The URL can be used to link to this page

SR-CA/HA/PA/RA-2C IWIND~WSITEMPISRBUDS00 WPD Council Meetmg June 22. i 999 TO Mayor and Cfty Cour~c+~ FROM C~#y Staff ~ I~I~L ~b c~l~l~l~¢~ ~~ ~~u~~~ -_ Santa Monica, Caiifarnia SUB,IECT Supplemental Staff Re~art - Add~tional Recommended Changes to the FY 1999-00 Propased City Budget Attached are addit~anal recommended changes ta the FY 1999-00 Proposed C~ty Budget Highlights of these changes include the followjng • Increased revenue resulting from act~on taken by the State IegESlature ($275,000) • An increased expenditure for the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School D~strict ($250,000) • Staff and ather resources to implement a commerc~al distr~ct s~dewalk cleaning pragram ($79,600) • Funding to the Bayside Distnct Co~pora#~on far venu~ managemenf and street performers monitoring ($39,040) and mcreased hu~get authority to Resource Management Depa~tme~t for en~ancect ma~nter~ance m t~e Downtown Distf~ct area ($41,000}, an~ • Allocations to Pier Restoration Corporation for sponsorship development ($80,040} ar~d to the Reso~rce Management Department an~f Gity Attorney's Off~ce to handle leas~ng transactions wEth Pier lessees ($242,100) As shown ~n the follawmg table, jf these additionai changes are approved, the undes~gnated anci unreserved General Fund Balance for June 30, 2000 will increase by -1- ~~IV ? ~ ,~~a~ S ~~1~t~fi~. ~ tA~~~J1Aa~~? : • ~ s"~j ` , • a . y~~~ '~ :~ ' x s~ ~ ~ i~~' ~~ ~ ~•• iiY~ . .' ~ ~12,900 ta $~6,314,764 #rom the balance proJected in the prev~ously distributed June 22, 1999 budget adoption staff report Fina1 Revrsed C/30199 Esttmated ~ctual Fund Baiance Pius Revenues Less Expenditures Balance Sheet Changes fi130l00 Budgetec! Re~ised Propased Recommended FY ~ 999-00 Budget Chanqes $ 16,000,000 164,31$, 887 ~ 90,125,469 26, ~ 08,446 $ -~- ~75,C ~7 6'~ 2,100 Praposed FY 1999-00 Budqet $ 16,000,000 164,593,8$7 190,737,569 Fund Balance ~~o, oao $ 16, 301, 864 $ 12, 900 Prepared by Susan McCarthy, Ass~stant City Manager Katie Lichtig, Assistant to the City Manager Mike Dennis, Director of Fina~ce Rafph Bursey~ Re~enue Mana~erlTreasurer David Carr, Assfstant Re~enue Manager Karen Feinberg, Prmcrpal Budget Analyst -2- 2fi,458,448 $ 1 fi, 314, 764 yr, ~ a~r:'~~;1~ ~i ~..a~ ^i v°~t~~i~e ~~-•. ,`' ~ SUPPLEMENT TO ATTACFfMENTS A& B FundlDept!(Div or Pro~) REVENUES GeneralNanous Solid Waste ManagemenU Garbage/Refuse Collection Fees Computer ReplacemenUComputer Replacement Computer Replacemenf/Future Replacement Less Reiinbursements and Transfers EXPEI~DITLIRES Genera~lCity Attorney General/Non-Depart- mentaV(Retirement} General/Non-DeparE- mentall{Alf Others) GenerallNon-Depart- rnental/(All Others) General/ Non-~epartmentalt (InterFund Transfers) SUPPLEMENTAl. REVISIQNS TO THE PRQ POSED FY 'f 999-00 BUDGET Final Supplamental Changes final Changes Re~ised or to the Revised Proposed orProposed Budqet Budqet Net Chanqe Explanation of Chanqe SN1A $275.000 $1a,961.721 $11,447,321 $8fi2,448 5800.348 S673.419 $640,0'~ 9 ($26,228,193) (526,132,693) S4.306.546 $4,412,146 $7,991.569 $7,998,269 ~29,312,04$ $29,322,248 $29,322,24$ $29,572,248 $24,651,671 $24,891,271 $275,000 To reflect additional revenue resulting from 5tate budget $79,604 ~o reflect add~tional revenues from revised rates included ~n the Proposed FY 99/Q4 rate revision resolution ($fi2,100) To decrease contnbutions by various funds for current replacement of oomputer equ~pment {$33,4QU) To decrease contributions by various funds for future replacement of computer eqwpment $95,500 To decrease contnbutions by vanous funds for computec equ~pmeni $105.60Q ~o add 5alaries and Wages fundrng for 1 0 FT~ limited-term Deputy CEty Attorney Ili position far increased leasing transact~on workload $6,700 For retirement benefits for 1 0 FTE Deputy City Attorney III posit~an ~10,200 For other fnnge benefits assac~ated with 1 0 FTE Deputy City Attorney ~il positian (+$9 0.200) $25fl,000 To increase funding for Santa Monica Malibu Unified School Dfstrict, contingent upon the City's receipt of ~ncreased revenues from the State of CalifornEa {+$250,000) $239,600 To reimburse the Pier Fund for costs assoc~ated w~th the Bays~de Qistnct Corporafion for street performer mon~toring (+g39,000), far costs assoaated with the Pier Restoration Corporation far sponsorship development (+$80,000), and for the cost af 1 0 FTE limited term Sen~ar Adm~nistrative Analys# posdion (+$69,604), consu~ting services far Pier leasmg activitEes (+$10,d00}, and for additEanal maintenance ~n the Bayside Qistnct (+$41,00~} ~ SI~RPLEM~NT TQ ATTACHMENTS A~ B SUPPLEMENTAL REVISIONS TO THE PROPQSED FY 1999-00 BUDGET Final Supplemental Changes Final Changes Revised or to the Revised Praposed orProposed Fundl~ept!(biv or Pro~) Bud,yet Budqet Net Chanqe Explanat~on of Chanqe GenerallBalance Sheet $26,108,446 $26,458,446 $350,440 To finance vanous expenses (e g Transfers market~nglpromotion and other expenses of the ~RC) from funds prev~ously set-aside for program management and promot+on Sahd Waste Manage- ~2,467,700 $2,547.300 579,600 To add ~ -+es and Wages. +~ #ing mentlEnvironmental & assaciai~ nge benefits, for =TE Publ~c Works Manage- permane aintenance Worke • ment/(Street Sweep~ng} posit~on ; ~i,600}, S~ppfies a- i Expense t~ndEng (+$15,5U0}, ar ~ Cap~tal Outlay fund~ng (+$22,54fl) for expenses assoaated with additional sidewaik clean~ng worklaad PierlResource $4,387,220 ;4,B2B.820 5239,600 To add Salaries & Wages funding for Management/(Economic 1 p F~E permanent Senior Developmenf) Admirnstrative Analyst to handle ~ncreased leasing transaction warkload (+$68,6~0}, and to add funding for a) sponsorship development by the P~er Restoratron Co-poration (+~8p,00D), b) consulting services in~ofving lease transactions (+$70,000}, c) costs of venue management and rnonitor~ng street performers by the Bayside D~stnct Corporation (+$39,000), ar~d d) enhanced maintenance work in the Baysids Distnct (}$41,ODQ) PierlNon-Departmental/ ($2.030,30a} ($2,269,900} ($239,640) For reimbursement-from the General (Irrterfur~d Transfers} F~nd for ~ncreased expenses associated w~th the Baysade Distnct Corporatior~, the Pier Restoration Carparation. and Gity Pier operatians ' ' ~ ~ ' ' ~ ' ' ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ' ' ' ~ ~ F 1CMANAGERIINF~ITEM1Budget99-00 wpd May 20, 1999 INFO~MATIOIV IT~iN Santa Monjca, Califarnia ~ _ , , ;u "°{: '~ ~ ~ ~ " ' . • ~~ ~ , m ;, V ~ ".. - FJ -" r ~ - TO Mayar and City Council FROM City Staff SUBJECT S~pplemental lnforrna~ion regard~rtg the Fisca! Year 1999-Oa C~ty of Santa Monjca Budget tntrod~cfion This documen~ provides supplementak ir~formafion related to the F~scal Year 1999-Oa C~ty of Santa Mon~ca Budget Discussion A n~mber of ~ssues related ta the Fiscal Year 1999-00 budget re~uire more de#a~led ti~scussion T~e Departments with program responsib~fity for these issues prepared ~nformat~on ~tems or brief descr~~fions for that purpase. The following table of contents ident~fes the +r~format~or~ ~tems and supp~emental material Tab1e of Contents Suhfect Fxh~bit '~ Resuits of Cityvuide Fee Study and Recommended Modifica~ions to Fees A 2 Praposed Re~us~ Rate Changes Q 3 NeFghbor~ooc~ 4rganiza#ion Support C 4 Fiscal Year 9910~ Work Priorities for tt~e Department o# Planning and Community Development D 5 Propvsed Changes to a port~on of the Wa#er Rate E ' CO~GIUS10t1 ' The Budget Study SessEar~s. schedul~d for June 1, 2, and 3, 1999 (the Tuesday. ' Wednesdayand Th~rsdaylmmed~atelyfo[lowmg Memor~ai Day) providefurtherapportunEiy to address ~ssues related to the budget. Shoufd yau ha~e any quest~ans or require further ~ c~a~ification before these meefings please contact the City Manager's OfFce staff ~ ~ Prepared by. Susan McCarthy, Assistant Ciiy Manager ~ Katie E Lichtig, Assistant to the Ciiy Manager for Management Services , ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ W ...._........~....~~........~......_ ~ ~ FINANCE:TREASURY~RB DRC_F.IFINANCEITREASISHAREIFEEST98.FEESfNIT May 20, 1999 Sar~ta MoRica, CaErfornia ~ INFQRMATI~N ETEM ~ TO~ Mayor and C~#y Co~ncif ' FROM C~ty Staff SUBJECT Res~lts of Cityw~de Fee Study a~d Recammended Modifications ta Fees ~ Introductron ~ This report discusses the results of the recent~y compieted citywide fee study, and prov~des recammendat~ons for re~ised rates for ex~st~ng fiees and rates for new user fees for ~ services provided by various City departments. ~ Backqro~a~d ~ lt~ 199~, the frm of Da~id M Griffith & Assoaates, now ~Cnown as DMG Maximus (DMG}, , conducted a study af all General Fund fees for services and Cou~cd subsequently adopted resolut~ons sett~ng the new fee levels The resolut~ons pro~icfed for an ann~tal irtcrease ~ based u on chan e in the Cor~sumer Pnce Index_ In addrtion, the resol~trons r~avided t~tat R 9 R ~ comprehensi~e fee study u~da~es w~fl be completed at five year mtervals to ensure that the ~ appropnate levef of cos#s for user fees is bemg collected. , ln FY 'f 997-98, DMG was engaged by the C~ty #o conduct the frst fi~e yea~ fee study ~ u~date. The study was recently compieted and the results are discussed m th~s report ~ 1 1 , ~ Discussion ~ The fee update rnethodology ~sed by DMG was to meet with City personne! ta determine ~ the amo~nt af #ime s~aent by each position involved €n providing #he service fior which the fiee rs charged These time estFinates were then multcphed by the fu11 cast per ho~r for the ~ appl~cable posittion The resu{t was the fUf{ cast per untit ofi serv~ce The fu~l cost per un~t ~ af service was then compared to the amount currently being charged per u~ft of servECe a~d revisions were recomm~nded, as appropriate, after further cansultation with ~ departmental management and staff Both mcreases and decreases are bein~ ~ recommended ~• in most cases, #he City's poliey is to charge a fee that reco~ers the fulf cast of providing ~ serv~ces that benefit individua! users rath~r than the community as a whole_ However, in ~ some cases, fees are set at le~els that do nat reco~er the fuli cost of providing the service based on socEal and poircy considerat~ons. For example, Santa Mvnica has hfstorically had ~ a policy of subsidizing youth recreatiorr programs, w~rch not only beneft mdi~idua~ children, ~ but also be~efi# socre as a whole ~ ' ~~e iast fee study set a number of fees, par~icular~y m the P1a~rnng and Commu~i~y ~ Devefopment and Env~ronmental a~d PublEC Works Departme~ts, at a le~el less than full cast recovery hecause the C~ty was emerging from a severe recession at the time, and the ~ mcrease of these #ees to a ful! cost recovery fevel mrgf~t have served as a~ im~ediment to ~ economic recovery m the City. Given the perFormance of the ecanomy ~n the years s~nce tf~e last fee study, staff beheves that it is now appropriate to raise those fees ta a full cost ~ 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ' ' ~ ~ ~ reco~ery level Staff attempted, where possib~e, to set fees a# leve~s consistent with neighbormg cfties whi[e mamtainmg the goal of full cost reco~ery Attachment A is a~ist shawing tF~e current rate, proposed rate, and the estimated revenue mcrease for the fees incfuded in this fee ~study The study examined al~ Ger~eral Fund f~es for service as well as certain Environmental P~ogram fees in the Wastewater Fund In total, these fees c~rrently ~~rrerate ap~rox~mately ~4 m~ll~or~ ann~alty The aRnUal reven~e zncrease resuftrng from adap#EOn of #he recommended fee rate cha~ges is estimated to be ap~rox~mately $473,000 to tY~e Genara! Fund and $60,OD0 to the Wastewater Fund, which represents a net re~enue ~ncrease of about 1~% A brief discussion o~ each of the departmen#sldivis~ons is providsd in Attachment A Certain beach fees and ather eve~t related fees were not mcluded ~n #his study. These fees w~l~ be addressed ir~ a separate s~aff repart addressmg an overall ~olicy for e~ent I mar~ageme~t. ~ ~ The fee changes recommended will ta~te efFect July ~, 1999 with the exceptian ot Planning fees, wh~ch wilf take effect on September 1, 1999 REI fees wi[i increase a~nualiy by tE~e change ~n the local consumEr ~rice index A complete fee update will be scheduled in , 2Qfl4 ~ ~ ~ ~ Adopt~on of the recommended fee mcreases wi~l result in annuai re~enue af approximately ~473,OOa to the General Fund and $60,~00 to the Wastewater Fund These mcreases are 3 ~ _ , d h Git ' P d FY '[999 2~00 B d fl ~ ~n t e y s ropose get re ec#e - u ~ Prepared by Mi~ce Dennis, D~rector of ~ir~ance Ralph Bursey, C~#y TreasurerlRe~enue Manager ~ Da~id Carr, Assistant City Treasurer Enciosures Attac~ment A- List of proposed fees s~owrng cuRent and pro~osed ' rates ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 j r ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ' 1 ~ ' ATTAGHMENT A En-rironmental and Pubfic Worics Manaqement TF~e recommended fee re~is~ans ~n the Generai Fund are primariiy due to increasing the fees to a rate that provicles full cost recovery Some fees had been set below #~lE cost recvvery in the 9 994 fee study because t~e rate of mcrease was thoug~t to be excessive tak~ng into account that the local economy was recovermg from a se~ere recessEO~_ In addit~on, the study found t~at the current fee structure far e~g~~eenng plan check servicES te~ded to over c~arge for smali prvJects and under charge for targe pro~ects. In response, t~e staff recommends changmg t~e structure to charg~ on a more equitable bas~s Also, the establishment of fees for Encroachment Perm~ts for non-commerc~al (resrdent~al} pra~ec#s and far 4ther Right of Way Inq~~rieslResearc~r (miscellaneous ser~ices sucFr as researchmg survey information or wri~~r~g flood hazard le~ers are recommended. T#~e estimated revenue increase resulting from adoptian at the recammended General Fund fee revis~flns wou~tf be approximately $22,aoa, nearly 90% of which is the result of the Plan Check fee restructunng The recommended fee re~~sEOns assocEated wr~h the undergraund tank storage program result from new Federal regulations wh~ch re~uire annual ins~ectiar~s of tank sites that were pre~~ously mspected once every tf~ree y~ars The estimated revenue mcrease resuft~ng from adopt~on of the recommer~ded underground graund storage tank fee ! ~ 6, ~ ~ -- -~ - - - - ... "~ _ . _ _. - _ - ~r - - -- - ° - -- _ _ -v - '~`'.=`:.~~-_- - - • - - 1 ~ _ - _ _ _~-=°` ` " ._ • - - - - _ . Rev3sed ~e,~ as-o~ V ]i~~sion: Environmental arrd P~blic Works Management - ?l~198 PerUnii ofi Proposed ~~e per ~ Administratior~ - Ser-vice StU~y Vote All fees are per Etem unless ot~erwise desigrtated ' EXISTING F~ES Ufii~ty ~xca~ation Permits ~ , U To 24 Fee# .... ~77 39 , ~77 39~ 25 Feet to i,Q00 Feet fi 19 19 6'I 9 19 ' Ov~r ~,000 Feet 1,~60 99 7,160 99 ~ Encroachments __ ~ 1 dG U3 ~ ~ O6 03: ' Sidewalk Dming S5D 00 up to 100 l OQ.QO u~ to 200 ~ If If ' $ 50 per If if o~er $ 50 per if if over I ~ . ,. 10Dff . . _ 2001f ~. - _. _..,--. ' ' remporary No Parkmg ~ " ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~25 00 hase plus ~~ $2D OO~base~plus '$ 1 00 each for ~ 1.00 each far 'No Paricmg ° "No ~arkmg " ' ~igns, ~, signs, ~4 OQlday for ~4 OOlday fior ' ~ach metered ~ach metered ^ ~~ ___~ ~ark~n~ space __ ~arking space ; Banners Permit ~3 0'! 59 00 ~ Demohtion, excavatron, or gradEng activ~ties durmg restricted ha~rs (SMMC Sectian 4~2 130 103.9G 165 00 ~ Construccion, mair~tenance, a~d repa~r of bu~ldmgs dunng restricted ~our (SMMC Section 4 i2 i40) 103 94 ~ 16~ QO Newsrack Code Enforcemen# lRemovall 26 50 5D 00 ' Encroachment Permit - Commercial 381 70 Time 8 Mater~al reco~ery of actual C~#y cvsts ' Nuisance Abatement Board ; Time & Matenai ~~me 8 Matena! ~ecovery of actual recovery of actual : l~l COSfS CEf~ COStS , ~lEW FEES ~ =ncroachment Perrr~~t - iVon-Commer~cai ~~, ,., „_ _ _ _ .~.~,..~ _~ ~i ~Q OC~ , i ~ - - - - -- -_ . ~; -~ ; ~ _ -f ' -# ~ _ ~ D~~isian~ Envrronmental &Pubbc 1Norks h1Fna~ement CiviE Fngineering _ -.: - ~. ,. .;" ~'~. ' Re~ised Fee as of 7f1198 Per Unit af Servtce _~; ~~~ - - -, €~" _" -. _ . ~ : ~- ~ ' Proposed-~~e pe St~dy Note Ali fees are ~er iterrtl~ermit uniess othervvise nated EXISTING ~~ES Pian Check Fees Residenf~al Unde~ $24,404 Vaiua~on ~222.fi6 S289_QO 520,001-$75,000 Valuation 3S5 19 326_00 57~,~41-~200,Q00 VafuatEon 641 46 548 OQ ~200,001-~~00,000 Valuat~on 64~ 46 548 ~0 $SQO.Oa1-~1,OD0,000 Valuation 641 46 9a6 On ~1,0OO.OQ1-~5,000,~00 Valuation 641 4B 3.47i 00 ~S~OOO,Di}1-~iQ,aoo,00a Valuatian 6~3~ 46 ime and Mater~af Cost Recove S~Q,000,001-57~,Q04,000 Valuatior~ fi41 46 ime and Material Cost Recove $15,DOQ,ODT-~20,OOO,fl00 VaEuation 641 46 Time and Mater~al Cost Reco~e ~2Q,000,001-$2~,aoa,400 Valuation fi41 46 ime and Materiaf COSt RECOVE Over ~25,~OO,OUO Valuation 641 46 ime and Matenal Cast Recave Commesc~a~ Under $20.0~0 Valuation 180 24 Tir~e and Mater~al Cost Recove ~20,0~1-575,000 VaEuation ~80 24 B08 ~0 ~75,001-$200A00 Valuation 2,~47 04 833 00 5200.007 -~5Q0.000 Vaiuat~on 2,147 04 1.08fi 00 ~50Q,OD1-~1,0~0,000 Valuation 2,147 04 1,909 00 ~1,000,001-55,000,000 Valuatior~ 2,'147 04 3,471 UO S5,d00,oa~-~~a,000,000 Valua#ion 2,~47 04 ~me and MatenaE Cost Recove $10,OOQ,001-$15,OOQOQO Vafuation 2,147 i~4 ime and Mater[ai Cast Reco~e 515,400,OD7-~20,000,000 ValuatEOn 2.i47 04 TErr~e and Material Cast Recove S20,OU0,00~-$25,0~0,000 ValuatEOr~ 2,'~~7 D4 Trme and MaterEal Cast Reco~e Valuation O~er ~25,000,000 Valuation 2,147 04 T~me and Matenal Cost Recove F~r-aE Parcel Ma 9.293 53 1,7U9 00 Final Tract Ma 1,860 77 1,7Q9.OU Ma Rev~s~on 55fi 64 fi54 04 Lot LEne Ad~~stmen# 201 4a Time and Material Cost Recove ~ ~ ~ ' l ' ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ' ' , ~ , ~ ' ' ' ~ ' i _ _ ^ • __ _ _ _ ~ - ; _ ' _ __-. _ - - - _ _ - - - - - ~ _ - --: - ~ ~ivision: Enviror~rr~ental 8~ ~rblic Works Management , V, C~~il Engineenn.g . _ _ , . , _ - _ ._ • - -°~e _ _ +~~ _; _- - »; Re~ised Fe~~s of ~fil98-P8r" ~3rut a€ _ _ S~vice - ~ _ "~. ; ~ [ », . _ , - : _ _ - _ Proposed Fee ~e Sittd~+ = _ . . . Request to Rev~ew Legal Easement 673 27 ime and Matenal Cost Recove Parcel Merger i,033 lfi rme and Mater~al Cost Recove dmirnstration of ~ertormance Bond 89 07 584 OQ Ma s, Draw~n s, Plans, and S EC~C~fEDflS 81ue rmtslMa s 1 $ 1,r2" x 11" $1 34 $1 30 13" x 20" thrau h 24" x 36" 1 50 1 50 27" x 40" throu h 31" x 4Q" 1_6~ 1 60 30" x 48" 2.0~ 2 00 43" x 60" 2_35 2 35 5tandard Specifications Gost plus 10°/a to reco~er reasonable adm~rnstrat~ve costs Gost plus 10% to recover reasonable adm~nEStrative costs Items other than listed af~ove Cost plus 'i0% to reco~er reasonable administrati~e osts Cost plus 10% to recover reasonable adminEStrat~Ue costs Centerl~ne T~es, Benchmarks, and M~scelkaneous Surve T~es $2 60 $2.60 5oldier Beam Perrr~~t 2 636 16 70'! _00 SoEI Naii Perm~t 2 fi36 16 70'f _00 Tie Back Permit 2 636 'E5 7U1 00 Street Vacat~on - Commerc~al Time and Material Cost Reco~e ime and Material Cost Recove Stree: Vacation - Non-Comrrrercial Time and Matenal Cost Reco~e ime and MatenaE Cost Recove Flood Hazard Letter ~ 48 3 N~W FEES Other Right of Way Inquir~es/Research T~me and Material Cos# Recove , 1 ~ Notes ~ ~ (1) T~ese fees were revised per Resolut€on #8944 (CGS} on 1011 ~J95 Na increase ~s recommended (2} Fees for sharmg perm~ts (soil naEis, soldier beams, and t+ebaeks) were orig~nafly mcluded ~r+ the ~ #ee st~dy, but were se~arateEy rev~sed by Councd on 11/1 Q198 per Resalution Na 9334 (CCS) (3) Now wrff be ~RCl~ded m"Ot~er Right-af-Way InqurrEes/Research" ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .' r ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ 1 , ~ ~ ' ~ ~ , , _ _ _ _ ~ . _ _ , _ _ _ _ ~ ~~ _ _ ~~~ ~ - ~~ ~ .~:~._ ~~ ~ ..~:~~x_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _w .~ _ _ , ._ y=~~~~~.~~~,~~ _ -__~~ _ _. _ . - - - ~ ~ _ Re~~sed Fee as.o~. - D~vision: fr~~irnnrnental 8~ F'trt~lic Warks Mar~agement 7i'i/98-P~~nit s~f ?r~pose.d ~e.~er Street Maintenance - _ . - - -_ ~~~ = -~~ - - EX3STING FEES Weed Abatemer~t ime and mater~al T~me and rrtaterEal cast recove ost recove Clean Pubirc R~ght-af-Way 3me and mater~al ~me and material cost recovery ost recovery Removal of [ifegal SignslQb~ecis $90 59 per ime and materEal occurrence cost recove Damage Bill~ngs ime and matena{ ime a~d mater~al to reco~er C~ry o recover City costs to repacr costs to repai dama e dama e R~ght of Way lmpro~ements {Concrete) Time and matenal ~r~e and material cost reco~ery cast reco~ery S5o0 min~rnum 5500 min~mum Right of Way improvements (Asphalt} ime and materEaE ime and r~'~aterial st reca~ery cost recovery S500 min~rr~um 540 minimum ~ ~ ~ - - _ _ -_ . ~ - _ - . .. . ~ _ _ - -. , ; =.:4 = . ~ _ _ - _ ` ~ ~ ~ - - i ~ ~ _ ~ _ _~ #z t~ _ ~,a.~,~ -=°-_ _~ - ~'f Ys~3[-` ~Y~+. - ~ ~ _ _ - ~ Revised ~ee~s of Div~sion: EnVironmentat ~ Public Warks Management 711i98 Per-.Un~t of Proposed -Fee per Enu~ronmenta! Programs V , _ ~ervice - ~iudy Note Al! items are ~er permi# unless otherwise noted E?CISSTlNG F~ES EJr~deraround Stora e Tanks - Permit to O erate ~225 84 S9fi4 00 Permit to Operate/AddEtional Tank 49 83 85 OU Lfnderc~roufld 5tora e Tanks - Permit to Instaff 412 45 1,'~SO 04 Permit to InstalllA~d3tronal Tank 71 ~ 419 00 Underaround Stara e Tanks - Perm~t to Remove 329 75 ~,233 UO Perm~t to RemovelAdd~tcanaf Tank 115 57 ~rs~e and matertal recovery of City costs Starage Tank Clean~p Fees Time and mater~al Time ancf materEal recovery o~ Crty reco~ery of C~ty costs costs ~ , , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i 1 t t 1 1 ! 1 ~ 1 i ~ ~ Police ~ T~e ma~onty vf services prov~ded by the Police Department provide benefit #o the commun~ty as a who~e and th~s are funde~ by general tax revenues rather tha~ by user ~ fees However, there are a number af services which d~rectly beneft ~ndividuals and ~ thus have refated fees Most of the fiees related to these seNices are recommended for a levef equai to full cost recovery ' , Tf~e est~mated tevenue increase resulting from adop~ion of tF~e recommended fee revisians would be approximately $3fi,4~Q TF~is represents an increase of ' approxEmately fi% ~ Ap~raximately 77% of the mcreased revenues ~s from revised fees for veh~cle impound ' release $'~ 6,~00 and olice ermits ~10,'E 00 Tt~ese increases rtmaril result #rom ~ ) P P t ) P Y , the re-e~aluat~on of tt~e cos#s requ~red to provide those services. ~~ add~ion, th~ ~ fiRgerprintir~g fee is recommer~ded for ~ncrease due to increased cost from new State requireme~ts ' , ~ ' 1 ' ~ ~ ~ \ _ ' " _ t~t~~i.` _ ' ' ' - - _ J'-~--~-~~:~~r'T'~- t'?~p'-~_~° +, ° 1a ~ _ - _ • . ~' _ " - ~- __ ~ :e+~'~ _ ' ~ '~ - Y ~ : _ r. _- - . - ~ - - _ ~ . _ _ -,.~' r" :_°3n " _ 3` ,'E' ' ~ - ~ "' n..'.~.~s~.~ ".., r' - c~- ~~"--.. •- ~" . - -' _ ' ' _ _ - " _ _~ - - ^ ~ '. ,y_ c ~~~5~-~~~~SiJ~~ _ ' _ ~~' =~. ` -` _~- - 71~ 198 PeF linit r-f P~iasedFae ~er ~'ss~or~, ~'~ljce De~arime~tfAdmi~zstrati~re Serv~es ~"5er~nce- ~"_ Study_ EXISTIhlG FEES Other Re~orts Theft ~3 60 ~er a e 1 53 50 er a e(1 Traffic Accident Re orts 3 50 er a e 1 3 50 er a e(1 PhotoslColor ~r Black ~ White 20 15 pl~s outs~c~e 2E} 9B p~~s flutsEde lab rocessin fee ~ab rocessrn fee Cr~me Ar~al sis/Research-One search of database 59 3~ ~2 5~ Crrme Anal s~s - Mult~ple searches of database 93.37 82 ~0 Fin e r3ntrn -P~bs~c 5.30 ~2A0 Veh~cle Im ound & Release 26 50 35 00 Boo# Remavaf 79 52 92 00 Pa Res onse - 2nd cail ~n da 153 74 3~3 00 ~US Res onse - Acc~dentlln u 3941$ 476 00 Police Billable Services 55 00 55 00 Faise Alarm Fees 3rd Res flnse dur~r~ sar~e fisca~ eas '~ U3 95 103 9~ 4#h and Subse uent Res onse durm same fiscal ear 935 13 135 13 (1 } 7hese Tess were revised per ResoVution #8944 (CCS} on 10;10l95 No CPI ~ncrease is rpv~ded for r f ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ' ' ' ~ , ~ ' i ' ' ~ ' ' ~ , ' , ' -, - . _ __ _ __,_- __ _ - 0.~-_ ~~~~_: .- - - - _ - ' _ ' - _- _ _ - _= _ _ -- _° _ -- .= ~ .~;~%;_~=: ~.:w -. - _' ~ ` - -" _" - - - - _ _ _ _ " - `t-' -~~".~ ~ _-~ : - - - - - RevisedFee as of -~ ~ ._. ~ -- ~ 7~119$ Per Ut3it-of , Proposed ~~ee per D~vision: Palice DeparhnentlAdministrative Servlces- ~ ~eri+ice ; ~Study Pohce Perrnft ~ees -(Types of business for w~~ch an annual Pohce ~ verm~t ~s reauired? Alcohof D~spensina ~icense 14 $q' 20.75 Amusement & Entertainment 45 74 55 00 I Enterprises ~ 45 74 - - - 55 OQ ~ Arca~e 45 74 • 55 Q~ Rides 45 74 55 00 fVon Permanent R~des - -- 45 74 ~ ~ 55.0C ~ - ._ .... .. _. Shows 45 74 ~ 55 OC SKdI Games 45 74 ~ 55 0{ ~ Non-Permar~ent Skill Games 45 74! 55 4( ~ Auct~oneer 45 74 ~ 5~ OC Auction Nouse 45 i4 55 OC FErearms 45 74 55 Da Fortune Te~ler 45 74 55 QO Health Gkub 45 74 55.00 Herb Doctor 45 74 55 00 Itinerant Vendor I 45 74~ ~ 55 00 ~ ~ Massage EstablEshment ~ ~ ~ ~ 45 74` ~ 55 00 ~ Massage Techn~cran 45 74 ~ . S5 00 a ~ Parade -~~..:~ . _ _~ 45 74 ~ 55 00 Peddler 45 74 55 00 PhysicaE Train~ng or F~tness ~ 45_74 ~ 55 00~ ~ Poal Haif 4S 74 55 40 5ecand Hand Dealer 45 l4 SS 0( C Boxmg ~ 4S 74~ 55.Q~, CamivaE 45 74 55 00 Camivaf Merchand~5e ~ ~ 4S 74~ 55.Q~~ Circus 45 74 55_00 _ ~ l A i ! C ! n ma ontro H~stancatiy, the City has subsidized ap~roximately 50% of the costs af prov~ding An~ma! ' Control serviees Neavy subs~dizat~on of arnmal regt~lation servti~es ts consistent w~th ~ the pvlicy of mos# Jurrsdictions and is intended encourage ~se of the services The recommended fee revisions wault~ cont~nue tF~~s ~olicy. Additionally, it ~5 recomrnended ' ~~at the #ee for b+te reports be fadueed to comp4y v+r~tl~ Publsc Reco~ds Act lim~ta~tions ~ The estimated reWe~ue mcrease resul#Eng from ado~tion af the recommended fee ~ revESions wou~d be approx~mately S12,Q0~ or 12.5°l0. The ~~crease ~s primarify due to ~ Encreases in ~m~ound fees, boarding fees, and I~censrng fees. P~rtially offsetting is a decrease in the fee for bite reports as staff has determined that thfs fees ~s sub~ect ~o , Publ~c Records Act restrict~ons Adoption of the fee recommend~tions would ma~ntain ~ the City's subsidy of these services at a rat~ of ap~roximateiy 50% ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' , ~ ~ ~ -- - ' - - - -_ _ - ~ _ ° - ~-" ~<ti . -. _ - ,- '^ - ' y . V -- _ ' - . , -' = -"tit'~,`=' ` , - r V x _ '~` - _ _ ~ _ _ - : ~ ~ _ " __ ~ 1111510f1 Police Departmer~tlAnirnal Cantrul - - - '. y ~- -^~; ~.~,~--~`i.v ~4 ~~~.:±~~~+i5`'-<."?a: :~~~~W ' -_ :~ ` - Revised ~Fee as o~ 711198 PEr~Unit af _ ~ _-;SePyir~ - - - ^ - - - _ ' , ~ - - : - Pro~oserl F~e-~er ~udy _ Note All fees are per occurrence unless otherwise nated EXISTING FEES Pet Reiin uEShmen4 - wrth License $5 30 5 79 Pet Reimqu~shment - without ~icense 6 34 lus license fee 3.2~ lus IECense fee Picku llm ound - Retrun to Owrter - 1 da s 26 60 29 26 i~icku llm ound - Retrun to Qwner - 2 da s 31 81 41 _00 Bite Reoort 8~ In~esti at+on 39 8~ 3 25 nimal Trap Re~tal 5.30 5 78 Ar7irr~al Licensm Neutered male or s a ed female ~t 0 6D 17 56 Unneutered male or unspayed ferrtale 21 21 23 12 lssue L~cense m Field Neutered male or s a ed femaie 10 60 11 56 Unneutered male or uns a ed femake 21 21 23 ~2 Boardin 5.2C er da 5 77 er d~ Ado tion Cats 5.26 5_8D do tion ~a s 10 51 11 ~fi i ~ ~ ~ Fire , As with fhe Palice De~artmer~t, tf~e ma~or functiar~s of the Fire De~artment ber~eft t~e ~ community as a whole and th~s are funded by general tax revenues rather than by user fees Howe~~r, there are a Rumber services fvr wh~ch user fees are appropriate Th~ ' depar#mer~t has tra~~t~onally attempted to reco~er 1 q0% of the cost of provid~ng those ~ services. ~ Based on the anaiysis of fhe departmerit's fee str~ct~~e, staff Es recommend~ng a ~ modification of the fee st~ucture to one similar to that of the County of Orange. The recammended s#ructure ~s more refiective of the actuat warEc performed and the costs , fncurred thar~ the current structure. Certain fees have been broken out into a~tumber of ~ expanded categor~es allowmg for a more equitabfe fee structure. This resulted in mcreases m some exist~ng fees partally offset by substant~al decreases m others ~ ~ AdaptEOn of the recommendations wauld result m Encreased re~enues of approx~mately ~ ~54,000 annua!!y or 41 % Approx~mately 9Q% of th~s ~ncrease ~s due to the ~ establ~s~ment of five new fees These are disc~ssed briefly below. Written Response Fees - Fee far ins~rance agents and inve~tigat~~e #`irnns ~ requestmg a copy of a fire report. These requests require research and a wntten response from t#~e department. Th~s fee is prolected to generafe approx~mate[y ' annually $27,800 ir~ additEOnai revenue Staff is also recommending elimmatEOn of the fees for resident and locaf businesses requesting fire reports. 5 ecial Commercial S rinklers - Thrs fee ~s for Fire De artrnent sta~F review of ~ ~ P P new techno~ogy spnnkler systems. Thase systems require addiftional staff ~ f ' ' ' res~urces because of very spec~fc n.iles that apply to these systems This fee is projec#ed to ger~erate approximate~y annually $6,500 in new revenuE ' Altemate Methods - This fee is ~ntende~ to formalize #he process of rev~ewing requests for alternate methods of fire pratecfion. This service takes a s~gnifica~t ~ amQUnt of staff time, but is currently provided free of charge This fee would generate approx~mately $13,500 annually m new re~er~ue. ~ Special Inspec~ions - This fee rs ~or ~nspectrons conducted after norma~ working hours This fee is expected #o generate a~proximately $500 m new revenue annually ~ Appro~ec~ Praduct~on Facil~ty - This is a new category in the Unifvrm Fire Cade requirmg ins~ectron. TF~:s fee is pra~ected to generate approximately $9 ,004 in ~ new revenue annually ~ ' ' ~ ~ 1 ' ~ , ' ~ 1 ~ ~ _ _ ____ _ ~.~ - _ - _ i _•~ _ _~ - _ ; : »i.,;K~+. ; ~~• ~ - '__ _ :C,:;~~°?a._:-~`.~-.~.~ -~ y: Y~-- --- °, , l' ' t - _ts~rt'2y=t ~ ~t~~~4_^~"r~ ~^]:, ~ _ _ -- ' , ="`C' Y ~ c ' ' _ ` "" -~y y~~~ - ` ~ ; .~4. ~~5~, ~ "~~ s _ _ `~ _ ~ _' ' " ' :~.a.` _i y~~....R -- - ~ - _ •= -_ . - _-- - - .~ - - ~ ~ - . . " Revised ~e~~sxxif ~~=~ _ ~ - ~? ` , : :~ ~.` - -r- - ~ ~ , ~ _ _ ~-_ _ _ _ ~- - - - .7.i1/98 Pei~iJn~~of : Propossd-~ee per rnsion: FirelAdminis~ration `-,r~- ~, -_ ~ _ _ ~ _ ~ _ -~ . _~~-Service~.- - = ~~y_ . Note ~niess otherwise noted, fees are `per permitlmspectio~" i E?CISTf N G New Construct~on < fi,000 sf ~ 0~ 7D 171 19 New Constructio~ Ins ec#~on Onl 101 70 64 92 l~ew Cur~struct-on > 6,OQQ sf ~01 7Q 448 73 New Construction ins ect~on ~nl 101 7Q; 'I29 80 Tenant tm rovements <6,000 sf iQ~ 70 'i44 61 , Tenant im ro~ements lns ection Onl <6,000 sf 141 70 48 70 Fenant Improvements ~6.aoa s~ 10~ 70 3iD D3 Tenant Irnprovements kns ection Onl >6,000 sf ~a~ 70 97 32 ~ommeraai S rmkfers ~100 Heads 159 59 256 88 ;,ammercial S rmklers 1 QO - 299 Heads ~99 28 289 17 ~ommercial S rmklers 30U - 7Q0 Heads 1,135 28 427 95 ~ommercial S nnklers ~700 Neads 1,983 28 620 05 5tandb Pipe 5 stem 232 78 ~407 37 :.omr-~ercaal S rinlcler Tl ~10 Heads 8~.87 118 Ofi ~ommercial S nnkler TE i 0- 1 d0 HeadS 1 v8 ~ U 203 fi4 Commerc,al S rmkler T! >~00 Heads 392.81 289 17 Residential Sqnnkler S stems 13D 158 10 4 DO ~Private H drant S stems 75 29 258 OD F~re Pum Install 371 10 707 BO 5pec Ext~n u~sher S stem 113 44 289 17 Spec Extin wsher S stem - InerE 113 44 374 80 S ecia! ~ w ment 75.29 256 88 Gas S stems 75 29 342.9D fVew Fire AlarmlLG TI i 60.16 684 77 Fire Alarm 71 160 16 342 3$ FEre AlarmlControl Manitor 160 1fi 256 88 Fii h P~led 5tora e 75 8U 45U QO 1~5~ Install 1~7 59 407 27 ;4bove Grourid Tanks 22ti 40 26~ 3D Niclhrise Ins ec#ion 493 $2 369 16 Laborato 75 28 97 4Q Resrdentia~ Care 75 28 97 43 Da Care <50 75.28 4$ 74 Da Care >50 75 28 97 ~ 0 ~ri~ate Schaof 75 28i 729 88 're5chool ' 7~.28 fi4 60 ~os ~tal ' SO_58 196 00 :.an~alescant Hos rtal 75 28 195 00 4mbulato SC 75.28 i 29 73 ~srcfaft Refuel 75.28 64'~1 4ircraft Re air Han ar 75.28 'I29.50 Candles/0 en Flame 43 47 32 46 Carni~afsl~a~rs 75.28 65 05 XMAS Tree Lois 79 52 64.8U Combustib{e Fibers 75 26 64.6D Combustrble MaterEals 75 28 64 60 ~ ' ' ' , ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ , ~ ' ~ , , ' ~ ~ ~ ~ - " - - _ _ .: _ ._ . ~~ _~ _ ~ ° - , _, " _ . _ ° . ~ - - -- _ - _ _ _ - . ~ - , - - ~ ~_ - - ~- ivision- FirelAdrr~inistration T ~_ - -~_~ ~~; ~ - -- = ~----- _ ~~" ` _: -~`~~=, ~ Revised ~Fee as vf 719l98 Per Ur~'~ of~ Serri~o~: - - - - - _ - - _ • - - ~ ~ ~ _ ~ - Proposed-Feeper = ~" ~~7~ ,:~ - ~ ° ~ Combust~ble Dust Products ~~ ~S ~ $4 Ex io5i~es 75 28 129 fi0 Fireworks - Aer~a~ 1~0.56 259 25 Fireworks - Ground 75.28 129 60 Hiph PEVed Comt~ust~bie Stora e T5 80 '!29 60 Hot W~rk 7B 34 65 00 Industrial Ovens 38 17 64 80 Liquified Petroleum Gas Use - E~ent 43 47 61 00 ~i u~fied Petroleurn Gas - Vehicle in ~uildEn 75 80 97 10 Lumber Yard 75•28 9~•QO Ma nes~um, Workin 43 47 97 00 Mall, Use of Cars'~mon Area 38 17 64.80 Publfc Assembl < 5,000 sf 37 '11 97 32 Pe~bl~c Assemt~t 5,000 sf and reater 75 28 129 87 Refr~ eration S stem 38 17 65 OS Re a~r Gara e 75•28 64•82 S ravin 1Di in ~~•~8 ~•sd P rotechlFiame SFX 121 93 '~94 l4 TentslCano ies > 200 -400 sf 75 28 32 37 TentslCano ies 40i -2.OOfl sf 154 ='~ ~$9 entslCano ies 2001 -SQOQ sf 225 84 429 $3 e~tslCano ~es > 504Q sf 293 70 194_73 Re ort Co - Fire 2.5~ 0 OU Re ort Co - EMS 2.5a U 00 Hourl C~ar e 7~•28 7~ •~~ C RTK Gate a 1 i 74 06 2fi6 00 CRT14 Cate o 2 339.28 273 87 CRT1C Cate o 3 726 29 46610 CRTK Cate o 4 i,351.84 ~,110 90 Hazardous Materia! Response ime ~nd Matena! charge to recor~er ~I~/ C05tS O~ i85pOfi585 1Q hazardous materials emergency ituat~ons 7ime and Material charge to reca~er CI~ COStS Of TB5}]0f55e5 t0 hazardaus ma#erials emergency situat~ons ' ~ , - .~, - _--rr-1 _ __ - _ - -- - - - '~ - .,' ~_ ___ ,-_ ~ _ ._~ ` -. _` _` _ ` " ~ ., ~ _" _ - _,~ ~ ;-.__. ; " _ ~ __ -- ~ -. - ~ _ - - ` ` ~ _- . ivtsion: FirelAdministration - - ~ .t~. w ~r ~~C~ ~~ti~5 - Revised Feeas vf 7r~ 198 Per llnit oF Service . ' - Proposed Fee per Study NEW FEES ~re Stora e fi4 60 U~C Perm~ts - Others 61 00 P rotechlFlame SFX 129 $3 ~~~e Aud~ence 64 73 Flammable/Combust~bie Li uids 0 00 ro~ed Production FaciEities 194 20 S ecial Ins ectron 426.0~ ]temate Method 448 8~ Writ~en Response 277 ~S Special Comrr3ercial S rinkier 6S2 40 ~ ~ ~ ' , ~ r ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r r ~ ~ ' 1 Traffic Enqineerinq ' The Traffic Engineenng Div~sron admin~sters the Ci#y's Transportatian Management P~an and processes overs~ze load ~ermits, as well as performing many non-fee ~ functions ' The Transportat~on Management P~an ~s pnmarily funded by a fee c~arged annually ta I employers for review af ~heir transpartat~on management pians S#aff is recommending ' an ir~crease a~ ~1.00 per employee annuaily to tt~ese fees It is estimated that this wil~ ~ncrease revenue by approximately $31,000 annualiy, which will allow full cost recv~ery ~ , No change is recornmended for o~ersize load ~ermits as this fee is governed by State statute ~ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ~ ' ~ , r < < ,. ~ - ~ _ - _ ~ _ _ `S ivision_ Pdanning and Commun"~y ~e~eloprnent/ TrafF`jc ~ngineering __ _ - _ - _ _~ -~ = ' _ ~~ a4 +~t' _. ~ .' - ~ .' . Revised-Fee as of 7f~l98 Per Urai~Af -_ _ ~~~ = rapas~ed Feeper Study EXISTING FEES TMP Fees 1 D-49 EmployeTS $8.00 er ern fa ee/ r $9 00 er em lo eel r TM~ Fees ~~-~ 6 OQ pes em fo eel r 7 04 per em lo ee! r Oversize Load Perrn~t 1 fi 04 16 00 ~ ' ~ ~ ' ~ ' ~ ' , ~ , ' ' ~ ' ~ ~ i ~ , ~ , ' ' ' , ' ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ' , ~ , ' City C1erk The primary functions ot the City Clerk's o~ce are f~anded by gene~al taxation Howe~er, some user fees are co~lected far sennces such as document copying and sale af documents. Adoption of the recommended feE revisions wo~ld result in a mmor ravenue ~ncrease of approx~ma#ely $1,700 Most of the pro~ected increase ~s due ta a new ~ee for research for the publrc regardmg Ci#y issues Whiie it is not uncommon for cities to charge a fee #or thfs service, Santa Ma~~ca current[y does not. Establishment of this fee at the recommended level of $25.00 per ho~r would still maintain a C~ty subsidy for tt~e serv~ce of a~proximately 4~°/a whiie establ~sF~ing a rate simdar ~o fhat vf other cities. ~ ' ' -•„ ~_ - - - _ - - _ - ~.; _~ =~ =£` _ ~ ~-- ~ ~ ~ . - f_ - r - ~ _~ ~ ' -- _ ~- . - ` ~ - _ -- ~: i~isi~n: City C~erklAdmin-stration , ~ -- ° - . ^ - ~_ ~~=~± - -=~ ~{ ~~. ~ - -_:, ~tevised =Fee~s o~ 71~l~BP~r-tlni~-of ~errnce _ - ~ ~ Pro~os$d Fee per St~tly EXtSTING FEES bocvment Co ~n $0 20 er a e SO 20 er a e Pubhc B 8~ C Directo Saies 3 00 each 3 04 each PublEC Cr Charter Sales 3 00 each 3 DO each Pre-A enda Subscr~ tion Cost of Posta e Cost of Posta e Com ieted A enda Subscr~ t~on 44 24 er ear 49 31 er ear Minutes Subscr~ tion 62.20 er ear 75 64 er ear Co m 7a es 23.OQ er ta e 23 00 er ta e TEEW FE~ ReSearch 25 00 er t~our i ' i ~ ' 1 ' ' t ~ ' , ~ ~ , ' ~ 1 ~ 1 1 1 ~ ~ t ' ~ , ~ ' ~ ~ ' , ' ~ , ' Library Staff is recommendmg na revisions ta Library fees A re~:ew of other mun~crpal iib~aries has confirmed tha# tF~e Library currently recovers an a~propriate level of costs fo~ user services ~ _ ~ Plann~r~g ~ The fee ~e~els recommendecf by s~aff are ~ased on settERg most fees a ievef equal to ' cast recavery The fee study determ~ned that most fees are currently recovering a much lower percentage of cost. One reason for this ts that the fast campreher~s~ve fee ' action by Counc~f in 1994 set a number of fess at a le~el less than 10~% cost recovery ~ because, as stated earlier, the City was emerging from a recess~on Additionally, the c~rrent fee st~dy determined that the effort in~Ql~ed in pro~~d~ng many serviees had ' increased since ti~e last s#udy. , Ada tion o~ t~e recommended Plannm fee revis~ons wo~ld result in mcreased reven~e , P 9 of a~prax~mately $316,000 Approx~mately haff of #he increase fs due to ~ncreasing the ~ }evel af cost recovery fior a number of fees to 100°fo The remainder of the estFinated ~ rev~nue increase is due to the reeualuation ofi the actua! work required to perform these senr~ces and the proposed establishment of two new fees ' ~ Approx~mately 6D% of the increaseci revenue r~sults from rev~sions to Plan Check (5129,~Q0) and Business License Review/Home Occupation Permit ~$5fi,p00} fees ~ The re~ised Plan Ch~ck fees reflect #he r~evaluat~on af #he costs #o perform #he servic~ ~ as we11 ensure tha# the fee is equitable for afl proJect sizes The re~ision to the Bt~smess ~icense Rev~ewfHame Occupattion Perm~t primari{y reflects increasting tf~e ' cost r~co~ery level firam 80% to 100%. ' Establishment of new fees are proposed for Code Compliance Checks a~d ~ ~ ~ ~ ' 1 ' ' Arch~tectural Re~iew Board Staff Approval These services cutrer~tiy prav~ded fee of charge Establfshme~t of the new fees wi[i generate app~oximately $25,~00 m new rever~ue aRr~~ally ' Staff is recammend~ng to contmue subsidi~mg the fees for certain services for which t~e iee has been set Jow for poJ~cy r~asor~s. 7hese ~nclude the fees for Admin~s#rat~ve ' Appro~als, Histor~cal D~str~cULandmark Designatior~s, Temporary Use Permits, and ' Reduced Parkmg Permits, which are set at cost reco~ery le~els of 80°/a No increases ' are recommended for fees for appeals, and the fees fot Gert~ficates af Appropriatsness will contin~~ to be waived 1 ' There are certain fees far wh~ch staff is recommend~ng cost recovery of less thar~ 100% in keep~ng wE#h pre~ious Councd pol4cy dec~srons For exarnple, no change is ' rECOmmended for the fee far appeals which will marntain the policy of affording tF~e ' oppor~unEty of appeals to everyone at a reasonable fee le~el. Addit~onally, staff is recommending no change to the wa~ver of fees for Certificates of Appropnateness. , ' 1 ' 1 1 1 ` _ -~ _ _ _ _ ~ _ -- . - :~ w --~`"~~: , s~ -- ~:~~ -4 -_ - - . - - . ~ _ - - - ~=- -~-- - `- _ - - /_ _Y -- - -' -~ =-, _ --__ s _~~ -- : _~---"='~~:~ _~-° - - Y ~evised ~ee as af7~~1J8'~ey ~ Y ~ ~ ~ropossd ~ee ' a4v~s~on Plann'~ng and Zoning~ _ - - - - LJniE of Senrice~ .- ` = " - - . ~ ~er.5~dy - ---•------ ---- ~ ~ ' 1 ' ' ' ' 1 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' ' ' , ' ' ' 1 . ' _ - _ _ - - • - r - ~ -~a~ -_ _ -`=`~v _; - -, a - ~- - ~ -' ; , -' __ -_ - " _ ` ± ~ ~ Divis7on Planning and Zaning . - ~ _ _ _~.-~_,.~:~`~= = `- ~-_ - : r~fi :.~~~-- _ _ , ~ . __ ~~ Revised Fee as flf ~~ fL98~Psr • I~n~t of SenTice~"-~ ~ - .._- -~ ~~=~:-- - -- - ~-=~-_~~~~ ~ ~ . ~ '' - - •*~~ _ ,-_~~,..;~:° s ~; := - .- ~ Pnaposed ~ser - - - $~~ " - -~ ~~~ -_ h~otes I fees are ~er r~em Development Agreement fees as a~tharized under Resolution #7211 (CCS) 5l13I86 are recommended to remain at currer~t le~ei and are not incfuded in this ee resolu~on Fees for Cert~fcate of AppraprEateness and Certrficate of Appropriateness - Ma~or are wai~ed per Resolut~on #8300 CCS dated 1Q/819~ ' ~ Community and Culturat Serrrices Ti~e City has traditionally subsidize~ a substantiaE port~on of recreational and ather services sa t~at the entfre community can par~icipate withaut regard to financ~al implica~ians. The department is recommending no changes to most fe~s as ar~ appropr~ate Ievel of costs are being reco~ered, Fee rev~sEOns are being recommer~ded for ~ark and Ken Edwards Center facility rentaf charges. The recommendations inclvde increased rates at some si#es ar~d c~ecreases at others. ln addition the categorEes of rates are bemg expanded The revenue impact of t~ese rev~sions is expected ta be mtr~imal ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . City of Santa Monica, Commuriity and Cultural Services Department Park Building Rental Fees i~ ~~n~r Ih m A 75% nbrd Ih~n q 1dIX nuro Ihan C 10076 morr. lhnn A 9596 rtkxa than E IA1 {Bl sr.e. t~r.7nw ~C~ 101 (F1 la'1 CIIRRf-N7 ('ROPOSED CIIRRFNT F'ROf'USCp Cl1RR~NT FROF'OSCU CtIIiRFI+lT' I'IiUPUSED FROP6SF.I] PRQPDSED H811pYQ1 ~iipi~lhf 199.918@ 4.988144 189918@ ]889L04 Reeldenl Resld~nt ~ NOlL•$411d Kon Ree ].]@9L~@ 14@@14Q Resldant ~y~ y~ 3EB9lB@ ~Q~~ Rq~ a9@9144 yQ~q~ 1889l09 Realdent ]@981.QQ ~,p.$gp ~~ ~ Ehalraltkla Ih~alm iYQa•PratR ~cQflt Chanaff NQaP.taflt HaaProG! ~4mmunlhc ~ommunlG~ Chanaa f,smmwuty ~pmmunlb[ EocproHt Fvr Piail! ~lnunlaa Pk Memorla! Pk Mertwrlaf Pk Vlrp Ave PM Mr.mniial Pk Sr Rec Cnlr Joslyn Park Reed Park Mr.rnOnaf Pk Club House 3616 40 Cedar Room af3l8 4n l aurel Room 3fi16 40 Meeling Iim 3$!6 40 Gran Room dF~6 ~0 pallo 3filG 55 Crnf! Ra~m 3676 4p Card Room 4217 55 Mep1e Rnom q2A A6 S 5 63 S T BS 34 69~ E 1 I F6 S I S y0 S 7 42 S 7 85 5 If'SS S, 14 OA S 15 70 a 7 42 E 7 85 5 B95 S 14 04 S 15 70 S 7 42 S 7 65 5 9"r; S 14 84 3 15 70 S 9 Fi4 S T 85 I7 796 E f 90B S ii 70 S 5 83 S 7 A5 1A f% S i 1 68 E 15 ~p S 7 42 5 7 R5 5 R% S 14 04 S 15 70 ~ 5 ftd S ! 85 94 6°/ S 11 G6 t 7 p5 S 7 42 E 7l15 5 R°~ S 14 ~4 S 15 ~0 ~ 5 63 E 13 74 S 7 q7. E 73 74 a 7 47. E 1~ 7A S 7 42 E 57 74 S 9 SQ S 13 7A S v 83 $ 19 74 S 7 42 3 1174 S 5 B7 S 1a 74 S 7 42 E i4 74 1'~~ firy„ S 85 1°k S AF 1% S 85 1% 3 44 0% S 135 6~. E 85 1~ S 1]5 G'Y S BS i% y 11 G6 1A 84 1 q AA 14 tlA i9 OII l i 68 14 B4 11 88 1A OA ~ E E a y S E 3 a 27 49 2) 4E~ 27 4A z7 qq Q7 4R 27 d0 27 40 11 7A 7.7 AB S a S a $ 3 E S S 11 AO 31 40 31 40 31 AO 31 49 91 40 9i 40 31 40 ai nn 3 3 S E y S § E a 42 39 42 39 4? '19 42 39 42 19 A2 9~3 42 33 'i1 AO 47 39 Sr Rec Cnlr 3r t~ee Cntr Heed Park SMC AddiUOn 80175 a0 Audllo~lum 107.I17 100 doslyn NaN 781i7 9C1 Rec Room nla n!a S 9 54 S 10 'i5 8 S% S 19 OB 3 20 70 S 12 20 f 10 35 15 ?~ S 24 40 S 2U TO S 17. 20 S 10 35 -15 2Y S 24 40 S 1~ 35 S 9 54 S 10 35 R 5°!n S 19 08 5 2U 70 E 9 54 E tR i f S 12 20 S 16 ti E 12 20 S 18 11 E 9 54 S 1 B 11 B9 995 E 4B 5~ a 4B 5°Y, S B9 9~/, S 19 OR 2h 40 24 40 19 OB S S E S 36 23 36 23 18 11 36 2~ y 3 S 5 41 40 41 AO 41 4U 4 Y 40 3 f E 3 55 6g 55 R9 d 1 d0 55159 Joslyn Park Mnrlna Park Virg Ave Pk Memodal Pk Audtlorlum f 08l18 7?(1 Audilonum tOB~1R f?0 Auddamm IOB118 120 CAti Raom 126121 13p S 9 54 E 72 B5 34 79'o S 19 06 S 25 7U i 12 20 S !2 85 5 396 f .^.A 40 ; TS ~d S 12 7.0 S 12 BS 5 34~ S 74 40 f 25 7(7 S t? 20 S 12 BS 5 3~ S 24 40 S 25 70 E 9 54 u 22 49 S 12 20 S 22 44 S 12 20 S 27 49 S 12 20 5 ?.2 49 135 7yo S 84 3% S P4 9 k S BA 345 S 19 08 2? 40 24 A4 24 40 S 3 a S 44 9B 44 9i~ 44 98 44 96 S S S S 51 A0 5i 40 51 AQ 57 4o S 3 a S 68 99 89 39 B9 39 6q 'S9 Memartal Pk Gymnasfum n!a n!a E 56 f 0 ~ 58 10 0 09o E 70 38 S 75 Oa ~ 56 10 S 56 10 6 5~ S 70 98 S 75 00 Mlh N!A S!alllnp ~ e9 7998/99 Ralp a I O 67R~r I'~oposed f 9991p0 Ra~e $ i0 98Ihr Commu-rlty. Many users In thls category use (acllit~es at noR~staHed times and ~re r.harr~ed a ppr hot~r for staft fee in adddion lo the rental rate Tlie staff(ing iQe wauld he eliminated for uses from 9arn - 11pm daily (Virfllnla A~enue Park, M- 7h Sam - 8pm, Fn 8am - 7pm, Sat 9am - 2pmy Please Note Capacitles vary from facdiiy to facdity depending upon square footage, placing of exits, amount of furniture and equipment in !he room Renlal r~tes had nol prevlously heen eslabllshed for uses by ~or-Profit Companres Rates fOr commercial ventures and filminA In park huildinr~s a Delln~Nons far columns R- F are stated an tlie Park Fa~rl~ty lJsagQ CatAgories shPPt re listed separalefy RenEa! tee waivers may be avadahie far collabarallve programs, Clfy sponsored programs, rw,sident youlh prou~s ~nd 5M neighhorhood graups NOn-resident rates for Reed Park are the snme as resident rates duP to Pronosd~on A[unding requrrements A staffing fee wlll 6e assessed for facildy usage outside of normaf aperaling hours facfees 5/18199 C~ty of 5anta Monica, Community and Cultural Services Depa~tmer~t Ken Edwards Center Rentai Fees ~ ~.ar~citx Sanauet E~IGlllky. Ra4m I~ir.e ~air.sltabl~ Ken Edwards Cntr Sfnall Mlg Rooms 40 - 50 2414 - 30l5 700A ~ 100F3 100 AQl13 1 p3 & 1 Q4 8 105 125 9UI15 ~~~~.~tgt P~'9t~.~d (3 hr block} Pronoses! P_CQ~45ed 189~t9$ 1898t24l~0 i~$!~ 99~91ZQOQ ].59~1~ t89912444 '/o ~r.~eod~~~ ~r~5etrlc.e~ ~a Rer.~rate ~~rate b N9n~itt Non_qr.oFit Gh~nse ~aprQi~! Non_pc~t Ghaqg~ P...rfYa~_ ~d~!ate ~hange '$ 9U 00 $ 12 50 25 0% nla n/a $ 33 33 $ 35 00 4 77°/d $ 20 [Kl $ 24 4fl 2Q p% $ 7 50 3 70 UO 33 3"/n ~ fi6 67 $ 74 Op a 76% S 25 00 ~ 30 00 20 0% $ 45 00 $ 20 0~ 33 3°10 $ 83 33 $ 90 04 7 41°!0 ' Ken ~dwards Center hours are Mon - T'hur, 8 00 a m- 10 OQ p m, Fri 8, Sat 8 00 a m- 5 d0 p m Uses outside of these times will require a staffing fee of $10 88 per hvur, s~b~ect to Department approval Please allow three weeks from sece3pt af completed appl~cation ior processmg ~~he rental rates indicatecf above are per hour of use All rentals must pay a minimum of two hours ` Permits requested on C~ty hol~days wdl be grant~d dependen! upon staff~ng avadabi~ity A$1 ~ 88 per hour staffing fee w~N be ass~ssed ~n adddion to 1he rental iee C~ty holidays are IVew Year's ~ve, IVew Year's Day, Martfr~ Luther King nay, Pres~der~#s Day, Memonal Day, Independence Day, Labar Oay, Tlianksgiving & cfay after, Christmas E~e and Christmas Day ' Pe~m~ftees must agree to folfow the Ken Edward Center Usage - General Rules, corr~plei~ an Applicatio~ form and with the excep#ion of SM City permittees, a Certifacation form Perrnits wdl be issued in accordance with the Ken ~dvuarcEs Ce~ter Usage Caleganes ' Non-profit organizations conducting fund rais~nc~ evenks wdl be charged the prwate rate. '' ~he Ken Edwards Center is not available for cor~mercia~ ver~tures "` Filming rates are listed separaiely '` Rental iee wa~vers are avatlable for City ftantied non-profit orgarnzations and SM ne~c~~~borhood groups facfees 5118/99 ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~. ~ - .' ~ Other ' Staff ~s recommendrng a retumed check process~ng fee of ~25 00. The City ct~rrently does not ha~e an standard retumed c~eck processing fee There are sEgnificant bank ' and staff costs ~nvalved in processmg the bad checks and coflect~o~ of funds due ' Adopt~on af this ~ee shauld serve as a deterrer~t to bad checks ' ' 1 ' ' 1 ' 1 , ' ' 1 ' ' ~ -_ - _ _- _ -- ,~~:.~<~ - - _ - - - ,' - .- - _ :~;=.~-.;~ ~=:=`k = '~ -._ ~ _ _ _ _ _ . - ; - . ~ . , _ ~ ° _ _ - - - _ ~ , ~ - - ; -~~~~-.=_.~ - , - ~ - - ~ - • - - ' • -_ - - ~ Re~ise~fe~~s=of - - ~ - . - - ~~ = _ ~ 711798~?ei~J~~ o~ P~apose~F`~ee. per D'n+ision: Vanoas _ _ ~ _ ~ ~ - S~eritice ~` ° ~~ NEW FE~S Retc~rned Check Processmp Fee er retumed rterr~ S25 00 f , ' ' ' ' ~ ' ~ ' , ' 1 , ' ' 1 ~ 1 ' t ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ' ' ' 1 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ~ ' ' , 1 F 1CMANAGERIINFQITEMISoIidWasteRates wpd May 20, 1999 INFORMATIDN lTEM To Mayor and City Co~r~ai From City Staff Sub~ect Propased Ref~se Rate Char~ges [ntroduction Santa Monica, Cahforn~a This Ir~formation Item presents tf~e resufts of an analysis of revenues, expenditures and fund ba~ance pro~ections far the SoE~d Waste Fund In addition, a summary of proposed changes to rates is presented Backqround The Solid Waste D~visi~n is responsibfe for residential and commercial ref~se collection, recycling programs, the private haul~r permit sys~em, ~ransfer station operat~ons, street swee~ing, beach ma~n'tenance, Th~rd Street Promer~ade maintenance and downtown parking structure mamtenance The Sohd Waste Management Fund receives revenue through fees, charges, and interfund transfers The ma~or sources of revenue for the di~ision are refuse fees ~80%) and transfier s~atian fees (12%) Tf~e ma~anty of the division's budget falls into three ma~o~ ex~aense categones labor costs (36%), ~ehicle replacemer~t ar~d mamtenance costs (31 %) and d~sposal costs (13%}. 1 ' ln the past two yea~s the So~4d Waste Dtv~s~on has ~mplemented new programs and made operat~onal changes in order to flperate more efficiently. Examples of th~ changes are listed below • Transitioned to clean burn~ng CNG ~e~icles for most of Solid Waste's operafions • Impiemented one-person automated refuse collection far most residential and some commercial customers to improve collec#ion efficiency and reduce employee in~ur~es ~ lmplemented a yard waste col{ection pragram withaut requiring additional vehicles ar personne! • Replacedapproxfmately2,OQdoldmetalbinswithplastic300-galEor~cantainersthatlast 3-4 t~mes long~r and require less mamtenance than metal bms. • Replaced 1,~04 metal bins currentfy used for commercial refuse collection and some multi-family colfections with new or refurbished metal bins The di~isian's new CNG powe~ed front loaders wsll be co~lect~ng the new or refurbtshed ~i~s • fn Jur~e, staffwill impl~ment a co-mmgled autamated c~rbside recycling program far approximatefy 600 homes TF~~s program wifl be ex~anded next fiscal year The last time rates were increased was m Ju~y of ~ 994 S~nce that time, salarEes ha~e ~ncreased 13.7% and veh~cle mamtenanc~ and replacernent costs have risen 18% Staff ~s recammending changes in rates that will resul# in an '! 1 5% revenue enhancement ta the Solid Waste F~nd m Fiscal Year 1999-00 T~e proposed rate increase will improve cash flaw to the Solid Waste F~nd and is pro~ected to increase the fund ba~ance to a satisfactory 2 ' ' ' , ' ' ~ , ' 1 ' , ' ~ ' ' ' ' ' ' , ' ~ ~ ' ' ~ reserve level ~#-nro m4nths vf o~eratmg expenses} by #he end of fiscal ~ear 2~4~-02 Discussion In 1992 the City modified the refiuse rat~ structure to encourage bo4h waste reduction and recycl~~g as part of an overal~ p~ar~ ta comply wtth #he state mar~dated reduct-on goal of used con~amer sizes and collection freq~ency as the bas~s for fefuse fees Also, the flat 50% by the year 200~ At #f~at time a valume based rate structure was ~mplemented which muiti-family unit charges were reduced while individual container charges were instit~ted Volume ~ased rate structures, also known as PayAs You Throw (PAYT) rat~ systems, are recommended by the Federal En~~ronmental Protection Agency and ~he California Integrated Waste Managemer~t Baard (CIWMB) as a way ~o encourage waste reduct~on ' and recycling ~ ' ' i An mteg~al part of all PAYT rate systerns is the eliminat~or~ of fixed rates and volume d~scounts #or large waste generators Rather than propasmg art across the board rate increase, staff recammends modifcation of the rate sfructure to further promote the concept af PAYT The fo[lowing changes to the rate structure are recommend~d- ' • Increase rates for large 95-gallon containers for single fam~ly homes at a higher ~ percentage than 68-gallon rates to further encourage waste reduct~an and recyclir~g • Reciuce muft~-fam~ly unit charges by 50°/Q from $12 ~8 to ~a6 00 per unit and mcrease ' mu~t~-family contarner rates to ~ncflurage recycfmg and waste reductron ~ 3 1 • Ad~ust rates to eliminate ~olume disco~nts, thereby elimmatmg discounts for large waste producers • Remvve st~eet s~rveeping cha~ges from cammerc~al refuse rates and cseate a separate charge for stree# sweeping based on a more equ~table basis for d~stributmg the cost of these services The table ~eiow summar~zes the changes to smgle family rates Pro~sased Single Family Rates Sesv~ce Curre~t Proposed % Levei Rate Rate Increase ~-68 Gallon 35 53 39 QO 9 77°/a 1-95 Gallon 42.14 ~0.00 18 65% 2-95 Gallon 83.44 100 00 19 85% NOT~ The City does not charge single fam~ly res~dences for 95 gallon green waste recycl~ng containers Very #ew customers changed from a 95-gallon cantaEner to a 68-gallon conta~ner after the yard waste recycf~ng program was implemented To promote recycfmg and waste reduction, staff recommencfs that the rate far a 95-gallo~ container be increased 18 65°/fl compared #o a 9 77% increase for a 68-gailan conta~ner_ Th~s propased rate structure is expected to result in more customers changing to the 68-gallon container by reducing, reusing and recycling to lessen the ~mpact of the rate increas~ 4 ' ' ~ 1 ~ ' , , ~ , ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ 1 ' , ' ' ' ' , 1 ' ' 1 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' , 1 1 ' The tabfe below depicts how the proposed rates effect multi-fam~ly customers Samples of Proposed ~Vlulti-family Rates Customer Service Samples Le~el G Unit Bldg. 1- b~n lxweek 32 Unit Bldg. 1- ~in 6x~s week 48 llnit Bldg. 2- bin 6x's weelc rncE a bin roll-aut chargE 50 llnit Bldg. ~- b~n 3x's weelc 91 Unif Bldg. 3- b~ns 6x's week incl a charge far a bin stored on C~ty land Gurrent Proposed Rate Rate 922.28 729.00 685.36 750.00 1327.16 1704.f#0 753 40 579.00 2D63.74 23T6A0 °/a Increase 5 50% 9 43°fo 28.~~°la -23.15% 15.13% Under the proposed rate struc#ure, rates paid by multi-fam~ly custamers wiff be based more ~eavtly on the r~umber of contaiRers and #t~e col~ection frequency rather than or~ #he fla# per-unit charge By reducing tfi~e fla# per-unit charge from $12 OS to $6.00 p~r-u~it and increasing the conta~ner charges, customers who recycle and produce less refuse are rewarded by paymg considerably lower rates As the table abo~e ~emanstrates, finro apartment buddings can be close to the same sEZe but pay very different refuse rates A 50 unit build~ng tf~at has one bEn coliected #hree #imes per-week would pay $579 00, compared to a 48 un~t buildmg t~at has two bms colEected 6 times per-week that w~uld pay 51704 OQ TF~is new pric~ng structure wauid pravrde an ecanomrc mcenttve to awners af multi-family build~ngs to promote recycl~ng and waste reduct~an ~ragrams to the~r tenants 5 ~ The rate study completed by the S~lid Waste Dfvis~on found that the cost of cleaning the ' streets in commercial areas (mcfud~ng street sweeping and collecting htter from ' rec~ptacfes} was not being recovered by cQmmercral street swee~mg charges Custamers that c~oose a rivate hauler ra#her thar~ the Ci to collect their refuse a a street ~ P tY P Y sweep~ng only charge (~57.~4 bi-monthly) Street Sweepmg charges are fnc~uded in the ' sefuse ~ates cha~ged ta commeresal l~usinesses that choose tE~e C~ty as thesr servtice ' prav~der The s#udy also founc~ t~at a#lat rate for tf~ese se~tices does not fasrfy distr~bute tll~ C05t O'F tF1~58 S~r1iiCES Rates shoufd vary fn such a way that Varge commerc~al 1 buildmgs and office comp~exes which gen~rate more street debris and ~itter pay a higher ~ fee than smaller commercial pro~ert~es 1 In an efforf to more fairly dis#ribute street sweeping ct~arges, a new rate structure was ' developed using water meter saze (an rnd~cator of a property's impact or~ street ' cleanEiness) Meter size was selected ~ecause #~~gher water consumption is relafed to property size and buiid~ng usage Proper~ies that ha~e a largermeter occupy a larger area, ' accommodate mo~'e people, and genera#e greater traffic, all ofwh~ch d~rectly impact street ' debris and litter The taller bu~ldir~gs #hat have larger mefers are alsa lacated in commercial areas of the city that rece~~e street sweeping six times per-week Afthough ' #~eir street fro~tage may not be e~ctensi~e, they cor~tnbute to the need for, aRd recEive, a ' higher leve! of service than other areas Water meters des~gnafed for fire sprinklers would ' be exempted from the above cf~arges Staff researched the concept flf charg~ng for street sweeping ba~ed on the acfual curb miles swept ~n front of each commerc~al customer It t 6 ' 1 ' ' , ' 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ' 1 ' ' ' ' 1 ' ' 1 was ~Jeterm~ned that this system wovld not equ~tably account for hig~ r~se bU~}d~ngs that have a smaller street frontage but cons~derably more impact a~ street cleanliness This new rate structure for street sweeping is shown belaw Proposed Bi-monthly Commercial Street Sweeping Charges ini,.~.,~ ne,.a.... c._.. I n~.,,_.,_ ___ ~e_s-- (~ iT1C1l .Sy L~ 1 inch ~2 33 1 5 mch 78 49 2 inch 104 6fi 3 inch 156 99 4 inch 209 31 6 inch 393 97 Nota Water meters desrgnated far fire sprmklers ~,vould be exempted fresrr~ the abvve charges The Salid Waste Di~ision ofFers o~er 6D0 different service ie~els for commercEal refuse customers CommercEa! rates for C~~r ser~ice will be prese~ted d~fferently an ~Future bills, because street sweepmg charges #hat are currently inclu~ed in those rates, will be separated au# and charged as a separate lir~e item o~ the bill The new billing forrnat will make ~t easier for busmesses to compare the cost of C~ty refuse serv~ce witf~ the cost of private hauler trash ser~~ces that a~erate in the City 7 The table belaw depicts how proposed rate st~ucture changes w~l! effect some o~the more popular service levels of commercia[ service Proposed Camrrtercial Rate Increase ~xamp~es Actual Customer Service Current Propased % Examples Level Rate Rate Increase Customer-A 1-2CuYd bm-9x's 908.B2 118.33 8 9% CuStomer-B 1-2CuYd bm-2x's 779.29 290.49 17 4% Gustomer-C 3-2CuYd b~n-2x's 502.33 552.99 10 0% NOTE ~or comparrson purposes the proposed rates include the new vanable street swee~ing charges based on water meter sizes The amovnt of increase differs between customers becausE street sweepmg charges vary according to water meter size. Although refuse rate structures and services ~ary from c~ty to city, a comparison af refuse rates wit~ neEghbormg cities was conductecf The attached s~nrey mdicates that the new rates are consistent w~th rates charged in other cfties f n adc~ition to comparing rates, the chart can~rasts services and points out factors that can impact rates, such as proximity of a city to a far~df[If 8 ' ~ ' ' 1 ' ' 1 ' ' 1 ' ~ ' 1 ~ ' ' ' ' ' t , ' ' ' ~ 1 ' ' ' ' 1 ' 1 ' , 1 Impact of Rate Chanqes T~e tabte below c~eprcts the projected furrd balance at the e~d of ~aeh frscai year for fY~e next fi~e years The frst ~~ne is the projected fund balance based on current rates. The second line is the pro~ected fund balance assuming #he impleme~tafion of new rates in FY 1999-DO and an annuaf increase based on the CPI beginr~ing in FY 00-01 FY 99-00 FY 00-0'! FY 01-D2 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 Pro~ected Fund Bafance S(~7,1fi0) S(761,213) $(2,285,811} 5(3,683.846) $(52$3,065) at Current Rates Pro~ected Fund Bafance With revised rates anci ~911,071 ~2,069,572 S2,427,622 $3,242,792 $4.235,066 CPI Incceases At current rates, the pro~ected five yearfu~d balance would be m a defiat at the end af next fiscaf yea~ With the praposed revenue rncr~ase and an annual CPI ad~ustm~nt, tf~e fund balance would mcrease to a satisfactvry levef by fiscal year 2p00-0~ and ma~ntam that IeWel far the remainder of the fi~e year period Although this analysis ~ncludes an inflation ad~ustment, it does not mclude increased exper~ditures associated with futur~ capital improvement pro~ects The proposed rate inereases and mod~ficatio~s to the rate sfructure far bath refuse collection and street sweepmg wa~ld be adopted along wrth the FY 1J99-20Q0 budget Rates would become effecti~e for ser~~ces provided after July 1, 1999 A b~llmg insert would be ~ncluded with b~lls mailed beginnmg September 1, 1999 that would explain the 9 _ ' ' rate mcrease and changes to the rate structure. ~ Summary ' The chan es ta ra~es that sca ort the Sof~d Waste ~und are needed to s~ ort the vehic~e 9 pP Pp replacement program, new pragrams implemen#ed wi~hout a rat~ change and cost af livmg ' salary increases The ra#e changes are crit~cal m an effort to ~mprove the cash flow and ' fhe ~und balance which ha~e been eroded by rising costs and cap~~ai equt~ment purchases f h I ' over t e last five years n additior~, ta eliminate signi icant increases suc~ as thrs ~n the future, staff recommends that refuse rates be acfjusted annually based on CPl increases ' and studied e~ery fi~e years to ensure that the rates rEmain equitable and cornpe#iti~e , Prepared by Craig Perkir~s, Environmental PubE~c Works Mana~ement D~rector ' Joe Delaney, Solid Waste Operations Manager ' Attachme~t SahcE Waste Rate Comparable Cittes Sunrey ' 1 ' ~ ' t 10 ' i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H ~ ~ .~ - a t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w ^1^I ~ ~~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ i ~ t~ ~ O C~ ^^~ ~ r ~ ~^r ~ r~ ~ ^~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (:'[TY OF SAN I'A MONIC'A SOI,II) WAS'I'F RATF, CUMPAK~SnN 13~-MON'1'l1LY ILAT~ 5~nta Monica I3everly i~lillq Culvcr City P:~sadcna~ Etesidential Sin~fe H`~~ni1y ,~39.00 ~59.85 $35 22 $30 3fr Notcs 65 (~~11on Ycr Lot-90U0 sqft Properly 'L"axes ~)S (ialluii Cotremcrci~l $66.U(~ $~ 57 00 Max $! GO 4!) ~]~i7 3CI NUlcs 2 cuyd T'ra~lchise H~:ulers 3 cu.yd. 3 cu.yd. Solid Waste Scrviccs Rate Sysiem Vareable Variable Fixcci V~iriahlc by eont~ir~cr sizc by ~nt s~ic llai r~ttc by cc-nia~ncr s~~c Transfcr Station Ycs Yes Yes No Charge f'or r,xtra Pick-ups Yes Yes Yes Yes Ytirciw<isCe C;nilect~nn Yes Ycs Yes Yes Curbsicie Recyclmg Yes Yes Yes Yes C~~y I faztirdo~s Wasle Ycs No No No *P~sadena is located wrthin S miles o1.~their lancllill and th eref~~re nc~ transicr sta~ ian costs are incurred. ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ W ..__.._..___.._________ , ' 1 ~ ~ , ' ' 1 ~ ' , ' ' ~ ' ~ ~ i CM JR lcmanagerlinfortemine~ghborhoodsup~ort wpd May 20, 1999 1NFORMATlON ITEM TO Mayor and C~ty Cauncil FROM City Staff SUBJECT Ne~ghborhood Organization Support introduction Santa Monica, CA This ~nfiormatior~ item propas~s s~tvices, programs, and fund~ng leveis for encouraging res~dent participatEOn in neighborhaod organizations and enhanc~ng neighborhood organization partnership with City Hall in the caming fiscal year A$60,000 allocation for neighborhood support, to fund the efforts describe~ here, has been inc[uded ~n the proposed 1999-00 mu~~cipal budget Backqround In 1997, all City suppar~ for Santa Montca neighborhood associatEOns was el~minated and the Neighborhood Support Genter dismantled In 1998, Council endorsed a series c~f acti~~t~es a~med at er~~anc~ng ouerall comm~n~ty rnvolwement in government, w~th neighbarhaod organizat~ons as well as indi~idual residents expected to benefit from the efforts (see A#tachme~t) !n addit~on. as pa~t of the 1998-99 budget process, the Counc~f adopted a collaborati~e ob~ective on Community Outreach & Customer Service wr#h commun~#y-wide aetron steps that wau~d berr~frf ne~gF~bornood groups as well as ~ 1 ~ Rndi~fdual residents. That ob~ect~ve w~il contfnue tf~rough the commg year Smce 1997, not only ha~e fi~e neigh~orhood organ~zations remained actfve, vne new group has emerged and there is energet~c leadership amang the groups Foilowing fhe public ~earing on the 1999-00 budget m January, City Counc~~ directed staff to rev~ew var~ous neig~barhood suppart modeis and make recammendations for "re~nst~tuting some le~el of support" far neighborF~ood organizations, with the inter~t of encourag~ng exist~ng associat~ons, nurturEng fledglmg groups, ar~d facihtating neighborhood activity Staff also was asked to consider lessons learned o~er the past few years abou't ne~ghborhood ~Tganization mvoi~emer~# in ci~ic iife and how model ~rograms migh# davetai~ wrth m~tiat~rtes afready ur~derway (e g, t~e Leadershrp Series} Discussiori Pr~or tQ recommending an appraach to neEghborhvod support ~n '~ 998-99, staf€ sevtewed models from the Cal~forn~a citEes of Concard, Pasadena, S~mi Valley, Escond~do a~d Sacramento, SpoKane, Washington, Boulder, Colo~ado, and Cincinnati, Ohio #n add~t[an fo revis~t~ng these rnodels, staff looked at ~eighborhood suppor~ mod~ls from 5ar~ta Ana, San Jase and Glendale, CalEfornia, Seattle, Was#~ingtor~, and Westm~nster, ~olorado. From among these models, certain elements seem readily adaptable to Santa MonECa and wo~ald, toge~her, be a pract~cai ar~d helpfuE package of resources to achieWe the 2 ' ~ ~ ~ ' ' i ' ~ , ~ ' ' ' , , ' ~ , ' ' ~ ' ~ i i ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ~ ~ ' 1 neighbarhood support goals outl~ned by Counc~l in January_ These elements inciude. ^ Teams of city employees identified to w~rk with ne~ghbarhood leaders ^ Free workshops and tra~n~ng appartuniti~s for neighbarhood groups ^ Ar~nua! +~e~ghborhoods conferer~ce ~ Reso~rce library for n~ighborhood organ~zations and mdividuals (~ideos and books on fundraising, tenants rights, mediating neighborhaod d~sputes, etc ) ^ A community "toolk~t" on a varjety of ne~ghborE~ood concerns and how to get help fram C~ty Hai! and other agencies and organizatians ^ NeighborE~ood Matching Fund and Min~-Grant programs Most promising at fhis ~uncture are the Neight~orhood Matching Fund and Mini-Grant programs used m both Seattle and San Jose Smal~-scale versions of these pro~rarns would alfaw the Gity ta support Sanfa Mornca r~eighborhood argarnzat~ons and neighborhood-based pro~ects, wl~ile a~lowing the organEZatians ta mainta~n the au#onamy that has characterized their relationship with the City over the past finr~ years These program concepts are descnbed below Neighborhood Organiza~ion MatcF~ing Fund Program Genera~ recommendafions for the Neighborhoad OrganEZat~on Ma#ch~ng Fund Program would ~nclude earmarking twa-thirds of the avajlable funds {$24,Q00--see Budqet/Frnanc~at tm~act sectron that follows) for the exist~ng s~x active neig#~~orhood 3 organizations (Frier~ds of 5unset Park, Mid-C~ty Neighbors, North of Mantana Assaciation, Ocean Park Community Organizatian, Pico Neighborhoflc# Asspciation and W~Ishire/Montana Neighborhood Coalit~on) ir~ amounts up to $4,OOQ per organ~zatfon, to #urther eommun~cation ancf b~~ld memt~ership within the organizatiflns and the n~ighborhoods they represent Shoufd acfd~tional neighborhood groups achre~e 501c3 stat~s durmg the year and meef criteria established for part~c~pat~on in the Ma#ching Fund Program, addi#ional funding would be ~dentifed for the program Quaiifiying for 5up~ort To qual~fjr for partrci~ation in the Neighborhoad Organization Matchmg Fund Program, i# is recommended #ha# a nefghborhood orgarnzat~on must . ^ Represer~t a commor~ly recogn~zed ~etighbarhaod w~tl~m Santa Mon~ca ^ Possess a c~rrent 501 c3 ar 5a1 c4 certification (certificatio~ proof and copy af ~ylaws on fle wEth the City} ^ Ha~e an elected, acti~e board of directors or officers, in accordance with associat~on bylaws, wha meet regularly, with meetmgs open to the public ^ Hold at least one generaf inembership meeting ~nnual~y ^ Maintain a membersh~p list of at I~ast 50 acti~e mernbers (restding at separate addresses) or ~ percent of eligibie hausehol~s w~thin the ne~ghborhoad boundaries as defined in the bylaws, whiche~er is greater 4 ' ~ ' ' ' ' ' r i ' ~ ~ , ~ ' , , ' ' ' ' t ' ' ' ~ i Neighborhood Project Mini-Grants The balance of the funds ($12,000} wo~ld be a~ailable to other neighborhood-based groups (e g, Green 7eams, Ne~g~tborhoocf Wa~ch, orgarnzed but ~ton-504 c3 ~eighborhood mterest groups) or indiv~duals who come together to work on a spec~fie neighborhaod need (e g, landscaping a commar~ area, organizing a pedestrjanlbiice safety farr for ne~ghbarhood chrldren, condtactrng a neighbor~ood rnterest survey, collectEng and storing emergency preparedness supplies) in amounts of ~500-$1Q~0 per pro~ect, also requiri~g a matc~ from the ap~lican#s. Membership m a neighborhooc~ arganizatran would nat precEude an mdivrdual from beir~g mvolv~d m a minr-grant pro~ect i 1 i ~ ~ ~ ' ' ' Apphcations for mafcf~ing fur~d grants couirl be mad~ at any time dunng tFre year The professianal services, cash or a corn~ination, with an agr~ed upan value established for groups' contribution toward the match could be i~ volunteer iabor, materials, various efernents of t~e m-kmd match Shauld Council direct staff to include tE~e Neighborhood Organ~zation Matching Fund and NeighborF~ood Project Mini-Granfs programs in the mix of neigF~borf~ood support programs and services #or the coming year, specifc critena fo~ applicants and pro~ects, pro~e~ct selection Gomm~ttee makeup (to include City and community representat~on), se(ection cri~eria, ar~d proposed schedufe will be developed with ir~put ~rom neighborhaod organiza~ians ' ~ BudqetlFinanaal Impact The proposed use of ~60,000 Neighborhood Support Line }tem ~s described below The programs or sennces w~ll be coordmated by the Gity Manager's Office, with the City's Comrnunications Coordinator as the responsible admEntstrator and as the primary lia~son with the neighborhaod groups SenricelPrograrn Estimated Cost Neighbarhaad Organ~zation Matching Fund and Ne~ghborhood Pro~ect Mir~~-Grants Programs $ 3fi,00Q Halfi-day semi-annual workshops for communify leacf~rs fln such sub~ec#s as fund-raising. consensus-building, strategic pianning -prio~ity attendance to neighborhood organizations 6,OQ0 Two Citywide direct mailers annually to mclude mformation on a11 r~e~ghborhood organizatians, programs far ne~ghbor- #~oods, Cify Hall contacts, etc 10,Qa~ Crty co-sponsorship of ~ssues fion.~ms on an as-needed basGS throUghout the year (~rovid~ng space, he~ping publtic4ze, malcsng educat~o~al mate;tiai ava3table} 3,flOfl s ~ ' i ' ' ' i ' ~ ~ i 1 , ' 1 t , ' 1 ~ ~ , ' ~ ~ ' ' ' ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ' ' ' C~ty-pa~d ad~ertising ~n Ioca[ newspa~ers, on-lir~e and on-air (CEtyTVj, rn buses, er~couragmg invol~ement iR nerghborhood organizativns (ads #o be developed with the groups} 5,000 TOTAL $ GO,ODQ Otl~er Efforts Other efforts, begur~ ~n 'I998-99 or to b~~in next year, with no ac~ditiona[ fur~d~ng required inclUde ^ Regular (2-3 times/year} meetmgs of officers of all neighborhoo~ orgarnza~ians with appropriate C~ty staff, Ci~y-hosted, agenda de~eloped ~ointly {helping formalize iast year's inforrnal "Neighborhoods Network") ^ L~stfn~ of ne~ghborhood organ~zat~on contacts, meetfr~g dates, t~mes, locat~ons ~n eac~ regular ~ssue of Seascape and on the Ne~ghborhoods page of the City Web site ^ Compie#e Council agenda packets, one set of planning documents, no#ices of upcomfng Board and Commission meefings ar~d cammunity workshaps, and other key ~nfarmation provided in a timely man~er to e~ch af the currentiy acti~e neighbor#~ood organizations, to allow for neighborhood awareness of and dialog on rssues_ Organ~zat~ons may chonse electror~~c or hard co{~y if both formats are a~aitable 7 ^ Development and mamtenance of Neighborhoad Resources Library ^ Ne~ghbarhood Ertformafion in City Hall On Call (automated city mfo/fax by p~one) ^ ~eadership Series (6 times a year, 3 courses held to-date in 1999) ~ How-ta Resaurce Manuals ~e g,"Na~igatmg City Ha1E" manual ~eing p~epared for.luly Readersh~p Ser~es course) ^ Ctty s#aff attendance, by invitation, at neig~borhood organ~zation boafd meetrngs and annual meetmgs ^ Spansormg meet~ngs for start-up nerghbor#~ood groups at C~ty facilities ^ "Get lrrvolved" postcard mailing ^ Maintaining & encouragir~g use of City's master cammunity events caiendar ^ Pravid~ng lia~son between grouPs and C~ty dspartments ^ Lin~Cmg from the City Web site to r~e~ghborhood organ~zation Web sites Conclus~a~ ~'he propased strategies and fundi~g for City support of neighborhood organizations and encouragement af neighborhood activit~es and mvoi~ement in c~vic iife, as outlmed in #his information item, were developec~ and refined with input from neighborhoad organ~zation ieadership Each neighborhood organ~za#iar~ was in~ited to a meet~ng on May 1f to discuss the match~ng fund concept and ather efements af the proposaf F~fteen people attended, re~resentmg four af the neighborhood organizations and three other areas o~ the community with ~nterests specific ta their ne~ghborhoads ~South Beach, Downtown and Borderline 5anta MqnECa-Venice). Leaders af the ather two 8 ! ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ' ' 1 , , ' nefghborf~ood organizat~ons had discussed the draft proposal w~th C~ty staff prior to the ~ meeting Neighbarhood organizat~ons ~ave expressed suppart for the proposal ~ Pre ared b Jud Rambeau, Communicatians Coordinator P Y Y ~ City Manager's Office Attachment June 1998 Information Item on Camm~n~ty In~o[vement and I Ne~ghbor}~ood Organ~zations ~ ~ ' ~ ' ' ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ' , 1 1 1 1 1 t ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 June 1998 Information ltern on Community In~olvement and Neighborhood arganizations ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ CM JR tcmanagert~nfoifemtne~ghborhoods Santa Monica, Ca[~forn~a June 8, 1998 lNFORMATlON ITEM T~ Mayor and City Council FRQM City Staf~ SUBJECT Cornmunity Involvement and Neighborhood Qrganiza~ions lrrtraduct~on This report pra~~des ~nformation an pians for enhancing community involvement ~n City business and addresses the ways in wMich r~e~ghbarhood organ~zations will benefit from this approach Backqround Foliawing the publ~c hearing on the '~ 998-99 City budget m January. C~ty Councii drrect~:d staff to explore options with assaciated costs for support fo neighborhoad organizations in the carnmg fiscal year Courtc~lmembers specifically recommended exploring a ~arEety vf models, re~~s~ting what other cities are doing, cor~sidering ways for neighbors ta be ~nvofved and express v~~ws wif~out ~labora#e or costly su~port structure, ex~and~ng Neigi~borhood VIlatch, de~eloprng a menu of aptrans, and findrng ways ta nurture the growth of fledglmg organizations 1 ~ D~scussFOn ~ Staff revisited research done in sprmg 1997 of neighborhood supPor# madels m cEfies ' tf~foughout Caltforr~ta and ~h~ nation, loakmg s~ec~fica4ly for c~tres of approx~mate4y the same s~ze as Santa Mo~ica Pasadena (pop 137,000), S~mi Vafley (pop 103,a00} and ~ Boulder, Calorada {pop 90,000} each provide ne~ghborhood support and the city of ~ Esconditio {pap '118,000} had a ne~gttborhoo~f su~port system, wh~ch has been drsma~tled Follow~ng is information an scope and budget of t}~ese prog~ams, to gi~e ~ Council an rdea of potential program range and costs The Crty of Santa Monica's farmer j Ne~ghb~rhood Support CeR#er budget was $294,000 (~ 995-97} ~ Pasadena Neighborhood Connection Project , Programs organ~zational suppor#, infarmatROn on city plannir~g pracess, organizmg ' ass~stance, spec+a~ 3~farmat3onal pha~e ~mes by ztip code, coofdtination w~th att~er ctity staff Staffing' 2 FTE Budget $127,300 , ~ Simi Valley Community Services Dfvision Programs n~ighborhoo~ organizing, cammunrty forums, newsletter assistance, youth , council. neEghbarhood recommendations included m staff reports ~ Staffing 1 FTE Budget $ 70,000 ~ Boulder Neighborhoods ~ Programs_ assistance with neig~barhoad organrzing, confiict mediat~an, newsletter, annual ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ neighborhood conference ~ Staffing- 1 5 FTE Budget $130,000 ~ Escondida Neighborhood ar~c~ Organiza#ionat De~~lopmen# l Programs comm~nity organ~z~ng suppor~, ne~ghborhoocf wor~CSf~op series. 3 aufreach ofFices, community hr~ks infa fine, ne~ghborhaad plann~ng ~ Staffing 10 FTE Buclget ~9a0,D00 ~ Staff also contacted additional c~t~es, loaking for models or approaches that could be ~ adapted or replicatec! m Santa Mon~ca Amon the cEtEes cantacted, thE fallowm affe~ed 9 9 ' desirable features that can be im~femented at a reasonable cast ~ ^ S okar~e liaison in Cit Hall-- staff alread on board here P ~ Y Y ) ~ ^ Sacramento (leadership academy using stafftramers--cost onlyfar ma~enals, some ~ poss~ble o~ertime for support staff) ^ Pasadena (neighborhaod cammuntcat~on networ#c--City's new Tele-Works system ~ can be applied to this use} ^ Concord, Caf~forn~a (resource manual--costs kept down through in-hvuse des~gn ~ and pr~nting) ^ C~ncinnatE (neighborhood focus groups--stafffacilEtated, materiaUtranscnptzon costs ' minimal} ~ Finally, staff conducted an in#armal reviewto determine how Santa Monica neighborhood organ~zatEOns hat~ fared s~nce the defundcng of the Neighborhood Support Cen#er Fi~e ' organi~ations have continued to meet, to ma~nta~n member rosters a~d elec# boarcis af , ' , ~ disectofs, and to prese~tv~ewpo~r~ts to C~ty Counci~ or~ sss~es of concem to ~e~ghborhoods ~ (e g, traffic, parking and zornng) Additior~ally, one ~ew group (North of Mor~tana ~ Associa#~o~} is forming and another (L~ncoln Boulevard Ne~ghbors} has ~eld issue-speafic meetrngs The var~ous neighborhood organizations ha~e created a Neighbo~hoods ~ Networ[c to address ~oint concerns The Network made a~v~nt presenfatEan to the City ~ Council a# the .~anuary 13 ~udget heanng Staff has met and communicat~d numerous times over the past few months wrth Ne~inrork representat~ves The recommendations in ~ this informafio~ r#em were formulated with their support ~ Staff determmed thaf a special allocation for nerghborhood support in the 1998-99 eneraf ~ 9 ~~nd budget is not necessary because the goals of 1} encouraging ~ncreased in~olvement ~ in c~~ic iife and Z) ass~sting i~terested members of the comm~nity ta become mare ~ knawledgeable about and to participate m cify act~~+tres and decisian-makmg are already part of the work plan for the Communicat~ons Coord~nator w~th budget support in the CEty ~ Manager's Offce ~ The goals also are addressed in the praposed Callaborat~ve 4~~ecti~e on Community ~ Qutreach & Customer Service (see attachment)_ The work plan associated with these ~ goals is adequately funded in the proposed b~dget and applies ta neighborhaod graups as wel~ as to o#her groups ar-d ~r~d~~+d~als To g~ve Caunc~l a sense af tl~e overall b~adget ~ impact of the ac#i~itEes, estimates used m budget~ng appear below Stafftime has not been ~ ~ncluded ~n the calculat~on, r~or has the cost of act~~ifies that ha~e a wider a~plication than assistance to cammuni#y groups (e g., Seascape pu~l~cation, Web s~te, public atti~tude i 4 ~ , ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' i ~ ~ ~ i ' ' ~ ~ ' su rveys) Budget/F~nancial Impact The activities listed here, artd others that may be added throughout #he year. wall be coordinated, by staff in the Commun~cations Un~t of tF~e City Mar~ager's Office Pre~iously autharized communications pos~t~ons include a community outreact~ special~st and a publica~~ons spec~alist who w~ll Join the commun~catians ca4rdinator in respondiRg to individ~al and group ne~ds in a wide ~ariety ot aTeas. ir~c~~d~ng the follawing Activity Conducting City Hall Acac~emy ~rvice a year ~Includes leadership training, meeting facrlitation, organizing techniques in additian to City functions, roles and fina~ces} PubEishing How-#o Resource Manuals ('~Getting Envo[~ed." "Navigating City Hall"} Consultmg or~ ~ssues and group process Estimated Cost $ 3,OQ0 (rnatenaEs, food, supphes) 5,0~0 (designed, p~nted in-ho~ase) S#aff ttIT1~ Only (could brmg m outside assistance when warranted} Operating a Spea[ce~s Bureau Staff time only, exis#Eng material Contmuing use of Ke~ Edward Center & park community raoms by nonprofits No addit~onal cost Sponsor~ng up to three meetings for start-up groups at city facilities No additional cost Ma~ntaming a resource iisf of mEe#mg Iocatians No addr#ionaf cost Publishing mee#mg natices in Seascape, on CityN, ~111eb site, and other existing vehicles {e.g , PD FAX) No add~t~onal cost Pro~idmg "get in~olved" postcard de[iWenes twice 5 ~ a year, with mformation on neEghborhood groups, ~ Ne~g4~5orhood Watef~, volur~tee~ opport~rnit~es, etc 8,004 Ads (same as above) in focaf newspapers 1,040 ~ Marntaming and encouragmg use of city's ~ master community events calendar Na additional cast Conductmg surveys and foc~s graups ~ on ~ssues of concern to res~dents No additional cost Ma~Cir~g generic meeting announcemer~t ban~ers ~ a~aElabl~ on-loan 500 Pro~idfng liaison betwe~n graups ~ and city departments No additronal cost Encouraging invalvement in Neighborhood Watch No addrtiona! cost , The $17,5a0 total for activities outlmed here is available in nonde artmental accounts, ~ P including public informa#ion efforts (4411), coordinated community outreach (4439} and , promot~or~/assessment of city programs (55D6) ~ conciUSior~ i Staff wrlf be a~a~labl~ to ass~st ~ndividuals and groups with a wide ~ariety of resource and ~ i~formatron needs, to pramote mvoiv~ment ~n ciwc I~fe a~d to encourage communfty-based proJects ant~ programs Tl~e Gsty's ob~ectiue w~l1 be to ass~st organ~zat~ans ~r~ meetmg the~r ~ growth and seff-sufficiency goals and ta facilitate the exchange of information with city ~ staff Advocacy acti~~~es are the independent responsibil~#y af the groups themsefves The mformatian pieces and notification acti~ities included ~n the abo~e lisf are aimed at ~ promoting irivolvem~nt in general, which Es an appropriate rale for the Ciiy ~ 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ The actfvrt~es described ~n t~is repar# w~ll ~nvolve all Crty departments and the commun~ty to butld on #he Iong-standing ~radition of cEtizen part~cipatior~ in the City af Santa Monica Prepared by Judy Rambeau, Communicatian Co~rdinatar CEty Manager's 4ffice Attachm~nt '~ ~98-99 Colla~orat~r~e ObJectrve ort Cammun~ty Outreach & Customer Service 7 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ s W ~^rr rw~ ~ ir r~^M ~ r~r r~ a~ r rr r r r^r ~r rr ~r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ pcd SF f `••plan',admm`~,ccinfo`.pro~99 «.pd May 20, 1999 InFORl1~Z~TI01~ ITEI~i TO: Mayor arZa Git~- Councz~ FR~M City Staff Santa li~ionica, Califomia SLBJECT Fiscal Year 99~00 ~~Tork Prionties For The Department Of Planning ar~d Commumt~~ De~~elopment This repart pro<<ides an update of the workload pnonties for the Plaiuiina and Comrn~uty De~elopment Department. This rzport identifies the ~~~ork presentl~- ass~gned to the Department b}' di~ision, pro~ects for the next fiscal }~ear ar~d timing ~y~hen the pro~ect u~ill be ~nitiated The pra~}ects and tim~ng are based on the staffin; levels presented in the FY 99;'00 budget The matenal is beina provided to assist the Council in establishing work pnorities for the Department and to clanfti~ th.e status of specific pra~ects Prepar~d B~~ ~uzauzae Fnck, Director Jay Tre~~mo, ~,ICP, Planrung Manage~r Lucy Dyke. Transportation Plamm~g Manaaer Ron Fuch~ti; ak~, Traffic Operatzons ~Vlanager Tim'VIcCo~rnick, Buildzn~ Official ~ t ~ ~ Pro~ects Unden~~ay CITY PL~Y\ I~ G DI~'ISIUN ~ SIGV m'VENTOR~"~~NF'ORCEMEI~~T As par~ of mult~ phase pro~ect identify and nohfy businesses, and Zmplement tYte Crty's S~;n Code ~~~h~.ch «~~11 rec~uire remo~-ai of non-conforrn~ng si~s m the ~ear 2000 per the City~'s Si~n. ~ Code Ongomg proJect El\'F'ORCEI~•fENT ACTI~~ITIES 1~ELATED TO ALTO DEALERS Al`~ REP~IR SHOPS ~ PreparaT~on of ~nformat~on ~tem pro~-zdina Council u-~th mformat~on on ordinances tkzat appl~ to auto dealers and implement enfozcement for auto repair shops Auto Dealer analvsls campleted m Fall 1999 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ' ' ~ ' PRO~'IDE I'vFOR1~1 ATIOl`T ~\T DEVELOPME\"~T ACTNI7Y THROUGHOLTT CITY Provide znforrnation to Council o~ the rate of demolrtaon and the t~~e of det~elopment activrty takmg place in the residential distncts over the last five years Tnfarmanor~ to be pro~-~ded ta Council in spnng 1999 CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE Preparation of u~date to the Crty's Circulation Element of the General Plan and associated En~ironmental Impact Report Plann~ng Commission revieu- est~mated for Summer, 1999 Ca~nc~l re~jie«- late, 1999 DO~'4''~~'~~'l'~`~T URBAI~ DESIGV PL~'~1,'TR_ANSIT ~VIALL De~-elopnnent of fmal design, construction and bid docurnents far do«rntov~~n transrt mall per direct3on grovtaed in I?o~sTnto~~n Lrban Design Plan. Design to be presented ta Counci~ summer 1999 Continued coordination v~•ith Steenna Commi~tee Antictpate canstruction to be ~den~•ay falt 2000. ~ :~.DELAIDE~ DRIVE PREFERE~TTIAL PARKL~ G DISTRICT Coordinate and track occupancy survey of parked cars in the area bounded by 5an Vicente Blvd, Ocean A~~enue, Adela.tde Dn~e and Ivlarguezzta A~.~enue for subz~nussion to the Coastal Comuusszon for its approval Sun-e}T submrtted to the Caastal Commission in January 1999, addrtional survev ~.~ork requested to occur ~ June Coastal _ scheduled in August 1999 REVIE`~' PROCEDURES FOR AIRPORT RELATED PROJECTS De~~e~opment of proced~res far the review of proJects at the Santa Moriica Au~port Draft procedures deve~oped with a subco7nmittee of A~rport Cornmission and Planning Commis5ion Procedures to be revie«•ed by Plar~un~ Commissian, Summer, 1999. Council revie`v° an#~cipated fall, 1999. 2 i ~ ALCOHOL POLICF ~ Interdepartmental effort to develop c1t~- alcohol polic~~ Informat~on ite~ to be pro~-ided to Council m spnng, 1999 Imtfate Z.anm~ Ordmance amendments for Planziing Commission ~ re~~ze~~s- in summer 1999. City Council re~-~e~v «~inter 2p00 SUST4II~!~BLE DEVELOPVIE~TT GUIDELI~"ES ~ A~amt pro~ect «-~th En~~ironmental and Pubhc Works Management Department ta de~•elop sustainable deveiopment ffuidelmes far use bt~ the dei-elopment cornznunity an Santa vlonica. Phase I of pro~ect completed, Phase II unden.~~a}~ Anticipate Plannir~g Commzssion ret~ie«~ and 1 consideration of ~idel~nes and related ardinances s~r~er 1999. Council re~~ie« late 1999 ~TE~~' ZONIIvG DESIGV~TION ~QR THE TRAI~TSPORTATI4~' RIGHT O~ ~~~AY ~ Deti-elop a new zonina di5tnct to ad~.ress short term and long term uses alon~ the ~ZTA n~ht of way Reco~nendations be~ng prepared Presentanon to Plamm~g Cornrnission anticipated fall 1999 Council presentation late 1999 a PICQ BOULE~`ARD STREETSCAPE PL.4~~ ~ Streetscape desa~n for P~co Baulevaxd ~ncludin; neti~~ street trees, med.ians. zmprot~ed bus stops. cemetery fence, gatev~~av treatment and pedestriaaa,~side~-alk light~ng Desi~ approved br~~ Council, ~iay 1998 Construction beban spnng. 1999 Completron antic~pated for November 1999 ~ CONSER~'ATIQN ELE'v1EI~T UPD•~TE ~ Prepara#zon of an update to the City's Conservation EIeznent of the General Plan and associated en~,~ironmental ~~.-ork Plannuig Commission re~le~r~ begun; estimated ta conclude in fall 1999, CouncZl re~iew- estimated for late, 1999 Final adaption est~mated for sprui~ 2000 ; TR4I~SPdRTATIQN YARDS ~f.~STER PL.4_~ Preparanon of En~~ironmental Impact Report for Master Plan after City Council acts on \U~aster ~ Plan Consultant seiect~on process under~.~~a}~ Gauncal considerahon a.n~~cipated fall 1999 BREAK~~ _ATER EIR ~ Prepare E~IR for proposed Santa Momca Bay Breakw-ater EIR in process anttcipated completion fall 1999 OPEl~ S~ACE ELEMENTrPARKS ~~TD RECREATION MASTER PLAl~ ~ Preparation of the Open S~ace Element of the General Plan and Parks and Recreation Master Plan Element and Master Plan ha~-e been conceptually approved by Ciri~ Counc~l , Enti~ronmental Impact Report preparation wnder~Tay~_ Anticipate Plarming Gommxssion, Parks and Recreation Comm~ssion reti-ie~~• faIl 1999; CounciI adoption and certification af EIR, late falUu~inter 1999 ~ MEA UPDATE Prepare update to the 199~!96 II~tEA Traffic counts began spnng, 1999 Ready for Planr~ng ~ Commission revie~v early fall, 1949 ~ ~ ~ ~ ' EUCLTD STREET HOUS~N~ q.VD VEIGHBORHOOD PARK ~ Preparatian of en~~ironmental re~~ew docurnents for proposed adaptnte reuse of CQUnty Mental Heaith buildin; to housing for ct~sabled and comn~uruty meeting roams and ad~ acent det°elapment of smaI1 neiahbarhaod park En~~xronmental Rei~ew carttp~eted 5ectian 1~6 ~ monttonnQ undez~~-ay STL~Y OF DEFIIVIT'FOI~ OF A"PROJECT" FOR PL~RPQSES OF CEQA ~ Staff to study and deveiop a proposed defimtion for w~hat constitutes a pro~ect for purpases of CEQA and zomng in order ta address the threshold far en~~ronrnental re~~Few v~~hen pro~ects are ~roposed to be locatec~ ad~acent to each other, are submztted for revlev~• concuixenrly and ~ mdnzduallv are m~nister~al but ~f cans~dered to~ether ~~ould reqiure discret~onan~ re~~ie~~ Anticzpate ~~hat a proposed approach u-i11 be brouQht forvvard to Planning Cammission in fali. 1999 and Gounc~l, late 1999. ~ BEACH IMPRO~"E;VIEI~T GROUP BIG E ) ~ Preparation of EIR and initial study~negatj~~e declaration for federally funded portaans of BIG pro~ect Final Section 106 report subinitted to Caltrans for revie~;~ ~lnticipate Cauncxl certification of en~~~ronmental documents, late 1999 r RESIDENTIr1L DEV"ELOPVIEI~T STA_VDARDS Recomrnendations for modi~ications to zonin~ ordinance development standa~rds in R'? and R3 ~ d~stnct to pro~-ide mcentn~es for on-site densrtv bonus units Recommendations pending Cauncil direct~on Council reviev~~ antic~pated late 1999 ~ HISTORIC PRESER~'ATI01T ELEMENT Iniuate preparatxon of a Yiustonc preser~-ation element to the General Plan Consultant se~ection coartpleted Draft document av°a,tlable for re~-~eu~ spnn~ 2004 ~ ~TAIN STREET I1~CIDE~TT~L ARTS .P~`VD E'VTERT~'-1~IE~-'I l~er Cvuncil direction, performance of addrtianal analysis ta ~dentify appropnate mechanism to ~ allo«~ incidental arts and entertainment on ~Iam Street_ Information Item prepared and pro~-~ded to CounciI Council report prepared and scheduled for actaon spring 1999 Actian deferred at the request of Main Street NTerchants Association and OPGO. ^ DE~rELOPMEI\rT AGREE_'VLEI~"T 1VI~\TTQRIlvG dngoing morutonng of existin~ development a~-eements to ensure compliance of pro~'ams and I unplementation of required poiicies PREFERENTL4L PARKING ZONES ~ Preparation of appropnate en~zronmental dacumentation m comphance with CEQA for preferential park~ng zo~e requests ' G_ARAGE SIZE TEXT ~VIE~~~ZENT Rei~se req~red zntenor ~imensaons for exist~ng ri;To car gara;es foz- single fam2~~~ homes wherf 4 ~ ~ ~ such structures are expanded or remodeled Plannin~ COTI1ri115510L1, 5p1'llla 1999, C~ri~ Caunczl, summer 1999 REGIONAI, C01~iPREHENSIVE PLAI~ (RCP) ~~'ork ti~~th other «~estside crties and SCAG on issues t~ed to transpar[atxon in the «~estside and re~~on as a u~hole ~Iorutor SC~-G initiat~ves Vl'ork tasks Fnclude taxi l~censin~ in~tiatives, mzxed use develapment guzdeiines, L.AX expansion mor~tonnQ, truck routes and loading zssues, RTP, Ongozng PROCESS GURRENT PL~'1~~'G CASELOAD Ongomg processing of current planning cases includmg Admu~tstrat~~~e Approti~als, Vanances, Temporar;- Use Permits, Use Permits, Condrt~ana.l L:se Perrnzts, Development Re~-iew Pez-mits Ma~or pro~ects currentl;~- in the pipeline ~nclude the T'arget Pro~ect. expansion of Lantana Center (3404 Olympic), Santa tilon~ca Studias (currently on-hold pend~ng developer mrt~ated design chan~es) ~E~~' PROJECTS F~R F~~ ~~roo PL-ANtVII~TG Ah'D E?~T<<IRONMENT.AI. REti'IE~~' FOR NEVGr CIF PRQJECTS In con~unct~on with the Library rev~e« the Lzbrary expanszon pro~ect for conslstenc~~ v~7th Crty land use and desi~ standards and inatiate preparation of environmental documentation ~~'ark to begin in summer 1999 In con~unciion «~~th EPV4'~'VI, prepare environmental re~~ieu~ documents for the bluff stabilization pro~ ect PUBLIC L~~DS TEXT AME~TDME~T ~mend the Public Lands Zoruna Aistnct to allo«~ cornm~rcia~ ach~=itv to accur on SchooI District groperty. Planznng Commission re~-ie~~ scheduled for fall, 199}, Cauncil reyietiu ~ late 1999 REVIEV4r AND REVISE AL'TO DE<4LER DEVELOP?~SEl~'T ST_A,.~TDARDS In con~uncnon with res~dents and the automobile dealer representatzves, deveIap recommendaEions to addre55 parkln~ and develapment needs for existing dealers Thzs process ~i~~Jl beg~n once the auta dealers pro~zde City staff w~ith recommendations, anticipated to beg~n fall, 1999 SA\"TA MQ1~~I~A BOLSL.EVARD STREETSC:4PE Il~'~PROVE~~ENTS After ~he design is complete for the downtoti~-n xznpro~ements. ~mprovements wi11 be desi~e~ for Santa Maruca Boule~ ard betv,.°een 7`~ Stree~ and fhe eastem Gity hmyts The process ~{~ill began in the ~rst quarter of 2000. ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ i ~ 1 1 ~ ~ r ~ AMENDME~TTS T4 THE tiQISE QRDIN~~TCE Staff to reti-~e«° anc~ recoznmend aznendments to the Noi~e Ordmance to address noise outside the current noise standards. The process «~zll begin in early ?000, ant~cipated to take approximately 15 months to complete ivIO1~T~A A'~'ENUE ?~~ASTER PL.~Iti Irutiate a master plan pracess for Viontax~a A~~e The plan ~t~ould address development standards, perrnrtted uses, p~k~x~a requirzments; public parkin~ oppartun~ties and urban design Process would begin in summer, 2p00_ CHILD CARE ~'~I~ PERC~I~T F~R ARTS ~TEXL;S STL'DY Irutiate "nexus" anaIysis to deternune pnvate developer obli~ation m pro~riding cl~ldcare ser~~~ces and fac~lrties and pubhc art contnbut~on Stud~~ ~~ould be inrtiated spnng, 2000. 6 , ~ TR.4_'lSPORTATTON tiIA1~iAGEVIEtiT DI~rISION PR4JECTS ~ DQV~'\TO~~'V PARKTI~G MANAGEMENT STUDY This pro~ect ~s a comprehensi~-e parking study of the do~Fntozt-n azea to det~elop a plan to enhance ~ the availabihty b,~ of park~n; b~~ coordinating both public and prn~ate parkxn~ facilities After se~ eral `'stake~older" meetmgs, includfnQ the Chamber of Cornmerce and Ba~~side Dastnet Corporation, a re~~ised c~raft ~s be~ng prepared arid «-ill be released for public re~-ie« in spnng, 1999 Plaruun~ Coinmiss~on re~-~eti;- is anticEpated in summer. 1999, arid Cit~- Council fall, 1999 ~ SPEED HUFI~IP ALTER.~AT~'ES ~ Th~s ~s a pro~ ect to de~ elop alternat~ves to speed humps for residential streets The pro~ ect includes test~ng and possible use of traffic medians and•`or cxzcles as a speed control measure Traffic ~4anagement Handbook w~ill be reti•ised to incorparate ne«• measures and ~nplementation ~ procedures Test streets v~-x11 be 28th Street and Fourth Street Testmg zx•as inrtiated m fall, I999, and coinplehon is expected in summer, 1999 Alternati~~e measures ~~cn1l be presented to Council in fall, Z 999 ~ CONVERT S'41 PL.qCE STRUCT'URES TO ATTE~TDANT PARIiTNG Vti7ork v~~th Santa ;~Tomca Place to unplement attendant parking m the Santa Monica P~ace ' parking structures. Crty Council re~-iew fall, 1999 I1~IPLEMENT TR.AFFIC l~iODIFICATIONS O"v l~'EILSO~ W~~' ~ Implement temporary test measures to reduce traffic speed~ az~d zmpro~e pedestnan crossinas Ternporan~ measures installed summer, 1999 Council review• and determination af permanent fall 1999 , EXPAI~'•D DRIVE UP POST OFFICE DROP OFF OPPORTUNiTIES ~~'ork wrth the US Postal Sernice to estabIish n~w s~tes for dnve-np letter drop aff boxes ~ Alterriat~ves identified in con~unction with the Post ~ffice_ Tnfonnattan Iterzl pro~~ided to Council fall 1998 Staff still ~vorl:in~ ~vith Post Of~'ic~e to mstall dri~=e throujh locations li1~IPRQVE FREE~'4'AY SIGNAGE ~ ~~ ark ~~~th Ca~trans to iinproti-e freEway directional si~age to the Do~~~ntow~n and Beach areas ~ I~e~~~ free~t~av direct~on.al si~age ~•as appro<<ed by Cal Trans in sprui~, 1999. mstallation date no« pendina TRAN P RTATI N ~?v~, ~ PR I S O O M~ GEME_'T OGR.4I~2 TluS is an on-going program to admm~ster the Ci#y's Transpor~ation _V.fana~ement Ordinance ~ PREFEREI~TT'IAL PARKII~G PROGRAII~1 ~ T~us is an an-goin¢ pro~-am to unprove the ad~umstration and implemerztation of ti~e Citv's . ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ preferential parlun6 proQram. includin; the pracessing of requests, the ~stabllshm~nt of pazking 2ones and the sales and adm~astrat2on of parkmg permzts I`TEIGHB~RHQOD TRAFFIC 1~TtL.'~AGEI~ZEIrT~' PL~..~TS ThFS is an on gving proQram to de~~elop and implement traffc mana~ement plans for residential and neighborhood azeas throu~out the Cit-~ The pro~ ram mcludes the use of traff c calmmg devices to manaae the speed and volume of traffic on res~dential streets C 4PIT.4L IMPRO`~'E~IE~iT PROJECTS SY~ICHRO~TIZE~'I'~TERCO?~'\-ECT TRAFFIC SIG~':~LS This pro~ect is a three-yeax prog-ram to upgrade and modemize the traffic signals an and around the Special Office Dismct This w~ould include a sy~nchroruzanon plan to better manage the traffic flo«l Developer traffic mit~gatian fees fund the pro~ect On-gaing througt~ FYZ001!2002. QPTICOM This is a three-year pra~ect to mstall Opticorri on the uaffic si~nals thro~~hout the Cit~~ Ophcorn is a svstem t~te turr-s or rnaintains traffic si~als ?reen in the direction of Fire emergeney vehicles Qn-gomg thxou~h FI 2000,''2001 MID CIT~" A_VD SUNSET P_ARK I'RAFFIC PL_~S This project is the desian and construction of the 3~id Cit~~ and 5~anset Park Tra.ffic Plans, incIudmg c~.u-b extens~ons, medians, and other traffic caIming rneasures Bid~ng cornpleted and a~~ard of constructian contract l~~ay 1999 Construction due to be completed January 2D00 P.~RKP_~TG STRUCTLRE ~LE~'ATOR I?1-TPROV EME?~TTS ?h~s ~s a three-year pro~ect to up~rade and moderiuze the 15 ele~:ators in the downta~~~n parkin~ structures This includes nev~~ operatzng equFprnent, cab «~aZls and doors, l~ght~na, and ~DA requirements Completion of fi~~e ele~-ators svmrner I999, completion of next fi`~e elevators wmter, 2000, completion of final f E-e eIe~-ators spnng, 2000 DAY T~ DAY OPERATIONS Ci#izen requests, inqu2nes and complaint; school area traffic safety, publzc caunter plan checks and inqutries fram the publxc, en;ineers, ar~hftects and c~evelopers, oversize, oven~~eight, housing mo~ ing permrts, traffic cantral plan checks, reti-iew o#' street and encroachment permrts, traffic sl~al operations (signal tuning and m~nor improvements}, assist C~h~ Attarzaey's office v~-ith traffic related la~-s~ts, annual~re~lar updates of traff c count, speed, etc znformatlon, process parkang lot permrts; rnamtain on-street meters: issue on-street ran~;ter permit~; mana~e emplo}ree parkuag Iot, permits and keycards, issue a.nd enforce valet parking permits, ~ssue temporary parking permits, ret-iew- trafffc studiesrEnvFronmental impact reports, Parlcin~ Structure }~ Stair Improvements, Parkin~ Structures ~-6 Fire Safety Ixnpro~ements ~ , ~ 1V'EV4' PROJECTS FOR FY" 99/4~ DOW'IvT'OVS~I CIRCULA?ION OPER4T'IO1~S ~ In con~unction ~;~zth the Bayside Distnct Corporanon azid dounta~~n businesses and Police Department, establish loadma and unloadir~g regulatians, centralxzed ti'alet, alley operat~onaJ. ~ plans and orher matiagement pro~rams ta assist «~ith the implementation of the Transrt 11~a11 Irutiate process ~n fall, 1999 ~ REVISE SPEED SL~~~ E~' FOR CITY SPEED LI?~IITS Conduct ar~alysis and estabhsh speed limrts far C~tti~ streets ~nalz~sis to be conducted sumxner, , 1999, Council re~-iev~~ fall 1999 P~RKING STRUCTURE'_VIA.~TAGE~IENT ~ The present park~na structure aperatar contract expires m spnna 2040. u rt.h assistarice from the Bayside Dismct, Crt~ Staff w-i1] prepare a neti~~ requese for proposal and seleet a parlcin; structure operator RFP ro be p~ep~red fall 1999 ~ DE~'ELOP A LIST OF I~l~ZP1~0~'EI1~TE?`TS A'~TD PRIORITES FOR L'1~PLEME~TTATIQN RELATED TO PQLICES COl\'TAIIv"ED L\T THE CIRGL-LATION ELEMEI`T ~ After ado~at~on af ttze Cireulation Element, Staff ~~~i~l de~~elop a i~st of ampros•ements and impleznentation schedule of specific Fneasures Spzxng. 2000 DEVEL4P A LIST O~ ~~PRO`'EMEi~rTS & PRIORITIES FOR MPLEME~'TATIOI~ ~ RELATED TO RECOMME~-DA'~IO'~TS FROM ~'HE DO~~r:NI'O~'~'N PARKI~G MANAGEVIENT' STL'DY ~ Fa11ow'IIia cons~deratron by Cauncil m fal~, Z999 Staff u=il~ dei~elop a Zist af irnp~-oti~ernents and implefnen#ation schedule of speczfic zxzeasures, «-inter. 2flOG ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 9 ~ ~ ~ ' TRAFFIC OPER4TI4NS DIVISIO~T ~ ~ CITI'ti~'IDE STRIPIIvTG A.\'D PAVEME~TT MARKERS This is an on-~om; pra~ect to enhance and mamtain the stripmg and raised reflectonzed pavement markers throughout the Cat~~~-ide street system ' CZTYV4'IDE SIGI`T REPLACE~~ENT ~ROGR~~~ This ~s a on-going proJect to replaceimainta.in all of the traffic control signs ~rou~hout the Crty ~ On-gorng ihrou~~ FY 2d00/2001 DIRECTIO:VAL SIGNAGE PR~GRAh2 ' This is a pro~ect to iFnplement the City's directional signage pra~ram and gate~nay signage m con~unc~ion with the Qraphic idenntr,- proararn The signage w~ll direct motonsts to kev destinations in the Cit~~ anc~ w-elcame motonsts to the Citr,~ Phase 1(caastal and do«~-nto«~ ~ darecnonal si~nage and ~aEew-ay siana~e) completed Completion of Phase 2(remaimng direcnonal signage in ather parts af ~he Cit~;-), fall 1999 ~ CONSPUTERIZED I~~AIlVTE1~TAi\CE ~T~~AGEMEI`T PROGRAIVI De~relop and implement a rnaintenance management program to track installation, maintenance and repa~r of s~~s, curb ~atntsngs, and pa~~ement messages Completion of pro~ect m siunmer ~ 2000 DAY T~ DAY OPER~TIONS ~ Fnsta~lation and maantenance of traffic control de~ices, signs. stnpmg and pa~emen~ mar~tings, installat~on, repair and maantenance of traffic signals, parkin~ meters, responding to requests from the public and other c~ty departments ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ' ' ~o ~ ~ ~ BLTiLDING AND S ~.FETY DI~'ISI~N AL?TO~SOBILE, DE4LERS ~TD AUT0~~10BILE REP~iR EI`'FORCEME\T ~ Enfarce Zonin~ Drdmance requzrements related to autoznvbile dealerships and au#o repair ~ businesses REORGA~~IZ~TIO'V~ Ah"D STRE ~~7LI1~-PVG ~F PLAN CHECK PROCESS ~ Ne~.r pfan check procedures and recard keeping practices "rere created and unplemented in the Di~•ision of Buildin; and Safety as the first step ~n streamhrung the permittmg process. Coordination «~rth ather Departments and Dn~sions in the Ci#y has started in an effort to ~ streamline ~he permzttina process Cit~' ~r•ide This will contmue into FY1999-2000 REVIE~~' A'~'D IIVIPLEMENT M.4I`"DATOR~ RETROFITTING ST~~ ~RDS ' I~nplement retrofitting standards adopted for sofr stor4 structures and re~zeti~ ~~ih the Bu11d111Q and Safety Commission ihe standards for retrofittm; non-duct~le concrete, steel frarr~e and tilt-up stru~tures ~ REdRG:~'`7ZATIQN 4F CODE Eh'F'ORCEMENT PERSQIV\'EL A~TD IMPLEME~TTATION OF ~'EW CODE ENF'ORCEI~4E~? PROCEDL"RES ' Code enforcement z'esponsibilities ti~yere cansahdated into one sin~le unxt, ~-hich has resulted m a faster turn-around time from the receipt af complainis to the~r resolut~on or referral, and ~-e11 as ~mproving efficiency for tlus function overall Additional sEaff is recammended in rhe proposed ' budeet DAY TO DAY OPERr~TIO~ S ~ Reti~e~r,~ and appro~~al of buFlding plans; issue constructyon related permrts, per#'orm buildmg mspections; respond to citizen requests; questions and complau~ts, pro~~de pub~ic counter assistance, investigate and resolve zoning oFdinance ~~iolations. conduct proactive enforcement of , restaurants and bar ~ondrtional use permrt condrtions of appro~als, imre~hgate and enforee after hours ~~alet park~n~ permit condrt~ons of appra~-als, implementation of ~nteracti~e voice respanse system for znspectton r~quests, and enforce noise ord.~nance and construction no~se restnctions ~ , ~ ~ ~ 11 ~ ~ ~ ' ADMINISTRAT~ON DIVISION ' ' PUBLIC SAFETY BL"ILDING In cooperation with the Police Depastment, Fue Department, and EPVr'M, complete construction dra~~%ings and begin constnictzon af the Public 5afery Build;ng. Construcnon to ' begxn summer, 1999 COMMU~iITY LIVABILITY COLLABORATIVE OBJECTNE 1 Serve as co-manager af the collaboratrve ob~ectrve r~lork~ng together urth the other Departments involved in irnplementation. ' ENFORCEMENT ~NALYSIS Work wrth Bu~iding and Safety and Ciry Attorne}r's Off ce to develop plan for systematic, pra- ~ actn~e, code enforcement and €ailow-up throughout the City, ~cludin~ establishment af eriforcemeat fees This effort is on ~ozng and v~~ill be re-evaluated as addit~onal Code Enforcement Staff has been recommended ~ the proposed budget , M.AP~ STREET PARKII~G CoordinaEe and implement paxlcing improvements identified in the Mau~. Street Parkulg analysis During FY 99~~ 00 desagn and implernentation of Lot 9 reconstructzon ~v°ill occur ~ CRO55V4~AL.K ?~'VD PEDESTRL~ POLICIES ~ND ENH.AI~CE~~EI~TS , Tius is a pro~ ect to de~.~ elop and implement crass~valk and pedesmari enhancements at desi~ated study comdors It includes a cansultant study and recommendations, design and construction of crosswalk enhancements Irnpl~rxaentation of Pico Boule~ ard improvements fail 1999, Desagn , and construct zmpro~~ements on 'vlontana Avenue, Ocean Aven~e, Barnard `'4'ay azid Neilson Way during FY 99'00 Derelop recommended measure for Phase II, ti~4'xlshire Boulevard, Santa I~iomca Boule~ azd, Luzcoln Boulevard, and ~cean Paric Boulevard ~ E~%ALUATE COASTA,L CIRGULATIOl` A?VD PARKI~G SOLUTIONS AROU~ID SEA CASTLE SITE AND COASTAL AREA ~ Re~%iew and e~raluate the publ~c parking supp~y and demand and identffy alternat~~:e options for Council revie~~. Draft report available for public rev~ew and cornment spnng 1999 Crty Council review scheduled for fa~l 1999. ~ TENANT RELOCATIOtii AI~'D CONSTRLCTTON MITIGATi4I~ In cooperatian w~th Rent Controf, C~ty~ Attamey's Off'ice, Fire Department, anc~ Resaurce ~ ~Ianagement, develop mod~fica~ions to the Municipal Cade and Crty processes to ensure tenant safety and welfare is protected dunn~ apartment rehabihtation Counc~l re~~~e~;r summer 1999 , , 12 ~ ~ ~ OCEAl~ PARK PREFERE'~"TI:~L PARKI:~G ~'4ork ~.~'rtY~ residents and Coastai Caznmtss~on to secure a Coastal De~~elopment Permrt, or a ~ determznation that a permit is not requzred, for the seven existfng preferential parlan~ zones in Ocean Park Coastal Cammission reti-ie«~, fa11 1999 ~ ~ ' ~ 1 i ~ 1 1 1 ~ 1 1 ~ ~, ~ ! ~ ' PRO~]rECT~ CONIPLETED Il~ F~' ~998i99 ~ PARKING OPER.4TIO~S AL"DIT Thxs pro~ect ti~~as a preliminar~~ audit of the parking operations in the dot;nto~~n parking structures ~ LP_VCOL~1:~'VD MICHIG~N TR~F'~IC SIGI~AL T~is is a pro~ect to construct a traffic s~~al at the zntersection of L~ncoln BI and Michigan Ave ' Complet~on of desi~n summer, 1998, complet2on of construct~an fall, an~ 1998 MODTFY 1iILrNICIPA.L CODE IDE~T'IF~c"P_~IG PREFERE~TIAL PaRKIi~`G ZQ1~'ES ~ :~s a result of the modificarians to the processmg of preferential parking zones and the abilitv to enact ne~~c' zones by resolution, a cons~stent ident~fication system needs to be de~reloped to ~ combine ordinance adapted zones «~ith zones adopted by resolutzon Cotu~cil action fall, 1998 REORG~,'~'~Z~.TIO~ OF NAB PR4CEDURES AND 4SSIGNivIEI~TT OF ST_~F'F TO ~ L'~~PLEVIENT Y~~t' ACTIVIT'~' GEl`"ERATED BY THESE CHA..~IGES In cooperation ~rith the Police Deparhnent, Fire Department and C~ty Attorr~e~'s Office, coordinate 1~TUisance Abatement enforceznent with pnmary focus on ti~acant and abandoned ~ Butldings ADOPTIQI`T QF 1997 BUILDP~G CODES , Pres~nt nev~- 1997 Building, Mechamcal, Electrical and Plumbing Codes to City Council for ac~opt~o~ Cotinc~~ Action sgr~ng 1999 Trazn staff and implement proce~ures for enfarcin;1997 Uruform Building Code ~ EV!~LUATE :4ND ~VIPLEMEN? P.~RK1hrG SOLL'TIOVS O?V 12L~ STREET Rev~eu~ opt~ons for expandtng pub~ic parking around ~2'~ Street between Santa 'Vlon2ca ~ Bvule~~ard and ~zona Ave ~mplementation «-~nter, 1999 SECO~'D L'NITS TF~kT :4MEti7I3~IE~T ~ Zon2n~ Ord~nance text amendment to estab~~sh de~relopment standards to p$rm~t second uxuts in the Rl and OP 1 Dismcts Council adopted permanent standards spnng, 1999 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ DO~~''VTO~'?V CIRCULATIO't IMPR4VERZENTS Th~s zs a pro~ec# to canvert Sth St and Broad~~ai~ from one-ti~at~ streets to rivo-u.-ay streets as part of tlae Do~;~to«n Urban Design Plan Campletion of Sth St, I~rovember 1997, cannpletion of Broadtivay fall, 1998. 14 ~ W ~ ._ ~ ._ s W ~.........~................._....~.. ' ~ , i ~ ' ~ ~ ' ~ ~ , ' 1 ~ ~ ~ , ' F 1CMANAGERIINFOIT~M1WaterRate wpd May 20, '! 999 INFORMATION ITEM TO Mayar and City Council FROM ~~ty Staff SUBJ~CT Praposed Changes to a port~on of the Water Rate introductian Santa Monica, CA Thts report provides ~nfarmation to ~he City Council regardmg a proposed mcrease to the #ixed-charge component of the water service rate structure Backqround The curre~t water rate struc#ure was de~elaped and adopted in 1996 The rate structure is comprised of bath a bi-monfhfy fixed servECe charge component and a three-tier commod~ty charge component Service charges are t~e same across all customer classes and mcrease wit~ meter s~ze Commodity charges are structured #o ~rov~de a conservation incentEVe, priee per unit mcreases with quantity Water rates have remamed unchanged smce de~elopment and adoption of the current rate s#ructure in '1996 Discussion The Utifities Di~isian proposes a fee increase on the bi-monthly fixed ser~ice charge portion of the current water rate struc#~re The pro~osed mcrease wE11 realize a 2% 1 ~ increase En revenue to the Water Fund, consistent with the Cansumer Price ind~x ~CPI) of 2% for February 1998 to Febr~ary 1999 for Los Angeles-Ri~erside-Orange Co~nty The proposed increase will generate $i93,72Q m increased re~enue for 1999/Q~ The UtilitEes Division proposes a~ mcrease of 9 6% in the fixed charge component of the rate structure (not the cammodity rates) sir~ce inflation in recent years has increased the #ixed costs of t~e utilitJr A modest increase is proposed at this time to ava~d having to req~est a larger increase ~n the water rates andlor fixed service fees in the near future The praposed increase wiil provide a mare stable base of revenUe, independ~nt of water demand forecasting whach can be affected by climatic variances The D~~ision proposes thaf #he increase be s~rea~ urnformly across meter size By sprea~ing the increase uniformly among the fixed service charges for each meter size. re~enue fo the Water Fund can be gene~ated as rndtcated ~n TaE~le 1 That tabie 4ndticates the curfent and praposed bE-monthfy fixed service c~arges The praposed fee increase would keep rate charges comparable to surroundmg c~fies_ For exampfe, Santa Monica's proposed ser-rice charge of $9 49 brmonthly for a 3/4-mch me#er (typical si~gle fam~ly res~dence} compares favorably w~th similar charges for Burba~k ($8_84), inglewood ($17 26), Glendal~ ~$13 D4), Pasadena ($12 18), and Be~erly Hills {$14 2~) 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ' , ~ ' ~ ~ ' ~ ' , The pro~osed fee ~ncrease would become effect~ve Ju1y ~, 1999 Either a bdl~ng inser~ or a m~ssage or~ the bill would notify eustomers af the increase I Conclusion ~ ~ ~ ' ' ' , , ~ ~ ~ ' ' ~ The proposed mcrease vbrril be presented #a C~ty Co~ncr~ for appro~al m cor~~~nct~or~ w~th the fiscal year 1999-2Q00 budget Prepared by Craig Perkins, D~rector of En~~ronmental and Public Works Management GEi Borboa, P E, Util~ties Manager Jean H~gbee, Utlltties 8usiness Supervisor 3 ' 1 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' , ' ' ' ' ' ~ ' ' ' '