The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2018-07-02 Agenda PacketMEETING ASSISTANCE NOTICE: In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, services are available to members of our community who require special assistance to participate in public meetings. If you require special assistance, 48-hour prior notification will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements for an assisted listening device (ALD) for the hearing impaired, American Sign Language interpreters, a reader during the meeting and/or large print agendas. Please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (714) 536-5227 for more information, or request assistance from the staff or Sergeant-at-Arms at the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS: To address the legislative body on items of interest not scheduled for public hearing, Request to Speak forms will be made available at the meeting and are collected by the staff or Sergeant at Arms. Some legislative bodies may provide different Request to Speak forms for public hearing items. AUDIO/VIDEO ACCESS TO BROADCASTED MEETINGS: City Council and Planning Commission meetings are televised live on HBTV-3 Channel 3, and can be viewed via live or archived website at https://huntingtonbeach.legistar.com. AGENDA CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Monday, July 2, 2018 Council Chambers 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Study Session - 4:30 PM / 5:00 Closed Session Regular Meeting - 6:00 PM MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MIKE POSEY, Mayor ERIK PETERSON, Mayor Pro Tem PATRICK BRENDEN, Councilmember BARBARA DELGLEIZE, Councilmember JILL HARDY, Councilmember WILLIAM O’CONNELL, Councilmember LYN SEMETA, Councilmember STAFF FRED A. WILSON, City Manager MICHAEL E. GATES, City Attorney ROBIN ESTANISLAU, City Clerk ALISA CUTCHEN, City Treasurer 1 1 City Council/Public Financing Authority AGENDA July 2, 2018 4:30 PM - COUNCIL CHAMBERS Based on the amount of time needed to cover Study Session and Closed Session items, the meeting will be called to order at 4:30 PM CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL O'Connell, Semeta, Peterson, Posey, Delgleize, Hardy, Brenden ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS (Received After Agenda Distribution) PUBLIC COMMENTS PERTAINING TO STUDY SESSION / CLOSED SESSION ITEMS (3 Minute Time Limit) STUDY SESSION 18-1061.A representative from Rainbow Environmental/Republic Services will present information regarding AB 1826, the State’s mandatory commercial organics recycling law, including an updated proposal for providing City of Huntington Beach businesses with an AB 1826 compliant recycling program. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENT(S) 18-1572.Mayor Posey to Announce: Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6, the City Council shall recess into Closed Session to meet with its designated labor negotiators: Peter Brown, outside counsel and Chief Negotiator, Lori Ann Farrell-Harrison, Assistant City Manager; also in attendance: Fred Wilson, City Manager; David Segura, Fire Chief; Robert Handy, Chief of Police; Gilbert Garcia, Chief Financial Officer regarding the following: Huntington Beach Firefighters' Association (HBFA), Municipal Employees’ Organization (MEO), Municipal Employees’ Association (MEA) and Huntington Beach Police Officers’ Association (POA). CLOSED SESSION 18-1583.Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6, the City Council shall recess into Closed Session to meet with its designated labor negotiators: Peter Brown, outside counsel and Chief Negotiator, Page 1 of 5 2 2 City Council/Public Financing Authority AGENDA July 2, 2018 Lori Ann Farrell-Harrison, Assistant City Manager; also in attendance: Fred Wilson, City Manager, David Segura, Fire Chief, Robert Handy, Chief of Police, Gilbert Garcia, Chief Financial Officer regarding the following: Huntington Beach Firefighters’ Association (HBFA), Management Employees’ Organization (MEO), Municipal Employees’ Association (MEA), and Huntington Beach Police Officers’ Association (POA). 18-1594.Pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(d)(2) the City Council shall recess into Closed Session to confer with the City Attorney regarding potential litigation. Number of cases, one (1). 6:00 PM – COUNCIL CHAMBERS RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY MEETING ROLL CALL O'Connell, Semeta, Peterson, Posey, Delgleize, Hardy, Brenden PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION In permitting a nonsectarian invocation, the City does not intend to proselytize or advance any faith or belief. Neither the City nor the City Council endorses any particular religious belief or form of invocation. 18-1125.Janet Ewell of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints - North Stake and member of the Greater Huntington Beach Interfaith Council CLOSED SESSION REPORT BY CITY ATTORNEY AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS 18-1036.Mayor Posey to present commendation to Huntington Beach High School student Kylie Cochran for her perfect attendance from kindergarten through her senior year 18-1137.Mayor Posey to present commendation to 100-year-old Huntington Beach resident Rita Simonton for her incredible swimming feats ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS (Received After Agenda Distribution) Page 2 of 5 3 3 City Council/Public Financing Authority AGENDA July 2, 2018 PUBLIC COMMENTS (3 Minute Time Limit) COUNCIL COMMITTEE - APPOINTMENTS - LIAISON REPORTS, AB 1234 REPORTING, AND OPENNESS IN NEGOTIATIONS DISCLOSURES CITY MANAGER'S REPORT CONSENT CALENDAR 18-1488.Approve and Adopt Minutes Approve and adopt the City Council/Public Financing Authority regular meeting minutes dated June 18, 2018, as written and on file in the Office of the City Clerk. Recommended Action: 18-1499.Approve the June 2018 City of Huntington Beach Strategic Plan Update Approve the June 2018 Strategic Objectives Update as contained within Attachment 1. Recommended Action: 18-13410.Approve appointment and reappointments to the Community Services Commission (CSC) with terms to expire June 30, 2019, as recommended by the local school districts A) Appoint John Briscoe or Stephanie Green, Ocean View School District Representative to a term of July 1, 2018 , to June 30, 2019; and, B) Reappoint Ian Collins, Fountain Valley School District Representative to a term of July 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019; and, C) Reappoint Bridget Kaub, Huntington Beach City School District Representative to a term of July 1, 2017, to June 30, 2018; and, D) Reappoint Roy Miller, Huntington Beach Union High School District Representative to a term of July 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019. Recommended Action: 18-13111.Approval of In-Kind Donation of $10, 000 for the 2018 VISSLA ISA (International Surfing Association) World Junior Surfing Championship Approve $10,000 for in-kind donations to the International Surfing Association. Recommended Action: 18-13512.Adopt a Seven-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for fiscal years 2018/2019 through 2024/2025 for compliance with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements Page 3 of 5 4 4 City Council/Public Financing Authority AGENDA July 2, 2018 Adopt the Seven-Year Capital Improvement Program (FY 2018/2019 through 2024/2025) attached as Exhibit “A” for compliance with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements. Recommended Action: ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS 18-13613.Special Event Application - Country Harvest Festival Discuss Specific Events application from Activated Events, LLC to produce the Country Harvest Festival Concert and advise staff accordingly on any potential action. Recommended Action: COUNCILMEMBER ITEMS 18-14714.Submitted by Councilmember Delgleize - Authorize staff to return with a proposal to purchase a plaque dedicated to Zach Martinez for installation at Patriot Point Direct the City Manager to return with a proposal to purchase a plaque commemorating the life and dedication of Mr. Martinez and install said plaque at Patriot Point. Recommended Action: 18-15615.Submitted by Councilmember Brenden - Direct staff to return with a proposal for a moratorium on Shared Mobility Devices (Bike and Scooter Sharing Services) and schedule a Study Session A) Direct the City Manager to work with the City Attorney to return to the July 16, 2018, City Council Meeting with a proposal for a moratorium on Shared Mobility Device Services operating in Huntington Beach. B) Direct the City Manager and City Staff to hold a Study Session on Shared Mobility Devices within 60 days. Study session to include a survey of current regulations being applied in other cities. Recommended Action: COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS (Not Agendized) ADJOURNMENT The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Huntington Beach City Council/Public Financing Authority is Monday, July 16, 2018, at 4:00 PM in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California. INTERNET ACCESS TO CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AGENDA AND STAFF REPORT MATERIAL IS AVAILABLE PRIOR TO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AT Page 4 of 5 5 5 City Council/Public Financing Authority AGENDA July 2, 2018 http://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov Page 5 of 5 6 6 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-106 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 A representative from Rainbow Environmental/Republic Services will present information regarding AB 1826, the State’s mandatory commercial organics recycling law, including an updated proposal for providing City of Huntington Beach businesses with an AB 1826 compliant recycling program. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 7 7 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-157 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 Mayor Posey to Announce: Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6, the City Council shall recess into Closed Session to meet with its designated labor negotiators: Peter Brown, outside counsel and Chief Negotiator, Lori Ann Farrell-Harrison, Assistant City Manager; also in attendance: Fred Wilson, City Manager; David Segura, Fire Chief; Robert Handy, Chief of Police; Gilbert Garcia, Chief Financial Officer regarding the following: Huntington Beach Firefighters' Association (HBFA), Municipal Employees’ Organization (MEO), Municipal Employees’ Association (MEA) and Huntington Beach Police Officers’ Association (POA). City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 8 8 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-158 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6, the City Council shall recess into Closed Session to meet with its designated labor negotiators: Peter Brown, outside counsel and Chief Negotiator, Lori Ann Farrell-Harrison, Assistant City Manager; also in attendance: Fred Wilson, City Manager, David Segura, Fire Chief, Robert Handy, Chief of Police, Gilbert Garcia, Chief Financial Officer regarding the following:Huntington Beach Firefighters’ Association (HBFA), Management Employees’ Organization (MEO), Municipal Employees’ Association (MEA), and Huntington Beach Police Officers’ Association (POA). City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 9 9 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-159 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 Pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(d)(2) the City Council shall recess into Closed Session to confer with the City Attorney regarding potential litigation.Number of cases, one (1). City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 10 10 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-112 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 Janet Ewell of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints - North Stake and member of the Greater Huntington Beach Interfaith Council City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 11 11 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-103 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 Mayor Posey to present commendation to Huntington Beach High School student Kylie Cochran for her perfect attendance from kindergarten through her senior year City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 12 12 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-113 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 Mayor Posey to present commendation to 100-year-old Huntington Beach resident Rita Simonton for her incredible swimming feats City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 13 13 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-148 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Robin Estanislau, CMC, City Clerk PREPARED BY:Robin Estanislau, CMC, City Clerk Subject: Approve and Adopt Minutes Statement of Issue: A request is submitted to review and approve the City Council/Public Financing Authority regular meeting minutes dated June 18, 2018. Financial Impact: None. Recommended Action: Approve and adopt the City Council/Public Financing Authority regular meeting minutes dated June 18, 2018, as written and on file in the Office of the City Clerk. Alternative Action(s): Do not approve and/or request revision(s). Analysis: None. Environmental Status: None. Strategic Plan Goal: Non-Applicable - Administrative Item Attachment(s): 1. June 18, 2018 CC/PFA Regular Meeting Minutes City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 14 14 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-149 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Fred A. Wilson, City Manager PREPARED BY:Antonia Graham, Assistant to the City Manager Subject: Approve the June 2018 City of Huntington Beach Strategic Plan Update Statement of Issue: The City Council held a Strategic Planning Retreat on February 13, 2018, in which the City Council developed 25 Strategic Objectives based on five (5) Strategic Plan Goals. The Strategic Objectives were reviewed in a public meeting and through consensus by the City Council Members present, were compiled into a draft Strategic Objectives Grid. The Strategic Objectives were brought forth to City Council for approval on March 19, 2018. Financial Impact: Not applicable. Individual Strategic Objectives which have a budgetary impact will be considered separately. Recommended Action: Approve the June 2018 Strategic Objectives Update as contained within Attachment 1. Alternative Action(s): Amend or reject the Strategic Objectives Update and direct staff accordingly. Analysis: In 2009, the City Council began an annual strategic planning process to develop consensus on a Mission State, Three-Year Goals, and corresponding Priority Strategic Objectives. This process is on -going and is a critical component of maintaining the City in a fiscally sustainable manner. In fulfilling this process, the City Council met on February 13, 2018, to review and update the Three-Year Goals and their Priority Strategic Objectives. The Three-Year Goals are organized into five categories as follows: - Improve quality of life - Enhance and maintain infrastructure - Strengthen economic and financial sustainability - Enhance and maintain public safety - Enhance and maintain city service delivery City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 15 15 File #:18-149 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 Each of these categories includes a list of Six-Month Strategic Objectives. The Strategic Objectives contained in the matrix all gained consensus at the Strategic Planning Retreat. Additionally, the Strategic Objectives were brought forth to City Council on March 19, 2018, where they were approved in their entirety. The attached Strategic Objectives Matrix contains a status and comments column that are updated to reflect the most recent activity on each item that was identified at the Council Strategic Planning Session. Going forward the Council will receive the attached matrix monthly as progress is made on each item. Environmental Status: Not Applicable. Strategic Plan Goal: Improve quality of life Enhance quality of life Strengthen economic and financial sustainability Enhance and maintain public safety Enhance and maintain City service delivery Attachment(s): 1. City of Huntington Beach Strategic Objectives City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 16 16 A C I T Y O F H U N T I N G T O N B E A C H S T R A T E G I C O B J E C T I V E S (February 13, 2018 – January 1, 2019) THREE-YEAR GOAL:IMPROVE QUALITY OF LIFE WHEN WHO WHAT STATUS COMMENTS DONE ON TARGET REVISED 1. By June 1, 2018 Chief Information Officer (lead), City Attorney and Councilmember Jill Hardy Implement a website interface for the community to file nuisance complaints that is more visible and prominent to the public. X The new “contact us” page was implemented on 6/12/2018. 2. By September 1, 2018 City Attorney (lead), and Councilmembers Erik Peterson, Jill Hardy and Lyn Semeta Propose amendments to the City Council for action that strengthen the Neighborhood Nuisance Ordinances. X 17 17 B THREE-YEAR GOAL:ENHANCE AND MAINTAIN INFRASTRUCTURE WHEN WHO WHAT STATUS COMMENTS DONE ON TARGET REVISED 1. By June 1, 2018 Assistant City Manager (lead), Police Chief and Public Works Director Complete a needs assessment and financing of Police Department Facilities and provide recommendations for improvement to the City Council for action. X The Police, Public Works, and Finance Departments are completing and developing recommendations for City Council approval, including potential hiring options. Staff recommendations to be presented in August/September 2018. 2. By June 1, 2018 Public Works Director and Community Services Director, working with the Central Park Committee and Community Services Commission Prioritize park maintenance needs and improvements and present to the City Council for consideration. X On May 21, 2018, the FY 2018/19 Proposed Budget Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) was presented to the City Council, including park improvement projects to be financed next year. 3. By June 1, 2018 August 1, 2018 Community Services Director and Public Works Director, with input from the Community Services Commission Complete an assessment of park playground equipment and playground surfacing and recommend priorities to the City Council for consideration. x Staff is targeting the August or September Commission for this presentation. Once the Commission approves of the recommended priorities, this list will be used to allocate available CIP and/or park funding on a priority basis. 4. By October 1, 2018 Chief Information Officer (CIO) and Public Works Director Perform and assessment of all technology needs and current technology programs used to support infrastructure assets to prepare for development of a Comprehensive Asset Management System. X Staff met with the vendors and received a proposal from NextLevel Technology to perform a technology assessment for Public Works. 5. By December 15, 2018 Public Works Director and Assistant City Manager, with input from the Department Directors Assess City facility deficiencies and provide recommendations for improvement to the City Council for action. X 18 18 C 6. By January 1, 2019 Public Works Director and CIO Perform a power and electricity needs assessment for City facilities and report results with recommendations to the City Manager. X Public Works Director and CIO will discuss details at the next IS/PW quarterly meeting. THREE-YEAR GOAL:STRENGTHEN ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY WHEN WHO WHAT STATUS COMMENTS DONE ON TARGET REVISED 1. By July 1, 2018 Assistant City Manager (lead), CFO and Deputy Director of Business Development Conduct a City Council Study Session on budget balancing options, including looking at current revenue sources, potential new revenue options and sale of surplus property. X Presented at 5/7/18 Study Session. Item has been referred to the Finance Commission for follow up and recommendations. Finance Commission to discuss at June monthly meeting and present to City Council thereafter. 2. By August 1, 2018 Public Works Director and CFO Recommend options for the commercial refuse franchise fee.X Under consideration as part of the franchise renewal negotiation. 3. By November 15, 2018 Assistant City Manager and CFO Conduct a cost-benefit analysis of the City’s programs and services and recommend to the City Council for action adjustments to assist with balancing the budget. X ACM and CFO are working on this and are on target for Nov. 15, 2018. 4. By January 1, 2019 HR Director and CFO Identify funding to enhance the funded status of the City’s Workers Comp Plan. X 5. By January 1, 2019 Community Development Director Bring to the City Council for action the implementation of the Research and Technology Section of the Zoning Code. X Introduce work plan to City Council at 07/16/18 Study Session, Stakeholder meetings to begin mid-July. 19 19 D THREE-YEAR GOAL:ENHANCE AND MAINTAIN PUBLIC SAFETY WHEN WHO WHAT STATUS COMMENTS DONE ON TARGET REVISED 1. On or before July 1, 2018 and December 1, 2018 Police Chief Provide an update to the City Council on the implementation of Management Partners’ recommendations. X The Police Chief made a presentation regarding the implementation of the study’s recommendations to City Council on May 7, 2018. 2. By July 1, 2018 Police Chief and CFO Present to the City Council for consideration revenue opportunities to increase funding for police staffing. X Options to enhance General Fund revenue in order to improve infrastructure, increase staffing (including police officers) and address rising labor costs were presented to the City Council at the May 7, 2018 Study Session on Budget Balancing Options. 3. By September 1, 2018 Fire Chief and CFO Present the findings of the Peak Load Staffing for Emergency Transport Services Pilot Program and make a recommendation, including financial impact, to the City Manager. X Staff from IS and Fire departments have been working to implement the new inspection reporting system. 4. By September 1, 2018 Fire Chief and CIO Present to the City Council for consideration a third party Fire Safety Inspection Reporting System to assist the business community with web-based reporting. X Draft RFP has been created and ready for review. 5. By September 1, 2018 Police Chief and CIO Complete the RFP process and recommend a contract to the City Council for consideration for a new Computer Aided Dispatch System and a Records Management System.X Staff from Police and IS departments have been working with a vendor to gather functional requirements and develop scope of work for the project. 20 20 E 6. By September 1, 2018 Assistant City Manager, Police Chief and Deputy Director of Economic Development, working with the ad hoc Council Committee on Homelessness Present to the City Council for consideration a Comprehensive Plan to Address Homelessness. X A comprehensive plan to address homelessness in Huntington Beach will be presented to the City Council in September. Community outreach meetings are taking place alongside working with the Council Subcommittee on Homelessness. 7. By January 1, 2019 Fire Chief and CIO Conduct a needs assessment of the Fire Department’s Computer Aided Dispatch System and Records Management System and make recommendations for system integration to the City Manager. X 8. By July 1, 2018 Fire Chief and Assistant City Manager Conduct a City Council Study Session on optimizing staffing during peak and non-peak times. X 21 21 F THREE-YEAR GOAL:ENHANCE AND MAINTAIN CITY SERVICE DELIVERY WHEN WHO WHAT STATUS COMMENTS DONE ON TARGET REVISED 1. By July 1, 2018 August 1, 2018 ACM and CIO Provide to the City Council an update regarding the implementation of an Enterprise Land Management (ELM) system.X 2. By September 1, 2018 Library Services Director (lead), CFO and CIO Implement a system to enable library cardholders to pay fees and fines online. X Checking with system vendor on Ecommerce module and timeline for possible implementation. 3. By November 1, 2018 PIO (lead), CIO, City Attorney and Assistant to the City Manager Create and present to the City Manager a citywide social media plan for promoting City services, events and operations. X 4. By January 1, 2019 City Manager and CIO Develop and present a plan to the City Council for action to improve connectivity via broadband to downtown City facilities. X Members of the broadband committee are evaluating different options. 22 22 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-134 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Fred A. Wilson, City Manager PREPARED BY:Marie Knight, Director of Community Services Subject: Approve appointment and reappointments to the Community Services Commission (CSC) with terms to expire June 30, 2019, as recommended by the local school districts Statement of Issue: There is a need for the City Council to approve appointments to the Community Services Commission per recommendations by the local school districts. Financial Impact: Not applicable. Recommended Action: A) Appoint John Briscoe or Stephanie Green, Ocean View School District Representative to a term of July 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019; and, B) Reappoint Ian Collins, Fountain Valley School District Representative to a term of July 1, 2018,to June 30, 2019; and, C) Reappoint Bridget Kaub, Huntington Beach City School District Representative to a term of July 1, 2017, to June 30, 2018; and, D) Reappoint Roy Miller, Huntington Beach Union High School District Representative to a term of July 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019. Alternative Action(s): Do not approve appointments for the Community Services Commission and direct staff accordingly. Analysis: Per Municipal Code 2.64.040, each elementary, high school, and public community college district City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 23 23 File #:18-134 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 having facilities within the City of Huntington Beach shall have representatives on the Community Services Commission. Chapter 2.64.040 states: The City Council shall appoint six members for terms of one-year. Each elementary, high school and public community college district having facilities within the City may recommend to the Council, on or before the third Monday of June of each year, two or more persons, residents of the City of Huntington Beach, to represent their district. One of said persons shall be appointed by the Council for a one-year term which will terminate on June 30 the following year. In the event that any district shall not make such recommendations to the Council by the first day of July, then the Council may appoint some qualified person to a one-year term to represent such school district on the commission (1113-7/65, 1300-3/67, 2383-7/79, 2389-9/79, 3723-12/05, 3983- 1/14) Huntington Beach Union High School District (HBUHSD), Fountain Valley School District (FVSD), and Huntington Beach City School District (HBCSD) are recommending the re-appointment of their current representatives as follows: Roy Miller for HBUHSD; Ian Collins for FVSD; and, Bridget Kaub for HBCSD. The Ocean View School District is recommending one of two individuals to represent their district, either John Briscoe or Stephanie Green. The Westminster School District has informed staff that they are not making a recommendation this year. The Coast Community College District recommended re-appointing Albert Gasparian. However, Mr. Gasparian has reached his term limit of eight-years and, therefore, must serve an absence of one-year before being reappointed. At this point, the College District has not offered an alternative recommendation. Per Chapter 2.64, City Council has the option to appoint residents of the City to represent each district should they so choose. Should City Council choose not to appoint the representatives, the Commission would consist of the seven City Council appointees and representatives from HBUHSD, FVSD, OVSD and HBCSD. Environmental Status: Not applicable. Strategic Plan Goal: Improve quality of life Attachment(s): 1) Community Services Commission 2018/19 Term Roster 2) School District Recommendations Letters City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 24 24 COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION Effective 7/01/18 SCHOOL DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVES 1 YEAR TERM TDB* 7/1/18 – 6/30/19 Coast Community College District 1th Term TBD* 7/1/18 – 6/30/19 Ocean View School District 1st Term TBD* 7/1/18 – 6/30/19 Westminster School District 1st Term IAN COLLINS** 7/1/18 – 6/30/19 Fountain Valley School District 2nd Term BRIDGET KAUB** 7/1/18 – 6/30/19 Huntington Beach City School District 7th Term ROY MILLER ** 7/1/18 – 6/30/19 Huntington Beach Union High School District 7th Term COUNCIL MEMBER REPRESENTATIVES – 4 YEAR TERM JOE CARCHIO 1/1/17 – 12/31/20 Appt. by Patrick Brenden 1st Term NICOLINA CUZZACREA 1/1/15 – 12/31/19 Appt. by Billy O’Connell 1st Term JAY KREITZ 1/1/17 – 12/31/20 Appt. by Jill Hardy 3rd Term JANIS MANTINI*** 1/1/15 – 12/31/19 Appt. by Barbara Delgleize Fulfilling Term of J.D. Miles MICHELLE SCHUETZ*** 1/1/15 – 12/31/19 Appt. by Michael Posey Fulfilling Term of Jerry Moffatt KRISTA STERUD 1/1/17 – 12/31/20 Appt. by Lyn Semeta 1st Term DICK THIEL 1/1/15 – 12/31/19 Appt. by Erik Peterson 1st Term * Pending City Council appointment ** Pending City Council reappointment ***Fulfilling a partial term prior to 1st term 25 25 June 5, 2018 David C. Dominguez Facilities, Development & Concessions Manager Community Services Commission Secretary City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648-2702 Dear Mr. Dominguez, The Fountain Valley School District values the opportunity to have representation on the City of Huntington Beach Community Services Commission. We respectfully recommend reappointment of Fountain Valley School District Board of Trustees member, Mr. Ian Collins to serve in the role of representative for the District. Mr Collins is a long-time resident of Huntington Beach and extremely active in the local community. He has also enjoyed serving on the committee this past year. We look forward to continued collaboration with the City of Huntington Beach and our District through the City of Huntington Beach Community Services Commission. Sincerely, Mark Johnson, Ed.D. Superintendent FOUNTAIN VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT 10055 Slater Avenue | Fountain Valley, CA 92708 | (714) 843-3200 www.fvsd.us From the Office of the Superintendent 26 26 2727 28 28 June 22, 2018 Honorable Mike Posey Mayor, City of Huntington Beach 200 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 SUBJECT: Community Services Commission Representative At the June 12, 2018, Board meeting, the Ocean View School District Board of Trustees appointed John Briscoe and Stephanie Green, as possible representatives to the Community Services Commission. Thank you for forwarding the District’s appointed representative to the City Council for approval. Sincerely, Carol Hansen, Ed.D. Superintendent 29 29 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-131 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Fred A. Wilson, City Manager PREPARED BY:Kellee Fritzal, Deputy Director of Economic Development Subject: Approval of In-Kind Donation for 2018 VISSLA ISA (International Surfing Association) World Junior Surfing Championship. Statement of Issue: The City of Huntington Beach and Visit Huntington Beach have an opportunity to host the International Surfing Association World Junior Surfing Championships in Huntington Beach. The 2018 VISSLA ISA is the qualifying event for the 2020 International Olympic Teams. To assist the event, the City has been asked to consider an in-kind donation to be used towards permit and parking fees. Financial Impact: There are no expenditures with the in-kind donation; however, the City would be providing in-kind permit fees and parking fees foregoing revenue of up to $10,000. All Public Safety and Public Works related costs will be paid by the ISA. Recommended Action: Approve $10,000 for in-kind donations to the International Surfing Association. Alternative Action(s): Do not approve the in-lieu donation and direct staff accordingly. Analysis: The International Olympic Committee recognizes the International Surfing Association (“ISA”) as the World Governing Authority for Surfing. The ISA membership includes the surfing National Federations of 103 countries. One of the ISA’s signature events is the VISSLA World Junior Surfing Championship. These events are held around the world, the 2017 event was held in Hyuga Japan. The event consisted of over 300 surfers from 41 nations and highlights were broadcast in 125+ territories. The VISSLA World Junior Surfing Championships launches the professional careers of top pro surfers. There are a record number of participating countries, competitors, and spectators expected for the 2018 event and the City has the opportunity to host it here in Huntington Beach. The previous event in the United States was in Oceanside, California, in 2015. Some of the participants may be City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 30 30 File #:18-131 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 representing their countries in the 2020 Summer Olympics in Japan. The 2018 VISSLA ISA World Championships would be on October 27-November 4. Strategically, it is important for the City of Huntington Beach to work in tandem with the ISA to host events like the VISSLA World Junior Surfing Championship in order to be considered as a potential competition venue for the 2028 Summer Olympic Games. The in-lieu donation would consist of the following: Application Fee - $400 Permit Fee - $5,400 Stage Fee - $700 Fire Permit Fees - $980 (estimate) Business License - $250 (estimate/actual based number of vendors/exhibitors/providers) Approximately $7,730 in permit fees. The remaining potential fee of $2,270 would be applied towards parking for the officials from ISA. All other parking will be paid and charged at the full-rate. Environmental Status: Not Applicable Strategic Plan Goal: Strengthen economic and financial sustainability Attachment(s): None City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 31 31 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-135 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Fred A. Wilson, City Manager PREPARED BY:Travis K. Hopkins, PE, Director of Public Works Subject: Adopt a Seven-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for fiscal years 2018/2019 through 2024/2025 for compliance with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements Statement of Issue: In order to remain eligible to receive Measure M2 Program funding, the City must submit to the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) an adopted seven-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) in compliance with the renewed Measure M eligibility requirements. Financial Impact: No additional funding is required for this resolution. Annual M2 local fair-share allocation is approximately $3.4 million for the City. Recommended Action: Adopt the Seven-Year Capital Improvement Program (FY 2018/2019 through 2024/2025) attached as Exhibit “A” for compliance with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements. Alternative Action(s): Do not adopt the attached Seven-Year CIP for Measure M eligibility and forego M2 funding eligibility. This action would result in the loss of $3.4 million for the next fiscal year, and the loss of allocated and potential grant funding for traffic and street improvement projects. Analysis: On November 6, 1990, the Orange County voters approved the original Measure M, the revised Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Ordinance, for 20 years (1991-2011). On November 7, 2006, the Orange County voters approved Renewed Measure M. Renewed Measure M is a 30- year (2011-2041), multi-billion dollar program extension of the original Measure M. Renewed Measure M net revenues are generated from the transactions and use tax, plus any interest or other earnings after allowable deductions. Net revenues may be allocated to local jurisdictions for a variety of programs identified in Ordinance No. 3. Compliance with the eligibility requirements established in Ordinance No. 3 must be established and maintained in order for local jurisdictions to receive Measure M net revenues. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 32 32 File #:18-135 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 The City must satisfy certain requirements to maintain eligibility in order to receive funding from OCTA. A key requirement is that the City adopt a Seven-Year CIP for the fiscal years 2018/2019 through 2024/2025, in compliance with the renewed Measure M eligibility requirements. The Seven- Year CIP, which is attached as Exhibit “A,” identifies all projects, currently and potentially, funded by OCTA Measure M2 funds. The following projects are identified in the attached Exhibit “A”: 1. Adams Ave. Traffic Signal Synchronization and Communication Equipment Upgrades 2. Arterial Rehab FY 18/19 (Edinger, Saybrook, Algonquin, Slater, Newland, Graham, Delaware, Atlanta) 3. Arterial Rehab FY 17/18 (Heil, Atlanta, Indianapolis) 4. Arterial Rehab FY 17/18 (Heil, Indianapolis, Slater, Edinger, Springdale) 5. Atlanta Ave. Widening from Huntington St. to Delaware St. 6. Magnolia St. and Brookhurst St. Bridge Preventive Maintenance 7. Brookhurst St. Synchronization 8. City of Huntington Beach Seasonal Transit Circulator 9. Citywide Concrete Replacements 10.General Street Maintenance for Public Works 11.Goldenwest St. Traffic Signal Synchronization and Communication Equipment Upgrades 12.Huntington Beach Catch Basin Retrofit Project 13.Huntington Beach Northwest Catch Basin Retrofit Project 14.Huntington Harbour Marina Trash Skimmers 15.Magnolia St. Synchronization 16.McFadden/Edwards and Heil/Algonquin Catch Basin Retrofit Project 17.Residential Curb Ramp Project 18.Citywide Residential Overlay 19.Utica Bicycle Blvd from Main St. to Beach Blvd. 20.Warner Ave. Traffic Signal Synchronization and Communication Equipment Upgrades Environmental Status: Not applicable for this action. Strategic Plan Goal: Enhance and maintain infrastructure Attachment(s): 1. Exhibit “A,” Measure M Seven-Year CIP (FY 2018/2019 through 2024/2025) 2. OCTA Ordinance No. 3 City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 33 33 EXHIBIT “A” 34 34 Measure M Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2018/2019 through 2024/2025 16/12/2018 Provide operational and infrastructure improvements. Communications intertie between agency and Caltrans to manage traffic Systems Management Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Adams Avenue Traffic Signal Synchronization and Communication Equipment Upgrades Project Name: From Beach Boulevard to City Boundary (Multi Jurisdictional) Project Limits: 13-OCTA-TSP-3663Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $ 10,000 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $268 $268 Annual MaintenanceOther 2.68 $9,732 $9,732AQMD 97.32 $10,000 $10,000 1)Edinger(Graham-Bolsa Chica); 2) Saybrook(Heil-Edinger); 3)Algonquin(Warner-Heil); 4)Slater(Beach-Gothard); 5)Newland(Yorktown-Garfield); 6)Graham(Warner-Springdale); 7)Delaware(Main-Ellis); 8)Atlanta(Bushard-Brookhurst) Rehabilitation of roadway Road Maintenance Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Arterial Rehabilation FY 18/19Project Name: See Project DescriptionProject Limits: Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $50,000 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $6,630,923 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,630,923 $6,630,923 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,680,923 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,680,923 $ 6,680,923 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $700,000 $700,000General Fund 10.48 $1,900,000 $1,900,000M2 LFS 28.44 $800,000 $800,000 City Infrastructure FundOther 11.97 $3,280,923 $3,280,923 RMRAOther 49.11 $6,680,923 $6,680,923 35 35 Measure M Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2018/2019 through 2024/2025 26/12/2018 Rehabilitate Arterial's Heil Avenue, Atlanta Avenue, and Indianapolis Avenue. This a carryover project for FY18/19. Funding shown in prior years. Rehabilitation of roadway Road Maintenance Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Arterial Rehabilitation FY 17/18Project Name: Heil Ave (Edwards-Springdale), Atlanta Ave (Delaware-Beach), and Indianapolis Ave (Beach-Magnolia) Project Limits: Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ 0 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $0 $0General Fund 22.73 $0 $0M2 LFS 45.45 $0 $0 Infrastructure FundOther 27.27 $0 $0Prop 42 4.55 $0 $0 Rehabilitate 1)Heil, 2)Indianapolis, 3)Slater, 4)Edinger, 5)Springdale (carry-over from FY 2017-18) Rehabilitation of roadway Road Maintenance Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Arterial Rehabilitation FY 17/18Project Name: 1)Springdale-Bolsa Chica;2)Newland-Beach;3)Goldenwest-Gothard;4)E dwards-Springdale;5)Warner-Slater Project Limits: Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ 0 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $0 $0General Fund 21.16 $0 $0M2 LFS 55.02 $0 $0 RMRAOther 23.82 $0 $0 36 36 Measure M Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2018/2019 through 2024/2025 36/12/2018 This project will widen the south side of Atlanta Avenue. This project is carryover from FY 15/16 CIP. Add 1 lane to existing roadway in project limits Road Widening Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Atlanta Avenue WideningProject Name: Atlanta Avenue (Huntington St. to Delaware St.)Project Limits: 15-HBCH-ACE-3770Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ 0 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $0 $0M2 ACE 75.00 $0 $0 25% Match to previously approved M2 ACEGeneral Fund 25.00 $0 $0 Provide Design and Construction of City Bridges including Roadway. This project was included as carry-over from FY 17/18 CIP. Bridge Road Maintenance Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Bridge Preventative MaintenanceProject Name: Magnolia Street and Brookhurst Street Bridge at Pacific Coast Highway Project Limits: Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ 0 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $0 $0Gas Tax 16.94 $0 $0M2 LFS 1.08 $0 $0 Water FundOther 72.74 $0 $0Prop 42 9.24 $0 $0 37 37 Measure M Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2018/2019 through 2024/2025 46/12/2018 Provide operational and infrastructure improvements. This is a corridor project managed by OCTA and funding reflects planned improvements within Huntington Beach only. Carry-over from FY 17/18 Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Traffic Signals Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Brookhurst Street SynchronizationProject Name: Garfield Avenue to Pacific Coast HighwayProject Limits: 16-OCTA-TSP-3794Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $833,490 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $833,490 $856,828 O&M $0 $0 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $833,490 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $843,490 $ 866,828 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $10,000 $10,277General Fund 1.19 $618,757 $635,877M2 TSSP 73.36 $214,733 $220,674AQMD 25.46 $843,490 $866,828 Provide Seasonal Transit Service by adding additional free local shuttle service connections within the City from Memorial Day to Labor Day and selected weekends. New Service Transit Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: City of Huntington Beach Seasonal Transit CirculatorProject Name: CitywideProject Limits: 16-HBCH-CBT-3826Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $122,545 $122,545 $122,545 $122,545 $122,545 $0 $0 $612,725 $612,725 $122,545 $122,545 $122,545 $122,545 $122,545 $0 $0 $612,725 $ 612,725 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $61,274 $61,274General Fund 10.00 $551,451 $551,451M2 Transit - V 90.00 $612,725 $612,725 38 38 Measure M Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2018/2019 through 2024/2025 56/12/2018 Replace damaged concrete sidewalks or curb and gutter throughout the City. This is annual program with locations selected throughout Huntington Beach at streets where an overlay is required by PMP. Reconstruction or rehabilitation of sidewalk Pedestrian Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Concrete ReplacementsProject Name: CitywideProject Limits: Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $0 $0 $1,250,000 $1,321,988 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $0 $0 $1,250,000 $ 1,321,988 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $1,250,000 $1,321,988General Fund 100.00 $1,250,000 $1,321,988 Annual maintenance work for concrete, potholes and failed asphalt; O&M of traffic signals, replacement of striping and signage, including engineering and inspection as needed on an annual basis. Reconstruction or rehabilitation of sidewalk Pedestrian Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: General Street Maintenance for Public WorksProject Name: CitywideProject Limits: Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $0 $0 $7,000,000 $7,403,131 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $0 $0 $7,000,000 $ 7,403,131 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $7,000,000 $7,403,131M2 LFS 100.00 $7,000,000 $7,403,131 39 39 Measure M Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2018/2019 through 2024/2025 66/12/2018 Provide operational and infrastructure upgrades including signal timing and installation of fiber optic cable along Goldenwest Street. Multiagency project includes Caltrans and City of Westminster. CO project for FY18/19. Coordinate signals within project limits Traffic Signals Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Goldenwest Street Traffic Signal Synchronization and Communication Equipment Upgrades Project Name: Goldenwest St. from State Route 22 to Pacific Coast Highway Project Limits: 11-OCTA-TSP-3554Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $2,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000 $ 2,000 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $1,560 $1,560M2 TSSP 78.02 $440 $440AQMD 21.98 $2,000 $2,000 Maintenance of 84 catch basins retrofitted with Bio Clean Round Curb Inlet Filters. Catchment Retrofit Environmental Cleanup Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Huntington Beach Catch Basin Retrofit ProjectProject Name: City-wideProject Limits: 14-HBCH-ECP-3742Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $20,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $ 20,000 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $20,000 $20,000General Fund 100.00 $20,000 $20,000 40 40 Measure M Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2018/2019 through 2024/2025 76/12/2018 Maintenance of 126 catch basins retrofitted with Bio Clean Round Curb Inlet Filters and Skimmer Box. Catchment Retrofit Environmental Cleanup Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Huntington Beach Northwest Catch Basin Retrofit Project Project Name: City-wide in Northwest Part of CityProject Limits: 13-HBCH-ECP-3687Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $20,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $ 20,000 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $20,000 $20,000General Fund 100.00 $20,000 $20,000 Marian Trash Skimmers will be installed in various locations Marina Trash Skimmer Environmental Cleanup Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Huntington Harbour Marina Trash SkimmersProject Name: Various Locations within Huntington HarbourProject Limits: 16-HBCH-ECP-3852Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ 0 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $0 $0M2 ECP-1 75.00 $0 $0General Fund 12.50 $0 $0 Donations CountyOther 12.50 $0 $0 41 41 Measure M Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2018/2019 through 2024/2025 86/12/2018 Provide operational and infrastructure improvements; carry-over from FY 17/18 Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Traffic Signals Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Magnolia Street SynchronizationProject Name: from Garfield Avenue to Pacific Coast HighwayProject Limits: 16-OCTA-TSP-3795Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $724,153 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $724,153 $744,429 O&M $0 $0 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $724,153 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $734,153 $ 754,429 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $10,000 $10,276General Fund 1.36 $524,364 $538,846M2 TSSP 71.42 $199,789 $205,307AQMD 27.21 $734,153 $754,429 Provide maintenance for catch basin screens. Automatic Retractable Screen and other debris screens or inserts Environmental Cleanup Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: McFadden/Edwards and Heil/Algonquin Catch Basin Retrofit Project Project Name: City-wideProject Limits: 11-HBCH-ECP-3573Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $0 $0 $0 $20,300 $20,300 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $0 $0 $0 $20,300 $ 20,300 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $20,300 $20,300General Fund 100.00 $20,300 $20,300 42 42 Measure M Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2018/2019 through 2024/2025 96/12/2018 Install ADA Access Ramps . This is an annual project that will install Ramps at locations where we are providing an overlay to adjacent street. Installation of ADA access ramps Pedestrian Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Residential Curb Ramp ProjectProject Name: Ramps to be installed throughout CityProject Limits: Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $25,000 $25,000 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $270,000 $270,000 $270,000 $270,000 $270,000 $0 $0 $1,350,000 $1,427,747 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $275,000 $275,000 $275,000 $275,000 $275,000 $0 $0 $1,375,000 $ 1,452,747 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $1,375,000 $1,452,747CDBG 100.00 $0 $0Gas Tax 0.00 $1,375,000 $1,452,747 Provide cold mill and overlay of various streets throughout Huntington Beach. This annual project will provide street overlay rehabilitation based on the PMP ratings. Rehabilitation of roadway Road Maintenance Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Residential OverlayProject Name: CitywideProject Limits: Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $30,000 $30,000 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $2,090,000 $2,090,000 $2,090,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,270,000 $6,447,199 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,100,000 $2,100,000 $2,100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,300,000 $ 6,477,199 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $6,300,000 $6,477,199Gas Tax 100.00 $0 $0Other 0.00 $0 $0Other 0.00 $6,300,000 $6,477,199 43 43 Measure M Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2018/2019 through 2024/2025 106/12/2018 Construct a "Bicycle Boulevard", where bicycling is emphasized over motor vehicle use. Project includes a new traffic signal, curb bulb-outs, signing & striping improvements. This project is a carryover for FY18/19. Widening of existing bike route Bikeways Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Utica Bicycle Boulevard from Main Street to Beach Boulevard Project Name: Utica Avenue from Main Street to Beach BoulevardProject Limits: Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ 0 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $0 $0Prop 42 0.00 $0 $0BCIP 100.00 $0 $0 Provide operational and infrastructure upgrades including signal timing and installation of fiber optic along Warner Avenue. Includes Caltrans and Cities of Fountain Valley, Santa Ana and Tustin. Carryover for FY18/19. Coordinate signals within project limits Traffic Signals Project Description: TOW Description: Type of Work (TOW): Huntington BeachAgency: Warner Avenue Traffic Signal Synchronization and Communication Equipment Upgrade Project Name: Warner Avenue from Pacific Coast Hwy to Red Hill Avenue Project Limits: 11-OCTA-TSP-3558Project Number: 24/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,000 $ 5,000 PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES $3,959 $3,959 OCTA anticipated expendituresM2 TSSP 79.17 $1,041 $1,041AQMD 20.83 $5,000 $5,000 44 44 ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY ORDINANCE NO. 3 JULY 24, 2006 AMENDED: November 9, 2012 November 25, 2013 December 14, 2015 (corrected March 14, 2016) Orange County Local Transportation Authority 550 South Main Street P.O. Box 14184 Orange, CA 92863-1584 Tel: (714) 560-6282 45 45 Measure M2 Amendments Transportation Investment Plan Amendments 1. November 9, 2012 • Reallocation of Funds within Freeway Program Between SR-91 and I-405 2. December 14, 2015 (corrected March 14, 2016) • Closeout of Project T and Reallocation of Remaining Funds within Transit Program between Metrolink Service Expansion (Project R) and Fare Stabilization Program (Project U). Corrected amendment language was presented to the Board on March 14, 2016. Ordinance Amendment 1. November 25, 2013 • Strengthens the eligibility and selection process for TOC members to prevent any person with a financial conflict of interest from serving as a member. Also requires currently elected or appointed officers who are applying to serve on the TOC to complete an “Intent to Resign” form. 2. December 14, 2015 (corrected March 14, 2016) • Accounts for additional funding from Project T allocated to the Fare Stabilization Program by changing Attachment B language to reflect a 1.47% delegation (rather than 1%) of Project U funding towards Fare Stabilization. Corrected amendment language was presented to the Board on March 14, 2016. 46 46 TABLE OF CONTENTS Ordinance No. 3 Page Preamble ............................................................................................... 1 Section 1. Title ......................................................................................... 1 Section 2. Summary ................................................................................ 2 Section 3. Imposition of Retail Transactions and Use Tax ...................... 2 Section 4. Purposes ................................................................................ 2 Section 5. Bonding Authority ................................................................... 3 Section 6. Maintenance of Effort Requirements ...................................... 3 Section 7. Administration ......................................................................... 4 Section 8. Annual Appropriations Limit .................................................... 4 Section 9. Effective and Operative Dates ................................................ 5 Section 10. Safeguards of Use of Revenues ............................................. 5 Section 11. Ten-Year Comprehensive Program Review ........................... 6 Section 12. Amendments .......................................................................... 6 Section 13. Request for Election ............................................................... 7 Section 14. Effect on Ordinance No. 2 ...................................................... 8 Section 15. Severability ............................................................................. 8 ATTACHMENT A – Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan ................................... A-1 ATTACHMENT B - Allocation of Net Revenues Section I. Definitions ............................................................................... B-1 47 47 Section II. Requirements ......................................................................... B-4 Section III. Requirements for Eligible Jurisdictions ................................... B-7 Section IV. Allocation of Net Revenues; General Provisions .................... B-10 Section V. Allocation of Net Revenues; Streets and Roads Programs/Projects ....................................................... B-12 Section VI. Allocation of Net Revenues; Transit Programs/ Projects .................................................................................. B-14 Section VII. Allocation of Net Revenues; Environmental Cleanup Projects .................................................................................. B-17 ATTACHMENT C - Taxpayer Oversight Committee Section I. Purpose and Organization ...................................................... C-1 Section II. Committee Membership ......................................................... C-1 Section III. Appointment of Members ....................................................... C-2 Section IV. Duties and Responsibilities .................................................... C-4 48 48 Ordinance No. 3 Renewed Measure M Transportation Ordinance and Investment Plan PREAMBLE A. Pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180050, the Orange County Transportation Authority (“Authority”) has been designated as the Orange County Local Transportation Authority by the Orange County Board of Supervisors. B. There has been adopted a countywide transportation expenditure plan, referred to as the Orange County Transportation Investment Plan, dated July 24, 2006, pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180206 (“Plan”), which will be administered by the Authority. C. The Plan provides for needed countywide transportation facility and service improvements which will be funded, in part, by a transactions and use tax of one-half of one percent (1/2%). D. Local Transportation Ordinance Number 2 (“Ordinance No. 2”) funds transportation facility and service improvements through a transactions and use tax of one- half of one percent (1/2%) that will be imposed through March 31, 2011. E. Ordinance No. 3 (“Ordinance”) provides for the continuation of the existing Ordinance No. 2 transactions and use tax of one-half of one percent (1/2%) for an additional period of thirty (30) years to fund transportation facility and service improvements. SECTION 1. TITLE The Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the Renewed Measure M Transportation Ordinance and Investment Plan. The word “Ordinance,” as used in the Ordinance, shall mean and include Attachment A entitled “Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan,” Attachment B entitled “Allocation of Net Revenues,” and Attachment C entitled “Taxpayer Oversight Committee,” which Attachments A, B and C are attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. 49 49 SECTION 2. SUMMARY The Ordinance provides for the implementation of the Orange County Transportation Investment Plan, which will result in countywide transportation improvements for freeways, highways, local streets and roads, bus and rail transit, transportation-related water quality (“Environmental Cleanup”), and transit services for seniors and disabled persons. These needed improvements will be funded by the continuation of the one-half of one percent (1/2%) transaction and use tax for a period of thirty years. The revenues shall be deposited in a special fund and used solely for the identified improvements authorized by the Ordinance. SECTION 3. IMPOSITION OF RETAIL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX Subject to approval by the electors, the Authority hereby imposes, in the incorporated and unincorporated territories of Orange County (“County”), in accordance with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code and Division 19 (commencing with Section 180000) of the California Public Utilities Code, continuance of the existing retail transactions and use tax at the rate of one-half of one percent (1/2%) commencing April 1, 2011, for a period of thirty years. This tax shall be in addition to any other taxes authorized by law, including any existing or future state or local sales tax or transactions and use tax. The imposition, administration and collection of the tax shall be in accordance with all applicable statutes, laws, rules and regulations prescribed and adopted by the State Board of Equalization. SECTION 4. PURPOSES All of the gross revenues generated from the transactions and use tax plus any interest or other earnings thereon (collectively, “Revenues”), after the deduction for: (i) amounts payable to the State Board of Equalization for the performance of functions incidental to the administration and operation of the Ordinance, (ii) costs for the administration of the Ordinance as provided herein, (iii) two percent (2%) of the Revenues annually allocated for Environmental Cleanup and (iv) satisfaction of debt service requirements of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of 50 50 separate allocations, shall be defined as “Net Revenues” and shall be allocated solely for the transportation purposes described in the Ordinance. SECTION 5. BONDING AUTHORITY “Pay as you go” financing is the preferred method of financing transportation improvements and operations under the Ordinance. However, the Authority may use bond financing as an alternative method if the scope of planned expenditures makes “pay as you go” financing unfeasible. Following approval by the electors of the ballot proposition authorizing imposition of the transactions and use tax and authorizing issuance of bonds payable from the proceeds of the tax, bonds may be issued by the Authority pursuant to Division 19 of the Public Utilities Code, at any time before, on, or after the imposition of taxes, and from time to time, payable from the proceeds of the tax and secured by a pledge of revenues from the proceeds of the tax, in order to finance and refinance improvements authorized by the Ordinance. SECTION 6. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REQUIREMENTS It is the intent of the Legislature and the Authority that the Net Revenues allocated to a jurisdiction pursuant to the Ordinance for street and road projects shall be used to supplement existing local discretionary funds being used for transportation improvements. Each jurisdiction is hereby required to annually maintain as a minimum no less than the maintenance of effort amount of local discretionary funds required to be expended by the jurisdiction for local street and road purposes pursuant to the current Ordinance No. 2 for Fiscal Year 2010-2011. The maintenance of effort level for each jurisdiction as determined through this process shall be adjusted effective July 1, 2014 and every three fiscal years thereafter in an amount equal to the percentage change for the Construction Cost Index compiled by Caltrans for the immediately preceding three calendar years, providing that any percentage increase in the maintenance of effort level based on this adjustment shall not exceed the percentage increase in the growth rate in the jurisdiction’s general fund revenues over the same time period. The Authority shall not allocate any Net Revenues to any jurisdiction for any fiscal year until that jurisdiction has certified to the Authority that it 51 51 has included in its budget for that fiscal year an amount of local discretionary funds for streets and roads purposes at least equal to the level of its maintenance of effort requirement. An annual independent audit may be conducted by the Authority to verify that the maintenance of effort requirements are being met by the jurisdiction. Any Net Revenues not allocated pursuant to the maintenance of effort requirement shall be allocated to the remaining eligible jurisdictions according to the formula described in the Ordinance. SECTION 7. ADMINISTRATION The Authority shall allocate Revenues to fund facilities, services and projects as specified in the Ordinance, and shall administer the Ordinance consistent with the authority cited. Revenues may be expended by the Authority for salaries, wages, benefits, and overhead and for those services, including contractual services, necessary to carry out its responsibilities pursuant to Division 19; however, in no case shall the Revenues expended for salaries and benefits of Authority administrative staff exceed more than one percent (1%) of the Revenues in any year. The Authority shall use, to the extent possible, existing state, regional and local transportation planning and programming data and expertise, and may, as the law permits, contract with any public agency or private firm for services necessary to carry out the purposes of the Ordinance. Expenses incurred by the Authority for administrative staff and for project implementation, including contracting with public agencies and private firms, shall be identified in the annual report prepared pursuant to Section 10, subpart 8, of the Ordinance. SECTION 8. ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT The annual appropriations limit established pursuant to Article XIII. B. of the California Constitution and Section 180202 of the Public Utilities Code shall be established as $1,123 million for the 2006-07 fiscal year. The appropriations limit shall be subject to adjustment as provided by law. All expenditures of the Revenues are subject to the appropriations limit of the Authority. /// 52 52 SECTION 9. EFFECTIVE AND OPERATIVE DATES The Ordinance shall be effective on November 8, 2006, if two thirds of the electors vote on November 7, 2006, to approve the ballot measure authorizing the extension of the imposition of the existing tax. The continuance of the imposition of the existing tax authorized by Section 3 of the Ordinance shall be operative on April 1, 2011. SECTION 10. SAFEGUARDS OF USE OF REVENUES The following safeguards are hereby established to ensure strict adherence to the limitations on the use of the Revenues: 1. A transportation special revenue fund (the “Local Transportation Authority Special Revenue Fund”) shall be established to maintain all Revenues. 2. The County of Orange Auditor-Controller (“Auditor-Controller”), in the capacity as Chair of the Taxpayer Oversight Committee, shall annually certify whether the Revenues have been spent in compliance with the Ordinance. 3. Receipt, maintenance and expenditure of Net Revenues shall be distinguishable in each jurisdiction’s accounting records from other funding sources, and expenditures of Net Revenues shall be distinguishable by program or project. Interest earned on Net Revenues allocated pursuant to the Ordinance shall be expended only for those purposes for which the Net Revenues were allocated. 4. No Net Revenues shall be used by a jurisdiction for other than transportation purposes authorized by the Ordinance. Any jurisdiction which violates this provision must fully reimburse the Authority for the Net Revenues misspent and shall be deemed ineligible to receive Net Revenues for a period of five (5) years. 5. A Taxpayer Oversight Committee (“Committee”) shall be established to provide an enhanced level of accountability for expenditure of Revenues under the Ordinance. The Committee will help to ensure that all voter mandates are carried out as required. The roles and responsibilities of the Committee, the selection process for Committee members and related administrative procedures shall be carried out as described in Attachment C. 53 53 6. A performance assessment shall be conducted at least once every three years to evaluate the efficiency, effectiveness, economy and program results of the Authority in satisfying the provisions and requirements of the Investment Summary of the Plan, the Plan and the Ordinance. A copy of the performance assessment shall be provided to the Committee. 7. Quarterly status reports regarding the major projects detailed in the Plan shall be brought before the Authority in public meetings. 8. Annually the Authority shall publish a report on how all Revenues have been spent and on progress in implementing projects in the Plan, and shall publicly report on the findings. SECTION 11. TEN-YEAR COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM REVIEW At least every ten years the Authority shall conduct a comprehensive review of all projects and programs implemented under the Plan to evaluate the performance of the overall program and may revise the Plan to improve its performance. The review shall include consideration of changes to local, state and federal transportation plans and policies; changes in land use, travel and growth projections; changes in project cost estimates and revenue projections; right-of-way constraints and other project constraints; level of public support for the Plan; and the progress of the Authority and jurisdictions in implementing the Plan. The Authority may amend the Plan based on its comprehensive review, subject to the requirements of Section 12. SECTION 12. AMENDMENTS The Authority may amend the Ordinance, including the Plan, to provide for the use of additional federal, state and local funds, to account for unexpected revenues, or to take into consideration unforeseen circumstances. The Authority shall notify the board of supervisors and the city council of each city in the county and provide them with a copy of the proposed amendments, and shall hold a public hearing on proposed amendments prior to adoption, which shall require approval by a vote of not less than two thirds of the Authority Board of Directors. Amendments shall become effective forty five days after 54 54 adoption. No amendment to the Plan which eliminates a program or project specified on Page 31 of the Plan shall be adopted unless the Authority Board of Directors adopts a finding that the transportation purpose of the program or project to be eliminated will be satisfied by a different program or project. No amendment to the Plan which changes the funding categories, programs or projects identified on page 31 of the Plan shall be adopted unless the amendment to the Plan is first approved by a vote of not less than two thirds of the Committee. In addition, any proposed change in allocations among the four major funding categories of freeway projects, street and road projects, transit projects and Environmental Cleanup projects identified on page 31 of the Plan, or any proposed change of the Net Revenues allocated pursuant to Section IV C 3 of Attachment B for the Local Fair Share Program portion of the Streets and Roads Projects funding category, shall be approved by a simple majority vote of the electors before going into effect. SECTION 13. REQUEST FOR ELECTION Pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180201, the Authority hereby requests that the County of Orange Board of Supervisors call a special election to be conducted by the County of Orange on November 7, 2006, to place the Ordinance before the electors. To avoid any misunderstanding or confusion by Orange County electors, the Authority requests that the Ordinance be identified as “Measure M” on the ballot. The ballot language for the measure shall contain a summary of the projects and programs in the Plan and shall read substantially as follows: “Measure “M,” Orange County Transportation Improvement Plan Shall the ordinance continuing Measure M, Orange County’s half-cent sales tax for transportation improvements, for an additional 30 years with limited bonding authority to fund the following projects: * relieve congestion on the I-5, I-405, 22, 55, 57 and 91 freeways; * fix potholes and resurface streets; * expand Metrolink rail and connect it to local communities; * provide transit services, at reduced rates, for seniors and disabled persons; 55 55 * synchronize traffic lights in every community; * reduce air and water pollution, and protect local beaches by cleaning up oil runoff from roadways; and establish the following taxpayer protections to ensure the funds are spent as directed by the voters: * require an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee to review yearly audits to ensure that voter mandates are met; * publish an annual report to the taxpayers on how all funds are spent; and * update the transportation improvement plan every 10 years, with voter approval required for major changes; be adopted for the purpose of relieving traffic congestion in Orange County?” SECTION 14. EFFECT ON ORDINANCE NO. 2 The Ordinance is not intended to modify, repeal or alter the provisions of Ordinance No. 2, and shall not be read to supersede Ordinance No. 2. The provisions of the Ordinance shall apply solely to the transactions and use tax adopted herein. If the Ordinance is not approved by the electors of the County, the provisions of Ordinance No. 2 and all powers, duties, and actions taken thereunder shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 15. SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, part, clause or phrase of the Ordinance is for any reason held invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, that holding shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining funds or provisions of the Ordinance, and the Authority declares that it would have passed each part of the /// /// /// /// /// /// 56 56 57 57 RENEWED MEASURE MRENEWED MEASURE M Transportation Investment PlanTransportation Investment Plan ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 550 South Main Street P.O. Box 14184 Orange, CA 92863-1584 (714) 560-5066 www.octa.net As amended on December 14, 2015 Approved by voters on November 7, 2006 Updated March 14, 2016 ATTACHMENT A58 58 59 59 Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................2 Overview ................................................................................................3 Freeway Projects Overview ..................................................................................................................5 Orange County Freeway Projects Map ...............................................................6 I-5 Santa Ana Freeway Interchange Improvements ...........................7 I-5 Santa Ana/San Diego Freeway Improvements .............................8 SR-22 Garden Grove Freeway Access Improvements .............................9 SR-55 Costa Mesa Freeway Improvements ...............................................9 SR-57 Orange Freeway Improvements .....................................................10 SR-91 Riverside Freeway Improvements ..................................................11 I-405 San Diego Freeway Improvements .................................................13 I-605 Freeway Access Improvements ........................................................15 All Freeway Service Patrol .....................................................................15 Streets & Roads Projects Overview ................................................................................................................16 Orange County Streets and Roads Projects Map ...........................................17 Regional Capacity Program ...............................................................................18 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program ..........................................19 Local Fair Share Program ...................................................................................20 Transit Projects Overview ................................................................................................................21 Orange County Transit Projects Map ................................................................22 High Frequency Metrolink Service ....................................................................23 Transit Extensions to Metrolink ...........................................................................23 Metrolink Gateways ..............................................................................................24 Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities............24 Community Based Transit/Circulators ...............................................................25 Safe Transit Stops .................................................................................................25 Environmental Cleanup Overview ................................................................................................................26 Project Description ...............................................................................................27 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits Overview ................................................................................................................28 Description ..............................................................................................................29 Measure M Investment Summary ........................................................31 160 60 RENEW E D Measure M Promises Fulfilled On November 6, 1990, Orange County voters approved Measure M, a half-cent local transportation sales tax for twenty years. All of the major projects promised to and approved by the voters are underway or complete. Funds that go to cities and the County of Orange to maintain and improve local street and roads, along with transit fare reductions for seniors and persons with disabilities, will continue until Measure M ends in 2011. The promises made in Measure M have been fulfilled. Continued Investment Needed Orange County continues to grow. By the year 2030, Orange County’s population will increase by 24 percent from 2.9 million in 2000 to 3.6 million in 2030; jobs will increase by 27 percent; and travel on our roads and highways by 39 percent. Without continued investment average morning rush hour speeds on Orange County freeways will fall by 31 percent and on major streets by 32 percent. Responding to this continued growth and broad support for investment in Orange County’s transportation system, the Orange County Transportation Authority considered the transportation projects and programs that would be possible if Measure M were renewed. The Authority, together with the 34 cities of Orange County, the Orange County Board of Supervisors and thousands of Orange County citizens, participated during the last eighteen months in developing a Transportation Investment Plan for consideration by the voters. A Plan for New Transportation Investments The Plan that follows is a result of those efforts. It reflects the varied interests and priorities inherent in the diverse communities of Orange County. It includes continued investment to expand and improve Orange County’s freeway system; commitment to maintaining and improving the network of streets and roads in every community; an expansion of Metrolink rail service through the core of Orange County with future extensions to connect with nearby communities and regional rail systems; more transit service for seniors and disabled persons; and funds to clean up runoff from roads that leads to beach closures. Strong Safeguards These commitments are underscored by a set of strong taxpayer safeguards to ensure that promises made in the Plan are kept. They include an annual independent audit and report to the taxpayers; ongoing monitoring and review of spending by an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee; requirement for full public review and update of the Plan every ten years; voter approval for any major changes to the Plan; strong penalties for any misuse of funds and a strict limit of no more than one percent for administrative expenses. No Increase in Taxes The traffic improvements detailed in this plan do not require an increase in taxes. Renewal of the existing Measure M one-half cent transportation sales tax will enable all of the projects and programs to be implemented. And by using good planning and sensible financing, projects that are ready to go could begin as early as 2007. Renewing Measure M The projects and programs that follow constitute the Transportation Investment Plan for the renewal of the Measure M transportation sales tax approved by Orange County voters in November of 1990. These improvements are necessary to address current and future transportation needs in Orange County and reflect the best efforts to achieve consensus among varied interests and communities throughout the County. Introduction 2 RENEW E D 61 61 RENEW E D The Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is a 30-year, $11.8 billion program designed to reduce traffic congestion, strengthen our economy and improve our quality of life by upgrading key freeways, fixing major freeway interchanges, maintaining streets and roads, synchronizing traffic signals countywide, building a visionary rail transit system, and protecting our environment from the oily street runoff that pollutes Orange County beaches. The Transportation Investment Plan is focused solely on improving the transportation system and includes tough taxpayer safeguards, including a Taxpayer Oversight Committee, required annual audits, and regular, public reports on project progress. The Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan must be reviewed annually, in public session, and every ten years a detailed review of the Plan must take place. If changing circumstances require the voter-approved plan to be changed, those changes must be taken to the voters for approval. Freeways Relieving congestion on the Riverside/Artesia Freeway (SR-91) is the centerpiece of the freeway program, and will include new lanes, new interchanges, and new bridges. Other major projects will make substantial improvements on Interstate 5 (I-5) in southern Orange County and the San Diego Freeway (I-405) in western Orange County. The notorious Orange Crush — the intersection of the I-5, the Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) and the Orange Freeway (SR-57) near Angel Stadium — will be improved and upgraded. Under the Plan, major traffic chokepoints on almost every Orange County freeway will be remedied. Improving Orange County freeways will be the greatest investment in the Renewed Measure M program: Forty- three percent of net revenues, or $4.871 billion, will be invested in new freeway construction. Streets and Roads More than 6,500 lane miles of aging streets and roads will need repair, rejuvenation and improvement. City streets and county roads need to be maintained regularly and potholes have to be filled quickly. Thirty-two percent of net revenue from the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan, or $3.625 billion, will be devoted to fixing potholes, improving intersections, synchronizing traffic signals countywide, and making the existing countywide network of streets and roads safer and more efficient. Overview RENEW E D 2 362 62 RENEW E D Public Transit As Orange County continues to grow, building a visionary rail transportation system that is safe, clean and convenient, uses and preserves existing rights-of-way, and, over time, provides high-speed connections both inside and outside of Orange County, is a long term goal. Twenty-five percent of the net revenue from Renewed Measure M, or $2.83 billion, will be dedicated to transit programs countywide. About twenty percent, or $2.24 billion, will be dedicated to creating a new countywide high capacity transit system anchored on the existing, successful Metrolink and Amtrak rail line, and about five percent, or $591 million, will be used to enhance senior transportation programs and provide targeted, safe localized bus service. Environmental Cleanup Every day, more than 70 million gallons of oily pollution, litter, and dirty contaminants wash off streets, roads, and freeways and pour onto Orange County waterways and beaches. When it rains, the transportation-generated beach and ocean pollution increases tenfold. Under the plan, two percent of the gross Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan, or $237 million, will be dedicated to protecting Orange County beaches from this transportation-generated pollution (sometimes called “urban runoff”) while improving ocean water quality. Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits When new transportation dollars are approved, they should go for transportation and transportation purposes alone. No bait-and-switch. No using transportation dollars for other purposes. The original Measure M went solely for transportation purposes. The Renewed Measure M must be just as airtight. One percent of the gross Measure M program, or $118.6 million over 30 years, will pay for annual, independent audits, taxpayer safeguards, an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee assigned to watchdog government spending, and a full, public disclosure of all Renewed Measure M expenditures. A detailed review of the program must be conducted every ten years and, if needed, major changes in the investment plan must be brought before Orange County voters for approval. Taxpayers will receive an annual report detailing the Renewed Measure M expenditures. Additionally, as required by law, an estimated one and a half percent of the sales taxes generated, or $178 million over 30 years, must be paid to the California State Board of Equalization for collecting the one-half cent sales tax that funds the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan. In this pamphlet, every specific project, program, and safeguard included in the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is explained. Similar details will be provided to every Orange County voter if the measure is placed on the ballot.RENEW E D 463 63 RENEW E D Every day, traffic backs up somewhere on the Orange County freeway system. And, every day, freeway traffic seems to get a little worse. In the past decade, Orange County has made major strides in re-building our aging freeway system. But there is still an enormous amount of work that needs to be done to make the freeway system work well. You see the need for improvement every time you drive on an Orange County freeway. Forty-three percent of net revenues from the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is dedicated to improving Orange County freeways, the largest portion of the 30-year transportation plan. SR-91 is the Centerpiece Making the troubled Riverside/Artesia Freeway (SR-91) work again is the centerpiece of the Renewed Measure M Freeway program. The fix on the SR-91 will require new lanes, new bridges, new overpasses, and, in the Santa Ana Canyon portion of the freeway, a diversion of drivers to the Foothill Corridor (SR-241) so the rest of the Orange County freeway system can work more effectively. And there’s more to the freeway program than the fix of SR-91 — much more. More than $1 billion is earmarked for Interstate 5 in South County. More than $800 million is slated to upgrade the San Diego Freeway (I-405) between Irvine and the Los Angeles County line. Another significant investment is planned on the congested Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55). And needed projects designed to relieve traffic chokepoints are planned for almost every Orange County freeway. To make any freeway system work, bottlenecks at interchanges also have to be fixed. The notorious Orange Crush Interchange — where the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) meets the Orange Freeway (SR-57) and the Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) in a traffic tangle near Angel Stadium — is in need of a major face lift. And the intersection of Interstate 5 and the Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) is also slated for major repair. Pays Big Dividends Local investment in freeways also pays big dividends in the search for other needed freeway dollars. Because of state and federal matching rules, Orange County’s local investment in freeway projects acts as a magnet for state and federal transportation dollars — pulling more freeway construction dollars into the county and allowing more traffic- reducing freeway projects to be built sooner. Innovative Environmental Mitigation A minimum of $243.5 million will be available, subject to a Master Agreement, to provide for comprehensive, rather than piecemeal, mitigation of the environmental impacts of freeway improvements. Using a proactive, innovative approach, the Master Agreement negotiated between the Orange County Local Transportation Authority and state and federal resource agencies will provide higher-value environmental benefits such as habitat protection, wildlife corridors and resource preservation in exchange for streamlined project approvals for the freeway program as a whole. Freeway projects will also be planned, designed and constructed with consideration for their aesthetic, historic and environmental impacts on nearby properties and communities using such elements as parkway style designs, locally native landscaping, sound reduction and aesthetic treatments that complement the surroundings. Freeway Projects Overview RENEW E D 4 564 64 A B C F G H I J K L Orange County Freeway Projects Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) page 7 Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway (I-5) page 8 Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway (I-5) page 8 Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) page 9 Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) page 9 Orange Freeway (SR-57) page 10 Riverside Freeway (SR-91) page 11 Riverside Freeway (SR-91) page 12 San Diego Freeway (I-405) page 13-14 Freeway Access Improvements (I-605) page 15 (not mapped) Freeway Service Patrol (not mapped) page 15 A B D C E F NG M K L J H I C 6 E M D 65 65 Freeway Projects Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) Interchange Improvements A B RENEW E D 6 7 Project Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) Improvements between Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) and “Orange Crush” Area (SR-57) Description: Reduce freeway congestion through improvements at the SR-55/I-5 interchange area between the Fourth Street and Newport Boulevard ramps on I-5, and between Fourth Street and Edinger Avenue on SR-55. Also, add capacity on I-5 between SR-55 and SR-57 to relieve congestion at the “Orange Crush”. The project will generally be constructed within the existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. The current daily traffic volume on this segment of the I-5 between SR-55 and SR-57 is about 389,000. The demand is expected to grow by more than 19 percent by 2030, bringing the daily usage to 464,000 vehicles per day. Regional plans also include additional improvements on I-5 from the “Orange Crush” to SR-91 using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost to improve this section of the I-5 is $470.0 million. Project Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) Improvements from the Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) to El Toro “Y” Area Description: Build new lanes and improve the interchanges in the area between SR-55 and the SR-133 (near the El Toro “Y”). This segment of I-5 is the major route serving activity areas in the cities of Irvine, Tustin, Santa Ana and north Orange County. The project will also make improvements at local interchanges, such as Jamboree Road. The project will generally be constructed within the existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. The current traffic volume on this segment of I-5 is about 356,000 vehicles per day and is expected to increase by nearly 24 percent, bringing it up to 440,000 vehicles per day. In addition to the projects described above, regional plans include additional improvements to this freeway at local interchanges, such as Culver Drive, using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost to improve this section of I-5 is $300.2 million. 66 66 Project San Diego Freeway (I-5) Improvements South of the El Toro “Y” Description: Add new lanes to I-5 from the vicinity of the El Toro Interchange in Lake Forest to the vicinity of SR-73 in Mission Viejo. Also add new lanes on I-5 between Coast Highway and Avenida Pico interchanges to reduce freeway congestion in San Clemente. The project will also make major improvements at local interchanges as listed in Project D. The project will generally be constructed within the existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. Current traffic volume on I-5 near the El Toro “Y” is about 342,000 vehicles per day. This volume will increase in the future by 35 percent, bringing it up to 460,000 vehicles per day. Regional plans also include construction of a new freeway access point between Crown Valley Parkway and Avery Parkway as well as new off ramps at Stonehill Drive using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost to improve these segments of I-5 is $627.0 million. Project Santa Ana Freeway / San Diego Freeway (I-5) Local Interchange Upgrades Description: Update and improve key I-5 interchanges such as Avenida Pico, Ortega Highway, Avery Parkway, La Paz Road, El Toro Road, and others to relieve street congestion around older interchanges and on ramps. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. In addition to the project described above, regional plans also include improvements to the local interchanges at Camino Capistrano, Oso Parkway, Alicia Parkway and Barranca Parkway using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost for the I-5 local interchange upgrades is $258.0 million. Mission Viejo Laguna Niguel San Juan Capistrano Dana Point San Clemente Mission Viejo Laguna Niguel San Juan Capistrano Dana Point San Clemente Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway (I-5) C Freeway Projects D RENEW E D 867 67 Project Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) Access Improvements Description: Construct interchange improvements at Euclid Street, Brookhurst Street and Harbor Boulevard to reduce freeway and street congestion near these interchanges. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. Regional plans also include the construction of new freeway-to-freeway carpool ramps to the SR-22/I-405 interchange, and improvements to the local interchange at Magnolia Avenue using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost to improve the SR-22 interchanges is $120.0 million. Project Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Improvements Description: Add new lanes to SR-55 between Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) and the San Diego Freeway (I-405), generally within existing right-of-way, including merging lanes between interchanges to smooth traffic flow. This project also provides for freeway operational improvements for the portion of SR-55 between SR-91 and SR-22. The project will generally be constructed within the existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. This freeway carries about 295,000 vehicles on a daily basis. This volume is expected to increase by nearly 13 percent, bringing it up to 332,000 vehicles per day in the future. In addition to the projects described above, regional plans also include a new street overcrossing and carpool ramps at Alton Avenue using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost for these SR-55 improvements is $366.0 million. Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Garden Grove Stanton Westminster Santa Ana Tustin Orange Anaheim Buena Park Fullerton Costa Mesa Irvine Westminster Fountain Valley Huntington Beach Garden Grove Los Alamitos Seal Beach Cypress Stanton Freeway Projects E F 8 968 68 Project Orange Freeway (SR-57) Improvements Description: Build a new northbound lane between Orangewood Avenue and Lambert Road. Other projects include improvements to the Lambert interchange and the addition of a northbound truck climbing lane between Lambert and Tonner Canyon Road. The improvements will be designed and coordinated specifically to reduce congestion at SR-57/SR-91 interchange. These improvements will be made generally within existing right-of- way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. The daily traffic volume on this freeway is about 315,000 vehicles. By 2030, this volume will increase by 15 percent, bringing it up to 363,000 vehicles per day. In addition to the project described above, regional plans include new carpool ramps at Cerritos Avenue using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost to implement SR-57 improvements is $258.7 million. Orange Freeway (SR-57) Freeway Projects G RENEW E D 1069 69 Project Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Improvements from the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) to the Orange Freeway (SR-57) Description: Add capacity in the westbound direction and provide operational improvements at on and off ramps to the SR-91 between I-5 and the Orange Freeway (SR-57), generally within existing right-of-way, to smooth traffic flow and relieve the SR-57/SR-91 interchange. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The current daily freeway volume along this segment of SR-91 is about 256,000. By 2030, this volume is expected to increase by nearly 13 percent, bringing it up to 289,900 vehicles per day. Cost: The estimated cost for improvements in this segment of SR-91 is $140.0 million. Project Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Improvements from Orange Freeway (SR-57) to the Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Interchange Area Description: Improve the SR-91/SR-55 to SR-91/SR-57 interchange complex, including nearby local interchanges such as Tustin Avenue and Lakeview, as well as adding freeway capacity between SR-55 and SR-57. The project will generally be constructed within the existing right-of- way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. Current freeway volume on this segment of the SR-91 is about 245,000 vehicles per day. This vehicular demand is expected to increase by 22 percent, bringing it up to 300,000 vehicles per day in the future. Cost: The estimated cost for these improvements to the SR-91 is $416.5 million. Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Santa Ana Tustin Orange Anaheim Buena Park Fullerton Costa Mesa Westminster Fountain Valley Huntington Beach Garden Grove Los Alamitos Seal Beach Cypress Stanton Placentia Villa Park Anaheim Freeway Projects H I RENEW E D 10 1170 70 Project Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Improvements from Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) to the Orange/ Riverside County Line Description: This project adds capacity on SR-91 beginning at SR-55 and extending to I-15 in Riverside County. The first priority will be to improve the segment of SR-91 east of SR-241. The goal is to provide up to four new lanes of capacity between SR-241 and Riverside County Line by making best use of available freeway property, adding reversible lanes, building elevated sections and improving connections to SR-241. These projects would be constructed in conjunction with similar coordinated improvements in Riverside County extending to I-15 and provide a continuous set of improvements between SR-241 and I-15. The portion of improvements in Riverside County will be paid for from other sources. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. This project also includes improvements to the segment of SR-91 between SR-241 and SR-55. The concept is to generally add one new lane in each direction and improve the interchanges. Today, this freeway carries about 314,000 vehicles every day. This volume is expected to increase by 36 percent, bringing it up to 426,000 vehicles by 2030. Cost: The estimated cost for these improvements to the SR-91 is $352.0 million. Placentia Yorba Linda Villa Park Anaheim Riverside Freeway (SR-91) J Freeway Projects RENEW E D 12 Project cost estimate amended on November 9, 2012. 71 71 Project San Diego Freeway (I-405) Improvements between the I-605 Freeway in Los Alamitos area and Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Description: Add new lanes to the San Diego Freeway between I-605 and SR-55, generally within the existing right- of-way. The project will make best use of available freeway property, update interchanges and widen all local overcrossings according to city and regional master plans. The improvements will be coordinated with other planned I-405 improvements in the I-405/SR-22/I-605 interchange area to the north and I-405/SR-73 improvements to the south. The improvements will adhere to recommendations of the Interstate 405 Major Investment Study (as adopted by the Orange County Transportation Authority Board of Directors on October 14, 2005) and will be developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. Today, I-405 carries about 430,000 vehicles daily. The volume is expected to increase by nearly 23 percent, bringing it up to 528,000 vehicles daily by 2030. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. Near-term regional plans also include the improvements to the I-405/SR-73 interchange as well as a new carpool interchange at Bear Street using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost for these improvements to the I-405 is $1,072.8 million. San Diego Freeway (I-405) Santa Ana Tustin Orange Anaheim Buena Park Fullerton Costa Mesa Westminster Fountain Valley Huntington Beach Garden Grove Los Alamitos Seal Beach Cypress Stanton Freeway Projects K RENEW E D 12 13 Project cost estimate amended on November 9, 2012. 72 72 Project San Diego Freeway (I-405) Improvements between Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) and Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) Description: Add new lanes to the freeway from SR-55 to the I-5. The project will also improve chokepoints at interchanges and add merging lanes near on/ off ramps such as Lake Forest Drive, Irvine Center Drive and SR-133 to improve the overall freeway operations in the I-405/I-5 El Toro “Y” area. The projects will generally be constructed within the existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. This segment of the freeway carries 354,000 vehicles a day. This number will increase by nearly 13 percent, bringing it up to 401,000 vehicles per day by 2030. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. In addition to the projects described above, regional plans include a new carpool interchange at Von Karman Avenue using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost for these improvements to the I-405 is $319.7 million. San Diego Freeway (I-405) Freeway Projects L RENEW E D 1473 73 Project I-605 Freeway Access Improvements Description: Improve freeway access and arterial connection to I-605 serving the communities of Los Alamitos and Cypress. The project will be coordinated with other planned improvements along SR-22 and I-405. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. Regional plans also include the addition of new freeway-to-freeway carpool ramps to the I-405/ I-605 interchange using federal and state funds. This improvement will connect to interchange improvements at I-405 and SR-22 as well as new freeway lanes between I-405 and I-605. Cost: The estimated cost to make these I-605 interchange improvements is $20.0 million. Project Freeway Service Patrol Description: The Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) provides competitively bid, privately contracted tow truck service for motorists with disabled vehicles on the freeway system. This service helps stranded motorists and quickly clears disabled vehicles out of the freeway lanes to minimize congestion caused by vehicles blocking traffic and passing motorists rubbernecking. Currently Freeway Service Patrol is available on Orange County freeways Monday through Friday during peak commuting hours. This project would assure that this basic level of service could be continued through 2041. As demand and congestion levels increase, this project would also permit service hours to be extended throughout the day and into the weekend. Cost: The estimated cost to support the Freeway Service Patrol Program for thirty years beyond 2011 is $150.0 million. I-605 Freeway Access Improvements Freeway Service Patrol Freeways Projects M N RENEW E D 14 1574 74 RENEW E D Orange County has more than 6,500 lane miles of aging streets and roads, many of which are in need of repair, rejuvenation and improvement. Intersections need to be widened, traffic lights need to be synchronized, and potholes need to be filled. And, in many cases, to make Orange County’s transportation system work smoothly, we need to add additional lanes to existing streets. Thirty-two percent of net revenues from the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is dedicated to maintaining streets, fixing potholes, improving intersections and widening city streets and county roads. Making the System Work Making the existing system of streets and roads work better — by identifying spot intersection improvements, filling potholes, repaving worn- out streets — is the basis of making a countywide transportation system work. That basis has to be the first priority. But to operate a successful, countywide system of streets and roads, we need more: street widenings and traffic signals synchronized countywide. And there’s more. Pedestrian safety near local schools needs to be improved. Traffic flow must be smoothed. Street repairs must be made sooner. And, perhaps most importantly, cities and the county must work together — collaboratively — to find simple, low-cost traffic solutions. Renewed Measure M provides financial incentives for traffic improvements that cross city and county lines, providing a seamless, county- wide transportation system that’s friendly to regional commuters and fair to local residents. Better Cooperation To place a higher priority on cooperative, collaborative regional decision-making, Renewed Measure M creates incentives that encourage traffic lights to be coordinated across jurisdictional lines, major street improvements to be better coordinated on a regional basis, and street repair programs to be a high priority countywide. To receive Measure M funding, cities and the county have to cooperate. The Streets and Roads program in Renewed Measure M involves shared responsibilities — local cities and the county set their local priorities within a competitive, regional framework that rewards cooperation, honors best practices, and encourages government agencies to work together. Streets and Roads Projects Overview RENEW E D 1675 75 Signal Synchronization Network Orange County Streets and Roads Projects Regional Capacity Program page 18 (not mapped) Nearly 1,000 miles of new lanes Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program page 19 (see grid above) Over 750 miles of roadway Over 2,000 coordinated signals Local Fair Share Program page 20 (not mapped) Street maintenance and improvements O P Q 16 1776 76 Streets and Roads Projects OProject Regional Capacity Program Description: This program, in combination with local matching funds, provides a funding source to complete the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH). The program also provides for intersection improvements and other projects to help improve street operations and reduce congestion. The program allocates funds through a competitive process and targets projects that help traffic the most by considering factors such as degree of congestion relief, cost effectiveness, project readiness, etc. Local jurisdictions must provide a dollar-for-dollar match to qualify for funding, but can be rewarded with lower match requirements if they give priority to other key objectives, such as better road maintenance and regional signal synchronization. Roughly 1,000 miles of new street lanes remain to be completed, mostly in the form of widening existing streets to their ultimate planned width. Completion of the system will result in a more even traffic flow and efficient system. Another element of this program is funding for construction of railroad over or underpass grade separations where high volume streets are impacted by freight trains along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad in northern Orange County. Cost: The estimated cost for these street improvement projects is $1,132.8 million. Regional Capacity Program RENEW E D 1877 77 RENEW E D Project Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Description: This program targets over 2,000 signalized intersections across the County for coordinated operation. The goal is to improve the flow of traffic by developing and implementing regional signal coordination programs that cross jurisdictional boundaries. Most traffic signal synchronization programs today are limited to segments of roads or individual cities and agencies. For example, signals at intersections of freeways with arterial streets are controlled by Caltrans, while nearby signals at local street intersections are under the control of cities. This results in the street system operating at less than maximum efficiency. When completed, this project can increase the capacity of the street grid and reduce the delay by over six million hours annually. To ensure that this program is successful, cities, the County of Orange and Caltrans will be required to work together and prepare a common traffic signal synchronization plan and the necessary governance and legal arrangements before receiving funds. In addition, cities will be required to provide 20 percent of the costs. Once in place, the program will provide funding for ongoing maintenance and operation of the synchronization plan. Local jurisdictions will be required to publicly report on the performance of their signal synchronization efforts at least every three years. Signal equipment to give emergency vehicles priority at intersections will be an eligible expense for projects implemented as part of this program. Cost: The estimated cost of developing and maintaining a regional traffic signal synchronization program for Orange County is $453.1 million. Streets and Roads Projects P Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program 18 1978 78 Streets and Roads Projects QProject Local Fair Share Program Description: This element of the program will provide flexible funding to help cities and the County of Orange keep up with the rising cost of repairing the aging street system. In addition, cities can use these funds for other local transportation needs such as residential street projects, traffic and pedestrian safety near schools, signal priority for emergency vehicles, etc. This program is intended to augment, rather than replace, existing transportation expenditures and therefore cities must meet the following requirements to receive the funds. 1. Continue to invest General Fund monies (or other local discretionary monies) for transportation and annually increase this commitment to keep pace with inflation. 2. Agree to use Measure M funds for transportation purposes only, subject to full repayment and a loss of funding eligibility for five years for any misuse. 3. Agree to separate accounting for Measure M funds and annual reporting on actual Measure M expenditures. 4. Develop and maintain a Pavement Management Program to ensure timely street maintenance and submit regular public reports on the condition of streets. 5. Annually submit a six-year Capital Improvement Program and commit to spend Measure M funds within three years of receipt. 6. Agree to assess traffic impacts of new development and require that new development pay a fair share of any necessary transportation improvements. 7. Agree to plan, build and operate major streets consistent with the countywide Master Plan of Arterial Highways to ensure efficient traffic flow across city boundaries. 8. Participate in Traffic Forums with neighboring jurisdictions to facilitate the implementation and maintenance of traffic signal synchronization programs and projects. This requires cities to balance local traffic policies with neighboring cities — for selected streets — to promote more efficient traffic circulation overall. 9. Agree to consider land use planning strategies that are transit-friendly, support alternative transportation modes including bike and pedestrian access and reduce reliance on the automobile. The funds under this program are distributed to cities and the County of Orange by formula once the cities have fulfilled the above requirements. The formula will account for population, street mileage and amount of sales tax collected in each jurisdiction. Cost: The estimated cost for this program for thirty years is $2,039.1 million. Local Fair Share Program RENEW E D 2079 79 RENEW E D RENEW E DTransit Overview Building streets, roads and freeways helps fix today’s traffic problems. Building a visionary transit system that is safe, clean and convenient focuses on Orange County’s transportation future. Twenty-five percent of net revenues from the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is allocated towards building and improving rail and bus transportation in Orange County. Approximately twenty percent of the Renewed Measure M funds is allocated to developing a creative countywide transit program and five percent of the revenues will be used to enhance programs for senior citizens and for targeted, localized bus service. All transit expenditures must be consistent with the safeguards and audit provisions of the Plan. A New Transit Vision The key element of the Renewed Measure M transit program is improving the 100-year old Santa Fe rail line, known today as the Los Angeles/San Diego (LOSSAN) rail corridor, through the heart of the county. Then, by using this well-established, operational commuter rail system as a platform for future growth, existing rail stations will be developed into regional transportation hubs that can serve as regional transportation gateways or the centerpiece of local transportation services. A series of new, well- coordinated, flexible transportation systems, each one customized to the unique transportation vision the station serves, will be developed. Creativity and good financial sense will be encouraged. Partnerships will be promoted. Transportation solutions for each transportation hub can range from monorails to local mini-bus systems to new technologies. Fresh thinking will be rewarded. The new, localized transit programs will bring competition to local transportation planning, creating a marketplace of transportation ideas where the best ideas emerge and compete for funding. The plan is to encourage civic entrepreneurship and stimulate private involvement and investment. Transit Investment Criteria The guiding principles for all transit investments are value, safety, convenience and reliability. Each local transit vision will be evaluated against clear criteria, such as congestion relief, cost-effectiveness, readiness, connectivity, and a sound operating plan. In terms of bus services, more specialized transit services, including improved van services and reduced fares for senior citizens and people with disabilities, will be provided. Safety at key bus stops will be improved. And a network of community- based, mini-bus services will be developed in areas outside of the central county rail corridor. 20 2180 80 Pacific Electric right-of-way Laguna Niguel Mission Viejo Station San Juan Capistrano Station San Clemente Station Irvine Transportation Center Tustin Station Santa Ana Depot Orange Station Anaheim Canyon Station Anaheim Station Buena Park Station Fullerton Station Orange County Transit Projects High Frequency Metrolink Service ( = existing rail line/stations) page 23 Transit Extensions to Metrolink page 23 Metrolink Gateways (not mapped) page 24 Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities (countywide; not mapped) page 24 Community Based Transit/Circulators (countywide; not mapped) page 25 Safe Transit Stops (countywide; not mapped) page 25W V U T S R 2281 81 Transit Projects Project High Frequency Metrolink Service Description: This project will increase rail services within the county and provide frequent Metrolink service north of Fullerton to Los Angeles. The project will provide for track improvements, more trains, and other related needs to accommodate the expanded service. This project is designed to build on the successes of Metrolink and complement service expansion made possible by the current Measure M. The service will include upgraded stations and added parking capacity; safety improvements and quiet zones along the tracks; and frequent shuttle service and other means, to move arriving passengers to nearby destinations. The project also includes funding for improving grade crossings and constructing over or underpasses at high volume arterial streets that cross the Metrolink tracks. Cost: The estimated cost of capital and operations is $1,129.8 million. Project Transit Extensions to Metrolink Description: Frequent service in the Metrolink corridor provides a high capacity transit system linking communities within the central core of Orange County. This project will establish a competitive program for local jurisdictions to broaden the reach of the rail system to other activity centers and communities. Proposals for extensions must be developed and supported by local jurisdictions and will be evaluated against well-defined and well-known criteria as follows: • Traffic congestion relief • Project readiness, with priority given to projects that can be implemented within the first five years of the Plan • Local funding commitments and the availability of right-of-way • Proven ability to attract other financial partners, both public and private • Cost-effectiveness • Proximity to jobs and population centers • Regional as well as local benefits • Ease and simplicity of connections • Compatible, approved land uses • Safe and modern technology • A sound, long-term operating plan This project shall not be used to fund transit routes that are not directly connected to or that would be redundant to the core rail service on the Metrolink corridor. The emphasis shall be on expanding access to the core rail system and on establishing connections to communities and major activity centers that are not immediately adjacent to the Metrolink corridor. It is intended that multiple transit projects be funded through High Frequency Metrolink Service Transit Extensions to Metrolink R S RENEW E D 22 23 Project R cost estimate amended on December 14, 2015. 82 82 a competitive process and no single project may be awarded all of the funds under this program. These connections may include a variety of transit technologies such as conventional bus, bus rapid transit or high capacity rail transit systems as long as they can be fully integrated and provide seamless transition for the users. Cost: The estimated cost to implement this program over thirty years is $1,000.0 million. Project Convert Metrolink Station(s) to Regional Gateways that Connect Orange County with High-Speed Rail Systems Description: This program will provide the local improvements that are necessary to connect planned future high-speed rail systems to stations on the Orange County Metrolink route. The State of California is currently planning a high-speed rail system linking northern and southern California. One line is planned to terminate in Orange County. In addition, several magnetic levitation (MAGLEV) systems that would connect Orange County to Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties, including a link from Anaheim to Ontario airport, are also being planned or proposed by other agencies. Cost: The estimated Measure M share of the cost for these regional centers and connections is $57.9 million. Project Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities Description: This project will provide services and programs to meet the growing transportation needs of seniors and persons with disabilities as follows: • One and forty-seven hundredths percent (1.47%) of net revenues will stabilize fares and provide fare discounts for bus services, specialized ACCESS services and future rail services • One percent of net revenues will be available to continue and expand local community van service for seniors through the existing Senior Mobility Program • One percent will supplement existing countywide senior non-emergency medical transportation services Over the next 30 years, the population age 65 and over is projected to increase by 93 percent. Demand for transit and specialized transportation services for seniors and persons with disabilities is expected to increase proportionately. Cost: The estimated cost to provide these programs over 30 years is $392.8 million. Transit Projects T Metrolink Gateways Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities U RENEW E D 24 Project T and U cost estimates amended on December 14, 2015. 83 83 RENEW E D Transit Projects V Community Based Transit/Circulators Safe Transit Stops WProject Community Based Transit/Circulators Description: This project will establish a competitive program for local jurisdictions to develop local bus transit services such as community based circulators, shuttles and bus trolleys that complement regional bus and rail services, and meet needs in areas not adequately served by regional transit. Projects will need to meet performance criteria for ridership, connection to bus and rail services, and financial viability to be considered for funding. All projects must be competitively bid, and they cannot duplicate or compete with existing transit services. Cost: The estimated cost of this project is $226.5 million. Project Safe Transit Stops Description: This project provides for passenger amenities at 100 busiest transit stops across the County. The stops will be designed to ease transfer between bus lines and provide passenger amenities such as improved shelters, lighting, current information on bus and train timetables and arrival times, and transit ticket vending machines. Cost: The estimated cost of this project is $25.0 million. 24 2584 84 Every day, more than 70 million gallons of oily pollution, litter, and dirty contamination washes off streets, roads and freeways and pours onto Orange County waterways and beaches. When it rains, the transportation-generated pollution increases tenfold, contributing to the increasing number of beach closures and environmental hazards along the Orange County coast. Prior to allocation of funds for freeway, street and transit projects, two percent of gross revenues from the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is set aside to protect Orange County beaches from transportation-generated pollution (sometimes called “urban runoff”) and improving ocean water quality. Countywide Competitive Program Measure M Environmental Cleanup funds will be used on a countywide, competitive basis to meet federal Clean Water Act standards for controlling transportation-generated pollution by funding nationally recognized Best Management Practices, such as catch basins with state-of- the-art biofiltration systems; or special roadside landscaping systems called bioswales that filter oil runoff from streets, roads and freeways. The environmental cleanup program is designed to supplement, not supplant, existing transportation- related water quality programs. This clean-up program must improve, and not replace, existing pollution reduction efforts by cities, the county, and special districts. Funds will be awarded to the highest priority programs that improve water quality, keep our beaches and streets clean, and reduce transportation-generated pollution along Orange County’s scenic coastline. Environmental Cleanup Overview RENEW E D 2685 85 XProject Environmental Cleanup Description: Implement street and highway related water quality improvement programs and projects that will assist Orange County cities, the County of Orange and special districts to meet federal Clean Water Act standards for urban runoff. The Environmental Cleanup monies may be used for water quality improvements related to both existing and new transportation infrastructure, including capital and operations improvements such as: • Catch basin screens, filters and inserts • Roadside bioswales and biofiltration channels • Wetlands protection and restoration • Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS) units • Maintenance of catch basins and bioswales • Other street-related “Best Management Practices” for capturing and treating urban runoff This program is intended to augment, not replace existing transportation related water quality expenditures and to emphasize high-impact capital improvements over local operations and maintenance costs. In addition, all new freeway, street and transit capital projects will include water quality mitigation as part of project scope and cost. The Environmental Cleanup program is subject to the following requirements: • Development of a comprehensive countywide capital improvement program for transportation related water quality improvements • A competitive grant process to award funds to the highest priority, most cost-effective projects • A matching requirement to leverage other federal, state and local funds for water quality improvements • A maintenance of effort requirement to ensure that funds augment, not replace existing water quality programs • Annual reporting on actual expenditures and an assessment of the water quality benefits provided • A strict limit on administrative costs and a requirement to spend funds within three years of receipt • Penalties for misuse of any of the Environmental Cleanup funds Cost: The estimated cost for the Environmental Cleanup program is $237.2 million. In addition it is estimated that new freeway, road and transit projects funded by the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan will include more than $165 million for mitigating water quality impacts.RENEW E D 26 27 Environmental Cleanup 86 86 RENEW E D When new transportation dollars are approved, they should go for transportation and transportation alone. No bait-and-switch. No using transportation dollars for other purposes. The original Measure M went solely for transportation. The Renewed Measure M will be just as airtight. And there will be no hidden costs in the program. Prior to allocation of funds for freeway, street and transit projects, one percent of gross revenues from the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plans is set aside for audits, safeguards, and taxpayer protection. By state law, one and one half percent of the gross sales taxes generated by Measure M must be paid to the California State Board of Equalization for collecting the countywide one-half percent sales tax that funds the Transportation Investment Program. Special Trust Fund To guarantee transportation dollars are used for transportation purposes, all funds must be kept in a special trust fund. An independent, outside audit of this fund will protect against cheaters who try to use the transportation funds for purposes other than specified transportation uses. A severe punishment will disqualify any agency that cheats from receiving Measure M funds for a five-year period. The annual audits, and annual reports detailing project progress, will be sent to Orange County taxpayers every year and will be reviewed in public session by a special Taxpayer Oversight Committee that can raise fiscal issues, ask tough questions, and must independently certify, on an annual basis, that transportation dollars have been spent strictly according to the Renewed Measure M Investment Plan. Back to the Voters Of course, over the next 30 years, things will change. Minor adjustments can be made by a 2/3 vote of the Taxpayer Oversight Committee and a 2/3 vote of the Orange County Local Transportation Authority Board of Directors. Major changes must be taken back to voters for authorization. And, every ten years, and more frequently if necessary, the Orange County Local Transportation Authority must conduct a thorough examination of the Renewed Measure M Investment Plan and determine if major changes should be submitted to the voters. There are other important taxpayer safeguards, all designed to insure the integrity of the voter- authorized plans. But each is focused on one goal: guaranteeing that new transportation dollars are devoted to solving Orange County’s traffic problems and that no transportation dollars are diverted to anything else. Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits Overview RENEW E D 2887 87 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits Description: Implement and maintain strict taxpayer safeguards to ensure that the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is delivered as promised. Restrict administrative costs to one percent (1%) of total tax revenues and state collection of the tax as prescribed in state law [currently one-and-one-half (1.5%) percent]. Administration of the Transportation Investment Plan and all spending is subject to the following specific safeguards and requirements: Oversight • All spending is subject to an annual independent audit • Spending decisions must be annually reviewed and certified by an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee • An annual report on spending and progress in implementing the Plan must be submitted to taxpayers Integrity of the Plan • No changes to the Plan can be made without review and approval by 2/3 vote of the Taxpayer Oversight Committee • Major changes to the Plan such as deleting a project or shifting projects among major spending categories (Freeways, Streets & Roads, Transit, Environmental Cleanup) must be ratified by a majority of voters • The Plan must be subject at least every ten years to public review and assessment of progress in delivery, public support and changed circumstances. Any significant proposed changes to the Plan must be approved by the Taxpayer Oversight Committee and ratified by a majority of voters. Fund Accounting • All tax revenues and interest earned must be deposited and maintained in a separate trust fund. Local jurisdictions that receive allocations must also maintain them in a separate fund. • All entities receiving tax funds must report annually on expenditures and progress in implementing projects • At any time, at its discretion, the Taxpayer Oversight Committee may conduct independent reviews or audits of the spending of tax funds • The elected Auditor/Controller of Orange County must annually certify that spending is in accordance with the Plan Spending Requirements • Local jurisdictions receiving funds must abide by specific eligibility and spending requirements detailed in the Streets & Roads and Environmental Cleanup components of the Plan • Funds must be used only for transportation purposes described in the Plan. The penalty for misspending is full repayment and loss of funding eligibility for a period of five years. • No funds may be used to replace private developer funding committed to any project or improvement • Funds shall augment, not replace existing funds • Every effort shall be made to maximize matching state and federal transportation dollars RENEW E D 28 29 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits 88 88 RENEW E D Taxpayer Oversight Committee • The committee shall consist of eleven members — two members from each of the five Board of Supervisor’s districts, who shall not be elected or appointed officials — along with the elected Auditor/Controller of Orange County • Members shall be recruited and screened for expertise and experience by the Orange County Grand Jurors Association. Members shall be selected from the qualified pool by lottery. • The committee shall be provided with sufficient resources to conduct independent reviews and audits of spending and implementation of the Plan Collecting the Tax • The State Board of Equalization shall be paid one-and-one-half (1.5) percent of gross revenues each fiscal year for its services in collecting sales tax revenue as prescribed in Section 7273 of the State’s Revenue and Taxation Code Cost: The estimated cost for Safeguards and Audits over thirty years is $296.6 million. 30 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits 89 89 RENEW E D I-5 Santa Ana Freeway Interchange Improvements $470.0 I-5 Santa Ana/San Diego Freeway Improvements 1,185.2 SR-22 Garden Grove Freeway Access Improvements 120.0 SR-55 Costa Mesa Freeway Improvements 366.0 SR-57 Orange Freeway Improvements 258.7 SR-91 Riverside Freeway Improvements 908.7* I-405 San Diego Freeway Improvements 1,392.5* I-605 Freeway Access Improvements 20.0 All Freeway Service Patrol 150.0 Regional Capacity Program $1,132.8 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program 453.1 Local Fair Share Program 2,039.1 High Frequency Metrolink Service $1,129.8* Transit Extensions to Metrolink 1,000.0 Metrolink Gateways 57.9* Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities 392.8* Community Based Transit/Circulators 226.5 Safe Transit Stops 25.0 Clean Up Highway and Street Runoff that Pollutes Beaches $237.2 Collect Sales Taxes (State charges required by law) $178.0 Oversight and Annual Audits 118.6 Measure M Investment Summary Streets & Roads Projects (in millions) $3,625.0 Environmental Cleanup (in millions) $237.2 Transit Projects (in millions) $2,832.0 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits (in millions) $296.6 A E F G H I J K L M N O P Q X S T U V W Total (2005 dollars in millions) $11,861.9 2005 estimatesin millions Freeway Projects (in millions) $4,871.1 COSTSPROJECTSLOCATION R B C D 30 31 *Asterisk notes project estimates that have been amended since 2006. 90 90 91 91 ATT ACHMENT B ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES I. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of the Ordinance the following words shall mean as stated. A. “Capital Improvement Program”: a multi-year-year funding plan to implement capital transportation projects and/or programs, including but not limited to capacity, safety, operations, maintenance, and rehabilitation projects. B. “Circulation Element”: an element of an Eligible Jurisdiction’s General Plan depicting planned roadways and related policies, including consistency with the MPAH. C. “Congestion Management Program”: a program established in 1990 (California Government Code 65089), for effective use of transportation funds to alleviate traffic congestion and related impacts through a balanced transportation and land use planning process. D. “Eligible Jurisdiction”: a city in Orange County or the County of Orange, which satisfies the requirements of Section III A. E. “Encumbrance”: the execution of a contract or other action to be funded by Net Revenues. F. “Environmental Cleanup”: street, highway, freeway and transit related water quality improvement programs and projects as described in the Plan. G. “Environmental Cleanup Revenues”: Two percent (2%) of the Revenues allocated annually plus interest and other earnings on the allocated revenues, which shall be maintained in a separate account. H. “Expenditure Report”: a detailed financial report to account for receipt, interest earned and use of Measure M and other funds consistent with requirements of the Ordinance. I. “Freeway Project”: the planning, design, construction, improvement, 92 92 operation or maintenance necessary for, incidental to, or convenient for a state or interstate freeway. J “Local Fair Share Program”: a formula-based allocation to Eligible Jurisdictions for Street and Road Projects as described in the Plan. K. “Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan”: identification of traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals within a jurisdiction. L. “Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH)”: a countywide transportation plan administered by the Authority defining the ultimate number of through lanes for arterial streets, and designating the traffic signal synchronization street routes in Orange County. M. “Net Revenues”: The remaining Revenues after the deduction for: (i) amounts payable to the State Board of Equalization for the performance of functions incidental to the administration and operation of the Ordinance, (ii) costs for the administration of the Ordinance, (iii) two percent (2%) of the Revenues annually allocated for Environmental Cleanup, and (iv) satisfaction of debt service requirements of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of separate allocations. N. “Pavement Management Plan”: a plan to manage the preservation, rehabilitation, and maintenance of paved roads by analyzing pavement life cycles, assessing overall system performance and costs, and determining alternative strategies and costs necessary to improve paved roads. O. “Permit Streamlining”: commitments by state and federal agencies to reduce project delays associated with permitting of freeway projects through development of a comprehensive conservation strategy early in the planning process and the permitting of multiple projects with a single comprehensive conservation strategy. P. “Programmatic Mitigation”: permanent protection of areas of high ecological value, and associated restoration, management and monitoring, to comprehensively compensate for numerous, smaller impacts associated with individual transportation projects. Continued function of existing mitigation features, such as wildlife 93 93 passages, is not included. Q. “Project Final Report”: certification of completion of a project funded with Net Revenues, description of work performed, and accounting of Net Revenues expended and interest earned on Net Revenues allocated for the project. R. “Regional Capacity Program”: capital improvement projects to increase roadway capacity and improve roadway operation as described in the Plan. S. “Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program”: competitive capital and operations funding for the coordination of traffic signals across jurisdictional boundaries as included in the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan and as described in the Plan. T. “Revenues”: All gross revenues generated from the transactions and use tax of one-half of one percent (1/2%) plus any interest or other earnings thereon. U. “State Board of Equalization”: agency of the State of California responsible for the administration of sales and use taxes. V. “Street and Road Project”: the planning, design, construction, improvement, operation or maintenance necessary for, incidental to, or convenient for a street or road, or for any transportation purpose, including, but not limited to, purposes authorized by Article XIX of the California Constitution. W. “Traffic Forums”: a group of Eligible Jurisdictions working together to facilitate the planning of traffic signal synchronization among the respective jurisdictions. X. “Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan”: an element of the MPAH to promote smooth traffic flow through synchronization of traffic signals along designated street routes in the County. Y. “Transit”: the transportation of passengers by bus, rail, fixed guideway or other vehicle. Z. “Transit Project”: the planning, design, construction, improvement, equipment, operation or maintenance necessary for, or incidental to, or convenient for transit facilities or transit services. AA. “Watershed Management Areas”: areas to be established by the 94 94 County of Orange, in cooperation with local jurisdictions, or by another public entity with appropriate legal authority, for the management of water run-off related to existing or new transportation projects. II. REQUIREMENTS. The Authority may allocate Net Revenues to the State of California, an Eligible Jurisdiction, or the Authority for any project, program or purpose as authorized by the Ordinance, and the allocation of Net Revenues by the Authority shall be subject to the following requirements: A. Freeway Projects 1. The Authority shall make every effort to maximize state and federal funding for Freeway Projects. No Net Revenues shall be allocated in any year to any Freeway Project if the Authority has made findings at a public meeting that the state or the federal government has reduced any allocations of state funds or federal funds to the Authority as the result of the addition of any Net Revenues. 2. All Freeway Projects funded with Net Revenues, including project development and overall project management, shall be a joint responsibility of Caltrans, the Authority, and the affected jurisdiction(s). All major approval actions, including the project concept, the project location, and any subsequent change in project scope shall be jointly agreed upon by Caltrans, the Authority, and the project sponsors, and where appropriate, by the Federal Highway Administration and/or the California Transportation Commission. 3. Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for a Freeway Project, the Authority shall obtain written assurances from the appropriate state agency that after the Freeway Project is constructed to at least minimum acceptable state standards, the state shall be responsible for the maintenance and operation of such Freeway Project. 4. Freeway Projects will be built largely within existing rights of way using the latest highway design and safety requirements. However, to the greatest extent possible within the available budget, Freeway Projects shall be implemented using 95 95 Context Sensitive Design, as described in the nationally recognized Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Principles of Context Sensitive Design Standards. Freeway Projects will be planned, designed and constructed using a flexible community-responsive and collaborative approach to balance aesthetic, historic and environmental values with transportation safety, mobility, maintenance and performance goals. Context Sensitive Design features include: parkway-style designs; environmentally friendly, locally native landscaping; sound reduction; improved wildlife passage and aesthetic treatments, designs and themes that are in harmony with the surrounding communities. 5. At least five percent (5%) of the Net Revenues allocated for Freeway Projects shall fund Programmatic Mitigation for Freeway Projects. These funds shall be derived by pooling funds from the mitigation budgets of individual Freeway Projects, and shall only be allocated subject to the following: a. Development of a Master Environmental Mitigation and Resource Protection Plan and Agreement (Master Agreement) between the Authority and state and federal resource agencies that includes: (i) commitments by the Authority to provide for programmatic environmental mitigation of the Freeway Projects, (ii) commitments by state and federal resource agencies to reduce project delays associated with permitting and streamline the permit process for Freeway Projects, (iii) an accounting process for mitigation obligations and credits that will document net environmental benefit from regional, programmatic mitigation in exchange for net benefit in the delivery of transportation improvements through streamlined and timely approvals and permitting, and (iv) a description of the specific mitigation actions and expenditures to be undertaken and a phasing, implementation and maintenance plan. (v) appointment by the Authority of a Mitigation and Resource Protection Program Oversight Committee (“Environmental Oversight 96 96 Committee”) to make recommendations to the Authority on the allocation of the Net Revenues for programmatic mitigation, and to monitor implementation of the Master Agreement. The Environmental Oversight Committee shall consist of no more than twelve members and be comprised of representatives of the Authority, Caltrans, state and federal resource agencies, non-governmental environmental organizations, the public and the Taxpayers Oversight Committee. b. A Master Agreement shall be developed as soon as practicable following the approval of the ballot proposition by the electors. It is the intent of the Authority and state and federal resource agencies to develop a Master Agreement prior to the implementation of Freeway Projects. c. Expenditures of Net Revenues made subject to a Master Agreement shall be considered a Freeway Project and may be funded from the proceeds of bonds issued subject to Section 5 of the Ordinance. B. Transit Projects 1. The Authority shall make every effort to maximize state and federal funding for Transit Projects. No Net Revenues shall be allocated in any year for any Transit Project if the Authority has made findings at a public meeting that the state or the federal government has reduced any allocations of state funds or federal funds to the Authority as the result of the addition of any Revenues. 2. Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for a Transit Project, the Authority shall obtain a written agreement from the appropriate jurisdiction that the Transit Project will be constructed, operated and maintained to minimum standards acceptable to the Authority. C. Street and Road Projects Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for any Street and Road Project, the Authority, in cooperation with affected agencies, shall determine the entity(ies) to be responsible for the maintenance and operation thereof. /// 97 97 III. REQUIREMENTS FOR ELIGIBLE JURISDICTIONS. A. In order to be eligible to receive Net Revenues, a jurisdiction shall satisfy and continue to satisfy the following requirements. 1. Congestion Management Program. Comply with the conditions and requirements of the Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP) pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 65089. 2. Mitigation Fee Program. Assess traffic impacts of new development and require new development to pay a fair share of necessary transportation improvements attributable to the new development. 3. Circulation Element. Adopt and maintain a Circulation Element of the jurisdiction’s General Plan consistent with the MPAH. 4. Capital Improvement Program. Adopt and update biennially a six-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The CIP shall include all capital transportation projects, including projects funded by Net Revenues, and shall include transportation projects required to demonstrate compliance with signal synchronization and pavement management requirements. 5. Traffic Forums. Participate in Traffic Forums to facilitate the planning of traffic signal synchronization programs and projects. Eligible Jurisdictions and Caltrans, in participation with the County of Orange and the Orange County Division of League of Cities, will establish the boundaries for Traffic Forums. The following will be considered when establishing boundaries: a. Regional traffic routes and traffic patterns; b. Inter-jurisdictional coordination efforts; and c. Total number of Traffic Forums. 6. Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan. Adopt and maintain a Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan which shall identify traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals; include a three-year plan showing costs, available funding 98 98 and phasing of capital, operations and maintenance of the street routes and traffic signals; and include information on how the street routes and traffic signals may be synchronized with traffic signals on the street routes in adjoining jurisdictions. The Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan shall be consistent with the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. 7. Pavement Management Plan. Adopt and update biennially a Pavement Management Plan, and issue, using a common format approved by the Authority, a report every two years regarding the status of road pavement conditions and implementation of the Pavement Management Plan. a. Authority, in consultation with the Eligible Jurisdictions, shall define a countywide management method to inventory, analyze and evaluate road pavement conditions, and a common method to measure improvement of road pavement conditions. b. The Pavement Management Plan shall be based on: either the Authority’s countywide pavement management method or a comparable management method approved by the Authority, and the Authority’s method to measure improvement of road pavement conditions. c. The Pavement Management Plan shall include: (i) Current status of pavement on roads; (ii) A six-year plan for road maintenance and rehabilitation, including projects and funding; (iii) The projected road pavement conditions resulting from the maintenance and rehabilitation plan; and (iv) Alternative strategies and costs necessary to improve road pavement conditions. 8. Expenditure Report. Adopt an annual Expenditure Report to account for Net Revenues, developer/traffic impact fees, and funds expended by the Eligible Jurisdiction which satisfy the Maintenance of Effort requirements. The Expenditure 99 99 Report shall be submitted by the end of six (6) months following the end of the jurisdiction’s fiscal year and include the following: a. All Net Revenue fund balances and interest earned. b. Expenditures identified by type (i.e., capital, operations, administration, etc.), and program or project . 9. Project Final Report. Provide Authority with a Project Final Report within six months following completion of a project funded with Net Revenues. 10. Time Limits for Use of Net Revenues. a. Agree that Net Revenues for Regional Capacity Program projects and Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program projects shall be expended or encumbered no later than the end of the fiscal year for which the Net Revenues are programmed. A request for extension of the encumbrance deadline for no more than twenty-four months may be submitted to the Authority no less than ninety days prior to the deadline. The Authority may approve one or more requests for extension of the encumbrance deadline. b. Agree that Net Revenues allocated for any program or project, other than a Regional Capacity Program project or a Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program project, shall be expended or encumbered within three years of receipt. The Authority may grant an extension to the three-year limit, but extensions shall not be granted beyond a total of five years from the date of the initial funding allocation. c. In the event the time limits for use of Net Revenues are not satisfied then any retained Net Revenues that were allocated to an Eligible Jurisdiction and interest earned thereon shall be returned to the Authority and these Net Revenues and interest earned thereon shall be available for allocation to any project within the same source program. 11. Maintenance of Effort. Annual certification that the Maintenance of Effort requirements of Section 6 of the Ordinance have been satisfied. 12. No Supplanting of Funds. Agree that Net Revenues shall not be 100 100 used to supplant developer funding which has been or will be committed for any transportation project. 13. Consider, as part of the Eligible Jurisdiction’s General Plan, land use planning strategies that accommodate transit and non-motorized transportation. B. Determination of Non-Eligibility A determination of non-eligibility of a jurisdiction shall be made only after a hearing has been conducted and a determination has been made by the Authority’s Board of Directors that the jurisdiction is not an Eligible Jurisdiction as provided hereinabove. IV. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; GENERAL PROVISIONS. A. Subject to the provisions of the Ordinance, including Section II above, use of the Revenues shall be as follows: 1. First, the Authority shall pay the State Board of Equalization for the services and functions; 2. Second, the Authority shall pay the administration expenses of the Authority; 3. Third, the Authority shall satisfy the annual allocation requirement of two percent (2%) of Revenues for Environmental Cleanup; and 4. Fourth, the Authority shall satisfy the debt service requirements of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of separate allocations. B. After providing for the use of Revenues described in Section A above, and subject to the averaging provisions of Section D below, the Authority shall allocate the Net Revenues as follows: 1. Forty-three percent (43%) for Freeway Projects; 2. Thirty-two percent (32%) for Street and Road Projects; and 3. Twenty-five percent (25%) for Transit Projects. C. The allocation of thirty-two percent (32%) of the Net Revenues for 101 101 Street and Road Projects pursuant to Section B 2 above shall be made as follows: 1. Ten percent (10%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated for Regional Capacity Program projects; 2. Four percent (4%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated for Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program projects; and 3. Eighteen percent (18%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated for Local Fair Share Program projects. D. In any given year, except for the allocations for Local Fair Share Program projects, the Authority may allocate Net Revenues on a different percentage basis than required by Sections B and C above in order to meet short-term needs and to maximize efforts to capture state, federal, or private transportation dollars, provided the percentage allocations set forth in Sections B and C above shall be achieved during the duration of the Ordinance. E. The Authority shall allocate Net Revenues for programs and projects as necessary to meet contractual, program or project obligations, and the Authority may withhold allocations until needed to meet contractual, program or project obligations, except that Net Revenues allocated for the Local Fair Share Program pursuant to Section C above shall be paid to Eligible Jurisdictions within sixty days of receipt by the Authority. F. The Authority may exchange Net Revenues from a Plan funding category for federal, state or other local funds allocated to any public agency within or outside the area of jurisdiction to maximize the effectiveness of the Plan. The Authority and the exchanging public agency must use the exchanged funds for the same program or project authorized for the use of the funds prior to the exchange. Such federal, state or local funds received by the Authority shall be allocated by the Authority to the same Plan funding category that was the source of the exchanged Net Revenues, provided, however, in no event shall an exchange reduce the Net Revenues allocated for Programmatic Mitigation of Freeway Projects. G. If additional funds become available for a specific project or program 102 102 described in the Plan, the Authority may allocate the Net Revenues replaced by the receipt of those additional funds, in the following order of priority: first, to Plan projects and programs which provide congestion relief in the geographic region which received the additional funds; second, to other projects and programs within the affected geographic region which may be placed in the Plan through an amendment to the Ordinance; and third, to all other Plan projects and programs. H. Upon review and acceptance of the Project Final Report, the Authority shall allocate the balance of Net Revenues for the project, less the interest earned on the Net Revenues allocated for the project. V. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAMS/ PROJECTS A. Regional Capacity Program. 1. Matching Funds. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall contribute local matching funds equal to fifty percent (50%) of the project or program cost. This local match requirement may be reduced as follows: a. A local match reduction of ten percent (10%) of the eligible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction implements, maintains and operates in conformance with the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. b. A local match reduction of ten percent (10%) of the eligible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction either: (i) has measurable improvement of paved road conditions during the previous reporting period as determined pursuant to the Authority’s method of measuring improvement of road pavement conditions, or (ii) has road pavement conditions during the previous reporting period which are within the highest twenty percent of the scale for road pavement conditions as determined pursuant to the Authority’s method of measuring improvement of road pavement conditions. c. A local match reduction of five percent (5%) of the 103 103 eligible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction does not use any Net Revenues as part of the funds for the local match. 2. Allocations shall be determined pursuant to a countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in establishing criteria for determining priority for allocations. B. Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program. 1. Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. The Authority shall adopt and maintain a Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan, which shall be a part of the Master Plan of Arterial Highways. The Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan shall include traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals within and across jurisdictional boundaries, and the means of implementing, operating and maintaining the programs and projects, including necessary governance and legal arrangements. 2. Allocations. a. Allocations shall be determined pursuant to a countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in establishing criteria for determining priority for allocations. b. The Authority shall give priority to programs and projects which include two or more jurisdictions. c. The Authority shall encourage the State to participate in the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program and Authority shall give priority to use of transportation funds as match for the State’s discretionary funds used for implementing the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program. 3. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall contribute matching local funds equal to twenty percent (20%) of the project or program cost. The requirement for matching local funds may be satisfied all or in part with in-kind services provided by the Eligible Jurisdiction for the program or project, including salaries and benefits for employees of the Eligible Jurisdiction who perform work on the project or programs. 104 104 4. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall issue a report once every three years regarding the status and performance of its traffic signal synchronization activities. 5. Not less than once every three years an Eligible Jurisdiction shall review and revise, as may be necessary, the timing of traffic signals included as part of the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. 6. An Eligible Jurisdiction withdrawing from a signal synchronization project shall be required to return Net Revenues allocated for the project. C. Local Fair Share Program. The allocation of eighteen percent (18%) of the Net Revenues for Local Fair Share Program projects shall be made to Eligible Jurisdictions in amounts determined as follows: 1. Fifty percent (50%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction’s population for the immediately preceding calendar year to the total County population (including incorporated and unincorporated areas) for the immediately preceding calendar year, both as determined by the State Department of Finance; 2. Twenty-five percent (25%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction’s existing Master Plan of Arterial Highways (“MPAH”) centerline miles to the total existing MPAH centerline miles within the County as determined annually by the Authority; and 3. Twenty-five percent (25%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction’s total taxable sales to the total taxable sales of the County for the immediately preceding calendar year as determined by the State Board of Equalization. VI. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; TRANSIT PROGRAMS/PROJECTS. A. Transit Extensions to Metrolink. 1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation planning and engineering resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in designing Transit 105 105 Extensions to Metrolink projects to provide effective and user-friendly connections to Metrolink services and bus transit systems. 2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Transit Extension to Metrolink projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with the Authority regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction, ownership, operation and maintenance of the Transit Extension to Metrolink project. 3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Transit Extension to Metrolink projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the development of the evaluation process and methodology. B. Metrolink Gateways. 1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation planning and engineering resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in designing Regional Transit Gateway facilities to provide for effective and user-friendly connections to the Metrolink system and other transit services. 2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Regional Gateway projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with the Authority regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction, ownership, operation and maintenance of the Regional Gateway facility. 3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Regional Gateway projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the development of the evaluation process and methodology. C. Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities. 1. An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with another entity to perform all or part of a Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities project. 106 106 2. A senior is a person age sixty years or older. 3. Allocations. a. One percent (1%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated to the County to augment existing senior non-emergency medical transportation services funded with Tobacco Settlement funds as of the effective date of the Ordinance. The County shall continue to fund these services in an annual amount equal to the same percentage of the total annual Tobacco Settlement funds received by the County. The Net Revenues shall be annually allocated to the County in an amount no less than the Tobacco Settlement funds annually expended by the County for these services and no greater than one percent of net revenues plus any accrued interest. b. One percent (1%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated to continue and expand the existing Senior Mobility Program provided by the Authority. The allocations shall be determined pursuant to criteria and requirements for the Senior Mobility Program adopted by the Authority. c. One and forty-seven hundredths percent (1.47%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated to partially fund bus and ACCESS fares for seniors and persons with disabilities in an amount equal to the percentage of partial funding of fares for seniors and persons with disabilities as of the effective date of the Ordinance, and to partially fund train and other transit service fares for seniors and persons with disabilities in amounts as determined by the Authority. d. In the event any Net Revenues to be allocated for seniors and persons with disabilities pursuant to the requirements of subsections a, b and c above remain after the requirements are satisfied then the remaining Net Revenues shall be allocated for other transit programs or projects for seniors and persons with disabilities as determined by the Authority. D. Community Based Transit/Circulators. 1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation planning, procurement and operations resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in 107 107 designing Community Based Transit/Circulators projects to provide effective and user- friendly transit connections to countywide bus transit and Metrolink services. 2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Community Based Transit/Circulators projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with the Authority regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction, ownership, operation and maintenance of the Community Based Transit/Circulators project. 3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Community Based Transit/Circulator projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the development of the evaluation process and methodology. 4. An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with another entity to perform all or part of a Community Based Transit/Circulators project. VII. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP PROGRAMS/PROJECTS. A. An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with any other public entity to perform all or any part of an Environmental Cleanup project. B. Allocation Committee. 1. The Allocation Committee shall not include any elected public officer and shall include the following twelve (12) voting members: (i) one (1) representative of the County of Orange; (ii) five (5) representatives of cities, subject to the requirement for one (1) representative for the cities in each supervisorial district; (iii) one (1) representative of the California Department of Transportation; (iv) two (2) representatives of water or wastewater public entities; (v) one (1) representative of the development industry; 108 108 (vi) one (1) representative of the scientific or academic community; (vii) one (1) representative of private or non-profit organizations involved in environmental and water quality protection/enforcement matters; In addition, one (1) representative of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and one (1) representative of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board shall be non-voting members of the Allocation Committee. 2. The Allocation Committee shall recommend to the Authority for adoption by the Authority the following: a. A competitive grant process for the allocation of Environmental Cleanup Revenues, including the highest priority to capital improvement projects included in a Watershed Management Area. The process shall give priority to cost-effective projects and programs that offer opportunities to leverage other funds for maximum benefit. b. A process requiring that Environmental Cleanup Revenues allocated for projects and programs shall supplement and not supplant funding from other sources for transportation related water quality projects and programs. c. Allocation of Environmental Cleanup Revenues for proposed projects and programs. d. An annual reporting procedure and a method to assess the water quality benefits provided by completed projects and programs. 109 109 ATTACHMENT C TAXPAYER OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE I. PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION. A Taxpayer Oversight Committee (“Committee”) is hereby established for the purpose of overseeing compliance with the Ordinance as specified in Section IV hereof. The Committee shall be organized and convened before any Revenues are collected or spent pursuant to the Ordinance. II. COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP. The Committee shall be governed by eleven members (“Member”). The composition of the Committee membership shall be subject to the following provisions. A. Geographic Balance. The membership of the Committee shall be geographically balanced at all times as follows: 1. There shall be two Members appointed from each of the County’s supervisorial districts (individually, “District”); and 2. The Auditor-Controller shall be a Member and chairman (“Chair”) of the Committee. B. Member Term. Each Member, except the Auditor-Controller and as provided in Section III B 2 below, shall be appointed for a term of three years; provided, however, that any Member appointed to replace a Member who has resigned or been removed shall serve only the balance of such Member’s unexpired term, and no person shall serve as a Member for a period in excess of six consecutive years. C. Resignation. Any Member may, at any time, resign from the Committee upon written notice delivered to the Auditor-Controller. Acceptance of any public office, the filing of an intent to seek public office, including a filing under California Government Code Section 85200, or change of residence to outside the District shall constitute a Member’s automatic resignation. D. Removal. Any Member who has three consecutive unexcused absences from meetings of the Committee shall be removed as a Member. An absence 110 110 from a Committee meeting shall be considered unexcused unless, prior to or after such absence (i) the Member submits to each of the other Members a written request to excuse such absence, which request shall state the reason for such absence and any special circumstances existing with respect to such absence; and (ii) a majority of the other Members agree to excuse such absence. E. Reappointment. Any former Member may be reappointed . III. APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS. A. Membership Recommendation Panel. 1. The Authority shall contract with the Orange County Grand Jurors’ Association for the formation of a committee membership recommendation panel (“Panel”) to perform the duties set forth in this subsection III A. If the Orange County Grand Jurors’ Association refuses or fails to act in such capacity, the Authority shall contract with another independent organization selected by the Authority for the formation of the Panel. 2. The Panel shall have five members who shall screen and recommend potential candidates for Committee membership. 3. The Panel shall solicit, collect and review applications from potential candidates for membership on the Committee. No currently elected or appointed officer of any public entity (“Public Officer”) will be eligible to serve as a Member, except the Auditor-Controller, and a Public Officer shall complete an Intent to Resign form, which shall be provided as part of the application and submitted as part of the initial application process. Failure to submit an Intent to Resign form will deem such Public Officer ineligible for consideration to serve as a Member. In addition, a person who has a financial conflict of interest with regard to the allocation of Revenues will be deemed ineligible for consideration to serve as a Member. A Member shall reside within the District the Member is appointed to represent. Subject to the foregoing restrictions, the Panel shall evaluate each potential candidate on the basis of the following criteria: a. Commitment and ability to participate in Committee meetings; 111 111 b. Demonstrated interest and history of participation in community activities, with special emphasis on transportation-related activities; and c. Lack of conflicts of interest with respect to the allocation of Revenues. 4. For initial membership on the Committee, the Panel shall recommend to the Authority at least five candidates from each of the two Districts that are represented by one member on the Ordinance No. 2, Citizens Oversight Committee (“COC”) as of the date the Authority appoints the initial Members. Thereafter, the Panel shall recommend to the Authority at least five candidates for filing each vacancy on the Committee. B. Initial Members. 1. The COC members, as of the date the Authority appoints the initial Members of the Committee, shall be appointed as initial Members of the Committee. These Members shall each serve until each of their respective terms as a member of the COC expires. 2. Two additional initial Members shall be appointed. The Authority shall place the names of the candidates recommended by the Panel on equally- sized cards which shall be deposited randomly in a container. In public session, the Chairman of the Authority will draw a sufficient number of names from said container to allocate Committee membership in accordance with the membership requirements and restrictions set forth in Section II hereof. The first person whose name is drawn shall be appointed to serve a term of three years. Thereafter, the person whose name is drawn who is not from the same District as the first person whose name is drawn shall be appointed to serve a term of two years. C. Member Vacancy. A member vacancy, however caused, shall be filled by the Authority. A Member shall be appointed on or about July 1 to replace a Member whose term has expired. A Member may be appointed at any time as necessary to replace a Member who has resigned or been removed. The Authority shall place the 112 112 names of the candidates recommended by the Panel for the appointment on equally-sized cards which shall be deposited randomly in a container. In a public session, the Chairman of the Authority will draw one name from said container for each vacancy on the Committee. The person whose name is so drawn shall be appointed by the Authority to fill the vacancy. IV. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. The Committee is hereby charged with the following duties and responsibilities: A. The initial Members shall convene to adopt such procedural rules and regulations as are necessary to govern the conduct of Committee meetings, including, but not limited to, those governing the calling, noticing and location of Committee meetings, as well as Committee quorum requirements and voting procedures. The Committee may select its own officers, including, but not limited to, a Committee co-chair who will be the primary spokesperson for the Committee. B. The Committee shall approve, by a vote of not less than two thirds of all Committee members, any amendment to the Plan proposed by the Authority which changes the funding categories, programs or projects identified on page 31 of the Plan. C. The Committee shall receive and review the following documents submitted by each Eligible Jurisdiction: 1. Congestion Management Program; 2. Mitigation Fee Program; 3. Expenditure Report; 4. Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan; and 5. Pavement Management Plan. D. The Committee shall review yearly audits and hold an annual public hearing to determine whether the Authority is proceeding in accordance with the Plan. The Chair shall annually certify whether the Revenues have been spent in compliance with the Plan. In addition, the Committee may issue reports, from time to time, on the progress of the transportation projects described in the Plan. 113 113 E. The Committee shall receive and review the performance assessment conducted by the Authority at least once every three years to review the performance of the Authority in carrying out the purposes of the Ordinance. F. Except as otherwise provided by the Ordinance, the Committee may contract, through the Authority, for independent analysis or examination of issues within the Committee’s purview or for other assistance as it determines to be necessary. G. The Committee may submit a written request to the Authority to explain any perceived deviations from the Plan. The Authority’s Chair must respond to such request, in writing, within sixty days after receipt of the same. 114 114 Measure M2 Amendments & Staff Reports September 24, 2012 Measure M2 Transportation Investment Plan Amendment November 9, 2012 Public Hearing on Amendment of the Measure M2 Freeway Category: State Route 91 (Project J), Interstate 405 (Project K) October 11, 2013 Proposal to Amend Orange County Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 to Modify Taxpayer Oversight Committee Membership Eligibility November 25, 2013 Public Hearing to Amend Orange County Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 to Modify Taxpayer Oversight Committee Membership Eligibility October 26, 2015 Proposed Amendment to the Measure M2 Transportation Investment Plan December 14, 2015 Public Hearing to Amend the Renewed Measure M Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 and Transportation Investment Plan for the Transit Program March 14, 2016 Renewed Measure M Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 and Transportation Investment Plan Amendment Update 115 115 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-136 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Fred A. Wilson, City Manager PREPARED BY:Marie Knight, Director of Community Services Robert Handy, Chief of Police Subject: Special Event Application - Country Harvest Festival Statement of Issue: The City of Huntington Beach has received a Specific Events Application from Activated Events, LLC to produce the Country Harvest Festival Concert on the beach on October 7, 2018. The concert would take place between the hours of noon and 9 p.m. on a footprint south of the pier. Financial Impact: Per Section 13.54 of the Municipal Code relating to Specific Events all direct costs associated with the Country Harvest Festival Event will be reimbursed by Activated Events LLC. Recommended Action: Discuss Specific Events application from Activated Events, LLC to produce the Country Harvest Festival Concert and advise staff accordingly on any potential action. Analysis: Activated Events LLC has submitted a Specific Events Application to produce the Country Harvest Festival Concert on the beach on October 7, 2018, (Attachment 1). This will be a fenced venue and ticketed event. The main components of the event are as follows: ·Location: South of the Pier (Site Map Attachment 2) ·Set Up Dates: October 2 - 6, 6a.m. - 8p.m. ·Event Date: October 7, noon - 9p.m. ·Tear Down Dates: October 8 - 10, 6a.m. - 8p.m. ·Attendance: 8,000 (estimated) ·Headliner: Billy Currington with other supporting artists throughout the day ·Ticket Prices: General Admission $35 - $85, VIP: $99-$149 ·Promoter: Activated Events LLC of Anaheim/Steve Thacher ·Theme:Fall Festival City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 116 116 File #:18-136 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 ·Food/Beverage: Food Booths, Food Trucks, and Bars will be setup within the event space selling food, beer, spirits and non-alcoholic drinks. ·Demographics: Both families with children as well as single professionals. Marketing to ages 25-49. Average age is 34. Sixty-five percent female, thirty- five percent male. History Since the early 90’s, concerts and live music were allowed in conjunction with Specific Events conducted on the beach. Most notable were concerts in conjunction with the US Open of Surfing (USOS). Starting around 2010, the concerts with the USOS began to grow in popularity and size. In 2013, the headliner for the USOS concert was “Weezer”. After the concert, a civil disturbance took place in the Main Street area of Downtown. As a result of this disturbance, the City Council formed a Downtown Task Force (DTTF) in July of 2013, to address various safety related issues. On June 16, 2014, the DTTF presented their recommendations to the City Council at a Study Session. (Attachment 3) Recommendation #2 stated:Reduce the size and scope of the US Open of Surfing to eliminate concerts, expo and non- competitive related items. The minutes of the Study Session indicates Council concurred with Recommendation #2 (Attachment 4). Since the June 14, 2014 Study Session, Specific Events staff has consistently denied all requests for concerts on the beach. Routinely, those requests have come from the US Open of Surfing, AVP Tour, Branches Church, Paintball, as well as anecdotally four to five other general inquiries a year by outside promoters. Currently, live entertainment is allowed as a part of some events at the beach such as “Surfin Sundays” at Pier Plaza, the “Surf City Marathon” (live bands in the beach beer garden), Beachside Summer Fest, and the Music Festival at Pier Plaza by Calvary Chapel. However, the music is a part of the overall event and not offered in a concert or ticketed fashion. Information for Consideration ·For the past several years, the State of California has offered live music concerts throughout the year on the State Beach and at Bolsa Chica. Each time, the City received noise complaints from our residents and those complaints were forwarded to the State Beach offices. ·Currently, there is a pending Specific Events application for the He’eNalu Aloha Pier Festival on October 7 at the Pier. This event will coincide with the 25 th Anniversary Celebration for Duke’s Restaurant. A concert in close proximity could negatively affect this event. ·There are Specific Events taking place at the beach the three other weekends in October, already stretching our public safety resources: The Surf City 10: October 14; the Great Pacific Airshow: October 19-21; and the ISA Junior World Championship Surf Contest: October 27-November 4. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 117 117 File #:18-136 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 ·Based on current agreements with some of the hotel properties, staff reached out to receive input from VHB and the major hotels on the waterfront regarding this event in particular. Generally, the major hotels are not opposed to the proposed Country Concert on City Beach on October 7 as a pilot program. However, some concerns/requests have been expressed such as: They want assurances that the proposed footprint does not extend any further south than as proposed in the attached site plan, the hotels would be concerned if the date would change from October 7 to another date as they have only looked at their hotel events for that day and if the date changes there may be conflicts with existing bookings, they are requesting that the event minimizes the effect on ocean view shed from hotels and restaurants for entire length of set up and tear down period, and they would want input in advance into the concert’s run of show of performers so they can work with existing booked business to minimize the impact on the hotel guests. For example, there is a wedding planned at the Hyatt at 5:00 PM on October 7 and the Hyatt would request no performers at that time. Finally, the general consensus is that if this event generates major problems for regular beach goers, concert attendees and/or the overall experience for HB’s hotels guests, then this should be taken into consideration when approving any post October 7 concerts on City Beach. ·Currently there is not an established fee for a ticketed music event on the beach. Should a decision be made to allow concerts on the beach, staff suggests that a revenue sharing fee and/or Agreement be established for such events. ·A concert on the beach potentially creates an opportunity for local businesses (i.e. hotels, retailers and restaurants) to generate additional revenue from concert-goers attending the event. However, specific data regarding a potential economic benefit to local businesses is not available at this time. Environmental Status: Not applicable Strategic Plan Goal: Improve quality of life Attachment(s): 1) Specific Event Application 2) Event Site Plan 3) Downtown Task Force Report 4) June 14, 2014 Study Session Minutes City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 118 118 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Specific Event Application City of Huntington Beach Community Services Department 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 714-536-5486 www.huntingtonbeachca.gov 119 119 Specific Event Permit Process Permit applications must be received by the City of Huntington Beach no later than 90 days prior to the actual date of your event. Huntington Beach Municipal Code section 13.54 provides the framework and guidance for the issuance of Specific Event Permits within the City of Huntington Beach. Generally, any organized activity involving the use of, or having impact upon, public property including parks, beaches, parking lots and street areas in a manner that varies from its current land use, requires a permit. The Specific Event permit process is required of events that are large in scale and necessitate the involvement of more than one city department or division. Specific Event permits are also required for any event at Pier Plaza. The Beach Division issues permits for small events on the beach and they may be contacted at 714-536-5281. The Community Services Department issues permits for small events in the parks and may be contacted at 714-536-5486. The Planning Department issues permits for events on private property and may be contacted at 714-536-5271. The Specific Event permit process begins when a completed Specific Event application is submitted, along with a site map and non-refundable application fee. It is strongly recommended that you discuss your event with the Specific Event Supervisor before submitting an application to discuss available dates and the feasibility of your plan. Submittal of an application should not be construed as approval of your request. In addition to your Specific Event Permit you may be required to obtain permits or licenses from other city departments or state or county agencies. These departments or agencies may have a longer approval process than the Specific Event Permit procedure. The permit process varies based on the size and scope of the event. Generally, upon receipt of the application, a meeting is scheduled with the Specific Event Committee. The committee is composed of representatives of various city departments and outside agencies. You should be prepared to describe your event in detail and answer logistical questions posed by the committee at the meeting. Following the meeting, a letter that outlines your conditions of approval and estimated costs will be sent to you within approximately 30 days. A final permit is issued when all costs are paid and all conditions of approval have been met or verified. In most cases, the final Specific Event Permit is issued only a few days in advance of the event date. Visit Huntington Beach maintains a calendar of events for the City of Huntington Beach. The calendar of events can be accessed on the internet at www.surfcityusa.com. You can provide information regarding your event to the HBCVB for listing on this site. The City of Huntington Beach thanks you for contributing to the vitality of our community by considering our city as a site for your special event. 120 120 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH SPECIFIC EVENT APPLICATION Event Information and Overview Event Title: Country Harvest Festival Actual Event Dates: October 7, 2018 Actual Event Times: 12n-9p Proposed Event Location: City beach, south of pier Set up/Assembly/Construction Date(s): Set-up Date(s): October 2 – October 6 Set-up Times: _6a-8p_______________________________________________________ Take-down Dates: _October 8 – October 10 _____________________________________ Take-down Times:__6a-8p___________________________________________________ Please describe the scope of your set up/take down work: Set up would begin by securing the perimeter with 8 ft fencing. Fenced bone yard would be built in the parking lot. Once secured, assembly of staging and production elements would begin. Restrooms, generators, concessions, art installations, décor, pumpkins, and festive fall elements would be brought into the space. Once event was completed trash would be removed and stage would strike. All elements would then be removed. Beach would receive thorough cleaning after all production elements removed. Anticipated Attendance 8,000 Number of Event Staff/Volunteers 250 Is the event open to the public? X Yes No If no, please describe how the event will be restricted and indicate plan on the site map: If admission is to be charged, what is the price of tickets? GA: $35 - $85, VIP: $99-$149 121 121 Please provide a detailed description of the event including type of event and major components: Country Harvest Festival would be our Fall themed country event with country artist Billy Currington as the headlining performer. Activated Events would build the venue space with top of the line stage, lighting and sound production. Billy Currington and support artists would perform throughout the day from 12:30p-9p with 30 minute intermissions between performances. Other fun elements of the event would include line dancing, pumpkin patch, BBQ and “fall themed” food featured at event. Specialty beer tasting (pumpkin) and bars. Fall/Farm décor including hay bales, corn stalks, etc… would be around the venue for guests to sit and take photos with. Art installations placed throughout the venue geared towards theme of event as well as tying in Huntington Beach for great photo sharing opportunities. Sponsorship activations placed throughout the venue (sponsors and activations TBD). Subaru vehicles would be displayed inside event. Event would be open to families, adults and country music lovers and geared towards music and food enthusiasts. Applicant, Sponsoring Organization and Contact Information Type of Event: X Commercial Non-Profit If your organization is a “tax exempt, nonprofit” organization, you must attach a copy of your IRS 501 C tax exemption letter providing proof and certifying your current tax exempt, nonprofit status. Event Applicant: Steve Thacher Organization/Corporation: Activated Events, LLC Address: 2912 E. Blue Star St., Anaheim, CA 92806 Phone:949-252-8737 Email: steve@activatedevents.com Contact person(s) “on site” during event, including times of set-up/take down: Steve Thacher, Nick Noland, Adam Villarreal Cell Phone number of contact person(s): 714-612-9192 Contact(s) must be in attendance for the duration of the event and immediately available to city officials. 122 122 Contact Name and Number for Public Information This information may be given out to the public Name: Cacie Moses Phone: 888-496-6070 Email: cacie@activatedevents.com Website: CountryHarvestFestival.com (not launched yet) Please list any professional event organizer or event service provider hired by you that is authorized to work on your behalf to produce the event. Attach a written communication from the Chief Officer of the organization that authorizes the applicant or professional event organizer to apply for this Specific Event Permit on their behalf. Name: Activated Events, LLC Address: 2912 E. Blue Star St., Anaheim, CA 92806 Phone: 949-252-8737 Email: steve@activatedevents.com Security Will you hire a security company to develop and manage your event’s security plan? X Yes No If yes, you are required to provide a copy of the security company’s valid Private Patrol Operator’s License issued by the State of California. Security Organization: Global Protection Group Address: 640 N. Tustin Ave. Ste. 205, Santa Ana, CA 92705 Telephone:714-951-4647 Private Patrol Operator License #: PPO#16433 Please describe your security plan including crowd control, internal security or venue safety, or attach the plan to this application. Security is strategically placed both inside and outside the event as well as in the adjacent parking lot. Guests are queued up in admission lines and submit to bag checks (all guests) and pat downs (as needed). All guests are wristbanded prior to entering event so it is easily distinguishable that they entered through the proper entrance. Guests that are 21+ need to be carded if they intend to order or consume alcohol. Security is placed at all entrance/exit points, stage, restrooms, VIP, bars, perimeter and other key areas to monitor guests. Teams of roaming guards are used 123 123 to move throughout the event looking for any guests in need and help facilitate any issues. Guards sweep the event at close of event to move guests towards the exits once event has ended. Overnight security is on-site from load in through load out to oversee all equipment and insure there are no issues. Our security team works hand in hand with city, county and state public safety officers. For small events that need to leave event equipment on public property overnight, please describe your plan to have a responsible party present at all times until the event equipment has been removed from the site. Medical Plan After review of this completed application, the Huntington Beach Fire Department will determine if there is a need for ambulance or paramedic services. If these services are deemed necessary, the HBFD will provide the services at a cost to the event organizer. Please describe your additional medical plan including your communications plan, the number of medical personnel, certification levels (MD, RN, Paramedic, EMT). Include management and deployment. You may attach the plan to this application if necessary. For each event, we currently coordinate with Huntington Beach Fire Department to have ALS ambulance and staff on site. For an event this size we usually have one ALS ambulance and two EMT’s. We also have a security and first aid tent within the event to help facilitate with any non life threatening medical conditions. City lifeguards would also be a welcome addition to have on-site (we currently have State lifeguards in our event). Road Closures and Traffic Impact Does your event require any closure of city streets or traffic lanes? Yes X No If yes, please describe and attach a detailed plan for road closure. Parking 124 124 Please provide a detailed list of your anticipated parking needs for the public and for event staff, volunteers and VIP’s. An event of this size typically takes up two parking lots. One is used for our boneyard to store heavy equipment, commercial trucks, etc… as well as artist buses and trailers. We usually use a secondary parking lot for ride transportation options such as Uber/Lyft and shuttle service. Remaining parking lots are open for paid guest parking. Trash and Sanitation Please provide a plan for pick up and removal of trash and sanitation equipment. Dumpster rentals must be made through the City’s contracted service provider, Republic Services. We bring in three (3) 40 yard dumpsters which are stored in the bone yard. Cardboard trash receptacles and liners are placed throughout the venue for guests to dispose of their trash. Receptacles are emptied throughout the day and taken to dumpsters. After event is complete, all trash is picked up from venue area and disposed of into receptacles. Dumpsters are then picked up once all trash has been removed from event. Distribution of stickers is prohibited in or around the event. Special equipment to be used for proposed event: X P A System Bleachers X Amplified sound/music X Booths X Banners X Cooking fuel X Tents X Generator(s) - Hand Carried X Porta-Potties X Generator(s) - Vehicle Towed X Stages X Barricades Other: Fencing, barricades, ground cover, art installations, beanbags, lounge furniture 125 125 Stage Are you requesting to use the City mobile stage? Yes X No If yes, please list times of event and set up/take down. Electricity Are you requesting that the City hook up electrical power? Yes X No If yes, please describe your power requirements. (not all event sites have electrical access) Banners The City has a banner program that allows for the hanging of banners over the street at three locations on Main Street and at the entrance to the Pier. Banners are reserved on a first come basis through the Public Works Department at 714-960-8861. The City also has a pennant program that allows for the display of pennants on light poles at various sites throughout the City and on the Pier. Reservations for pennants are made through the Public Works Department at 714-375-5018. Please describe your proposed use of banners, either within the City programs or within the event site. We would like to promote this event through the various city channels listed above. Banners would promote event date, time, artist and location. Banners within the event would either be used for signage purposes such as GA Admission, VIP Admission, Restrooms, Pumpkin Patch, etc… Some additional signage would be provided by sponsors (TBD) and contained to within the event perimeter. 126 126 Entertainment Are there any musical entertainment features related to your event? X Yes No If yes, please attach a schedule of bands, times and type of music. Billy Currington would be the proposed headliner and perform from 7:30-9p. Additional artists to be announced and schedule to be provided. Typically this type of event would have 4-5 artists performing 60-75 minutes each with a 30 minute intermission between acts. Will there be sound checks? X Yes No If yes, please indicate start and finish time: 10a-12n on day of event Will sound amplification be used during the event? X Yes No If yes, please indicate start time and finish time: 12:30p – 9p Do your event plans include any casino games, bingo games, opportunity drawings, massage activities, live animals, OR fortune telling? X Yes No If yes, please describe. Potentially we would incorporate a petting zoo into the event but this is yet to be determined. No other above listed activities would be included in this event. Merchandise Do you intend to sell merchandise? X Yes No If yes, please describe. Concert and artist related t-shirts, hats, and sweatshirts. Vendor booths selling country gear would also be set up selling similar merchandise. 127 127 Food Please describe your proposed food service for VIP’s, participants or the public. Please list all food or beverage sampling proposed to be conducted by sponsors. A collection of food vendors would be setup within the venue. It would be primarily food booths and a handful of food trucks. Local restaurants and vendors would be our first choice of partners. Top level BBQ and food vendors would be supplemented as needed. No food sampling would be conducted. Possible small samples of alcohol would be sampled by sponsor(s). Samples would be distributed in a controlled system by professionally trained bartending staff. Guests would be limited to one sample per sponsor (usually two sponsors total). Alcohol Does the event involve the sale or use of alcoholic beverages? X Yes No If yes, please describe. Proposed alcohol service areas must be included on overall site map as well as a separate detail map. Please note that a separate license from Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) may be required. Bars would be set up within the event space selling beer, spirits and non-alcoholic drinks. Professional staff would manage bars and bartenders would all be TIPS certified. Alcoholic beverages would only be served to guests that are 21+ with 21+ wristbands on. Management would monitor guests and staff to insure no over pouring occurs. Filming Will film, video or photography be involved with the production of the event? If please list the equipment to be used. X Yes No If yes, please describe. Professional grade, handheld cameras would be used to capture still photos and video. Photos and video would be used for event recap as well as future marketing purposes. 128 128 Sponsors Please provide a list sponsors. The City of Huntington Beach has exclusivity contracts with certain corporations for the beach, particularly in the automobile category. These may affect your ability to provide sponsor recognition opportunities to your sponsors at that location. In addition, there are specific guidelines for alcohol sponsors. Potential sponsors to include Subaru, San Diego Credit Union, Budweiser, Airstream, Lyft, General Mills, Monster Energy Drink, Discovery Cube OC, The Toll Roads and other various sponsors. There would also be an assortment of vendors (defined as 10x10 merchandise booths). Marketing/Demographics Please describe your target audience and how the event will be marketed. Huntington Beach, Orange County and Southern California residents ages 25-49. Both families with children as well as single professionals. Average age for this event is 34. 65% female, 35% male. Additional Information Please stage other pertinent information, activities or special requests not covered in this application. We would like to build a small pumpkin patch where guests can purchase and pick a pumpkin. Possible pumpkin carving station and other arts and craft activities within event. Possible small, ferris wheel TBD. 129 129 Site Map A detailed site map must be submitted with the application and include the following: • An outline of the entire event venue, including areas of equipment staging for set up/breakdown • The location of all fencing or barricades • The location of first aid facilities • The location of all stages, platforms, scaffolding, bleachers, grandstands, canopies, tents, portable toilets, booths, food/alcohol service, cooking areas, trash containers and dumpsters and other temporary structures. • The location and size of inflatable’s and banners • Generator locations and/or source of electricity • Placement of vehicles and/or trailers • Location of filming vehicles and structures • Accessibility path of travel and provisions for disabled This site map is for review by the Specific Events Committee. Additional site maps may be required for permits through the Building, Planning and Fire Departments. If the event includes structures such as bleachers, elevated platforms or stages the City’s Building and Safety Department may require the issuance of building permits. Applicants must provide all necessary structural calculations and drawings. A State of California licenses general contractor must pull Building and Safety Permits. 130 130 Business License The event organizer is responsible for submitting a blanket business license 2 weeks prior the commencement date of the event. The blanket license will cover and encompass all business activity involved at the event. Those involved will be separated into two different tiers: • vendors/sponsors/exhibitors – anyone promoting their business through the event, whether or not they are selling • service providers - anyone hired to provide a service to the event, such as an announcer, bounce house, security, etc The cost of the blanket business license will be determined by the number of those involved in each tier (HBMC 5.16.317). If your organization is a registered 501(c) non-profit, you will still need to obtain a blanket business license to cover any for-profit entity that is present at your event. Certain exemptions apply. Please Note: The blanket business license does not cover Mobile Food Facilities aka Catering Trucks. They must be licensed individually. Per State law, (R&T 6073) the organizer of an event is responsible for ensuring all of their vendors who are selling a “tangible sales taxable product or item” are in possession of a valid Seller’s Permit issued by the California Dept of Tax & Fee Administration. (Vendors not selling and only exhibiting their product do not need to fulfill this requirement) Any additional questions or clarification on this process can be directed to Elisabeth Ferguson in the Huntington Beach Business License office at elisabeth.ferguson@surfcity-hb.org or at (714) 536-5451. Or in person at the Business License counter, located on the first floor of City Hall. Insurance All insurance must be approved by the City prior to any event set up. A permit will not be issued unless insurance is in place. Submit insurance 30 days prior to event set up. Failure to submit insurance in a timely manner may result in the cancellation of your event. A minimum of $1 million general liability insurance is required. This insurance must be for "per occurrence." Coverage amounts required may be increased depending upon risk exposure. The attachment of a separate endorsement to the certificate of insurance is required. The separate, attached endorsement must be worded exactly as follows: "The City of Huntington Beach, it’s elected or appointed officials, agents, officers employees and volunteers are named as Additional Insured” A mandatory 30 day cancellation clause is required. The words "endeavor to" and "but failure to mail such notice shall impose no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company, its agents or representatives" must be lined out on the standard ACORD form. Proof of workers compensation is required of all employers. 131 131 APPLICANT AGREEMENT All applicable fees must be paid 30 days prior to the event date. No permit revisions will be accepted less than 14 days prior to the event date. The City of Huntington Beach retains the right to terminate the event at any time should a responsible city official determine any activity related to the event is a threat to public safety and/or property. I (we) agree to abide by all laws, rules and regulations that may apply to this area. I (we) accept specific responsibility for other members of my group and for any damage done to city property and/or facilities, and agree to clean and restore the site to the condition in which it was found prior to the holding of the specific event. I certify under penalty of perjury that all the preceding information is true to the best of my knowledge. Applicant’s Signature Date Applicant’s Signature Date If this is a non-profit organization, two officers of the organization must sign the application. Application must include: • Completed and signed application form • Non-refundable application fee Application Fee: o Under 2,000 estimated overall attendance $200 o Over 2,000 estimated overall attendance $400 • Detailed site map(s) on 8½ x 11 inch paper. • For non-profit organizations, a copy of non-profit status Incomplete or illegible applications will not be processed. Send completed package to: City of Huntington Beach, Community Services Department, Specific Events, PO Box 190, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 132 132 133 133 134 134 General Overview Downtown Task Force (DTTF) created by the City Council in _July 2013 14 Task Force Recommendations presented to City Council on April 21, 2014 Staff given direction to study the DTTF Recommendations 135 135 DTTF Recommendation #1 Paint inside of the Main-Promenade Parking Structure bright white so as to provide increased security and visibility, deter crime, and potentially make patrons feel safer 136 136 DTTF #1 Main Promenade Parking Structure Staff investigated options: A. Strategic painting of inaccessible areas to a lighter color B Upgrade from existing light fixtures to brighter, long life LED C. Comprehensive lighting re-design interior and exterior lights 137 137 DTTF #1 Strategic Painting A. Investigated with co-owner of building Concerns about cost of re-painting and graffiti/vandalism Agreed on painting inaccessible areas lighter color (such as bottom of stairs and above 8 feet) which will reflect light and brighten the area Estimated cost of limited painting $100,000 138 138 Interior Light Retrofit B. Upgrade of existing light fixtures to brighter & longer life fixtures Estimated cost $350,000 No energy savings, due to increased fixtures but some maintenance savings Included as an option in utility street light buyback project with Siemens 139 139 DTTF #1 Comprehensive Redesign C. Comprehensive redesign of interior and exterior lighting including new lighting in troublesome areas Improve lighting around exterior and in known trouble areas Estimated cost $700,000 140 140 DTTF #1 Staff Recommendation: In Fiscal Year 14-15, as part of the CIP Budget, strategic painting (A - $100,000) is recommended. In Fiscal Year 15-16, as part of the CIP Budget, the existing lighting fixtures will be requested to be update (B - $350,000). 141 141 DTTF Recommendation #2 Reduce size and scope of US Open of Surfing to eliminate concerts, expo and non-competition related items Completed No live concerts Scaled down venue \fr'Earlier close down time on Sunday \frEnhanced security Minimized vendor booths 142 142 DTTF #2 Staff Recommendation: Debrief after 2014 event and consider recommendations for the following year's US Open. 143 143 DTTF Recommendation #3 Consider providing additional security in public parking lots within District 1 144 144 The Police Department is finalizing a public private partnership to launch a Downtown Ambassador program. The program will be a pilot program starting in July funded by the City, the Downtown BID, and the Downtown bar owners. The ambassadors will be employed by a private security firm and trained by the Police Department and Visit HB personnel. The pilot program will be managed by the Police Department. Staff Recommendation: Evaluate the program after the summer and explore options for permanent funding if successful. DTTF #3 145 145 DTTF Recommendation #4 That a mechanism be developed to increase the use of the public parking structure for employees that work late night shifts in the downtown (similar to DTTF #11) 146 146 The City and BID conducted a survey of Downtown businesses, 42 responded as follows: The survey asked where the business believed their employees parked - 33 answered at the Main Promenade Parking Structure/or Other Parking Structures and 21 in the Neighborhood areas. Only 8 provide escorts or security for late night employees walking to their vehicles. Only 5 of 33 would be willing to contribute to the cost of providing additional security at the Main Promenade Parking Structure. If the price was reduced for late night parking, 20 believed their employees would purchase a monthly pass and 19 stated they would not. Staff Recommendation: Create a parking pass for late night employees to be sold for $15 per month (a $5 discount, with proof of late night shifts). A 6-month trial period should be established for review. DTTF #4 147 147 DTTF Recommendation #5 That City Council Resolution 2013-24, establishing conditions of approval for eating and drinking establishments with alcoholic beverage sales and live entertainment in District 1 become a zoning text amendment with the exception of those items already contained within the Huntington Beach Municipal Code 148 148 Currently, all new and modified eating and drinking establishment requests are required to comply with the conditions of City Council Resolution No. 2013-24. Per the resolution, only the City Council can modify the conditions. Incorporation of the conditions into the Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) would require approval by the California Coastal Commission (CCC). Could result in other unintended changes to the DTSP. Subsequent changes to conditions would require CCC approval resulting in longer process (6-24 months) and no guarantee that Council adopted changes would be approved. Staff Recommendation: Continue to incorporate CC Reso. No. 2013-24 as part of the CUP process. DTTF #5 149 149 DTTF Recommendation #6 HBDRA will attempt to acquire the required support of those within the proposed new parking permit district(s) by following the procedures identified by the Public Works Department. After costs are established, late-night businesses within District 1 will be asked to discuss the possibility of participating financially in the cost of establishing the district 150 150 DTTF #6 THREE (3) CONDITIONS WITH DIFFERING REQUIREMENTS 1) Outside Coastal Zone and DTSP a) Can be submitted any time and processed through DPW 2) Within Coastal Zone, outside DTSP a) Standard permit parking process through DPW b) Requires CDP with findings 3) Coastal Zone and DTSP jurisdiction a) First, requires Specific Plan Amendment (to allow permit parking) b) Standard permit parking process through DPW c) Requires CDP with findings 151 151 DTTF #6 HBDRA has officially initiated Parking Permit Requested Outside Coastal Zone and DTSP a) 7th, 8th, 9th Streets - Walnut to Palm (1 5 blocks) b) 10 PM to 5 AM, 7 days/week request Staff Recommendation: Continue processing request per current Municipal Code requirements. 152 152 DTTF Recommendation #7 Consider increasing the number of cameras in the downtown, pursuant to input by the Police Chief 153 153 DTTF #7 The Police Department implemented 7 cameras in the downtown area December 2013 as follows: >3 cameras located at the 200 block of Main Street >1 camera at Tower Zero on the Pier >3 cameras underneath the Pier capturing the bike racks and beach walk 154 154 DTTF #7 Success Stories The Police Department has the ability to monitor the cameras from the main police station. They have observed criminal activity ranging from assaults causing great bodily injury to minor violations such as drinking alcohol in public. 155 155 DTTF #7 Video clip of major assault 156 156 DTTF #7 Assault with great bodily injury Officers viewed this assault and were able to dispatch officers to affect the arrest No testimony was required by the officer since it was caught on video 157 157 DTTF #7 Success Stories Officers take several reports a month of stolen bicycles from the downtown area. The cameras captured a picture of a suspect/thief which was posted on Facebook. The suspect was captured within a week after a citizen reported seeing him in the area. 158 158 DTTF #7 Update on additional cameras The Police Department is currently adding 10 cameras to the downtown area. The new cameras will support the existing cameras by providing additional coverage with several cameras in fixed positions rather than a rotational system. Staff Recommendation: Continue program and update City Council as needed. 159 159 DTTF Recommendation #8 Consider increasing the number of trash receptacles during special events, including lining local streets around Main Street with temporary containers Staff Recommendation: As part of the Special Events process additional trash receptacles will be part of the conditions. 160 160 DTTF Recommendation # 9 Review formatting of existing signage in the downtown to increase visibility, more organized and consolidated and updated where possible 161 161 Improved Public Identification of Downtown Parking Areas 1. Four (4) Publicly Accessible Parking Structures a) City-owned/operated b) City/private partnership (The Strand) c) Private lots (Plaza Almeria, Piers ide Pavilion) 2. Provide consistent design and message 3. Improve visibility and recognition 1 1n 1 n 1 11 11111 k11,1111 ,11 111 1,,1 1111 111111111 DTTF #9 162 162 Main Promenade Parking Structure DTTF #9 163 163 Plaza Almeria Parking Structure DTTF #9 164 164 Pierside Pavilion Parking Structure DTTF #9 165 165 DTTF #9 166 166 Staff Recommendation: 1) Research the cost of the International Parking Sign and other building signs similar to The Strand 2) Work with the two private parking structure owners to update parking signage 3) Review potential directional signage for placement and visibility DTTF #9 167 167 DTTF Recommendation #10 Hold a City Council study session to explore and discuss regulation (limitation) of various business types in the downtown 168 168 Staff Research on other Cities with similar regulations Laguna Beach • Most uses require a Conditional Use Permit within the Downtown Specific Plan -Specific findings required to demonstrate that issuance of CUP will not contribute to an incremental effect of similar uses that would be detrimental to City >Dessert/ice cream stores: special findings require that not more than 10 establishments be located within Downtown Specific Plan >Off-site alcohol sales: must be a minimum 200 yards from main beach • Retail clothing stores: special finding requires that the business is not primarily engaged in retail sale of bathing suits or t-shirts • Formula-based business (national chains): special findings require that business will enhance destination quality of the Downtown Specific Plan and not exhibit local/regional saturation DTTF #10 169 169 DTTF #10 Pasadena >Regulation/limitation of uses occurs through separation requirements in the Zoning Code >Alcohol Overlay District: Minimum separation requirements (250' or 1,000' depending on location) for new uses that sale alcohol for on- or off-site consumption and existing uses that change from beer and wine to full liquor/alcohol license >Other uses with separation requirements (boarding houses, day care, donation collection facilities, arcades and Internet game centers, emergency shelters, massage, pawn shops) not relevant to Huntington Beach DTSP Staff Recommendation: Maintain existing regulations within the DTSP. 170 170 DTTF Recommendation # 11 Consider designating the top level of the Main Promenade Parking Garage for employee parking after 3:00 or 4:00 PM on Friday and Saturday (Similar to DTTF # 4) 171 171 DTTF #11 As mentioned in Recommendation #4, The City and BID conducted a survey of Downtown businesses, 42 responded as follows: >Only 17 of 22 believed their employees would park at the top level of the Main Promenade Parking Structure if designated. >Main Promenade Parking Structure has ample parking spaces available after 6 PM; therefore, the top level parking would not need to be reserved. >Additional staffing would be required to reserve and monitor the top level late night parking structure. Staff Recommendation: Staff does not recommend that this be implemented. 172 172 Recommendation #12 That a Zoning Text Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment be processed to amend the Downtown Specific Plan so that residential permit parking can be allowed 173 173 DTTF #12 >The process would require CCC approval (approx. 12-18 month process) >In 2011, CCC adopted DTSP Update that included language to specifically prohibiting preferential parking districts (includes residential permit parking) >CCC staff indicated that preferential parking districts affect coastal access and would not recommend/support amendment >Could result in other unintended changes to the DTSP Staff Recommendation: Do not pursue amendment to DTSP . 174 174 DTTF Recommendation # 1 3 That meters be enforced until 2:00 AM in residential neighborhoods in the downtown and add signage to existing meters to promote flat-rate Fri/Sat night parking in the Main Promenade Parking Garage. 175 175 DTTF #13 Staff Concerns: >This action may push cars further into neighborhoods, basically moving the problem to non-metered streets >Confusion over end times at different locations Not having late night staff to enforce Staff Recommendation: Focus on directing people to the garages and leave enforcement of meter times at 12 midnight. 176 176 DTTF Recommendation #14 Establish a permanent Downtown Committee that meets on a quarterly basis, consisting of three (3) City Council members, three (3) downtown resident representatives, one representative from the Downtown Business Improvement District, and one (1) representative of a Downtown restaurant that holds a valid liquor license 177 177 Options for Consideration: Retain current DTTF structure and conduct quarterly meetings Create new committee with three Council Members and downtown residents and conduct meetings as needed Downtown Economic Development Committee (DTEDC) - Reformat to include Downtown residents monthly meetings DTTF #1 4 178 178 Summary of Downtown Task Force and Staff Recommendations # DTTF Recommendation Staff Recommendation 1 Paint inside of the Main-Promenade Parking Structure bright white so as to provide increased security and visibility, deter crime, and potentially make patrons feel safer. In Fiscal Year 14-15, as part of the CIP Budget, strategic painting (A - $100,000) is recommended. In Fiscal Year 15-16, as part of the CIP Budget, the existing lighting fixtures will be requested to be update (B - $350,000). 2 Reduce size and scope of US Open of Surfing to eliminate concerts, expo and non-competition related items. Debrief after 2014 event and consider recommendations for the following year's US Open. 3 Consider providing additional security in public parking lots within District 1. Evaluate the program after the summer and explore options for permanent funding if successful. 4 That a mechanism be developed to increase the use of the public parking structure for employees that work late night shifts in the downtown, Create a parking pass for late night employees to be sold for $15 per month (a $5 discount, with proof of late night shifts). A 6-month trial period should be established for review. 5 That City Council Resolution 2013-24, establishing conditions of approval for eating and drinking establishments with alcoholic beverage sales and live entertainment in District 1 become a zoning text amendment with the exception of those items already contained within the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. — Continue to incorporate CC Reso. No. 2013-24 as part of the CUP process. 179 179 Summary of Downtown Task Force and Staff Recommendations # DTTF Recommendation Staff Recommendation 6 HBDRA will attempt to acquire the required support of those within the proposed new parking permit district(s) by following the procedures identified by the Public Works Department. After costs are established, late-night businesses within District 1 will be asked to discuss the possibility of participating financially in the cost of establishing the district. Continue processing request per current Municipal Code requirements. 7 Consider increasing the number of cameras in the downtown, pursuant to input by the Police Chief. Continue program and update City Council as needed. 8 Consider increasing the number of trash receptacles during special events, including lining local streets around Main Street with temporary containers, As part of the Special Events process additional trash receptacles will be part of the conditions. 9 Review formatting of existing signage in the downtown to increase visibility, more organized and consolidated and updated where possible. 1. Research the cost of the International Parking Sign and other building signs similar to The Strand. 2. Work with the two private parking structure owners to update parking signage. Review potential directional signage for placement and visibility. 10 Hold a City Council study session to explore and discuss regulation (limitation) of various business types in the downtown. Maintain existing regulations within the DTSP which requires a CUP for alcohol related businesses. 11 Consider designating the top level of the Main Promenade rking Garage for employee parking after 3:00 or 4:00 PM on nd Saturday. Staff does not recommend that this be implemented. 180 180 Summary of Downtown Task Force and Staff Recommendations # DTTF Recommendation Staff Recommendation 12 That a Zoning Text Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment be processed to amend the Downtown Specific Plan so that residential permit parking can be allowed. Do not pursue amendment to DTSP. 13 That meters be enforced until 2:00 AM in residential neighborhoods in the downtown, and to add signage to existing meters to promote flat-rate Fri/Sat night parking in the Main Promenade Parking Garage. Focus on directing people to the garages and leave enforcement of meter times at 1 2 midnight. 14 Establish a permanent Downtown committee that meets on a quarterly basis, consisting of three (3) City Council members, three (3) downtown resident representatives, one representative from the Downtown Business Improvement District, and one representative of a Downtown restaurant that holds a valid liquor license, Options to consider: • Retain current DTTF structure and conduct quarterly meetings. • Create new committee with three Council Members and downtown residents and conduct meetings as needed. • Downtown Economic Development Committee (DTEDC) - Reformat to include Downtown residents monthly meetings. 181 181 Huntington Beach Downtown Residents Association (HBDRA.com ) 419 Main Street, Suite 321, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 • HBDRA@HBDRA.com June 6, 2014 Dear City Council Members, The Downtown Task Force recommendations are scheduled for another study session on June 16th. I am writing regarding one particular Task Force recommendation which addresses residential permit parking in the coastal zone. Although one might easily conclude that the California Coastal Commission will deny preferential parking in the coastal zone, it certainly makes sense* to approve this recommendation and move forward. If it is approved by the Commission, that would be a tremendous boon to the downtown residents. (*I understand this would be a no fault application and no other changes to our DTSP could be made unilaterally by the Coastal Commission.) In speaking with city staff, I was told that the Coastal Commission will take as long as one or two years to respond to our application. In the meantime, the downtown residents need relief from the late night parking intrusions into their neighborhood sooner rather than later. The HBDRA respectfully requests that the City Council consider an alternate plan to run concurrent with the Coastal Commission deliberation. And that would be metered parking in the coastal zone. Metered parking could be implemented immediately and without any approval needed by the Coastal Commission. It would require nothing more than a CDP issued by the city. The HBDRA has determined that the coastal zone downtown residents would support "pay and display" parking meters exactly as we have at our beach parking lot. There is another consideration. The city has limited experience with parking meters in the downtown residential neighborhoods as compared to the area being considered which is 11.75 times larger than that which exists today with meters on 1st, 2nd and 5th streets. Additionally, the proposed location is several blocks away from the core downtown commercial district. For these reasons, there may be unforeseen consequences to metered parking on such a large scale and location. The HBDRA respectfully requests that the City Council consider establishing a one year test of metered parking in a small area of the coastal zone. During that time any negative unforeseen consequences, if any, could be identified and hopefully resolved satisfactorily. SUPPLEMENTAL Page 1 of 2 COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: 4/0/-(4 Agenda Item ts4o.n:57-t-A \SE.1-/ .90/0 182 182 Huntington Beach Downtown Residents Association (HBDRA.com ) 419 Main Street, Suite 321, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 • HBDRA@HBDRA.com In the event that the Coastal Commission denies preferential parking in the coastal zone, which is the most likely outcome, we would then have a full year's experience with metered parking and could move forward based upon our acquired knowledge. In the event that the Coastal Commission approves permit parking, then we would have two choices for the city and the residents from which to choose. Since there are distinct advantages and disadvantages to both options, that would make for a vigorous discussion and debate which will only serve to provide the city and the coastal zone downtown residents with the best possible solution. Thank you for your consideration. v-t Kim Kramer President, Huntington Beach Downtown Residents Association on behalf of the HBDRA Board of Directors cc: Fred Wilson, City Manager Rob Handy, Chief of Police HBDRA Board of Directors 183 183 Minutes City Council/Public Financing Authority and Special Meeting of the Successor Agency and Housing Authority City of Huntington Beach Monday, June 16, 2014 4:00 PM — Room B-8 6:00 PM — Regular/Special Meeting Civic Center Council Chambers 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 An audio recording of the 4:00 PM portion of this meeting, and a video recording of the 6:00 PM portion of this meeting, is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and is archived at www.surfcity-hb.orq/government/agengas/ 4:00 PM - ROOM B-8 CALL TO ORDER — 4:04 PM ROLL CALL Present: Katapodis, Hardy, Shaw, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan (arrived at 4:08 PM), Carchio Absent: None ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS (Received After Agenda Distribution) Pursuant to the Brown "Open Meetings" Act, City Clerk Joan L. Flynn announced supplemental communications that were received by her office following distribution of the Council agenda packet: Study Session PowerPoint communication submitted by Fred Wilson, City Manaaer , dated June 16 2014, entitled Update of Downtown Task Force Recommendations. Communication submitted by Kim Kramer, President of the Huntington Beach Downtown Residents Association, dated June 6, 2014, regarding residential permit parking in the coastal zone. PUBLIC COMMENTS PERTAINING TO STUDY SESSION / CLOSED SESSION ITEMS (3 Minute Time Limit) John Webb commended the City for its efforts during the last U.S. Open and suggested implementing parking meters, parking passes and guest passes downtown. He commented on other areas in the City that have parking meters. He believed that it is an issue of control and stated that would be another source of income for the City. Additionally, he suggested placing large trash containers and asked that Council consider his suggestions. (00:01:14) Robin Rustan commented on over population caused by over building in the City and opined that 184 184 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 2 of 35 placing parking meters in front of residences places the burden on homeowners. Additionally, he commented on problems created by allowing a large number of bars on Main Street and suggested placing an added tax on them to pay for extra security and Police services. (00:04:04) Dan Kalmick, Planning Commissioner and former member of the Downtown Task Force, but speaking as a private citizen, commented on the Downtown Taskforce recommendations. He indicated that parking will be the biggest issue, suggested that meters turn off at 6:00 PM and asked for information regarding the amount of revenues being generated by the parking structure and meters. He suggested offering free parking after 8:00 PM in the parking structure and commented on issues that need to be re-evaluated. He suggested implementing trials to determine what is best for the City and residents. (00:07:30) STUDY SESSION 1. Staff Analysis/Review of the Downtown Task Force Recommendations presented April 21, 2014, as directed by the City Council. City Manager Fred Wilson introduced the item, acknowledged the attendance of members of the Downtown Taskforce (DTTF) and provided a general overview. He deferred to staff for a detailed presentation of each recommendation. Energy Project Manager Aaron Klemm presented details of DUE Recommendation No. 1 (Main- Promenade Parking Structure), noting that the goal was to improve user experience in the downtown parking garage. He addressed options considered including strategic painting, interior light retrofit and comprehensive redesign of interior and exterior lighting, estimated costs for each option and staff recommendations. Discussion followed regarding challenges and concerns regarding graffiti and vandalism, stairwells and energy savings realized by using new technology. Councilnnember Sullivan stated that $100,000 for painting seems to be excessive. He added that as a Charter City, Huntington Beach has the ability to hire non-union workers in order to keep costs down. In response to his inquiry, Public Works Director Travis Hopkins reported on existing maintenance contracts. Councilmember Boardman clarified that the $100,000 estimate is with non-union contractors. Public Works Director Hopkins stated it is an estimate and could be either with union or non-union contractors. It was noted that painting would not only be done on the stairwells but also on the ceiling of the parking structure and that the $100,000 is only an estimate. The City has not yet gone through the bidding process. In response to Councilmember Sullivan's inquiry regarding the co-owner of the structure paying for any of the recommended improvements, Director of Community Services Janeen Laudenback reported the City has an agreement with the co-owner who would be responsible for 13% of the costs and the City for 87% which coincides with the ownership ratio. Councilmember Sullivan noted that the problem exists with the interior, not the exterior of the structure and stated that the estimates seem excessive for the work required. 185 185 Council/PEA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 3 of 35 Energy Project Manager Klemm reported there is no staff recommendation to retrofit the exterior of the parking garage and noted that staff recommendations include strategic painting and replacement of lighting fixtures. Councilmember Katapodis commented on the recommended improvements and suggested the possibility of increasing the parking rates to offset costs. Director of Community Services Laudenback presented details of Recommendation No. 2 (U.S. Open of Surfing) and addressed non-competition related items completed and staff recommendations. She addressed the branding and messaging for the U.S. Open noting that press releases have been issued which focus on making it a community event. Councilmember Sullivan commented on minimizing vendor booths and stated that the key is to consider the types of vendors as some attract undesirable crowds. He added that vendors should be those that offer surfing-related products and services. Director of Community Services Laudenback reported that the U.S. Open top sponsors will be the approved vendors and will focus on surfing-related products and services. In response to Councilmember Carchio's inquiry regarding the City having the opportunity to review the vendors prior to the event, Director of Community Services Laudenback stated that has not been a typical practice but that can be added as a condition of the event process. Police Chief Robert Handy presented details of Recommendation No. 3 (District 1 Public Parking Lots) noting that the goal is to improve security and a feeling of safety in the downtown area both during the day and at night. He reported that discussions have been initiated to form a private/public partnership for a Downtown Ambassador program. Ambassadors will be employed by a private security firm and trained by the Police Department and Visit HB staff and will be managed by the Police Department for the summer. Chief Handy reported that there is sufficient funding in place and the City will be responsible for one-third of same. Chief Handy presented recommendations as listed in the presentation and reported that if the program is successful, staff will look for future funding to extend it. Discussion followed regarding what Visit HB training will entail. Councilmember Sullivan commented positively on the concept, noting it should be done on a trial basis. Councilmember Boardman asked regarding delivery of horses. Chief Handy reported that the horses were delivered last week and that training has begun. He added there will be horses in the City from other agencies during the 4th of July and during all days of the U.S. Open. In response to Councilmember Sullivan's inquiry, Chief Handy reported that the City has two (2) horses and there are two (2) people who have expressed interest in donating one (1) each. Chief Handy commented on the care and upkeep of the horses and reported staff is working to reach a reduced-rate agreement with stable owners. He added that the horses will not be available until 186 186 Council/PEA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 4 of 35 the end of the summer. Councilmember Sullivan commented on the possibility of having youth volunteers to care for the horses. Councilmember Carchio commended the Chief for moving forward with the matter including the Ambassador program. Deputy Economic Development Director Kellee Fritzal presented details of Recommendation No. 4 (Employee Parking in Public Parking Structure) and addressed results of a City survey of downtown businesses and staff recommendations. Councilmember Hardy suggested that the recommended parking pass be good only for the top level of the parking structure. Associate Planner Jennifer Villasenor presented details of Recommendation No. 5 (Conditions of Approval - Eating and Drinking Establishments with Alcoholic Beverage Sales and Live Entertainment in District 1) and addressed specific staff recommendations. In response to Councilmember Sullivan's inquiry regarding the length of the Coastal Commission's reach on Main Street, Associate Planner Villasenor reported that it reaches up to Palm and includes all of the Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP). In reply to Councilmember Boardman's questions, Associate Planner Villasenor presented examples of possible unintended changes to the DTSP. Transportation Manager Bob Stachelski provided details of Recommendation No. 6 (New Parking Permit District(s)) addressing conditions with differing requirements; focus on the areas outside the coastal zone and staff recommendations. Councilmember Boardman pointed out that 67% of residents of each street must agree before a residential parking district can be established. In reply to Councilmember Sullivan's question, Transportation Manager Stachelski reported that staff just received a formal request and that staff will prepare a petition to send to residents, soon. Efforts will begin in mid-July and it was noted that the item will be brought to City Council for final approval. The process should take at least one (1) month as it is very labor-intensive. In response to Mayor Harper's inquiry, Transportation Manager Stachelski reported that the ordinance contains a provision for eliminating a district by a simple majority of residents. He added that he is unsure whether that would preclude the City Council from taking an action to eliminate a district. Transportation Manager Stachelski added that a discounted rate has not yet been requested. Chief Handy provided details of Recommendation No. 7 (Security Cameras Downtown). He addressed success stories and presented a video clip of a major assault and another with great bodily injury. He provided an update on additional cameras and presented staff recommendations. Discussion followed regarding cameras at the heliport and savings in connection with security 187 187 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 5 of 35 cameras. In response to Mayor Pro Tern Shaw's inquiry, Chief Handy reported there are signs indicating that people are being videotaped and the plan is to upgrade them when all of the cameras are in place and their positions are finalized. Director of Community Services Laudenback presented details of Recommendation No. 8 (Trash Receptacles During Special Events) and staff recommendations noting that additional trash receptacles will be part of the conditions as part of the Special Events process. Transportation Manager Stachelski presented Recommendation No. 9 (Downtown Signage) and addressed existing parking structures downtown and establishing a consistent signage program. Staff is researching costs and Transportation Manager Stachelski presented staff recommendations. Councilmember Sullivan commented on a simple signage design used in the City of Monterrey. Associate Planner Villasenor presented details of Recommendation No. 10 (Regulation/Limitation of Various Business Types Downtown) and addressed the results of research of other cities with similar regulations as those in Huntington Beach. She presented staff recommendations as listed in the report. Mayor Pro Tern Shaw noted the need for additional information and suggested a study session to look at the kinds of businesses that need to be downtown and the type of regulations needed to ensure that the area is family-friendly, has a healthy mix of retail and alcohol uses and that will ensure the long-term success of downtown. Councilmember Sullivan agreed with Mayor Pro Tern Shaw's comments. Deputy Economic Development Director Fritzal provided details of Recommendation No. 11 (Employee Parking - Main Promenade) and addressed limiting the top level of the parking structure for employee parking. She added that 17 out of 22 respondents to the City survey believed their employees would not park at the top level of the structure, if designated as the majority preferred parking where their cars are covered. She presented staff recommendations on this matter. Councilmember Sullivan commented on the possibility of using a color-coded sticker. Councilmember Hardy indicated she does not see a need for monitoring who parks on the top level as anyone could park there. The top level could be designated for employees having a permit (at a discounted rate) and suggested that those who do not like to park in the top level could pay extra to park elsewhere. Mayor Pro Tern Shaw noted that for people with limited means, the parking rates are high and stated that a solution would be to require, as a condition of use, that businesses pay for employee parking permits or make available a limited number of discounted parking passes. Councilmember Sullivan commented on employees leaving work at late hours. 188 188 Council/PEA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 6 of 35 Associate Planner Villasenor presented details of Recommendation No. 12 (Residential Permit Parking) addressing the Coastal Commission approval process and unintended changes to the DTSP as well as staff recommendations. Discussion followed regarding discussing the hours of the residential permit parking with the Coastal Commission, appealable and non-appealable zones, the number of streets in the non- appealable zone and the legality of walking on the path along Pacific Coast Highway at night. Chief Handy provided details of Recommendation No. 13 (Parking Signage/Meter Enforcement) and addressed potential, unintended consequences including pushing cars further into neighborhoods and moving the problem to non-metered streets. He presented staff recommendations as listed in the report. Mayor Pro Tern Shaw commented on the lack of funds for staffing and on the possibility of implementing meters on all streets. Chief Handy suggested considering the matter on a broader scale, looking at a bigger plan and considering the incorporation of meters on additional streets. Mayor Pro Tern Shaw commented positively on the possibility of expanding the use of meters downtown to non-meter streets. Councilmember Sullivan commented positively on focusing on directing people to garages. City Manager Wilson presented details of Recommendation No. 14 (Permanent Downtown Committee) and presented options for Council's consideration regarding the Downtown Task Force. He provided a summary of all of the recommendations and asked for input from Council. Members of Council concurred with Recommendations No. 1, 2 and 3. Concerns were expressed regarding Recommendation No. 4 and staff was directed to bring the matter back as a study session or agenda item to consider incentives for employees to park in the structure including financial considerations and additional options. Regarding Recommendation No. 5, Councilmember Boardman disagreed with staffs recommendations and stated she would like to see the matter move forward as a zoning text amendment. The matter will be brought back to Council for consideration. Members of Council concurred with Recommendations No. 6, 7, and 8. Councilmember Sullivan expressed concerns with Recommendation No. 9 and asked that it be brought back for Council to consider more cost-effective options. Members of Council concurred with holding a study session on Recommendation No. 10. Relative to Recommendation No. 11, the matter will be brought back for Council consideration. Discussion followed regarding Recommendation No. 12 and Council concurred with staffs recommendations. Regarding Recommendation No. 13, Council noted the need for further discussion on the matter. Relative to Recommendation No. 14, Council concurred with Option No. 2 to create a new committee with three Council Members and downtown residents and conduct meetings as needed. 189 189 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 7 of 35 RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION — 5:26 PM Mayor Harper announced: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6.a, the City Council takes this opportunity to publicly introduce and identify designated labor negotiator City Manager Fred Wilson, who will be participating today in Closed Session discussions regarding labor negotiations with FMA, MEA, MSMA, KRA and/or POA. A motion to recess to Closed Session Item Nos. 2-3 was approved by a consensus of Council. CLOSED SESSION 2. Pursuant to Government Code § 54957(b)1, the City Council recessed into Closed Session to consider employee discipline or dismissal. 3. Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6, the City Council recessed to Closed Session to meet with its designated labor negotiators and Fred Wilson, City Manager regarding the following: FMA, MEA, MS MA, PMA and/or POA. 6:00 PM — COUNCIL CHAMBERS RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY MEETING — 6:20 PM CLOSED SESSION REPORT BY CITY ATTORNEY - None ROLL CALL Present: Katapodis, Hardy, Shaw, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilmember Jim Katapodis. INVOCATION - Led by Father Christian Mondor of Sts. Simon & Jude Parish and the Greater Huntington Beach Interfaith Council. In permitting a nonsectarian invocation, the City does not intend to proselytize or advance any faith or belief. Neither the City nor the City Council endorses any particular religious belief or form of invocation. AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS Mayor Harper called on Victoria Alberty and Gisela Campagne to present the Adoptable Pet of the Month. Gisela Campagne, Director of Wagon Trails Rescue Foundation, invited residents to their Wags and Wine Fundraising event on Sunday, June 22, 2014, at the Waterfront Hilton. She introduced Pat with the Orange County Humane Society and presented a nine (9) year-old miniature poodle, Dorothy. 190 190 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 8 of 35 Pat thanked the City for allowing the presentation of the Adorable Pet of the Month. She provided a brief background on and description of Dorothy and encouraged the public to think about adoption, first. She added that the Pet of the Month is offered at discounted fees. Mayor Harper invited all to the 100 Years of the 1914 Pier Commemoration Celebration June 22 at 11:00 AM at the Pier. Mayor Harper announced the 100 Years of the 1914 Pier Commemoration Celebration on June 22, 2014, at 11:00 AM at the Huntington Beach Pier and invited residents to attend. Mayor Harper presented a commendation to Ocean View High School Senior Thien-An Nguyen, as he was the only Huntington Beach student to receive a 2014 Disneyland Resort Scholarship. The Disneyland Resort gives 10 scholarships to Orange County high school seniors. Mayor Harper invited Disney Ambassador Megan forward who presented a certificate to Ocean View High School Senior Thien-An Nguyen, as he was the only Huntington Beach student to receive a 2014 Disneyland Resort Scholarship in the amount of $7,500. She addressed eligibility requirements, including volunteering for a minimum of 150 hours and reported that Mr. Nguyen recently graduated as the class valedictorian. Megan listed Mr. Nguyen's accomplishments and qualifications and thanked him for his service to the community. Mayor Harper presented him with a commendation for his accomplishments. Mayor Harper called on Ken Inouye to present the Human Relations Commission Annual Report. Ken Inouye, Chair of the Orange County Human Relations Commission, introduced colleagues Tim Cole and Minzah Malik and deferred to them for a presentation. Mr. Cole and Ms. Malik presented details of the Human Relations Commission Annual Report and addressed civility in public forums, partnerships with cities, remediation, hate crimes and incidents, forums and accomplishments. Mr. Inouye thanked the City for its support and acknowledged Police Chief Robert Handy for providing resources to the City. He presented Mayor Harper with a Certificate of Appreciation. Councilmember Sullivan commented on his church's practice of placing a Nativity Scene outside the church during Christmas and reported that in 2012, it was desecrated. He asked what the Commission did in relation to that incident. Mr. Inouye stated that he does not have personal knowledge of the incident but that he will research the matter and provide information regarding the outcome. Councilmember Sullivan further explained that he is a Christian and commented on an artist by the name of Robert Mapplethorpe who immersed a crucifix in a jar of urine. He reported that the artist receives funds from the government and asked what the Commission would do if he were to do that in the City and whether the Commission feels that is a problem. 191 191 Council/PEA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 9 of 35 Mr. Inouye stated they would work with local officials to evaluate the issue. He added that many actions are protected by the First Amendment and noted the need to be mindful of the Constitution. He stated that the Commission is not an enforcement agency but rather tries to bring good people together to find solutions for problems. Mayor Harper commented on the work done by the Commission in Orange County and on its responsiveness and complimented them on the work they do for the County and the City. Mayor Harper presented a commendation to the Huntington Beach High School Head Volleyball Coach Craig Pazanti, coaching staff and the Oilers varsity volleyball team for its CIF Champions victory. Mayor Harper presented a commendation to the Huntington Beach High School Head Volleyball Coach Craig Pazanti, coaching staff and the Oilers varsity volleyball team for its CIF Champions victory. Coach Pazanti noted there were no losses during the entire season and listed the team's accomplishments. Mayor Harper called on Director of Finance Lori Ann Farrell to present the Mayor's Award to Accounting Technician Supervisor Mark Fegan. Director of Finance Lori Ann Farrell presented the Mayor's Award to Accounting Technician Supervisor Mark Fegan and commented on his experience, capabilities and accomplishments. Mr. Fegan expressed his appreciation to the City and staff. ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS (Received After Agenda Distribution) Pursuant to the Brown "Open Meetings" Act, City Clerk Joan L. Flynn announced supplemental communications that were received by her office following distribution of the Council agenda packet: CONSENT CALENDAR #7. Communication submitted by Travis K. Hopkins, Director of Public Works, dated June 16, 2014, submitting a corrected Attachment 3 (Exhibit A Commercial Rate Schedule Effective July 1, 2014). COUNCILMEMBER ITEMS #24. Communication submitted by Richardson Gray, dated June 12, 2014, supporting Councilmember Boardman's item to cap the alcohol licenses at the present level in District 1 of the Downtown Specific Plan. #24. Communication submitted by Mike Heh, dated June 15, 2014, supporting Councilmember Boardman's item. #25. Communication submitted by Mary Jo Baretich, dated June 13, 2014, supporting 192 192 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 10 of 35 Councilmember Sullivan's item authorizing that a letter be sent to Municipal Water District of Orange County opposing any efforts to change desalination from a "choice" service to a "core" service. PUBLIC COMMENTS (3 Minute Time Limit) (The number (hh:mm:ss) following the speakers' comments indicates their approximate starting time in the archived video located at http://www.surfcity-hblorg/oovernment/agendas/). Susan Welfringer, Manager for the Huntington Beach Downtown Business Improvement District (BID), expressed concerns with Councilmember Boardman's recommendation to direct staff to bring a zoning text amendment to Council for the purpose of capping alcohol licenses at the present level in District 1 in the Downtown Specific Plan (Item No. 24). She noted that the Downtown BID is opposed to the action and believed it would limit their ability to attract fine dining establishments to the area in the future. She addressed positive improvements and changes made and asked that Council trust in the leadership of Police Chief Handy in his efforts to provide a safe environment and to oppose the item. Additionally, she announced the Downtown Art Walk on June 19, 2014, and thanked those who participated in the recent Chili competition. (00:34:58) Tim Geddes spoke in support of Item No. 25, Councilmember Sullivan's proposal of issuing a letter of opposition to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) regarding changing Desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service. (00:35:22) Jerry Wheeler, President and CEO of the Huntington Beach Chamber of Commerce, commented on Item No. 23 regarding short-term vacation rentals with concerns about the proposed wording and what it may suggest in terms of it being easier to enforce a prohibition rather than current zoning regulations. He suggested taking a step back and reviewing how other communities have dealt with the issue without impacting personal property rights. He noted that short-term vacation rentals are a thriving business in the City and suggested regulating the business by imposing enforceable fines and penalties and creating a revenue stream for the City and accountability for homeowners. Additionally, he commented on maintaining personal property rights and stated there are options available that would preclude the need for another ban. (00:37:11) Mayor Pro Tern Shaw encouraged Mr. Wheeler to remain in order to hear the matter being considered. Mary Jo Baretich spoke in support of Item No. 25, Councilmember Sullivan's proposal of issuing a letter of opposition to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) regarding changing Desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service. (00:38:07) Nancy Agostini spoke in support of Item No. 25, Councilmember Sullivan's proposal of issuing a letter of opposition to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) regarding changing Desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service. (00:41:15) Merle Moshiri, President of Residents for Responsible Desalination, spoke in support of Item No. 25, Councilmember Sullivan's proposal of issuing a letter of opposition to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) regarding changing Desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service. She addressed the importance of residents being given a choice and commented on the excessive cost of desalinated water and on the positive effects of 193 193 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 11 of 35 conservation, reclamation and recycling efforts. (00:41:59) Michael Hoskinson reported attending a meeting regarding the General Plan Update and commented on the consultant (PMC) leading the meeting noting that she is a global warming expert and expert on the City's payment to her firm for the General Plan Update. He expressed concerns regarding the excessive price tag and lack of transparency in the General Plan process and stated that the process is fraudulent and unacceptable. He called on City Council to put a halt to the General Plan process, fire PMC and restart the process with the public being the primary driver as to the long-term direction of the City. (00:42:19) Councilmember Boardman asked staff to clarify the public input that has gone into the process and the fact that it is required, by law, to update the General Plan every ten (10) years. Director of Planning and Building Scott Hess reported that the City has a website that is devoted to the General Plan Update and addressed the General Plan Advisory Committee which is made up of representatives from all segments of the community and meets on a regular basis. He added that it is a two-to-three year process and that nothing is predetermined in the process. Staff is gathering technical data and taking community surveys. The public is welcomed to visit the website and take the survey and the process has another two years before it is completed. Councilmember Boardman noted that in addition to the Advisory Committee, there are Sub- Committees in each of the different aspects of the General Plan and there are people from all segments from the community involved in the process. Director of Planning and Building Hess provided information on websites that residents may visit to learn about the General Plan Update and participate in a survey including www.huntinqtonbeachca.qov or www.hbthenextwave.orq. Councilmember Sullivan asked Mr. Hoskinson to call him and expressed concerns with the City hiring someone with preconceived ideas adding that this is not the first time he has heard similar complaints. Debbie Cook spoke in support of Item No. 25, Councilmember Sullivan's proposal of issuing a letter of opposition to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) regarding changing Desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service. She believed that the MWDOC is attempting to force north Orange County to subsidize two (2) desalination plants and commented on how water subsidies do not work. (00:44:34) Craig Durfey, Garden Grove, commented on Resolution GA2014-2 relative to safety for walkers and bicyclists as well as on AB1371 and AB47 and urged that Council consider issuing "fix it" tickets for bicycles. Additionally, he spoke regarding distracted driving. (00:51:28) Maureen Lawson commented on the building of the new Senior Center and suggested the possibility of placing it on the site of a vacant school or constructing a multi-story building on the current site. She commented on the importance of parking and looking at all possibilities when it comes to location. In addition, she spoke about impacts of large apartment complexes in the City and suggested limiting the number of apartment buildings in the City. (00:54:39) Councilmember Sullivan commented on the multi-story Senior Center in Costa Mesa noting that 194 194 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 12 of 35 the firm running it is doing such a poor job that the City of Costa Mesa is considering taking over its control and commented on other multi-story senior centers in Orange County. He addressed sites and related issues considered for the Huntington Beach Senior Center. Norma Vandermolen spoke in support of Item No. 25, Councilmember Sullivan's proposal of issuing a letter of opposition to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) regarding changing Desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service. She expressed concerns with the Poseidon proposal adding that it would encumber the City with a terrible debt and that they do not have a good record of success. (00:58:22) Mike Heh expressed support of Item No. 24, Councilmember Boardman's proposal to place a cap on alcohol licenses at the present level in District 1 in the Downtown Specific Plan noting there are over eight times the ABC's recommended number of alcohol licenses in the area. He added that downtown neighborhoods are being overrun with late-night bar patrons and commented on crime and DUI statistics in the City. (00:59:59) Bill Cuppy commented on Item No. 23 proposed by Mayor Pro Tern Shaw regarding short-term rentals in the City. He asked that the wording of the proposal be changed to direct the City Attorney and staff to explore all possibilities of the future of short-term rentals in the City, including regulation, taxation and licensing of homes to be used for that purpose. He stressed that he does not support the concept of party houses and that not all vacation rentals become party houses as most are rented by families with children or people that travel with their pets and that not all short- term rentals are vacation rentals. (01:02:32) Angie Karkut commented in support of Item No. 23 proposed by Mayor Pro Tern Shaw regarding short-term rentals in the City. She provided testimony relative to vacation rentals near her home and complained of noise, drunkenness and trash resulting from vacationing patrons. (01:02:58) Mayor Pro Tern Shaw asked for Ms. Karkut's opinion if it would be helpful for the City to regulate occupancy levels and impose stricter noise requirements and fines. She stated that at one point, she felt that it may help but that patrons don't seem to follow the rules. She added that the owner runs the house as a business and noted that the area is not zoned as commercial, but rather as a residential area. Joe Anello spoke regarding Item No. 23 noting that he is in favor of vacation rentals but also the right of property owners to be able to enjoy quiet on their property. He stated the increased regulations and enforcement could alleviate the problems being faced. He questioned whether regular tenants would be any quieter than vacation renters. He added that by considering other options, the City has an opportunity to increase its revenue as well as control the issues of complaint. He stated he is in favor of a dialogue on the matter and offered his help. (01:11:18) Tim Boucher spoke regarding Item No. 23 and stated that vacation rentals should be regulated rather than prohibited. He believed that setting strict guidelines work very well and that the City would benefit from doing so. He expressed concerns with decreased property values and noted that vacation rentals are used by a variety of people. (01:11:29) Randy Wells, Pacific Mobile Home Park, reported that residents have asked for a meeting according to State law and have never been given one by Star Management. He commented on how they have raised space rents, how they have caused people to lose their homes and why 195 195 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 13 of 35 they are doing so. He added that the reason a lease is needed is to retain home values and Mr. Wells reported that Star Management has promised to issue same but have not done so. He stated that home owners had a professionally-drafted lease generated and gave it to management but they claimed to have lost it. Star Management changed their conditions and claimed that the only people who will be given a lease are those who are trying to sell their homes. Mr. Wells reported that if people are not given a lease, it creates a loss in their property value. He asked that Mike Cerillo be removed. (01:17:43) Kenneth Adler, vacation rental manager, spoke regarding Item No. 23 and referenced prior written communications he submitted to City Council. He commented on the recommendation for a clear prohibition and stated that an attorney would consider that arbitrary and capricious and added that higher fines discourage good renters. He commented on prohibitions on advertising and questions the constitutionality of same. He suggested that advertising without a permit or valid number be prohibited. He listed items that can be considered and regulated. (01:21:01) Juana Mueller spoke in support of Item No. 25, Councilmember Sullivan's proposal of issuing a letter of opposition to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) regarding changing Desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service. She hoped that Council will approve the letter. (01:24:10) Dianne Thompson, Chairman of the Board of the Huntington Beach Chamber of Commerce, commented on Item No. 24 relative to the proposed cap on alcohol licenses for the downtown area and noted that it is clear there is a problem with alcohol in the downtown area. She added that the problem is with existing bars and restaurants, not with potential future restaurants and bars and that the cap will not stop those who bring their own alcohol to party. She believed that capping licenses would reward the businesses that are part of the problem. She addressed increased enforcement, visibility and education by the Police Department and suggested the need to see if their efforts are making a difference before enacting another ban in the City. (01:24:40) Alison Goldenberg spoke in support of Item No. 25, Councilmember Sullivan's proposal of issuing a letter of opposition to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) regarding changing Desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service. (01:27:41) Dr. Alison Stanley thanked Council Members who recently voted against repealing the use of wild and exotic animals in entertainment ordinance, especially Councilmember Boardman. She commented on the cruel and inhumane treatment of animals in transporting, confining and beating animals to control their behavior adding that there is nothing fun or educational about it. She encouraged the City to enforce the ordinance and not repeal it. (01:27:58) Mark Dixon spoke in support of Item No. 25, Councilmember Sullivan's proposal of issuing a letter of opposition to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) regarding changing Desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service and in strong opposition to the Poseidon desalination project. He advocated for a strong, effective initiative to raise everyone's consciousness about water conservation. (01:28:08) Brenda Calvillo thanked Council Members who recently voted against repealing the use of wild and exotic animals in entertainment ordinance. She commented on the abuse and mistreatment of animals for entertainment including elephant rides. She noted there is a travelling zoo at a local Farmers' Market and complained they are in violation of the ordinance. She encouraged the 196 196 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 14 of 35 City to enforce its ordinance. (01:31:27) John Ehlenfeldt, Vice President of Sales and Marketing with Visit Huntington Beach, spoke in opposition to Item No. 24 regarding placing a cap on alcohol licenses in the downtown area. He commented on the work of Police Chief Handy in enforcement and patrol of the area and noted the need for the City to continue and encourage fine dining establishments that will attract visitors and drive revenue to the community. (01:34:13) John Earl commented on alcohol-related problems in the downtown area noting that not enough has been done to stop the problems. He spoke in support of Item No. 24 regarding placing a cap on alcohol licenses downtown. (01:34:35) Amy Von Freymann spoke in support of Item No. 25, Councilmember Sullivan's proposal of issuing a letter of opposition to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) regarding changing Desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service. She spoke on her behalf as well as her mother, father and her brother. She expressed concerns that the high price of desalinated water will drive prices up in many areas. (01:37:19) Dr. Mikel Hogan spoke in support of Item No. 25, Councilmember Sullivan's proposal of issuing a letter of opposition to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) regarding changing Desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service. She added that this move would force member water agencies to buy Poseidon's water rather than retaining other options. (01:38:22) Maria Laurienzo, Pacific Mobile Home Park resident, reported that the park recently got new pool furniture for $400 per month per resident. She thanked Councilmember Sullivan for supporting the City's seniors and announced he will be speaking at one of the Senior Mobile Home Parks on July 1,2014, at 6:30 p.m. and urged interested residents to attend. (01:39:14) Joe Geever, Surfrider Foundation, spoke in support of Item No. 25, Councilmember Sullivan's proposal of issuing a letter of opposition to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) regarding changing Desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service. He commented on the Poseidon project noting that MWDOC is considering a purchase agreement that would give Poseidon 30% more money for the water than the current estimate. He added that there is no good reason to give away choice when none of the important costs are known. In response to Mayor Harper's inquiry, Mr. Geever reported that Surfrider has no opposition to the Dana Point desalination project. (01:40:58) Evelyn Oynebraaten commented on the Farmers' Market in the downtown area and specifically the petting zoo and expressed concerns that it may be exposing the produce to serious diseases. She reported that when she complained about the matter, she was harassed by the provider, Giddy Up Ranch, who photographed her with flashes that injured her left eye, placed a large parrot in front of her face and a shovel in front of her that was soiled with animal feces. She reported that there were no Police present to help and that the public wanted to intervene but was too scared to do so. She urged the City to protect its residents from potential diseases from farm animals that could contaminate the prepared food and produce offered by the Farmers' Market. (01:42:45) Robert Hunter, General Manager of MWDOC, addressed the organization and its work and reported that the Orange County Water District (OCWD) is evaluating a water purchase 197 197 Council/PEA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 15 of 35 agreement with Poseidon, not MWDOC. He added that MWDOC is not considering forcing utilities to buy water and noted that the discussion of core versus choice has to do with their budget structure. He added that nineteen (19) of their member agencies have elected to be part of a work group to study what is said and presented about the Poseidon project and addressed the subscription for doing so. He reported that MWDOC has already passed its budget and that Huntington Beach subscribed as part of the work group, which is the "choice" part of the budget. He stressed this is not about taking the public's choice away and forcing them to buy expensive water. He stated he will be available for comment when the item is brought forward. (01:43:32) Cheryl Bernstein thanked Council for upholding the prohibition of using wild and exotic animals for entertainment and commented on the importance of the issue. She stated she is proud to be part of a city that makes compassionate choices. (01:49:00) Tamar commented on Item No. 23 adding that she owns and maintains seven (7) vacation rentals throughout the County. She addressed Huntington Beach as a vacation destination and commented on the people who use vacation rentals noting that they are typically, families with children, have sold their homes and are waiting to close escrow or remodeling their new purchases, snowbirds and people who attend for competitions such as the Equestrian Center. She stated that labeling a house as a vacation rental does not necessarily mean that it is a party house and that all vacation home owners must take responsibility for who they rent to. She suggested regulating vacation rentals would help the City in terms of controlling behavior and increasing revenue. (01:49:25) Councilmember Boardman clarified that vacation rentals in Huntington Beach are not currently legal and their rental is already prohibited. A speaker on behalf of Colette Chaillou, Pacific Mobile Home Park resident, noted that she is being removed from her house due to the proposed expansion. He reported that the group has offered $55,000 for the house and that she has been the victim of a sudden increase of $500 per month in space rental. He reported that she is confused through the process and that she entered into escrow on another house but that Star Management has refused to release her from her contract. He commented on Council's allocation of funds for Ms. Chaillou and others in her situation and reported that she will lose the money she put into the new house because Pacific Mobile Home Park will not release her. (01:52:56) Mayor Pro Tern Shaw asked if staff is aware of the situation and reported receiving a call from a friend asking how the City can help. He explained the situation and noted that because Pacific Mobile Home Park will not settle with Ms. Chaillou, she will lose her down payment on the new home. Deputy Economic Development Director Kellee Fritzal reported that staff is working on this with the Assistant City Manager and City Attorney and that they may have an answer by the end of the day, tomorrow. She asked for Ms. Chaillou's contact information in order to follow-up directly. Councilmember Sullivan asked that Council be kept informed as to the results of that situation. Councilmember Carchio noted this is not an isolated case and stressed the need to get it under control. He stated the City needs to put pressure on mobile home management companies who seem to be changing the rules. 198 198 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 16 of 35 Deputy Economic Development Director Fritzal reported that a meeting will be set with property owners and Star Management to see what can be done on this matter. Lorik Bernstein thanked Councilmembers Boardman, Hardy and Katapodis and Mayor Pro Tern Shaw for voting to continue the ban on using exotic and wild animals in Huntington Beach. She added that Huntington Beach is known as a compassionate city and would like to stay that way. (01:57:58) Lou Ann Robeson spoke in support of Item No. 25, Councilmember Sullivan's proposal of issuing a letter of opposition to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) regarding changing Desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service. (01:58:33) Karen Chepeka, animal advocate, noted she worked closely with Councilmember Boardman in the original drafting of the ordinance to ban the use of exotic and wild animals for entertainment in the City and protect public safety. She added that Mayor Harper attempted to rescind the ordinance, calling it obsolete as there is no space in the City to have a circus. Ms. Chepeka reported that the ordinance is far more than just a "circus" ordinance and listed other situations prevented by same. She addressed a comment by Councilmember Sullivan that circuses were an educational experience and suggested whale-watching as an educational experience. She thanked Mayor Pro Tern Shaw and Councilmembers Boardman, Katapodis and Hardy for their courage in doing what is right for the animals and keeping this ordinance in place. (01:58:55) COUNCIL COMMITTEE - APPOINTMENTS - LIAISON REPORTS AND ALL AB 1234 DISCLOSURE REPORTING Councilmember Katapodis reported attending a 25th Annual USC-SCAG Demographic Workshop on June 5, 2014. Mayor Pro Tern Shaw, Human Relations Task Force Liaison, commented on the Orange County Human Relations Committee Annual Report and felt they were disrespected. He added that they are community volunteers and that the City of Huntington Beach has been a leader in Human Relations. He commented on the creation of the Task Force in response to hate crimes in the City and on the unanimous passing of a Declaration of Policy about Human Dignity initiated by former Councilmembers Shirley Dettloff and Ralph Bauer. He read a passage from the latter noting that "everyone should be treated with courtesy and respect regardless of their racial background, their nation of origin, the religion they practice, their sexual orientation, gender or disability status. It is the right of all citizens to pursue their daily lives with the knowledge that they will not be physically harmed or verbally abused". He commented positively on the Human Relations Task Force and the Declaration and stated he will continue the work to create better human understanding which is the same thing that the Orange County Human Rights Commission does. Mayor Pro Tern Shaw noted he has a lot of respect for Councilmember Sullivan noting that when he speaks, he listens because usually he speaks wisdom but that tonight, he did not hear that and apologized to representatives of the Orange County Human Relations Commission for the way they were treated. Mayor Harper asked that Council Members limit their comments to Council Committees, liaison reports and AB1234 disclosure reporting. He urged Council Members to reserve comments for that portion of the meeting. 199 199 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 17 of 35 Councilmember Boardman announced the next meeting of the Compassionate Cities Committee on Wednesday, June 18, 2014, in Room B-8 at 7:00 p.m. She added that the Committee is in the process of organizing events for the Compassion Games between September 11 and 21, 2014, which will be acts of service or days of service in the community. Councilmember Sullivan noted he was on vacation and stated he will address Mayor Pro Tern Shaw at the appropriate time in the meeting. Councilmember Carchio reported speaking before the California Coastal Commission on June 11, 2014. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Fred Wilson provided information on the Library's new Book Shack noting that it will be unveiled on Saturday, June 21, 2014, at the pier. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Sullivan pulled Items No. 7, 10, 11, 15, 17 and 21 for separate discussion and consideration. Mayor Harper pulled Items No. 5 and 8 for separate discussion and consideration. Councilmember Katapodis recused himself from Item No. 12 as the project is near his place of residence. 1. Approved and adopted minutes A motion was made by Councilmember Carchio, second by Councilrnember Boardman to review and approve the City Council/Public Financing Authority regular meeting minutes dated May 5, 2014, the City Council/Public Financing Authority regular meeting minutes dated May 19, 2014, and the City Council/Public Financing Authority regular meeting minutes dated June 2, 2014 as written and on file in the office of the City Clerk. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Shaw (Out of the Chambers) 2. Received and filed the City of Huntington Beach Strategic Plan Update A motion was made by Counciimember Carchio, second by Councilmember Boardman to receive and file the Twelve-Month Strategic Objectives. The motion carried with the following vote: 200 200 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 18 of 35 AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Shaw (Out of the Chambers) 3. Approved Appointment of Kay Cowling for a first term to the Historic Resources Board (HRB) A motion was made by Councilmember Carchio, second by Councilmember Boardman to approve the appointment of Kay Cowling to a first term on the Historic Resources Board expiring June 30, 2017. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Shaw (Out of the Chambers) 4. Approved Youth Board appointments and reappointments with terms to expire June 2015 as recommended by City Council liaisons, Mayor Harper and Councilmember Hardy A motion was made by Councilmember Carchio, second by Councilmember Boardman to, as recommended by City Council Member liaisons Matthew M. Harper and Jill Hardy, approve the reappointment of the following students to a one-year term on the Huntington Beach Youth Board with terms to expire June 2015: Austin Smith — Edison High School Representative; Aurora Johnson — Huntington Beach High School Representative; Melissa Applebee — Marina High School Representative and, as recommended by City Council Member liaisons Matthew M. Harper and Jill Hardy, approve the appointment of the following students to a one-year term on the Huntington Beach Youth Board with terms to expire June 2015: Amanda Boyd — Edison High School At-large Representative; Darby Hughes — Edison High School At-large Representative; Natalie Anzivino — Huntington Beach High School At-large Representative; Mallory Matsumae — Marina High School At-large Representative; Ariana D'Zmura — Ocean View High School Representative; Halley Hoyt — Ocean View High School At-large Representative. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Shaw (Out of the Chambers) 5. Adopted Resolution No. 2014-26 approving the Pay Schedule for Part-Time Non- Permanent and Non-Classified Employees to comply with the State of California minimum wage law Mayor Harper asked for clarification and City Manager Wilson reported that these are positions requiring changes due to the State mandate. He added that there are only a handful of positions that will be subject to the minimum wage increase. 201 201 Council/PEA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 19 of 35 A motion was made by Mayor Harper, second by Councilmember Carchio to adopt Resolution No. 2014-26, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting the Updated Pay Schedule for Part-Time Non-Permanent and Non-Classified Employees. Effective July 1, 2014." The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Shaw, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Hardy (Out of the Chambers) 6. Adopted Resolution No. 2014-20 approving Amendments to the City's Classification Plan by adding the job classification of Code Enforcement Supervisor and establishing compensation A motion was made by Counciimember Carchio, second by Councilmember Boardman to adopt Resolution No. 2014-20, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Amending the City's Classification Plan by Adding the Job Classification of Code Enforcement Supervisor and Establishing the Compensation." The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Shaw (Out of the Chambers) 7. Adopted Resolution No. 2014-28 adjusting Residential Refuse Rates and Received and Filed 2014 the Commercial Refuse Rate Schedule Councilmember Sullivan commented on the fairness of the methodology by which residential and commercial solid waste rates are determined, noting that it is done by a combination of CPI, gate fees at the dump sites, and fuel costs. He pointed out that Rainbow Environmental Services is charging less than what they are entitled to and commended them for doing so. Councilmember Boardman pointed out that during nine (9) of the last fifteen (15) years, Rainbow has taken less than the formula allows and that staff just negotiated with them for a lower rate increase. She thanked City staff for its efforts. Councilmember Katapodis thanked Rainbow Environmental Services for their efforts. Councilmember Carchio commented on increased landfill percentages and commended Rainbow Environmental Services for keeping fees down. Councilmember Boardman provided information on the current and proposed fees. A motion was made by Councilmember Sullivan, second by Councilmember Carchio to adopt Resolution No. 2014-28, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adjusting Residential Refuse Rate Charge by the Formula Established in the Revised and Restated Refuse Collection and Disposal Services Franchise Agreement as Ratified on March 21, 202 202 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 20 of 35 2011;" and, receive and file the rate sheet for Commercial Solid Waste collection and disposal service effective July 1, 2014, as amended by Supplemental Communication replacing Attachment 3, Exhibit A, "Commercial Rate Schedule Effective July 1, 2014. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Shaw, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Hardy (Out of the Chambers) ABSTAIN: Harper 8. Adopted Fee Resolution No. 2014-25 revising and restating the Fee Schedule for Civil Fines for Municipal Code Violations to reference the current Fire Code Section Mayor Harper requested clarification regarding new fees or increases in existing fees. City Manager Wilson noted there are no new fees or increases in existing items in relation to this item. Fire Chief Patrick McIntosh added that every three (3) years, the City adopts its Uniform Code so that this matter is simply to state the correct code section in the most recently adopted version of the Uniform Code. A motion was made by Mayor Harper, second by Mayor Pro Tem Shaw to adopt Resolution No. 2014-25, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Revising and Restating the Fee Schedule for Civil Fines for Municipal Code Violations." The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Shaw, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Hardy (Out of the Chambers) 9. Adopted and authorized recordation of Resolution No. 2014-27 ordering the Summary Vacation of an existing Sidewalk/Pedestrian Access Easement at the Pacific City Commercial Development A motion was made by Councilmember Carchio, second by Councilmember Boardman to adopt Resolution No. 2014-27, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Ordering the Summary Vacation of a Pedestrian Ingress and Egress Easement on Property Located at Pacific City (Tract Map Number 16338)" (for sidewalks, pedestrian ingress and egress and access purposes) at the commercial/retail portion of Pacific City; and, instruct the City Clerk to record said Resolution (and attachments) with the Orange County Recorder. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Shaw (Out of the Chambers) 203 203 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 21 of 35 10. Adopted Resolution Nos. 2014-23 and 2014-24 which call for and consolidate with the County to conduct the General Municipal Election for City Officers (4 City Council Members and 1 Attorney) to be held on November 4, 2014 Councilmember Sullivan congratulated Mayor Harper for getting into a runoff for the Assembly position and noted that Mayor Harper has chosen to go for the Assembly office rather than for City Council. Mayor Harper noted the prohibition to run for incompatible offices and noted these are two (2) incompatible offices. Therefore, he will not be running for re-election for City Council. A motion was made by Councilmember Sullivan, second by Councilmember Katapodis to adopt Resolution No. 2014-23, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Calling for the Holding of a General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 4, 2014 for the Election of Certain Officers as Required by the Provisions of the Huntington Beach City Charter;" and, adopt Resolution No. 2014-24, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Orange to Consolidate a General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 4, 2014 with the Statewide General Election to be Held on that Date Pursuant to Section 10403 of the Elections Code." The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Shaw, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None City Clerk Flynn reported that if an incumbent who is able to run because his/her term limit has not been reached does not run, it extends the nomination period for five (5) days for everyone else. 11. Approved and authorized execution of a three-year Services Agreement with the City of Newport Beach for Public Safety Helicopter Services Councilmember Sullivan asked whether the rate being charged to Newport Beach is compatible with the rate being charged to Costa Mesa. Police Chief Handy stated the rates are the same and that CIP index increase ability was added to the contract which will allow adjusting the contract, as necessary. In response to Councilmember Boardman's inquiry regarding appropriate staffing in case of a natural disaster, Chief Handy stated that on most days, three (3) helicopters could be manned to provide emergency services to all three (3) cities. He added that currently, there are a couple of pilots in training as well. Councilmember Carchio commented on shared services noting that Huntington Beach is a leader in same. He thanked Police Chief Handy for his efforts. Mayor Harper commented on prioritizing and maximizing City resources. 204 204 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 22 of 35 Councilmember Sullivan commented on the noise and benefits of helicopters in terms of public safety. Councilmember Katapodis commented on the importance of helicopters in all aspects of police work. A motion was made by Councilmember Sullivan, second by Councilmember Katapodis to approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the "Services Agreement For Public Safety Helicopter Support Between the City of Huntington Beach and the City of Newport Beach." The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Shaw, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None 12. Awarded and authorized execution of a construction contract in the amount of $2,337,119.00 to All American Asphalt for the Residential Overlay of Maintenance Zone 11 including the Rehabilitation of Craig Lane and Edmonds Circle, CC-1477 A motion was made by Councilmember Carchio, second by Councilmember Boardman to accept the lowest responsive and responsible bid submitted by All American Asphalt in the amount of $2,337,119.00; and, authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a construction contract in a form approval by the City Attorney. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Hardy, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Shaw (Out of the Chambers) RECUSED: Katapod is 13. Awarded and authorized execution of a construction contract in the amount of $173,761.00 to Excel Paving Company, for the Northbound Beach Boulevard Improvements, CC-1454; and approved an appropriation of $136,331 in ACE grant funds; and approved the appropriation of $30,000 from the Gas Tax fund; and authorized up to fifteen percent (15%) in construction change orders A motion was made by Councilmember Carchio, second by Councilmember Boardman to accept the lowest responsive and responsible bid submitted by Excel Paving Company, in the amount of $173,761.00; approve an appropriation of $136,331 in ACE grant funds to OCTA Beach/Edinger Grant Account No. 121090001.82700; approve the appropriation of $30,000 from the Gas Tax fund undesignated fund balance to Account No. 20790023.82700; authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a construction contract in a form approved by the City Attorney; and, authorize the Director of Public Works to approve up to fifteen percent (15%) in construction change orders. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio 205 205 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 23 of 35 NOES: None ABSENT: Shaw (Out of the Chambers) 14. Approved and authorized execution of Professional Services Contract with Harris & Associates to provide engineering services to complete the design of the intersection widening of Brookhurst Street and Adams Avenue A motion was made by Councilmember Carchio, second by Councilmember Boardman to approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a professional services agreement with Harris & Associates to provide engineering services for an amount not to exceed $350,000. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Shaw (Out of the Chambers) 15. Approved and authorized execution of an Agreement for Temporary Assignment of State of California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) Fire Engine to the Huntington Beach Fire Department Councilmember Sullivan requested clarification in terms of the City incurring additional personnel costs. Fire Chief McIntosh reported that any repairs over $100 would be the responsibility of the State. He added that typically, the State would reimburse the City for personnel costs along with a 16% administrative rate. He added there would be no additional personnel or training costs. A motion was made by Councilmember Sullivan, second by Councilmember Katapodis to approve and authorize the Fire Chief to execute the "State of California Office of Emergency Services Fire and Rescue Division Agreement for Temporary Assignment of Vehicular Equipment." The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Shaw, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None 16. Approved and authorized execution of Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement between the City and DLR Group for preparation of plans and specifications for Senior Center building; and, authorized appropriation of funds A motion was made by Councilrnember Carchio, second by Councilmember Boardman to approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute "Amendment No.1 to Agreement Between the City of Huntington Beach and DLR Group for Preparation of Plans and Specifications for Senior Center Building;" and, authorize the appropriation of $81,000 from the Park Acquisition and Development Fund balance (Fund 209) to Central Park Senior Center account 20945005.82800. The motion carried with the following vote: 206 206 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 24 of 35 AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Shaw (Out of the Chambers) 17. Approved and authorized execution of a Cooperative Agreement between the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and City for Measure M Project V Program grant funding to implement free shuttle service on July 4th and on weekends during the US Open of Surfing; and, authorized appropriation of funds Mayor Harper commented on ensuring that there are transportation funds to be able to handle the City's large event and thanked staff for pursuing this. Councilmember Sullivan thanked Mayor Harper for his efforts and asked regarding the inclusion of weekends during the U.S. Open of Surfing. Project Manager Simone Slifman provided a short presentation addressing the dates of the U.S. Open of Surfing transportation service. She addressed the times, dates and locations of the shuttle service during the 4th of July holiday and for the U.S. Open of Surfing. She added that additional information is available on the City's website. Mayor Harper commented on the transportation service connection to the Golden West College Transportation Center. In response to Councilmember Boardman's inquiry regarding shuttle service to and from City Hall from Memorial Day to Labor Day, Project Manager Slifman reported that the funding is not available to run the full program at this time. She added that staff is looking for additional funding for the future. Councilmember Katapodis commended Ms. Slifman for her efforts. A motion was made by Councilmember Sullivan, second by Mayor Pro Tern Shaw to approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute "Cooperative Agreement No. C-3-1845 Between Orange County Transportation Authority and City of Huntington Beach for Project V Community- Based Transit/Circulators;" and, appropriate $93,287 over a seven-year period for the OCTA- funded portion of the program. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Shaw, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None 18. Adopted Housing Authority Resolution No. 04 approving execution of a Second Amendment to the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement to include the Housing Authority as a member of the Huntington Beach Public Financing Authority A motion was made by Boardmember Carchio, second by Boardmember Boardman to adopt Housing Authority Resolution No. 04, "A Resolution of the Governing Board of the Huntington Beach Housing Authority Approving the Execution and Delivery of a Second Amendment to Joint 207 207 Council/PEA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 25 of 35 Exercise of Powers Agreement and Other Matters Related Thereto Relating to the Huntington Beach Public Financing Authority;" and, authorize the Executive Director to execute any agreements and take any actions necessary in furtherance of the amendment. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Shaw (Out of the Chambers) 19. Adopted Resolution No. 2014-29 approving execution of a Second Amendment to the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement to remove membership of the Successor Agency and include the Housing Authority as a member of the Huntington Beach Public Financing Authority A motion was made by Councilmember Carchio, second by Councilmember Boardman to adopt Resolution 2014-29, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Approving the Execution and Delivery of a Second Amendment to Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement and Other Matters Related Thereto Relating to the Huntington Beach Public Financing Authority;" and, authorize the City Manager to execute any agreements and take any actions necessary in furtherance of the amendment. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Shaw (Out of the Chambers) 20. Adopted Successor Agency Resolution No. 2014-03 approving execution of a Second Amendment to the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement to remove the membership of the Successor Agency and include the Housing Authority as a member of the Huntington Beach Public Financing Authority A motion was made by Boardmember Carchio, second by Boardmember Boardman to adopt Successor Agency Resolution 2014-03, "A Resolution of the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach Approving the Execution and Delivery of a Second Amendment to Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement and Other Matters Related Thereto Relating to the Huntington Beach Public Financing Authority;" and, authorize the Executive Director to execute any agreements and take any actions necessary in furtherance of the amendment. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: Shaw (Out of the Chambers) 21. Adopted Ordinance No. 4027 approving an Amendment to Development Agreement No. 11-001 with Sares-Regis Group (Developer) and Freeway Industrial Park 208 208 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 26 of 35 (Property Owner) for the Boardwalk Mixed Use Project Approved for introduction June 2, 2014 Vote: 6-1 (Sullivan - No) Councilmember Sullivan pulled the item to publicly voice his opposition to the project. A motion was made by Councilmember Boardman, second by Councilmember Katapodis to adopt Ordinance No. 4027, "An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting the First Amendment to the Development Agreement By and Between the City of Huntington Beach and Freeway Industrial Park (Property Owner) and Sares-Regis Group (Developer)" (Development Agreement No. 11-001). The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Shaw, Harper, Boardman, Carchio NOES: Sullivan ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION 22. Approved for introduction Ordinance No. 4028 amending Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 10.44 related to oversized vehicle parking regulations, exceptions, and overnight parking in a commercial or industrial district Police Chief Handy presented details of the staff report addressing background and the basis for the ordinance. He highlighted and detailed each of the proposed changes to the ordinance. He added that the main motive was to have the City get more in line with the California Vehicle Code and with what neighboring cities are doing. Councilmember Sullivan commended Chief Handy for his efforts and commented on the amount of time allowed for oversized vehicles to be parked on City streets. He asked regarding the possibility of being more restrictive in this regard. Chief Handy stated that the City could be more restrictive and that in the past, recreational vehicles were eligible for an eight (8) day permit and for two (2) permits per month. The time has been cut back to twelve (12) days with a four (4) hour grace period for loading and unloading. He addressed the process for handling complaints as well as the penalties involved. Councilmember Boardman noted these are changes to regulations on public streets and does not impact private driveways and Chief Handy responded affirmatively. Councilmember Katapodis thanked Chief Handy for his work and efforts on this item. A motion was made by Councilmember Carchio, second by Councilmember Katapodis to after the City Clerk reads by title, approve for Introduction Ordinance No. 4028, "An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapter 10.44 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Relating to Parking — Time Limits" (Oversized Vehicle Parking Regulations, Exceptions, and Overnight Parking in a Commercial or Industrial District). The motion carried with the following vote: 209 209 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 27 of 35 AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Shaw, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: Harper COUNCILMEMBER ITEMS 23. Submitted by Mayor Pro Tern Shaw - Direct City Attorney to draft an Ordinance to enhance the enforcement of the prohibition of Short-Term Vacation Rentals Mayor Pro Tern Shaw reported receiving many citizen complaints regarding vacation rentals downtown. He reported meeting with the City Attorney and the Chief of Police to discuss ways to enhance enforcement. He acknowledged there may be options of making the problem turn around and be able to advance the policy objectives of having no party houses by regulating and allowing the use of vacation rentals and asked staff to return with a compare and contrast comparing cities with vacation rentals and prohibiting same (i.e., Palm Springs, Newport Beach and others). He reported he has expanded his ideas of what possible solutions could be and would like Council to consider not only stepping up enforcement, but all of the possibilities for creating a quieter atmosphere downtown with respect to vacation rentals. Councilmember Boardman stated she has received many complaints from downtown residents about the impacts of party vacation homes on their quality of life. In her research, she found there are people who are renting out rooms in their homes while owners are still there and felt these are not the source of the problem although the City's current ordinance prohibits doing so. She added there are fifty-five (55) sites all over the City offering vacation rentals and listed the prices being charged. She stated she would appreciate hearing from residents who live near a vacation rental home that may not be problematic as well as those where they are problematic. She added that Code Enforcement is reactive and responds when complaints are received. She stressed that vacation rentals are currently not legal in the City. Councilmember Sullivan commended Mayor Pro Tem Shaw for bringing the item forward and agreed with the idea of finding out what other cities are doing in deciding what is best for Huntington Beach. He added that he was intrigued at the possibility of increasing revenue for the City. Mayor Harper stated that just because something is prohibited in the City doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. He added that he has heard many firecrackers over the last few weeks and addressed the possibility of legalizing and regulating vacation rentals in the City. Councilmember Hardy commented on long-term rentals and parties and asked regarding the enforcement process. Chief Handy reported that the Police Department does some enforcement but primarily supports Code Enforcement in their efforts. Director of Planning and Building Hess reported that Code Enforcement works with the Police Department in terms of noise and nuisances in the early morning hours but stated that staff doesn't wait six (6) months for enforcement. Chief Handy reported on the enforcement process noting that there is a first-time warning and that 210 210 Council/PEA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 28 of 35 subsequent fines can be up to $1,000. He added that the warning does not cover an extended period of time. City Attorney Jennifer McGrath reported it would be $1,000 for a twelve-month calendar from the first day it was issued. Police Chief Handy reported that the fine goes to the occupant for noise citations and if it is a vacation rental, the fine goes to the property owner. Councilmember Hardy hoped that there could be a different set of standards or consequences for vacation rentals. She added that prohibition is not the solution and agreed with considering establishing regulations. Chief Handy clarified that the notice of violation is good for thirty (30) days. Councilmember Katapodis asked about the citation process for vacation rentals. Mr. Hess stated that the City will issue a warning notice and if staff can substantiate that they continue to violate, a $250 fine will be issued with a thirty (30) day period to respond. After that it elevates to $500 or $1,000 per day. He noted there is a limited ability to monitor websites and reported if there are addresses provided; the City is able to send notices and follow-up. He added that enforcement is complaint-based. Councilmember Katapodis commented positively on considering regulating vacation rentals. He encouraged residents to email him regarding the matter. Mayor Pro Tem Shaw commented on the possibility of restricting occupancy and noted there are a lot of options to consider. Councilmember Carchio commended Mayor Pro Tern Shaw for bringing this matter forward and noted that the City is losing a lot of money. He stated that the City should look at a strong ordinance and make sure that the minority of people that create the problems are covered. He suggested including a requirement that the property owner must post a bond which will be forfeited upon violations. Councilmember Hardy invited the Sunset Beach Homeowners Association to provide feedback on this matter. City Manager Wilson suggested bringing the matter back at a study session and Mayor Harper agreed. Councilmember Boardman encouraged staff to do independent research and "take with a grain of salt" information from anyone who is illegally profiting from short-term vacation rentals currently. In addition, she stated she would like to hear how other communities police their regulations. Mayor Harper commented positively on evolution of this item and stated he will support the motion. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tern Shaw, second by Councilmember Sullivan to direct City 211 211 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 29 of 35 staff to return with an ordinance comparing and contrasting ordinances from other cities that have vacation rentals such as Palm Springs and Newport Beach, and how they regulate them. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Shaw, Harper, Boardman, Sullivan, Carchio NOES: None 24. Submitted by Councilmember Boardman - Cap on Alcohol Licenses at the present level in District 1 in the Downtown Specific Plan Councilmember Boardman provided background on this matter and clarified she is not proposing a ban on alcohol noting there are forty-two businesses within District 1 of the Downtown Specific Plan that currently sell alcohol on site. The proposal is not to reduce that number, but simply to cap it. She pointed out the location of District 1 and noted it is not all of the downtown area. She added that the ABC recommends there be five (5) alcohol licenses in an area that small. She reported that Pacific City has 27,000 square feet of restaurant space with permitted alcohol licenses which provides a lot of room for nice restaurants to locate and that the community can support good restaurants elsewhere besides District 1 of the Downtown Specific Plan. She commented on the success of restaurants at Bella Terra. Mayor Harper expressed concerns regarding drawing the line on the types of businesses in the downtown area and stated that it is not the role of City Council to decide but rather free market. Councilmember Hardy asked regarding the availability of data related to the types of businesses downtown. Mr. Hess reported there are none available relative to the Downtown Specific Plan. He addressed Coastal Commission requirements for certain uses and that there are individual site requirements, but not for the entire downtown. Councilmember Hardy commented on a restaurant that requested an entertainment permit and claimed to be a family restaurant but is not. She believed that forty-two alcohol licenses are enough and commented on nice restaurants that have converted into bars. She noted that alcohol permits run with the land, not with the business owner and City Council needs to be mindful of that. She stated she will support this matter. Councilmember Sullivan commended Councilmember Boardman for bringing this item forward and that although he agrees with the concept; the area is a "combat zone" due to three (3) or four (4) bad bars. He stated wanting to encourage good restaurants in the downtown area and felt that if Council does the right thing and puts undesirable establishments out of business there can be a transition of Main Street over a period of time. He expressed concern that the matter would prohibit nice restaurants in the area. He stressed the need to do something about the downtown situation. Mayor Pro Tem Shaw agreed that forty-two alcohol licenses in downtown are enough. He commented on closing Main Street on Tuesday nights and on the creation of Surf City Nights and reported there are a lot of good things happening downtown but that more needs to be done to curtail bad things. He reported there will be nice restaurants at Pacific City, that there are 212 212 Council/PEA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 30 of 35 opportunities for them in other areas of the City, and that downtown needs a more holistic mix of businesses. Restaurants and bars need to be farther apart and changes need to be made downtown. There is a toxic mix of businesses in the area that bring the wrong element to the City and until the City starts to plan its way out of that, problems will continue. He commented on making downtown family-friendly and believed this is the first step towards making that happen. He stated his support of the matter. Councilmember Carchio stated that moratoriums do not work and tie hands for future growth. He believed that by implementing a cap on alcohol licenses, it increases the value of existing licenses. He stated there are a limited number of problem establishments within one (1) block and noted the need to enforce existing laws. He believed Chief Handy is moving in the right direction and stated that a moratorium will not improve the situation. He commented on the excessive rents in the downtown area and noted that restaurants have to serve alcohol because that is what the public demands. Councilmember Carchio stated there is a need to think carefully about this matter before jumping into it because of the strong ramifications for the future adding that it will tie the City's hands for future development. Councilmember Katapodis stated he would not want to discourage nice restaurants from opening downtown and asked whether there is a way to be able to identify nice establishments as opposed to bars that claim they are restaurants. Councilmember Boardman noted there is ample turnover of businesses with ABC licenses downtown. If a fine dining establishment had a strong interest in opening downtown, there would be, within a few months, an ABC license and spot available for that restaurant. She reiterated there are forty-two ABC licenses downtown and stated that is enough for the area. She expressed interest in Councilmember Katapodis's idea about ways of ensuring that the next restaurant will be of a certain quality and prevent more bars. Councilmember Carchio commented on controlling problem bars downtown through the Police Department and ABC. He added that alcohol licenses are tied to food sales and suggested engaging ABC to verify the percentage of food sales to alcohol. Mayor Pro Tern Shaw wondered if staff can determine if there is a way to make an exception for establishments in terms of a ratio of food sales to alcohol sales. City Attorney McGrath noted there is a number of ways to address the issues including engaging ABC and only placing a moratorium on places that stay open past 10:00 PM as most fine dining restaurants do not stay open past 10:00 PM. Councilmember Boardman suggested no more alcohol licenses for businesses that stay open past 10:00 PM. Mayor Pro Tern Shaw agreed. Councilmember Sullivan agreed and felt that it may be a good compromise. He noted he does not want any more alcohol licenses but believed the setting the closing time would be an acceptable solution. Councilmember Katapodis agreed. 213 213 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 31 of 35 Councilmember Carchio asked if consideration could be given to weekend closing times. Mayor Pro Tem Shaw asked Councilmember Boardman to consider that businesses downtown stay open an hour later on Friday and Saturday nights and asked to amend the motion to 10:00 PM on weekdays and Friday and Saturday nights at 11:00 PM. Councilmember Boardman stated she will not accept the amendment noting that initially, she didn't want any closure limitation and felt this is a reasonable compromise. Mayor Harper stated he and his wife enjoy downtown and find it to be a safe and enjoyable place to visit. He expressed disappointment at the way downtown is being portrayed and hoped that colleagues would not resort to scaring people away. He agreed with Councilmember Carchio's comments and spoke in support of the free market and opposed to governments picking winners and losers. He commented on the popularity of the Golden Bear and felt that this item would limit similar businesses in the downtown area. A motion was made by Councilmember Boardman, second by Mayor Pro Tern Shaw to direct staff to bring to the City Council a Zoning Text Amendment capping alcohol licenses for businesses that stay open past 10:00 PM in District 1 of the Downtown Specific Plan area. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Shaw, Boardman, Sullivan NOES: Harper, Carchio 25. Submitted by Councilmember Sullivan — Letter of opposition to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) regarding changing Desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service Councilmember Sullivan introduced the item and addressed the rate structure for water noting that MWDOC is moving towards going by the connection charge which will in effect; have the City subsidizing South Orange County. Additionally, he noted that his objection to Poseidon is that they have never built a successful desalination plant and commented on Coastal Commission actions and new technologies available. He spoke against building a desalination plant in Huntington Beach and commented on problems with the City's streets being dug up. Mayor Harper believed that in his lifetime, there will be a desalination plant in every beach city in California as a result of the drought situation. He asked regarding the relevancy of this specific action. Robert Hunter, General Manager of MWDOC, reported it is not relevant to their budget as they have already passed it for the next fiscal year. He stated referenced language dealing with subsidies by the northern utilities for the southern utilities and reported that is not true and noted that over the years, MWDOC has built customers in various ways. He addressed the settlement agreement and noted that the agency is not dominated by districts. He explained the matter is not removing choice from citizens or compelling them to pay the higher price for desalination but rather that individual agencies can opt in or out. He added that eighteen (18) agencies have opted in for participating in a work group relative to Poseidon and is not in support or opposition to 214 214 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 32 of 35 Poseidon. Mayor Harper asked for clarification regarding the OCWD and MWDOC and its relationship with the City. Mr. Hunter explained the structure of the organizations, their roles and the City's direct representatives. Councilmember Sullivan commented on the work group and asked regarding money paid by the City to participate in same. Mr. Hunter reported that the budget is $3,000 per agency. Councilmember Sullivan stated he does not want to pay anything and stated that the majority of people in the City do not want anything to do with a desalination plant. In terms of equal representation, he reported that it is different to having a Council Member deal with this issue versus people whose their entire elected job is to deal with water issues and noted there is an imbalance in terms of representation. Mayor Pro Tern Shaw invited Joe Geever, Surfrider Foundation, to comment. Mr. Geever expressed confusion related to the "Choice" program and stated that the difference between choice and core projects is the distribution of those projects. He believed that desalination facilities are somewhere in between adding that not everyone will benefit from them. He added that if the choice program is working, he cannot understand why it would be changed and spoke in support of Councilmember Sullivan's motion. Mayor Pro Tern Shaw indicated he will support Councilmember Sullivan's proposal because the City has choices. He stated that the Poseidon project is a failed, free-market project noting there is no private investment that wants to invest in Poseidon. The only way it can become profitable is if the taxpayers bail it out and support it. He noted that the City does not want to give corporate welfare to Poseidon. He added that what happened in Australia could happen here and that this is fiscally irresponsible on the part of OCWD. He noted the need for reform of water districts in California and reiterated he will support the motion. Councilmember Boardman indicated she will support the item as she opposes any change in the "opt out" of participation from choice to core. She added that not all agencies will benefit from desalinated water and believed it is appropriate that it remain a choice service and not a core service. In response to Councilmember Katapodis's inquiry, Mr. Hunter reported that the MWDOC board passed the budget and commented on the work group adding that it is not about Poseidon but rather knowledge, discussion and understanding for utilities about what is happening with the project. He added there are core elements related to issues dealing with desalination in general and sub issues that apply to a large number of projects. He added that the letter will not impact the MWDOC budget but will impact the City's utility managers' ability to participate in the work group. Mayor Harper noted the question at hand is whether or not to make comment on a budget that 215 215 Council/PEA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 33 of 35 has already passed. Councilmember Hardy stressed that she does not support the Poseidon project and will be supporting the motion. Councilmember Sullivan asked regarding other cities that oppose the project. Mr. Hunter reported that some include Irvine Ranch Water District and the City of Brea. He added that the permitting community is holding off the project, not the financial community. Few agencies have subscribed to taking Poseidon water because of the high cost. He added this is not about supporting Poseidon but rather knowledge and analysis. Councilmember Sullivan asked for copies of letters opposing the project from the City of Brea and the Irvine Ranch Water District. Councilmember Carchio commented on discussions and votes at the IRC and noted this is not about Poseidon. The IRC voted to have it remain as a choice in the future, always and that if it were to change; it would need to be approved by City Council. In response to Councilmember Sullivan, staff reported that no money has been sent to MWDOC. A motion was made by Councilmember Sullivan, second by Councilmember Boardman to authorize a letter to Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) opposing any efforts to change desalination from a "Choice" Service to a "Core" Service and to "Opt Out" of participation in the existing "Choice" desalination service for fiscal year 2014/2015. The motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Katapodis, Hardy, Shaw, Boardman, Sullivan NOES: Harper, Carchio COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS (Not Agendized) Councilmember Katapodis reported attending the Pacific City Hotel Ground Breaking Ceremony, the Open House at the Watertable Restaurant, the Third Annual Pacific Coast Dreamin' Barefoot Ball at Bolsa Chica State Beach and the Relay for Life event at Central Park. Additionally, he reported attending the California Coastal Commission meeting on June 11, 2014 and the Stacey Middle School Eighth Grade Exit Interviews. Mayor Pro Tern Shaw noted his enthusiasm on all matters related to Downtown Huntington Beach. He reported attending the 2014 Surf City 7th Annual Chili Cook-off, the installation of the new Friends of the Library Officers, and the California Coastal Commission meeting on June 12, 2014, relative to The Ridge. He departed the meeting at 10:50 PM. Councilmember Hardy congratulated the Community Service Program's (CSP) Huntington Beach Youth Shelter on their 8th anniversary. She thanked them for the resource. Councilmember Boardman reported attending the California Coastal Commission meeting on June 12, 2014, regarding The Ridge project and the 2014 Surf City 7th Annual Chili Cook-off. 216 216 Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 34 of 35 Councilmember Sullivan asked regarding the City's ordinance for campaign signs being taken down after elections and reported there is a sign for a gentleman named Boyd, who ran for the Orange County School Board and noted it needs to be removed as it is on the median on Edwards Hill. City Attorney McGrath stated it is a violation of the Zoning Code but was unsure as to how it is being enforced. Councilmember Sullivan suggested considering a financial penalty for not removing signs. Additionally, he addressed his comments to the Human Relations Commission and stated he does not apologize for them. He was surprised that Mr. Inouye did not know about the desecration of the Nativity scene and addressed his other comment regarding the artist Robert Mapplethorpe and his question regarding whether there can be hate crimes against Christians. He noted that the latter remained unanswered. Councilmember Carchio reported attending the Ground Breaking Ceremony of Pacific City Hotel, the Open House of the Watertable Restaurant in the Hyatt Regency, the Hoag Hospital Foundation Reception, the Third Annual Pacific Coast Dreamin' Barefoot Ball at Bolsa Chica State Beach, the CSP Huntington Beach Youth Shelter 8th Anniversary Reception and Open House and the California Coastal Commission meeting. Mayor Harper reported attending the Ground Breaking Ceremony of Pacific City Hotel, the Stacey Middle School Eighth Grade Exit Interviews, the Eagle Court of Honor for Kyle Graham, the Third Annual Pacific Coast Dreamin' Barefoot Ball at Bolsa Chica State Beach and the 2014 Girl Scout Gold Awards. Additionally, he attended the 25th Annual USC-SCAG Demographic Workshop, the CSP Huntington Beach Youth Shelter 8th Anniversary Reception and Open House, the California Coastal Commission meeting, the Huntington Beach High School Graduation and the Edison High School Graduation Ceremonies, the 2014 Surf City 7th Annual Chili Cook-off, the Eagle Scout Court of Honor for C. J. Mann, Billy Miller and Ryan Delcoure. Mayor Harper reported that the final Surfboard on Parade was unveiled and a short video was presented on the event. ADJOURNMENT —11:06 PM There being no further business to come before Council, Mayor Harper adjourned the meeting at 11:06 PM. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Huntington Beach City Council/Public Financing Authority is Monday, July 07, 2014, at 4:00 PM in Room B-8, Civic Center, 2000 M Street, Huntington Beach, California. 217 217 ATTEST: Council/PFA Regular Meeting Successor Agency and Housing Authority Special Meeting June 16, 2014 Page 35 of 35 City Mrk and ex-officio Cle-rk of the City Council/Successor Agency of the City of Huntington Beach, Secretary of the Huntington Beach Public Financing Authority and Housing Authority of the City of Huntington Beach, California 218 218 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-147 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 Submitted by Councilmember Delgleize - Authorize staff to return with a proposal to purchase a plaque dedicated to Zach Martinez for installation at Patriot Point Direct the City Manager to return with a proposal to purchase a plaque commemorating the life and dedication of Mr. Martinez and install said plaque at Patriot Point. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 219 219 220220 City of Huntington Beach File #:18-156 MEETING DATE:7/2/2018 Submitted by Councilmember Brenden - Direct staff to return with a proposal for a moratorium on Shared Mobility Devices (Bike and Scooter Sharing Services) and schedule a Study Session A) Direct the City Manager to work with the City Attorney to return to the July 16, 2018, City Council Meeting with a proposal for a moratorium on Shared Mobility Device Services operating in Huntington Beach. B) Direct the City Manager and City Staff to hold a Study Session on Shared Mobility Devices within 60 days. Study session to include a survey of current regulations being applied in other cities. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/27/2018Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 221 221 222222 223223