ABSTRACT: Six Noteworthy 1 November 2011 City Council Agenda Items, namely a Resolution amending the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) Local 4579, Carmel Professional Firefighters, a Resolution amending the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Carmel Police Association (POA), an Ordinance amending Chapter 3.32 of the Carmel Municipal Code (Transient Occupancy Tax) to establish a Transient Occupancy Tax Incentive Program, a Resolution approving a contract with the City of Monterey for fire services, Receive, file and disseminate the report of the ad hoc Carmel CalPERS Pension Committee and direct staff to return with recommended implementation actions and Approve the City’s art collection deaccession policy, are presented. Excerpts from Agenda Item Summaries and Staff Reports are provided; and supporting documents, namely HOSTELRY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM, PROPOSED AGREEMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE SERVICES Staff Report, The Carmel CalPERS Pension Committee Final Report and ART COLLECTION DEACCESSION PROJECT, are embedded.
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
4:30 p.m., Open Session
Live & Archived Video Streaming
City Hall
East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues
II. Roll Call
VII. Consent Calendar
E. Consider a Resolution amending the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) Local 4579, Carmel Professional Firefighters.
The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) concluded December 31, 2010, and in accordance with State law, the terms and conditions of that agreement remain in effect for both parties until amended or until a successor agreement is reached. A successor agreement has not been negotiated pending the City Council’s action on a shared services agreement for fire services. It is anticipated that in a shared services model the City of Carmel employees represented by the IAFF would become employees of the partner agency and would be represented by that agency’s bargaining unit.
The IAFF has requested the City consider amended terms to the MOU between the City and the IAFF in coordination with the City’s shared services model. These amended terms include:
• The term of this MOU shall be extended to June 30, 2012.
• A salary adjustment of 8.75% scheduled to be applied effective January 3, 2011, shall not be implemented subject to the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea entering into a contract with the City of Monterey to merge the two fire departments effective January 1, 2012. Otherwise the salary adjustment of 8.75% will be implemented per the effective date as stated in the MOU. In this event, the payment owed as a result of this salary adjustment will be paid by January 21, 2012. If Carmel cancels the fire merger contract with the City of Monterey within 24 months from the inception of employment with the City of Monterey, the existing MOU would apply, including the 8.75% salary increase, and which increase will not be retroactive.
• The City and IAFF have met and conferred on the potential change in the City’s relationship with Carmel Regional Fire Ambulance (CRFA), specifically that the CRFA ambulance service would become a function of the City.
Fiscal Impact: The cost of the 8.75% salary adjustment is estimated at $114,000 which would be a savings to the City in the event the City enters into a shared fire services agreement with Monterey and remains in the agreement for at lease 24 months.
F. Consideration of a Resolution amending the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Carmel Police Association (POA).
The City and the POA have entered into an MOU that is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2012. The agreement covers both sworn and non-sworn police department employees.
The City Council has determined that in order to achieve long term fiscal stability and sustainability, the City must implement fundamental change to how it provides employee benefits including the implementation of new retirement tiers. Changes in retirement benefit must be negotiated with the City’s recognized bargaining units. The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) administers the retirement benefits of the City’s employees. The California Public Employee retirement Law (PERL) mandates separate retirement formulas for safety and non-safety employees.
In order for the City to implement the new retirement tiers, amendments to the MOUs with all recognized bargaining units is required. The Carmel Professional Fire Fighters (IAFF) has offered to begin a two-tier PERS public safety formula for all fire department employees hired after July 1, 2011. The implementation of a second retirement tier and other minor changes to the MOU for all employees represented by the POA was ratified by its membership on October 21, 2011.
The proposed amendment to the current MOU accomplishes the City’s goal of reducing retirement costs and includes the following additional modifications:
1. 2%@50 retirement tier for newly hired sworn officers and 2%@60 for newly hired non-sworn personnel with three-year final average salary for each effective the implementation date of the new tier by CalPERS;
2. Section 11 and 12 of the MOU will be changed to the accrue rate of 12 hours for holidays and general leave;
3. Increase uniform allowance for all members from $50/month to $75/month; and
4. In-lieu cash for individuals who opt out of the insurance coverage be set at $291 rather than the $270 it states in the MOU (this corrects an error in the contract that was not previously caught since currently none of the members utilize the benefit and is not consistent with the other units.).
Fiscal Impact: The cost of achieving the two-tier agreement now rather than at the expiration of the MOU would be mitigated this fiscal year by implementing the economic benefits. The estimated cost of the economic terms is an estimated $22,000 this fiscal year and $44,000 in 2012-2013.
IX. Ordinances
A. Consideration of an Ordinance amending Chapter 3.32 of the Carmel Municipal Code (Transient Occupancy Tax) to establish a Transient Occupancy Tax Incentive Program. (First reading)
This Ordinance would amend Chapter 3.32 of the Carmel Municipal Code (Transient occupancy Tax) to establish a Transient Occupancy Tax Incentive Program. The purpose of the program is to provide an economic redevelopment incentive for the City’s hostelries to make certain capital improvements to their properties. This, in turn, will make City inns and hotels more competitive and will yield a higher TOT, which will benefit the City.
Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact with the recommended action. If the Council adopts the Ordinance establishing a TOT incentive program, inn operators may apply to the program. Each application will be considered individually and will have identified fiscal impact estimates. The program is designed to share TOT growth with an innkeeper that completes capital investment. The program anticipated increased occupancy rates as a result of the capital improvements. The City’s adopted budget anticipates $4.21 million in Transient Occupancy tax revenue for FY 2011-12.
HOSTELRY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM Exhibit A
HOSTELRY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM
X. Resolutions
B. Consideration of a Resolution approving a contract with the City of Monterey for fire services.
At its meeting of October 4, 2011 the City Council received a report on shared fire services with the City of Monterey and a draft shared services agreement with the City of Monterey for fire services. Council presented direction to staff, comments, thoughts and concerns. Staff of both cities have worked in the interim to incorporate those changes into the agreement included with this agenda item.
The material for this agenda item includes both a clean version of the proposed fire services agreement and a version that shows the changes from the draft version last reviewed by the City Council. In accordance with the comments and direction from the City Council on October 4, 2011 the changes focus on four policy areas:
• Leadership integration including clarification of the structure and the relationship between the Fire Department leadership and the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea;
• Ambulance Services and incorporation of those services into the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea organizational structure;
• Performance information including clarification of the services to be provided, metrics for measuring the frequency and types of services provided;
• Cost Sustainability including the ability to manage asset replacement and to have involvement in staffing cost issues.
Fiscal Impact: The estimate for providing services for FY 2012-13 included in the contract is $1,715,721. The FY 2012-13 estimate for fire services included in the City’s budget is $2,190,531.
PROPOSED AGREEMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE SERVICES Niovember 2011
PROPOSED AGREEMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE SERVICES Staff Report
XI. Orders of Council
A. Receive, file and disseminate the report of the ad hoc Carmel CalPERS Pension Committee and direct staff to return with recommended implementation actions.
On October 2010, an ad hoc committee was formed to review the City’s pension retirement plans provided by the California public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) and to make recommendations to the City concerning those and alternative plans.
Mayor McCloud charged the committee with understanding issues, developing options and recommendations, and advising the Council of its findings. All five Committee members have significant experience concerning pension and money management. Two are retired financial executive (Richard Borda and Joseph Mark), two are financial executives (Barbara Santry and Laura Zehm), and William Sharpe is a retired Professor of Finance at Stanford University. In the course of its almost year of work, the Committee studied available documents and data, supplemented by additional information provided by CalPERS and the City’s administrations.
On September 13, 2011, William Sharpe delivered the Committee’s interim report to Council.
The Committee’s final report covers many of the issues raised by the 2010 Monterey Civil Grand Jury, the findings and recommendations included in the Committee’s Interim Report, and additional background information.
Based on this final report, staff will develop a specific action plan and timeline for implementing the Committee recommendations and will offer this plan for Council consideration and approval. Many of the Committee’s recommendations could require a long-term, concerted strategy or involve negotiations with the City’s labor groups; others could pub into effect more quickly.
The Carmel CalPERS Pension Committee Final Report September 2011
The Carmel CalPERS Pension Committee Final Report
C. Approve the City’s art collection deaccession policy.
On June 8, 2010, the Carmel City Council adopted Resolution 2010-43, approving a management policy for the City’s art collection. The intent of the management policy was to define the scope of the collection as a regional collection that reflected the long artistic heritage of Carmel-by-the-Sea. As such, parameters were established in order that the collection would include art by artists who have lived, worked or belonged to art organizations in Carmel. In addition, art depicting the geography of the Carmel area would be included. Finally, art pertaining to Carmel history (people, architecture, events) also would be retained.
Resolution 2010-43 also authorized the city to hire art consultant Sheryl Nonnenberg to begin the deaccession process. Deaccessioning is defined as “the formal process of removing an object from a collection.” Nonnenberg’s report, detailing her work in this effort, is included in the attached report.
Fiscal Impact: Revenue generated by the sale of deaccessioned art works can be used for the care, maintenance and augmentation of the City’a art collection, which is a significan asset.
Important Considerations: By using these guidelines established in this deaccession policy, the City will be able to more objectively review and define its art collection so that only objects that fall within the stated parameters will be retained, and those that do not can be deaccessioned. This will reduce both staff time and the amount of physical space necessary to mange the art collection. Revenue generated by the sale of deaccessioned art works can be used for the care, maintenance and augmentation of the art collection.
ART COLLECTION DEACCESSION PROJECT August 2011
ART COLLECTION DEACCESSION PROJECT
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
FORUM ON THE FUTURE OF THE MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER SUPPLY, Wednesday, October 26 from 6:00 P.M. – 10:30 P.M.
NEWS ARTICLES: People hear pitches for water solutions
Monterey: Cal Am says it will decide on alternative source
By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 10/27/2011
News Blog
Live Blogging the Water Forum
By Kera.Abraham, October 26, 2011
UPDATE:Cal Am Water Addendum to Water Supply Alternatives Study
California American Water releases addendum to study of Monterey Peninsula water supply alternatives
October 26, 2011
ABSTRACT: The City of Monterey is hosting the Monterey Peninsula Water Forum featuring presentations by California American Water (Cal-Am), DeepWater Desal, the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD), the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA), and the People's Moss Landing Water Desal Project. WHO, WHAT, WHEN & WHERE is presented and the text of the AGENDA is reproduced. Notes: The Forum will be broadcast live on Comcast cable channel 25. A live video stream will be viewable on the web at www.monterey.org/tv and the forum will be re-broadcast on Channel 25 and will be available to view as video-on-demand on the web. Information about the Water Forum is available at www.monterey.org/waterforum
WHO: Hosted by the City of Monterey on behalf of the six peninsula cities of Carmel, Del Rey Oaks, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand City and Seaside.
California American Water, DeepWater Desal LLC, Monterey Peninsula Water Management District:, Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency and The People’s Moss Landing Water Desal Project
WHAT: Monterey Peninsula Water Forum
Five organizations with water supply solutions will discuss their plans, including how much water will be generated, the cost of the water, the timeline for delivering water, the mechanics of the solution, and the status of environmental reviews. Presentations will be made by California American Water (Cal-Am), DeepWater Desal, the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD), the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA), and the People's Moss Landing Water Desal Project.
California American Water will present the results of an RBF Consulting technical analysis of 11 alternative water supply options to meet the Monterey Peninsula’s water shortage. The analysis was developed to examine the technical feasibility of the 11 alternatives in a uniform manner to provide community stakeholders an objective look at each option.
DeepWater Desal LLC plans to build a 25-million gallon per day desalination plant at Moss Landing that will supply potable water to water agencies in both Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties. The feed water will be drawn deep from the Monterey Submarine Canyon that comes inshore at Moss Landing because this water is clearer and cleaner than ground water and contains less marine life than shallow sea water sources.
Monterey Peninsula Water Management District: To address the water supply gap, the District has approved five projects for further investigation. These include Aquifer Storage and Recovery (both the existing Phase 1 and additional phases), a small local desalination facility, support and assistance with the MRWPCA Groundwater Replenishment project, and creating additional capacity at the Los Padres Dam.
Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency proposes to construct a 2,700 acre feet per year Groundwater Replenishment Project that would recharge the Seaside Aquifer. This project will utilize the same state-of-the-art advanced water treatment technology successfully used for the last 35 years by the Orange County Water District.
The People’s Moss Landing Water Desal Project proposes a 10,700 acre feet per year desalination plant on 60 acres of its property in Moss Landing which already has intake and outfall pumps and pipes and a permit to process 60-million gallons of water per day, and 14 storage tanks having 44-million gallons capacity.
WHEN: Wednesday, October 26 from 6:00 P.M. – 10:30 P.M.
WHERE: Monterey Conference Center, Steinbeck Forum.
One Portola Plaza
Monterey, CA.
Free parking is available after 5:00 P.M. in the Downtown West Garage on Tyler Street between Del Monte and Washington streets.
NOTES:
The forum will be broadcast live on Comcast cable channel 25.
A live video stream will be viewable on the web at www.monterey.org/tv. The forum will be re-broadcast on Channel 25 and will be available to view as video-on-demand on the web.
Information about the Water Forum is available at www.monterey.org/waterforum
AGENDA
City Council Agenda
Monterey City Council
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
6:00 to 10:30 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
1. Opening Comments and Introductions (5 minutes)
Monterey Peninsula Water Forum
On behalf of the six Peninsula cities of Carmel, Del Rey Oaks, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand City and Seaside, this public forum will explore the current array of proposed water projects, along with each project's proposed solution, including how it creates a new water supply for the Peninsula, and at what cost.
PRESENTATIONS
2. Presentation by the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD) (30 minutes)
3. Presentation by the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA)(30 minutes)
4. Presentation on the DeepWater Desal Project (30 minutes)
5. Presentation on the People's Moss Landing Water Desal Project (30 minutes)
***15 MINUTE BREAK***
PRESENTATIONS CONTINUED
6. Presentation by California American Water Company (Cal-Am) (45 minutes)
***5 MINUTE BREAK***
COMMENTS – REMARKS
7. Answers to Written Questions Submitted by Audience (45 minutes)
8. Oral Public Comments Regarding the Presentations - Due to time constraints, speakers will be limited to one minute each (30 minutes)
9. Facilitator Remarks (5 minutes)
ADJOURNMENT
Monterey: Cal Am says it will decide on alternative source
By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 10/27/2011
News Blog
Live Blogging the Water Forum
By Kera.Abraham, October 26, 2011
UPDATE:Cal Am Water Addendum to Water Supply Alternatives Study
California American Water releases addendum to study of Monterey Peninsula water supply alternatives
October 26, 2011
ABSTRACT: The City of Monterey is hosting the Monterey Peninsula Water Forum featuring presentations by California American Water (Cal-Am), DeepWater Desal, the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD), the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA), and the People's Moss Landing Water Desal Project. WHO, WHAT, WHEN & WHERE is presented and the text of the AGENDA is reproduced. Notes: The Forum will be broadcast live on Comcast cable channel 25. A live video stream will be viewable on the web at www.monterey.org/tv and the forum will be re-broadcast on Channel 25 and will be available to view as video-on-demand on the web. Information about the Water Forum is available at www.monterey.org/waterforum
WHO: Hosted by the City of Monterey on behalf of the six peninsula cities of Carmel, Del Rey Oaks, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand City and Seaside.
California American Water, DeepWater Desal LLC, Monterey Peninsula Water Management District:, Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency and The People’s Moss Landing Water Desal Project
WHAT: Monterey Peninsula Water Forum
Five organizations with water supply solutions will discuss their plans, including how much water will be generated, the cost of the water, the timeline for delivering water, the mechanics of the solution, and the status of environmental reviews. Presentations will be made by California American Water (Cal-Am), DeepWater Desal, the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD), the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA), and the People's Moss Landing Water Desal Project.
California American Water will present the results of an RBF Consulting technical analysis of 11 alternative water supply options to meet the Monterey Peninsula’s water shortage. The analysis was developed to examine the technical feasibility of the 11 alternatives in a uniform manner to provide community stakeholders an objective look at each option.
DeepWater Desal LLC plans to build a 25-million gallon per day desalination plant at Moss Landing that will supply potable water to water agencies in both Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties. The feed water will be drawn deep from the Monterey Submarine Canyon that comes inshore at Moss Landing because this water is clearer and cleaner than ground water and contains less marine life than shallow sea water sources.
Monterey Peninsula Water Management District: To address the water supply gap, the District has approved five projects for further investigation. These include Aquifer Storage and Recovery (both the existing Phase 1 and additional phases), a small local desalination facility, support and assistance with the MRWPCA Groundwater Replenishment project, and creating additional capacity at the Los Padres Dam.
Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency proposes to construct a 2,700 acre feet per year Groundwater Replenishment Project that would recharge the Seaside Aquifer. This project will utilize the same state-of-the-art advanced water treatment technology successfully used for the last 35 years by the Orange County Water District.
The People’s Moss Landing Water Desal Project proposes a 10,700 acre feet per year desalination plant on 60 acres of its property in Moss Landing which already has intake and outfall pumps and pipes and a permit to process 60-million gallons of water per day, and 14 storage tanks having 44-million gallons capacity.
WHEN: Wednesday, October 26 from 6:00 P.M. – 10:30 P.M.
WHERE: Monterey Conference Center, Steinbeck Forum.
One Portola Plaza
Monterey, CA.
Free parking is available after 5:00 P.M. in the Downtown West Garage on Tyler Street between Del Monte and Washington streets.
NOTES:
The forum will be broadcast live on Comcast cable channel 25.
A live video stream will be viewable on the web at www.monterey.org/tv. The forum will be re-broadcast on Channel 25 and will be available to view as video-on-demand on the web.
Information about the Water Forum is available at www.monterey.org/waterforum
AGENDA
City Council Agenda
Monterey City Council
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
6:00 to 10:30 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
1. Opening Comments and Introductions (5 minutes)
Monterey Peninsula Water Forum
On behalf of the six Peninsula cities of Carmel, Del Rey Oaks, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand City and Seaside, this public forum will explore the current array of proposed water projects, along with each project's proposed solution, including how it creates a new water supply for the Peninsula, and at what cost.
PRESENTATIONS
2. Presentation by the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD) (30 minutes)
3. Presentation by the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA)(30 minutes)
4. Presentation on the DeepWater Desal Project (30 minutes)
5. Presentation on the People's Moss Landing Water Desal Project (30 minutes)
***15 MINUTE BREAK***
PRESENTATIONS CONTINUED
6. Presentation by California American Water Company (Cal-Am) (45 minutes)
***5 MINUTE BREAK***
COMMENTS – REMARKS
7. Answers to Written Questions Submitted by Audience (45 minutes)
8. Oral Public Comments Regarding the Presentations - Due to time constraints, speakers will be limited to one minute each (30 minutes)
9. Facilitator Remarks (5 minutes)
ADJOURNMENT
Monday, October 24, 2011
Carmel Arbor Day ‘Celebrating Sustainability:’ Featuring Joyce Stevens, Author & Paul Byrne, LEED Architect
ABSTRACT: The text of the Carmel Arbor Day “Celebrating Sustainability” flyer is reproduced. The event is scheduled for Thursday, October 27, 2011 from 2:00 P.M. – 4:00 P.M. at Carpenter Hall, Sunset Center and sponsored by Friends of Carmel Forest and Carmel-by-the-Sea Forest and Beach Commission.
Join Us For
Carmel Arbor Bay
Celebrating Sustainability
Featuring
Joyce Stevens
Co-author of "The Monterey Pine Forest"
Paul Byrne, LEED Architect
Grid Neutral Architecture
With Mike Branson, City Forester
Sustainable Carmel
and
Light Fare by Cypress Inn
2:00 to 4:00 p.m.
Thursday, October 27
Carpenter Hall at Sunset Center
S.W. Corner of Mission St. & 8th Avenue
Free parking San Carlos St. & 10th Avenue
Free Admission
Sponsored by
Friends of Carmel Forest
Carmel-by-the-Sea Forest and Beach Commission
For more information, please call 831-250-7721 or 831-620-2010
Or visit www.carmelforest.org
ADDENDUM:
The Trees for the Forest
New book by local nonprofit shines light on our own Monterey pine.
By Kera Abraham Thursday, July 28, 2011
The Monterey Pine Forest: Coastal California's Living Legacy (1/1/2011) by The Monterey Pine Watch Group
Friends of Carmel Forest on facebook
USGBC
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
Green Building Codes Resource Center
California’s New Green Building Code (CALGreen)
Summary Information about the Codes
PowerPoint Overviews
2010 California Green Building Standards Code
California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11
First Printing: June 2010
ISBN 978-1-58001-979-8
COPYRIGHT © 2010
Held by
California Building Standards Commission
2525 Natomas Park Drive, Suite 130
Sacramento, CA 95833-2936
Green Building Program
Carmel-by-the-Sea Department of Community Planning and Building
Join Us For
Carmel Arbor Bay
Celebrating Sustainability
Featuring
Joyce Stevens
Co-author of "The Monterey Pine Forest"
Paul Byrne, LEED Architect
Grid Neutral Architecture
With Mike Branson, City Forester
Sustainable Carmel
and
Light Fare by Cypress Inn
2:00 to 4:00 p.m.
Thursday, October 27
Carpenter Hall at Sunset Center
S.W. Corner of Mission St. & 8th Avenue
Free parking San Carlos St. & 10th Avenue
Free Admission
Sponsored by
Friends of Carmel Forest
Carmel-by-the-Sea Forest and Beach Commission
For more information, please call 831-250-7721 or 831-620-2010
Or visit www.carmelforest.org
ADDENDUM:
The Trees for the Forest
New book by local nonprofit shines light on our own Monterey pine.
By Kera Abraham Thursday, July 28, 2011
The Monterey Pine Forest: Coastal California's Living Legacy (1/1/2011) by The Monterey Pine Watch Group
Friends of Carmel Forest on facebook
USGBC
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
Green Building Codes Resource Center
California’s New Green Building Code (CALGreen)
Summary Information about the Codes
PowerPoint Overviews
2010 California Green Building Standards Code
California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11
First Printing: June 2010
ISBN 978-1-58001-979-8
COPYRIGHT © 2010
Held by
California Building Standards Commission
2525 Natomas Park Drive, Suite 130
Sacramento, CA 95833-2936
Green Building Program
Carmel-by-the-Sea Department of Community Planning and Building
Thursday, October 20, 2011
ORAL ARGUMENT: THE FLANDERS FOUNDATION, Plaintiff and Appellant v. CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA et al, Defendants and Appellants (Sixth District Court of Appeal Case No. H035818)
NEWS ARTICLE: Appeals court hears Flanders arguments
By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 10/21/2011
ABSTRACT: On Thursday, 20 October 2011, Justices Mihara, Duffy and Walsh (pro tem) heard oral argument from the attorney for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, David W. Balch, and the attorney for The Flanders Foundation, Susan Brandt-Hawley. Both attorneys had approximately 20 minutes for opening statements and 10 minutes rebuttal, including answering direct questions from the Justices. Basically, attorney Brandt-Hawley argued that Judge Kingsley’s decision on the Surplus Land Act issue should be upheld because there was no analysis of the environmental impacts of a public agency purchasing the Flanders Mansion Property in the Environmental Impact Reports (EIR). On the Economic Feasibility Analysis issue, Brandt-Hawley argued that the document should have been a part of the Draft EIR since the basis for the City Council approving the sale or lease of the property was based on the City Council’s determination that the lease option was economically infeasible. She further argued that the Economic Feasibility Analysis was insufficient because it did not ask and answer the correct questions involving analogous properties and analyzing feasible alternatives not limited to the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property. And specifically the context for the Economic Feasibility Analysis of whether the City could make a profit was incorrect. The attorney for the City, David Balch, basically argued that the Court must respect the broad discretion of the City Council in making its decision to approve the sale or lease of the Flanders Mansion Property. Specifically, Balch argued that the City complied with the Surplus Land Act provisions sufficiently because “future action” is “speculative” and therefore any further analysis would be “misleading” and financially wasteful. On the Economic Feasibility Analysis issue, Balch stated that there is no requirement that the Economic Feasibility Analysis be included in the EIR and while the document was not available to the public until after the public comment period closed for the Draft EIR, it was available prior to the City Council’s final determination to approve the sale or lease of the Property. Balch further argued that it is within the discretion of the City to define “infeasible” as 17 years for a residential lease to recoup the cost of the estimated $1.3 million rehabilitation or 7 years for a commercial lease compared to sale of the Flanders Mansion Property for $2.7 million without rehabilitation or $4 million with rehabilitation. Both attorneys recognized that the City’s purpose was divestment of the Property for financial reasons, i.e., a desire not to use taxpayer monies to maintain or improve the Property. Attorney Brandt-Hawley argued that it is feasible to achieve that objective without selling the Flanders Mansion Property, whereas attorney Balch argued that there is substantial evidence in the record to support the City Council’s decision and it is within the City’s discretion to sell the Flanders Mansion Property subject to CEQA and a public vote. During the presentations of the attorneys, Justices asked questions of clarification and other questions regarding the conservation easements and public access issues, reasonable expectations for complying with the Surplus Land Act, et cetera. After approximately one hour, the case was submitted and an opinion is expected within 90 days. A Summary of the Case, prepared by Monterey County, not the Court, was available for the public. The Summary is embedded below.
ORAL ARGUMENT CALENDAR
ORAL ARGUMENT CALENDAR
COURT OF APPEAL, SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
CASE NO. H035818
TITLE THE FLANDERS FOUNDATION, Plaintiff and Appellant v. CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA et al., Defendants and Appellants
Clarifications/Corrections to Summary include the following:
• Statement in Summary: “The Mansion borders a 35-arce city park and a public garden.”
Clarification: The Mansion is within Mission Trail Nature Preserve and the 1.252 acre parcel comprises an inholding in the City’s largest park.
• Statement in Summary: “Because the Mansion property included nearly 15 acres of parkland, the City reduced the size of the Mansion property to 1.5 acres.”
Correction/Clarification: The Flanders Mansion Property parcel is 1.252 acres, not 1.5 acres. The “parkland” is Mission Trail Nature Preserve, 35 acres total.
By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 10/21/2011
ABSTRACT: On Thursday, 20 October 2011, Justices Mihara, Duffy and Walsh (pro tem) heard oral argument from the attorney for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, David W. Balch, and the attorney for The Flanders Foundation, Susan Brandt-Hawley. Both attorneys had approximately 20 minutes for opening statements and 10 minutes rebuttal, including answering direct questions from the Justices. Basically, attorney Brandt-Hawley argued that Judge Kingsley’s decision on the Surplus Land Act issue should be upheld because there was no analysis of the environmental impacts of a public agency purchasing the Flanders Mansion Property in the Environmental Impact Reports (EIR). On the Economic Feasibility Analysis issue, Brandt-Hawley argued that the document should have been a part of the Draft EIR since the basis for the City Council approving the sale or lease of the property was based on the City Council’s determination that the lease option was economically infeasible. She further argued that the Economic Feasibility Analysis was insufficient because it did not ask and answer the correct questions involving analogous properties and analyzing feasible alternatives not limited to the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property. And specifically the context for the Economic Feasibility Analysis of whether the City could make a profit was incorrect. The attorney for the City, David Balch, basically argued that the Court must respect the broad discretion of the City Council in making its decision to approve the sale or lease of the Flanders Mansion Property. Specifically, Balch argued that the City complied with the Surplus Land Act provisions sufficiently because “future action” is “speculative” and therefore any further analysis would be “misleading” and financially wasteful. On the Economic Feasibility Analysis issue, Balch stated that there is no requirement that the Economic Feasibility Analysis be included in the EIR and while the document was not available to the public until after the public comment period closed for the Draft EIR, it was available prior to the City Council’s final determination to approve the sale or lease of the Property. Balch further argued that it is within the discretion of the City to define “infeasible” as 17 years for a residential lease to recoup the cost of the estimated $1.3 million rehabilitation or 7 years for a commercial lease compared to sale of the Flanders Mansion Property for $2.7 million without rehabilitation or $4 million with rehabilitation. Both attorneys recognized that the City’s purpose was divestment of the Property for financial reasons, i.e., a desire not to use taxpayer monies to maintain or improve the Property. Attorney Brandt-Hawley argued that it is feasible to achieve that objective without selling the Flanders Mansion Property, whereas attorney Balch argued that there is substantial evidence in the record to support the City Council’s decision and it is within the City’s discretion to sell the Flanders Mansion Property subject to CEQA and a public vote. During the presentations of the attorneys, Justices asked questions of clarification and other questions regarding the conservation easements and public access issues, reasonable expectations for complying with the Surplus Land Act, et cetera. After approximately one hour, the case was submitted and an opinion is expected within 90 days. A Summary of the Case, prepared by Monterey County, not the Court, was available for the public. The Summary is embedded below.
ORAL ARGUMENT CALENDAR
ORAL ARGUMENT CALENDAR
COURT OF APPEAL, SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
CASE NO. H035818
TITLE THE FLANDERS FOUNDATION, Plaintiff and Appellant v. CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA et al., Defendants and Appellants
Clarifications/Corrections to Summary include the following:
• Statement in Summary: “The Mansion borders a 35-arce city park and a public garden.”
Clarification: The Mansion is within Mission Trail Nature Preserve and the 1.252 acre parcel comprises an inholding in the City’s largest park.
• Statement in Summary: “Because the Mansion property included nearly 15 acres of parkland, the City reduced the size of the Mansion property to 1.5 acres.”
Correction/Clarification: The Flanders Mansion Property parcel is 1.252 acres, not 1.5 acres. The “parkland” is Mission Trail Nature Preserve, 35 acres total.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
CALIFORNIA AMERICAN WATER: Monterey Water Supply Analysis & Technical Memorandum, October 5, 2011, RBF Consulting, Cost Analysis of Water Supply Alternatives
NEWS ARTICLE:
Error prompts revision of desal alternatives study
Estimate too high on one project
By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 10/25/2011
ABSTRACT: California American Water (CAW) has issued a technical memorandum concerning water supply alternatives designed to meet the Monterey Peninsula’s water shortage. The memo, which was prepared by RBF Consulting, examines eleven water projects capable of meeting the area’s water supply deficit, including the Marina desalination plant, pipeline, and Aquifer, Storage and Recovery (ASR) project approved by the California Public Utilities Commission. The findings will be presented at a public forum planned by the City of Monterey on Wednesday, October 26. A supplemental memo that examines permitting requirements and anticipated timelines for each project is also being prepared. In that memo, the company’s consultant will make a recommendation as to which project represents the best water supply solution for the area based on the criteria defined. Monterey Water Supply Analysis and Technical Memorandum, October 5, 2011, RBF Consulting, Cost Analysis of Water Supply Alternatives, are embedded. A SUMMARY OF REGIONAL PROJECT & ALTERNATIVES CAPITAL COST COMPARISONS appears at the end of the Post based of values from TABLE 3, TABLE 4 and TABLE 5. The Technical Memorandum’s Summary states: “We have reviewed possible physical solutions to the peninsula’s water supply shortage on an equal basis. The next step is to complete an assessment of the permitting and schedule impact for each alternative. This will be presented in a subsequent technical memorandum at which point a final recommendation as to the most attractive alternate or alternates can be determined.”
Note: Documents Courtesy of Catherine Bowie, California American Water.
Monterey Water Supply Analysis October 5 2011 FINAL
Monterey Water Supply Analysis, October 5, 2011
Content includes Project Supply and System Demand, Alternatives 1-11, Total Capital Costs Bar Chart for Alternatives 1-11, Total Annualized Capital and O&M/Annual Costs, Unit Costs ($/AF), Alternatives 1, 2 & 11, Alternatives 3 & 4-Lower Carmel Valley Filtration Plant (LCVFP) + Extended Aquifer Storage Recovery (ASR), Alternative 5 – Lower Carmel Valley Filtration Plant (LCVFP) + Desal Plant in Marina + Extended ASR, Alternative 6-LCVFP + Sand City Desal Expansion + Extended ASR, Alternative 7-LCVFP + Monterey Desal Plant + Extended ASR, Alternative 8-Lower Carmel Valley Iron Removal Plant (LCVIRP) + Monterey Desal Plant + Extended ASR, Alternative 9-SRFP + Extended ASR, Alternative 10.
Technical Memorandum RBF Consulting
Technical Memorandum
Date: October 5, 2011
To: Richard Svindland, Director of Engineering, California American Water
From: Paul Findley, RBF Consulting
Subject: Cost Analysis of Water Supply Alternatives
This technical memorandum presents the results of cost analysis for eleven alternatives to solve the water supply deficit in CAW’s Coastal Division. It should be noted that these alternatives represent physical solutions and that we have not fully explored permitting and schedule impacts for each of these alternatives. Permitting and schedule impacts will be presented in a subsequent technical memorandum.
•Alternative 1 – Implementation of 10 mgd Marina project;
•Alternative 2 – Implementation of 6.5 mgd Marina project with 2700 AFY MRWPCA Groundwater Recharge in Seaside, and 2700 AFY of Carmel River water used for ASR and injection dilution;
•Alternative 3 – 35 mgd Lower Carmel Valley Filtration Plant with a 6900 AFY ASR system in Seaside;
•Alternative 4 – 24 mgd Lower Carmel Valley Filtration Plant with a 6900 AFY ASR system in Seaside, with 2700 AFY MRWPCA Groundwater Recharge, and 4200 AFY of Carmel River water used for ASR and injection dilution;
•Alternative 5 – 32 mgd Lower Carmel Valley Filtration Plant, a 3. 5 mgd desalination plant in North Marina, and a 5500 AFY ASR system in Seaside;
•Alternative 6 – 35 mgd Lower Carmel Valley Filtration Plant, expansion of the Sand City desalination plant from 0.3 mgd to 1.0 mgd, and a 6500 afy ASR system in Seaside;
•Alternative 7 – 32 mgd Lower Carmel Valley Filtration Plant, a 3.0 mgd desalination plant near the Naval Post Graduate School, and a 5200 AFY ASR system in Seaside;
•Alternative 8– 20 mgd Lower Carmel Valley Iron Removal Plant, a 5 mgd desalination plant near the Naval Post Graduate School, and a 5100 AFY ASR system in Seaside;
•Alternative 9 – 35 mgd Salinas River Filtration Plant with a 6900 AFY ASR system in Seaside;
•Alternative 10 – 10 mgd “Deep Water Desalination” Plant near Moss Landing with a 1300 AFY ASR system in Seaside.
•Alternative 11 – 5 mgd Marina project with 2700 AFY MRWPCA Groundwater Recharge in Seaside, 2700 AFY of Carmel River water used for ASR and injection dilution, and implementation of a more aggressive conservation program to reduce demand by an additional 1500 AFY. A potential variation of this alternative would be to obtain additional Table 13 direct diversion rights in lieu of additional conservation.
Contents include Description and Operation for each Alternative, Tables (REGIONAL PROJECT CAPITAL COST, System Flow Rates, CAPITAL COST COMPARISON (2012 Dollars in Millions), O&M/ANNUAL COST COMPARISON (2012 Dollars), UNIT COST COMPARISON Figures (Alternative 3, Alternative 5, Alternative 6, Alternative 7, Alternative 8, Alternative 9 , Cost Comparison including Capital Cost, O&M/Annual Cost, Unit Cost, Other Considerations and Summary
SUMMARY OF REGIONAL PROJECT & ALTERNATIVES CAPITAL COST COMPARISONS
REGIONAL PROJECT CAPITAL COST (Estimated Cost (Oct 2012 $)
MCWD/MCWRA Total MCWD/MCWRA Capital Cost $297,000,000
CAW Total CAW Capital Cost $107,000,000
TOTAL REGIONAL PROJECT CAPITAL COST $404,000,000
Cost Analysis of Water Supply Alternatives -
Error prompts revision of desal alternatives study
Estimate too high on one project
By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 10/25/2011
ABSTRACT: California American Water (CAW) has issued a technical memorandum concerning water supply alternatives designed to meet the Monterey Peninsula’s water shortage. The memo, which was prepared by RBF Consulting, examines eleven water projects capable of meeting the area’s water supply deficit, including the Marina desalination plant, pipeline, and Aquifer, Storage and Recovery (ASR) project approved by the California Public Utilities Commission. The findings will be presented at a public forum planned by the City of Monterey on Wednesday, October 26. A supplemental memo that examines permitting requirements and anticipated timelines for each project is also being prepared. In that memo, the company’s consultant will make a recommendation as to which project represents the best water supply solution for the area based on the criteria defined. Monterey Water Supply Analysis and Technical Memorandum, October 5, 2011, RBF Consulting, Cost Analysis of Water Supply Alternatives, are embedded. A SUMMARY OF REGIONAL PROJECT & ALTERNATIVES CAPITAL COST COMPARISONS appears at the end of the Post based of values from TABLE 3, TABLE 4 and TABLE 5. The Technical Memorandum’s Summary states: “We have reviewed possible physical solutions to the peninsula’s water supply shortage on an equal basis. The next step is to complete an assessment of the permitting and schedule impact for each alternative. This will be presented in a subsequent technical memorandum at which point a final recommendation as to the most attractive alternate or alternates can be determined.”
Note: Documents Courtesy of Catherine Bowie, California American Water.
Monterey Water Supply Analysis October 5 2011 FINAL
Monterey Water Supply Analysis, October 5, 2011
Content includes Project Supply and System Demand, Alternatives 1-11, Total Capital Costs Bar Chart for Alternatives 1-11, Total Annualized Capital and O&M/Annual Costs, Unit Costs ($/AF), Alternatives 1, 2 & 11, Alternatives 3 & 4-Lower Carmel Valley Filtration Plant (LCVFP) + Extended Aquifer Storage Recovery (ASR), Alternative 5 – Lower Carmel Valley Filtration Plant (LCVFP) + Desal Plant in Marina + Extended ASR, Alternative 6-LCVFP + Sand City Desal Expansion + Extended ASR, Alternative 7-LCVFP + Monterey Desal Plant + Extended ASR, Alternative 8-Lower Carmel Valley Iron Removal Plant (LCVIRP) + Monterey Desal Plant + Extended ASR, Alternative 9-SRFP + Extended ASR, Alternative 10.
Technical Memorandum RBF Consulting
Technical Memorandum
Date: October 5, 2011
To: Richard Svindland, Director of Engineering, California American Water
From: Paul Findley, RBF Consulting
Subject: Cost Analysis of Water Supply Alternatives
This technical memorandum presents the results of cost analysis for eleven alternatives to solve the water supply deficit in CAW’s Coastal Division. It should be noted that these alternatives represent physical solutions and that we have not fully explored permitting and schedule impacts for each of these alternatives. Permitting and schedule impacts will be presented in a subsequent technical memorandum.
•Alternative 1 – Implementation of 10 mgd Marina project;
•Alternative 2 – Implementation of 6.5 mgd Marina project with 2700 AFY MRWPCA Groundwater Recharge in Seaside, and 2700 AFY of Carmel River water used for ASR and injection dilution;
•Alternative 3 – 35 mgd Lower Carmel Valley Filtration Plant with a 6900 AFY ASR system in Seaside;
•Alternative 4 – 24 mgd Lower Carmel Valley Filtration Plant with a 6900 AFY ASR system in Seaside, with 2700 AFY MRWPCA Groundwater Recharge, and 4200 AFY of Carmel River water used for ASR and injection dilution;
•Alternative 5 – 32 mgd Lower Carmel Valley Filtration Plant, a 3. 5 mgd desalination plant in North Marina, and a 5500 AFY ASR system in Seaside;
•Alternative 6 – 35 mgd Lower Carmel Valley Filtration Plant, expansion of the Sand City desalination plant from 0.3 mgd to 1.0 mgd, and a 6500 afy ASR system in Seaside;
•Alternative 7 – 32 mgd Lower Carmel Valley Filtration Plant, a 3.0 mgd desalination plant near the Naval Post Graduate School, and a 5200 AFY ASR system in Seaside;
•Alternative 8– 20 mgd Lower Carmel Valley Iron Removal Plant, a 5 mgd desalination plant near the Naval Post Graduate School, and a 5100 AFY ASR system in Seaside;
•Alternative 9 – 35 mgd Salinas River Filtration Plant with a 6900 AFY ASR system in Seaside;
•Alternative 10 – 10 mgd “Deep Water Desalination” Plant near Moss Landing with a 1300 AFY ASR system in Seaside.
•Alternative 11 – 5 mgd Marina project with 2700 AFY MRWPCA Groundwater Recharge in Seaside, 2700 AFY of Carmel River water used for ASR and injection dilution, and implementation of a more aggressive conservation program to reduce demand by an additional 1500 AFY. A potential variation of this alternative would be to obtain additional Table 13 direct diversion rights in lieu of additional conservation.
Contents include Description and Operation for each Alternative, Tables (REGIONAL PROJECT CAPITAL COST, System Flow Rates, CAPITAL COST COMPARISON (2012 Dollars in Millions), O&M/ANNUAL COST COMPARISON (2012 Dollars), UNIT COST COMPARISON Figures (Alternative 3, Alternative 5, Alternative 6, Alternative 7, Alternative 8, Alternative 9 , Cost Comparison including Capital Cost, O&M/Annual Cost, Unit Cost, Other Considerations and Summary
SUMMARY OF REGIONAL PROJECT & ALTERNATIVES CAPITAL COST COMPARISONS
REGIONAL PROJECT CAPITAL COST (Estimated Cost (Oct 2012 $)
MCWD/MCWRA Total MCWD/MCWRA Capital Cost $297,000,000
CAW Total CAW Capital Cost $107,000,000
TOTAL REGIONAL PROJECT CAPITAL COST $404,000,000
Cost Analysis of Water Supply Alternatives -
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
‘MINUTES’ for Ten Noteworthy 4 October 2011 City Council Agenda Items
“MINUTES”
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Archived Video Streaming
City Hall
East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues
II. Roll Call
PRESENT: Council Members Burnett, Hazdovac, Sharp, Talmage, and Mayor McCloud
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: John Goss, Interim City Administrator
Jason Stilwell, City Administrator
Heidi Burch, Asst. City Administrator/City Clerk
Don Freeman, City Attorney
Mike Calhoun, Interim Police Chief
Andrew Miller, Monterey Fire Chief
Sean Conroy, Planning Services Manager
V. Announcements from Closed Session, from City Council Members and the City Administrator.
A. Announcements from Closed Session.
1. Existing Litigation -- Government Code Section 54956.9(a) - Conference with legal counsel regarding The Flanders Foundation, a California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation, Petitioner v. City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Respondents – Monterey County Superior Court Case No. M99437/State of California Court of Appeals, Sixth District, Civil Case No. H035818.
2. Labor Negotiations – Government Code Section 54957.6(a) Meet and confer with Carmel-by-the-Sea’s Meyers-Milias Brown Act representative, Interim City Administrator Goss, to give direction regarding labor negotiations with the Carmel-by-the-Sea Police Officers Association and the Carmel Professional Firefighters/International Association of Firefighters (IAFF).
City Attorney Don Freeman stated that there were no announcements from Closed Session other than the Appellate Panel will hear Flanders Foundation v. City of Carmel-by-the-Sea on October 20 in Salinas at 9:45 A.M.
C. Announcements from City Administrator.
3. Report by outgoing Interim City Administrator Goss.
Interim City Administrator Goss stated he was “smitten with the charm of Carmel.” He mentioned work on the City’s budget and reviewed his goal “to move projects forward.” As city administrator, he has worked about 1000 hours as city administrator and his “basics” include “focused recommendations." He thanked the city staff, including Assistant City Administrator Heidi Burch, and City Council Members and the public.
X. Resolutions
A. Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the City Administrator to enter into a Mills Act Contract with Stephanie Ager Kirz for an historic property located on Junipero Avenue 2 NW of Third Avenue.
Sean Conroy, Planning Services Manager, presented the staff report, including the residence is a Comstock house built in 1929 with very few alterations; an excellent example of his work. A Mills Act contract is ten years and typically results in a 40%-60% reduction in property taxes based on income approach to valuation. Staff recommends the adoption of Resolution approving a Mills Act contract. This would be the City’s first Mills Act contract.
Stephanie Ager Kirz, the project applicant, addressed the Council and public. She stated that the name of her residence is “Curtain Calls” named by a silent screen actress.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Alison Pratt Shelling stated support for the Mills Act contract program.
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member HAZDOVAC moved to authorize the City Administrator to enter into a Mills Act Contract with Stephanie Ager Kirz for an historic property located on Junipero Avenue 2 NW of Third Avenue amended to eliminate “annual grounds and tree maintenance,” seconded by Council Member BURNETT and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
B. Consideration of a Resolution extending the Forest Theater Guild’s lease of the Forest Theater for one year.
John Goss, Interim City Administrator, presented the staff report. He stated that due to concerns about last season regarding compliance with the sale of food and beverages he recommended a one-year lease of the Forest Theater.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Kathryn Harrison Coleman (FTG Board Member) spoke of a “misunderstanding of procedure” and FTG had obtained all food and beverage licenses from the Health Department and ABC and appealed for more than a one-year lease.
Mayor McCloud mentioned a power point presentation prepared by the Forest Theater Guild, including programs and organizations and stated the need for more information and suggested the FTG take a year and get “organized.”
Kathryn Harrison Coleman stated that she expected the power point to be available for presentation at the meeting. That it has been the City’s past practice to grant a five–year lease and in light of their progress this past season, she advocated for the duration of the lease, i.e., four-year lease. The FTG is actively working with new board members, consultants on a “sustainability plan,” et cetera. And a one-year lease does not allow FTG to commit to programs and organizations. Ergo, the FTG is requesting the rest of the term, i.e., a four-year lease.
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member Burnett queried “do we have confidence in this new team” and my answer is “yes.” He stated that his experience as President of the Board of Directors of the Natural History Museum has informed him that there is a case to be made for a longer lease for seeking grants and donor commitments. (Natural History Museum has a several decades-long lease with the City of Pacific Grove).
Council Members Hazdovac and Talmage advocated for a three-year lease.
Mayor McCloud stated her belief that the FTG is not ready for major fundraising, et cetera, and the need for the City to work with the neighborhood.
Council Member BURNETT moved to approve a Resolution extending the Forest Theater Guild’s lease of the Forest Theater for three years, seconded by Council Member HAZDOVAC and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCLOUD
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
C. Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the transfer of $40,000 from the Rio Park Deposit Fund for the design development, construction documents and administration and bid negotiation elements of Phase II of the Scenic Road Beach Restrooms Project.
John Goss, Interim City Administrator, presented the staff report, including the project has been “languishing.” Due to council’s reluctance to use Capital Reserves, he recommended using interest from “inactive” and “restricted” Rio Park funds for the Scenic Road Beach Restrooms Project. Robert Carver, Carver & Schicketanz Architects, asked about the next step. Planning Services Manager Sean Conroy stated that the next step would be the Planning Commission.
Council Members Burnett and Talmage raised issues including showers, neighbors concern about restroom placement involving view and toilets, Carver stated that the roof would be an “extension of the landscape” and use of gray water from Del Mar cistern could be used for toilets. Project can connect to sewer as opposed to pumping mechanism. To a query from Council Member Hazdovac, Carver stated that the restroom as designed is not ADA compliant, but compliance could be accomplished in the future. Council Member Talmage expressed concern with ceiling height; Carmel stated ceiling height 8’ to 10’ as designed and skylights not visible due to landscaping. Council Member Burnett stated monies should come from Capital Improvement Reserves.
City Attorney Don Freeman stated the importance of public notice due to concern about past litigation in 2002.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
David Banks read prepared comments by Barbara Livingston regarding using Rio Park funds, all $100,000 plus interest part of agreement with Pebble Beach and that monies in an exclusive Rio Park deposit account be used for park development and requested the city attorney address her concerns.
Motta Potter, Carmel Chamber of Commerce President, stated the receipt of complaint letters about pubic nudity at the Carmel Beach; a concern with only a shower, not a changing room. She supported the use of Rio Park funds for project.
Alison Pratt Shelling expressed support for the project and urged City to contact all members of the public.
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member BURNETT moved to approve a Resolution authorizing the allocation of up to $54,000 from the Capital Improvement Fund for the design development, construction documents and administration and bid negotiation elements of Phase II of the Scenic Road Beach Restrooms Project, with modifications by the Interim City Administrator, seconded by Council Member TALMAGE and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
D. Consideration of a Resolution modifying the City’s 2011-12 operating budget, effective January 1, 2012, to include CRFA expenditures and revenues, and revising the staff position table.
E. Consideration of a Resolution establishing Job Descriptions for the positions of Paramedic Fire Fighter, EMT Fire Fighter, Per Diem EMT Paramedic Fire Fighter and Operations Officer.
F. Consideration of a Resolution adopting the Carmel Regional Ambulance Authority (CRFA) Firefighters Memorandum of Understanding.
John Goss, Interim City Administrator, presented the staff report, including JPA dissolved 31 December 2011 and required steps for CRFA members becoming City employees.
Council Member Burnett expressed issues about CRFA potentially becoming employees of the City of Monterey as anticipated of the Carmel Firefighters becoming Monterey employees under Fire Services Agreement between the City and the City of Monterey. He expressed the possibility of savings through “economies of scale.”
Council Member Talmage addressed Memorandum of Understanding regarding the need to update the MOU. Interim City Administrator stated that it is the current MOU and provides a transition period to work through issues. To query about subsidy, the subsidy is reduced due to savings from social security, workers compensation and liability insurance.
To Council Member Talmage’s query about the staffing list, David Jedinak, CRFA, stated that presently there are three full time paramedics, one full time EMT Fire Fighter/Paramedic, and currently CRFA is bringing on board two additional Firefighters/Paramedics.
Gerard Rose, CRFA President, addressed financial “projection” and MOU issues
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Barbara Livingston expressed concern for Carmel ambulance service or ambulance as part of Monterey.
Carolyn Hardy expressed concern regarding City’s position that ambulance is part of a separate division of a department which no longer exists. She voiced the need to address fire and ambulance together, not separately. “There needs to be a firm commitment, not something that will be figured out later.”
Gerard Rose, CRFA President, advocated the need for the Council to act on Goss’s recommendations.
Charlotte Townsend, the “oldest surviving mayor,” stated that she believes residents do not want to give up tradition of Carmel’s own Fire Department, not an adjunct to Monterey.
Monte Miller asked how the process is to be managed regarding firefighters and ambulance members.
Andrew Miller, Monterey Fire Chief, stated that Monterey Fire Department has been overseeing Carmel’s ambulance for the last five years and will continue that commitment. Monterey is prepared for full integration of fire and ambulance if Carmel Council makes such a decision.
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member HAZDOVAC moved to approve a Resolution adopting the Carmel Regional Ambulance Authority (CRFA) Firefighters Memorandum of Understanding, as amended, including documents regarding adoption of two-tier system, seconded by Council Member SHARP and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
Council Member BURNETT moved to approve a Resolution modifying the City’s 2011-12 operating budget, effective January 1, 2012, to include CRFA expenditures and revenues, and revising the staff position table, seconded by Council Member TALMAGE and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
Council Member BURNETT moved to approve a Resolution establishing Job Descriptions for the positions of Paramedic Fire Fighter, EMT Fire Fighter, Per Diem EMT Paramedic Fire Fighter and Operations Officer, seconded by Council Member TALMAGE and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
XI. Orders of Council
A. Receive report on tentative contract with Monterey Fire.
John Goss, Interim City Administrator, presented the staff report, specifically the Draft Agreement for the Provision of Fire Service between Carmel and the City of Monterey, including modifications, such as the deletion of Section 2.5 Option to create a JPA, addition of City of Monterey will follow OSHA requirements (two-in, two-out), Section 4.2(b) (i) (D) Response Time and Monthly Report, response times not to exceed the national standard of 5 minutes or less 90% of the time, Section 9.1 Amendments to Agreement, such as “more restrictive language” to cover operational nuances.
Mayor McCloud included Section 9.2 Assignment.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Barbara Livingston stated “follow the money” and that “Monterey stands to make a lot of money” with the acquisition of the Carmel Fire Department. She expressed the City has not performed “due diligence,” such as the Council never articulated Council’s goal for the Carmel Fire Department.
Carolyn Hardy expressed concerns about continuity of employees for only one year, agreement amended without city council approval, option to create JPA, response times, elevated level of service. She asked the city attorney for his opinion regarding the pitfalls of the tentative agreement.
Monte Miller stated contract should recognize CRFA and two-in, two-out. He expressed concern with a cost plus agreement and advocated a fixed price contract.
Michael LePage, CRA Board, read a statement in opposition of the proposed acquisition of Carmel’s Fire Department by the City of Monterey; support current headquarters model; many concerns about the contract; more time needed for “full review” of contract; need to clarify CRFA in contract with regard to two-in, two-out; all amendments should be reviewed and approved by council; and advocates a fixed price contract.
Roberta Miller stated that the change from a headquarters model with Monterey to a merger with Monterey poses no control over cost, no voting rights, no say in decision, and loss in community service and it is a “huge mistake.” She asked city attorney about binding arbitration and problems regarding binding arbitration for the City and residents.
Carolyn Hardy expressed interest in including annual testing and maintenance of fire hydrants in contract.
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
City Attorney Don Freeman stated that the California Constitution prohibits delegation of binding arbitration. Under contract, Carmel Firefighters will be part of binding arbitration process of Monterey. He stated that it is prudent for the City Council to spend a lot of time reading the agreement and determine whether or not it is in the best interest of the City.
Council Member Talmage commented about the need to address fire and ambulance together. He advocated CRFA becoming city employees as of January 1, 2012 and include CRFA in Fire Services Agreement for 4 ½ year duration of Agreement. He called for “specificity” in the Agreement. He acknowledged agreement is a cost plus agreement; a need for a split in the financial risk. He advocated for Carmel Firefighters to be stationed at the Carmel Station for longer than one year. For “specificity,” include fire inspections, two-in, two-out, CalPERS, staff meetings and a more operational agreement “in tone.”
Council Member Burnett commented on policy issues, including better service to the community, response time language, integration of fire and ambulance, Carmel’s choice about fate of CRFA employees, continuity of Carmel Firefighters at Carmel station over time, Carmel control over costs (“cafeteria” style) and labor negotiations, Monterey’s provision of information, City Administrator’s input in Fire Chief performance review, cost plus agreement, fire fuel abatement, emergency preparedness training, Monterey’s unfunded CalPERS liability and leave bank.
Monterey Fire Chief Andrew Miller stated that the council’s issues are “manageable” and you cannot write a contract and micromanage it to the point where you have so much control, that is difficult, but there are things that can be done. This is a matter for further negotiation and discussion with Mr. Stilwell.
Mayor McCloud cited no criticisms and kudos regarding the performance of Monterey over the past few years.
Council Member Talmage expressed concern about the budget process including the total City cost for the operation of the Fire Department.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Archived Video Streaming
City Hall
East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues
II. Roll Call
PRESENT: Council Members Burnett, Hazdovac, Sharp, Talmage, and Mayor McCloud
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: John Goss, Interim City Administrator
Jason Stilwell, City Administrator
Heidi Burch, Asst. City Administrator/City Clerk
Don Freeman, City Attorney
Mike Calhoun, Interim Police Chief
Andrew Miller, Monterey Fire Chief
Sean Conroy, Planning Services Manager
V. Announcements from Closed Session, from City Council Members and the City Administrator.
A. Announcements from Closed Session.
1. Existing Litigation -- Government Code Section 54956.9(a) - Conference with legal counsel regarding The Flanders Foundation, a California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation, Petitioner v. City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Respondents – Monterey County Superior Court Case No. M99437/State of California Court of Appeals, Sixth District, Civil Case No. H035818.
2. Labor Negotiations – Government Code Section 54957.6(a) Meet and confer with Carmel-by-the-Sea’s Meyers-Milias Brown Act representative, Interim City Administrator Goss, to give direction regarding labor negotiations with the Carmel-by-the-Sea Police Officers Association and the Carmel Professional Firefighters/International Association of Firefighters (IAFF).
City Attorney Don Freeman stated that there were no announcements from Closed Session other than the Appellate Panel will hear Flanders Foundation v. City of Carmel-by-the-Sea on October 20 in Salinas at 9:45 A.M.
C. Announcements from City Administrator.
3. Report by outgoing Interim City Administrator Goss.
Interim City Administrator Goss stated he was “smitten with the charm of Carmel.” He mentioned work on the City’s budget and reviewed his goal “to move projects forward.” As city administrator, he has worked about 1000 hours as city administrator and his “basics” include “focused recommendations." He thanked the city staff, including Assistant City Administrator Heidi Burch, and City Council Members and the public.
X. Resolutions
A. Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the City Administrator to enter into a Mills Act Contract with Stephanie Ager Kirz for an historic property located on Junipero Avenue 2 NW of Third Avenue.
Sean Conroy, Planning Services Manager, presented the staff report, including the residence is a Comstock house built in 1929 with very few alterations; an excellent example of his work. A Mills Act contract is ten years and typically results in a 40%-60% reduction in property taxes based on income approach to valuation. Staff recommends the adoption of Resolution approving a Mills Act contract. This would be the City’s first Mills Act contract.
Stephanie Ager Kirz, the project applicant, addressed the Council and public. She stated that the name of her residence is “Curtain Calls” named by a silent screen actress.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Alison Pratt Shelling stated support for the Mills Act contract program.
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member HAZDOVAC moved to authorize the City Administrator to enter into a Mills Act Contract with Stephanie Ager Kirz for an historic property located on Junipero Avenue 2 NW of Third Avenue amended to eliminate “annual grounds and tree maintenance,” seconded by Council Member BURNETT and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
B. Consideration of a Resolution extending the Forest Theater Guild’s lease of the Forest Theater for one year.
John Goss, Interim City Administrator, presented the staff report. He stated that due to concerns about last season regarding compliance with the sale of food and beverages he recommended a one-year lease of the Forest Theater.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Kathryn Harrison Coleman (FTG Board Member) spoke of a “misunderstanding of procedure” and FTG had obtained all food and beverage licenses from the Health Department and ABC and appealed for more than a one-year lease.
Mayor McCloud mentioned a power point presentation prepared by the Forest Theater Guild, including programs and organizations and stated the need for more information and suggested the FTG take a year and get “organized.”
Kathryn Harrison Coleman stated that she expected the power point to be available for presentation at the meeting. That it has been the City’s past practice to grant a five–year lease and in light of their progress this past season, she advocated for the duration of the lease, i.e., four-year lease. The FTG is actively working with new board members, consultants on a “sustainability plan,” et cetera. And a one-year lease does not allow FTG to commit to programs and organizations. Ergo, the FTG is requesting the rest of the term, i.e., a four-year lease.
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member Burnett queried “do we have confidence in this new team” and my answer is “yes.” He stated that his experience as President of the Board of Directors of the Natural History Museum has informed him that there is a case to be made for a longer lease for seeking grants and donor commitments. (Natural History Museum has a several decades-long lease with the City of Pacific Grove).
Council Members Hazdovac and Talmage advocated for a three-year lease.
Mayor McCloud stated her belief that the FTG is not ready for major fundraising, et cetera, and the need for the City to work with the neighborhood.
Council Member BURNETT moved to approve a Resolution extending the Forest Theater Guild’s lease of the Forest Theater for three years, seconded by Council Member HAZDOVAC and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCLOUD
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
C. Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the transfer of $40,000 from the Rio Park Deposit Fund for the design development, construction documents and administration and bid negotiation elements of Phase II of the Scenic Road Beach Restrooms Project.
John Goss, Interim City Administrator, presented the staff report, including the project has been “languishing.” Due to council’s reluctance to use Capital Reserves, he recommended using interest from “inactive” and “restricted” Rio Park funds for the Scenic Road Beach Restrooms Project. Robert Carver, Carver & Schicketanz Architects, asked about the next step. Planning Services Manager Sean Conroy stated that the next step would be the Planning Commission.
Council Members Burnett and Talmage raised issues including showers, neighbors concern about restroom placement involving view and toilets, Carver stated that the roof would be an “extension of the landscape” and use of gray water from Del Mar cistern could be used for toilets. Project can connect to sewer as opposed to pumping mechanism. To a query from Council Member Hazdovac, Carver stated that the restroom as designed is not ADA compliant, but compliance could be accomplished in the future. Council Member Talmage expressed concern with ceiling height; Carmel stated ceiling height 8’ to 10’ as designed and skylights not visible due to landscaping. Council Member Burnett stated monies should come from Capital Improvement Reserves.
City Attorney Don Freeman stated the importance of public notice due to concern about past litigation in 2002.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
David Banks read prepared comments by Barbara Livingston regarding using Rio Park funds, all $100,000 plus interest part of agreement with Pebble Beach and that monies in an exclusive Rio Park deposit account be used for park development and requested the city attorney address her concerns.
Motta Potter, Carmel Chamber of Commerce President, stated the receipt of complaint letters about pubic nudity at the Carmel Beach; a concern with only a shower, not a changing room. She supported the use of Rio Park funds for project.
Alison Pratt Shelling expressed support for the project and urged City to contact all members of the public.
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member BURNETT moved to approve a Resolution authorizing the allocation of up to $54,000 from the Capital Improvement Fund for the design development, construction documents and administration and bid negotiation elements of Phase II of the Scenic Road Beach Restrooms Project, with modifications by the Interim City Administrator, seconded by Council Member TALMAGE and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
D. Consideration of a Resolution modifying the City’s 2011-12 operating budget, effective January 1, 2012, to include CRFA expenditures and revenues, and revising the staff position table.
E. Consideration of a Resolution establishing Job Descriptions for the positions of Paramedic Fire Fighter, EMT Fire Fighter, Per Diem EMT Paramedic Fire Fighter and Operations Officer.
F. Consideration of a Resolution adopting the Carmel Regional Ambulance Authority (CRFA) Firefighters Memorandum of Understanding.
John Goss, Interim City Administrator, presented the staff report, including JPA dissolved 31 December 2011 and required steps for CRFA members becoming City employees.
Council Member Burnett expressed issues about CRFA potentially becoming employees of the City of Monterey as anticipated of the Carmel Firefighters becoming Monterey employees under Fire Services Agreement between the City and the City of Monterey. He expressed the possibility of savings through “economies of scale.”
Council Member Talmage addressed Memorandum of Understanding regarding the need to update the MOU. Interim City Administrator stated that it is the current MOU and provides a transition period to work through issues. To query about subsidy, the subsidy is reduced due to savings from social security, workers compensation and liability insurance.
To Council Member Talmage’s query about the staffing list, David Jedinak, CRFA, stated that presently there are three full time paramedics, one full time EMT Fire Fighter/Paramedic, and currently CRFA is bringing on board two additional Firefighters/Paramedics.
Gerard Rose, CRFA President, addressed financial “projection” and MOU issues
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Barbara Livingston expressed concern for Carmel ambulance service or ambulance as part of Monterey.
Carolyn Hardy expressed concern regarding City’s position that ambulance is part of a separate division of a department which no longer exists. She voiced the need to address fire and ambulance together, not separately. “There needs to be a firm commitment, not something that will be figured out later.”
Gerard Rose, CRFA President, advocated the need for the Council to act on Goss’s recommendations.
Charlotte Townsend, the “oldest surviving mayor,” stated that she believes residents do not want to give up tradition of Carmel’s own Fire Department, not an adjunct to Monterey.
Monte Miller asked how the process is to be managed regarding firefighters and ambulance members.
Andrew Miller, Monterey Fire Chief, stated that Monterey Fire Department has been overseeing Carmel’s ambulance for the last five years and will continue that commitment. Monterey is prepared for full integration of fire and ambulance if Carmel Council makes such a decision.
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member HAZDOVAC moved to approve a Resolution adopting the Carmel Regional Ambulance Authority (CRFA) Firefighters Memorandum of Understanding, as amended, including documents regarding adoption of two-tier system, seconded by Council Member SHARP and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
Council Member BURNETT moved to approve a Resolution modifying the City’s 2011-12 operating budget, effective January 1, 2012, to include CRFA expenditures and revenues, and revising the staff position table, seconded by Council Member TALMAGE and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
Council Member BURNETT moved to approve a Resolution establishing Job Descriptions for the positions of Paramedic Fire Fighter, EMT Fire Fighter, Per Diem EMT Paramedic Fire Fighter and Operations Officer, seconded by Council Member TALMAGE and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
XI. Orders of Council
A. Receive report on tentative contract with Monterey Fire.
John Goss, Interim City Administrator, presented the staff report, specifically the Draft Agreement for the Provision of Fire Service between Carmel and the City of Monterey, including modifications, such as the deletion of Section 2.5 Option to create a JPA, addition of City of Monterey will follow OSHA requirements (two-in, two-out), Section 4.2(b) (i) (D) Response Time and Monthly Report, response times not to exceed the national standard of 5 minutes or less 90% of the time, Section 9.1 Amendments to Agreement, such as “more restrictive language” to cover operational nuances.
Mayor McCloud included Section 9.2 Assignment.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Barbara Livingston stated “follow the money” and that “Monterey stands to make a lot of money” with the acquisition of the Carmel Fire Department. She expressed the City has not performed “due diligence,” such as the Council never articulated Council’s goal for the Carmel Fire Department.
Carolyn Hardy expressed concerns about continuity of employees for only one year, agreement amended without city council approval, option to create JPA, response times, elevated level of service. She asked the city attorney for his opinion regarding the pitfalls of the tentative agreement.
Monte Miller stated contract should recognize CRFA and two-in, two-out. He expressed concern with a cost plus agreement and advocated a fixed price contract.
Michael LePage, CRA Board, read a statement in opposition of the proposed acquisition of Carmel’s Fire Department by the City of Monterey; support current headquarters model; many concerns about the contract; more time needed for “full review” of contract; need to clarify CRFA in contract with regard to two-in, two-out; all amendments should be reviewed and approved by council; and advocates a fixed price contract.
Roberta Miller stated that the change from a headquarters model with Monterey to a merger with Monterey poses no control over cost, no voting rights, no say in decision, and loss in community service and it is a “huge mistake.” She asked city attorney about binding arbitration and problems regarding binding arbitration for the City and residents.
Carolyn Hardy expressed interest in including annual testing and maintenance of fire hydrants in contract.
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
City Attorney Don Freeman stated that the California Constitution prohibits delegation of binding arbitration. Under contract, Carmel Firefighters will be part of binding arbitration process of Monterey. He stated that it is prudent for the City Council to spend a lot of time reading the agreement and determine whether or not it is in the best interest of the City.
Council Member Talmage commented about the need to address fire and ambulance together. He advocated CRFA becoming city employees as of January 1, 2012 and include CRFA in Fire Services Agreement for 4 ½ year duration of Agreement. He called for “specificity” in the Agreement. He acknowledged agreement is a cost plus agreement; a need for a split in the financial risk. He advocated for Carmel Firefighters to be stationed at the Carmel Station for longer than one year. For “specificity,” include fire inspections, two-in, two-out, CalPERS, staff meetings and a more operational agreement “in tone.”
Council Member Burnett commented on policy issues, including better service to the community, response time language, integration of fire and ambulance, Carmel’s choice about fate of CRFA employees, continuity of Carmel Firefighters at Carmel station over time, Carmel control over costs (“cafeteria” style) and labor negotiations, Monterey’s provision of information, City Administrator’s input in Fire Chief performance review, cost plus agreement, fire fuel abatement, emergency preparedness training, Monterey’s unfunded CalPERS liability and leave bank.
Monterey Fire Chief Andrew Miller stated that the council’s issues are “manageable” and you cannot write a contract and micromanage it to the point where you have so much control, that is difficult, but there are things that can be done. This is a matter for further negotiation and discussion with Mr. Stilwell.
Mayor McCloud cited no criticisms and kudos regarding the performance of Monterey over the past few years.
Council Member Talmage expressed concern about the budget process including the total City cost for the operation of the Fire Department.
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE FIRE SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITIES OF MONTEREY AND CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
ABSTRACT: The text of the DRAFT AGREEMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE SERVICE, as presented by Interim City Administrator John Goss at the October 4, 2011 City Council meeting, is embedded, excluding EXHIBITS A-F. Some of the major elements of the Draft Agreement, from the staff report, are outlined. Note: From Exhibit C, Carmel Fire Services Agreement, Budget Projection Model, Fiscal Year 2011/2012 (full year), Personnel Services total $1,610,255, Operating Expenses total $78,022. The GRAND TOTAL is $1,713,828 compared to a proposed 2011/12 Police Department total expenditure of $ 3,069,774.
DRAFT AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE FIRE SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITIES
DRAFT AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE FIRE SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITIES OF MONTEREY AND CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
TO: MAYOR McCLOUD AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: INTERIM CITY ADMINISTRATOR JOHN GOSS
SUBJECT: DRAFT AGREEMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE SERVICE
DATE: OCTOBER 4, 2011
_____________________________________________
Basic Service. The draft agreement which is attached covers the basic service which will implement Council’s direction on September 13. This includes providing a Fire Captain, Engineer and Firefighter “each and every day” at the Carmel Fire Station. It also provides continuity of staffing, assuring that all current Carmel employees will be assigned to the Carmel fire station for a period of not less than one year. It further provides that Monterey will train all of its fire safety personnel to the unique response characteristics of Carmel. In fact, this has been occurring for some time under the current contract. In addition, the agreement continues to provide that Monterey will provide Chief Fire Officer duty-chief coverage for the management of emergency incidents.
Basically, the agreement will provide fire service in Carmel-by-the-Sea similar to that currently provided. Monterey will also oversee emergency medical services including ambulance response as is currently the case. The agreement will provide administrative services including program planning and management, budgeting, training, procurement, human resource support, and records management.
Term/Termination Clause. One of the questions raised at the September 13, 2011 meeting is whether the “escape clause” in the agreement was sufficient. First, the agreement provides that the agreement would be for four and one-half years, rather than five years. The initial term would be from January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2016, since the agreement will begin in mid-year. It also provides that upon the conclusion of the initial term, the agreement can be automatically extended for five years, unless either party gives written notice in the form of a Council Resolution of its intent to allow the agreement to lapse.
Permitting the agreement to lapse can occur if, no later than the preceding June 30 before the end of the term, written notice is given by either party of its intent to not renew the agreement. In addition, there is a another provision that the agreement can be terminated by either party at any time with 12 months notice in the form of a Council resolution. In either case, Carmel will retain its real property, buildings, equipment and apparatus. It should be noted, that in connection with this last provision (property retention) the City will be responsible for equipment repair, maintenance and replacement as it is now.
Method and Conditions of Payment. The agreement provides that by March 15 each year, a budget projection for the following fiscal year will be provided describing the total expected costs of providing Fire Service. Carmel will then pay 1/12 of that amount each month by the 15th of that month, subject to a penalty for late payment.
At the end of the fiscal year, a final calculation of the actual costs for providing fire service will be determined. If the actual costs are greater than the budget projection, Carmel will pay the difference between the actual and budgeted costs. If the actual costs are less than the budget projection, Monterey shall pay to Carmel the difference between the actual and budgeted costs. An interest rate factor will be applied to these payments starting from the beginning of the following fiscal year. In the case of Pacific Grove, thus far, money has been returned by Monterey at the end of each fiscal year.
Since the proposed agreement is scheduled to begin January 1, 2012, the initial phase of the agreement will be for six months from January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012. At the end of the initial six month period, the budget will be provided and payments made annually as described above.
Cost of Service. The proposed cost of service on a fiscal year basis calculated by Monterey and submitted earlier this year, was $1,720,396. After further refinement and discussion, the 2011-12 estimate for Monterey Fire Service as reflected in Exhibit C is $1,713,828. The cost for the initial six month term, and the remainder of the 2011-12 fiscal year beginning January 1, 2012, is $873,179 also documented in Exhibit C.
Ambulance Service. Elsewhere on this Council agenda there are three resolutions which will start the process of moving the ambulance service provided by Carmel Regional Fire Ambulance (CRFA) to the City of Carmel effective January 1, 2012. The CRFA employees would become City employees at that time. With the merger with Monterey, the ambulance operation would become a division of the newly merged Fire Department. So even though the ambulance employees will be City employees, operational oversight will be provided by the Monterey Fire Department, as is now the case. In terms of service and operations, there would be no change in ambulance service and operations, even with the Monterey merger and transfer of CRFA employees to the City.
During the initial six-month period of the Fire contract beginning January 1, 2012, additional analysis will be conducted by Monterey, Carmel and CRFA staff regarding the provision of ambulance service to the City. Monterey has agreed to provide interim operational oversight to CRFA at no cost to Carmel upon commencement of the fire service contract. After this initial period, Monterey will administer the ambulance service based on directions given by Carmel-by-the-Sea through a negotiated contract amendment or through an additional contract for service. Carmel-by-the-Sea ambulance will continue the continuity of the pre-contract system and maintain the current staffing level of two paramedic/firefighters, or one paramedic/fighter and one firefighter/EMT, per shift.
It is important that Carmel-by-the-Sea maintain formal continuity of direction and control over the provision of ambulance service in order to preserve their “201” rights in providing this service.
Transfer of Employment. The agreement provides that existing Carmel firefighters will be hired as City of Monterey employees on the effective date of the agreement. This is contingent upon each Carmel fire fighter passing a Monterey pre-employment medical evaluation. (See Exhibit D)
There are only moderate differences in the compensation and benefit packages in the Carmel-by-the-Sea and Monterey compensation and benefits packages; however, the agreement ensures that no Carmel fire fighter will lose any compensation.
Also, there will be no layoffs or demotions of Carmel-by-the-Sea employees. This is because all of the Carmel position classifications are in-line with the Monterey position classifications and the nine Carmel positions of three fire captains, three fire engineers and three firefighters dovetail with the positions and staff assignments used by Monterey.
It should be noted that when Carmel-by-the-Sea fire safety employees become new employees of Monterey, that City (Monterey) will not assume any responsibility for PERS liabilities that these employees incurred during their employment by Carmel-bythe- Sea. This same provision was incorporated in the Pacific Grove and Monterey fire merger agreement.
Labor Agreements. When there is a change in compensation, benefits and working conditions, the California Government Code requires that employers meet and confer with recognized labor organizations. Officers of the affected labor organizations have worked cooperatively with each City to resolve issues concerning any impacts of the proposed agreements. Pertinent to Carmel-by-the-Sea firefighters there will be an agreement with Monterey regarding the initial position classification and related salary step, transfer of accumulated leave balances up to the maximum allowed by Monterey, maintenance of seniority for certain specified benefits, station assignments and vacation selection. It precludes layoff of any incumbent Carmel-by-the-Sea firefighters during the term of the agreement.
Regarding Carmel-by-the-Sea and the Carmel firefighters, an agreement has been reached to amend the current MOU. The term of the existing agreement would be extended from January 1, 2011 to January 1, 2012. The 8.75% salary adjustment scheduled for January 1, 2011 would not be implemented.
Fire Prevention. A service provided by Monterey Fire is to coordinate the planning and development of fire prevention and safety education programs for schools, businesses, community associations, child-care providers and other members of the community. This service will be extended to Carmel-by-the-Sea under this agreement.
Also as part of this service, fire safety inspections of all state-mandated occupancies and fire protection systems within Carmel can be provided as well as the review of all development and building plans to ensure compliance with all applicable fire and life safety codes. All fees collected through this process will be retained by Carmel-by-the-Sea. There has been some interest, however, in retaining the current consultant used to conduct fire inspections and to review building plans from the fire code perspective. Monterey Fire is receptive to continuing the provision of this service. In fact, Monterey uses the same consultant for some of this specialty work. The only stipulation is that the fire inspections and fire code reviews be coordinated with Monterey Fire and under their supervision.
Conclusion. This report touches on some of the highlights of the proposed agreement for fire services. It is based on the agreement developed between Pacific Grove and Monterey. However, certain refinements have been made, which include:
• The proposed draft agreement clarifies that Carmel-by-the-Sea will have all of its buildings and equipment returned at “lapse” of the agreement in addition to exercise of the “termination” clause.
• The proposed draft agreement provides for the payment of interest from the end of the fiscal year in reconciling actual versus budgeted expenditures.
• The proposed draft agreement provides for ongoing discussion of issues related to service, operations, and labor relations at least annually but more frequently as requested by either party.
ADDENDUM:
Exhibit C
Carmel Fire Services Agreement
Budget Projection Model
FY 2011-12 (full year)
SUBTOTAL: Command & Support Staff $185,235
SUBTOTAL: Fire Suppression Staff: $1,121,032
SUBTOTAL: Overtime $147,992
SUBTOTAL: Other Personnel Costs: $155,966
SUBTOTAL: PERSONNEL SERVICES: $1,610,255
SUBTOTAL: OPERATING EXPENSES: $78,022
GRAND SUBTOTAL: $1,688,277
GRAND TOTAL: $1,713,828
DRAFT AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE FIRE SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITIES
DRAFT AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE FIRE SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITIES OF MONTEREY AND CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
TO: MAYOR McCLOUD AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: INTERIM CITY ADMINISTRATOR JOHN GOSS
SUBJECT: DRAFT AGREEMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE SERVICE
DATE: OCTOBER 4, 2011
_____________________________________________
Basic Service. The draft agreement which is attached covers the basic service which will implement Council’s direction on September 13. This includes providing a Fire Captain, Engineer and Firefighter “each and every day” at the Carmel Fire Station. It also provides continuity of staffing, assuring that all current Carmel employees will be assigned to the Carmel fire station for a period of not less than one year. It further provides that Monterey will train all of its fire safety personnel to the unique response characteristics of Carmel. In fact, this has been occurring for some time under the current contract. In addition, the agreement continues to provide that Monterey will provide Chief Fire Officer duty-chief coverage for the management of emergency incidents.
Basically, the agreement will provide fire service in Carmel-by-the-Sea similar to that currently provided. Monterey will also oversee emergency medical services including ambulance response as is currently the case. The agreement will provide administrative services including program planning and management, budgeting, training, procurement, human resource support, and records management.
Term/Termination Clause. One of the questions raised at the September 13, 2011 meeting is whether the “escape clause” in the agreement was sufficient. First, the agreement provides that the agreement would be for four and one-half years, rather than five years. The initial term would be from January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2016, since the agreement will begin in mid-year. It also provides that upon the conclusion of the initial term, the agreement can be automatically extended for five years, unless either party gives written notice in the form of a Council Resolution of its intent to allow the agreement to lapse.
Permitting the agreement to lapse can occur if, no later than the preceding June 30 before the end of the term, written notice is given by either party of its intent to not renew the agreement. In addition, there is a another provision that the agreement can be terminated by either party at any time with 12 months notice in the form of a Council resolution. In either case, Carmel will retain its real property, buildings, equipment and apparatus. It should be noted, that in connection with this last provision (property retention) the City will be responsible for equipment repair, maintenance and replacement as it is now.
Method and Conditions of Payment. The agreement provides that by March 15 each year, a budget projection for the following fiscal year will be provided describing the total expected costs of providing Fire Service. Carmel will then pay 1/12 of that amount each month by the 15th of that month, subject to a penalty for late payment.
At the end of the fiscal year, a final calculation of the actual costs for providing fire service will be determined. If the actual costs are greater than the budget projection, Carmel will pay the difference between the actual and budgeted costs. If the actual costs are less than the budget projection, Monterey shall pay to Carmel the difference between the actual and budgeted costs. An interest rate factor will be applied to these payments starting from the beginning of the following fiscal year. In the case of Pacific Grove, thus far, money has been returned by Monterey at the end of each fiscal year.
Since the proposed agreement is scheduled to begin January 1, 2012, the initial phase of the agreement will be for six months from January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012. At the end of the initial six month period, the budget will be provided and payments made annually as described above.
Cost of Service. The proposed cost of service on a fiscal year basis calculated by Monterey and submitted earlier this year, was $1,720,396. After further refinement and discussion, the 2011-12 estimate for Monterey Fire Service as reflected in Exhibit C is $1,713,828. The cost for the initial six month term, and the remainder of the 2011-12 fiscal year beginning January 1, 2012, is $873,179 also documented in Exhibit C.
Ambulance Service. Elsewhere on this Council agenda there are three resolutions which will start the process of moving the ambulance service provided by Carmel Regional Fire Ambulance (CRFA) to the City of Carmel effective January 1, 2012. The CRFA employees would become City employees at that time. With the merger with Monterey, the ambulance operation would become a division of the newly merged Fire Department. So even though the ambulance employees will be City employees, operational oversight will be provided by the Monterey Fire Department, as is now the case. In terms of service and operations, there would be no change in ambulance service and operations, even with the Monterey merger and transfer of CRFA employees to the City.
During the initial six-month period of the Fire contract beginning January 1, 2012, additional analysis will be conducted by Monterey, Carmel and CRFA staff regarding the provision of ambulance service to the City. Monterey has agreed to provide interim operational oversight to CRFA at no cost to Carmel upon commencement of the fire service contract. After this initial period, Monterey will administer the ambulance service based on directions given by Carmel-by-the-Sea through a negotiated contract amendment or through an additional contract for service. Carmel-by-the-Sea ambulance will continue the continuity of the pre-contract system and maintain the current staffing level of two paramedic/firefighters, or one paramedic/fighter and one firefighter/EMT, per shift.
It is important that Carmel-by-the-Sea maintain formal continuity of direction and control over the provision of ambulance service in order to preserve their “201” rights in providing this service.
Transfer of Employment. The agreement provides that existing Carmel firefighters will be hired as City of Monterey employees on the effective date of the agreement. This is contingent upon each Carmel fire fighter passing a Monterey pre-employment medical evaluation. (See Exhibit D)
There are only moderate differences in the compensation and benefit packages in the Carmel-by-the-Sea and Monterey compensation and benefits packages; however, the agreement ensures that no Carmel fire fighter will lose any compensation.
Also, there will be no layoffs or demotions of Carmel-by-the-Sea employees. This is because all of the Carmel position classifications are in-line with the Monterey position classifications and the nine Carmel positions of three fire captains, three fire engineers and three firefighters dovetail with the positions and staff assignments used by Monterey.
It should be noted that when Carmel-by-the-Sea fire safety employees become new employees of Monterey, that City (Monterey) will not assume any responsibility for PERS liabilities that these employees incurred during their employment by Carmel-bythe- Sea. This same provision was incorporated in the Pacific Grove and Monterey fire merger agreement.
Labor Agreements. When there is a change in compensation, benefits and working conditions, the California Government Code requires that employers meet and confer with recognized labor organizations. Officers of the affected labor organizations have worked cooperatively with each City to resolve issues concerning any impacts of the proposed agreements. Pertinent to Carmel-by-the-Sea firefighters there will be an agreement with Monterey regarding the initial position classification and related salary step, transfer of accumulated leave balances up to the maximum allowed by Monterey, maintenance of seniority for certain specified benefits, station assignments and vacation selection. It precludes layoff of any incumbent Carmel-by-the-Sea firefighters during the term of the agreement.
Regarding Carmel-by-the-Sea and the Carmel firefighters, an agreement has been reached to amend the current MOU. The term of the existing agreement would be extended from January 1, 2011 to January 1, 2012. The 8.75% salary adjustment scheduled for January 1, 2011 would not be implemented.
Fire Prevention. A service provided by Monterey Fire is to coordinate the planning and development of fire prevention and safety education programs for schools, businesses, community associations, child-care providers and other members of the community. This service will be extended to Carmel-by-the-Sea under this agreement.
Also as part of this service, fire safety inspections of all state-mandated occupancies and fire protection systems within Carmel can be provided as well as the review of all development and building plans to ensure compliance with all applicable fire and life safety codes. All fees collected through this process will be retained by Carmel-by-the-Sea. There has been some interest, however, in retaining the current consultant used to conduct fire inspections and to review building plans from the fire code perspective. Monterey Fire is receptive to continuing the provision of this service. In fact, Monterey uses the same consultant for some of this specialty work. The only stipulation is that the fire inspections and fire code reviews be coordinated with Monterey Fire and under their supervision.
Conclusion. This report touches on some of the highlights of the proposed agreement for fire services. It is based on the agreement developed between Pacific Grove and Monterey. However, certain refinements have been made, which include:
• The proposed draft agreement clarifies that Carmel-by-the-Sea will have all of its buildings and equipment returned at “lapse” of the agreement in addition to exercise of the “termination” clause.
• The proposed draft agreement provides for the payment of interest from the end of the fiscal year in reconciling actual versus budgeted expenditures.
• The proposed draft agreement provides for ongoing discussion of issues related to service, operations, and labor relations at least annually but more frequently as requested by either party.
ADDENDUM:
Exhibit C
Carmel Fire Services Agreement
Budget Projection Model
FY 2011-12 (full year)
SUBTOTAL: Command & Support Staff $185,235
SUBTOTAL: Fire Suppression Staff: $1,121,032
SUBTOTAL: Overtime $147,992
SUBTOTAL: Other Personnel Costs: $155,966
SUBTOTAL: PERSONNEL SERVICES: $1,610,255
SUBTOTAL: OPERATING EXPENSES: $78,022
GRAND SUBTOTAL: $1,688,277
GRAND TOTAL: $1,713,828
FIVE-YEAR USE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA & FOREST THEATER GUILD FOR THE OUTDOOR FOREST THEATRE
ABSTRACT: At the 4 October 2011 City Council Meeting, the City Council considered a Resolution extending the Forest Theater Guild’s lease of the Forest Theater for one year; Staff recommended that a Resolution be adopted to extend the Forest Theater Guild’s lease for the Forest Theater for one year. After council deliberations, Council Member Jason Burnett made a motion to approve a Resolution extending the Forest Theater Guild’s lease of the Forest Theater for three years, seconded by Council Member Paula Hazdovac and carried by a vote of 4-1, Mayor McCloud dissenting. The Forest Theater Guild’s 5-Year Use Agreement of April 2011 is embedded. The Agenda Item Summary, Staff Report and Resolution are reproduced.
FOREST THEATER 5-YR USE AGREEMENT FTG April 2011
FOREST THEATER 5-YR USE AGREEMENT Between the CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA AND FOREST THEATER GUILD
Meeting Date: October 4, 2011
Prepared by: John Goss
City Council
Agenda Item Summary
Name: Consideration of a Resolution extending the Forest Theater’s lease of the Forest Theater for one year.
Description: The Forest Theater Guild (FTG) has leased the Forest Theater for many years, presenting a number of live plays and movies each season. At the April 5, 2011 Council meeting, a one-year lease with the Guild for use of the Forest Theater was approved, with the direction to ask Guild to return after the conclusion of the 2011 season with a request for a full lease to 2015. The Council action also gave specific direction on construction time schedules and the performance calendar.
At the conclusion of the 2011 season, on July 29, 2011, the City received a letter from FTG requesting approval of four years of what the Guild considers a normal five-year lease. Action by the Council was requested in order to facilitate the Guild’s planning for the 2012 season. After evaluating FTG’s request for a lease extension to 2015, staff met with members of the Guild’s Board of Directors to discuss some problems
noted during the 2011 season. The Board members present indicated that these issues would be addressed, such as obtaining blanket permits from the Health Department, ABC and the City. Staff was impressed by the efforts of the new Board to better organize FTG and to move the Guild forward.
Overall Cost: None
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that a Resolution be adopted to extend the Forest Theater Guild’s lease for the Forest Theater for one year.
Important Considerations: It appears that the focus of the Board is pointed in the right direction; however, to determine if this intent is followed through by appropriate action, it is recommended that the lease be extended by one year rather than four at this time.
Decision Record: None
Reviewed by:
________________________________ _________________
John Goss, Interim City Administrator Date
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: INTERIM CITY ADMINISTRATOR JOHN GOSS
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE FOREST THEATER GUILD’S LEASE OF THE FOREST THEATER FOR ONE YEAR
The Forest Theater Guild (FTG) has leased the Forest Theater for a number of years, presenting a number of live plays and movies each season. On July 29, 2011, the City received a letter from FTG requesting approval of four years of what the Guild considers a normal five-year lease. Action by the Council was requested in order to facilitate the Guild’s planning for the 2012 season.
You may recall that a lease extension with the FTG was considered at your April meeting. Council’s action at that time was to enter into a one-year lease with the Guild for use of the Forest Theater, and to ask the Guild to return after the season with a request for a full lease to 2015. The action also gave specific direction on construction time schedules and the performance calendar.
Now that the 2011 season has concluded, and an extension of the lease to 2015 has been proposed, staff has evaluated FTG’s request. After meeting with representatives of the Guild’s Board of Directors, staff was impressed by the efforts of its new Board to better organize FTG and move the Guild forward. Revised By-laws are scheduled to be considered by the Board on October 3, 2011. A Board retreat was held to set the tone and direction for FTG. Fund Builders Alliance was engaged to develop a sustainable financial plan for the Guild.
The Board members at the meeting also expressed a desire to address problems in 2012 that were brought to their attention. These problems include:
• Not consistently obtaining written permission from the City Administrator’s Office for the sale of food or beverages as required by Exhibit “C” of the Forest Theater use agreement. These permits require information regarding the type of food and beverage to be furnished and the name of the responsible person who will provide the food and be responsible for the cleanup.
• Although the FTC has use of the facility for nine weeks, permits were only requested for four nights during the season, and those were for special events. Also, these permit requests did not contain the detail required by the use agreement.
• It appears that ABC licenses were obtained for certain events, but not for other evenings where they were required.
• There is a general impression among staff that FTG is a high maintenance organization regarding requests for staff assistance. Maintenance staff has very limited hours to devote to these requests.
The Board members at the meeting indicated that these issues would be addressed, such as obtaining blanket permits from the Health Department, ABC and the City. It was explained by staff that the permits from the Health Department and ABC can be used as attachments to support the permit required from the City.
It appears that the focus of the Board is pointed in the right direction. To determine if this intent is followed through by appropriate action, however, it is recommended that the lease be extended by one year rather than four. While a lengthy lease may be needed for a capital campaign, most nonprofit organizations normally find a one-year lease is sufficient for operational fund raising.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that a Resolution be adopted extending the Forest Theater Guild’s lease for the Forest Theater for one year.
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 2011-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA EXTENDING THE FOREST THEATER’S LEASE OF THE FOREST THEATER FOR ONE YEAR
WHEREAS, Forest Theater Guild is a performing arts organization in the City; and
WHEREAS, the City owns the Forest Theater facility and property; and
WHEREAS, the City leases the Forest Theater facility and property during a performance season, generally commencing early April and ending in late July; and
WHEREAS, the Forest Theater Guild made a formal request at the completion of its 2011 season for an extended lease agreement for the Forest Theater facility (including the Indoor Theater).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA DOES:
1. Authorize a one-year lease extension with the Forest Theater Guild.
2. Authorize depositing fees generated from the Forest Theater Guild lease into the Forest Theater Enterprise Fund – Account #60-40727.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA this 4th day of October 2011, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
SIGNED:
_______________________
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR
ATTEST:
__________________________
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
FOREST THEATER 5-YR USE AGREEMENT FTG April 2011
FOREST THEATER 5-YR USE AGREEMENT Between the CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA AND FOREST THEATER GUILD
Meeting Date: October 4, 2011
Prepared by: John Goss
City Council
Agenda Item Summary
Name: Consideration of a Resolution extending the Forest Theater’s lease of the Forest Theater for one year.
Description: The Forest Theater Guild (FTG) has leased the Forest Theater for many years, presenting a number of live plays and movies each season. At the April 5, 2011 Council meeting, a one-year lease with the Guild for use of the Forest Theater was approved, with the direction to ask Guild to return after the conclusion of the 2011 season with a request for a full lease to 2015. The Council action also gave specific direction on construction time schedules and the performance calendar.
At the conclusion of the 2011 season, on July 29, 2011, the City received a letter from FTG requesting approval of four years of what the Guild considers a normal five-year lease. Action by the Council was requested in order to facilitate the Guild’s planning for the 2012 season. After evaluating FTG’s request for a lease extension to 2015, staff met with members of the Guild’s Board of Directors to discuss some problems
noted during the 2011 season. The Board members present indicated that these issues would be addressed, such as obtaining blanket permits from the Health Department, ABC and the City. Staff was impressed by the efforts of the new Board to better organize FTG and to move the Guild forward.
Overall Cost: None
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that a Resolution be adopted to extend the Forest Theater Guild’s lease for the Forest Theater for one year.
Important Considerations: It appears that the focus of the Board is pointed in the right direction; however, to determine if this intent is followed through by appropriate action, it is recommended that the lease be extended by one year rather than four at this time.
Decision Record: None
Reviewed by:
________________________________ _________________
John Goss, Interim City Administrator Date
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: INTERIM CITY ADMINISTRATOR JOHN GOSS
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE FOREST THEATER GUILD’S LEASE OF THE FOREST THEATER FOR ONE YEAR
The Forest Theater Guild (FTG) has leased the Forest Theater for a number of years, presenting a number of live plays and movies each season. On July 29, 2011, the City received a letter from FTG requesting approval of four years of what the Guild considers a normal five-year lease. Action by the Council was requested in order to facilitate the Guild’s planning for the 2012 season.
You may recall that a lease extension with the FTG was considered at your April meeting. Council’s action at that time was to enter into a one-year lease with the Guild for use of the Forest Theater, and to ask the Guild to return after the season with a request for a full lease to 2015. The action also gave specific direction on construction time schedules and the performance calendar.
Now that the 2011 season has concluded, and an extension of the lease to 2015 has been proposed, staff has evaluated FTG’s request. After meeting with representatives of the Guild’s Board of Directors, staff was impressed by the efforts of its new Board to better organize FTG and move the Guild forward. Revised By-laws are scheduled to be considered by the Board on October 3, 2011. A Board retreat was held to set the tone and direction for FTG. Fund Builders Alliance was engaged to develop a sustainable financial plan for the Guild.
The Board members at the meeting also expressed a desire to address problems in 2012 that were brought to their attention. These problems include:
• Not consistently obtaining written permission from the City Administrator’s Office for the sale of food or beverages as required by Exhibit “C” of the Forest Theater use agreement. These permits require information regarding the type of food and beverage to be furnished and the name of the responsible person who will provide the food and be responsible for the cleanup.
• Although the FTC has use of the facility for nine weeks, permits were only requested for four nights during the season, and those were for special events. Also, these permit requests did not contain the detail required by the use agreement.
• It appears that ABC licenses were obtained for certain events, but not for other evenings where they were required.
• There is a general impression among staff that FTG is a high maintenance organization regarding requests for staff assistance. Maintenance staff has very limited hours to devote to these requests.
The Board members at the meeting indicated that these issues would be addressed, such as obtaining blanket permits from the Health Department, ABC and the City. It was explained by staff that the permits from the Health Department and ABC can be used as attachments to support the permit required from the City.
It appears that the focus of the Board is pointed in the right direction. To determine if this intent is followed through by appropriate action, however, it is recommended that the lease be extended by one year rather than four. While a lengthy lease may be needed for a capital campaign, most nonprofit organizations normally find a one-year lease is sufficient for operational fund raising.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that a Resolution be adopted extending the Forest Theater Guild’s lease for the Forest Theater for one year.
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 2011-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA EXTENDING THE FOREST THEATER’S LEASE OF THE FOREST THEATER FOR ONE YEAR
WHEREAS, Forest Theater Guild is a performing arts organization in the City; and
WHEREAS, the City owns the Forest Theater facility and property; and
WHEREAS, the City leases the Forest Theater facility and property during a performance season, generally commencing early April and ending in late July; and
WHEREAS, the Forest Theater Guild made a formal request at the completion of its 2011 season for an extended lease agreement for the Forest Theater facility (including the Indoor Theater).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA DOES:
1. Authorize a one-year lease extension with the Forest Theater Guild.
2. Authorize depositing fees generated from the Forest Theater Guild lease into the Forest Theater Enterprise Fund – Account #60-40727.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA this 4th day of October 2011, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
SIGNED:
_______________________
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR
ATTEST:
__________________________
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
Friday, October 07, 2011
MONTEREY COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: Villas de Carmelo Public Hearing, Tuesday, October 11, 2011 @ 1:30 P.M.
UPDATE III: Panel to reject condo plan
By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 10/12/2011
UPDATE II(11 October 2011):
ROLL CALL
Present: Supervisors Armenta, Calcagno, Salinas, Parker, Potter
SCHEDULED MATTERS
S-2 Public Hearing to:
a. Consider proposed Local Coastal Plan (LCP) Amendments to the Carmel Area Land Use Plan and Coastal Implementation Plan (Chapter 20.146.120-- Land Use and Development Standards) to include a High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation and HDR zoning district and to change the existing designation and zoning on a 3.68 acre site from MDR/2 (Medium Density Residential/2 units per acre) to HDR/12.5 (High Density Residential/12.5 units per acre) and submit the amendments to the California Coastal Commission for certification;
b. Consider certification of the Environmental Impact Report; and
c. Consider the application (Rigoulette (Villas de Carmelo)/PLN070497) for a Combined Development Permit to allow a 46 unit residential condominium project and continue the hearing on the Combined Development Permit until after the Coastal Commission acts on the proposed amendments.
Motion by Supervisor Potter to deny the project, seconded by Supervisor Salinas, 5-0.
HIGHLIGHTS:
• Twenty-six members of the public commented, including but not limited to, Sean Conroy (Planning & Building Services manager, City of Carmel-by-the-Sea), Lucinda Lloyd, Mark McDonald, Christine Jensen, Richard Warren, Barbara Warren, Mark Bayne, Pam Gillooly, Beverly Boardman, Donna Dougherty, Yoko Whitaker, Lois Roberts, Christine Williams, Wayne Iverson, Michael LePage (Vice President, CRA), Carol Stollorz, Amy White (Director, Land Watch), Barry Kohler, Tracy Manning plus SOCNC attorney Molly Erickson. All except two public speakers spoke in opposition to the LCP Amendments and project.
• SOCNC attorney Molly Erickson addressed the following issues: Villas de Carmelo is inconsistent with the neighborhood and Local Coastal Plan; project has no legal water supply given the CDO against CalAm, PUC Moratorium prohibits new and intensified connections with zoning changes; project does not meet inclusionary housing mandate of very low and low income affordable housing; strong opposition to project from City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Carmel Woods Neighborhood Association and Save Out Carmel Neighborhoods Coalition.
• Supervisor Dave Potter stated that his decision to deny the LCP Amendments and project was based on three issues namely traffic, zoning and water. Regarding traffic, Potter objected to Widewaters consultant’s characterization of segments of Highway One as an “urban roadway,” as opposed to a “highway.” The designation of “highway” yielded a LOS of F, whereas the designation of “urban roadway” yielded a LOS of E. Regarding zoning, Potter stated that zoning has to be “appropriate” and property owners have the expectation of the current MDR/2 zoning, not HDR/12.5. And regarding water supply, he cited the Cease and Desist Order by the State Water Resources Control Board against CalAm which should be respected. Potter further objected to the applicant’s characterization of the project as “in-fill” development.
• Chair/Supervisor Jane Parker stated her concerns about the project not meeting the County’s requirements for affordable housing (6% very low income: 6% low income: 8% moderate income), the CDO and the legal risks to the County if approved.
• Supervisors’ consensus on a “starting point” for Widewaters Group is Alternative 8 (EIR) which maintains MDR zoning for parcel except HDR zoning for existing hospital building to allow nine units in the existing historic hospital building.
Supervisors directed Staff to prepare findings for denial of the project for the Board of Supervisors' 15 November 2011 meeting at 1:30 P.M.
UPDATE I: Opponents say they have 'silver bullet' to stop hospital condos, CHRIS COUNTS, The Carmel Pine Cone, October 7, 2011
ABSTRACT: The Monterey County Board of Supervisors (Fernando Armenta, Louis Calcagno, Simon Salinas, Jane Parker and Dave Potter) is scheduled to conduct a Public Hearing on Villas de Carmelo on Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:30 P.M. at the County Government Center, 168 W. Alisal Street, 1st Floor, Salinas, to:
a. Consider adoption of resolution of intent to approve proposed amendments to the Carmel Area Land Use Plan and Coastal Implementation Plan (Chapter 20.146.120-- Land Use and Development Standards) to include a High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation and HDR zoning district and to change the existing designation and zoning on a 3.68 acre site from MDR/2 (Medium Density Residential/2 units per acre) to HDR/12.5 (High Density Residential/12.5 units per acre) and submit the amendments to the California Coastal Commission for certification;
b. Consider certification of the Environmental Impact Report; and
c. Consider the application (Rigoulette (Villas de Carmelo)/PLN070497) for a Combined Development Permit to allow a 46 unit residential condominium project and continue the hearing on the Combined Development Permit until after the Coastal Commission acts on theproposed amendments.
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors:
a. Consider adoption of resolution of intent to approve proposed amendments to the Carmel Area Land Use Plan and Coastal Implementation Plan to include a High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation and HDR zoning district and to change the existing designation and zoning on a 3.68 acre site from MDR/2 (Medium Density Residential/2 units per acre) to HDR/12.5 (High Density Residential/12.5 units per acre) and submit the amendments to the California Coastal Commission for certification;
b. Await certification of the Environmental Impact Report until after the California Coastal Commission acts on the LCP Amendments; and
c. Consider application for a Combined Development Permit to allow a 46 unit residential condominium project and continue the hearing on the Combined Development Permit until after the Coastal Commission acts on the proposed amendments.
The Agenda is reproduced and the Board Report and Exhibits A – H are embedded.
Note: Monterey County Board of Supervisors Meeting Video & MP3 Audio (Live & Archived)
MONTEREY COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 11, 2011 9:00 AM
County Government Center, 168 W. Alisal St., 1st Floor
Salinas, CA 93901
AGENDA
1:30 P.M. RECONVENE
MONTEREY COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
ROLL CALL
SCHEDULED MATTERS
S-2 Public Hearing to:
a. Consider proposed Local Coastal Plan (LCP) Amendments to the Carmel Area Land Use Plan and Coastal Implementation Plan (Chapter 20.146.120-- Land Use and Development Standards) to include a High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation and HDR zoning district and to change the existing designation and zoning on a 3.68 acre site from MDR/2 (Medium Density Residential/2 units per acre) to HDR/12.5 (High Density Residential/12.5 units per acre) and submit the amendments to the California Coastal Commission for certification;
b. Consider certification of the Environmental Impact Report; and
c. Consider the application (Rigoulette (Villas de Carmelo)/PLN070497) for a Combined Development Permit to allow a 46 unit residential condominium project and continue the hearing on the Combined Development Permit until after the Coastal Commission acts on the proposed amendments.
ADJOURNMENT
Villas de Carmelo Board Report 10-11-11
Board Report
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit A Discussion
Exhibit A - Discussion
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit B Draft Resolution of Intent to Approve LCP Amendments
Exhibit B - Draft Resolution of Intent to Approve LCP Amendments
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit C Applicant's Recommended LCP Amendments
Exhibit C - Applicant's Recommended LCP Amendments
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit D Carmel Area Vacant Parcels Map
Exhibit D - Carmel Area Vacant Parcels Map
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit E Planning Commission Resolutions A _project_ _ B _LCP Amendments for 31 August 2011
Exhibit E - Planning Commission Resolutions A (project) & B (LCP Amendments for August 31, 2011)
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit F Letters MPWMD_ Stamp_ Zischeke_ SWRCB
Exhibit F - MPWMD Letter dated June 29, 2011, Stamp Letter dated August 16, 2011, Stamp Letter dated July 8, 2011, SWRCB Letter dated August 10, 2011, Jacqueline Zischeke Letter dated August 25, 2011, and SWRCB Letter dated August 30, 2011
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit G Monterey County Growth Management Policy
Exhibit G - Appendix A Monterey County Growth Management Policy
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit H Plans for Modified Alternative
Exhibit H - Plans for Modified Alternative (Identified as Alternative 4 in the EIR)
By JIM JOHNSON Herald Staff Writer, 10/12/2011
UPDATE II(11 October 2011):
ROLL CALL
Present: Supervisors Armenta, Calcagno, Salinas, Parker, Potter
SCHEDULED MATTERS
S-2 Public Hearing to:
a. Consider proposed Local Coastal Plan (LCP) Amendments to the Carmel Area Land Use Plan and Coastal Implementation Plan (Chapter 20.146.120-- Land Use and Development Standards) to include a High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation and HDR zoning district and to change the existing designation and zoning on a 3.68 acre site from MDR/2 (Medium Density Residential/2 units per acre) to HDR/12.5 (High Density Residential/12.5 units per acre) and submit the amendments to the California Coastal Commission for certification;
b. Consider certification of the Environmental Impact Report; and
c. Consider the application (Rigoulette (Villas de Carmelo)/PLN070497) for a Combined Development Permit to allow a 46 unit residential condominium project and continue the hearing on the Combined Development Permit until after the Coastal Commission acts on the proposed amendments.
Motion by Supervisor Potter to deny the project, seconded by Supervisor Salinas, 5-0.
HIGHLIGHTS:
• Twenty-six members of the public commented, including but not limited to, Sean Conroy (Planning & Building Services manager, City of Carmel-by-the-Sea), Lucinda Lloyd, Mark McDonald, Christine Jensen, Richard Warren, Barbara Warren, Mark Bayne, Pam Gillooly, Beverly Boardman, Donna Dougherty, Yoko Whitaker, Lois Roberts, Christine Williams, Wayne Iverson, Michael LePage (Vice President, CRA), Carol Stollorz, Amy White (Director, Land Watch), Barry Kohler, Tracy Manning plus SOCNC attorney Molly Erickson. All except two public speakers spoke in opposition to the LCP Amendments and project.
• SOCNC attorney Molly Erickson addressed the following issues: Villas de Carmelo is inconsistent with the neighborhood and Local Coastal Plan; project has no legal water supply given the CDO against CalAm, PUC Moratorium prohibits new and intensified connections with zoning changes; project does not meet inclusionary housing mandate of very low and low income affordable housing; strong opposition to project from City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Carmel Woods Neighborhood Association and Save Out Carmel Neighborhoods Coalition.
• Supervisor Dave Potter stated that his decision to deny the LCP Amendments and project was based on three issues namely traffic, zoning and water. Regarding traffic, Potter objected to Widewaters consultant’s characterization of segments of Highway One as an “urban roadway,” as opposed to a “highway.” The designation of “highway” yielded a LOS of F, whereas the designation of “urban roadway” yielded a LOS of E. Regarding zoning, Potter stated that zoning has to be “appropriate” and property owners have the expectation of the current MDR/2 zoning, not HDR/12.5. And regarding water supply, he cited the Cease and Desist Order by the State Water Resources Control Board against CalAm which should be respected. Potter further objected to the applicant’s characterization of the project as “in-fill” development.
• Chair/Supervisor Jane Parker stated her concerns about the project not meeting the County’s requirements for affordable housing (6% very low income: 6% low income: 8% moderate income), the CDO and the legal risks to the County if approved.
• Supervisors’ consensus on a “starting point” for Widewaters Group is Alternative 8 (EIR) which maintains MDR zoning for parcel except HDR zoning for existing hospital building to allow nine units in the existing historic hospital building.
Supervisors directed Staff to prepare findings for denial of the project for the Board of Supervisors' 15 November 2011 meeting at 1:30 P.M.
UPDATE I: Opponents say they have 'silver bullet' to stop hospital condos, CHRIS COUNTS, The Carmel Pine Cone, October 7, 2011
ABSTRACT: The Monterey County Board of Supervisors (Fernando Armenta, Louis Calcagno, Simon Salinas, Jane Parker and Dave Potter) is scheduled to conduct a Public Hearing on Villas de Carmelo on Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 1:30 P.M. at the County Government Center, 168 W. Alisal Street, 1st Floor, Salinas, to:
a. Consider adoption of resolution of intent to approve proposed amendments to the Carmel Area Land Use Plan and Coastal Implementation Plan (Chapter 20.146.120-- Land Use and Development Standards) to include a High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation and HDR zoning district and to change the existing designation and zoning on a 3.68 acre site from MDR/2 (Medium Density Residential/2 units per acre) to HDR/12.5 (High Density Residential/12.5 units per acre) and submit the amendments to the California Coastal Commission for certification;
b. Consider certification of the Environmental Impact Report; and
c. Consider the application (Rigoulette (Villas de Carmelo)/PLN070497) for a Combined Development Permit to allow a 46 unit residential condominium project and continue the hearing on the Combined Development Permit until after the Coastal Commission acts on theproposed amendments.
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors:
a. Consider adoption of resolution of intent to approve proposed amendments to the Carmel Area Land Use Plan and Coastal Implementation Plan to include a High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation and HDR zoning district and to change the existing designation and zoning on a 3.68 acre site from MDR/2 (Medium Density Residential/2 units per acre) to HDR/12.5 (High Density Residential/12.5 units per acre) and submit the amendments to the California Coastal Commission for certification;
b. Await certification of the Environmental Impact Report until after the California Coastal Commission acts on the LCP Amendments; and
c. Consider application for a Combined Development Permit to allow a 46 unit residential condominium project and continue the hearing on the Combined Development Permit until after the Coastal Commission acts on the proposed amendments.
The Agenda is reproduced and the Board Report and Exhibits A – H are embedded.
Note: Monterey County Board of Supervisors Meeting Video & MP3 Audio (Live & Archived)
MONTEREY COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 11, 2011 9:00 AM
County Government Center, 168 W. Alisal St., 1st Floor
Salinas, CA 93901
AGENDA
1:30 P.M. RECONVENE
MONTEREY COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
ROLL CALL
SCHEDULED MATTERS
S-2 Public Hearing to:
a. Consider proposed Local Coastal Plan (LCP) Amendments to the Carmel Area Land Use Plan and Coastal Implementation Plan (Chapter 20.146.120-- Land Use and Development Standards) to include a High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation and HDR zoning district and to change the existing designation and zoning on a 3.68 acre site from MDR/2 (Medium Density Residential/2 units per acre) to HDR/12.5 (High Density Residential/12.5 units per acre) and submit the amendments to the California Coastal Commission for certification;
b. Consider certification of the Environmental Impact Report; and
c. Consider the application (Rigoulette (Villas de Carmelo)/PLN070497) for a Combined Development Permit to allow a 46 unit residential condominium project and continue the hearing on the Combined Development Permit until after the Coastal Commission acts on the proposed amendments.
ADJOURNMENT
Villas de Carmelo Board Report 10-11-11
Board Report
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit A Discussion
Exhibit A - Discussion
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit B Draft Resolution of Intent to Approve LCP Amendments
Exhibit B - Draft Resolution of Intent to Approve LCP Amendments
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit C Applicant's Recommended LCP Amendments
Exhibit C - Applicant's Recommended LCP Amendments
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit D Carmel Area Vacant Parcels Map
Exhibit D - Carmel Area Vacant Parcels Map
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit E Planning Commission Resolutions A _project_ _ B _LCP Amendments for 31 August 2011
Exhibit E - Planning Commission Resolutions A (project) & B (LCP Amendments for August 31, 2011)
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit F Letters MPWMD_ Stamp_ Zischeke_ SWRCB
Exhibit F - MPWMD Letter dated June 29, 2011, Stamp Letter dated August 16, 2011, Stamp Letter dated July 8, 2011, SWRCB Letter dated August 10, 2011, Jacqueline Zischeke Letter dated August 25, 2011, and SWRCB Letter dated August 30, 2011
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit G Monterey County Growth Management Policy
Exhibit G - Appendix A Monterey County Growth Management Policy
Villas de Carmelo Exhibit H Plans for Modified Alternative
Exhibit H - Plans for Modified Alternative (Identified as Alternative 4 in the EIR)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)