The URL can be used to link to this page

06/14/2011 PENDING CRA APPROVAL CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES REGULAR MEETING -JUNE 14,2011 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 June 14, 2011 at 4:30 p.m. PRESENT: Walt Stanckiewitz, Chairman Lee Ann Garcia, Vice-Chairman Darcy McNaboe, Agency Member Bernardo Sandoval, 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 Ed Finneran, San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department Rick McClintock, San Bernardino County Fire Department ABSENT: Gene Hays, Agency Member CONVENE THE JOINT CRA/CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORKSHOP AT 4:30 P.M. Finance Director Bernard Simon, presented the proposed FY 2011-2012 Budget. Mayor Stanckiewitz adjourned the Joint CRA/City Council Budget Workshop at 5:43 p.m. CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AT 6:00 P.M. 1. APPROVAL OF 05-24-2011 MINUTES CRA-2011-35 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER MCNABOE, SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER SANDOVAL, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (AGENCY MEMBER HAYS WAS ABSENT), to approve the May 24, 2011 Minutes. 2. AGENCY PURCHASE OF A 14.22 ACRE PARCEL IN THE 21800 BLOCK OF VAN BUREN STREET, ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 1167-151-22 FOR $1,393,702.00 CRA-2011-36 MOTION BY VICE-CHAIRMAN GARCIA, SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER MCNABOE,CARRIED 4-0-1-0(AGENCY MEMBER HAYS WAS ABSENT),to CRA AGENDA ITEM NO. Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes June 14,2011 Page 2 approve a Purchase and Sale Agreement and Escrow Instructions for the acquisition of APN 1167-151-22 for signature by the Chairman and 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 and authorize the Executive Director to execute all documents required to complete the Agency's due diligence and the acquisition. 3. CLOSED SESSION - CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-POTENTIAL LITIGATION GC54956.9 (B) - TWO CASES Mayor Stanckiewitz announced that the Agency met in Closed Session to hold a conference with Legal Counsel to discuss Potential Litigation per GC54956.9 (b) - Two Cases. There was no reportable action taken. Chairman Stanckiewitz adjourned the Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting at 10:00 p.m., until the next CRA/City Council Meeting that is scheduled to be held on Tuesday,June 21,2011 at 6:00 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 . 1. APPROVAL OF 05-24-2011 MINUTES CRA-2011-35 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER MCNABOE, SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER SANDOVAL, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (AGENCY MEMBER HAYS WAS ABSENT), to approve the May 24, 2011 Minutes. 2. AGENCY PURCHASE OF A 14.22 ACRE PARCEL IN THE 21800 BLOCK OF VAN BUREN STREET, ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 1167-151-22 FOR $1,393,702.00 CRA-2011-36 MOTION BY VICE-CHAIRMAN GARCIA, SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER MCNABOE,CARRIED 4-0-1-0(AGENCY MEMBER HAYS WAS ABSENT),to CRA AGENDA ITEM NO. The Blur\buntain Grand Terrace AGENDA REPORT CALIFORNIA 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, Assessor's 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 DeBerry 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. 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 "Seller 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 Agency's 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 1 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 Agency's 2011 B bond issue. Any funds not used will be applied toward future projects. Respectfully submitted: J•'ce owers 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 Attachment No. 1 Map of Agency Parcels and Proposed Parcel • • FF .. M^#t yp� Lb ''. C r� 1 S� • ,� -i � 'cm k+4. a �'i•� I r 1 ,-i, ,i � y' l �(i -PI- i5 -,;sue, ..iia' ,%,z.F,w 11{J,-, '� '—•� f,'. i 1.ti E I..Li. ! �+. r 3yy- 74E1: �4 t„ T i� : _ . '`�I� ��;. fil ` Lk ��14 '•n y.• .7 1.i' [ 2 .: , t,, ,�#r + ,�y',' S'7�•1 �y{: L` h i'.i. a ,.yy. `y•. `,y•� v, 1.) j �• L ��.0. •. �l, i--_-, �4•s 1 d :•�lS.; . �' r ^.f1 --.r lE.-. 4..+r„' CU 0 • f••,�, ',_ . 3 i .+Ci, �.Gt �...:w� '3��yy .4 i '+ '. ' N-,`'�^•i 1i=�,.1'.s' ta`.,i .' y 20. ,. '� `. a * 'E'4 •'i 5vLkl '^C�. f�4u7i.'r - "i.,,i l t j /"�� 'Y ,',1 t v 'O O 'O ;Zi -i - ..;' .. ,0 �%-t + C�,.7+.-'•i,r..� G 1 �',k W 3,,--,,,,, . j" Q 2 to i ro`rt� t i:: 1 is d aytrYJ ! �� r}�� y � nt'y �E�' a� Q O 4 .,`i".4`ti '�',yF ii .sf!,A. ,1 1 zAM ay ...... � �4_, �„ 5-t,.•.;:.iiG •�• ' ."`TMt',.:¢ C2 5. —I' i.. ra-�.-r�*`SII•� {,�t^; 1 ;:+t M r' .,,�,,� y�i, 4 4._. i i tr p' :io i I t `sue 7.4. "' °. � 1.`ea , 1 1. I i• -z 41 _ h .ra "4 L. x . ,. a . ''�-�;; i —- �.'..c_n_. �Ssi�_" •� �.�.I .P � - s.. `5w• ,} ,u s...., `• ..� ,�.�.n "I .,1 s x -, 1 �I , f .� �+n.M 1 di 4..} � -1• h r '� �.� o.� c* _. ,+` �# pia. { if w • 1 �r• 1 `3 is /.F �:• t t y Ei1- 1. :•-•::-i`M ;. Atli w' !. L iist 9' •.,,1 `lt 'r ,. I r.„ s 4 � +C-t 7L��"� • -f .ir i e� � - �� ' � � ,�a-+� � '..mR'a u�y�Y.�, $_ 7 'w r '� R j t«1 • .7'4 s lot . ... .. ....7%.......„ "N •u! �' f'a s.,' r -' +—. `u; a'. .Y rl —: ,' 'lc:I �O .� - 23qa „ki , ' � r � _ i it 41•'°4\ ` 'Y•,* " I{'' q, may+ < kid L .... . _ .y,.,_.1: . 1-7-:'1,,,,L'I`::77.:';:',%.,'V‘.1*(.7-‘,7 --"I'' .'.."\i'• .:-4., tAt :lt+ ,` v k.-.. .y "ek�f+'Y:''.ay P„•eert ti •i S ,-Y'ti.t • •"*' dry.,h.. f /I` 't, 1,: ...4. ...1' 4` ,• d& • �_�)% • • • Q_ j Sn t ? n � • :F �^ ! � '{ t * y5+t, ' I > s 1 • a.•. t% q�"'. '" ' fi 1[ k • *:-.,,...,.,.. ,. 1.e �F! tti ",t y . }Fti i`: T.. .,,,,„,. . ,.. ..,, ,,, .. ,,,,,„ ....„,.. Attachment No. 2 Purchase and Sale Agreement and Escrow Instructions PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS This Purchase and Sale Agreement and Escrow Instructions("Agreement"), dated this day of June, 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 ALS A. Seller is the owner of that certain real property("Seller's Property"or"Property") consisting of approximately 14.22 acres,more particularly described as APN 1167-151-22 and attached hereto as Exhibit CfA„ 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($1,393,702.00), (the"Purchase Price"). 1.3 Payment by Buyer. 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. 1 .. . _ .y,.,_.1: . 1-7-:'1,,,,L'I`::77.:';:',%.,'V‘.1*(.7-‘,7 --"I'' .'.."\i'• .:-4., tAt :lt+ ,` v k.-.. .y "ek�f+'Y:''.ay P„•eert ti •i S ,-Y'ti.t • •"*' dry.,h.. f /I` 't, 1,: ...4. ...1' 4` ,• d& • �_�)% • • • Q_ j Sn t ? n � • :F �^ ! � '{ t * y5+t, ' I > s 1 • a.•. t% q�"'. '" ' fi 1[ k • *:-.,,...,.,.. ,. 1.e �F! tti ",t y . }Fti i`: T.. .,,,,„,. . ,.. ..,, ,,, .. ,,,,,„ ....„,.. (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) Requisite 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) Validity. 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 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 Property. 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 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. (j) Changes. 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) General 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: &Af/ / / 2.2 Representations of 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 Seller 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. 3.3Property 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 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 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 periods in this section 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 Instructions. 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. 4.3 Opening 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"Opening 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 "Closing"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 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 (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 Certain Obligations of Seller. 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"Grant 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 Seller 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 Policy. 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 the Closing occurs and the term "Closing"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 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 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 the Grant Deed and Delivery of Funds. 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 Default. Time is of the essence in this Agreement and if Buyer or Seller(the"Defaulting Party") 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 Buyer and Seller Concerning Executory 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 ND 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 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. 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 Attorneys' 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: 8 7 ND 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 If to Buyer at: Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace,CA 92324 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: 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 Assigns. 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 Assignment. 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 or 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 t 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. 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 Attorneys' 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: 8 7 ND 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 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 Severability. 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 ernight delivery, charges prepaid, addressed as follows: 8 7 ND 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 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 BY: P.• t Center inanci. ,Inc., its Manager By: Chairperson ///�/� Dated: June _,2011 By. `L!c �1/ an J.Harke 7Presidenf 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 EXHIBIT "A" APN: 1167-151-22 11 ement are for purposes of reference only and shall not limit or define the meaning of the provisions of this Agreement. 5.11 Severability. 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 ernight delivery, charges prepaid, addressed as follows: 8 7 ND 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 Jun 06 11 10:06a Nord 949-715-7948 p.1 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 BY Point Center Financial, Inc.,its Manager By: Chairperson 'By. Dated:June 2011 Dan J.Harkey,President The Nord Family Trust May 11,1987 By:Jon A.Nord and Mary J.Nord, Trustees ✓By: vI // J A.Nord,Trustee AA,/ ✓By. rd rustee / Mary J. ✓Dated: June 6 ,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 11 agraph, 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 ernight delivery, charges prepaid, addressed as follows: 8 7 ND 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 • 5.17 Recitals. The provisions of the recitals of this Agreement shall constitute operative and cgagronable provisions of this Agreement. 24 WITNESS WHEREOF,this Agreement has been executed by the parties on the dates set forth under 'tee signatures below,notwithstanding that this Agreement is dated for convenience and referende as mid year first written above, SELLER: • .' REDEVELOPMENT Michigan Avenue(band Terrace Investments, • C 'Y OP GRAND TERRACE LLC BY: Point Center Financial,Inc.,its Manager eitniveraos By: Ante ,2011 Dan J.Harkey,President The Nord Family Trust May 11,1987 By:Jon A.Nord and Mary J.Nord,Trustees By: Jon A.Nord,Trustee By: Mary J.Nord,Trustee Dated:June 2011 The Robert L. Wells Trust dated April4, 1991 • By: Robert L.W s, /By: • / e Trustee ✓Dated:June ,2011 Agpsoved as to Form: J ,City Attorney • 11 2011 Approved as to Form: John R.Harper,City Attorney 11 agraph, 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 ernight delivery, charges prepaid, addressed as follows: 8 7 ND 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 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, said 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 of said Lot 25; Thence South 89° 58' 11" 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 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 ernight delivery, charges prepaid, addressed as follows: 8 7 ND 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 Thence South 28° 41' 00" West along said West line a distance of 213.66 feet to the True Point of Beginning; Thence South 69° 19' 18" West 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. Parcel 3: An easement for roadway purposes,described as follows: 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 described 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. APN: 1167-151-22 2 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, said 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 of said Lot 25; Thence South 89° 58' 11" 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 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 ernight delivery, charges prepaid, addressed as follows: 8 7 ND 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 EXHIBIT B 7# s 3 , ;s ?fi r:-cj' i' ,fit 'if ' r Ill,.�� ..d' t 1 • tic, k'''s i � .•, t as (j iiF! APN: 1167-151-22 r '� `� =' ''' 14.22+/-Acres .. .;«5''{ ++:'wzf,:'Ien•eek'Mkx.• ..�.e?r y .3 7 i — ..� ..- ' .,# ,�+ :" 1 v �1,rye r i _ ry�. {� M t ti� _,: k • .1 8' w,t _� t' • I 'M_S!t -,} r 4%133 ilk . 1 I I. w. .. S . _, _ • .R .AW .. -j .. +. '' s.)I 1 �' I 1 ,r i r .. • y • • .. ' i • a .: . ! �` a� `r• • y i 47 t 3 .. , yI ar 4,• ,.41 ' 1 . . -I V4•• M :'{ rt; RI' k ' • .,.. ., t. ' li - , - ". ." i: kI , ' 1., = 6 , ; , ti I,- 'r = " . . .,r, — ale►e► �ir r:'•f .? : , _ , tiEra ,,. • :.... ,.,i . 0 ....:,ID'"` -'k. — ram+--. u -. .. :.,'+6■e'Wit.+ . .=ry , '' :Gkr, 4 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 of said Lot 25; Thence South 89° 58' 11" 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 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 ernight delivery, charges prepaid, addressed as follows: 8 7 ND 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 'fhe Hlor Mountain Cih CAGraLnId TerraceFORNIA AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: June 14, 2011 Council Item (X) CRA Item ( ) TITLE: Check Register No. 06-14-2011 PRESENTED BY: Bernie 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 CRA. Expenditure account number formats are XX-XXX-XXX [Fund-Depart-General Account]. Expenditures may be made from trust/agency accounts (fund 23-)ox-) 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. 4 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 of said Lot 25; Thence South 89° 58' 11" 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 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 ernight delivery, charges prepaid, addressed as follows: 8 7 ND 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 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, Bernie Simon Finance Director Manager Approval: Bets M. A ams City Manager ATTACHMENTS: Check Register—June 14, 2011 r C CC M M M M 0) CO r 0) t` ,T UUo O O M N d' 0) CO N Ln CO W r T- M r r 4. 00 ts O r CO N N- 0 O O r CO O• O CD N CO CO CO 0) o N NNN CO 6 N h t- CO r 0) CO O O •r Uo M N O CO O N N co E t` N lco r r NW N CO M it) Ln let 0 0 UFO Is 'Cr Is CO CO 0 tI) Q r r CO CO r r N r H 4- O CA a 0 a m Cl) v 7 Ca _ O O O ` F- 1- 43 o 1- $ y Li LL H c ID a 0 0 al � 00 Q D z E 3 = 6 E v 0 C)) o o V d 3 W �° U)) f0 N • T 0) CO' , .- C LU N m CU c o c a ._ re '� L m a E o) o U r W N 2 41) an g �` 0 _2 a = a 0 z W 6 J a .� .� c m c N F 0 O W V) E' > > > m _c L_ v t v N U a) W 4 W U O U n. O < J 0 J LL W E Z c 0 m o o = 0 0 �' O O O O O O O O O C 0 0 0 0 0 °� O e a ( m o moo 00 00000 °ty 0000o w o O ` LJJ c 9 L OO 00 00000 0 00000 J O o 0 LL 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 00000 c 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 O MOO 00 00000 o 0 0 0 0 0 < O O u o J O O 000000000000 L 0 0 0 0 0 09 c o 9 a' 9 E o > oo . oLn9i OLncONCO d tnLnlnLnLn W UO N CO N ra- � � NrCOCOtscr a) MMMMM Z M '.0�. 7 W ( a M C NNNNCDNNNNN c NNNNN D N o. L N J N c O 2 0000LINLnNLnLnc m 000Lnco -, Ln 'c .c N N o O -. Nr0Tt0) Nt- t- h1- O ' 0) � Ln00 O 0 c O M O . CO .` .- r N 1 .- O r r .- r C9 T r � � O UO >- co a) o 0 M 0 MN a00r) 00000000 00000 o W 0 0 ,- < ,-- m M Q r r N r r .- . . . . . 2 ‘- 0 r �. M .+ re r Q r m W 6 M r O J 1' , Cc N — W s- CIv m o s Z rM) L`tn 2 N cc o O c M o N a > m > w — d O t` Q 2 2 O z 2 V J a z z w W 2 0 wW c Z 0_ o W w ~_ W w in g coo o m co W U >- 0 M W U a Q o Q z 0N W W W Q U Q M F 0 u) d Y 0 Q Q H h. N 0) O CO _M O o O O O r C Lf _ M N N r r 2 > O O O O O O m ✓ r r r r r N �- r r O co A N N N N N N ✓ L el CO N W CD CO N N N N l j Ln L1) L j Ln to ✓ 0 r 4. GON v O Otl t O O O CO 065 CO CO CO CO COOL O ' m > (IDCOO COO COO COO COO AL 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 N C. e- Y.' CO CO N 0 N N N N N •d' Co CO CO N 3 O a a) co CD Co O CO O Co (.0 CD Co CO N N E CO CO CO r- e- e- co Ti O) Oi N- N CO CO N Cti0 (V� N Ln in L() in ,- e- Co C+) O N- � 't N Q '� e- Cn CO N N CO CD N N e- e- CO tO e- (D e- CO co O) O e- a) 0) a) a) Ili dj O) a) CO a.a a F I°- I- I°- I- I- I- 0 0 H Z w q CA CC CC Q ¢p Z Z C.) W Z CI O Z U - U) Z J C 0 Z g F a z fY W Z w U U) W W Z 0 Iw Z 0 CC a z w w w w E m 0 z EL I- a. I 2 E > w 0 Z C.) F H a w 05 w 0 in Z o �' W O -J 0 0 CO O CD O 4. W w C J O LL J O O 3 0 w O O w W 0 v m 0 a . C7 N O CI O d 0 w >- U u Vo QO 0oo � o Qo � o }po � O Qo Q W co n. 9 >> N N N N O J O a 0O O C C") d 0 U e- e- O CO 0 N a e- e- 0 0 N Q' c) M CO CO W N CD W CO Q N 0 �_ L!� j.jj O H' o O C6 0 O CC O W N N LL O 'V O i[) 0 0 0 2 I'm U < v N W N LL N H CO 1- N (O co Ln U >- O Z O , C) a O a M N N a) e- o O D o W N WW G 2 N U) CO CO LL N M N U e- N O O M O co > VI W Ln CO J ~ y 00NI- CO N o O rn Co 0 t Z y C [t tI L O N N coco O ,QJ t) o co 2 = co O o cD p U co M y CO co co > LL CO L() Ll O M Y a 0 ✓ 0 0 W w 0 0 Z ZZ g COD D LL Q }a }� m m I- U !� U U w z z0 0 z w w cc p J J co W m 0 Z Z Z 0 0 00 U) U Z Q Q 0 C7 LL LL 0 uJ L U E 0 0 0 0 2 2 w -) _ U) 0 w w F- H Q 0 U U UU Li 2 Q ` O O rn N- v v N- co rn rn ° — — co co a) O v a) e- 0 0 0 g > 0 0 0 O o 0 0 O O 0 a ✓ e- e- e- 1 T e e- - e- N O 0 A N N N N N N N N N N Co Co Co Co Co CO Co N N N Lo LE, co in- Lo Lo in- Lt.) to l n e- m e- -o to ++ N V N O O e- N M LLB Co I-- CO N) ti .1c V co co O e- CO 00 e-0 CO e- CT.; CO B O C O O CO CD CO CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 M C O O CD 0 0 0 0 CD CD LO o I- co 1- . 0 toCfl to co a �t O O O O co; O) O Cn I) N I,- CO I- 0 0 CO O 0) O o CIY N M ID CO O N CV (n .- O M Co co C() N CC) M Eor CA M N CD O O N N C 0 0 co n N co N Cn CA Q � � C) . - e- N .-- N (O m O co m (a t0 a a 3 3 3 Too 30 0 0 3 0 H I- 0 1-- 1-- I- I- (A z I - Q 0 O aa)) Z I L O U m . Z z z Co a Z Con) a w a a� a z W c.5 (2i a) W W I J O O O O O C O . . . . . . . w 0 0 J 00 m 0 O a(f 0 a) 0000000 J 0 al C O O O co O O O 0000000 (n 0 w O CO o M 'co'' O N O C O y o 0 0 o 0 o o o } W O O C O y 0 o 0 O O O O O O O O Q (n O O •n o z 0 L O - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 z O Q N N a) (O > O CL Cl) > CO CO CO CO Co aO QO N a C co � •- O N > • co C'9 E M M co C'o CT) M M • N '.o-. = M M C N c N C N C N N N N N N N W CV w 'a V 00 rn -J N -, rn W � (onrnoI � v W o w u CY_ co co - j, ' j, ,- >, in •or .- W -. .- v z aO z H d Q N N 'a. o f6 o m o 43 CO00000o -) o 0 (V 0 0 O 0 a+ Ce •n W rn co 0 J N L 0 a) co O) . CO t z v C co0 O co N co cn O CA O p C9 c U o v r-.. m > o N ' M Co O N I u. V 0 U 2 W W 0 I- z (/) _0 >. cn D 0 1- } (Un Z D z D LU a ain O cthn2 CL w w a 1- � 0 CO } a W w Cr z W 0 W I_ -I Q a. 0Q w I- coCoo z w U O 1-- O 1- < W co W U N co 0 H a < LL 0 > < 0Co D 0 p N- O n.O COO N N O co c r r co r 2 > O O O O O O O O O a r N a- r r O w 4) 0 O O O O O O O 0 CON N N N N N N N G N CO CCD (O CD Is- co co co CO co CO CO CO T to O .O tl) •N t) t co o) N N N CO N N O C 7 CO CO CO CO CO CO O co > CD CO CD CO CD CD CD CD N M LLB Co I-- CO N) ti .1c V co co O e- CO 00 e-0 CO e- CT.; CO B O C O O CO CD CO CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 Tr C NP CV M 0 0) CO Is CA Lf) C") OD OD O N Ps CD O 10 cr ct CV CO 0 C•) Cif CD Tr or) co CD M NP 07 CDPsCD (OD CD Ps NCO CO r MI OD 00 N r Lt) Ln Tr ME O h TiI. CDNM <- NCON CDOCOhOhTr CV N. I- I- CD Is. MC°) M oo I- N OD CO '- D CDC CD Ps CV LI) CA yr CV coLA CO CD U) I- CV Cb Q TrMNd_ M 0) ttC - N- CIN ,- () CO 'qt r ' CV CV U) In 3Is N '- 00 CD CD dl y- G) O) CT a0 f0 a. a. 11 11 I-- ID- > I°- I- (0 us J w 2 Z M g Z O J I- 0 D H Z Z ZO (Y H z o I— Q --I Q coZ 2 o OU < U_ o u) w Q O i O OOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO d z OQ O H 0 W O CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o w w o a o a o z o o >. O 9 p OOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO } V CD 0) ch 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 j O O J O 2 0 a 0000000000000000000 oJ 00 9 >z O O 9 Q_ 9 CV CV CV I U) CVNNNCV CV CV CV NNNNCV Q_ O > N U � W C c Tr Tr (DvvvTrvvvvvTrvvTr O z C CD N i i i i i i i i i i W Ti; H N H CI (9 CV N 00 U) CV OOLn6NLP) 000OOLL) La) O N J O J O 0 \ 1 NO N NCDNNcrIsN- ODPsOOtf CC) IsIsO W N O O < O u Ch CO O 07 M T' 1. .- .- N Z O EE N IY CO m C? d NTr O CD O CS OOOOO CD CD OOCD � CV D O Q NQ ((N 0 CO < O W C] CI CI) CVc1 -) .- U g N Ce W LC) J H v () ▪ Z v a) CD O O M coCy co CO O N- _O ' CO O~) M p C9 c U M c.; N 7 IL 0 V 2 w H co co >- w co H a al w w 0 >- in J>- co Z LU W H CL co o ? W 0 M C O w Q m Z a w m §. > 0 o < < < CD CO M v C') p a) ,- e'- N C O _ r 0 O_ E > O 0 0 0 O a N r 'la 42 II `- O O O O o N CV CV CV CV yr O O T CO CCO d1 w N t) 0 N CO N N co h O C =o co co co co O '• co CO > CD COO CO CO CO CO CO T to O .O tl) •N t) t co o) N N N CO N N O C 7 CO CO CO CO CO CO O co > CD CO CD CO CD CD CD CD N M LLB Co I-- CO N) ti .1c V co co O e- CO 00 e-0 CO e- CT.; CO B O C O O CO CD CO CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 to C CO 0 0 0 0 CO 0) Is. U) 0 to 0 0 0 0 U) I o a) co N U) a . O o co co CO CO N 0 N 0 0 0 0 CO CO CI h ti CO 0 C') to O 0 O to to O 6 h.: N c) O v 4 CO CO C) a) a) CA co N N U) O e- CO O CA U) O to tl) a) 0) U) tl) ' N- N O Q N N CO CO e- r to t0 Co co r' r )LOU) hi °) W CT co N a a .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ra li To To To To To 3 IS I- I- H H I- I- I- I-- H c W .c IL o W o 0 W o H o m W § § 0 C Y u_ 1— 00 ct C Jo L Z Z Cl) o � o 0 o Q o o g o o d o o F- 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 O Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 Q O O 0 0 0 0 u � 0 g0 00 Hoo 0 0 Woo `o00 o yo O � Oo 0 a a o 3 0 o o o 0 0 0 > 0 0 o 0 Cn CO o to N N m co O m 0 O) U) 2 0 0 0 0 C c ,I LL O (, N- N- W to U) 0 N CS 0 U) to N N :7 ,_ N CO Z N N > N N (� N CO N a N N Co N N a O to 01) 00 > U) U) J O O < 0O W NU) (9 Cn co ti U Nt 0 W N N W L to Co CU N- Vs- N > ,- C U) E 'T Co Z e- r- a e- N Tr � e- Ch C 1- r- Ct o 0 C6 e- C1 0 0 0 O. 0 T. O Q cc c 0 0 W p W a-- -, N < a-- CO '..) e- 4- < r- H e- _ e- e- —) e- e- q0 a+ re N W m J I- v CO o O Clt_ y 4 to N N- a) rn V ¢ •O C coco Q) co N CND CO Q 0 > 0 (7 O < CO O� - O N- > IL 0 I— Z alU g W 0- Q H W Co 2 w -J uJ d CO 0 -J Q a' 5 Q 0 0 a ul cn CO CO 0 W —I0 Z a 0 J W a a JQ 0 Z U.Z F- 0 a J Fr)co CLCO ti d }W LL} W Q } 0 F- 1- 0 COm 2 z YZ < < 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N CO co O CO N COO COO e- I e- CO Co O Co e- O_ -. O O_ O e- — _0 r- o r- 2 > 0 0 O O O O O O O a N e- r- e• e- E. o N N N N N N N N N N CO (�O CO CO CO CiO CD CEO CO 0 O 0 I- a+ N v cl)c N C) C.) CO CO C) CO CO CO t "a c 0 COO COO (0) COO COO t0O COO COO COO 0> 0 CO j CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO O CD CO CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 (0 C 0 CO CO CO CC) CO r 00 t0 O O O O .4 sT co co .- O n 0 o O 0 0) N Cr) to c0 00 eh to 0 0 0 0 CA O) 0 C) M 0 M o O O h f` 0) to 00 co h mi O O 00 (0 M () M N Cr) O O) E r I,- CO N 0 to co co mt t0 N CO I,- O Q O_ Or mr mr ►s-N N O C)r r N N r R .- N N r r r N O) cola a o_ To A A 9 3 To To I-o I- I- I- t°- N-- I- ii r N l!') co 0 Z a) 6 w L a) CC co C. E a. i a) a) E CO co r r a) ctf C Ea) 4- LL L co .N 2 `n co aci E U co n Z w T O E w 0 - d a=) l c) O C O CC J L O O a 0 0 0 0 O CL O O O 2 0 N o O d o 0 0 0 O O OCa Z O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 v 3 CD 0 C 0 0 0 O O .0 0 '-' o w 0 . 0000 aVo � o a) o cn0p0o Eo mo 0o V0000 C L() .•C. N O N C O o O O 2 LO = N Q N 0 0 r M 00 C to ' E o - co m co CO J N L NNNN 0 '� N O n CO CO N N >, N N N N N N t (13 6 = O (n 00 -0 N N N -, N o o c O O O O v.0 - v 0 .- 0 C N Z O N r ti _) '_ 0 a) v r r to ca. = 0 00 00000 >- o a) o 00 00000 Lu t] < r W r 0 e- C) 1- r LL r LL U.) r 2' r r r 1- Co) r r CO g r N N c r r a+ re M N- a) r Oi N ,- 0 r- N N r ` G r N In In N_ T N r t Z a) r N 'C C cco �0 mr N O (V (DN w w r i u) N C 0 (NO C7 CC CC >- N to LL M M 0) d LL LL CO 0 0 0 J U >- 0 a 0 0 w a 0 Z 00 >- Z Z Z Q a I- w U) ZO O H _ LLI J Q 0 w Q 0 ~ U Q U Z Q CC Q wE Z I- CC LLJ Ill Z f- 0 ii w 0 Z 2 0 w N to o 0) r to 0 co co lo 0) N N ac0 to 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 > o C. to 0 o O O o 0 _ r r r r r r r N r r r OS 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 ti C T 0 0 0 0 d' 0 0 0 cm0000 0 0 'cf. CM r` CO O 0 O O O O co 0 O 0 0 00 CO GO 0 0 0 CO U) o CO a0 C 600 00 O O CA O) GV N ` N N r c O O GD Cj F- co r T T CO COT co Q cri IA N. N co co to. N ei a) A co a a- I- I- I- H H I- I- H V) > EL a m z oca 0 Q z W CL cn co O 0 U) w W -JU co j a Z E a0 ° a D C. G) o UJ � o > o o wo Zo 000 �' � 0 � 0 § � o Wo � o DO ( o po 000 0 co9c 9 o co 00 �, 0 0 06 UO o0o w moDo 0 0 0 W0 00 0 yO0o 0o00 u � O � o �00 00 < 9 Jo D000 Eo o O co Q CO N N co Li-0 F- n N. E N LL N LL N M Q N i- N Q N O N @ N Z N Z N N N E W N W N O. O 0 L- CD O C f) Q r- C n O O 0 0 O ce O T. VO Wv 'coo O ( arm co Oj 00 < < m n r` 0 o tea)) co U)0 o a o c< O cu O o v �H�I� c%) • 0 0 W 0 Q T —3 T N T T Q T G T .. T T c O N U T 0 T 0 g HCe 0 r` W J F T (.00 0 T T T 0 T • Z V CA Ti O N. N Co T O0 O• (U c T CO cc) � co O co • U. c) T O CO in CO T T 0 0 0 Z_ W Q V) 0 J 0 0 0 Z Gn U)} 0 0 0 Z O 0 J Z WCL Q a. 0 5 ✓ W 0 O O n. 0 W u Z § Z o 0 0 V) W > 0 } cc 0 a 0 X z a cc z z Q co 0 z 0 0 CL W 0 W 0 0 0 0 m U 0 0 05 m p ti O cco co 0 co coo 60) 'O O coc7) co co co co cco CCO C~O O coo 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 co c '- Co Co 7 8 0 S S 0 ,- CO % o ; (N w o ecri # co w 16 6 < N N. ® © ,- I. % 28 @ in hi CI c, % a I k k § k k k i. i. I- I- I- u co• k CC co z 0 0 to Et in @ 2 q 5 / V) 0 I () > co I > ct o CO Co 0 \ COft x X R k \ \ \ ƒ \ ƒ E \ E \ O w / o w \ z \ / Lu 0 ) k CO "I � _j U) < 0 < 0 CO z @ w w ® % � G 2 � _1 & •j —16 -16 5 k 2 I g \ E 2 » $ y $ k k 0 ƒ k < k < k 2 k I k 0 @ — co w o f < _ s- Ci CD I j \ S 2 w z q C k17 Co 02 0 0 I d d \ \ 4 o 0 0 0 0 0� $ -J 0 m — _ CL < } $ 0 0 Et 0 w » _ < z 0 CO § i x 2 I- 2 9 § 0 k $ coo coo w a 0)o Q 0) q CO k k c = — 0 w w e > S G 3 S S ■ ■ a- . N J E k § \ \ \ \ 2 ° 4 ƒ f f 4 5 ) a a a a a > o D S S 2 -c G 2 Co 2 2 % « = co Co co co co 0 2 m > 2 Co 2 Co 2 Co T O0 O• (U c T CO cc) � co O co • U. c) T O CO in CO T T 0 0 0 Z_ W Q V) 0 J 0 0 0 Z Gn U)} 0 0 0 Z O 0 J Z WCL Q a. 0 5 ✓ W 0 O O n. 0 W u Z § Z o 0 0 V) W > 0 } cc 0 a 0 X z a cc z z Q co 0 z 0 0 CL W 0 W 0 0 0 0 m U 0 0 05 m p ti O cco co 0 co coo 60) 'O O coc7) co co co co cco CCO C~O O coo 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 m J w O a z F- X2 a 0Z 11 WI- Q � wwm � w a E- E a U � op_ U Z W > U z H O W F- � Z > U � W ~ 4 O z ZNW jw cn 0WujW0 ZQW ZFW- a w � o w 2 3 O w z 2 5 cn u_ CC O w C m N ccnn co w J ce w a ww 0 1 < c° p z a � cn04( ,5a L. V W V2xw ��-- wz ¢ QQ cnw W -, mW apmZcn Jacpg0UU) O0wQCCwxcUn mW } W a Q W a < D W y m W IX Z W - W ••,5 W cn H D J g< OcF- YUU � 0 ce w � F- FLli � mZ > JF � JdU 5 a 2 w p w U- O a pp O H LU ¢ CL O C W �a a w Q O w 0 cn w W x 5. 2 O z cn ¢ U D x 2 a U z 2 1- F- w s 0 w U > Q) O) N CO n in p _ N N N N N S 8 Ts O CA O N Cr! � 0 N O O tC) Ch � � � � O � O Xx O M N6NNNC6d 52 NNNNNCeSN. t- r. N N N N N N P. a o x O w m W o a ?� UW20W0W Z W C-) 2N H 2 z z 01- °z l- e Z O z wZ OZ zzU Uz zZ m O J_ ai g O Q2 _ ZU a }F- Q w ce } lL W U - W W N uj ZV w OZ J W W QYW W g0!y g z co re a. 22 ZU "fNJ U c3 a °5Om0mxO - Wi_ WaU Z z O ~ z - wi- zSZ Z 20a ooJUU J zz cn2z n0 vs U2Uaaom2r 1- 3 � z _ � zwzzo2 - 0dO r4 0tCma 02 _, QUQc0xoaw0000 0 aa. co 46 Z ONvpO N. pOpp � 4'Nwr- wCDCA MMv 4288 p p p O a 0 Y N U N ? = j CD -, U Z K V 1 z a F- W w CC n LL 0 0 NIc � w 2 (nzaz � zz � O WW W 0 'weft aapO 00 WC9 W Vz za tLw > Op ; x > > }} ooa1 > re - o C m a a0Omax0 aZ U. zpWwDo - Qx wU- ". a m Q U w a z J z Ez - z a mCww () i- = w - g ccYN0 • L. ~ NNaWIII�' Ccocne � u. 22 _, � u. 0a. 0 0comv 4Ea sm000 d _ �p Z O N c+) et 1A Co N. O N N N Co eO er F- M CC') N CI U. c7) co co co co cco CCO C~O O coo 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 .b cd cn U o 2 a)• 'd a, E o - � b .� a) a '" U 4) (i) v (1) i U N • •� bA CD CI C) U o a) • o E •I ' ."- eta) .a) o c " o °• o tea, " C, U Finance Director Manager Approval: Bets M. A ams City Manager ATTACHMENTS: Check Register—June 14, 2011 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE PENDING CRY COUNCIL APPROVAL CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING -JUNE 14,2011 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 June 14, 2011 at 4:30 p.m. PRESENT: Walt Stanckiewitz, Mayor Lee Ann Garcia, Mayor Pro Tern Darcy McNaboe, Councilmember Bernardo Sandoval, 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 Ed Finneran, San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department Rick McClintock, San Bernardino County Fire Department ABSENT: Gene Hays, Councilmember CONVENE THE JOINT CRA/CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORKSHOP AT 4:30 P.M. Finance Director Bernard Simon, presented the proposed FY 2011-2012 Budget. Mayor Stanckiewitz adjourned the Joint CRA/City Council Budget Workshop at 5:43 p.m. The City Council meeting was opened at 6:00 p.m.with an Invocation by Pastor Pat Bower,Calvary the Brook Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Walt Stanckiewitz. ITEMS TO DELETE City Manager, Betsy M. Adams, requested that Item 3E. Grand Terrace Senior Center Fee Waiver Request, be removed from the Agenda. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS A. Women of Distinction- Pat Nix and Sally McGuire Pat Nix and Sally McGuire were each recognized as being one of the 63 Women of Distinction in the 63`d Assembly District that were honored at Assemblyman Morrell's COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 3C Qc0xoaw0000 0 aa. co 46 Z ONvpO N. pOpp � 4'Nwr- wCDCA MMv 4288 p p p O a 0 Y N U N ? = j CD -, U Z K V 1 z a F- W w CC n LL 0 0 NIc � w 2 (nzaz � zz � O WW W 0 'weft aapO 00 WC9 W Vz za tLw > Op ; x > > }} ooa1 > re - o C m a a0Omax0 aZ U. zpWwDo - Qx wU- ". a m Q U w a z J z Ez - z a mCww () i- = w - g ccYN0 • L. ~ NNaWIII�' Ccocne � u. 22 _, � u. 0a. 0 0comv 4Ea sm000 d _ �p Z O N c+) et 1A Co N. O N N N Co eO er F- M CC') N CI U. c7) co co co co cco CCO C~O O coo 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 Council Minutes 06/14/2011 Page 2 Women of Distinction Luncheon. CONSENT CALENDAR CC-2011-46 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SANDOVAL, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER HAYS WAS ABSENT), to approve the following Consent Calendar Items: 3A. Approve Check Register No. 06/14/2011 3B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda 3C. Approval of Minutes of 05/24/2011 3D. Unfunded Mandate Test Claim to the Commission of State Mandates Regarding Provisions of Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 PUBLIC COMMENT Sally McGuire, 12480 Nightingale Way, reminded everyone that the Grand Terrace Area Chamber of Commerce will be holding their installation dinner on Thursday,June 23,2011. Mr. Jack Brown will be the guest speaker. She encouraged everyone to attend the event. COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Darcy McNaboe, reported that she participated in the wall painting on Barton Road,Pico and Reed Street on June 5,2011 with a group from Azure Hills Seventh- Day Adventist Church. They worked very hard and got all of the walls painted. She is looking forward to an opportunity to work with them again in the future. She stated that at the last Council Meeting there was a financial projection that showed the budget difficulties, not only for balancing the coming fiscal year but for many to come in the future. Although they will be balancing the budget for this fiscal year that won't be the end of the changes that will need to be made in the City. She thanked those who gave their input and ideas and encouraged everyone to continue to give their thoughts and recommendations. She urged residents to shop locally. She encouraged residents to contact the Chamber of Commerce to let them know what restaurants and businesses they do shop at so that they can reach out and attract them to Grand Terrace. She reported that Omnitrans is offering free rides on their bus on June 16, 2011. The pass can be downloaded from their website. Councilmember Bernardo Sandoval, reported that there was a serious law enforcement incident that occurred in town. He indicated that he was told that there were several calls that were made regarding this property prior to the incident and questioned if this statement could be confirmed. z J z Ez - z a mCww () i- = w - g ccYN0 • L. ~ NNaWIII�' Ccocne � u. 22 _, � u. 0a. 0 0comv 4Ea sm000 d _ �p Z O N c+) et 1A Co N. O N N N Co eO er F- M CC') N CI U. c7) co co co co cco CCO C~O O coo 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 Council Minutes 06/14/2011 Page 3 Sgt.Ed Finneran,San Bernardino County Sheriffs Department,confirmed that several calls were made over a period of time , however, when the reports were made there was no incident or the reporting individuals did not want to become victims. Councilmember Sandoval, stated that they are recognizing that the budget is a very serious situation. It is his hope that the public recognizes that they are transitioning and working diligently in a short period of time to transition from a budget that was unsustainable to something that is sustainable. It is his hope and expectation that these cuts will not be permanent. As aggressively as they are making the cuts necessary to balance the budget this year they are also persuing opportunities to be able to raise sales tax revenue but it just won't happen very quickly. Mayor Pro Tern Lee Ann Garcia,reported that Grand Terrace Days will be held on Saturday, June 25, 2011. Staff has been working with a community group and it is her understanding that the Lion's Club will be doing the Car Show once again. The Chamber will be doing all the booths. She encouraged everyone to attend the event from 10:00 a.m.to 2:00 p.m. She thanked all of the volunteers and staff for their efforts. She encouraged everyone to have a safe 4th of July. Brian Reinarz is soliciting sponsorships from business and she encouraged the businesses to support local sports. She thanked the Women's Club for the big GT topiary that is out in front of Azure Hills. She thanked residents for their input on the budget and the Chamber of Commerce for stepping up and bringing the community together. Mayor Walt Stanckiewitz, reported that he attended the Boy Scouts of America Eagle of Honor Ceremony. Christian Montoya from Grand Terrace earned his Eagle Scout. It was a long road for him but he met all of the requirements and completed the program. He reported that the City kicked off of the bond offering netting the City 20 million dollars that will allow the City to complete projects that will ensure the future of the City. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6A. Resolution of the City of Grand Terrace Confirming a Diagram and Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District Mayor Stanckiewitz opened the public hearing,there being none,he returned the discussion to the Council. CC-2011-47 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER MCNABOE,CARRIED 4-0-1-0(COUNCILMEMBER HAYS WAS ABSENT),to approve a Resolution Confirming a Diagram and Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District. o 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 Council Minutes 06/14/2011 Page 4 UNFINISHED BUSINESS -None NEW BUSINESS 8A. Review Offers for Selling City Owned Cellular Site Leases at the Following Locations: Richard Rollins Park and Grand Terrace Fire Station No. 23 CC-2011-48 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SANDOVAL, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER HAYS WAS ABSENT), to direct staff to pursue the cellular lease purchase offer from Unison Site Management, LLC., in the amount of $365,897, for the sites located at Richard Rollins Park and Grand Terrace Fire Station No. 23 and authorize the City Manager to sign the final agreements for the sale of City owned cellular site leases. 8B. Fiscal Year 2011-12 Preliminary Budget Finance Director Simon, presented the FY 2011-12 Preliminary Budget. City Manager Adams, presented recommendations for the Council to consider to close the General Fun Budget gap. Ryan Stephens,22821 De Soto Street,encouraged the Council to move forward with the Dog Park indicating that the Foundation of Grand Terrace is committed in seeing this project through and will be seeking donations. The Foundation is ready to construct the park with volunteers and to maintain it as well once it is completed. It was the consensus of the Council to direct staff to include the following reductions in the FY 2011-2012 Budget: #1 Remove Traffic Deputy Position from Sheriff's Contract #2 Merge Rental Inspection Program into Code Enforcement #3 Defund Management Analyst Position in Community Development #4 Defund Community Events Program #5 Defund Deputy City Clerk Position #6 Reduce Parks and City Hall Maintenance CC-2011-49 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER MCNABOE, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SANDOVAL, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER HAYS WAS ABSENT),to call a Special Meeting to be held on Tuesday,June,21, 2011. CLOSED SESSION million dollars that will allow the City to complete projects that will ensure the future of the City. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6A. Resolution of the City of Grand Terrace Confirming a Diagram and Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District Mayor Stanckiewitz opened the public hearing,there being none,he returned the discussion to the Council. CC-2011-47 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER MCNABOE,CARRIED 4-0-1-0(COUNCILMEMBER HAYS WAS ABSENT),to approve a Resolution Confirming a Diagram and Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District. o 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 Council Minutes 06/14/2011 Page 5 9A. Labor Relations per GC54957.6 Mayor Stanckiewitz announced that the Council met in Closed Session to discuss Labor Relations per GC54957.6 and there was no reportable action taken. Mayor Stanckiewitz adjourned the meeting at 10:00 p.m.,until the next City Council Meeting which is scheduled to be held on Tuesday, June 21, 2011 at 6:00 p.m. CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace MAYOR of the City of Grand Terrace er ATTACHMENTS: Check Register—June 14, 2011 The Blue Vounlain Cih GrandCALI TerraceFORNIA AGENDA 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. R8-2010-0036 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 California 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.3 p INGS 6A. Resolution of the City of Grand Terrace Confirming a Diagram and Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District Mayor Stanckiewitz opened the public hearing,there being none,he returned the discussion to the Council. CC-2011-47 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER MCNABOE,CARRIED 4-0-1-0(COUNCILMEMBER HAYS WAS ABSENT),to approve a Resolution Confirming a Diagram and Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District. o 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 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 mandates" under Article XIII B, Section 6 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) born 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. 2 nd Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District. o 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 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 ullysubmitted, W' Managem yst Manager Approval: e. 9Y Betsy A ams City Manager 3 ihr 6iur 110unimn(il GrandCALI TerracefORN1A AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: June 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 filing 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.3 t 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. 2 nd Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District. o 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 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, Joy a Powers Community & Economic Development Director Manager Approval: Bet sy sy Adams City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Waiver request from Senior Center the tens of thousands of dollars. Res ullysubmitted, W' Managem yst Manager Approval: e. 9Y Betsy A ams City Manager 3 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 ,President Grand T ace Seniors ollars. Res ullysubmitted, W' Managem yst Manager Approval: e. 9Y Betsy A ams City Manager 3 i he Blue 1I Unlnin CM Grand Terrace AGENDA REPORT CALIFORNIA 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. pA ,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 filing 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.3 t 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. 2 nd Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District. o 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 Respectfully submitted, i &644 RI, and Shiel•s Director of Building & Safety/Public Works Manager Approval: Betsy dams City Manager ATTACHMENTS: Resolution for the Annual Assessment Levy 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 ,President Grand T ace Seniors ollars. Res ullysubmitted, W' Managem yst Manager Approval: e. 9Y Betsy A ams City Manager 3 LAW OFFICES OF HARPER& BURNS LLP A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 453 S.GLASSELL STREET JOHN R.HARPER* ORANGE,CALIFORNIA 92886 RIVERSIDE/SAN BERNARDINO CO. ALAN R BURNS (951) 674-0698 COLIN R BURNS (714) 771-7728 OF COUNSEL FAX(714) 744-3350 JUDI A CURTIN' MICHAEL MONTGOMERY' PROFESSIONAL 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. 89-1 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) panied 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 filing 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.3 t 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. 2 nd Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District. o 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 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 ial flag pole at the Susan Petta Memorial Park. Thank you so much for your consideration. M t sincerely, '� JoAnn Jo s ,President Grand T ace Seniors ollars. Res ullysubmitted, W' Managem yst Manager Approval: e. 9Y Betsy A ams City Manager 3 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 heard at the Public Hearing. If a written protests submitted, and not withdrawn, constitute in excess of fifty (50%) 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. ling 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.3 t 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. 2 nd Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District. o 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 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 further notice, order the exclusion of territory 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. 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. ling 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.3 t 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. 2 nd Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District. o 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 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 (50%) 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. ardino 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. 2 nd Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District. o 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 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. 89-1 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 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 14th day of June, 2011. Mayor for the City of Grand Terrace A I l EST: City Clerk for the City of Grand Terrace opted 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. ardino 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. 2 nd Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District. o 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 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 14th day of June, 2011, and that the same was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: EXECUTED this 14th day of June, 2011, at Grand Terrace, California. City Clerk for the City of Grand Terrace [SEAL] s ,President Grand T ace Seniors ollars. Res ullysubmitted, W' Managem yst Manager Approval: e. 9Y Betsy A ams City Manager 3 The Blue\lounlain fits craniaCALIFORNi TenNaceA 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 50/50 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.N for the City of Grand Terrace A I l EST: City Clerk for the City of Grand Terrace opted 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. ardino 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. 2 nd Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District. o 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 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 "A". 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. d 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. 2 nd Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District. o 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 Company Offer Length Terms of Lease in years Advanced $340,000 30 years Easement Required: Yes Wireless Closing costs: No Capital LLC Future revenue split: N/A (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 yr/semi to the city annual Other Notes: $450,000 End of the term, 100% of rent reverts 5 yr/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: N/A Partners. (WCP) Future revenue split: 100% to the City Other Notes: Interest after 99 year reverts back city 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. d 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. 2 nd Assessment and Providing for Annual Assessment Levy for a Landscaping and Street Lighting District. o 2 > O O O O O O O O 0 a T T T T T T T T T T N T ,- CO RN T T T N NO N N N T T T T T T T CD GO GD GO CD CD C\O coco GcO T a) T 12 y N 0 it U L 'co' Tr 0 U) co lM U) O C o co co co Co co CO co co co co co co co 0 co co co O CD 0 > CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO > 0 N N N 0 N 0 N N N r -0 0 d• mr mr rt vt ct- r r r c0 C�0 cD CD CD CO c0 CO 4- m O. 9 to H N v t co 0 IS M mr mr VM' mr mr O c 0 co c0 c0 00 c0 00 c0 00 0 ' co 0 0 > (r)CD COO 00 ccCO 00 0 O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 co W L C O a) a N 0 c U co a) -0 O co .: 0) co a) o. co z. E > co P E m 0 ... .. U a) — >+ co L t T L 4) '� 03 RI .. O �. W E O O O a O C \ W co co _< z.a o -a • 0) 0 o N `C < O W -a E } ZZC.) ZZccDDWV} C00 (/) ZZti } ZZO ZZ � E ODI— U) W c VI C -c O 'a = p 'a 4.. O 'a �+ = ' = = u d E. C d a — W a W a a) a W a ea c Y = a) L.a a) a s a) N a a) 7 a) 7 d U a a. .. W W a' .. a. .. a. .. a) -0 m c m 13 = ,� a) = a) a a) z 0 c tz co) m e ... re a7 N H re H y vi co cc co W H px co N co -p ce O d H ca 2 ++ O > O (I) +' O > W +' O > (1) C +r O > +r O > .2 0 r O > s mto c u EZE C V N O > c u oZ :R c o al O c ° 0 Oo C v 0 0 U) E W 0z W m p) LZ W O 00- Z a O a) ` Z O v) ` Z c W LT - Z = c EcL U EC ` . .. ECELV EcLa. E _ P. ,_ s E = i > c N _p +a+ ,C fl- " .o — . N t0 0 .6,.. ,= W tl) o .b, m N pra+ L 3 R O � r � v WOLLO WULiO � WULi0 � W0LiOWULiO WOu O E z H (0 L 46 gr. O >, 0 t 4-' M C W co co co co co co co co , W H J N >, >, >, >, >,} } } } } CD --� M 0 0 0 Lf0) � MM 0 d0) ate. c W CC a) " N i. O E E �,� >E,� c0 >, > Co co i=1 ma a. co a. as a a 0- .. .,. 4-. =Y 5 c E' cCwc� C 0 CO CO W W W C C c c E E E ii a i m co Ecc coa > r . f°co co0) � coco cc Sa. E E W W W E ,� E ,� O Wu EEE 0u)) CO CO , :_. :_. :_. a Q u E >,�, �, >, , , , �r cacD ca x a, r- chcn C C c 0 0 o 0 000 0 W o W cf) NN- 0) A— O +J O 000 0 e 2 O CI) r-- r� o) yr o o c o c oo v_ li c000 cc) O -0 O N O (D V, o w ti ' v O ti V O riaicricri N to c a, V 11, 011) V " 2 N ' 2 ti cD c0 — c0 co n. cr) C5) d' vT N = • N = . mmmv v m ar EA 6F3 EA 69 ER O H Ee a. H EA EA Eft ER ER EA a" (o Ti C o m, CO Co C 3 CO U U a7 c.) U c E a. "O a) .c Y 0 E U asa0i � � § E `° -0 :0O cn a) a To Q ca > c Qs -J <CS U0 -JCI D LL * O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 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 terms. If the cellular site leases are sold, the revenue loses for selling the leases amounts to $36,825 per year. Respectfully submitted, Ric and Shields Director of Building & Safety/ Public Works Manager Approval: Betsy . Adams City Manager ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A- Steel in the Air, Letter Grand Terrace [SEAL] s ,President Grand T ace Seniors ollars. Res ullysubmitted, W' Managem yst Manager Approval: e. 9Y Betsy A ams City Manager 3 EXHIBIT "A" A 16001 Waterleaf Lane • Fort Myers, FL 33908 4"Y Office. 877 428 6937 • Fax• 866-335-4053 AIM gill IM TAt AIA.INC City of Grand Terrace c/o Matt Wirz 22795 Barton Road Suite B 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.com) 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.wirelesscapital.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 www steelintheair corn 0) A— O +J O 000 0 e 2 O CI) r-- r� o) yr o o c o c oo v_ li c000 cc) O -0 O N O (D V, o w ti ' v O ti V O riaicricri N to c a, V 11, 011) V " 2 N ' 2 ti cD c0 — c0 co n. cr) C5) d' vT N = • N = . mmmv v m ar EA 6F3 EA 69 ER O H Ee a. H EA EA Eft ER ER EA a" (o Ti C o m, CO Co C 3 CO U U a7 c.) U c E a. "O a) .c Y 0 E U asa0i � � § E `° -0 :0O cn a) a To Q ca > c Qs -J <CS U0 -JCI D LL * O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 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.comcapgroup.com) 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 times 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.apwip.com)-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 RFS Capital. MD7-(www.md7capital.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 third party buyout market is in a transitional period. As recently as two years ago,the average multiple for all the 3'a 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 package;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. a > c Qs -J <CS U0 -JCI D LL * O CO CO CO CO CO CO G m >, Co Co CO CO Co CO CO CO CO Co ION 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 II. 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 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 femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, 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. III. 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 8 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 ROI-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 property. 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, 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 list. 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 Sites 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. Grand Terrace Lease Comparables Location Carrier/Company Monthly Rent Hesperia Verizon Tower $900 Big Bear City T-Mobile Tower $1,300 Moreno Valley Verizon Stealth $1,910 Perris T-Mobile Tower $1,500 Mission Viejo 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. ue 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, - , . tr I . • i. 'I I. _ 2 '� - / 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 57'monopole 0.81 mi west. This T-Mobile site is too far away to provide similar coverage to the City's 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 valuable and unlikely to be terminated in the next 5-10 years. ,"''° ae �,� °"ti Carhr An 157'T-Mobile Monopole T adc'.Grand Term `� H 's. 4' r 1►' . Yy 3 McGann A 8mm�wn ayy A y D i RIMS°U° 5 ? ad !� Rd Pawn Ave Nextel Rooftop,.S w City Center oP •`rpmn CI f,,,.�..w.� 7-Mobile Srte I-1 5 T1 1 L.P.St Qp' Jensen Ct Y 64'Crown Castle La Nat• 128'KG Tower' Monopine with Sprint I Do Sao St Se Soto St a eery St Da eery St `-r wIW,st c' M.vDst ! T'City's Verizon-t d Fla...le £ 40'AT&T(FormerlyCingular) > .• . $ Monopole S / U C r6 St 8i,»tr tu+ 3 < Van Wm St < g 7, 6 KenPIeU St,t. Kee1MG S. t U Un St ;3 La1.St E c..ntpn St 174'American Tower Site) ntco St S 'so s. fter,.po St; ` y ''nr21rV—,7 s Tarrge St 6 P of CO !' } l'an+pr St unding area. The map below illustrates the varied types of properties and streets the subject sites cover. ue 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, 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. SITA 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,SITA 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. E ' -44 .�.. r no 0 Nr151r11e BARtDN RCN) _ k Wit.. k;. rT _F;� � g r� OF aioi rlift I � OEf9roFlll�f 8 j I _.- -_ r�rccr nfap,,•'. 3 1 i i6 .e rF..r. i -- -:- i rw„rrfr 1 •w I -- -— -,1- cMppra fr uwert s r.s i WOW"r�ireFf , woM& er 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, RH-Hillside Residential L_ R1-10-Low Density Single Family r' R1-20-V..Low Density Single Family R1-7.2-Single Family R2-Low Med.Density Residential ▪ R3-Medium Density Residential ▪ R3-S(Multiple Family-Senior Citizen) ME BRSP-General Commercial BRSP-Village Commercial BRSP-Office Professional AP-Administrative Professional ▪ C2-General Commercial CM-Commercial Manufacturing ▪ MR-Restricted Manufacturing ▪ M2-Industrial MI PUB-Public Facilities 7Jj FP-Floodplain 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-Mobile 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 space. 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. A better arrangement would be to only sell a fixed term easement such as 30 or 40 years. Based upon recent 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 indudes 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 aty in breach of contract should you sell to a 3rd party buyout company. Please contact your attorney about this clause before signing a buyout agreement. Elelutinitt LirJlwd Brant-t, cnirl the eriluzr..r n!_h' 12 n.ni.et Oh. L.,rtJ!ore s t`rnperr. an,)to:!!hle3-,e,t i.Le-!,: pc,riton et the!'t_rase tc nnrP:,tn:•;or opct3tor;to-rurroccc n':ot:dt:cr.m, ,r:.tGto ennntun:cat:ons from e,n the 1 anriinrc' ;Pr ;er s tiva_,t Jie tore.,.1n.I,c rantnic r;tic 1rotecnterr:.�3adiutd shall n.yutre atr, an,i]I'Gnur. r ,'enn31 [do.,,onut,uu._ u,mc ton;-it,or t„ .uIJ rt:[cr tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, 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 tt 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 closing costs on the transaction and figure that into the final offer for comparison. Specifically,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 200 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. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, Ilk Blue%Matuin oh Grand TeFORNrraIceA AGENDA REPORT CALI 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 Oa d 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 200 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. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, 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 4,692,383 (5,245,499) (389,743) Special Revenue/Entpr Street Fund 752,411 7,000 (187,100) 572,311 Storm Drain 64,919 350 0 65,269 Park Fund 218,791 7,100 (16,629) 209,262 AB 3229 COPS 0 0 0 0 Air Quality Fund 55,666 14,250 (700) 69,216 Gas Tax Fund 92,147 405,860 (434,738) 63,269 Traffic Safety (40,624) 70,000 (58,735) (29,359) (Continued) O Oa d 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 200 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. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, 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 I 84,251 216,913 (271,974) 29,190 Wastewater 1,563,611 1,495,300 (1,673,760) 1,385,151 CDBG 0 110,100 (110,100) 0 LLMD 2,187 14,335 (14,065) 2,457 Total Spec Rev/Entpr 2,999,702 2,341,408 (2,767,801) 2,573,309 Other Funds Capital lmprov.-Streets 0 828,732 (828,732) 0 Barton/Colton Bridge 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 Projects Fund 0 1,837,000 (1,818,070) 18,930 Debt Service Fund 1,251,673 6,052,858 (7,082,960) 221,571 CRA Low Mod Fund 0 1,280,560 (1,267,687) 12,873 CRA Trust. Fund 1,207,500 0 (241,500) 966,000 Total CRA Funds 2,459,173 9,170,418 (10,410,217) 1,219,374 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 4,692,383 (5,245,499) (389,743) Special Revenue/Entpr Street Fund 752,411 7,000 (187,100) 572,311 Storm Drain 64,919 350 0 65,269 Park Fund 218,791 7,100 (16,629) 209,262 AB 3229 COPS 0 0 0 0 Air Quality Fund 55,666 14,250 (700) 69,216 Gas Tax Fund 92,147 405,860 (434,738) 63,269 Traffic Safety (40,624) 70,000 (58,735) (29,359) (Continued) O Oa d 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 200 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. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, Projected Ending FY 2011-12 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 459,107 0 0 459,107 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: Betsy&t%) dams City Manager ATTACHMENTS: FY 2011-12 Budget(under separate cover) (7,082,960) 221,571 CRA Low Mod Fund 0 1,280,560 (1,267,687) 12,873 CRA Trust. Fund 1,207,500 0 (241,500) 966,000 Total CRA Funds 2,459,173 9,170,418 (10,410,217) 1,219,374 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 4,692,383 (5,245,499) (389,743) Special Revenue/Entpr Street Fund 752,411 7,000 (187,100) 572,311 Storm Drain 64,919 350 0 65,269 Park Fund 218,791 7,100 (16,629) 209,262 AB 3229 COPS 0 0 0 0 Air Quality Fund 55,666 14,250 (700) 69,216 Gas Tax Fund 92,147 405,860 (434,738) 63,269 Traffic Safety (40,624) 70,000 (58,735) (29,359) (Continued) O Oa d 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 200 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. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, Ih(Rlur Slvuntdin(ih GranCALidFORNIA Terrace 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 Governor'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. e their current lease area of 450 sq ft. SITA estimates that you could receive$400/mo to$600/mo for every 200 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. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, 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 # Description $ 1 Remove Traffic Deputy Position from Sheriff's Contract 228,714 2 Merge Rental Inspection Program into Code Enforcement 51,465 3 Defund Management Analyst Position in Community Development 6,496 4 Defund Community Events Program 52,880 5 Defund Deputy City Clerk Position 58,533 6 Reduce Parks & City Hall Maintenance 23,600 7 Defund Management Analyst Position in Public Works 21,584 8 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? Sincerely, Ken Schmidt President- Steel in the Air,Inc. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, FY 11-12 General Fund Budget Recommended Budget Reductions June 14, 2011 Page 3 ■ Should the City explore alternatives to the Sheriff's 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: If 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 Low/Mod Projects Housing 1 228,714 0 9,135 0 0 0 237,849 2 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 9,187 0 0 63,411 7 21,584 3,238 0 19,929 0 0 44,751 8 118,404 0 0 0 0 0 118,404 Total 561,676 33,862 9,135 29,116 49,635 7,804 691,228 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? Sincerely, Ken Schmidt President- Steel in the Air,Inc. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, FY 11-12 General Fund Budget Recommended Budget Reductions June 14, 2011 Page 4 Respectfully submitted: Betsy . Adams City Manager ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Recommended Budget Reductions #1 through #8 loses for selling the leases amounts to $36,825 per year. Respectfully submitted, Ric and Shields Director of Building & Safety/ Public Works Manager Approval: Betsy . Adams City Manager ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A- Steel in the Air, Letter Grand Terrace [SEAL] s ,President Grand T ace Seniors ollars. Res ullysubmitted, W' Managem yst Manager Approval: e. 9Y Betsy A ams City Manager 3 FY 11-12 General Fund Budget Recommended Budget Reductions June 14, 2011 Page 5 Attachment A submitted: Betsy . Adams City Manager ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Recommended Budget Reductions #1 through #8 loses for selling the leases amounts to $36,825 per year. Respectfully submitted, Ric and Shields Director of Building & Safety/ Public Works Manager Approval: Betsy . Adams City Manager ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A- Steel in the Air, Letter Grand Terrace [SEAL] s ,President Grand T ace Seniors ollars. Res ullysubmitted, W' Managem yst Manager Approval: e. 9Y Betsy A ams City Manager 3 FY 11-12 General Fund Budget Recommended Budget Reductions June 14, 2011 Page 6 Recommended Budget Reduction #1 Description: Remove Traffic Deputy Position from Sheriffs 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 # Fund 10 Fund 16 Fund 17 Fund 21 Fund 32 Fund 34 Total General Gas Tax Traffic Safety Waste Water CRA CRA $ Disposal Capital Low/Mod Projects Housing 1 228,714 0 9,135 0 0 0 237,849 2 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 9,187 0 0 63,411 7 21,584 3,238 0 19,929 0 0 44,751 8 118,404 0 0 0 0 0 118,404 Total 561,676 33,862 9,135 29,116 49,635 7,804 691,228 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? Sincerely, Ken Schmidt President- Steel in the Air,Inc. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, FY 11-12 General Fund Budget 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 [$68,900 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 landlord/tenant program. Staffing Impacts: Code Enforcement Officer position (part-time employee) and Code Enforcement Clerk position (part-time employee) would be removed from the FY 2011-12 budget. Policy Issue: None ct (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 # Fund 10 Fund 16 Fund 17 Fund 21 Fund 32 Fund 34 Total General Gas Tax Traffic Safety Waste Water CRA CRA $ Disposal Capital Low/Mod Projects Housing 1 228,714 0 9,135 0 0 0 237,849 2 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 9,187 0 0 63,411 7 21,584 3,238 0 19,929 0 0 44,751 8 118,404 0 0 0 0 0 118,404 Total 561,676 33,862 9,135 29,116 49,635 7,804 691,228 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? Sincerely, Ken Schmidt President- Steel in the Air,Inc. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, FY 11-12 General Fund 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 JUSD 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 # Fund 10 Fund 16 Fund 17 Fund 21 Fund 32 Fund 34 Total General Gas Tax Traffic Safety Waste Water CRA CRA $ Disposal Capital Low/Mod Projects Housing 1 228,714 0 9,135 0 0 0 237,849 2 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 9,187 0 0 63,411 7 21,584 3,238 0 19,929 0 0 44,751 8 118,404 0 0 0 0 0 118,404 Total 561,676 33,862 9,135 29,116 49,635 7,804 691,228 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? Sincerely, Ken Schmidt President- Steel in the Air,Inc. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, 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. Sheriffs 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 Policy Issue: None JUSD 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 # Fund 10 Fund 16 Fund 17 Fund 21 Fund 32 Fund 34 Total General Gas Tax Traffic Safety Waste Water CRA CRA $ Disposal Capital Low/Mod Projects Housing 1 228,714 0 9,135 0 0 0 237,849 2 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 9,187 0 0 63,411 7 21,584 3,238 0 19,929 0 0 44,751 8 118,404 0 0 0 0 0 118,404 Total 561,676 33,862 9,135 29,116 49,635 7,804 691,228 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? Sincerely, Ken Schmidt President- Steel in the Air,Inc. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, 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 0 0 52,880 5 58,533 0 0 0 11,707 7,804 78,044 6 23,600 30,624 0 9,187 0 0 63,411 7 21,584 3,238 0 19,929 0 0 44,751 8 118,404 0 0 0 0 0 118,404 Total 561,676 33,862 9,135 29,116 49,635 7,804 691,228 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? Sincerely, Ken Schmidt President- Steel in the Air,Inc. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, 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 Hall 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: Staff would need to seek competitive proposals for contract cleaning of the park 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? f 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 0 0 52,880 5 58,533 0 0 0 11,707 7,804 78,044 6 23,600 30,624 0 9,187 0 0 63,411 7 21,584 3,238 0 19,929 0 0 44,751 8 118,404 0 0 0 0 0 118,404 Total 561,676 33,862 9,135 29,116 49,635 7,804 691,228 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? Sincerely, Ken Schmidt President- Steel in the Air,Inc. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, 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 $5,00o 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 2011-12 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? 0 44,751 8 118,404 0 0 0 0 0 118,404 Total 561,676 33,862 9,135 29,116 49,635 7,804 691,228 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? Sincerely, Ken Schmidt President- Steel in the Air,Inc. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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, FY 11-12 General 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 248/week to 228/week (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: • Sheriff's Department has expressed concern about this recommended budget reduction, especially the possibility of increased response times. • Model prepared by RSG recommended removing the Sheriff's Service Specialist (SSS) position from the Sheriffs contract as crime prevention is not a mandated service (savings would be $69,267). City Manager recommends 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 Sheriff's 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 Sheriff's Department for law enforcement services? 118,404 Total 561,676 33,862 9,135 29,116 49,635 7,804 691,228 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? Sincerely, Ken Schmidt President- Steel in the Air,Inc. r tnt,+,t.hlrasc or.1cence tc-om,-r.=w!ti,To nu ment 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 l sites such as picocells or femtocells(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcell and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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,