06/14/2011 FILE COPY
Rats June 14,2011
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace
California 92313-5295
(9Cii)ic("enter CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
84-6621
Fox(909)783-7629
Fox(909)783-2600
CRAICITY COUNCIL
Wait Stanckiewitz
Mayor REGULAR MEETINGS
Lee Mayor Pro Garcia
2ND AND 4TH Tuesday - 6:00 p.m.
Mayor Pro Tcm
Bernardo Sandoval
Darcy McNaboe
Gene Bays
Council Members
Betsy M.Adams
City Manager
Council Chambers
Grand Terrace Civic Center
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA 92313-5295
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS June 14,2011
GRAND TERRACE CIVIC CENTER Workshop at 4:30 p.m.
22795 Barton Road Meeting at 6:00 p.m.
rRE
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMPLIES WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990. IF YOU
UIRE SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING,PLEASE CALL THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AT
824-6621 AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
IF YOU DESIRE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL DURING THE MEETING,PLEASE COMPLETE A REQUEST TO
SPEAK FORM AVAILABLE AT THE ENTRANCE AND PRESENT IT TO THE CITY CLERK. SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED
UPON BY THE MAYOR AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.
ANY DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO A MAJORITY OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ANY ITEM ON THIS AGENDA
WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AT CITY HALL LOCATED AT
22795 BARTON ROAD DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. IN ADDITION,SUCH DOCUMENTS WILL BE POSTED ON
THE CITY'S WEBSITE AT WWW.CITYOFGRANDTERRACE.ORG
* Call to Order-
* Invocation-
* Pledge of Allegiance-
* Roll Call-
STAFF COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEMS RECOMMENDATION ACTION
4:30 P.M.
JOINT CRAICITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORKSHOP
6:00 P.M.
CONVENE CITY COUNCIL
1. Items to Delete
2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Woman of Distinction-Pat Nix and Sally McGuire
3. CONSENT CALENDAR
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and
noncontroversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time
without discussion. Any Council Member,Staff Member,or Citizen
may request removal of an item from the Consent Calendar for
Ldiscussion.
A. Approve Check Register No.06-14-20I 1 Approve
B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda
C. Approval of 05-24-2011 Minutes Approve
D. Unfunded Mandate Test Claim to the Commission of State Authorize
Mandates Regarding Provisions of Santa Ana Regional Water
Quality Control Board Order No. 118-2010-0036
E. Grand Terrace Senior Center Fee Waiver Request Waive
COUNCIL AGENDA
06-14-20I1 PAGE 2 OF 2
AGENDA ITEMS STAFF COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATIONS ACTION
4. PUBLIC COMMENT Adopt/Approve
This is the opportunity for members ofthe public to comment on any
items not appearing on the regular agenda. Because of restrictions
contained in California Law,the City Council may not discuss or act
on any item not on the agenda,but may briefly respond to statements
made or ask a question for clarification. The Mayor may also
request a brief response from staff to questions raised during public
comment or may request a matter be agendiud for a future meeting.
5. COUNCIL REPORTS
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Resolution of the City of Grand Terrace Confirming a Diagram Adopt
and Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for
a Landscaping and Street Lighting District
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS-None
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Review Offers for Selling City Owned Cellular Site Leases at the Direct Staff/Authorize
following Locations: Richard Rollins Park and Grand Terrace
Fire Station No.23
B. Fiscal Year 2011-12 Preliminary Budget Consider
9. CLOSED SESSION
A. Labor Relations per GC54957.6
ADJOURN CITY COUNCIL
CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1. Approval of 05-24-2011 Minutes Approve
2. Agency Purchase of a 14.22 Acre Parcel in the 21800 Block of Approve,-Appropriate and
Van Buren Street,Assessor's Parcel Number 1167-151-22 for Authorize
S1,393,702.00
3. Closed Session - Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential
Litigation GC54956.9(b)-Two Cases
ADJOURN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
CONVENE PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
1. Approval of 05-24-2011 Minutes Approve
ADJOURN
THE NEXT REGULAR CRA/CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE
HELD ON TUESDAY,JUNE 28,2011 AT 6:00 P.M.
AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING
TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE NO LATER THAN 14
CALENDAR DAYS PRECEDING THE MEETING.
MR
IM AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 14, 2011 Council Item (X) CRA Item ( }
TITLE: Check Register No. 06-14-2011
PRESENTED BY: Bemis Simon, Finance Director
RECOMMENDATION. Approve
BACKGROUND:
The Check Register for June 14, 2011 is presented in accordance with Government
Code §37202.
The attached index to the warrant register is a guideline account list only and is not
intended to replace the voluminous list of accounts used by the City and CPA.
Expenditure account number formats are XX-XXX-XXX [Fund-Depart-General Account].
Expenditures may be made from trust/agency accounts (fund 23-xxx-) or temporary
clearing accounts which do not have budgetary considerations.
DISCUSSION:
A total of $315,955.87 in accounts payable checks was issued during the period for
services, reimbursements, supplies and contracts and are detailed in the attached
Check Register. Payroll costs for the period amounted to $147,210.63 and are
summarized below.
Some of the non-routine items include:
66853 Studio 33 2011 Community Day Stage & Sound $2,110.00
Productions Trust Account: 23-200-12-00
Some the larger items include:
66812 D.J.D. Group Senior Comm. Kitchen Remodel Project $11,694.82
Payment# 5
66813 City of Colton February Wastewater Treatment $98,279.02
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 3r)
66814 City of Colton March Wastewater Treatment $99,647.62
Payroll costs processed for period ending May 27, 2011:
Date Period Payroll and payroll costs
05/13/11 Biweekly $73,947.99
05/27/11 Biweekly $73,262.64
FISCAL IMPACT:
All disbursements are made in accordance with the adopted budget for FY 2010-11,
Respectfully submitted,
Bemis Simon
Finance Director
Manager Approval:
Bets A ams
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
Check Register—June 14, 2011
0
vchllst Voucher List Page: 1
06107/2011 1:48:21PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice DescriptlonlAccount Amount
66804 5/18/2011 005702 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES'RETIREMENT PRend 4-15-11 Contributions for PRend 4-15-11
10-022-62-00 16,77210
Total: 16,772.10
66805 5124/2011 011199 KEENAN&ASSOCIATES,PRUDENTIAL MUNI,0000338643 April APRIL EMP LIFEISHORTILG TERM DISABILITY
10-022-66-00 1,502.43
Total: 1,502.43
66806 5/26/2011 003210 DEPT 32-2500233683 7123540 Barton/Palm Sign Board Supplies
32-600-3204000-000 18.03
Total. 18.03
66807 5/26/2011 001206 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION Apr/May 2011 April/May Visa Charges
10-120-2104000-000 Council MeetlnglWorkshop Food 42.79
10-110-210-000-000 Council Meeling/Workshop Food 27.96
23-200-14-00 CPR Workshop(Snow Day/Mothers Day Supplies 757.11
10-440-2104)00-000 Planner Calendar Refills 46.69
10-195-245-000-000 City Hall Supplies(C-fold hand towels) 271.77
10-022-62-00 Adding Machine 69.74
10-175-2104000-000 Landscape Maint.Pest Control Study Guide 36.98
10-172-265-000-000 Certification Renewal 50.00
10-175-268-000-000 Landscape Mainl Exam Agudo 50•00
10-175-272-000-000 F-250 Alignment 541.13
10-808-248-000-000 EOC Emergency Food Supplies 408.87
Total: 2,303.04
66808 5/26/2011 001213 AT&T May 2011 May/June Phone 8,Internet Service
10-190-235-0004000 842.09
10-440-235-0004000 470.66
10450-235-000400 46.22
10-805-235-000-000 160.85
10-808-235-000-000 82.86
Total: 1,602.68
66809 5/2612011 011110 TIME WARNER CABLE May 844840..,381 MAYIJUNE CABLE&INTERNET SRV-SR CNTR
10-805-238-00D-000 58.91
Page: 1
Vchlist Voucher List Page: 2
0610712011 1:48.21PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code, bola
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
66809 5/26/2011 011110 TIME WARNER CABLE (Continued) Total: 68.91
66810 5/26/2011 011110 TIME WARNER CABLE May 844840. 382 MAYMUNE CABLE&INTERNET SRV-SR CNTR
10-805-238-000-000 58.91
Total. 58.91
66811 5/26/2011 011195 AMERICAN FIDELITY ASSURANCE CO 684184E MAY EMP PAID FLEX SPEND/DEPENDENT CARE
23-250-10-00 1,411.66
Total. 1,411.66
66812 5/26/2011 011171 D J. D.GROUP INC. 533 SR CTR COMM'L KITCHEN-RETENTION
32-600-311-0004000 1.161.82
32-600-311-0024XIO 10,533.00
Total: 11,694.82
66813 5/2612011 001840 CITY OF COLTON February 2011 February Wastewater Treatment
21-570-802-000-000 98.279.02
Total: 98,279.02
66814 5/26/2011 001840 CITY OF COLTON March 2011 March Wastewater Treatment
21-570-802-000-000 99,647.62
Total: 99,647.62
66815 5/26/2011 001907 COSTCO#478 0478 07 005810 C.CARE SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 228•44
Total, 228.44
66816 5/27/2011 011196 FIDELITY SECURITY LIFE 3780259 May MAY EMPLOYEE PAID VISION INSURANCE
10-022-61-00 167.84
Total: 167.84
66817 5/27/2011 011092 METLIFE SBC KM05736710 000-JUNE EMPLOYEEIDEPENDENT DENTAL INSURANCE
10-022-61-00 1,642.26
Total: 1,642.26
66818 t „7 2011 011194 AMERICAN FIDELITY ASSURANCE CO A656690 EMP PAID ACCIDENTISUPP LIFE/SUPP STD INS
23-250-20-00 545.46
.� 0 Page:
0
vchlist Voucher List Page: 3
06/0712011 1:48:21PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bola
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
66818 5127/2011 011194 AMERICAN FIDELITY ASSURANCE CO (Continued) Total: 545.46
66819 6/6/2011 011106 FRACO ENTERPRISES INC 300.10 MARCH BASEBALL FIELD SERVICES
32-600-312-0004000 1,192.00
32-600-312-003-000 1.363.00
Total: 2,555.00
66820 6/6/2011 001705 CA.STATE DEPT. OF JUSTICE 846966 April Fingerprints-Bohn&Mercado
10-190-226-000-000 64.00
Total: 64.00
66821 6/6/2011 001038 VERIZON WIRELESS-LA D979916493 MaylJun Widess Service-Public Works
10-175-240-M-000 98.96
Total: 98.96
66822 6/6/2011 001213 AT&T May 909-254-012I May/June Phone&Intemel Services
10-190-235-000-000 122.55
Total: 122.55
66823 6/7/2011 006720 SO.CA.EDISON COMPANY May 2011 May Energy Usage
16-510-238-0004000 475.20
10-050-2384000-000 1,071.77
10-190-238-0004000 2,980.36
10-805-238-0004000 75377
10-172-238-000-000 78.01
10-175-238-000-000 78.00
10-440-238-000-000 88684
Total: 6,322.95
66824 6/7/2011 001024 UNITED STATES TREASURY 255053 JUNE SR. NEWSLETTER PRINTING
10-805-222-000-000 193.95
Total: 193.95
66825 6/7/2011 010996 CA PUB EMPLOYEES'RET. SYSTEM H2O1161493000 JUNE EMPLOYEE/DEPENDENT HEALTH INS.
Page: 3
vchlist Voucher List Page: 4
0610712011 1.48:21PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
66825 617r2011 010996 CA PUB EMPLOYEES'RET SYSTEM (Continued)
32 370-142-000-000 470.34
34-400-142-000-000 384.84
10-625-14240004000 277.92
10-022-61-00 7,486.33
10-190-265-000-000 72.40
10-120-1424000-000 363.45
10-125-142-0004300 641.38
10-140-142-M-M 962.07
10-172-142-000-000 406.19
10-175-142-000-Q00 662.75
10-180-142-000-000 171.03
10-370-142-000-000 726.88
10-380-142-000-000 320.68
10-440-142-000-000 2,256.70
10450-142-000-000 1.197.22
16-175-1 42-000-000 940.67
21-175-142-000-000 427.60
32-200-142-M-000 684.10
Total: 18,452.55
66826 617:2011 011196 FIDELITY SECURITY LIFE 3864892 JUNE EMPLOYEE PAID VISION INSURANCE
10-022-61-00 167.84
Total. 167.84
66827 6/14/2011 011143 ALBERT A.WEBB ASSOCIATES 111169 APRIL TRAFFIC ENG SRVSSICONSULT-MIGUELS
32-200-250-M4)00 257.22
111190 APRIL TOWN SQUARE CONSTRUCTION MGMT SRVS
32-600-323-003-000 6.270.18
Total: 6,527.40
66828 6/14/2011 010444 AN-WIL BAG COMPANY 31973 60 BAGS COLDPATCH ASPHALT
16-900-257-0004000 54353
Total: 543.53
66829 6/14/2011 010293 AVAYA, INC. 2731034915 MAYIJUNE PHONE/VOICE MAIL MAINT
10-190-246-000-000 18346
0 Page, 4
vchlist Voucher List Page: 5
06/0712011 1:48:21PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bola
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
66829 6/14/2011 010293 AVAYA.INC. (Continued) Total: 183.46
66830 6/14/2011 011116 CA DEPT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATION G036457SB Elevator inspection
10-195-246-000-000 225.00
Total: 225.00
66831 6/14/2011 001840 CITY OF COLTON 001045 January Flow Meter/Trunkline Monitoring
21-573-605-000-000 5,650.80
Total: 5,650.80
66832 6/14/2011 010403 CITY OF REDLANDS AR132480 April CNG Fuel
10- 40-272-000-000 15.38
34-800-272-000-000 135.49
Total: 150.87
66833 6/14/2011 010866 CIVIC PLUS 89465 JUNE WEBSITE MAINT FEE
10-125-250-000-M 595.25
10-125-250-000-000 57.00
Total: 652.25
66834 6/14/2011 011029 COBRA SIMPLE 109 APRIL COBRA ADMINISTRATION FEE
10-190-220-000-000 50.00
Total: 50.00
66835 6/14/2011 001867 COMMERCIAL LANDSCAPE SUPPLY 172467 Trash Bags
10450-245-000-000 394.00
Total: 394.00
66836 6/14/2011 011166 CORNERSTONE RECORDS MANAGEMENT 0162397 MAY ARCHIVE TAPE STORAGE
10-140-2504000-= 56.65
10-380-250-000-000 56.65
Total: 113.30
66837 6/14/2011 010711 DANKA FINANCIAL SERVICES 74738910 June E-Studio 350 Toshiba Copier
10-172-220-000-000 79.79
10-175-220-0004300 79.78
Total: 159.57
Page: 5
Vchlist Voucher List Page: 6
0610712011 1:48:21 PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bola
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
66838 6/1412011 001942 DATA TICKET INC. 36201 April Parking Cite Processing Services
10-140-255-000-000 100.00
Total: 100.00
66839 6/14/2011 002795 GARCIA,LEE ANN June 2011 June Health Ins. Reimbursement
10-110-142-000-M 427.58
Total: 427.58
66840 6/14/2011 002930 GRAINGER 9526572830 EOC Storage Cabinet
10-808-702-M-ON 21998
Total: 219.98
66841 6/14/2011 010164 GREAT-WEST PR End 5/1 312 0 1 1 Contributions for PR End 5/13/11
10-02-2-63-00 4,978.61
PR End 5/27/2011 CONTRIBUTIONS&OANS FOR PR END 5/27/11
10-022-63-00 4.978.87
10-022-64-00 2,167.48
Total: 12,124.96
66842 6/14/2011 010619 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL FY 11-12 Renewe FY 11/12 Membership Renewal-R.Shields
10-172-265-000-ON 50.00
Total: 50.00
66843 6/14/2011 010611 MCNABOE, DARCY Feb-May 2011 Feb-May Health Ins.Reimbursement
10-110-142-000-OW 1,268.00
Total: 1,268.00
66844 6/14/2011 005435 ORIENTAL TRADING COMPANY 644564267-01 SCHOOL AGE SUPPLIES
10-440-223-000-000 43.94
Total; 43.94
66845 6/14/2011 005586 PETTY CASH 0602-2011 Replenish C.Care Petty Cash
10-440-220-0004300 6308
10-440-221-000-000 22.98
10-440-223-000-000 33.31
10-440-228-000-000 70.00
Total: 189.37
Page. 6
0
vchlist Voucher List Page:
0610T12011 1:48:21PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice DescriptionlAccounl Amount
66846 6/14/2011 011074 REDFLEX TRAFFIC SYSTEMS 31229 April Contract Services
17-900-2554300-000 5.79861
Total: 5.798.61
66847 6/14/2011 006310 ROADRUNNER SELF STORAGE INC. 12884 JUNE STORAGE RENTAL
10-140-241-000-000 11900
Total: 119.00
66848 6/14/2011 006335 ROQUET PAVING INC. 0508-11 Repair Asphalt-Mt Vernon> Road
16-900-257-000-000 2,58800
Total: 2,588.00
66849 6/14/2011 006365 S&S WORLDWIDE 6948011 SCHOOL AGE SUPPLIES
10-440-223-000-000 15084
Total: 150.84
66850 6/14/2011 006510 S.B_COUNTY INFORMATION 11427 April Pager Access
10-175-240-000-000 900
Total: 9.00
66851 6/14/2011 006435 SAN BERNARDINO.CITY OF 5430 MAY ANIMAL CONTROUHOUSING SRVS
10-187-256-000-000 8,682.00
Total: 8,682.00
66852 6/14/2011 006730 SO.CA.GAS COMPANY May 2011 May CNG Fuel
10-175-272-000-000 7.80
10-440-272-000-000 2.60
34-800-272-000-000 260
Total: 13.00
66853 6/14/2011 010447 STUDIO 33 PRODUCTIONS 6462 GT Community Day Stage/Sound Equip
23-200-12-00 2 110.00
Total: 2,110.00
66854 6/14/2011 006898 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF L.A. 1051805685 C.CARE FOOD&SUPPLIES
10-440-2204)00-000 56864
1060114087 C.CARE FOOD&SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 680.53
Page: 7
vchlist Voucher List Page: 8
06101/2011 1.46:21 PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
66854 6/14/2011 006898 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF L.A. (Continued) Total: 1,249.17
66855 6/14/2011 011110 TIME WARNER CABLE Jun 844840...724',JUNE CABLE&INTERNET SERVICE-SR CNTR
10-805-238-0004)00 121.28
Total: 121.28
66856 6/14/2011 010693 UNITED WAY PR End 5/13111 PR End 5/13/11 Donations
10-022-65-00 62.50
Total; 62.50
66857 6/14/2011 007920 WILLDAN 002-11223A APRIL INSPECTION SERVICES
10-172-2504000-000 1,190.00
002-11223B APRIL PLAN CHECK SERVICES
10-172-250-000-000 275.00
Total: 1,465.00
66858 6/14/2011 007987 XEROX CORPORATION 055268569 MAY LEASE XEROX CC265H
10-190-700-000-000 294.34
055268570 MAY LEASE XEROX WORKCENTRE 5755
10-190-7004000-000 308.10
Total: 602.44
55 Vouchers for bank code: bofa Bank total: 315,955.87
55 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 315,955.87
Page, 8
City of Grand Terrace
Warrant Register index
FD No. Fund Name DM No. Deoatt Mt Name Genera[Account Numbers
10 GENERAL FUND 110 CITY COUNCIL 110 SALARIESIWAGES
11 STREET FUND 120 CITY MANAGER 139 EMPLOYEES'BENEFIT PLAN
12 STORM DRAIN FUND 125 CITY CLERK 140 RETIREMENT
13 PARK FUND 140 FINANCE 142 HEALTH/LIFE INSURANCE
14 AB 3229 COPS FUND 160 CITY ATTORNEY 143 WORKERS'COMPENSATION
15 AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT FUND 172 BUILDING&SAFETY 1381141 MEDICARE/SUI
16 GAS TAX FUND 175 PUBLIC WORKS 210 OFFICE EXPENSE
17 TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND/TDA FUND 180 COMMUNITY EVENTS 218-219 NON-CAPITAL FURNISMALL TOOLS
19 FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT FUND 185 RENTAL INSPECTION PROGRAM 220 SPECIAL DEPARTMENTAL EXP
20 MEASURE I FUND 190 GENERAL GOVERNMENT(NON-DEPT) 230 ADVERTISING
21 WASTE WATER DISPOSAL FUND 195 FACILITIES MAINTENANCE 235 COMMUNICATIONS
22 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT 370 COMMUNITY&ECONOMIC DEV 238-239 UTILITIES
26 LSCPG/LGHTG ASSESSMENT DIST. 380 MGT INFORMATION SYSTEMS 240.242 RENTS&LEASES
44 BIKE LANE CAPITAL FUND 410 LAW ENFORCEMENT 246-246 MAINT BLDG GRNOS EQUIPMNT
46 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 430 RECREATION SERVICES 250.251 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
47 BARTON RD.BRIDGE PROJECT 440 CHILD CARE 255-256 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
32 CRA-CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 450 PARKS MAINTENANCE 260 INSURANCE&SURETY BONDS
33 CRA-DEBT SERVICE FUND 631 STORM DRAIN MAINTENANCE 265 MEMBERSHIPS b DUES
34 CRA-LOW&MOD HOUSING 801 PLANNING COMMISSION 268 TRAINING
802 CRIME PREVENTION UNIT 270 TRAVELICONFERENCESIMTGS
804 HISTORICAL S CULTURAL COMM. 272 FUEL b VEHICLE MAINTENANCE
805 SENIOR CITIZENS PROGRAM 570 WASTEWATER TREATMENT
807 PARKS 3 REC COMMITTEE 33-300 DEBT SERVICE
808 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PROG. 7XX FACILITIES IMPRV(NO CIP) f
700 COMPUTER-RELATED
701 VEHICLES&EQUIPMENT
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the afore-listed checks for payment of City and
Community Redevelopment Agency liabilities have been audited by me and are necessary and
appropriate for the operation of City and Agency.
Bernie Simon, Finance Director
a
PENDWO CRY COUNCILAPPROYAL
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MAY 24,2011
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order in the Council
Chambers,Grand Terrace Civic Center,22795 Barton Road,Grand Terrace,California,on May 24,
2011 at 4:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Walt Stanckiewitz, Mayor
Lee Ann Garcia, Mayor Pro Tern
Darcy McNaboe, Councilmember
Bernardo Sandoval, Councilmember
Gene Hays, Councilmember
Betsy M. Adams, City Manager
Brenda Mesa, City Clerk
Bernard Simon, Finance Director
Joyce Powers, Community& Economic Development Director
Richard Shields, Building& Safety Director
John Harper, City Attorney
Detective Martin, San Bernardino County Sheriff s Department
Rick McClintock, San Bernardino County Fire Department
ABSENT: None
CONVENE THE JOINT CRAXITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 4:30 P.M.
CRAICITY COUNCIL - CLOSED SESSION
1. Labor Relations per GC54957.6
2. Closed Session- Conference with Legal Counsel -Potential Litigation GC54956.9
(b) - One Case
Mayor Stanckiewitz announced that the Agency and Council met in Closed Session to discuss Labor
Relations per GC54957.6 and held a Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation
GC54956.9 (b) -One Case and there was no reportable action taken.
Mayor Stanckiewitz convened the Public Financing Authority,Community Redevelopment Agency
and the City Council Meeting at 6:15 p.m. The meeting was opened with an Invocation by Mayor
Pro Tern Lee Ann Garcia, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by City Attorney John Harper.
AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE REDEVELOPMENT TAX ALLOCATION BONDS
A. Actions by Public Financing Authority
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO.,3�
Council Minutes
05/24/2011
Page 2
1. Resolution of Public Financing Authority Establishing Regular Meeting
Dates
GTPFA-201 1-01 MOTION BY AUTHORITY MEMBER MCNABOE, SECOND BY
AUTHORITY MEMBER HAYS, CARRIED 5-0, to approve a Resolution
of the Public Financing Authority Establishing Regular Meeting Dates.
2. Authorization to Issue Redevelopment Tax Allocation Bonds
GTPFA-2011-02 MOTION BY AUTHORITY MEMBER SANDOVAL, SECOND BY
AUTHORITY MEMBER MCNABOE, CARRIED 5-0, to Approve a
Resolution Approving the Forms of an Indenture of Trust,Purchase Contract,
Continuing Disclosure Agreement and an Official Statement and Authorizing
the Execution of the Purchase Contract Relating to the Issuance of the
Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace's Tax
Allocation Bonds Issue of 2011 A and Issue of the 2011 B for the Community
Redevelopment Project Area and Approving Certain Action in Connection
Therewith.
B. Actions of the City Council
1. Approve the Issuance by the Agency of Redevelopment Tax Allocation O
Bonds
CC-2011-40 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HAYS, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
MCNABOE,CARRIED 5-0,to approve a Resolution Approving the Issuance by the
Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace of Tax Allocation
Bonds,Issue of 201 IA and Issue 2011 B,for the Community Redevelopment Project
Area and Making Certain Determination Relating Thereto and Authorizing Certain
Other Actions in Connection Therewith.
C. Actions by Community Redevelooment Agency_
1. Authorization to Issue Redevelopment Tax Allocation Bonds
CRA-2011-31 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER MCNABOE, SECOND BY AGENCY
MEMBER HAYS,CARRIED 5-0,to approve a Resolution Authorizing the Issuance
and Sale of Tax Allocation Bonds, Issue of 2011 A and Issue of 2011 B, for the
Community Redevelopment Project Area,and Approving the Form of an Indenture
of Trust, Official Statement, Purchase Contract,Continuing Disclosure Agreement
and Related Documents and Authorizing Certain Other Actions in Connection
Therewith.
Council Minutes
05/24/2011
Page 3
Mayor Stanckiewitz adjourned the Public Financing Authority Meeting at 6:55 p.m.
1. Approval of 05-10-2011 and 05-12-2011 CRA Minutes
CRA-2011-32 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER HAYS, SECOND BY VICE-CHAIRMAN
GARCIA,CARRIED 5-0,to accept the May 10,2011 and May 12,2011 Community
Redevelopment Agency Minutes.
2. Joint Public Hearing for the Sale of Agency-owned Property at 12569 Michigan
Street to Habitat for Humanity San Bernardino Area,Inc.For$1.00 to Construct Two
Single Family Homes
Community and Economic Development Director. Joyce Powers, indicated the that the
Agency's Law-to Moderate-Income Housing Fund purchased the 0.5 acre parcel at 12569
Michigan Street from the City on March 8, 2011,to develop affordable housing. Staff has
been working with Habitat for Humanity San Bernardino Area, Inc. to determine their
interest in developing two or three homes under their self-help housing program. They have
expressed interest in a Grand Terrace project for 2012. Their Board of Directors will meet
on May 19, 2011 to discuss the approval of the Grand Terrace project. She outlined the
various conditions that would be approved through resolutions of the City Council and
Redevelopment Agency. She stated that staff is recommending that the City and Agency
approve the resolutions and partner with Habitat for Humanity San Bernardino, Inc. to
complete the project. She indicated that the residences that will be constructed will assist
the City and Agency in meeting their affordable housing requirements.
Mayor Stanckiewitz opened the public hearing for discussion. There being none,he returned
discussion to the Council/Agency.
Councilmember Bernardo Sandoval questioned what safeguards would be put into place to
ensure that the homes that are built fit in with the neighborhood around them.
Community and Economic Development Director Powers,responded that the project would
be reviewed and processed through the Planning Department.
Mayor Walt Stanckiewitz, requested clarification on what low-income is and what the
threshold is for low-income.
Community and Economic Development Director Powers, responded that she didn't bring
that information with her to the meeting, however, the medium income for a family of four
is in the$70,000.00 range. She would suspect that it would be in the$50,000.00 range and
stated that she will get that information to the Council.
Council Minutes
05/24/201 l
Page 4
Mary Rose, Director of Habitat for Humanity San Bernardino Area, responded that they
follow HUD guidelines.
Councilmember Gene Hays questioned how they will go about generating the pool of
applicants that would be potential homeowners.
Mary Rose,responded that they start out with an information evening that is by an invitation
that is published in the paper or people who have contacted them. They are given an
application packet. They do background checks,credit checks and employment verification
and a home visit.
Councilmember Darcy McNaboe,questioned if the requirement through the covenant is that
a low or very low income family live in the homes for 45 years, what type of follow-up is
done to ensure that the houses are being maintained.
Mary Rose, responded that they have a family partner that works with them and maintains
a relationship with them.
Councilmember McNaboe,questioned what would be done if family is failing to keep up
to standards, what would happen.
Mar+Rose. responded that they will meet with them and work out a solution. a
Councilmember McNaboe, questioned if they have ever been in a position to remove a
family.
Mary Rose, stated that they have come close but no.
Mayor Pro Tem Lee Ann Garcia,questioned what type of philosophy Habitat for Humanity
has in their efforts to making the families feel a part of the already established
neighborhoods.
Mary Rose, responded that they reach out to the neighbors so that they can get acquainted
with the volunteers and invite them to get involved.
CC-2011-41 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER MCNABOE, SECOND BY
COUNCILMEMBER HAYS, CARRIED 5-0,to adopt a Resolution exempting the
application of California Health and Safety Code Section 33433 to Small Housing
Projects.
CRA-2011-33 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER MCNABOE, SECOND BY AGENCY
MEMBER SANDOVAL,CARRIED 5-0,to adopt a Resolution approving the Sale
Council Minutes
05f24/201 l
Page 5
of 12569 Michigan Street to Habitat for Humanity San Bernardino Area, Inc. For
$1.00 to construct two affordable residences.
CRA-2011-34 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER SANDOVAL, SECOND BY AGENCY
MEMBER HAYS,CARRIED 5-0,to approve a Purchase and Sale Agreement, and
Grant Deed and Affordability Covenant for Signature by the Chairman.
Chairman Stanckiewitz adjourned the Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting at 7:10 p.m.
ITEMS TO DELETE
Mayor Stanckiewitz indicated that Item 2B. Women of Distinction will be continued to June
14, 2011 City Council Meeting.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Water Awareness Poster Contest Winner- Grand Terrace Elementary School
Frank Sanchez, Riverside Highland Water Company, indicated that each year Riverside
Highland Water Company adopts Grand Terrace Elementary School and as a part of their
program the students participate in the Water Awareness Poster Contest. He introduced
Cynthia Coello, Principal of Grand Terrace Elementary School who will introduce the
winners of the contest.
Cynthia Coello,Principal,Grand Terrace Elementary School,announced all of the winners
of the contest. She thanked the Council for the opportunity.
C. Chamber of Commerce Business of the Month
Sally McGuire, President, Grand Terrace Chamber of Commerce, announced that Tim's
Mobile Truck Repair is the Grand Terrace Area Chamber of Commerce Business of the
Month.
Tim Lundstrum,Owner,Tim's Mobile Truck Repair,thanked the Council and Chamber for
the recognition. He gave an overview of what his business does.
CONSENT CALENDAR
CC-2011-42 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
SANDOVAL, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the following Consent Calendar Items:
3A. Approve Check Register No. 05/24i2011
Council Minutes
05/24/2011
Page 6
3B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda
3C. Approval of Minutes of 05/10/2011 and 5/12/2011
31). Approve San Bernardino Cal-ID Contract
PUBLIC COMMENT -None
COUNCIL REPORTS 0
Councilmember Bernardo Sandoval,thanked those who came to the meeting. He feels that
the information that will be presented at the meeting is a critical moment for the City. The
challenges that the Council is faced with are very serious. The solutions to the financial
challenges do not lay in City Council, City Staff or on the residents. It is us all together
coming together as a community to find solutions and to find methods to address the issues.
He feels that this moment will be a defining moment. He is not taking this situation lightly
and he is personally committed to doing everything possible to maintain the solvency of the
City. He cares deeply about the community and he will do everything that he can to preserve
this great City.
Councilmember Gene Hays, reported that he had an opportunity to spend a nice amount of
time with his friend that is a police officer with the Redland Police Department. He spoke
to him with regards to the types of crimes that have been going on in Grand Terrace. He
suggested that the City look into using a GPS device that is used as bait and when the
perpetrator goes for the item they are able to apprehend them within 6 minutes. He indicated
that it is very inexpensive. He feels that it would be an effective way to combat these crimes.
Councilmember Darcy McNaboe,reported that on May 19 she attended the San Bernardino
Valley Municipal Water District Advisory Committee and Water Policy. The group meets
quarterly and they look at water usage in the region. One of the issues that they are looking
at is that the whole region is going to need to reduce their water usage by 20% by the year
2020. On June 4`h the San Bernardino Home Depot on Hospitality Lane will be giving 50%
off to garden friendly plant sales. There will be a demonstration garden at Cal State San
Bernardino which will be open for the public. It will be an area where you can get ideas on
how to plan out your garden so that you aren't using as much water. Angela Dissenger,the
Principal of the New High School in Grand Terrace,gave a presentation to the School Board
and it gives an overview of what the new high school is going to look like. They are still
scheduled to open August of 2012. They will be enrolling students from 9", 10'h and I v,
grade. They will be looking at full sports programs as well as academics and full activities
Programs. She questioned if the Council could invite the Principal to come to a Council
Meeting to give the same presentation that she gave the school board. She reported that on
June 1 and 2"d she will be traveling with the Riverside Chamber of Commerce group to
Sacramento. They will be talking to legislators there and she is hoping to get a better feeling
of how things are really going with the Redevelopment Agency, as far as the budget and
Council Minutes
05/24/2011
Page 7
other budgetary items. She feels that the only people that really know what is going on are
those in Sacramento. She wished everyone a happy Memorial Day.
Mayor Pro Tem Lee Ann Garcia echoed the sentiments of Councilman Sandoval. She stated
that difficult times lie ahead for the City. Everyone is going to rise to the occasion to get
through this difficult time. She feels that there are some lessons to be learned from the
people that have been around for a long time. She feels that the founding principles are
something that they can benefit from. She wants to represent the residents and business
owners in town and encouraged them to stay involved through the process. She liked the
GPS idea that Councilmember Hays brought up. She stated that the Women of Distinction
recognition will be done at the June 14'ti City Council Meeting.
Mayor Walt Stanckiewitz,reported that on Friday someone tried to pass a counterfeit$50.00
bill. He wanted everyone to be aware of this going on. He suggested that staff look into
restructuring the format for all future Council Meetings to provide for Special Presentation
at the beginning of the agenda.
PUBLIC HEARINGS-None
UNFMSHED BUSINESS -None
NEW BUSINESS
8A. Presentation of the General Fund Financial Sustainability Model
Sylvia Robles, Orangewood Court, stated that the City is in some interesting times. The
issue on the financial sustainability study for her is she would like the Council to look at the
fact that the League of California Cities has a proposal that is doing a little bit of yielding on
first year as far as RDA. Also, the things that they are doing aren't going to give us instant
money to handle this years problem. She stated that we are a sub-unit of the State and they
can decide what part of the portion of the property tax assessment that can be re-organized
and what we can keep. Once we know what our core baseline budget is of essential services,
we need to get on a dual track asking Assemblyman Morell to introduce a bill to grant us that
bit of money that we need. If they are going to take tax increment money away that they give
us that money to operate our baseline part of the City. Also, benefit assessment districts
could be formed. She feels that the City needs to look at getting the tax base re-designated
to general property tax to the City.
City Mana eg r Betsy Adams, indicated that on April 12, 2011 the Council voted to retain
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. To prepare a General Fund Financial Sustainability Model
which includes a forecast of revenues and expenditures. She introduced Jim Simon from
RSG who gave a presentation of the completed model.
Council Minutes
05/24f2011
Page 8
8B. Professional Services for Sewer User Billing System Review and Potential Ordinance
Revision (Black&Veatch Management Consulting)
CC-201143 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
SANDOVAL,CARRIED 5-0,to approve a Professional Service Agreement between
the City of Grand Terrace and Black & Veatch Management Consulting and to
appropriate$31,920 from the available equity in the Wastewater Disposal Fund(21) O
to Professional Services, Account No. 21-175-255.
8C. 2011-2012 Landscaping& Lighting Assessment District 89-1
CC-201144 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILM-EMBER
SANDOVAL,CARRIED 5-0,to Approve a Resolution Ordering the City Engineer
to Prepare Plans,Specification,Cost Estimates,Diagram and Assessment and Report
Pursuant to the Provisions of Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code
of the State of California, for Proceedings for the Annual Assessment Levy after
Formation of a District, Approve the Resolution Approving the Engineer's Report
for the Annual Levy of an Assessment for the Fiscal Year 2010-2011 in a District
Within Said City and a Resolution Declaring its Intention to Provide for an Annual
Levy and Collection of Assessments for Certain Maintenance in an Existing District,
Pursuant to the Provisions of Decision 15, Part 2 of the Street and Highways Code
of the State of California,and Setting a Time and Place for the Public Hearing to be
held on June 14, 2011.
8D. Selection Process for City Attorney Services Request for Proposal
It was the consensus of the Council to see all of the Proposals submitted for City Attorney
Services and for the Council to come up with a ranking system that the Council will follow.
8E. Special Assessments and Liens for Delinquent Non-Owner Occupied/Rental Property
Program Fees and Fines.
CC-201145 MOTION BY MAYOR STANCIEWITZ, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
MCNABOE, CARRIED 5-0, to adopt a Resolution confirming delinquent Non-
owner Occupied/Rental Property Program fees and fines for the 2010 calendar year
and authorize special assessments against the parcels listed in Exhibit "A" of the
Resolution.
CLOSED SESSION -None
Mayor Stanckiewitz adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m.,until the next City Council Meeting which
is scheduled to be held on Thursday,June 14, 2011 at 6:00 p.m.
Council Minutes
05/24/2011
Page 9
CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace
MAYOR of the City of Grand Terrace
C
CALIFORNIAAGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 14, 2011 Council Item (X) CRA Item
TITLE: Unfunded Mandate Test Claim to the Commission of State
Mandates Regarding Provisions of Santa Ana Regional
Water Quality Control Board Order No. RB-2010-0036
PRESENTED BY: Matt Wirz, Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: 1. Authorize the City to participate as an additional party
named under the filing of the Unfunded Mandate Test Claim
to the Commission of State Mandates.
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute any agreements
pertaining to the filing of the Unfunded Mandate Test Claim.
BACKGROUND:
In January of 2010, the Califomia Regional Water Quality Control Board — Santa Ana
Region — issued new waste discharge requirements for the County of San Bernardino
and the incorporated cities of San Bernardino County, under Order No. R8-2010-0036,
NPDES No. CAS618036, General Permit.
General permits are issued on the average of once every five (5) years. Each permit
addresses any changes to federal environmental regulations, as well as any local
problems that require addressing. The City of Grand Terrace has joined with other
agencies to share resources and collaborate on permit compliance activities, as
provided for in the General Permit.
San Bernardino County Flood Control District is the Principal Permittee and City of
Grand Terrace is a Co-Permittee along with seventeen (17) other agencies. The
following are the eighteen (18) agencies affected by this order. Those agencies are:
County of San Bernardino City of Loma Linda City of Big Bear Lake
City of Montclair City of Chino City of Ontario
City of Chino Hills City of Colton City of Redlands
City of Fontana City of Rialto City of Grand Terrace
City of San Bernardino City of Highland City of Upland
1
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. D
City of Yucaipa City of Rancho Cucamonga
San Bernardino County Flood Control District
Each agency contributes a fair portion of the annual program budget required to meet
the general permit requirements as a group, plus whatever expenses there are at the
local level for staffing and compliance.
DISCUSSION:
Staff recommends that the City of Grand Terrace participate in the filing of a test claim
to determine if certain provisions of the current NPDES General Permit are "unfunded 0
mandates" under Article XIII B, Section fi of the California Constitution.
The filing of a test claim enables the San Bernardino County Stormwater Program as a
whole to determine if some provisions of the current general permit fall into the category
of unfunded mandates. This filing would not challenge the current general permit or any
of its requirements, but is to seek relief from some of the costs associated with that
permit.
An unfunded mandate is defined as a statute or regulation that requires a state or local
government to perform certain actions, yet provides no money for fulfilling the
requirements. The agencies guided by the current general permit believe that several of
the provisions of the new permit meet this definition. The purpose of the test claim
would be to determine if the court concurs there are unfunded mandates that are
eligible for State reimbursement to the participating agencies. Potential monies
reimbursed may include a portion of the general permit budget paid by the member
agencies and those expenses, (wages, materials and such) bom by the individual
agency.
Several of the surrounding counties have similar general permits and virtually all major
California stormwater programs have or are in the process of filing a tests claim,
including San Diego County, Los Angeles County, Riverside County and Orange
County.
The filing of the test claim does not obligate the City of Grand Terrace to any long-term
commitment. The City may withdraw from the claim at any time without incurring any
encumbrances. The expense of filing the test claim will come from the budget of the
County of San Bernardino Stormwater Program and will not require an outlay of any
additional fees by the City.
This action will name the City of Grand Terrace as a party to the test claim to be filed by
the County of San Bernardino Stormwater Program to recover unfunded program costs
mandated by the State.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost associated with filing the initial test claim is covered within the current program
budget for the County of San Bernardino Stormwater Program. There is no additional
request for funding or future financial commitment associated with this action. The City
may at any time opt out of the test claim at any point. A successful test claim may result
in the reimbursement of expenses associated with the test claim that occurred at both
the group level and the local level. Depending on the results of the claim for an
unfunded mandate, reimbursements may run from the thousands to the tens of
thousands of dollars.
Res lly submitted,
W
ManagemfintAfmiyst
Manager Approval:
Betsy Adfims
City Manager
3
il
CALIFORNIA AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: ,tune 14, 2011 Council Item ( X ) CRA Item ( )
TITLE: Grand Terrace Senior Center
Fee Waiver Request
PRESENTED BY: Community and Economic Development Department
RECOMMENDATION: Waive the $400.00 filing fees.
BACKGROUND:
The previous Grand Terrace Senior Center site had a flag pole with national flag, which
was removed with the construction of the new Senior Center facility. Although not re-
installed, the flag pole was retained. The Lion's Club is assisting the Senior Center with
the re-installation of the flag pole. A national flag will be donated by Congressman Jerry
Lewis.
DISCUSSION:
The flag pole is proposed to be installed at Susan Petta Park, and will be illuminated. It
measures approximately 34 feet in height. The flag itself is anticipated to measure
about 5 feet by 8 feet. The City's Zoning Code limits the height of flag poles to 20 feet.
A flag pole can exceed 20 feet in height if a conditional use permit is filed. The flag pole
would qualify for an administrative conditional use permit, which has a filing fee of
$400.00, as opposed to the standard $2,400.00 filing fee. The planning application
must be accompanied by written permission from Corporation for Better Housing (CBH),
authorizing the installation of the flag pole.
The Grand Terrace Senior Center has requested a waiver of the $400.00 tiling fee
(Attachment 1). The decision to waive fees cannot be done at a staff level; rather it is
subject to the Council's discretion.
The Building and Safety Department has indicated that the authorization from CBH,
would need to include the Building Permit Application Form which identifies the entity
that will install the flag pole. if CBH is in accordance with the Lion's Club installing the
flag pole, then CBH would be required to pull the permit as an Owner-Builder.
Although, not included in the written request, installation of the flag pole will incur
Building and Safety plan check and inspection fees, in the amount of approximately
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO_3E
1
Agenda Report
Page 2 of 2
$250.00. Staff has confirmed with JoAnn Johnson that the Senior Center is also
requesting a waiver of these fees, as well.
FISCAL IMPACT:
A decision to waive the Planning and Building and Safety fees would result in a fiscal
impact of$650.00 to the general fund.
Prepared by,
Sandra Molina
Senior Planner
Respectfully submitted,
QOe
�olule .J
oy a Powers
Community& Economic
Development Director
Manager Approval:
Betsy KA. Adams
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Waiver request from Senior Center
.JO M3TlAGAjr)AJUMU00
RECEIVED
Grand Terrace Senior Center
22627 Grand Terrace Road MAY 2 6 2011
Grand Terrace,CA 92313 Community&Economic
May 26,2011 Development Department
Sandra Molina,Senior Planner
City of Grand Terrace
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace,CA 92313
Dear Ms. Molena,
The Grand Terrace Seniors would like to request a waiver of the$400 fee for the
Administrative Use Permit for installing our memorial flag pole at the Susan Petta
Memorial Park.
Thank you so much for your consideration.
M t sincerely,
JoAnn Jo s Zeniors
resident
Grand T ce
3
t
CAL[FFORNIA AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 14, 2011 Council Item (X) CRA Item ( }
TITLE: 2011-2012 Landscape & Lighting Assessment District 89-1
PRESENTED BY: Richard Shields, Director of Building & Safety/Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: 1. Conduct the Public Hearing.
2. Adopt the attached Resolutions for the Annual
Assessment Levy.
BACKGROUND:
At the regular meeting of May 24, 2011 City Council adopted a Resolution
ordering the preparation of plans, specification, cost estimates, diagrams,
engineer's report and acceptance thereof for Landscape and Lighting District No.
89-1.
DISCUSSION:
This agenda item is for the purpose of conducting the public hearing and
adoption of the resolution for the assessment levy.
Staff has reviewed the expenditures for last fiscal year 2010-2011, based on our
best estimate, the cost of operation and maintenance should approximately equal
the assessments levied and collected. It is our estimate that these costs and
assessments should remain for the coming fiscal year (2011-2012).
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. ��
Respectfully submitted,
Riahard Shiel s
Director of Building & Safety/Public Works
Manager Approval:
Betsy dams
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution for the Annual Assessment Levy
.OH M3Ti ACIN30A J1364000
LAW OFFICES OF
HARPER& BURNS LLP
A LIMBED LMALOY PAIRfEAB"p WCWOMO A PROPE35WHAL CORPORATION
453 S.GLASSELL STREET
JOHN R.HARPER" ORANGE,CALIFORNIA 92BBS
ALAN R.SURNS
COLIN R.BURNS (951)674-OM
(714)771-TM
OF COLWM FAX(714) 744 73W
JUGI A CURTIW
MICHAEL MONTGOMERY•
A PROFEBBIOIML CORPORATION
May 4,2011
Mr. Richard Shields, Director of Building/Safety&Public Works
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace,California 92324
RE: CITY OF GRAND TERRACE LANDSCAPING AND STREET
LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 89-I
Dear Richard:
Enclosed please find the following material relating to the annual levy for the above referenced
District:
1. Order of Procedure;
2. Instruction Sheet(Annual Assessment Levy);
3. Resolution Confirming Assessment.
The resolution should be adopted at the conclusion of the public hearing on June 14, 2011. After
that meeting, I'd appreciate your sending me a conformed copy.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Very truly yours,
HARPER& BURNS LLP
John R. Harper, City Attorney
c: Brenda Mesa,City Clerk
Enclosure(s)
3
ORDER OF PROCEDURE
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
LANDSCAPING AND STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO.89-1
PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 14, 2011
STAFF: Present ENGINEER'S REPORT, general
discussion of LANDSCAPING AND
STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO.
89-1
CITY COUNCIL: See attached INSTRUCTION SHEET-
PUBLIC HEARING.
Adopt RESOLUTION CONFIRMING
ASSESSMENT
INSTRUCTION SHEET-PUBLIC HEARING
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
LANDSCAPING AND STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 89-1
PUBLIC HEARING
MAJORITY PROTEST: Any interested person may file a written protest with the City
Clerk, stating the grounds for their objection. Said protest shall contain a description of the
property sufficient to identify said property. All interested persons shall be afforded the
opportunity to be beard at the Public Hearing. If a written protests submitted, and not withdrawn,
constitute in excess of fifty (509/6) percent of the total value of the assessment, the proceedings
must be abandoned.
ASSESSMENT ROLL
If there are to be no changes or modifications in the individual assessment amounts, then
the assessment roll as previously prepared should be confirmed. A copy of the confirmed
assessment should be filed in the Office of the City Engineer, with a duplicate copy on file in the
Office of the City Clerk and open for public inspection.
RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT
The adoption of this Resolution constitutes the levy of the special assessment for the
fiscal year so referred to in the assessment.
COUNTY AUDITOR
Immediately after the adoption of the Resolution Confirming the Diagram and the
Assessment, and no later than the August 10, 2011, the Clerk shall file a copy of the assessment
diagram and the assessment, or a certified copy thereof, with the County Auditor. I would
recommend that together with a copy of the diagram and assessment, a certified copy of the
Resolution Confirming the Assessment be forwarded also.
FISCAL YEAR
The assessment, as levied for these proceedings, will relate to the fiscal year commencing
July 1,2011, and ending June 30,2012. Note that an annual updating of the proceedings will be
required for each subsequent fiscal year to accomplish the levy for the ensuing fiscal year.
5
FUTURE PROCEEDINGS
Be advised that it is necessary, each year, to update the Engineer's "Report" and approve
said "Report" for the ensuing fiscal year. We should all probably mark our calendars for some
time after the first of the year to begin the process.
CHANGES AND MODIFICATIONS AT HEARING
During the course of the Public Hearing, or upon the conclusion of said hearing, the
legislative body may order changes in the improvements, the boundaries of the District, or any
zones thereof. The legislative body may, without fiuther notice, order the exclusion of temtory
from the District, but no property shall be added to said District except upon the following terms
and conditions:
a. Upon written request by a property owner for the inclusion of his property;
b. Upon the legislative body declaring its intention to add additional property
and directing that mailed notice be given to the property owners within the area
proposed to be annexed.
I would recommend that if any changes are to be considered, the matter be continued so
that the proper documentation can be drafted.
0
RESOLUTION NO. 2011-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GRAND TERRACE CONFIRMING A DIAGRAM AND
ASSESSMENT AND PROVIDING FOR ANNUAL
ASSESSMENT LEVY FOR A LANDSCAPING AND
STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the City Council has initiated proceedings for the annual levy of the
assessments for a landscaping and street lighting district pursuant to the terms and provisions of
the "Landscaping and Street Lighting Act of 1972", being Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and
Highways Code of the State of California, in a district known and designated as
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
LANDSCAPING AND STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO.89-1
WHEREAS, the City Council has ordered the preparation of a report and the City
Engineer has prepared and filed with this City Council a report pursuant to law for its
consideration and subsequently thereto this City Council did adopt its Resolution of Intention to
levy and collect assessments for the next ensuing fiscal year relating to the above-referenced
District, and further did proceed to give notice of the time and place for a Public Hearing on all
matters relating thereto;and,
WHEREAS, at this time, this City Council has heard all testimony and evidence and is
desirous of proceeding with the annual levy of assessments.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE,CALIFORNIA AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the above-recitals are all true and correct.
SECTION 2. That upon the conclusion of the Public Hearing, protests filed and not
withdrawn, did not represent property owners being obligated for more than fifty percent (50010)
of the total assessments within the District..
SECTION 3. That this City Council hereby confirms the diagram and assessment as
submitted and orders the annual levy of the assessment for the fiscal year and in the amounts as
set forth in the Engineer's Report and as referred to in the Resolution of Intention as previously
adopted relating to said annual assessment levy.
SECTION 4. That the diagram and assessment as set forth and contained in said Report
are hereby confirmed and adopted by this City Council.
7
SECTION 5. That the adoption of this Resolution constitutes the levy of the assessment
for the fiscal year.
SECTION 6. That the estimates of costs, the assessment diagram, the assessments and
all other matters, as set forth in Engineer's "Report", pursuant to said "Landscaping and Street
Lighting Act of 1972", as submitted, are hereby approved, adopted by this City Council and
hereby confirmed.
SECTION 7. That the maintenance works of improvements contemplated by the
Resolution of Intention shall be performed pursuant to law and the County Auditor shall enter on
the County Assessment Roll the amount of the Assessment and said assessment shall then be
collected at the same time and in the same manner as the County taxes are collected. After
collection by said County,the net amount of the assessment shall be paid to the City Treasurer of
said City.
SECTION 8. That the City Treasurer has previously established a special fund known as
the
SPECIAL FUND
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
LANDSCAPING AND STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO.99-1
into which the City Treasurer shall place all monies collected by the Tax Collector pursuant to
the provisions of this Resolution and law and including any surplus amounts in those funds
established for the existing Districts and said transfer shall be made and accomplished as soon as 0
said monies have been made available to said City Treasurer.
SECTION 9. That the City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to file a certified copy
of the diagram and assessment roll with the County Auditor,together with a certified copy of this
Resolution upon its adoption.
SECTION 10. That a certified copy of the assessment and diagram shall be filed in the
office of the City Engineer,with a duplicate copy on file in the Office of the City Clerk and open
for public inspection.
PASSED,APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14&day of June, 2011.
Mayor for the City of Grand Terrace
ATTEST:
City Clerk for the City of Grand Terrace
I, Brenda Mesa, City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace, California,do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution,being Resolution No. was duly passed, approved and adopted
by the City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor, and attested by the City Clerk, all at the
regular meeting of said City Council held on this 14'h day of June, 2011, and that the same was
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
U
EXECUTED this 14ie day of June,2011, at Grand Terrace, California...
City Clerk for the City of Grand Terrace
[SEAL]
0
9
CALIFORNIA AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 14, 2011 Council Item (X) CRA Item ( }
TITLE: Review offers for selling City owned cellular site leases at
the following locations: Richard Rollins Park and Grand
Terrace Fire Station No. 23.
PRESENTED BY: Matt Wirz, Management Analyst.
RECOMMENDATION: 1. Direct Staff to pursue the cellular lease purchase offer
from Unison Site Management LLC., in the amount of
$373,775, for the sites located at Richard Rollins Park and
Grand Terrace Fire Station No. 23.
2. Grant the City Manager the authority to sign the final
agreements for the sale of City owned cellular site leases.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Grand Terrace currently owns a lease agreement with T-Mobile for a cellular
site located at Grand Terrace Fire Station No. 23. The City also owns a cellular lease
which is managed by Site Management Services (SMS) located in Richard Rollins Park.
The Richard Rollins Park cellular site is leased to Verizon through SMS.
The City was approached by Unison Site Management with offers to purchase the City
owned cellular leases. The original offers from Unison include a perpetual easement of
additional 15 feet of land adjacent to the existing ground space with a promise of a
50150 split in future rents. Unison expressed urgency in the sale of the leases because
of new satellite technologies that are on the horizon. The new technology could possibly
reduce the need for redundant cellular site locations.
Staff consulted with "Steel in the Air" (SITA) which is a company experienced in
conducting reviews of cellular site locations and real-estate transactions related to
cellular site offers. SITA has reviewed the offer from Unison and found that it would be
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. C2A
1
beneficial to the City to solicit other offers from companies that provide the same
services. SITA also suggested that the City not sell the cellular site and if we decided to
move forward, not to entertain a perpetual easement with the sale of the site. Staff has
attached the report from SITA for City Council's review on the pros and cons of selling
the City's cellular site leases. See Exhibit W.
On April 26, 2011 the City Council reviewed the concept of selling City owned cellular
site leases and provided direction to Staff to continue to market the City owned cellular
site leases and submit all offers to the City Council for review.
DISCUSSION:
Staff received five (5) proposals to purchase the City cellular leases. Two (2) of
proposing companies would only offer on the T Mobile site claiming that their
companies would not be able to underwrite the loans for the Verizon site that is
currently held by SMS. Staff contacted our City Attorney for an opinion on selling the
Verizon lease held by SMS and we were informed that the lease can be sold. Staff also
discussed this subject with Unison and the other offering companies who also confirmed
that it can be done.
Unison is the highest offer for both sites at $373,775, for a 50 year lease. Unison has
indicated they will review any terms the City has decided upon. As indicated in the
SITA letter, future revenue splits for co-locations will not likely take place because the
purchasing companies typically do not market to new cellular companies if they do not
have an agreement for additional easements in place.
Staff is recommending that the City Council direct staff to pursue the Unison offer. Staff
also suggests that a one-time payout for the leases be accepted to avoid any future
problems that may arise with the company which could affect the full payout on the
cellular site leases.
Staff is also requesting the City Manager be given the authorization to execute the final
documents in order to expedite the selling of the leases. The final amount received will
vary depending on exact terms and conditions of rents, verification of assumed
information during closing and underwriting processes.
I'H !l ITt AOM30A J13OD03
2
Company Offer Length Terms
Of
Lease in
years
Advanced $340,000 30 years Easement Required: Yes
Wireless Closing costa: No
Capital LLC Future revenue split: NIA
(AWC) Other Notes:
City may lease additional space that
does not Interrupt lease.
AP Wireless $351,200 30 years Easement Required: No
(APW) 1 time Closing costs: No
$402,000 Future revenue split: 67%
3 yrl semi to the city
annual Other Notes:
$450,000 End of the tens, 100% of rent reverts
5 yrl semi back to the City.
annual
Communication $246,400 30 years Easement Required: Yes
Capital Purchase Closing costs: No
T-Mobile Future revenue split: 80%
Only to the city
Other Notes:
Seller pays taxes and recording fee.
Landmark $227,000 30 years Easement Required: No
Dividend Purchase Closing costs: No
T-Mobile Future revenue split: 75%
Only to the city
Other Notes:
Unison $373,775 50 years Easement Required: Yes
$369,172 40 Years Closing costs: No
$365,897 30 Years Future revenue split: No
Other Notes:
Defined easement Closes within 90
days
Wireless $355,000 99 Year Easement Required: No
Capital Closing costs: NIA
Partners. (WCP) Future revenue split:
100% to the City
Other Notes:
Interest after 99 year reverts back city
3
FISCAL IMPACT:
The selling of the cellular tower lease agreements would benefit the general fund in
fiscal year 2011/2012 anywhere from $227,000 to $373,775 dependant on which offer is
accepted and how the City will determine payment terns. If the cellular site leases are
sold, the revenue loses for selling the leases amounts to $36,825 per year.
Respectfully submitted,
Micliand Shields
Director of Building &Safety/ Public Works
Manager Approval:
Betsy K Adams
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS: Q
Exhibit A- Steel in the Air, Letter
�r�
16001 Waterleaf Lane • Fort Myers, FL 33908 /�_ Office: 877-428-6937 . Fax: 866-335-4053
Siul If1 Tll[pIR lit(
City of Grand Terrace
c/o Matt Wirz
22795 Barton Road
Suite 8
Grand Terrace,CA 92313
RE: Unison Proposal to Purchase SMS and T-Mobile Leases in Grand Terrace,CA
February 20,2011
Dear Mr.Wirz:
Steel in the Air,Inc.(SITA)is pleased to provide the following assessment regarding the proposed
buyout of your leases by Unison Site Management. We believe it is helpful to start with a summary of
the options available to you in reference to buyouts.
i. History and Makeup of Lease Buyout Industry
The lease buyout industry commenced as a project for AT&T whereby they attempted to prepay some
of their cell site leases. This grew from one company to a number of companies looking to acquire
leases as other groups saw the success and looked to emulate It. There have been six main companies
that have purchased leases in the last few years. The multiples below are used in the industry in order
to compare offers made on varying rental rates. The multiple is calculated by dividing the offer amount
by the monthly rental amount.
UNISON SITE MANAGEMENT-"Unison"(www.unisonsite.comi
Unison historically has offered 95 to 135 times the monthly lease rate being paid to the
landowner. In return they request a perpetual easement on the property around the existing
cell site lease area.They used to agree to 30-year easements,but that has changed in the last
two years. Unison typically asks for more area than the current lease provides. Their
motivation is simple-if the existing tenant needs additional space;they get the revenue even
though they haven't paid anything more for it. They offer to split future revenue 50/50,but this
is an empty promise as the landowner would have received 100%of that revenue otherwise.
Please note that Unison's offer to market your site is not that valuable in our opinion-they are
unlikely to add tenants to your site that would not otherwise find you directly. They use this
claim to get landowners to sign their agreements. In early to mid-2010,Unison's offers were
around 85-95 times the monthly rent,but because their competition has picked back up in
recent months,offers have increased in the last two months to an average of 95-105 times the
monthly rent with some offers as high as 115 times.
WIRELESS CAPITAL PARTNERS-"WCP" www.wirelessca ital.com
Wireless Capital Partners shut their doors on Sept 23,2008. Wireless Capital Partners used to
offer 90 to 125 times the monthly lease rate being paid to the landowner. A landowner told us
5
In October 2010 that they had received an offer from Wireless Capital Partners so It Is possible
that they are now active again. We don't know how attractive their offers are.
COMMUNICATIONS CAPITAL GROUP-"CCG"-(www.comcapjtroup.coml
CCG Is remarkably similar to Unison and not without cause. CCG's founders came from Unison
and Wireless Capital. Their offers are similar in form and amount to Unison's with the exception
that they will purchase as little as a 10 year term. CCG stopped making offers for a while after
they lost their funding from the Royal Bank of Scotland. They have a new funding source and
have recently started making lease buyout offers in the last few months. Most offers are around
95 times,although they seem flexible with the length of purchase and the revenue sharing.
Recent offers have been around 100 to 105 times the monthly rent with some exceeding 110
tunes monthly rent.
LANDMARK DIVIDEND: (www.landmarkdividend.com) Landmark is an offshoot of people who
previously worked at Unison,Wireless Capital,and CCG. They have been competitive with
Unison in terms of the lump sums paid. They also have a one page purchase agreement which
they claim is better for the landowner. Landmark seems more flexible on terms and conditions
for their lease purchases,and will agree to purchase just the lease area itself.
AP WIRELESS INFRASTRUCTURE PARTNERS: (www.anwio.comi-We have seen a few offers
from them and it appears they are offering between 80 and 120 times the monthly rent for a
perpetual easement. The people at WIP used to be from RF5 Capital.
M137-(www.md7cag)ital.com)
Md7 is an entity that works as a"lease optimization company"whereby they approach
landowners with leases and attempt to pre-pay a certain number of years'worth of rent at a
discount. Typically they would pay between 70-90 times the monthly rent.The good thing is
that Md7 does not take an easement and the agreement is much simpler. Furthermore,they
won't take any additional space. Md7 Is only interested in T-Mobile and US Cellular leases.
The thins party buyout market is in a transitional period. As recently as two years ago,the average
multiple for all the P party buyout companies above was 114,with offers as high as 144 times the
monthly rent Because most of these companies exist solely to purchase the leases,bundle them
together,and then resell them as a padcage,and because many of the companies were having difficulty
procuring capital,nearly all the companies shut their doors,reduced,or otherwise stopped making
offers. Unison had the lease buyout market cornered,and accordingly began reducing their offers to 85-
95 times the monthly rent.
However,the lease buyout market has improved in the past year,specifically in the last three months.
Accordingly,Unison's offers have increased because the competition field has opened up again. SITA
has seen not only a resurgence of interest from new companies like Landmark and APWIP,but from the
existing companies like CCG as well.
In summary,you now have options if you wish to sell your lease. The final offers between the
companies are usually similar in dollar amount,but the landowner can choose the length of the buyout
(usually 25 years to perpetual). Additionally,the landowner does not need to make undue concessions
to the buyout companies. These concessions include the expansion of the existing lease area and
liberties with the use of the site and giving up 50%to have someone market your property.
f
11. General Risk of Termination
Many landowners we consult ask whether there Is a risk of technical obsolescence on these towers. It is
our general opinion that terrestrial based tower networks will not be obsolete within the next 10—15
years,and will fairly likely last considerably longer than that. Furthermore,is our belief that there are
other wireless technologies that will Increase the need for towers,at least during the next 10 years.
These include wireless Internet,satellite radio repeaters(many of our clients don't know that satellite
radio actually relies on towers In more urbanized areas),and new voice and data services.
We often get the question of whether everything will just go to satellite in the future. The short answer
to this question is that It is not likely,primarily because of two reasons. First,the distance between a
satellite phone and a satellite is significant enough to cause a lag. While that lag is present on cell
phones as well,it is nowhere nearly as pronounced. If you have used a satellite phone,you know it is
common to have a 34 second delay between when you start talking and when the other party hears you.
Secondly,the power required to transmit from the phone to the satellite is substantial as compared to a
cell phone. Thus battery life is a significant hindrance to widespread use of satellite phones because it
requires a sizeable battery to get any amount of battery longevity from a satellite phone.
The greater risk of termination to the average cell site comes from two things:
1. Termination due to Consolidation: There is and has been the possibility of consolidation
between carriers. In the last three years,the industry has had a number of large mergers.
AT&T/Cingular,Sprint/Nextel,and Verizon/Alltel to name a few. In each of these cases,some
cell sites have been terminated or will be terminated as a result of duplication. In the case of
AT&T and Cingular,approximately 6500 cell sites out of 50,000 combined sites(14%)were
0 terminated. Additionally,Sprint has announced a plan to terminate 20,000 of its 66,000 sites
due to its merger with Nextel. Future consolidation could create further redundancy,thereby
increasing the risk that a specific cell site might no longer be needed. The latest rumor of
consolidation involved T-Mobile's potential purchase of Sprint,as T-Mobile announced earlier
this year that they had hired an investment bank to review the possibility of acquiring Sprint
2. Termination due to Optimization: While there is no technology that we are aware of now that
will make cell towers obsolete as a whole in the near and mid-term future,there are
technologies that could increase the effectiveness of individual cell sites,making some
expendable. Increases in the capabilities of"smart antennas"could extend the range of cell
sites or make them capable of handling calls differently depending upon the time of day.
Increases in base station equipment efficiency(the equipment that handles the calls at the cell
site)could increase capacity,thereby reducing the number of cell sites necessary for the
operation of the network, in general,we don't believe that optimization will cause a significant
termination of existing cell sites. In fact,we suspect that optimization of networks will increase
the number of cell sites substantially in the future. Some estimates that we have heard have
suggested a threefold increase In the number of new cell sites. However,many of these cell
sites will be not be traditional macrocells(Verizon and T Mobile's sites in Grand Terrace are
macrocells). New smaller cell sites such as picocells or femtoceils(see
http,//en.wikioedia.ore/wtki/Microcell and htt en.wiki edia.or wile Femtocell)will increase
the flexibility that the carriers have in deploying their networks. The carriers may find it easier
and cheaper in the future to work around problematic or expensive sites. We don't believe that
the average landowner should factor optimization into their decision of whether or not to sell,
7
although there are situations where optimization might cause termination for existing owners in
unique circumstances. This is especially true in rural areas or suburban areas without taller
buildings or structures. Below we will address the risk to your specific sites as appropriate.
Ill. Pros/Cons of lease Buyouts
PROS
1. The primary benefit of agreeing to a lease buyout is that the landowner eliminates the risk of
the lease terminating over the number of years that are prepaid. For Instance,if the wireless
carrier or tower company is willing to pay 96 months(or a years)worth of rent,and the lease
was terminated in that 8 year period,the landowner would be better off having taken the lump
sum today In most cases. In some cases though,it is possible that the lease that is terminated
may be replaced by another lease from another wireless carrier.
2. A secondary benefit to a lease buyout is possible if the landowner takes the revenue from the
sale and places it in another investment that gives a better return than what the landowner
would have received from simply getting the regular lease Income. Because the lease buyout
companies are heavily discounting the future revenue stream(12-17%)this Is hard to do
without an investment with a high 1101-return on investment.
3. Lastly,if the property owner Intends to sell the property in the short term,It may make sense to
sell the wireless leases separately. Traditional commercial and residential purchasers of
property look at the liberal termination rights vested to the tower company in most wireless
leases(typically 30-90 days),and will not pay a fair value for the lease. The lease buyout
companies have the ability to leverage the risk that any one lease will be terminated against the
other thousand they own. Accordingly,they typically pay more than the landowner would
receive from a normal purchaser of the properly.
CONS
1. The primary reason that these lease buyout offers are not good ones to move forward Is that
they often fail to fairly value the potential to increase the lease rate at the expiration of the
lease. This is particularly true In leases of lower lease rates(below$700/mo),in leases where
there Is some type of revenue sharing for additional subleases,or for towers where there are
multiple tenants using the tower.
2. The length of the lease buyout can also be a negative factor. These lease buyouts bind the
landowner for a longer period of time than typically remains to the end of the lease. The
landowner is,in essence,taking a reduced present value of the lease and in exchange is giving
up a longer obligation on the property. This is especially true for perpetual easements. We
advise all owners considering a lease buyout to evaluate the future use of their property and
whether the placement of a tower on the property for 30-40 years would impact that use
significantly. If you enter one of these buyout agreements,you could be limiting the
redevelopment of your property.
3. Companies like Unison require a larger footprint than the current lease areas provide. They do
this for two reasons. If another wireless company approached you for a ground lease within the
expanded footprint,the buyout company would get 50%of that additional revenue. They also
do this to Insure that they receive a portion of any additional rent in the event a current carrier
needed to expand Its ground space. However,the buyout companies don't pay a premium for
these rights,so essentially you are giving up something for free. Do not be persuaded by the
lease buyout company salespeople who suggest that they will market the property. Their
"marketing"efforts consist of placing the site on a list and distributing the Ilst. The likelihood
that they will successfully add a wireless carrier to your tower that would not have come to you
directly Is very small.
4. In some cases,there is a possibility that if an existing tenant terminates their lease,you could
potentially replace it with another lease. However,if you have sold the lease,the lease buyout
company can negotiate with the new company at a higher rate than what you are currently
receiving and keep the difference.
IV. The Subject Skes
In the case at hand,T-Mobile pays$2,069/mo with a 3%term escalation annually. SMS pays$1,000/mo
as a revenue share for Verizon's presence at the site under the management contract you have with
SMS. The chart below shows come comparable leases for your area;they average$1,455/mo. Your
lease escalations are average,with most leases SITA reviews having a 3%annual increase. The leases
below are within a 40 mile radius of your sites.
Location Carrier/Company Monthly Rent
Hesperia Verizon Tower 7
Big Bear City T-Mobile Tower $1,300
Moreno Valley Verizon Stealth $1,910
Perris T Mobile Tower $1,500
Mission Vie o AT&T Rooftop $1,400
Irvine Verizon Rooftop $2,500
Irvine Sprint/Nextel Stealth $1,644
Tustin T Mobile Tower $1,000
Santa Ana Sprint/Nextel Tower $1,050
Stanton Sprint Stealth $1,500
Santa Ana T-Mobile Tower $1,300
The subject sites provide coverage to a significant area of Grand Terrace,Including a stretch of Riverside
Freeway(1-215). Also Included in the coverage area are numerous residential and commercial
properties in the surrounding area. The map below illustrates the varied types of properties and streets
the subject sites cover.
9
Specific Risk of Termination
The map below shows the closest tower sites in our database. There are several sites in the area,
represented by yellow pushpins. The Nextel rooftop was not visually confirmed. The nearest T-Mobile
site we found is a ST monopole 0.81 mi west This T Mobile site is too far away to provide similar
coverage to the[itys T-Mobile site. Although there are several towers in the area,the high daytime
traffic of the area and the carrier's growing need for additional capacity for data make the subject sites O
valuable and unlikely to be terminated in the next 5-10 years.
c.n.M �� erg Rea
57'T41b0Y de S
HGAM Rod!y = CRY CMGW
ww Uftbft 86 t? o
61'Cn Cg1Y •w 3 0_r
mw G 2d KGI Tower
so'I wdhSodl nrS�s 0.1�■
Or O—V In 7•l�T M
T A.w'A
w...
amp a
WAT6T ffonnay�+4datrl
IYIMM010 lr n.reia
•«r.0 7
—OM MI
s
j 74-American Tnwr Sqa
1C
We also reviewed the City of Grand Terrace Zoning Code and Zoning Map to see If there were options
available to the carriers should they decide to terminate the sites and find an alternate location.
According to our research(please review the zoning map below),it would be impossible to get a tower
approved at a similar height near this site. According to section 18.71.050 of the code,'no ground
mounted structure...shall be located on a lot with an existing residential use,within one hundred feet
of any residential use—or in the Barton Road specific plan village commercial district and administrative
professional district." Essentially these criteria give city property a monopoly within the immediate
area. There are no structures in town over three stories upon which to install rooftop equipment,and
towers aren't allowed in residential or the surrounding zones.
For T-Mobile sites,the main risk of termination Is usually a merger between or among carriers. The
most probable merger would be one Sprint and T-Mobile,and we estimate that there is a moderate
chance of such a merger occurring In the next few years. 51TA believes that the combined company
would look to a common technology that would enable removal of duplicative leases(Most likely CDMA
migrating to LTE). If this merger was to occur,it is likely that within 3-5 years of the merger
consummation,that the combined company would begin looking to terminate some of its leases.
However,the closest Sprint tower is still too far away to provide comparable coverage,and in the event
of a merger,we believe that the T Mobile site would be needed and that two of the three T Mobile,
Nextel and Sprint sites to the west would be terminated.
For the SMS flagpole,Verizon is currently the only carrier using the site. However,SMA believes there is
a moderate chance of collocation at this site. If another carrier came on to the site,then the stability of
this lease would Increase,and the risk of termination would be significantly less because SMS would be
making more profit from the tower. You would also receive 50%of the rent from the additional tenant.
The likelihood of Verizon merging with another major carrier is low due to antitrust Issues. Even If
Verizon were to merge with another company,they would likely still need the site in order to provide
capacity for the 3G and 4G applications and the growing demand for wireless data.
'dry ..,... e �,a•,; �4-;� .. - h�--.�.
Nix
.. r••imr - F
e `��� .�w4 *l � �•••r �lsf r.ewa
1 }
RH-Hlliside Residential
?�R140-Low Density Singie Family
RI-20-V Low Density Single Family
R1.7.2-Singlee Family
R2-Low Med Density Residential
R3-Medium Density Residential
R3-S(Multiple Famdr Senior Ulm)
SRSP-General Commercial
ORSP.WNage commercial
SRSP-OMee Professional
ARAdmhtisaarive Professional
20 C2-General Commercial
] CAI-Commercial Manufacturing MR-Restricted Manufacturing 0
M24ndustrial
PUB-Public Facludes
FP-Fioodpleln Overlay District
AG-Agricultural Overlay District
V. Unison's Offers and Competing Offers
Unison is offering to purchase the T-Mobile lease revenues and ground easement in perpetuity for
$175,865 and the SMS lease revenue for$85,000.Each offer equate to 85 times the monthly rents. As
late as September of 2008,Unison would have paid$248,280 or more for the T Moblle site and
$120,000 for the SMS site(120 times the monthly rent). Furthermore,they would have been willing to
purchase the lease area for a 30-year term instead of a perpetual easement exclusively,and would have
agreed to not taking part in future revenue from additional ground spate. Because lease competition
has opened back up,we believe you could and should solicit competitive offers from the other lease
buyout companies.
We also specifically dislike the requirement that the lease is purchased in perpetuity. It Is possible that
at the end of the lease that you might prefer that the equipment were no longer there. Under the
Unison agreement,you wouldn't have that option until the site was not in use for 3-5 years. Abetter
arrangement would be to only sell a fixed term easement such as 30 or 40 years.
Based upon regent offers,for the T-Mobile site we believe that you will be able to get offers for 110 to
115 times the monthly lease rate or$227,590 to 237,935. For the Verizon lease,we believe that you
should be able to get$110,000 for the current lease payments. We strongly recommend against selling
the future revenue sharing rights with the Verizon revenue share. In fact,if you can't procure an offer
that only includes the Verizon revenue share,we would strongly recommend against selling at all.
Please note that the SMS lease has an exclusivity clause whereby SMS has the exclusive right to market
the property,a clause which may make the City In breach of contract should you sell to a 3rd patty
buyout company. Please contact your attorney about this clause before signing a buyout agreement.
r. Frclu-mitr.
Lsr,:hnJ usmt•:o 'event the:u1u{ur r it'u u i 3rl.ct tits L.r^J art!' t'rnt!rrn,a 14 rc +nM:�s-nr ; G!,c
., ,n. pum nl vt the}'t •rrsrs-to wtrelecs, 'rim nl-30 n ; ,Twues )r 1puimr.fn r))rpncGs nr enr.iva sK
•';cC:Vr'.Ir.la C1inl!itlnl�711Ut1%troT q!AR'hG l.)n:Ilnrd ;1'T`:'Cr S.ID'-a s 'h:ierr= :n.7 sr r:nr,nc r`{+h)e
1 u:-n)eut._eal;rrl s;ull c.U)ure�sr: ins�I:frnrr�n 1 -t:„
t:340 ut-)•F•1+1053C i�r.::nee_F!{CrM'Mr1*e•s ul=�.•!.r.;
�L
Please also note that the Unison offer on the SMS revenue says it is for a Verizon rooftop. You should
clarify with Unison that this Isn't a rooftop.
VI. Recommendation
It is our recommendation that you do not sell the leases at this time. The main reason we believe this
Is that both leases are secure for the next 10-15 years and that the offers as proposed(or that will likely
be proposed even with competitive bidding)are too greatly discounted as compared to future cash flow.
If you do choose to sell,we suggest selling the T-Mobile lease but keeping the SMS lease. If you must
sell both sites,we suggest selling the T-Mobile lease to whichever lease buyout company would pay the
most for it with the best terms. On the SMS lease,you should sell to the company that offers the best
price but who will not take any revenue sharing.
The key to both transactions will be getting the best terms at the price currently on the table or slightly
higher. That is,we suggest that you shop around and see what Unison's competitors can offer for the
sites-including WIP,CCG,and Landmark Dividend. Their contact information Is listed in the
introduction. They may be able to beat the offer,but with a 30 or 40 year easement Instead of a
perpetual one. Let each of the companies know that you have received an offer for Unison on the site
that includes a lump sum and 50%revenue share for future collocations. Do not disclose the specific
amount of the Unison offer. Let the companies know that you will be asking for offers from at least
three other companies. Mention that you do not like that Unison Is requesting additional land,wants to
share in the revenue sharing on the SMS lease,and that you do not want to give the leases up for
perpetuity. Ask each party who will pay the dosing costs on the transaction and figure that Into the
final offer for comparison.
QSpecifically,see if the other companies can match the Unison offer for a fixed length of time(30 years)
and without adding additional ground space or taking any revenue sharing that Unison is requesting.
This Is especially Important because if one or more carriers wanted to collocate onto the tower,you
would receive 50%of the revenue of the SMS lease. For the T-Mobile lease,you would likely be entitled
to additional rent for the expanded footprint if they needed space outside their current lease area of
450 sq ft. SITA estimates that you could receive$400/mo to$600/mo for every 20D square feet that T-
Mobile or another wireless provider needed. There is no need to give up that space for free.
In short,because of the resurgence of competitors In the lease buyout market,SiTA believes you could
get better terms along with a higher offer than what Unison is currently putting on the table. Contact us
when you receive the offers from the competitors,and we will gladly review those proposals.
Please don't hesitate to contact us with any questions.
Sincerely,
Ken Schmidt
President- Steel in the Air,Inc.
13
1
k-
CALHORI[A AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 14, 2011 Council Item (X ) CRA Item ( }
TITLE: FY 2011-12 Preliminary Budget
PRESENTED BY: Bernie Simon, Finance Director
RECOMMENDATION: For discussion
BACKGROUND:
The City Council conducted a budget workshop review of the proposed City budget for
Fiscal Year 2011 2012 in a special meeting prior to today's regularly scheduled Council
meeting. A budget hearing is now conducted at the regularly scheduled Council meeting
for additional discussion and to accept any public comments.
DISCUSSION:
The City budget includes the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds and Capital
Projects Fund. For FY 2011-12, the City budget consists of proposed expenditures of
$8,936,120 supported by estimated revenues of $7,956,611, plus the use of fund
balance reserves. The proposed City budget has a combined deficit of $(979,509)
comprised of shortfalls in the General Fund, and other Special Revenue Funds. The
ending combined City fund balance reserves is projected to be $3,206,526, including
reserve designations. However, the General Fund will have a reserve deficit based on
the preliminary FY 2011-12 Budget, prior to any deficit reduction actions.
The FY 2011-12 General Fund budget consists of proposed expenditures of
$5,245,499, including transfers out, supported by estimated revenues of $4,692,383.
The General Fund budget has a deficit of $(553,116) with a projected ending fund
balance deficit of$(389,743). Staff recommended options to eliminate the budget deficit
are presented separately.
The FY 2011-12 Special Revenue Fund and Enterprise Fund budget includes proposed
expenditures of$2,767,801, including transfers out, supported by estimated revenues of
$2,341,408. The proposed Special Revenue Fund budget has combined expenditures
over revenue of $426,393 with a projected ending fund balance reserve of $3,596,269.
Expenditures over revenue in Special Revenue Funds that are capital improvement
funds or developer impact fee funds do not have an operational issue and are more
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO.
1
dependent on the timing of capital projects. The Special Revenue and Enterprise Fund
reserve includes $2,573,309 of available funds and a Waste Water Disposal designated
reserve of$1,020,260 for interagency capital funds. The Traffic Safety Fund is projected
to have a negative balance due to the "catch-up" of contract amounts owed to Redflex
for the red-light camera fines that was temporarily borrowed from the Facilities Fund.
The FY 2011-12 Capital Projects Fund budget consists of proposed expenditures of
$922,820, including transfers out, supported by estimated revenues of$922,820.
The FY 2011-12 CRA Fund budget consists of proposed expenditures of $10,410,217,
including transfers out, supported by estimated revenues of $9,170,418. CRA reserve
includes $1,219,374 of available funds and$4,580,490 of designated funds.
PROPOSED CITY REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES Table 1
Fund Revenue Expenditures Surplus
(Deficit)
General Fund 4,545,074 (5,098,190) 553,116
GF/CRA Loan 147,309 147,309 0
Special 2,341,408 (2,767,801) (426,393)
Rev/Entrp
Capital Project 922 820 (922,820) 0
Total CITY $7,956,611 $8,936,120 $979,509
Total CRA 9,170,418 10,410,217 1,239,799
Projected FY 2011-12 Available Fund Balance Reserves-TABLE 2
Beginning Revenue Expenditure Ending
Available FY 2011-12 FY 2011-12 Available
General Fund 163,373 4,545,074 (5,098,190) (389,743)
Cash Resv- CRA Loan 0 147,309 0 147,309
Loan Payment to CRA 0 0 147,309 147,309
Total General Fund 163 373 4 g92 383 5 245,499 389 743
Special Revenue/Entpr
Street Fund 752,411 7,000 187100 572,311
Stone Drain 64,919 350 0 65,269
Park Fund 218,791 7100 16 62 ) 209,262
AB 3229 COPS 0 0 0 0
Air QualityFund 55,666 14,250 700 69,216
Gas Tax Fund 92,147 405,860 (434,738 63,269
Traffic Saf 40,624 70,000 58,735 29,359
Continued
QY M9TI A IDA JIOMUQ',)
Projected FY 2011-12 Available Fund Balance Reserves -continued
Beginning Revenue Expenditure Ending
Available FY 2011-12 FY 2011-12 Available
Facilities Development 206 343 200 0 206,543
Measure 1 84,251 216,913 (271,974 29190
Wastewater 1,563,611 1,495 300 1,673,760 11385,151
CDBG 0 110100 110100 0
LLMD 2,187 14,335 14 065 2,457
Total Spec Rev/En r 2,999,702 2,341,408 2,767,801 2.573,309
Other Funds
Capital Im rov.-Streets 0 828,732
(828,72?L 0
Barton/Colton Bride 0 94,088 (94,088) 0
Total Other Funds 0 922,820 922,820 0
TOTAL AVAILABLE 3,163,075 7,956,611 8,936,120 2,963,052
Projected FY 2011-12 Available Fund Balance Reserves CRA -TABLE 3
Beginning Revenue Expenditure Ending
Available FY 2011-12 FY 2011-12 Available
CRA Funds
Capital Pro'ects Fund 0 1,837,000 1,818 070 18,930
Debt Service Fund 1 251 673 610521 B58 7 082 960 221,571
CRA Low Mod Fund 0 1,280 560 1,267,687 12,873
CRA Trust. Fund 1 207 500 D 241 500 966 000
Total CRA Funds 2,459,173 9,170,418 10510,217 1,218,374
3
Pro ected Endinj 1 FY 20114 2 Designated Fund Balance Reserves -TABLE 4
Purpose Beginning Increases Decreases Ending
Designated FY 2011- FY 2011- Designated
12 12
Wastewater— Improve- 1,022,960 0 0 1,022,960
Capital ments
CRA Funds
Debt Service Bond debt& 2,168,335 147,309 0 2,315,644
Fund Other
Debt Service Pass through 1 836 429 0 0 1,836,429
Debt Service SERAF Loan <448 636> 0 0 <448 636>
Low Mod Pass through 459107 0 0 459107
Low Mod LM project 417,946 0 0 417 946
Total CRA 4,433,181 147,309 0 4,580,490
Funds
FISCAL IMPACT:
Fiscal impact is presented in the FY 2011-12 Budget document and proposed deficit
reduction actions are presented separately.
Respectfully submitted,
Bernie Simon,
Finance Director
Manager Approval: a
Betsy A. Adams
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
FY 2011-12 Budget(under separate cover)
CALIFORNIA AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 14, 2011 Council Item (X ) CRA Item ( )
TITLE: Recommended Fiscal Year 2011-12 Budget Reductions
PRESENTED BY: Betsy M. Adams, City Manager
RECOMMENDATION: Consider recommendations to close Fiscal Year 2011-12
General Fund budget gap.
BACKGROUND:
On May 24, 2011, representatives from the Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. (RSG)
presented to the City Council the Fiscal Sustainability Model (Model) for the General
Fund which included a 20-year forecast of revenues and expenditures. The Model
developed was in response to the Govemor's proposed elimination of redevelopment
agencies. The Model identifies a General Fund structural deficit which substantially
increases over time unless significant mitigating actions are taken. If redevelopment
agencies are eliminated the General Fund structural deficit would substantially worsen.
DISCUSSION:
For Fiscal Year (FY) 2011-12, the Model identified a General Fund deficit in excess of
$500,000. This deficit number has been further refined in the proposed operating
budget for FY 2011-12 and presently is $553,116.
The City Council has two alternatives available to eliminate the General Fund deficit so
that a balanced budget is adopted for FY 2011-12. The first alternative is to reduce
General Fund operating expenditures by $553,116. The second alternative is to use a
combination of expenditure reductions and fund balance. Unlike the present fiscal year,
there is not enough fund balance in the General Fund to cover the deficit in FY 2011-12.
During the presentation on the Model, RSG also discussed the General Fund's cash
position (approximately $3.6 million) along with the need to designate various reserves.
RSG recommended using no more than $120,000 a year through FY 2015-16 to
address the General Fund deficit. This recommendation was made assuming that the
City would actively work to increase General Fund revenues over the next five years.
Use of the $163,373 in beginning fund balance for the General Fund has not been
considered because these funds may be needed during FY 2011-12 for two matters
presently in Closed Session.
7
FY 11-12 General Fund Budget
Recommended Budget Reductions
June 14, 2011
Page 2
An important element of the Model was the identification of mandatory, essential and
discretionary services in the General Fund. For preparation of the General Fund
budget, RSG identified services (including positions) which are discretionary. It is
important to emphasize that this does not mean these services, and the employees who
provide them, are not important to the City, rather it means there are no legal mandates
for the City to provide these services.
The following summary of budget reductions is based on RSG's recommendations,
unless otherwise noted in the information provided for each recommendation in
Attachment A. The savings shown below is for the only the General Fund. The savings
for all funds will be addressed in the Fiscal Impact section of this staff report.
Recommended FY 2011-12 Budget Reductions
# I Description $
1 Remove Traffic Deputy Position from Sheriffs Contract 228,714
2 Mere Rental Inspection Program into Code Enforcement 51,465
3 Defund Management Analyst Position in Community Development 6,496
4 Defund Communi Events Program 52,880
5 Defund De u City Clerk Position 58,533
6 Reduce Parks & City Hall Maintenance 23,600
7 Defund Management Analyst Position in Public Works 21,584
8 1 Share Patrol Deputy with City of Loma Linda 118,404
Total 561,676
While the service level impacts of the eight recommended budget reductions, detailed in
Attachment A, are very significant, they would provide the General Fund with much
needed on-going budget savings. No one-time budget savings items were included in
the recommended reductions because the Model projects that the General Fund will
have a deficit in excess of $800,000 in FY 2012-13 if on-going budget reductions are
not made in FY 2011-12. if the $561,676 in recommended reductions is incorporated
into the FY 2011-12 budget, the City goes into the following year, FY 2012-13, either
needing to reduce General Fund expenditures by approximately $300,000 or raising
revenues. As difficult as the service level reductions would be for FY 2011-12, the ones
which would have to be considered for FY 2012-13 would be no less difficult.
Three major policy issues related to two of the recommended budget reductions, noted
in the information provided in Attachment A, are summarized below:
• Should the City proceed with the dog park or the westside park when parks
maintenance staffing would be reduced?
• Should the City consider using reserves to maintain the current level of patrol service
since it is identified in the Model as a mandated service?
FY 11-12 General Fund Budget
Recommended Budget Reductions
June 14, 2011
Page 3
■ Should the City explore alternatives to the Sheriffs Department for law enforcement
services?
A decision on the second policy issue, use of reserves to maintain patrol service, needs
to be made prior to the adoption of the FY 2011-12 budget. Decisions on the other two
items should be deferred until the future status of redevelopment agencies is known.
As of June 8, when this staff report was included in the agenda packet, the fate of
redevelopment agencies was still undecided. It appears the Governor may not have the
needed votes in the Senate or Assembly to eliminate redevelopment agencies. Bills
have been proposed to reform redevelopment agencies with AB 1250 (Alejo) appearing
to be the one with the most support. If redevelopment reform is included in the State's
adopted budget, and depending on the language of the legislation, then there may be a
need to revisit the General Fund and Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
budgets. The status of redevelopment agencies may be known soon because the State
is constitutionally required to adopt its budget by June 15. While this deadline has not
been achieved in recent years, the State Controller advised the Legislature on June 2
that its members would stop being paid on June 16 if the deadline is not met. Until the
status of redevelopment agencies is known, the City's budget focus will be on resolving
the $553,116 deficit in the General Fund next fiscal year.
FISCAL IMPACT:
QIf the eight recommended budget reductions in this staff report are implemented the
projected General Fund deficit in FY 2011-12 would be eliminated. A summary of the
savings by fund is shown below.
# Fund 10 Fund 16 Fund 17 Fund 21 Fund 32 Fund 34 Total
General Gas Tax Traffic Safety Waste Water CRA CRA $
Disposal Capital LowlMod
Projects Housing
1 228.714 0 9,135 0 0 0 237,849
2 1 51,465 0 0 0 0 0 51,465
3 6,496 0 0 0 37,928 0 44,424
4 52,880 0 0 0 0 0 52,880
5 58,533 0 0 0 11,707 7,804 78,044
6 23,600 30,624 0 9,1871 0 0 63,411
7 1 21,584 3,238 0 19,929 0 0 44,751
8 118,404 0 0 0 0 0 118,404
Total 1 561,676 33,862 9,135 29,116 49,635 7,804 691,228
3
FY 11-12 General Fund Budget
Recommended Budget Reductions
June 14, 2011
Page 4
Respectfully submitted:
Betsy W. Adams
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Recommended Budget Reductions#1 through #8
FY 11-12 General Fund Budget
Recommended Budget Reductions
June 14, 2011
Page 5
0
Attachment A
C�
FY 11-12 General Fund Budget
Recommended Budget Reductions
June 14, 2011
Page 6
Recommended Budget Reduction #1
Description: Remove Traffic Deputy Position from Sheriff's Contract
Annual Savings: General Fund (Fund 10) - $228,714
Traffic Safety (Fund 17) - $9,135
General Fund Revenue Impact: None
Service Level Impacts:
■ Traffic citations would be written by patrol deputies. Model prepared by RSG
anticipates revenue from these citations could drop by 50%.
■ Minor citations issued by schools to students would be approved by patrol
deputies. It may take longer for these citations to be approved.
■ Sheriffs Service Specialist (SSS) would issue parking citations previously
handled by Traffic Deputy. SSS would become the schools primary contact.
■ Staff support would no longer be provided to the Crime Prevention Committee.
Other Impacts:
Revenue from traffic citations goes to Traffic Safety Fund (17) and is used to
fund Crossing Guard and Substitute Crossing Guard positions which would be
defunded. City would no longer provide crossing guard service.
Other Comments:
Colton Joint Unified School District (CJUSD) has already eliminated FY 2011-12
funding for another Crossing Guard position. City would ask CJUSD if parent
volunteers (under the direction of CJUSD) want to handle this function at each
elementary school.
Staffing Impacts:
Crossing Guard and Substitute Grossing Guard positions (part-time employees)
funded by the Traffic Safety Fund and Crossing Guard position (part-time
employee) funded by CJUSD would be removed from the FY 2011-12 budget.
Deputy serving as Traffic Deputy would be reassigned elsewhere in the Sheriff's
Department.
Policy Issue:
None
FY 11-12 Venerai Fund tiudget
Recommended Budget Reductions
June 14, 2011
Page 7
Recommended Budget Reduction #2
Description: Merge Rental Inspection Program into Code Enforcement
Annual Savings: General Fund (Fund 10) - $51,465 [$ss,soo less $17,435 to fund
Community Events portion of Secretary position in Community Development Department]
General Fund Revenue Impact: None
Service Level Impacts:
Responsibility for rental inspections would be transferred to Senior Code
Enforcement Officer. Minimal service level impacts anticipated if Recommended
Budget Reduction #4 (defund Community Events program) is implemented.
Other Impacts:
Other positions in Community Development would need to provide backup
support to the public counter.
Other Comments:
Rental inspections revenues are anticipated to decline beginning in FY 2012-13
as more landlords qualify to participate in the good landlordttenant program.
Staffing Impacts:
Code Enforcement Officer position (part-time employee) and Code Enforcement
Cleric position (part-time employee) would be removed from the FY 2011-12
budget.
Policy Issue:
None
7
FY 11-12 General l^und Budget
Recommended Budget Reductions
June 14, 2011
Page 8
Recommended Budget Reduction #3
Description: Defund Management Analyst Position in Community Development
Annual Savings: General Fund (Fund 10) - $6,496 [$37,928 less $31,432 to fund
Community Events portion of Senior Code Enforcement Officer position]
CRA Capital Projects (Fund 32) - $37,928
General Fund Revenue Impact: None
Service Level Impacts:
Technical assistance at the Community Development public counter would be
provided by other employees in the department. Other employees would assume
responsibility for updating the electronic reader board. Staff support to
Community & Economic Development Director for parks grant would be assigned
to other employees in the department.
Other Impacts:
Some support for economic development projects may be outsourced (funded by
bond proceeds, not the General Fund).
Other Comments:
Employee in the Management Analyst position has submitted her resignation
with her last day of employment with the City to be June 30, 2011.
Staffing Impacts:
Management Analyst position in Community Development (full-time employee)
would be removed from the FY 2011-12 budget.
Policy Issue:
None
i
FY 11-12 General Fund Budget
Recommended Budget Reductions
June 14, 2011
Page 9
Recommended Budget Reduction #4
Description: Defund Community Events Program
Annual Savings: General Fund (Fund 10) - $52,880
General Fund Revenue Impact: None
Service Level Impacts:
City would discontinue Grand Terrace Community Day, Movies in the Park, and
Halloween Haunt.
Other Impacts:
Senior Code Enforcement Officer, who is responsible for City sponsored
community events, would have time available to handle rental inspections,
provide assistance at the Community Development public counter, and
coordinate volunteer activities (e.g. neighborhood clean ups, etc.).
Other Comments:
City could continue to provide volunteer resources (e.g. Community Emergency
Response Team) to other entities for community events similar to the assistance
provided for the Walk on Blue Mountain in 2011. Sheriff's Department could also
provide volunteer resources (e.g. Citizens on Patrol).
Staffing Impacts:
Portions of Secretary position and Senior Code Enforcement Officer funded in
Community Events have been addressed in Recommended Budget Reductions
#2 and #3 respectively.
Policy Issue:
None
9
FY 11-12 General Fund Budget
Recommended Budget Reductions
June 14, 2011
Page 10
Recommended Budget Reduction #5
Description: Defund Deputy City Clerk Position
Annual Savings: General Fund (Fund 10) - $58,533
CRA Capital Projects (Fund 32) - $11,707
CRA Low/Mod Housing (Fund 34) - $7,804
General Fund Revenue Impact: None
Service Level Impacts:
■ City Clerk would be responsible for all department activities (preparing minutes
of City Council, Public Financing Authority, and Community Redevelopment
Agency meetings, advertising legal notices, codifying newly adopted municipal
codes, administering oaths, ensuring that city staff and elected and appointed
officials comply with State conflict of interest and campaign reporting laws,
providing notary services, and managing municipal elections).
• Staff support to the Cultural & Historical Committee would be limited.
■ Volunteer banquet would be discontinued.
■ Second floor public counter and telephone backup would be provided by the
Assistant to the City Manager who may also need to assist with assembling
the Agenda packets for Council.
Other Impacts:
Employees would need to be trained so that each department is able to update
its own information on the City's website.
Other Comments:
■ Options for providing department services when City Clerk is not in the office
would need to be explored (e.g. outsourced service, deputizing other City
employees).
■ Model prepared by RSG recommended defunding the City Clerk position
instead of the Deputy City Clerk position. City Manager recommends keeping
the City Clerk position. If the volunteers running the Senior Center become a
Council appointed committee (recommendation from the City's insurance pool)
they would need to report to a department director which could be the City
Clerk. In addition, when financial resources become available, the City Clerk
would need to implement a software system to automate the Council Agenda.
Staffing Impacts:
Deputy City Clerk position (full-time employee) would be removed from the FY
2011-12 budget.
Policy Issue:
None
FY 11-12 General Fund Budget
Recommended Budget Reductions
June 14, 2011
Page 11
Recommended Budget Reduction #6
Description: Reduce Parks & City Hall Maintenance
Annual Savings: General Fund (Fund 10) - $23,600 [$43,600 less $20,000 for
outsourced cleaning of park restrooms and City Hail buildings]
Gas Tax (Fund 16) - $30,624
Waste Water Disposal (Fund 21) - $9,187
General Fund Revenue Impact: None
Service Level Impacts:
■ Parks would be mowed and weeded less frequently. Landscaped medians and
right-of-way would be maintained less frequently. Staff would continue to use
court ordered work release workers to assist with parks and right-of-way
maintenance.
■ Staff would seek volunteers to assist with opening and closing the parks.
■ Parks restrooms would be cleaned 3 times per week (Friday — Sunday) and
City Hall buildings would be cleaned 2 times per week. For the parks to be
cleaned daily the annual savings to the General Fund would need to be
reduced by $6,400.
Other Impacts:
r-� Staff would need to seek competitive proposals for contract cleaning of the park
J restrooms and City Hall buildings.
Other Comments:
Staff would seek volunteers for parks and right-of-way clean ups.
Staffing Impacts:
Maintenance Worker 3 position (full-time employee) and Park & Fields Assistant
position (part-time employee) would be removed from the FY 2011-12 budget.
Policy Issue:
Should the City proceed with the dog park or the westside park when parks
maintenance staffing would be reduced?
11
FY 11-12 General Fund Budget
Recommended Budget Reductions
June 14, 2011
Page 12
Recommended Budget Reduction #7
Description: Defund Management Analyst Position in Public Works
Annual Savings: General Fund (Fund 10) - $21,584 [$36,584 less $15,000 for
General Fund portion to outsource NPDES]
Gas Tax (Fund 16) - $3,238
Waste Water Disposal (Fund 21) - $19,929 [$24,929 less $5,000 for waste water
Disposal portion to outsource NPDES]
General Fund Revenue Impact: None
Service Level Impacts:
■ NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) program
administration would need to be outsourced at an estimated cost of$20,000.
■ Other responsibilities (e.g. December 2010 Rains applications with FEMA and
Caltrans, trash franchise, etc.) would be handled by other employees in
Building & Safety/Public Works.
■ Staff support would no longer be provided to the EOC (Emergency Operations
Center) Committee or to CERT (Community Emergency Response Team).
Other Impacts:
■ Staff would obtain competitive quotes to outsource NPDES program
administration (a federally mandated program).
■ Staff would see if Burrtec could assist with preparing the annual waste
management diversion report for the State.
■ Each department would need to update its own information on the City's
website (Management Analyst in Public Works and the Deputy City Clerk are
the primary employees who presently do this work).
Other Comments:
The cities of Colton, Loma Linda and Grand Terrace are discussing the
possibility of cost sharing Loma Linda's Emergency Services Coordinator
position (40-40-20 split). When this would start, the cost for Grand Terrace's
portion, and whether any grant funding could be available are not yet know. This
shared position would be able to provide staff support to CERT and possibly the
EOC Committee.
Staffing Impacts:
Management Analyst position (full-time employee) in Public Works, funded in the
General, Gas Tax and Waste Water Disposal funds would be removed from the
FY 2011 A 2 budget.
Policy Issue:
If needed, should the City consider reducing the budget for the EOC Committee
and CERT ($7,320 and $3,000 respectively) to help fund Grand Terrace's portion
of the Emergency Services Coordinator?
1 :
F Y 11-12 Ueneral Fund budget
Recommended Budget Reductions
June 14, 2011
Page 13
Recommended Budget Reduction #8
Description: Reduce Patrol Deputy Position by One Half
Annual Savings:
General Fund (Fund 10): $118,404
General Fund Revenue Impact: None
Service Level Impacts:
Patrol hours would be reduced 20 hours a week, from 2481week to 2281week
(decrease of 9.2%).
Other Impacts:
City currently contracts for 6 patrol deputies (provides coverage of 2 deputies
during peak hours and 1 deputy during non peak hours). Sharing a patrol deputy
would decrease some 2 deputy coverage during peak hours. This could increase
possibility of no deputy in town when a suspect is being booked into the County
jail. (Assumes traffic deputy position already been removed from the contract.)
Other Comments:
■ Sheriffs Department has expressed concern about this recommended budget
reduction, especially the possibility of increased response times.
• Model prepared by RSG recommended removing the Sheriffs Service
Specialist (SSS) position from the Sheriffs contract as crime prevention is not
a mandated service (savings would be $69,267). City Manager recommends
�J keeping the SSS position so that Citizens on Patrol volunteers continue to be
available to the City and because an additional $49,147 in budget reductions
(another City position), or use of reserves, would be needed.
• State Senate recently passed SB 223 (Leno) which, if the bill became law,
would allow counties to levy their own vehicle license fee (VLF). The local
portion of the State's VLF, which ends June 30, 2011, funded an annual
$100,000 COPS grant and booking fees ($20,000 to $40,000) for Grand
Terrace. At this time, it does not appear likely San Bernardino County would
consider a local VLF even if SB 223 is passed by the State Assembly.
• History of staffing changes in the Sheriffs contract includes a deputy position
dropped in October 1999, a deputy added in FY 2002-03 budget, and a deputy
position added in August 2006.
Staffing Impacts:
One half Deputy position would be reassigned elsewhere in Sheriff's Department.
Policy Issues:
• Should the City consider using reserves to maintain the current level of patrol
service since it is identified in the Model as a mandated service?
• Should the City explore alternatives to the Sheriffs Department for law
enforcement services?
13
PENDING CRA APPROVAL
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MAY 24,2011
A regular meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency, City of Grand Terrace, was held in
the Council Chambers,Grand Terrace Civic Center,22795 Barton Road,Grand Terrace,California,
on May 24, 2011 at 4:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Walt Stanckiewitz, Chairman
Lee Ann Garcia, Vice-Chairman
Darcy McNaboe,Agency Member
Bernardo Sandoval, Agency Member
Gene Hays, Agency Member
Betsy M. Adams, City Manager
Brenda Mesa, City Clerk
Bernie Simon, Finance Director
Joyce Powers, Community& Economic Development Director
Richard Shields, Building & Safety Director
John Harper, City Attorney
Detective Martin, San Bernardino County Sheriffs Department
Rick McClintock, San Bernardino County Fire Department
ABSENT: None
CONVENE THE JOINT CRAICITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP at 4:30 P.M.
CRA/CITY COUNCIL- CLOSED SESSION
1. Labor Relations per GC54957.6
2. Closed Session- Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation GC54956.9
(b)- One Case
Mayor Stanckiewitz announced that the Agency and Council met in Closed Session to discuss Labor
Relations per GC54957.6 and held a Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation
GC54956.9(b)- One Case and there was no reportable action taken.
Mayor Stanckiewitz convened the Public Financing Authority,Community Redevelopment Agency
and the City Council Meeting at 6:15 p.m. The meeting was opened with an Invocation by Mayor
Pro Tem Lee Ann Garcia, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by City Attorney John Harper.
AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE REDEVELOPMENT TAX ALLOCATION BONDS
A. Actions by Public Financing Authority
CRA AGENDA ITEM NO.
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
May 24,2011
Page 2
1. Resolution of Public Financing Authority Establishing Regular Meeting
Dates
GTPFA-201 1-01 MOTION BY AUTHORITY MEMBER MCNABOE, SECOND BY
AUTHORITY MEMBER HAYS, CARRIED 5-0, to approve a Resolution
of the Public Financing Authority Establishing Regular Meeting Dates.
2. Authorization to Issue Redevelopment Tax Allocation Bonds
GTPFA-2011-02 MOTION BY AUTHORITY MEMBER SANDOVAL, SECOND BY
AUTHORITY MEMBER MCNABOE, CARRIED 5-0, to Approve a
Resolution Approving the Forms of an Indenture ofTrust,Purchase Contract,
Continuing Disclosure Agreement and an Official Statement and Authorizing
the Execution of the Purchase Contract Relating to the Issuance of the
Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace's Tax
Allocation Bonds Issue of 2011 A and Issue of the 2011 B for the Community
Redevelopment Project Area and Approving Certain Action in Connection
Therewith.
B. Actions of the City Council
1. Approve the Issuance by the Agency of Redevelopment Tax Allocation
Bonds
CC-2011-40 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HAYS, SECOND BY COUNCILEMBER
MCNABOE,CARRIED 5-0,to approve a Resolution Approving the Issuance by the
Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace of Tax Allocation
Bonds,Issue of 2011 A and Issue 2011 B,for the Community Redevelopment Project
Area and Making Certain Determination Relating Thereto and Authorizing Certain
Other Actions in Connection Therewith.
C. Actions by Community Redevelopment Agency_
1. Authorization to Issue Redevelopment Tax Allocation Bonds
CRA-2011-31 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER MCNABOE, SECOND BY AGENCY
MEMBER HAYS,CARRIED 5-0,to approve a Resolution Authorizing the Issuance
and Sale of Tax Allocation Bonds, Issue of 2011 A and Issue of 2011 B, for the
Community Redevelopment Project Area,and Approving the Form of an Indenture
of Trust, Official Statement, Purchase Contract, Continuing Disclosure Agreement
and Related Documents and Authorizing Certain Other Actions in Connection
Therewith.
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
May 24,2011
Page 3
Mayor Stanckiewitz adjourned the Public Financing Authority Meeting at 6:55 p.m.
1. Approval of 05-10-2011 and 05-12-2011 CRA Minutes
CRA-2011-32 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER HAYS, SECOND BY VICE-CHAIRMAN
GARCIA,CARRIED 5-0,to accept the May 10,2011 and May 12,2011 Community
Redevelopment Agency Minutes.
2. Joint Public Hearing for the Sale of Agency-owned Property at 12569 Michigan
Street to Habitat for Humanity San Bernardino Area,Inc.For$1.00 to Construct Two
Single Family Homes
Communi1y and Economic Develo ment Director.-Joyce Powers indicated the that the
Agency's Low-to Moderate-Income Housing Fund purchased the 0.5 acre parcel at 12569
Michigan Street from the City on March 8, 2011, to develop affordable housing. Staff has
been working with Habitat for Humanity San Bernardino Area, Inc. to determine their
interest in developing two or three homes under their self-help housing program. They have
expressed interest in a Grand Terrace project for 2012. Their Board of Directors will meet
on May 19, 2011 to discuss the approval of the Grand Terrace project. She outlined the
various conditions that would be approved through resolutions of the City Council and
O Redevelopment Agency. She stated that staff is recommending that the City and Agency
approve the resolutions and partner with Habitat for Humanity San Bernardino, Inc. to
complete the project. She indicated that the residences that will be constructed will assist
the City and Agency in meeting their affordable housing requirements.
Mayor Stanckiewitz opened the public hearing for discussion. There being none,he returned
discussion to the Council/Agency.
Councilmember Bernardo Sandoval,questioned what safeguards would be put into place to
ensure that the homes that are built fit in with the neighborhood around them.
Community and Economic Development Director Powers,responded that the project would
be reviewed and processed through the Planning Department.
Mayor Walt Stanckiewitz, requested clarification on what low-income is and what the
threshold is for low-income.
Community and Economic Development Director Powers,responded that she didn't bring
that information with her to the meeting,however, the medium income for a family of four
is in the$70,000.00 range. She would suspect that it would be in the$50,000.00 range and
stated that she will get that information to the Council.
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
May 24,201 l
Page 4
Mary Rose, Director of Habitat for Humanity San Bernardino Area, responded that they
follow HUD guidelines.
Councilmember Gene Hays, questioned how they will go about generating the pool of
applicants that would be potential homeowners.
MaryR�responded that they start out with an information evening that is by an invitation
that is published in the paper or people who have contacted them. They are given an
application packet. They do background checks,credit checks and employment verification
and a home visit.
Councilmember Darcy McNaboe questioned if the requirement through the covenant is that
a low or very low income family live in the homes for 45 years, what type of follow-up is
done to ensure that the houses are being maintained.
Mary Rose, responded that they have a family partner that works with them and maintains
a relationship with them.
Councilmember McNaboe,questioned what would be done if a family is failing to keep up
to standards,what would happen.
Mary Rose, responded that they will meet with them and work out a solution. 0
Councilmember McNaboe questioned if they have ever been in a position to remove a
family.
Mga Rose, stated that they have come close but no.
Mayor Pro Tern Lee Ann Garcia,questioned what type of philosophy Habitat for Humanity
has in their efforts to making the families feel a part of the already established
neighborhoods.
Mary Rose,responded that they reach out to the neighbors so that they can get acquainted
with the volunteers and invite them to get involved.
CC-2011-41 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER MCNABOE, SECOND BY
COUNCILMEMBER HAYS, CARRIED 5-0,to adopt a Resolution exempting the
application of California Health and Safety Code Section 33433 to Small Housing
Projects.
CRA-2011-33 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER MCNABOE, SECOND BY AGENCY
MEMBER SANDOVAL, CARRIED 5-0,to adopt a Resolution approving the Sale
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
May 24,2011
Page 5
of 12569 Michigan Street to Habitat for Humanity San Bernardino Area, Inc. For
$1.00 to construct two affordable residences.
CRA-2011-34 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER SANDOVAL, SECOND BY AGENCY
MEMBER HAYS, CARRIED 5-0,to approve a Purchase and Sale Agreement,and
Grant Deed and Affordability Covenant for Signature by the Chairman.
Chairman Stanckiewitz adjourned the Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting at 7:10 p.m.,
until the next CRA/City Council Meeting that is scheduled to be held on Thursday, May 12, 2011
at 5:00 p.m.
SECRETARY of the Community Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Grand Terrace
CHAIRMAN of the Community Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Grand Terrace
CALIFORNIA AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 14, 2011 Council Item ( ) CRA Item ( X )
TITLE: Agency Purchase of a 14.22 acre parcel in the 21800 block
of Van Buren Street, Assessoes Parcel Number 1167-151-22
for$1,393,702.00
PRESENTED BY: Joyce Powers, Community and Economic Development
Director
RECOMMENDATION: 1. Approve the attached Purchase and Sale Agreement and
Escrow Instructions for the acquisition of APN 1167-151-22
for signature by the Chairman.
2. Appropriate $1,405,000.00 from the pending 2011 B
(taxable) Redevelopment bond proceeds to a project
account to fund the acquisition and associated costs.
3. Authorize the Executive Director to execute all
documents required to complete the Agencys due diligence
and the acquisition.
BACKGROUND:
On May 12, 2011, staff discussed with the Agency the possible acquisition of property
listed for sale within the southwestern area of the City, east of and adjacent to 1-215,
between Van Buren and DeBer y Streets. During the closed session property
negotiation meeting, the Agency Board authorized staff to make an offer to purchase a
14.22 acre parcel in the 21800 block of Van Buren Street. The parcel, APN 1167-151-
22, is adjacent to other parcels owned by the Agency as depicted on Attachment 1, an
area map.
The Agency has assembled 38.51 acres within this area for economic development
purposes, and this acquisition would increase the Agencys holdings in the area to 52.73
acres for a project of regional interest. Property assembly and redevelopment of land in
partnership with private enterprise are stated goals of the Redevelopment Plan.
DISCUSSION:
On May 19, 2011, staff sent a written offer to the property owner to purchase the subject
property for $2.25 per square foot or $1,393,702.00. The offer was accepted on May
CRA AGENDA ITEM NO.2
1
25, 2011. The recommended purchase price is below the negotiation amount
previously authorized by the Agency Board.
A Purchase and Sale Agreement and Escrow Instructions (Agreement-Attachment 2)
has since been prepared and executed by persons authorized to sign for the owners.
The 'Sellef is comprised of an investment partnership and two trusts, and due to the
nature of the ownership, the Agreement (Section 4.7d) allowed the Seller two business
days to obtain ballots from the membership approving the sale. This condition has
since been met.
The recommended source of funding for the purchase, including closing costs, is the
pending proceeds from the 2011 B Redevelopment bonds, which will be received by the
Agency on or about June 23, 2011. The Agencys bonds received an"A'rating on June
2, 2011, and the 2011 B taxable bond proceeds will be approximately $5 million. Staff
recommends that the Chairman execute the Agreement on or after the bond closing
date.
The escrow period is 35 days after opening unless extended by mutual agreement of
the parties. During the escrow period, staff would complete a new Phase i
Environmental Site Assessment. The Seller provided a 2007 Phase 1, which states no
obvious evidence of recognized environmental conditions were identified, and that no
further investigation is recommended.
The purchase of this property will create an attractive 52.38 acre site with freeway
visibility to attract commercial services to our community.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The purchase price and all associated costs, including the Phase 1 and escrow closing
costs, will not exceed $1,405,000, which would be funded with the proceeds of the
Agencis 2011 B bond issue. Any funds not used will be applied toward future projects.
Respectfully submitted:
J ce Powers
Community and Economic Development Director
Manager Approval:
Betsy . Adams, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Map of Agency-owned parcels and proposed parcel
2. Purchase and Sale Agreement and Escrow Instructions
47W W'T' -4;1030A ARO
Attachment No. 1
Map of Agency Parcels and Proposed Parcel
0
77
i:.r I r, .F.r,- ;5,,�y�7,>� itY'_ �.� lid •r> ,' F� ^� -_4 r. ' ax 'oOipOwl.mac_ v•'
ff �� 1• ', _,1�.�av►t�� ��T - �•.��.,:.bac,"�� ` 3��•��:c'...1.-`;'. .,i •• d +l:ti.:i
-' i •[� -�'� � � .,r l � i/tt �T`� y:: RDA
J Properties
,, .`' _ 'i�• [:�, Ir'���1' }f� .�.�H�r-,�
, Owned 1 1 r x:.4 - i .�.5. I!'-'1 �a:- -t�;,'�Zltfr''
- r
�.t � •'t,;w�'i. ! Y�,.• �r f•'[�
•�t. 'r� r1 r ';;gs�1.,f' �Y .#' --r,.� .fit. •` .�U7•. ��n'..,,.�• t., i•
..['
if�. + '� L1_'t l i .�, /. .� ''• r• J 4i^ '.�.7 r'• �.: -i r•''� r ':_1 Y1 r, J
r }�J<. ." t r. ,� .� - ''�- ,� ts.��.irJ" r. :, �:.;4 Ft'r. "��Y '.�. i _ •"' + 4 • ti
�' Am r•j�.r
# ;1 ,�,�F�t'p: «r� .Z;I. ~..�'-�" �_ f- ��,c�. - .. _ w , ' i .. 'C.3/:�' � - may, T .•. _.� S 1�;•
lop
i' .p:.i �rfiL 1' /.: r M1 J4 , `L _ tt, w+r, .Q�-_Yw l.. ,.•t,t
.�,r� �:' 'S�{r' � :..:�' - .-� � .��r�•� � 7a k' I�rri>6SS�1 L.=+`.a }'tr..'..r..^�:_'�-. .�a,,a ,.y •� ��, y ,.,� 'I' r�
+ i � i•rC,� =$$; �,] .T':�tSr .r.t r:�.. f�ll� .mil ��}?..�.�Y'v�1, 'a.. .aF' ri ;�. -�•.�r• �. �Ma !1'i
i..+' , i�' Y •�i•� y J r+• :'A•. tSS'i��F`e ru..T.: .: _ p,� 1 }..,,aa- .�',r! 13 a �.
r' 1 •� ,y h. f 5;;x• �f )r �. •: -. .+. - i � DI•c`[� ii,..` ., ..'
•[� I i _�- r :Y � - ;t4••:� ry �• .F:.t.•+d r'T, �.r .._._. ,_ J tit'JFr r1 i
%;t;f'" q ' � `il '•I i ,.,f1 �, e." P` ``" .,.�.c,.:_._._� qu�.i'ili� l', .., ,'•: r•' _`�Yy.f5 `'..'`_.'�•'r"r•• �;`y2:,'�'.t�f�;i
�' i��'f :4f •'•'r �, st�.:�ji' '�;- 'Vyr'`'' "7-��.�rily.ti���'^` L"{'1J'•r� �.'�(,�'�"�y'1�'`�
b.►i `� '�f�i' �f �' '� �If:i�*`�a� '- - L�,•w 7�
►:hyry��i1�._��{:v•: t►—' S..:J�.S:t r
` 1 J" ' }a,4 a;l 2 •;�-� 1{ •-
.l - ' x r.T -•Y _. .. Y' 1 r•1`J({y.f::•: •��"i Witt'.
,� -i" , .ILL• •r! i !` �. f 3 • +�k' ..' ' i4- �y^-:r.t t��~ � '"-.��r+ hY Z.
-�rf, sl' `��-��;�','.i, ""j _.i..-'..` �.v,..•*.?: X y?`ti'..'� ��I�•!�r''i�'��'..r-.��'
::fir' � F �1. -"�,-r-��.'�reis�Pi ,�• �� _ _ F. "�'..,; . G4ilS .'� 1
L ,+fl F..� fs.S..+���� .i!x.�'�7' .Y�`�`�•��C•�`YFIC�ZVi3 ti•.-,_ r•`!1' .wA
J �• j ': uii .i.!+• . r-',�'_jL� r, •�" 1ji•;�;�4Y }. ��',Y. '=�E:...
r y SS LL
t.; US '.{'r� 4sE+bh- grt':75%� .�.l.i' 1 ^'fi -'.a�•crRTt 10m;97
JI
J-
•}Y r I�-. . �i Tr1' p-i it1, l'z , V1'-':r�,w�0ml�
F J -ram r r 1 •.r r_ t1 fir`
�tii a� Ck 1 �+` � __.J S E rs •i_711:rJ.._��t'w <y�r/ - _'�•s..�'2���• .,� '�F�
Y,y.yr•+A '!" I S.,f .;a r'R'i -a i 1,, ti 'k t' .w '�1 ' "'���Fql d _•i.
'i,,, '' , lx'� - CS ii• ,'nC:x�1
Legend
RDA
erties
.; ' .. rx�r Tr _ '�"a�l li•,.�s�r-..�L._ a i � �",. ` ' .�1 T�Sr ."ti �. .A"ti.� ,j'� a�
�4'� r'�t �,'J'�1(H 'vi'•-i���' -.. .-, +•�jL rK Ir~� 'J •�:'. '11�� .r . ��' ,. - �.3.•i ia.. 1 Property
I'
tv; Proposed
�f� �. ', i•- '� l`; \
Y. ({•CF� �:7,+1� tia� I�t ' .i 1,. •rrra r•,w!• -
Attachment No. 2
O Purchase and Sate Agreement
and Escrow Instructions
0
PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND
ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS
This Purchase and Sale Agreement and Escrow Instructions("A augg"),dated this day of rune,
2011,is entered into by and between the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace, on
one hand("Buyer"),and Michigan Avenue Grand Terrace Investments, LLC, Little Penguin, LLC,The Nord
Family Trust established May 11, 1987, and The Robert L.Wells Trust dated April 4, 1991, ("Seller").
RECITALS
A. Seller is the owner of that certain real property("Seller's Prap�t�'or"P ') consisting of
approximately 14.22 acres,more particularly descdbcd as APN 1167-151-22 and attached hereto as Exhibit
.&A„
B. Buyer is a public entity with the power to acquire real and personal property for public uses and
purposes. Buyer is engaged in property acquisition that shall be deemed to be for a public purpose for purposes
of this Agreement
C. As a consequence of the foregoing, Buyer has agreed to purchase Seller's Property and Seller has
agreed to convey it to Buyer pursuant to the following terms and conditions:
AGREEMENT
ARTICLE I
1.1 Sale and Purchase. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Seller agrees
to sell the Property to Buyer and Buyer agrees to purchase the Property from Seller.
1.2 Purchase Price. The total purchase price for the Property shall be One Million Three Hundred
Ninety-Three Thousand Seven Hundred Two Dollars(SI,393,702.00),(the"Purchase Price").
1.3 Payment by Buyr . The Purchase Price shall be paid at the Close of Escrow.
1.4 Condition of Title. At Closing,Seller shall convey to Buyer good and marketable title in fee
simple to the Property subject only to all easements,restrictions,or covenants of record which do not interfere
with the use of the Property for the purposes,including,without limitation,current,non-delinquent real
property taxes(the"Permitted Exceptions").
ARTICLE II
REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES
2.1 Representations and Warranties of Seller True and Correct. Seller hereby represents and
warrants to Buyer that the following facts are true and correct as of the date hereof. The truth and accuracy of
the following representations and warranties shall constitute a condition precedent to the Close of Escrow for
the benefit of Buyer. These representations and warranties shall survive the Close of Escrow and the recording
of the Grant Deed and shall not be deemed merged into the Grant Deed upon its recordation.
i
i
(a) Power and Authority. Subject to the condition set forth in section 4. 7(d), Seller has the
legal power, right and authority to enter into this Agreement and the instruments,referenced herein, and to
consummate the transactions contemplated hereby. The individuals executing this Agreement and the
instruments referenced herein on behalf of the Seller have the legal power,right and actual authority to bind
Seller to the terms and conditions hereof and thereof Furthermore, Seller warrants that it has good and
marketable title to the Property.
(b) R uisite Action. Subject to the condition set forth in section 4. 7(d), all requisite action
has been taken by Seller in connection with the entering into of this Agreement,the instruments referenced
herein, and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby.
(c) Validi This Agreement and all documents required hereby to be executed by Seller are
and shall be valid, legally binding obligations of and enforceable against Seller in accordance with their terms
subject only to applicable bankruptcy, insolvency,reorganization,moratorium or similar laws or equitable
principles affecting or limiting the rights of contracting parties generally. Neither the execution and delivery of
this Agreement and documents referenced herein,nor the consummation of the transactions contemplated
herein,conflict with or result in the material breach of any terms or provisions of any contract,loan, or other
agreement or instrument to which Seller is a party or affecting the Property. All consents,approvals and
authorizations necessary for the execution of this Agreement and the consummation of the transactions
contemplated herein by Seller have been or will be obtained Seller has not sold,conveyed or entered into any
contract for the sale of all or any portion of the Property or any rights incident thereto,nor do there exist any
rights of first refusal or options to purchase the Property or any rights incident thereto.
(d) Recitals. The information contained in the Recitals is true and correct.
(e) Lawsuits and Claims. To Seller's actual knowledge,without any duty of inquiry or
O investigation,there are no pending actions,lawsuits,claims or judicial,municipal or administrative proceedings
affecting all or any portion of the Property or in which Seller is a party by reason of Seller's ownership of the
Property. To Seller's knowledge, there are no threatened or contemplated actions,lawsuits, claims or
proceedings nor the existence of any facts which might give rise to such actions,lawsuits,claims or
proceedings. During the Escrow period, Seller will not commence or defend any action with respect to the
Property except upon such terms as are mutually acceptable to Seller and Buyer.
(f) Condition of Propert . Seller has not received notice of any violation of applicable
governmental regulations relating to the Property, any existing or contemplated plan to widen or modify any
street or highway contiguous to the Property(other than the Grading and Improvements contemplated by this
Agreement)or any other plan,study or effort of any applicable governmental authorities relating to the
Property.
(g) Taxes and Assessments. Seller has provided to Buyer all relevant information in its
possession concerning real property taxes and any special assessments or bonds which may be levied against the
Property as a result of any existing public improvements or work, activities or improvements done to the
Property by Seller.
(h) Hazardous Materials. To Seller's actual knowledge, without any duty of inquiry or
investigation, all operations or activities upon,or use or occupancy of the Property by Seller or any current
occupant or user thereof are in compliance with all state, federal and local laws and regulations governing or in
2
7
any way relating to the generation,handling,manufacturing, treatment,storage,use,transportation, spillage,
leakage,dumping,discharge or disposal(whether accidental or intentional)of any toxic or hazardous
substances,materials or wastes,including,without limitation, any hazardous material (as such terms are
commonly defined or employed in accordance with applicable federal, state or local laws,codes, ordinances,
rules and regulations). To the Seller's actual knowledge,without any duty of inquiry or investigation,there is
not present upon the Property,or on any portion thereof underground storage tanks,any hazardous material or
any structures,fixtures,equipment or other objects or materials containing any hazardous material in violation
of any applicable environmental law.
(i) Leases and Contracts. To Seller's knowledge,there are no oral or written leases,
subleases,licenses, occupancies,or tenancies in effect pertaining to the Property, and no persons or entities
occupy or have the right to occupy or use all or any portion of the Property. To Seller's knowledge, except as
disclosed by Seller to Buyer,there are no service or maintenance contracts,warranties,guarantees,bonds,
insurance policies or other agreements(whether oral or written)which will affect or be obligations of Buyer or
the Property after the Close of Escrow. At the Close of Escrow,Seller shall deliver possession of the Property
to Buyer free of actual occupancy and any right of occupancy by the party.
6) Chancres. Seller shall promptly notify Buyer of any material, adverse change in any
condition with respect to the Property or of any event or circumstance which makes any representation of
warranty of Seller under this Agreement untrue or any covenant of Buyer under this Agreement incapable or
less likely of being performed, it being understood that Seller's obligation to provide notice to Buyer shall in no
way relieve Seller of any liability for a breach by Seller of any of its representations,warranties or covenants
under this Agreement.
(k) Gen"—Representation. No representation,warranty or statement of Seller in this
Agreement or in any document,certificate of schedule prepared by Seller and to be furnished to Buyer pursuant
to the terms of this Agreement contains any untrue statement of material fact.
Except for the representations and warrantees explicitly set forth above,Buyer hereby releases Seller,
Seller's affiliates,officers, directors,partners, employees,and agents,and their respective heirs, successors,
personal representatives and assigns,from and against any and all claims which Buyer may have and which
arise out of or are in any way connected with this Agreement and the Property,including,without limitation,
every physical and environmental condition of the Property. BUYER EXPRESSLY WAIVES ITS RIGHTS
GRANTED UNDER CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE SECTION 1542 AND UNDER ANY PROVISION OF
LAW THAT PROVIDES A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS THAT BUYER
DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN ITS FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE
RELEASE,WHICH IF KNOWN BY IT MUST HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED ITS AGREEMENT TO
RELEASE SELLER. BUYER HEREBY AGREES,REPRESENTS AND WARRANTS THAT BUYER
REALIZES AND ACKNOWLEDGES THAT FACTUAL MATTERS NOW UNKNOWN TO BUYER MAY
HAVE GIVEN OR MAY HEREAFTER GIVE RISE TO CLAIMS WHICH ARE PRESENTLY UNKNOWN,
UNANTICIPATED AND UNSUSPECTED, AND BUYER FURTHER AGREES, REPRESENTS AND
WARRANTS THAT THE WAIVERS AND RELEASES HEREIN HAVE BEEN NEGOTIATED AND
AGREED UPON IN LIGHT OF THAT REALIZATION,AND THAT BUYER NEVERTHELESS HEREBY
INTENDS TO RELEASE, DISCHARGE AND ACQUIT SELLER FROM ANY SUCH UNKNOWN
CLAIMS,AND THAT SUCH WAIVERS AND RELEASES FORM A MATERIAL PORTION OF THE
CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO SELLER BY BUYER IN EXCHANGE FOR SELLER'S PERFORMANCE
UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. BUYER HAS CONSULTED WITH LEGAL COUNSEL CONCERNING
3
THE EFFECTS OF THIS WAIVER AND RELEASE ON BUYER'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES RELATED
TO THE PROPERTY.
Initials: Buyer. Seller.
2.2 RepresentatioNgf Buyer. Buyer is validly existing as a California Community Redevelopment
Agency and has performed all acts and obtained all approvals and consents,in each case as necessary to offer to
purchase and to purchase the Property. Buyer has the full authority and power to comply with all of its
obligations set forth in this Agreement.
ARTICLE III
COVENANTS OF SELLER AND BUYER AND INSPECTION PERIOD
3.1 License to Enter. Seller hereby agrees that Buyer and/or its agents,representatives,contractors
and subcontractors may, following the Opening Date and prior to the Closing Date, conduct its own reasonable
engineering studies, environmental assessment,soil and compaction tests and other tests and studies on the
Property provided that(i) such activities do not impair the drainage of the Property, and(ii) Buyer shall be
responsible for any damage caused thereby to the Property. Buyer shall be responsible for any liability, cost,
claim,damage or injury caused by such entry and shall keep the Property free of any and all liens arising
therefrom. Buyer shall indemnify and hold Seller harmless and defend Seiler from and against such liability,
loss,judgment,cost,claim,damage or injury,including but not limited to attorneys' fees and costs, arising out
of or in connection with entry or testing on the Property by Buyer or its agents,representatives, contractors or
subcontractors.
3.2 Inspection Review Period. Buyer shall have a period of thirty(30)days from the
opening of Escrow, which shall mean the date on which Buyer&Seller execute a Contract for Sale and
Purchase,to approve at its sole discretion,the following,which shall be provided by
Seller to Buyer within ten(10)days from opening of escrow, and include,but not be limited to:
1) Preliminary Title Report and related documents.
2) Plat Map
3) Hazardous Substance Condition report
4) Size and description of the property.
5) ALTA Survey.
6) Geotechnical Report, if any.
Additionally,any or all items requested above that are in the Seller's possession shall be
submitted to Buyer for its review. Seller shall also deliver reliance letters to Buyer from each of the consultants
who have produced the Third Party reports referenced above.
3.3Progeriy Condition. Buyer shall inspect the Property during the Inspection Review Period. Should
Buyer determine that there are any defects; Seller shall at its option within Five(5)business days provide a
credit to the purchase price in an amount sufficient to repair the defects or advise Buyer that no credit will be
4
9
provided. If Seller advises Buyer that no credit will be provided,Buyer may give written notice of termination
of escrow within Five(5)business days,in which case the Deposit shall be returned to Buyer. If no notice of
termination of escrow is given by Buyer,Buyer shall be deemed to have waived defects identified by Buyer.
This acquisition is subject to,and conditioned upon,acceptable soil conditions of the absence of toxic or
hazardous substances or any other kind of soil or water contamination. Buyers are hereby grant a right-of-entry
for the purpose of conducting any necessary soils,toxic and hazardous substances investigations of the property
at the expense of the Buyer.
To the extent that the notice yeriods in this sec0ou 3.3 extend beyond the Inspection Review Period,
the Inspection Review Period shall be extended to the last day of the notice periods and the close of escrow
shall be extended to Five(5)days after the expiration of the Inspection Review Period.
Thereafter,the Property will be sold"As is"with Seller making no additional representations or
warranties concerning the Property.
ARTICLE IV
ESCROW
4.1 Agreement to Constitute Escrow Instruction. This Agreement together with any General
Provisions of Escrow Holder(the"General Provisions") collectively shall constitute escrow instructions and a
copy hereof shall be deposited with Escrow Holder for this purpose. In the event of any inconsistency between
the terms of the General Provisions and this Agreement,the provisions of this Agreement shall prevail to the
extent of any such inconsistency.
4.2 Escrow Holder. The escrow(the"Escrow") shall be First American Title and Escrow or other
escrow company upon mutual agreement of the Parties. 0
4.3 QMing of Escrow. Escrow shall open on the date on which a copy of this Agreement,properly
executed by the parties hereto,has been deposited with Escrow Holder(the"Oppnin¢of Escrow"), which copy
the parties hereto agree shall be delivered to Escrow Holder immediately following execution. Escrow Holder
shall notify the parties immediately upon receipt of a copy of this Agreement as so executed as to the date of the
Opening of Escrow.
4.4 Close of Escrow. The Closing shall occur not later than thirty-five(35)days after Opening of
Escrow (the"Scheduled Closing Date"),unless extended by mutual written agreement of the parties or pursuant
to section 3.3, above. For purposes of this Agreement,the terms"Closing Date"and the"Close of Escrow"
mean the date on which the Closing occurs and the term"O_Qs_i_njr means the recordation of the Grant Deed.
4.5 Certain Obligations of Buyer.
(a) In addition to any other obligations contained in this Agreement, Buyer shall have
deposited the Deposit into Escrow as required pursuant to Section 1.3 or before the time set forth in such
Section.
(b) Not later than one(1)business day prior to the Scheduled Closing Date, Buyer shall
deposit into Escrow:
5
1(
(i) The total Purchase Price, less the Deposit, as provided in Section 1.3, in cash or
by wire transfer.
(ii) All other sums and documents required by Escrow Holder to be deposited by
Buyer to carry out this Escrow.
4.6 li a 'on'ons of Sell . In addition to any obligations contained in this Agreement, not
later than one(1)business day prior to the Scheduled Closing Date, Seller shall deposit with Escrow Holder:
(a) A grant deed in the Title Company's usual form, duly executed,acknowledged and in
recordable form conveying Seller's interests in the Property to Buyer(the" rant Deed').
(b) All other sums and documents required by Escrow Holder to be deposited by Seller to
carry out this Escrow.
4.7 Conditions to Seller's Obligation to Sell. Seller's obligation to sell the Property is expressly
conditioned upon each of the following:
(a) Buyer shall have deposited with Escrow Holder all sums and documents required
pursuant to Section 4.5.
(b) Buyer shall have timely performed each obligation and covenant of Buyer required
pursuant to this Agreement.
(c) All representations and warranties of Buyer hereunder are materially true and correct.
(d) Within two(2)business days of the execution of this Agreement, Seller will submit the
terms of the Agreement to its members("Members")along with a ballot for the Members to approve or
disapprove the Agreement in writing. Seller's obligation to perform under this Agreement is contingent on
receiving the ballots approving the Agreement from Members comprising a majority interest of Seiler
4.8 Conditions to Buyer's Obligation to Buy. Buyer's obligation to buy the Property is expressly
conditioned upon each of the following:
(a) Seller shall have deposited with Escrow Holder all sums and documents required
pursuant to Section 4.6.
(b) Seller shall have timely performed each obligation and covenant of Seller required
pursuant to this Agreement.
(c) Escrow Holder holds for issuance the Title Policy(as hereinafter defined).
(d) All representations and warranties of Seller hereunder are materially true and correct.
(e) No material adverse change shall have occurred to the condition of the Property or the
improvements thereon.
4.9 Title Policv. Escrow Holder is hereby instructed to deliver to Buyer through Escrow a Standard
ALTA owner's policy of title insurance from Chicago Title Insurance Company with regional exceptions dated
6
1 �
the date and time of Closing with liability in the amount of the Purchase Price(the"Title Policy"). The Title
Policy shall insure Buyer(or its nominee) as owner of good,marketable and indefeasible fee title to the
Property subject only to(i)the standard printed title company exceptions and(ii)the Permitted Exceptions and
any other exceptions approved by or created by Buyer.
4.10 Recordation of ft Grant Deed and Delivefy.gf_F_u_n_d_s. Upon receipt of the documents and sums
described in this Article IV,Escrow Holder shall cause the Grant Deed to be recorded(with documentary
transfer tax information to be affixed after recordation)in the office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino
County,California,and shall deliver the proceeds of the Escrow less appropriate charges to Seller. A
conformed copy of the recorded Grant Deed shall be delivered to Buyer immediately following the Closing. All
sums to be disbursed to Seller by Escrow Holder shall be by certified or cashiers check of Escrow Holder or by
wire transfer if Escrow Holder is so advised by Seller.
(a) Prorations. Real property taxes and any other assessment payment,shall be prorated as of
Close of Escrow. The parties acknowledge that Buyer is exempt from real property taxes.
(b) Costs of Escrow.
(i) Seller shall pay one-half(1/2)of the Escrow fee,and cost of a CLTA standard
coverage title policy,together with all documentary transfer tax.
(ii) Buyer shall pay all costs not described as Seller's costs in Section 4.10(b)(i).
4.11 Broker's Commission. Buyer represents that it was not represented by a broker and will
indemnify Seller from any claims,damage,or expense for any and all commission fees.
4.12 Defaul Time is of the essence in this Agreement and if Buyer or Seller(the"Defaulting Part 10
fails to deposit any of the amounts due pursuant to this Agreement,or to perform any other act when due,then
the other party(the"Non-Defaulting Party")may initiate any of its rights under this Agreement,in law or in
equity by notice in writing to the Defaulting Party and Escrow Holder. Should Buyer default, Seller shall be
entitled to retain Buyer's deposit as liquidated damages. If the Defaulting Party has not fully cured the default
within seven(7)calendar days after receipt of said notice by the Defaulting Party, Escrow Holder may be
instructed by the Non-Defaulting Party to cancel this Escrow and the Non-Defaulting Party shall thereupon be
released from its obligations under this Agreement.
4.13 Buyer's Remedies. Buyer and Seller agree that if the sale contemplated by this Agreement is not
completed as herein provided solely by reason of any material default of Seller,Buyer shall have the right to
pursue any remedy available at law or in equity for such default of Seller, including,without limitation,the
specific performance of this Agreement.
4.14 Statement of Bu er and Seller Concerning Ex to Terms Buyer and Seller acknowledge that
the consummation of the Escrow is contingent upon compliance with some or all of the executory terms and
provisions this Agreement and that the parties hereto are the sole persons or entities entitled and authorized to
determine whether all executory terms and provisions required to be performed prior to the close of Escrow
have been satisfied or deemed satisfied prior to the close of Escrow. Accordingly,prior to the Scheduled
Closing Date, Buyer and Seller shall each deposit with Escrow Holder a written statement acknowledging that
all executory terms and provisions of this Agreement, insofar as the same relate to each party respectively and
7
1 ;
any obligation of Escrow Holder relating thereto,have been satisfied,deemed satisfied or waived. Deposit of
such statement with Escrow Holder shall constitute each party's authorization to close Escrow.
4.15 Termination of Agreement. In the case of termination of this Agreement in accordance with its
terms and cancellation of the Escrow, all documents and funds (together with any interest accrued thereon)
previously deposited into the Escrow shall be promptly returned to the depositing party by the person or entity
then holding such documents and funds,and all rights and obligations of the parties existing hereunder shall
thereafter terminate and be of no further force and effect except for the indemnification of Buyer in Recital B,
and in Sections 3.1, and 4.11,all of which shall survive the termination of this Agreement and except as
provided in Section 4.6.
4.16 Escrow Cancellation Charges. In the event that this Escrow shall fail to close by reason of the
default of either party hereunder,the defaulting party shall be liable for all Escrow cancellation charges. In the
event that the Escrow shall fail to close for any other reason,each party shall be liable for one-half(1/2) of all
Escrow cancellation charges.
4.17 Delay in Closing: Authority to Close. If Escrow Holder cannot close the Escrow on or before the
Scheduled Closing Date,it will,nevertheless, close the same when all conditions have been satisfied or waived,
notwithstanding that one or more of such conditions has not been timely performed, unless after the Scheduled
Closing Date and prior to the close of the Escrow, Escrow Holder receives a written notice to terminate the
Escrow and this Agreement from a party who, at the time such notice is delivered, is not in default hereunder.
The exercise of such right, and the return of moneys and documents, shall not affect the right of the permitted in
this Agreement for the other party's breach of this Agreement. In addition, the giving of such notice, the failure
to object to termination of the Escrow or the return of moneys and documents shall not affect the right of the
other party to pursue other remedies permitted hereunder for the breach of the party who gives such notice.
O ARTICLE V
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
5.1 incorporation of Exhibits. All exhibits attached hereto and referred to herein are incorporated in
this Agreement as though fully set forth herein.
5.2 AttornW' Fees. In any legal proceeding between Buyer and Seller seeking enforcement of or
attempting to construe any of the terms and provisions of this Agreement,or in connection with any of the
property described herein,including,without limitation,insolvency,bankruptcy, arbitration, declaratory relief
or other litigation,the prevailing party in such action shall be awarded,in addition to damages,injunctive or
other relief,its reasonable costs and expenses,including,without limitation,service of process, filing fees, court
and court reporter costs, investigation costs,expert witness fees and the cost of any bonds, and reasonable
attorneys' fee.
5.3 Notices. All notices required or permitted by this Agreement shall be in writing and may be
delivered in person(by hand delivery or professional messenger service) to either party or may be sent by
registered or certified mail,with postage prepaid,return receipt requested or delivered by Express Mail of the
U.S. Postal Service or Federal Express or any other courier service guaranteeing overnight delivery, charges
prepaid, addressed as follows:
13
If to Buyer at:
Community Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Grand Terrace
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace,CA 92324 O
Attn: City Clerk
If to Seller at:
Michigan Avenue Grand Terrace Investments, LLC
C/o Point Center Financial, Inc.
Attn: V. Alan Bergfeld,Esq.; General Counsel
7 Argonaut
Aliso Viejo,CA 92656
If to Escrow Holder at: 0
Any such notice sent by registered or certified mail,return receipt requested, shall be deemed to have
been duly given and received seventy-two(72)hours after the same is so addressed and mailed in Los Angeles,
Orange, San Bernardino or Riverside Counties with postage prepaid Notices delivered by overnight service
shall be deemed to have been given twenty-four(24)hours after delivery of the same, charges prepaid,to the
U.S.Postal Service or private courier. Any notice or other document sent by any other manner shall be
effective only upon actual receipt thereof. Any party may change its address for purposes of this Section by
giving notice to the other party and to Escrow Holder as herein provided.
5.4 Successors and AssigN This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of
each of the parties hereto and their respective successors and permitted assigns.
5.5 Assi_g�nment_. This Agreement may not be assigned by either party without the express written
consent of the other party first had and obtained. Except as provided in the preceding sentence,any assignment
of delegation of rights,duties or obligations hereunder made without the prior written consent of the other party
_-r parties hereto shall be void and of no effect. No such assignment shall be deemed to relieve the assigning
party from any liability or responsibility hereunder.
9
1
5.6 Relationship of Parties. The relationship of the parties to this Agreement shall be solely that of
Buyer and Seller,and nothing herein contained shall be construed otherwise.
5.7 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by, interpreted under,and construed and
enforced in accordance with the internal laws of the State of California.
5.8 Entire Agreement: Amendment. This Agreement contains all of the agreements of the parties
hereto with respect to the matters contained herein and no prior or contemporaneous agreement or
understanding,oral or written, pertaining to any such matters shall be effective for any purpose. No provision
of this Agreement may be modified,waived,amended or added to except if in writing and signed by the party
against which the enforcement of such modification,waiver,amendment or addition is or may be sought.
5.9 Pronouns. All pronouns and any variations thereof shall be deemed to refer to the masculine,
feminine or neuter, singular or plural,as the identity of the parties may require.
5.10 Headings. The headings of this Agreement are for purposes of reference only and shall not limit
or define the meaning of the provisions of this Agreement.
5.11 Sevembilily. If any paragraph, section,sentence,clause or phrase contained in this Agreement
shall become illegal,null or void,against public policy,or otherwise unenforceable,for any reason, or shall be
held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal,null or void,against public policy,or otherwise
unenforceable,the remaining paragraphs, sections, sentences, clauses or phrases contained in this Agreement
shall not be affected thereby.
5.12 Waiver. The waiver of any breach of any provision hereunder by Buyer or Seller shall not be
deemed to be a waiver of any preceding or subsequent breach hereunder. No failure or delay of any party in the
exercise of any right given hereunder shall constitute a waiver thereof nor shall any partial exercise of any right
preclude further exercise thereof.
5.13 Further Assurances. Seller and Buyer each agree to do such further acts and things and to
execute and deliver such additional agreements and instruments as the other may reasonably require to
consummate, evidence or confirm the sale or any other agreement contained herein in the manner contemplated
hereby.
5.14 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts,each of which
shall be an original but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
5.15 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement as to all dates and time periods set
forth herein.
5.16 Eminent Domain Proceedings. Seller shall promptly notify Buyer of any condemnation
proceeding commenced prior to the Close of Escrow. If any such proceeding relates to or may result in the loss
of any material portion of the Property, Seller or Buyer may,at its option,elect either to(i)terminate this
Agreement, in which event all funds deposited into Escrow by Buyer or released to Seller shall be returned to
Buyer,all instruments shall be returned to the respective parties who deposited the same, and neither party shall
have any further rights or obligations hereunder except as provided in Section 4.15, or(ii)continue the
Agreement in effect, in which event upon the Close of Escrow, Buyer shall be entitled to any compensation,
awards, or other payments or relief resulting from such casualty or condemnation proceeding.
10
15
5.17 Recitals. The provisions of the recitals of this Agreement shall constitute operative and
enforceable provisions of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,this Agreement has been executed by the parties on the dates set forth under
their respective signatures below,notwithstanding that this Agreement is dated for convenience and reference as
of the date and year first written above.
BUYER: SELLER:
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT Michigan Avenue Grand Terrace Investments,
AGENCY CITY OF GRAND TERRACE LLC 0
BY:P ' t Center inanci ,Inc.,its Manager
By:
Chairperson
By:
Dated: June �2011 as J.Harke Presides
The Nord Family Trust May 11,1987
By:Jon A.Nord and Mary J.Nord,Trustees
The Robert L. Wells Trust dated April 4, 1991
By: Robert L. Wells,Trustee
Dated:June,2011
Approved as to Form:
John R. Harper,City Attorney
EXHMI T"A"
APN: 1167-151-22
ll
1�
Jun 06 11 10,068 Nord 949-715-7W p.1
5.17 Reciggs. The provisions of the recitals of this Agreement dMU constitute operative and
enforceable provisions of this Agreement-
,Iv W--NEss WHREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the parties on the dates set forth under
their respective signatures below,notwithstanding that this Agreement is dated for convenience and reference as
of the date and year first written above.
BUYER: SELLER:
OCOMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT Michigan Avenue Grand Terrace Investments,
AGENCY CITY OF GRAND TERRACE BY point Center Financial,Inc.,its Manager
By.
Chairperson
Dated:June . 2011 Dan J. Harkey,President
The Nord Family Trust May 11,1987
By:Jon A.Nord and Mary J.Nord, Trustees
/By: r,r
A.Nord,Tr uste�c
OMary J.Ndrdyrrustce
Dated:June 2011
The Robert L.Wells Trust dated April 4, 1991
By. Robert L.Wells,Trustee
By:
Robert L. Wells,Trustee
Dated: June,2011
Approved as to Form:
John R.Harper,City Attorney
ll
17
5.17 wit d3 The Provisions 4f the recitals of this Agent shall constitute operative and
awe provisions of this Agreement
IN WTrNESS WHEREOF,this Agreement mett has been ameauted by the patties on the dates set forth udder
their sipattiu+es below,notwithstanding that this Agteement is dated for convenience and mfere nde as
aid yew first written above.
�= SELLER:
REDEVELOPMENT Michigan Avenue(band Terrace Investinants,
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE LLC
BY:Point Center Pinancisl,lnc.,its Manager
aY
nook Jape 2011 Dan J.Harkey,President
The Nord Family Trost May 11,1987
By.Jou A.Nord and Mary J.Nozd,Tmmtee s
By:
Jon A.No4 Trustee
By:
Mary J.Nand,Thufte
Dated:Junes 2011 O
The Robert L..Wahs.Trust dated April 4, 1991
By. Robert L.W
✓By;
rrustae
Dated:JuAL.-L 2011
Appmwed as to Form:
JoWL Sape r,City Attorney
1�
EXHIBIT "A"
(Legal Description)
Real property in the County of San Bernardino,State of California,described as follows:
All that certain Real property situated in the County of San Bernardino, State of California,
described as follows:
Parcel 1:
Lot 26 and that portion of Lot 25 lying East of the right of way of Riverside Water Company's
Canal, Section 5, Township 2 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the
County of San Bernardino, State of California, according to Map showing land of the East
Riverside Land Company, as per Plat recorded in Book 6 of Maps, Page 44, Records of said
County.
Except that portion of Lot 25 granted to the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, a
body corporate and politic recorded December 21, 1964 in Book 6297, Page 333, of Official
Records.
Also excepting therefrom those two parcels conveyed to the City of Riverside, a Municipal
Corporation, by deed recorded February 10, 1992 as instrument No. 92-047279 of Official
Records of said County.
Parcel 2:
An easement for roadway purposes over the Westerly 30 feet of the following described
property;
That portion of Lot 25, Section 5, Township 2 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian, according to Map showing Land of East Riverside Land Company, in the County of
San Bernardino, State of California as per Plat recorded in Book 6 of Maps, Page 44,Records of
said County, ;aid portion also being described in Director's Deed recorded in Book, 5701, Page
635, Official Records of said County, said part more particularly described as being all of said
portion lying from the right of way of Riverside Water Company's canal and Southerly of the
Southerly described line.
Commencing at the Northeast corner )f said Lot 25;
Thence South 89° 58' 1 V West along the North line of said Lot 25 a distance of 289.05 feet to
the West line of said Riverside Water Company's Canal Right of Way,
1
19
Thence South 28° 41' 00" West along said West line a distance of 213.66 feet to the True Point
nf Beginning;
Thence South 69° 19, 18" W,,st a distance of 255.15 feet to the Point of Termination, in the
Westerly line of said portion of Lot 25 described in Deed recorded in said Book 5701,Page 635,
Official Records.
Parrel 3:
An easement for roadway purposes,described as follows: 0
All that part of that portion of Lot 25, Section 5, Township 2 South. Range 4 West, San
Bernardino Meridian, as said Lot is shown on the Map of The Lands of the East Riverside Land
Company, in the County of San Bernardino,State of California, as per Plat recorded in Book 6 of
Maps. Page 44, Records of said County,Said Lot also being shown on Licensed Land Surveyor's
Map recorded in Book 7, Pages 65 and 66, Records of Survey, said portion being that real
property conveyed by deed recorded in Book 5786, Page 978, Official Records of said County,
said part being more particularly descnbed as follows:
The Westerly 30.00 feet of said portion of Lot 25, lying Easterly from,measured at right angles
to, the Southerly prolongation of the West line of that parcel of land conveyed to the State of
California by Deed recorded in Book 4303,Page 150,Official Records of said County.
APNI: 1167-151-22
0
3
■
r r
,� +,.r• _
_ Si�•r_
' _Y�:
- - #-_ +�, '.•t-"'S t • i aim � t � } ��'_ �,� �` fa �I
'{' =_ta.�''J'rJ St.- ' ,C•?'�F'*'` :t~ _�_ --.�I O#—1 1 • - ] ';by- ♦1 1 .
- rim+' ' '1•' {�+�•+* •";' -�. i�� + i { xy; 4 ..+� } -
di
Pr
Pr
14-22 Acres
_.f ,' fir_�±{ - _ :; ..{ �+ 'i �'Y�_ �'�':'.'^'.::T{F � '•�;x7�J�� '�
L ',•_'-;,} ��J`�.'J _�:d @'i .� ap,�Tr.•
�', Y=�r�`�'"^-'."'+'j" ._ '.`sue .. s'_ - .. -�i' ��_ -- '=4•y + t_ � -."'*+i�[�- '� "(.T�
pis,
o .� - .�: -}: � ri i t i +ice' .1 �'- .. 3:'��:.,,L�_'rt"•�^-�'f^'•-•T_ '- �. - r— - -. - _ '__
AP
-- � 5�*1*��; q':�:.�.i 5� l�n.+.y�. • '� _.F+ _�` �,
is % ;:Q r:� �Y :� i�F�i•�� - -r - {��.• *�xAr , ''` LF qk&."
It r �i u•� ,� 5 }w t 1
.� w.'.�C���±i�l L � fa �F r; _ _ mow/_}. �+'• _�•b� ���tiy..3'.`�*}}I L * �� f�f!
Pending Public Financing Authority Approval
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING- MAY 24,2011
A regular meeting of the Public Financing Authority,City of Grand Terrace,was held in the Council
Chambers,Grand Terrace Civic Center,22795 Barton Road,Grand Terrace,California,on May 24,
2011 at 6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Walt Stanckiewitz, Chairman
Lee Ann Garcia,Vice-Chairman
Darcy McNaboe,Agency Member
Bernardo Sandoval, Agency Member
Gene Hays, Agency Member
Betsy M. Adams, City Manager
Brenda Mesa, City Clerk
Bernard Simon, Finance Director
Joyce Powers, Community& Economic Development Director
Richard Shields, Building& Safety Director
John Harper, City Attorney
Detective Martin, San Bernardino County Sheriffs Department
Rick McClintock, San Bernardino County Fire Department
ABSENT: None
Mayor Stanckiewitz convened the Public Financing Authority,Community Redevelopment Agency
and the City Council Meeting at 6:15 p.m. The meeting was opened with an Invocation by Mayor
Pro Tern.Lee Ann Garcia,followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by City Attorney John Harper.
AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE REDEVELOPMENT TAX ALLOCATION BONDS
A. Actions by Public Financing Authorijy
1. Resolution of Public Financing Authority Establishing Regular Meeting
Dates
GTPFA-201 1-01 MOTION BY AUTHORITY MEMBER MCNABOE, SECOND BY
AUTHORITY MEMBER HAYS, CARRIED 5-0, to approve a Resolution
of the Public Financing Authority Establishing Regular Meeting Dates.
2. Authorization to Issue Redevelopment Tax Allocation Bonds
GTPFA-2011-02 MOTION BY AUTHORITY MEMBER SANDOVAL, SECOND BY
AUTHORITY MEMBER MCNABOE, CARRIED 5-0, to Approve a
PFA Item No. 9
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
May 24,2011
Page 2
Resolution Approving the Forms ofan Indenture of Trust,Purchase Contract,
Continuing Disclosure Agreement and an Official Statement and Authorizing
the Execution of the Purchase Contract Relating to the Issuance of the
Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace's Tax
Allocation Bonds Issue of 2011 A and Issue of the 2011 B for the Community
Redevelopment Project Area and Approving Certain Action in Connection
Therewith. 0
B. Actions of the City Council
1. Approve the Issuance by the Agency of Redevelopment Tax Allocation
Bonds
CC-2011-40 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HAYS, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
MCNABOE,CARRIED 5-0,to approve a Resolution Approving the Issuance by the
Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace of Tax Allocation
Bonds,Issue of 2011 A and Issue 2011 B,for the Community Redevelopment Project
Area and Making Certain Determination Relating Thereto and Authorizing Certain
Other Actions in Connection Therewith.
C. Actions by Communily Redevelopment Agency
�}
1. Authorization to Issue Redevelopment Tax Allocation Bonds LJ'
CRA-2011-31 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER MCNABOE, SECOND BY AGENCY
MEMBER HAYS,CARRIED 5-0,to approve a Resolution Authorizing the Issuance
and Sale of Tax Allocation Bonds, Issue of 2011 A and Issue of 2011 B, for the
Community Redevelopment Project Area,and Approving the Form of an Indenture
of Trust,Official Statement, Purchase Contract, Continuing Disclosure Agreement
and Related Documents and Authorizing Certain Other Actions in Connection
Therewith.
Mayor Stanckiewitz adjourned the Public Financing Authority Meeting at 6:55 p.m.
SECRETARY of the Public Financing Authority
of the City of Grand Terrace
CHAIRMAN of the Public Financing Authority
of the City of Grand Terrace