RPVCCA_CC_SR_2011_07_19_03_WQFFP_User_Fee_Rate_2011-12Date:
Subject:
PUBLIC HEARING
July 19,2011
Water Quality and Flood Protection Program Annual User Fee Rate
FY11-12
Subject Property:Citywide
1.Declare the Hearing Open:Mayor Long
2.Report of Notice Given:City Clerk Morreale
3.Staff Report &Recommendation:Director of Finance and IT Services McLean
Director of Public Works Holland
Senior Engineer Dragoo
Associate Engineer Winje
4.Public Testimony:
Applicant:N/A
Appellant:N/A
5.Council Questions:
6.Rebuttal:
7.Declare Hearing Closed:Mayor Long
8.Council Deliberation:
9.Council Action:
3-1
CITY OF
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
REVIEWED:
HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DENNIS McLEAN,DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND INFORMATION ~
TECHNOLOGY ~
RAY HOLLAND,D~RECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS ~
JULY 19,2011
PUBLIC HEARING·WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD
PROTECTION PROGRAM -ANNUAL USER FEE RATE -FY11·
12
CAROLYN LEHR,CITY MANAGERcfJ..---
Staff Coordinators:
RECOMMENDATION
Ron Dragoo,PE,Senior Engineer
Andy Winje,PE,Associate Engineer
1)Receive,review and file the independent Water Quality and Flood Protection Program
Annual Report,dated May 25,2011,prepared by the Oversight Committee for the
storm drain program.
2)Conduct a public hearing pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 5473.2 and
Section 3.44.40 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code on July19,2011 on the
Annual Report prepared by Harris &Associates,the Annual Report prepared by the
Oversight Committee and information provided by Staff,and determine whether to
collect the Storm Drain User Fee (the "Fee")for FY11-12,and if so,the rate per
Equivalent Residential Unit ("ERU")for FY11-12.
3)At the conclusion of the Public Hearing determine the existence or absence of a
majority protest.
4)In the absence of a majority protest,Staff recommends that the Council determine that
the rate per ERU for FY11-12 shall be $92.53 as set forth in the Annual Report,adopt
the attached Resolution No._;A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
3-2
PUBLIC HEARING -WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION
PROGRAM -ANNUAL USER FEE RATE -FY11-12
July 19,2011
Page 2,of 6
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES FINALLY ADOPTING A REPORT,AS FILED,IN
CONNECTION WITH THE STORM DRAIN USER FEE ESTABLISHED PURSUANT
TO CHAPTER 3.44 OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE;
DETERMINING THE AMOUNT OF SUCH FEE FOR FY11-12;AND ORDERING THAT
SUCH FEE BE COLLECTED ON THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TAX ROLL FOR
FY11-12.
5)In the event of a majority protest,direct Staff to present to Council at a subsequent
Council meeting a resolution determining the amount of the Storm Drain User Fee for
FY11-12 and providing for an alternative method of collecting the Storm Drain User Fee
for FY11-12..
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff has timely published public notices for this Public Hearing in the Palos Verdes
Peninsula News on June 30,2011 and July 7,2011.During the Public Hearing,the City
Council shall make a decision whether to collect the User Fee for FY11-12.Prior to this
Public Hearing,Staff updated the Committee on February 3,2011 and again on March 30,
2011 and April 20,2011 (see attached staff report),including the status of storm drain
capital projects,storm drain lining projects,catch basin filtration devices and other
expenditures for the program.At a public hearing conducted on May 25,2011,Staff
presented to the Committee the proposed project plan and draft budget for the Storm Drain
program for FY11-12,excerpts from the 2011 draft Five-Year Financial Model,the draft
2011 Capital Improvement Plan,as well as the draft 5-Year Storm Drain Plan.During the
public hearing,staff presented an update to the draft 5-Year Storm Drain Plan and its
recommendation to increase the User Fee by 2%from $90.72/ERU to $92.53,the
maximum increase allowed.Upon concluding the public hearing,the Committee decided
4-1 (Member Constantino dissenting)to support Staff's recommendation to increase the
Fee to $92.53,the maximum increase allowed.The Committee then proceeded to draft its
Annual Report,including a recommendation to increase the Fee to the maximum amount
allowed.
If the Council elects to collect the Fee during FY11-12,it must decide whether to:
~Follow the recommendation of the Oversight Committee and Staff to increase the
User Fee to the maximum rate:$92.53/ERU;or
~Maintain the current Fee rate at $90.72/ERU;or
~Decrease the Fee rate;or
If the Council elects to not collect the Fee during FY11-12,it must decide whether to:
~Reduce the Fee to zero for FY11-12;or
~Repeal Chapter 3.44 (the User Fee).
3-3
PUBLIC HEARING -WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION
PROGRAM -ANNUAL USER FEE RATE -FY11-12
July 19,2011
Page 3 of6
The City Council's decision should be based upon Staff's recommendation,the
recommendation from the Oversight Committee,its own review of the Fee rate,as well as
Staff's estimates of other revenue and current and projected expenditures (including the
storm drain program),current and projected General fund reserves and the fund balance in
the WQFP enterprise fund.
Staff's Finding and Recommendation
Staff believes that General Fund revenues will not be sufficient to fund the Storm Drain
program for the following reasons:
1)Property tax represents about 42%of General Fund revenue and any small
variance in the percentage increase of property assessments has a large
cumulative effect on the five years of the Model.
The FY11-12 estimate of property tax revenue is based on the maximum 2%
increase allowable by Proposition 13 and an additional 0.3%increase for property
sales and re-assessments,based on Staff's analysis of information from the City's
parcel database.
General Fund expenditures have been increased an average of 3.9%in FY11-12
and 2.9%for FY12-13 based on the draft two-year budget prepared by Staff.The
FY11-12 increase is primarily due to a more proactive approach to Public Works
maintenance,additions to the Emergency Preparedness program,and unfreezing
the Recreation Director position.Expenditures have been increased by a range of
3.0%to 3.4%for the remaining years of the Model.The increase is based on the
forecasted increase of Consumer Price Index from the Congressional Budget
Office,and annual 3%merit increases for employee salaries.
Therefore,the Model represents that General Fund expenditures could increase at
a greater rate than revenue over next five years.
2)Staff continues to work with the City's grant consultant and federal advocate to
secure federal funding for San Ramon Canyon Stabilization Project.The project
has widespread support from federal,state and local representatives.The City has
submitted applications for both 50%funding from a state Proposition 1E grant and
an earmark from the federal Water Resources Development Act (WRDA).Staff
does not expect to hear from either agency until the end of 2011 or early 2012.Per
the San Ramon Project Study Report presented to City Council on March 1,2011,
construction of the ultimate solution is estimated to cost $19.4 million.Until funding
is secured,the project has been included in the CIP unfunded project list.
3-4
PUBLIC HEARING -WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION
PROGRAM -ANNUAL USER FEE RATE -FY11-12
July 19,2011
Page 4 of 6
The FY10-11 budget includes a $1.4 million appropriation for the study report
necessary to apply for outside funding,as well as development of bid-ready
construction documents.On March 1,2011,the City Council authorized staff to
pursue final design and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)clearances.
Council also directed staff to urgently develop plans to relocate the sanitary sewer
currently located at the edge of the canyon.Finally,Council affirmed their desire to
have a "shelf-ready"early action plan (EAP)to stabilize the PVDE switchbacks.
Design of the EAP is nearly complete.The EAP project with an estimated cost of
about $2 million could be built in about 3 months.The EAP project mayor may not
be necessary,depending on the timing of construction of the ultimate solution.
3)The Storm Drain User Fee,which generates revenue totaling about $1.2 million
annually,will sunset in 2016 in accordance with the ballot measure approved by the
voters in 2007.Staff expects to prepare an update to the Storm Drain Master Plan
which is expected to identify additional projects that will necessitate a future source
of funding.The cost of Master Plan update has been included in the 2011 Model.
When the WQFP program was established in 2005,a list of 38 projects totaling
about $20.1 million was identified and included in the original program.Of those
projects,a number of projects that affect 5 regional systems with an estimated total
cost of about $9.4 million remain unfunded through FY15-16.As described
previously,the estimated cost of the San Ramon Canyon Stabilization project is
$19.4 million and is currently unfunded.The original 2005 program also included
about $4.6 million of pipe lining over 30 years.Through FY15-16,about $5.1 million
of pipe lining will have been completed over a period of 11 years.
4)The draft 2011 Capital Improvement Plan includes a list of unfunded projects with a
total cost range of $70 million to $105 million.The unfunded list includes the San
Ramon Canyon Stabilization project,a new civic center,various arterial roadway
projects,and many other projects.The 2011 Model does not include any projects
from the unfunded list.
In light of the significance of the multi-million dollar amount of unfunded CIP projects and
the City's Reserve Policy to set-aside funds to help pay for a portion of the future projects,
Staff recommends an increase of the Fee from $90.72 to $92.53 for the FY11-12,an
increase of 2%,as authorized under Chapter 3.44 of the Municipal Code.
At the time this report was finalized,no protests regarding the Fee had been received.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Overview of Scope and Purpose for the Oversight Committee
3-5
PUBLIC HEARING -WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION
PROGRAM -ANNUAL USER FEE RATE -FY11-12
July 19,2011
Page 5 of6
A revised Scope and Purpose was approved by the City Council on May 5,2009,to be
effective with the 2009 Fee Review process.The process was outlined in the Resolution as
follows:
As described in Section 3.44.080 A.,"The committee shall hold at least one public hearing
and issue a report,on at least an annual basis,to inform city residents and the City Council
regarding how storm drain user fee revenues are being spent and to make
recommendations to the city council regarding future expenditures of the storm drain user
fee revenues."Staff expects to use maps,pictures,video and financial information regarding
the storm drain program to assist the Oversight Committee's understanding.
The Committee's review will include the following information provided by Staff:
~a comparison of bUdget v.actual accounting for the current fiscal year;
~a construction project status report,including information about expenditures to date and
major contract status (i.e.design and construction contracts);
~the proposed budget (including major projects)for the forthcoming year;
~an excerpt of the Five-Year Financial Model for the storm drain program,including the
estimated ending balance,if any,in the Water Quality and Flood Protection fund;
~an excerpt of the Five-Year Financial Model regarding the projected revenues ofthe General
Fund of the City for the current and forthcoming fiscal years,including but not limited to,
property taxes,sales taxes and transient occupancy taxes;the projected expenditures of the
General Fund of the City for the current and forthcoming fiscal years;and the estimated
ending General Fund reserves for the current and forthcoming fiscal years;and
~Staff's recommendation regarding the User Fee rate for the forthcoming year.
Staff believes that its presentation to the Oversight Committee made on April 20,2011,
March 30,2011,May 25,2011 and May 25,2011 satisfied the provisions of Municipal
Code section 3.44.080 that outlines the information to be annually reviewed by the
Oversight Committee.
Passage of Measure C -November 6,2007
On November 6,2007,the voters approved an amendment to the User Fee ordinance to
include a voter enacted Oversight Committee and a 1O-year sunset of the storm drain user
fee.When the User Fee rate was established by the property owners in 2005,the total
User Fees to be collected over 30 years was estimated to be about $50 million to pay for
known construction projects,storm drain lining,maintenance,staffing and engineering.
Based upon the 1O-year sunset established with the passage of Measure C,the maximum
total User Fees that could be collected is estimated to be about $13 million.It appears as
though it will be necessary to secure other funding sources to continue the Storm Drain
program when the User Fee expires on June 30,2016.
3-6
PUBLIC HEARING -WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION
PROGRAM -ANNUAL USER FEE RATE -FY11-12
July 19,2011
Page 6 of6
Meetings and Public Hearings Conducted by the Oversight Committee
Staff presented a FY10-11 update regarding the Water Quality and Flood Protection
program (the "Storm Drain program")in a Memorandum,dated February 3,2011,sent via
email.Staff updated the Committee again on March 30,2011 and April 20,2011,(see
attached staff report)including the status of storm drain capital projects,storm drain lining
projects,catch basin filtration devices and other expenditures for the program.At a public
hearing conducted on May 25,2011,Staff presented the proposed project plan and draft
budget for the Storm Drain program for FY11-12,excerpts from the draft 2011 Five-Year
Financial Model,the draft 2011 Capital Improvement Plan,as well as the draft 5-Year
Storm Drain Plan.During the public hearing on May 25,2011,staff presented an update to
the draft 5-Year Storm Drain Plan and its recommendation to increase the User Fee to
$92.53,which is the maximum amount allowed.Upon concluding the public hearing,the
Committee decided 4-1 (Member Constantino dissenting)to support Staff's
recommendation to increase the Fee to $92.53,the maximum increase allowed.The
Committee then proceeded to draft its Annual Report,including a recommendation to
increase the Fee to the maximum amount.
Attachments:
1)Exhibit A -RESOLUTION NO.A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES FINALLY ADOPTING A REPORT,
AS FILED,IN CONNECTION WITH THE STORM DRAIN USER FEE
ESTABLISHED PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 3.44 OF THE RANCHO PALOS
VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE;DETERMINING THE AMOUNT OF SUCH FEE FOR
FISCAL YEAR 11-12;AND ORDERING THAT SUCH FEE BE COLLECTED ON
THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TAX ROLL FOR FISCAL YEAR 11-12
2)Exhibit B -Annual Report of the Water Quality and Flood Protection Program,
dated May 25,2011,prepared by the Oversight Committee for the storm drain
program
3)Exhibit C -Annual Report for the Storm Drain User Fee -FY11-12,prepared by
Harris &Associates,dated June 27,2011
4)Exhibit D -Staff Report to Oversight Committee,dated May 25,2011
3-7
Exhibit A -RESOLUTION NO.A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES FINALLY ADOPTING A REPORT,AS
FILED,IN CONNECTION WITH THE STORM DRAIN USER FEE ESTABLISHED
PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 3.44 OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL
CODE;DETERMINING THE AMOUNT OF SUCH FEE FOR FISCAL YEAR 11-12;
AND ORDERING THAT SUCH FEE BE COLLECTED ON THE COUNTY OF LOS
ANGELES TAX ROLL FOR FISCAL YEAR 11-12
3-8
Exhibit A
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
PALOS VERDES FINALLY ADOPTING A REPORT,AS FILED,IN
CONNECTION WITH THE STORM DRAIN USER FEE ESTABLISHED
PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 3.44 OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES
MUNICIPAL CODE;DETERMINING THE AMOUNT OF SUCH FEE FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2011·12;AND ORDERING THAT SUCH FEE BE
COLLECTED ON THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TAX ROLL FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2011·12
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES HEREBY
FINDS,DETERMINES,ORDERS AND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.The City Council finds:
A.Pursuant to Ordinance No.418 of the City Council of the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes (the "City Council"),adopted on August 16,2005,and Chapter
3.44 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (the "Municipal Code"),the City
Council is authorized to levy an annual Storm Drain User Fee on each parcel of real
property in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (the "City")that drains into City-maintained
storm drain infrastructure.The Storm Drain User Fee is levied to fund the City's Water
Quality and Flood Protection Program.
B.Pursuant to Section 5473 of the California Health and Safety Code,
the City elected in Ordinance No.418 to have the Storm Drain User Fee collected for
each fiscal year on the County of Los Angeles tax roll in the same manner,by the same
person,and at the same time as,together with,and not separately from the general
taxes of the City.
C.A written report (the "Report")entitled,"Annual Report for the Storm
Drain User Fee,FY 2011-12"and dated June 27,2011,has been prepared by Harris &
Associates and has been filed with the City Clerk.The Report contains a description of
each parcel of real property in the City that drains into the City's storm drain system and
the proposed amount of the Storm Drain User Fee for each such parcel for Fiscal Year
2011-12 (commencing July 1,2011 and ending June 30,2012),computed in conformity
with Chapter 3.44 of the Municipal Code.Such Report is on file in the office of the City
Clerk and incorporated herein by reference.
D.The City Clerk caused notice of a hearing on the Report to be
published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News on June 30,2011,and July 7,2011.
E.The City Council held a public hearing on the Report on July 19,
2011 (the "Public Hearing").In addition,pursuant to Section 3.44.40 of the Municipal
Code,at the Public Hearing the City Council considered whether to collect the Storm
Drain User Fee for Fiscal Year 2011-12,and the rate per Equivalent Residential Unit
("ERU")for Fiscal Year 2011-12.In that regard,the City Council took into account the
current and projected revenues of the City for Fiscal Year 2011-12,including but not
3-9
Exhibit A
limited to,property taxes,sales taxes and transient occupancy taxes;the current and
projected expenditures of the City for Fiscal Year 2011-12,including,but not limited to,
proposed expenditures in connection with the City's storm drain system;the balance,if
any,in the Water Quality and Flood Protection Program Enterprise Fund;and the
current and projected General Fund reserves.In addition,the City Council took into
account any report and recommendation submitted by the Oversight Committee
established by the City Council in connection with the City's Water Quality and Flood
Protection Program.
F.All interested persons were given an opportunity to attend the
Public Hearing and express opinions about the Report and the proposed levy of the
Storm Drain User Fee for Fiscal Year 2011-12.The City Council heard and considered
all protests and objections against the Report and all testimony regarding the proposed
levy of the Storm Drain User Fee for Fiscal Year 2011-12.
G.No majority protest against the Report,determined in accordance
with Health and Safety Code Section 5473.2,exists.
Section 2.The City Council hereby overrules all protests and objections;
hereby approves and finally adopts the Report as filed;hereby determines that the
Storm Drain User Fee for Fiscal Year 2011-12 against each parcel described in the
Report shall be as described in the Report;and orders that the Storm Drain User Fee
shall be collected for Fiscal Year 2011-12 on the County of Los Angeles tax roll in the
same manner,by the same person,and at the same time as,together with,and not
separately from the general taxes of the City.
Section 3.The City Clerk is directed to file a copy of the Report,with a
statement endorsed on the Report over the City Clerk's signature that the Report has
been approved and finally adopted by the City Council,with the City Treasurer on or
before August 10,2011 pursuant to Section 4 of Ordinance No.418.
Section 4.The City Clerk is directed to file a copy of the Report,with a
statement endorsed on the Report over the City Clerk's signature that the Report has
been approved and finally adopted by the City Council,with the Auditor of the County of
Los Angeles on or before August 10,2011 pursuant to Section 5 of Ordinance No.418.
PASSED,APPROVED and ADOPTED this __day of ,2011.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
3-10
Exhibit A
State of California )
County of Los Angeles )ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes )
I,CARLA MORREALE,City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,hereby certify
that the above Resolution No.2011-was duly and regularly passed and adopted
by the said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on ,2011.
City Clerk
R6876-0001 \1342958v1.doc -3-
3-11
Exhibit B -Annual Report of the Water Quality and Flood Protection Program,dated
May 25,2011,prepared by the Oversight Committee for the storm drain program
3-12
Exhibit B
2011 ANNUAL REPORT ON THE WQFP PROGRAM
MAY 25,2011
INTRODUCTION
An Oversight Committee was established by the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council in 2007 to
annually review project expenditures and plans for the Water Quality and Flood Protection (WQFP)
Program and to recommend a User Fee Rate for each fiscal year.The Committee consists of the
following members:
Frank Lyon (Chairman)
John Constantino
John Curtis
Henry Ott
Lowell Wedemeyer
The Committee met several times with the City's Finance and Information Technology and Public
Works staffs over the past couple months to review WQFP Program activities in FY 10-11 and planned
projects and budgeted expenditures in FY 11-12.Staff also provided the Committee with their
proposed Storm Drain Plan through FY 15-16,excerpts from the City's 2011 draft Five-Year Financial
Model,the draft 2011 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP),and their recommendation for the FY 11-12
User Fee Rate.
This report conveys the Committee's conclusions and recommendations in accordance with their
responsibilities designated by the City Council on May 5,2009 and documented in RPV Municipal
Code Section 3.44.080.
FY 10-11 EXPENDITURES
The approved WQFP Program expenditure plan (i.e.budget)for FY 10-11 totaled $3.5 million.As of
May 25, $765,685 had been spent or committed and total fiscal year expenditures are estimated to be
about the same.Major projects are described in the Schedule of Project Descriptions,as it was
contained in the staff report dated May 25,2011 (Attachment A),and fiscal year expenditures are
summarized in the Storm Drain Plan through FY15-16 (Attachment B)which were prepared by Staff.
Staff advised the Committee that the large variance between the $3.5 million budget and the estimated
expenditures of about $0.8 million is mainly due to:
1)The necessity to complete the investigation of design alternatives for the San Ramon
Stabilization project presented in the Project Study Report that was prepared by Harris &Associates
during FYI0-ll that led to the selected design concept.Staff expected that both the Project Study
Report would be completed (as it was)and the design and environmental phases would begin during
FY 10-11 when the FYI0-ll budget planning was conducted. The Committee has been advised by
Staff that the design contract,in the amount not to exceed $733,695,has been approved by the City
Council,but was executed after Staffs last presentation,therefore,not included in the Committed
column in Storm Drain Plan through FYI5-16.The design contract was executed prior to finalizing
this report.
3-13
Exhibit B
2)The Storm Drain Lining project was delayed in order to refine and organize video files to
achieve cost efficiencies.Staff has advised the Committee that the Storm Drain Lining project is
expected to resume in early FY 11-12 with an expected cost in excess of$1 million,using the FYIO-11
appropriation of$839,617 and the proposed FYII-12 budget amount.
3)The PVDE San Pedro Canyon project was revised to achieve budgetary compliance and cost
efficiency.
4)The continuing update of the Drainage Master Plan program has been slowed to allow for
further integration with the City's Geographic Information System ("GIS").The GIS system is
expected to be upgraded during FYII-12.
FY 10-11 User Fee collections through May 13 have totaled $1,117,915.
The uncommitted fund balance remaining in the City's WQFP Program Fund as of June 30,2011 is
estimated to be about $3.2 million.However,staff has advised the Committee that it expects that $2.7
million of appropriations will be carried forward from FYI0-ll to FYII-12 as described below.
The Committee believes that all WQFP Program costs to date,including User Fee revenues,have
been properly spent to discover and mitigate storm drain problems in the City.
PLANS FORFY 11-12
Staff presented the Committee with a proposed FY 11-12 Storm Drain expenditure plan (see
Attachment B)of $1.4 million,not including previously authorized but unspent funds.With the
expected $2.7 million to be carried forward from FY 10-11,total WQFP Program expenditures in FY
11-12 are projected to be about $4.1 million.
Major planned projects in FY 11-12 are described in Attachment A.
All planned projects appear necessary and are being funded appropriately under the present
circumstances.
USER FEE RATE FOR FY 11-12
On a 4-1 vote (Constantino dissenting),the Committee concurred with Staff's recommendation
to increase the Storm Drain User Fee Rate by 2 percent up to $92.53/ERU,the maximum allowed
by law.
OTHER COMMENTS
1)The Committee continues to believe that currently planned resources are inadequate to address
known storm drain repair needs in the City,and experience has shown that additional unknown needs
will probably arise that may require immediate attention.The San Ramon Canyon Stabilization Project
3-14
Exhibit B
alone is estimated to cost around $19.4 million and definite sources for these costs are currently
unknown.If funding from outside the City (i.e.grant funding)for the San Ramon project is not timely
obtained,then reprioritization of all City capital improvement projects will be essential.
2)The Committee recommends that a provision for funding long-term maintenance of the City's
storm drain system beyond 2016,when the Storm Drain Fee sunsets,should be included in future Five-
Year Financial Models.
Attachment A:Description of Storm Drain Projects
Attachment B:Storm Drain Plan through FY 15-16
3-15
Exhibit B
ATTACHMENT A -SCHEDULE OF STORM DRAIN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
Project Name;San Ramon Canvon Stabilization Proiect
Proiect Area:ProiectArea3
BUdaetedCost:$1,514,082
~TCo°tantl:.:.aa;::terc.::dd;.:.,:C:-o-s-:-ts-:----H$:-76~08=:"3::c:0:..::0;,,..-:___::__-_:_-_;:___;__;:_------_I~$19.4M (construction costs,unfunded)
Percentage Completion:50%(ore-construction activities onM
Project Description:
City Council has authorized staff to pursue final design and CEQA clearances.Council directed staff
to urgently develop plans to relocate the sanitary sewer currently located at the edge of the canyon.
Council also affirmed their desire to have a "shelf-ready"early action plan (EAP)to stabilize the
PVDE switchbacks.Design of the EAP is about 80%complete and could be built in about 3 months,
if it's determined to be necessary.City Staff and Elected Officials are actively pursuing Federal
funding opportunities and evaluating a State grant opportunity.The $1,514,082 budget,shown
above,includes money spent,budgeted and projected for portion of the project up to and including
development of bid ready construction documents.It does not include construction of the sewer
relocation,implementation of the EAP,or implementation of the ultimate project Construction costs
estimated to be $19.4 million for the ultimate project,including the sewer relocation,have not been
included in a funding plan.The EAP switchback project estimated to cost -$2M can hopefully be
avoided.It has not been included in a financina Dian at this time either.
Pl'ol.ectName:StorrnDrainLinirtg
Proiect Area:Proiect Area 12
Budgeted Cost:$1,159,172
Contract Award:TBD
Total/Estimated Costs:$3,632,787
Percentaae Completion:0%
Proiect.·Descdptlol'l:
As a result of the inspections performed on the large diameter storm drain pipes in FY 09-10,seven
storm drain lines were determined to need some form of repair.One of the seven pipes,a one-
hundred twenty inch diameter pipe running under PVDS,was repaired in the previous year,as an
emergency repair when holes in the pipe were discovered during a follow up inspection.Three large
diameter storm drains scheduled to be repaired in the FY 2009-1 0 lining program will be lined during
FY1 0-11 and FY11-12.The remaining three large diameter pipes needing repairs will be inspected
again this year and be scheduled for repairs based upon condition and urgency.In total,the twenty-
six lines identified for lining last year,(three large diameter lines and the remaining twenty-three lines
that are thirty inches and smaller)will be included in this year's program.Investigations are underway
to identify additional drains requiring lining this year.Staff anticipates bringing this item to Council for
awardlhis summer._l,)r.!sP!l(1(b_u~9~t_a.!l1_0!J(1~!C!I~g f~l'!Y!u~Jl:!r9l!Q.hJ:,(~Q1J :t2_"!.n~_aYl!iLapLe JC!r_
this work totals $1,159,172.
______---(Deleted:in May of this year
3-16
2crr~i~~NUAL REPORT ON THE WQFP PROGRAM
ATTACHMENT A -SCHEDULE OF STORM DRAIN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
May 25,2011
Page 2 of4
Proiect Name:Catch Basin Filtration Devices
Proiect Area:Proiect Area 12
Budgeted Cost:$100,000
Contract Award:$27,000 for about 60%installed.
Final/Estimated Costs:$441,490
Percentaae Comoletion:60%
ProlectD$sCriotion:
Retrofitting of catch basins with filtration screens in this area of the City is required by the Regional
Board to address the trash problems at Lake Machado in Los Angeles.The City has until 2016 to
install screens in the 111 catch basin contributing to this drainage.SiXty eight (68)catch basins have
been retrofitted in FY 2010-11 at a cost of about $27,000,a savings of 78%over original estimates.
The City's compliance response is about 60%,so we are ahead of schedule.The remaining basins
in this drainage are county owned and will require an MOU for maintenance with Los Angeles County.
Installation ofthese will be performed after an MOU is authorized by both agencies.The remaining
40%ofthe basins will come at a higher cost due to involvement of LA County and cost for completing
their flood permits.Based on this year's results and anticipated costs for the remaining 40%,
$105,000 in funds from original budget for Machado Lake basins ($205,000)will be available for other
programs.
prolectName:MiscelianeOU$Repairs.&Storm Drain Filtration Maintenance
Proiect Area:Project Area 12
Budgeted Cost:$194,817
Contract Award:N/A
Total/Estimated Costs:TBD
Percentaae Comoletion:0%
Proiect.Descrh:>tlon:
As a result ofthis program and the following maintenance activities,the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
has not received a single "after-hours"callout to address a rain related emergency during the past
three years.
~All of the filters in the 29 catch basins with filtration devices installed in the City are
scheduled to be replaced;
~The City contracts with LA County for annual clearing of City-owned catch basins.The
County process is cumbersome and makes financial planning and required reporting difficult.
Staff is evaluating use of private contractor s for future years;
~Large Diameter Storm Drain Maintenance projects have been identified on PVDE,
Hawthorne Blvd.,and Indian Peak Rd.and will be repaired through the lining project this
year;
~44 storm drain outlets are identified and scheduled to be cleaned and repaired throughout
the City this year;
~Cleaned and video inspected 26 sections of CMP (about 13%)in FY2009-10;
~Scheduled to clean and video inspect additional CMP in PVDE area in FY201 0-11 ;
~$50,000 has been reprogrammed to the Via Canada project for FY 2011-12 in anticipation of
construction necessary to make system corrections.
3-17
2d1'~i~~NUAL REPORT ON THE WQFP PROGRAM
ATTACHMENT A -SCHEDULE OF STORM DRAIN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
May 25,2011
Page 3 of4
Project Name:Drainaa.e Master Plan Proaram
Project Area:Project Area 12
Budaeted Cost:$720,000
Contract Award:$31,723 (to date)
Total/Estimated Costs:$840,000
Percentaae Comoletion:0%
PrOject DesCriotion:
The City is upgrading its GIS platform and PW Staff will continue improving GIS data and best
practices to maximize use for stormwater management planning.Available as-built drawings have
been scanned and linked to existing GIS database.Links to inspection video is underway.
Staff has engaged a Master Plan Program Management consultant to guide our efforts to develop a
current,sustainable and useful management tool.Staff anticipates engaging a data verification
contractor in late spring or early summer to verify atlas data in the field and with County records.
Additional work anticipated for next yeClr includes collection of additional data from other agencies,
addition of hydrology and hydraulic modeling tools integrated into the GIS platform,determination of
deficient facilities and orioritization of corrective oroiects.
Proiect Name:
Proiect Area:
Budaeted Cost:
Contract Award:
Total/Estimated Costs:
Percentage Completion:
Project Description:
Roan Systems
Project Area 7
$242,500
TBD
$446,728
0%
The Via Colin ita portion of this project is being addressed under the San Pedro Canyon Storm Drain
project and $50,000 will be transferred to that project in FY2011-12.The remaining portion is for
addressing the physical deficiencies in the Roan road area system
3-18
2<tr~i~~NUAL REPORT ON THE WQFP PROGRAM
ATTACHMENT A -SCHEDULE OF STORM DRAIN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
May 25,2011
Page 4 of4
Proiect Name:San Pedro Canvon Storm Drains
Proiect Area:Proiect Area 6
Budgeted Cost:$570,000 (Re-allocated from Hawthorne Blvd.proiect.)
Contract Award:TBD
Final/Estimated Costs:TBD
Percentaae ComDletion:0%
Prolect·OescriDtion:
This project in San Pedro Canyon lies east of PVDE and is crossed several times by residential
streets.This project has become a priority due to observed flooding in the area,sediment and debris
accumulation in potentially undersized debris basins and degraded pipes and inlet/outlet structures.
Staff has engaged a consultant to provide hydrologic and hydraulic analyses and design
recommendations,including construction drawings.New County standards for hydrology
assumptions complicate the design process from replacement in kind to upsizing of pipes which has
downstream consequences.Staff is working with consultant to develop solutions to address known
or anticipated capacity issues based on field observations,with a mind to restrict hydromodification
(I.e.effects on downstream areas).Analysis and design work is expected to begin this year and carry
into next followed bv construction of improvements.
projeclName:ViaCanacla [)rainage$tudy
Proiect Area:Proiect Area 6
Budaeted Cost:$125,000
Contract Award:$24,985
Final/Estimated Costs:TBD
Percentage Completion:20%
Project·De$criPt!on:
This project east of PVDE and north of Miraleste Canyon results from observed flooding at the bottom
of Via Canada (cul-du-sac)during moderate to heavy rain events.This drain in question is County
owned and the flooding issue was brought to their attention 10 years ago.Since no action has been
taken,the impacted homeowners have requested the City do something.This project will study likely
causes of the flooding at the bottom of the hill and develop solutions that work around the County
system.The scope includes development of bid ready documents for corrective construction.An
additional budget of $100,000 was added for FY 2011-12 in order to implement the identified
solutions.The $100,000 addition comes from $50,000 reductions to each of the Storm Drain
Maintenance Projects item and the Via Col in ita/Roan System Project (as described above).
Therefore,there is no net increase to the budget by reprogramming these funds.
3-19
::;:::::.:::.:...:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::(:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::;:;=;;:;:;:::;:::;:::;:::;:::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;:;:::;:{{{;:::;:;:.::.::;:;:;:;:::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;:;:::;:::;:::;:::;:;:;:;{;:;:::;:::::::.:.....
Exhibit B
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Storm Drain Plan through FY15·16
2,839,837
1,750,000
2,438,992
2,240,000
840,000
11,813
145,470
570,000
417,381
1,553,778
1,514,082
1,403,500
1,863.851
::l
229,727 237,518 245,544
/».
152,418 157,080 161,792 166,646
30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000
200,000
319,555 324,842 329,881 335,278 340,838
3,
242,500 446,128
485,000 485,000
440,000 440,000
139,160
446,000 446,000
73,000 441,490
8.600
135,000
119,213
Included In the·C 's fltUlnclal stateltUlnts.
3-20
Exhibit C -Annual Report for the Storm Drain User Fee -FY11-12,prepared by Harris
&Associates,dated June 27,2011
3-21
Annual Report
for the
Storm Drain User Fee
FY 2011·12 .
For the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Los Angeles County,California
June 27,2011
Exhibit C3-22
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Storm Drain User Fee
Annual Report -FY 2011·12
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Certificates Pg.1
Introduction Pg.2
Cost Estimates Pg.3
Annual Fee Rate Calculations Pg.4
Sample Calculations Pg.6
Assessment Roll Under Separate Cover
Q:\RPV\SD Fee Admin\FY 11-12\reports\SD Fee Rpt 11-12 Fina1.doc
June 27,2011
ExhibitC
3-23
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Water Quality and Flood Protection Fee
Annual Report-FY 2011-12
FY 2011-12 Annual Report
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Storm Drain User Fee
The undersigned respectfully submits the enclosed report as directed by the City Council.
June 27,2011
Page 1
DATED:
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Annual Report,together with Assessment Roll thereto attached,
was filed with me on the __day of ,2011.
Carla Morreale,City Clerk,
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Los Angeles County,California
By _
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Annual Report,together with Assessment Roll thereto attached
was finally adopted and confirmed by the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,California,on
the __day of ,2011.
Carla Morreale,City Clerk,
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Los Angeles County,California
By _
Q:\RPV\SD Fee Admin\FY 11-12\reports\SD Fee Rpt 11-12 Final.doc
Exhibit C
3-24
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Water Quality and Flood Protection Fee
Annual Report -FY 2011-12
INTRODUCTION
June 27,2011
Page 2
To insure a flow of funds for the Water Quality and Flood Protection Program,the City of Rancho
Palos Verdes established a user fee in September 2005.This Fee ensures a fair and equitable levying
of the costs of the Water Quality and Flood Protection Program.
Pursuant to Section 3.44.40 of the City's Municipal Code,at a public hearing,the City Council will
consider whether to collect the Storm Drain User Fee for Fiscal Year 2011-12 (July 1,2011 through
June 30,2012),and,if so,establish the rate per Equivalent Residential Unit for Fiscal Year 2011-12.
In making its determinations,the City Council will take into account the current and projected
revenues of the City for Fiscal Year 2011-12,including but not limited to,property taxes,sales taxes
and transient occupancy taxes;the current and projected expenditures of the City for Fiscal Year
2011-12,including,but not limited to,proposed expenditures in connection with the City's storm
drain system;the balance,if any,in the Water Quality and Flood Protection Program Enterprise
Fund;and the current and projected General Fund reserves.In addition,the City Council will
consider any report and recommendation submitted by the Oversight Committee established by the
City Council in connection with the City's Water Quality and Flood Protection Program.
The Storm Drain User Fee is levied under the authority of the California Health and Safety Code
Section 5471 et seq.(the "Code").Payment of the fees for each parcel will be made in the same
manner and at the same time as payments are made for property taxes for each property.
This report contains the necessary data required to establish the annual fee rates and is submitted for
filing in the office ofthe City Clerk,where it shall remain open for public inspection.
Q:\RPV\SD Fee Admin\FY 11-12\reports\SD Fee Rpt 11-12 Final.doc Exhibit C
3-25
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Water Quality and Flood Protection Fee
Annual Report -FY 2011·12
COST ESTIMATE
June 27,2011
Page 3
The estimated annual costs to fund the Water Quality and Flood Protection Program are provided
below in Table 1.
Table 1-Estimated Annual Costs
BEGINNING FUND BALANCE (7/1/11)
ESTIMATED REVENUES
Annual Fee Levy
Interest Earnings
City Contribution
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES
Storm Drain Master Plan
Backbone Projects
Pipe Lining
Secondary Projects
Miscellaneous Repairs &Maintenance
Filtration Device Installation
Reserve for Anticipated Additional Costs
Administration (contract/staff engineer)
ENDING FUND BALANCE (6/30/12)
The ending fund balance constitutes a Reserve for Future Projects.
Q:\RPV\SD Fee Admin\FY 11-12\reports\SD Fee Rpt 11-12 Final.doc
$563,692
$1,367,832
$2,800
$0
$1,370,632
$225,000
$200,000
$319,555
$342,500
$194,817
$0
$0
$223,017
$1,504,889
$429,435
Exhibit C
3-26
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Water Quality and Flood Protection Fee
Annual Report -FY 2011·12
ANNUAL FEE RATE CALCULATIONS
June 27,2011
Page 4
By definition,all properties that drain into the City's storm drain system use the storm drain system.
The amount of use attributed to each parcel is measurable by the amount of storm runoff contributed
by the property,which is directly proportional to the amount of impervious area on a parcel (such as
buildings and concrete).The more impervious area on a property,the more storm runoff the property
generates.Vacant,unimproved parcels are still in their natural states and do not contribute any
additional runoff to burden the system,therefore these parcels are not charged a storm drain fee.
Table 2 shows the estimated Impervious Pt;lrcentages for single-family residential (SFR)properties of
various size ranges.These Impervious Percentages are the estimated percent impervious cover on a
property based on a ten percent data sampling of SFR parcels within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
when the fee was initially adopted.
Because of the variations in condominiums and non-SFR properties,which include multi-family
residential,institutional (such as churches and private schools)and government-owned properties,
these properties were reviewed individually using the City GIS and Aerial photography to determine
the actual Impervious cover for each parcel.
Table 2-SFR Impervious Percentages
Land Impervious
Use Percentage SFR Size Ranges
SFR1 74.0%0.01 -0.16 acres (-1 sf --7,012 sf)
SFR2 58.0%0.161 -0.20 acres (-7,013 sf --8,755 sf)
SFR3 48.5%0.201 -0.28 acres (-8,756 sf --12,239 sf)
SFR4 41.0%0.281 -0.54 acres (-12,240 sf --23,565 sf)
SFR5 34.5%0.541 -2.99**acres (-23,566 sf --130,680 sf)
SFR6 n/a*3.0 acres and greater
*the actual Impervious percentage IS used for each parcel.
**the actual impervious percentage is used for SFR5 over 3/4 AC
if less than originally noticed.
The amount each parcel uses the storm drain system is computed by the following formula:
(Parcel Area)x (Impervious Percentage)=Drainage Units
The more Drainage Units a parcel has,the more storm run-off it generates,and the more it uses the
storm drain system.
It is often convenient to relate other land uses to a developed single family horne,instead of working
exclusively with Drainage Units.Since 85%of the parcels within the City are designated as Single
Family Residential (SFR)parcels,and the median number of Drainage Units is 0.118 for all SFR
parcels,it makes sense to relate all parcels to this median residential property.Therefore,0.118
Drainage Units is set equal to one Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU).
Parcels within the City that have runoff flowing out of the City without going through any City-
maintained drainage infrastructure are not included in this fee.There are also a number of County-
maintained pipes within the City.If properties drain exclusively to these pipes and the pipe system
Q:\RPV\SD Fee Admin\FY 11-12\reports\SD Fee Rpt 11-12 Fina1.doc Exhibit C
3-27
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Water Quality and Flood Protection Fee
Annual Report -FY 2011-12
June 27,2011
Page 5
does not include any City-maintained infrastructure,then they are not included in the fee.These
areas,which consist of approximately 3,042 parcels,are excluded from the Storm Drain User Fee.
For the purposes of this report,City-maintained infrastructure includes pipes,inlets,outlets,and
natural drainage courses,and is also referred to as the "City's storm drain system."
Inventory of Parcels
Table 3,below,provides a summary of parcels by land use and shows the total estimated Drainage
Units and ERUs for the City.
Table 3-Drainage Unit Summary Table
Land Imperv.Drainage
Use Parcels Acreaae Percent Units ERU Land Use Description
SFR1 1,113 162.57 74.0%120.056 1,017.4318 SFR:0.01 -0.16 acres (-0 sf --7,012 sf)
SFR2 1,900 350.02 58.0%202.768 1,718.4219 SFR:0.161 -0.20 acres (-7,013 sf --8,755 sf)
SFR3 3,096 736.16 48.5%357.307 3,028.0663 SFR:0.201 -0.28 acres (-8,756 sf --12,239 sf)
SFR4 2,798 1,101.23 41.0%449.141 3,806.2846 SFR:0.281 -0.54 acres (-12,240 sf --23,565 sf)
SFR5 944 741.69 34.5%*212.431 1,800.2628 SFR:0.541 -2.99 acres (-23,566 sf --130,680 sf)
SFR6 10 52.38 actual*3.551 30.0930 SFR:3.0 acres and Qreater
CNDO 1,846 139.48 actual*95.727 811.2726 Condominiums
MFR 38 50.77 actual*40.501 343.2288 Multi-Family Residential
COM 47 152.73 actual*77.693 658.4151 Commercial
INST 20 114.80 actual*64.692 548.2371 Churches,Private Schools,Institutions
GOV 47 488.25 actual*120.462 1,020.8641 Government-owned parcels
11,859 4,090.09 1,744.329 14,782.5781
*the actual impervious percentages have been used for parcels with these land uses
which includes SFR5 parcels>.75 AC
The parcel areas for condominiums are calculated by dividing the total area of the condominium
complex (which includes the common area)by the number of condominium units,and the total
imperviousness of the entire complex is attributed to each individual condo parcel in the complex.
(This divides the runoff of the entire complex to each ofthe individual units.)Because the
condominium common areas are taken into consideration in this manner,they are exempt from the
charge.
Annual Fee Rate
Table 4 provides the calculation ofthe Maximum Annual Fee Rate for FY 2011-12 and shows the
actual proposed Fee Rate.
Q:\RPV\SD Fee Admin\FY 11-12\reports\SD Fee Rpt 11-12 Final.doc Exhibit C
3-28
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Water Quality and Flood Protection Fee
Annual Report-FY 2011·12
Table 4 -Annual Fee Rate
June 27,2011
Page 6
CPI CPI 2%Max.Actual
Increase Rate Rate Rate Rate
Base Year·FY 2006·07 $86.00 $86.00
FY 2007·08 3.8%$89.27 $87.72 $87.72 $87.72
FY 2008·09 3.3%$90.61 $89.47 $89.47 $89.47
FY 2009·10 0.0%$89.47 $91.26 $89.47 $89.47
FY 2010·11 1.4%$90.72 $91.26 $90.72 $90.72
FY 2011·12 2.3%$92.81 $92.53 $92.53 $92.53
The maximum rate will increase automatically on an annual basis by an amount equal to the annual
change in Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI)for the Los Angeles,Riverside,
Orange County Areas including all items as published by the U.S.Bureau of Labor Statistics as of
March I of each year,not to exceed a maximum increase of two percent (2%)per year.
The actual rate to be levied each year will be as approved by the City Council at a public hearing,
after they consider an Annual Fee Report outlining the estimated annual costs of the program.
Table 5 provides sample fee calculations for various land uses and parcel sizes based on the proposed
Actual Fee Rate.
Q:\RPV\SD Fee Admin\FY 11-12\reports\SD Fee Rpt 11-12 Final.doc Exhibit C
3-29
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Water Quality and Flood Protection Fee
Annual Report-FY 2011-12
Table 5-Sample Calculations
June 27,2011
Page 7
Est.FY 11-12 Annual
Land Use Parcel Parcel Imperv.Drainage Fee Rate/ERU
Designation Area (sf)Area (a c)x Percent =Units I 0.118 =ERU's $92.53
SFR1 3,500 0.08 x 0.740 =0.059 /0.118 =0.5000 $46.27
SFR2 7,400 0.17 x 0.580 =0.099 /0.118 =0.8390 $77.63
SFR2 8,300 0.19 x 0.580 =0.110 /0.118 =0.9322 $86.26
SFR3 9,200 0.21 x 0.485 =0.102 /0.118 =0.8644 $79.98
SFR3 10,000 0.23 x 0.485 =0.112 /0.118 =0.9492 $87.83
SFR3 11,300 0.26 x 0.485 =0.126 /0.118 =1.0678 $98.80
SFR4 13,500 0.31 x 0.410 =0.127 /0.118 =1.0763 $99.59
SFR4 17,000 0.39 x 0.410 =0.160 /0.118 =1.3559 $125.46
SFR4 21,400 0.49 x 0.410 =0.201 /0.118 =1.7034 $157.62
SFR5 52,300 1.20 x 0.345 =0.414 /0.118 =3.5085 $324.64
CNDO*1,307 0.03 x 0.800 =0.024/0.118=0.2034 $18.82
CNDO*3,049 0.07 x 0.850 =0.060 /0.118 =0.5085 $47.05
Non-SFR 13,068 0.30 x 0.820 =0.246 /0.118 =2.0847 $192.90
Non-SFR 13,068 0.30 x 0.700 =0.210 /0.118 =1.7797 $164.68
Non-SFR 29,185 0.67 x 0.350 =0.235 /0.118 =1.9915 $184.27
Non-SFR 29,185 0.67 x 0.700 =0.469 /0.118 =3.9746 $367.77
Non-SFR 71,874 1.65 x 0.650 =1.073 /0.118 =9.0932 $841.39
Non-SFR 71,874 1.65 x 0.850 =1.403 /0.118 =11.8898 $1,100.16
Non-SFR 135,907 3.12 x 0.400 =1.248 /0.118 =10.5763 $978.63
Non-SFR 135,907 3.12 x 0.600 =1.872 /0.118 =15.8644 $1,467.93
0.118 =Drainage Units per median SFR ERU =Equivalent Residential Unit
*Condominium parcel areas =the area of the entire complex divided by the total number of units in the complex.
The Preliminary Fee Roll,which is a listing of each parcel to be charged a fee and maximum and
actual fee for FY 2011-12,is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
Appeals Process
If a property owner disagrees with the calculation of his or her fee,based on the parcel area and
estimated impervious percentage assigned to the property,then the property owner may appeal the
calculation as follows:
1.Property owner must provide written documentation explaining the reason why the charge
should be changed.This documentation must include:
a.The name,phone number,mailing address,and email address,if available,of the property
owner.
Q:\RPV\SD Fee Admin\FY 11-12\reports\SD Fee Rpt 11-12 Final.doc Exhibit C
3-30
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Water Quality and Flood Protection Fee
Annual Report -FY 2011·12
b.The Assessor's Parcel Number (APN)of the property in question.
June 27,2011
Page 8
c.To-scale drawings of the property in question and the impervious areas located on it with
accompanying calculations.The to-scale drawings shall include the square footage and
labels for each impervious area (i.e.house,garage,driveway,patio,tool shed,carport,etc.).
2.If additional documentation is required or insufficient documentation was submitted,a
representative of the Public Works Department or his or her designee (Staff)will notify the
property owner in writing within two (2)weeks of receipt of the appeal.
3.Once Staff has determined that sufficient documentation has been submitted,Staff will perform
the initial review.Staffwill notify the property owner in writing within four (4)weeks from the
time sufficient documentation was submitted as to whether or not the fee amount will be
changed.
a.If the determination is to change the fee amount,then the new fee amount will be
documented within the City's fee database.
b.If the determination is that the fee should not be changed,the property owner can appeal
Staffs decision to the Director of Public Works (Director).The appeal must be made in
writing and returned no later than four (4)weeks from the date of mailing of Staff s initial
review decision.The Director will notify the property owner in writing within four (4)
weeks from the date of receipt of the appeal as to whether or not the fee amount will be
changed.
If the Director's determination is that the fee should not be changed,the property owner can
appeal this decision to the City Council.The appeal must be made in writing and returned
no later than four (4)weeks from the date of mailing of the Director's appeal decision.The
City Clerk shall fix a time and place for hearing the appeal and shall give notice in writing to
the appellant in the manner prescribed in Section 3.16.090 for service of notice of hearing.
The City Council's determination on the appeal shall be final.
Appeals will be accepted annually up until June 30 for inclusion on the following fiscal year's
property tax roll submittal.However,if an appeal is granted by Staff,the Director or the City
Council that does not permit inclusion for the following fiscal year's property tax roll submittal,a
reimbursement will be provided to the property owner by the City.
Q:\RPV\SD Fee Admin\FY 11-12\reports\SD Fee Rpt 11-12 Final.doc Exhibit C
3-31
Exhibit D -Staff Report to Oversight Committee,dated May 25,2011
3-32
Exhibit D
CITY OF
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE OVERSIGHT
COMMITTEE FOR THE WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD
PROTECTION PROGRAM
DENNIS McLEAN,DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
RAY HOLLAND,DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
MAY 25,2011
WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM -
PUBLIC HEARING FOR ANNUAL USER FEE RATE -FY10-11
Staff Coordinators:
RECOMMENDATION
Ron Dragoo,PE,Senior Engineer
Andy Winje,PE,Associate Engineer
1)Receive,review and file the revised 5-Year Storm Drain Plan,excerpts from the
draft 2011 Five-Year Financial Model ("Model")and excerpts from the draft Capital
Improvement Program ("CIP").
2)Conduct a public hearing to consider Staff's recommendation to increase the annual
Storm Drain User Fee (the "Fee")by 2%,from $90.72/ERU to $92.53/ERU,based
upon the change in CPI for the 12 months ended February,2011,to fund the City's
Water Quality and Flood Protection Program.
3)Draft the Annual Report of the Oversight Committee to be addressed to the City
Council regarding Staff's recommendation to increase the Fee,as well as any other
findings,comments and recommendation it wishes to make to the City Council
regarding the City's Water Quality and Flood Protection Program.
3-33
Exhibit 0
USER FEE RATE -FY10-11
May 25,2011
Page 2 of7
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Overview of Scope and Purpose for the Oversight Committee
The Scope and Purpose for the Oversight Committee,approved by the City Council on May
5,2009,serves to establish the process by which the Oversight Committee exercises its
duty.The process was outlined in the Resolution as follows:
As described in Section 3.44.080 A.,"The committee shall hold at least one public
hearing and issue a report,on at least an annual basis,to inform city residents and
the City Council regarding how storm drain user fee revenues are being spent and
to make recommendations to the city council regarding future expenditures of the
storm drain user fee revenues."Staff expects to use maps,pictures,video and
financial information regarding the storm drain program to assist the Oversight
Committee's understanding.
The Committee's review will include the following information provided by Staff:
~a comparison of budget v.actual accounting for the current fiscal year;
~a construction project status report,including information about expenditures to date
and major contract status (i.e.design and construction contracts);
~the proposed budget (including major projects)for the forthcoming year;
~an excerpt of the Five-Year Financial Model for the storm drain program,including
the estimated ending balance,if any,in the Water Quality and Flood Protection fund;
~an excerpt ofthe Five-Year Financial Model regarding the projected revenues ofthe
General Fund of the City for the current and forthcoming fiscal years,including but
not limited to,property taxes,sales taxes and transient occupancy taxes;the
projected expenditures of the General Fund of the City for the current and
forthcoming fiscal years;and the estimated ending General Fund reserves for the
current and forthcoming fiscal years;and
~Staff's recommendation regarding the User Fee rate for the forthcoming year prior to
making its own recommendation regarding the User Fee rate for the next fiscal year.
Staff believes that its presentation to the Oversight Committee made on April 20,2011,
along with the information included with this report,satisfies the provisions of Municipal
Code section 3.44.080 that outlines the information to be annually reviewed by the
Oversight Committee.
Passage of Measure C -November 6,2007
On November 6,2007,the voters approved an amendment to the User Fee ordinance to
include a voter enacted Oversight Committee and a 1O-year sunset of the storm drain user
fee.When the User Fee rate was established by the property owners in 2005,the total
User Fees to be collected over 30 years was estimated to be about $50 million to pay for
known construction projects,storm drain lining,maintenance,staffing and engineering.
Based upon the 1O-year sunset established with the passage of Measure C,the maximum
3-34
Exhibit 0
USER FEE RATE -FY10-11
May 25,2011
Page 30f7
total User Fees that could be collected is estimated to be about $13 million.It appears as
though it will be necessary to secure other funding sources to continue the Storm Drain
program when the User Fee expires on June 30,2016.
City Council Policy 41 •Reserve Policies
The City Council approved revisions of the Reserve Policies on December 21,2010 and
April 19,2011.Paragraph B.of the Policy establishes a procedure for the prudent
management of Transient Occupancy Tax ("TOT")revenue for funding capital improvement
projects as follows:
Capital Improvement Fund
The City will maintain a minimum of $3 million in the Capital Improvement
Projects (CIP)fund as a reserve for major improvement projects related to
roadways,storm drains,parks,buildings,rights-of-way,and the sewer
system.Subject to the annual budgeting process,the CIP reserve will be
funded,to the extent possible,by allocating amounts equal to the annual
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)revenue to the CIP fund.All interest
earnings in this fund will be used for capital improvement projects.
The revised Policy 41 serves to provide a mechanism to facilitate the link of TOT revenue
with CIP needs,especially in light of the priorities and amount of unfunded CIP projects
(including unfunded storm drain projects)as described in the previous section.
Update -New Information Subsequent to the Oversight Committee Meeting on April
20,2011
Based upon the suggestion of the Committee expressed during the meeting on April 20,
2011,Staff has incorporated a (Memo Only)column in the 5 Year Storm Drain Plan
Through FY15-16 that presents the unspent and unencumbered funds that are expected to
be carried forward from FY1 0-11 to FY11-12,subject to approval by the City Council.
On May 17,2011,the City Council approved the award of a design contract to Harris &
Associates for the design of the San Ramon Canyon Stabilization project for an amount not
to exceed $733,695.Because the contract is not finalized at this time,a purchase
requisition has not been completed and the amount is not included in the Spent/Committed
column for FY10-11 in the attached 5-Year Storm Drain Plan Through FY15-16.
The FY10-11 budget includes a provision for $839,617 for storm drain lining projects.
Although nothing has been spent to date,Staff expects to present a recommendation to the
City Council to proceed with the bid process for a storm drain lining project in the amount of
about $800,000.Staff expects that the unspent and unencumbered funds will be carried
forward from FY1 0-11 to FY11-12 for this storm drain lining project,subject to approval by
the City Council.
3-35
Exhibit 0
USER FEE RATE -FY10-11
May 25,2011
Page 4 of 7
Draft 2011 Model
The draft 2011 Model includes the proposed FY11-12 budget,which is balanced;and each
of the City Council's policy reserve thresholds are expected to be exceeded as of June 30,
2012.The 2011 Model assumes no changes to service levels.
There are two material outstanding issues that may affect the draft budget.Prior to the
June i h City Council Budget Workshop,Staff expects to have more information regarding:
~The City's $187,000 contribution to the Sheriff's CORE program (discussed in
assumption no.5);and
~The City's $165,000 contribution to the Sheriff's Liability Trust Fund.
The City is required to contribute an amount equivalent to 4%of its cost of services from
the Sheriff into a county liability trust fund.The county is currently considering whether to
temporarily suspend this requirement for FY11-12 only.Both the CORE contribution and
the liability trust fund contribution are currently included in the draft General Fund budget.
Summary 2011 Model Information
The 2011 Model currently indicates that the General Fund Reserve will fall below the policy
threshold of 50%of annual expenditures by the end of FY12-13,and continue to decline by
about $1.1 million each year thereafter.There are several factors that are primarily
responsible for this trend:
~Expenditures are expected to grow at an average rate of about 3.2%annually,
whereas revenue is expected to only increase an average of about 2.5%annually
(annual deficit of about $180,000);
~The Reserve threshold (50%of annual expenditures)grows with expenditure growth
(average of $312,000 annually);
~It will become necessary for the General Fund to subsidize the Street Maintenance
Fund,as the cost of maintenance of Palos Verdes Drive South in the landslide area
of the City outpaces the Proposition C revenue dedicated to that purpose
(contributions ranging from $100,000 to $190,000 annually);and
~Beginning in FY12-13,the 2011 Model includes a $400,000 annual placeholder for
the transition plan to improve compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA).
~Per the City Council's Reserve Policy,the 2011 Model includes annual transfers
from the General Fund to the Capital Improvement Projects (CIP)Reserve for
Future Projects in the amount of the annual transient occupancy tax (TOT)revenue.
The 2011 Model currently indicates that the CIP Reserve will grow to more than $17
million by the end of FY15-16.
3-36
Exhibit D
USER FEE RATE -FY10-11
May 25,2011
Page 5 of 7
However,the draft 2011 Capital Improvement Plan includes a list of unfunded projects with
a total cost range of $70 million to $105 million.Staff expects that as the Capital
Improvement Plan evolves,the City Council will provide direction to fund additional
projects;and the CIP Reserve will stabilize at an amount closer to the policy threshold of$3
million for emergency projects.
STAFF'S FINDING AND RECOMMENDATION
General Fund revenues will not be sufficient to fund the Storm Drain program;therefore,
continuing and increasing the Fee is necessary for the following reasons:
1)Property tax represents about 42%of General Fund revenue and any small variance
in the percentage increase of property assessments has a large cumulative effect on
the five years of the Model.
The FY11-12 estimate is based on the maximum 2%increase allowable by
Proposition 13 and an additional 0.3%increase for property sales and re-
assessments,based on Staff's analysis of information from the City's parcel
database.
General Fund expenditures have been increased an average of 3.9%in FY11-12
and 2.9%for FY12-13 based on the draft two-year budget prepared by Staff.The
FY11-12 increase is primarily due to a more proactive approach to Public Works
maintenance,additions to the Emergency Preparedness program,and unfreezing
the Recreation Director position.Expenditures have been increased by a range of
3.0%to 3.4%for the remaining years of the Model.The increase is based on the
forecasted increase of Consumer Price Index from the Congressional Budget Office,
and annual 3%merit increases for employee salaries.
Therefore,the Model represents that General Fund expenditures could increase at a
greater rate than revenue over next five years.
2)Staff continues to work with the City's grant consultant and federal advocate to
secure federal funding for San Ramon Canyon Stabilization Project.The project has
widespread support from federal,state and local representatives.The City has
submitted applications for both 50%funding from a state Proposition 1E grant and
an earmark from the federal Water Resources Development Act (WRDA).Staff
does not expect to hear from either agency until the end of 2011 or early 2012.Per
the San Ramon Project Study Report presented to City Council on March 1,2011,
construction of the ultimate solution is estimated to cost $19.4 million.Until funding
is secured,the project has been included in the CIP unfunded project list.
3-37
Exhibit D
USER FEE RATE -FY10-11
May 25,2011
Page 6 of 7
The FY 10-11 budget includes a $1.4 million appropriation for the study report
necessary to apply for outside funding,as well as development of bid-ready
construction documents.On March 1,2011,the City Council authorized staff to
pursue final design and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)clearances.
Council also directed staff to urgently develop plans to relocate the sanitary sewer
currently located at the edge of the canyon.Finally,Council affirmed their desire to
have a "shelf-ready"early action plan (EAP)to stabilize the PVDE switchbacks.
Design of the EAP is nearly complete.The EAP project with an estimated cost of
about $2 million could be built in about 3 months.The EAP project mayor may not
be necessary,depending on the timing of construction ofthe ultimate solution.Staff
expects to request an appropriation of $200,000 in the FY10-11 budget,prior to
June 30,2011 for relocation of the sanitary sewer line.
3)The Storm Drain User Fee,which generates revenue totaling about $1.2 million
annually,will sunset in 2016 in accordance with the ballot measure approved by the
voters in 2007.Staff expects to prepare an update to the Storm Drain Master Plan
which is expected to identify additional projects that will necessitate a future source
of funding.The cost of Master Plan update has been included in the 2011 Model.
When the WQFP program was established in 2005,a list of 38 projects totaling
about $20.1 million was identified and included in the original program.Of those
projects,a number of projects that affect 5 regional systems with an estimated total
cost of about $9.4 million remain unfunded through FY15-16.As described
previously,the estimated cost of the San Ramon Canyon Stabilization project is
$19.4 million and is currently unfunded.The original 2005 program also included
about $4.6 million of pipe lining over 30 years.Through FY15-16,about $5.1 million
of pipe lining will have been completed over a period of 11 years.
4)The draft 2011 Capital Improvement Plan includes a list of unfunded projects with a
total cost range of $70 million to $105 million.The unfunded list includes the San
Ramon Canyon Stabilization project,a new civic center,various arterial roadway
projects,and many other projects.The 2011 Model does not include any projects
from the unfunded list.
In light of the significance of the multi-million amount of unfunded CIP projects,the City's
Reserve Policy to set-aside funds to help pay for a portion of the future projects,Staff
recommends an increase ofthe Fee from $90.72to $92.53 for the FY11-12.,an increase of
2%.
Reports and Meetings Prior to the Public Hearing for FY10-11
Staff presented a FY10-11 update regarding the Water Quality and Flood Protection
program (the "Storm Drain program")to the Oversight Committee via a Memorandum,
3-38
Exhibit D
WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM -ANNUAL
USER FEE RATE -FYi 0-11
May 25,2011
Page 7 of 7
dated February 3,2011,sent via email.Staff updated the Committee again on March 30,
2011,(see attached staff report)including the status of storm drain capital projects, storm
drain lining projects,catch basin filtration devices and other expenditures for the program.
Staff also presented the proposed project plan and draft budget for the Storm Drain
program for FY11-12,as well as the draft 5-Year Storm Drain Plan at a meeting on April 20,
2011.
Attachments:
Staff Report,Dated April 20,2011
5-Year Storm Drain Plan Through FY15-16
Excerpts from Draft 2011 CIP -Capital Improvement Plan -Unfunded Projects
Excerpts from 2011 Draft Five-Year Financial Model-General Fund (Pages 3 -6)and
Exhibit C -CIP Plan Project Expenditures
3-39
Exhibit D
CITY OF
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE OVERSIGHT
COMMITTEE FOR THE WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD
PROTECTION PROGRAM
RAY HOLLAND,DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
DENNIS McLEAN,DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
APRIL 20,2011
WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM -
DRAFT FY 2011-12 BUDGET AND 5-YEAR PLAN
Project Manager:Ron Dragoo,Senior Engineer
Andy Winje,Associate Engineer
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
This report includes a brief update regarding the major projects included in the Water
Quality and Flood Protection program including the FY11-12 budget and 5-Year plan in
draft form.
PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
San Ramon Canyon (PVDE/PVDS Roadway)Stabilization Project
City Council has received the Project Study Report and directed staff to proceed with final
design,environmental review and outside funding pursuits.Final design should be ready
by early 2012 with environmental review taking up to 24 months beyond that,depending on
resource agencies workload.These activities are included in the amount budgeted through
end of FY 2011-12.Any necessary easement acquisitions,construction and other post
design activities are currently unfunded.
To address the funding gap,a state grant application has been submitted,requesting 50%
funding.Also,federal opportunities for funding exist,including the SAFETEA-LU (Highway
Bill)and the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA).The City's federal advocacy firm
indicates both bills are seeing activity and could be passed this year.Funding from either
bill,if appropriated to the project,would not likely be seen before the beginning of
3-40
Exhibit D
WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM -DRAFT FY 2011-12
BUDGET AND 5-YEAR PLAN
April 20,2011
Page 2 of6
construction.Each of them will require the City to share in costs,either through funds from
the State grant if awarded or some other plan.Development of a financing plan will be
initiated when results from outside funding pursuits are better understood.
In addition to the primary storm drain project,the City Council approved development of a
shelf-ready roadway stabilization project for Palos Verdes Drive East (PVDE).This shelf
ready project,known as the Early Action Plan,provides bid ready documents for the
construction of a stabilization project that would shore up a certain area of the PVDE
switchback using caissons.The Early Action Plan would be implemented in the event the
erosion of the San Ramon Canyon advances beyond a critical point before the ultimate
project can be done.
Please see the City's website to view the Project Study Report and for additional updates
regarding the project at:
http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/publicworks/San-Ramon/index.cfm.
Stormwater Master Plan Program
Staff has engaged RBF Consultants to help develop our storm water master plan program
on the City's GIS platform.A primary goal will be the creation of a "living document"to
allow staff to study and track system deficiencies in real time,allowing more responsive
corrections and better prioritization of limited maintenance and capital project funds.The
City is in the process of upgrading its GIS system;although not drawing on the user fee
budget for the cost of technology.The user fee will be used to enhance the stormwater
data and tools necessary to track and anticipate stormwater system deficiencies and plan
for appropriate corrections.
FY2011-12 Draft Budget and 5-Year Plan
Additional budget items for both FY 2011-12 and the five-year plan are described in the
project updates and on the attached spreadsheet entitled Storm Drain Plan through FY15-
16.
3-41
Exhibit D
WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM -DRAFT FY 2011-12
BUDGET AND 5-YEAR PLAN
April 20,2011
Page 3 of6
PROJECT UPDATES
Project Name:
Project Area:
Budaeted Cost:
Contract Award:
Total/Estimated Costs:
Percentage Completion:
Project Description:
SanRamon Canyon Stabilization Project
Project Area 3
$1,514,082
$608,300
$19.4M (construction costs,unfunded)
50%(pre-construction activities onlv)
City Council has authorized staff to pursue final design and CEQA clearances.Council directed staff
to urgently develop plans to relocate the sanitary sewer currently located at the edge of the canyon.
Council also affirmed their desire to have a "shelf-ready"early action plan (EAP)to stabilize the
PVDE switchbacks.Design of the EAP is about 80%complete and could be built in about 3 months,
if it's determined to be necessary.City Staff and Elected Officials are actively pursuing Federal
funding opportunities and evaluating a State grant opportunity.The $1,514,082 budget,shown
above,includes money spent,budgeted and projected for portion of the project up to and including
development of bid ready construction documents.It does not include construction of the sewer
relocation,implementation of the EAP,or implementation of the ultimate project.Construction costs
(estimated to be $19.4 million for the ultimate project,including the sewer relocation)have not been
included in a funding plan.The EAP switchback project estimated to cost -$2M can hopefully be
avoided;therefore,has not been included in a financing plan at this time either.
Project Narne:StormDrainLining
Proiect Area:Proiect Area 12
Budgeted Cost:$1,159,172 (including $839,617 expected carryover from
FY10-11)
Contract Award:TBD
Total/Estimated Costs:TBD
Percentaae ComDletion:0%
PrQjeClDe$criptic:>n:
As a result of the inspections performed on the large diameter storm drain pipes in FY 09-10,seven
storm drain lines were determined to need some form of repair.One of the seven pipes,a one-
hundred twenty inch diameter pipe running under PVDS,was repaired in the previous year,as an
emergency repair when holes in the pipe were discovered during a follow up inspection.Three large
diameter storm drains scheduled to be repaired in the FY 2009-10 lining program will be lined during
FY10-11 and FY11-12.The remaining three large diameter pipes needing repairs will be inspected
again this year and be scheduled for repairs based upon condition and urgency.In total,the twenty-
six lines identified for lining last year,(three large diameter lines and the remaining twenty-three lines
that are thirty inches and smaller)will be included in this year's program.Investigations are underway
to identify additional drains requiring lining this year.Staff anticipates bringing this item to Council for
award in May of this year.With Council approval,unspent budget amounts rolled forward through FY
2011-12 and available for this work totals $1,159,172.
3-42
Exhibit 0
WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM -DRAFT FY 2011·12
BUDGET AND 5·YEAR PLAN
April 20,2011
Page 4 af6
Project Name:Catch Basin Filtration Devices
Project Area:Project Area 12
Budgeted Cost:$114,000 (including $$41,000 expected carryover from
FY10-11)
Contract Award:$27,000 for about 60%installed.
Final/Estimated Costs:TBD
Percentaae Completion:60%
ProIEJct.Pe$c!'iption:.
Retrofitting of catch basins with filtration screens in this area of the City is required by the Regional
Board to address the trash problems at Lake Machado in Los Angeles.The City has until 2016 to
install screens in the 111 catch basin contributing to this drainage.Sixty eight (68)catch basins have
been retrofitted in FY 2010-11 at a cost of about $27,000,a savings of78%over original estimates.
The City's compliance response is about 60%;therefore,ahead of schedule.The remaining basins
in this drainage are county owned and will require an MOU for maintenance with Los Angeles County.
Installation of these will be performed after an MOU is authorized by both agencies.The remaining
40%of the basins will come at a higher cost due to involvement of LA County and cost for completing
their flood permits.Based on this year's results and anticipated costs for the remaining 40%,
$105,000 in funds from original budget for Machado Lake basins ($205,000)will be available for other
programs.
ProiectName;Miscellaneous Repairs &Storm Drain Filtration Maintenance
Proiect Area:Proiect Area 12
Budaeted Cost:$194,817
Contract Award:N/A
Total/Estimated Costs:TBD
Percentage Completion:0%
Project.·Oescriptiol1:
As a result of this program and the following maintenance activities,the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
has not received a single "after-hours"callout to address a rain related emergency during the past
three years.
~All of the filters in the 29 catch basins with filtration devices installed in the City are
scheduled to be replaced;
~The City contracts with LA County for annual clearing of City-owned catch basins.The
County process is cumbersome and makes financial planning and required reporting difficult.
Staff is evaluating use of private contractors for future years;
~Large Diameter Storm Drain Maintenance projects have been identified on PVDE,
Hawthorne Blvd.,and Indian Peak Rd.and will be repaired through the lining project this
year;
~44 storm drain outlets are identified and scheduled to be cleaned and repaired throughout
the City this year;
~Cleaned and video inspected 26 sections of CMP (about 13%)in FY2009-10;
~Scheduled to clean and video inspect additional CMP in PVDE area in FY201 0-11;and
~$50,000 has been reprogrammed to the Via Canada projectforFY2011-12 in anticipation of
construction necessary to make system corrections.
3-43
Exhibit D
WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM -DRAFT FY 2011·12
BUDGET AND 5·YEAR PLAN
April 20,2011
Page 5 af6
ProjectName:DrainaaeMaster Plan Program
Project Area:Project Area 12
Budgeted Cost:$720,000
Contract Award:$31,723 (to date)
Total/Estimated Costs:$840,000
Percentaae Comoletion:0%
Proiect••OescriDlion:
The City is upgrading its GIS platform and PW Staff will continue improving GIS data and best
practices to maximize use for stormwater management planning.Available as-built drawings have
been scanned and linked to existing GIS database.Links to inspection video is underway.
Staff has engaged a Master Plan Program Management consultant to guide our efforts to develop a
current,sustainable and useful management tool.Staff anticipates engaging a data verification
contractor in late spring or early summer to verify atlas data in the field and with County records.
Additional work anticipated for next year includes collection of additional data from other agencies,
addition of hydrology and hydraulic modeling tools integrated into the GIS platform,determination of
deficient facilities and prioritization of corrective proiects.
Project Name:
Proiect Area:
Budaeted Cost:
Contract Award:
Total/Estimated Costs:
Percentage Completion:
Project Description:
Roan Systems
Proiect Area 7
$242,500
TBD
$446,728
0%
The Via Colinita portion of this project is being addressed under the San Pedro Canyon Storm Drain
project and $50,000 will be transferred to that project in FY11-12.The remaining portion is for
addressing the physical deficiencies in the Roan road area system
3-44
Exhibit 0
WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM -DRAFT FY 2011·12
BUDGET AND 5·YEAR PLAN
April 20,2011
Page 6 of6
Project Name:San Pedro Canyon Storm Drains
Project Area:Proiect Area 6
Budgeted Cost:$570,000 (Re-allocated from Hawthorne Blvd.proiect.)
Contract Award:TBD
Final/Estimated Costs:TBD
Percentage Completion:0%
PrQj~e(.[)~.$c:rip(iQn:
This project in San Pedro Canyon lies east of PVDE and is crossed several times by residential
streets.This project has become a priority due to observed flooding in the area,sediment and debris
accumulation in potentially undersized debris basins and degraded pipes and inlet/outlet structures.
Staff has engaged a consultant to provide hydrologic and hydraulic analyses and design
recommendations,including construction drawings.New County standards for hydrology
assumptions complicate the design process from replacement in kind to upsizing of pipes which has
downstream consequences.Staff is working with consultant to develop solutions to address known
or anticipated capacity issues based on field observations,with a mind to restrict hydromodification
(Le.effects on downstream areas).Analysis and design work is expected to begin this year and carry
into next followed bv construction of improvements.
Pr()jectName:via Canada Drainaae StudY
Proiect Area:Proiect Area 6
Budaeted Cost:$125,000
Contract Award:$24,985
Final/Estimated Costs:TBD
Percentage Completion:20%
PtoJect••Oescl"h,(iQn:
This project east of PVDE and north of Miraleste Canyon results from observed flooding at the bottom
of Via Canada (cul-du-sac)during moderate to heavy rain events.This drain in question is County
owned and the flooding issue was brought to their attention 10 years ago.Since no action has been
taken,the impacted homeowners have requested the City do something.This project will study likely
causes of the flooding at the bottom of the hill and develop solutions that work around the County
system.The scope includes development of bid ready documents for corrective construction.An
additional budget of $100,000 was added for FY 11-12 in order to implementthe identified solutions.
The $100,000 addition comes from $50,000 reductions to each of the Storm Drain Maintenance
Projects item and the Via Colinita/Roan System Project (as described above).Therefore,there is no
net increase to the budget by reprogramming these funds.
3-45
Exhibit D City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Storm Drain Plan through FY15·16
_
Memoon_(A less B)
Expected
Carryover
FY11·1Z
Backbone Pro ects I
i 1,403.500
370,000 ;...1-=::20~0:c,OOO=+_--_l---_!_---+---_I_-'5~7~0~,00:::04__;2,;;,43;:8?:,9:;9~2
1.750,000
898,395 1-'+_--_l---_!_---+---__1!..('5~1~4~,0~82'+_=2"',24O=:,0:;00:;_J
•-2,839637
I
466,605 '
370,000
417.361
129.082 1.385,000
1.403.500
2 McCarren Canyon 7.487.716 "7,487.716
McCarren Canyon.Tarragon Property
2 ACQuisition
3 Lower San Ramon CanYOn Steblllzatlan
5 PVCt::Mlraleste CanYOn System
6 pvce San Pedro Canyon System
4 A1temlra CanYOn
1 Sunnyside Rldae
PlaeLlnlna
12 Phase I 532.000 532,0001-....,1:;:0H:p~h::as:::e'-;II;-;O'M;::on~a=ra:-;;:St;::ar=m:-D;::-ral=n;------+-.:::17:;:4~,7;;2:::3+----\-------l,f-,---+---+----+-----\----+--;:17:;4~.7=2~3+-----I
1-~2"'P,::VC~S~fro~m~CI~iIPtPle3r...:to::..::;Se~a:::co::;v:.::e't..)_+-.::2~10~.000;;;;;+---_\_---;,j-'+---+----+_---_\_---+---=,21"'0"".000'*+_---_1
10 Crest to Crestridae 59700 59,700
I lr~°:i:::erMow :~~~~:;:~:5
2 tarm';:;D=raf.:ln:7L7.:in;.:ln'="9,,'O'"th=e::"r------}-'1;-:,1i"i47;2,'*'97=8;-r-8;;';3;;;9:-;;,6"'17;;-----l1 839.617 :-1-;;:31;;9;-;,5;;;;5";;"5+-'3;;;24',:-'84;;;2:+--;;;32"'9:<:,8;;;81:0+--;;3;;;35·,2;;::7;;;8+-340;:;:""'.8;;;38..-t-""3;;-.6;;;3:::2':;,7~87H------t
Capacity &SecondarY SYStem Projects
7 Via CoHntta &Roan System Projects 204,226 I 292500 496,728
Hawthorne Blvd.(closed FY1D-11 ,re-
allocated to the San Pedro Canyon Storm
2 Drain Prolect)9!,'"';--;cks8::;Fe,er~as:.::c=at~i----+---'"-+-----11------1'
11 ect -3~en~t1n~e~)::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~:::::::::::::::-:::::::~:::::::::::::::::::t::::::::::::::::::~1
485000
446,000
440.000
485.000
440.000
446.000
139180
Filtration SYStems
12 Catch B!lliln Filtration DllVlces
2 30502 PVDW Catch Basin
327.490
8.800
41,000 38,984 4,016 I "
I
73,000 441,490
8.600
Other Pro ecte
McCalTlll1 Canyon Interim,
2 BarkentlneiSeacove 135.000
McCarrell Cenyon IntEll'im.Gabion &Timber
2 WailS 119,213
Palos Verdes Bay Club Interim
2 Imorovements 185 000
! !135,000
119,213
185 000
1OPVDS Salvation Army Outlet 26,000 26000
6 Branco Drive 88,000
~INire-",·~:-:----_---+---'2=;7;f"000~+---+---..........J~~Other 7.400
~~D~r:EaIn~R=el=oca=ti",onl...-__+-_-=,9:;;8g480=-+-__--1 _l'
3 Tarliilaca •;s~d;e;::St:::u::Ldy +_-:d6:-s,3;:77H +"";
6 PVOE t::nolneerino Reserve 20,380
6 pvoe Inlata
I 660001---lr----t----+---t----1--~27;<;,OO=0t----l
7.400
98.480
6,377
20.380
10 Mossbank Storm Drain Rehabilitation
4 PVOS till A1temlra CanYOn
5 Via Canada
245,885
25.000 24.985 •
245,885
1~---I!__--+__--+_---1----1-~:_::_::,-:-=+-----115,~25,000
Miscellaneous Repairs &Maintenance
12 Miscellaneous ReDairs
Storm Draln/FIRratlon Maintenance (includes
Hawthorne.Montemalaga &VIdeo
12 Inspection/Cleaning)
145.470
521.398 212.687
12,474 ,
!
51,530 I
i
161,1571
2260726
244 817 222,162 229.727 237518 245 544
145,470
1,913,851
12 Purchase of Push Camera 11.813 11813
1--:1;12-=Ad~m~l~nls::tr~a7tlo~n~co=;:;ntr=a=:;ctI<::s::te~ff~en~g~ln:!::ee=r~)-+.....::6~22~.0~1~1+-1;:;:4~6'=31:S4:+_~1~28=',=:10:-=7-!1 18,207 1~*148~,5;;;17;;+--'1~52~,~504~_..:.;15;;;7;';.0:::80~--'1~61~.7;.;9;;;2+--.:.;188~.848=-_1_.:.<1 ,5~5;;;2~.8"'84=+---__t
1-~1~2i-"D~r&I~·n~a~ale~M"'as~t"'er--'P-"lan""-'.p.!::3roa~lra:::;m~_+----::.....+...:4"'9"'5""0"'004_-"2~5~,0=00~'470,000 1-'-=2",25::1.,00=0+--,30=,OO=0+---,3:::0",.0:.::00,-...:30=,0:::;00=-t_..::30:::..",0",00=-t-",840=,00=0+_---_1
.,0 ..-2748 933
Nota:This schedule reflects actual costs and does not Include deDrec/ation or caDltallzation ofstorm drain 1m rovamarrts which ara
Included In the ::ltv's financial statements.
I
I
3-46
Funding Sources
$270,000
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$180,000
$300,000
$1,000,000
$3,000,000
$20,500,000
RPV Capital Improvement Plan -Unfunded Projects
Cost Range
Minimum Maximum
1 Communit
$150,000
$300,000
$740,000
$450,000
$200,000
$130,000
$200,000
$200,000
$470000
$1100000
$1100000
$250,000
$820000
$600,000
$400,000
$120,000
$150000
$100,000
$150,000
$150,000
$300000
$1 000000
$1,300,000 $1 500,000
$1,900,000 $2,200,000
$280000 $340000
$5,000,000 $8,000,000
$270000 $320,000
Hesse Park/Hawthorne Blvd.Traffic
13 Circulation &Safet 1m rovement $100,000 $200,000
PVDE at Bronco Drive
14 1m rovements $205,000 $230,000
Lower Point Vicente Park Access
15 Modification Pro'ect $930,000 $1,100,000
Switchbacks Traffic Safety
16 1m rovements $1 750000 $2000000
17 PVDE Multi-Modal 1m rovements $2,800,000 $4,450,000
3-47
CITYLQf,.RANCHO PALOS VERDES
201 ff~-'VEAR FINANCIAL MODEL -(BY FUND)
EXHIBIT B
"""'An;
~FY10·11
GENERAL FUND REVENUE DETAIL
TAXES:
Property taxes (e)5,855,099 5,924,893 5,820,225 (104,668)6,239,417 6,172,700 6,327,000 6,485,200 6,647,300 6,813,500
Property taxes In-Lieu of VLF evenues (e)3,388,494 3,428,500 3,433,202 4,702 3,490,200 3,599,400 3,689,400 3,781,600 3,876,100 3,973,000
Property taxes In-Lieu of Sales Tax (d)301,454 301,500 296,349 (5,151)310,500 440,000 448,800 457,800 467,000 476,300
Sales and use tax (<I)1,060,220 1,211,767 1,157,795 (53,972)1,630,400 1,543,300 1,574,200 1,605,700 1,637,800 1,670,600
Property transfer tax (k)178,813 207,100 238,303 31,203 180,000 209,100 213,300 217,600 222,000 226,400
Business license tax (c)531,982 515,600 609,176 93,576 608,800 593,300 605,200 616,100 628,400 642,200
Transient occupancy tax (I)85,245 1,826,100 1,954,507 128,407 2,626,100 2,830,000 2,872,500 2,924,200 2,982,700 3,048,300
Franchise taxes (0)1,709,009 1,719,715 1,711,456 (8,259)1,726,000 1,811,700 1,847,900 1,881,200 1,918,800 1,961,000
Utility user tax (n)2,267,431 2,448,800 2,395,107 (53,693)2,461,800 2,5e20,700 2,571,100 2,617,400 2,669,700 2,728,400
Golf tax '(c)278,343 333,000 346,413 13,413 336,300 338,600 345,400 351,600 358,600 366,500
Total Taxes 15,656,090 17,916,975 17,962,533 45,558 19,609,517 20,058,800 20,494,800 20,938,400 21,408,400 21,906,200
LICENSES AND PERMITS:
Animal control fees (a)45,810 55,000 50,161 (4,839)58,600 51,200 52,200 53,200 54,300 55,400
Right of way &parking permits (h)39,819 63,800 58,947 (4,853)59,100 87,500 91,900 96,300 101,100 106,400
Building and safety permits &geology fees (h)1,278,568 1,015,800 1,310,513 294,713 1,351,200 1,446,800 1,511,600 1,577,000 1,648,400 1,726,300
Planning permits (g)367,545 791,400 462,509 (328,891)495,600 378,400 397,300 416,400 437,200 459,900
Film permits (c)21,408 66,100 68,982 2,882 50,000 76,900 78,400 79,800 81,400 83,200
Massage Permits (c)1,537 0 2,715 2,715 0 2,800 2,900 3,000 3,100 3,200
Total Licenses &Permits 1,754,687 1,992,100 1,953,827 (38,273)2,014,500 2,043,600 2,134,300 2,225,700 2,325,500 2,434,400
FINES &FORFEITURES:
Miscellaneous court fines (a)205,635 205,400 173,049 (32,351)140,600 148,900 151,900 154,900 158,000 161,200
False alarm fines (a)8,265 13,100 5,900 (7,200)13,400 6,000 6,100 6,200 6,300 6,400
Total Fines &Forfeitures 213.,900 218,500 178,949 (39,551)154,000 154,900 158,000 161,100 164,300 167,600
USE OF MONEY &PROPERTY:
Property &Monopole Leases (c)158,019 179,300 228,814 49,514 125,800 142,500 145,400 148,000 151,000 154,300
Facility rentals -PVIC (p)181,534 176,800 208,855 32,055 180,000 123,800 126,300 128,600 131,200 134,100
Facility rentals -Other (p)130,699 113,100 115,118 2,018 106,500 115,600 117,900 120,000 122,400 125,100
Parking lot fees 43,857 43,500 50,582 7,082 43,500 48,900 48,900 48,900 48,900 48,900
PVIC gift shop (c)80,272 97,400 97,738 338 98,100 110,000 112,000 114,000 116,300 118,900
Interest earnings (m)266,124 90,100 73,144 (16,956)65,000 51,700 77,940 96,100 110,090 119,140
Total Use of Money &Property 860,505 700,200 774,251 74,051 618,900 592,500 628,440 655,600 679,890 700,440
CHARGES FOR SERVICES:
Recreation fees (c)8,863 8,900 6,695 (2,205)9,000 9,400 9,600 9,800 10,000 10,200
Sale of SignsiServices (c)4,618 6,500 7,308 808 6,600 7,500 7,700 7,800 8,000 8,200
Interfund charges for services (a)145,300 148,200 148,200 0 151,200 154,300 157,400 160,500 163,700 167,000
Total Charges For Services 158,781 163,600 162,203 (1,397)166,800 171,200 174,700 178,100 181,700 185,400
REVENUES FROM OTHER AGENCIES
Motor vehicle license fees (i)147,904 140,000 127,658 (12,342)140,000 151,900 151,900 151,900 151,900 151,900
Grant income 4,797 62,972 43,018 (19,954)15,000 0 0 0 0 0
Total Revenues From Other Agencies 152,701 202,972 170,676 (32,296)155,000 151,900 151,900 151,900 151,900 151,900
OTHER REVENUES:
Donations (a)37,182 14,800 11,722 (3,078)15,100 21,000 21,300 21,700 22,100 22,500
Other miscellaneous (a)82,314 20,400 89,070 68,670 18,900 5,200 5,300 5,400 5,500 5,600
Total Other Revenues 119,496 35,200 100,792 65,592 34,000 26,200 26,600 27,100 27,600 28,100
TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUES 18,916,160 21,229,547 21,303,231 73,684 22,752,717 23,199,100 23,768,740 24,337,900 24,939,290 25,574,0403-48
CITY.Of.RANCHO PALOS VERDES
201 ff~--VEAR FINANCIAL MODEL -(BY FUND)
EXHIBIT B
~!ESTIMATE
~FY10·11
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURE DETAIL
City Council (b)104,015 106,768 105,935 833 106,135 135,000 142,000 146,300 151,000 156,100
City Manager (includes Risk Management)(b)1,266,989 1,544,156 1,375,577 168,579 1,718,767 1,702,900 1,774,300 1,827,500 1,886,000 1,950,100
City Attomey (b)1,000,542 1,075,000 1,048,721 26,279 1,065,000 1,065,000 1,065,000 1,097,000 1,132,100 1,170,600
City Clerk (b)276,389 387,463 379,289 8,174 460,549 475,850 393,950 490,100 406,600 506,800
Community Outreach (b)143,350 89,650 85,961 3,689 94,400 107,800 107,800 111,000 114,600 118,500
RPVTV (b)0 0 0 0 0 100,600 103,900 107,000 110,400 114,200
Personnel (b)179,084 211,583 206,212 5,371 247,469 231,050 240,850 248,100 256,000 264,700
Total Administration 2,970,369 3,414,620 3,201,695 212,925 3,692,320 3,818,200 3,827,800 4,027,000 4,056,700 4,281,000
Finance (b)1,053,750 1,272,180 1,269,290 2,890 1,324,570 1,360,300 1,428,700 1,471,600 1,518,700 1,570,300
Information Technology -Data (b)705,669 568,340 545,915 22,425 508,747 538,000 583,800 601,300 620,500 641,600
Information Technology -Voice (b)65,399 81,705 73,675 8,030 92,970 93,800 123,400 127,100 131,200 135,700
Total Finance &Information Technology 1,824,818 1,922,225 1,888,880 33,345 1,926,287 1,992,100 2,135,900 2,200,000 2,270,400 2,347,600
Public Safety -Sheriff Services (f)3,941,881 3,995,750 3,939,997 55,753 3,994,087 4,111,000 4,235,000 4,362,100 4,493,000 4,627,800
Special Safety Programs (b)71,934 42,000 38,294 3,706 240,545 71,500 71,500 73,600 76,000 78,600
Animal Control (b)117,926 125,250 92,529 32,721 140,250 120,250 122,750 126,400 130,400 134,800
Emergency Preparedness (b)69,229 172,177 171,265 912 176,745 148,000 158,300 161,000 166,200 171,900
Total Public Safety 4,200,970 4,335,177 4,242,085 93,092 4,551,627 4,450,750 4,585,550 4,723,100 4,865,600 5,013,100
Public Works Administration (Staffing,Project
Management,and Engineering)(b)1,087,341 1,711,021 1,658,617 52,404 1,995,660 2,035,000 2,128,100 2,191,900 2,262,000 2,338,900
Sewer Maintenance (b)102,344 131,300 57,194 74,106 90,300 63,000 63,000 64,900 67,000 69,300
Traffic Management (b)291,539 220,600 209,778 10,822 348,400 154,000 156,000 160,700 165,800 171,400
Storm Water Quality (NPDES Compliance)(b)146,800 221,900 122,283 99,617 174,600 180,300 180,800 186,200 192,200 198,700
Public Building Maintenance (b)516,573 572,200 447,825 124,375 634,000 614,800 584,200 601,700 621,000 642,100
Parks,Trails &Open Space Maintenance (b)829,796 899,893 613,556 286,337 1,817,249 1,130,250 1,124,000 1,157,700 1,194,700 1,235,300
Total Public Works 3,034,393 3,756,914 3,109,253 647,661 5,060,209 4,177,350 4,236,100 4,363,100 4,502,700 4,655,700,
Planning (b)1,315,607 1,310,944 1,320,867 (9,923)1,482,844 1,280,600 1,326,800 1,366,600 1,410,300 1,458,300
Building &Safety Services (b)519,945 646,177 611,145 35,032 650,509 646,000 673,800 694,000 716,200 740,600
Code Enforcement (b)177,141 201,658 179,496 22,162 191,594 206,200 217,100 223,600 230,800 238,600
View Restoration/Preservation (b)193,154 326,288 324,139 2,149 326,276 337,600 349,600 360,100 371,600 384,200
Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP)(b)45,581 10,550 10,550 0 65,450 0 0 0 0 0
Geology (Privately Inmated Projects)(b)160,722 200,000 108,453 91,547 200,000 150,000 150,000 154,500 159,400 164,800
Total Community Development 2,412,150 2,695,617 2,554,650 140,967 2,916,673 2,620,400 2,717,300 2,798,800 2,888,300 2,986,500
Recreation Administration (Staffing,Park Rangers)(b)491,510 639,756 593,127 46,629 323,220 771,300 811,000 835,300 862,000 891,300
Recreation Facilities (b)350,404 430,296 419,836 10,460 461,538 438,090 460,350 474,200 489,400 506,000
Special Events (b)86,667 40,904 25,787 15,117 40,980 52,100 69,300 71,400 73,700 76,200
PI.Vicente Interpretive Center (PVIC)(b)334,067 335,331 294,565 40,766 328,291 382,275 403,775 415,900 429,200 443,800
REACH (b)91,283 74,672 68,488 6,184 53,790 53,300 49,600 51,100 52,700 54,500
Total Recreation &Parks 1,353,931 1,520,959 1,401,803 119,156 1,207,819 1,697,065 1,794,025 1,847,900 1,907,000 1,971,800
Contingent Liabilities 0 0 320,000 (320,000)0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES 15,796,631 17,645,512 16,718,366 927,146 19,354,935 18,755,865 19,296,675 19,959,900 20,490,700 21,255,700
GENERAL FUND NET BEFORE TRANSFERS 3,119,529 3,584,035 4,584,865 1,000,830 3,397,782 4,443,235 4,472,065 1 4,378,000 II 4,448,5901 4,318,340
3-49
CITYLQF..RANCHO PALOS VERDES
201 fflW-Y'EAR FINANCIAL MODEL -(BY FUND)
EXHIBIT B _I ESTIMATE
FY10-11
••iF
GENERAL FUND TRANSFER DETAIL
GENERAL FUND TRANSFERS IN:
From CDBG fund -REACH 20,646 26,848 26,847 (1)0 0 0 0 0 0
From RPVTV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
From Measure A Maint 54,200 151,000 38,460 (112,540)151,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
From Public Safety Grants fund 100,000 100,000 100,000 0 100,000 0 0 0 0 0
From Waste Reduction 0 12,000 0 (12,000)12,000 12,000 12,000 12,400 12,800 13,200
From Employee Benefits 0 0 0 0 0 340,000 0 0 0 0
From Utility Undergrounding 0 0 0 0 276,549 0 0 0 0 0
From Roadway Beautification 0 0 0 0 102,588 0 0 0 0 0
From Proposition A 2,700 2,800 2,800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total General FiJnd Transfers In 177,546 292,648 168,107 (124,541)642,137 452,000 I 112,000 II 112,400 II 112,800 I 113,200
GENERAL FUND TRANSFERS OUT:
To CIP fund 4,531,571 1,416,000 1,416,000 0 6,413,299 4,618,553 5,102,500 4,899,200 4,977,700 4,923,300
ToCDBG 0 0 0 0 44,000 0 0 0 0 0
To Improvement Authority PB 82,252 110,000 110,000 0 101,000 60,000 106,000 108,000 110,000 112,000
To Abalone Cove Sewer District 10,700 14,700 14,700 0 32,700 10,700 10,700 10,700 10,700 10,700
To Habitat Restoration 115,000 169,000 169,000 0 109,900 90,000 90,000 110,000 113,000 127,000
To Subregion 1 Maintenance fund 55,000 55,000 55,000 0 70,000 60,000 65,000 65,000 65,000 65,000
To Street Maintenance fund 455,025 22,000 22,000 0 0 0 0 100,000 150,000 190,000
To RPVTV 54,590 105,000 105,000 0 84,270 0 0 0 0 0
To Employee Benefits 0 1,594,125 1,575,501 18,624 0 0 0 0 0 0
To RDA Debt Service fund 0 45,800 0 45,800 47,200 0 0 0 0 0
Total General Fund Transfers Out 5,304,138 I 3,531,62511 3,467,20111 64,4241 6,902,3691 4,839,25311 5,374,200 II 5,292,900 II 5,426,400 I 5,428,000
I I I I
Net Activity (2,007,063)I 345,05811 1,285,77111 811,8651 (2,862,450)1 55,98211 (790,135)11 (802,500)1 (865,010)1 (996,460)
I I I I
3-50
CITY,Of...RANCHO PALOS VERDES
201 ff~-"IEAR FINANCIAL MODEL -(BY FUND)
EXHIBIT B
"'nMAT<
~FY10·11
GENERAL FUND SUMMARY
Beginning Fund Balance 20,094,337 18,087,274 18,087,274 0 19,373,045 16,510,595 16,566,577 15,776,442 14,973,942 14,108,932
Plus:Revenues 18,916,160 21,229,547 21,303,231 73,684 22,752,717 23,199,100 23,768,740 24,337,900 24,939,290 25,574,040
Less:Expenditures (15,796,631) (17,645,512) (16,718,366)927,146 (19,354,935) (18,755,865) (19,296,675) (19,959,900)(20,490,700) (21,255,700)
Plus:Transfers In 177,546 292,648 168,107 (124,541)642,137 452,000 112,000 112,400 112,800 113,200
Less:Transfers Out (5,304,138) (3,531,625)(3,467,201)64,424 (6,902,369)(4,839,253)(5,374,200) (5,292,900) (5,426,400)(5,428,000)
Ending Fund Balance 18,087,274 18,432,332 19,373,045 940,713 16,510,595 16,566,577 15,776,442 14,973,942 14,108,932 13,112,472
Less Fund Balance Reservations:
PB &AC RDA Loans,Bond Restructuring 6,219,543 6,306,376 6,306,376 6,306,376 6,306,376 6,306,376 6,306,376 6,306,376
Continuing Appropriations 1,333,300 1,462,450 0 0 0 0 0 0
Prepaid Items &other 94,175 860,090 860,090 860,090 860,090 860,090 860,090 860,090
Available Fund Balance 10,440,256 I I 10,744,129 9,344,129 9,400,111 8,609,976 7,807,476 6,942,466 5,946,006
Policy Reserve Threshold 9,458,080 8,359,183 8,968,243 9,377,933 9,648,338 9,979,950 10,245,350 10,627,850
Surplus/(Deficit)Reserve vs.Policy Threshold 982,176 2,384,946 375,886 22,178 (1,038,362) (2,172,474) (3,302,884)(4,681,844)
3-51
Exhibit 0
CIP FUND PROJECTS
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
2011 FIVE-YEAR FINANCIAL MODEL
CIP PLAN PROJECT EXPENDITURES
EXHIBITC
111~t~I~":tr ~~~;~T1IIe~~j:i'If4.I~~t!I'111(1_1'~1:~'lllitIFUNDINGSOURCE
Street Infrastructure
Annual Residential Pavement I 930,461 1,095,067
Annual Arterial Pavement 1172,173 2,149,099
Pavement Management Plan Update '4,689 5,003
~~~:~~-~i:P{~~~~~nis----------------------------------+-----f~~f~~--------480;754-
Traffic Signal-Crenshaw/Crestridge ,11,217 8,796
Traffic Signal Synchronization -Hawthorne Blvd
Traffic Calming Toscanini I 20,831
3,168,152
2,543,560
500,500
254,000
1,600,000 1,600,000 1,600,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 'General Fund,TDA Article 3/$25K
2,380,000 IProp C/STPUMeasure R
120,000 120,000 IGeneral Fund
Prop A
---------------------------250~OOO-----------------------250;O-oo-lB;;~iificatio;;Fund--------------------------
General fund/Grant
785,532 IHSIP GrantlCIP Excess Reserve 10%matc!
CIP Accumulated Fund Balance
PVDE Safety Improvements -Early Action Impr (Guardrails)--------------------------------------------------------------------t------------------------------
ADA Curb Ramp Improvements I 15,616
Pedestrian Improvements on Hawthorne Blvd
PVDS Bikeway Safety Project I 11 ,852
Study PVDS in Landslide Area
Parks &Open Space Infrastructure
PVIC &Fom3stal Trail Improvements I 7,700
~~~~~~~~~~!~fny~~~~~~e-nts--------------------------------+-~;:;~~-------TU93-
--------~~g1~~-t---------------------------------------------------------------------------1~~~?~!I~*~~-~~-Ge~~_!1!£~~~_--------------l
1,427,000 I 180%Grantl20%C~Match
801,000 I IPro p C &Grant
50,000 CIP Accumulated Fund Balance
General fund
EET
Hesse Park Lower Picnic Playgroung ,198,377 I I IEET
~~~;~~~~-6~*-~~~!~~t~~1~~~f~cement-----------------+----------------------------t-------~~c!?.ll-t--------f45;oOO------------------------------------------------------------------~~~ii~~{-;~~~~nt-Fu-;;d-----------------j
C~Hall Commun~y Room Drop Ceiling Retrofit/Replacement 1 I I 15,000 IGeneral Fund
Ryan Park Field Upgrade ,I 323,150 I IGeneral Fund/EET
Ryan Park Southern Entrance Road ,I I 20,000 220,000 ICIP Excess Reserve/General Fund
~:{~w~~~~~~6~~~~J-mentPh~Se-I&-"-------------------------t-------------------------------t------------------t ------~~~~-~~-------~~~~~g-g------------------------------------------~~f~~~~J._~~~~-~~~R~r;;~~~~~--~-~~~~~
&~~~;~il~~~~~~~~;!~:~~~~!~~~;~~!1-~~------------------+---------------6;ifo6~367-t-----------------t--------!QQ~g.ll_g !E~g_~-------------1~~:~~2~~v~~~-j-~~-~;!;Z!s-------------
Grandview Park Improvements ,11,378 I 2,046,595 I IGeneral Fund/CIP Reserve
Lower Hesse Park Improvements I 1 1 2,400,000 IGeneral Fund/CIP Reserve
Ocean Trails Beach Lifeguard Station Phone Service/Power 20,000 50,000 CIP Excess Reserve
~~~l~i~E!175~~~i?i~W~~i~;iN~~PDr~inage-c~ni~~I-----t---------------------------------t-------------------t---------~~~g~~-------------------------------------------------------------------~~*-~:~;-~~-~;;~--------------------------
Shoreline Park Erosion Control I I I 35,000 IGeneral Fund
Eastview Park Playground Improvements I _I 1 89,000 .ICIP Reserve
Misc Project Design 10,000 10,000 CIP Excess Reserve
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------&-----------------------------------------------
Facilities
ADA Trans~ion Plan 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 IGeneral Fund
sewerIilfra-structure--------------------------------------------+----------------------------------t-------------t-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+------------------------------------------------j
Sewer Overflow Capac~y Analysis 69,282 4,989 CIP Accumulated Fund Balance
General Administration/Maintenance
Total CIP Fund Expend~ures
165,176 1,985
1,501,4771 10,484,860
53,600
11,715,707
27,500
5,924,0321
25,000 25,500 26,000 26,600 ICIP Fund Interest Earnings
3,245,000 I 4,425,500 I 2,046,000 I 2,176,600
NOTE:The Tota/Expenditures above agree to Total CIP fund expenditures on Page 9 of the Mode/.3-52