SR 06-13-2017 3E
Ci ty Council
Report
City Council Meeting : June 13, 2017
Agenda Item: 3.E
1 of 10
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Susan Cline, Director , Public Works, Civil Engineering
Subject: Award Construction Contract for Repairs to Parking Garages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9,
10
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Award Bid #SP2373 to Slater Waterproofing, Inc., a California -based company
for the Repairs to Parking Garages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10 Project;
2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with Slater
Waterproofing, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $3,273,26 0 (including a 10%
contingency);
3. Award RFP #SP1982 to Psomas Inc., a Colorado -based company for
construction management and inspection services for the Repairs to Parking
Garages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10 Project;
4. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and e xecute an agreement with Psomas
Inc., a Colorado -based company, in an amount not to exceed $330,000
(including a 10% contingency);
5. Authorize the Director of Public Works to issue any necessary change orders to
complete additional work within contract autho rity .
Executive Summary
The City’s parking structures are a vital public asset and their continued operation and
functionality are an essential service of the City. In 2009, severe concrete cracking
occurred at Parking Structure 3 prompting immediate rep air of the problem and
inspection of all City -owned parking structures. Based on these inspections, the City
identified Parking Structures 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9 and 10 as candidates for repairs. The
primary structural elements that would be repaired include th e structural slabs, concrete
walls and columns, and vertical walls situated below grade that have shown signs of
waterproofing issues. In October 2015, the City hired structural consultant, Walter P.
Moore, to perform overall condition assessments of these elements in each of the
parking structures, which led to preparation of final construction documentation (plans,
specifications and cost estimates) for the repairs.
Staff recommends Slater Waterproofing, Inc. for the construction of the p roject in an
amount not to exceed $3,273,260 (including a 10% contingency). Staff recommends
Psomas, Inc. to provide construction management and inspection services in an amount
not to exceed $330,000 (including a 10% contingency).
2 of 10
Background
The City of Santa Monic a currently owns eleven parking structures, and maintains nine
of them. Parking Structures 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10 and the Civic Center structure are
maintained by the City while parking structures 7 and 8 are maintained by the Macerich
Company (Attachment A). Alternative long -term uses are being considered by the City
for Parking Structures 1 and 3, so these structures were not considered in the original
repair scope of work. The Civic Center structure and Parking Structure 6 are relatively
new structures, constructed in 2007 and 2013 respectively.
The original parking structures 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 were constructed in the 1960s. Parking
Structures 4 and 5 were originally built as five story structures with the upper four -story
additions completed later in the 1970s and 1980s. Parking Structures 2, 4 and 5 were
seismically upgraded in 2010, 2009, and 2005, respectively, as these structures
experienced some degree of damage after the 1994 Northridge earthquake. Parking
Structure 9 (built in 2001) and Parking Structure 10 (built in the 1980s) were built as
three and two level structures, respectively, with housing constructed on top of each.
In 2009, severe concrete cracking occurred at Parking Structure 3 prompting the City to
inspect all City -owned parking structures. Multiple cracking locations were identified and
subsequently repaired in all parking structures. Recently, these structures have shown
signs of structural slab wear and distress due to long -term usage and exposure to the
elements.
Parking Stru cture 1 Structural Issues
Parking Structure 1 was excluded from the original repair scope of work due to the
uncertainty of its future use, as the City wa s considering future redevelopment of this
site. However, on March 8, 2016, two large pieces of concre te fell from the bottom of
the second level slab onto the City of Santa Monica Promenade Maintenance Office,
located on the ground level of the structure. Due to the severity of the deficiencies near
the office, emergency temporary shoring of the second le vel slab was implemented. A
permanent structural repair solution would be installed as part of this project to remedy
3 of 10
the issue. As a result, this structure was included in the design scope of work through a
contract modification approved by City Council on May 24, 2016 (Attachment B).
Diagram 1 - Parking Structure 1 Structural issue
Parking Structure 3 Inclusion
Parking Structure 3 was also excluded from the original scope of work as private
developers for Arclight Theatres have submitted a proposal to the City for the
construction of a new movie theatre and mixed -use development, which would require
the demolition of Parking Structure 3.
On April 26, 2016, the City Council directed staff to include Parking Structure 3 as part
of the design and repa ir scope of the project in order to compare the financial impacts
related to repair costs of the existing structure versus replacing the structure with the
future redevelopment (Attachment C). The design and repair scope of work that was
included for Parki ng Structure 3 was consistent with the original scope of work for the
other structures in order to extend the immediate operational cycle life of the structure.
Additional in -depth repair analysis, such as seismic retrofit analysis, was not included in
thi s scope as further explained in the section below. The scope of work was added
through a contract modification approved by City Council on May 24, 2016.
Parking Structure 1 and 3 Future Seismic Retrofit
4 of 10
In a follow up on Council’s initiative to include s eismic retrofitting of Parking Structure 3
as part of the design scope of the project, staff looked into the opportunity of
incorporating seismic retrofitting analysis for both Parking Structure 1 and 3 into the
design and construction scope of the project in order to compare these costs with the
future potential redevelopment costs of these sites. Staff reached out to the project’s
structural consultant, Walter P. Moore, in order to obtain estimated costs to seismically
retrofit each of the structures. Tot al budget for design and construction of both
structures is anticipated to be $2.6 million with costs to be increased based on future
consumer price index (CPI) and labor costs. Due to the uncertainty of the future uses of
both sites, these structures had not been previously analyzed seismically.
With this uncertainty and limited knowledge of the proposed future uses of each site and
costs associated with each proposed redevelopment, staff considers deferring cost
comparisons until further information ab out these potential redevelopments becomes
available in order make a more informed decision on whether or not to incorporate
seismic retrofit capital investments to these assets. Also, because of budgetary
limitations and to avoid delays to the current pro ject improvements, seismic retrofit
improvements would best be accomplished as separate capital improvements when
funding has been identified and when further information is obtained about future
redevelopment of these sites.
Should Council decide not to pursue the potential redevelopment of PS1 and PS3,
C ouncil could ask staff to consider the implementation of the seismic retrofit work at
PS1 and PS3 in the upcoming Capital Improvement Program Budget cycle .
Discussion
In October , 2015, the City hired str uctural consultant, Walter P. Moore, to perform
overall condition assessments of the structural slabs, curbing, vertical and overhead
surfaces and waterproofing components in Parking Structures 2, 4, 5, 9 and 10. Parking
Structures 1 and 3 were added throu gh contract modifications. The condition
assessments of these facilities included site observations, documentation of distressed
conditions, and various testing of these elements ultimately compiled into a final
5 of 10
assessment report. The final assessment repo rt provides guidance for the repair work.
Staff used the information compiled in the final assessment report to collaborate with
the consultant in development of final construction documentation.
The final assessment report did not document any signs o f structural instability in any of
the City’s parking structures , however numerous lower priority deficiencies were
identified . Staff emphasizes importance in taking a proactive approach in identifying
and addressing issues as they arise in order to prolo ng the useful life of these facilities.
The final assessment report indicated that structural concrete slabs in many of the
parking structures exhibit various types of cracking, which over time, may result in
moisture intrusion and long -term corrosion wi thin the slabs. Treatments would include
concrete penetrating sealants, coatings, crack sealing, structural slab repairs and other
defined measures, which would extend the useful life of the facilities. In addition, the
report identified signs of water in trusion on the vertical walls of Parking Structure 9.
Intrusion appears to come from pipe sleeves in the walls, exhaust airshaft, and cracks in
the basement walls.
A key component of the final assessment report is the Capital Asset Management Plans
(CAMP s), developed for each of the parking structures in order to provide a roadmap in
making cost -effective decisions to maintain the assets over a 10 -year period. CAMPs
are used to organize, prioritize and itemize repair components identified during the
condi tion assessment phase and documented in the final assessment report.
Maintenance and repair items were divided into the following four (4) categories:
High Priority Repairs
Medium Priority Repairs
Low Priority Repairs
Enhancements
High priority re pairs include life safety and structural issues that need to be addressed
in the short term. Medium priority repairs include implementation of waterproofing and
other items in order to reduce the potential of future deterioration and extend the useful
6 of 10
life of the parking structures. Low priority repairs are maintenance items that address
the aesthetics and function of the garage (which consist mainly of painting repairs).
Enhancements include the aesthetic and functional items (which consist of items like
r etrofitting existing lighting to LED lighting).
High priority and medium priority items need to be addressed within the first two (2)
years of discovery. High priority and medium priority repair items are included in the
current CIP program budget and wi ll be implemented as part of this project. Additionally,
there are select low priority repair items that will be included in the current CIP program
and are within budget. Enhancements are not included in the scope of work.
Contractor Selection - Constr uction
On March 28, 2017, the City published Notices Inviting Bids for construction services for
the Repairs to Parking Garages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9 and 10 Project. The bid was posted on
the City’s online bidding site, and notices were advertised in the Santa Monica Daily
Press in accordance with City Charter and Municipal Code provisions. A total of 1,856
vendors were notified and 58 vendors downloaded the bid. Two bids were received and
publicly opened on April 27, 2017. Bid results are as follows:
Bidder Base Bid Amount Alternate Bid
Amount
Total Bid
Amount
Slater Waterproofing, Inc. $2,459,632 $516,059 $2,975,691
Howard Ridley Co. $3,701,479 $1,021,465 $4,722,944
Engineer’s Estimate $2,662,850 $516,050 $3,178,900
Bids were evaluated based on crite ria in SMMC 2.24.072, including pricing,
understanding of the project scope, direct experience with similar projects, approach to
the work, technical competence, qualifications of the proposed staff, and the ability to
meet the project schedule. Staff con tacted reference agencies listed by the
recommended contractor to ascertain past performance on similar projects, including
the City of Pasadena and City of Redondo Beach. Staff also verified with the
Contractors State License Board that Slater Waterproofi ng, Inc. and its subcontractors’
licenses are current, active, and in good standing. Based on these criteria, Slater
7 of 10
Waterproofing, Inc. is recommended as the best bidder for construction services of the
Repairs to Parking Garages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10 Proj ect.
Consultant Selection - Construction Management
On September 22, 2015, the City issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for
construction management and inspection services for upcoming construction projects
on the City’s online bidding website. A total of 1,674 vendors were notified and 124
vendors downloaded the RFQ. The City received 25 proposals. A selection panel of
staff from the Public Works Department reviewed responses to the RFQ.
The evaluation was based on the selection criteria set for th in SMMC Section 2.24.073,
with a specific review of: technical competence, staffing capability, project approach,
past performance, dispute resolution, quality control, cost control, management
services, customer service, and the ability to meet require d time frames. The top five
firms were placed on a pre -qualified list of construction management firms in the
Parking Lots, Parking Structures, and Piers categories. The list includes Caltrop
Corporation, Civil Source, Hill International, Psomas, and Swin erton Management &
Consulting. The firms were invited to participate in the Request for Proposal (RFP)
phase posted in January 2017.
Based on the selection criteria set forth in SMMC 2.24.073, Psomas is recommended
as the best qualified firm to provide co nstruction management and inspection services
based on its qualifications, cost of services, and its directly related experience in
providing similar services for municipal agencies. Psomas has extensive knowledge and
experience on numerous construction pr ojects in the cities of Los Angeles, Long Beach,
Irvine, Manhattan Beach, and Santa Monica.
Services provided by Psomas would include continuous inspection of the contractor’s
night work, verification and management of field changes and unforeseen conditi ons,
monitoring and mitigation of construction impacts, attendance at periodic progress
meetings, arranging for deputy inspections and materials testing, project document
control, and public outreach.
8 of 10
Public Outreach
Public outreach during construction of this project would be provided by the City and by
the City’s construction management consultant as part of the construction management
effort. Public outreach would include notifications distributed to adjacent properties and
the surrounding community reg arding the scope of the Project. Periodic updates would
be posted on the City’s “Know Before You Go” (KBUG) website and Monday editions of
the Santa Monica Daily Press.
Properties impacted by the project would receive two separate construction notices. T he
first general notice would be hand -delivered to properties adjacent to the proposed
project two weeks prior to the start of construction. A second two -day notice would be
subsequently hand -delivered to each adjacent property with detailed information
re garding the planned construction activity, potential impacts, and contact information.
The notices would be prepared by Public Works staff and distributed by the contractor.
The construction notices would also be posted in the parking structures adjacent to the
elevators and near the structure entrances.
The City’s project manager would regularly update Downtown Santa Monica (DTSM) on
the progress of the work and address any issues that community members bring to
DTSM. City staff from Public Works and P arking Operations met with DTSM in March
2017 to discuss upcoming impacts and work restrictions on the contractor for this
project.
Schedule and Parking Impacts
Impacts to the public would involve the temporary loss of no more than 50 parking
spaces p er parking structure during the workday and no more than 25 parking spaces
per structure over the weekends. An exception to this parking loss requirement would
occur during deck sealing operations that would close the entire top level of the
structure. I n addition, Parking Structure 5 would be closed entirely for approximately
five days since the sealing operations affect multiple levels. The reason for this closure
9 of 10
is that a section to be sealed on level two of this parking structure is located within th e
circulation aisle that all vehicles must use to exit the structure. The sealant product has
to be applied in three phases to allow adequate curing time, and the application cannot
be phased in a way that would allow traffic to pass due to the limited wid th at certain
areas within the structures. The design engineer and City staff have looked at numerous
options and determined that closure of the structure is the best solution.
The contractor must provide at least one week notice prior to any shutdowns an d before
beginning activities in a new structure, as only one structure would be worked on at a
time. All work impacts ramps and drive aisles. Additional restrictions have been placed
on the contractor’s work during the Pier Concert Series and the Wednesd ay Farmers
Markets. No work would take place during the holiday season between Thanksgiving
and New Year’s Day.
The project is anticipated to begin in September 2017. The project duration is 15
months, but since work would be suspended during the holida y season, the anticipated
end date is March 2019.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
The contract to be awarded to Slater Waterproofing, Inc.is for an amount not to exceed
$3,273,260 (including a 10% contingency). Funds of $1,687,794 are available in th e FY
201 6 -1 8 Capital Improvement Program budget in account C0109053.589000. Funds of
$1,585,466 are included in the FY 2017 -18 Proposed Capital Improvement Program
b udget in the following accounts:
C019053.589000 $228,000
C019203.589000 $598,485
C019204.589000 $457,466
C779203.589000 $301,515
TOTAL $1,585,466
Future year funding is contingent on Council budget approval.
The contract to be awarded to Psomas Inc. is for an amount not to exceed $330,000
10 of 10
(including a 10% contingency). Funds are availabl e in the FY 2016 -17 Capital
Improvement Program budget in account C019053.589000.
Prepared By: Joshua Carvalho, Civil Engineer
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. City Parking Map
B. May 24, 2016 Staff Report
C. April 26, 2016 Staff Report
D. Slater Waterproofing Oaks
E. Psomas Oaks Form
S e a s i d e T e r r .
O l y m p i c D r .
C i v i c C e n t e r D r .
K i n n e y S t .
A s h l a n d
H i l l S t .
H o l l i s t e r
S t r a n d S t .
P a c i f i c B i c k n e l l A v e .
B i c k n e l l A v e .
B a y S t .
M a r i n e S t .
M o n t a n a A v e .
W i l s h i r e B l v d .
A r i z o n a A v e .
S a n t a
M o n i c a B l v d .
Santa
Monica
Pier
B r o a d w a y
C o l o r a d o A v e .
P i c o B l v d .
O l y m p i c B l v d .
A p p i a n W a y N e i l s o n W a y
4th St.4th St.
2 n d S t .
5th St.
6th St.
7th St.
11th St.
Euclid
14th St.
16th St.
3rd St.
2nd St.
S A N T A M O N I C A F R W Y .
Ocean Ave.Ocean Ave.
M a i n S t .Main St.
Lincoln Blvd.
Third St. Promenade
Pacific Coast Hwy.C A L I F O R N I A I N C L I N E
B a r n a r d W a y O c e a n P a r k B l v d .
O c e a n A v e .
10
T
u
n
n
e l 1
S9
S10
7
8
12
8N7N6N 5AN 5N4N3N 1 S 2 S 3 S
4 S
5 S
2 6 1 1 1 0 9
1N 9N
S2S4S6
S5 S 3 S 1
S8
S7 Civic
Lot
Civic
Structure
Pier Deck
Annenberg
Beach House
Parking
Office
Lot 28
Lot 29
KEC
Lot 30
Library
Lot
27
City
Hall
S h o r t T e r m L o t
P a r k i n g I n f o r m a t i o n
4 05
405
405
2 10
2 10
605
605
10
1 0
5
5
5
1
1
1
2 7
2
118
6 0
170 2
9 1
91
2 2
1 34
101
101 101
10
1 10
110
1 10
1 05
710
G ett y
Center
B everly
Hills
Universal
S tudios
To Santa
B arbara
Redondo
Beach
Malibu Hollywood
L .A.
Convention
C enter
U CLA
P asadena
A naheim
Long
Beach San Pedro
D isneyland
R ose Bowl
Venice
Santa
Monica
Downtown L.A.
Marina del Rey
Los Angeles
International
Airport (LAX)
L o s A n g e l e s A r e a L o s A n g e l e s A r e a P a r k i n g L o t s & S t r u c t u r e s P a r k i n g L o t s & S t r u c t u r e s P a r k i n g I n f o r m a t i o n
S A N T A M O N I C A P U B L I C P A R K I N G
F o r r e a l -t i m e p a r k i n g i n f o r m a t i o n ,
v i s i t o u r w e b s i t e :
w w w .s m g o v .n e t /p a r k i n g
O r , c o n t a c t t h e C i t y ’s P a r k i n g O f f i c e a t :
1 7 1 7 4 t h S t r e e t , S u i t e 1 5 0
S a n t a M o n i c a , C A 9 0 4 0 1
P h o n e : (3 1 0 ) 4 5 8 -8 2 9 5
E -m a i l : p a r k i n g .o f f i c e @ s m g o v .n e t
C e n t r a l P a r k i n g
(F o r i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t p a r k i n g s t r u c t u r e s
a n d l o t s , i n c l u d i n g r a t e s a n d h o u r s )
1 4 4 4 4 t h S t r e e t
S a n t a M o n i c a , C A 9 0 4 0 1
P h o n e : (3 1 0 ) 5 7 6 -4 7 4 3
F o r p a r k i n g c i t a t i o n s /e n f o r c e m e n t c a l l :
(3 1 0 ) 4 5 8 -8 4 6 6
M a i n S t r e e t P a r k i n g
L o t 9 1 1 0 H i l l S t .
L o t 1 0 1 1 1 H i l l S t .
L o t 1 1 1 7 0 H o l l i s t e r A v e .
L o t 2 6 1 5 0 S t r a n d S t .
D o w n t o w n P a r k i n g
S t r u c t u r e 1 1 2 3 4 4 t h S t .
S t r u c t u r e 2 1 2 3 5 2 n d S t .
S t r u c t u r e 3 1 3 2 0 4 t h S t .
S t r u c t u r e 4 1 3 2 1 2 n d S t .
S t r u c t u r e 5 1 4 4 0 4 t h S t .
S t r u c t u r e 6 1 4 3 3 2 n d S t .
S t r u c t u r e 7 3 2 0 B r o a d w a y
S t r u c t u r e 8 1 5 7 1 2 n d S t .
S t r u c t u r e 9 1 1 3 6 4 t h S t .
S t r u c t u r e 1 0 1 1 2 5 T h i r d S t .
K E C 1 5 2 7 4 t h S t . (K e n E d w a r d s C e n t e r )
L o t 2 7 1 3 2 0 5 t h S t .
L o t 2 8 1 3 2 3 5 t h S t .
L o t 2 9 1 6 3 6 5 t h S t .
L o t 3 0 1 6 6 5 O c e a n A v e .
L i b r a r y 6 0 1 S a n t a M o n i c a B l v d .
C i v i c L o t 1 8 5 5 M a i n S t .
C i v i c S t r u c t u r e 3 3 3 C i v i c C e n t e r D r i v e
B e a c h & P i e r P a r k i n g
A n n e n b e r g B e a c h H o u s e
4 4 5 P a c i f i c C o a s t H w y .
L o t 9 N o r t h 5 3 0 P a c i f i c C o a s t H w y .
L o t 8 N o r t h 8 1 0 P a c i f i c C o a s t H w y .
L o t 7 N o r t h 9 3 0 P a c i f i c C o a s t H w y .
L o t 6 N o r t h 9 5 0 P a c i f i c C o a s t H w y .
L o t 5 A N o r t h 1 0 1 8 P a c i f i c C o a s t H w y .
L o t 5 N o r t h 1 0 3 0 P a c i f i c C o a s t H w y .
L o t 4 N o r t h 1 0 6 0 P a c i f i c C o a s t H w y .
L o t 3 N o r t h 1 1 5 0 P a c i f i c C o a s t H w y .
L o t 1 N o r t h 1 5 5 0 P a c i f i c C o a s t H w y .
T o r e a c h L o t 1 N o r t h , u s e O c e a n A v e n u e t o a c c e s s S e a s i d e
T e r r a c e a n d f o l l o w g r e e n d o t t e d l i n e o n m a p t o e n t e r v i a
A p p i a n W a y .
P i e r D e c k W e s t e n d o f C o l o r a d o A v e . o n t h e P i e r
L o t 1 S o u t h 1 6 4 0 A p p i a n W a y
L o t 2 S o u t h 1 6 7 0 A p p i a n W a y
L o t 3 S o u t h 1 7 5 0 A p p i a n W a y
L o t 4 S o u t h 2 0 3 0 O c e a n A v e n u e
L o t 5 S o u t h 2 6 0 0 B a r n a r d W a y
M i d -C i t y P a r k i n g
L o t 7 1 2 1 7 E u c l i d S t .
L o t 8 1 1 4 6 1 6 t h S t .
L o t 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 4 t h S t .
A l l i n f o r m a t i o n c u r r e n t a s o f M a r c h 2 0 1 5 , s u b j e c t t o c h a n g e w i t h o u t n o t i c e .
N O R T H
N O
R T H
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
O A KS INIT I A TI V E NOTICE
NO T ICE TO A P PL IC A N T S , B IDD E R S , P R O P O SE RS
A ND O T H E RS SE E K I NG DI S CR E T I ON A RY PE R M IT S , CO N T R A C T S ,
OR O T H E R BE N E F I TS FROM T HE CI T Y O F SA NTA M ONICA
S an t a M on i ca ’s v o t e r s adop t ed a Ci t y C ha rt er a m end m e n t c o m m on l y k no w n as
t he O a ks I n i t i a t i v e. T he O a k s I n i t i a t i v e r e q u i r e s t he Ci t y t o p r o v i de t h i s no t i ce and
i n f o rm a t i on about t he I n i t i a ti v e ’s r e q u i r e m e n t s . Y ou m ay ob t a i n a f u l l copy o f t he I n i t i a t i v e ’s
t e x t f r o m t he Ci t y Cl e r k .
T h i s i n f o rm a t i on i s r e q u i r ed by Ci t y C ha rt er A rt i c l e X X I I —T a x pa y er P r o t e c t i on. I t
p r oh i b i t s a pub li c o f f i c i al fr o m r ece i v i n g , a nd a pe r son o r en t i t y fr o m co n f e rr i n g , sp e c i f i ed
p e r sonal ben e f i t s or c a m pa i gn ad v an t a g es fr om a p e r s on or e n t i t y a ft er t he o f f i c i al v o t es,
or o t h e r w i se t a k es o ff i c i al a c t i on, t o aw a r d a “pub li c ben e f i t ” t o t h a t p e r son or en t i t y . The
p r o h i b i t i on app li es w i t h i n and ou t s i de o f t he g e o g r a p h i cal bounda r i es o f S an t a M on i ca.
Al l pe r sons or e n t i t i es a pp l y i ng o r r e c e i v i ng pub l i c ben e f it s fr om t he Ci t y o f S a n t a
M on i ca sha l l p r o v i de t he n a m es o f tr u s t ees, d i r e c t o r s , p a rt n e r s , and o f f i c e r s , and na m e s
o f pe r so n s w i t h m o r e t han a 10% e q u i t y , p a rt i c i pa t i on or r e v enue i n t e r e s t . A n e x cep t i on
e x i s t s f or pe r s o ns se r v i ng i n t h o se cap a c i t i es as v o l un t ee r s, w i t hout co m pens a t i on, f or
o r g a n i z a t i ons e x e m pt fr om i nco m e t a x es under S e c t i on 501 (c )(3 ), (4 ), or (6 ), o f t he
I n t e r nal R e v enue C ode. H o w e v e r , t h i s e x cep t i on does n o t app l y i f t he o r g an i z a t i on i s a
po li t i c al co m m i t t ee or co n tr o l s po li t i cal c o m m i tt ee s . E x a m p l es o f a “pub li c b e n e f i t ” i nc l ude
pub li c con tr a c t s t o p r o v i de g oods or se r v i ces w o rt h m o r e t han $2 5 ,000 or a l and u se
ap p r o v al w o rt h m o r e t han $2 5 ,000 o v er a 12 -month pe r i od.
I n o r d e r t o f ac ili t a t e c o m p li ance w i t h t he r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t he O a k s I n i t i a t i v e, t he Ci t y
co m p il es and m a i n t a i ns ce r t a i n i n f o rm a t i on. T hat i n f o rm a t i on i nc l udes t he n a m e o f any
p e r son or persons w ho i s se e k i n g a “p ub li c ben e f i t .” I f t he “pub li c b e n e f i t ” i s s o u g ht by an
e n t i t y , r a t her t han an i nd i v i dual pe r son, t he i n f o rm a t i on i nc l udes t he n a m e o f e v e r y person
who is : (a ) tr u s t e e , (b) d i r e c t o r , (c ) p a rt n e r , (d ) o f f i c e r , o r has (e) more than a t en pe r cent
i n t e r est i n t he e n t i t y . T h e r e f o r e, i f y ou a r e se e k i n g a “pub li c ben e f i t ” co v e r ed by t he O a k s
I n i t i a t i v e, y ou m u s t s upp l y t hat i n f o rm a t i on on t he O a k s I n i t i a t i v e Di sc l osu r e Fo r m . T h i s
i n f o r m a t i on m ust be upda t ed and s u pp li ed e v e r y 12 m on t h s .
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
O A KS INIT I A TI V E DI S CLO S URE FORM
I n o r d e r t o f ac ili t a t e c o m p li ance w i t h t he r e q u i r e m en t s o f t he O a k s I n iti a t i v e, t he Ci t y
co m p il es and m a i n t a i ns ce r t a i n i n f o rm a t i on. T hat i n f o rm a t i on i nc l udes t he n a m e o f any
p e r son or persons w ho i s se e k i n g a “p ub li c ben e f i t .” I f t he “pub li c b e n e f i t ” i s s o u g ht by
an e n t i t y , r a t her t han an i nd i v i dual pe r son, t he i n f o rm a t i on i nc l udes t he n a m e o f e v e r y
person who is : (a ) tr u s t e e , (b) d i r e c t o r , (c ) p a rt n e r , (d ) o f f i c e r , o r has (e) more than a t en
pe r cent i n t e r est i n t he e n t i t y .
P ub li c bene f i t s i nc l ude:
1. P e r sonal se r v i ces co n tr a c t s i n e x cess o f $25 ,000 o v er any 12 -m o n t h p e r i od;
2. S a l e o f m a t e r i a l , e q u i p m ent o r supp li es t o t he Cit y i n e x cess o f $2 5 ,000 o v er a 12 -
m on t h pe r i o d ;
3. P u r chase, sa l e o r l ease o f r eal p r op e rt y t o o r fr o m t he Ci t y i n e x cess o f $25 ,000
o v er a 12 - m on t h pe r i od;
4. N on -co m p e t i t i v e f r anch i s e a w a r ds w i t h g r oss r e v enue o f $50 ,000 or m o r e i n any
12 -m o n t h pe r i od;
5. Land use v a r i ance, spec i al use pe r m it , o r o t her e x cep t i on t o an es t ab li shed l and
use p l a n , w he r e t he dec i s i on has a v a l ue i n e x cess o f $2 5 ,0 00;
6. T ax “ab a t e m e n t , e x cep t i on, o r ben e f i t ” o f a v a l ue i n e x cess o f $5 ,000 i n a n y 12 -
m on t h pe r i o d ; o r
7. P a y m ent o f “c a sh o r sp e c i e” o f a n e t v a l ue t o t he r ec i p i ent o f $1 0 ,000 i n a ny 12 -
m on t h pe r i o d .
N a m e (s) o f pe r s o n s o r ent i t i e s r e c e i v i n g pub lic be ne f it:
N a m e (s) o f t r u s t ee s, d i r e ct o r s, p a r t ne r s, an d o f f ic e r s:
N a m e (s) o f persons w ith m o r e t h a n a 10 % e q u i ty , pa r tici pa ti on , o r r e v enu e i n t e r e s t :
Prepared by: ____________________________Title: __________________________
Signature: ______________________________________ Date: ________________
Email: ____________________________________ Phone: ____________________
FOR CITY USE ONLY:
Bid/PO/Contract # ____________________________ Permit # ___________________________
REFERENCE:
Agreement No. 10467
(CCS)
REFERENCE:
Agreement No. 10468
(CCS)