripled since 2003/04 - a $3.6 million increase . Retiree health costs (OPEB) have doubled since 2003/04 - a $750,000 increase . The above three items, alone, equal present General Fund budgetary shortfall of $8 million. . Recent review of Building and Planning fees by MAXIMUS suggests said charges are $800,000 short of full cost recovery - however, it is not known at this time if any increases in such fees would be compatible with market conditions . No other significant fee discrepancies were noted, based upon a cursory review (Le., Performing Arts Center, Recreation, and Aquatics) '" 1li\1. ~~ 3 .[il . Voter approval is required for new or increased revenues of necessary significance . The cost allocations of general government and indirect costs utilized by the Finance Department appear reasonable . Investment practices seem reasonable and well thought out 4 '" ~~. i"<;<;r'"~;;},'>(' &f~ .t%B rv,'^tr' ~~Ji%~ The following table and figures illustrate the financial realities of Rohnert Park's present challenges and issues. Table 1, in particular, shows the dollar and percentage growth in salaries and benefits, 50%, total expenses, 38%, and revenue 14%. Rohnert Park will continue to face challenges sustaining itself in a continuum where the rate of expenditure growth is three times greater than revenue growth. Budgeted FTE's SalarieslWages Overtime PERS Health Insurance Retiree Health Other Benefits Total Salaries & Bene Debt/Long Term Leases Operational Costs Total Expenses Net of Recharge Revenue-Less Land Sale Projected Ongoing Deficit Net of Recharge Recharge Amount Projected Ongoing Deficit Without Recharge Table 1 City of Rohnert Park Budgetary Revenue andCost Comparison 2003/04 Through 2008/09 Percentage Budaet Change 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 03/04 - 08/09 152 164 164 163 163 163 7.24% 11,339.487 11,858,018 12,813,953 13,397,552 14,347,839 14,962,159 31.95% 1,202.453 1,184,766 1,012,728 1,261,178 1,514,557 854,200 -28.96% 1,834,317 2,792,236 3,397,038 3,476,792 5,362,750 5,432,297 196.15% 1,377,700 1,519,023 1,615,170 1,629,394 1,646,216 1,631,610 18.43% 549,232 648,591 661,045 868,606 912,058 1,294,452 135.68% 331,531 471,252 434,402 460,061 741,111 599,505 80.83% 16,634,720 18,473,886 19,934,336 21,093583 24,524,531 24,774,223 48.93% 638.437 617,751 650,722 695,111 671.497 649,651 1.76% 5,285,197 5738.636 6 322 490 6,619693 6,375,749 5,635,089 6.62% 22,558,354 24,830,273 26,907,548 28 408,387 31,571,777 31,058,963 37.68% 20,282,645 20310,664 20,594,358 23 580,345 24,513,850 23,047,430 13.63% 12,275,709) (4,519,609) 16,313,190 14 828,042 17,057,927 (8,011,533 252.05% (3,550,720 (3,294 900' (3,727,965' (4 176,000' (4,514,632 (2,800,450 -21.13% (5,826.429 (7,814,509) 110,041,155 19,004,042' (11,572,559 (10,811,983 85.57% Note: Total budgeted expenses in 2003/04 before recharge = $26,109,074; 2004/05 = $28,125,623; 2005/06 = $30,635,513; 06/07 = $32,584,387; 07/08 = $36,086,409; 08/09 = $33,859,413 '" ._,.'. ;,;~~_,,,,,:&i:) ~'1 5 .""'"'' ~.~~ i~~~l As noted in Figure 1, the budgetary deficit has grown in each year. 35,000,000 30,000,000 25,000,000 C 20,000,000 = ~ ol( 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 Figure 1 City of Rohnert Park Budgeted Expenses v. Revenues Expenses } ~.., o 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 Fiscal Year 2007/08 2008/09 Significantly contributing to the City's growing deficit are the consistently increasing salaries/wages. Figure two graphs a growth of over $3M in the last six years. 16,000,000 14,000,000 12,000,000 C 10,000,000 I 8,000,000 < 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 2003/04 . 2004/05 Figure 2 City of Rohnert Park Budgeted Expenses - SalarieslWages 2005/06 2006/07 Fiscal Year 2007/08 2008/09 Figure 3 below reflects a tripling of Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) costs over the last six years as a result of increased staffing levels and implementation of enhanced benefit plans. Despite rate smoothing by PERS, Portfolio investment returns were lower than assumed by PERS portfolio 2001 through 2003 and 2007-2008. '" &11. t,,,,,,,1ll] 6 .~)! ~'\l.iJP ~t~ Figure 3 City of Rohnert Park Budgeted Expenses. PERS 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 I o 3,000,000 .i 2,000,000 1,000,000 o 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 Fiscal Year 2007/08 2008109 Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) consisting mainly of retiree health costs have doubled in six years. This is due to increasing health care costs, a growing number of retirees, and negotiated employee separation opportunities, such as health care guarantees and golden hand shakes implemented in 2004 (see Figure 4 below). Figure 4 City of Rohnert Park Budgeted Expenses. Retiree Health 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 '" 800,000 ~ .i 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2008/07 Fisca I Year 2007/08 2008109 Of considerable concern is the imbalance in compensation programs and overall expenses compared to revenue growth from 2003/04 through 2008/09 (Figure 5). The largest component of expenditure growth is attributable to the employee compensation packages (salary, retirement, health benefits). Citywide, employee compensation appears to be growing at an average annual rate of approximately $1.5M. Much of this growth is the result of the implementation of the enhanced PERS plan for miscellaneous employees in 2007 (Le., 2.7(55) and negotiated labor agreements with the various labor groups. (Figure 6). '" ~. /l:SW:[~ ~t~ 7 .~1l ,,",,~,.",~ ~z:~ Rgure 5 City of Rohnert Park Increases by Category FY 2003/04 through 2008109 60.00% 50.00% cP 40.00% III 1\I ! u .5 30.00% C cP e :. 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Total Salaries & Benefits Total Expenses Category Revenue-Less Land Sale Figure 6 City of Rohnert Park Budgeted Expenditures by Category 16,000,000 14,000,000 12,000,000 10,000,000 C :I 8,000,000 0 ~ 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 2003/04 2004/05 l!l Salari~s/Wages . PERS . Retiree Health 2005/06 2006/07 Fiscal Year 2007/08 2008/09 '" l'Z~. l~~~;;:; f%J&it&!7l 8 .~~'ii!; ^~f""(;"\'f. 1f~ How Did The City Get To Where It Is Todav? Since 2003, the City has experienced a steady climb in operating costs. Simultaneously, revenues declined significantly between 2007 and 2009. Concurrently, the City anticipated land sales and various agreements coming to fruition to help enhance its revenue base. While the City has been successful in selling available property to help balance the City's operating budget, the reliance on delivery of approved agreements as potential revenue enhancements have proven unsuccessful, primarily because of the struggling economy. The City has implemented compensation programs which, beginning in 2007-08, eclipsed General Fund revenues. Both safety and miscellaneous employee costs which have steadily increased, began to level ,off in 2008-09 as a result of benefits restructuring and implementation of budget savings measures. (see Figure 7 below). 30,000,000 Figure 7 City of Rohnert Park Salaries and Benefits 25,000,000 5,000,000 ~~ - 20,000,000 C! i 15,000,000 ~ 10,000,000 _ Safety _ Miscellaneous -Re\enue-Less Land Sale -Total Salaries & Benefits o 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Fiscal Year While compensation programs were increasing, the City's budget assumed continued growth in the economy. These two factors have created a budget deficit which has been growing annually over the past 5 years. Figure 8 below depicts the growth of total operating costs, public safety costs specifically, and revenues over the past 5 years. On a percentage basis, revenues have not kept pace with expenditure growth. In fact, while revenues were declining, costs, particularly those associated with public safety increased, primarily as a result of increased benefit costs. '" ~~1l. ~"~':f~ ...~ 9 ."'''''''''' "~"i'::>%'/:1 l'J1 Figure 8 City of Rohnert Park Percent IncreaselDecrease 0,2 o . Re_ue-Less Land Sale .Tolal Expenses ill Public Safety Total Exp 0.15 0.1 t! ~ 0.05 . L .j),05 .j).1 Fiscal Year If past budgetary and labor practices continue, the deficit will continue to grow. For example, the average growth rate in expenses over the last six years has been 8%, whereas revenues growth has been at an average annual rate of 3%. Projecting these same growth rates over the next five years, the budgetary gap/deficit will soar to $15 million in 2013-14 (see Figure 9 below). Contractual Obligations / Outstanding Agreements The City has a number of outstanding agreements which continue to influence budgetary decision making. Two such agreements approved in 2003 are the Option to Purchase and Purchase Agreement with Redwood Equities and University District LLC and the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria (FIGR). '" ~~l. ('<:'\f<",-i~ t:~~ 10 ..j The Option to Purchase and Purchase Agreement involves the sale of 40 acres consisting of the following parcels: Stadium, Southern, Wastewater Holding Pond, and KRCB. Better known as the "Stadium Lands," the parcels are scheduled to be sold to Redwood Equities and University District LLC. Contained in the Preamble of the Agreement is the assumption at full build out, the project is expected to produce a $1.4M positive cash flow for the City. While such an agreement is not uncommon, most agreements of this type are stalled because of the economy and global credit crisis. Despite poor economic conditions, the land sale of $6M continues to be included in budgetary presentations as a measure to balance the budget. We believe the sale of property for retail or commercial development in the current economic environment remains uncertain and should not be considered a solution to addressing the budget deficit. The MOU with FIGR is similar to the agreement with Redwood Equities. In exchange for the construction and operation of a gaming facility, FIGR has entered into an agreement with the City to fund significant capital projects and facilities, to provide the City with annual funds to support public safety functions and $5M annually in lieu of property taxes. While the circumstances which lead to the development of a gaming facility for FIGR are unknown, we assume the slow down in the economy is affecting FIGR's ability to get the project underway. Once again, we recommend the City not assume receipt of any revenues from this project until the facility is approved and under construction. Review of Economic Development Programs/Strategies: The Economic Development Action Plan, prepared by the Conley Consulting Group, appears quite comprehensive and adequately covers all typical influences on an area's fiscal capacity - demographics, labor force, existing employers, current and potential key retailers, industrial growth opportunities, and impending entertainment venues, such as the Green Music Center and Graton Rancheria Resort and Casino. Maintenance and expansion of the present business and employment base, as evidenced in the plan, is the most effective strategy - particularly considering current economic conditions. Consistent and enthusiastic outreach and contact with the local business community is essential as also noted by Conley. This report is being prepared concurrently to the drafting of the CDC 5-Year Implementation Plan. It is strongly suggested the Implementation Plan reflect the priorities of the City as a whole allowing for consistency with redevelopment guidelines. As the City continues to face financial challenges, involvement of the CDC in developing the City long term financial future is paramount. Existing Debt Obligations & Coverage Concerns Given the current high interest rate environment relative to tax-exempt municipal bonds, there do not appear to be any opportunities for refunding existing debt obligations. This condition applies to all debt reviewed including special assessments, water and wastewater revenue bonds, Community Development Commission tax allocation bonds, and long-term leases for . capital equipment. In 2007, the CDC issued $35M in non-housing and $27M in housing tax allocation bonds. Based on our review, the CDC has an expenditure plan in place to allocate the non-housing funds within the required 3-years from the date of issuance. However, because of the slow down in the housing market, allocating and spending the housing funds within 3-years will be '" llili\?i;~. 2'>::,~ fi~~%i 11 .~1jl :\\;!i!,;;' ~ difficult. Should the COC determine excess housing bond proceeds exist the COC may want to consider tendering the bonds. By tendering the bonds, COC will be able to essentially call the bonds early without the pre-payment penalties. Tendering the bonds would also reduce annual debt service providing additional cash flow to the COCo The passage of Measure L in November 2008 will likely adversely impact the City's bond covenant calling for debt service coverage of 120%. A debt service coverage analysis of the wastewater (sewer) bonds is highly recommended to ascertain current and projected coverage ratios. It is anticipated that the bond coverage ratios will drop below the 120% requirement in the very near future. Should this happen, the City has a legal obligation to either 1) increase rates to appropriate coverage ratios; and/or 2) reduce expenditure levels to meet the required coverage ratios. PHASE TWO - BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The City has a daunting question to answer: How do we operate with $8 million less? To begin to address this question, the following objectives have been developed as a guideline. Obiectives: Develop a financial plan to phase in budgetary adjustments over a multi-year period managing the impacts on the organization, community, and service delivery Reduce on-going General Fund expenditures through targeted reductions in the organization while preparing the City for future opportunities Identify new on-going General Fund revenue opportunities of the highest probability of passage and acceptance Identify cost sharing opportunities through public private partnerships and/or multi-agency opportunities Create a "sustainable" budgetary plan with funding for base level services on an on-going basis with enhanced programs and services requiring new or special revenues To "right size" the organization, based upon Council and Community priorities, so that expenditures match available revenues '" i\'!~. ~~.3;.,J ::-;'~~""9::'l 12 .~'@~ ii:'~."'?>~'. ~if~ Establish Basic Service Levels Before a meaningful expenditure/revenue balancing effort can occur, it will be necessary to understand and define Rohnert Park's basic service levels and the costs associated with them. Basic service levels are those required to open the doors of City Hall and operate on a daily basis. Establish Enhanced Level Services Enhanced service levels are those programs/amenities that the City Council has funded based on community input and values. While important to the Council and citizens, enhanced services are those above and beyond basic levels and are not required in the provision of basic service levels. It is not unusual to find the line of enhanced service levels blurred with basic service levels. Establish Optimum Service Levels Optimum service levels are those programs/amenities that the council and community would like to have but for which funding is not available. Nonetheless, it is important to identify optimum service levels as goals in the event funding comes available and/or in the event the Council elects to put revenue enhancing measures on the ballot. These service levels should be developed by staff, reviewed by the Council and then submitted to the community for input. Understanding service levels in this manner will also provide useful information in determining what expenditure reductions will have the least impact on the community as well as what services the community may be willing to support through revenue enhancement measures. Strategic Plan "We can't get there if we don't know where we are going." Through one or more facilitated workshops, the City Council should develop a Strategic Plan for Rohnert Park. The Plan will include the Council's priorities and associated timelines. As a part of the Strategic Plan, the Council should consider a series of Best Practices/Policies (Le. Fiscal and Investment Policies, Council "Norms" etc.) that will serve as a guide in decision making and prioritizing. We particularly believe that and adopted Fiscal Policy is critical. We have attached a recommended policy (Attachment A). The Strategic Plan should also include council's goals with regards to expenditure reduction/revenue enhancement measures. With defined service levels and a Strategic Plan, staff will then be able to develop a multi-year budget that addresses the Council's and community's goals. Additionally, departmental Strategic Implementation Plans are also highly recommended. Each department should draft 5- Year Strategic Implementation Plans which outline financial assumptions, operating service levels, and organization structure that allow services to be delivered in the parameters of available resources. '" ~"7i!i. \~. @"&,, 13 .Ffm It~ Possible General Fund Expenditure Reduction and Revenue Enhancement Alternatives: To achieve its operational objectives and community priorities, the City must develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to address its financial deficit. A necessary first step is to accept where the City is today and to agree to move forward collectively. While we cannot recommend a single strategy to solve the City's financial deficit, we do recommend the City take a multi-phased approach to financial sustainability. Listed below are a number of options to City should consider in its decision making process. By addressing operations, salaries and benefit programs, staffing levels, cash flow, and revenue enhancement alternatives, the City can begin to put the pieces of the puzzle together to create one clear picture. We believe operational cuts will not be enough to fully address the City's financial deficit without a significant affect to service delivery and possibly to highly supported community programs. Therefore, we have developed the attached General and Special Taxes Memorandum to assist the City is determining possible revenue enhancement options. (Attachment B) ODerations Implement Full Cost Recovery as recommended by MAXIMUS in their study of 1 Building and Planning Fees 2 Work towards a self supporting Performing Arts Center 3 Evaluate the cost recovery of the City's Recreation Programs 4 Evaluate Joint Services and Public/Private Opportunities 5 Evaluate consolidation of Departments or Divisions to reduce administrative costs Salary and Benefits 6 Limit! reduce Stipends 7 Reduce salaries and benefits 8 Eliminate the City paid portion of employee PERS costs (8% Misc & 9% Sworn) 9 Voluntary retirement! separation Plan 10 No COLAs or merit increases 11 Eliminate Retiree Health for new hires/create 2-Tier programs Staffina 12 Hold or eliminate vacant non-sworn positions 13 Evaluate the use of part-time/contract employees Cash Flow 14 Sell City owned land designated for future development opportunities 15 Sell old Civic Center property to the CDC Other ODtions Consider City-wide Benefit Assessment District to fund parks and right-of-way 16 maintenance 17 Consider Utility User Tax (UUT) to fund Public Safety and enhanced programs '" "'~. '""''''~~J1 ~~i~ 14 .. CONCLUSION The City of Rohnert Park has ominous structural problems in that operational costs exceed revenues. In the past, land sales have filled this gap. This stop gap measure has limits as there is only so much land that the City owns and/o'r is willing to sell. Selling City/CDC land may well prove to be short-sighted. This land could, with a Specific Plan in place, generate long term revenue. Establishing a fiscally sustainable Rohnert Park will require a comprehensive approach to service delivery, strategic planning and fiscal management. The City, in consultation with its community, will need to take an entrepreneurial approach to running programs and departments. A phased approach is recommended in order for the Council and staff to make good public policy decisions preserving priority and basic services to the community. '" ~*~. . 15 ATTACHMENT A '" PROPOSED CITY OF ROHNERT PARK FISCAL POLICIES The budget document allocates City resources such as personnel, materials, and equipment in tangible ways to achieve the general goals of the community. It is prudent, therefore, for the City to have in place adopted fiscal policies to guide the city administration and City Council through the budget decision-making process. These policies are: Operational Efficiencies ,/ To implement internal operating efficiencies wherever possible. ,/ To utilize private contractors when the same or higher level of service can be obtained at lower total cost. ,/ To staff each department according to adopted service levels, and to utilize consultants and temporary help instead of hiring staff for special projects or peak workload periods. ,/ To develop agreements with the other public agencies, consider consolidation of services and contracting services as appropriate. ,/ To enter into joint operating arrangements with other agencies so as to provide services more cost effectively. Voter Approved Revenues ,/ To utilize revenues derived from voter approved measures to fund programs and services important to the community. ,/ To establish the appropriate rates and assessments to best manage and operate the City's enterprise operations and capital maintenance needs. Reserves ,/ To set a goal equal to 25% of the General Fund operating expenses in a reserve account by annually committing the funds necessary to achieve this objective. :> .,. 1 Infrastructure ./ To provide sufficient routine maintenance each year to avoid a deferred maintenance backlog. Employee Development ./ To attract and retain competent employees by providing a professional work environment, safe working conditions, adequate training opportunities, and competitive salaries as finances may allow. ./ To base salary increases on individual merit and job performance levels. Economic Development ./ To aggressively pursue new developments and businesses that add to the City's economic base, particularly those that generate sales tax and' tax increment revenue. ./ To promote a mix of businesses that contributes to a balanced community. ./ To develop programs to enhance and retain existing business. ./ To charge the COC its fair share of the cost of City support services. New Services ./ To add new services only when a need has been identified and a funding source developed. ./ To allocate discretionary funds and grants to programs with the greatest benefit to the community. ./ To require agreements for specific services and monitor effectiveness on an ongoing basis. Construction of New Facilities ./ To plan for new facilities/amenities only if construction and on-going maintenance costs will not adversely impact the operating budget. '" 2 Fiscal Management ../ To maximize revenues by utilizing grants from other agencies to the fullest extent possible. ../ To charge fees for services that refleCt the true cost of providing such services and to review fee schedules on a regular basis. ../ To fully account for the cost of the enterprise operation to avoid any subsidy by the General Fund, and to charge Enterprise Funds their fair share of the cost of City support services. ../ To maintain accurate accounting records to keep the city manager and City Council informed of the financial condition of the City at all times. ../ To file a quarterly report of investments that adhere to both state law and City policy, and which follow reasonable and prudent guidelines for investment of the City's idle cash. ../ To prepare and maintain a rolling 5-Year financial forecast for all major funds including: General Fund, CDC, the Enterprise Fund, Recreation, Performing Arts Center and Pools '" 3 ATTACHMENT B .,. 1 TO: Dan Schwarz, City of Rohnert Park FROM: Michael Busch, Urban Futures Incorporated DATE: May 7, 2009 RE: "General and "5pecialN Taxes: Timing of Measure Local agencies, such as cities, may impose taxes using a variety of methods, subject to voter approval. These taxes are classified as either "general" or "special" pursuant to Proposition 218. A "general tax" may be used for any public purpose - the funds are fully discretionary and may be deposited into the General Fund. A majority vote (50%+1) of the electorate is required to impose, increase, or extend a general tax. A "special tax" is a tax imposed for a specific purpose. For example, some cities dedicate tax revenues for the payment of law enforcement or street maintenance costs rather than using the taxes for the general operations of government. A two-thirds majority of voters is required to impose, increase, or extend a tax for a specific purpose. Special tax revenues must be accounted for in a separate fund, and the City must prepare an annual report stating the revenues collected and expended. General taxes may only be put on the ballot at the same general election when the City Council election his held unless the Council unanimously finds that there is an urgent need to impose the tax measure. Upon such unanimous declaration, the General Tax measure may be put before the voters at a special election. Special Taxes may be placed before the electorate at any time, either during a general election or in a special election. Local Revenue Measures November 2008 This past November over 380 local tax measures were considered including 239 aimed to increase revenues through taxes and fees for bonds for a variety of public agencies. Of particular interest to the City are the 81 fiscal measures placed on the ballot by cities throughout the State. Of the 81 measures, 56 were majority vote general tax measures, 4 measures were repeals of existing taxes and fees, and 21 were special taxes or bonds requiring 2/3 majority for passage. As with previous elections, city measures requiring a majority vote were most successful achieving 71 % approval with 2/3rds voter required measures achieving 52% approval. 't April 3, 2009 Page 2 of 10 The election in November 2008 for transaction and use tax revealed voter preferences which should be taken into consideration for voter approved revenue enhancements. Voters clearly preferred a "general purpose" transactional and use tax, 13 passing with 4 failing, over the "special purpose" tax 5 passing with 5 failing. A total of 23 measures to increase or expand utility user taxes were on the November 2008 ballot with a majority of those (13) coming from Los Angeles County cities. In total, 17 of the 23 passed with those seeking to expand the type of utilities covered while maintaining or reducing current rates. However, only 3 of the 9 measures seeking to create or increase rates passed. Transient Occupancy Tax measures in November 2008 faired about the same rate of passage from previous elections in June 2002 and 2008. A total of 10 measures were presented to the voters with 7 passing and 3 failing to gain the required 50% approval rating. Most of the measures were seeking to increase rates by 2-3%. A total of 9 cities sought voter approval of Parcel Taxes on the November 2008 ballot. Because Parcel Tax measures require 2/3's majority vote, just 3 measures passed. A majority of those seeking approval of the Parcel Tax listed public safety as the purpose; only two such measures were passed by the voters (Union City and Berkeley). Lessons learned from previous measures lead us to believe the best step forward is to develop a plan around majority tax measures simply because of the voter requirements 1/2 vs. 2/3rds. If past elections are any indication of success of future measures, "general purpose" majority measures are more likely to be approved than any others. Options for Local Taxation in Rohnert Park There are several locally-controlled taxes that may be imposed or increased with voter approval: Parcel Tax (Property Tax Override) Voter Approval Required: 2/3rds A parcel tax (otherwise known as a property-tax override) is a special non-ad valorem (non-value based) tax on parcels of property generally based on either a flat per-parcel rate or a variable rate depending on the size, use, or number of units on the parcel. However, since this tax is not based on the value of the property, it is a "fixed" tax. Parcel taxes require two-thirds voter approval and are imposed for any number of purposes, including funding police and fire services, and neighborhood improvement and revitalization. 2 April 3, 2009 Page 3 of 10 There are over 11,000 taxable parcels in the City. With an annual assessment of $100 on each parcel in the City, the revenue derived would be approximately $1,100,000 after the costs of the Tax Assessor's administration and distribution (estimated at 3.00%). Communitv-Wide Benefit Assessment Voter Approval Required: 2/3rds The use of this assessment requires that the revenues derived from the assessment be only used to fund new levels of service; the funds cannot be used to supplant funding used to provide current service levels. A commonly known benefit assessment is a Mello-Roos assessment. These assessments are used in new developments where the new level of service is easily defined and there is usually one voter (the developer). These assessments are frequently used to ease the burden on cities for the cost of providing new levels of service and infrastructure maintenance associated with the development. Although, primarily used for the costs of new operational service levels posed by new developments, in general, this type of assessment has not been successfully approved in built-out communities. This non ad-valorem tax is weighted by property area, and an engineer's report is needed to determine the rate of assessment for each parcel. The assessment can be increased by linking it to a common inflation index. Benefit Assessment Districts Voter Approval Required: Majority Prop. 218 affirmative vote requirement The City may want to establish a Benefit Assessment District; one each for Lighting, Medians, and Parks. The City's General Fund is paying the full costs of these facilities. To increase the assessments in these districts, the City must fulfill the following requirements: 1. Identify the "special benefit" that each property receives from the improvement or maintenance that is the subject of the assessment. This "special benefit" must be over and above the benefit that the public generally enjoys from the improvement or maintenance and a general enhancement to property values does not equate to a special benefit. 2. Public agencies (excluding the federal government) are subject to the assessment if they are landowners within the district. 3" April 3, 2009 Page 4 of 10 3. The assessment must be on a weighted basis (for example, size of parcel in relation to benefit received). An Engineer's Report must detail the formula for determining how each parcel is assessed based upon the benefit received. 4. The actual balloting process is similar to fees with regard to timing and the process by which ballots and information are mailed out to property owners. But, the protest process is substantively different between fees and assessments. With respect to fees, such as those for water, wastewater and solid waste, the Proposition 218 process provides that property owners who don't want the fee imposed return a protest ballot. If a majority of the total number of property owners in the City returns a protest ballot then the local agency cannot implement the proposed fee. For assessment districts, property owners must be given the right to vote yes or no with regard to the proposed assessment. If the number of no votes received outweighs the number of yes votes received, then the assessment cannot be imposed. It should be noted that the votes must be counted based upon the weighted basis discussed in NO.3 above (that is, based upon the amount of the assessment to each property owner). It is a complicated process with numerous legal hurdles. One of the issues that is currently being litigated is what really constitutes a "special benefit". The City's current assessment districts were grandfathered under Proposition 218. However, if the City seeks to increase the amount of the assessments, then the City must comply with all of the above requirements. The Howard Jarvis group made it very difficult to increase assessment district fees or create new assessment districts. It is generally thought that those who oppose an assessment are significantly more likely to return a ballot than those who are neutral or support the assessment. Couple this with all of the requirements set forth above, and this likely explains why very few local agencies have attempted to establish or increase assessment district fees since January 1996. Local Sales Tax (Transactions and Use Tax) Voter Approval Required: For General Purposes: Majority For Special Purposes: 213rds The Transactions and Use Tax was adopted in 1969, authorizing the adoption of local "transactions and use tax" add-ons to the combined state and local sales tax rate. Over the years, the law was amended to allow for specific authorizations for various particular cities, counties, special districts and countywide authorities. Prior to 2003, the most common transactions and use tax measures were those 4' April 3, 2009 Page 5 of 10 for a specific countywide need, most commonly transportation. But since a 2003 change in the law, add-on Transaction and Use Taxes (local sales tax add-ons) by cities for general purposes have become more frequent. In fact, over fifty cities in the state have Transactions and Use Taxes. There are differences between the statewide "Sales and Use Tax" and the locally approved "Transactions and Use Tax". The statewide Sales and Use Tax, currently at 8.75%, includes portions that go to the State General Fund, to several specific State funds, the cities, and the counties, based on the location of the purchase. The Transactions and Use Tax, however, generally applies to merchandise that is delivered in a jurisdiction that imposes the tax. For purchases of everyday items, the state allocates the taxes paid on those purchases to the city or county in which the item was purchased; but, for the sale or lease of a vehicle, vessel or aircraft, the Transactions and Use Tax is charged and allocated based on the location in which the property will be registered. For example: If the city Ms. Hernandez lives in has a Transaction and Use Tax of a 1/4 cent, she will pay that tax (in addition to the base 8.75% sales tax) when she purchases a car, regardless of whether she makes the purchase in a neighboring city or county, or regardless of whether the neighboring city or county has its own Transactions and Use Tax. Conversely, if Ms. Hernandez purchases hand soap in another city or county without a Transactions and Use Tax, she would not pay her city's Transactions and Use Tax. But, if the city she purchases the hand soap from has a Transactions and Use Tax, she will pay that city's total tax (base sales tax plus Transactions and Use Tax). A substantial amount of new revenues could be raised with an increase in the Transactions and Use Tax and the revenue received would increase or decrease at approximately the same rate as current sales tax receipts (depending on how many citizens purchase and register vehicles, vessels and aircraft in the City). We estimate the City could raise an additional $1 million plus with an increase of X cent in the transaction and use tax. Business License Tax Voter Approval Required: For General Purposes: Majority ForSpedaIPurposes:2f3rds The City's business license taxes may not have been adjusted for many years. The City has a Business License Tax comprised of two distinct parts: 1) a "fixed tax" schedule in which various named business categories are taxed on a flat rate; and 5'" April 3, 2009 Page 6 of 10 2) a business license tax, based on the gross receipts of businesses not listed on the fixed tax schedule. There are several considerations with this tax that the City may wish to consider: 1) Increase the fixed taxes on various types of businesses (election required). Business License rates should mirror inflation with an adjustment annually based on the previous year CPI. 2) Increase the gross receipts rate of taxation (election required). 3) Add a separate processing and servicing fee to the Business License Tax to cover costs of operating this program. Unlike the business tax, which exists solely to raise revenues for general municipal purposes, a new or amended Business License Fee could be established to cover the costs of processing new business licenses, renewing current business licenses, and ensuring that the establishment of new businesses is consistent with zoning and building requirements. This new or amended fee, which is charged by other cities in the County, does not require a ballot measure, but can be added by ordinance and/or resolution. We recommend that All business licenses renew on July 1 of each year; therefore, a new or amended fee would not be imposed on current business license holders until July 1, 2009. This timing allows the City to give plenty of advanced notice to business owners, many of whom have paid the same business tax for years. However, new business owners would pay the new or amended administrative fee upon application of a new business license. Similar to our other recent fee increases, a brief study will need to be completed to justify the fee increase, which can be easily accomplished with staff time. Business License Tax on Individual Residential Rental ProDerlies Voter Approval Required: For General Purposes: Majority ForSpedalPurposes:V3rds Your Municipal Code should allow for the taxation of "Rental Businesses". In most Municipal Code a Rental Business is defined as, "Every person carrying on the business of operating or renting an auto park or mobile home court, residential units with or without kitchen facilities, commercial or industrial units, apartment house or rooming house having four (4) or more such units shall pay an annual tax as b April 3, 2009 Page 7 of 10 follows: Example fee: One hundred five dollars ($105.00) for the first four such units, plus six dollars ($6.00) for each additional living unit, room or trailer space." (Ordinance No. XXX, Month, Day, Year) A Business License Ordinance should not allow for the taxation of individual residential rental units, but only the taxation of four units and larger rental properties. There are practical reasons why the Rental Business tax should be structured to tax only properties of four units and larger, and why individual properties should not be taxed: 1 ) The proper identification of individual residential rental units can be very difficult. After screening all residential units for primary residency using assessor's records (Le., tax notice mailing address different from street address), there may be many situations where the owner of the home or condo is using the residence as their personal vacation home without renting it out. . 2) It can be easy to dodge this tax by claiming that the people living in a single house are relatives or friends, and no rental payment is being paid to the property owner. If the tax is levied as a percentage of rent paid, the owner could easily claim less than the rent actually paid, or claim that the residence is not rented all year long. Investigation and prosecution costs would easily surpass the tax collected. 3) This will be a locally collected tax. Unlike the property tax, in which the County Tax Collector administers the tax collection program and distributes the receipts to the City, a tax on individual residential rental properties will be collected and enforced by the City (similar to the Business License Tax program, or Transient Occupancy Tax discussed below). One new staff member in/ the Finance Department would need to be hired to administer the program, and the costs associated with that position would need to be covered by the tax collected. Currently; the ease of identifying and enforcing the business license tax on fourplexes and above avoids the need for additional administrative expense. If a tax rate for currently-defined Rental Businesses was set at a flat $250 per rental unit per year (for all residential and commercial rental properties of four (4) or more rental units), the City would receive several hundred thousand dollars in new General Fund revenue without incurring the additional administrative expense associated with hiring additional staff, or investigating and prosecuting fraud Cases on individual rental properties. T April 3, 2009 Page 8 of 10 Utilitv User Tax Voter Approval Required: For General Purposes: Majority For Special Purposes: 213rds The City currently does not impose a Utility Users Tax on the use of telephone, electrical, gas, water, and cable television service. Over 150 cities in California currently levy a utility user tax. The rates range from 1% to 12.5%. The utilities to which the taxes are applied vary. In some cities different rates apply to residential versus commercial users. The most common rate (the mode) is 5%, applied broadly among many types of utilities. The average rate (the mean) is 6%. Because most large cities, including Los Angeles, levy utility user taxes, the majority of California residents (over 54%) and businesses pay a utility user tax. Below is an estimate on revenues for utility user tax measure at a variety of rates: · 3% UUT would raise $2 million · 5% UUT would raise $3.3 million · 7% UUT would raise $4.5 million Transient Occuoancv Tax (Hotel Bed Tax) Voter Approval Required: For General Purposes: Majority For Special Purposes: 213rds The City currently charges a Transient Occupancy Tax (hotel bed tax) on the rental of a room for less than 30 days in a hotel, motel, inn, or other lodging facility. The rate is 12% of the lodging rate, and this general tax currently raises approximately $1.9 million. Because the City is already at the higher end of the State wide mean, a change in the TOT rate is not recommended as a means of increasing revenue. Document Transfer Tax (Real Estate) Voter Approval Required: For General Purposes: Majority ForSpeciaIPurposes:213rds The document transfer tax is a tax on the transfer of interests in real estate. It is currently imposed at a rate of $0.55 for each $500 of property value. This rate is uniform throughout the County. This tax is solely dependent on the value of real estate that changes ownership. 8' April 3, 2009 Page 9 of 10 A preliminary inquiry with the County Board of Realtors indicates strong opposition to raising this tax, as they believe it unfairly taxes homeownership and investment. Given that the City would be the only City raising this tax in the next election, it is likely that the Board of Realtors would focus its efforts on defeating it, as a successful election result would signal to other cities in the County that they, too, could successfully raise this tax. Given the slowing real estate market, an initiative to increase this tax seems untimely. I hope you will find this information helpful as you continue to refine the City's finances for long term stability. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. 9