CITY HALL
CITY OF ANGELS PO Box 667, 200 Monte Verda St. Suite B, Angels Camp, CA 95222 P: (209) 736-2181
CITY OF ANGELS
CITY COUNCIL AMENDED AGENDA
August 2, 2022
THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD AT ANGELS FIRE HOUSE, 1404 VALLECITO ROAD AND WILL BE OPEN TO PUBLIC. MASKS ARE RECOMMENDED FOR ATTENDEES.
In person public attendance will be available with limited seating. Seats are available on a first come, first served basis. Members of the public shall have the right to observe and offer public comment at the appropriate time. To view or participate in the meeting online, please use the following link:
Google Meet joining info
Video call link: https://meet.google.com/bfn-ezik-fue
Or dial: (US) + 1 630-634-5291 PIN: 858 431 338#
CITY COUNCIL appreciates your interest and encourages your participation. Regularly scheduled meeting are held the 1st and 3rd Tuesday of each month. The Agenda is divided into two sections:
CONSENT AGENDA: These matters include routine financial and administration actions and are usually approved by a single majority vote.
REGULAR AGENDA: These items include significant financial and administration actions of special interest, hearings and work sessions.
The numerical order of the items on this agenda is for convenience of reference. Items may be taken out of order upon request of the Mayor or Council Members. All questions shall be directed to the Mayor who, at his/her discretion, will refer to Staff.
Mayor Alvin Broglio Vice Mayor Jennifer Davis-Herndon
Council Members Gretel Tiscornia, Isabel Moncada, Caroline Schirato City Administrator Rebecca Callen City Attorney Doug White 6:00 p.m. REGULAR MEETING
1. ROLL CALL
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS POSTED (OR AMENDED)
4. PUBLIC COMMENT
The public may address the Council on any item of public interest not otherwise on the agenda that is within the jurisdiction of the City. No action may be taken. Matters to be addressed may be referred to City Staff or placed on a subsequent meeting Agenda. Speakers are limited to five minutes per person.
CITY HALL
CITY OF ANGELS PO Box 667, 200 Monte Verda St. Suite B, Angels Camp, CA 95222 P: (209) 736-2181
5. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of Resolution No. 22-40, Authorizing the City to Implement Teleconferenced Public Meetings Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361, Allowing the City to Continue a Hybrid Virtual Meeting Environment, Rose Beristianos, City Clerk
B. Approval of the School Resource Officer Contract between the City of Angels and Bret Harte High School in the Amount not to Exceed $ and to Remain in Effect Though June 30, 2023, Scott Ellis, Police Chief C. Adopt Resolution No. 22-46, Establishing the Fiscal Year 2022-23 Gann Appropriations Limit for the City of Angels Camp, Rebecca Callen, City Administrator
D. Approval of CALOES 130 Form Designating an Authorized Agent for the City of Angels, Rebecca Callen, City Administrator
6. REGULAR AGENDA
A. PUBLIC HEARING and Consideration of the Levy of Assessments for the Proposed Formation of Landscaping & Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek to Replace Existing Landscaping & Lighting District No. 1 – Greenhorn Creek, Rebecca Neilon, Engineering Department I. Receive Staff Report
II. Open Public Hearing
III. Receive Public Comment
IV. Close Public Hearing
Approve Resolution No. 22-41 FORMATION, Resolution of the City of Angel Camp City Council Approving Engineers Report, Confirming Diagram and Assessment, and Ordering Levy of Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 Greenhorn Creek for Fiscal Year 2022-23 or Approve Resolution No. 22-42 NO FORMATION, Resolution of the City of Angels Camp City Council Certifying the Results of the Ballot Proceeding for Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 Greenhorn Creek, Rebecca Neilon, Engineering Department B. PUBLIC HEARING to Consider the Continuation of the Assessments for Fiscal Year 2022-23 for the Landscaping & Lighting District #1 – Greenhorn Creek Assessment; Adoption of Resolution No. 22-44, Approving the Engineer’s Report, Confirming the Diagram and Assessment, and Ordering the Continuation of Assessments for Fiscal Year 2022-23, Rebecca Neilon, Engineering Department I. Receive Staff Report
II. Open Public Hearing
III. Receive Public Comment
IV. Close Public Hearing
C. PUBLIC HEARING: Amending Community Development Block Grant (CV-1), Allocation Small Business Programs to Support Security Measures in Conjunction with Installing a Generator at the Utica Park Kitchen and for Emergency Signage and ADA Access at Utica Park, Amy Augustine, City Planner I. Receive Staff Report
II. Open Public Hearing
III. Receive Public Comment
IV. Close Public Hearing
D. PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution No. 22-23 Amending Community Development Block Grants (CV-2/3) Allocation for Microenterprise Loans and Grants to Instead Increase the Budget for Utica Park Kitchen Improvements and to Construct New ADA Bathrooms in support of the Commercial Kitchen, Amy Augustine, City Planner
CITY HALL
CITY OF ANGELS PO Box 667, 200 Monte Verda St. Suite B, Angels Camp, CA 95222 P: (209) 736-2181 I. Receive Staff Report
II. Open Public Hearing
III. Receive Public Comment
IV. Close Public Hearing
E. Approve Resolution No. 22-43 Awarding a Contract to Pioneer Electric and Authorizing the City Administrator to Execute said Contract for Purchasing and Installing a Generator at the Utica Park Kitchen in the Amount of $24,830 and Authorizing the City Administrator, Contingent Upon Execution of Revised CDBG Agreements, to Execute a Change order for $5,600 for Fencing, Amy Augustine, City Planner F. Approve Resolution No. 22-45 to Purchase APN 60-014-001, Next Door to NAPA Auto for Future Parking and Circulation Improvements for Utica Park and the Downtown Historic District, Amy Augustine, City Planner G. Accept Recommendation and Award an I.T. Services Contract to Coneth Solutions for a Period from August 2, 2022, through June 30, 2025, Rebecca Callen, City Administrator H. Approval of Abatement Costs for Lot# 288, APN 058-064-005, Nathan Pry, Fire Marshal/ Deputy Chief I. Approve Resolution No. 22-49 and Side Letter with the City of Angels Police Officers Association to Include Changes in Canine Officer Compensation and Addition of Incentive and Retention Pay, Rebecca Callen, City Administrator
J. Approve Budget Amendment for a City Speed Survey for $89.418 Using SB1 (RMRA) Funds, Rebecca Callen, City Administrator
K. Approve Budget Amendment for Roadside Safety Audit and Install, Relocate, and Remove Roadway Signs for $122,475, Rebecca Callen, City Administrator
L. Approval of a Grant Agreement Between Calaveras Public Power Agency (CPPA) and the City of Angels for an Amount up to $30,000, Rebecca Callen, City Administrator M. Approval of a Budget Adjustment for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program – City of Angels All Hazard Planning Code Update Project, Rebecca Callen, City Administrator N. Acceptance of Proposal for Groundwater Monitoring FNA Regulatory Reporting with Condor and Approval of the Professional Service Agreement, Rebecca Callen, City Administrator O. Approve Resolution No. 22-47, Amending the 2022/23 Budget to Incorporate Abatement Cost, CPPA Grant, Federal Planning Grant, Groundwater Monitoring, HSIP Project, IT Services, SB 1 Project, and Property Purchase.
P. Discussion and Approval of a Variance to the No Fee Waiver Policy for Bret Harte Union High School for Homecoming 2022 and Approve Resolution No. 22-48 for Road Closure, Rebecca Callen, City Administrator
7. ADMINISTRATION REPORT
8. COUNCIL REPORT
9. CORRESPONDENCE
A. News and Notes the Week of July 11, 2022
B. News and Notes the Week of July 18, 2022
C. Angels Camp Museum Foundation Letter
10. CALENDAR
11. ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at City Hall 209-736-2181. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II) Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the Agenda packet are available for public inspection at City Hall at 200 Monte Verda Street Ste. B, Angels Camp, CA 95222 during normal business hours. The Agenda is also available on line at www.angelscamp.gov.
City of Angels Council Meeting
AUGUST 2, 2022 CONSENT: 5A
A. Approval of Resolution No. 22-40, Authorizing the City to Implement Teleconferenced Public Meetings Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361, Allowing the City to Continue a Hybrid Virtual Meeting Environment, Rose Beristianos, City Clerk
___________________________________________________________________ {CW110982.1}
CITY HALL
CITY OF ANGELS PO Box 667, 200 Monte Verda St. Suite B, Angels Camp, CA 95222 P: (209) 736-2181 MEETING DATE: August 2, 2022
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Douglas L. White, City Attorney
RE: Resolution No. 22-40, Authorizing the City to Implement Teleconferenced Public Meetings Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 Allowing the City to Continue a Hybrid Virtual Meeting Environment.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
Staff recommends Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the City to Implement Teleconferenced Public Meetings Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 Allowing the City to Continue a Hybrid Virtual Meeting Environment.
BACKGROUND:
On September 16, 2021 Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill (“AB”) 361 which allows cities to continue to meet remotely during proclaimed states of emergency under modified Ralph M. Brown Act requirements that are similar but not identical to the rules and procedures established by the previous Executive Orders temporarily suspending provisions of the Brown Act. On September 20, 2021, Governor Newsom signed Executive Order N-15-21 to suspend AB 361 until October 1, 2021.
AB 361, until January 1, 2024, authorizes a local agency to use teleconferencing without complying with the teleconferencing requirements imposed by the Brown Act when a local legislative body holds a meeting during a declared state of emergency by the governor and when state or local health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION:
On June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08-21, which among other things rescinded his prior Executive Order N-29-20 and set a date of October 1, 2021, for public agencies to transition back to public meetings held in full compliance with the Brown Act.
As the Delta and Omicron variants have surged in California, the Legislature has taken action to extend the COVID-19 exceptions to the Brown Acts’s teleconference requirements, subject to some additional safeguards.
A local agency that holds a meeting under these circumstances would be required by AB 361 to do all of the following, in addition to giving notice of the meeting and posting agendas as required under the Brown act.
These additional requirements are intended to protect the public’s right to participate in the meetings of local agency legislative bodies.
{CW110982.1}
Pursuant to AB 361 local agencies are required to do all of the following in addition to meeting notice requirements under the Brown Act:
• Allow the public to access the meeting and require that the agenda provide an opportunity for the public to directly address the legislative body pursuant to the Brown Act’s other teleconferencing provisions. • In each instance when the local agency provides notice of the teleconferenced meeting or posts its agenda, give notice for how the public can access the meeting and provide public comment. • Identify and include in the agenda an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in or an internetbased service option; the legislative body need not provide a physical location for the public to attend or provide comments.
• Conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the public.
• Stop the meeting until public access is restored in the event of a service disruption that either prevents the local agency from broadcasting the meeting to the public using the call-in or internet-based service option or is within the local agency’s control and prevents the public from submitting public comments (any actions taken during such a service disruption can be challenged under the Brown Act’s existing challenge provisions). • Not require comments be submitted in advance (though the legislative body may provide that as an option) and provide the opportunity to comment in real time. • Provide adequate time for public comment, either by establishing a timed public comment period or by allowing a reasonable amount of time to comment.
• If the legislative body uses a third-party website or platform to host the teleconference, and the thirdparty service requires users to register to participate, the legislative body must provide adequate time during the comment period for users to register and may not close the registration comment period until the comment period has elapsed.
AB 361 also provides that if a local agency conducts teleconference meetings in reliance on AB 361, the local agency must make the following findings by majority vote every 30 days to continue using the bill’s exemption to the Brown Act teleconferencing rules:
• The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the emergency; and • Either of the following circumstances exist: The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of members to meet safely in person, or State or local officials continue to impose or recommend social distancing measures.
The goal of AB 361 is “to improve and enhance public access to local agency meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic and future applicable emergencies, by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options” consistent with Executive Order N-29-20. AB 361 contains an urgency clause which became effective upon signing with a sunset of January 1, 2024.
Over the past year, the Angels Camp City Council meetings have been held with virtual hybrid teleconference components. The City Council Chamber is not open for public attendance, but public participation is ensured through a virtual environment.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
There is no fiscal impact.
{CW110982.1}
OPTIONS:
1. Adopt the Resolution;
2. Continue the item for later consideration of the City Council with direction to City staff; or
3. Reject the Resolution.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
{CW110983.1}
RESOLUTION NO. 22-40
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANGELS CAMP CITY COUNCIL
PROCLAIMING A LOCAL EMERGENCY AND AUTHORIZING
REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS OF THE LEGISLATIVE
BODIES OF THE CITY OF ANGELS PURSUANT TO ASSEMBLY BILL
361 AND BROWN ACT PROVISIONS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Angels (the “City”) is committed to preserving public access and participation in meetings of the City Council; and WHEREAS, all meetings of the City’s legislative bodies are open and public, as required by the Ralph M. Brown Act (Gov. Code, §§ 54950 – 54963), so that any member of the public may attend, participate, and watch the City’s legislative bodies conduct their business; and
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill (“AB”) 361, amending Government Code section 54953, subdivision (e) to allow for remote teleconferencing participation in meetings by members of a legislative body without compliance with the requirements of Government Code section 54953, subdivision (b)(3), subject to the existence of certain conditions; and WHEREAS, a required condition for remote teleconferencing participation in meetings by members of a legislative body is that a state of emergency is declared by the Governor, pursuant to Government Code section 8625, proclaiming the existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the state caused by conditions as described in Government Code section 8558; and WHEREAS, a proclamation is made when there is an actual incident, threat of disaster, or extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the jurisdictions that are within the City’s boundaries, caused by natural, technological, or human-caused disasters; and
WHEREAS, it is further required that state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing or the legislative body meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees; and WHEREAS, such conditions now exist in the City, specifically, on March 4, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency to exist in California as a result of the threat of COVID-19; despite sustained efforts, the virus continues to spread and is impacting nearly all sectors of California; and WHEREAS, there has been a significant increase in COVID-19 cases due primarily to the Omicron variant and COVID-19. Emerging evidence indicates that the {CW110983.1}
Omicron variant is far more transmissible than prior variants of the virus, and can be spread by fully vaccinated individuals; and
WHEREAS, as a consequence of the declared emergency, the City Council does hereby find that the legislative body of the City shall conduct their meetings without compliance with Government Code section 54953, subdivision (b)(3), as authorized by Section 54953, subdivision (e), and that such legislative bodies shall comply with the requirements to provide the public with access to the meetings as prescribed in Section 54953, subdivision (e)(2); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 54953, subdivision (e)(3), in order to continue to teleconference without compliance with Government Code section 54953, subdivision (b)(3), the City Council shall, not later than 30 days after teleconferencing for the first time pursuant to this Resolution, and every 30 days thereafter, make the following findings by majority vote: The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency and any of the following conditions exist: (1) the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person or (2) state or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing; and
WHEREAS, the City reserves the option to hold in-person meetings, consistent with local health officer directives, or to continue a practice of remote meetings that still allow multiple options for public participation.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANGELS CAMP DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by this reference.
Section 2. Proclamation of Local Emergency. The City Council hereby proclaims that a local emergency exists throughout the City, and that the legislative body meeting in person could present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees due to the prevalence of COVID-19 in Calaveras County and the state, such that the City reserves the right to continue virtual meetings or conduct in-person meetings, consistent with local health guidance or duly issued orders.
Section 3. Remote Teleconference Meetings. The legislative body and designees of the City are hereby authorized and directed to take all actions necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this Resolution, including conducting open and public meetings in accordance with Government Code section 54953, subdivision (e), and other applicable provisions of the Brown Act.
{CW110983.1}
Section 4. Effective Date of Resolution. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption and shall be effective until the earlier of (i) September 1, 2022, or (ii) such time the City Council makes a subsequent finding by majority vote in accordance with Government Code section 54953, subdivision (e)(3), to extend the time during which the legislative bodies of the City may continue to teleconference without compliance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of section 54953.
PASSED AND ADOPTED AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANGELS CAMP ON THIS 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2022 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
______________________________
Alvin Broglio, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Rose Beristianos, City Clerk
City of Angels Council Meeting
AUGUST 2, 2022 CONSENT: 5B
B. Approval of the School Resource Officer Contract between the City of Angels and Bret Harte High School in the Amount not to Exceed $ and to Remain in Effect Though June 30, 2023, Scott Ellis, Police Chief
___________________________________________________________________
CITY HALL
CITY OF ANGELS PO Box 667, 200 Monte Verda St. Suite B, Angels Camp, CA 95222 P: (209) 736-2181 DATE: August 2, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Rebecca Callen, City Administrator
RE: APPROVE CONTRACT FOR THE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER POSITION BETWEEN THE
CITY OF ANGELS CAN BRET HARTE SCHOOL DISTRICT
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the agreement between the City of Angels and the Bret Harte School District for the School Resource Officer position.
BACKGROUND
The City of Angels Police Department has been contracting with the Bret Harte Unified School District for the services of a School Resource Officer. This is an annual agreement, depending on funding.
DISCUSSION
Bret Harte has agreed to another school year funding a School Resource Officer. Within the agreement, Bret Harte agrees to pay approximately 75% of the costs of an officer or nine months of service to fulfill this position. The City General fund pays the other 25%.
This position will allow the high school to have an officer on school grounds throughout each school day of the week. This position benefits the district and the police department as it will ass to our available resources and expand our ability to respond appropriately to emergencies within the City Limits.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The 2022-23 Fiscal Year budget included costs and associated revenue.
Attachments:
SRO Contract
Contract No. Page 1 of 6
AGREEMENT
between
THE CITY OF ANGELS CAMP
and
BRET HART UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT
for
Police Officer Services
at
Bret Hart High School
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 2nd day of August 2022 by and between the CITY OF ANGELS CAMP, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as “City”), and the BRET HART UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT (hereinafter referred to as “District”). City and District may be referred to individually as a “Party” or collectively as the “Parties”. There are no other parties to this Agreement.
WHEREAS, District desires to acquire the on-site services of an Angels Camp Police Officer for its high school campus located at: 364 Murphys Grade Rd (hereinafter referred to as the “High School”).
WHEREAS, City desires to accommodate District’s request for police services.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereto agree as follows:
1. Recitals. The recitals stated above (“Recitals”) are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into this Agreement. In the event of any inconsistency between the Recitals and paragraphs one through ten of this Agreement, paragraphs one through ten shall prevail.
2. Term. Subject to paragraph five of this Agreement, City shall assign one officer (hereinafter referred to as “Police Officer,” “Officer,” or “SRO”) to provide police services to the High School campus for a period beginning at the time the Officer is hired or appointed to the position and ending the last day of the scheduled school year. District understands and agrees that City retains the right of control over the selection of Officer(s) to be assigned as SRO’s and may recall an SRO and assign a different Officer as necessary to meet the needs of the City.
Contract No. Page 2 of 6
3. Duty Hours/Compensation. The maximum number of hours that the SRO shall be on duty in a work week shall be forty-three (43) hours. Any hours worked over this amount must be pre-approved by the City. Whenever possible, it is the intent of the Parties that the SRO’s duty hours shall conform to the school day. It is not a material breach of this Agreement if the SRO and/or marked police vehicle is absent from campus. It is understood and agreed that time spent by SRO attending court juvenile and/or criminal cases arising from and/or out of his or her employment as an SRO shall be considered as hours worked under this Agreement.
District understands and agrees that in the event of an emergency, or to meet the policing needs of the City, the SRO may be ordered by the City to leave their school duty station during normal duty hours as described above to perform other services for the City. District further understands and agrees that staffing and/or operational demands may require the City to withdraw the SRO for other duties entirely and agrees that the City may do so at its discretion at any time. Any time spent performing duties for the City shall not be considered hours worked for the District under this Agreement. In such an event, the monthly compensation paid by the School to the City shall be reduced by the number of hours the SRO provided services to the City.
The City, in its sole discretion, shall have the power and authority to hire, discharge, and discipline the SRO. The Department shall retain control over supervision, wages and other terms and conditions of employment of the SRO in providing the Services under this Agreement. The Parties acknowledge that the SRO is held to the requirements of the law and City policies and procedures. The Department shall have the responsibility to evaluate, manage, and supervise the SRO. The District shall immediately notify the City of any concerns regarding the performance of the assigned officer.
District will compensate City for SRO’s who are employed as full-time officers with the City at a rate which includes all pay and other benefits and/or costs associated with the Officer’s employment with the City, including but not necessarily limited to: sick leave, vacation leave, retirement compensation, disability salary continuation, workers compensation, unemployment compensation, life insurance, dental insurance, and medical/hospitalization insurance, as set forth in the MOU between the City of Angels Camp and the Angels Camp Police Officers Association (“MOU”) or any other applicable policy related to the assigned Officer’s employment. If the number of on-duty hours the SRO works performing services for the District exceeds eighty-four (84) hours in any 14-day period, those hours will be compensated and reimbursed to City at a rate of one and a half times that of the Officer’s base pay as set forth in the MOU.
Should the City determine that the SRO position is best filled by an Officer who works in a part-time reserve position for the City, the District shall compensate and reimburse City at rate of thirty-two dollars and seventy-three cents ($32.73) per hour.
Contract No. Page 3 of 6
4. Billing. City will bill District quarterly in arrears beginning the first payroll period following August 15th, 2022, and District shall remit payment within thirty (30) calendar days.
5. No Additional Duty of Care. The Parties understand that staffing demands may require City to withdraw the assigned Officer for other duties and agree that City may do so at its discretion. The Parties anticipate that the assigned Police Officer’s duties are often off-campus. This Agreement does not create an affirmative duty of care (including, without limitation, a duty to protect, a duty to deter, or a duty to intervene) by the City or the assigned Police Officer and the absence of the assigned Police Officer is not a breach of this Agreement.
6. Rates. The rate outlined in paragraph three of this Agreement will remain in effect for the term of this Agreement, through June 30th, 2023.
7. Indemnification.
(a) The District shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers from and against any and all liability, claims, damage, cost, expenses, awards, fines, judgments, and expenses of litigation (including, without limitation, costs, attorney fees, expert witness fees and prevailing party fees and cost) of every nature arising out of or in connection with the assigned Officer’s performance of work or his or her failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in the Agreement, except such loss or damage which was caused by the active negligence by the City, or the gross or willful misconduct of the assigned Officer.
The provisions of this paragraph 7(a) shall survive the termination of this Agreement. (b) The City shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the District, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all liability, claims, damages, cost, expenses, awards, fines, judgements, and expenses of litigation (including without limitation costs, attorney fees, expert witness fees, and prevailing party fees and costs) of every nature arising out of active negligence by the City or the gross or willful misconduct of the assigned SRO during the performance of his or her work hereunder. The provisions of this paragraph 7(b) shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
(c) If the District rejects a tender of defense by the City and/or the assigned Officer under this Agreement, and it is later determined that the City and/or the Officer breached no duty of care and/or was immune from liability, the District shall reimburse the City and/or Officer for any and all litigation expenses (including, without limitation, costs, attorney fees, expert witness fees and prevailing party fees and cost). A duty of care or immunity determination may be made by a jury or a court, including a declaratory relief determination by a court after the City and/or Officer settles a liability claim, with or without participation by the District. The provisions of this paragraph 7(c) shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
(d) The Parties acknowledge that it is not the intent of the Agreement to create a duty of care by the City or its assigned Officer that they would not owe in the Contract No. Page 4 of 6
absence of the Agreement. The Agreement does not create an affirmative duty of care (including, without limitation, a duty to protect, a duty to deter and/or a duty to intervene) by the City or the assigned Officer and the absence of the assigned Officer and/or the patrol vehicle is not a material breach of this Agreement. The Parties further acknowledge that by entering into this Agreement neither the City nor its assigned Officer intends to waive any immunities to which they would be entitled in the absence of the Agreement.
(e) Each Party shall notify the other Party within ten (10) days of any claims or legal actions with respect to any of the matters described in this indemnification section.
8. Term of Agreement/Cancellation. This Agreement shall be effective August 15, 2022, through June 30, 2023. Notwithstanding the forgoing, either Party has the right to cancel this Agreement at any time and without any future obligation upon thirty (30) days’ written notice to the other Party. The City Administrator, in his or her sole direction, may extend the Term from time to time in increments of at least one (1) year.
No later than three (3) months prior to the expiration of the Term.
9. Students Records. The Parties agree that the Police Officer shall be allowed access to necessary student records for which the SRO has a “legitimate educational interest.” The Police Officer shall not provide student records to anyone else without first consulting with a District Administrator. The Police Officer shall not inspect or copy confidential student records outside the scope of the Police Officer’s service, including any record related to a student’s place of birth or immigration status, except as allowed by law. The District remains in direct control of the use, maintenance and disclosure of student records in accordance with Education Code section 49076 and other applicable provisions of law.
10. General Provisions.
(a) Governing Law; Venue. The validity, interpretation, and performance of this Agreement shall be controlled by and construed pursuant to the laws of the State of California. Venue for any legal proceedings related to the enforcement of this Agreement shall be in the Superior Court for the County of Calaveras. (b) Severability. If this Agreement in its entirety is determined by a court to be invalid or unenforceable, this Agreement shall automatically terminate as of the date of final entry of judgment. If any provision of this Agreement shall be determined by a court to be invalid and unenforceable, or if any provision of this Agreement is rendered invalid or unenforceable according to the terms of any federal or state statute, which becomes effective after the Effective Date of this Agreement, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect and shall be construed to give effect to the intent of this Agreement.
(c) Waiver. Waiver of any condition, breach or default under this Agreement does not constitute a continuing waiver, or the waiver of a subsequent breach. No Party shall be deemed to have made any such waiver unless it is in writing and signed by the Party so waiving.
Contract No. Page 5 of 6
(d) Supersedes Prior Agreement. It is the intention of the Parties hereto that this Agreement shall supersede any prior agreements, discussions, commitments, representations, or agreements written, electronic, or oral between the Parties hereto with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement.
(e) Integration of Prior Terms and Conditions. This Agreement, including all recitals, constitutes the entire agreement and understandings of the Parties. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by the mutual written agreement of the Parties. This Agreement is invalid unless approved by the legislative body of each Party, although it may be executed by an authorized agent of each Party. An authorized agent of the City shall be a person specifically authorized by the legislative body of the City to execute this Agreement, at the level of City Manager or City Attorney or equivalent. Unless set forth herein, neither Party shall be liable for any representations made express or implied not specifically set forth herein. (f) Amendment of this Agreement. This Agreement may only be amended or modified by the mutual written agreement of the Parties. (g) Captions. The captions of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and the words contained therein shall in no way be held to explain, modify, amplify or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of the provisions of this Agreement.
(h) Mandatory and Permissive. “Shall” and “will” and “agrees” are mandatory. “May” or “can” are permissive.
(i) Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously and, in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.
(j) Other Documents. Parties agree that they shall cooperate in good faith to accomplish the objectives of this Agreement and to that end, agree to execute and deliver such other instruments or documents as may be necessary and convenient to fulfill the purposes and intentions of this Agreement.
(k) Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement in each covenant and term and condition herein.
(l) Authority. This Agreement is invalid unless executed by an authorized agent of each Party. All signatories to this Agreement warrant and represent that they have the power and authority to enter into this Agreement on behalf of their respective Parties and the names, titles and capacities herein stated on behalf of any entities, persons, states or firms represented or purported to be represented by such entities, persons, states or firms and that all former requirements necessary or required by the state or federal law in order to enter into this Agreement had been fully complied with.
Contract No. Page 6 of 6
(m) Document Preparation. Each Party acknowledges that it has reviewed this Agreement with its own legal counsel, and based upon the advice of that counsel, freely entered into this Agreement. Each Party has participated fully in the review and revision of this Agreement. This Agreement will not be construed against the Party preparing it but will be construed as if prepared by all Parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their respective officers thereunto duly authorized.
CITY OF ANGELS CAMP, BRET HART UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT
a municipal corporation
By: _______________________________ By: ______________________________ City Administrator
Title: _____________________________
Date: _____________________________
Print name: ________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Date: _____________________________
By: _______________________________
Douglas L. White, City Attorney
ATTEST:
By: _______________________________
Rose Beristianos, City Clerk
City of Angels Council Meeting
AUGUST 2, 2022 CONSENT: 5C
C. Adopt Resolution No. 22-46, Establishing the Fiscal Year 2022-23 Gann Appropriations Limit for the City of Angels Camp, Rebecca Callen, City Administrator
___________________________________________________________________
CITY HALL
CITY OF ANGELS PO Box 667, 200 Monte Verda St. Suite B, Angels Camp, CA 95222 P: (209) 736-2181 DATE August 2, 2022
TO City Council
FROM Rebecca Callen, City Administrator
RE ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 22-46 ESTABLISHING THE FISCAL YEAR 2022-23 GANN
APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR THE CITY OF ANGELS CAMP
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the attached resolution authorizing the appropriations limit at $4,180,011 for the Fiscal Year 2022-23.
BACKGROUND
In 1979, Proposition 4 was approved by voters, which required limits or ceilings on the appropriations of tax proceeds that can be made by government entities. As such, the State established Article XIII B of the State Constitution, which requires each government agency to establish an Appropriations Limit (sometimes referred to as the Gann Limit). Subsequently, procedures in the calculation of the Appropriations Limit and the appropriations subject to the limit have been modified by the approval of Propositions 98 and 111. Ultimately, the effect of the limit is to require government agencies to return tax revenues to taxpayers if actual appropriations, as adjusted by regulatory exclusions, exceed the calculated limit.
Each year the City Council is required to authorize the Gann Appropriations Limit for the upcoming fiscal year.
Limits are calculated as the previous year’s Appropriations Limit adjusted by factors for the change of personal income within the State and the greater of the change of population within the City or within the County.
DISCUSSION
The Appropriations Limit approved for the fiscal year 2021-2022 was $3,902,183. The Per Capita Personal Income increased by 7.12% and the County’s population increased by 0.00%. This would establish the new limit for the fiscal year 2022-2023 as $4,180,011, calculated as follows:
$3,902,183 x (1.0712 x 1.0000) = $4,180,011
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact related with this item since expected appropriations for the fiscal year will not exceed the recommended limit to be established by City Council.
ATTACHMENT
1. Resolution 22-46
2. Gann Limit Trends
CITY OF ANGELS
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 22-46
GANN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-23
WHEREAS, the voters of California on November 6, 1979 added Article XIIB to the State Constitution placing various limitations on the appropriations of the State and Local Governments; and WHEREAS, Article XIIB provides that the appropriations limit for the fiscal year is calculated by adjusting the base year appropriations of the fiscal year 1978-1979 for changes in the cost of living and population; and
WHEREAS, the City of Angels has complied with all the provisions of Article XIIB in determining the appropriations limits for the fiscal years.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Appropriations Limit for the City of Angels for the 2022-2023 fiscal year is $4,180,011, which reflects a 7.12% increase in Per Capita Personal Income and a 0.00% increase in population in the County over the prior year.
DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of August, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
________________________________
Alvin Broglio
Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Rose Beristianos
City Clerk
HOME OF THE JUMPING FROG
Schedule of Gann Limit Revisions by Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Beginning
Gann
Limit
Tax Increase
Adjustment(2)
Prior Year
Gann Limit,
As Revised
Price Factor
PCPI
County
Population
Factor (1) CP
City
Population
Factor(1) CP
Factor
Increase
(Decrease)
New
Limit
Increase /
(Decrease)
2000-2001 $ 1,555,713 $ 1,555,713 4.9100 0.4400 2.4100 1.0744 $ 1,671,432 2001-2002 $ 1,671,432 $ 1,671,432 7.8200 0.4200 4.2400 1.1239 $ 1,878,549 $ 207,117 2002-2003 $ 1,878,549 $ 1,878,549 -1.2700 1.5300 4.3200 1.0300 $ 1,934,814 $ 56,265 2003-2004 $ 1,934,814 $ - $ 1,934,814 2.3100 1.5400 1.7900 1.0414 $ 2,014,941 $ 80,127 2004-2005 $ 2,014,941 $ 2,014,941 3.2800 1.3500 1.9900 1.0534 $ 2,122,444 $ 107,503 2005-2006 $ 2,122,444 $ 2,122,444 5.2600 1.8200 1.2300 1.0718 $ 2,274,745 $ 152,301 2006-2007 $ 2,274,745 $ 2,274,745 3.9600 1.3800 0.4500 1.0539 $ 2,397,459 $ 122,714 2007-2008 $ 2,397,459 $ 2,397,459 4.4200 0.8900 0.5000 1.0535 $ 2,525,707 $ 128,248 2008-2009 $ 2,525,707 $ 2,525,707 4.2900 0.6100 0.5900 1.0493 $ 2,650,128 $ 124,421 2009-2010 $ 2,650,128 $ 2,650,128 0.6200 0.2100 0.0000 1.0083 $ 2,672,159 $ 22,031 2010-2011 $ 2,672,159 $ 2,672,159 -2.5400 -0.1900 -0.6700 0.9727 $ 2,599,338 $ (72,821) 2011-2012 $ 2,599,338 $ 2,599,338 2.5100 0.2100 0.0000 1.0273 $ 2,670,177 $ 70,839 2012-2013 $ 2,670,177 $ 2,670,177 3.7700 -0.5400 -1.0500 1.0321 $ 2,755,880 $ 85,703 2013-2014 $ 2,755,880 $ 2,755,880 5.1200 -0.6600 -0.8200 1.0443 $ 2,877,861 $ 121,981 2014-2015 $ 2,877,861 $ 2,877,861 -0.2300 -0.7100 -0.8000 0.9906 $ 2,850,856 $ (27,005) 2015-2016 $ 2,850,856 $ 2,850,856 3.8200 0.2600 0.2400 1.0409 $ 2,967,454 $ 116,598 2016-2017 $ 2,967,454 $ 2,967,454 5.3700 -0.1600 0.7200 1.0613 $ 3,149,319 $ 181,865 2017-2018 $ 3,149,319 $ 3,149,319 3.6900 -0.1700 -0.7200 1.0351 $ 3,259,977 $ 110,658 2018-2019 $ 3,259,977 $ 3,259,977 3.6700 -0.0400 0.3200 1.0400 $ 3,390,433 $ 130,456 2019-2020 $ 3,390,433 $ 3,390,433 3.8500 -0.1400 0.3700 1.0423 $ 3,533,992 $ 143,559 2020-2021 $ 3,533,992 $ 3,533,992 3.7300 -0.0700 0.6800 1.0444 $ 3,690,737 $ 156,745 2021-2022 $ 3,690,737 $ 3,690,737 5.0150 -0.0700 0.6800 1.0573 $ 3,902,183 $ 511,750 2022-2023 $ 3,902,183 $ 3,902,183 7.5500 -0.4000 -0.4900 1.0712 $ 4,180,011 $ 646,019 (1) The higher of the City population factor or the County-wide population factor would be used. Bolded factors represent the factor used in the revised calculations. (2) 2003/2004 TOT Adjustment (6% to 10%)
Not adjusted because measure did not include adequate language to consider the additional tax as valid increase to the Gann Limit. 2019/2020 Sales Tax Adjustment
Schedule of Gann Limit Revisions by Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Prior Year Gann
Limit, As Revised
TOT
Increase
Adjustment(1)
Adjusted
Prior Year
Gann Limit
PYAL Price Factor PCPI
County Population
Factor (1 ) CP
City Population
Factor(1) CP
Factor Increase
(Decrease) Based on
Higher Population
Change New Limit Increase
2000-2001 $ 1,555,713 $ 1,555,713 4.9100 0.4400 2.4100 1.0744 $ 1,671,432 2001-2002 $ 1,671,432 $ 1,671,432 7.8200 0.4200 4.2400 1.1239 $ 1,878,549 $ 207,117 2002-2003 $ 1,878,549 $ 1,878,549 -1.2700 1.5300 4.3200 1.0300 $ 1,934,814 $ 56,265 2003-2004 $ 1,934,816 $ 1,934,816 2.3100 1.5400 1.7900 1.0414 $ 2,014,943 $ 80,129 2004-2005 $ 2,014,943 $ 2,014,943 3.2800 1.3500 1.9900 1.0534 $ 2,122,446 $ 107,503 2005-2006 $ 2,122,446 $ 2,122,446 5.2600 1.8200 1.2300 1.0718 $ 2,274,747 $ 152,301 2006-2007 $ 2,274,747 $ 2,274,747 3.9600 1.3800 0.4500 1.0539 $ 2,397,462 $ 122,715 2007-2008 $ 2,397,462 $ 2,397,462 4.4200 0.8900 0.5000 1.0535 $ 2,525,710 $ 128,248 2008-2009 $ 2,525,710 $ 2,525,710 4.2900 0.6100 0.5900 1.0493 $ 2,650,131 $ 124,421 2009-2010 $ 2,650,131 $ 2,650,131 0.6200 0.2100 0.0000 1.0083 $ 2,672,162 $ 22,031 2010-2011 $ 2,672,162 $ 2,672,162 -2.5400 -0.1900 -0.6700 0.9727 $ 2,599,341 $ (72,821) 2011-2012 $ 2,599,341 $ 2,599,341 2.5100 0.2100 0.0000 1.0273 $ 2,670,180 $ 70,839 2012-2013 $ 2,670,180 $ 2,670,180 3.7700 -0.5400 -1.0500 1.0321 $ 2,755,883 $ 85,703 2013-2014 $ 2,755,883 $ 2,755,883 5.1200 -0.6600 -0.8200 1.0443 $ 2,877,864 $ 121,981 2014-2015 $ 2,877,864 $ 2,877,864 -0.2300 -0.7100 -0.8000 0.9906 $ 2,850,859 $ (27,005) 2015-2016 $ 2,850,859 $ 2,850,859 3.8200 0.2600 0.2400 1.0409 $ 2,967,457 $ 116,598 2016-2017 $ 2,967,457 $ 2,967,457 5.3700 -0.1600 0.7200 1.0613 $ 3,149,322 $ 181,865 2017-2018 $ 3,149,322 $ 3,149,322 3.6900 -0.1700 -0.7200 1.0351 $ 3,259,981 $ 110,659 2018-2019 $ 3,259,981 $ 3,259,981 3.6700 -0.0400 0.3200 1.0400 $ 3,390,437 $ 130,456 2019-2020 $ 3,390,437 $ 3,390,437 3.8500 -0.1400 0.3700 1.0423 $ 3,533,996 $ 143,559 2020-2021 $ 3,533,996 $ 3,533,996 3.7300 -0.0700 0.6800 1.0444 $ 3,690,742 $ 156,746 2021-2022 $ 3,690,742 $ 3,690,742 5.4000 -0.0700 0.6800 1.0612 $ 3,916,494 $ 225,752 (1) The higher of the City population factor or the County-wide population factor would be used. Bolded factors represent the factor used in the revised calculations.
City of Angels Council Meeting
AUGUST 2, 2022 CONSENT: 5D
D. Approval of CALOES 130 Form Designating an Authorized Agent for the City of Angels, Rebecca Callen, City Administrator
___________________________________________________________________
CITY HALL
CITY OF ANGELS PO Box 667, 200 Monte Verda St. Suite B, Angels Camp, CA 95222 P: (209) 736-2181 DATE: August 2, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Rebecca Callen, City Administrator
RE: APPROVAL OF CALOES 130 FORM DESIGNATING AN AUTHORIZED AGENT FOR THE
CITY OF ANGELS
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Designation of Applicant’s Agent Resolution for Non-State Agencies
BACKGROUND
The California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services requires an authorized signatory found on an approved Cal OES 130 form. The last one that was adopted by the City in 2019 included two positions that no longer exist. To ensure that the City is up to date on designated signers, it is necessary to approve a new Cal OES 130 form.
DISCUSSION
The new Cal OES 130 form will be submitted to CalOES for the purpose of obtaining federal financial assistance for any existing or future grant programs.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
None
Attachments:
Cal OES 130 Authorization
2019 Cal OES 130 Authorization
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES Cal OES ID No:
Cal OES 130
DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT'S AGENT RESOLUTION FOR
NON-STATE AGENCIES
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE OF THE
(Governing Body) (Name of Applicant)
THAT , OR
(Title of Authorized Agent)
, OR
(Title of Authorized Agent)
(Title of Authorized Agent)
is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of the , (Name of Applicant)
a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, this application and to file it with the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services for the purpose of obtaining federal financial assistance for any existing or future grant program, including, but not limited to any of the following:
- Federally declared Disaster (DR), Fire Mitigation Assistance Grant (FMAG), California State Only Disaster (CDAA), Immediate Services Program (ISP), Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC), Legislative Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program (LPDM), under - Public Law 93-288 as amended by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988, and/or state financial assistance under the California Disaster Assistance Act.
- Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMA), under Section 1366 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968.
- National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) 42 U.S. Code 7704 (b) ((2) (A) (ix) and 42 U.S. Code 7704 (b) (2) (B) National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, and also The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018, Div. F, Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-141 - California Early Earthquake Warning (CEEW) under CA Gov Code – Gov, Title 2, Div. 1, Chapter 7, Article 5, Sections 8587.8, 8587.11, 8587.12 That the , a public entity established under the
(Name of Applicant)
laws of the State of California, hereby authorizes its agent(s) to provide to the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services for all matters pertaining to such state disaster assistance the assurances and agreements required.
Cal OES 130 (Rev 3/9/22)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Cal OES 130 (Rev 3/9/22)
GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES
Cal OES 130
Please check the appropriate box below
This is a universal resolution and is effective for all open and future disasters/grants declared up to three (3) years following the date of approval.
This is a disaster/grant specific resolution and is effective for only disaster/grant number(s):
Passed and approved this __day of , 20
(Name and Title of Governing Body Representative)
(Name and Title of Governing Body Representative)
(Name and Title of Governing Body Representative)
CERTIFICATION
I, , duly appointed and of
(Name) (Title)
, do hereby certify that the above is a true and
(Name of Applicant)
correct copy of a resolution passed and approved by the (Governing Body)
of the on the day of , 20 .
(Name of Applicant)
(Signature) (Title)
(Page 2 of 2)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Cal OES 130 (Rev 3/9/22)
GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES
Cal OES 130 - Instructions
Cal OES Form 130 Instructions
A Designation of Applicant’s Agent Resolution for Non-State Agencies is required of all Applicants to be eligible to receive funding. A new resolution must be submitted if a previously submitted resolution is older than three (3) years from the last date of approval, is invalid, or has not been submitted.
When completing the Cal OES Form 130, Applicants should fill in the blanks on pages 1 and 2. The blanks are to be filled in as follows:
Resolution Section:
Governing Body: This is the group responsible for appointing and approving the Authorized Agents.
Examples include: Board of Directors, City Council, Board of Supervisors, Board of Education, etc.
Name of Applicant: The public entity established under the laws of the State of California.
Examples include: School District, Office of Education, City, County or Non-profit agency that has applied for the grant, such as: City of San Diego, Sacramento County, Burbank Unified School District, Napa County Office of Education, University Southern California.
Authorized Agent: These are the individuals that are authorized by the Governing Body to engage with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services regarding grants for which they have applied.
There are two ways of completing this section:
1. Titles Only: The titles of the Authorized Agents should be entered here, not their names. This allows the document to remain valid if an Authorized Agent leaves the position and is replaced by another individual. If “Titles Only” is the chosen method, this document must be accompanied by either a cover letter naming the Authorized Agents by name and title, or the Cal OES AA Names document.
The supporting document can be completed by any authorized person within the Agency (e.g., administrative assistant, the Authorized Agent, secretary to the Director). It does not require the Governing Body’s signature.
2. Names and Titles: If the Governing Body so chooses, the names and titles of the Authorized Agents would be listed. A new Cal OES Form 130 will be required if any of the Authorized Agents are replaced, leave the position listed on the document, or their title changes.
(Page 1 of 2)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Cal OES 130 (Rev 3/9/22)
GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES
Cal OES 130 - Instructions
Checking Universal or Disaster-Specific Box: A Universal resolution is effective for all past disasters and for those declared up to three (3) years following the date of approval. Upon expiration it is no longer effective for new disasters, but it remains in effect for disasters declared prior to expiration. It remains effective until the disaster goes through closeout unless it is superseded by a newer resolution.
Governing Body Representative: These are the names and titles of the approving Board Members.
Examples include: Chairman of the Board, Director, Superintendent, etc. The names and titles cannot be one of the designated Authorized Agents. A minimum of three (3) approving board members must be listed. If less than three are present, meeting minutes must be attached in order to verify a quorum was met.
Certification Section:
Name and Title: This is the individual in attendance who recorded the creation and approval of this resolution.
Examples include: City Clerk, Secretary to the Board of Directors, County Clerk, etc. This person cannot be one of the designated Authorized Agents or Approving Board Member. If a person holds two positions (such as City Manager and Secretary to the Board) and the City Manager is to be listed as an Authorized Agent, then that person could sign the document as Secretary to the Board (not City Manager) to eliminate “Self-Certification.” (Page 2 of 2)
ST A TE OF CALIFORNIA
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES
Cal OES 130
Cal OES ID No: 009-02112
--------- -
DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT'S AGENT RESOLUTION
FOR NON-STATE AGENCIES
BE IT RESOLVED By TI IE City Council OF THE City of Angels -----'--- - ------ - (Gove ming Body) (Name of Applicant) THAT City Administrator OR --------------------·
(Title of AuUwrized Agent)
Finance Officer Of"' ------~~-----------· '- (Tille 01 Authorized Agent) Director of Administrative Services
(Title of Authorized Agent)
is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of the _ C_ity_o_f_A_n_ g_e _ls _ _ ____________ ~ a public entity (Name of Applicant)
established under the laws of the State of California, this application and to file it with the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services for the purpose o f obtaining certain federal financial assistance under Public Law 93-288 as amended by lhe Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988, andior state financial assistance under the California Disaster Assistance Act.
THAT the City of Angels .apu blicentityestablishedunderthe lawsofthe StateofCalifomia, (Name of Applicant)
hereby authorizes its agent(s) lo provide to the Governor's Office of Emergency Services for all matters pertaining to such state disaster assistance the assurances and agreements required.
Please check the appropriate box below:
·~ This is a universal resolution and is effecti ve for all open and fun1re disasters up to three (3) years follo,,;,ing the date ofapproval below.
O This is a disaster specific resolution and is effective for only disaster number(s) _________ _ · Passed and approv_ed this _ ___ 17_t_h_day o f December ,20_1_9_ I. Sus an Wenger
(Name)
Mayor Folendorf
(Name and Titie of Governing Body Representative)
Vice Mayor Oliveira
(Name and Title of Governing Body Representative)
Council Members Metildi, Broglio
(Name and Title of Governing Body Represenlative)
CERTIFICATION
duly appointed and Deputy City Cl e rk
(Title)
RECEIVEC'
DEC 2 3 2019
r; C?6S-33
GRANTS PROCESSING UNIT
of
_t_h_e_C_i....:ty_o_f_A_ng::.e_l_s _____________ , do hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of a (Name of Applicant)
Resolution passed and approved by Lhe _C_it...::y_C_o_u_n_c_i_l _____ _ of the City of Angels (Governing Body) (Name of Applicant)
on the _____ 1_7_th _ _ day of December
~ ul.t~ Deputy City Cle rk
Signature) (Title)
Cal OES 130 (Rev,9/ 13) Page I
City of Angels Council Meeting
AUGUST 2, 2022 REGULAR: 6A
A. PUBLIC HEARING and Consideration of the Levy of Assessments for the Proposed Formation of Landscaping & Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek to Replace Existing Landscaping & Lighting District No. 1 – Greenhorn Creek, Rebecca Neilon, Engineering Department I. Receive Staff Report
II. Open Public Hearing
III. Receive Public Comment
IV. Close Public Hearing
Approve Resolution No. 22-41 FORMATION, Resolution of the City of Angel Camp City Council Approving Engineers Report, Confirming Diagram and Assessment, and Ordering Levy of Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 Greenhorn Creek for Fiscal Year 2022-23 or Approve Resolution No. 22-42 NO FORMATION, Resolution of the City of Angels Camp City Council Certifying the Results of the Ballot Proceeding for Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 Greenhorn Creek, Rebecca Neilon, Engineering Department ___________________________________________________________________ DATE: August 2, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Rebecca Neilon, Engineering Department
RE: Public Hearing and Consideration of the Levy of Assessments for the Proposed Formation of Landscaping & Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek to Replace Existing Landscaping & Lighting District No. 1 – Greenhorn Creek.
RECOMMENDATION
Receive staff report, open the Public Hearing, receive testimony, tabulate all valid ballots received, close the Public Hearing, discuss, and take the following actions:
A. If a majority protest does not exist (i.e., a weighted majority of ballots cast are in favor of the measure), adopt Resolution 22-41 (FORMATION) approving the Engineer’s Report, confirming Diagram and Assessment, and Ordering Levy of the Landscaping & Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Assessment for Fiscal Year 2022- 23;
Or
B. If a majority protest does exist (i.e., a weighted majority of ballots cast are opposed to the measure), adopt Resolution No. 22-42 (NO-FORMATION) Certifying the Results of the Ballot Proceeding for Landscaping & Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Assessment.
BACKGROUND
The City of Angels Landscaping and Lighting District No. 1 – Greenhorn Creek (District) was formed by the City Council on June 6, 1995, through the Landscape and Lighting District Act of 1972 (Act). It was created to fund the maintenance of landscaping, lighting, cultural and wildlife areas, local infrastructure, environmental mitigation services, and related improvements within the Greenhorn Creek development.
At 25-years old, the District is no longer meeting the expectations of the residents it was created to benefit. The District is seeing infrastructure such as footpath bridges, streetlights, and monument signs in need of major maintenance/replacement with no funds in the District budget available to accomplish this task. The District annual budget is insufficient to maintain the infrastructure in the District and aggravating the budget is the lack of a mechanism to capture annual escalation costs. The annual assessment rate is currently levied at the maximum rate ($300) and legally cannot be increased without conducting a Proposition 218 balloting.
On March 15, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-11, initiating proceedings for the formation of the proposed Landscaping & Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek pursuant to provisions of Division 15, part 2, of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, and designating SCI Consulting Group as the Engineer of Record.
On June 7, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-25, declaring intention to form Landscaping & Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek and levy assessments, preliminarily approving the Engineer’s Report, providing notice of Public Hearing, and ordering the mailing of the assessment ballots.
On June 15, 2022, approximately 459 ballots were mailed to all property owners of record, at least 45 days prior to this Public Hearing. Should the proposed Landscaping & Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek receive voters' approval and be approved by the City Council, it will replace the existing Landscape and Lighting District No. 1 – Greenhorn Creek.
In the event that District property owners do not support the new formation, the existing Lighting and Landscape District No. 1 – Greenhorn Creek will remain active.
DISCUSSION
Engineer's Report and Assessment Rates
The Final Engineer's Report for the proposed FY 2022-23 Landscaping & Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek (Report), which is prepared pursuant to provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 of Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, includes authority for the Report, estimated costs of operation and maintenance, a diagram for the District and the assessments.
As provided in Attachment 2, the Report is now complete and filed with the City for approval and estimates the annualized cost to perform the required services to be $344,076 in FY 2022-23 dollars. This results in a proposed assessment rate of $650.00 per single-family equivalent (SFE).
Below is a summary of the main aspects in the Report:
• A description of the Improvements to be funded with assessment proceeds, services, and incidental costs; and • An estimate of the annual cost of such Improvements; and • A description of the assessable parcels of land within the District and proposed to be subject to the assessment; and
• A description of the proportionate special and general benefits conferred on property by the proposed assessment; and
• A description of the boundaries of the proposed Assessment District; and • A specification of the amount to be assessed upon various types of assessable land to fund the cost of the Improvements; and
• The proposed method and formula of assessing the costs and expenses of the Improvements to the properties which will specially benefit from the Improvements.
• Annual Assessment Calculation: The assessment is proposed to be subject to an adjustment tied to the Consumer Price Index-U for the Northern California (San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward) Consumer Price Index-All Urban Consumers (the “CPI”) as of December of each succeeding year (the "CPI"). The maximum authorized assessment rate is equal to the maximum assessment rate in the first fiscal year the assessment was levied adjusted annually by the change in CPI.
Community Outreach Efforts
In addition to the required procedures above, Staff has conducted extensive outreach efforts to inform affected property owners of the issues and proposed actions and to listen to their feedback. Since August 25, 2021, the following outreach efforts have been implemented.
• Webpage: Two webpages were developed and deployed to inform the community on the District's history, timeline, and formation processes and offer specialized maps and graphics. • Postcards: Three Postcards were mailed out to all Greenhorn Creek property owners announcing the community meetings and explaining how to receive email updates.
• Community Meetings: The community was able to discuss and learn about the Greenhorn Creek LLD through ten (10) virtual community meetings held between August 25, 2021 – June 29, 2022. The recordings of community meetings have been shared on the District webpage (GreenhornCreekLLD.com). In addition, starting in October 2022, in-person meetings were held the following afternoon after each virtual meeting at the Shady Oaks Room. Lastly, a community-wide meeting was held on May 31, 2022. • Community Site Walks: Three (3) community site walks were organized within the District to educate community members about the Historical Cultural Resources that the District maintains. • Email Campaign: An email campaign was created to distribute information to the community members who have signed up. In total, 190 of community members have signed up. • Survey: To gather information and feedback from the Greenhorn Creek community, a survey was developed and added to the District webpage.
• Resident Volunteer Groups: Two volunteer resident groups have formed during this outreach process. The first is the LLD Ambassadors who are working to spread the word to other community members. This group prepared a list of Frequently Asked Questions to share with other members. That FAQ is now posted on the District’s webpage. The second group is a Historical Conservation Team. The mission of this group is to educate the community about the historical resources in their neighborhood and restore the Protected Cultural Resource areas. This volunteer group is currently undertaking restoration work of the split rail fencing at the Selkirk Chimney site and recreation of the informational signs along the area’s two walking trails. Their volunteer effort has offset a substantial amount of deferred maintenance reducing the fiscal impact to the rest of the community.
Procedure
The process of increasing the assessment levels for a district or formation of a new district is governed by Proposition 218 and requires a ballot proceeding where the property owners would need to approve the increase. The procedure is laid out in Division 15, Part 2 of the California Streets and Highways Code as well as Section 53750 - 53754 of the Government Code. It requires three steps:
1. Adopt a resolution to initiate the proceedings and direct preparation of the Engineer's Report (completed on March 15, 2022);
2. Adopt a resolution approving an Engineer's Report (which establishes assessment rates) and setting the date for a public hearing (completed on June 7, 2022); and
3. Conduct the public hearing (this report’s recommendation) at which time ballots will be tabulated and the outcome of the ballot proceeding will be known.
In accordance with the statutes, these proceedings are voted on by property owners (instead of registered voters). In addition, votes are weighted by the amount of the proposed assessment. The specific procedures for this ballot proceeding were established in Resolution No. 22-23, approved by the City Council on May 17, 2022. Ballots can be returned any time up to the close of the hearing.
Once the Public Hearing is completed and all ballots have been received, the tabulation process will commence under the direction of the City Clerk. It is expected that the tabulation will not take longer than one or two hours, so the results should be available in time for the Council to take its final action at this same meeting. Based on the outcome of the ballot tabulation, the Council can act on one of the two draft resolutions attached to this report:
1. If a majority protest does not exist (i.e., a weighted majority of ballots cast are in favor of the measure), Resolution 22-41 (FORMATION) could be considered.
2. If a majority protest does exist (i.e., a weighted majority of ballots cast are opposed to the measure), Resolutions No. 22-42 (NO FORMATION) could be considered.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The cost of the assessment formation and engineering for the Greenhorn Creek Landscaping and Lighting District is $45,500. The project will be funded with Landscaping & Lighting District funds budgeted for this purpose.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution 22-41 (FORMATION)
2. Resolution 22-42 (NO FORMATION)
3. Landscape and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report RESOLUTION NO. 22-41
(FORMATION)
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANGELS CAMP CITY COUNCIL
APPROVING ENGINEER’S REPORT, CONFIRMING DIAGRAM AND
ASSESSMENT, AND ORDERING LEVY OF LANDSCAPING AND
LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 2 GREENHORN CREEK FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-23
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 22-11, approved on March 15, 2022, the City Council ordered the initiation of proceedings for the formation of a landscape and lighting district pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (commencing with § 22500 thereof) (“Act”) and Article XIII-D of the California Constitution to be known as the Landscape and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek (“Assessment District”) of the City of Angels Camp, for the purpose of financing the cost of installation, maintenance and servicing as detailed in the Engineer’s Report prepared by the Assessment Engineer, SCI Consulting Group.
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a resolution approving and filing an Engineer’s Report which includes: (1) a description of the Improvements to be funded with assessment proceeds; (2) an estimate of the annual cost of the Improvements described in the Engineer’s Report; (3) a description of the assessable parcels of land within the District and proposed to be subject to the new assessment; (4) a description of the proportionate special and general benefits conferred on property by the proposed assessment; (5) a diagram and boundary map for the Assessment District, and (6) a specification of the amount to be assessed upon various types of assessable land within the Assessment to fund the cost of the Improvements. The Engineer’s Report is incorporated herein by this reference.
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-23, on May 17, 2022, a Resolution of Intention to Conform with Proposition 218 and its requirements.
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-25 on June 7, 2022, a Resolution Declaring Intention to Levy Assessments, Preliminarily Approving the Engineer’s Report, Providing Notice of Public Hearing and the Mailing of the Assessment Ballots. The annual assessment rates for various types of real property within the proposed assessment, the total number of parcels to be assessed, and the total amount of annual assessment revenue is contained within the Engineer’s Report.
WHEREAS, the City Council has provided a 45-day written mailed notice to each record owner of assessable parcels of real property located within the Assessment boundaries for the proposed Landscape Assessment District, as set forth on the Assessment Diagram and Boundary Map, of a public hearing which was held at a regular meeting of the City Council on August 2, 2022, at 6:00 p.m. in the Angels Fire House, located at 1404 Vallecito Road, Angels Camp, CA, on the issue of whether the Assessment District should be formed and assessments levied and collected as proposed in the Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2022-23 and future Fiscal Years. 2 WHEREAS, the form of written mailed public notice of the public meeting contained the following information: (a) the total amount of assessments proposed to be levied within the District for Fiscal Year 2022-23; (b) the assessment chargeable to each owner’s parcel; (c) the duration of the proposed assessment; (d) the reason for the assessment; (e) the basis upon which the amount of the proposed assessment was calculated; (f) the date, time and place of the public hearing as specified in this resolution; and (g) a summary of the voting procedures and the effect of a majority protest. The form of the written mailed public notice also included an Assessment ballot by which each property owner could express their support or opposition to the proposed assessment.
The ballot indicated that it must be returned before the conclusion of the public hearing on August 2, 2022, in order to be valid and counted, and that all assessment ballots received by the City Clerk (the “Tabulator”), would be tabulated after the conclusion of the public input portion of the public hearing on August 2, 2022, by the City Clerk.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of California Constitution Article XIIID, an opportunity for protest has been afforded, and the assessment ballots mailed to owners of assessable real property within the proposed boundaries of the Landscape and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek have been received and tabulated, with assessment ballots weighted according to the proportional financial obligation of each affected parcel.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Angels Camp as follows:
Section 1. The above Recitals are in all respects true and correct.
Section 2. The canvass of the assessment ballots submitted by the property owners is complete and certified by the Tabulator, and the votes cast are as follows:
Total Number of Valid Ballots Processed:
Total Assessment Amount of Valid Ballots: $
Total Number of “Yes” Votes Processed:
Total Assessment Amount of “Yes” Votes Processed: $
Percentage of “Yes” votes, unweighted: %
Total Percentage of “Yes” Ballots, weighted: %
Total Number of “No” Votes Processed:
Total Assessment Amount of “No” Votes Processed: $
Percentage of “No” votes, unweighted: %
Total Percentage of “No” Ballots, weighted: %
Total Number of “Invalid” Votes Processed
Total Assessment Amount of “Invalid” Votes Processed: $ 3 Section 3. _________assessment ballots were returned and received prior to the close of the public hearing on August 2, 2022. This represents a ______% ballot return rate on the 459 ballots mailed. Of the assessment ballots returned, ________ assessment ballots were declared invalid in that they were either not marked with a “Yes” or “No”, were marked with both a “Yes” and a “No”, were not signed, or the property ownership and barcode information was illegible.”
Section 4. As determined by ballots cast, as weighted according to the amount of assessment for each parcel, ______________% of the property owners cast ballots in support of Landscape and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek. Since a majority protest, as defined by Article XIIID of the California Constitution, did not exist, this City Council thereby acquired jurisdiction to order the levy of assessment prepared by and made a part of the Engineer's Report to pay the costs and expenses thereof.
Section 5. The Final Engineer’s Report for Landscape and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek, together with the diagram of the Assessment District contained therein, and the proposed assessment roll for Fiscal Year 2022-23 are hereby confirmed and approved.
Section 6. Based on the oral and documentary evidence, including the Engineer’s Report, offered and received at the public hearing, the City Council expressly finds and determines that: (a) each of the several assessed lots and parcels of land within the District will be specially benefited by the Improvements (as described in the Engineer’s Report) in at least the amount of the Assessment apportioned against such lots and parcels of land, respectively; and (b) that there is substantial evidence to support, and the weight of the evidence preponderates in favor of, said finding and determination as to special benefit to property with the District from the Improvements to be financed with assessment proceeds.
Section 7. Landscape and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek is hereby formed, and assessments consistent with the Engineer’s Report are hereby levied, pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code.
Section 8. Assessments for Fiscal Year 2022-23 shall be levied at the SingleFamily Equivalent (“SFE”) assessment rate of SIX HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLARS ($650.00) as specified in the Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2022-23 with estimated total annual assessment revenues as set forth in the Engineer’s Report.
Section 9. The Landscape and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek Improvements to be financed with assessment proceeds described in the Engineer’s Report are hereby ordered.
Section 10. The authorized maximum assessment to be levied in future Fiscal Years shall be increased by an amount up to the change in the Northern California (San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward) Consumer Price Index-All Urban Consumers (the “CPI”), 4 which adjustment shall be based on actual costs, including any reasonable reserves, supported by an Engineer’s Report prepared in accordance with Article XIIID of the California Constitution.
Section 11. The assessment is in compliance with the provisions of the Act, and the City Council has complied with all laws pertaining to the levy of an annual assessment pursuant to the Act. The assessment is levied for the purpose of paying the costs and expenses of the improvements described in the report referred to hereinabove for fiscal year 2022-23.
Section 12. The City of Angels Camp City Council hereby certifies that the assessments to be placed on the 2022-23 property tax bills meet the requirements of Proposition 218 that added Article XIIID to the California Constitution.
Section 13. The assessments are levied without regard to property valuation.
Section 14. Immediately upon the adoption of this resolution, but in no event later than the second Monday in August following such adoption, the City Council shall file a certified copy of the Diagram and Assessment and a certified copy of this resolution with the Auditor/Tax Collector of the County of Calaveras (“County Auditor/Tax Collector”).
Upon such filing, the County Auditor/Tax Collector shall enter on the County tax roll opposite each lot or parcel of land the amount of assessment thereupon as shown in the Assessment. The assessments shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as County taxes are collected and all laws providing for the collection and enforcement of County taxes shall apply to the collection and enforcement of the assessments. After collection by the County Tax Collector, the net amount of the assessments, after deduction of any compensation due the County for collection, shall be paid to the City of Angels Camp Landscape and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek.
Section 15. The monies representing assessments collected shall be deposited in a separate fund established under the distinctive designation of the Landscape and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek. Funds collected from Landscape and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek Assessment shall be expended only for the special benefit of parcels within the District.
Section 16. The Landscape and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek Assessment, as it applies to any parcel, may be corrected, cancelled or a refund granted as appropriate, by order of the City Council by a determination from the Assessment Engineer that the Assessment should be revised to be consistent with the method of assessment established in the Engineer’s Report. Any such corrections, cancellations or refunds shall be limited to the current Fiscal Year.
Section 17. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and staff shall cause a true and correct copy of this Resolution to be published pursuant to California Government Code § 6061.
5 PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Angels, State of California this 2nd day of August 2022, by the following vote:
___________________
Alvin Broglio, Mayor
ATTEST:
I, Rose Beristianos, City Clerk of the City of Angels Camp, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved, and adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Angels Camp held on the 2nd day of August 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
__________________________
Rose Beristianos, City Clerk
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. 22-42
(NO FORMATION)
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANGELS CAMP CITY COUNCIL
CERTIFYING THE RESULTS OF THE BALLOT PROCEEDING FOR
LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 2 GREENHORN CREEK WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 22-11, approved on March 15, 2022, the City Council ordered the initiation of proceedings for the formation of a landscape and lighting district pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (commencing with § 22500 thereof) (“Act”) and Article XIII-D of the California Constitution to be known as the Landscape and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek (“Assessment District”) of the City of Angels Camp, for the purpose of financing the cost of installation, maintenance and servicing as detailed in the Engineer’s Report prepared by the Assessment Engineer, SCI Consulting Group.
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a resolution approving and filing an Engineer’s Report which includes: (1) a description of the Improvements to be funded with assessment proceeds; (2) an estimate of the annual cost of the Improvements described in the Engineer’s Report; (3) a description of the assessable parcels of land within the District and proposed to be subject to the new assessment; (4) a description of the proportionate special and general benefits conferred on property by the proposed assessment; (5) a diagram and boundary map for the Assessment District, and (6) a specification of the amount to be assessed upon various types of assessable land within the Assessment to fund the cost of the Improvements. The Engineer’s Report is incorporated herein by this reference.
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-23, on May 17, 2022, a Resolution of Intention to Conform with Proposition 218 and its requirements.
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-25 on June 7, 2022, a Resolution Declaring Intention to Levy Assessments, Preliminarily Approving the Engineer’s Report, Providing Notice of Public Hearing and the Mailing of the Assessment Ballots. The annual assessment rates for various types of real property within the proposed assessment, the total number of parcels to be assessed, and the total amount of annual assessment revenue is contained within the Engineer’s Report.
WHEREAS, the City Council has provided a 45-day written mailed notice to each record owner of assessable parcels of real property located within the Assessment boundaries for the proposed Landscape Assessment District, as set forth on the Assessment Diagram and Boundary Map, of a public hearing which was held at a regular meeting of the City Council on August 2, 2022, at 6:00 p.m. in the Angels Fire House, located at 1404 Vallecito Road, Angels Camp, CA, on the issue of whether the Assessment District should be formed and assessments levied and collected as proposed in the Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2022-23 and future Fiscal Years. 2 WHEREAS, the form of written mailed public notice of the public meeting contained the following information: (a) the total amount of assessments proposed to be levied within the District for Fiscal Year 2022-23; (b) the assessment chargeable to each owner’s parcel; (c) the duration of the proposed assessment; (d) the reason for the assessment; (e) the basis upon which the amount of the proposed assessment was calculated; (f) the date, time and place of the public hearing as specified in this resolution; and (g) a summary of the voting procedures and the effect of a majority protest. The form of the written mailed public notice also included an Assessment ballot by which each property owner could express their support or opposition to the proposed assessment.
The ballot indicated that it must be returned before the conclusion of the public hearing on August 2, 2022, in order to be valid and counted, and that all assessment ballots received by the City Clerk (the “Tabulator”), would be tabulated after the conclusion of the public input portion of the public hearing on August 2, 2022, by the City Clerk.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of California Constitution Article XIIID, an opportunity for protest has been afforded, and the assessment ballots mailed to owners of assessable real property within the proposed boundaries of the Landscape and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek have been received and tabulated, with assessment ballots weighted according to the proportional financial obligation of each affected parcel.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Angels Camp as follows:
Section 1. The above Recitals are in all respects true and correct.
Section 2. The canvass of the assessment ballots submitted by the property owners is complete and certified by the Tabulator, and the votes cast are as follows:
Total Number of Valid Ballots Processed:
Total Assessment Amount of Valid Ballots: $
Total Number of “Yes” Votes Processed:
Total Assessment Amount of “Yes” Votes Processed: $
Percentage of “Yes” votes, unweighted: %
Total Percentage of “Yes” Ballots, weighted: %
Total Number of “No” Votes Processed:
Total Assessment Amount of “No” Votes Processed: $
Percentage of “No” votes, unweighted: %
Total Percentage of “No” Ballots, weighted: %
Total Number of “Invalid” Votes Processed
Total Assessment Amount of “Invalid” Votes Processed: $ 3 Section 3. _________assessment ballots were returned and received prior to the close of the public hearing on August 2, 2022. This represents a ______% ballot return rate on the 459 ballots mailed. Of the assessment ballots returned, ________ assessment ballots were declared invalid in that they were either not marked with a “Yes” or “No”, were marked with both a “Yes” and a “No”, were not signed, or the property ownership and barcode information was illegible.”
Section 4. As determined by ballots cast, as weighted according to the amount of assessment for each parcel, ______________% of the property owners cast ballots in support of Landscape and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek. Since a majority protest, as defined by Article XIIID of the California Constitution, exists, the measure fails and the Assessment District cannot be formed or its proposed assessments levied.
Section 5. The results of the ballot proceeding are hereby certified by the City Council of the City of Angels Camp.
Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and staff shall cause a true and correct copy of this Resolution to be published pursuant to California Government Code § 6061.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Angels, State of California this 2nd day of August 2022, by the following vote:
___________________
Alvin Broglio, Mayor
ATTEST:
I, Rose Beristianos, City Clerk of the City of Angels Camp, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved, and adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Angels Camp held on the 2nd day of August 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
__________________________
Rose Beristianos, City Clerk
EXHIBIT A
Page
Fiscal Year 2022-23 ENGINEER’S REPORT
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District No. 2
Greenhorn Creek
Pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972,
Government Code and Article XIIID of the California
Constitution
August 2022
Final Report
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Page i
City of Angels
City Council
Alvin Broglio, Mayor
Jennifer Davis-Herndon, Vice Mayor
Gretel Tiscornia Council Member
Isabel Moncada, Council Member
Caroline Schirato, Council Member
City Staff
Rebecca Callen, City Administrator
Rebecca Neilon, City Engineer
Chris O’Flinn, Public Works Director
City Attorney
Douglas L. White
Engineer of Work
John Bliss, P.E., SCI Consulting Group
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Page ii
Table of Contents
Introduction ...........................................................................................................1 History and Overview ...................................................................................................................... 1 Engineer’s Report and Continuation of Assessments...................................................................2 Legislative Analysis.......................................................................................................................... 2 Plans & Specifications .............................................................................................5 Maintenance and Improvements................................................................................................... 6 Fiscal Year 2022-23 Estimate of Cost and Budget.....................................................15 Budget for Fiscal Year 2022-23.....................................................................................................15 Method of Assessment Apportionment..................................................................17 Method of Apportionment ...........................................................................................................17 Discussion of Benefit.....................................................................................................................17 Special Benefit ...............................................................................................................................19 General Versus Special Benefit.....................................................................................................20 Quantification of General Benefit Contribution from Other Sources.......................................24 Zones of Benefit.............................................................................................................................25 Method of Assessment .................................................................................................................26 Assessment Apportionment .........................................................................................................27 Annual Cost Indexing.....................................................................................................................31 Duration of Assessment................................................................................................................32 Appeals of Assessments Levied to Property................................................................................32 Assessment Funds Must Be Expended within the District.........................................................32 Oversight, Annual Review, and Accountability ...........................................................................32 Citizens’ Oversight Committee.....................................................................................................33 Assessment.......................................................................................................... 34 Assessment Diagram............................................................................................. 36 Assessment Roll, FY 2022-23.................................................................................. 38 City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Page iii
List of Tables
Table 1 – Formal Landscaping Planter.................................................................................................. 7 Table 2 – Formal Landscaping Lawn ..................................................................................................... 8 Table 3 – Weed Control ......................................................................................................................... 8 Table 4 – Protected Cultural Resource Areas....................................................................................... 9 Table 5 – Trail Maintenance .................................................................................................................. 9 Table 6 – Trail Bridge Maintenance ...................................................................................................... 9 Table 7 – Defensible Space Clearing (Annual)....................................................................................10 Table 8 – Wetland Exclusionary Fencing and Signage.......................................................................11 Table 9 – FY 2022-23 Estimate of Costs.............................................................................................. 15 Table 10 – Residential Property Types................................................................................................ 28 Table 11 – Commercial/Industrial Benefit Assessment Factors .......................................................29 Table 12 – Budget Summary................................................................................................................ 34 City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Page iv
List of Figures
Figure 1 – 404 Permit Maintenance and Improvements ..................................................................12 Figure 2 – Non-Permit Maintenance and Improvements .................................................................13 Figure 3 – Annual Defensible Space Clearing .....................................................................................14
Introduction
History and Overview
The Greenhorn Creek Landscape and Lighting District has two purposes: (1) to fund the ongoing protection and preservation of on-site environmental resources and (2) to fund maintenance of streetlights, landscaping, curb-gutter-and-sidewalk, entry monument signs, and related community use infrastructure within the Greenhorn Creek development.
The City of Angels Camp Landscaping and Lighting District No. 1 – Greenhorn Creek was formed by a majority vote of the City of Angels (”City”) City Council on June 6, 1995. As a result of the subsequent passage of Proposition 218 in 1996, the assessment rate for the existing assessment District (No.1) cannot be increased beyond the previously approved amount of $300.00 per parcel (resulting from the fact that a cost-of-living adjustment mechanism was not explicitly included in the original formation documents.) As costs have continued to increase, this assessment amount no longer generates sufficient revenue to fund Greenhorn Creek’s improvements and services.
Without additional resources and funding, service levels will continue to deteriorate.
As a result, the Angels Camp City Council has directed that a new assessment be proposed and voted on by property owners in accordance with Proposition 218 (Article XIIIC and D or the California Constitution). The Council’s intent is to replace the existing Landscaping and Lighting District No. 1 – Greenhorn Creek with a new Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek (“District”) within the existing boundary and including the same improvements and services. If approved, the existing District No. 1 will be dissolved. Further, the proposed Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek is engineered to generate sufficient funding, and include an optional, annual cost-of-living adjustment mechanism to ensure longterm fiscal sustainability of the District.
This Engineer’s Report ("Report") has been prepared to establish the budget for the Improvements (as described below) that will be funded by the proposed assessments and other revenue and to determine the general and special benefits received from the Improvements by property within the District and the method of assessment apportionment to lots and parcels.
This Report and the assessments have been made pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (the "Act") and Article XIIID of the California Constitution (the “Article”).
(Note: Although the District funds maintenance and services of landscaping, lighting, and related improvements within the Greenhorn Creek development, it does not fund the maintenance or operations of the adjacent Greenhorn Creek golf course, which is maintained and funded by a separate entity using separate funding.)
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Engineer’s Report and Continuation of Assessments
As required by the Act, this Report includes plans and specifications, a diagram or map of the District, the benefits received by property from the Improvements within the District, and the method of assessment apportionment to lots and parcels within the District.
If the Council approves this Engineer’s Report and the proposed Assessments by resolution, a ballot and notice will be mailed to each property owner as identified in the most recent equalized tax roll prepared by the Calaveras County Assessor’s office. The resolution preliminarily approving the Engineer’s Report and mailed notice will include the date for a public hearing at which time all ballots must be received to be counted in accordance with Government Code Section 53753.
The notice and ballots must be mailed at least 45 days prior to the public hearing.
At the appointed time and place, a public hearing is held to allow public testimony about the proposed Assessments. At this hearing, the Council will hear public testimony and tabulate all ballots turned in before the close of the public comment period of the public hearing. If it is determined that the assessment ballots submitted in opposition to the proposed Assessments do not exceed the assessment ballots submitted in favor of the Assessments (each ballot is weighted by the proportional financial obligation of the property for which the ballot is submitted) the Council may take action to approve the levying of Assessments for Fiscal Year 2022-23. If so confirmed and approved, the Assessments would be submitted to the Calaveras County Auditor/Controller for inclusion on the property tax rolls for fiscal year 2022-23.
Legislative Analysis
Proposition 218
This assessment is formed consistent with Proposition 218, The Right to Vote on Taxes Act, which was approved by the voters of California on November 6, 1996, and is now Article XIIIC and XIIID of the California Constitution. Proposition 218 provides for benefit assessments to be levied to fund the cost of providing services, improvements, as well as maintenance and operation expenses to a public improvement which specially benefits the assessed property.
Proposition 218 describes several important requirements, including a property-owner balloting, for the formation and continuation of assessments. These requirements are satisfied by the process used to establish this assessment.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, Inc. v Santa Clara County Open Space Authority (2008) 44 Cal. 4th 431
In July of 2008, the California Supreme Court issued its ruling on the Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority (“SVTA”). This ruling is significant in that the Court clarified how Proposition 218 made changes to the determination of special benefit. The Court also found that:
Benefit assessments are for special, not general, benefit The services and/or improvements funded by assessments must be clearly defined Special benefits are directly received by and provide a direct advantage to property in the Assessment District
The assessment paid by property should be proportional to the special benefits it receives from the Improvements
Dahms v. Downtown Pomona Property (2009) 174 Cal. App. 4th 708 In Dahms v. Downtown Pomona Property (“Dahms”) the Court upheld an assessment that was 100% special benefit (i.e. 0% general benefit) on the rationale that the services and improvements funded by the assessments were directly provided to property in the assessment district. The Court also upheld discounts and exemptions from the assessment for certain properties.
Bonander v. Town of Tiburon (2009) 180 Cal. App. 4th 103 Bonander v. Town of Tiburon (“Bonander”), the 1st District Court of Appeal overturned a benefit assessment approved by property owners to pay for placing overhead utility lines underground in an area of the Town of Tiburon. The Court invalidated the assessments primarily on the grounds that the assessments had been apportioned to assessed property based on the costs within subareas of the assessment district instead of the overall cost of the improvements and the overall proportional special benefits.
Beutz v. County of Riverside (2010) 184 Cal. App. 4th 1516 Steven Beutz v. County of Riverside (“Beutz”) the Court overturned an assessment for park maintenance in Wildomar, California, primarily because the general benefits associated with improvements and services were not explicitly calculated, quantified, and separated from the special benefits.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Golden Hill Neighborhood Association v. City of San Diego (2011) 199 Cal. App. 4th 416
On September 22, 2011, the San Diego Court of Appeal issued a decision on the Golden Hill Neighborhood Association v. City of San Diego appeal. This decision overturned an assessment for street and landscaping maintenance in the Greater Golden Hill neighborhood of San Diego, California. The court described two primary reasons for its decision. First, like in Beutz, the court found the general benefits associated with services were not explicitly calculated, quantified, and separated from the special benefits. Second, the court found that the City had failed to record the basis for the assessment on its own parcels.
Compliance with Current Law
This Engineer’s Report is consistent with the SVTA decision and with the requirements of Article XIIIC and XIIID of the California Constitution because the Improvements to be funded are clearly defined; the benefiting property in the District enjoys close and unique proximity, access and views to the Improvements; the Improvements serve as an extension of usable land area for benefiting properties in the District and such special benefits provide a direct advantage to property in the District that is not enjoyed by the public at large or other property.
This Engineer’s Report is consistent with Beutz, Dahms and Greater Golden Hill because the Improvements will directly benefit property in the District and the general benefits have been explicitly calculated and quantified and excluded from the Assessments. The Engineer’s Report is consistent with Bonander because the Assessments have been apportioned based on the overall cost of the Improvements and Services proportional special benefit to each property, rather than the proportional cost to the District to provide the Improvements to specific properties.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Plans & Specifications
The District maintains landscaping and other improvements in locations within the District’s boundaries. The work and Improvements to be undertaken by the City of Angels Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek, and the cost thereof paid from the levy of the annual Assessment provide special benefit to Assessor Parcels within the District as defined in the Method of Assessment herein. In addition to the definitions provided by the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, (the “Act”) the work and Improvements are generally described as follows:
The installation, maintenance, and servicing of public improvements and facilities, may include, but are not limited to, landscaping, sprinkler systems, park grounds, park facilities, playground equipment, landscape corridors, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, storm drainage systems, public lighting facilities, fencing, entry monuments, signage, frontage and retention walls, other landscaping facilities, and related labor, materials, supplies, utilities, equipment, and incidental expenses in and for the parks, landscape areas, detention basins and other public places owned or maintained by the District. (Collectively known as the “Improvements.”) As applied herein, “Installation” means the construction of Improvements, including, but not limited to, land preparation (such as grading, leveling, cutting, and filling), sod, landscaping, irrigation systems, sidewalks, walkways and drainage, lights, playground equipment, play courts, playing fields, recreational facilities, and public restrooms. “Maintenance” means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation and servicing of any improvement, including repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement; providing for the life, growth, health, and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, or treating for disease or injury; the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris, and other solid waste, and the cleaning, sandblasting, and painting of walls and other improvements to remove or cover graffiti.
Maintenance activities within the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) 404 permit protected areas must follow the permit requirements. Deviation from the permit requirements requires written approval from the USACOE.
“Servicing” means the furnishing of electric current, or energy, gas or other illuminating agent for any public lighting facilities or for the lighting or operation of any other improvements, or water for the irrigation of any landscaping, the operation of any fountains, or the maintenance of any other improvements.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Incidental expenses include all of the following: (a) The costs of preparation of the report, including plans, specifications, estimates, diagram, and assessment; (b) the costs of printing, advertising, and the giving of published, posted, and mailed notices; (c) compensation payable to the County for collection of assessments; (d) compensation of any engineer or attorney employed to render services in proceedings pursuant to this part; (e) any other expenses incidental to the construction, installation, or maintenance and servicing of the Improvements; (f) any expenses incidental to the issuance of bonds or notes pursuant to Streets & Highways Code Section 22662.5; and (g) costs associated with any elections held for the approval of a new or increased assessment (Streets & Highways Code §22526).
The assessment proceeds will be exclusively used for Improvements within the District plus incidental expenses. The Improvements and area to be maintained by the District are described as follows:
Maintenance and Improvements
Sidewalk and Drainage Facilities
Includes maintenance service for roadway drainage facilities, sidewalks, and reserves for future repairs. Culvert and drainage inlets that are located on private property, including the golf course, will not be maintained by the District.
Maintained infrastructure includes storm water drainage inlets, sidewalk, curb, and gutter (both rolled and standard), and stormwater conveyance pipes along District streets.
Lighting and Signage
The street lighting Improvements, which will be maintained by the District, consist of 49 streetlights, six pedestal lights, and all required appurtenances. This includes cost of power plus maintenance service for streetlight poles, lamps, glassware, plus cost of power for miscellaneous monument signs.
The signage which will be maintained by the District includes the three (3) entry monument signs.
The safety and street signs within the District will be maintained by the City. The golf course will maintain Golf Course wayfinding signs.
Formal Landscape Areas
The formally landscaped areas (planter and lawn areas) require turf to be mowed, edged, and kept free of debris. Irrigation control and repair, pruning, fertilizing, weed control, and trash pickup are also required. Golf course turf adjacent to roads will be maintained by the golf course.
Below is a list of the formal landscaped areas within the District:
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Table 1 – Formal Landscaping Planter
Area Area (SQFT) Location
LAND-1 744 GHC Rd Median by Gateway Park
LAND-2 4,243 GHC Rd & Selkirk Entrance by Wetland E-WET-6 LAND-3 880 Selkirk Median at Entrance
LAND-4 7,460 Selkirk Planter by WorldMark
LAND-5 3,204 Selkirk Planter by 10th Hole
LAND-6 5,638 Selkirk Planter by 2nd Hole and 18th Tee
LAND-7 612 Lot 3 - Selkirk
LAND-8 232 Lot 8 - Selkirk
LAND-9 6,252 Smith Flat between Pointe Dr and Hole #11, Tee #17 LAND-10 621 Lot 202 Smith Flat
LAND-11 1,521 Olivia Place
LAND-12 2,030 Cornelia Place - Lot 209
LAND-13 2,755 Lot 192 and WILD-2e - Smith Flat
LAND-14 338 Lot 190 Smith Flat
LAND-15 135 Lot 188 Smith Flat & Raggio Ct
LAND-16 343 Lot 179 Smith Flat
LAND-17 623 Lot 178 Smith Flat
LAND-18 1,102 Lightner Place
LAND-19 203 Lot 174 Lighter PL and Smith Flat
LAND-20 716 Alawa Place
LAND-21 1,103 Sasa Place
LAND-22 789 Lots174 & 173 Smith Flat
LAND-23 543 Lot 172 Smith Flat
LAND-24 535 Lot 171 Smith Flat
LAND-25 344 Lot 170 Smith Flat
LAND-26 144 Lot 169 Smith Flat
LAND-27 210 Lot 169 & 168 Smith Flat
LAND-28 859 Lot 168 & 167 Smith Flat
LAND-29 148 Lot 167 Smith Flat
LAND-30 117 Lot 166 Smith Flat
LAND-31 328 Lot 165 Smith Flat
LAND-32 71 Lot 164 Smith Flat
LAND-33 1,141 Lot 164 Smith Flat
LAND-34 1,128 Lot 164 Smith Flat
LAND-35 717 Across from Lot 133 Smith Flat
LAND-36 13,887 Behind Sidewalk Smith Flat SE Corner of Property LAND-37 371 Across from Lot 132 Smith Flat
LAND-38 501 Across from Lot 131 Smith Flat
LAND-39 1,135 Across from Lot 130 and Open Space Smith Flat LAND-40 862 Across from Lot 128 and 127 Smith Flat
LAND-41 988 Across from Lot 126 Smith Flat
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
LAND-42 560 At end of Smith Flat at GHC Dr.
LAND-43 1,334 McCauley Entrance North Shoulder
LAND-44 817 McCauley Entrance Median
LAND-45 7,357 McCauley Entrance South Shoulder & by Wetland E-Wet-1 LAND-46 494 McCauley & Selkirk NW Curb
LAND-47 126 Lot 80 Selkirk at Chimney Hill
LAND-48 342 Lot 67 Selkirk at Chimney Hill
LAND-49 304 Lot 71 Selkirk at Springhouse Ct.
LAND-50 1,810 GHC Rd. Median between Gateway Park and Selkirk Entrance LAND-51 133 Lot 189 Smith Flat
LAND-52 643 Smith Flat & GHC Rd South Side of Intersection Table 2 – Formal Landscaping Lawn
Area Area (SQFT) Location
LAWN-1 8,671 Triangle area: Angel Oak/Live Oak/Acorn
LAWN-2 3,570 GHC Rd Shoulder past triangle area
LAWN-3 1,781 Selkirk Entrance East of Wetland Site 6
LAWN-4 576 Smith Flat at Selkirk Entrance south side of Wetland S-Wet-6 LAWN-5 21,951 GHC Rd - Median Selkirk to McCauley
LAWN-6 16,501 GHC Rd - Median McCauley South
LAWN-7 15,419 Lawn in front of WorldMark
Table 3 – Weed Control
Area Area (SQFT) Location
WEED-1 2,020 GHC Rd shoulder west of Selkirk Entrance
WEED-2 2,456 Smith Flat South of Wetland E-WET-6
WEED-3 13,239 GHC Rd shoulder between Selkirk and McCauley WEED-4 295 Smith Flat at Lot N, Just west of Albasio Ct WEED-5 1,298 Smith Flat North side of PCR-4
WEED-6 11,158 GHC RD Shoulder South of McCauley
WEED-7 765 Blair Mine Rd. South side of Wildlife Corridor WILD-1c WEED-8 665 Blair Mine Rd. North side of Wildlife Corridor WILD-1d WEED-9 843 Smith Flat South of Wildlife Corridor WILD-1a by WEED-10 257 Selkirk South side of Wildlife Corridor WILD-2a WEED-11 458 Selkirk North side of Wildlife Corridor WILD-2c WEED-12 607 Selkirk East side of Wildlife Corridor WILD-2c WEED-13 221 Selkirk West side of Wildlife Corridor WILD-2b WEED-14 605 Smith Flat North side of Wildlife Corridor WILD-1b WEED-15 686 Smith Flat South side of Wildlife Corridor WILD-1c City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Protected Cultural Resource Area (PCR)
The District is responsible for maintaining and protecting the five (5) Protected Cultural Resource areas (PCR's) listed in Table 4 below. This includes fence and sign maintenance, scheduled inspections by LLD, Miwok, and Qualified Archeologist as specified in the Historic Properties Treatment Plan of February 1999, annual informational brochures for residents and golfers, and vegetation management as directed by the City of Angels Fire Marshall. Walking Trails through the PCR areas are to be kept weed-free. (Weed whack only, no spraying allowed) Table 4 – Protected Cultural Resource Areas
Area Location
PCR #1 Near tee for hole #16
PCR #2 Chimney Site
PCR #3 Albasio Court
PCR #4 Raggio Court
PCR #5 South of Raggio Court
Protected Wildlife Corridor
The District is responsible for maintaining and protecting the two (2) Protected Wildlife Corridors within the District. This includes maintenance of the trails, trail bridges, trail signage, and annual defensible space clearing listed in the tables below.
Per the USACOE Permit the Protected Wildlife Corridor areas are to be left to develop naturally with no human intervention. The permit allows defensible space clearing when directed by the City Fire Marshal for public safety. See Figure 3 for an exhibit of current defensible space areas.
This permit may be modified as empty lots develop near the Wildlife Corridors. Minimally invasive walking trails through the Wildlife Corridor identified as WILD-2e are permitted and will be maintained by the District.
Table 5 – Trail Maintenance
Area Location
WILD-2e Between Albasio and Raggio (10' corridor x 2,200 ft) Table 6 – Trail Bridge Maintenance
Area Location
WILD-2e East and West Pedestrian Bridges between Albasio and Raggio City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Table 7 – Defensible Space Clearing (Annual)
Area Area (acre) Location
A-0 0.00 Open Space (near Selkirk Entrance)
A-1 1.06 Behind Selkirk and Point Drive (WILD-1b)
A-2 0.51 Catalpa and Smith Flat - North Side (WILD-1b)
A-3 0.39 Catalpa and Smith Flat - South Side (WILD-1c)
A-4 0.11 North of the Blair Mine/Smith Flat intersection (WILD-1c) A-5 0.60 Down slope from Corral Loop (WILD-1d)
A-6 0.24 Selkirk East of Grinding Rock (WILD-2b)
A-7 1.86 Selkirk, Greenstone Way, & Grinding Rock Rd. (WILD-2c) A-8 0.15 End of Springhouse (WILD-2d)
A-9 0.84 North and West of PCR-4, south of Smith Flat (WILD-2e) A-10 1.15 Southeast side of PCR-4, along the sewer maint. rd (WILD-2e) A-11 0.43 East of Albassio, south of PCR-3 (WILD-2e)
Wetlands
The Greenhorn Creek project impacted 4.41 acres of Waters of the United States, triggering the need for a Section 404 Permit under the Clean Water Act. This permit is issued, monitored, and enforced by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The project removed 4.41 acres of wetlands and replaced them with 7.67 acres of compensation wetland.
There are three types of wetlands throughout the development:
Seasonal Wetland: wetlands scattered along drainages below springs and along shorelines
Emergent Wetland: The emergent zone stretches from the high-water mark to 3 feet below the high-water mark. Notice the edges of the large pond are Emergent Wetlands, but the center of the pond is not classified as wetland. However, the entire pond is classified as Waters of the United States and is protected by several regulatory agencies. Stream: waterways that exhibit an incised channel
As a requirement of the 404 Permit, the District is required to maintain the exclusionary fencing and informational signage listed in Table 8 below. The District is also required to monitor the water level and notify the golf course when the water level falls below the required minimal level.
Wetland 4b (E-WET 4b) located by the 5th Tee box is unsuccessful due to excessive nutrient loading from fertilizer runoff and insufficient depth. To mitigate these issues, the District treats this pond with beneficial bacteria monthly during the dry season. Coordination with the ACOE is ongoing to find a solution for wetland 4b.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Table 8 – Wetland Exclusionary Fencing and Signage
Area Location
E-WET 1 McCauley Entrance Wetland
E-WET 4a Large Pond (By 5th, 6th, and 7th greens)
E-WET 4b Small Pond (by 5th Tee Box)
E-WET 6 Selkirk Entrance Wetland
Replacements
Dedicated funding, often referred to as “reserves,” will be used to augment for replacement costs as needed. Reserves are needed in the event improvements need to be replaced due to failure, damage, natural disaster etc.
Maps of the District with corresponding areas of maintenance are included on the following pages.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Figure 1 – 404 Permit Maintenance and Improvements
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Figure 2 – Non-Permit Maintenance and Improvements
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Figure 3 – Annual Defensible Space Clearing
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Fiscal Year 2022-23 Estimate of Cost and Budget
Budget for Fiscal Year 2022-23
The 1972 Act provides that the total costs for providing the maintenance and servicing of the District Improvements and facilities can be recovered in the assessment spread including incidental expenses. The latter can include engineering fees, legal fees, printing, mailing, postage, publishing, and all other costs identified with the District proceedings.
An estimate of District costs for fiscal year 2022-23 for the maintenance and servicing of the Improvements is provided below.
Table 9 – FY 2022-23 Estimate of Costs
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Expenditure Item Amount
LLD Management $ 41,070
Repayment of Wetland Loan 17,721
Repayment of Prop 218 Loan 10,200
Fencing Repair (annual) -
Defered Maintenance Fencing and Signs (PCR+Wetland) 27,432 Interpretive Signs (5 total) (15 Year) 160
Vegetation Management (annual) 12,760
Chimney Preservation (20 year) 1,000
Walking Trail Clearing / Maintenance (annual) 2,320
Informational Brochures Residents and Golfers (annual) 1,000 Trail Maintenance - between Albasio and Raggio 800
Trail Bridge Maintenance Annual (2 bridges) -
Trail Bridge Deck & Railing Replacement (15 years) 1,333 Wildlife Corridor Signs - 20 Year Replacement 392
Defensible Space Clearing (Annual) 12,510
Replace Exclusionary Fencing around Wetland (20 year) 4,750 Maintain Fencing Around Wetlands (annual) -
Informational Signage Around Wetlands (15 years) 273
Beneficial Bacteria for Small Pond (annual) 255
Bulb Replacement / Light Repair 5,700
Paint Streetlights (15 years) 1,333
Replace Streetlight poles (100 year) 3,327
Electrical Bill (annual) 3,912
Weed Control (annual costs) 3,681
Formal Landscaping Planter (annual Costs) 65,473
Formal Landscaping Lawn (W/O median and triangle) 35,415 Median High Intesity Landscaping 10,190
Median Conversion 48,427
Triangle Parcel Maint. (without conversion Project) 16,816 Sidewalks 3,885
Entry Monument Signs (total 3)
Convert to LED (One Time Cost) 1,500
Repair As needed/Replace Bulbs (annual) 4,500
Replace Entry Monument Signs (TOTAL 3) (40 year) 2,250
Pedestal Lights (Total 6)
Convert to LED (one time cost) 1,110
Repair As needed/Replace Bubls (annual) 1,830
Replace Pedestal Light Structure (40 years) 750
Estimated Expenditures $ 344,076
Budget Allocation to Parcels Amount
Total Assessment Budget $ 344,076
Total SFEs 529.35
Assessment per SFE 1 $ 650.00
Streetlights
Landscaping & Water
Hardscape
Miscellaneous
LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2
GREENHORN CREEK
Management, Legal, & Insurance
Protected Cultural Areas
Wildlife Corridor
Wetlands
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Method of Assessment Apportionment
Method of Apportionment
This section of the Engineer's Report explains the benefits to be derived from the Improvements and the methodology used to apportion the total assessment to properties within the District.
The District consists of certain assessor parcels within the boundaries as defined by the Assessment Diagram referenced in this report and the parcels identified by the Assessor Parcel Numbers listed with the levy roll. The parcel list includes all privately and publicly owned parcels as shown. The method used for apportioning the assessment is based upon the proportional special benefits derived by the properties in the District over and above general benefits conferred on real property or to the public at large. Special benefit and the Assessments are calculated for each parcel in the District using the following process:
1. Identification of special benefit factors derived from the Improvements
2. Calculation and quantification of the general benefits
3. Determination of the relative special benefit within different areas within the Assessment District
4. Determination of the relative special benefit per property type
5. Apportionment of the costs to Assessment and calculation of the Assessment for each individual parcel based upon special benefit; location, property type, property size, property characteristics, improvements on property and other supporting attributes.
Discussion of Benefit
In summary, the Assessments can only be levied based on the special benefit to property. This special benefit is received by property over and above any general benefits. With reference to the requirements for assessments, Section 22573 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 states:
"The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements."
Proposition 218, as codified in Article XIIID of the California Constitution, has confirmed that assessments must be based on the special benefit to property and that the value of the special benefits must exceed the cost of the assessment:
"No assessment shall be imposed on any parcel which exceeds the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel." City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
The following benefit categories summarize the types of special benefit to residential and other lots and parcels resulting from the installation, maintenance, and servicing of the Improvements to be provided with the assessment proceeds. These categories of special benefit are derived from the statutes passed by the California Legislature and other studies which describe the types of special benefit received by property from maintenance and Improvements such as those within by the District. These types of special benefit are summarized as follows:
1. Proximity to improved landscaped, cultural and wildlife areas, and other public Improvements within the Assessment District.
2. Access to improved landscaped, cultural and wildlife areas, and other public Improvements within the Assessment District.
3. Improved views within the Assessment District.
4. Extension of a property’s outdoor areas and green spaces for properties within close proximity to the Improvements.
5. Improved nighttime visibility and safety from streetlights
6. Creation of individual lots for residential use that, in absence of the Assessments, would not have been created.
In this case, the recent SVTA v. SCCOSA decision provides enhanced clarity to the definitions of special benefits to properties from similar improvements in three distinct areas:
Proximity
Expanded or improved access
Views
The SVTA v. SCCOSA decision also clarifies that a special benefit is a service or improvement that provides a direct advantage to a parcel and that indirect or derivative advantages resulting from the overall public benefits from a service or improvement are general benefits. The SVTA v.
SCCOSA decision also provides specific guidance that park improvements are a direct advantage and special benefit to property that is proximate to a park that is improved by an assessment:
The characterization of a benefit may depend on whether the parcel receives a direct advantage from the improvement (e.g. proximity to a park) or receives an indirect, derivative advantage resulting from the overall public benefits of the improvement (e.g. general enhancement of the district’s property values).
Proximity, improved access and views, in addition to the other special benefits listed above further strengthen the basis of these assessments.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Moreover, the Dahms decision further clarified that certain services and improvements funded by assessments, that are over and above what otherwise would be provided and that other property in general and the public do not share or receive are 100% special benefit. The assessment-funded services upheld by Dahms included streetscape maintenance and security services.
Special Benefit
SCI assessment engineers have identified the following special benefits:
Proximity and Access to Improved Landscaped, Cultural and Wildlife Areas, and Other Public Areas within the Assessment District
Only the specific properties within close proximity to the Improvements are included in the District. The District has been narrowly drawn to include the properties that receive special benefits from the Improvements. Therefore, property in the District enjoys unique and valuable proximity and access to the Improvements that the public at large and property outside the District do not share.
In absence of the Assessments, the Improvements would not be provided and the landscaped, cultural and wildlife areas in the District would be degraded due to insufficient funding for maintenance, upkeep, and repair. Therefore, the assessments provide Improvements that are over and above what otherwise would be provided. Improvements that are over and above what otherwise would be provided do not by themselves translate into special benefits but when combined with the unique proximity enjoyed by parcels in the District, they provide a direct advantage and special benefit to property in the District.
Since the parcels in the District are nearly the only parcels that enjoy close access to the Improvements, they directly benefit from the unique close access to improved landscaping areas that are provided by the Assessments. This is a direct advantage and special benefit to property in the District.
Improved Views within the Assessment District
The District, by maintaining permanent public improvements funded by the Assessments in the District, provides improved views to properties in the District. The properties in the District enjoy close and unique proximity, access and views of the specific Improvements funded in the District; therefore, the improved and protected views provided by the Assessments are another direct and tangible advantage that is uniquely conferred upon property in the District.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Extension of a Property’s Outdoor Areas and Green Spaces for Properties within Close Proximity to the Improvements
The landscaped, cultural and wildlife areas within the District provide additional outdoor areas that serve as an effective extension of the land area for proximate properties. The Improvements, therefore, provide an important, valuable, and desirable extension of usable land area for the direct advantage and special benefit of properties with good and close proximity to the Improvements.
Improved Nighttime Visibility and Safety from Streetlights Well maintained, effective street lighting provides special benefit to proximate parcels, within the range of the light, because it allows for safer and improved use of the property in the evenings and night. Street lighting also provides special benefit as it increases neighborhood safety and reduces the likelihood of crime on the proximate parcels.
Creation of Individual Lots for Residential Use that, in Absence of the Assessments, Would Not Have Been Created
In the District, the original owner/developer(s) of the property within the District agreed unanimously to the Assessments. The Assessments provide the necessary funding for improvements that were required as a condition of development and subdivision approval.
Therefore, such Assessments allowed the original property to be subdivided and for development of the parcels to occur. As parcels were sold, new owners were informed of the Assessments through the title reports, and in some cases, through Department of Real Estate “White Paper” reports that the parcels were subject to assessment. Purchase of property was also an “agreement” to pay the Assessment. Therefore, in absence of the Assessments, the lots within most of the District would not have been created. These parcels, and the improvements that were constructed on the parcels, receive direct advantage and special benefit from the Assessments.
General Versus Special Benefit
Proposition 218 requires an assessing agency to separate the general benefits from the special benefits of a public improvement or service, estimate the quantity of each in relation to the other, and limit the assessment amount to the portion of the improvement or service costs attributable to the special benefits.
In the legal decisions known as Golden Hill and Beutz, the California courts have determined that there typically will be some general benefit associated with parks, landscaping and lighting maintenance and improvements because people who don’t reside or own property in an assessment district do receive some, albeit minimal, benefit from the Improvements.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
The separation and quantification of general and special benefits requires an apportionment of the cost of the service or improvement between the two benefit types. General benefits cannot be funded by assessment revenue. Rather, the funding must come from other sources. The Engineer, therefore, has analyzed the quantity to which the general public may reasonably be expected to use or benefit from the improved and maintained areas in relation to the quantity or extent to which property owners within the assessment district use and benefit from the improved and maintained areas.
Although the improved areas may be available to the general public at large, they have been specifically designed, located, and created to provide additional and improved public resources for property inside the District, and not the public at large. Other properties that are either outside the District, or within the District and not assessed, do not enjoy the unique proximity, access, views, and other special benefit factors described previously. These Improvements are of special benefit to properties located within the District because they provide a direct advantage to properties in the District that would not be provided in absence of the Assessments.
There is no widely-accepted or statutory formula for calculating general benefit. General benefits are benefits from improvements or services that are not special in nature, are not “particular and distinct” and are not “over and above” benefits received by other properties. The SVTA vs.
SCCOSA decision provides some clarification by indicating that general benefits provide “an indirect, derivative advantage” and are not necessarily proximate to the improvements.
In other words:
In any case, following is a description of the separation and quantification of general benefit in the District. In each step of this analysis, the more liberal assumptions and determinations have been used in order to ensure that the total calculated general benefit is liberally determined.
A widely-accepted formula to estimate the general benefit is listed below:
Total
Benefit = General Benefit + Special
Benefit
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Benefit to Property Outside the District
Properties within the District receive almost all of the special benefits from the Improvements because properties in the District enjoy unique proximity and access to the Improvements that is not enjoyed by other properties or the public at large. Further, the District has significant physical barriers, such as roads, fences, and open space that impede the benefit from the Improvements by properties outside the District. There are only two points of ingress/egress into the District and these points are designed to limit random access. Developed residential properties only exist outside the District along a portion of the northern boundary. Nonetheless, some properties within immediate adjacent proximity of the Improvements, but outside of the boundaries of the District, may receive some benefit from the Improvements. These benefits include improved views, but do not include improved proximity or access, extension of outdoor areas, nor improved lighting. Since these adjacent properties have limited direct view and access, and only receive a small portion of the benefits, a 25% reduction factor is used. This benefit is conferred to properties outside the District’s boundary. It contributes to the overall general benefit calculation and will not be funded by the Assessments.
The general benefit to property outside of the District is calculated as follows with the parcel and data analysis performed by SCI Consulting Group.
Total General Benefit to Properties Outside of the District = 2% Benefit to Property within the Assessment District
The “indirect and derivative” benefit to property within the District is particularly difficult to calculate. A solid argument can be presented that all benefit within the Assessment District is special because the Improvements are clearly “over and above” and “particular and distinct” when compared with the baseline level of service and the unique proximity, access and views of the Improvements enjoyed by benefiting properties in the District.
Assumptions:
43 parcels outside and adjacent to the District
526 parcels in the Assessment District
Calculation
General Benefit to Property outside the Improvement District= (43/(43+526)) * 25% = 2%
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Nevertheless, the SVTA decision indicates there may be general benefit “conferred on real property located in the district.” A measure of the general benefits to property within the District is the percentage of land area within the District that is publicly owned, open to the public, and used for regional purposes such as major roads, rail lines, hospitals, and other regional facilities because such properties, while physically within the District, are used for regional purposes and could provide indirect benefits to the public at large. In this case, essentially 0% of the land area is used for such regional purposes.
Total General Benefit to Properties Inside of the District = 0% Benefit to the Public at Large
This Engineer’s Report uses this general benefit measure as the third component of the overall general benefit quantification. In the Beutz case, the Court opined those general benefits from parks and recreation facilities could be quantified by measuring the use of parks and recreation facilities by people who do not live within the assessment boundaries. Therefore, the general benefit to the public at large can be estimated by the proportionate amount of time that the District’s landscaped, cultural, wildlife and lighting facilities are used and enjoyed by individuals who are not residents, employees, customers, or property owners in the District.
The golf course attracts members of the public at large into the primarily residential District.
Hence, the “Public at Large” within the District used to evaluate this component of general benefit is primarily made up of non-resident golfers.
Some of the Improvements are proximate to the Greenhorn Creek golf course and enjoyed in part by non-resident golfers. However, it should be noted, however, that there are wetlands, cultural areas, and wildlife areas distributed throughout the District, they are in close proximity accessible to all the parcels and contribute to improved views. Finally, the maintenance and improvements to the golf course clearly provide additional, offsetting special benefit to the District’s Improvements.
Based upon observations and records obtained from the golf course operator, use by persons who do not own property within the District are approximately 50% of the persons who use the golf course. Approximately 30,000 rounds of golf are played a year at the golf course. 30,000 rounds * 50% non-resident = 15,000 rounds by non-resident golfers 15,000 rounds/365 days per year = 41 golfers per day
41 non-resident golfers/1,000 approximate total population = 5% City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
In addition, the street lighting benefits both pedestrians and drivers who reside in the District area as well as those pedestrians and drivers from outside the District (i.e., those walking or driving through or into the District). Because the District involves residential subdivisions with no major arterial roads and few through roads, the vast majority of the walking and driving in the District at night is by those who reside in the area. City staff persons, as well as residents and golf course staff over the years have observed the drivers and pedestrians in the District area. Based on these observations, and experience with other similar projects, the Engineer has determined that approximately 5% of the drivers and pedestrians on the District streets with lighting reside outside the District.
5% General Benefit to non-resident night-time drivers
With 5% of golf course benefit by non-residents and 5% benefit from street lighting to nonresidents, the total general benefit to the public at large is:
Total General Benefit to Public at Large = 5% + 5% = 10% Total General Benefits
Using a sum of these three measures of general benefit, we find that approximately 15% (rounded up from 12%) of the benefits conferred by the Improvements may be general in nature and should be funded by sources other than the assessment.
Quantification of General Benefit Contribution from Other Sources As a result, at least 15% of the District budget must come from sources other than the assessment.
This contribution offsets any general benefits from the Assessment services. This general benefit contribution offset comes from several sources, including the Greenhorn Creek golf course, the City of Angels Camp, and the effective value of the original development. This general benefit contribution exceeds the 15% required general benefit.
General Benefit =
2 % (Outside the District)
+ 0 % (Property within the District)
+ 10 % (Public at Large)
= 12% (Round up to 15%)
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
General Benefit Contribution from Greenhorn Golf Course The Greenhorn Creek Golf Course owns, maintains, rehabilitates, and improves the golf course that is proximate and directly adjacent to the Improvements areas maintained by the District, and is largely funded by course use fees and an annual fee from members. The maintenance of the golf course serves to contribute to the maintenance of the District Improvements in significant ways. For example, maintenance of the landscaping proximate to the District’s improved areas provides for improved views, extension of improved areas, weed control, species control, rodent control, and other types of maintenance. The golf course’s pathways provide improved access to the District Improvements. The golf course’s drainage system manages water flow and helps maintain the improved areas. The golf course itself provides a boundary for the Improvements and retains them. The contribution from the Greenhorn Creek golf course towards general benefit from the services described in this section is conservatively estimated to be worth at least 10% of overall costs and benefits.
General Benefit Contribution from Original Development of the Improvements The value of the construction of the Improvements can be quantified and monetized as an annuity. Since this construction was performed and paid for by non-assessment funds, this “annuity” can be used to offset general benefit costs and is conservatively estimated to contribute at least 10%.
Therefore, the total required general benefit is conservatively quantified at 15% (calculated above) which is more than offset by the total non-assessment contribution towards general benefit of 20%.
Zones of Benefit
The boundaries of the District were carefully drawn to include the properties in the District and currently receive special benefit from the Improvements.
The SVTA vs. SCCOSA decision indicates:
General Benefit contribution for non-assessment
sources =
10 % (from golf course)
+ 10 % (from initial development)
= 25% (Total General Benefit contribution)
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
“In a well-drawn district — limited to only parcels receiving special benefits from the improvement — every parcel within that district receives a shared special benefit. Under section 2, subdivision (i), these benefits can be construed as being general benefits since they are not “particular and distinct” and are not “over and above” the benefits received by other properties “located in the district.”
“We do not believe that the voters intended to invalidate an assessment district that is narrowly drawn to include only properties directly benefitting from an improvement.
Indeed, the ballot materials reflect otherwise. Thus, if an assessment district is narrowly drawn, the fact that a benefit is conferred throughout the district does not make it general rather than special. In that circumstance, the characterization of a benefit may depend on whether the parcel receives a direct advantage from the improvement (e.g., proximity to park) or receives an indirect, derivative advantage resulting from the overall public benefits of the improvement (e.g., general enhancement of the district’s property values).” In the District, the advantage that each parcel receives from the Improvements is direct, and the boundaries are narrowly drawn to include only parcels that benefit from the assessment.
Therefore, the even spread of assessment throughout the narrowly drawn district is indeed consistent with the OSA decision.
Within the District, zones of benefit are not justified or needed because the Improvements are provided relatively evenly across the entire area and for all parcels. Parcels of similar type in the District receive similar benefits on a per parcel and land area basis. Therefore, zones of benefit are not justified.
Method of Assessment
As previously discussed, the proposed Assessments will provide comprehensive Improvements that will clearly confer special benefits to properties in the proposed District. The allocation of special benefits to property is partially based on the type of property and the size of property.
These benefits can also partially be measured by the occupants on property in the District because such parcel population density is a measure of the relative benefit a parcel receives from the Improvements. It should be noted that many other types of “traditional” assessments also use parcel population densities to apportion the Assessments. For example, the assessments for sewer systems, roads and water systems are typically allocated based on the population density of the parcels assessed. Therefore, the apportionment of benefit is reasonably based on the type of parcel, the size of parcels and the population density of parcels.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
The next step in apportioning Assessments is to determine the relative special benefit for each property. This process involves determining the relative benefit received by each property in relation to a single-family home, or, in other words, on the basis of Single-Family Equivalents (SFE).
This SFE methodology is commonly used to distribute Assessments in proportion to estimated special benefit and is generally recognized as providing the basis for a fair and appropriate distribution of Assessments. For the purposes of this Engineer’s Report, all properties are assigned an SFE value, which is each property’s relative benefit in relation to a single-family home on one parcel. In this case, the "benchmark" property is the single-family detached dwelling which is one Single Family Equivalent or one SFE.
Assessment Apportionment
The Improvements provide direct and special benefit to properties in the District. The District is primarily residential single family development. As such, each single family residential property receives similar benefit from the Improvements. Therefore, the Engineer has determined that the appropriate method of apportionment of the benefits derived by all parcels is on a dwelling unit basis. All improved properties or properties proposed for development are assigned an SFE factor equal to the number of dwelling units developed or planned for the property.
Residential Properties
Certain residential properties in the Assessment Area that contain a single residential dwelling unit and are on a lot of less than or equal to one acre are assigned one Single Family Equivalent or 1.0 SFE. Traditional houses, zero-lot line houses, and town homes are included in this category of single family residential property. Properties with more than one detached single family residence on one acre or less are assigned 1.0 SFE per single family home.
Properties with more than one residential unit (other than parcels with more than one detached single family dwelling as described above) are designated as multi-family residential properties.
These properties benefit from the Improvements in proportion to the number of dwelling units that occupy each property, the average number of people who reside in multi-family residential units versus the average number of people who reside in a single family home and the relative size of each type of residential dwelling unit. The population density factors for the area in City of Angels Camp encompassing the District, as depicted in the following table, provide the basis for determining the SFE factors for residential properties.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Using the total population in a certain property type in the area of the District from the 2020 Census and dividing it by the total number of such households, finds that approximately 2.16 persons occupy each single family residence, whereas an average of 2.23 persons occupy each multi-family residence. The ratio of 2.16 people on average for a single family residence and 2.23 people per dwelling unit in a multi-family residence unit result in a population density equivalent of 1.03 for multi-family residences. Next, the relative building areas are factored into the analysis because special benefits are related to the average size of a property, in addition to average population densities. For a multi-family residence, this calculation results in an SFE factor of 0.37 per dwelling unit.
Table 10 – Residential Property Types
Source: 2020 Census, City of Angels, and property dwelling size information from the Calaveras County Assessor data and other sources.
Commercial Properties
Commercial properties are generally open and operated for more limited times, relative to residential properties. Therefore, the relative hours of operation can be used as a measure of benefits since employee density also provides a measure of the relative benefit to property. Since commercial properties are typically open and occupied by employees approximately one-half the time of residential properties, it is reasonable to assume that commercial land uses receive onehalf of the special benefit on a land area basis relative to single family residential property.
The average size of a single family home with 1.0 SFE factor in the Service Area is 0.25 acres.
Therefore, a commercial property with 0.25 acres receives one-half the relative benefit, or a 0.50 SFE factor.
The SFE values for various commercial land uses are further defined by using average employee densities because the special benefit factors described previously are also related to the average number of people who work at commercial properties.
Total Occupied Persons per Pop. Density SqFt Proposed
Population Households Household Equivalent Factor Rate
Single Family Residential 3,062 1,419 2.16 1.00 1.00 1.00 Multi-Family Residential (5+ Units) 138 62 2.23 1.03 0.36 0.37 City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
To determine employee density factors, this Report utilizes the findings from the San Diego County Association of Governments Traffic Generators Study (the “SANDAG Study”) because these findings were approved by the State Legislature which determined the SANDAG Study to be a good representation of the average number of employees per acre of land area for commercial and industrial properties. As determined by the SANDAG Study, the average number of employees per acre for commercial and industrial property is 24. As presented in Figure 1, the SFE factors for other types of businesses are determined relative to their typical employee density in relation to the average of 24 employees per acre of commercial property.
Table 11 – Commercial/Industrial Benefit Assessment Factors
1. Source: San Diego Association of Governments Traffic Generators Study, University of California, Davis and other studies and sources.
2. The SFE factors for commercial and industrial parcels indicated above are applied to each fourth acre of land area or portion thereof. Additional acres over five for commercial, office, shopping center and industrial parcels are calculated per acre or portion thereof. (Therefore, the minimum assessment for any assessable parcel in these categories is the SFE Units listed herein.) Vacant/Undeveloped Properties
The Improvements will make the land in the District more desirable and useable. The benefit to undeveloped properties is determined to be proportional to the corresponding benefits for similar type developed properties, but at a lower rate due to the lack of improvements on the property. A measure of the benefits accruing to the underlying land is the average value of land in relation to Improvements for developed property. An analysis of the assessed valuation data from the City of Angels Camp found that approximately 15% of the assessed value of improved properties is classified as the land value. It is reasonable to assume, therefore, that approximately 15% of the benefits are related to the underlying land and 85% are related to the improvements and the day-to-day use of the property. Using this ratio, the SFE factor for vacant/undeveloped parcels is 0.15 per parcel.
Average SFE Units SFE Units
Type of Commercial Employees per per
Land Use Per Acre 1 Quarter Acre 2 Acre After 5
Commercial 24 0.500 0.500
Office 68 1.420 1.420
Shopping Center 24 0.500 0.500
Self Storage or Parking Lot 1 0.021 0.021
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Other Property Types
For certain properties, additional analysis and calculation of special benefit is required, as indicated below:
Golf Course Fairways and Greens
Golf course fairways and greens parcels do provide special benefit in the form of improved views and beautification to all parcels within the District – however, they also receive some special benefit from the proposed Improvements as enjoyed by golfers on these parcels. The fairways and green parcels include:
Parcel Acres
058-045-002-000 19.56
058-046-013-000 35.14
058-046-015-000 39.47
058-047-005-000 8.84
058-047-009-000 25.37
058-047-012-000* 28.55
058-060-006-000** 1.74
Total acreage = 158.67
*Note: mixed-use parcel – 2.5 sfe added for Caddy Shack Rental **Note: entry way parcel with similar benefit to fairways and greens The Engineer has conducted an analysis and determined that there are typically 21 golfers on the course at anytime.
The special benefit is calculated as such:
21 golfers/2.16 household residents = 9.72 Single Family Equivalents of special benefit
9.72 SFE’s/158.67 acres = 0.0612 SFEs/ acre
Fitness, Tennis, Basketball, Pool, etc.
Fitness and sport court parcels receive special benefit from the improvements similar to other parcels. The fitness and court sport parcels include:
Parcel Acres
058-071-014-000 1.91
058-043-005-000 0.33
058-080-019-000 1.36
Total acreage = 3.60
The Engineer has conducted an analysis and determined that there are typically 5 users on these facilities at anytime.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
The special benefit is calculated as such:
5 users/2.16 household residents = 2.314 SFEs of special benefit
2.314 SFE’s/3.60 acres = 0.6430 SFEs/ acre
Club house (Restaurant, Pro Shop, and Wedding Facilities) The Club house parcel does provide special benefit similar to the other parcels. The club house parcel include:
Parcel Acres
058-046-007-000 2.86
Total acreage = 2.86
The Engineer has conducted an analysis and determined that there are typically 7 golfers in Club house, 15 restaurant customers, 1 pro shop customers, and 2 special event guests anytime at anytime.
The special benefit is calculated as such:
The benefit to golfers + benefit to restaurant customers + benefit to pro shop customers + benefit to special event guests
(7 golfers + 18 non-golfers)/2.16 household residents = 11.5740 SFEs of special benefit
11.5740 SFE’s/2.86 acres = 4.0468 SFEs/ acre
Annual Cost Indexing
It should also be noted that, if the Assessments are approved, the maximum assessment rate within the Improvement District may increase in future years based on the annual increase, if any, in the Northern California (San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward) Consumer Price Index-All Urban Consumers (the “CPI”) from December to December of each year, with a maximum annual adjustment not to exceed 3% per year.
Any change in the CPI in excess of 3% shall be cumulatively reserved as the “Unused CPI” and shall be used to increase the maximum authorized assessment rate in years in which the CPI is less than 3%. The maximum authorized assessment rate is equal to the maximum assessment rate in the first fiscal year the assessment was levied adjusted annually by the minimum of 1) 3% or 2) the change in the CPI plus any Unused CPI as described above.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Duration of Assessment
It is proposed that the Assessments, if approved by property owners, will be continued every year after their formation, so long as the public Improvements need to be maintained and improved, and the City requires funding from the Assessments for these Improvements in the District. As noted previously, the Assessment can continue to be levied annually after the City Council approves an annually updated Engineer’s Report, budget for the Assessment, Improvements to be provided, and other specifics of the Assessment. In addition, the City Council must hold an annual public hearing to continue the Assessment.
Appeals of Assessments Levied to Property
Any property owner who feels that the Assessment levied on the subject property is in error as a result of incorrect information being used to apply the foregoing method of assessment may file a written appeal with the City of Angels Camp City Administrator or their designee. Any such appeal is limited to correction of an Assessment during the then-current Fiscal Year and applicable law. Upon the filing of any such appeal, the City Administrator or their designee will promptly review the appeal and any information provided by the property owner. If the City Administrator or their designee finds that the Assessment should be modified, the appropriate changes shall be made to the Assessment Roll. If any such changes are approved after the Assessment Roll has been filed with the County for collection, the City Administrator or their designee is authorized to refund to the property owner the amount of any approved reduction. Any dispute over the decision of the City Administrator or their designee shall be referred to the Angels Camp City Council, and the decision of the City Council shall be final.
Assessment Funds Must Be Expended within the District
The net available Assessment funds, after incidental, administrative, financing, and other costs shall be expended exclusively for Improvements within the boundaries of the District or as described herein, and appropriate incidental and administrative costs as defined in the Plans and Specifications section.
Oversight, Annual Review, and Accountability
The Assessment proceeds and expenditures will also be reviewed and overseen by the City Council. In addition, the Assessment budget, Assessment rate, Assessment CPI increase, and Improvements will be reviewed at a noticed public hearing by the Councill and public.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
In general, the public review and accountability process is as follows: The Assessments will not automatically continue and will require specific actions, reports, and procedures for continuation.
In each subsequent year for which the Assessments will be levied, the Council must preliminarily approve at a public meeting a budget and costs for the upcoming Fiscal Year’s Improvements, an updated annual Engineer’s Report, and an updated Assessment roll listing all parcels and their Assessments. At this meeting, the Council will also call for the publication in a local newspaper of a legal notice of the intent to continue the Assessments for the next Fiscal Year and set the date for the noticed public hearing. At the annual public hearing, members of the public can provide input to the Council prior to the Council’s decision on ordering the Improvements and the Assessments for the next Fiscal Year.
Citizens’ Oversight Committee
A Citizens’ Oversight Committee (the “Citizens’ Oversight Committee”) will be established for the Assessment District. The Citizens’ Oversight Committee shall review potential projects that may be funded by the assessments and shall make recommendations about the expenditure of assessment funds. Members of the Citizens’ Oversight Committee will be nominated and approved by the City Council. All members of the Citizens’ Oversight Committee shall own property within the Assessment District and shall not have conflicts of interest with the Assessment District or the Services funded by the Assessments. The Citizens’ Oversight Committee will meet quarterly on an annual basis.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Assessment
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Angels Camp, County of Calaveras, California, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 and Article XIIID of the California Constitution (collectively “the Act”), adopted its Resolution Initiating Proceedings For the Formation of the Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District; WHEREAS, the Resolution directed the undersigned Engineer of Work to prepare and file a report presenting a description of the Improvements, an estimate of the costs of the Improvements, a diagram for the Assessment District and an assessment of the estimated costs of the Improvements upon all assessable parcels within the Assessment District, to which Resolution and the description of the Improvements therein contained, reference is hereby made for further particulars;
NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned, by virtue of the power vested in me under the Act and the order of the City Council of the City of Angels Camp, hereby make the following assessment to cover the portion of the estimated cost of the Improvements, and the costs and expenses incidental thereto to be paid by the Assessment District.
The amount of the costs of the Improvements and related incidental expense to be paid by the District for the fiscal year 2022-23 is as follows:
Table 12 – Budget Summary
As required by the Act, the Assessment Diagram is hereto attached and made a part hereof showing the exterior boundaries of the District. The distinctive number of each parcel or lot of land in the City of Angels Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek is its Assessor Parcel Number appearing on the Assessment Roll.
Management, Legal, & Insurance 68,991
Protected Cultural Areas 44,672
15,035
Wetlands 5,278
Streetlights 14,272
Landscaping & Water 180,002
Hardscape 3,885
Miscellaneous 11,940
Net Amount to Assessments $ 344,076
Wildlife Corridor
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
I do hereby assess and apportion the net amount of the cost and expenses of the Improvements, including the related incidental expenses, upon the parcels and lots of land within the District, in accordance with the special benefits to be received by each parcel or lot, from the Improvements, and more particularly set forth in the Cost Estimate and Method of Assessment in the Report.
The assessment is made upon the parcels or lots of land within the District in proportion to the special benefits to be received by the parcels or lots of land, from the Improvements.
The Assessment is subject to an annual increase tied to the Consumer Price Index-All Urban Consumers for Northern California (San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward) as of December of each succeeding year (the “CPI”).
Each parcel or lot of land is described in the Assessment Roll by reference to its parcel number as shown on the Assessor's Maps of the County of Calaveras for the fiscal year 2022-23. For a more particular description of the parcel, reference is hereby made to the deeds and maps on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder of Calaveras County.
I hereby place opposite the Assessor Parcel Number for each parcel or lot within the Assessment Rolls, the amount of the assessment for the fiscal year 2022-23 for each parcel or lot of land within the District.
Dated: July 14, 2022
________________________________
Engineer of Work
By John W. Bliss, License No. C052091
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Assessment Diagram
The District Boundary and the parcels to be assessed in Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 – Greenhorn Creek are displayed on the Assessment Diagram, which is on file with the City Clerk of the City of Angels Camp. The following Assessment Diagram is for general location only and is not to be considered the official boundary map. The lines and dimensions of each lot or parcel within the District are those lines and dimensions as shown on the maps of the Assessor of the County of Calaveras for Fiscal Year 2022-23, and are incorporated herein by reference, and made a part of this Diagram and this Report.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Assessment Roll, FY 2022-23
An Assessment Roll (a listing of all parcels assessed within the Assessment District and the amount of the assessment) is below.
Each lot or parcel listed on the Assessment Roll is shown and illustrated on the latest County Assessor records and these records are, by reference made part of this Report. These records shall govern for all details concerning the description of the lots or parcels.
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
City of Angels Camp
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 2 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
City of Angels Council Meeting
AUGUST 2, 2022 REGULAR: 6B
B. PUBLIC HEARING to Consider the Continuation of the Assessments for Fiscal Year 2022-23 for the Landscaping & Lighting District #1 – Greenhorn Creek Assessment; Adoption of Resolution No. 22-44, Approving the Engineer’s Report, Confirming the Diagram and Assessment, and Ordering the Continuation of Assessments for Fiscal Year 2022-23, Rebecca Neilon, Engineering Department
I. Receive Staff Report
II. Open Public Hearing
III. Receive Public Comment
IV. Close Public Hearing
___________________________________________________________________ DATE: August 2, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Rebecca Neilon, Engineering Department
RE: Public Hearing to Consider the Continuation of the Assessments for Fiscal Year 2022-23 for the Landscaping & Lighting District #1 - Greenhorn Creek Assessment; Adoption of Resolution No. 22-44 Approving the Engineer’s Report, Confirming the Diagram and Assessment, and Ordering the Continuation of Assessments for Fiscal Year 2022-23
RECOMMENDATION
If a majority protest does exist for the Landscaping & Lighting District #2 - Greenhorn Creek Assessment and the Assessment is not approved, Staff recommends the City Council:
1) Hold a public hearing for the proposed continuation of the assessments for the Landscaping & Lighting District #1- Greenhorn Creek Assessment (District), in order to receive any public input on the proposed continuation of the assessments, approve the proposed assessment budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 and the services and improvements funded by the assessments fund, and any other issues related to the assessments; and 2) Upon the conclusion of the public hearing, Adopt Resolution No. 22-44 (Attachment 1), approving the Final Engineer’s Report (Attachment 2), and confirming the diagram and assessments for FY 2022-23 for the District.
BACKGROUND
The City of Angels Landscaping and Lighting District No. 1 (LLD) was formed by the City Council on June 6, 1995, through the Landscape and Lighting District Act of 1972 (Act). It was created to fund the maintenance of landscaping, lighting, cultural and wildlife areas, local infrastructure, environmental mitigation services, and related improvements within the Greenhorn Creek development. In 2009 the City accepted the Greenhorn Creek public roads, including adjacent parking areas, into the City maintained street system, at that time the road maintenance responsibility was removed from the LLD. Every year an Engineer’s Report is prepared to establish the budget for the improvements listed in the report.
DISCUSSION
The Act requires an annual Engineer’s Report be prepared by a licensed professional engineer. Since 2013, the LLD Engineer’s Report has been prepared by SCI Consulting Group from Fairfield, California. On March 2, 2021, the City Council Approved Resolution No. 21-09 directing SCI to prepare the Engineer’s Report, which is the first step in a threestep process required by the Act to continue the annual assessments for FY 2021-22.
On May 17, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-21, a resolution of the City’s intention to continue the assessments for FY 2022-23, preliminarily approve an Engineer’s Report, and provide notice of a Public Hearing for the District for FY 2022-23. That resolution preliminarily approved the Engineer’s Report and the estimated expenses and proposed assessments therein.
The Engineer’s Report, based upon information provided by the City Engineer, has determined the amount of work or improvements that will be performed in FY 2022-23. The estimated FY 2022-23 cost of providing the Services and Balloting is $182,130. This cost results in a proposed assessment rate for fiscal year 2022-23 of $300.00 per single-family equivalent benefit unit, which is the maximum authorized assessment rate.
Each year, the Council is required to conduct a noticed public hearing and receive public input on the proposed assessments and the services that they would fund, in order to continue to levy the assessments for the upcoming fiscal year. After hearing the public testimony, the Council may take final action on setting the assessment rate, establishing the services and improvements to be funded and order the continuation of the assessments for FY 2022-23.
Approval of Resolution 22-44 will continue the assessments for FY 2022-23 and to direct additional actions related to the levy of the assessments, which will provide funds for the proposed assessment budget for FY 2022-23. With the collection of the FY 2022-23 assessment, the services and improvements made possible by the assessment funds can be accomplished.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The project will be funded with Landscaping & Lighting District funds budgeted for this purpose.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution 22-44
2. Final Engineer’s Report
RESOLUTION NO. 22-44
OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANGELS, COUNTY OF CALAVERAS, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ENGINEER'S REPORT, CONFIRMING DIAGRAM AND
ASSESSMENT AND DIRECTING AUDITOR OF CALAVERAS COUNTY TO CONTINUE AND TO COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-23 FOR THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 1 – GREENHORN CREEK WHEREAS, after receiving a weighted majority of ballots in support of the proposed assessments, this City Council ordered the formation of and continuation of the first assessments within the Landscaping and Lighting District No. 1 – Greenhorn Creek (the "Assessment District") pursuant to the provisions of Article XIIID of the California Constitution, and the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (the "Act"), Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (commencing with Section 22500 thereof); and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the Assessment District is for the installation, maintenance and servicing of improvements within the Landscaping and Lighting District No. 1 – Greenhorn Creek, as described in the annual Engineer’s Report; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 22-10, the City Council ordered the preparation of an Engineer's Report for the Landscaping and Lighting District for fiscal year 2022-23; and WHEREAS, pursuant to said Resolution, the Engineer's Report was prepared by SCI Consulting Group, Engineer of Work, in accordance with Section 22565, et. seq., of the Streets and Highways Code (the "Report") and Article XIIID of the California Constitution; and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 22-21, the City Council preliminarily approved the Preliminary Engineer’s Report for said Assessment District and set a date for a Public Hearing; and WHEREAS, said report was duly made and filed with the City Administrator and duly considered by this City Council and found to be sufficient in every particular, whereupon it was determined that the report should stand as the Engineer’s Report for all subsequent proceedings under and pursuant to the aforesaid resolution, and that August 2, 2022, at the hour of 6:00 p.m., at the Angels Camp Firehouse, 1404 Vallecito Road, Angels Camp, CA 95222, were appointed as the time and place for a hearing by this City Council on the question of the continuation of the proposed assessment, notice of which hearing was given as required by law.
WHEREAS, at the appointed time and place the hearing was duly and regularly held, and all persons interested and desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard, and all matters and things pertaining to the continuation were fully heard and considered by the City Council, and all oral statements and all written protests or communications were duly heard, considered and overruled, and this City Council thereby acquired jurisdiction to order the continuation of the assessments and the
confirmation of the diagram and assessment prepared by and made a part of the Engineer’s Report to pay the costs and expenses thereof.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANGELS DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The public interest, convenience and necessity require that the continuation be made.
SECTION 2. The Assessment District benefited by the improvements and assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and the exterior boundaries thereof, are as shown by a map thereof filed in the office of the City Administrator, which map is made a part hereof by reference thereto.
SECTION 3. The assessment is levied without regard to property valuation.
SECTION 4. The Engineer's Report as a whole and each part thereof, to wit:
(a) the Engineer's estimate of the itemized and total costs and expenses of maintaining the improvements and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith; (b) the diagram showing the assessment district, plans and specifications for the improvements to be maintained and the boundaries and dimensions of the respective lots and parcels of land within the Assessment District; and
(c) the assessment of the total amount of the cost and expenses of the proposed maintenance of the improvements upon the several lots and parcels of land in the Assessment District in proportion to the estimated special benefits to be received by such lots and parcels, respectively, from the maintenance, and of the expenses incidental thereto are finally approved and confirmed.
SECTION 5. Final adoption and approval of the Engineer's Report as a whole, and of the plans and specifications, estimate of the costs and expenses, the diagram and the assessments, as contained in the report as hereinabove determined and ordered, is intended to and shall refer and apply to the report, or any portion thereof as amended, modified, or revised or corrected by, or pursuant to and in accordance with, any resolution or order, if any, heretofore duly adopted or made by this City Council.
SECTION 6. Those assessments for fiscal year 2022-23 shall be continued at the rate of THREE HUNDRED ($300.00) per single family equivalent as specified in the Engineer’s Report for fiscal year 2022-23 with estimated total annual assessment revenues as set forth in the Engineer’s Report; and
SECTION 7. The assessment to pay the costs and expenses of the maintenance of the
improvements for fiscal year 2022-23 is hereby continued. For further particulars pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, reference is hereby made to the Resolution Directing Preparation of Engineer's Report.
SECTION 8. Based on the oral and documentary evidence, including the Engineer's Report, offered and received at the hearing, this City Council expressly finds and determines (a) that each of the several lots and parcels of land will be specially benefited by the maintenance of the improvements at least in the amount if not more than the amount, of the assessment apportioned against the lots and parcels of land, respectively, and (b) that there is substantial evidence to support, and the weight of the evidence preponderates in favor of, the aforesaid finding and determination as to special benefits.
SECTION 9. Immediately upon the adoption of this resolution, but in no event later than the third Monday in August following such adoption, the City Administrator shall file a certified copy of this resolution with the Auditor of the County of Calaveras. Upon such filing, the County Auditor shall enter on the County assessment roll opposite each lot or parcel of land the amount of assessment thereupon as shown in the assessment. The assessments shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as County taxes are collected and all laws providing for the collection and enforcement of County taxes shall apply to the collection and enforcement of the assessments, after collection by the County, the net amount of the assessments, after deduction of any compensation due the County for collection, shall be paid to the City of Angels Landscaping and Lighting District No. 1 – Greenhorn Creek.
SECTION 10. Upon receipt of the moneys representing assessments collected by the County, the County shall deposit the moneys in the City Treasury to the credit of the improvement funds previously established under the distinctive designation of the Assessment District. Moneys in the improvement funds shall be expended only for the maintenance, servicing, construction, or installation of the improvements.
SECTION 11. The City Administrator shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Angels, State of California this 2nd day of August 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
_____________________
Alvin Broglio, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Rose Beristianos, City Clerk
Fiscal Year 2022-23 ENGINEER’S REPORT
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District No. 1
Greenhorn Creek
August 2022
Final Report
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Page i
City of Angels
City Council
Alvin Broglio, Mayor
Jennifer Davis-Herndon, Vice Mayor
Gretel Tiscornia Council Member
Isabel Moncada, Council Member
City Administrator
Rebecca Callen, City Administrator
Rebecca Neilon, City Engineer
City Attorney
Douglas L. White
Engineer of Work
John Bliss, P.E., SCI Consulting Group
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Page ii
Table of Contents
Table of Contents....................................................................................................ii List of Tables .........................................................................................................iii Introduction ...........................................................................................................1 Overview .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Proposition 218................................................................................................................................ 3 Legal Analysis................................................................................................................................... 3 Plans & Specifications .............................................................................................6 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Maintenance.................................................................................................................................... 8 Improvements................................................................................................................................10 Replacements.................................................................................................................................11 Clarification on De Nova Subdivision Infrastructure...................................................................11 Fiscal Year 2022-23 Estimate of Cost and Budget.....................................................12 Estimate of Annual Cost of Improvements..................................................................................12 Method of Apportionment .................................................................................... 13 Discussion of Benefit.....................................................................................................................13 Identification of Benefit ................................................................................................................14 General versus Special Benefit, and Quantification and Separation of General Benefit.........16 Special relationship between the District and the Golf Course - Effect on General Benefit...17 Quantification of General Benefit Contribution from Other Sources.......................................20 Method of Assessment .................................................................................................................22 Assessment Apportionment .........................................................................................................22 Zones of Benefit.............................................................................................................................23 Appeals and Interpretation...........................................................................................................24 Assessment.......................................................................................................... 25 Assessment Diagram...............................................................................................2 Assessment Roll, FY 2022-23....................................................................................3 City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Page iii
List of Tables
Table 1 – 2022-23 Total Budget Summary .........................................................................................12 Table 2 – Residential Property Types.................................................................................................. 22 Table 3 – Budget Summary.................................................................................................................. 25 Introduction
Overview
The City of Angels Landscaping and Lighting District No. 1 – Greenhorn Creek (“District”) was formed by majority vote of the City of Angels (”City”) City Council on June 6, 1995. The District was created to fund maintenance and services of landscaping, lighting, cultural and wildlife areas, local infrastructure such as curb and gutter, sidewalks and drainage facilities, environmental mitigation services and related improvements within the Greenhorn Creek development (“PROJECT”). It is a specific contractual requirement of the Development Agreement. Section B.13 of the Development Agreement states:
As a financing mechanism for the costs of on-going operation and maintenance of PROJECT street lighting, streetscape landscaping along PROJECT roads, maintenance of all PROJECT roads except Greenhorn Creek Road, and maintenance and monitoring of required wetlands mitigation areas, elderberry habitat, and cultural resources preservation areas, CITY shall form a Landscaping, Lighting and Maintenance District (“LLMD”) pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (California Streets and Highways Code, Section 22500 et seq.)
Further, as documented in previous Engineer’s Reports:
The Development Agreement is a binding covenant running with the land which was recorded in the Official Records of Calaveras County on June 16, 1994, and its requirements apply to and bind all parcels and properties located within the Greenhorn Creek PROJECT. The Development Agreement was required in specific conditions or approval for the Master Plan, Use Permit, and Tentative Subdivision Map for the PROJECT granted by the CITY. Failure by the District to impose and collect assessments to cover specified cost of maintenance and operations on an on-going basis would amount to breach of contractual obligations protected by the Contract Impairment Clause of the Constitution of the United States.
Although the District funds maintenance and services of landscaping, lighting, and related improvements within the Greenhorn Creek development, it does not fund the maintenance or operations of the adjacent Greenhorn Creek golf course, which is maintained and funded by a separate entity using separate funding.
The District was established pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, California Streets and Highways Code Sections 225000 et seq. However, the District was formed prior to the approval of Proposition 218 (now Article XIIID of the California Constitution), which added a number of significant and strict requirements to the formation and maintenance of assessment districts.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
For 1995-96, assessments were imposed on properties within the District at the rate of $180 per single family dwelling per year. For 1996-99, assessments were imposed on properties within the District at the rate of $164 per single family dwelling per year. In 1999, the assessment increased to $300 per single family dwelling per year, and, as required by Proposition 218 for an assessment increase, a balloting was required of all properties within the District. The balloting was successfully approved by the property owners within the District and the rate was increased to a maximum of $300 per single family dwelling per year. Most importantly, this 1999 increase and balloting triggered compliance with all requirements and limitations of Proposition 218, including justification of special benefit, quantification and separation of general benefit, and implementation of a sound and proportional assessment methodology.
In 2009, the City approved Resolution 09-53 which accepted all of the Greenhorn Creek public roads, including adjacent parking areas into the City maintained street system. As a result, the phrase “maintenance of all PROJECT roads except Greenhorn Creek Road” was removed from the Engineer’s Report, and the District was relieved from any maintenance of the asphalt public streets from inside edge of gutter to inside edge of gutter, and the asphalt parking areas adjacent thereto, from inside edge of concrete to inside edge of concrete, within the Development.
In 2013, the City engaged attorney Richard P. Shanahan of Bartkiewicz, Kronick and Shanahan to evaluate several specific aspects of the Assessment District and provide recommendations.
Among Mr. Shanahan’s recommendations was that since there have been a number of recent legal decisions affecting Proposition 218 implementation, “it is prudent to structure the assessment and the assessment Engineer’s Report in such a manner as to demonstrate compliance with the general benefit, special benefit and proportionality requirement and limitations of Proposition 218.” Along with the recommendation to expand the Engineer’s Report’s compliance with Proposition 218, as well as some other important considerations, Mr.
Shanahan’s report indicated the existing assessment was fundamentally sound, and did not require re-balloting as long as the rate stayed at or below $300 per single family and there were not changes to the methodology. Further, Mr. Shanahan’s report indicated Proposition 218, and relevant case law, allow for practical latitude in the use of any reserve funds, as long as the use is reasonably within the intent of the Assessment District.
Accordingly, also in 2013, the City engaged SCI Consulting Group to prepare the annual Engineer’s Report, with special focus on addressing current issues of compliance with Proposition 218 in the current legal environment.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
This Engineer’s Report ("Report") was prepared to establish the budget for the Improvements (as described below) that will be funded by the 2022-23 assessments and other revenue and to determine the special benefits received from the Improvements by property within the District and the method of assessment apportionment to lots and parcels. This Report and the assessments have been made pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (the "Act") and Article XIIID of the California Constitution (the “Article”).
Following submittal of this Report to the City of Angels City Council (the “Council”) for preliminary approval, the Council may, by Resolution, call for the Public Hearing on the assessments for landscaping maintenance and Improvements. This hearing is scheduled for July 20, 2021 at 6:00 p.m. After the close of the hearing, the Council may take action to approve the continuation of the assessments for fiscal year 2022-23. If the assessments are so confirmed and approved, the levies would be submitted to the Calaveras County Auditor/Controller in August 2021 for inclusion on the property tax roll for Fiscal Year 2022-23.
Proposition 218
This assessment is formed consistent with Proposition 218, The Right to Vote on Taxes Act, which was approved by the voters of California on November 6, 1996, and is now Article XIIIC and XIIID of the California Constitution. Proposition 218 provides for benefit assessments to be levied to fund the cost of providing services, improvements, as well as maintenance and operation expenses to a public improvement which specially benefits the assessed property.
Proposition 218 describes a number of important requirements, including a property-owner balloting, for the formation and continuation of assessments, and these requirements are satisfied by the process used to establish this assessment.
Legal Analysis
Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, Inc. v Santa Clara County Open Space Authority
In July of 2008, the California Supreme Court issued its ruling on the Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority (“SVTA vs. SCCOSA”). This ruling is the most significant court case in further legally clarifying the substantive assessment requirements of Proposition 218. Several of the most important elements of the ruling included further emphasis that:
Benefit assessments are for special, not general, benefit The services and/or improvements funded by assessments must be clearly defined City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Special benefits are directly received by and provide a direct advantage to property in the assessment district
This Engineer’s Report, and the process used to establish this assessment are consistent with the SVTA vs. SCCOSA decision.
Dahms v. Downtown Pomona Property
On June 8, 2009, the Court of Appeal approved a benefit assessment for property in the downtown area of the City of Pomona. In Dahms, the Court upheld an assessment that was 100% special benefit (i.e. 0% general benefit) on the rationale that the services and improvements funded by the assessments were directly provided only to property in the assessment district. The Court also upheld discounts and exemptions from the assessment for certain properties.
Bonander v. Town of Tiburon
On December 31, 2009, the Court of Appeal overturned a benefit assessment approved by property owners to pay for placing overhead utility lines underground in an area of the Town of Tiburon. The Court invalidated the assessments on the grounds that the assessments had been apportioned to assessed property based in part on relative costs within sub-areas of the assessment district instead of proportional special benefits.
Beutz v. County of Riverside
On May 26, 2010 the Court of Appeal overturned an assessment for park maintenance in Wildomar, California, primarily because the general benefits associated with improvements and services were not explicitly calculated, quantified and separated from the special benefits.
Golden Hill Neighborhood Association v. City of San Diego On September 22, 2011, the Court of Appeal issued a decision on the Golden Hill Neighborhood Association v. City of San Diego appeal. This decision overturned an assessment for street and landscaping maintenance in the Greater Golden Hill neighborhood of San Diego, California. The court described two primary reasons for its decision. First, like in Beutz, the court found the general benefits associated with services were not explicitly calculated, quantified and separated from the special benefits. Second, the court found that the City had failed to record the basis for the calculation of the assessment amount on city-owned parcels.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Compliance with Current Law
This Report is consistent with the requirements of Article XIIIC and XIIID of the California Constitution and with the SVTA decision because the improvements to be funded are clearly defined; the improvements are directly available to and will directly benefit property in the District; and the improvements provide a direct advantage to property in the District that would not be received in absence of the Assessments.
This Report is consistent with Buetz, Dahms, and Greater Golden Hill because, the improvements will directly benefit property in the District and the general benefits have been explicitly calculated and quantified and excluded from the Assessments. The Engineer’s Report is consistent with Bonander because the Assessments have been apportioned based on the overall proportional special benefit to each property.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Plans & Specifications
Introduction
The Act requires the Report to include “plans and specifications” that show and describe the existing and proposed “Improvements” (as defined at section 22525 of the Act) that will benefit the property in the District. Consistent with the Act the Improvements are described as follows:
Installation, Maintenance and Servicing of public improvements and facilities (including but not limited to, Landscaping, sprinkler systems, park grounds, park facilities, playground equipment, landscape corridors, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, storm drainage systems, Public Lighting Facilities, fencing, entry monuments, signage, frontage and retention walls, other landscaping facilities), and related labor, materials, supplies, utilities, equipment, and Incidental Expenses in and for the parks, landscape areas, detention basins and other Public Places in the District owned or maintained by the City of Angels. (Collectively known as the “Improvements.”) Installation means the construction and installation of landscaping, park, detention basin and related Improvements, including, but not limited to, land preparation, such as grading, leveling, cutting, and filling, sod, landscaping, irrigation systems, sidewalks and drainage, and lights.
Other capitalized words and phrases in this section shall have the meanings as defined in the Act.
In his 2013 report of recommendations and legal considerations, Mr. Shanahan advised that “the scope of the Improvements and maintenance may be changed over time through the Engineer’s Report and levy process.” In order to maintain clarity and consistency, the descriptions of the Maintenance and Improvements within the District is largely included verbatim from the 2012-13 Engineer’s report. Additional clarification is added where appropriate.
A map of the District with corresponding areas of maintenance is included on the following page.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Maintenance
The Improvements and area to be maintained by the District are described as follows:
Sidewalk and Drainage Facilities
Includes maintenance service for drainage facilities, sidewalks and reserves for future repairs.
Culvert and drainage inlets that are located outside of the roadway areas will be maintained with the exception of those that lay within the golf course parcels.
This includes all sidewalk, curb, and gutter (both rolled and standard) along streets.
This includes maintaining vegetation on private property and/or Wildlife Corridor in order to maintain a clear walking path along the sidewalk.
Lighting
Includes cost of power plus maintenance service for streetlight poles, lamps, glassware (34 total street lights) plus cost of power for miscellaneous monument signs.
Landscaping
Includes the landscape areas within Greenhorn Creek Subdivision that require maintenance which falls into two categories:
1.) Formal Landscape areas
The formally landscaped areas require turf to be mowed, edged, and kept free of debris.
Irrigation control and repair, pruning, fertilizing, weed control, and trash pickup are also required. Golf course turf adjacent to roads will be maintained by the golf course. Below is a list of the formal landscaped areas within the PROJECT:
a. Project Entry – (mounds and lawn adjacent to Greenhorn Creek Road) b. Entry wetlands and Selkirk entry island and turf areas. c. Selkirk Ranch Road planter areas at No. 2 green, No. 10 green, and No. 18 tees. d. Selkirk Ranch Road Planter areas at cul-de-sacs.
e. Small mounds adjacent to Pointe Drive and adjacent to golf course bathroom. f. Greenhorn Creek Road median from Project Entry to Smith Flat Road. g. McCauley Ranch Road entry planter.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
h. McCauley Ranch Road planter at Wetlands pond.
i. McCauley Ranch Road Lawn and planters behind practice driving range. j. Smith Flat Road planter areas on south side of road from Greenhorn Creek Road to Lot N.
k. Lightner, Alawa, Sasa, Cornelia and Olivia Court planter areas.
In additional to the above listed areas, the District has elected to maintain the triangular shaped landscape area along the westerly side of Greenhorn Creek Road just south of Live Oak Drive and just north of the northerly District Boundary.
Clarification beginning in 2013-14: the District will maintain the three large entry monument signs.
Clarification beginning in 2013-14: the District will improve and maintain the strip of land between the street and sidewalk at the corner of Smith Flat Road and Selkirk Ranch Road that has previously not been improved.
2.) Native Terrain Area (Wildlife Areas)
The Native Terrain areas require weed control either by spraying herbicides, mechanical trimming, or both and trash and debris removal as required. The areas to be maintained extend from back of curb to 5’ behind back of curb or sidewalk for the reaches described below:
a. Greenhorn Creek Road – Selkirk Ranch Road to Smith Flat Road. b. McCauley entry to Clubhouse property line-north side of road. c. Open space adjacent to Units 1,2,3,3A, 4A, and 4B roads except for private parcels. d. Lots M, N and I.
e. Walkway through PCR 2 from Selkirk Ranch Road to Springhouse Road (weed only, no spray). Contact Miwuk Tribal Representative-Debra Grimes at telephone number (209) 293-4135.
f. Walking path contained within Lot I.
WOODLANDS PRESERVATION, MITIGATION AND BUFFER AREA
No physical maintenance for these areas as they develop naturally. However, monitoring will be performed as required by the Wetlands Preservation and Conservation Plan and the US Army Corps of Engineers’ “404 Permit.” Also, fallen limbs and other debris from will be maintained to prevent damage to adjacent areas.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
CULTURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION AREA
Includes fence and sign maintenance, scheduled inspections by LLD, Miwok and Qualified Archeologist as specified in the Historic Properties Treatment Plan of February 1999 and weed abatement as directed by the City of Angels Fire Marshall. Walkway through PCR2 from Selkirk Road to Springhouse Road and walkways to display areas to be kept weed free. (Weedwhack only, no spraying allowed)
WETLANDS
As explained above, in 2013 the City engaged attorney Richard P. Shanahan of Bartkiewicz, Kronick and Shanahan to evaluate several specific aspects of the Assessment District and provide recommendations. Mr. Shanahan’s report indicated Proposition 218, and relevant case law, allow for practical latitude in the use of any reserve funds, as long as the use is reasonably within the intent of the Assessment District. Hence, Mr. Shanahan’s recommendation allows for the City to increase the level of annual monitoring, maintenance, and mitigation to the wetlands, as well as invest considerable District funds in wetlands mitigation. For 2013-14, the District invested $307,000 in direct, “one-time” improvements and mitigation.
In fiscal year 2015-16, the District was approved for a loan to pay the remaining balance for the wetlands mitigation project in the amount of $114,689. The loan is on a seven-year amortization schedule with the first payment made in 2016-17. For 2022-23, a payment of $16,371 will be made.
Improvements
With the adoption of Resolution 09-53 by the City of Angels City Council accepting the Greenhorn public streets, including adjacent parking areas, in the City Maintained Street System, the remaining roadway Improvements to be maintained by the District consists of the sidewalks in Units 1,2,2A,2B, 2C,S, 3A, 4A, and 4B. Clarification beginning in 2013-14: The standard and rolled curb and gutter, and safety and street signs will be maintained by the District.
The street lighting Improvements for this PROJECT, which will be maintained by the District, consists of 34 streetlights and all required appurtenances as shown on the Street Light Master Plans for the areas within Units No. 1, 2, 2A,2B, 2C, 3, 3A, 4A, and 4B. The Street Light Master Plans are on file with the City of Angels.
The landscaping Improvements for this Project, which will be maintained by the District, consist of landscaping and irrigation systems with Units 1,2,3.
As previously stated, significant mitigation Improvements will be made to the wetlands ($307,000) beginning in 2013.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Replacements
Beginning in 2013-14, replacement costs are included in the Engineer’s Report. Existing dedicated funding, often referred to as “reserves,” will be used to augment for replacement costs as needed. Reserves are needed in the event improvements need to be replaced due to failure, damage, natural disaster etc.
Clarification on De Nova Subdivision Infrastructure
(APNs 058-084-001-000 through 058-084-014-000; 058-085-001-000 through 058-085-012-000; 058-086-001-000 Through 058-086-016-000; and 058-087-001-000 Through 058-087-015-000) Parcels within the De Nova Subdivision were developed into single family homes during 2018 through 2020. These parcels receive special benefit from the District’s existing maintenance, operations, and improvements in the same way that other District parcels receive special benefit and are assessed the same, accordingly. Additionally, this subdivision includes subdivision-specific streets, sidewalks and streetlights which are not part of the existing District infrastructure and hence, the funding for this local subdivision-specific maintenance, operations and improvements will come from the De Nova Homeowner’s Association or some other nonassessment source.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Fiscal Year 2022-23 Estimate of Cost and Budget
Estimate of Annual Cost of Improvements
The Act requires the Report to estimate the costs of the Improvements for the fiscal year, including estimates for the total costs for the Improvements for the year, the amount of any surplus or deficit to be carried over from a previous fiscal year, and the amount of funding contributions made from sources other than assessment revenue. After determining these amounts, the Report then must calculate the net amount to be assessed upon assessable lands within the District.
Table 1 – 2022-23 Total Budget Summary
Total Budget
2022-23
Total Costs
LLD Management $41,070
Repayment of Cattail Loan $17,721
Repayment of Prop 218 Loan $10,200
Protected Cultural Resource Area Maintenance $12,510
Wildlife Corridor Maintenance $16,686
Wetlands $5,278
Streetlights $16,545
Landscaping $59,369
Hardscape $1,000
Miscellaneous -
Contingency -
Administration Fee - County $1,750
Total Maintenance and Servicing and Related Expenditures $182,130 Total Maintenance and Servicing and Related Expenditures and Incidentals (Net Amount to be Assessed: Annual Costs - Revenues) $182,130 Budget Allocation to Property
Total Assessment Total
SFE Units per SFE Assessment
607.10 $300.00 $182,130
City of Angels - Greenhorn Creek
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 1
Estimate of cost
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Method of Apportionment
This section of the Engineer's Report includes an explanation of the benefits derived from the installation, maintenance and servicing of the Improvements for Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek and the methodology used to apportion the total assessment to properties within the District.
The District consists of all Assessor Parcels within the PROJECT. The method used for apportioning the assessment is based upon the proportional special benefits derived by the properties in the District over and above general benefits conferred on real property or to the public at large. The apportionment of special benefit is a multi-step process:
1. Identification of all special benefits and ancillary general benefits to the properties derived from the Improvements
2. Calculation of the proportion of these benefits that are special vs. general
3. Finding that all general benefits are paid for by non-assessment sources, as required
4. Determination of the relative special benefit per property type and property characteristic (the “Methodology”)
5. Calculation of the specific assessment for each individual parcel based upon special vs. general benefit; location, property type and property characteristics, Discussion of Benefit
In summary, the assessments can only be continued based on the special benefit to property.
This benefit is received by property over and above any general benefits. Moreover, such benefit is not based on any one property owner’s use of the Improvements or a property owner’s specific demographic status. With reference to the requirements for assessments, Section 22573 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 states:
"The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements."
Proposition 218, as codified in Article XIIID of the California Constitution, has confirmed that assessments must be based on the special benefit to property:
"No assessment shall be imposed on any parcel which exceeds the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel." City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Identification of Benefit
The following benefit categories summarize the types of special benefit to residential and other lots and parcels resulting from the installation, maintenance and servicing of the Improvements to be provided with the assessment proceeds. These categories of special benefit are derived from the statutes passed by the California Legislature and other studies which describe the types of special benefit received by property from maintenance and Improvements such as those within by the District. These types of special benefit are summarized as follows:
1. Proximity to improved landscaped, cultural and wildlife areas within the Assessment District.
2. Access to improved landscaped, cultural and wildlife areas within the Assessment District.
3. Improved views within the Assessment District.
4. Extension of a property’s outdoor areas and green spaces for properties within close proximity to the Improvements.
5. Improved nighttime visibility and safety from streetlights The SVTA v. SCCOSA decision provides enhanced clarity to the definitions of special benefits to properties in three distinct areas:
Proximity
Expanded or improved access
Views
The decision clarifies that a special benefit is a service or improvement that provides a direct advantage to a parcel and that indirect or derivative advantages resulting from the overall public benefits from a service or improvement are general benefits. The SVTA v. SCCOSA decision also provides specific guidance that park improvements are a direct advantage and special benefit to property that is proximate to a park that is improved by an assessment:
[T]he characterization of a benefit may depend on whether the parcel receives a direct advantage from the improvement (e.g. proximity to a park) or receives an indirect, derivative advantage resulting from the overall public benefits of the improvement (e.g. general enhancement of the district’s property values).
The proximity, improved access and views, in addition to the other special benefits listed above further strengthen the basis of these assessments.
The special benefits from the Improvements are further detailed below:
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Proximity to improved landscaped, cultural and wildlife areas within the Assessment District
Only the specific properties within close proximity to the Improvements are included in the District. Therefore, property in the District enjoys unique and valuable proximity and access to the Improvements that the public at large and property outside the District do not share.
In absence of the assessments, the Improvements would not be provided and the landscaped, cultural and wildlife areas in the District would be degraded due to insufficient funding for maintenance, upkeep, and repair. Therefore, the assessments provide Improvements that are over and above what otherwise would be provided. Improvements that are over and above what otherwise would be provided do not by themselves translate into special benefits but when combined with the unique proximity enjoyed by parcels in the District, they provide a direct advantage and special benefit to property in the District.
Access to improved landscaped, cultural and wildlife areas within the Assessment District
Since the parcels in the District are nearly the only parcels that enjoy close access to the Improvements, they directly benefit from the unique close access to improved landscaping areas that are provided by the Assessments. This is a direct advantage and special benefit to property in the District.
Improved views within the Assessment District
The Improvements provide improved views to properties in the District. The properties in the District enjoy close and unique proximity, access, and views of the Improvements; therefore, the improved and protected views provided by the Assessments are another direct and tangible advantage that is uniquely conferred upon property in the District.
Extension of a property’s outdoor areas and green spaces for properties within close proximity to the Improvements
The landscaped, cultural and wildlife areas within the District provide additional outdoor areas that serve as an effective extension of the land area for proximate properties. The Improvements, therefore, provide an important, valuable, and desirable extension of usable land area for the direct advantage and special benefit of properties with good and close proximity to the Improvements.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Improved nighttime visibility and safety from streetlights Well maintained, effective street lighting provides special benefit to proximate parcels, within the range of the light, because it allows for safer and improved use of the property in the evenings and night. Street lighting also provides special benefit as it increases neighborhood safety and reduces the likelihood of crime on the proximate parcels.
General versus Special Benefit, and Quantification and Separation of General Benefit
Proposition 218 requires an assessing agency to separate the general benefits from the special benefits of a public improvement or service, estimate the quantity of each in relation to the other, and limit the assessment amount to the portion of the improvement or service costs attributable to the special benefits.
In the legal decisions known as Golden Hill and Beutz, the California courts have determined that there typically will be some general benefit associated with parks, landscaping and lighting maintenance and improvements because people who don’t reside or own property in an assessment district do receive some, albeit minimal, benefit from the Improvements.
The separation and quantification of general and special benefits requires an apportionment of the cost of the service or improvement between the two benefit types. General benefits cannot be funded by assessment revenue. Rather, the funding must come from other sources. The Engineer, therefore, has analyzed the quantity to which the general public may reasonably be expected to use or benefit from the improved and maintained areas in relation to the quantity or extent to which property owners within the assessment district use and benefit from the improved and maintained areas.
Although the improved areas may be available to the general public at large, they have been specifically designed, located and created to provide additional and improved public resources for property inside the District, and not the public at large. Other properties that are either outside the District, or within the District and not assessed, do not enjoy the unique proximity, access, views, and other special benefit factors described previously. These Improvements are of special benefit to properties located within the District because they provide a direct advantage to properties in the District that would not be provided in absence of the Assessments.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
There is no widely-accepted or statutory formula for calculating general benefit. General benefits are benefits from improvements or services that are not special in nature, are not “particular and distinct” and are not “over and above” benefits received by other properties.
The SVTA vs. SCCOSA decision provides some clarification by indicating that general benefits provide “an indirect, derivative advantage” and are not necessarily proximate to the improvements.
In other words:
In any case, following is a description of the separation and quantification of general benefit in the District. In each step of this analysis, the more conservative assumptions and determinations have been used in order to ensure that the total calculated general benefit is conservatively determined.
A formula to estimate the general benefit is listed below:
Special relationship between the District and the Golf Course - Effect on General Benefit
In the analysis of general benefit, the Engineer has found that the unique relationship between the Improvements and the Greenhorn Creek golf course adds additional challenges to calculating general benefit and special benefit in the District. The Golf Course is privately owned and operated, and membership-driven.
Total
Benefit = General Benefit + Special Benefit
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
The golf course attracts members of the public at large into the primarily residential District.
These non-resident members of the public at large also enjoy benefits from the Improvements.
Hence, the District’s Improvements are arguably enjoyed by a larger number of non-resident members of the public at large, than those in a typical landscaping and lighting assessment district. In fact, because of their location on the golf course, some of the Improvements, such as the larger wetlands area and some of the cultural areas, are arguably enjoyed more by golfers, than by residents who do not use the golf course. It should be noted, however, that there are wetlands, cultural areas, and wildlife areas distributed throughout the District, they are in close proximity accessible to all the parcels and contribute to improved views. Further, the maintenance and improvements to the golf course clearly provide additional, offsetting benefit to the District’s Improvements.
All of these factors have been incorporated in the calculations below.
Benefit to Property Outside the District
Properties within the District receive almost all of the special benefits from the Improvements because properties in the District enjoy unique proximity and access to the Improvements that is not enjoyed by other properties or the public at large. Further, the District has significant physical barriers, such as roads, fences, and open space that impede the benefit from the Improvements by properties outside the District. There are only two points of ingress/egress into the District and these points are designed to limit random access. Developed residential properties only exist outside the District along a portion of the northern boundary.
Nonetheless, some properties within immediate adjacent proximity of the Improvements, but outside of the boundaries of the District, may receive some benefit from the Improvements.
These benefits include improved views, but do not include improved proximity or access, extension of outdoor areas, nor improved lighting. Since these adjacent properties only receive a small portion of the benefits, a 20% reduction factor is used. This benefit is conferred to properties outside the District’s boundary. It contributes to the overall general benefit calculation and will not be funded by the Assessments.
The general benefit to property outside of the District is calculated as follows with the parcel and data analysis performed by SCI Consulting Group.
Total General Benefit to Properties Outside of the District = 2% Assumptions:
43 parcels outside and adjacent to the District
526 parcels in the Assessment District
Calculation
General Benefit to Property outside the Improvement District= (43/(43+526)) * 20% = 2%
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Benefit to Property within the Assessment District
The “indirect and derivative” benefit to property within the District is particularly difficult to calculate. A solid argument can be presented that all benefit within the Assessment District is special, because the Improvements are clearly “over and above” and “particular and distinct” when compared with the baseline level of service and the unique proximity, access and views of the Improvements enjoyed by benefiting properties in the District.
Nevertheless, the SVTA decision indicates there may be general benefit “conferred on real property located in the district.” A measure of the general benefits to property within the District is the percentage of land area within the District that is publicly owned, open to the public, and used for regional purposes such as major roads, rail lines, hospitals, and other regional facilities because such properties, while physically within the District, are used for regional purposes and could provide indirect benefits to the public at large. In this case, essentially 0% of the land area is used for such regional purposes.
Total General Benefit to Properties Inside of the District = 0% Benefit to the Public at Large
In the Beutz case, the Court opined that general benefits from parks and recreation facilities could be quantified by measuring the use of parks and recreation facilities by people who do not live within the assessment boundaries. This Engineer’s Report uses this general benefit measure as the third component of the overall general benefit quantification. Therefore, the general benefit to the public at large can be estimated by the proportionate amount of time that the District’s landscaped, cultural, wildlife and lighting facilities are used and enjoyed by individuals who are not residents, employees, customers or property owners in the District. Here, the public at large within the District is primarily made up of non-resident golfers.
Some of the Improvements are proximate to the Greenhorn Creek golf course and enjoyed in part by non-resident golfers. Based upon observations and records obtained from the golf course operator, use by persons who do not own property within the District are approximately 50% of the persons who use the golf course. Approximately 30,000 rounds of golf are played a year at the golf course.
Further, an analysis by the Engineer of the Improvements, including the larger wetlands and some of the cultural areas, indicates that approximately 46% of the Improvements are adjacent or proximate to the golf course. Other factors to consider are that the golf course is only used during daylight hours, or conservatively, 75% of the day. Finally, it is recognized that no more than 33% of the people within the District at any time are playing golf. Hence; City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
In addition, the street lighting benefits both pedestrians and drivers who reside in the District area as well as those pedestrians and drivers from outside the District (i.e., those walking or driving through or into the District). Because the District involves residential subdivisions with no major arterial roads and few through roads, the vast majority of the walking and driving in the District at night is by those who reside in the area. City staff persons, as well as residents and golf course staff over the years have observed the drivers and pedestrians in the District area.
Based on these observations, and experience with other similar projects, the Engineer has determined that approximately 5% of the drivers and pedestrians on the District streets with lighting reside outside the District.
5% General Benefit to non-resident night-time drivers
With 6% of golf course benefit by non-residents and 5% benefit from street lighting to nonresidents, the total general benefit to the public at large is:
Total General Benefit to Public at Large = 6% + 5% = 11% Total General Benefits
Using a sum of these three measures of general benefit, we find that approximately 15% (rounded up from 13%) of the benefits conferred by the Improvements may be general in nature and should be funded by sources other than the assessment.
Quantification of General Benefit Contribution from Other Sources As a result, at least 15% of the District budget must come from sources other than the assessment. This contribution offsets any general benefits from the Assessment services. This general benefit contribution offset comes from several sources, including the Greenhorn Creek golf course, the City of Angels, and the effective value of the original development. This general benefit contribution exceeds the 15% required general benefit. 50 % (Non-resident golfers)
* 46 % (Improvements proximate to the golf course)
* 75 % (Daytime use)
* 33 % (Maximum number of golfers)
= 6% Golf Course Benefit by Non-residents
General Benefit =
2 % (Outside the District)
+ 0 % (Property within the District)
+ 11 % (Public at Large)
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
General Benefit Contribution from Greenhorn Golf Course The Greenhorn Creek Golf Course owns, maintains, rehabilitates and improves the golf course that is proximate and directly adjacent to the Improvements areas maintained by the District, and is largely funded by course use fees and an annual fee from members. The maintenance of the golf course serves to contribute to the maintenance of the District Improvements in significant ways. For example, maintenance of the landscaping proximate to the District’s improved areas provides for improved views, extension of improved areas, weed control, species control, rodent control, and other types of maintenance. The golf course’s pathways provide improved access to the District Improvements. The golf course’s drainage system manages water flow and helps maintain the improved areas. The golf course itself provides a boundary for the Improvements and retains them. The contribution from the Greenhorn Creek golf course towards general benefit from the services described in this section is conservatively estimated to be worth at least 10% of overall costs and benefits.
General Benefit Contribution from City of Angels
The City of Angels owns and maintains local public streets, and adjoining parking areas, throughout the District. These public streets provide essential and sole access to the Improvements for its enjoyment as well as maintenance. The contribution from the City of Angels towards general benefit from the maintenance local public streets is conservatively estimated to be at least 5% of overall costs and benefits.
General Benefit Contribution from Original Development of the Improvements The value of the construction of the Improvements can be quantified and monetized as an annuity. Since this construction was performed and paid for by non-assessment funds, this “annuity” can be used to offset general benefit costs and is conservatively estimated to contribute at least 10%.
Therefore, the total required general benefit is conservatively quantified at 15% (calculated above) which is more than offset by the total non-assessment contribution towards general benefit of 25%.
General Benefit contribution for non-assessment
sources =
10 % (from golf course)
+ 5 % (from City)
+ 10 % (from initial development)
= 25% (Total General Benefit contribution)
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Method of Assessment
After separating out the general benefits, the second step in apportioning assessments is to determine the relative special benefit for each property. This process involves determining the relative special benefit received by each property in relation to a single family home, or, in other words, on the basis of Single Family Equivalents (SFE). This SFE methodology is commonly used to distribute assessments in proportion to estimated special benefit and is generally recognized as providing the basis for a fair and appropriate distribution of assessments. For the purposes of this Report, all properties are designated a SFE value, which is each property’s relative special benefit in relation to a single family home on one parcel. In this case, the "benchmark" property is the single family detached dwelling which is one Single Family Equivalent or one SFE.
Assessment Apportionment
The Improvements provide direct and special benefit to properties in the District. The District is primarily residential single family development. As such, each single family residential property receives similar benefit from the Improvements. Therefore, the Engineer has determined that the appropriate method of apportionment of the benefits derived by all parcels is on a dwelling unit basis. All improved properties or properties proposed for development are assigned an SFE factor equal to the number of dwelling units developed or planned for the property.
Residential Properties
There are several types of residential property uses. Table 3, below, documents each property use and the associated relative SFEs per unit.
Table 2 – Residential Property Types
Property Use
SFEs (Single Family
Equivalents) Unit
Single Family Residential 1 each
Multi-Family Residential 0.23 each unit
Vacant Lots 1 each
Vacant Land - not subdivided 0 each
Other Property Types
When the District was initially created, a parcel-by-parcel benefit analysis was conducted and relative SFE amounts were calculated for individual non-residential properties. These benefit findings are maintained for non-residential properties except in cases where significant attributes of the parcel have changed.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
In 2013-14, parcel 58-046-007 was adjusted from 22.88 SFEs to 24.0 SFEs to account for the increased benefit resulting from the development of the Caddy Shack facility.
There are no publicly owned parcels within the District.
The assessments for each parcel are listed on the enclosed Assessment Roll.
Zones of Benefit
The boundaries of the District were carefully drawn to include the properties in Greenhorn Creek development PROJECT and currently receive special benefit from the Improvements.
The SVTA vs. SCCOSA decision indicates:
In a well-drawn district — limited to only parcels receiving special benefits from the improvement — every parcel within that district receives a shared special benefit. Under section 2, subdivision (i), these benefits can be construed as being general benefits since they are not “particular and distinct” and are not “over and above” the benefits received by other properties “located in the district.”
We do not believe that the voters intended to invalidate an assessment district that is narrowly drawn to include only properties directly benefitting from an improvement.
Indeed, the ballot materials reflect otherwise. Thus, if an assessment district is narrowly drawn, the fact that a benefit is conferred throughout the district does not make it general rather than special. In that circumstance, the characterization of a benefit may depend on whether the parcel receives a direct advantage from the improvement (e.g., proximity to park) or receives an indirect, derivative advantage resulting from the overall public benefits of the improvement (e.g., general enhancement of the district’s property values).
In the District, the advantage that each parcel receives from the Improvements is direct, and the boundaries are narrowly drawn to include only parcels that benefit from the assessment.
Therefore, the even spread of assessment throughout the narrowly drawn district is indeed consistent with the OSA decision.
Within the District, zones of benefit are not justified or needed because the Improvements are provided relatively evenly across the entire area and for all parcels. Parcels of similar type in the District receive similar benefits on a per parcel and land area basis. Therefore, zones of benefit are not justified.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Appeals and Interpretation
Any property owner who claims that the assessment levied on its property is in error as a result of incorrect information being used to apply the foregoing method of assessment, may file a written appeal with the City Administrator or his or her designee. Any such appeal is limited to correction of an assessment during the then current or, if before July 1, the upcoming fiscal year. Upon the filing of any such appeal, the City Administrator or his or her designee will promptly review the appeal and any information provided by the property owner. If the City Administrator or his or her designee finds that the assessment should be modified, the appropriate changes shall be made to the assessment roll. If any such changes are approved after the assessment roll has been filed with the County for collection, the City Administrator or his or her designee is authorized to refund to the property owner the amount of any approved reduction. Any property owner, who disagrees with the decision of the City Administrator or her or his designee, may refer their appeal to the City Council of the City of Angels and the decision of the City Council of the City of Angels shall be final.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Assessment
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Angels, County of Calaveras, California, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 and Article XIIID of the California Constitution (collectively “the Act”), adopted its Resolution Initiating Proceedings For the Formation of the Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District; WHEREAS, the Resolution directed the undersigned Engineer of Work to prepare and file a report presenting a description of the Improvements, an estimate of the costs of the Improvements, a diagram for the Assessment District and an assessment of the estimated costs of the Improvements upon all assessable parcels within the Assessment District, to which Resolution and the description of the Improvements therein contained, reference is hereby made for further particulars;
NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned, by virtue of the power vested in me under the Act and the order of the City Council of the City of Angels, hereby make the following assessment to cover the portion of the estimated cost of the Improvements, and the costs and expenses incidental thereto to be paid by the Assessment District.
The amount of the costs of the Improvements and related incidental expense to be paid by the District for the fiscal year 2022-23 is as follows:
Table 3 – Budget Summary
As required by the Act, the Assessment Diagram is hereto attached and made a part hereof showing the exterior boundaries of the District. The distinctive number of each parcel or lot of land in the City of Angels Landscaping and Lighting District No. 1 – Greenhorn Creek is its Assessor Parcel Number appearing on the Assessment Roll.
I do hereby assess and apportion the net amount of the cost and expenses of the Improvements, including the related incidental expenses, upon the parcels and lots of land within the District, in accordance with the special benefits to be received by each parcel or lot, from the Improvements, and more particularly set forth in the Cost Estimate and Method of Assessment in the Report.
Budget Item Cost
Total Annual Costs $180,380
Incidentals $1,750
Total Budget $182,130
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
The assessment is made upon the parcels or lots of land within the District in proportion to the special benefits to be received by the parcels or lots of land, from the Improvements.
Each parcel or lot of land is described in the Assessment Roll by reference to its parcel number as shown on the Assessor's Maps of the County of Calaveras for the fiscal year 2022-23. For a more particular description of the parcel, reference is hereby made to the deeds and maps on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder of Calaveras County.
I hereby place opposite the Assessor Parcel Number for each parcel or lot within the Assessment Rolls, the amount of the assessment for the fiscal year 2022-23 for each parcel or lot of land within the District.
Dated: July 14, 2022
________________________________
Engineer of Work
By John W. Bliss, License No. C052091
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Assessment Diagram
The boundaries of the District are displayed in the following Assessment Diagram.
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
Assessment Roll, FY 2022-23
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
City of Angels
Landscaping and Lighting District No.1 - Greenhorn Creek Engineer’s Report, FY 2022-23
City of Angels Council Meeting
AUGUST 2, 2022 REGULAR: 6C
C. PUBLIC HEARING: Amending Community Development Block Grant (CV1), Allocation Small Business Programs to Support Security Measures in Conjunction with Installing a Generator at the Utica Park Kitchen and for Emergency Signage and ADA Access at Utica Park, Amy Augustine, City Planner
I. Receive Staff Report
II. Open Public Hearing
III. Receive Public Comment
IV. Close Public Hearing
___________________________________________________________________
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF ANGELS PO Box 667, 200 Monte Verda St. Suite B, Angels Camp, CA 95222 P: (209) 736-2181 Mayor Alvin Broglio • Vice Mayor Jennifer Davis-Herndon Council Members Caroline Schirato, Gretel Tiscornia, Isabel Moncada City Administrator Rebecca Callen • City Attorney Doug White, Churchwell White, LLP DATE: August 2, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Amy Augustine, AICP City Planner
RE: PUBLIC HEARING Amending Community Development Block Grant (CV-1) Allocation for Small Business Programs to support security measures in conjunction with installing a generator at the Utica Park Kitchen and for emergency signage and ADA access at Utica Park
RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing for amending the City’s Community Development Block Grant (CV-1) Allocation for Small Business Programs to support securing measures in conjunction with installing a generator at the Utica Park Kitchen and for emergency signage (e.g., a changeable message board, and park signage/banner frames) and ADA access at Utica Park.
BACKGROUND
The City Council adopted Resolution 22-32 on July 5, 2022, for this item as part of its consent calendar. To ensure adequate public input, this item is being presented as a public hearing.
The City was allocated Covid Relief Funds (aka CARES Act) through three Community Development Block Grants. The first of these was CV-1-00116 in the amount of $68,004. The CDBG was to be used for small business support in response to Covid. The funding must be spent prior to 6/25/23.
Destination Angels Camp was to implement the program and a subrecipient agreement was executed in the amount of $59,440 with DAC on September 14, 2020. The remainder was allocated to administration (e.g., contract administration, reporting, invoicing). The DAC Board withdrew from the program due to restrictions placed on the qualifications of those who could attend classes and participate in the program (e.g., requirements to show tax returns etc.).
Cares Act Rounds 2 and 3 allocated additional funds to the City for other programs. One of the programs is upgrading the Utica Park kitchen to a commercial kitchen, including installing a generator. In conjunction with installing the generator, staff determined that fencing surrounding the generator is required to discourage theft. Therefore, instead of returning the $68,004 in CARES Act Funds, staff proposes to use the funds for fencing the generator to protect it from theft. In addition, given the grant requirements, staff, in coordination with the City’s CDBG Consultant and the City Police Department, determined that the remainder could be spent in a timely manner to secure emergency signage (a changeable message sign and banner frames for Utica Park) with the remainder for project administration. Any remaining funds would be used to improve ADA access in the park.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF ANGELS PO Box 667, 200 Monte Verda St. Suite B, Angels Camp, CA 95222 P: (209) 736-2181 Mayor Alvin Broglio • Vice Mayor Jennifer Davis-Herndon Council Members Caroline Schirato, Gretel Tiscornia, Isabel Moncada City Administrator Rebecca Callen • City Attorney Doug White, Churchwell White, LLP
FISCAL IMPACT
The City will receive the full $68,004 in CARES Act funding under the Round 1 grant program under this proposal. No general fund monies are proposed.
ATTACHMENT: Proposed CDBG CV-1 Amendment
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF ANGELS PO Box 667, 200 Monte Verda St. Suite B, Angels Camp, CA 95222 P: (209) 736-2181 Mayor Alvin Broglio • Vice Mayor Jennifer Davis-Herndon Council Members Caroline Schirato, Gretel Tiscornia, Isabel Moncada City Administrator Rebecca Callen • City Attorney Doug White, Churchwell White, LLP Amendment Proposal to CDBG for CV-1 Existing Section Reference (if applicable):
Existing Provision:
Implement Small Business Clinics
Existing Budget
Small Business Program Admin Budget: $59,440.
Admin Budget: $8,564.00
Total Budget: $68,004.00
Amended Provision:
Security for Kitchen. Install concrete slab, purchase and install fencing surrounding Utica Park kitchen generator for security to protect the generator from theft. The generator is used to maintain commercial kitchen operations in support of the community during emergencies, including Covid.
Signage: One changeable message sign for operations during emergencies to direct the public with Covid updates, direct them to services, etc. Two sets of banner poles for the park (emergency meeting location) to direct the community to emergency services offered at the park and post signage during emergencies.
ADA: Improvements at Utica Park to increase accessibility to services offered during emergencies.
Amended Budget
Budget Security Fencing/Pad for Kitchen Generator, Signage, ADA and Admin: $68,004.00 DATE: July 5, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Amy Augustine, AICP City Planner
RE: Resolution 22-32 Amending Community Development Block Grant (CV-1) Allocation for Small Business Programs to support security measures in conjunction with installing a generator at the Utica Park Kitchen and for emergency signage
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution 22-32 amending the City’s Community Development Block Grant (CV-1) Allocation for Small Business Programs to support securing measures in conjunction with installing a generator at the Utica Park Kitchen and for emergency signage (e.g., a changeable message board, and park signage/banner frames).
BACKGROUND
The City was allocated Covid Relief Funds (aka CARES Act) through three Community Development Block Grants. The first of these was CV-1-00116 in the amount of $68,004. The CDBG was to be used for small business support in response to Covid. The funding must be spent prior to 6/25/23.
Destination Angels Camp was to implement the program and a subrecipient agreement was executed in the amount of $59,440 with DAC on September 14, 2020. The remainder was allocated to administration (e.g., contract administration, reporting, invoicing). The DAC Board withdrew from the program due to restrictions placed on the qualifications of those who could attend classes and participate in the program (e.g., requirements to show tax returns etc.).
Cares Act Rounds 2 and 3 allocated additional funds to the City for other programs. One of the programs is upgrading the Utica Park kitchen to a commercial kitchen, including installing a generator.
In conjunction with installing the generator, staff determined that fencing surrounding the generator is required to discourage theft. Therefore, instead of returning the $68,004 in CARES Act Funds, staff proposes to use the funds for fencing the generator to protect it from theft. In addition, given the grant requirements, staff, in coordination with the City’s CDBG Consultant and the City Police Department, determined that the remainder could be spent in a timely manner to secure emergency signage (a changeable message sign and banner frames for Utica Park) with the remainder for project administration. Any remaining funds would be used to improve ADA access in the park.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City will receive the full $68,004 in CARES Act funding under the Round 1 grant program under this proposal. No general fund monies are proposed.
ATTACHMENT:
Resolution 22-32
APPENDIX D 1
Department of Housing and Community Development
Revised 5/11/2022
CDBG-CV1 NOFA
RESOLUTION NO. 22-32
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE STANDARD
AGREEMENT FOR THE 2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT PROGRAM CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE ROUND 1 (CDBG-CV1)
NOFA DATED JUNE 5, 2020
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Angels as follows:
SECTION 1:
The City Council has reviewed and hereby approves the submission to the State of California (“State”) of one or more amendments to its existing CDBG-CV1 Standard Agreement with the State numbered 20-CDBG-CV1-00116 (the “Standard Agreement”) pursuant to the State’s June 2020 CDBG-CV1 Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA). The reviewed and approved amendment(s) are presented in Section 2 of this Resolution.
SECTION 2:
The following amendments to the Standard Agreement have been reviewed and approved by the City Council with acknowledgement that all provisions of the existing Standard Agreement other than those shown in the tables below shall remain unmodified.
APPENDIX D 2
Department of Housing and Community Development
Revised 5/11/2022
CDBG-CV1 NOFA
Existing Section Reference (if applicable):
Existing Provision:
Implement Small Business Clinics
Existing Budget
Small Business Program Admin Budget: $59,440.
Admin Budget: $8,564.00
Total Budget: $68,004.00
Amended Provision:
Security for Kitchen. Install concrete slab, purchase and install fencing surrounding Utica Park kitchen generator for security to protect the generator from theft. The generator is used to maintain commercial kitchen operations in support of the community during emergencies, including Covid.
Signage: One changeable message sign for operations during emergencies to direct the public with Covid updates, direct them to services, etc. Two sets of banner poles for the park (emergency meeting location) to direct the community to emergency services offered at the park and post signage during emergencies.
ADA: Improvements at Utica Park to increase accessibility to services offered during emergencies.
Amended Budget
Budget Security Fencing/Pad for Kitchen Generator, Signage, ADA and Admin:
$68,004.00
(Add as many tables as necessary to document the requested amendments. Include associated budget changes, if any.)
APPENDIX D 3
Department of Housing and Community Development
Revised 5/11/2022
CDBG-CV1 NOFA
SECTION 3:
The City acknowledges compliance with all state and federal public participation requirements with respect to the approved amendments to the Standard Agreement described in Section 2 above.
SECTION 4:
The City hereby authorizes and directs the City Administrator, or designee*, to execute and deliver all applications and/or amendments and to act on the City's behalf in all matters pertaining to all such applications and/or amendments.
SECTION 5:
If an amendment to the Standard Agreement is approved as contemplated above, the City Administrator, or designee*, is authorized to enter into, execute, and deliver an amendment to the Standard Agreement and any and all other documentation which may be required by the State from time to time for the purposes of this grant.
SECTION 6:
If an amendment to the Standard Agreement is approved, the City Administrator, or designee*, is authorized to sign and submit Funds Requests and all required reporting forms and other documentation as may be required by the State of California from time to time in connection with this grant.
* Important Note: If the designee is signing any application, agreement, amendment, or any other document on behalf of the designated official of the City/County, written proof of designee authority to sign on behalf of such designated official must be included with the Resolution, otherwise the Resolution will be deemed deficient and rejected. Additionally, do not add limitations or conditions on the ability of the signatory or signatories to sign documents, or the Resolution may not be accepted. If more than one party’s approval is required, list them as a signatory. The only exception is for county counsel or city attorney to approve as to form or legality or both, IF such approval is already part of the standard city/county signature block as evidenced by the signed Resolution itself. Inclusions of additional limitations or conditions on the authority of the signer will result in the Resolution being rejected and will require your entity to issue a corrected Resolution prior to the Department issuing a Standard Agreement or any subsequent amendment(s) thereto.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Angels held on July 5, 2022, by the following vote:
[Instruction: Fill in all four (4) vote-count fields below. If none, indicate “0” for that field.] AYES: _______ NOES: _______
ABSENT: _______ ABSTAIN: _______
APPENDIX D 4
Department of Housing and Community Development
Revised 5/11/2022
CDBG-CV1 NOFA
____________________________________
Alvin Broglio, Mayor
City Council, City of Angels
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
City of Angels
I, Rose Beristianos, City Clerk of the City of Angels, State of California, hereby certify the above and foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of a resolution adopted by said City Council on this 5th day of July, 2022 .
___________________________________________
Rose Beristianos, City Clerk
City of Angels, State of California
By: Rose Beristianos, City Clerk
(Note: The attesting officer cannot be the person identified in the Resolution as the authorized signer.)
City of Angels Council Meeting
AUGUST 2, 2022 REGULAR: 6D
D. PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution No. 22-23 Amending Community Development Block Grants (CV-2/3) Allocation for Microenterprise Loans and Grants to Instead Increase the Budget for Utica Park Kitchen Improvements and to Construct New ADA Bathrooms in support of the Commercial Kitchen, Amy Augustine, City Planner
I. Receive Staff Report
II. Open Public Hearing
III. Receive Public Comment
IV. Close Public Hearing
___________________________________________________________________
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF ANGELS PO Box 667, 200 Monte Verda St. Suite B, Angels Camp, CA 95222 P: (209) 736-2181 Mayor Alvin Broglio • Vice Mayor Jennifer Davis-Herndon Council Members Caroline Schirato, Gretel Tiscornia, Isabel Moncada City Administrator Rebecca Callen • City Attorney Doug White, Churchwell White, LLP DATE: August 2, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Amy Augustine, AICP City Planner
RE: PUBLIC HEARING amending Community Development Block Grants (CV-2/3) Allocation for Microenterprise Loans and Grants to instead increase the budget for Utica Park kitchen improvements and to construct new ADA Bathrooms in support of the commercial kitchen
RECOMMENDATION
Hold a public hearing and take community input to amend the City’s Community Development Block Grant (CV-2/3) Allocation for Microenterprise Loans and Grants to instead increase the budget for Utica Park kitchen improvements and to construct new ADA Bathrooms in support of the commercial kitchen at Utica Park.
BACKGROUND
The City Council adopted Resolution 22-33 on July 5, 2022, for this item as part of its consent calendar. To ensure adequate public input, this item is being presented as a public hearing.
The City was allocated Covid Relief Funds (aka CARES Act) through three Community Development Block Grants. The second of these was CV-2 in the amount of $197,520 to be used for small business support in the form of grants and loans in response to Covid. The third grant was CV-3 in the amount of $49,941 to upgrade the Utica Park Kitchen to meet commercial standards so that facility could operate as a commercial kitchen serving the public during emergencies.
These funds must be spent prior to 12/31/23.
Destination Angels Camp was to implement the programs. However, it was determined that DAC could not undertake federal procurements (for the kitchen), therefore City Staff took on implementing the Utica Kitchen upgrade grant (APA Task Order). To date, a refrigerator and freezer and new shelving has been purchased and installed at the kitchen. The procurement process was completed and a contractor selected to install a generator for the kitchen. Pending completion of an environmental document, the generator award will be brought to the City Council for approval and installation.
For the third grant, guidelines for expending the funds followed the grant award by many months. Upon the release of the implementation guidelines, DAC determined that it would be required to operate as a bank in order to provide the loans and grants under the CV-3 program and withdrew. The City’s options are to return funds under CV-3 or find an alternative use. In upgrading the Utica Park kitchen to commercial status, the City was informed that nearby bathrooms are required for a commercial kitchen. Therefore, staff is recommending using CV-3 to construct new ADA bathrooms at the park (2 stalls).
Mayor Alvin Broglio • Vice Mayor Jennifer Davis-Herndon Council Members Caroline Schirato, Gretel Tiscornia, Isabel Moncada City Administrator Rebecca Callen • City Attorney Doug White, Churchwell White, LLP
FISCAL IMPACT
The City will receive the full $247,461 in CARES Act funding under the Round 2/3 grant program under this proposal. No general fund monies are proposed.
ATTACHMENT:
Proposed CDBG CV2/3 Amendment and budget
Existing Section Reference (if applicable):
Existing Provision:
Microenterprise: $197,520.00
Kitchen Improvements (Refrigeration and Generator): $49,941.00 Total: $247,461
Amended Provision:
Remove Microenterprise: (Reduce from $197,520 to $0.00) Amend the Kitchen Improvements to increase the budget: (Increase from $49,941 to $63,840) – See Attachment A.
Add construction of ADA bathrooms required for a commercial kitchen. Bathrooms in close proximity to the kitchen are required to achieve a commercial kitchen approval. A commercial kitchen is necessary to support the community during emergencies, including Covid. ($183,621 – See Attachment A).
Kitchen Improvements: $63,840.00
Bathrooms: $183,621.00
Total: $247,461
Mayor Alvin Broglio • Vice Mayor Jennifer Davis-Herndon Council Members Caroline Schirato, Gretel Tiscornia, Isabel Moncada City Administrator Rebecca Callen • City Attorney Doug White, Churchwell White, LLP CV-2-3
Budget Amendment
Kitchen - CV 2-3 00262
Item Existing Proposed
Commercial refrigeration and delivery $7,291.00 $8,540.00 Generator purchase and installation, panel upgrade $25,000.00 $35,000.00 Cookware/serve ware $5,000.00 $15,000.00
Safety equipment/signage $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Upgrades to meet County standards (shelving) $0.00 $2,300.00 $40,291.00 $63,840.00
Bathroom (2 stalls –ADA) – CV 2/3 00247
Item Proposed Cost
Plans 3,500.00
Grading 2,800.00
Slab 7,500.00
Apron/flatwork 3,000.00
Lumber 3,200.00
Siding 4,200.00
Carpentry 5,600.00
Finish/Site Supervisor 2,500.00
Sheetrock 2,000.00
Hot water 3,500.00
Lighting 500.00
Plumbing 9,500.00
Insulation 800.00
Toilets, Urinal, Sinks (Fixtures) 3,000.00
Commercial ADA Door 1,400.00
Seal concrete floor 500.00
Electrical 4,800.00
Paint 2,800.00
Gutters 1,200.00
Roof 3,200.00
Tie-in to existing utilities 2,000.00
Subtotal each 67,500.00
Overhead/Prevailing Wage 20% 13,500.00
Total each 81,000.00
X2 162,000.00
Contingency 5,000.00
TOTAL $167,000.00
Admin (CV 2/3): $16,621
TOTAL (CV 2/3): $247,461.00
ATTACHMENT A
CV-2-3
Budget Amendment
Kitchen - CV 2-3 00262
Item Existing Proposed
Commercial refrigeration and delivery $7,291.00 $8,540.00 Generator purchase and installation, panel upgrade $25,000.00 $35,000.00 Cookware/serve ware $5,000.00 $15,000.00
Safety equipment/signage $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Upgrades to meet County standards (shelving) $0.00 $2,300.00 $40,291.00 $63,840.00
Bathroom (2 stalls –ADA) – CV 2/3 00247
Item Proposed Cost
Plans 3,500.00
Grading 2,800.00
Slab 7,500.00
Apron/flatwork 3,000.00
Lumber 3,200.00
Siding 4,200.00
Carpentry 5,600.00
Finish/Site Supervisor 2,500.00
Sheetrock 2,000.00
Hot water 3,500.00
Lighting 500.00
Plumbing 9,500.00
Insulation 800.00
Toilets, Urinal, Sinks (Fixtures) 3,000.00
Commercial ADA Door 1,400.00
Seal concrete floor 500.00
Electrical 4,800.00
Paint 2,800.00
Gutters 1,200.00
Roof 3,200.00
Tie-in to existing utilities 2,000.00
Subtotal each 67,500.00
Overhead/Prevailing Wage 20% 13,500.00
Total each 81,000.00
X2 162,000.00
Contingency 5,000.00
TOTAL $167,000.00
Admin (CV 2/3): $16,621
TOTAL (CV 2/3): $247,461.00
DATE: July 5, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Amy Augustine, AICP City Planner
RE: Resolution 22-33 Amending Community Development Block Grants (CV-2/3) Allocation for Microenterprise Loans and Grants to instead increase the budget for Utica Park kitchen improvements and to construct new ADA Bathrooms in support of the commercial kitchen
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution 22-33 amending the City’s Community Development Block Grant (CV-2/3) Allocation for Microenterprise Loans and Grants to instead increase the budget for Utica Park kitchen improvements and to construct new ADA Bathrooms in support of the commercial kitchen at Utica Park.
BACKGROUND
The City was allocated Covid Relief Funds (aka CARES Act) through three Community Development Block Grants. The second of these was CV-2 in the amount of $197,520 to be used for small business support in the form of grants and loans in response to Covid. The third grant was CV-3 in the amount of $49,941 to upgrade the Utica Park Kitchen to meet commercial standards so that facility could operate as a commercial kitchen serving the public during emergencies. These funds must be spent prior to 12/31/23.
Destination Angels Camp was to implement the programs. However, it was determined that DAC could not undertake federal procurements (for the kitchen), therefore City Staff took on implementing the Utica Kitchen upgrade grant (APA Task Order). To date, a refrigerator and freezer and new shelving has been purchased and installed at the kitchen. The procurement process was completed and a contractor selected to install a generator for the kitchen. Pending completion of an environmental document, the generator award will be brought to the City Council for approval and installation.
For the third grant, guidelines for expending the funds followed the grant award by many months. Upon the release of the implementation guidelines, DAC determined that it would be required to operate as a bank in order to provide the loans and grants under the CV-3 program and withdrew. The City’s options are to return funds under CV-3 or find an alternative use. In upgrading the Utica Park kitchen to commercial status, the City was informed that nearby bathrooms are required for a commercial kitchen.
Therefore, staff is recommending using CV-3 to construct new ADA bathrooms at the park (2 stalls).
FISCAL IMPACT
The City will receive the full $247,461 in CARES Act funding under the Round 2/3 grant program under this proposal. No general fund monies are proposed.
ATTACHMENT: Resolution 22-33
Department of Housing and Community Development
Revised 5/11/2022
CDBG-CV2 & CV3 NOFA
RESOLUTION NO. 22-33
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE STANDARD
AGREEMENT FOR THE 2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT PROGRAM CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE ROUND 2 and 3 (CDBG-CV2 and CV3) NOFA DATED DECEMBER 18, 2020
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Angels as follows:
SECTION 1:
The City Council has reviewed and hereby approves the submission to the State of California (“State”) of one or more amendments to its existing CDBG-CV2 and CV3 Standard Agreement with the State numbered 20-CDBG-CV2-3-00247 and 00262 (the “Standard Agreement”) pursuant to the State’s December 2020 CDBG-CV2 and CV3 Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA). The reviewed and approved amendment(s) are presented in Section 2 of this Resolution.
SECTION 2:
The following amendments to the Standard Agreement have been reviewed and approved by the City Council with acknowledgement that all provisions of the Standard Agreement other than those shown in the tables below shall remain unmodified.
Department of Housing and Community Development
Revised 5/11/2022
CDBG-CV2 & CV3 NOFA
Existing Section Reference (if applicable):
Existing Provision:
Microenterprise: $197,520.00
Kitchen Improvements (Refrigeration and Generator): $49,941.00 Total: $247,461
Amended Provision:
Remove Microenterprise: (Reduce from $197,520 to $0.00) Amend the Kitchen Improvements to increase the budget: (Increase from $49,941 to $63,840) – See Attachment A.
Add construction of ADA bathrooms required for a commercial kitchen. Bathrooms in close proximity to the kitchen are required to achieve a commercial kitchen approval. A commercial kitchen is necessary to support the community during emergencies, including Covid. ($183,621 – See Attachment A).
Kitchen Improvements: $63,840.00
Bathrooms: $183,621.00
Total: $247,461
(Add as many tables as necessary to document the requested amendment. Include associated budget changes, if any.)
Department of Housing and Community Development
Revised 5/11/2022
CDBG-CV2 & CV3 NOFA
SECTION 3:
The City acknowledges compliance with all state and federal public participation requirements with respect to the proposed amendments to the Standard Agreement described in Section 2 above.
SECTION 4:
The City hereby authorizes and directs the City Administrator, or designee*, to execute and deliver all applications and/or amendments and act on the City's behalf in all matters pertaining to all such applications and/or amendments.
SECTION 5:
If an amendment to the Standard Agreement is approved as contemplated above, the City Administrator, or designee*, is authorized to enter into, execute, and deliver an amendment to the Standard Agreement and any and all other documentation which may be required by the State from time to time for the purposes of this grant.
SECTION 6:
If an amendment to the Standard Agreement is approved, the City Administrator or designee*, is authorized to sign and submit Funds Requests and all required reporting forms and other documentation as may be required by the State of California from time to time in connection with this grant.
* Important Note: If the designee is signing any application, agreement, amendment, or any other document on behalf of the designated official of the City/County, written proof of designee authority to sign on behalf of such designated official must be included with the Resolution, otherwise the Resolution will be deemed deficient and rejected. Additionally, do not add limitations or conditions on the ability of the signatory or signatories to sign documents, or the Resolution may not be accepted. If more than one party’s approval is required, list them as a signatory. The only exception is for county counsel or city attorney to approve as to form or legality or both, IF such approval is already part of the standard city/county signature block as evidenced by the signed Resolution itself. Inclusions of additional limitations or conditions on the authority of the signer will result in the Resolution being rejected and will require your entity to issue a corrected Resolution prior to the Department issuing a Standard Agreement or any subsequent amendments thereto.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Angels held on July 5, 2022, by the following vote:
Department of Housing and Community Development
Revised 5/11/2022
CDBG-CV2 & CV3 NOFA
[Instruction: Fill in all four (4) vote-count fields below. If none, indicate “0” for that field.] AYES: _______ NOES: _______
ABSENT: _______ ABSTAIN: _______
____________________________________
Alvin Broglio, Mayor
City of Angels City Council
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
City of Angels
I, Rose Beristianos, City Clerk of the City of Angels, State of California, hereby certify the above and foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of a resolution adopted by said City Council on this 5th day of July, 2022 .
___________________________________________
Rose Beristianos, City Clerk of the
City of Angels, State of California
By: _____________________________
Rose Beristianos, City Clerk
(Note: The attesting officer cannot be the person identified in the Resolution as the authorized signer.)
Department of Housing and Community Development
Revised 5/11/2022
CDBG-CV2 & CV3 NOFA
ATTACHMENT A
ATTACHMENT A
CV-2-3
Budget Amendment
Kitchen - CV 2-3 00262
Item Existing Proposed
Commercial refrigeration and delivery $7,291.00 $8,540.00 Generator purchase and installation, panel upgrade $25,000.00 $35,000.00 Cookware/serve ware $5,000.00 $15,000.00
Safety equipment/signage $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Upgrades to meet County standards (shelving) $0.00 $2,300.00 $40,291.00 $63,840.00
Bathroom (2 stalls –ADA) – CV 2/3 00247
Item Proposed Cost
Plans 3,500.00
Grading 2,800.00
Slab 7,500.00
Apron/flatwork 3,000.00
Lumber 3,200.00
Siding 4,200.00
Carpentry 5,600.00
Finish/Site Supervisor 2,500.00
Sheetrock 2,000.00
Hot water 3,500.00
Lighting 500.00
Plumbing 9,500.00
Insulation 800.00
Toilets, Urinal, Sinks (Fixtures) 3,000.00
Commercial ADA Door 1,400.00
Seal concrete floor 500.00
Electrical 4,800.00
Paint 2,800.00
Gutters 1,200.00
Roof 3,200.00
Tie-in to existing utilities 2,000.00
Subtotal each 67,500.00
Overhead/Prevailing Wage 20% 13,500.00
Total each 81,000.00
X2 162,000.00
Contingency 5,000.00
TOTAL $167,000.00
Admin (CV 2/3): $16,621
TOTAL (CV 2/3): $247,461.00
City of Angels Council Meeting
AUGUST 2, 2022 REGULAR: 6E
E. Approve Resolution No. 22-43 Awarding a Contract to Pioneer Electric and Authorizing the City Administrator to Execute said Contract for Purchasing and Installing a Generator at the Utica Park Kitchen in the Amount of $24,830 and Authorizing the City Administrator, Contingent Upon Execution of Revised CDBG Agreements, to Execute a Change order for $5,600 for Fencing, Amy Augustine, City Planner
___________________________________________________________________
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF ANGELS PO Box 667, 200 Monte Verda St. Suite B, Angels Camp, CA 95222 P: (209) 736-2181 DATE: August 2, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Amy Augustine, City Planner
RE: RESOLUTION 22-43 AWARDING A CONTRACT TO PIONEER ELECTRIC AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT FOR PURCHASING AND INSTALLING A GENERATOR AT THE UTICA PARK KITCHEN IN THE AMOUNT OF $24,830 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
ADMINISTRATOR, CONTINGENT UPON EXECUTION OF REVISED CDBG AGREEMENTS, TO EXECUTE A CHANGE ORDER FOR $5,600 FOR FENCING.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve Resolution 22-43 awarding a contract and authorizing the City Administrator to execute said contract for purchasing and installing a generator at the Utica Park kitchen in the amount of $24,830 and authorizing the city administrator, contingent upon execution of revised CDBG agreements, to execute a change order for $5,600 for fencing.
BACKGROUND:
The City was allocated Covid Relief Funds (aka CARES Act) through three Community Development Block Grants (CV-1 and CV2/3). The initial CV 2/3 (00262) grants allocated funds to secure a generator for the Utica Park kitchen to allow for community food service during emergencies. Staff determined that fencing was necessary to secure the generator after installation and is completing an amended CDBG contract to fund fencing (CV-1 amendment – see prior agenda item).
BID ANALYSIS
The City released a Request for Bids (RFB) February 23, 2022, with a response deadline of March 23, 2022. Three bids were received as follows:
Bidder Bid Amount
22kw
Bid Amount
25kw
Bid Amount
26 kw
Fencing Total
Gold Electric 16,937.00 22,253.00 -- Excluded $16,937-
22,253
Pioneer Electric 20,850.00 -- 23,466
(24,830)*
4,600
($5,600)*
$25,450-
28,066-
$30,420.00*
Royal Electric -- 71,200.00 -- 5,800 $77,000
*(Revised 7/15/22 to $30,420.00)
The City Planner and Public Works Superintendent, with assistance from the City Fire Marshal reviewed the proposals.
Gold Electric declined to include fencing stating that it would void the Generac warranty. Upon further investigation with the City’s building official, it was determined that fencing could be installed if it provided sufficient space around the generator to allow for sufficient air flow. Gold Electric did not submit a revised bid. Therefore, Pioneer Electric provided the lowest responsible bid. Staff determined that the 26kw generator would be best suited to the use.
Due to the necessity to amend the scope of the CDBG contracts resulting in a delay from March 23rd to July 15th , Pioneer Electric’s original bid amount for the 26 kw generator and fencing was void. Pioneer was asked to revise the bid in July. The total increased by $2,354 to $30,420. $1,000 of the increase is related to the rising cost of lumber for fencing and the remainder is related to the rising costs of generators. The proposed bid for the generator and fencing is $30,420. Pioneer, with the revision, remains the lowest responsive bidder. Because final contracts have not yet been executed for the CDBG revisions, staff is requesting authorizations for the City Administrator to sign a contract authorizing work to proceed with the proposed kitchen generator for $24,830.00 and later approve a work order for the fencing, in the amount of $5,600, upon execution of the final AMENDED CDGB contracts.
FISCAL IMPACT
None. Purchase and installation costs for the generator are covered by the City’s existing Community Development Block Grant agreement. Purchase and installation costs for the fencing are pending finalizing CDBG contract agreements and will be authorized only upon execution of amended CDBG final agreements. The 2022-23 Fiscal Year Budget already included the associated expenditures and grant reimbursement revenue associated with this project.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution 22-43
B. Pioneer Electric Bid
Admin Service Officer Review and Received _____
Finance Officer Review and Received _________
RESOLUTION 22-43
AWARDING A CONTRACT TO PIONEER ELECTRIC AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE SAID
CONTRACT FOR PURCHASING AND INSTALLING A GENERATOR AT THE UTICA PARK KITCHEN IN THE AMOUNT OF $24,830 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ADMINISTRATO, CONTINGENT UPON EXECUTION OF REVISED CDBG AGREEMENT, TO EXECUTE A CHANGE ORDER FOR $5,600 FOR FENCING WHEREAS, on February 23, 2022, the City released a Request for Bids (RFB) to supply and install a generator at the Utica Park kitchen, posted the RFB on the City’s website and e-mailed the RFB to qualified bidders; and WHEREAS, on March 23, 2022, the City received three bids; and WHEREAS the bids received were within the projected project cost; and WHEREAS, it was determined that Pioneer Electric is the lowest responsible bidder; and WHEREAS Community Development Block Grant funds received by the City provide sufficient funding for the project;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Angels, State of California as follows:
1. Awards the contract to Pioneer Electric pursuant to the scope of work in Attachment A and subject to the contingency included herein; and
2. Authorizes the City Administrator to execute a contract with Pioneer Electric in an amount not to exceed $24,830; and
3. Authorizes the city administrator to execute a change order for $5,600 for fencing upon execution of revised CDBG agreements.
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Abstain:
________________________________
Alvin Broglio, Mayor
ATTEST:
Rose Beristianos
City Clerk
Attachment A
Scope of Work – Pioneer Electric
City of Angels Council Meeting
AUGUST 2, 2022 REGULAR: 6F
F. Approve Resolution No. 22-45 to Purchase APN 60-014-001, Next Door to NAPA Auto for Future Parking and Circulation Improvements for Utica Park and the Downtown Historic District, Amy Augustine, City Planner ___________________________________________________________________ DATE: August 2, 2022
TO: City Council
FROM: Amy Augustine, AICP - City Planner
RE: Resolution 22-45 Authorizing the Purchase of APN 60-014-001 (Next to NAPA Auto) for future parking and circulation improvements
RECOMMENDATION
Approve Resolution 22-45 to purchase APN 60-014-001, next door to NAPA Auto, for future parking and circulation improvements for Utica Park and the downtown historic district.
BACKGROUND
The subject property is identified in Figures 1 and 2.
Figure 1: Subject Property
The subject parcel is identified in the City’s adopted Angels Camp Main Street Plan (COG, Caltrans, Angels Camp, 2017)
As shown, the purpose of the parcel is to provide additional downtown parking and to provide a return loop to downtown. In addition, since the plan was adopted, emergency service vehicles and delivery trucks have identified Sam’s Way as a constraint for entry when the site is used as a community gathering site or resiliency center during emergencies.
At its June 21, 2022, meeting, the City Council, in closed session, discussed the item and directed staff to make an offer on the subject property. A counter-offer was received and accepted by the City Council at the same meeting for a purchase price of $55,000 contingent upon the City preparing a Phase 1 Environmental Hazard assessment. The Phase 1 assessment was prepared at a cost of $2,400 (Nelson Environmental, Atwater) and found no environmental hazards that would preclude purchase. The City has made a deposit of $2,500 toward the purchase and opened escrow. Prior to closing, an official resolution from the City Council is required.
The site currently carries a general plan land use designation and zoning of Historical Commercial. A general plan amendment and rezoning to Public (P) is included on this agenda will be finalized on August 16, 2022, following close of escrow, with approval from the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
Total cost: $55,000 purchase, $2,400 Phase 1 hazard assessment, and closing costs of 1,012.75 = $58,412.75. Funding is from parking in-lieu fees and RSTP (transportation) funds through the Calaveras Council of Governments.
ATTACHMENT:
A. Resolution 22-45
B. Phase I, Environmental Assessment - Available Upon Request at City Hall Figure 2: Excerpt Angels Camp Main Street Plan
RESOLUTION NO. 22-45
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF APN 60-014-001 AND
AUTHORIZING THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO SIGN, AUTHORIZE AND
HAVE RECORDED ALL RELEVANT DOCUMENTS AND AGREEMENTS
WHEREAS, the City of Angels (“City”) has identified Assessor’s Parcel 60-014-001, located next door to Napa Auto on SR 49 in the vicinity of Utica Park, Angels Camp, CA as a parcel targeted to improve historical district circulation and increase parking while additionally improving the ability to use Utica Park as an emergency gathering center for the community; and WHEREAS, the City has completed a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment which concluded that no environmental hazards exist that would preclude a purchase by the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council made an offer on the property which has been accepted; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Angels hereby approves the purchase of APN 60-014-001 and authorizes the City Administrator to sign, authorize and have recorded all relevant documents and agreements to complete the purchase.
The foregoing resolution was introduced and moved for adoption August 2, 2022, by Council member ________________and duly seconded by Council member ______________.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 2nd day of August, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
_____________________________
Alvin Broglio, Mayor
ATTEST:
Rose Beristianos, City Clerk
City of Angels
{CW114639.1} PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT
PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT WITH ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS
THIS PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT WITH ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS (“Agreement”) is entered on July__, 2022, (“Effective Date”) by and between the City of Angels Camp, a California municipal corporation (“Buyer”) and the Estate of Richard E. Wilmhurst (“Seller”). Seller and Buyer may be referred to herein as a “Party” or collectively as the “Parties.” There are no other parties to this Agreement.
RECITALS
A. Seller owns that certain parcel of land with improvements thereon located in the County of Calaveras, Assessor Parcel Number 060-014-001 with the physical address S Main Street, Angles Camp, California 95222, and as further described in the legal description attached and incorporated hereto as Exhibit A (the “Property”).
B. Buyer desires to purchase the Property, and Seller desires to sell the Property, according to the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
C. On June 21, 2022, the City Council for the City of Angels Camp, at a duly noticed meeting, approved the purchase of the Property pursuant to the terms and conditions in this Agreement.
NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1. Sale of Real Property. Seller shall convey the Property to Buyer in consideration of the Purchase Price (defined below) to be paid to Seller by Buyer and in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. The transfer shall include all of Seller’s rights, title and interest in and to all mineral rights, zoning rights, governmental permits and licenses, rights-of-way, roadways and alleyways, reversions, appurtenances, easements, or other rights and privileges used in connection with the beneficial use of, or associated with, the Property.
2. Purchase Price. The purchase price for the Property is Fifty-Five Thousand Dollars ($55,000.00) (the “Purchase Price”). The Purchase Price shall be payable at Closing (as defined below) in cash, cashier’s check, or by wire transfer.
DocuSign Envelope ID: DDC08C64-4B27-49FB-BE99-93A86BFF48EA {CW114639.1} PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT
3. Escrow Instructions.
(a) Escrow Agent. After execution of this Agreement by Seller and Buyer, Buyer shall promptly open an escrow account (the “Escrow”) with Placer Title, Angels Camp Branch (the “Escrow Agent”) by delivering three (3) fully executed counterpart originals of this Agreement to the Escrow Agent. After delivery, Escrow Agent shall sign each counterpart and promptly deliver a fully executed counterpart of this Agreement to each Party. The Parties agree to be bound by the Escrow Agent’s standard form or general provisions and shall execute and deliver to the Escrow Agent such other reasonable or customary supplemental instruments as may be required by Escrow Agent in order to consummate the transaction. This Agreement shall control in the event of any inconsistency between this Agreement and the Escrow Agent’s standard form, general provisions, or any other documentation provided by the Escrow Agent. (b) Escrow Deposit. Within five (5) business days after the Effective Date, Buyer shall deposit with Escrow Agent the sum of Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500. 00), in cashier’s or certified check (the “Escrow Deposit”). The Escrow Deposit shall be nonrefundable to Buyer if Buyer elects to terminate this Agreement after the expiration of the Inspection Period (defined below), unless provisions for refunding the Escrow Deposit to Buyer are provided in this Agreement, such as an event of default by Seller or non-satisfaction of any of the Conditions Precedent (defined below). Upon Closing, the Escrow Deposit shall be credited toward the Purchase Price.
(c) Closing Deadline. Conveyance of the Property (the “Close of Escrow” or “Closing”) is estimated to occur thirty days (30) after the Effective Date. Closing may occur on an earlier date with written notice by both Buyer and Seller, provided that all of the following have been provided to the Escrow Officer on or before the date that is two (2) business days before the scheduled date of the Closing:
(i) Seller’s Delivery Obligations. Seller shall deliver the following into Escrow: (1) a grant deed for the Property, properly executed and notarized (the “Deed”); (2) a duly executed certification to the extent applicable to Seller as required by the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act and its California Revenue and Taxation Code equivalent (together, “FIRPTA”); (3) an affidavit on the Escrow Agent’s standard forms so that the Escrow Agent can delete or modify the standard printed exceptions as to parties in possession, unrecorded liens (including statutory materialmen’s liens), and similar matters; (4) an acknowledged closing statement reflecting the Purchase Price and the closing adjustments and prorations contemplated by this Agreement (the “Closing Statement”); and
DocuSign Envelope ID: DDC08C64-4B27-49FB-BE99-93A86BFF48EA {CW114639.1} PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT
(ii) Buyer’s Delivery Obligations. Buyer shall deliver the following into Escrow: (1) cash for the balance of the Purchase Price and the other obligations to be paid by Buyer pursuant to this Agreement; and (2) an executed counterpart of the Closing Statement. (iii) Simultaneously with or following the Closing, the Parties will execute such additional documents and perform such other acts as will be reasonably required to carry out the intent and purposes of this Agreement.
(d) Close of Escrow. The following are Conditions Precedent that must be delivered to Escrow prior to Closing: (i) written notice from Buyer that the conditions to Closing hereunder have been satisfied; (ii) all deliverables contemplated by Section 3(c) above; and (iii) the Title Policy (defined below) that Escrow Agent is prepared to issue and deliver to Buyer. Once the above conditions are satisfied, the Escrow Agent shall: (1) record the Deed with the Calaveras County Recorder, with the documentary transfer tax shown on a separate paper; (2) deliver the proceeds of the sale to Seller; (3) deliver to Buyer the FIRPTA statement and the Title Policy; (4) pay all costs and expenses as authorized by these instructions and charge each Party’s account for such costs and expenses as required by this Agreement; and (5) deliver to each Party the executed Closing Statement and itemized statement of costs charged to each Party’s account. To comply with Internal Revenue Code § 6045(e), Escrow Agent is designated as the “person responsible for closing the transaction” and also as the “reporting person” for purposes of filing any required information or returns with the Internal Revenue Service.
4. Inspection of the Property.
(a) Tests. Buyer and Buyer’s authorized agents, contractors, employees and designees shall have the right, after the Effective Date and prior to Closing, or until this Agreement is terminated, to enter the Property for the purpose of making such surveys, soil, engineering, geological, environmental and other tests, inspections and measurements, including Phase I Environmental Assessment (the “Tests”) as Buyer deems advisable, provided they are done without cost to Seller and such activities do not unreasonably interfere with Seller. Buyer shall give reasonable written, telephonic, or email advanced notice to Seller of any Tests that Buyer or Buyer’s agents will perform. The notice shall specify the nature of the Tests to be performed, the approximate time the Tests will be performed, and the person or entity performing the Tests. Buyer is responsible for the cost of repairing any damage to the Property caused by Buyer’s inspection activities.
(b) Inspection Period. If Buyer, in its sole discretion, for any reason or no reason at all, decides not to proceed with Closing, Buyer shall have the right at any time within twenty-five (25) calendar days after the Effective Date (the “Inspection Period”) to terminate this Agreement by written notice to Seller. If terminated, Buyer shall provide Seller with copies of all DocuSign Envelope ID: DDC08C64-4B27-49FB-BE99-93A86BFF48EA {CW114639.1} PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT
reports, if any, relating to the Property that Buyer received as a result of the Tests. Buyer makes no warranty or representations as to the accuracy or completeness of these reports. (c) Property Documents. During the Inspection Period, Seller shall make available to Buyer for Buyer’s inspection, within five (5) business days after Buyer’s request, all documents and information in Seller’s possession or control pertaining to the Property or an interest in the Property, including but not limited to any and all leases, liens, tentative and final maps, surveys, plats, title reports, soil reports, assessment and financing district documentation, environmental studies, and entitlement documents (collectively the “Property Documents”). Seller shall not be obligated to disclose to Buyer any appraisal or opinions of the value of the Property, any of Seller’s internal financial analyses, credit analyses business plans, materials relating to Seller’s cost to acquire the Property, or any documents or communications subject to the attorney/client privilege. Buyer acknowledges that the Property Documents are furnished to Buyer solely as a courtesy and Seller has neither verified the accuracy of any statements or other information contained in those documents, nor the qualifications of the persons preparing such information. Inspection of the Property Documents shall be performed at a location agreeable to Seller and Buyer during reasonable business hours. Buyer shall be entitled to copy, at Buyer’s expense, any of the Property Documents it chooses. If this Agreement is terminated prior to Closing, Buyer shall, upon Seller’s request, promptly return to Seller all Property Documents and all copies of those materials delivered to or obtained by Buyer from Seller.
5. Title.
(a) Permitted Exceptions. At Closing, Seller shall convey fee title to the Property to Buyer free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, excepting only: (i) general and special real property taxes and assessments not yet due and payable; (ii) all exceptions to title set forth in the Title Report (defined below), which have been approved by Buyer; (iii) any new or existing community facilities district bonds, special taxes, fire assessment districts, and the like for the Property as approved by Buyer during the Inspection Period; and (iv) any exceptions to title caused by acts or omissions of Buyer (collectively, the “Permitted Exceptions”). (b) Title Report. Seller, at its sole cost and expense, shall deliver to Buyer a current, preliminary title reports for the Property no later than five (5) business days after the Effective Date, together with legible copies of all documents referenced therein as exceptions to title (the “Title Report”). The Title Report shall be issued by Escrow Agent and dated no earlier than thirty (30) days before the Effective Date.
(c) Objections by Buyer. Within ten (10) business days after its receipt of the Title Report, Buyer shall notify Seller, in writing, of any objection that Buyer has to the title exceptions reflected in the Title Report (the “Buyer Objection Notice”). Buyer’s failure to timely deliver to DocuSign Envelope ID: DDC08C64-4B27-49FB-BE99-93A86BFF48EA {CW114639.1} PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT