Agenda packet — Glendale City Council, August 29, 2023

A G E N D A

GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor
Glendale, CA 91206
Meetings

are

broadcast

live

Glendale

TV,

viewable

Spectrum

Cable,

channel

and

AT&T

U-
verse,

channel

99. Meetings

are

also

streamed

live

high

definition

(HD)

the

City

webpage,
glendaleca.gov/live
,

YouTube.com/myglendale
,

and

Apple

TV,

Roku,

Amazon

Fire,

iOS

and
Android

devices

using

free

app

called

Cablecast

and

choosing

"Glendale

TV"

from

the

menu.

Meetings

are

also

archived

the

City

Website

for

viewing

anytime

glendaleca.gov/agendas
.

Call

(818)

548-4013

for

program

schedules.

For

public

comments

and

questions

during

the
meeting,

call

(818)

937-8100.

Public

comments

specific

agenda

item

will

taken

when

that
agenda

item

discussed.

you

have

any

question

about

matters

the

agenda,

requests

for
assistance, please contact the City Clerk at (818) 548-2090 during regular business hours.

PLEASE TURN OFF CELLULAR PHONES WHILE INSIDE THE MEETING LOCATION In

compliance

with

the

Americans

with

Disabilities

Act

(ADA)

1990,

auxiliary

hearing

aids,

sign
language

translation,

and

Braille

transcripts

are

available

upon

request.

Assisted

listening

devices
are

available

same-day

upon

request.

The

City

Clerk’

office

should

notified

72 hours

(three
business

days)

soon

practicable

for

requests

regarding

sign

language

translation

and
Braille

transcription

services.

All

documents

open

session

items

this

agenda

that

are
received

less

than

72 hours

prior

this

meeting,

and

are

public

records,

will

available

for

review
in the Office of the City Clerk, 613 E. Broadway, RM 110, Glendale, CA 91206.

Translation

services

are

provided

for

meetings

through

the

use

bilingual

staff

for

speakers

who
wish

utilize

the

service

available.

Speakers

should

state

their

request

contacting

the

City
Clerk’s

office

(818)

548-2090,

least

72 hours

prior

the

scheduled

meeting

soon

as
practicable.

Please

specify

the

language

for

which

you

require

translation.

The

exclusive

use

City
provided

interpreters

not

required

and

persons

are

welcome

use

their

own

interpreter

speak
in their native language.

AUGUST 29, 2023

ROLL CALL

1. CLOSED SESSION
– 1:00 PM ( To Commence at 4:00 PM)
a.

Conference with Legal Counsel - Pending Litigation: Sadeghi v. City of Glendale, LASC Case No. 20STCV34372
b.

Conference with Legal Counsel - Pending Litigation: Edgarian v. City of Glendale, et

1 TYPED 8/28/2023 12:56:07 PM
08 29 23
CC

al., LASC Case No. 21STCV07056
c.

Conference with real property negotiators. City negotiators attending the closed session are: Roubik Golanian, John Takhtalian, Bradley Calvert, Jason Bradford, Michael J. Garcia, Gillian van Muyden, and Onnig Bulanikian. Property location:
115 & 121 West Wilson Avenue. Negotiating Parties: Lillie S Makhanian Trust.

Instructions to the negotiator(s) will concern the price and terms for the acquisition of property

2. REGULAR BUSINESS AGENDA
– 6:00 PM
Roll Call
a.

Flag Salute: Mayor Dan Brotman
b.

Invocation: Suzie Abajian, City Clerk
c.

Report of the City Clerk, re: Posting of Agenda. The Agenda for the August 29, 2023 Regular Meeting of the Glendale City Council was Posted on August 24, 2023, on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.

3. PRESENTATIONS AND APPOINTMENTS
a.

Agenda Preview for the Meetings of Tuesday, September 5, 2023 b.

Commendation for Talia Hovsepian, California Bears Youth Hockey Club c.

Identification of Nominating Panel for Building and Fire Board of Appeals Commission (Kassakhian/Devine)
d.

Appointment of Ara Hatamian to the Civil Service Commission (Brotman/Devine, 08/22/23)

4. CONSENT ITEMS
(Including Minutes)
The following are Routine and May be Acted Upon by One Motion. Any Member of Council or the Audience Requesting Separate Consideration May do so by Making Such Request Before Motion is Proposed.
a.

City Clerk, re: Minutes of the Special City Council and Regular City Council Meetings of August 22, 2023
b.

Glendale Water and Power, re: Amendment No. 1 to the Existing Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Carollo Engineers, Inc. for the Development of the 2023 Water Master Plan

1. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute Amendment No. 1 to the existing Professional Services Agreement (PSA), Contract No. 8002074, with Carollo Engineers, Inc., to increase the contract amount by $44,217 and to include hydraulic model calibration and age-based asset replacement plan within their Scope of Work, for a new not-to-exceed amount of $188,404
c.

Public Works, re: Urban Forestry Tree Planting Grant Continuation

1. Resolution of Appropriation in the amount of $292,500 to begin Caltrans tree planting grant activity in FY 2023-24
d.

Public Works, re: Professional Services Agreement for Franchise and Permitted Hauler Performance, Fees, and Legislative Compliance Audit

1. Motion authorizing the City Manager or a designee to enter into and execute a professional services agreement with R3 Consulting Group, Inc. for Franchise and

2 TYPED 8/28/2023 12:56:07 PM
08 29 23
CC

Permitted Hauler Performance, Fees, and Legislative Compliance Audit in the amount of $593,446 for five years
e.

Police Department, re: Allocation from the Board of State and Community Corrections, Request to Accept the Disbursement of $162,884 as Approved by the Budget Act of 2022 for the Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant Program

1. Motion to accept the disbursement of $162,884 as approved by the Budget Act of 2022 that is to be allocated by the Board of State and Community Corrections

2. Resolution of Appropriation
f.

Public Works, re: Pacific Park Playground and Pool Shade Structure Project

1. Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a construction contract with ARC Construction, Inc., for the Pacific Park Playground and Pool Shade Structure Project, Specification No.3853R, in the amount of $2,377,902, plus a 10% contingency $237,790

2. Resolution of Appropriation for the funding of the Pacific Park Playground and Pool Shade Structure Project
g.

Public Works, re: Public Works Department Building Maintenance and Repair Services

1. Motion Awarding a Contract to AZ Tech Elevator Company (AZ Tech) for Citywide Elevator Systems Maintenance and Repairs services per Specification No. 3945 for the not-to-exceed amount of $702,930 for five-years and directing the City Manager or a designee to execute the contract

2. Motion Awarding a Contract to R&S Overhead Doors of Commerce, Inc. (R&S) for Citywide Industrial Doors and Gates Maintenance and Repairs services per Specification No. 3946 for the not-to-exceed amount of $1,392,735 for five-years and directing the City Manager or a designee to execute the contract h.

City Attorney, re: Consumer Price Index (CPI) Adjustment to Campaign Finance Contribution Limits

1. Resolution Adjusting the Campaign Contribution Limits of $1,190 in the amount of Consumer Price Index (CPI) to $1,340
i.

Management Services, re: Humanitarian Aid For Glendale Sister City, Martuni in Armenia

1. Motion directing the City Manager to take the necessary actions to provide Humanitarian Aid for Glendale Sister City, Martuni in Armenia

5. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS

6. COMMUNITY EVENT ANNOUNCEMENTS (3-Minutes)

7. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES

8. ACTION ITEMS
a.

Public Works, re: San Fernando Road Beautification Project Alternatives

1. Motion accepting staff’s recommendation to proceed with the design and implementation of Alternative 2A for the San Fernando Road Beautification Project b.

Glendale Water and Power, re: Professional Services Agreement with Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. (E3) to assist Glendale Water and Power (GWP) with the Development of a Plan to Increase Solar Penetration and Develop Additional Distributed Energy Resources (DER) (Continued from 08/22/23 CC Meeting)

3 TYPED 8/28/2023 12:56:07 PM
08 29 23
CC

Community Development, re: Landlord/Tenant Ad-Hoc Committee Update on Work Plan (Continued from 08/22/2023 CC Meeting)

1. Motion to approve Landlord/ Tenant Ad-Hoc Committee’s suggestions on the Rental Rights Program, with the intention of revisiting these suggestions in a redlined version of the ordinance at a subsequent council session

2. Motion to approve Rental Rights Marketing Strategy

3. Motion to provide direction on the desire to establish a Dispute Resolution/Mediation program

9. HEARINGS

10. REPORTS - INFORMATION

11. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS

12. DISCUSSION OF COUNCILMEMBER FUTURE AGENDA REQUESTS

13. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Discussion is Limited to Items NOT a Part of this Agenda. Each Speaker is Allowed 5 minutes.

Council May Question or Respond to The Speaker But There Will be no Debate or Decision.

The City Manager May Refer the Matter to the Appropriate Department for Investigation and Report.

14. NEW BUSINESS

15. ADJOURNMENT

4 TYPED 8/28/2023 12:56:07 PM
08 29 23
CC

5 of 289

1 M I N U T E S
SPECIAL MEETING: GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor
Glendale, CA 91206
AUGUST 22, 2023
The Special Public Meeting of the Glendale City Council convened in the City Hall Council Chambers, in said City, at 10:53 p.m. on the above date, pursuant to a call for such meeting signed by the City Clerk of the City Council, and on file with the City Clerk, a copy of which is as follows:

August 21, 2023
Date
A SPECIAL PUBLIC MEETING of the City Council is hereby called to meet at 6:00 PM on Tuesday, August 22, 2023, in the Council Chamber, 613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor, Glendale, CA 91206 to consider the following item(s) of business, to wit;

1. Request to Agendize Consideration of a Revision to the Council Resolution Establishing the Selection Process for Appointments to the Boards and Commissions to Revise the Effective Date of Implementation of the Panel System Written Notice of said meeting was given, which Notice consisted of a copy of the foregoing Call, and was served on each Member of the Council not joining in the Call, and upon the in said City not less than 24 hours before the time fixed in said Call for said meeting, as follows:

Upon Elen Asatryan at 5:00 p.m. August 21, 2023 Glendale, CA Upon Paula Devine at 5:00 p.m. August 21, 2023 Glendale, CA Upon Ardy Kassakhian at 5:00 p.m. August 21, 2023 Glendale, CA Upon Ara Najarian at 5:00 p.m. August 21, 2023 Glendale, CA Upon Dan Brotman at 5:00 p.m. August 21, 2023 Glendale, CA Mayor Brotman called the meeting to order at 10:53 p.m.

ROLL CALL
- All Present
- Report of the City Clerk of the City Council, re: Posting of Agenda. The Agenda for the Tuesday, August 22, 2023 Special Public Meeting of the City Council was posted on August 21, 2023 on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.

Mike Garcia, City Attorney
Public Comments:

Allan Durham
Damian Sullivan
Tom O’Shaughnessy
Carl Fieler
6 of 289

2 Devine, Kassakhian, Brotman
Asatryan, Najarian
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Elizabeth Luce
Motion Not to Agendize the Item
Moved: Devine Seconded: Kassakhian
ADJOURNMENT- 11:20 p.m.

Moved: Kassakhian Seconded: Najarian
Mayor of the City of Glendale
City Clerk of the City of Glendale
7 of 289

1 4A

M I N U T E S

GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor Glendale, CA 91206
AUGUST 22, 2023
ROLL CALL – Absent: Kassakhian

1. CLOSED SESSION – 3:15 p.m.
a. Public Employee Performance Evaluation – City Manager b. Conference with Labor Negotiators: The City-designated negotiator attending the closed session is: Mayor Dan Brotman. Unrepresented Employee Position: City Manager
c. Public Employee Performance Evaluation – City Attorney d. Conference with Labor Negotiators: The City-designated negotiator attending the closed session is: Mayor Dan Brotman. Unrepresented Employee Position: City Attorney
e. Conference with Labor Negotiators. The City-designated negotiators attending the closed session are: Roubik Golanian, John Takhtalian, Michael J. Garcia, Gillian van Muyden, Paula Adams, Aymee Martin, and Jason Bradford. The names of the employee organizations are: Glendale City Employees’ Association, Glendale Management Association, Glendale Police Officers’ Association, Glendale Fire Fighters Association and I.B.E.W., Local 18, Unit 40.

Unrepresented Employees: Executives and Confidential Employees f. Conference with Legal Counsel - Pending Litigation: In Re Aqueous Film- Forming Products Liability Litigation, U.S.D.C. (South Carolina) Case No. 2:18 MN 2873
g. Public Employment – Attorneys
h. Conference with Legal Counsel - Pending Litigation: Hadadian v. City of Glendale, L.A.S.C. Case No. BC 722321
i. Conference with Legal Counsel - Pending Litigation: Friends of Rockhaven v.

City of Glendale et al., L.A.S.C. Case No. 23STCP01092
j. Conference with real property negotiators: Property location – Real property generally located at the terminus of New York Avenue near Park Vista Drive, commonly referred to as “Mountain Oaks.” Negotiating parties: F.E. & M. Inc.

Employee’s Defined Contribution Plan Trust dated July 10, 1984. Agency negotiators attending the closed session are: Roubik Golanian, John Takhtalian, Michael J. Garcia, Gillian van Muyden, Bradley Calvert, Jason Bradford and Onnig Bulanikian. Instructions to the negotiator(s) will concern the price and terms for the acquisition of property
City Attorney Mike Garcia indicated that action is anticipated on items 1g and 1h. Council recessed to Closed Session at 3:18 p.m.

2. REGULAR BUSINESS AGENDA – 6:07 PM
Roll Call – All Present
a. Flag Salute: Mayor Dan Brotman
b. Invocation: Suzie Abajian, City Clerk
c. Report of the City Clerk, re: Posting of Agenda. The Agenda for the August 22, 2023 Regular Meeting of the Glendale City Council was Posted on August 16, 2023 on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.
8 of 289

2 Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

3. PRESENTATIONS AND APPOINTMENTS
a. Agenda Preview for the Meetings of Tuesday, August 29, 2023 Asst. City Manager John Takhtalian provided the preview. b. Proclamation designating August 26, 2023 as Women’s Equality Day Members of the Commission of the Status of Women
Members of the YWCA

4. CONSENT ITEMS (Including Minutes)
The following are Routine and May be Acted Upon by One Motion. Any Member of Council or the Audience Requesting Separate Consideration May do so by Making Such Request Before Motion is Proposed.

Item 4b pulled for separate consideration.
a. City Clerk, re: Minutes of the Regular City Council meeting on August 15, 2023 Moved: Najarian Seconded: Devine
b. City Manager, re: Approval of FY 2023-24 Workplan
Staff Comment:

Roubik Golanian, City Manager

1. Motion to approve FY 2023-24 Workplan
Moved: Asatryan Seconded: Najarian
c. Community Services and Parks, re: Community Impact Arts Grant (CIAG) program funds from the Los Angeles County Department of Arts and Culture for the 2023 Summer Concerts in the Park

1. Motion accepting Community Impact Arts Grant (CIAG) program funds in the amount of $9,200 from the Los Angeles County Department of Arts and Culture for the 2023 Summer Concerts in the Park; and authorizing the City Manager or a designee to execute all agreements, certifications, and documents necessary to accept and implement the funds
Moved: Najarian Seconded: Devine
9 of 289

3 Asatryan, Devine, Kassakhian, Najarian, Brotman
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

2. Resolution 23-119 of Appropriation to appropriate $9,200 in CIAG program funds from the Los Angeles County Department of Arts and Culture for the 2023 Summer Concerts in the Park
Moved: Najarian Seconded: Devine

5. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS
Councilmember Devine and Mayor Brotman nominated Ara Hatamian for the Civil Service Commission.

Councilmember Kassakhian invited the public to watch a documentary film at the Laemmle Theatres called “Aurora’s Sunrise,” based on the life of Aurora Mardiganian, an Armenian Genocide survivor. He asked to adjourn the meeting in memory of former Mayor Richard “Rick” Reyes. Councilmembers spoke fondly of Mr. Reyes and sent their condolences to the family of the deceased. Kassakhian commended Araik Sinanian, who coordinated the Navasartian Festival 2023.

Mayor Brotman thanked the Filipino American Business Association of Glendale (FABAG) and city staff for conducting an ADU Workshop.

City Manager Roubik Golanian updated council regarding the recent tropical storm. He also provided an update on council’s direction on aiding the people of Artsakh.

Police Chief Manny Cid updated council regarding the taskforce that was recently established to combat the flashmob burglaries that is happening in the region. Council acknowledged the efforts of the Police Department.

6. COMMUNITY EVENT ANNOUNCEMENTS (3-Minutes)
Allan Durham
Anita Karapetyan
Ani Torosyan

7. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES

8. ACTION ITEMS
a. Glendale Water and Power, re: Professional Services Agreement with Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. (E3) to assist Glendale Water and Power (GWP) with the Development of a Plan to Increase Solar Penetration and Develop Additional Distributed Energy Resources (DER)
Staff Comments:

Roubik Golanian, City Manager
Mike Garcia, City Attorney
Scott Mellon, Asst. General Manager
Aneta Badalian, Business Transformation Manager
Presenting:

Herbert Garcia, Public Benefits Charge Marketing Manager 10 of 289

4 Devine, Najarian
Asatryan, Brotman
None
Kassakhian
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Public Comment:

Eric Cutter, Energy and Environmental Economics
Mike Borisov
Cole Bazemore
Jackie Gish
Kate Unger
Jack Walworth
Elise Kalfayan
David Dowell
David Eisenberg

1. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. (E3) to assist GWP with the Development of a Plan to Increase Solar Penetration and Develop Additional Distributed Energy Resources (DER) in the not-to-exceed amount of $335,875
Moved: Najarian Seconded: Devine
Motion did not pass. Item to be continued to next week’s meeting. b. Community Development, re: Landlord/Tenant Ad-Hoc Committee Update on Work Plan
Staff Comments:

Roubik Golanian, City Manager
Peter Zovak, Asst. Director of Community Development – Housing Mike Garcia, City Attorney
Lucy Varpetian, Principal Assistant City Attorney
Presenting:

Sipan Zadoryan, Senior Housing Analyst
Public Comments:

Carmen Arom
Sevak Sohrabian
Max Sherman
Mathew Buck
Eddie Minassian
Susan Broussalian
Ramella Eraghi
Frank Gallo
Greg Astoryan
Javier Beltran
Sevak Keshishyan
Herbert Molano
Teal Marchande
11 of 289

5 Najarian, Brotman
None
Asatryan, Devine
Kassakhian
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Items to be continued to next week’s meeting.

1. Motion to approve Landlord/Tenant Ad-Hoc Committee’s suggestions on the Rental Rights Program, with the intention of revisiting these suggestions in a redlined version of the ordinance at a subsequent council session

2. Motion to approve Rental Rights Marketing Strategy

3. Motion to provide direction on the desire to establish a Dispute Resolution/Mediation program
Council recessed at 10:48 p.m. for five minutes. Council called to order the Special City Council Meeting at 10:53 p.m. and reconvened thereafter. Asatryan and Devine left the council chambers at 11:20 p.m.

9. HEARINGS

10. REPORTS - INFORMATION

11. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS

12. DISCUSSION OF COUNCILMEMBER FUTURE AGENDA REQUESTS

13. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Discussion is Limited to Items NOT a Part of this Agenda. Each Speaker is Allowed 5 minutes. Council May Question or Respond to The Speaker But There Will be no Debate or Decision. The City Manager May Refer the Matter to the Appropriate Department for Investigation and Report.

Araik Sinanian
Jordan Henry
Allen Dish
Steven Dunwoody
Allan Durham
Frank Higginbotham

14. NEW BUSINESS
Mayor Brotman passed the gavel to Mayor Pro Tem Kassakhian. a. Motion to enter into and execute a Legal Services Agreement with the law firms of Baron & Budd, P.C. and Cossich, Sumich, Parsiola & Taylor LLC for the representation of Glendale’s interests in the pending per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) litigation in the matter entitled in Re Aqueous Film-Forming Products Liability Litigation, Case No. 2:18 MN 2873, before the US District Court, District of South Carolina, as well as represent the interests of Glendale in any upcoming PFAS-related litigation.

Moved: Najarian Seconded: Brotman
12 of 289

6 Najarian, Brotman
None
Asatryan, Devine
Kassakhian
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
b. Motion to resolve the lawsuit entitled Vahik Haddadian v. City of Glendale, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 722321 in exchange for a full release of all claims in the amount of $825,000.

Moved: Najarian Seconded: Brotman

15. ADJOURNMENT – 11:46 p.m., adjourned in memory former Mayor Rick Reyes Moved: Kassakhian Seconded: Najarian
Mayor of the City of Glendale
City Clerk of the City of Glendale
13 of 289

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Amendment No. 1 to the Existing Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Carollo Engineers, Inc. for the Development of the 2023 Water Master Plan.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for August 29, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The intent of this report is to request the approval of City Council to execute Amendment No. 1 to the existing Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Carollo Engineers, Inc., by increasing the PSA amount by $44,217 to include hydraulic model calibration and age-based asset replacement plan within their original Scope of Work for the development of the 2023 Water Master Plan.

COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Operational Efficiency: The Water Master Plan will be used as a strategic planning guide for optimizing the operation and maintenance of the City’s water system which will enable the City to continue providing reliable and high-quality water.

RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute Amendment No. 1 to the existing PSA with Carollo Engineers, Inc., to increase the contract amount by $44,217 and to include hydraulic model calibration and age-based asset replacement plan within their Scope of Work. The new not to exceed amount of the PSA will be $188,404. 14 of 289

24d
4 3
8 7

BACKGROUND
Master planning for municipal water services is a dynamic process driven by new development, revitalization, supply availability, drought management, rapid changes in treatment technologies and increasingly restrictive federal and state water quality regulations. The goal of developing a Water Master Plan is to provide GWP with a strategic planning guide for optimizing the operation, maintenance and capital projects of its potable and recycled water systems which will enable the City to continue providing reliable and high-quality water.

In March 2016, Carollo Engineers, Inc. (Carollo) completed the 2016 Water Master Plan for the City of Glendale (City) which has been used by GWP as the guide in the planning, development, and budgeting of potable and recycled water system improvement projects required to meet system performance criteria for existing customers, as well as to support anticipated growth of water demand.

Long-term and near-term demand projections need to be updated every five to seven years. In order to accurately plan water system improvements, expansions, and capital outlays, a Water Master Plan update is necessary to re-evaluate long-term trends for the projected demand.

On May 2, 2023, the City entered into and executed the PSA with Carollo for an amount not to exceed $144,187 to provide technical advisement and hydraulic modeling services to GWP staff to update and prepare the 2023 Water Master Plan.

ANALYSIS
During the development phase, Carollo identified three additional tasks deemed necessary for a complete and comprehensive 2023 Water Master Plan. •Task 1: Hydraulic Model Calibration
•Task 2: Hydraulic Modeling Technical Memorandum
•Task 3: Age-Based Replacements and Rehabilitation (R&R) Plan The current hydraulic model was developed and last calibrated in 2018. The calibration process involves making incremental adjustments to the hydraulic model to bring modeling results into alignment with data collected in the field during a predetermined calibration period. This improves confidence in modeling results, which translates into greater confidence in the scheduling and budgeting for capital projects.

The hydraulic modeling technical memorandum ™ will help the City incorporate hydraulic modeling results into the Master Plan. The TM will also serve as a historical document for use in future hydraulic modeling efforts and updates. The TM will be stamped and signed by a professional engineer, establishing the credibility, accuracy, and viability of the Master Plan.

The R&R Plan makes recommendations for periodic replacement of infrastructure due to age and condition. As a mature water distribution system, the bulk of capital investments will continue to focus on replacement and renewal rather than growth. 15 of 289

34d
4 3
8 7
The R&R Plan will give the City confidence in scheduling and budgeting replacement projects and will serve as a tool for identifying the most vulnerable components in the system for prioritization.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Not Applicable.

FISCAL IMPACT
The increase in the contract with Carollo Engineers Inc. for the additional tasks will cost $44,217. The GWP budget can absorb this cost and therefore no new appropriation is being requested at this time. The funding is outlined below:

Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$188,404 GL: 43110-5920-GWP-4700-P0000 Water Works Depreciation Fund

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This item is to amend an existing contract to continue professional technical services provided to the City and is not a project for the purposes of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and thus not subject to CEQA review.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
In accordance with the City Campaign Finance Ordinance No. 5744, the following are the names and business addresses of the members of the board of directors, the chairperson, CEO, COO, CFO, Subcontractors and any person or entity with more than ten percent (10%) interest in the company proposed for contract in this agenda item report:

Officers of Carollo Engineers, Inc.:

Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Balakrishnan
Narayanan
President/
CEO and
Chairman of
the Board
2795 Mitchell Drive Walnut
Creek
CA 94598
Michael W.

Barnes
Secretary 2795 Mitchell Drive Walnut
Creek
CA 94598
David Sobeck, III Director 4600 E. Washington
Street, Suite 500
Phoenix AZ 85034
16 of 289

44d
4 3
8 7
Vincent Hart Director 101 E. Kennedy
Blvd., Suite 700
Tampa FL 33602
Ashwani K.

Wason
Treasurer/CFO 3150 Bristol Street,
Suite 500
Costa
Mesa
CA 92626
James P.

Hagstrom
Director 870 Market Street,
Suite 728
San
Francisco
CA 94102
Russell A.

Wachter
Director 4600 E. Washington
Street, Suite 500
Phoenix AZ 85034
Carollo Engineers, Inc. does not have any shareholder that holds a ten percent (10%) or more interest in the company.

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: Authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to the existing PSA with Carollo to increase the contract amount by $44,217 and to include hydraulic model calibration and age-based asset replacement plan within their Scope of Work, for a new not to exceed amount of $188,404.

Alternative 2: Not to authorize the action requested herein. This will result in a less comprehensive and reliable Water Master Plan for GWP staff to use as guidance in operational and capital improvements planning in the next five years.

Alternative 3: Consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Richard Ruyle, Water Services Administrator
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS / ATTACHMENTS
None.
17 of 289

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member ________________________________, seconded by Council Member __________________________________, that the Council of the City of Glendale hereby authorizes the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into Amendment No. 1 to the existing Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Carollo Engineers, Inc. (Contract No. 8002074) with the City of Glendale to increase the contract amount by $44,217 and to include hydraulic model calibration and age-based asset replacement plan within their Scope of Work, for a new not-to-exceed amount of $188,404. The City Manager, or his designee, is authorized to execute said Amendment No. 1 subject to approval by the City Attorney.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
18 of 289

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Urban Forestry Tree Planting Grant Continuation

1. Resolution of Appropriation in the amount of $292,500 to begin Caltrans tree planting grant activity in FY 2023-24

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for August 29, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Department of Public Works was awarded a Clean California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) grant in FY 2022-23 and was authorized by the City Council on September 27, 2022 to execute a grant agreement with the grantor. The grant will fund the planting of 750 additional trees. A Resolution of Appropriation is needed to appropriate grant funds and start this tree planting program in the current fiscal year.

COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Economic Development: These programs will plant 750 additional street and park trees, helping the city increase its tree canopy towards its 25% coverage goal and ensuring the attractiveness and functionality for the Glendale public and businesses. A large, healthy urban forest is a critical component of a sustainable community due to trees’ positive impact on health, pollution reduction, and water savings.

Mobility/Traffic & Pedestrian Safety: Shade from trees encourages pedestrian use of public sidewalks.

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council approve the Resolution of Appropriation in the amount of $292,500 to begin the Caltrans grant funded tree planting project in FY 2023-24.

BACKGROUND
The Glendale Public Works Department is responsible for the maintenance of the city’s street and parks trees. This maintenance is performed with a strategic combination of in- house resources and a City Tree Maintenance Services contract. The use of State 19 of 289

24c
4 4
2 4
funding allows the department to make better utility of its allocated budget.

On February 1, 2022, the Departments of Public Works and Community Services and Parks submitted a grant application for funding for the planting of 750 trees from Caltrans’ Clean California program. On March 1, 2022, the city was awarded this grant worth $292,500. A Resolution on September 27, 2022, authorized participation. Reimbursable funding is now requested for FY 2023-24 to begin grant activities.

ANALYSIS
The Caltrans Clean California grant program is open to agencies statewide. Like the separate Cal Fire grant that Council approved and appropriated last year, trees must be planted in California EPA-defined ‘Disadvantaged Communities.’ Public Works selected four census tracts to focus planting efforts due to their low canopy coverage and high quantity of vacant planting locations. These four encompass an area bounded by Brand Blvd in the west, Windsor Street to the south, Broadway to the north, and the SR-134 and SR-2 freeways in the east. A total of 750 trees will be planted as part of this project. We aim to begin planting within parks and along streets in the fall and winter of 2023-2024.

Based on current contract rates, planting 750 trees at the larger 24-gallon size will cost $292,500. This planting will be performed by West Coast Arborist who currently maintains the city’s street trees and park trees.

The project requires matching funds in the form of staff time during the site selection stage amounting to $27,500. Table 1 summarizing these quantities over the course of the project is included below. Direct funding is reimbursable to the city upon approval of progress reports. Reimbursements for grant-related expenses will be disbursed quarterly.

Table 1: Clean California Grant Costs
Unit Cost Quantity Total Amount Funding Type
Trees $390 tree 750 trees $292,500 Direct
Staff time Varies 250 hours $27,500 Matching
Total $320,000
The annual breakdown of grant direct funded costs and activities is indicated in Table 2.

Table 2: Grant Costs Per Fiscal Year, Clean California
Grant Activity 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025
Tree planting, 24-box size
(WCA unit price $390/tree) $0 $292,500 $0
TOTAL $0 $292,500 $0
A Resolution of Appropriation for $292,500 is needed for activities within FY 2023-24.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
The grant plantings will greatly increase the tree canopy in Glendale, benefiting all 20 of 289

34c
4 4
2 4
residents, and especially communities located within the grant boundaries. Outreach materials will be targeted to communities and residences within the grant boundaries.

Grant funds dedicated to these neighborhoods will enable Public Works’ annual tree planting program to increase tree quantities in non-granted areas of the city.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Caltrans grant of $292,500 was not included as a part of the FY 2023-24 budget.

The project requires matching funds in the amount of $27,500, which is already appropriated in the form of General Fund staff time which is spent on the completion of the project. Therefore, staff is requesting an appropriation in the amount of $292,500 from State Grant Revenue. The existing appropriation along with the appropriation request is outlined below.

Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$27,500 GL: Various-1010-PWD-7507-P0000 General Fund
Requesting Appropriation
Amount From (Account String) To (Account String) Funding Source $292,500 GL: 32610-2160-PWD-
0020-P0000
PL: PWD01096AG
GL: 43110-2160-PWD-
0020-P0000
PL: PWD01096AG
State Grant
Revenue

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This item is considered a ministerial activity and therefore, not subject to CEQA review.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
Not applicable to this report.

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: Approve the Resolution of appropriation in the amount of $292,500 to begin Caltrans tree planting grant activity in FY 2023-24; 750 new additional trees will be planted in FY 2023-24.

Alternative 2: Take no action, which will result in no reimbursable grant activities, meaning 750 additional trees would not be planted.

Alternative 3: Consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
21 of 289

44c
4 4
2 4
Prepared by:

Loren Klick, Urban Forester
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS / ATTACHMENTS
None.
22 of 289

23 of 289

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Professional Services Agreement for Franchise and Permitted Hauler Performance, Fees, and Legislative Compliance Audit
1) Motion authorizing the City Manager or a designee to enter into and execute a professional services agreement with R3 Consulting Group, Inc. for Franchise and Permitted Hauler Performance, Fees, and Legislative Compliance Audit in the amount of $593,446 for five years.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for August 29, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A professional services agreement (PSA) is needed for a consultant to provide Franchise and Permitted Hauler Performance, Fees, and Legislative Compliance Audit.

Following a Request for Proposals (RFP) process, the consulting team of R3 Consulting Group, Inc. was selected to perform the audit work. The proposed PSA with R3 Consulting Group, Inc. will cost a total of $593,446.

The intent of this item is for the City Council to approve the PSA and allow staff to proceed with the audit.
24 of 289

24d
4 4
2 6

COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Financial Sustainability: An audit will check the accuracy of franchise and permitted hauler fee payments to the city, ensuring the stability of various city programs.

Additionally, the audit will check to see that Glendale’s commercial customers are being properly charged for waste management services.

Operational Efficiency: The audit will check that all haulers provide mandatory recycling and organics service and divert construction & demolition debris, to achieve state regulatory compliance.

RECOMMENDATION
Approve a motion authorizing the City Manager, or a designee, to enter into and execute a PSA in the amount of $593,446 for five years.

BACKGROUND
The Public Works Department verifies citywide compliance with Mandatory Commercial Recycling, Assembly Bill 341, Mandatory Organics Recycling, Assembly Bill 1826, and Short-Lived Climate Pollutants, Senate Bill 1383 which are incorporated into Glendale Municipal Code, Chapter 8.44, Refuse, Yard Trimmings and Recyclable Material Collection and Disposal, as well as Chapter 8.56, Solid Waste Disposal.

The four commercial solid waste franchise hauling agreements all include a provision for audits every other year beginning in 2023.

To ensure that both franchise and permitted haulers comply with the GMC and franchise agreements for commercial service, on March 6, 2023, the Public Works Department issued an RFP to obtain proposals from suitably qualified consultants to review hauler performance and compliance. Three consultants submitted responses to the city’s RFP by the April 27, 2023 deadline including MSW Consultants, Moss Adams LLP, and R3 Consulting Group, Inc.

ANALYSIS
The Public Works Department endeavors to hire a consultant familiar with the city’s franchise system and possessing experience auditing haulers to verify compliance with Title 14, Division 7 of California Code of Regulations, Glendale Municipal Code and Glendale’s Franchise Agreement for Business and Multi-Family Solid Waste Collection Service.

The proposals from all three companies were reviewed and evaluated based on the following criteria:
25 of 289

34d
4 4
2 6
•Quality, Clarity & Responsiveness of the Proposal
•Team Experience & Qualifications
•Relevant Project Experience
•Proposed Project Methodology
•Previous Client Satisfaction
•Best Overall Value
All candidates were interviewed to provide additional clarity. The proposed PSA allows the city’s four franchise haulers and permitted haulers (construction and demolition) to be audited in 2023, 2025, and 2027, as described under Section 11.2 of the franchise agreements which reads:
“City may conduct an audit of Contractor at any time. The scope of the audit, and auditor, will be determined by City and the scope may include, but is not limited to, compliance with terms of this Agreement, route maps, customer lists, billing records, weight tickets, AB 939 records and Customer Complaints, Contractor’s payment of fees to City and records which may be relevant in the event of an action under CERCLA or related claims, Customer service levels and Billing, fee payments, Gross Receipts, tonnage, verification of weightings of cost components used in the rate adjustment formula described in Section 9.3.1, and verification of Contractor’s diversion. The first audit, to be performed during 2023, will be based on the Contractor’s reports and records for calendar year 2022. Audits will be performed every other year thereafter (the biennial audit).” The audits will include:
•Walkthrough of Internal Controls
•Review of Reported Tonnages
•Review Franchise and Permit Hauler Fee Payments
•Review Franchise and Permit Hauler Quarterly Reporting Forms •Final Report
The purpose of the audits, as required by the franchise agreements, is to ensure Glendale customers are being accurately charged for commercial waste management services and to make sure optimal customer service for these clients is being maintained. Additionally, the audit will check reports from the haulers to make sure accurate AB 989 fees and Franchise fees are being reported and conveyed to the city.

Lastly, the audit will check to see that the franchise haulers complying with regulations taking all possible measures to divert waste and organics as well as promote and expand their recycling programs. R3 Consulting Group, Inc. is expected to provide recommendations on how these programs and reporting measures may be improved.

The selected proposer is expected to perform a thorough audit of documents and records from the franchise and open permit haulers. They will review quarterly franchise reports and payments, customer billings, regulatory compliance reporting, each of the hauler’s financial systems as well as their customer complaint databases and tracking 26 of 289

44d
4 4
2 6
system. These records will be analyzed both from an accounting standpoint as well as for waste management best practices.

The team evaluating the proposals determined that the proposal submitted from R3 Consulting Group, Inc. ranked highest due to their experience both with financial audits as well as operational audits for franchise haulers. They demonstrated strong knowledge and understanding of state and local regulations as well as familiarization with the financial systems used by the haulers operating in Glendale. Their proposal demonstrated the potential for creative and productive measures to boost diversion for commercial customers as well as improvements to reporting metrics. The proposer’s ranking are as follows:

Ranking Audit Firm Overall Score
1 R3 Consulting Group, Inc. 90
2 MSW Consultants 83
3 Moss Adams, LLP 80
The selection committee found R3 Consulting Group, Inc. to be the most qualified firm to provide this service to the city. The recommended five-year agreement with R3 Consulting Group, Inc. is for $593,446.

The five-year contract with R3 Consulting Group, Inc. is to complete three biennial audits with a portion of the cost being offset by a $30,000 commitment from each of the four franchise haulers, for a total of $120,000:

Audit Year Cost Franchise Hauler
Payment
Potential City
Cost
First - 2023 $189,260 $120,000 $69,260
Second - 2025 $190,330 $120,000 $70,330
Third - 2027 $213,855 $120,000 $93,855
Total $593,446* $360,000 $233,446*
* Total includes cents rounded
Project Description: Franchise and Permitted Hauler Performance, Fees, and Legislative Compliance Audit
RFP Approved: March 6, 2023
Advertisement Method: City website and email
RFP Issued: March 6, 2023
RFP Due Date: April 27, 2023
27 of 289

54d
4 4
2 6
Company Name(s) and
Proposal Amount(s):

R3 Consulting Group, Inc.: $593,446
Consultant(s): R3 Consulting Group, Inc.

New / Existing
Consultant(s):

Existing
Procurement Method
(RFP / SS):

RFP

Contract Term:

5 years

Project Begins:

July 1, 2023

Project Ends:

June 30, 2028

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
An important part of the audit scope is making sure the four franchise haulers are providing adequate customer service outreach to optimize their respective recycling and waste reduction programs.

FISCAL IMPACT
The PSA for a consultant to provide Franchise and Permitted Hauler Performance, Fees, and Legislative Compliance Audit for five years will cost $593,446. The cost of $189,260 in year-one was approved as a part of the FY 2023-24 budget. Therefore, no new appropriation is being requested at this time. Funding for the remaining PSA years will be requested as a part of the city’s annual budget process. The City Council approved funding is outlined below:

Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$ 189,260 GL: 43110-5300-PWD-7523-P0000 Refuse Disposal Fund

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
CEQA does not apply to projects where the lead agency determines "with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment." CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs.) § 15061(b)(3).

Here, the action involves hiring an auditor to evaluate franchise and permitted hauler performance. There is no possibility that the action may have a significant effect on the environment.
28 of 289

64d
4 4
2 6

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
The names and businesses address of the members of the board of directors, the chairperson, CEO, COO, CFO, Subcontractors and any other person or entity with more than 10% interest in the company proposed for contract in this Agenda Item Report are attached in Exhibit 1 in accordance with City Campaign Finance Ordinance N. 5744.

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: Approve the attached motion authorizing the City Manager to execute a PSA with R3 Consulting Group, Inc. for audit performance, fees, and legislative compliance of all haulers for five years for $593,446.

Alternative 2: Do not approve the attached motion. The audit will not be performed and there will be uncertainty regarding the performance, finances and regulatory compliance of the city’s franchises.

Alternative 3: City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Regina Wheeler, Recycling Coordinator
Etienne Ozorak, Integrated Waste Superintendent
Daniel Hardgrove, Assistant Director of Public Works
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS / ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Disclosure - Campaign Finance Ordinance - Contractors and Subcontractors 29 of 289

4d
30 of 289

9 3
9 1
MOTION
Moved by Council Member _________________________________, seconded by Council Member _____________________________, that the Council of the City of Glendale hereby:

1. Authorizes the City Manager, or a designee, to enter into and execute a professional services agreement – subject to approval by the City Attorney – with R3 Consulting Group, Inc., for five hundred ninety-three thousand, four hundred forty-six dollars ($593,446) to provide the Franchise and Permitted Hauler Performance, Fees, and Legislative Compliance Audit.

Votes as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

City Clerk
31 of 289

Exhibit 1: Disclosure–Campaign Finance Ordinance–Contractors and Subcontractors The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5744, “Campaign Finance Ordinance,” which became effective on September 9, 2011, and amended it with Ordinance No. 5768, which became effective on March 15, 2012 (“the Ordinance”). The Ordinance prohibits: (1) A Consultant* (including a subConsultant**)― who has a contract with the City of Glendale (“City”), Glendale Successor Agency or Glendale Redevelopment Agency (“GSA”), or the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale (“HA”) and that contract is subject to approval by the City Council, GSA, or HA― from making a contribution to a City Council member, GSA member, HA member, City Clerk, or City Treasurer; and (2) Council members, GSA members, and HA members from voting on matters concerning a contract affecting a Consultant or subConsultant who has provided a campaign contribution.

The provisions of the Ordinance restricting Council members from voting on matters affecting campaign contributors applies to a Consultant whose contract requires the City Council’s, GSA’s, or HA’s approval, and specified subConsultants. A contract with the City, GSA, or HA is known as a “City Contract.” The Ordinance excludes a competitively bid contract awarded to the lowest responsible bidder.

To assist members of the City Council, GSA, and HA before they vote on a matter regarding a City Contract, the Ordinance requires City staff to prepare this report which discloses certain information about the Consultant receiving the City Contract, and specified subConsultant(s) working under the City Contract.

Information that must be disclosed: ● Name of the person, entity, or organization (i.e., the Consultant or SubConsultant) ● Name of the Chief Executive Officer/President
● Chief Operating Officer
● Chief Financial Officer
● Chairperson
● All members of the Board of Directors
● All persons who own more than 10% of the person, entity, or organization ● Name of any campaign committee owned or controlled by the person, entity, or organization Please complete the following disclosure form:

Consultant(s)*:

Name Address
R3 Consulting Group, Inc. 1512 Eureka Road, Suite 220, Roseville, CA 95661 Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Chairperson
Garth Schultz Chief Executive Officer / Presid 405 14th Street, Suite 350 Oakland CA 94612 Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Janet Barile and Scott Hanin Board of Directors 1512 Eureka Road, Suite 220 Roseville CA 95661 Garth Schultz More than 10% interest owner 405 14th Street, Suite 350 Oakland CA 94612 * “Consultant” is the person, entity, or organization that is the party, or prospective party, to the contract with the City, GSA, or HA. In addition to the name of the person, or entity, the Consultant must also disclose the name(s) of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s Board of Directors, its 32 of 289

Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Please disclose these persons’ name and business address.
33 of 289

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Allocation from the Board of State and Community Corrections, Request to Accept the Disbursement of $162,884 as Approved by the Budget Act of 2022 for the Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant Program.

1. Motion to accept the disbursement of $162,884 as approved by the Budget Act of 2022 that is to be allocated by the Board of State and Community Corrections.

2.Resolution of Appropriation.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for August 29, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
To accept $162,884 disbursement to the City of Glendale Police Department through the Budget Act of 2022 that is to be allocated by the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC).
34 of 289

24e
4 4
6 1

COUNCIL PRIORITIES
N/A

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the attached motion accepting $162,884 from the BSCC to be used for the Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant Program.

BACKGROUND
The Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant Program, established in the 2022 Budget Act (Assembly Bill 178, Chapter 45, Statutes of 2022), provides $50 million for city and county law enforcement agencies for the purpose of improving officer wellness and expanding mental health sources. The funding may be used for any of the following purposes:
•Establishing or expanding officer wellness units
•Establishing or expanding peer support units
•Services provided by a licensed mental health professional, counselor or other professional that works with law enforcement
•Expanding multiagency mutual aid programs focused on officer wellness and mental health
•Other programs and services that are evidence-based or have a successful track record of enhancing officer wellness
The Police Department can utilize the funding for the stated purpose during the grant period of July 1, 2022 to December 1, 2025.

ANALYSIS
Glendale Police Department officers are called upon to respond to the most dangerous and dreadful incidents that occur in our community. They willingly and courageously do so day after day, year after year throughout their careers. Sadly, there can be a high price to pay for choosing such a vocation. Research consistently shows that police officers are at a higher-than-average risk for adverse short and long-term physical and mental outcomes including chronic injuries and pain, shortened life span, anxiety, depression, Post Traumatic Stress, alcohol abuse, divorce, and suicide. Tragically, the Glendale Police Department has not been immune from any of these.

In recent years, law enforcement agencies, including the Glendale Police Department, have come to better understand and more fully embrace the need for wellness services to help their officers not only survive their careers but thrive in both their professional and personal lives. As part of that effort, two years ago the Glendale Police Department established an in-house Peer Support program and partnered with The Counseling Team International to provide mental health services to all personnel. Professional 35 of 289

34e
4 4
6 1
counselors are called out for critical incident stress debriefs and are available to employees and their families for all types of individual, couple, and family counseling.

As part of California’s Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant Program, the Glendale Police Department received a disbursement of $162,884 to expand mental health resources, which staff recommends be used in the following areas:
•Contractual Services: for mental health services and a wellness app for personnel
•Travel: for the Peer Support team to attend the annual Public Safety Peer Support Association training conference
•Training: for the Peer Support team and department-wide wellness •Books: educational resources regarding officer wellness and mental health •General Supplies: to purchase supplies needed for wellness operations

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Various entities were consulted on their experience with wellness and mental health to better understand the resources used for these types of programs. These entities include mental health providers, clinicians, doctors, fellow law enforcement agencies, and various providers of officer wellness services and apps. Based upon the information gathered, the disbursement will be used to provide services and tools to police personnel to assist them in maintaining and improving their mental health and to provide additional training to the Peer Support team so they can be even better equipped to assist their partners in their time of need.

FISCAL IMPACT
The $162,884 disbursement to the City of Glendale Police Department for the 2022-23 Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant was not included as part of the FY2023-24 budget. Therefore, staff is requesting for an appropriation of $162,884 from State Grant Revenue. The appropriation request is outlined below:

Requesting Appropriation:

Amount From (Account
String)
To (Accounting
String)
Funding Source
$162,884 GL: 32610-2610-
GPD-0020-P0000
PL: GPD00986AG
Police Grant Fund –
State Grants
$133,270 GL: 43110-2610-GPD-
0020-P0000
PL: GPD00986AG
Police Grant Fund -
Contractual Services
36 of 289

44e
4 4
6 1
$8,901 GL: 44550-2610-GPD-
0020-P0000
PL: GPD00986AG
Police Grant Fund –
Travel
$3,925 GL: 44650-2610-GPD-
0020-P0000
PL: GPD00986AG
Police Grant Fund –
Training
$4,185 GL: 45100-2610-GPD-
0020-P0000
PL: GPD00986AG
Police Grant Fund –
Books
$12,603 GL: 45350-2610-GPD-
0020-P0000
PL: GPD00986AG
Police Grant Fund –
General Supplies

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
There is no possibility that the acceptance of this disbursement may have a significant effect on the environment. (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15061(b)(3))

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: Approve as requested by the Police Department to accept the grant funding.

Alternative 2: Deny the Police Department’s request and not utilize the resources provided by the State for Officer wellness and mental health.

Alternative 3: The City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Steven Corrigan, Police Lieutenant
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
None.
37 of 289

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member , seconded by Council Member , that the Council of the City of Glendale hereby accepts the disbursement of $162,884 as approved by the Budget Act of 2022 that is to be allocated by the Board of State and Community Corrections to create the Glendale Police Department’s mental health and drug intervention pilot program, as outlined in the Report to Council dated August 29, 2023.

Vote as Follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
38 of 289

39 of 289

40 of 289

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Pacific Park Playground and Pool Shade Structure Project

2. Resolution of Appropriation for the funding of the Pacific Park Playground and Pool Shade Structure Project.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for August 29, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Pacific Park is a prime location for summertime activities with numerous amenities including a swimming pool, playground and other water features. Due to the popularity of the park amongst the community, existing features are now in need of replacement.

The city received five bids in response to the Pacific Park Playground and Pool Shade Structure Project, Specification No.3853R. The proposed construction contract with ARC Construction, Inc. is for $2,377,902 plus a 10% contract contingency of $237,790. To fully fund this project, a resolution of appropriation is also needed.

The intent of this item is for the City Council to award a construction contract for needed improvements to the Pacific Park site. The improvements include the construction of new pool and playground shade structures, splashpad replacement and expansion, incorporation of a water recycling system to meet current energy regulations, accessible restroom improvements, replastering the pool, replacing pool tiles, and repairs to the deck.

COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Operational Efficiency: Adding new park amenities and improving accessibility, functionality, safety, and reliability of park features maximizes this public asset. This proposed project will bring this 20-year-old facility to current codes, regulations, energy efficiency and conservation levels.
41 of 289

24f
4 4
7 7

RECOMMENDATION
Approve a Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a contract with ARC Construction, Inc., for the Pacific Park Playground and Pool Shade Structure Project in the amount of $2,377,902, plus a 10% contingency of $237,790. In addition, approval of a resolution of appropriation in the amount of $1,101,322 to provide adequate project funding is recommended.

BACKGROUND
Pacific Park and Edison Elementary School, located at 501 S. Pacific Avenue, are a joint use facility between the city and Glendale Unified School District. The campus was originally completed in 2003 and was the first joint-use development project between the city and Glendale Unified School District. The 10.5-acre site includes a park, library, community center, and elementary school. The park includes a little league ballfield, picnic area, multi- purpose sports field, multi-purpose court, children’s play area, and outdoor pool. The Community Center building hosts several recreational programs including extensive after- school and educational programs, sports and arts enrichment classes, and youth and family services.

Due to its prime location and numerous amenities, the park is very popular and experiences heavy and constant use by the community, especially the swimming pool, playground, and water play feature areas during the summer months. These popular summertime areas currently lack shade elements. Pacific Park has a few mature and recently planted trees, however not many of those trees provide the necessary shade around the swimming pool and playground areas. In an ongoing effort to improve Glendale's parks and the health and safety of its patrons, the Pacific Park designs include strategically placed new shade structures at two playground areas and the swimming pool deck area where families tend to congregate to watch events, swimming lessons, and open swim time. Currently, portable shade structures are provided at the swimming pool deck areas which congest the available deck space, need replacing every year, and do not provide optimal relief from the sun.

The existing Pacific Park splashpad feature has been a welcome and fun reprieve from the heat for many children for nearly 20-years and is now in need of replacement. Due to its extensive use and age, the feature has significant calcium buildup, corrosion, and requires valve replacements annually to repair leaks. The project will replace the existing splashpad water play feature and expand it towards the playground area south/west of the current location. The new design will not only increase the capacity, functionality and sustainability of the water play feature but will also include a water recycling system required by current regulations. The existing restrooms will also be renovated to comply with current American’s with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards and to meet the demand at the park.

On August 28, 2018, City Council approved a motion authorizing the City Manager, to execute a professional services agreement with RJM Design Group, Inc., for professional design services for the Pacific Park Playground & Pool Shade Structure Project.

On August 20, 2019, City Council approved a motion authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to the professional services agreement with RJM Design Group, Inc., to 42 of 289

34f
4 4
7 7
include the design of additional features required by the Los Angeles County Health Department.

On November 1, 2022, the City Council approved a Resolution to adopt the project plans and specifications and the city advertised for bids. On November 8, 2022, bid documents were made available to contractors, and on November 17, 2022, twelve contractors attended the mandatory pre-bid conference. On December 21, 2022, the city received five bids.

After thorough review, staff determined that the two lowest bidding contractors, ARC Construction, Inc. and Bedrock Group, Inc. submitted non-responsive bids. Bids from the other three contractors were on average double than that of ARC Construction, Inc.

On March 28, the City Council approved a motion to reject all bids and direct the City Clerk to re-advertise for bids.

On May 3, 2023, eleven contractors attended the mandatory pre-bid conference. On June 14, 2023, the city received five bids.

ANALYSIS
Following extensive review, Public Works staff found ARC Construction, Inc., has submitted a responsive bid and they are a responsible bidder. The proposed contract with ARC Construction, Inc. is $2,377,902 plus a 10% contingency. In addition to the construction cost and contingency, there are also additional costs associated with permitting and inspection for the project site which total $50,000.

ARC Construction, Inc. has a current State of California General-B Contractors License that is active and in good standing.

The recommended contractor has a proven history with the city and has satisfactorily completed multiple projects such as the City Hall Front Step and Façade Restoration Project, Palmer Park Renovation Project, and is currently working on the Glendale Transportation Center Renovation Project.

The Pacific Park Playground and Pool Shade Structure Project is expected to take eight months to complete. All work will be scheduled and coordinated to minimize impacts to users of the Pacific Pool and Playground.

The project budget is outlined below:

Construction Contract (ARC Construction, Inc.,) $2,377,902 Construction Contingency $237,790
Permits $30,000
Inspection $20,000
Total Project Cost for Construction Phase $2,665,692
43 of 289

44f
4 4
7 7
Project Description: Pacific Park Playground and Pool Shade Structure Project, Specification No.3853R
Plans/Specs Adopted: March 28, 2023
Advertisement Method: City website, press release, direct invitation Specs Issued: May 23, 2023
Bids Opened Date: June 14, 2023
Company Name(s) and
Bid Amount(s):

1. ARC Construction, Inc. $2,377,902

2. Bedrock Group, Inc. $2,617,000

3. Masters Contracting Corp. $3,650,000

4. PUB Construction, Inc. $3,798,100

5. Dorado Design & Construction, Inc. $3,998,314
Contractor: ARC Construction, Inc.

New / Existing Contractor: Existing
Procurement Method
(Bid / SS):

Bid

Contract Term: 1 YEAR
Construction Phase
Begins:

October 2023
Construction Phase
Ends:

May 2024

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
The construction of Pacific Park will allow the city to continue to provide recreational spaces with up-to-date amenities for the community. In order to minimize interruptions to municipal operations and to ensure minimal impacts to the public during construction, the Project Manager will work with onsite staff and staff from the Community Services and Parks Department for schedule coordination.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Pacific Park Playground and Pool Shade Structure Project will cost $2,665,692, of which $1,564,368 was included as a part of the FY 2023-24 budget. Therefore, staff is requesting for an appropriation of $1,101,322 from the Parks Mitigation Fee Fund balance.

The existing appropriation of $1,564,368 is outlined below:

Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$45,067 GL: 52100-2010-CSP-0020-P0000
PL: G618314
CDBG
$13,320 GL: 52100-2010-CSP-0020-P0000
PL: G619314
CDBG
$370,000 GL: 52100-2010-CSP-0020-P0000
PL: G618315
CDBG
$645,812 GL: 52100-2010-CSP-0020-P0000
PL: CSP00709AG
CDBG
44 of 289

54f
4 4
7 7
$202 GL: 52100-4010-CSP-0020-P0000
PL: 52143
Capital Improvement
Fund
$189,967 GL: 51200-4010-CSP-0020-P0000
PL: 52144
Capital Improvement
Fund
$300,000 GL: 51200-4011-CSP-0020-P0000
PL: PWD01055AN
Capital Improvement
Fund (Measure S)
The new appropriation request of $1,101,322 is outlined below.

Requesting Appropriation
Amount From (Account String) To (Account String) Funding Source
$1,101,322 GL: 24242-4050-CSP-
0000-P0000-
GL: 51200-4050-CSP-
0020-P0000-
PL: PWD01099AN
Parks
Mitigation
Fee Fund

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
This project is Categorically Exempt under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a Class 2 exemption pursuant state CEQA Guidelines, Section 15302.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements since it was competitively bid.

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: Approve the motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute the contract with ARC Construction, Inc. in the amount of $2,377,902 including a contingency of $237,790, and approve a Resolution of Appropriation in the amount of $1,101,322 to provide adequate funding for the project.

Alternative 2: Do not approve the recommended actions. Doing so would result in the Community Services & Parks and Public Works Department to continue maintaining the playground and features to keep them in service as long as possible.

Alternative 3: Consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Kevin C. Todd, Assistant Director of Public Works
Arthur Asaturyan, Project Manager
45 of 289

64f
4 4
7 7
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
None
46 of 289

4f
MOTION
Moved by Council Member ,
seconded by Council Member , that the Council of the
City of Glendale finds that, ARC Construction, Inc., has provided the lowest responsive bid, and they are a responsible bidder, for the Pacific Park Playground and Pool Shade Structure Project, as described in Specifications No. 3853R, and that the bid of ARC Construction, Inc. for the amount of $2,377,902, is hereby accepted and approved, as recommended by the Director of Public Works, and that all other bids be, and are, hereby rejected. The Council authorizes the City Manager or his designee to execute a contract, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney, with ARC Construction, Inc., in the amount of $2,377,902.00. The Council further approves a reserve for contingencies in the amount of $237,790.00.

Votes as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
47 of 289

48 of 289

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Public Works Department Building Maintenance and Repair Services. 1) Motion Awarding a Contract to AZTech Elevator Company (AZTech) for Citywide Elevator Systems Maintenance and Repairs services per Specification No. 3945 for the not-to-exceed amount of $702,930 for five-years and directing the City Manager or a designee to execute the contract.
2) Motion Awarding a Contract to R&S Overhead Doors of Commerce, Inc. (R&S) for Citywide Industrial Doors and Gates Maintenance and Repairs services per Specification No. 3946 for the not-to-exceed amount of $1,392,735 for five-years and directing the City Manager or a designee to execute the contract.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for August 29, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Ongoing maintenance and repair contracts are needed for safety and proper upkeep of the city’s elevator and industrial doors and gates systems. The city received five bids in response to the Citywide Elevator Systems Maintenance and Repair Services Specification and one bid in response to the Citywide Industrial Doors and Gates Maintenance and Repair Services Specification. The proposed contract with AZTech for Citywide Elevator Systems Maintenance and Repairs services is $702,930 for five-years and the proposed contract with R&S for Citywide Industrial Doors and Gates Maintenance and Repairs services is $1,392,735 for five-years.

The intent of this item is for the City Council to award two separate maintenance and repair contracts for the proper upkeep of vital building components.

COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Operational Efficiency: The requested services will ensure proper upkeep of city assets and operational reliability of conveyance and industrial doors systems. 49 of 289

4 4
8 6

RECOMMENDATION
Approve two motions awarding five-year contracts for Citywide Elevator Systems Maintenance and Repair services to AZTech for $702,930, Citywide Industrial Doors and Gates Maintenance and Repair services to R&S for $1,392,735.

BACKGROUND
The Public Works Department is responsible for the maintenance and repair of all city buildings and systems including Fire Stations, Police Station, Libraries, Parks, Civic Center, Utility sites, Corporations Yards, and Parking Garages, totaling over 200 facilities and 1,250,000 occupied square feet. Maintenance and repair responsibilities are addressed with a strategic combination of in-house staff and contracted services. This strategy allows for sufficient and available resources to address regular assignments and emergency services.

On June 27, 2023, the City Council adopted Specification Nos. 3945 for Citywide Elevator Systems Maintenance and Repairs services and 3946 for Citywide Industrial Doors and Gates Maintenance and Repairs services, and directed the City Clerk to advertise for bids.

On July 26, 2023, the Public Works Department hosted a mandatory pre-bid meeting. Seven elevator contractors and three Industrial Door contractors attended.

On August 9, 2023, the City received bids for the two services as follows:

Mitsubishi Electric Elevators $517,529
AZTech Elevator Co. Elevators $702,930
Total Access Elevator Corp. Elevators $742,162
KONE, Inc. Elevators $840,879
Amtech Elevators $1,440,897
R&S Overhead Doors Industrial Doors & Gates $1,392,735

ANALYSIS
To maintain the safety, accessibility, and reliability of the City's facilities and to best address tenant and public needs, it is necessary for the Public Works Department to have sufficient, readily available resources to provide maintenance and repairs and to mitigate situations that could render a facility unsafe and/or unusable.

The Public Works Department is responsible for the maintenance and repair of 47 Conveyance Systems including elevators and wheelchair lifts and 267 industrial doors and gates. Certain maintenance and operations responsibilities such as conveyance and industrial door systems require specialized training, equipment, 50 of 289

4 4
8 6
certifications, and licensing that Public Works staff does not have. To provide the required upkeep of these systems, and stay current with regulations and codes, it is recommended to outsource these services.

The apparent lowest bid for Elevator services submitted by Mitsubishi was erroneous and Mitsubishi withdrew their bid. Staff has evaluated the lowest responsive bid for Elevator maintenance submitted by AZTech and found this bid to be responsive, and they are a responsible bidder. Staff has contacted references for AZTech and they reported satisfactory services. In addition to advertising the specification, staff directly invited nine Conveyance Systems contractors to bid. Seven contractors attended the mandatory job walk and five ultimately submitted bids. The proposed cost of services submitted by AZTech is less than the staff’s estimate and the historical costs of these services.

The only bid submitted for the Industrial Doors & Gates was by R&S for $1,392,735. This bid is responsive and they are a responsible bidder. The City had contracted with R&S in past years and experienced satisfactory work. Staff has contacted references for R&S and they reported satisfactory services. In addition to advertising the specification, staff directly invited 13 Industrial Doors & Gates contractors to bid. Three contractors attended the mandatory job walk and ultimately twelve declined to bid for various reasons including: too much work for them at this time, could not provide the required 24/7 service, and prevailing wage. The proposed cost of services submitted by R&S is consistent with the staff’s estimate and the historical costs of these services.

Plans, Specifications & Estimates
Project Description: Public Works Department Building Maintenance Contracts
Specification Nos. 3945 and 3946
Plans/Specs Adopted: June 27, 2023
Advertisement Method: City website, eBidBoard, press release, direct invitation Specs Issued: July 14, 2023
Bids Opened Date: August 9, 2023
Company Name(s) and
Bid Amount(s):

Elevators
Amtech – $1,440,897
AZTech – $702,930
KONE – $840,879
Mitsubishi – $517,529 (Withdrawn)
Total Access – $742,162
Industrial Doors & Gates
R&S Overhead – $1,392,735
Contractor: AZTech Elevator Company
New / Existing New Contractor
51 of 289

4 4
8 6
Contractor and Bid Amt.: $702,930
Contractor: R&S Overhead Doors & Gates, Inc.

New / Existing
Contractor and Bid Amt.:

Existing Contractor
$1,392,735
Procurement Method
(Bid / SS):

Bid
Contract Term: 5 Years
Services Begins: November 1, 2023
Services Ends: 5-years

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Building maintenance and repair services will be conducted in a manner as to not interrupt city operations and to not disturb the public to the greatest extent possible.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Citywide Elevator Systems Maintenance and Repair services is expected to cost $200,000 in year-one and the Citywide Industrial Doors and Gates Maintenance and Repairs services is projected to cost $274,000 in year-one. Both were approved as part of the FY 2023-24 budget. No new appropriation is being requested at this time.

Funding for the remaining contract years will be requested as a part of the city’s annual budget process. The City Council approved funding is outlined below:

Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$ 474,000 GL: 43110-6070-PWD-7508-P0000 Building
Maintenance Fund

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This item includes routine maintenance and repairs activities and therefore, not subject to CEQA review.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
N/A

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: Authorize the City Manager or a designee to execute maintenance and repair contracts with AZtech for elevator systems and R&S for industrial doors and gates. This will ensure sufficient resources for the maintenance and operation of these critical building systems.

Alternative 2: Do not authorize the contracts described in this report. Doing so, 52 of 289

4 4
8 6
however, will delay essential maintenance and repair services and may require certain systems to be taken out of service.

Alternative 3: The City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Kevin C. Todd, Assistant Director of Public Works
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS / ATTACHMENTS
NA
53 of 289

MOTION
Moved by Council Member , seconded by
Council Member , that the Council of the City of
Glendale finds that, AZTech Elevator Company (AZTech) has provided the lowest responsive bid, and they are a responsible bidder, for the Maintenance and Repair of Elevator Systems at Various City of Facilities, as described in Specifications No. 3945, and that the bid of AZTech for the amount of Seven hundred two thousand, nine hundred thirty dollars and no cents ($702,930.00) is hereby accepted and approved, as recommended by the Director of Public Works, and that all other bids be, and are, hereby rejected. The Council authorizes the City Manager to execute a contract, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney, with AZTech, in the amount of Seven hundred two thousand, nine hundred thirty dollars and no cents ($702,930.00).

Votes as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
54 of 289

MOTION
Moved by Council Member , seconded by
Council Member , that the Council of the City of
Glendale finds that, R&S Overhead Doors of Commerce, Inc. (R&S) has provided the lowest responsive bid, and they are a responsible bidder, for the Maintenance and Repair of Industrial Doors and Gates Systems at Various City of Facilities, as described in Specifications No. 3946, and that the bid of R&S for the amount of One million, three hundred ninety-two thousand, seven hundred thirty-five dollars and no cent ($1,392,735.00) is hereby accepted and approved, as recommended by the Director of Public Works, and that all other bids be, and are, hereby rejected. The Council authorizes the City Manager to execute a contract, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney, with R&S, in the amount of One million, three hundred ninety-two thousand, seven hundred thirty-five dollars and no cent ($1,392,735.00).

Votes as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
55 of 289

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Consumer Price Index (CPI) Adjustment to Campaign Finance Contribution Limits.

1. Resolution Adjusting the Campaign Contribution Limits of $1,190 in the amount of Consumer Price Index (CPI) to $1,340.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for August 29, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report provides information relating to the CPI adjustment to the City’s campaign contribution limit pursuant to GMC Section 1.10.030(B).

COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Not Applicable.

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council adopt a resolution making the CPI adjustment to the City’s individual campaign contribution limits as established by the GMC. 56 of 289

24d
4 5
0 5

BACKGROUND
This report provides information relating to the CPI adjustment to the City’s campaign contribution limit, currently set by Resolution 21-109, adopted pursuant to GMC Section

1.10.030(B), at $1,190.

ANALYSIS
On October 18, 2016, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5889, which included amendments to GMC Section 1.10.030(B) increasing the campaign contribution limits from $1,000 per person to $1,100. On February 5, 2019, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5921 which included amendments to GMC Section 1.10.030(F) enabling the City Council to review the contribution limits in July of each odd numbered year, commencing July 1, 2019, and make CPI adjustments to the contribution limits by Resolution. “The adjustment shall be rounded up to the nearest ten dollars ($10.00)” GMC Section 1.10.030(F). In July 2019 the City Council by Resolution 19-80 adjusted the individual contribution limit from $1,100 to $1,140, and thereafter in July 2021, by Resolution 21-109, the City Council adjusted the individual contribution limit to $1,190.

The current CPI adjustment is 11.99%. This percentage is based on the month ending April of 2023 and accounts for a 2-year adjustment. Applying the CPI adjustment to the current contribution limit amount of $1,190, the increase is $142.68, which rounded up to the nearest ten dollars, as set forth in GMC 1.10.030(F), yields a $150 increase.

Under this adjustment, the new campaign contribution limit will be $1,340, effective upon the adoption of the proposed Resolution. Staff recommends adoption of the attached Resolution making this adjustment per the CPI increase.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Not Applicable.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended action.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Not applicable for the action requested as the action does not involve a project for the purposes of California Environmental Quality Act.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
Not Applicable.
57 of 289

34d
4 5
0 5

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: Adopt the proposed Resolution implementing the CPI increase on campaign contribution limits.

Alternative 2: Maintain the current campaign contribution limit as is.

Alternative 3: The City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff. 58 of 289

44d
4 5
0 5

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Dorine Martirosian, Principal Assistant City Attorney
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS / ATTACHMENTS
None.
59 of 289

1 RESOLUTION NO. ________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA, ADJUSTING THE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMIT OF $1,190 TO $1,340 CONSISTENT WITH THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX
WHEREAS, Glendale Municipal Code, 1995 (GMC) Section 1.10.030, subsection (B) prohibits a person to contribute a total more than a certain set amount, by Resolution of the City Council, as campaign contribution limits, to any candidate for City Council, City Clerk, City Treasurer, and to his or her controlled committee for a single election cycle; and
WHEREAS, GMC Section 1.10.030, subsection (F) allows future Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustments to the campaign contribution limits set forth in subsection (B) to be effectuated by way of a Resolution adopted by the City Council in July of each odd numbered year; and
WHEREAS, on July 13, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 21-109 and increased and set the campaign contribution limit at $1,190; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered staff’s presentation of the Consumer Price Index adjustment and increase of 11.99% based on the month ending April 2023 and deems it appropriate to increase the current campaign contribution limit of $1,190 by $150 (which is $142.68 rounded up to the nearest ten dollars), to $1,340.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA:

Pursuant to Glendale Municipal Code, 1995 (GMC), Section 1.10.030(F), and based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI – All Urban Consumers) Los Angeles, Long Beach, Anaheim, with the month ending April 2023, the City Council hereby increases the current campaign contribution limit of GMC 1.10.030(B) to $1,340.

Adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale on this ___ day of _________, 2023.
________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
City Clerk
60 of 289

2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS.

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I, Suzie Abajian, PhD, City Clerk of the City of Glendale, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. _______________ was adopted by a majority vote of the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the ______ day of ______________________, 2023, and that the same was adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
________________________
City Clerk
61 of 289

AGENDA ITEM

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Report: Humanitarian Aid For Glendale Sister City, Martuni in Artsakh 1) Motion directing the City Manager to take the necessary actions to provide Humanitarian Aid For Glendale Sister City, Martuni in Artsakh

COUNCIL ACTION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On August 10, 2023, the City of Glendale received a request letter from the Office of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic in the USA seeking the City’s assistance for humanitarian aid to Glendale’s Sister City of Martuni. The City Manager presented this request at the August 15, 2023 City Council meeting and received support from the Council to proceed.

Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved forAugust 29, 2023 calendar
62 of 289

2 COUNCIL PRIORITIES
N/A

RECOMMENDATION
That Council direct the City Manager to take the necessary actions, including the establishment of a separate and temporary bank account, if necessary, to facilitate community donations for humanitarian aid to Glendale Sister City, Martuni in Artsakh.

BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
Azerbaijan’s blockade of the Lachin Corridor, the only road connecting Nagorno- Karabakh to Armenia since December 2022, has left its people with dwindling food, medicine and electricity. Since July, approximately 120,000 individuals are being denied access to food, water, medical supplies and services, gas, electricity and other basic needs.

On August 7, 2023, the First Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Luis Moreno Ocampo issued a report (Exhibit 1) that determined Azerbaijan’s deliberate blockade of the Lachin Corridor constitutes an act of genocide under Article II, (c) of the Genocide Convention: “Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.”
Congressman Adam Schiff has urged President Biden to lead a UN Security Council resolution demanding Azerbaijan's adherence to International Court of Justice orders and an independent human rights report, emphasizing the need for tangible actions to end Azerbaijan's blockade and enforce international law.

On August 10, 2023, the City of Glendale received a request letter (Exhibit 2) from the Office of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic in the USA seeking the City’s assistance for humanitarian aid to Glendale’s Sister City of Martuni. The City Manager presented this request at the August 15, 2023 City Council meeting and received support from the Council to proceed.

To not comingle City funds with this effort, the City will be looking at setting up a separate, stand alone and temporary bank account to facilitate community donations for humanitarian aid.

Launching a humanitarian aid campaign including collection of donations for Martuni City is in line with the City’s Sister City program and will help address immediate needs and foster stronger relationships. Targeted assistance can save lives, alleviate suffering, and help Martuni recover more effectively. Providing humanitarian aid will deepen our relationship by demonstrating solidarity and compassion during this great time of need, thereby strengthening our bond.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
N/A
63 of 289

3 FISCAL IMPACT
The City may experience nominal fees if the City needs to set up a bank account to keep track of community donations to keep these funds separate from City of Glendale funds. So as not to impact the City’s funds, the cost of the bank account set up can be deducted from the donations.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
N/A

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES
1) Direct the City Manager to take the necessary steps to provide humanitarian aid to Sister City, Martuni.
2) Do not direct the City Manager to take the necessary steps to provide humanitarian aid to Sister City, Martuni.
3) Council may choose another alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Stephanie Mkhlian, Senior Administrative Analyst
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Luis Moreno Ocampo’s Report, First Chief Prosecutor, International Criminal Court (ICC) Exhibit 2: Request Letter, August 10, 2023
64 of 289

MOTION
Moved by Council Member _________________________________, seconded by Council Member _____________________________, that the Council of the City of Glendale hereby directs the City Manager to take the necessary actions to provide Humanitarian Aid For Glendale Sister City, Martuni in Artsakh, as specified in City Manager’s August 29, 2023 City Council report, and as subject to City Council comments or further direction thereon.

Votes as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
________________________________
City Clerk
65 of 289

Expert Opinion
Genocide against Armenians in 2023
Luis Moreno Ocampo

New York, August 7, 2023

There is an ongoing Genocide against 120,000 Armenians living in Nagorno- Karabakh, also known as Artsakh.

The blockade of the Lachin Corridor by the Azerbaijani security forces impeding access to any food, medical supplies, and other essentials should be considered a Genocide under Article II, (c) of the Genocide Convention: “Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.” There are no crematories, and there are no machete attacks. Starvation is the invisible Genocide weapon. Without immediate dramatic change, this group of Armenians will be destroyed in a few weeks.

Starvation as a method to destroy people was neglected by the entire international community when it was used against Armenians in 1915, Jews and Poles in 1939, Russians in Leningrad (now Saint Petersburg) in 1941, and Cambodians in 1975/1976. Starvation was also neglected when used in Srebrenica in the winter of 1993/1994.

Analyzing the Srebrenica case, the International Court of Justice ruled that “deprivation of food, medical care, shelter or clothing” constitute Genocide within the meaning of Article II(c) of the Genocide Convention.

State parties of the Genocide Convention assumed the duty to prevent and punish Genocide. The International Court of Justice ruled that state parties should “not wait until the perpetration of Genocide commences,” and “The whole point of the obligation is to prevent or attempt to prevent the occurrence of the act.” This report analyzes:
66 of 289

1. The existence of an ongoing Genocide in Nagorno-Karabakh.

2. How to investigate those responsible for Genocide?

3. How to prevent the final destruction of the Armenian group?

1. Genocide in Nagorno-Karabakh in 2023
There is a reasonable basis to believe that a Genocide is being committed against Armenians living in Nagorno-Karabakh in 2023.

The International Court of Justice, at the request of Armenia, has already analyzed the Lachin corridor’s blockade. The Court focused on State liability for alleged violations of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination rather than individual criminal responsibility for the commission of Genocide.

Though predicated on a different set of State obligations, the Court confirmed the occurrence of the material elements of Genocide that are set out in Article II, (c) of the Genocide Convention: “Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.”
The Court’s preliminary findings considered “plausible” that the Lachin corridor blockade produced “a real and imminent risk” to the “health and life” of an ethnic group, “the Armenians living in Nagorno-Karabakh.”
The intention, a subjective element required by the crime of Genocide, should be deduced from the facts and statements from President Aliyev, who has supreme authority in Azerbaijan.

President Aliyev, in a fair trial, would have the opportunity to provide a different interpretation of the indicia. In the meantime, there is reasonable basis to believe that President Aliyev has Genocidal intentions: he has knowingly, willingly and voluntarily blockaded the Lachin Corridor even after having been placed on notice regarding the consequences of his actions by the ICJ’s provisional orders.

The facts are:
67 of 289

A. President Aliyev deliberately blocked the provision of life’s essentials to the Armenians living in Nagorno-Karabakh.

B. He openly disobeyed the specific orders of the International Court of Justice, “to ensure unimpeded movement of persons, vehicles, and cargo along the Lachin Corridor in both directions.”
C. The ICJ order put him on notice about the “real and imminent risk” created by the blockade to an Armenian group “health and life.” President Aliyev’s public statements affirming that the blockade was the consequence of people smuggling minerals and i-phones through the Lachin Corridor is a diversion.

Smuggling activities should be properly investigated but they are not an excuse to disobey a binding order of the International Court of Justice or a justification to commit a Genocide.

2. Could President Aliyev be investigated by the International Criminal Court? Article IV of the Genocide Convention establishes that “[p]ersons committing genocide shall be punished,” even if “they are constitutionally responsible rulers.” But there is no independent criminal justice system ready to investigate the crime of Genocide allegedly committed by President Aliyev.

President Aliyev cannot be investigated by any foreign national authorities because he enjoys immunity as a head of state.

The International Criminal Court provides a jurisdiction where such immunity does not apply. There are three ways to start an ICC investigation for the commission of the crimes in Lachin Corridor and Nagorno-Karabakh:
1) Azerbaijan becomes a state party (Article 12(1) of the Rome Statute); 2) Azerbaijan accepts the jurisdiction of the Court on its territory (Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute); or
68 of 289

3) The UN Security Council refers the situation of the Lachin Corridor and Nagorno-Karabakh after December 2022 to the ICC (Article 13(b) of the Rome Statute).

But Azerbaijan is not a state party of the Rome Statute (Article 12(1)), the treaty creating the ICC and has not accepted the ICC’s jurisdiction (Article 12(3)). As a result, immediate state action is required to adopt a UN Security Council Resolution referring the situation in the Lachin Corridor and Nagorno-Karabakh to the ICC.

There are precedents. In March 2005, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1395, referring the Darfur, Sudan situation to the ICC. Five years later, President Omar Al Bashir was indicted for Genocide.

In February 2011, the UN Security Council referred the situation in Libya to the Court. In June 2011 the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Muammar Gaddafi for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Obtaining a UN Security Council Resolution to provide ICC jurisdiction should be feasible. Under the Genocide Convention, state parties have an obligation to prevent and punish Genocide, and 14 of the current 15 members of the UN Security Council are also parties of that Convention, providing an overwhelming majority.

France proposed, as early as in 2013, that the five permanent members of the Council voluntarily and collectively suspend the use of the veto in case of Genocide and other mass atrocities.

3. How to Prevent the Final Destruction of the Armenian Group? President Aliyev as well as the international community has the rare opportunity to prevent further casualties and the “physical destruction” of a group in this Genocide.

Timely prevention requires the adoption of urgent political decisions, a) to stop the blockade and reestablish the provision of essentials to Nagorno- Karabakh in one or two weeks, and
69 of 289

b) institutional solutions to the disputed territorial claims. It should be adopted before May 2025 because, at that moment, Azerbaijan can request the end of the Russian peacekeeper protection.

By design, there are no central authorities at the international level to adopt such urgent measures. A specific International Court of Justice ruling on Genocide, smart sanctions, and other classic diplomatic tools would not be quick and strong enough.

In the short term, which is crucial to stop the ongoing Genocide by starvation, the duty of prevention would be exclusively defined by the interest of the states involved in the conflict.

In April 1994, most of the UN Security Council members refused to call "Genocide" what was happening in Rwanda. During the debate the Czech Ambassador challenged the intense focus on a negotiation to achieve a new ceasefire, which he likened to asking the Jews to reach a truce with Hitler.

In “A Problem from Hell,” Samantha Power explains the crucial role of the citizen in transforming the national leaders’ interests in a Genocide abroad. The voice of the Armenians in the diaspora could reduce the failure by design created by the international legal architecture. They should be mobilized worldwide to reach national leaders and promote a pragmatic solutions.

Russia, responsible for peacekeeping in Nagorno-Karabakh, and the US, promoting current negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan, are state parties of the Genocide Convention, as are all the European Union members. They have a privileged position to prevent this Genocide. Their intense confrontation due to the Ukrainian conflict should not transform the Armenians into collateral victims.

Is it possible to assist European, Russian, and USA leaders to reach a joint position to stop the ongoing Armenian Genocide? If they could agree, the food will reach the Armenians within one day.

The conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh is an opportunity for the international community to develop an innovative and harmonious solution to prevent Genocide. 70 of 289

Under Article 16 of the Rome Statute, a criminal investigation could eventually be suspended by the UN Security Council to find a final and fair solution.

President Aliyev asked: “Why Spain does not allow Catalunya to have a referendum? Why should we tolerate separatism?” The simple answer to complex issues of sovereignty involved in the question is that Spain is not committing genocide to control separatist efforts.

A. Background

1. History
Nagorno-Karabakh, known as Artsakh by Armenians, is predominantly inhabited by ethnic Armenians, living there for more than 20 Centuries.1 It is in a landlocked mountainous area in the South Caucasus. Institutionally, it has de facto autonomy although it is part of the recognized territory of Azerbaijan.

After the 1917 Russian revolution, Armenia and Azerbaijan emerged as independent states, Azerbaijan for the first time. The first republics of Armenia and Azerbaijan both asserted claims over Nagorno-Karabakh. Both republics continued to assert jurisdictional claims over Nagorno-Karabakh while the indigenous Armenian population rejected Azerbaijan’s attempts at conquest. During the Soviet Union, Nagorno-Karabakh became an autonomous oblast, an administrative division or region, within Azerbaijan.
a. War in 1992/1994
In 1988 Nagorno-Karabash adopted a resolution requesting to be transferred to Armenia, triggering conflicts and violence. In early 1992, following the Soviet Union's collapse, the region descended into an outright war between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

1 Felix Light and Guy Faulconbridge, ‘Explainer: What is Nagorno-Karabakh - and why are tensions rising?’ (Reuters, April 24, 2023), https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/what-is-nagorno- karabakh-why-are-tensions-rising-2023-04-24/.
71 of 289

A Russian-brokered ceasefire was signed in May 1994. As a result of a military victory, Armenia consolidated the autonomy of the Nagorno-Karabakh region and occupied the surrounding Azerbaijani territories. Peace negotiations were conducted but they were never conclusive. Nagorno-Karabakh became the Republic of Artsakh with its own government, but it has never been recognized by any member of the UN. b. War in 2022 and the Trilateral Agreement
A second war started in 2020, it lasted for 44 days, and Azerbaijan recovered the territories lost in the first war surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh, including the Agdam, the Kalbajar, and the Lachin Districts.

On November 9, 2020, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Russia signed the Trilateral Statement ending the war between the first two countries recognizing the new situation and established special agreements regarding Nagorno-Karabakh. 2 The Nagorno-Karabakh factual autonomy was not mentioned, but Azerbaijan authorized the presence of Russian peacekeepers to protect the Armenians living in Nagorno-Karabakh and the role of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees to facilitate the return of internally displaced persons and refugees return to the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh.
“The Lachin corridor (5 km wide), which will ensure the communication between Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia…shall remain under the control of the peacekeeping contingent of the Russian Federation” for five years.3 “The Republic of Azerbaijan shall guarantee the safe movement of citizens, vehicles, and cargo in both directions along the Lachin corridor.”4 A similar clause requested Armenia to guarantee the safety of transport communication between the western region of Azebaijan and the

Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic.5

2 Statement by President of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia and President of the Russian Federation (November 10, 2020) UN Doc. S/2020/1104. 3 Ibid., para 6(1)
4 Ibid., para 6(3).
5 Ibid., para 9.
72 of 289

After decades of de facto autonomy, Armenians living in Nagorno-Karabakh risk discrimination by Azerbaijan. It is remarkable that the Russian Federation has accepted to play the role of peacekeepers in the region in order to “prevent the mass death of the civilian population of Nagorno-Karabakh.”
6 2. Armenia v. Azerbaijan Case before the International Court of Justice i. On September 16, 2021, Armenia started proceedings against Azerbaijan before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Armenia alleged that “[f]or decades, Azerbaijan has subjected Armenians to racial discrimination” in violation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD).7
ii. On December 7, 2021, the Court considered that “propaganda promoting racial hatred and incitement to racial discrimination or to acts of violence against any group of persons based on their national or ethnic origin can generate a pervasive racially charged environment within society. This holds particularly true when rhetoric espousing racial discrimination is employed by high-ranking officials of the State. Such a situation may have serious damaging effects on individuals belonging to the protected group. Such damaging effects may include, but are not limited to, the risk of bodily harm or psychological harm and distress.”8
iii. After reviewing the information placed before it, the International Court of Justice considered “plausible the rights allegedly violated through incitement and promotion of racial hatred and discrimination against persons of Armenian national or ethnic origin by high-ranking officials of Azerbaijan and through

6 ‘Decree of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on the use of a military unit of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation in Nagorno-Karabakh’ (November 18, 2020), http://council.gov.ru/activity/documents/121580/.
7 Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Armenia v.

Azerbaijan) (Application Instituting Proceedings) September 16, 2021, para 3. 8 Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Armenia v.

Azerbaijan) (Order on Provisional Measures) [2021] ICJ Rep 361, para 83. 73 of 289

vandalism and desecration affecting Armenian cultural heritage” and added “that the alleged disregard of the rights deemed plausible by the Court … may entail irreparable prejudice to those rights and that there is urgency, in the sense that there is a real and imminent risk that such prejudice will be caused before the Court makes a final decision in the case.”9
iv. The Court adopted a unanimous decision ordering Azerbaijan to “[t]ake all necessary measures to prevent the incitement and promotion of racial hatred and discrimination, including by its officials and public institutions, targeted at persons of Armenian national or ethnic origin.”10
To reach such a conclusion the International Court of Justice took into consideration that “there is a real and imminent risk that irreparable prejudice will be caused to the rights claimed before the Court” validating Armenia claim of expressions of hate by Azerbaijan high ranking officers.11 Armenia had affirmed the existence of “obsessive and continuing expressions of hatred for persons of Armenian national or ethnic origin emanating from Azerbaijani politicians and high-ranking government officials, including the President.” It alleges that this environment of hate may entail irreparable consequences, in particular by making the physical and mental abuse of all Armenians more likely, “including those living in Nagorno- Karabakh.”12

3. The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Report In its latest periodic review of Azerbaijan, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination also expressed deep concern over the “[i]ncitement to racial hatred and the propagation of racist stereotypes against persons of Armenian national or ethnic origin, including on the Internet and social media, as well as by public figures

9 Ibid., paras 61, 88.
10 Ibid., para 91.
11 Ibid., para 88.
12 Ibid., para 74.
74 of 289

and government officials, and the lack of detailed information on investigations, prosecutions, convictions and sanctions for such acts.”13

4. The Blockade of the Lachin Corridor.

On the morning of December 12, 2022, President Aliyev allowed individuals without formal ties with the state apparatus to block the Lachin Corridor near the city of Shushi or Shusha, affecting the provision of food, medicines, oil, and all other essentials to Nagorno-Karabakh. President Aliyev denied the involvement of the State in the creation of the problem but justified the action to stop alleged illegal export of mineral resources.

5. The European Court of Human Rights and ICJ Provisional Measures

Armenia brought the problem to the attention of both the European Court of Human Rights and the International Court of Justice. It affirmed that “The 120,000 ethnic Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh are now entirely encircled by Azerbaijan, completely cut off from access to the outside world.” They are now “effectively under siege.”
i. On December 21, 2022, the European Court of Human Rights evaluated the State’s responsibility and instructed Azerbaijan to “take all measures that are within their jurisdiction to ensure safe passage through the ‘Lachin Corridor’ of seriously ill persons in need of medical treatment in Armenia and others who were stranded on the road without shelter or means of subsistence.” ii. On January 2023, Azerbaijan’s agents before the ICJ affirmed that Armenia has not demonstrated that “the protest is actually blocking the road or seriously obstructing the flow of traffic along it”; that “to the extent the traffic is obstructed, the intention or effect was racial discrimination”; and that “the

13 UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, ‘Concluding observations on the combined tenth to twelfth periodic reports of Azerbaijan’ (September 22, 2022) UN Doc. CERD/C/AZE/CO/10-12, para. 4(c).
75 of 289

consequences of the restrictions were such that there is now a real risk of irreparable prejudice.” “Armenia tries to suppress the fact that for nearly 30 years, it has been illegally exploiting the resource-rich territories of Azerbaijan that it invaded and occupied in violation of international law.” iii. On February 22, 2023, the International Court of Justice ordered: “The Republic of Azerbaijan shall, pending the final decision in the case and accordance with its obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, take all measures at its disposal to ensure unimpeded movement of persons, vehicles, and cargo along the Lachin Corridor in both directions.” 14 The order was reaffirmed on July 6, 2023.

6. The Checkpoint on Hakari River Bridge
On April 23, Azerbaijan installed a checkpoint over the Hakari River bridge blocking the Lachin corridor, claiming that it was implementing the ruling of the Court.

The demonstrators stopped their intervention.

On June 15, 2023, Azerbaijan escalated the situation, completely sealing off the Lachin Corridor, the lifeline of Nagorno-Karabakh. Since then, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Russian peacekeeping forces have been banned from delivering humanitarian relief.

The last attempt happened on July 26, 2023, when the Azerbaijan forces did not allow a convoy with humanitarian cargo to pass through the Lachin Corridor and enter Nagorno-Karabakh.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said that despite their “persistent efforts,” they are currently unable “to bring humanitarian assistance to the

14 See Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Armenia v. Azerbaijan) (Order on Provisional Measures) February 22, 2023, paras 62, 67. See also Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Armenia v.

Azerbaijan) (Order on Request for Modification of Provisional Measures) July 6, 2023, para 30. 76 of 289

civilian population through the Lachin corridor or through any other routes, including Aghdam.”
B. Is there a reasonable basis to believe that the Lachin corridor blockade implemented since December 12, 2022, constitutes the crime of Genocide against Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh?
Some specialized institutions have already claimed a Genocide is underway in Nagorno-Karabakh.15 As has happened in previous cases, Genocide, in particular, when committed by starvation, is neglected.

An estimated 1 million Armenians were murdered or died of disease and starvation in 1915 and the world did not stop it.16 Starving children in the Warsaw ghetto produced no reaction.17 Leningrad (now Saint Petersburg) became a “prison of starvation.”18 “A factor that blunted understanding of the evil of Khmer rouge’s regime was that many Cambodians died of starvation and malnutrition, which outsiders associated with “natural” economic and climatic forces.”19 “Photos of emaciated prisoners and refugee accounts of torture, starvation, and executions,” promoted false promises of change in Srebrenica by the Milosevic regime.20

15 On February 1, 2023, the International Association of Genocide Scholars Executive and Advisory Boards stated: “Significant genocide risk factors exist in the Nagorno-Karabakh situation concerning the Armenian population.” Available at: https://genocidescholars.org/wp- content/uploads/2023/02/IAGS-EB-AB-Statement-on-Azeri-Blockade-of-Artsakh.pdf. On June 22, 2023, the Lemkin Institute for Genocide prevention issued a Red Flag Alert for Genocide, see Lemkin Institute for Genocide, ‘Azerbaijan Update #8’ (June 22, 2023), https://www.lemkininstitute.com/_files/ugd/ 391abe_2bdcf33e1e0d4acf95e82292efed03c8.pdf.
16 See Samantha Power, “A Problem From Hell”: America and the Age of Genocide (Basic Books 2002) 27; Taner Akçam, ‘The Armenian Genocide’ in Ben Kiernan et al. (eds), The Cambridge World History of Genocide, vol. III (Cambridge University Press 2023) 67, 83. 17 Power (n 16) 74. An official Nazi order commanded that “the basic provisioning of the Jewish Residential District must be less than the minimum necessary for preserving life, regardless of the consequences.” Economic Sector of Jewish Residential District in Warsaw, Order, 7 BFG 65 (April 19, 1941).
18 Ales Adamovich and Daniil Granin, Leningrad Under Siege: First-Hand Accounts of the Ordeal (Pen & Sword Books 2007) 190.
19 See Power (n 16) 179–80; Adam Jones, Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction (Routledge 2006) 198; Ben Kiernan, ‘The Genocides in Cambodia, 1975–1979’ in Kiernan et al. (n 17) 518, 534. 20 Power (n 16) 580. See also Markéta Slavková, ‘Starving Srebrenica and the Recipes for Survival in the Bosnian War (1992–1995)’ (2019) 106 Český Lid 297.
77 of 289

1. Material elements of Article II (c) of the Genocide Convention:
“Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.”

a. Historical Background
When debating the parameters of Article II(c) during the early-stage drafting of the Convention by the UN Economic and Social Council’s Ad Hoc Committee on Genocide, France observed that “[i]f any group were placed on rations so short as to make its extinction inevitable, merely because it belonged to a certain nationality, race or religion, the fact would also come under the category of genocidal crime.”21 The proposal on which France was affirmatively commenting was accepted by the other members of the Ad Hoc Committee,22 eventually manifesting in the final text in the form of Article II(c).23
i. Jurisprudence on the elements of the crime
The demarcation between genocide by the imposition of conditions of life and by killing or serious injury was captured by the District Court of Jerusalem in its Eichmann case, where it opined that, “there were two separate actions: first, subjection to living conditions calculated to bring about their physical destruction, and later the physical destruction itself.”24
The jurisprudence of the International Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda describes this form genocide as “the denial to members of a certain group of the elementary means of existence enjoyed by other sections of the population.”25 This

21 UN ESCOR, 7th Session, Ad Hoc Committee on Genocide, 4th meeting (April 7, 1948) UN Doc.

E/AC.25/SR.4, at 14 (Mr. Ordonne, France).
22 Ibid., 15 (Mr. Rudzinski, Poland), 16 (Mr. Maktos, United States). 23 William A. Schabas, Genocide in International Law: The Crime of Crimes (2nd edn, Cambridge University Press 2009) 189–90.
24 Cr.C. (Jerusalem) 40/61 Attorney General v. Eichmann (1961) 45 PM 3, (1968) 36 ILR 5, para 196. 25 Prosecutor v. Stakić (Decision on Rule 98 bis Motion for Judgment of Acquittal) IT-97-24-T (31 October 2002) para 25.
78 of 289

process occurs through methods “by which the perpetrator does not immediately kill the members of the group, but which, ultimately, seek their physical destruction.”26 Notably, genocide through such underlying acts does not require the acts in question actually result in any physical or mental harm to members of the protected group.27 In fact, when such results do occur, the ICTY Appeals Chamber has found that paragraphs (a) or (b) of Article II of the Genocide Convention relating to killing members of the group or causing serious harm to them, respectively,28 are more fitting than those under Article II(c).29
The travaux préparatoires of the Genocide Convention demonstrate an explicit rejection of a causal element in the form of the UN General Assembly’s Sixth Committee’s rejection of a proposed amendment by Uruguay and the United Kingdom that suggested the phrase “likely to cause,”30 which was instead attenuated to the phrase “calculated to bring about.”31
A similar conclusion on the war crime of ‘starvation’ under Article 54(1) of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions was reached in 2020, by the UN Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan:

26 Prosecutor v. Akayesu (Trial Judgment) ICTR-96-4-T (September 2, 1998) para 505. See also Prosecutor v.

Tolimir (Trial Judgment) IT-05-88-2-T (December 12, 2012) para 740; Prosecutor v. Brđanin (Trial Judgment) IT-99-36-T (1 September 2004) para 691; Prosecutor v. Stakić (Trial Judgment) IT-97-24-T (July 31, 2003) para paras 517–18; Prosecutor v. Musema (Trial Judgment) ICTR-96-13-T (January 27, 2000) para 157; Prosecutor v. Rutaganda (Trial Judgement) ICTR-96-3-T (December 6, 1999) para 52; Prosecutor v. Popović et al. (Trial Judgment) IT-05-88-T (June 10, 2010) para 814; Prosecutor v. Karadžić (Trial Judgment) IT-95-5/18- T (March 24, 2016) para 2586; Prosecutor v. Mladić (Trial Judgment) IT-09-92-T (November 22, 2017) para 3453.
27 See Tolimir Trial Judgment (n 28) para 741; Karadžić Trial Judgment (n 28) para 546; Brđanin Trial Judgment (n 28) para 691; Stakić Trial Judgment (n 28) para 517. 28 See Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (adopted May 25, 1993) 32 ILM 1170 (ICTY Statute) art 4(2)(a), (b); Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (adopted July 17, 1998) 2187 UNTS 3 (Rome Statute) art 6(a), (b).
29 See ICTY Statute (n 31) art 4(2)(c); Rome Statute (n 31) art 6(c). 30 See ‘Uruguay: Amendments to the Draft Convention on Genocide’ (October 1, 1948) UN Doc.

A/C.6/209; ‘United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: Amendments to Articles II and III of the Draft Convention on Genocide’ (October 7, 1948) UN Doc. A/C.6/222. 31 UN GAOR, 3rd Session, 6th Committee, 82nd meeting (October 23, 1948) UN Doc. A/C.6/SR.82, at 183; UNGA Sixth Committee, ‘Genocide – Draft Convention and Report of the Economic and Social Council’ (October 23, 1948) UN Doc. A/C.6/245. See also Lars Berster, ‘Article II’ in Christian J. Tams, Lars Berster, and Björn Schiffbaur (eds), Convention on the Prevention and Publishment of the Crime of Genocide: A Commentary (C.H. Beck/Hart/Nomos 2014) 79, para 75.
79 of 289

The term “starvation” should be understood to encompass deprivation not just of food and water but also of other goods essential for survival in a particular context. The crime of starvation does not require that victims die from starvation, only that they should intentionally be deprived of objects indispensable to their survival.32
ii. The Findings of the International Court of Justice in the Armenia v. Azerbaijan Case.

The ICJ has already analyzed the Lachin corridor’ blockade. The Court focused on State liability for alleged violations of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination rather than individual criminal responsibility for the commission of Genocide.

Though predicated on a different set of State obligations, the Court confirmed the occurrence of the material elements of Genocide that are set out in Article II, (c) of the Genocide Convention: “Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.”33
The ICJ’s preliminary decision indicates the plausible concurrence of the material elements of the crime of Genocide required by Article II of the Genocide Convention: (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction, in whole or in part.

The Court issued provisional measures considering “plausible” that the rights of a part of an ethnic group, the “Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh,” are affected by the blockade of the Lachin Corridor established in December 2022.34 Therefore, the

32 UN Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan, ‘“There is Nothing Left for Us”: Starvation as a Method of Warfare in South Sudan’ (October 5, 2020) UN Doc. A/HRC/45/CRP.3, para 26. 33 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (adopted December 9, 1948) 78 UNTS 277 (Genocide Convention) art II(c).
34 Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Armenia v. Azerbaijan) (Provisional Measures) February 22, 2023, para 39 [Armenia v. Azerbaijan Order of February 22, 2023].
80 of 289

International Court of Justice assessed that the “persons affected belonged to a particular ethnical group” as required by the Genocide Convention.

According to the “Elements of the Crimes” adopted by the International Criminal Court, the term “conditions of life” calculated to bring about the physical destruction of that group “may include, but is not necessarily restricted to, deliberate deprivation of resources indispensable for survival, such as food or medical services, or systematic expulsion from homes.”35
In its February order, the ICJ accepted the request related to food and medicines, affirming “[a] prejudice can be considered as irreparable when the persons concerned are exposed to danger to health and life. The Court has further noted that restrictions on the importation and purchase of goods required for humanitarian needs, such as foodstuffs and medicines, including lifesaving medicines, treatment for chronic disease or preventive care, and medical equipment, may have a serious detrimental impact on the health and lives of individuals.”36
The International Court of Justice concluded that the blockade “may entail irreparable consequences to those rights and that there is urgency, in the sense that there is a real and imminent risk that irreparable prejudice will be caused before the Court makes a final decision in the case.”37
Such a conclusion is an indication of the concurrence of the infliction of “certain conditions of life calculated to bring about the physical destruction of that group.” The requirement of a plan or a manifest pattern of similar conduct directed against that group is evident, but it will be further analyzed below. b. Subjective Element of the Crime of Genocide

35 ICC Elements of Crimes (2013) art 6(c)(4), fn 4.
36 Armenia v. Azerbaijan Order of February 22, 2023 (n 37) para 55, citing Alleged Violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America) (Provisional Measures) [2018] ICJ Rep 623, para 91.
37 Armenia v. Azerbaijan Order of February 22, 2023 (n 37) para 59. 81 of 289

The crime of Genocide requires intention: “The perpetrator intended to destroy, in whole or in part, that ethnical group, as such.”38 A blank confession is not the only way to prove intention. Voluntary actions, even in silence, express intentions to “[d]eliberately [inflict] on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.”
President Aliyev’s Genocidal intentions can be deduced from the following:
1) He knowingly took systematic steps to stop the transit and transport of people and goods through the Lachin Corridor and ultimately blockaded it by placing a checkpoint with cement blocks;
2) Having been placed on notice by the International Court of Justice regarding the “impending” dangers of blockading the Lachin Corridor, he continued with the blockade; and
3) In addition to having the specific knowledge of the consequences of his deliberate acts, President Aliyev has willingly refused the execute the International Court of Justice’s orders.

i. Jurisprudence on intention
The ICTR Appeals Chamber in Kayishema and Ruzindana observed that “explicit manifestations of criminal intent are ... often rare in the context of criminal trials.”39 The ICTY Appeals Chamber similarly noted in Karadžić that “by its nature, genocidal intent is not usually susceptible to direct proof,”40 with the ICTR Appeals Chamber adding in Gacumbitsi that “[o]nly the accused himself has first-hand knowledge of his own mental state, and he is unlikely to testify to his own genocidal intent. Intent thus must usually be inferred.”41

38 Genocide Convention (n 36) art II.
39 Prosecutor v. Kayishema and Ruzindana (Appeal Judgement) ICTR-95-1-A (May 21, 1999) para 159. 40 Prosecutor v. Karadžić (Rule 98 bis Appeal Judgment) IT-95-5/18-AR98bis.1 (July 11, 2013) para 80. 41 Prosecutor v. Gacumbitsi (Appeal Judgment) ICTR-2001-64-A (July 7, 2006) para 40. 82 of 289

The ICTR trial Chamber accordingly had held in Rutaganda that “[i]n the absence of explicit, direct proof, the dolus specialis may … be inferred from relevant facts and circumstances” and that “[s]uch an approach prevents perpetrators from escaping convictions simply because such manifestations are absent.”42 Similarly, the ICTY Appeals Chamber held in Krstić that “[w]here direct evidence of genocidal intent is absent, the intent may still be inferred from the factual circumstances of the crime.”43
ii. Analysis of President Aliyev’s Intentions.

The President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, is de jure and de facto Supreme Commander of the security forces in Azerbaijan. Under his command the security border personelle have been placed in control of the checkpoint on the Lachin Corridor and blocked transit of all goods and people.

President Alliyev’s intention to destroy the “Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh” should be deduced from his informed, voluntary and antagonistic decisions with full disregard of the International Court of Justice orders.

In 2020, when President Aliyev accepted the Russian peacekeepers and agreed to guarantee a free corridor between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh, he implicitly recognized the Nagorno-Karabakh’s de facto autonomy.

Then, a few months later, when Russia became engaged with Ukraine, President Aliyev reversed direction and decided that the region has no autonomy. Instead of negotiating the autonomy of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh, he systematically took steps through a series of decisions to eliminate the Armenians living in Nagorno- Karabakh.

42 Prosecutor v. Rutaganda (Trial Judgment) ICTR-97-20-T (December 6, 1999) para 525. 43 Prosecutor v. Krstić (Appeal Judgment) IT-98-33-A (April 19, 2004) para 34, citing Prosecutor v.

Jelisić (Appeal Judgment) IT-95-10-A (July 5, 2001) paras 47. See also Prosecutor v. Blagojević and Jokić (Appeal Judgment) IT-02-60-A (May 9, 2007) para 123; Prosecutor v. Hategekimana (Appeal Judgment) ICTR-00-55B-0272/1-A (May 8, 2012) para 133; Prosecutor v. Tolmir (Appeal Judgment) IT-05-88/2-A (8 April 2015) paras 246–47.
83 of 289

First, he allowed a group of civilians to block the Lachin Corridor.

Second, one year after the beginning of the Ukrainian war, he established a checkpoint on the border with Armenia, obstructing free transit through the Lachin Corridor. He imposed the Lachin Corridor blockade knowing the consequences described by the International Court of Justice’s order.

Third, he completely sealed the Lachin Corridor and refused to obey the Court’s order.

It is possible to deduce that President Aliyev’s instructions to establish a full blockade of the Lachin Corridor was adopted voluntarily with the intention to ‘deliberately inflict on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.’
The inference is confirmed that President Aliyev had knowledge that the International Court of Justice reached the conclusion that the blockade created “real and imminent risk” to the “health and life” of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Furthermore, President Aliyev’s genocidal intention is so strong that he openly challenges a binding order of the International Court of Justice. iii. President Aliyev’s Statement on August 1, 2023.

To safeguard my accuracy and impartiality, before producing this report, I wrote to President Aliyev explaining the consequences of the blockade and offering him an opportunity to clarify his position. My letter put President Aliyev on notice of the commission of Genocide. He could be responsible for Genocide. I received no answer, and the blockade continues.

President Aliyev discussed the matter during a Euronews interview aired two days after my letter. He indirectly recognized that the blockade was his official policy and pretended to justify the starvation of 120,000 Armenians to avoid the alleged smuggling of minerals, cigarettes, iPhones, and gasoline. 84 of 289

He justified the December blockade produced by the “representatives of civil society of Azerbaijan” because of the “illegal excavation of natural resources in Karabakh.”
He said that an Azerbaijan checkpoint was established to implement the International Court of Justice decision. “And as soon as we established a border checkpoint on our border with Armenia, which is our legitimate right…we communicated through my representative here in Shusha with NGOs’ representatives for them to stop, and they stopped. They left. So now, freedom of movement is not blocked.”
Then he explained that “On June 15, Armenia made another military provocation and wounded one of our border security guards, and temporarily the road was closed for investigation.”
“But then it was reopened. Red Cross restarted again to transport medications and evacuate patients who need treatment in Armenia. But unfortunately, Red Cross trucks, when checked, we found smuggling goods like cigarettes, iPhones, and gasoline.

Red Cross admitted that. So, that is how, again, it was blocked.” The ICRC clarified the incident. This statement confirms that President Aliyev is in command of the situation, providing misleading arguments to divert attention from his commission of Genocide.

He pretends that he is disobeying an ICJ decision and starving 120,000 persons to control the smuggling of some iPhones or minerals. The smuggling cases should be properly investigated but they should not distract from the genocidal impact of his decisions.

In the interview, President Aliyev stated his motive, which is to “put an end to separatism.” He said he is “not organizing ethnic cleansing,” but he proposes that Armenians in Karabakh could live as a minority in Azerbaijan, ignoring the discrimination and the Genocide, or they have to leave. 85 of 289

Perpetrators of genocide attempt to conceal their genocidal intent. Combating such concealment is the raison d’être of the explicit distinction between motive and intent with respect to genocide.44
Intent refers to the actual goal the perpetrator strives to achieve, while motive refers to the specific reason of the perpetrator in the commission of criminal acts.

Accordingly, the ICTY Appeals Chamber conclusively declared in Stakić that “the reason why the accused sought to destroy the victim group has no bearing on guilt.”45 Thus the existence of a “personal motive,” such as the acquisition of territory or integration of a separatist entity, “must be distinguished from intent and does not preclude a finding of genocidal intent.”46
President Aliyev rightly said that Azerbaijan recovered in the 2020 war a territory occupied by Armenia, but now, he threatens Armenia with a new war to end the special status of Nagorno-Karabakh.

He explained that the last year’s geopolitical changes were in his favor and posed the question: “Who will protect Armenia?” This is akin to Hitler’s statement that he made in August of 1939, when he said, “who remembers now the extermination of the Armenians?”47
President Aliyev ended his interview with a threatening message to the Armenians: “They should understand that the situation where they are today would not change in their favor if they continue to ignore us if they continue to behave that we do not exist.”

44 See Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro) (Merits) [2007] ICJ Rep 43 (Bosnian Genocide Judgment) para 189. 45 Prosecutor v. Stakić (Appeal Judgment) IT-97-24-A (March 22, 2006) para 45, citing Jelisić Appeal Judgement (n 45) para 49; Prosecutor v. Tadić (Appeal Judgment) IT-94-1-A (July 15, 1999) para 269. 46 Popović et al. (n 28) para 825.
47 Louis P. Lochner, What About Germany? (Dodd, Mead & Co 1943) 12. See also Office of United States Chief of Counsel for the Prosecution of Axis Criminality (ed), Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression, vol. VII (US Government Printing Office 1946) 753.
86 of 289

D. Who Could be Personally Responsible?
President Aliyev should be investigated for Genocide because he is at the top of the state apparatus and controls decisions politically, militarily and diplomatically. He’s the mastermind behind the operations of the Genocide.

There are reports that identify other perpetrators involved in the blockade, but there is no indicia against them about their genocidal intention. They should still be investigated for their eventual participation in Genocide and in the blockade as crimes against humanity.

There are confidential reports alleging that the following individuals should be investigated. The list includes, but is not limited to the following:
1) Zakir Asker Oghlu Hasanov (Azerbaijani: Zakir Əsgər oğlu Həsənov) – Minister of Defense
2) Elchin Guliyev (Azerbaijani: Elçin Isa oğlu Quliyev) - Chief of State Border Service of Azerbaijan
3) Akshin Maherramov - Chief of Staff of the Border Detachment for State Border Protection
4) Misir Aliyev - Rapid Response Brigade of the Rapid Response Forces of the State Border Guard Service
5) Farid Shafiyev - Center of Analysis of International Relations E. Could President Aliyev be Investigated by the International Criminal Court?
Article IV of the Genocide Convention establishes that “Persons committing genocide shall be punished,” even if “they are constitutionally responsible rulers.”48 But there is no independent criminal justice system to investigate the crime of Genocide.

President Aliyev cannot be investigated by any national authorities because he enjoys immunity as a head-of-state.49

48 Genocide Convention (n 36) art IV.
49 See Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium) [2002] ICJ Rep 3, para 51. 87 of 289

Such immunity does not apply at the International Criminal Court.50 There are three ways to start an ICC investigation for the commission of the crimes in the Lachin Corridor and Nagorno-Karabakh:
1) Azerbaijan becomes a state party (Article 12.1 of the Rome Statute); 2) Azerbaijan accepts intervention of the Court on its territory (Article 12.3 of the Rome Statute); and
3) The UN Security Council refers the situation of the Lachin Corridor and Nagorno-Karabakh after December 2022 to the ICC (Article 13.b of the Rome Statute).

But Azerbaijan is not a state party of the Rome Statute, and, did not accept an ICC intervention. As a result, immediate state action is required to adopt a UN Security Council Resolution referring the situation in the Lachin Corridor and Nagaorno- Karabakh to the ICC.

There are precedents. In March 2005, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1395, referring the Darfur situation to the ICC. Five years later, President Omar Al Bashir was indicted for Genocide.51
Obtaining a UN Security Council Resolution to provide ICC jurisdiction should be feasible. Under the Genocide Convention, state parties have an obligation to prevent and punish Genocide, and 14 of the current 15 members of the UN Security Council are also parties of that Convention, providing an overwhelming majority.

France proposed, as early as in 2013, that the five permanent members of the Council voluntarily and collectively suspend the use of the veto in case of Genocide and other mass atrocities.

F. How to Prevent the Final Destruction of the Armenian Group?

50 Prosecutor v. Al Bashir (Judgment in the Jordan Referral re Al-Bashir Appeal) ICC-02/05-01/09-397 (May 6, 2019) paras 113–17.
51 See Prosecutor v. Al Bashir (Second Warrant of Arrest for Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir) ICC-02/05- 01/09-95 (July 12, 2010).
88 of 289

Determining that Genocide against Armenians is being committed in 2023 would transform the understanding of the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh.

One hundred and fifty-three nations, including Azerbaijan, Russia, the United States, and members of the European Union are contracting parties of the Genocide Convention. Under the Convention, the Parties confirm that Genocide is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and punish. Timely prevention requires the adoption of urgent political decisions.
a) to stop the blockade and reestablish the provision of essential goods to Nagorno- Karabakh in one or two weeks, and
b) institutional solutions to the disputed territorial claims. This should be adopted before May 2025 because at that time, Azerbaijan can request that Russia ends its peacekeeper role.

1. A failure by design

By design, there are no central authorities at the international level to adopt such urgent measures. A ruling by the International Court of Justice on Genocide, smart sanctions, and other classic diplomatic tools are slow and inadequate measures to respond and prevent the current dire situation.

In the short term, which is crucial to stop the damages caused by the ongoing Genocide by starvation, the duty of prevention is exclusively defined by the interests of the states involved in the conflict.

Samantha Power affirmed that U.S. policymakers did almost nothing to deter genocides, because America’s “vital national interests” were not considered imperiled.52

52 Power (n 16) 708.
89 of 289

She described magnificently in “The Problem from Hell” how politicians avoid efforts to control genocides. They appease, bribe, seduce or manipulate their constituencies that demand action.53
The reluctance, described by Samantha Power to act before a Genocide, was exposed in April 1994, when most of the UN Security Council members refused to call what was happening in Rwanda a “Genocide.” During the debate members of the Council requested negotiations to achieve a ceasefire. The Czech Ambassador challenged them and likened it to asking the Jews to reach a truce with Hitler.54 In “A Problem from Hell,” Samantha Power also explains the crucial role of the citizen in transforming the national leaders’ interests in a Genocide abroad. The voice of the Armenians in the diaspora could reduce the failure by design created by the international legal architecture. They should be mobilized worldwide to reach national leaders and promote a collective and pragmatic solution.

2. The role of Russia, the U.S. and European Union

As mentioned, Russia, responsible for peacekeeping in Nagorno-Karabakh, and the U.S., promoting current negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan, are state parties of the Genocide Convention as all the European Union members. They have a privileged position to prevent the Genocide. Their intense confrontation due to the Ukrainian conflict should not transform the Armenians into collateral victims.

Is it possible to assist European, Russian, and U.S. leaders to reach a joint position to stop the ongoing Armenian Genocide? If they agree, the food will reach the Armenians within one day.

53 The reluctance of states to “[t]hey advance politically only as they placate, appease, bribe, seduce, bamboozle, or otherwise manage to manipulate the demanding threatening elements in their constituencies. The decisive consideration is not whether the proposition is good but whether . . . the active-talking constituents like it immediately.” Power (n 16) 335. 54 Cable from the Czech Republic Mission to the United Nations to the Czech Foreign Ministry, Prague (April 25, 1999), https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB472/docs/Document%2010.pdff. 90 of 289

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken spoke with Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev a few days after the full blockade was imposed, rightly requesting to open the Corridor. But, at the time, there was no clarity on the genocidal circumstances surrounding the event. Secretary Blinken limited the conversation to stressing “the need for all parties to keep up positive momentum on peace negotiations.”55 President Aliyev’s actions show that he is under the perception that his method of committing Genocide to force his victims to accept his demands, is tolerated by the international community.

The U.S., Russia and the European Union involved in the negotiations between Azerbaijan and Armenia must make publicly clear that they do not allow, and will not allow, explicitly or implicitly, President Aliyev to commit a genocide.

3. The time to prevent is now

As the International Court of Justice established, accepting genocide as a method to procure an agreement is complicity.

In its 2007 Bosnia v. Serbia judgment, the International Court of Justice established the principle that the states’ “obligation to prevent, and the corresponding duty to act, arise at the instant that the State learns of, or should normally have learned of, the existence of a serious risk that genocide will be committed.”56 The Court added: “This obviously does not mean that the obligation to prevent Genocide only comes into being when the perpetration of Genocide commences; that would be absurd since the whole point of the obligation is to prevent or attempt to prevent the occurrence of the act.”57 From the moment when a State has information that leads it to believe that a Genocide is afoot, it establishes its obligation to take all

55 ‘Secretary Blinken’s Call with Azerbaijani President Aliyev’ (U.S. Department of State, July 30, 2023), https://www.state.gov/secretary-blinkens-call-with-azerbaijani-president-aliyev-14/. 56 Bosnian Genocide Judgment (n 46) para 431.
57 Ibid.
91 of 289

measures possible to prevent and stop the further “physical destruction” of a group of people.

Secretary of State Blinken explained in the Holocaust Museum that one of his responsibilities “is determining, on behalf of the United States, whether atrocities have been committed. It’s an immense responsibility that I take very seriously, particularly given my family’s history.”58 He identified intent to destroy a group and hate speech as a path in the Rohingya situation, “mirroring in so many ways the path to the Holocaust and other genocides.”59
President Biden took a courageous step and became the first U.S. President that labeled the 1915 events as the Armenian Genocide. “The American people honor all those Armenians who perished in the genocide that began 106 years ago today. Let us renew our shared resolve to prevent future atrocities from occurring anywhere in the world.”60
Now that the path of Genocide against an Armenian group in Nagorno- Karabakh is exposed, it is time for the U.S. to put words into action.

The U.S., Russia, members of the European Union, all state parties of the Genocide Convention, and UN members have a rare historic opportunity to stop Genocide against an Armenian group in 2023.

In many respects, the starvation of the ethnic Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh, represents the archetype of genocide through the imposition of conditions of life designed to bring about a group’s destruction.61 It closes a tragic circle because “[t]he

58 ‘Secretary Antony J. Blinken on the Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity in Burma’ (U.S.

Department of State, March 21, 2022), https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-at-the-united- states-holocaust-memorial-museum/.
59 Ibid.
60 ‘Statement by President Joe Biden on Armenian Remembrance Day’ (White House, April 24, 2021), https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/04/24/statement-by-president- joe-biden-on-armenian-remembrance-day/.
61 Guénaël Mettraux, International Crimes and the Ad Hoc Tribunals (Oxford University Press 2006) 239–40. 92 of 289

treatment of the Armenians by the Turkish rulers in 1915 provides the paradigm for the Genocide provision dealing with imposition of conditions of life.”62 As an individual with some experience in the field, I was honored to make my contribution providing an impartial report and I am ready to assist any party committed to prevent the destruction of the Armenian group in Nagorno-Karabakh.

62 Schabas (n 24) 19. “These crimes have often been described as ‘deportations.’ But they went far beyond mere expulsion or transfer, because the deportation itself involved deprivation of fundamental human needs with the result that large numbers died of disease, malnutrition and exhaustion.” Ibid. (emphasis added). 93 of 289

This material is distributed on behalf of the Government of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic. The Office of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic is registered with the U.S.

Government under the Foreign Agent Registration Act. Additional information is available at the Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.

1016 16th Street, NW, Suite 300 ● Washington, DC 20036 ● Tel (202) 398-3986 [email protected] ● www.nkrusa.org ● www.facebook.com/ArtsakhinUSA

OOFFFFIICCEE OOFF TTHHEE NNAAGGOORRNNOO KKAARRAABBAAKKHH RREEPPUUBBLLIICC IINN TTHHEE UUSSAA ²²ØØÜÜ--ááõõÙÙ ÈÈÔÔÐÐ ÙÙßßïï³³ÏÏ³³ÝÝ ÝÝ»»ññÏÏ³³ÛÛ³³óóááõõóóããááõõÃÃÛÛááõõÝÝ

August 10, 2023
Mr. Roubik Golanian
City Manager
City of Glendale

Dear Mr. Golanian:

I am writing to you regarding the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the Republic of Artsakh. As you know, since December 12, 2022, Azerbaijan has been blocking the only road connecting Artsakh with Armenia and the rest of the world. The lives of 120,000 people in Artsakh, including 30,000 children and thousands of people with disabilities, have severely worsened. Children and adult medical patients are suffering in hospitals from lack of supplies and treatment outside the Republic. People die as a result.

Grocery shops, markets and gas stations are empty.

To aggravate the suffering, Aliyev’s regime has cut the supply of natural gas, sabotaged and blocks the repair of high-voltage power line that provides much of Artsakh’s electricity. This causes energy rationing and disruptions of communications. The situation rapidly aggravates into a humanitarian catastrophe. International legal experts confirm the fears of an imminent genocide.

The international community condemns Azerbaijan’s actions and demands to lift the blockade Nonetheless, Azerbaijan’s authorities continue to disregard calls from democratic governments, and ignore the relevant Order by the International Court of Justice.

Mr. Golanian, the City of Glendale has consistently demonstrated support for democratic aspirations and economic prosperity of the Republic of Artsakh, including through the Sister City format between Glendale and Artsakh’s City of Martuni.

Glendale is a home for tens of thousands of our Armenian compatriots, who care about the fate of their brothers and sisters in Artsakh. We hope that the City of Glendale will continue to demonstrate solidarity with our Republic during these trying times. Hereby, I kindly ask you and the City of Glendale to consider allocating humanitarian aid to Glendale’s Sister City Martuni.

Thank you for your consideration. Please do not hesitate to contact our Office should you need any additional information.

Respectfully,

Robert Avetisyan
Permanent Representative
94 of 289

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: San Fernando Road Beautification Project Alternatives 1) Motion accepting staff’s recommendation to proceed with the design and implementation of Alternative 2A for the San Fernando Road Beautification Project

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for August 29, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff has completed the feasibility study for bicycle facilities on San Fernando Road between Elk Avenue and Grandview Avenue and developed multiple options, along with a recommended alternative.

These options were presented to the community as well as to the Transportation and Parking Commission (TPC). Based on all input received, as well as the recommendation by the TPC, staff recommends the implementation of Alternative 2A because it is the most efficient in achieving the project and the grant funding goals.

95 of 289

28a
4 4
7 2

COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Mobility, Traffic & Pedestrian Safety: This project will improve access to public spaces by improving walking paths, installing raised median islands and shade trees, and implementing traffic calming measures to improve safety for various modes of travel.

Operational Efficiency: New, upgraded, and well-maintained infrastructure reduces downtime, minimizes disruptions, and optimizes resource allocation, allowing the city to provide efficient and reliable services to the community. Furthermore, the construction of infrastructure projects enables the city to meet the needs of the capital improvement program and improve critical pavement condition index levels.

Financial Sustainability: This project utilizes approximately $5 million dollars of grant funding received from the Clean California Local Grant Program. This additional funding strengthens the financial viability of the project by reducing the burden on the city budget.

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council approve the motion accepting staff’s recommendation to proceed with the design and implementation of Alternative 2A for the San Fernando Road Beautification Project.

BACKGROUND
The Public Works Department received direction from the City Council to improve and beautify the San Fernando Road corridor alongside the railroad tracks.

To accomplish this goal, staff applied and was successful in receiving $5 million in grant funds from the Clean California Local Grant Program (CCLGP) for the beautification of San Fernando Road, with a strict deadline to complete construction by June 30, 2024.

Furthermore, to comply with the grant deadline, the project will be constructed in two phases, with the first phase located between Grandview Avenue and Elk Avenue, that runs parallel to the railroad, and the second phase located between Grandview Avenue and the City of Burbank jurisdictional limits, at Alameda Avenue.

This project includes planting new drought-tolerant, native landscaping on the west side of the roadway along the railroad tracks, providing ground cover and beautifying the blight of the railroad tracks. It also includes upgraded sidewalks on the east side of the roadway, creating uninterrupted access and providing greater areas for vegetation, increasing pervious surfaces, and reducing storm water runoff to improve water quality.

Additional improvements will include high visibility and creative crosswalks at intersections, upgraded bus stop amenities and bus shelter improvements, median islands with bioswale infrastructure between Grandview Avenue and Elk Avenue, drywells, curb bulb-outs, and improved ADA ramps at roadway intersections. All project improvements will be located within city-owned public right-of-way on the western and 96 of 289

38a
4 4
7 2
eastern sides of San Fernando Road.

To proceed with project plan development, a Traffic Corridor Study (TCS) was conducted to study the existing conditions of the roadway segments to determine the feasibility of incorporating active transportation elements. The TCS studied the feasibility of modifying travel lanes, implementing new bicycle facilities, and installing raised medians by conducting a vehicle miles traveled (VMT), level of service (LOS) for intersection operations only, and parking utilization analyses. The study resulted in three design alternatives that were shared with community and various stakeholders over multiple engagement events and analyzed further in this report. Our goal was to select a design alternative that could accomplish the project’s main goals and be able to be constructed within the constraints of the grant funding deadline.

ANALYSIS
The Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) adopted by City Council in 2012, recommends the installation of a Class I bicycle route that runs parallel to San Fernando Road in the railroad’s right-of-way, and outside of San Fernando Road. However, since the California High-Speed Rail Authority intends to use this same right-of-way, staff studied the feasibility of incorporating bicycle infrastructure outside of the railroad’s right-of-way.

The TCS developed alternatives for potential installation of bicycle infrastructure along this route. By exploring these alternatives, the aim is to find practical solutions that accommodate the needs of all roadway users, while enhancing safety and accessibility within the corridor. At the same time, the goal is to improve the function of the roadway and minimize adverse impacts to the business, residents, and neighborhoods that are served by the corridor.

Staff engaged the services of a professional engineering consultant, Mark Thomas and Company, Inc. (Mark Thomas), to assist with the preparation of the study. Mark Thomas and their subconsultants conducted a comprehensive study of the San Fernando Road corridor, considering the current traffic conditions, levels of cut-through traffic, roadway constraints, and parking utilization, and developed conceptual roadway alternatives for consideration. The study provides valuable insights and data to inform the decision- making process, ensuring that any improvements align with the city's goals for this project and the grant funding deadlines.

Alternatives
The study proposes the following five main alternatives for consideration:

Alternative 1: Class III Bike Route with Raised Planted Medians and Enhanced Sharrows (Green-back type Sharrows)
This consists of maintaining the current roadway lane configuration and incorporates non-continuous raised medians that are strategically designed to beautify the corridor, allow for stormwater infiltration infrastructure, and improve turning-movement safety. 97 of 289

48a
4 4
7 2
This alternative is enhanced by introducing new shared roadway pavement markings known as "Enhanced sharrows” (Green-back Sharrows) in the outermost travel lane in each direction, along with improved signage. Additionally, preserving on-street parking and retaining the existing travel lanes in each direction are important considerations addressed by this alternative. This alternative provides a modestly enhanced bicycle facility that does not adversely impact corridor businesses or neighborhood streets, and the heavily utilized on-street parking spaces.

Alternative 2: Class II Bike Lane
This consists of repurposing a portion of the roadway and incorporating Class II bicycle lanes. This approach involves eliminating 141 parking spaces within areas that are highly utilized by businesses and their customers throughout the day.

Alternative 2A: Class II Bike Lane Only in Southbound Direction and Class III Bike Route with Enhanced Sharrows (Green-back type Sharrows) in Northbound Direction.

To avoid the elimination of the parking lane in Alternative 2, Class II bike lanes may be installed only on the west side of San Fernando Road for the southbound travel direction with the installation of "Enhanced sharrows” in the northbound direction, along with improved signage. This reconfiguration does allow for the preservation of existing on-street parking. However, the proposed bike lane in this option would not be protected on a heavily traveled corridor by both passenger and commercial vehicles, now using narrower lanes. Furthermore, the lack of a bike lane in the northbound direction creates a gap and limits connectivity of bicycle infrastructure within the corridor, and alternate connector routes northbound will need to be further considered in the upcoming Bicycle Transportation Program Update.

Alternative 3: Class IV Protected Bicycle Lane
Alternative 3 consists of repurposing a portion of the roadway and incorporating a Class IV protected bicycle lane. This alternative involves the implementation of raised traffic delineators and pavement striping to create a dedicated and protected space for cyclists. The installation of a protected bicycle lane in both directions would only be feasible by eliminating one travel lane in each direction and converting San Fernando Road from two travel lanes to one travel lane in each direction.

Alternative 3A: Class IV Protected Two-Way Cycle Track
This consists of repurposing one southbound lane on San Fernando Road and 98 of 289

58a
4 4
7 2
incorporating a Class IV protected two-way cycle track on the westside of the roadway.

Similar to Alternative 3, this option involves the implementation of raised traffic delineators and pavement striping to create a dedicated and protected space for cyclists.

Based on the findings of the study, the removal of a travel lane in each direction will adversely impact corridor service levels, resulting in increased cut-through traffic to adjacent residential neighborhoods and parallel connector roadways. Most importantly, this alternative impacts emergency response operations. Additionally, this alternative will require traffic signal modifications and updates to the traffic signal timing at all railroad crossings along the corridor. This modification alone will take approximately 12 months to complete, since it involves applying for and receiving approval from the California Public Utility Commission and Metrolink. In this scenario, we may be unable to execute the project within the grant designated timeframe and would need to return the grant funds in failing to meet the required deadline.

Technical Findings
The following summarize the main findings of the TCS:

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis
Alternative 1 does not have a VMT analysis because it does not impact the VMT.

Alternative 2 and 2A decrease VMT less than 1%. For Alternative 3 and 3A, there is also a minimal decrease in VMT of less than 1% on San Fernando Road, however, there are also increases in VMT in the study area. These increases would occur along Glenoaks Boulevard, Concord Street, Flower Street, and Fairmont Avenue. This increase in VMT may also impact neighborhoods and local streets as traffic seeks alternate routes, such as the Pelanconi, Glenwood, and Grandview neighborhoods, including Glenwood Road, Kenneth Road, Olmstead Drive and Pacific Avenue.

Additionally, the North Hollywood Bus Rapid Transit is planned for implementation beginning in 2025, and the project is approved to convert a lane of travel on Glenoaks Boulevard to a Bus Only Lane. The VMT impacts shown in this study did not account for that potential impact, which is expected to further decrease corridor service levels on San Fernando Road and increase VMT in the surrounding neighborhood streets.

Level of Service (LOS) Analysis for intersection delay:

There are a total of 14 intersections within the project limits of this study and the study shows that Alternatives 3 and 3A impacts the intersection LOS or causes significantly increased delays at most of the intersections along the study corridor. As an example, the corridor travel time for the southbound traffic between Grandview Avenue to Elk Avenue increases by 45 seconds in the AM peak times and up to 3 minutes and 26 seconds for the PM peak times. The corridor travel time for northbound traffic increases by up to 1 minute and 9 seconds in the AM peak times and up to 2 minutes and 54 99 of 289

68a
4 4
7 2
seconds for the PM peak times, which will have adverse impacts on emergency response operations. Alternative 1 has no impact on intersection delay and Alternatives 2 and 2A have negligible impact.

Parking Utilization
A comprehensive parking study was also conducted along the San Fernando Road corridor and all side streets up to a few hundred feet radius from the corridor, with the goal of assessing the current parking situation and taking into account various factors such as utilization rates, time restrictions, and overall demand.

The parking study results indicated that up to 90% of the parking spaces during peak hours along San Fernando Road between Elk Avenue and Grandview Avenue are always utilized, and 40% of the parking spaces are utilized during the remainder of the day. Furthermore, the study revealed that street parking is more utilized on the residential side streets, with some locations at or near 100% utilization.

Therefore, eliminating parking will have a significant impact on the local community and businesses that heavily rely on available parking for their daily needs.

Project Safety Benefit
A crash data analysis, using the 2022 Caltrans Local Roadway Safety Manual data, shows that 13% of crashes are reduced, with the installation of a raised median that is included on all Alternative configurations for this project. Furthermore, the same data shows a reduction of 35% of crashes, with the installation of a bike lane that is included in Alternative 2 and 2A.

Conclusion and Recommendation
San Fernando Road serves as a crucial transportation corridor within the City of Glendale as well as being a critical link between the Cities of Burbank and Los Angeles.

Any reduction in lane capacity would impede the flow of traffic and create spillover effects onto adjacent roads, further worsening the overall traffic conditions. Additionally, as a connectivity corridor and route for local traffic, San Fernando Road also serves as a crucial detour route for the I-5 Freeway in the event of closures or accidents. The I-5 Freeway is one of the major north-south arteries in the region, and any disruption to its normal flow can have significant impacts on regional transportation. San Fernando Road provides a viable alternative for motorists to bypass the congested or blocked sections of the freeway, ensuring the continued movement of people and goods. By reducing traffic lanes on San Fernando Road, the capacity to handle diverted traffic from the I-5 Freeway would be severely constrained, resulting in even more extensive delays and gridlock during such incidents.

In examining the various alternatives identified in the TCS, the following is a summary of each alternative:
100 of 289

78a
4 4
7 2
Alternative 1 accomplishes the main goal of beautifying San Fernando Road alongside the railroad tracks, while maintaining this corridor as a crucial transportation and emergency response link and preserving the much needed on-street parking. However, Alternative 1 does not provide an improved bicycle facility.

Alternative 2 is not supported by most of the residents and businesses along the corridor and in the neighborhoods that are impacted by the project due to the elimination of on-street parking along San Fernando Road. Furthermore, this alternative would transfer the current on-street parking demand along San Fernando Road to the adjacent residential neighborhoods. Finally, bicyclists will be traveling in both directions in an unprotected state on a heavily traveled corridor.

Alternative 2A maintains parking spaces but leaves bicyclists traveling southbound in an unprotected state on a heavily traveled corridor and eliminates bicycle connectivity for northbound cyclists. It does not impact corridor service levels, provides a dedicated bicycle lane southbound resulting in an improved active transportation facility, while also beautifying San Fernando Road, and preserving on-street parking. In further discussing this option with the GFD, they agree that although the two 10 foot wide lanes going south and one that is going north, are not ideal width, they can accommodate emergency responders.

Alternatives 3 and 3A impact emergency response operations. Furthermore, these alternatives are also not supported by most of the residents and businesses who are impacted by its implementation.

Based on the foregoing analysis, comparison of various alternatives, and the discussion and feedback at the TPC, staff is recommending moving forward with Alternative 2A.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Prior to the application of CCLGP funds to beautify and improve the San Fernando Road corridor, a project-specific community engagement campaign was initiated to collect feedback on the project to further support the grant application. As part of the public information campaign, a factsheet was prepared that summarized key components of the project with a link to a brief online survey. This information was provided to the public through an email blast to stakeholder groups and posted on the city’s website and social media platforms (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, etc.). The Public Works Department also created a project webpage, which included a brief description of the project and renderings representing potential improvements for the corridor.

Furthermore, the San Fernando Road Beautification Project is an implementation step that was identified from public involvement obtained in completing the South Glendale Community Plan and supports the goals of other city planning efforts. Public engagement materials during the grant application process included a fact sheet which provided an overview of the project’s improvements and benefits. It also illustrated examples of several infrastructure elements like curb bulb outs, planted medians, and 101 of 289

88a
4 4
7 2
sidewalk plantings. The fact sheet also included links to the project website and project survey. The project survey also included background information on the project, with questions given to stakeholders for public input that focused on the following topics:

1. The type of improvements that would be supported;

2. Input on landscape improvements;

3. Information on how respondents first heard of the project, and

4. Requested contact information to keep respondents informed of the project’s progress and other related information.

The public showed strong support for the project due to the following expected benefits to the community:
•More livable communities;
•Improved safety for all users;
•More walking to improve public health;
•Increased transportation choices, and
•Greenhouse gas reduction and improved air quality.

After the successful receipt of grant funds and during the pre-design development phase of the project, stakeholder and public outreach has included the development of a key stakeholder database, updated fact sheets, a dedicated project webpage and storymap, electronic surveys, city stakeholder briefings, door-to-door business and residential canvassing, and an in-person project community open house. All campaigns were further supported by Spanish and Armenian speaking staff and included print materials in these languages.
•Email Campaign: The email ad campaign aimed to inform and engage the community about the upcoming project. Through a series of outreach events and an interactive online platform, our efforts provided opportunities for community members to learn about the project's goals, provide feedback, and share ideas.

The campaign successfully generated awareness and fostered active participation from the community, who expressed enthusiasm and eagerness about the project. The insights and feedback gathered were considered in the project's planning, ensuring a collaborative approach that reflects the community's needs. Five email campaigns were sent to more than 300 stakeholders between February and March of 2023.
•Door Hangers: The door hanger distribution campaign was launched to inform and involve residents in the upcoming project. By distributing door hangers throughout the community, we aimed to provide concise information about the project's purpose and encourage residents to participate. The door hangers included details on upcoming community meetings, workshops, and the online platform where they could access additional project-related materials. The campaign successfully raised awareness among residents and generated interest, resulting in increased participation in the stakeholder outreach efforts. 102 of 289

98a
4 4
7 2
Over 5000 door hangers were distributed to the businesses and residents around the project in March and April of 2023 over two days.
•Postcard Mailers: Approximately 2250 postcards were distributed to the impacted businesses and residents informing them of the project and the upcoming stakeholder efforts.
•Social Media Campaign: Various social media channels, such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and the city webpage, were utilized to reach a wider audience and generate awareness about the project and its alternatives. •Community Engagement Workshop: An in-person public open house was organized to present the findings of the study and provide an opportunity for community members to ask questions, share concerns, and provide feedback.

This meeting was advertised well in advance, and the length of the meeting was increased for those who could make it earlier and to accommodate those that return home from work later in the evening. The meeting was also held locally in the project neighborhood to make it more convenient for the immediately impacted stakeholders to attend.
•Stakeholder Outreach: Key stakeholders, including local businesses, community organizations, and neighborhood associations, as well as emergency responders such as the Glendale Police and Fire Departments were directly engaged in the outreach process. A dedicated meeting was arranged with the Glendale Fire Department to ensure their input and concerns were considered. •Online Survey-Project Awareness: Between February 17 to 28, 2023, an online survey was conducted to raise awareness about the project. As a result of this online survey, the top improvements requested by the community were the following:
oRoadway/Traffic Improvements (75.2%)
oCorridor Beautification (66.5%)
oPedestrian Improvement (59.1%)
oStreet Parking Improvements (28.9%)
oBikeway Improvements (28.9%)
oTransit Service Improvements (24.8%)
•Online Survey-Project Alternatives: After the development of the initial project alternatives, an online survey was conducted between March 30, 2023, and April 30, 2023, to receive public feedback on the proposed alternatives. Alternative 1 received 37% support. Alternative 2 received 40% support, and Alternative 3 received 55% support, with the survey participants consisting of 38% active cyclists and 44% living near San Fernando Road. 3% of the respondents identified themselves as businesses on San Fernando Road. 103 of 289

108a
4 4
7 2
•Door-to-Door Canvasing: Since the responses to the on-line survey represented a very small portion of the businesses along San Fernando Road, Staff decided to complete a door-to-door canvassing effort. The corridor was surveyed on multiple dates, with businesses surveyed on Wednesday, June 7th, and residents on Friday, June 9th, and Saturday, June 10th. The survey encompassed businesses along San Fernando Road from Elk Avenue to Grandview Avenue, as well as the adjacent side streets within an approximate 250-foot radius of San Fernando Road. The canvassed residential area was primarily in the Pelanconi Neighborhood, located north of Grange Avenue.

Alternative 1 received 93% support, Alternative 2 received 7% support, and Alternative 3 did not receive any support from the business owners. In the residential areas, Alternative 1 received 78% support, Alternative 2 received 21% support, and Alternative 3 received 2% support.

Additionally, during the survey of the residential neighborhood, the residents indicated their concerns about the elimination of street parking and potential increase of cut- through traffic on their residential streets, which could impact the safety of their neighborhood. A notable theme that emerged was a preference to keep San Fernando Road as it is while implementing the beautification improvements consisting of the planted median islands and additional vegetation areas on both sides of the corridor.

PWD staff also held a coordination meeting with the Glendale Fire Department (GFD).

The GFD team noted that San Fernando Road is a major throughfare for emergency response to the City of Glendale as well as some portions of the City of Los Angeles.

Furthermore, GFD indicated that they do not support the proposed lane reconfigurations in Alternative 3 and 3A due to potential impacts to emergency response operations.

GFD representatives expressed their apprehension about potential delays in emergency response times that may arise from the reconfigured lanes. They emphasized the importance of maintaining unimpeded access and swift response capabilities to ensure public safety. Their input highlighted the critical need to balance the benefits of lane reconfiguration with the essential requirement of emergency services. GFD was supportive of any alternative that would not reduce travel lanes on San Fernando Road.

Transportation and Parking Commission (TPC)
On August 21, 2023, staff presented this project to the TPC. The project details were shared, including the bicycle facility alternatives, outreach efforts as of the TPC meeting date, and next steps. Staff recommended Alternative 1 because this alternative in staff’s professional opinion, as well as the consultant’s opinion, achieved the project and grant goals, and is the immediate business and neighborhood community’s preference. This alternative also did not introduce an unprotected bicycle lane and did not limit northbound cyclist connectivity. However, based on the discussion and input received from the TPC, including the idea that having some bike lanes on this road is better than not having any, staff now supports Alternative 2A.

To date, the Public Works Department has conducted an extensive outreach effort to 104 of 289

118a
4 4
7 2
make sure all stakeholder input is also considered in the final project design. Therefore, staff's recommendation to proceed with design plans for Alternative 2A is based on evaluating the different elements of this project, including the main goal of beautifying the corridor, improving access to public spaces, implementing traffic calming measures to improve safety for various modes of travel, and considering public and commission opinion and support.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
The Project is categorically exempt from environmental review because of CEQA Guidelines §15301(c), allows an exemption for the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting or minor alteration of existing public facilities involving negligible or not expansion of the existing or former use, examples include, existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities (this includes road grading for the purpose of public safety, and other alterations such as the addition of bicycle facilities, including but not limited to bicycle parking, bicycle-share facilities and bicycle lanes, transit improvements such as bus lanes, pedestrian crossings, street trees, and other similar alterations that do not create additional automobile lanes).involving.

This project fits precisely into this exemption. It includes planting new drought-tolerant, native landscaping on the west side of San Fernando Road along the railroad tracks, providing ground cover and beautifying the areas near the railroad tracks. It also includes upgraded sidewalks on the east side of the roadway, creating uninterrupted access and providing greater areas for vegetation, increasing pervious surfaces, and reducing storm water runoff to improve water quality. Additional improvements will include high visibility and creative crosswalks at intersections, upgraded bus stop amenities and bus shelter improvements, median islands with bioswale infrastructure between Grandview Avenue and Elk Avenue, drywells, curb bulb-outs, and improved ADA ramps at roadway intersections. All project improvements will be located within city-owned public right-of-way on the western and eastern sides of San Fernando Road.

Alternative 2A is designed to avoid the elimination of the parking lane in Alternative 2, Class II bike lanes may be installed only on the west side of San Fernando Road for the southbound travel direction with the installation of "Enhanced sharrows” in the northbound direction, along with improved signage. This reconfiguration does allow for the preservation of existing on-street parking. However, the proposed bike lane in this option would not be protected on a heavily traveled corridor by both passenger and commercial vehicles, now using narrower lanes. Based on these facts and for these reasons the project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA Guidelines §15301(c).

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
105 of 289

128a
4 4
7 2
Not applicable.

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: Approve the motion accepting staff’s recommendation to proceed with the design and implementation of Alternative 2A for the San Fernando Road Beautification Project.

Alternative 2: Do not approve the motion accepting staff’s recommendation to proceed with the design and implementation of Alternative 2A for the San Fernando Road Beautification Project and authorize staff to proceed with design and implementation of any other alternatives identified in this report.

Alternative 3: The City Council may consider any other alternatives not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Sarkis Oganesyan, P.E., Deputy Director of Public Works/City Engineer Armen Avazian, P.E., Principal Civil Engineer
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1: Project Alternatives
106 of 289

9 4
4 8
MOTION
Moved by Council Member ____________________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________________, that the Council of the City of Glendale hereby accepts staff recommendation of Alternative No. 2A for the San Ferando Road Beautification Project and directs staff to proceed with project design plans and project implementation for Alternative 2A.

Votes as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Abstain:

Absent:

City Clerk
107 of 289

SAN FERNANDO ROAD BEAUTIFICATION AND MULTI-MODAL IMPROVEMENTS EXHIBIT 1: PROJECT ALTERNATIVES

ALTERNATIVE 1

MATCH EXISTING LANE CONFIGURATION, NO BIKE LANES

108 of 289

San Fernando Road Beautification and Multi-Modal Improvements Page 2 Exhibit 1: Project Alternatives

ALTERNATIVE 2

CLASS II BIKE LANES

109 of 289

San Fernando Road Beautification and Multi-Modal Improvements Page 3 Exhibit 1: Project Alternatives

ALTERNATIVE 2A

SOUTHBOUND CLASS II BIKE LANE ONLY

110 of 289

San Fernando Road Beautification and Multi-Modal Improvements Page 4 Exhibit 1: Project Alternatives

ALTERNATIVE 3

CLASS IV PROTECTED BIKEWAY

111 of 289

San Fernando Road Beautification and Multi-Modal Improvements Page 5 Exhibit 1: Project Alternatives

ALTERNATIVE 3A

CLASS IV PROTECTED TWO-WAY CYCLE TRACK

112 of 289

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Professional Services Agreement with Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. to assist Glendale Water and Power (GWP) with the Development of a Plan to Increase Solar Penetration and Develop Additional Distributed Energy Resources.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent
Approved for August 22, 2023 Calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On November 15, 2022, City Council adopted a Motion authorizing the General Manager of Glendale Water & Power (GWP) to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) soliciting proposals from consulting firms to assist with the development of a Plan to Increase Solar Penetration and Develop Additional DER.

The RFP was issued on December 8, 2022, and the submittal period was closed on March 10, 2023. Based on the results of a competitive selection process, staff recommends E3 to perform the required analysis to achieve the goal of having at least 10% of GWP customers adopt solar and energy storage, calculate the estimated dispatchable capacity, perform a cost-benefit analyses and develop a plan to achieve the set goals. E3 estimates that the entire process will require approximately 8 months to complete.

COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Not applicable.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with E3 to assist GWP with the Development of a Plan to Increase Solar Penetration and Develop Additional DER in the not-to-exceed amount of $335,875.
113 of 289

28b
2 7
2 6

BACKGROUND
On August 16, 2022, City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-125, which among other things, declared the City of Glendale’s intent to adopt policies and practices designed to reach a goal of having at least 10% of GWP customers adopt solar and energy storage systems by 2027, and develop additional demand management measures, with a minimum total peak dispatchable and peak-load-reducing capacity of 100 MW. In support of said goals, City Council directed Staff to issue a RFP to solicit proposals for the engagement of the services of a consultant, or consultants, to develop the plan and to complete the studies and analysis specified in Resolution No. 22-125.

ANALYSIS
On December 8, 2022, GWP issued a RFP for the following services:

Category 1: Develop a plan to achieve the goal of having at least 10% of GWP customers adopt solar and energy storage systems by 2027, and to develop additional demand management measures, with a minimum total peak dispatchable and peak-load-reducing capacity of 100 MW.

Category 2: Calculate the estimated dispatchable capacity and demand reduction that can be achieved through the plan developed in Category 1.

Category 3: Complete a cost benefit analysis of the plan developed in Category 1. The analysis must include: direct and indirect economic benefits and costs, as well as environmental, societal, and other noneconomic benefits and costs; and direct and indirect impacts to low- and moderate-income households.

If the analysis concludes any negative impacts on low-and-moderate- income households, include program options to mitigate the impact.

Proposers could submit a proposal for one, two or all three categories.

The initial proposal submittal deadline was extended from February 10, 2023, to March 10, 2023, to allow additional time for proposal submittal.

Proposal Selection and Evaluation
GWP received proposals from the following six (6) firms:
oCenter for Sustainable Energy (Partner: Strategen)
oEcoMotion Inc (Subcontractor: Verdant Associates, LLC) oEnergeia USA (Partner: Consensus)
oEnergy and Environmental Economics, Inc (E3)
oMCR Corporate Services, Inc (Partner: Enerlogics Networks, Inc) oOptony, Inc (Subcontractors: NewGen Strategies & Solutions LLC) GWP staff conducted a competitive selection process with the six respondents rating proposals based on criteria that include Qualification and Experience, Reasonableness 114 of 289

38b
2 7
2 6
and Quality of the Proposal, Proposed Methodology/Approach to be used in development of the Cost-Benefit Analysis, Ability to meet proposed schedule and budget estimates, and lastly, Proposed Cost.

Interviews were conducted with each proposer seeking additional details about planned outreach efforts, initial assessment of feasibility to reach set goals, experience doing assessments of lower-income and underserved communities, and preferred tools and methodologies to be used for Categories 2 and 3.

These interviews also provided each proposer an opportunity to further clarify any of their strengths or prior experience. The additional clarification from the interviews was considered in the final scoring.

The table below illustrates the rating for proposers based on the selection criteria.

Table I
E3 ranked the highest based on overall score, as summarized in Table I.

Project Approach and Methodology
Upon execution of the contract, E3 will start with evaluating the adoption potential for GWP in the following three categories:

Category 1
(1) review existing GWP data, (2) determine solar and battery technical capacity potential, (3) gather market segmentation data, and proceed with (4) developing a plan for mix of customer and GWP controlled sites, (5) identify robust Net Metering Policy, Feed-In Tariffs, Incentives and Rebates and (6) develop equitable program options.

When designing programs and incentives, E3 will concentrate on: (1) bundled DER offering, (2) contractor vetting, (3) designer guidelines, (4) demand response, (5) permitting, and (6) resilience planning.

There will be outreach and engagement with customers throughout the planning process.

E3’s sister company, Willdan will identify and include Community Solar Projects and will work on integrating with additional DER technologies.
115 of 289

48b
2 7
2 6
The result of this work will be a formal plan with prioritized approaches and strategies with input from GWP and its customers.

Category 2
(1) review and summarize GWP’s Integrated Resource Plan, with a focus on load and DER forecasts to ensure accurate representation, (2) use NREP ResStock to quantify the dispatchable capacity and demand reduction potential of DERs (through its RESTORE model) for valuation & rate design considerations and (3) leverage its experience performing resource adequacy analyses for other CA utilities and use these utilities’ results to quantify Effective Load Carrying Capacity (ELCC) for demand reduction.

Category 3
E3 is currently implementing several improvements for 2024 update of CPUC Avoided Cost Calculator to better reflect value of DER in low carbon planning paradigm that they will be using as part of the cost-benefit analysis. They will use GWP IRP results to update avoided costs, with an emphasis on Green House Gas emissions, clean/renewable energy, system and local capacity value.

In determining the non-energy benefits to be included in an analysis of GWP’s solar plus storage, E3 will provide well-reasoned methods and explanations for which benefits to include and appropriate methods for quantification, with an emphasis on which benefits are and are not appropriate for host customer and societal perspectives or quantification in a cost-benefit analysis.

To the extent that there are any differences in costs and benefits available to low-income households, a separate cost-benefit analysis will be conducted from the customer perspective to incorporate these differences.

Willdan has been implementing a commercial direct installation program for GWP since 2021 and has been meeting contractual targets.

Stakeholder Engagement
Seeking stakeholder information will be an open, fair, and accessible process by which individuals, groups, and organizations representing a reasonable cross section of the Glendale community can provide contributions towards the development of DER programs.

Included in E3’s proposal and cost are community engagement efforts, including three (3) community meetings as part of this planning process. During those meetings E3 will provide multi-lingual materials and communication to residents in different parts of the city to understand barriers to DER adoption and areas of particular concern and will work with GWP to share information about other available programs and benefits for their customers in attendance. E3’s Environmental Justice lead will support these efforts to ensure that diverse perspectives are included and that proposals are equitable. 116 of 289

58b
2 7
2 6
Project Description: City of Glendale, Water & Power
Plan to Increase Solar Penetration and Develop
Additional DER
Procurement Method (RFP / SS): Request for Proposal
Advertisement Method: City of Glendale Website
RFP Issued: 12/8/2022
RFP Due Date: 3/10/2023
Company Name(s): oCenter for Sustainable Energy
oEcoMotion Inc
oEnergeia USA
oE3, Inc
oMCR Corporate Services, Inc
oOptony Inc
Selection Criteria: Qualification and Experience, Reasonableness and Quality of the Proposal, Proposed
Methodology/Approach to be used in
development of the Cost-Benefit Analysis, Ability
to meet proposed schedule and budget
estimates, Proposed Cost.

Recommended Company or
Consultant:

E3, Inc
Contract Term: Upon completion of work
Project Begins: Upon execution of Agreement
Project Ends: Upon receipt of deliverables

CONTRACT DASHBOARDS
Not Applicable.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Not Applicable.

FISCAL IMPACT
The total not-to-exceed amount for the agreement is $335,875. Funding associated with this agreement for the current fiscal year is available in the FY 2023-2024 budget.

Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$335,875 GL: 43110-5820-GWP-4520-
P0000-T1562-F0000-0000-0000
Electric Works Revenue Fund
117 of 289

68b
2 7
2 6

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Not Applicable. The action herein is to award a PSA for the development of a plan and thus is not a project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
In accordance with the City Campaign Finance Ordinance No. 5744, the Campaign Disclosures including the names and business addresses of the members of the board of directors, the chairperson, CEO, COO, CEO, subcontractors, and any person or entity with more than ten percent interest in the company are attached as follows:

Exhibit 1: Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. (E3) Exhibit 2: Center for Sustainable Energy (Partner: Strategen) Exhibit 3: EcoMotion Inc (Subcontractor: Verdant Associates, LLC) Exhibit 4: Energeia USA (Partner: Consensus)
Exhibit 5: MCR Corporate Services, Inc (Partner: Enerlogics Networks, Inc) Exhibit 6: Optony, Inc (Subcontractors: NewGen Strategies & Solutions LLC)

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: Authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a Professional Services Agreement with E3, Inc to develop a Plan to Increase Solar Penetration and Develop Additional DER, for the not-to-exceed amount of $335,875.

Alternative 2: Not Authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a Professional Services Agreement with E3, Inc to develop a Plan to Increase Solar Penetration and Develop Additional DER.

Alternative 3: Consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Scott Mellon, Assistant General Manager, Power Management - GWP Herbert Garcia, PBC Marketing Manager – GWP
Aneta Badalian, Business Transformation Manager – GWP
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager
118 of 289

78b
2 7
2 6

EXHIBITS / ATTACHMENTS
Campaign Disclosures for proposers as follows:

Exhibit 1: Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. (E3) Exhibit 2: Center for Sustainable Energy
Exhibit 3: EcoMotion Inc
Exhibit 4: Energeia USA
Exhibit 5: MCR Corporate Services, Inc
Exhibit 6: Optony, Inc
119 of 289

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member ________________________________, seconded by Council Member __________________________________, that the Council of the City of Glendale hereby authorizes the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. (E3) to assist Glendale Water & Power (GWP) with the Development of a Plan to Increase Solar Penetration and Develop Additional Distributed Energy Resources (DER) in the not to exceed amount of $335,875, as described in the Report Dated August 22, 2023 by the General Manager of GWP. The City Manager, or his designee, is authorized to execute said PSA subject to approval by the City Attorney.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
120 of 289

121 of 289

122 of 289

123 of 289

124 of 289

125 of 289

City of Glendale
Plan to Increase Solar Penetration and Develop Additional Distributed Energy Resources RFP DISCLOSURE - CAMPAIGN FINANCE ORDINANCE – CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5744, “Campaign Finance Ordinance,” which became effective on September 9, 2011, and amended it with Ordinance No. 5768, which became effective on March 15, 2012 (“the Ordinance”). The Ordinance prohibits: (1) A contractor* (including a subcontractor** Glendale (“City”), Glendale Successor Agency or Glendale Redevelopment Agency (“GSA”), or the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale (“HA”) and that contract is subject Clerk, or City Treasurer; and (2) Council
members, GSA members, and HA members from voting on matters concerning a contract affecting a contractor or subcontractor who has provided a campaign contribution.

The provisions of the Ordinance restricting Council members from voting on matters affecting campaign contributors applies to a contractor whose contract requires the City Council’s, GSA’s, or HA’s approval, and specified subcontractors. A contract with the City, GSA, or HA is known as a “City Contract.” The Ordinance excludes a competitively bid contract awarded to the lowest responsible bidder.

To assist members of the City Council, GSA, and HA before they vote on a matter regarding a City Contract, the Ordinance requires City staff to prepare this report which discloses certain information about: the contractor receiving the City Contract, and specified subcontractor(s) working under the City Contract.

Information that must be disclosed: Name of the person, entity, or organization (i.e., the Contractor or Subcontractor) Name of the Chief Executive Officer/President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Chairperson
All members of the Board of Directors
All persons who own more than 10% of the person, entity, or organization Name of any campaign committee owned or controlled by the person, entity, or organization Please complete the following disclosure form:

Contractor(s)*:

Name Address
EcoMotion 216 West Kenneth Road, Glendale, CA 91202
Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Chairperson
Ted Flanigan Chief Executive Officer / President 216 West Kenneth Road Chief Operating Officer
Glendale CA 91202
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
More than 10% interest owner
* “Contractor” is the person, entity, or organization that is the party, or prospective party, to the contract with the City, GSA, or HA. In addition to the name of the person, or entity, the Contractor must also disclose the name(s) of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Please disclose these persons’ name and business address.

PF:25
126 of 289

City of Glendale
Plan to Increase Solar Penetration and Develop Additional Distributed Energy Resources RFP Subcontractor(s)**:

Name
Verdant Associates
Address
1972 Los Angeles Avenue, Berkeley, California, 94707
Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Chairperson 1972 Los Angeles Avenue Berkeley CA 94707
Dr. Jean Shelton Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
More than 10% interest owner
** “Subcontractor” is a person, entity, or organization that has entered into a contract for the performance of all or a portion of the work undertaken under an agreement with an architect, design professional, engineer, or general or prime contract, usually by a general or prime contractor. You must also disclose the names of each Subcontractor’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons’ name and business address. Attach additional forms as needed for additional Subcontractors.

Campaign Committee owned or controlled by:

Title Business Address City State Zip

CERTIFICATION
On behalf of the above-named x Contractor Subcontractor:

I acknowledge that I have a continuing obligation to update this disclosure form if I substitute or if I select additional architects, design professionals, contractors, or subcontractors within ten (10) days of the selection or change; and I hereby certify that:

In total, this disclosure form (including attachments) is 1 pages.

Executed on:

Signature:

February 10 , 20 23 , at: Glendale , California.

Print Full Name: Ted Flanigan
Address: 216 West Kenneth Road
Phone Number: 949 - 292 - 7314 E-mail Address: [email protected] PF:26
127 of 289

Confidential Page 43 of 89 February 2023

128 of 289

Confidential Page 42 of 89 February 2023
Disclosure – Campaign Finance Ordinance Form
129 of 289

130 of 289

131 of 289

To assist members of the City Council, GSA, and HA before they vote on a matter regarding a City Contract, the Ordinance requires City staff to prepare this report which discloses certain information about: the contractor receiving the City Contract, and specified subcontractor(s) working under the City Contract.

Contractor(s)*:

Name Address
Optony, Inc 5201 Great America Pkwy, Suite 320, Santa Clara, CA 95054 Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Byron Pakter Chairperson same as below
Byron Pakter
Jonathan Whelan
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
5201 Great America Pkwy, Suite 320
5201 Great America Pkwy, Suite 320
Santa Clara
Santa Clara
CA
CA
95054
95054
More than 10% interest owner
* “Contractor” is the person, entity, or organization that is the party, or prospective party, to the contract with the City, GSA, or HA. In addition to the name of the person, or entity, the Contractor must also disclose the name(s) of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Please disclose these persons’ name and business address.

PF:25
132 of 289

City of Glendale
Plan to Increase Solar Penetration and Develop Additional Distributed Energy Resources RFP Subcontractor(s)**:

Name Address
NewGen Strategies and Solutions, LLC
Full Name
Mike Lane
225 Union Blvd., Ste. 450, Lakewood, CO 80228
Title
Chairperson
Business Address City State
TN
Zip
49 Music Square West, Ste. 505 Nashville 37203
David Yanke Chief Executive Officer / President 8140 N. Mopac Expy., Bldg. 1, Ste. 240 Austin TX 78759 Chief Operating Officer
Christopher Ekrut Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
Richardson TX275 W. Campbell Rd., Ste. 440 75080
Anthony Georgis More than 10% interest owner 225 Union Blvd., Ste. 450 Lakewood CO 80228 ** “Subcontractor” is a person, entity, or organization that has entered into a contract for the performance of all or a portion of the work undertaken under an agreement with an architect, design professional, engineer, or general or prime contract, usually by a general or prime contractor. You must also disclose the names of each Subcontractor’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons’ name and business address. Attach additional forms as needed for additional Subcontractors.

NACampaign Committee owned or controlled by:

Title Business Address City State Zip

CERTIFICATION
On behalf of the above-named X Contractor Subcontractor:

I have identified all persons for which the Ordinance requires disclosure; The information in this disclosure form (and any attachment to this form) is true, accurate, correct, and complete; and I have been legally authorized to submit this disclosure form. 2In total, this disclosure form (including attachments) is pages. , at:February 8 23 Berkeley
Print Full Name:

Executed on:

Signature:
, 20 , California.

Byron Pakter
5201 Great America Pkwy, Suite 320, Santa Clara, CA 95054 (510) 705-2811
Address:
[email protected] Number: XXXXXXXXXXX 408-567-9216 E-mail Address:

PF:26
133 of 289

CITY OF GLENDALE

GLENDALE WATER & POWER
Proposal
Plan to Increase Solar and DER
February 7, 2023
134 of 289

Volume I - Proposal Forms
135 of 289

PF:1
APPENDIX D –

PROPOSAL FORMS AND DETAILED INSTRUCTIONS

PROPOSAL CHECKLIST
The City has developed this optional checklist to assist Proposers in complying with the proposal submittal requirements.

Volume I – PROPOSAL FORMS
___ Proposal Form and Signature Page
___ Notarial Acknowledgement Form
___ Experience Form and Attached Brief description of each Project ___ Proposer’s Qualifications Statement
___ Insurance Requirements Affidavit
___ Disclosure – Campaign Finance Ordinance Form
___ Public Records Exempt Information
Volume II – MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL
___ Organization/ Management Approach to the Work
___ Qualifications of Key Personnel
___ Key Personnel References
Volume III – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
___ Project Summary
___ Budget
___ Project Development Process
___ Project Implementation Timeline
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
136 of 289

137 of 289

138 of 289

139 of 289

140 of 289

141 of 289

142 of 289

143 of 289

144 of 289

145 of 289

146 of 289

147 of 289

148 of 289

149 of 289

150 of 289

151 of 289

152 of 289

153 of 289

154 of 289

155 of 289

156 of 289

157 of 289

158 of 289

159 of 289

160 of 289

161 of 289

Volume II - Management Proposal
162 of 289

Table of Contents
Organizational/Management Approach to the Work _____________________________ 1

1.1 Team Structure ______________________________________________________________ 2

1.2 Approach to Risk Management __________________________________________________ 3 Qualifications of Key Personnel ______________________________________________ 4 Key Personnel References __________________________________________________ 16

3.1 Snuller Price, Senior Advisor ___________________________________________________ 16

3.2 Eric Cutter, Project Lead ______________________________________________________ 16

3.3 Margo Bonner, Project Manager ________________________________________________ 17

3.4 Patrick Burgess, DER Lead _____________________________________________________ 18

3.5 Sierra Spencer, Cost Benefit Lead _______________________________________________ 18

163 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 1
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Organizational/Management Approach to the Work Organizational/Management Approach to the Work
E3 has decades of experience completing complex, multi -stakeholder projects on tight deadlines, and understands what it will take to provide GWP with a high-quality plan. This section defines our approach to working closely with GWP to ensure that we hit t he ground running and manage the Study appropriately.

E3 will provide GWP with a project management team consisting of a Project Lead, Project Manager, and two Senior Advisors. The Project Lead will be responsible for the direction of the project and the quality of all project deliverables. The Project Manager will be the day -to-day point of contact for GWP and will coordinate the E3 team’s timely completion of all tasks. The Senior Advisors will focus their support at strategic junctures in the project, including participation in important stakeholder engagement activities and during meetings between the E3 team and GWP. E3 has successfully deployed this project management model for many large, multi-stakeholder projects.

Upon contract execution, the E3 project team will develop a draft work plan showing a detailed scope of work, assignment of E3 project members to tasks, project timeline, and potential stakeholders.

E3’s project manager will schedule an online project kick-off meeting with GWP to discuss the work plan, project deliverables and logistics. During the project, our project manager will establish regular check -in meetings with the project manager from GWP to ensure clear communication and real -time feedback regarding the project’s progress.

Following the project kick-off meeting, E3 will organize biweekly meetings with GWP to provide updates on progress towards key deliverables and to identify any challenges or key questions for GWP’s review.

E3 will circulate agendas in advance of each meeting and will follow up with meeting minutes and a written summary of action items following each meeting. The E3 project team will prepare monthly progress reports describing the work completed to date, budget status, and next steps on each task. The progress report will include an updated project milestone schedule , a list of activities completed and not accomplished since the previous report, identification of any items that might impact the project schedule and an updated list of action items. Should any delay arise which impacts deliverable dates, the GWP team will be notified immediately of the cause of the delay and a plan will be put in place to ensure the project remains on track.

Project Communication deliverables and schedule
Deliverables Schedule
Meeting minutes of each E3 and GWP meeting Within two days of call/meeting Coordination call summaries Within one day of call
Monthly Progress Reports By the 7th day of following month 164 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 2
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Organizational/Management Approach to the Work

1.1 Team Structure
Given the interdisciplinary nature of this work, covering program and implementation potential, impacts on customer demand, and avoided costs and cost benefit analysis, E3 has developed a project leadership team that draws expertise from across our firm. T he E3 team structure is pictured below, with brief role descriptions below. Team member resumes are included in Section 2 of this Management Proposal.

Eric Cutter, Partner at E3, will be the partner engaged in this work and will be responsible for the overall work quality as the Lead Partner. He will provide strategic direction and oversight for this work as the Project Lead. Margo Bonner, Managing Consultant at E3 , will serve as the day -to-day Project Manager and the primary contact between E3 and GWP. Patrick Burgess, Vice President at Willdan, will be the DER Lead on this project. He will leverage his implementation expertise to lead Category 1. Sierra Spencer, Senior Consultant at E3, will lead Category 2 a nd Category 3 , supported by E3 analysts Charlie Duff, Fangxing Liu, Tara Katamay-Smith, and Hannah Platter, who will provide modeling, analytical support, and technical writing. The project team will be rounded out by subject-matter experts (SMEs) from across E3 to provide insight on key aspects of the project.
165 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 3
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Organizational/Management Approach to the Work

1.2 Approach to Risk Management
All E3 work products, including models and reports, go through rigorous quality control and internal scrutiny and debate before they are released. All client deliverables are thoroughly reviewed by the E3 Project Manager before delivery to the client. Additionally, E3’s breadth of project resources provides cross-checking of results against similar analysis. E3 monitors and tracks quality of performance of staff and subcontractors to ensure contract compliance and excellence.

The importance of producing high -quality, error-free technical work is evident in a number of facets of our organization:

First, we structure our project teams to ensure each project has the direct att ention of multiple senior staff. Each project is assigned a Project Lead, a Project Manager, and technical or task leads, and all three positions play crucial roles in the successful outcome of the project. The Project Lead, either a Partner or Director with 10+ years of industry experience, guides the overall direction of the project and applies his/her extensive knowledge to ensure the analysis aligns with expectations and is consistent with E3’s larger body of work. The Project Lead is supported by a Project Manager who oversees day -to-day operations managing project resources, deliverables, and close coordination with th e client. The Project Manager develops and maintains a project plan, schedule and action log, organizes and maintains project records including meeting materials and notes, and reports progress on a regular cadence. A Technical Lead is also assigned whose responsibility is to attend to the quality of the technical analysis. Our Technical Leads have generally developed deep working knowledge of the models they oversee and have strong intuition for the results.

Second, E3 has instituted a rigorous internal t raining program for all new consultants. E3’s new hire training program is a lecture- and homework-style training course that ensures all of E3’s consultants are well-versed and experienced in the fundamentals of energy systems modelling and understand the standards to which their work will be held. E3’s training program also includes a “continuing-education”- style component whereby staff can seek further training on specific models and topics outside of normal project work as their careers at E3 progress.

Third, E3 has developed internal protocols and best practices for data management. A common source of errors in technical work originates when data is transferred between parties and is either misinterpreted or mismanaged after receipt. Our data management practices require our employees to store and share data in a consistent format and structure to reduce the likelihood of these types of errors. Further, our data management policies are designed to mitigate version control issues.

Finally, E3 has developed diagnostic reports and checks for our most common modelling tools that allow us to identify errors and correct them quickly. Many of these diagnostic reports, written as Python-based add-ons that print out diagnostics and key results with each model run, provide us with a regular and consistent approach to error-checking and flagging erroneous results.

Through these measures, E3 has developed a reputation for extremely high -quality analysis and reports that our clients can be confident are accurate and ca n withstand intense regulatory and stakeholder scrutiny.
166 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 4
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Qualifications of Key Personnel Qualifications of Key Personnel
Resumes for the key personnel on the E3 team begin on the following page.

167 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 5
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Qualifications of Key Personnel Snuller Price
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 1500, San Francisco, CA 94104 [email protected]

ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS, INC. San Francisco, CA Senior Partner

Mr. Price joined E3 in 1993 and Distributed Energy Resource (DER) practice area. For over 25 years, he has helped state and federal government agencies, utilities, and technology companies recognize and support a clean energy transition. His work in regulatory analysis focuses on evaluation of DER cost-effectiveness and he has contributed to assessments of the largest and most sophisticated DER programs in the U.S., including those in California, New York, and other states. He has also built several tools to support utility planning and assessment of distributed resources as well as rooftop solar, energy storage, advanced demand response, building standards, and other resources. In 2012, Mr. Price co-authored a landmark E3 article in the journal Science exploring the pivotal role of electrification in achieving deep greenhouse gas reductions. His clients include state agencies such as California Public Utilities Commission, California Energy Commission, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority; utilities such as Pacific Gas and Electric, Consolidated Edison, Southern California Edison, National Grid; and technology companies and others. Some select projects at E3 by practice area include:

Distributed Energy Resources:

o Technical lead for New York City Local Law 97 Implementation Action Plan for the NYC Department of Energy Management. This project, currently underway, charts an implementation plan to achieve 40% reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in city operations by 2025, and 50% reduction by 2030.
o Lead investigator for the development of California’s Avoided Costs (2004 to Present). Mr. Price oversees the E3 work on the cost-effectiveness framework for California’s DER cost- effectiveness assessment used to evaluate the nearly $2 billion per year portfolio. o Lead investigator for the development of the Time-Dependent Valuation (TDV) methodology adopted by the California Energy Commission for the 2005, 2008, 2013, 2016, and 2019 Title 24 Building Standards.
o Led numerous analyses on the cost-effectiveness of Net Energy Metering for state commissions, energy offices, and legislatures. Work was completed in California, Nevada, New York, and other states and jurisdictions.

Energy Transition:

o Led analysis of the impact of California’s Assembly Bill 32 (Global Warming Solutions Act) on the electricity sector for the California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) and California Air Resources Board (CARB). Continues to lead the E3 team in supporting the ARB in periodic Scoping Plan Updates.
o Principal Investigator for New York State Energy Research and Development Authority in the development of deep decarbonization scenarios for New York in support of the CLCPA. o Updated the energy efficiency framework to allow California’s public purpose funds to be spent on fuel switching subject to emissions, source energy, and cost-effectiveness criteria.

168 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 6
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Qualifications of Key Personnel Energy Efficiency and Demand Response:

o Supported the work to develop the U.S. EPA / DOE National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency.

Led the development of materials for the Leadership Group on the following topics: the business case for energy efficiency; decoupling and incentives for utility shareholders; and integrating energy efficiency in resource planning. Provided material contributions to the 2015 DOE Quadrennial Energy Review on energy efficiency, solar rooftops, and energy storage. o Led the team that developed the CPUC Demand Response cost-effectiveness tool, the “DR Screening Template.” Supported the California ISO in its response to FERC regarding Order 719 and the status of demand response in California. Supported the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab Demand Response Potential Study released in 2016.

Integrated Distribution Planning:

o Since 1993, Mr. Price has led dozens of studies and pilots on the economics of distributed resources across a range of technologies including renewables, energy storage, combined heat and power, demand response, and energy efficiency. He has evaluated numerous local integrated resource planning (LIRP) analyses for distribution utilities and developed several economic and reliability screening tools to evaluate distributed resource.

Education

Stanford University Palo Alto, CA M.S., Engineering Economic Systems and Operations Research 1998

Swarthmore College Swarthmore, PA
B.A., Economics and B.S., Engineering 1993

Selected Professional Reports and Publications

1. A. Mahone, Dr. Z. Subin, J. Kahn-Lang, D. Allen, V. Li, G. De Moor, Dr. N. Ryan, S. Price “Deep Decarbonization in a High Renewables Future: Updated Results from the California PATHWAYS Model” (2018).

2. Aas, D., S. Bharadwaj, A. Mahone, Z. Subin, T. Clark, S. Price “Pacific Northwest Pathways to 2050” (2018).

3. Price, S., Z. Ming, A. Ong “Nevada Net Energy Metering Impacts Evaluation 2016 Update” (2016)

4. J.Williams, A. DeBenedictis, R.Ghanadan, A. Mahone, J. Moore, W. Morrow III, S. Price, M.

Torn, “The Technology Path to Deep Greenhouse Gas Emissions Cuts by 2050: The Pivotal Role of Electricity” Science 06 Jan 2012: Vol. 335, Issue 6064, pp. 53-59.

5. Sreedharan, P., D. Miller, S. Price and C.K. Woo (2012) "Avoided cost estimation and cost- effectiveness of permanent load shifting in California," Applied Energy, 96, 115-121.

6. Moore, J., C.K. Woo, B. Horii, S. Price and A. Olson (2010) "Estimating the Option Value of a Non- firm Electricity Tariff," Energy, 35, 1609-1614.
169 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 7
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Qualifications of Key Personnel Eric Cutter
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 1500, San Francisco, CA 94104 [email protected]

ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS, INC. San Francisco, CA Partner

Mr. Cutter leads E3’s practice area enabling distributed resources and electric vehicles to serve as valuable resources for the electric grid. He manages E3’s team working on vehicle grid integration with utilities, regulators, automakers and electric vehicle service providers to develop strategic roadmaps, perf orm cost-benefit analysis and develop business strategies. Building on decades of experience in distributed resources, Mr. Cutter is also leading work on valuation of energy storage and flexible loads, with an emphasis on distribution planning. Prior to joining E3, he worked as an independent consultant in water resources for seven years, and at PG&E for ten years. Some Mr. Cutter’s recent projects include:

o Developing transportation electrification strategies for utilities in California, Arizona, the Pacific Northwest, Ohio, Massachusetts, and Quebec, and winning management and regulatory approval supported by robust modeling of EV charging behavior and cost-benefit analysis. o Supporting Nova Scotia Power in the development of its utility electrification strategy. E3’s support included a jurisdictional review of electrification activities across North America, and E3 is now working closely with NS Power to perform several modeling tasks including developing scenario-based building and transportation load shapes consistent with Net-Zero and performing an analysis of the costs and benefits associated with electrification investment. o Quantifying the value of distribution-aware vehicle-to-grid (V2G) EV services for local distribution and wholesale energy market benefits for Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and Nuvve. Leading the team developing E3’s EV Grid Impacts Model optimizing charging behavior for 30+ vehicle types and customer segments.
o Leading development of E3’s Integrated Distributed Energy Resources (IDER) model to develop the business case for targeted deployment of solar, storage, EVs and other DER. Engaged with numerous utilities and project developers to evaluate proposed storage projects in competitive solicitations.
o Leading E3’s advanced cost-benefit analysis for DERs and improved valuation of DERs to support key strategic decision-making regarding impacts on rates, competitiveness, and electrification policy.
o Leading California Solar Initiative (CSI) RD&D $1.8 million PV integrated storage project, deploying Sunverge systems for SMUD to provide local distribution and customer benefits.

Analysis with E3’s Integrated Distributed Energy Resources (IDER) model showed benefits increased by 2.5x when storage is dispatched for utility and customer benefits. o Developing and updating robust models since 2009 calculating avoided costs and reporting on cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency, demand response, and distributed generation programs for four investor-owned and 34 municipal utilities in California.

100TH MERIDIAN San Anselmo, CA Lead Consultant 2000-2005

o Developed robust economic and reservoir operations models for FERC re-licensing proceedings 170 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 8
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Qualifications of Key Personnel o Developed cost of generation model for California Energy Commission comparing costs for different technology, ownership, financing and operating scenarios

PG&E ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION SERVICES San Francisco, CA Senior Resource Analyst 1998-1999

o Developed and promoted policy changes before the California Independent System Operator, saving PG&E over $60 million in annual Reliability Must Run payments; successfully advocated progressive solutions in uncertain regulatory environment

PG&E POWER MARKET PLANNING San Francisco, CA Senior Resource Planner 1997-1998

o Structured and implemented extensive Energy Trading Risk Management System o Created and analyzed hedging strategies for energy trading at real-time desk

PG&E – VARIOUS San Francisco, CA 1989-1997

o Developed and advocated transportation and storage pricing strategies, increasing margins and earning revenues of $7 million per month from sales of storage and transportation products o Implemented risk management procedures for valuing embedded options in transportation and storage contracts
o Lead regulatory policy analyst for implementation of capacity brokering for PG&E’s intra- and interstate natural gas pipelines

Education

University of California Berkeley, CA M.B.A., Haas School of Business
University of California Berkeley, CA M.S., Energy and Water Resources, Energy and Resources Group

Tufts University Medford, MA
B.A., Economics and German, Magna Cum Laude

Refereed Publications

1. E. Cutter, B. Haley, J. Hargreaves, J. Williams, “Utility Scale Energy Storage and the Need for Flexible Capacity Metrics”, Applied Energy, 124 (2014) 274-282.

2. DeBenedictis, A., B. Haley, C.K. Woo, E. Cutter “Operational energy-efficiency improvement of municipal water pumping in California,” Energy, 53 (2013) 237-243.

3. Cutter, Eric A., C.K. Woo, F. Kahrl, A. Taylor “Maximizing the Value of Responsive Load,” The Electricity Journal, (2012) 25:7, 6-16.
171 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 9
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Qualifications of Key Personnel Margo Bonner
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 1500, San Francisco, CA 94104 [email protected]

ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS, INC. Remote
Managing Consultant

Margo Bonner joined E3 in 2022 and will support E3’s work in distributed energy resources. Margo brings over nine years of experience in program design and evaluation, policy analysis, and consulting. Prior to joining E3, Margo worked at Opinion Dynamics, where she conducted market assessments and evaluations of customer -facing energy efficiency programs, primarily within the non -residential sector.

Margo holds a master’s degree in international public policy from the University of California, San Diego and a Bachelor of Science from Georgetown University’s Walsh School of Foreign Service.

OPINION DYNAMICS San Diego, CA
Principal Consultant February 2021 – October 2022

o Lead multiple complex research projects with a focus on distributed energy resources within the non-residential sector.
o Responsible for all aspects of projects, including working with subcontractors, serving as the day-to-day contact for a range of clients (state governments, utilities, and corporations), and managing budget, schedule and deliverables.
o Routinely collaborate with engineering, data analytics, and field research teams to translate technical concepts into meaningful and actionable evaluation results. o Manage and develop two junior staff, including hiring, onboarding, and ongoing performance management.
o Write proposals for new work, including drafting proposed research scopes and developing budgets, schedules and staffing plans.

Managing Consultant February 2020 – February 2021
o Conducted evaluations of pilot programs, emerging technology, and non-resource programs (e.g., energy-efficiency financing mechanisms) for the California Public Utilities Commission. o Managed the analytics and reporting components of a novel research project to understand enduse load profiles in ZNE homes for the California Energy Commission.

Senior Consultant November 2018 – February 2020
o Quantified energy savings and economic impacts achieved by Home Performance with ENERGYSTAR programs.
o Executed GIS analyses using climate and census data to develop customer targeting tools.

Consultant November 2017 – November 2018
o Lead analyst for impact and process evaluations of energy efficiency and demand response programs. Primary responsibilities included developing detailed analysis plans, designing data collection instruments, fielding surveys, aggregating and cleaning large datasets, and translating research into detailed reports and presentations.

UC SAN DIEGO SCHOOL OF GLOBAL POLICY AND STRATEGY La Jolla, CA Graduate Student Researcher January 2016 – August 2017
172 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 10
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Qualifications of Key Personnel

o Performed water consumption and demand forecasting using ecosystem service mapping software for California’s agricultural sector through a National Science Foundation grant focused on monitoring and managing food, energy, and water systems under stress.

BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON, INC. Washington, DC
Senior Consultant January 2014 – June 2015

o Supported the U.S. Navy’s contract and legal teams in all aspects of the defense acquisition process to procure and deploy a $4.3 billion electronic health record system.

Consultant March 2013 – January 2014
o Led policy research and analysis portion of the DoD Base and Installation Defense (DBID) scoping study to define the existing organizational and regulatory landscape related to the military’s base defense operations.
o Initiated and developed in collaboration with engineering team a unique data methodology and mapping system using weighted metrics in support of the DBID team’s cost valuation.

Education

University of California, San Diego La Jolla, CA
M.A., International Politics & Public Policy June 2017

Georgetown University Washington, DC
B.S., Edmund A Walsh School of Foreign Service, International Security Studies May 2013

173 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 11
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Qualifications of Key Personnel

PROFILE
Patrick Burgess has 10 years of experience managing complex energy projects, including the development and deployment of behind the meter distributed energy resources, such as energy storage systems, solar, building electrification, grid management devices, and a fully developed smart grid network and SCADA system at the IIT Microgrid in Chicago. He leads operations for the CA utility programs to deploy demand response enabled heat pump water heaters to commercial customers and has overseen the installation of over 200 projects on time and on budget. He also completed financial and technical stud ies and created feasibility plans for 15 advanced community microgrids for cities in NY (NYSERDA’s NY Prize Program), MA (MassCEC’s Community Microgrid Program), and CA (direct-to-customer work).

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
University of Hawai’i at Mānoa, Strategic Energy Management Plan.

Leads the development of an energy master plan that will guide campus decisions regarding facility updates and ensure they align with University commitments to achieve Zero Net Energy by 2035 and carbon neutrality by 2050. This includes a detailed campus technical review, modeling of solar, storage, hydrogen fue l cell, and cogeneration pathways to meet 2035 and 2050 goals, development of a framework for campus decision making, and publishing a public facing report with findings and recommendations.

PG&E Public EE Program and SCE Commercial Program, California. Leads operations for PG&E Public program and SCE Commercial Program including managing and onboarding subcontractors, training the field audit team, managing engineering, construction managemen t, and permit and project closeout teams for electrical and mechanical upgrades in facilities ranging from police and fire stations and city halls to gyms, hotels, and hospitals. Since 2021, Patrick has led a team of 15 to deliver over 200 projects on time and on budget.

Resilient Solar Storage System and Red Cross Emergency Shelter Site. Managed the implementation for a microgrid at San Jacinto High School, whose gymnasium is a designated Red Cross emergency shelter, to provide prolonged disaster relief through battery backup and microgrid capability during emergencies such as wildfires. Project is funded through the local utility, Southern California Edison, and pilots an innovative solution that can be expanded to other California utilities to provide lon g-term disaster relief capabilities. Performed value engineering to determine quantified needs, benefits, and risks for different combinations of solutions. Designed a resilient energy supply (1 MW solar, 500 kW battery -enabled microgrid) with islanding capabilities.

South Coast Air Quality Management District. Performed engineering design and analysis for a Solar + Storage resilient microgrid combining two designated Red Cross emergency shelter sites that serve over 400 residents in areas at high-risk for wildfire. Performed energy efficiency load reduction study for 20% baseline energy savings, solar analysis for 750 kW of Solar PV, optimal dispatch for 1,600 kWh of energy storage, islanding infrastructure, and controls analysis and developed preliminary technical design costs and configuration for an implementation funding proposal.

EDUCATION
MS, Electrical Engineering
Illinois Institute of
Technology, Chicago, IL

BS, Electrical Engineering,
Illinois Institute of
Technology, Chicago, IL

Patrick
Burgess
DER Lead
10 Years’ Experience
174 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 12
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Qualifications of Key Personnel Sierra Spencer
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 1500, San Francisco, CA 94104 [email protected]

ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS, INC. San Francisco, CA Senior Consultant
Sierra Spencer joined E3 in 2019. Her work focuses on analyzing opportunities to leverage distributed energy resources to reduce the environmental impacts of energy use and supporting clients’ transportation electrification and renewables integration efforts. Sie rra has also worked on long -term resource planning with an emphasis on meeting emission reductions goals, maintaining system reliability, and achieving equitable outcomes. Prior to joining E3, Sierra conducted research on managed charging for electric vehi cles and utilizing biofuels for central heating. In addition to her master’s degree, Sierra received a M.S. in civil and environmental engineering from University of California, Berkeley and a B.S. in engineering and B.A. in environmental studies from Swarthmore College. Recent E3 projects include:
o Xcel Energy (2022). Led a cost-benefit analysis of vehicle electrification in Xcel’s Minnesota and Wisconsin service territories to understand the economic implications of proposed EV charging and school bus purchase programs on Xcel’s Minnesota and Wisconsin drivers, ratepayers, and society as a whole. The cost-benefit analysis and written report supported the regulatory filing of Xcel’s proposed EV programs.
o Pacific Northwest RESOLVE for BPA study on the replacement of Lower Snake River dams (2022). Led RESOLVE modeling to determine the value of the Lower Snake River dams under different clean energy policy, load growth, and emerging technology availability scenarios.

RESOLVE modeling assessed the resources needed to replace the energy and reliability services provided by the dams and the costs associated with those resources. o Electrification Strategy for confidential electric utility (2021-present). Conducted a cost-benefit analysis of transportation electrification, including the electrification of light-duty vehicles, parcel trucks, and transit buses, in the utility’s service territory. Findings from the transportation electrification cost-benefit analysis were evaluated alongside a building electrification analysis to create a comprehensive electrification strategy for the utility. o Black Hills Colorado (2021-2022). Led analysis in E3’s RESOLVE capacity expansion model to assess the cost and reliability implications of options for long-term resource portfolios. o California Public Utilities Commission Net Energy Metering (NEM) proceeding (2021).

Conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of party proposals for reforms to California’s NEM policy. The cost-effectiveness analysis informed the California Energy Commission’s proposed decision on the state’s NEM reform.
o New York Power Authority Transit Bus Electrification Master Plan (2021). Evaluated the cost implications of electrifying New York state’s five largest transit agencies outside of New York City by 2035. Findings were used to inform electrification roadmaps for each transit agency. o EV load shape modeling for utilities and automakers (2019-present). Developed electric vehicle (EV) charging profiles under different charge management strategies using E3’s EV Load Shape Tool for a variety of utility and automaker clients. Charging profiles are used to understand implications of charge management strategies, electric rate designs, and technological innovations on additional load from EV charging.
175 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 13
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Qualifications of Key Personnel o Hawaiian Electric Company EV charging rates and DCFC program expansion regulatory filings (2021). Conducted cost-benefit analyses to support HECO’s filings for Hawaii Public Utilities Commission approval of EV-specific electric rates and public charging infrastructure programs. o California Public Utilities Commission Residential Energy Cost Calculator (2020-2021). Worked to develop the Residential Energy Cost Calculator (RECC) as part of California’s integrated resource planning (IRP) process. The RECC provides 10-year forecasts of customer energy bills and affordability metrics for two dozen types of households in California. The RECC will be used in the IRP process to assess implications of long-term planning decisions, such as emissions reduction targets, on residential customer energy costs and affordability. The RECC can also be used to compare the impacts of electrification and rate design on household energy costs. o Sacramento Municipal Utility District 2030 Zero Carbon Plan (2020-2021). Utilized E3’s RESOLVE capacity expansion tool to assess the resource build and cost implications of different scenarios that comply with SMUD’s 2030 zero emissions goals. Sierra helped to identify optimal resource portfolios under different carbon accounting methodologies and technology availability scenarios.
o Confidential transit agency in US (2019). Ms. Spencer helped determine the most economic renewable energy procurement option to meet a large U.S. transit agency’s long-term sustainability targets. Ms. Spencer led development of load shapes for the transit agency’s end uses and helped calculate the emissions and cost implications of different procurement strategies.

TRANSPORTATION SUSTAINABILITY RESEARCH CENTER Berkeley, CA Graduate Student Researcher August 2018 – August 2019

PRESIDENTIAL SUSTAINABILITY RESEARCH FELLOWSHIP Swarthmore, PA Research Fellow August 2017 – May 2018

SWARTHMORE COLLEGE Swarthmore, PA
Student Researcher November 2017 – May 2018

CLIMATE SYSTEMS ANALYSIS GROUP Cape Town, South Africa Student Researcher January 2017 – June 2017

SWARTHMORE COLLEGE Swarthmore, PA
Student Researcher June 2016 – August 2016

THE PHILADELPHIA ZOO Philadelphia, PA
Environmental Education and Animal Behavior Intern May 2015 – August 2015

Education

University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA M.S., Civil and Environmental Engineering (Energy, Civil Infrastructure, & Climate) 2019

Swarthmore College Swarthmore, PA
B.S., Engineering and B.A., Environmental Studies 2018 176 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 14
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Qualifications of Key Personnel

PROFILE
Ben Laboy leads the implementation and analysis of distributed energy resources, including renewable generation and energy efficiency projects. Providing engineering support, Mr. Laboy performs energy analyses for commercial, industrial and government projects as well as optimization of utility incentives for these projects. Mr. Laboy draws from a strong background in interdisciplinary problem -solving to tackle complicated technical projects and provide reliable results.

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
City of Dublin. Lead Engineer for development of $7M of DER turnkey project scope at 8 different facilities, including solar PV, Battery Energy Storage, EV charging and traditional diesel generators to help the City reduce costs, improve resiliency during grid outages and emergencies and reduce carbon. Developed initial p roject feasibility, subcontractor bidding and pricing and obtained customer buy-in of final project scope.

Currently supporting construction of the selected DER projects to ensure a successful completion.

Escondido Union School District. Supported Escondido Union SD in their efforts to evaluate feasibility and procure solar PV totaling ~2.77 MW in carport and shade structures across 13 sites. Finalized PPA agreements and provided contract negotiation and c onstruction support to the District. Currently supporting $19M in comprehensive energy project scopes, including 1.8MW solar PV and 46 Level 2 EV chargers (including chargers serving the District’s maintenance fleet).

City of Elk Grove. Supported City of Elk Grove in their efforts to evaluate feasibility and procurement of solar PV across three meters at their newly constructed District56 site, which includes an Aquatic Center, a Community/Senior Center, and park spaces. Led engineering analysis efforts to project site load profiles and annual usage totals for the new facilities. Identified optimal solar PV system sizing and preliminary layouts, while also evaluating potential economic benefit of battery energy storage systems. Assessed multiple financin g options for the potential project, including loan and power purchase agreement (PPA) options. Following the feasibility process, assisted the City in writing and publishing an RFP to procure a design -build or PPA project to construct the solar PV system . Currently assisting in contract negotiation efforts with selected vendor and finalizing contract for ground mount system totaling 740 kW.

Eureka City Schools. Supported the design and turnkey installation of a vehicle-to-grid microgrid incorporating 140 kW rooftop solar PV, a 50kW battery energy storage (BES) system, and a school bus and charging station, as well as microgrid controls to coordinate all equipment.

Developed conceptual designs and assisted with procurement and financing strategies resulting in a low/no up front cost to the school for purchase and construction of microgrid.

EDUCATION
MS Earth Systems,
Concentration in Energy
Efficiency, Stanford
University, CA

BS Science, Technology
and Society, Stanford
University, CA

LICENCES &

AFFILIATIONS
Registered Professional
Engineer (Mechanical),
California
Benjamin R.

Laboy
PE
Senior Engineer
8 Years’ Experience
177 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 15
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Qualifications of Key Personnel Golden Empire Transit (GETBus). Lead engineer for the development and procurement of a 438kW PV system and associated 50kW battery energy storage (BES) system designed to power five transit agency buildings as well as a future on-site hydrogen fueling station. Led team that provided 100% engineering design drawings, a Request for Proposal and supporting documents, and assisted with vendor selection and oversight, including technical reviews of construction documents.

University of Hawai’i at Manoa. Lead Engineer for the analysis and development of renewable generation resources as part of the University’s Strategic Energy Master Plan. Developing engineering analyses for new solar PV, battery storage, and other Distributed Energy Resource (DER) options, as well as the evaluation of historical data for existing DER systems. Also supporting the evaluation of how planned increases in renewable generation capacity impact options for achieving zero-net energy (ZNE) and zero -net carbon at the building and campus level.

Culver City. Provided engineering analysis for solar PV and battery storage technology as part of a microgrid feasibility study for the Culver City Senior Center and Parks and Recreation facilities. Identified ~750 kW potential solar PV capacity along with battery storage solution to couple with energy efficiency projects to form a truly resilient microgrid solution for the site.

City of Palm Springs. Supported City of Palm Springs in their efforts to procure solar across three sites totaling ~2.4 MW. Currently overseeing inspection services subcontractor and reporting to City on progress. Each site has unique requirements with various system types including roof mount solar, and ground mount solar.

Merced Community College District. Supported Merced CCD in their efforts to evaluate feasibility and procure solar PV totaling ~450 kW in carport structures at their Los Banos campus. Currently evaluating vendor proposals and providing contract negotiation support to the District.

Mira Costa Community College District. Supported Mira Costa CCD in their efforts to evaluate feasibility of solar PV across three sites totaling ~4.2 MW in carport structures. Currently assisting in procurement efforts and phasing strategy with District’s Facilities Master Plan. Each site has unique requirements and phasing timelines due to Master Plan schedule.

178 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 16
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Key Personnel References Key Personnel References

3.1 Snuller Price, Senior Advisor
Client: California Energy Commission
Project: California Title 24 Building Energy Standard Updates Reference: Andrew McAllister, Commissioner
Contact Information: 916-879-1383
[email protected]

Client: Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) Project: Residential Building Electrification in California Reference: David Jacot, P.E., Director of Efficiency Solutions Contact Information: 213-367-0936
[email protected]

Client: Sacramento Municipal Utility District
Project: SMUD Carbon Calculator Tool
Reference: Obadiah Bartholomy, Manager of Distributed Energy Resources Contact Information: 916-732-6835
[email protected]

3.2 Eric Cutter, Project Lead
Client: California Public Utilities Commission
Project: CPUC Integrated DER Cost-effectiveness Framework and Update Reference: Joy Morgenstern, Ph.D., Senior Regulatory Analyst, Energy Division Contact Information: (415) 703-1900
[email protected]

179 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 17
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Key Personnel References Client: Portland General Electric
Project: PGE DER Cost-effectiveness Framework
Reference: Bachir Salpagarov, Principal Strategy and Planning Analyst Contact Information: 971-998-5001
[email protected]

3.3 Margo Bonner, Project Manager
Client: California Public Utilities Commission
Project: CPUC Advanced Rate Redesign Project:

Reference: Ankit Jain, Senior Analyst
Contact Information: 415-703-5322
[email protected]

Project: Dominion Energy South Carolina Non-Residential Market Study Reference: Melanie Munroe, Project Lead
Contact Information: 339-222-9016
[email protected]

Client: San Diego Gas & Electric
Project: SDG&E Residential EE Market Study
Reference: Dan Chen, IT VMO Project Advisor
Contact Information: 917-330-1373
[email protected]

180 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 18
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Key Personnel References

3.4 Patrick Burgess, DER Lead
Client: University of Hawai’i at Mānoa
Project: University of Hawai’i at Mānoa Strategic Energy Management Plan (SEMP) Reference: Miles Topping, Director of Energy Management Contact Information: [email protected]

Client: Illinois Institute of Technology
Project: Illinois Institute of Technology Perfect Power Microgrid Reference: Dr. Mohammad Shahidehpour, Director, Galvin Center for Electricity Innovation Contact Information: [email protected]

Client: Southern California Edison
Project: Red Cross Emergency Shelter Microgrid Pilot, San Jacinto Reference: Priscilla Ortiz, New Product Opportunities, Customer Programs and Services Contact Information: [email protected]

3.5 Sierra Spencer, Cost Benefit Lead
Client: Xcel Energy
Project: Xcel Energy Upper Midwest EV Cost-Benefit Analysis Reference: Jason Peuquet, Strategy and Policy Manager, Clean Transportation Contact Information: [email protected]

Client: Hawaiian Electric Company
Project: Hawaiian Electric Company EV DCFC Public Charging Program, HECO EV Rate Design and Make Ready Pilots
Reference: Lisa Giang, Director, Corporate Energy Planning Division Contact Information: [email protected]

181 of 289

City of GlendaleCity of Glendale
City of Glendale 19
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Key Personnel References Client: Nova Scotia Power
Project: Nova Scotia Power Electrification Cost-Benefit Analysis Reference: Shawn Connell, Senior Director, Key Accounts & Customer Solutions Contact Information: [email protected]

182 of 289

Volume III - Technical Proposal
183 of 289

Project Summary __________________________________________________________ 2

1.1 Executive Summary ___________________________________________________________ 2

1.2 Project Qualifications _________________________________________________________ 3 Budget __________________________________________________________________ 6 Project Development Process ________________________________________________ 8

3.1 Category 1: Develop Plan to Increase Solar and Energy Storage Penetration and Develop Additional DER ____________________________________________________________________ 8

3.1.1 Targeting DER Technologies and Market Segments for Plan ________________________ 8

3.1.2 Program Design and Incentive ______________________________________________ 12

3.1.3 Outreach and Engagement _________________________________________________ 13

3.1.4 Summarize Program Adoption and Impacts ____________________________________ 15

3.2 Category 2: Dispatchable Capacity and Demand Reduction Calculation _________________ 15

3.2.1 Review GWP Integrated Resource Plan, Load and DER Forecasts ___________________ 15

3.2.2 Summarize Dispatchable Capacity and Demand Reduction Potential ________________ 15

3.2.3 Optional – ELCC Value with RECAP ___________________________________________ 18

3.3 Category 3: Cost-benefit Analysis _______________________________________________ 19

3.3.1 Proposed Approach for Avoided Costs and Cost-benefit Analysis ___________________ 19

3.3.2 Develop DER Avoided Costs for GWP _________________________________________ 20 Project Implementation Timeline ____________________________________________ 28

184 of 289

Table of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Plan Development Flow .............................................................................................. 8 Figure 2: Project Sunroof data for Glendale ................................................................................................. 9 Figure 3: Visualization of Market Segmentation Data ................................................................................ 10 Figure 4: Example Culver City Community Solar and Microgrid Option ..................................................... 14 Figure 5. Customer Load with Dispatchable DER Responding to TOU Rate ............................................... 16 Figure 6. Customer Load with Dispatchable DER Responding to Dynamic Multi-Part Rate ....................... 17 Figure 7. Diminishing ELCC Value of Solar and of 4 Hour Storage with Increasing Penetration ................ 18 Figure 8. Summary of Community Benefit Indicators ................................................................................. 22 Figure 9: Example of Quantified Avoided Costs .......................................................................................... 24 Figure 10. Value of Customer Solar, SMUD Ratepayer Perspective, 2020 ................................................. 26 Figure 11. Value of Solar + Storage, Customer Dispatch and Utility Partnership Configurations, 2030 .... 27 Figure 12: Project Implementation Timeline .............................................................................................. 28

Table of Tables
Table 1: Proposed Budget ............................................................................................................................. 6 Table 2: Example Prioritization of Market Segments for Energy Efficiency Program ................................. 10 Table 3: Equitable Community Experience ................................................................................................. 13 Table 4. SMUD Value of Solar and Solar + Storage Value Categories ......................................................... 21

185 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 2
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Summary
Project Summary

1.1 Executive Summary
Energy and Environmental Economics (E3) and Willdan are pleased to present this proposal to City of Glendale Water & Power (GWP) to develop a plan to increase solar penetration and develop additional distributed energy resources (DER).

E3 is a leading economic consultancy focused on the transition to clean energy resources with a distinguished 30-year track record . E3 combines a robust analytics and planning practice with intimate knowledge of policy and po tential future regulatory outcomes to support informed approaches for achieving clean energy goals. E3 delivers analysis that is increasingly utilized by the utilities, regulators, and developers that are writing the script for the emerging clean energy transition in leading-edge North American jurisdictions. E3 completes roughly 250 projects per year to shape policy, market design, and strategy around low-carbon goals, distributed energy resources, and renewable technologies. E3’s suite of analysis tools is utilized by utilities, regulators, and developers in leading -edge North American jurisdictions to write the script for the emerging clean energy transition.

E3 is a wholly -owned subsidiary of The Willdan Group, Inc. and is one of the companies within Wil ldan Energy Solutions. Willdan, founded in California in 1964, is a nationwide provider of professional technical and consulting services to utilities, government agencies, and private industry. Its service offerings span a broad set of complementary disc iplines that include electric grid solutions, energy efficiency and sustainability, engineering and planning, and municipal financial consulting. Willdan has designed and implemented energy efficiency programs for over 10 years with LADWP, and ongoing p rogram work for GWP and all CA IOUs . Willdan is headquartered in Anaheim and maintains 14 California offices. Willdan has served 506 California cities and counties with municipal engineering services and 34 municipal utilities with program support. These programs have saved California utility customers over 1,100 GWH and 6.6 MM therms annually.

Together, E3 and Willdan can support GWP to develop a robust, equitable and cost -effective plan to increase adoption of solar, storage and other DER technologies. For over two decades, E3 has led the development of DER cost-effectiveness analysis for the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) DER programs and the California Energy Commission (CEC) Title 24 Building Standards. E3 recently supported both the CPUC and Sacramento Municipal Utilities District (SMUD) to evaluate the value of solar and storage and implement long overdue Net Energy Metering (NEM) reforms to reduce the cost -shift to lower-income customers while continuing to support a viable distributed solar industry. E3 also supports the CPUC, SMUD, and other clients on integrated resource planning, including in depth analysis of system and local area reliability needs and the reliable capacity contributions of DER.

Willdan has extensive experience designing, marketing and implementing utility DER programs in Southern California, highlighted by the ongoing Building Energy Upgrade Program (BEUP) with GWP which is one of Willdan’s fasting growing direct install programs in innovation and delivery. For the Solar and DER Development Plan ( Category 1 ), Willdan draws upon the momentum of outreach techniques 186 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 3
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Summary
currently in place with GWP to deliver a plan t hat achieves the goals of customer outreach, peak -load- reducing capacity, and timeframe.

Drawing on recent work for the CPUC, SMUD and other clients, E3 will summarize and recommend NEM, Feed-in Tariff (FIT) and other tariff and program options for compen sation solar, storage and other DER fairly, and in ways to maximize grid value.

For the Estimate of Dispatchable Capacity Analysis (Category 2 ), E3 will use vetted tools that have withstood extensive client and public stakeholder scrutiny to model the load shapes, dispatchable capacity and demand reductions for several representative customer types. These tools were used to model 10,000’s of combinations of technology configurations, building, customer and business types to support the CEC’s consideration requiring solar and storage for new construction in the most recent Title 24 Building Code update cycle. As an optional task, E3 is also prepared to also model the Effective Load Carrying Capacity (ELCC) contribution of the DER program for local resource adequacy with the RECAP model used by the CPUC for the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) proceeding.

Finally, for the Cost & Benefit Analysis (Category 3), E3 will leverage our experience updating the CPUC Avoided Cost Calculator to develop DER avoided costs that reflect GWP’s most recent IRP and DER planning processes. E3 will ensure that the avoided costs fully reflect the value of DER in supporting GWP’s decarbonization, reliability and resource planning goals. E3 will also recommend quantitative and qualitative metrics to consider community, societal and other non-energy benefit categories.

1.2 Project Qualifications
The following project descriptions outline some of E3’s most relevant experience in utility DER analysis, DER cost-benefit modeling, and distributed solar analysis.

SMUD Value of Solar and Solar+Storage Study (2020). Sacramento Municipal Utility District ( SMUD) selected E3 in 2020 to prepare a study of the value of customer solar and solar plus storage facilities in scenarios that are consistent with SMUD's long -term carbon goals. E3 subsequently worked with SMUD to quantify the impacts of a variety of rate design options on the economics of customer solar adoption as well as their ability to ameliorate the cost shifting associated with SMUD's current Net Energy Metering program.

Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) Virtual Power Plant Cost Effective ness & Resource Planning (2020-2021). E3 worked with SMUD to understand the adoption potential of DERs and use cases, including electric vehicles (V1G and V2G), behind -the-meter solar and storage, and building demand response from water heaters and AC. We then used these adoption rates, SMUD’s specific avoided costs, and SMUD’s bulk grid resource plan to: 1) determine the cost effectiveness of different DER configurations from multiple perspectives (utility and customer) specific to SMUD’s territory (using E3 developed avoided cost streams) 2) model the 8760 -hr economic operation of different VPP configurations and 3) determine the grid benefits of those different VPP configurations within the context of SMUD’s 2030 Zero Carbon Plan.

Portland General Electric (PGE), DER Cost -Effectiveness Framework (2022). E3 is supporting PGE to advance cost-benefit analysis for DERs, improve valuation of DERs, and support key strategic decision 187 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 4
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Summary
making at the company regarding impacts on rates, competitiveness , and electrification policy. E3 will help PGE align DER cost -benefit evaluation with Integrated Resource Planning, expand and improve the range of grid, host and societal benefits considered, balance environmental justice objectives with goals for energy affordability and competitive rates and to advance electrification policy.

CPUC Avoided Cost Methodology and “E3 Calculator” (2003-Present). E3 developed the CPUC’s officially adopted methodology for determining the cost effectiveness of investor‐owned uti lity energy efficiency programs. The methodology is based on an avoided cost methodology in combination with long‐term forecasts of electric and gas avoided costs. E3’s methodology produces avoided cost estimates that are transparent and are easily and regularly updated. In use since 2004, E3’s Avoided Cost Model (ACM) has evolved along with energy markets and policy in the West, as well as the needs of the CPUC. Since 2019, E3 has provided ongoing support to refine the CPUC’s cost-effectiveness framework for distributed energy resources, expanding the applications of the Avoided Cost Calculator to include the cost-effectiveness of California’s entire DER portfolio. The Avoided Cost Calculator currently projects avoided costs for energy, losses, generation c apacity, ancillary services, subtransmission and distribution capacity, renewable portfolio standard purchases, carbon allowances, and other air permit costs.

E3’s initial methodology was developed as part of a public rulemaking process involving fourteen external parties that included stakeholders from the California investor‐owned utilities, The Utility Reform Network, Natural Resources Defense Council, and California Large Energy Consumers Association. The “E3 Calculator,” developed in this project, remains in use almost 20 years later for all California IOUs to report on their energy efficiency programs.

California Public Utilities Commission, Net Energy Metering Revisit Rulemaking Technical Support (2020-present). E3 is supporting the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) in the development of a successor to existing NEM tariffs. Pursuant to CA Assembly Bill 327 (2013, Perea), the successor tariff must balance the objectives of maintaining the growth of distributed generation and ensuring that the benefits to NEM participants are not outweighed by the costs to nonparticipants. In this proceeding, E3 worked with Verdant Associates to develop the NEM 2.0 Lookback Study, which evaluated the impacts of the existing “NEM 2.0” tariff on participants and nonparticipants. Next, E3 developed a White Paper on Successor Tariff Options for the proceeding. After parties submitted their own proposals for tariff designs, E3 developed an Excel model to estimate the impact of these tariffs of participant and nonparticipants and summarized the results in a report on Party Proposal Cost-effectiveness. E3 has also provided technical modeling for the Commission’s December 2021 proposed decision.

Wilcox CEC Zero Net Energy. E3 calculated the cost-effectiveness of several technologies related to ZNE residential homes in 2020 including solar PV, smart thermostats, flexible heat pump water heaters, and battery storage. E3 found that solar PV under a variety of potential future NEM policy scenarios was cost- effective, even without federal subsidy support. Using this information, E3 created a new measure proposal that was the basis for the CEC inclusion of a prescriptive solar requirement in the 2019 building standards for new residential homes.

City of Culver City, Microgrid Feasibility Analysis. Willdan developed a feasibility analysis combining two Red Cross emergency sites into a single, sustainable microgrid arrangement. The microgrid solution included enough energy efficiency, solar PV, battery storage and microgrid controllers to supply continuous power to emergency sites for temporary community disaster recovery shelter needs. Willdan 188 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 5
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Summary
also conducted a feasibility study of converting Culver City’s transit fleet from renewable natural gas buses to a zero emissions fleet by 2028, in line with th e City’s sustainability plan. Analysis included assessment of zero emission bus options, infrastructure and EV charging needs, as well as necessary facility improvements to support fleet electrification needs.

Confidential California School District, Microgrid Design and Implementation. Willdan helped configure existing systems at a High School gymnasium into a fully islanding microgrid that uses clean energy and can safely disconnect and operate independently during situations such as wildfires or public safety power shutoff event. Willdan managed the system design and project management, coordinating subcontractors through construction, controls integration, commissioning, testing, and district training. The designed microgrid generates enough power to run critical life safety systems for Red Cross (lighting, HVAC, sprinkler systems) for days to weeks at a time. Willdan also provided District preparation for the system including clear signage, islanding/grid reconnection procedures, and annual drills for emergency events.

189 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 6
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Budget
Budget
Our budget for the propose d scope of work is presented in the table below. Per answers given in Addendum No. 1, we are proposing a fixed price budget for each task and subtask to be invoiced and paid upon milestone completions for each task. The total budget of $235,955 does not include the optional task of calculating effective load carrying capacity of the program in RECAP, priced separately at $99,920.

We believe the budget and scope of work proposed fully meets GWP requirements and will provide a robust program proposal and analysis. In order to provide the most competitive and cost -effective proposal, we have developed a budget for the scope of work that assumes:
 Two rounds of GWP review and approval for Category 1 tasks and one round of review and approval for Category 2 and 3 tasks.

Table 1: Proposed Budget
190 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 7
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Budget
 The project team will provide recommendations on types and levels of incentives, including rebates and NEM and FIT rates. GWP would be responsible for developing specific rates and tariff sheets that would be adopted by GWP.
 Willdan will hold three community meetings to solicit input for the plan and will provide a final plan to GWP. The proposal does not include community meetings or outreach after the plan is submitted to GWP.
 GWP is able to provide the inputs, assumptions and results from the most recent IRP and DER planning processes and reports in electronic format that can be readily incorporated to develop avoided costs for the cost-benefit analysis.

191 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 8
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process Project Development Process

3.1 Category 1: Develop Plan to Increase Solar and Energy Storage Penetration and Develop Additional DER

3.1.1 Targeting DER Technologies and Market Segments for Plan Throughout this section, we bold the plan policies that align with GWP’s Category 1 requirements.

3.1.1.1 Evaluate Adoption Potential for GWP
Our adoption plan includes the following components and development flow.

Figure 1: Conceptual Plan Development Flow

1. Existing data collection: Willdan will begin by first reviewing GWP’s prior plans and studies, including the December 2022 Consultant Report on lower-income EE, renewable energy and RD&D programs as well as any existing studies or data collection previously performed by other contractors.

2. Determine solar potential: Willdan will utilize available screening tools to identify a project approach that meets GWP’s goals. This includes balancing the amount of solar and storage 192 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 9
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process located at customer sites as compared to GWP sites. It will also provide some indication of the difficulty and cost associated with meeting ambitious renewable targets. For example, Project Sunroof (a publicly available Google tool) indicates that approximately 32 million square feet of roof space is available in the City of Glendale. (See Figure 2 below). A more refined analysis will help to shape Willdan’s approach to DER adoption planning.

Figure 2: Project Sunroof data for Glendale

3. Market Segmentation: Willdan will use segmentation data from vetted market research tools and internally developed software to develop plans to customize our approach to each market sector and customer. Willdan produces analysis of a utility territory in days that can take other consultants months to assemble, due to program segmentation features of our platform. We analyze and score targeted customers to maximize conversion and realized demand impacts.

Willdan uses an efficient machine learning process that combines census, parcel, business type, 3D building and other related data sources to estimate adoption propensity for individual customers. Our market research approach is also informed by our experience implementing numerous successful energy efficiency and DER programs across the US. Table 2 below provides an example market segmentation analysis. Figure 3 translates this information graphically to establish planning for utility program management and outreach teams. 193 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 10
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process Table 2: Example Prioritization of Market Segments for Energy Efficiency Program Description Total #
Assessment
Opp.%
Conversion
%

Participants
Total
kWh
Saved
Transportation, Communication, & Utilities 908 15% 33% 23 570,673 Wholesale Trade - Durable & Non-Durable 1,075 15% 33% 31 668,091 Automotive Service Station, Service &
Dealerships 1,577 20% 35% 44 774,996
Grocery & Food Stores 531 20% 30% 20 358,514
Restaurants, Eating, & Drinking Establishments 1,258 20% 30% 42 567,276 Retail Trade Locations 1,983 15% 30% 50 869,574
Banks 438 10% 15% 3 43,248
Non-Financial, Insurance, & Real Estate Offices 1,331 15% 25% 30 546,905 Hotel, Motel, & Lodging 195 10% 15% 1 35,311
Personal Services 932 15% 25% 15 145,623
Business & Misc. Repair Services 946 15% 25% 16 303,217 Amusement & Recreational Locations 386 15% 30% 8 166,995

Figure 3: Visualization of Market Segmentation Data

Case Study of Market Segmentation to Grow Energy Efficiency Impacts: Willdan has worked with utilities across the country to identify opportunities for targeted customer approach. For example, in one East Coast state, Willdan expanded utility program offerings into the Telecom market. We identified 400 customer sites that were previously not within the scope of any existing efficiency program, potentially contributing incremental 4 MWh of energy efficiency impact. Willdan identified these customers sites through in-depth market analysis and a propensity targeting model. 194 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 11
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process

4. Develop Plan for Mix of Customer and GWP Controlled Sites: GWP and Willdan have an ongoing program relationship through the Business Energy Upgrade Program (BEUP) through which Willdan has audited more than 2,000 customer sites within the City of Glendale. Willdan will work with the GWP team to understand the existing DER deployment plan for publicly owned sites. We have developed battery-siting DER options integrated with financial instruments, such as capacity payments for customer controlled sites and land-lease arrangements for utility-controlled projects sited on customer property.

5. Identify robust Net Metering Policy, Feed-In Tariffs, Incentives and Rebates: Willdan and E3 will work closely on this task, which pulls together elements from Categories 1, 2, and 3.

As more customers seek to manage their energy bills through behind -the-meter (BTM) solar generation, energy storage, and load management applications, E3 helps clients devise tariffs that promote investments in DERs and reflect cost causation and equity principles. E3 supports several utilities and regulators in developing and implementing tariffs, including the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), the New York State Energy Research and Develo pment Authority (NYSERDA), and Hawaiian Electric Company (HECO).

Leveraging this experience, E3 will summarize existing tariffs and programs adopted by other utilities across the U.S. for customer -owned and community -sited solar and storage, as well as dispatchable DERs. This summary will provide a range of best practices and approaches for consideration by GWP.

Drawing from recent work for the CPUC, E3 will describe the equity and cost shift challenges associated with net energy metering (NEM) compensat ion for BTM solar. We will provide a summary and recommendations on the competing goals of promoting customer adoption of solar and storage and minimizing the burden of shifting grid costs to customers without DERs. Topics we will cover include the misalig nment of customer compensation and the value of BTM solar, aligning retail rates and customer compensation with grid costs, and potential solutions to promote customer adoption and avoid cost shifts. Examples of potential solutions we will summarize include time-of-use (TOU) energy charges and demand charges, grid access charges, subscription charges, and income-based customer charges.

Using E3’s tariff research and recommendations, Willdan advances implementation elements needed to establish a competitive Feed-in Tariff program for solar projects, along with storage and solar-storage projects. Willdan and E3 anticipate several tariff design options to work through with GWP, such as the following gathered from experience. • What is the temporal value for power returned to the grid for customers with storage? • Is the benefit a bill credit or monetary payment?
• When is the credit reconciled?

6. Develop Equitable Program Options: Our plan development includes strategies to engage lower-income customers, customers in heavily pollution-burdened areas, multifamily properties, rental properties and opportunities for community solar projects. These strategies are described in more detail in Section 3.1.3.
195 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 12
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process

3.1.2 Program Design and Incentive
Willdan will focus on the following Pro gram Design Components with the goal of creat ing an integrated plan that incorporates GWP priorities and provides customers with a streamlined path to DER adoption.

Those components include:
a. Bundled DER Offering – To facilitate the interconnect process, minimize customer interruption and reduce the cost of customer acquisition, Willdan will design performance-based incentives for battery storage systems, encouraging customers to bundle both solar and battery storage. Willdan provides bundled offerings for our comprehensive commercial program in SCE territory, wherein customer satisfaction is increased by reducing the number of separate customer engagements. Willdan and E3 will also evaluate the effect of solar and battery storage on electric system reliability. b. Contractor Vetting – Consistent delivery of solar and storage projects will be a critical components of increasing customer adoption. Willdan will design a Contractor Vetting model as a key program design component to increase customer confidence and adoption potential.
c. Design Guidelines – Willdan will provide gathered standards with demonstrated success to establish future program performance and consistency. These standards include specifications for site access, project management, system design, materials/equipment, QA/QC, testing, O&M, performance guarantee and owner training. d. Demand Response – Willdan will identify integrated elements including heat pump water heaters, heat pump HVAC, and bi-directional charging to recommend how they might facilitate DER adoption as well as complement GWP’s existing offerings. The goal is to future-proof the plan such that it can accommodate technology improvements over time.
e. Permitting – Willdan will recommend methods by which GWP might facilitate customer permitting and reduce barriers to adoption. Willdan estimates that a significant volume of permits will be required to be processed in the first two years that customers begin installing DERs; this volume has the potential to overwhelm the existing City of Glendale processes. Willdan will evaluate and recommend alternatives including app-based services such as SOLARAPP++ (https://solarapp.nrel.gov). f. Resilience Planning – Willdan will recommend projects, placing a focus on community resilience. These include deploying DERs to develop cooling centers at community assembly centers in the event of a sustained power outage. Willdan has previously performed related work in Iowa when, following a natural disaster, the State Energy Office asked us to identify community resilience hubs where citizens could gain shelter and basic services during the next power outage.
196 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 13
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process

3.1.3 Outreach and Engagement

3.1.3.1 Establish an Equitable Program
Willdan will ensure that customers are equitably engaged and considered throughout the planning process. Willdan has extensive experience with outreach to lower-income communities as demonstrated in Table 3. In addition, Willdan has developed program connections to multifamily and rental properties locally and nationwide.

Table 3: Equitable Community Experience
Program Experience Equitable Community Component to Serve Lower-Income Customers and Customers in Heavily Pollution-Burdened Areas
LADWP Commerical
Direct Install (CDI)
Program
The LADWP CDI program uses seven Community Based Organizations (CBOs) to engage customers and educate communities about energy efficiency. This work has led to the creation of more than 40 jobs over the last six years as well as ensured that each LA City Council District is served equally, despite differences in income or language barriers.

SCE Commercial
Program
The SCE Commercial Program uses Disadvantaged Community (DAC) focused outreach and has had remarkable success serving those customers defined as Hard-to-Reach (HTR) due to a combination of language barriers and income. In the first 12 mo nths, Willdan performed more than 1,400 audits for HTR participants.

ConEd Clean Heat
Program
The ConEd Clean Heat Program encourages multifamily and rental property owners throughout 5 NYC boroughs to convert their existing gas heating systems to electric. To date, the program has installed more than 4,800 units with focus on serving residents of all income levels.

Willdan will hold three (3) community meetings as part of this planning process. During those meetings we will provide multi-lingual materials and communication to residents in different parts of the city to understand barriers to DER adoption and areas of particular concern and will work with GWP to share information about other available programs and benefits for their customers in attendance.

Willdan has established connections to several Los Angeles County non-profits focused on Environmental Justice (EJ) and in serving communities historically impacted by poor air quality due to the proximity of freeways and power plants. Willdan intends to subcontract with an EJ consultant to strengthen our plan.

Among the non -capacity benefits that Willdan anticipates identifying in the DER plan are job creation opportunities, community education benefits and the identification of community resilience opportunities.
197 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 14
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process

3.1.3.2 Identify and Include Community Solar Projects
Willdan will design incentives to encourage development of community solar projects by allocating fair values between developers a nd subscribers, and policies including net billing/crediting proces s.

Willdan/E3 is currently advising one of the largest cities in the U.S. on community solar.

Willdan also has experience providing turn -key service to lower -income customers and members of underserved communities toward the dual-purpose of reduced costs and extended resilience and service as a community asset. An example of this work is a study performed for Culver City in 2019. That study proposed a microgrid at Culver City’s Veterans Memorial Park and adjacent facilities. The goal was a fully renewable, cost-effective, and resilient energy supply while achieving the city’s zero net energy goals.

Figure 4 shows the proposed solution.

Figure 4: Example Culver City Community Solar and Microgrid Option

3.1.3.1 Integrate with Additional DER Technologies
GWP and Willdan have worked together to offer energy efficiency (EE) across the GWP service territory, which forms a basis of mutual success. Willdan believes our program implementation with GWP customers extends naturally to solar and storage plan development tuned to specific customer sets.

Willdan anticipates GWP will need to examine policies for revision such as maximum solar installation cap or time-of-use (TOU) rates along. These policy changes may be added to targeted incentives from demand reduction and shifting energy to off -peak time periods to help build an enrollment and installation pipeline.
198 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 15
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process

3.1.4 Summarize Program Adoption and Impacts
The intent of the plan created by Willdan with support from E3 will be to drive customer adoption of DERs in an equitable and cost-effective way. To do this, Willdan will follow the steps above, first examining the potential for DER deployment and then identifying strategies and opportunities to encourage adoption and customer penetration.

Willdan believes prioritized planning for key elements are necessary to achieve the 100 MW capacity reduction goal, including:
▪ Streamline permitting of solar installations
▪ Evaluate ground-mounted solar opportunity in Scholl Canyon ▪ Create and promote a parking lot solar canopy program ▪ Develop a successful Residential program to secure up to 50% of the desired capacity The RFP timeline is ambitious to achieve significant activity by December 31, 2027. Willdan recommends early examination of strategies to help achieve that timeline, including:
▪ An attractive incentive structure with enhanced benefits for first movers or early adopters ▪ A program delivery schedule emphasizing pace - removing project hurdles to throughput.

The result of this work will be a formal plan with prioritized approaches and strategies with input from GWP and its customers. This plan will allow for GWP to embark on an aggressive DER adoption pathway to meet the stated 100MW capacity reduction goal.

3.2 Category 2: Dispatchable Capacity and Demand Reduction Calculation

3.2.1 Review GWP Integrated Resource Plan, Load and DER Forecasts To properly support GWP’s DER strategy, E3 must comprehensively understand the GWP system. The E3 team will conduct a thorough review of GWP's Integrated Resource Plan, Loa d, and Distributed Energy Resources Forecast. The review will include a detailed analysis of GWP's assumptions, methodologies, and data inputs used in the development of the IRP.

The IRP review will focus on evaluating GWP's resource mix, key upcoming decisions, and levers that may accommodate the adoption of DERs. It will also include an evaluation of the approach to determining the reliability of GWP's proposed resource plan. E3 will also have a focused review on GWP’s assumptions and methodologies for assessing the potential for DERs and load growth. The E3 team will leverage its findings to inform other components of the project; including but not limited to the DER reliability analysis, targeted DER adoption strategies, and the cost benefit analysis.

3.2.2 Summarize Dispatchable Capacity and Demand Reduction Potential E3 will work with GWP to combine internal planning conventions with best-available industry data, along with E3’s modeling expertise, to calculate the impact of potential supply side impacts of DERs in this plan. 199 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 16
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process

3.2.2.1 Quantify DER Dispatch and Load Shapes
To quantify these impacts, E3 will first develop a limited number of prototypical customer load shapes (ex. medium consumption residential, high consumption residential, small commercial, large commercial) and model typical DER dispatch patterns. E3 will generate l oad shapes for prototypical customers will be generated based on best available data between internal data from GWP, and external sources such as NREL’s ResStock database of prototypical building energy models. The project team will then select building energy models based on appropriate geography and scale them to match the annual consumption of representative GWP customers.

With load shapes in place, E3 will perform a limited number of model runs, using our DER optimal dispatch tool – RESTORE. RESTORE receives inputs of baseline load shapes, characteristics for battery storage, BTM PV, and other DERs, as well as a rate signal. RESTORE takes these inputs and calculates a perfect foresight/optimal dispatch for the given DER technologies, based on a selected rate signal. E3 will work with GWP to determine appropriate rate signals to guide dispatch – E3 typically uses appropriate retail rates or hourly avoide d costs as dispatch signals. More simplistic dispatch characteristics can also be performed to demonstrate the impacts of sub-optimal dispatch algorithms.

RESTORE’s main focus is on PV and battery storage dispatch, but it can also model other dispatchable behind-the-meter devices, such as smart thermostats. There is limited publicly available data on the flexibility characteristics of such devices, but E3 can leverage its work with the CPUC and LBNL on modeling flexible loads to inform estimated load shape impacts alongside more detailed PV and storage impacts.

These model outputs will be scaled up based on projected market uptake across different customer types to determine an aggregate system impact. Examples of DER dispatch and load profiles modeled with RESTORE are shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6 below.

Figure 5. Customer Load with Dispatchable DER Responding to TOU Rate

This figure shows an example dispatch and load shape of a customer with energy storage and an EV. T he energy storage charged from solar to avoid exports and maximize bill savings under a NEM tariff. Storage is discharged immediately at the beginning of the on-peak TOU period, and the EV begins charging immediately at the start of the nighttime off-peak period. The customer load with DERs is significantly reduced throughout the on-peak TOU period.
200 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 17
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process Figure 6. Customer Load with Dispatchable DER Responding to Dynamic Multi-Part Rate

In this example, the customer is responding to a multi-part dynamic rate based on utility marginal costs. The storage discharge is shifted an hour later to coincide with the highest value hours for the grid. Because the dynamic rate reflects increased distribution capacity value in the afternoon, the customer’s s olar generation is not used for charging but is instead allowed to export to the grid. Both storage and the EV charge from the grid during the off - peak hours with the lowest energy prices (midnight and late morning).

3.2.2.2 Quantify Effective Load Carrying Capacity (ELCC) for Demand Reduction With per-customer and utility-wide aggregate load impacts, E3 will then estimate the reliability value of DERs at the system planning level. This step will ensure GWP can invest in the appropriate amount of capacity to meet its needs and understand how DERs can fit into its resource adequacy plans. E3 has expertise using models and other more -simplified approaches to ensure portfolios resulting from integrated resource plans are reliable and the ELCCs and NQCs o f conventional resources, variable resources, energy storage technologies, and DERs are appropriately quantified. After working closely with GWP to determine the best approach, E3 will develop custom ELCCs for DERs which will help inform GWP’s DER strategy. As a baseline option, E3 proposes the following as a more simplistic approach:

E3 has worked on reliability analyses in California and elsewhere for many years and has a deep understanding of key dynamics and expectations of ELCCs of DERs and other variable renewable resources.

E3 will leverage its knowledge and prior work to develop tailored ELCCs that would be representative of a small electric system in California. E3 will draw from its work with the California energy agencies (i.e.

CPUC, CAISO, and CEC), as well as its work with smaller utilities across the country (i.e. SMUD and OPPD) to inform the reliability value of GWP’s DERs.

An illustration of how the ELCC of solar and 4 hour storage decline with increasing penetration on the system are shown in Figure 7 below.
201 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 18
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process Figure 7. Diminishing ELCC Value of Solar and of 4 Hour Storage with Increasing Penetration

3.2.3 Optional – ELCC Value with RECAP
Alternatively, if GWP would like to choose a more detailed approach, E3 can perform optional analysis with additional detail. E3 will utilize its in-house reliability model, RECAP, to represent GWP’s system and resources. RECAP is a loss -of-load probability model that is well -established and has been used in many jurisdictions to evaluate system reliability, establish planning reserve requirements, and develop NQC and ELCC values for many resource types. By building a custom RECAP model tailored specifically to GWP, we will be able to understand the reliability value of specific resources and constraints. GWP will also be able to leverage this model for future reliability analyses as it refines and updates its system plans in future years.
202 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 19
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process

3.3 Category 3: Cost-benefit Analysis

3.3.1 Proposed Approach for Avoided Costs and Cost-benefit Analysis With zero GHG emission goals, the paradigm for DER cost -effectiveness has fundamentally changed.

Utilities are transitioning from procuring fossil fuel-based resources dominated by fuel and operating costs to signing long-term contracts for non-emitting resources that are 90%+ up front capital investment with virtually zero marginal costs. Intermittent renewable resources pose new operational challenges for the grid that DERs can support, with the right visibility and control. This shifts the priority for DERs to reduce GHG emissions, and necessary capacity investments in the system, and de-emphasizes reducing electricity consumption as both renewable energy costs and grid emissions are declining. With energy so low cost, it can be harder for DER to pass traditional Standard Practice Manual (SPM) cost -effectiveness tests, particularly energy focused resources. At the same time, zero GHG emission goals require significant investment in our bulk supply infrastructure, and the value proposition of DERs avoiding costs all the way up through the electricity supply system as this transformation unfolds remains important. Therefore, the valuation framework for DER cost-effectiveness must guide program design and procurement towards those DER that most effectively meet the future policy and reliability goals for the electric grid.

E3 has worked with the utilities and regulators that are leading innovators for DER cost -effectiveness in the US, including the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) and Hawaiian Electric Company (HECO) . We are familiar with the National Standard Practice Manual (NSPM) and proposals for new or revised cost -benefit tests (e.g. the National Standard Practice Manuel Jurisdiction Specific Test and EPRI/Brattle Total Value Test) for DER.

E3 has worked on innovative new approaches to both better align DER procurement with the current and future needs of the grid and align DER cost-effectiveness with utility integrated resource planning (IRP).

This activity would leverage this experience and provide a review and summary and emerging topics that can help GWP realize greater resource benefits from DER, balance costs and benefits, encourage market transformation in electrification and other objectives. To achieve this outcome, the following areas would be explored.

1. Aligning DER avoided costs and IRP to better reflect supply side procurement costs in the new planning paradigm

2. Defining separate program buckets for evaluating DER, e.g. for resource procurement, market transformation and public policy support

3. As feasible and appropriate, include additional quantitative and qualitative benefits in DER cost - benefit analysis and cost tests including for Community, Equity, Resiliency, Environmental and Non-energy Benefits.

E3 will work with GWP to develop and recommend an over arching framework for evaluating the costs, benefits and cost -shifts for customer sited DER. E3 will describe the challenges and barriers that key jurisdictions have faced with revising and enhancing DER cost-effectiveness in the new zero GHG emission planning paradigm. Key challenges include increasing complexity of modeling, declining cost-effectiveness, in particular for EE and distributed solar, commensurate stakeholder pressure add and increase benefits, 203 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 20
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process incorporating electrification measures in utilit y cost-tests, and how to balance public policy goals and upward pressure on utility rates. E3 has translated complex planning and marginal cost calculations into simplified, transparent spreadsheets for stakeholder use and can readily support and advise GWP.

3.3.2 Develop DER Avoided Costs for GWP

3.3.2.1 Gather Inputs and Assumptions for DER Avoided Costs E3 will work with GWP to identify and gather the necessary inputs and assumptions needed to develop avoided costs for DER from GWP’s IRP and other planning documents. E3 will help GWP identify a list of key assumptions that will be needed to develop avoided costs specific to SVP’s context. E3 will work closely with the GWP staff to collect any existing information, data, and forecasts available from GWP and identify strategies to address any gaps if necessary. E3 will review the data and forecasts provided by GWP and compare them against alternative public benchmarks including the CPUC Avoided Costs (Developed by E3). E3’s experience working with a wide range of utiliti es on integrated resource planning and DER avoided costs will allow us to provide unique insights and help GWP ensure that the inputs to the avoided costs and DER cost-benefit analysis are sound and well-justified.

3.3.2.2 Consideration of Community, Societal and Non-energy Benefits A variety of Community, Societal, and Non -energy Benefits must be considered in an assessment of the costs and benefits of customer-sited solar+storage systems and other DERs. There are some overlapping and some distinct Community, Societal, and Non-energy Benefits depending on if the analysis is from a Host Customer or Societal perspective.

While there is typically more agreement on the types of benefits that should be included, it is frequently challenging to gain consensus on ap proaches and develop quantitative values with sufficient rigor and confidence for inclusion in a cost -benefit analysis. E3 will provide a thorough review of benefits and approaches to evaluation and will provide recommendations across four criteria:

1. Which values can be quantified with a sufficient degree of rigor and confidence

2. Which values are likely to be large enough to be meaningful in cost -benefit analysis and which values are small enough to reasonably be excluded

3. Which values can be considered in a qualitative, but not quantitative approach

4. Which might be appropriate for consideration in each perspective (Host Customer and Societal) analyzed
An example of this analysis is E3’s review of 24 benefit categories selected by a technical working group for consideration in the SMUD Value of Solar and Solar + Storage Study. Table 4 below summarizes how each value category was included in the analysis.

204 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 21
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process Table 4. SMUD Value of Solar and Solar + Storage Value Categories Category # TWG Value Description
(abbreviated) E3 Value Component(s)
Ratepayer
Societal
Solar
Customer
Energy
1 Avoided energy, including GHG /
RPS requirements
Energy, GHG, Ancillary
Services ✓ ✓
2 Integration costs Integration ✓ ✓
3 Higher marginal cost of
emissions (intermittency) Qualitative ✓ ✓
Generation
Capacity
4 Resource adequacy Generation Capacity ✓ ✓
5 Resource flexibility (increased
need for flexibility) Integration ✓ ✓
Financial Risk
6 Fuel price risk reduction Fuel Price Risk ✓ ✓
7 Increases in energy price
volatility Energy Price Volatility ✓ ✓
8 Sunk cost of Emission Reduction
Credits Qualitative
Variable
Operating
9 Decreased thermal operations Energy ✓ ✓
10 Increased standby costs Integration ✓ ✓
Criteria
Emissions 11 Criteria emissions reductions Criteria Pollutants ✓ Carbon
Emissions 12 Carbon reductions beyond
SMUD compliance requirements
Carbon Emission
Reductions ✓
Land & Water
Use 13 Reduced land and water usage Land use; water use ✓ Equity 14 Reduced energy burden for low
income customers Qualitative ✓ ✓
Resilience 15 Customer ability to meet critical
needs Resilience ✓
Reliability 16 Restoring service or preventing
outages in an emergency Reliability ✓ ✓
Emotional /
Political 17 Engaging customers through
NEM Qualitative ✓ ✓
Local Economy 18 Jobs and local economic growth
resulting from rooftop solar Qualitative ✓
Transmission
19 Transmission capacity Transmission Capacity ✓ ✓
20 Transmission line losses Line Losses ✓ ✓
Distribution
21 Distribution capacity Distribution Capacity ✓ ✓
22 Distribution line losses Line Losses ✓ ✓
23 Grid modernization Qualitative ✓ ✓
24 Voltage / power quality Voltage / power quality ✓ ✓

205 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 22
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process Based on previous work, E3 anticipates that several benefits will require consideration and discussion with GWP of different approaches to measurement; these benefits include reduced energy burden, reduced forced mobility, asset value, productivity, health & safety, and reliability & resiliency benefits. Below is an example of Community Benefit Indicators (CBIs) considered in an evaluation of non-energy benefits for community-based renewable resources . E3 is assisting a utility in the Pacific Northwest in evaluating methods to incorporate CBIs into its integrated resource planning process.

Figure 8. Summary of Community Benefit Indicators

In determining the non-energy benefits to include in an analysis of GWP’s solar+storage, E3 will provide well-reasoned methods and explanations for which benefits to include and appropriate methods for quantification, with an emphasis on which benefits are and are not appropriate for Host Customer and Societal perspectives or quantification in a cost-benefit analysis. E3 recently completed the Societal Cost Test Impact Evaluation report for the California Public Utilities Commission. E3 is familiar with publicly available tools, such as the US Environmental Protection Agency’s CO -Benefits Risk Assessment Health Impacts Screening and Mapping Tool (COBRA) that assesses air quality impacts of specific scenarios and adoption f orecasts and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Jobs and Economic Development Impact (JEDI) model that determines economic benefits such as employment opportunities from customer-sited renewable systems. E3 also led two recent projects that have quantified substantial health impacts of reduced fossil fuel combustion, “Quantifying the Air Quality Impacts of Decarbonization and Distributed Energy Programs in California ” and New York Climate Action Council Scoping Plan (Appendix G).

Additionally, E3 has supported several utilities and private DER aggregators to understand the cost-benefit implications of different DER management and control styles. Often, DER are optimized for customer bill 206 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 23
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process reductions which drives the utilization and dispatch of DERs in modeling and planning efforts. DERs can also be optimi zed or energy supply cost reductions or the ability to provide other grid services such as demand response. E3 has the modeling capability to optimize for different methods of optimization to understand how DERs can best serve the grid, and how this change in operations impacts DER benefits.

This analysis has been used to provide a basis for incentive creation and program generation to ensure customer benefits while simultaneously optimizing DER dispatch to grid needs. E3 will work with GWP to incorporate t hese aspects into the modeling of customer -sited solar+storage systems and into the valuation framework.

3.3.2.3 Develop Avoided Costs for DER Cost-benefit Analysis Based on collected input data, E3 will develop DER avoided costs for GWP. These avoided costs will look out over an agreed-upon lifetime for DER technologies (ex. 20 years, 30 years). GWP and E3 can determine appropriate avoided cost components to include, but as a starting point, E3 proposes using these components:
 Wholesale energy (ex. Hourly CAISO market prices)
 Generation capacity
 Transmission and distribution capacity
 Emissions (ex. Cap and Trade market emissions/costs), cost of reducing supply side emissions to achieve electricity decarbonization targets, societal cost of carbon)  System losses (cost of procuring additional wholesale energy to offset losses in transmission and distribution system
We are aware that a cost-benefit analysis of GWP’s EE program is included in the annual report on Energy Efficiency in the Public Power Sector, using the Energy Platform ESP tool. In the past, report has used the avoided costs of SCE for public utilities in Southern California that do not provide information on their utility specific avoided costs. We anticip ate that some work will be required to update or enhance the avoided costs for GWP to reflect your emissions reductions, environmental and societal goals and to equitably value DER for GWP. At the same time, to provide a competitive cost for this proposal , we do not propose developing a comprehensive new set of avoided costs from scratch. We will work with GWP to develop a recommended approach that provides robust cost -benefit analysis without requiring significant new modeling and analysis. It may be that using the SCE avoided costs developed for the CPUC, with some augmentation and modifications is feasible and most efficient. On the other hand, a simplified approach developing new avoided costs from GWP’s resource plan that reflect your specific goals ma y prove most effective.

E3 has developed methods to forecast these cost streams, consistent with changing future market conditions, and along with methods to allocate them specific hours of the year (ex. Generation capacity costs are allocated to hours wi th a higher probability of loss of load events). These avoided costs are typically quantified in terms of hourly $/MWh values but can be simplified, as GWP sees fit – for example assigning capacity contributions to different DER technologies and valuing th ese benefits at appropriate $/kW-yr forecasts for generation capacity, transmission and distribution. Other quantitative and qualitative benefits can be developed alongside these cost components listed above as E3 and GWP see fit.
207 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 24
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process The value of each avoided cost component changes depending on the system dynamics throughout the year. As system dynamics and underlying factors such as energy demand and the portfolio of resources change over time, the value of avoided cost components wil l also change, creating the importance to calculate avoided costs for each year in the modeling horizon.

An example of avoided costs that E3 quantified for the California Public Utilities Commission is shown below. Figure 9 shows the average avoided costs by hour broken out by component. The figure shows that energy, generation capacity, distribution capacity, and GHG value make up most of the avoided cost value, while the other components make up a smaller share. This chart also shows how the avoided costs can vary significantly depending on the time of day. The avoided costs are very low in the middle of the day when solar is plentiful on the California grid. The avoided costs are higher during non-daytime hours when gas is on the margin. The avoided cost s are especially high during the early evening hours when capacity on the system is more limited.

Figure 9: Example of Quantified Avoided Costs

The avoided costs are calculated for each component over time by determining the mar ginal cost of providing each component to the system. The marginal cost depends on the cost of providing that particular service, which may require new infrastructure (e.g. new generation capacity) or not (e.g. generate additional energy from a gas plant). The resource -related avoided cost components can be calculated using capacity expansion and production cost modeling results for the system. Avoided cost components for transmission and distribution require understanding the relationship between load growth and incremental investments. Avoided costs are calculated for each component such that there is no double-counting of benefits across components.

3.3.2.4 Perform Cost-benefit Analysis
With hourly avoided costs in place, E3 will evaluate the costs and benefits from two perspectives: first, a participant cost test that evaluates energy bill savings versus installation costs of DER technologies will determine customer economics, given different retail rates or upfront incentives. Next, a utility cost test 208 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 25
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process will determine if the costs or benefits of DER technologies as it relates to the costs of supplying energy to all GWP customers. Additional cost tests and perspectives can be added as needed.

E3’s RESTORE model can be used to determine optimal storage dispatch schedules for standalone storage systems, paired solar+storage, and a number of other DERs. E3’s RESTORE model calculates optimal energy storage system charging and discharging schedules, as well as the load reduction or shifting behavior of other DERs, on an 8760 hourly basis, maximizing total net revenue across the multiple value streams that DERs can provide, while monitoring state of charge and honoring any operational constraints that may limit a resource’s ability to provide more than one service simu ltaneously. Dispatch modeled with RESTORE can be optimized according to either:
1) Customer rates (such as time-of-use rates), to align most closely with DER behavior as optimized from a customer’s perspective
2) Hourly avoided costs (as developed in previous workstream), to represent DER behavior if optimized by utility to minimize energy supply costs
E3 proposes modeling two separate configurations of DERs, one in which resources are optimized by customers and a second in which resources are optimized by the utility. Both configurations represent realistic outcomes for the operation and dispatch of DERs. In reality, DERs in GWP’s service territory will likely include a combination of both configurations; therefore, modeling both configurations offers insights into the bookends of potential customer and utility costs and benefits from DERs.

E3 also proposes to break out the modeling of DERs into customer types since many resource parameters, such as size, will likely vary across customer types. For example, customer types that cover a sufficient range of possible DER systems may be residenti al single-family homes, residential multi -family homes, small commercial, and large commercial sites. The prevalence of adoption by each customer type can be used with customer-level costs and benefits to determine total costs and benefits across GWP’s ser vice territory.

Storage charging and discharging and other DER loads are used to inform the customer and utility valu streams based on the costs and benefits included in each perspective. From a customer perspective, primary costs and benefits include cust omer energy costs and savings from energy consumption and operation of a DER and the upfront installation costs of DERs. Other value streams include any incentives or rebates from policies or participation in programs, system maintenance costs, and customer resilience benefits. To the extent that there are any differences in costs and benefits available to low -income households, a separate cost -benefit analysis can be conducted from the customer perspective to incorporate these differences. For example, there may be differences in rates if low -income households are eligible for discounted rates or additional incentives or rebates to reduce upfront installation costs. If results of the cost-benefit analysis show negative impacts on low-income households, the breakdown of costs and benefits will help E3 identify the cost streams contributing to negative impacts that may be reduced through different types of programs.

Costs from the utility perspective will draw largely from avoided costs to determine energy supply costs.

Benefits from the utility perspective are primarily utility bills collected from customers. Other costs and benefits from the utility perspective may include costs of GWP programs, such as any incentives paid to customer for participating in programs.
209 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 26
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process An example of cost-benefit analysis for customer owned solar + storage performed for SMUD is shown in Figure 10 below. The cost to SMUD in the form of NEM compensation is shown on the right and compared against the benefits under two scenarios on the left. For the Helps Meet Clean Energy Goals case, BTM solar reduces the amount of utility scale solar procured by SMUD. For the Incremental Clean Energy case, BTM solar increases the total solar on SMUD’s system and avoids traditional fossil generation. Using SMUD projections of the growth in BTM solar and solar + storage systems, E3 estimated that absent a change in SMUD’s rate designs, by 2030 the net cost of BTM solar and solar + storage will reach $0.12 - 0.13 per kWh of solar, equivalent to a total of $92 - 94 million per year in bill increases, respectively. For the average residential customer, this would mean $90 - 92 in annual bill increases by 2030.

Figure 10. Value of Customer Solar, SMUD Ratepayer Perspective, 2020

Under a Utility Partnership system configuration, where BTM customers with battery storage dispatch their systems in order to provide the maximum value to all SMUD ratepayers, the value of solar + storage increases significantly in the Incremental Clean Energy scenario due largely to the additional generation capacity these systems are able to provide when dispatched against maximum value to SMUD ratepayers rather than retail rates. However, even in this configuration the compensation paid to NEM customers considerably exceeds the value provided by the systems, shown below for 2030. 210 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 27
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Development Process Figure 11. Value of Solar + Storage, Customer Dispatch and Utility Partnership Configurations, 2030

211 of 289

City of Glendale Water & PowerCity of Glendale Water & Power City of Glendale Water & Power 28
Plan to Increase Solar and DER Project Implementation Timeline Figure 12: Project Implementation Timeline
Project Implementation Timeline

212 of 289

Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc.
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94104
213 of 289

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Landlord/Tenant Ad-Hoc Committee Update on Work Plan

1. Motion to approve Landlord/Tenant Ad-Hoc Committee’s suggestions on the Rental Rights Program, with the intention of revisiting these suggestions in a redlined version of the ordinance at a subsequent council session.

2. Motion to approve Rental Rights Marketing Strategy.

3. Motion to provide direction on the desire to establish a Dispute Resolution/Mediation program.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for August 22, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City Council initiated the establishment of a Landlord/Tenant Ad-Hoc Committee (Ad- Hoc Committee) to address rental housing issues in Glendale. The Ad-Hoc Committee's purpose was to gather citizen input and provide recommendations to the City Council on landlord/tenant rental housing matters. The Ad-Hoc Committee was assigned three main tasks, including reviewing the Rental Rights Program ordinance (municipal code Chapter

9.30), developing education and marketing strategies, and evaluating a voluntary dispute resolution program. The Ad-Hoc Committee was originally comprised of seven members, later six members, representing both renters and landlords in Glendale, and convened monthly for a total of eleven months.

Staff has compiled three comprehensive reports attached as Exhibits 1-3 addressing the Rental Rights Program, marketing and outreach strategies, and mediation options. These reports provide detailed analyses and recommendations made by the Ad-Hoc Committee.

The attached reports offer valuable insights for decision-making and further improvement of the rental housing landscape in Glendale.
214 of 289

28c
4 4
7 5

COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Not applicable.

RECOMMENDATION
Provide direction on three key areas of discussion:
•Rental Rights Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions: Evaluate suggestions made by the Ad-Hoc Committee for changes to the Rental Rights program ordinance and either: (1) initiate the changes directly, (2) request additional analysis of suggested changes, or (3) offer alternatives to suggestions made. •Rental Rights Marketing Strategy: Approve or reject proposed marketing strategy for the Rental Rights Program or offer alternatives. •Dispute Resolution and Mediation: Review dispute resolution program for landlords and tenants and provide direction on whether to either (1) bring back a more detailed report, (2) bring back an outline of a program, or (3) reject all proposals for a dispute resolution program.

BACKGROUND
On August 24, 2021, the Community Development staff presented a report to the City Council regarding the establishment of a Landlord/Tenant Advisory body in Glendale to address rental housing issues. The City Council directed staff to prepare a report that would outline the framework for creating a Landlord/Tenant Ad-Hoc Committee. On January 18, 2022, the City Council approved the establishment and framework of the Ad-Hoc Committee.

The Ad-Hoc Committee's mission was to serve as a conduit for citizen input analyzing and recommending options on landlord/tenant rental housing issues to the City Council.

The Work Plan of the Ad-Hoc Committee was to:
• Review the Rental Rights Programs and recommend any possible changes to the ordinance, if needed.
• Discuss and develop best practices for education and marketing on landlord/tenant issues in Glendale; and
• Discuss and evaluate a voluntary dispute resolution program for landlords and tenants.

Other topics of discussion by the Ad-Hoc Committee included a rent registry program, new legislation ideas, rental programing, and other residential rental housing issues.

The Ad-Hoc Committee’s aim was to enhance the effectiveness and accessibility of rental rights measures, ensuring that both landlords and tenants are well-informed.

The Ad-Hoc Committee originally consisted of seven members represented by both renters and landlords in Glendale, with one neutral representative. At the nine-month mark, unfortunately one Ad-Hoc Committee member seat was vacated due to an 215 of 289

38c
4 4
7 5
unexpected death. That seat was left vacated. The following individuals were originally chosen by City Council to serve on the Ad-Hoc Committee:
• James Son (Landlord)
• Razmik Grigorian (Landlord)
• Jennifer Schultz Bertolet (Landlord)
• Victor Hairapetian (Neutral)
• Davit Zargaryan (Tenant)
• Isabela Tevanyan (Tenant)
• Teal Marchande (Tenant)
The Ad-Hoc Committee convened monthly, holding meetings for a total of eleven months. The Ad-Hoc Committee successfully worked through the tasks outlined in its work plan, with a single meeting remaining for any follow-up work assigned by City Council. By not concluding the desired twelve meetings, Council may identify any additional concerns and/or work assignments for the Ad-Hoc Committee to receive from City Council before officially concluding its work. Alternatively, should no further need for the Ad-Hoc Committee arise, staff will inform the Ad-Hoc Committee of its resolution and conclude its operations accordingly.

Reports on Committee Work
Staff has compiled three comprehensive reports addressing the three key topics assigned to the Ad-Hoc Committee by the City Council. These reports are included as attachments and provide a detailed analysis of the Rental Rights Program ordinance, outreach and marketing strategies, and options for mediation. The reports include:
•Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program (Attachment 1) •Marketing and Outreach for Rental Rights (Attachment 2) •Tenant Dispute Resolution and Mediation (Attachment 3) Next Steps
Once the City Council reviews and discusses the work and suggestions made by the Ad-Hoc Committee, staff can incorporate any suggested changes and reach out to stake holders for input. Staff can achieve this through community meetings, reach out to specific landlord and tenant organizations and provide forms on our city webpage for stakeholders to share their opinions.

Once stakeholders have expressed their opinions, staff will return to City Council with a draft of the new ordinance with suggested changes and stakeholder opinions, at which time City Council will have the opportunity to approve final draft of changes or provide further direction.
216 of 289

48c
4 4
7 5

ANALYSIS
Attachment 1 - Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program The Rental Rights Program was introduced by the City Council on February 12, 2019, as a response to the ongoing affordable housing crisis and escalating rental rates. It aimed to address these issues while considering the diverse perspectives and concerns expressed during the extensive deliberations. The program consists of three main sections: Just Cause Eviction, Right to Lease, and Renter Relocation. Collectively, these provisions within the Rental Rights Program were implemented to enhance stability, protect tenants from unfair practices, and address the challenges associated with displacement in Glendale.

The committee executed a structured and comprehensive methodology to diligently review the Rental Rights program. In this phase, they delved into the intricacies of the program, meticulously scrutinizing its provisions, rules, and regulations. They assessed each section and analyzed it line by line, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the program's content.

In the Ad-Hoc Committees analysis of the current Rental Rights program, they observed that the program is extensive and covers many areas and provides good protection for tenants while maintaining balance between tenants and landlord. However, while the program's intent to cover all its bases is commendable, it has led to a degree of complexity and difficulty in understanding and following its guidelines. One of the overall agreements that the Ad-Hoc Committee had was that the program needs to be simplified. The program's extensive coverage and the inclusion of multiple exemptions have contributed to its intricate nature, which can pose challenges for both landlords and tenants seeking to navigate its provisions. Also, some sections of the program have been found to be outdated and in need of change and revisions.

After staff received the comments, suggestions, and revisions from the Ad-Hoc committee, they compiled a concise report outlining the recommended changes.

Subsequently, staff presented the report to the committee for final approval before submitting it to the City Council.

In conducting their review, the Ad-Hoc Committee cited sections of the ordinance and provided their thoughts and suggestions on what could be amended and how, however they refrained from voting on making official recommendations as to how it should be amended. This was to allow the City Council the ability to evaluate the identified sections, and deliberate amongst themselves of how to best amend it. If the City Council wishes to evaluate a complete and recommended draft ordinance, the City Council could provide direction to remand the assignment back to the Ad-Hoc Committee for decision making. 217 of 289

58c
4 4
7 5
Attachment 2 - Marketing and Outreach for Rental Rights The City Council tasked the Ad-Hoc Committee with evaluating the marketing strategy for the Rental Rights Program and coming up with new ideas and strategies that would better target landlords and tenants. The Ad-Hoc committee's role was to gather insights, identify areas for improvement, and provide recommendations to develop a comprehensive marketing strategy that would effectively target both landlords and tenants.

Through collaborative discussions and analysis of the program's goals and objectives, the Ad-Hoc Committee generated valuable insights and suggestions to strengthen the marketing strategy. Staff used the Ad-Hoc committees input in shaping a robust plan that aligns with the needs and preferences of the target stakeholders.

Building upon the Ad-Hoc Committee's recommendations, staff developed a comprehensive marketing strategy that employs various channels and tactics to maximize outreach and engagement. The strategy aims to raise awareness about the Rental Rights Program, educate the public about its benefits and provisions, and foster compliance among landlords and tenants.

Attachment 3 - Tenant Dispute Resolution and Mediation
The Ad-Hoc Committee was tasked with assessing the feasibility and desirability of establishing a mediation program to address various issues, including rent increases, security deposits, evictions, habitability, and relocations. During the Ad-Hoc Committee's deliberations, it became evident that there was a consensus that a mediation program could bring benefits to the community. A majority of members agreed that such a program would be voluntary and non-binding in nature, aiming to facilitate constructive dialogue between parties involved in housing-related disputes.

A voluntary and non-binding program refers to a mediation program that does not require participation. In this context, "voluntary" means that participation in the program is not mandatory or legally required. It is up to the parties involved, both tenants and landlords, to decide whether they want to engage in the mediation process.

Overall, the Ad-Hoc Committee felt that tenant/landlord mediation/dispute resolution programs promote effective communication, collaborative problem-solving, and timely resolutions. By providing a constructive platform for dialogue, these programs can benefit tenants and landlords by preserving relationships, reducing costs, and offering tailored solutions to their specific disputes.

While the Ad-Hoc Committee acknowledged the need for a mediation program, it also recognized several challenges associated with a voluntary approach. One of the key concerns is the reliance on the willingness of both tenants and landlords to participate in mediation. Unfortunately, some landlords may choose not to engage in the process, leaving tenants without access to the benefits of the program. 218 of 289

68c
4 4
7 5

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
No stakeholder/outreach was conducted as part of this report.

FISCAL IMPACT
Making changes to the Rental Rights Program ordinance and implementing a Dispute Resolution and Mediation Program will have cost impacts. Staff will return to Council with a more detailed analysis based on Council’s direction.

Implementing the marketing strategy will cost approximately $30,000 to $50,000, which was included as a part of the FY 2023-24 budget. No new appropriation is being requested at this time. The City Council approved funding is outlined below:

Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$20,000 44450-1070-CDD-8507-
P8001
General Fund (Measure S)
$30,000 45450-1070-CDD-8507-
P8001
General Fund (Measure S)

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
This item is considered a ministerial activity and therefore, not subject to CEQA review.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: Adopt a motion providing direction on the suggestions made the Ad-Hoc Committee.

Alternative 2: Consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Peter Zovak, Assistant Director of Community Development Sipan Zadoryan, Housing Analyst
Lucy Varpetian, Principal Assistant City Attorney
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager
219 of 289

78c
4 4
7 5

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1: Ad- Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program Attachment 2: Marketing and Outreach for Rental Rights
Attachment 3: Tenant Dispute Resolution and Mediation
220 of 289

MOTION
Moved by Council Member and seconded by
Council Member that the Council
hereby approves the Landlord/Tenant Ad-Hoc Committee’s suggestions on the Rental Rights Program, as outlined in the Report to Council dated August 22, 2023, with the intention of revisiting these suggestions in a redlined version of the Rental Rights Program municipal code ordinances at a subsequent council meeting.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
221 of 289

MOTION
Moved by Council Member and seconded by
Council Member that the Council
hereby approves the Rental Rights Marketing Strategy, as outlined in the Report to Council dated August 22, 2023.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
222 of 289

MOTION
Moved by Council Member and seconded by
Council Member that, regarding the
establishment of a Dispute Resolution/Mediation program for landlord/tenant disputes as outlined in the Report to Council dated August 22, 2023, the Council hereby directs staff as follows:

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
223 of 289

ATTACHMENT 1
Community Development - Housing2023

AD-HOC COMMITTEE

SUGGESTIONS ON THE

RENTAL RIGHTS

PROGRAM

CITY OF GLENDALE
224 of 289

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

METHODOLOGY

FINDING

RECOMMENDED CHANGES

CONCLUSION
APPENDIX: RENTAL HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
1 2
4 6
8 10
34 35
Chapter 9.30 Just Cause And Retaliatory Evictions ..............

9.30.010 Legislative purpose ..................................................

9.30.020 Definitions ................................................................

9.30.025 Requirement of offering one-year written leases ..

9.30.030 Evictions – Nuisance ...............................................

9.30.030 Evictions – Qualified Tenants .................................

9.30.030 Evictions – Uninhabitable or illegal units ...............

9.30.030 Evictions – Other .....................................................

9.30.033 Rent Based Termination .........................................

9.30.035 Required Payment of Relocation Fee .....................

9.30.050 Affirmative defense and remedies .........................

9.30.070 Penalty for Violations...............................................

Other areas of considers ........................................................ 11 12
13 16
18 20
21 22
23 25
31 32
33 225 of 289

Executive Summary
This report aims to present a comprehensive review of proposed recommendations from the recently established Landlord/Tenant Ad-Hoc Committee. The objectives of this report are to outline the comments and suggestions made by the Ad-Hoc Committee
through their last year together.
2 OVERVIEW
This report provides a comprehensive review of the recommendations put forth by the Landlord/Tenant Ad-Hoc Committee (Ad-Hoc Committee) regarding the Rental Rights Program in the City of Glendale. The objectives of this report are to outline the committee's comments and suggestions and assess their implications for the program.

The Rental Rights Program was introduced by the Glendale City Council (City Council) on February 12, 2019, as a response to the ongoing affordable housing crisis and escalating rental rates. It aimed to address these issues while considering the diverse perspectives and concerns expressed during the extensive deliberations. The program consists of three main sections: Just Cause Eviction, Right to Lease, and Renter Relocation.

Under the Just Cause Eviction section, regulations were implemented to safeguard tenants from arbitrary or unjust evictions, promoting stability and security within the rental market. The Right to Lease provision mandates landlords to offer a one-year lease to new tenants and when implementing rent increases, providing tenants with greater certainty and the ability to plan for their housing needs. The Renter Relocation section requires landlords to provide relocation assistance if rent increases exceed 7% over the previous 12 months, aiming to mitigate the impacts of displacement.

Since the program's implementation, staff has been actively involved in addressing inquiries from tenants and landlords, providing education, clarifications, and guidance on program requirements, as well as county and state laws. The COVID-19 pandemic and related emergency orders further influenced the rental market, necessitating additional education efforts due to the complexities of new laws and regulations.

At its meeting on August 24, 2021, the City Council approved the implementation of a Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 226 of 289

3 Ad-Hoc Committee. The Ad-Hoc Committee's mission was to serve as a conduit for citizen input, analyzing and recommending options on landlord/tenant rental housing issues to the City Council.

At its meeting on August 24, 2021, the City Council approved the implementation of a Ad- Hoc Committee. The Ad-Hoc Committee's mission was to serve as a conduit for citizen input, analyzing and recommending options on landlord/tenant rental housing issues to the City Council. The Ad-Hoc Committee, through their discussions, made several recommendations for improving the Rental Rights Program. These recommendations include simplifying the one-year lease requirements, enhancing protections for tenants facing no-fault evictions, revisiting the formula for calculating relocation assistance, and exploring mechanisms to track illegally constructed units and monitor vacancies.

It is essential for the City Council to recognize the significance of the suggested changes and their potential benefits in fostering a fair and equitable rental market. Implementation of these recommendations will require careful planning, coordination, and allocation of necessary resources.

By considering the adoption of the proposed changes, the City of Glendale can further strengthen tenant protections, promote stability and affordability, and enhance the overall quality of the rental market. Continued support from the City Council will be instrumental in successfully implementing the recommended improvements to the Rental Rights Program and ensuring the well-being of both tenants and landlords in Glendale.

Executive Summary
Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 227 of 289

4 Following a series of meetings held between 2016 and 2019 to address the pressing issue of an ongoing affordable housing crisis and explore potential solutions to combat increasing rental rates, the City Council took a significant step forward on February 12, 2019. The City Council introduced the Rental Rights Program. The program was designed to tackle the issue of unaffordable rental rates while considering the diverse perspectives and concerns expressed during the extensive deliberations. This program represented a comprehensive strategy that sought to strike a balance between the interests of tenants and landlords, fostering a fair and equitable rental market for all stakeholders involved. By opting for an alternative to rent control, the City Council paved the way for innovative solutions that prioritized the needs of the community, establishing a framework that aimed to provide stability, affordability, and fairness in the rental sector. This comprehensive program encompasses three key sections: Just Cause Eviction, Right to Lease, and Renter Relocation.

Under the Just Cause Eviction section, specific regulations were introduced to govern the eviction process, ensuring that tenants are protected from arbitrary or unjust evictions.

This provision aims to foster stability and provide a sense of security for tenants within the rental market.

The Right to Lease provision mandates landlords to offer a one-year lease to new tenants, as well as when implementing rent increases. By enforcing this requirement, the City of Glendale aims to provide tenants with greater certainty and enable them to plan for their future housing needs effectively.

Recognizing the potential impacts of rapidly increasing rents, the Renter Relocation section of the program mandates landlords to provide relocation assistance to tenants if rent increases exceed 7% over the course of the previous 12 months. This provision seeks to mitigate the consequences of displacement and offer support to affected residents.

Collectively, these provisions within the Rental Rights Program were implemented to enhance stability, protect tenants from unfair practices, and address the challenges associated with displacement in Glendale.

Background and History
Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 228 of 289

5 The program took effect on March 14, 2019, with a budget of approximately $410,000 and the establishment of new positions. The program impacts approximately 47,000 rental units in Glendale.

Since the implementation of the Rental Rights Program, staff has received numerous calls and emails, addressing inquiries from both tenants and landlords. Staff has provided education, clarified program requirements, and offered guidance on county orders and state laws such as AB 1482, which established a rent increase cap and eviction protections statewide. The COVID-19 pandemic and related emergency orders also impacted the rental market, with a rent freeze and eviction suspensions. Rental Rights staff has responded to inquiries and provided resources to residents, with further education efforts needed due to the complexities of the new laws.

Background and History
Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 229 of 289

6 The Ad-Hoc Committee meticulously executed a structured and comprehensive methodology to diligently review the Rental Rights program. To effectively address the tasks assigned by the City Council in their work plan, the committee allocated its time into three distinct phases, each aligned with the major responsibilities outlined.

Methodology

OVERVIEW
The Ad-Hoc Committee meticulously executed a structured and comprehensive methodology to diligently review the Rental Rights program. To effectively address the tasks assigned by the City Council in their work plan, the committee allocated its time into three distinct phases, each aligned with the major responsibilities outlined.

The committee focused on thoroughly examining the Rental Rights program itself. In this phase, they delved into the intricacies of the program, meticulously scrutinizing its provisions, rules, and regulations. The committee members, guided by the expertise of the staff, embarked on a meticulous journey through the ordinance. They meticulously assessed each section and analyzed it line by line, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the program's content.

After staff received the comments, suggestions, and revisions from the Ad-Hoc Committee, they compiled a concise report outlining the recommended changes.

Subsequently, staff presented the report to the committee for final approval before submitting it to the City Council.

This rigorous review process was enriched by the active participation of all Ad-Hoc Committee members. Every member had the opportunity to contribute their insights, observations, and suggestions. The Ad-Hoc Committee fostered an environment that encouraged open dialogue, allowing diverse perspectives to be shared and considered.

Through collaborative discussions, the Ad-Hoc Committee leveraged the collective wisdom of its members, enabling a thorough evaluation of the Rental Rights program.

Throughout the entire review process, the committee maintained a meticulous and syste- Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 230 of 289

7 matic approach. They employed a combination of in-depth analysis, collaborative discussions, and external input to ensure that their recommendations were informed, balanced, and aligned with the objectives of the Rental Rights program.

Methodology
Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 231 of 289

8 Findings

PROGRAM ANALYSIS
In the Ad-Hoc Committees analysis of the current Rental Rights program, they observed that the program is extensive, covers many areas, and provides good protection for tenants while maintaining balance between tenants and landlord.

Upon closer examination, the Ad-Hoc Committee identified both strengths and weaknesses within the program. The relocation section for increases exceeding 7% stands out as a notable strength, serving as an effective deterrent against excessive rent hikes. This provision aligns with the program's objective of promoting stability and addressing the impacts of displacement for residents.

However, while the program's intent to cover all its bases is commendable, it has led to a degree of complexity and difficulty in understanding and following its guidelines. One of the overall agreements that the Ad-Hoc Committee had was that the program needs to be simplified. The program's extensive coverage and the inclusion of multiple exemptions have contributed to its intricate nature, which can pose challenges for both landlords and tenants seeking to navigate its provisions.

Some sections of the program have been found to be outdated, particularly the relocation section pertaining to Just Cause Evictions. It is crucial to review and update this section to ensure it remains relevant and in line with current circumstances and evolving needs.

Additionally, the Ad-Hoc Committee’s analysis has indicated that the provision for a one- year lease appears to unnecessarily complex and may have limited impact, potentially requiring further examination and possible adjustments.

Another area that necessitates attention is the banking system associated with the program’s rent increases. The Ad-Hoc Committee identified certain loopholes that need to be addressed to enhance the program's effectiveness and ensure that it functions as intended. By addressing these gaps in the banking system, the ordinance can provide greater clarity and protection for both landlords and tenants, fostering a more transparent and reliable rental process.

Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 232 of 289

9 KEY ISSUES AND CHALLENGES
Balancing Landlord-Tenant Rights: One of the key challenges is striking a balance between the rights and responsibilities of landlords and tenants. While the ordinance aims to protect tenants, it should also consider the interests and rights of landlords to ensure the sustainability and viability of the rental market.

Protection Against Substandard Living Conditions: The Ad-Hoc Committee recognizes that some residential rental units have substandard living conditions and reduced services. A key challenge has been to establish a provision that discourages retaliatory evictions, while also emphasizing the responsibility of landlords to ensure well-maintained living units and safeguard the health, safety, and welfare of tenants.

Implementation and Enforcement: The successful implementation and enforcement of the ordinance present significant challenges. This includes ensuring compliance by landlords, addressing potential disputes between landlords and tenants, and establishing effective mechanisms for resolving conflicts and enforcing penalties for non-compliance.

County and State laws: The impact of State laws, particularly AB 1482, was a significant topic of discussion. AB 1482, which sets a rent limit of 5% plus change in CPI (currently 8.8%), provides temporary protections for renters until its expiration in 2030. The Rental Rights Program and the development of effective legislation while considering the provisions of AB 1482 have presented challenges for staff and the Ad-Hoc Committee.

Adequate Resources and Support: To effectively implement the ordinance and support its objectives, sufficient resources and support are necessary. This includes providing accessible information and assistance to landlords and tenants, facilitating dispute resolution processes, and ensuring the availability of resources for inspections and enforcement activities.

Findings
Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 233 of 289

Recommended Changes
As mentioned earlier in the Methodology section, the Ad-Hoc Committee meticulously examined each line of the Rental Rights ordinance (Chapter 9.30) to thoroughly analyze its provisions and propose recommendations. Staff diligently collected and consolidated all the feedback provided by the Ad-Hoc Committee, summarizing their comments and concerns for each relevant section of the ordinance where changes or suggestions were proposed. The subsequent information presents a comprehensive overview of the committee's input and its impact on the ordinance.

In the subsequent sections, each heading will align with a specific section of Chapter 9.30, commonly referred to as the Rental Rights Program. Headings will be Bold and Italicized, to make them easier to identify. Within each section, the comments and suggestions provided by the Ad-Hoc Committee will be presented, accompanied by a rationale highlighting the significance and necessity of these proposed changes. Finally, staff will provide their perspectives and recommendations for appropriate actions to be taken. 10Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 234 of 289

Rational
It was identified that the current title, "Just Cause and Retaliatory Evictions," may not accurately reflect the comprehensive nature of the regulation and could potentially cause confusion when referring to it. To address this concern, the Ad-Hoc Committee proposed changing the title of Chapter 9.30 to better represent its scope and purpose and also to align the title of the regulation with public perception and its representation in marketing documents. The program is publicly known as the Rental Rights Program and is referred to as such in nearly all marketing and outreach documents.

Chapter 9.30 Just Cause And Retaliatory Evictions
The Ad-Hoc Committee proposed changing the title of the Chapter to one of the following titles:
-Rental Rights Program
-Residential Rental Rights Program
-Residential Hiring of Property
Staff Comments
Staff fully supports the proposed changes to the title of Chapter 9.30. It is recommended that the new title should be either "Rental Rights Program" or "Residential Rental Rights Program." This consistency will help prevent any misinterpretation or misconception that a new program has been introduced.

Recommended Changes
11Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 235 of 289

Rational
The legislative purpose of the ordinance was first drafted in 2001 when the original Just Cause and Retaliatory Eviction ordinance was first proposed.

Since then, it went through minor revisions in 2019 when additions to Chapter 9.30 were made. The committee felt that the section was dated and should be updated so that the legislative purpose reflects the current issues and concerns.

9.30.010 Legislative purpose
The Ad-Hoc Committee suggested that Section 9.30.010, Legislative purpose, should be revisited after the overall amendments are proposed to provide an updated version.

Staff Comments
While acknowledging the necessity for an updated version, many of the initial areas of concern addressed and original intent behind the legislative purpose remain as pertinent today as they were when the language was initially drafted. The concerns and issues identified at the time of its inception continue to hold significance within the context of the current rental landscape.

Recommended Changes
12Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 236 of 289

Rational
Currently, Chapter 9.30 of the Rental Rights Program defines "Rent" and "Base Rent" in a manner that encompasses various charges, including parking, storage, and utilities. However, the Ad-Hoc Committee has put forth a recommendation to differentiate between payments made directly for the rental unit and those made for additional services such as parking, storage, or utilities. The objective behind this proposed change is to establish a clear distinction between rent increases and separate charges.

By doing so, the calculation of relocation triggers would be simplified, and precise definitions would prevent any potential misunderstandings between landlords and tenants.

9.30.020 Definitions
The Ad- Hoc Committee discussed changing the definition of Base Rent and Rent to include a formula that distinguishes between reoccurring charges and those that are based on utility usage and to make a distinction between providing additional services, such as an extra parking spot or a new pet, addition of another tenant and allow also for a reduction if there is a decrease in services, such as removal of a laundry facility.

Staff Comments
Staff acknowledges the need for a more precise definition regarding the distinction between rent and utilities/fees. However, it is important to exercise caution in formulating this definition, as separating rent from utilities and other fees could potentially create a loophole that landlords may exploit to surpass rent increase limits by imposing additional charges.

Recommended Changes
13Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 237 of 289

Rational
One of the primary concerns raised by the Ad-Hoc Committee pertained to habitability and tenant protections concerning illegally constructed units.

The Ad-Hoc Committee expressed a strong determination to prevent unscrupulous landlords from exploiting tenants. Their goal was to ensure that if tenants were forced to vacate substandard units as a result of landlord negligence or if the units were illegally constructed, these tenants would receive enhanced relocation assistance.

9.30.020 Definitions
The Ad- Hoc Committee also discussed adding additional protections by expanding the definition for tenants residing in illegal units. This could be done by better defining a rental unit.

Staff Comments
Staff fully supports the committee's recommendations regarding the inclusion of stronger protections and stricter relocation fees for tenants residing in illegally constructed units. Building upon these recommendations, staff proposes that the City Council consider incorporating additional provisions into the ordinance to further address the concerns related to negligent landlords and substandard living conditions.

To address these issues effectively, staff suggests implementing measures that would require landlords who neglect major issues to promptly address them or provide compensation to tenants for damages incurred. This would serve as a strong incentive for landlords to address and resolve any maintenance or safety concerns in a timely manner, ensuring the well- being and satisfaction of their tenants.

Recommended Changes
14Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 238 of 289

Staff Comments - Continued
Furthermore, staff recommends including provisions in the ordinance that outline compensation for tenants who are displaced due to necessary renovations. This would cover expenses such as hotel fees and any other costs incurred as a result of the displacement/inconvenience caused by the renovation process. By providing appropriate compensation, tenants can be relieved of any financial burdens and inconveniences resulting from the renovation of their units.

In cases where a landlord evicts a tenant to renovate a unit that has been damaged due to negligence, staff proposes that the relocation fee be significantly increased. This serves as a deterrent against landlords intentionally neglecting their responsibilities and reinforces the principle that tenants should not bear the consequences of their landlord's negligence.

Recommended Changes
15Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 239 of 289

Rational
Many of the discussions and themes surrounding the one-year lease provision revolved around the need for simplification and clarity. Currently, the requirement to offer a one-year lease creates confusion due to inconsistencies with state law and arbitrary timing of the offers. This ambiguity can be burdensome for both landlords and tenants, leading to uncertainty about when the notice should be given. By simplifying this provision, it alleviates administrative burdens on landlords and provides tenants with a clear understanding of how they can secure a one-year lease, promoting transparency and facilitating smoother rental agreements.

9.30.025 Requirement of offering one-year written leases Removing the requirement of the one-year lease offer after the initial offer.

Simplifying it and keeping the notice timing consistent with state law.

Offering the one-year lease through to the second year only if the Tenant rejects the lease (but continue to offer the lease if Tenant accepts it).

Allowing future rent increases to be governed by state law.

Require any amendments to lease to be in writing.

No unilateral changes by the landlord, unless required by state law.

The one year written lease provision of Chapter 9.30 requires landlords to offer a one- year lease to prospective tenants and any tenants whose rent they wish to increase. The current law requires that a landlord make this offer 90 days prior to the expiration of the current lease term, failure to do so renders the increase void. The Ad-Hoc Committee extensively discussed the one-written lease requirement, and possible alternatives that were more in line with current state laws and ones that did not create administrative burden for landlords but still offered the protection for tenants that wanted it. Some ideas the committee had include:

Other changes that the Ad-Hoc Committee would like to see regarding leases but not necessarily associated with a one-year lease are:

Recommended Changes
16Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 240 of 289

Staff Comments
While staff acknowledges the need for a change in the one-year lease provision, there is disagreement with the proposed changes put forward by the Ad-Hoc committee due to concerns about added burdens and potential confusion. In light of this, staff suggests a simpler alternative. Staff has the following proposal, tenants would have the option to request a one-year lease annually, either on the anniversary of their move-in date or at the time of a rent increase. If a tenant makes such a request, the landlord would be obliged to provide them with a one-year lease term. However, landlords would not be required to proactively make an offer. This approach aims to alleviate administrative burdens on landlords while still ensuring protection for tenants, striking a balance between simplicity and safeguarding tenant rights.

Recommended Changes
17Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 241 of 289

Rational
There was general agreement among the Ad-Hoc Committee members to add additional actions that should be considered as nuisance. By providing greater clarity and specificity in our description, landlords would have a better understanding of what constitutes a nuisance, allowing them to take appropriate action to address such behaviors.

This proposed expansion of the nuisance provision recognizes the importance of maintaining a harmonious living environment and addressing behaviors that may disrupt the peace and well-being of other tenants. By providing landlords with a comprehensive list of specific offenses, they can take proactive measures to address these issues promptly and effectively, ultimately contributing to the overall satisfaction and comfort of the rental community.

9.30.030 Evictions - Nuisance
The Ad-Hoc Committee discussed expanding the definition of nuisance to include noxious odors, incessant dog barking, refusal to pick up dog feces.

The current definition of “nuisance” includes, but is not limited to:
“any gang-related crime, any documented activity commonly associated with illegal drug dealing, including complaints of noise, steady traffic day and night to a particular unit, barricaded units, sighting of weapons, drug loitering as defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 11532, or other drug related circumstances brought to the attention of the landlord by other tenants, persons within the community, law enforcement agencies or prosecutorial agencies. For purposes of this subdivision, gang-related crime is any crime in which the perpetrator is a known member of a gang, or any crime motivated by gang membership in which the victim or intended victim of the crime is a known member of a gang.”
The suggestion would add the three new actions mentioned above to the current definition, no other changes would be made.

Recommended Changes
18Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 242 of 289

Staff Comments
Staff fully supports the inclusion of the mentioned offenses in the nuisance provision of the eviction section within Chapter 9.30.

Recommended Changes
19Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 243 of 289

Rational
With the proposed changes, the Ad-Hoc Committee aims to enhance the existing safeguards and provide additional protections for vulnerable tenants facing no-fault evictions. By granting them longer periods of time to move, these measures would offer more stability and support during the transition process. This is especially important for individuals with disabilities or the elderly, who may require additional time and resources to find suitable alternative housing.

9.30.030 Evictions – Qualified Tenants
Just Cause provisions currently allow for certain no-fault evictions, such as owner move-in or resident manager move in. The Ad-Hoc committee has proposed additional protections for tenants facing such no-fault evictions. These additional protections would be for tenants who are disabled or elderly. The additional protections could be in the form of extended time to move out, additional relocation fees or some other form of protection.

Additionally, the Ad-Hoc Committee suggested imposing limitations on the number of times a landlord can utilize owner move-in evictions, along with a requirement for landlords to report these evictions to the City for monitoring and compliance purposes.

Staff Comments
Staff has no objection to the changes proposed.

Recommended Changes
20Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 244 of 289

Rational
The rationale for emphasizing the need to address illegally constructed units is based on the potential risks and challenges they pose to both tenants and the overall rental market. Illegally constructed units often lack proper safety measures and may not meet building codes and standards, jeopardizing the well-being of tenants. By tracking and identifying these units, the City can take necessary actions to ensure compliance with regulations, protect tenant rights, and maintain the integrity of the rental market. Implementing effective tracking systems and providing resources for enforcement will enable the City to proactively address these issues, promoting safer and more secure housing options for residents.

9.30.030 Evictions – Uninhabitable or illegal units
Throughout the Ad-Hoc committee's extensive deliberations, a significant focus was placed on addressing the issue of illegally constructed units. The Ad-Hoc Committee recognized the importance of tracking these properties and enhancing staff's ability to enforce regulations and identify such illegal units. The discussions highlighted the need for a comprehensive mechanism that would enable the City to monitor properties more effectively, ensuring compliance with safety standards and rental regulations.

Staff Comments
Staff recognizes the importance of establishing a process to track habitability in Glendale and acknowledges the benefits it would bring to the city. The current lack of data poses challenges in making informed policy decisions and addressing issues effectively. By implementing a tracking system, Glendale would gain access to valuable data that can inform policy-making, enable proactive interventions, and facilitate better understanding of the local rental market. This process would enhance the city's ability to ensure habitable living conditions for tenants and promote informed decision-making to support the needs of both landlords and tenants.

Recommended Changes
21Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 245 of 289

Rational
Some tenants can be a nuisance without necessarily meeting the definition of a nuisance. Therefore landlords should be given the opportunity to remove them easier. While tenants may not be engaged in activities that directly violate the lease agreement or local laws, their behavior can still cause disruptions and problems for other residents, creating an unpleasant living environment. In such cases, landlords often find themselves in a difficult position, as it can be challenging to take action against these tenants within the confines of the existing regulations.

9.30.030 Evictions – Other suggestions
Ad-Hoc Committee discussed situations where “a tenant is not good for the building” - when someone flies just under the radar for being a nuisance. Some members of the Ad- Hoc committee felt the need to have a clause in the ordinance that would allow landlords to remove troubled tenants.

Staff Comments
Staff strongly disagrees with this recommendation as it contradicts the fundamental principles of just cause eviction and tenant protections.

Granting landlords the ability to remove tenants without a valid reason would undermine the purpose of ensuring fairness and preventing arbitrary evictions. It could potentially lead to exploitative practices where landlords prioritize higher-paying tenants or unjustly retaliate against tenants exercising their rights. Landlords can identify any number of tenants as “troubled” based on little factual evidence. Upholding the principles of just cause eviction is crucial to maintain a balanced and equitable rental market that protects the rights and well-being of both tenants and landlords.

Recommended Changes
22Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 246 of 289

Rational
By implementing a limitation on how far back landlords can go to utilize unused rent increases, the proposed changes in the ordinance aim to prevent confusion and disputes between landlords and tenants. Under the current provision, landlords can potentially reach back several decades to utilize accumulated unused rent increases. This unrestricted timeframe can result in challenges for tenants who may not have maintained records or documentation to verify whether their landlord has indeed banked unused rent.

Introducing a specific limit on the timeframe for banking rent increases would provide clarity and transparency for both parties involved. It would enable tenants to more easily track and verify the utilization of unused rent increases by their landlords, minimizing the potential for disputes and ensuring fair treatment. By addressing this issue, the proposed changes seek to promote a more harmonious and transparent relationship between landlords and tenants within the rental community.

9.30.033 Rent Based Termination
The Ad-Hoc Committee expressed concerns regarding the complexity and lack of clarity in the banking provision of Chapter 9.30. Currently, the provision allows landlords to carry forward unused rent increases from previous years and bypass the requirement of offering relocation assistance. Landlords can bank up to 3 years' worth of unused rent, which amounts to 21%, but they are restricted from using more than 15% of the banked rent at any given time. Furthermore, there is no specific limitation on how far back a landlord can “look-back” to bank rent increases.

To address these issues, the Ad-Hoc Committee recommends implementing additional changes to simplify the tracking of such increases. One proposed change is to reduce the look-back period to two or three years, making it easier to monitor and manage the banking of rent increases. Additionally, it is crucial to clarify that the banking provision should transfer from the prior owner to the new owner, ensuring continuity and consistency in the application of banking rules.

Recommended Changes
23Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 247 of 289

Staff Comments
Staff acknowledges the necessity of implementing a look-back limit to enhance the clarity and streamline the regulation of the banking provision.

In order to simplify and bring consistency to the process, staff recommends a two-year look-back period. This limited timeframe would ensure that landlords can only utilize unused rent increases accumulated within the past two years.

Furthermore, staff proposes aligning the total banked amount with the maximum utilization limit of 15% at any given time. Currently, the provision allows landlords to bank up to 21% of unused rent increases, which is an arbitrary figure that adds unnecessary complexity to the regulation. By matching the total banked amount with the utilization limit, staff aims to eliminate confusion and provide a more straightforward and equitable approach for both landlords and tenants.

Recommended Changes
24Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 248 of 289

9.30.035 Required Payment of Relocation Fee
3 times the greater of Tenant’s current monthly Rent in effect or the FMR for a comparable unit plus two thousand dollars ($2,000).
2x Actual rent + value of security deposit; with possible escalator for larger projects. ((2x FMR) +$2000) x CPI; Council review every 5 years.

The Ad-Hoc Committee discussed simplifying the relocation calculation sections for both Just Cause Eviction relocation and rent increase relocations and including an escalation factor or a review mechanism. This section will be divided into two parts, Just Cause Eviction Relocation and Rent Increase Relocation.

Just Cause Eviction Relocation
The current Just Cause eviction relocation calculation in Chapter 9.30 involves multiplying the Fair Market Rent (FMR) for a comparable unit by two, and then adding $1000. The FMR, provided by HUD annually, represents the Market Rents for different bedroom sizes. However, the Ad-Hoc Committee has noted that the FMR released by HUD is often outdated and does not accurately reflect the current rental market conditions.

Consequently, the committee believes that the existing formula for calculating relocation assistance is dated and fails to provide adequate support for tenants facing eviction through no fault of their own.

To address this issue, the Ad-Hoc Committee recommends revising the relocation calculation formula to better align with the actual market conditions. By incorporating a more representative measure, such as an updated and accurate market rental rate, the proposed formula would ensure that tenants receive fair and appropriate assistance when faced with involuntary displacement.

Moreover, the committee suggests implementing an escalation mechanism as part of the formula to avoid the need for frequent adjustments in the future. This proactive approach would provide a long-term solution, reducing the necessity of revisiting the topic periodically to accommodate changing market dynamics. Some suggestions for formulas that the committee discussed include:

For further consideration, the Committee suggested differentiating between small owners and multiple owners. If the total number of units were a higher count, then the value of relocation could increase and consider whether the landlord owns in the aggregate less than 4 units and/or lives on the property.

Recommended Changes
25Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 249 of 289

Rational
The original formula for Just Cause Eviction relocation, established in 2001, was considered reasonable and even above market standards at that time. However, over the years, the rental landscape has evolved significantly, and the relocation fees offered in Glendale no longer align with current trends. In comparison to neighboring areas such as Los Angeles County where minimum relocation assistance for a 2 bedroom is $10, 797 compared to Glendale's maximum relocation payment for a 2 bedroom of $5,444 for any tenant falls significantly short. For Los Angeles City, the minimum relocation amount for any tenant starts at $9,900.

By adopting these proposed changes, the relocation assistance calculation would be more responsive to the current rental market, enabling displaced tenants to receive adequate support and helping to alleviate the financial burden associated with involuntary evictions.

The rationale behind differentiating between larger property owners and smaller mom-and-pop owners in relation to relocation fees is to prevent an unfair burden on the latter group. Recognizing that smaller-scale property owners may have limited resources compared to larger entities, the intention is to ensure that they are not disproportionately impacted by higher relocation costs.

Recommended Changes
26 Staff Comments
Staff acknowledges the need to update the formula for relocation assistance but disagrees with the proposal to differentiate between larger property owners and smaller mom-and-pop owners. Such differentiation could introduce unnecessary complexity and complications into the ordinance, contrary to the goal of simplifying it.

Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 250 of 289

Staff Comments - Continued
Implementing a system to identify and track mom-and-pop landlords who own fewer than four units would be challenging. Many property owners hold their properties under limited liability companies (LLCs) or other legal entities, making it difficult to accurately determine their ownership status.

Instead, staff suggests focusing on creating a fair and consistent formula for calculating relocation assistance that is applicable to all property owners, regardless of their size. Staff recommends looking into the possibility of differentiating between tenants who are 62 years of age or older and/or handicapped.

Recommended Changes
27Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 251 of 289

9.30.035 Required Payment of Relocation Fee
Rent Increase Relocation Calculation
Currently, under the rental rights provisions, landlords are required to offer relocation assistance if the rent is increased by more than 7%. The calculation for the relocation assistance varies based on the number of units in the property. For properties with 3 to 4 units, the calculation is 3 times the current rent. For properties with 5 or more units, the calculation takes into account the tenant's income. If the tenant's income is below 130% of the Area Median Income (AMI), the formula includes an additional factor, the multiplier becomes the number of years the tenant has resided in the unit, ranging from 3 to 6 maximum. If the tenant's income is above 130% of AMI, the calculation is 3 times the proposed rent.

The committee recommends simplifying the formula for relocation assistance and eliminating the AMI requirements. Additionally, they propose establishing a single value for relocation assistance.

Recommended Changes
28 Rational
The suggested changes to the relocation assistance formula in the Rental Rights program aim to address the complexity and challenges currently associated with determining the assistance amount. The existing formula, with its variations based on unit size, tenant income, and length of tenancy, can lead to confusion and difficulties in calculation.

By removing the AMI requirements and implementing a single value for relocation assistance, the revised formula would treat all tenants equally when it comes to relocation benefits. This approach acknowledges that the costs and inconveniences of moving are not exclusive to lower-income individuals and should be taken into account regardless of income bracket.

The suggested revisions aim to ensure fairness and avoid penalizing tenants solely based on their income level.

Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 252 of 289

Rational - Continued
By streamlining the formula and removing the AMI requirements, both landlords and tenants would benefit from a clearer and more straightforward process. This would eliminate the need for extensive calculations and ensure that the relocation assistance amount is easily understandable and consistent for all parties involved.

Recommended Changes
29 Staff Comments
Staff agrees with the need to remove the AMI requirement.

Staff further suggests the need to remove the differentiation between properties with 3 to 4 units and those with 5 or more units, as this distinction does not necessarily align with the actual ownership structure. Many investors with 3 to 4 units are larger companies rather than small-scale landlords. Removing this differentiation would simplify the formula and ensure a more consistent approach.

Additionally, staff suggests retaining the connection between the formula and proposed rent increases, as this serves as a deterrent for landlords from implementing excessive rent hikes. The provision acts as a safeguard to prevent landlords from significantly raising rents due to the potential financial obligations associated with relocation assistance.

To streamline the formula, staff proposes a revised calculation that considers the number of years a tenant has resided in the unit, up to a maximum of 10 years, multiplied by the proposed rent increase. This simplified formula would provide a clearer method for determining relocation assistance in addition to accounting for the length of tenancy.

Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 253 of 289

Rational
By implementing these suggestions, the regulations surrounding relocation assistance would be updated to align with current standards and provide tenants with clearer guidance. The change to match state law would insure protection for a new batch of properties.

The changes to include the city website aim to ensure that tenants have easy access to relevant information and resources regarding their rights and responsibilities under the rental rights program.

9.30.035 Required Payment of Relocation Fee
Rent Increase Relocation – other suggestions
The Ad-Hoc Committee proposed modifications to one of the exemptions regarding relocation assistance for rent increases. Currently, the regulation excludes the payment of a relocation fee for rental units that obtained a certificate of occupancy after February 1, 1995. The committee suggests aligning the look-back period with AB 1482, which establishes a 15-year look back for such exemptions. This means any property built within the last 15 years is exempt, as opposed to properties built after 1995.

Additionally, the committee recommends incorporating a noticing requirement that would direct tenants to the City of Glendale's rental rights page when receiving rent increases that require the offer of a relocation assistance.

Staff Comments
Staff has no objections to the suggestions made by the Ad-Hoc Committee.

Recommended Changes
30Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 254 of 289

Rational
The rationale behind considering a cap on attorney fees is to establish a fair and balanced approach in cases where a tenant takes legal action against a landlord but does not succeed in their claim. By implementing a cap, it ensures that landlords are not able to potentially accumulate exorbitant fees from tenants in such situations.

9.30.050 Affirmative defense and remedies.

During the deliberations of the Ad-Hoc committee, one member put forward the idea of incorporating a provision to cap attorney fees in the code. However, there were differing opinions among the committee members on this matter. Some members believed that the code should remain unchanged without a specific cap on attorney fees.

Staff Comments
Staff does not agree with the suggested change. Staff holds the viewpoint that implementing a cap on attorney fees could potentially discourage tenants from pursuing legal action against landlords as they may fear the financial consequences of an unsuccessful lawsuit.

The removal of a cap on attorney fees may pose challenges for tenants seeking legal representation, as it could potentially create financial constraints that limit their ability to secure legal assistance. Without the possibility of recovering attorney fees from the opposing party, tenants may face difficulties in finding attorneys willing to take their cases due to concerns about compensation for their services.

This situation raises important considerations regarding access to justice and the ability of tenants to effectively assert their rights in legal proceedings. The financial burden associated with attorney fees could deter tenants from pursuing legitimate claims or seeking legal remedies, ultimately impacting the fairness and balance of the legal process.

Recommended Changes
31Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 255 of 289

Rational
Administrative fees can serve as an effective deterrent and provide a mechanism to enforce compliance with the rental rights regulations.

By implementing administrative fees, the City of Glendale can reinforce the importance of adhering to the provisions outlined in Chapter 9.30. These fees would serve as a financial consequence for landlords who fail to comply with the established rental rights program, encouraging better adherence to tenant protections and promoting a more equitable rental market.

9.30.070 Penalty for Violations
While the Ad-Hoc Committee did not provide specific feedback on the addition of administrative fees as penalties for violations of Chapter 9.30, staff is recommending that administrative fees be added.

Recommended Changes
32Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 256 of 289

Other areas of considers
In addition to reviewing the specific provisions of Chapter 9.30, the Ad-Hoc Committee also explored broader strategies to address various aspects of rental rights and housing in Glendale. One significant topic of discussion centered around the implementation of a mechanism to track illegally constructed units and monitor the number of vacancies within the city.

By establishing a system to track illegal units, Glendale can enhance its ability to enforce housing regulations and hold landlords accountable for any violations. This proactive approach would contribute to maintaining a safe and habitable rental market for tenants while ensuring that landlords comply with legal requirements.

Furthermore, tracking units would allow for more effective enforcement of regulations and code compliance. By having a centralized database or system in place, authorities can streamline their efforts to investigate, inspect, and take appropriate actions against landlords who are engaging in illegal construction practices. This mechanism would not only deter future violations but also hold accountable those who disregard the well-being of tenants.

In addition, tracking these units can provide valuable insights into the scale and scope of the issue. It can help authorities understand the prevalence of illegal construction within specific neighborhoods or areas of the city, enabling targeted interventions and resource allocation.

Furthermore, the Ad-Hoc Committee discussed the possibility of implementing a vacancy tax. This tax, if adopted, could serve as an incentive for landlords to keep their rental units occupied, thereby addressing the issue of housing scarcity and discouraging the practice of keeping properties vacant for extended periods of time. The revenue generated from the vacancy tax could be utilized to support affordable housing initiatives or fund other programs aimed at addressing housing challenges in Glendale.

To strengthen enforcement efforts, the Ad-Hoc Committee proposed allocating additional resources for staffing. This would enable the city to dedicate more personnel to monitor compliance, conduct inspections, and respond to tenant complaints promptly. Greater staffing in code enforcement would enhance the effectiveness of enforcing rental rights regulations and ensure that tenants' concerns are addressed in a timely manner.

Overall, the Ad-Hoc Committee recognized that a comprehensive approach to rental rights involves not only the refinement of existing regulations but also the implementation of additional strategies to address broader housing issues. By exploring mechanisms for tracking illegal units, considering a vacancy tax, investing in code enforcement staffing, and conducting educational workshops and outreach, Glendale aims to create a more equitable and sustainable rental housing environment for all residents.

Recommended Changes
33Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 257 of 289

Conclusion
34 This report has provided a comprehensive analysis of the Rental Rights Program in Glendale, along with the recommendations put forth by the Ad-Hoc Committee. Through this discussion, several key areas have been identified for improvement in the program.

These include aligning the program's title with public perception, updating legislative purpose, revising definitions and calculations, simplifying the banking provision, enhancing protections for tenants in illegally constructed units, expanding the nuisance definition, and reevaluating the relocation assistance formula.

Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 258 of 289

Appendix: Rental HousingCharacteristics
Median Gross Rent
Bedroom Size Rent (Census) Rent (Zillow)
Studio $1,471 $1,795
1 $1,577 $2,200
2 $2,060 $3,000
3 $2,442 $4,500
Total $1,835 $2,875
35 This overview aims to present the composition of the rental market in Glendale. The primary data source for this overview is the 2021 American Community Survey conducted by the United States Census Bureau. The 2021 American Community Survey is the latest data available through the Census. While certain details might be slightly dated, the US Census remains the most readily available and reliable data for analysis purposes.

Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program Number of Housing Units
Occupancy Type # %
Owner-Occupied 25,211 33%
Renter-Occupied 45,620 60%
Vacant 5,389 7%
Total 76,220
259 of 289

Appendix: Rental HousingCharacteristics
Number of Rental Units Based on Property Types
Property Size Units %
1 - Detached 4,312 9.5%
1 - Attached 1,245 2.7%
2 Units 1,471 3.2%
3 or 4 Units 4,238 9.3%
5 to 9 Units 9,667 21.2%
10 or more Units 24,498 53.7%
Other 189 .4%
36Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program Number of Rental Units by Bedroom Size
Bedroom Size Units %
Studio 4,098 9%
1 14,499 31.80%
2 or 3 26,412 57.90%
4 or more 611 1.30%
260 of 289

Appendix: Rental HousingCharacteristics
Years Structure Built - Rental Units
Year Units %
2020 or later 0 0%
2010 to 2019 3,744 8.20%
2000 to 2009 1,468 3.2%
1980 to 1999 9,985 21.90%
1960 to 1979 16,530 36.20%
1940 to 1959 8,775 19.20%
1939 or earlier 5,118 11.20%
37Ad-Hoc Committee Suggestions on the Rental Rights Program 261 of 289

Marketing and
Outreach
Proposal for Rental Rights
Community Development - Housing 2023
ATTACHMENT 2

CITY OF GLENDALE
262 of 289

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION
GOALS

OUTREACH AND EDUCATION STRATEGY

COMMUNITY OUTREACH

CONCLUSION
1 2
3 4
5 11
18 PARTNERSHIPS AND COLLABORATIONS

EVALUATION AND FEEDBACK

TIMELINE
13 14
16 1
263 of 289

Marketing Proposal
Executive Summary
This marketing plan outlines strategies and initiatives to promote the Rental Rights Program in Glendale. The objective is to raise awareness, educate the public, and ensure that tenants and landlords are well-informed about their rights and
responsibilities. By implementing effective marketing strategies, public outreach initiatives, and educational campaigns, we aim to foster a fair and equitable rental market in Glendale. 2 264 of 289

The Rental Rights Program in Glendale was established in response to the pressing issue of unaffordable rental rates and the need to address the challenges faced by tenants and landlords in the city. The program was designed to strike a balance between the interests of tenants and landlords, fostering a fair and equitable rental market for all stakeholders involved.

The Glendale City Council tasked the Ad-Hoc Committee with evaluating the marketing strategy for the rental rights program and coming up with new ideas and strategies that would better target landlords and tenants. The Ad-Hoc Committee's role was to gather insights, identify areas for improvement, and provide recommendations to develop a comprehensive marketing strategy that would effectively target both landlords and tenants.

Through collaborative discussions and analysis of the program's goals and objectives, the Ad-Hoc Committee generated valuable insights and suggestions to strengthen the marketing strategy. Staff utilized the Ad-Hoc Committee’s input in shaping a robust plan that aligns with the needs and preferences of the target stakeholders.

Marketing Proposal
Introduction
Residents Served Phone Calls
7000+
Emails
1000 6000
3 ||
265 of 289

1. Increase Awareness
Goals
The marketing and outreach efforts of the Rental Rights Program in Glendale are driven by several key goals and objectives. The primary goal is to increase awareness of the program among landlords and tenants in the city. This includes enhancing program visibility, improving understanding of the Rental Rights Program and its benefits, and expanding program recognition through strategic marketing initiatives. Staff developed the strategy in this report with the following goals in mind:

2. Promote Engagement

3. Provide Education and Resources
4 Marketing Proposal
266 of 289

Marketing Proposal
Outreach and Education Strategy
5 Website and Online Presence
New Webpage
Recognizing the need for a more user-friendly online platform, the Rental Rights Program staff has taken the initiative to revamp its existing website. The current website has been deemed “clunky” and “difficult” to navigate, hindering users' ability to access vital information about tenant rights and landlord obligations. To address these issues, staff is working to develop a new website that provides an enhanced user experience.

The redesigned website will prioritize user-friendly navigation, intuitive design, and clear content organization. Users will be able to easily find the information they need, whether it pertains to the program overview, tenant rights, landlord obligations, frequently asked questions, or contact details. The content will be presented in a concise and digestible manner, ensuring that users can quickly grasp the key concepts and provisions of the Rental Rights Program.

The development of this new website is a significant step forward in improving program accessibility and providing comprehensive information to stakeholders. The website will be available in multiple languages to allow for further accessibility. It will serve as a centralized hub where tenants and landlords can access vital resources and gain a better understanding of their rights and responsibilities. Through a more user-friendly and inclusive website, the staff aims to empower individuals with knowledge and promote transparency within the rental market in Glendale. 267 of 289

Marketing Proposal
Outreach and Education Strategy
6 Website and Online Presence
Social Media
Staff recognizes the importance of leveraging social media platforms to engage with the community and effectively disseminate information. Working with our Public Information Office the program will establish a strong presence on popular social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, allowing for direct communication with the target audiences.

The primary objective of the Rental Rights Program's social media strategy is to keep the community informed and educated about tenant rights, landlord obligations, and program updates. Staff will regularly share valuable information, including program announcements, educational resources, relevant news articles, and important updates on rental regulations.

Campaigns may include informative videos, infographics, testimonials, and success stories to highlight the benefits of the program and showcase real-life examples of how it has positively impacted tenants and landlords in Glendale. By using compelling visuals and relatable narratives, the program can effectively communicate its objectives and encourage community members to actively participate and take advantage of the resources and protections offered by the Rental Rights Program. 268 of 289

One of the key advantages of utilizing social media platforms as part of the Rental Rights Program's marketing strategy is the ability to reach and engage with an audience that might not be easily targeted through traditional means of marketing.

Social media platforms provide a unique opportunity to connect with diverse demographic groups, including younger renters, tech-savvy individuals, and those who may not be actively seeking information through traditional channels such as print media or local events.

Through targeted advertising and content promotion, the Rental Rights Program staff can specifically tailor its social media campaigns to reach these specific audience segments. Platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram offer powerful targeting tools that allow the program to narrow down its audience based on factors such as age, location, interests, and even rental status. By utilizing these tools, the program can ensure that its messages and resources are reaching the right individuals who can benefit from the Rental Rights Program.

Social media also offers the advantage of virality and organic reach. When individuals find value in the content shared by the Rental Rights Program, they are more likely to share it with their own social networks. This can lead to a ripple effect, where information about the program spreads organically, reaching a wider audience that may not have been initially targeted. By creating compelling and shareable content, such as informative videos, infographics, or tenant testimonials, staff maximize its reach and impact within the community.

Marketing Proposal
7 Social Media
269 of 289

To effectively educate and inform both landlords and tenants about their rights and responsibilities under the Rental Rights Program, a comprehensive range of educational materials will be developed. These materials will serve as valuable resources that individuals can refer to for guidance and understanding of the program's key components.

Staff will create visually appealing and informative brochures, pamphlets, and flyers that concisely outline the program's objectives, tenant rights, landlord obligations, and key program features. These printed materials can be distributed at community centers, libraries, local businesses, and other public spaces where they are easily accessible to the target audience. They will serve as handy references that individuals can take with them and refer to when needed.

Staff will produce educational videos or host webinars to provide in-depth explanations of important topics related to tenant and landlord rights. These videos can cover subjects such as lease agreements, eviction processes, maintenance responsibilities, and dispute resolution. They will be shared on the program's website and social media platforms to reach a wider audience and allow individuals to access the information at their convenience.

Marketing Proposal
Outreach and Education Strategy
8 Educational Materials
In addition to staff will develop a newsletter
to keep stakeholders informed and
engaged with the Rental Rights Program.

A newsletter can serve as a regular
communication tool to provide updates,
share educational resources, and highlight
important events or changes related to the
program. By crafting informative and
engaging content, the newsletter can help
build a sense of community and encourage
ongoing participation. The newsletter can
include articles, tips, success stories, and
relevant information to address the
interests and concerns of both landlords
and tenants.
270 of 289

The program website will serve as a central hub for downloadable resources, offering a comprehensive collection of informative materials that individuals can access and refer to at any time. These resources may include guides, checklists, sample forms, and templates related to rental agreements, maintenance requests, and dispute resolution.

By providing downloadable resources, staff ensures that individuals have easy access to the necessary tools and information to navigate their rental rights effectively.

To promote these educational materials, the Rental Rights Program staff will integrate them into its overall marketing strategy. They will be featured on the program website, shared on social media platforms, and distributed during community outreach events and workshops. Collaborations with local organizations, such as community centers, schools, and nonprofit agencies, will also be established to disseminate the materials to a wider audience.

Marketing Proposal
9 271 of 289

To ensure maximum outreach and engagement, the program will employ targeted mailers, bill insertions, and property-specific distribution of printed materials. These efforts will enhance the program's visibility and provide valuable resources directly to residents and landlords in Glendale.

Marketing Proposal
10 Targeted Mailers
The staff will implement a targeted mailing campaign to reach all residential properties in Glendale. Large mailers will be sent to all households in Glendale, providing an overview of the Rental Rights Program, important contact information, and key highlights of tenant and landlord rights. By directly reaching residents in their mailboxes, the program ensures that important rental rights information reaches every household in the community.

Printed Material in GWP Billings
The Glendale Water and Power (GWP) billings present an excellent opportunity to reach a wide audience. The Rental Rights Program staff will cooridnate with GWP to include printed materials, such as brochures or informational inserts, in their bill mailings. By utilizing the existing bill distribution process, the program can effectively engage residents and landlords with vital rental rights information while minimizing additional costs and logistics.

Brochures for Newly Purchased Properties
To ensure that landlords are well-informed, the program will distribute brochures to newly purchased properties. These brochures will be provided to property owners or management companies during the transfer of ownership process. By proactively reaching out to new property owners, the program ensures that they are aware of their obligations and have access to resources that support compliance with rental rights regulations. This approach helps in establishing a strong foundation of awareness and adherence to the program from the early stages of property ownership.
272 of 289

Marketing Proposal
Community Outreach
11 The Ad-Hoc committee recognizes the significance of direct engagement and face-to- face interactions in building trust, fostering understanding, and disseminating crucial information. To maximize community outreach, the program will implement a series of initiatives that aim to connect with residents, landlords, and relevant stakeholders.

These initiatives include community workshops and seminars, collaboration with local organizations and tenant advocacy groups, and active participation in local events relevant to residential rental market.

Staff will organize informative workshops and seminars to educate residents and landlords about their rights and responsibilities under the program. The workshops and seminars will provide a platform for participants to ask questions, seek clarifications, and receive guidance from program representatives.
273 of 289

To enhance the effectiveness of community workshops and seminars, the Rental Rights Program staff will adopt a targeted approach by organizing intimate events in specific neighborhoods, on a monthly basis in varies languages. This approach is a result of valuable insights gained from past events, where large-scale community-wide workshops did not yield significant attendance. By shifting to smaller, neighborhood- focused workshops, the program aims to create a more intimate and engaging environment that encourages active participation and fosters meaningful interactions.

The targeted workshops and seminars will be strategically planned to cover different neighborhoods throughout Glendale, ensuring comprehensive outreach and participation from residents across the city. Each month, a specific neighborhood will be selected as the focal point for the workshop, and efforts will be made to ensure that all neighborhoods are included in the rotation. By rotating the locations, the program ensures that residents from every part of Glendale have the opportunity to attend a workshop in their vicinity.

To expand the reach and impact of the Rental Rights Program, collaborative partnerships will be forged with local organizations and tenant advocacy groups. These partnerships will enable the program to tap into existing networks and leverage their expertise and resources in reaching the target audience. By working closely with these organizations, the program can access their platforms, newsletters, and events to disseminate information and raise awareness about rental rights. Additionally, collaboration will facilitate the sharing of insights and best practices, enhancing the overall effectiveness of the program. Some suggestions by the Ad-Hoc Committee for community partners include the Department of Motor Vehicles, Glendale Community College, Verdugo Job Center and local churches and schools.

The Rental Rights Program staff will also actively participate in local events that are relevant to Housing, such as community fairs, neighborhood gatherings, and housing expos. These events provide an excellent opportunity to engage with the target audience directly, interact with community members, and distribute program materials.

Program representatives will be present at booths or designated areas to engage in conversations, address queries, and provide on-the-spot information about rental rights.

By actively participating in local events, the program establishes a visible presence, builds trust, and creates avenues for ongoing communication with the community.

Marketing Proposal
12 274 of 289

Staff recognizes the importance of forging partnerships and collaborations to amplify its impact and reach a wider audience. By working together with property management companies and landlord associations, the program can establish fruitful collaborations that benefit both landlords and tenants. These partnerships can facilitate the dissemination of program information, training sessions, and educational materials to a larger network of property owners and managers. By actively engaging property management companies and landlord associations, the program can ensure that the rental rights message reaches a broad spectrum of stakeholders within the rental housing industry in Glendale.

Collaborating with the Glendale Tenant Union (GTU) is another key avenue for expanding the program's reach and strengthening its advocacy efforts. The GTU is a prominent tenant advocacy group in Glendale, representing the interests of tenants and working towards ensuring affordable and fair housing. By partnering with the GTU, the Rental Rights Program staff can tap into their expertise, knowledge, and community networks. Collaborative initiatives may include joint educational workshops, co-hosted events, and mutually beneficial outreach efforts. This partnership can provide valuable insights, foster community engagement, and promote a unified approach towards rental rights in Glendale.

Through these partnerships and collaborations, the Rental Rights Program staff can leverage existing networks, resources, and expertise to reach a wider audience and foster a stronger community of renters, landlords, and tenant advocates. By working together, the program can expand its outreach efforts, share valuable information, and create a supportive network that champions the rights and responsibilities of all stakeholders in the rental housing market.

Marketing Proposal
Partnerships and Collaborations
13 275 of 289

Program Awareness: Monitor the level of program awareness among the target audience by measuring the percentage of landlords and tenants who are aware of the Rental Rights Program at different stages of the marketing campaign. Staff can do this pay conducting surveys among landlords and tenants to gauge their awareness of the Rental Rights Program.

Participation Rates: Track the number of landlords and tenants who actively participate in the program over time. Measure the number of participants in key outreach events, as well as the number of tenants and landlords who report compliance issues or seek assistance through program channels.

Stakeholder Feedback: Collect feedback from landlords and tenants to gauge their satisfaction with the Rental Rights Program. This can be done through feedback forms, online surveys, or direct communication channels. Pay attention to suggestions, concerns, and recommendations shared by stakeholders and use them to make improvements.

Website and Social Media Analytics: Monitor website traffic, engagement metrics, and social media analytics to assess the effectiveness of online marketing efforts. Track metrics such as page views, click-through rates, social media shares, and comments to gauge audience engagement and interest.

Data Analysis: Regularly analyze the collected data to gain insights into the effectiveness of specific marketing channels, messages, and campaigns.

Identify trends, patterns, and areas for improvement. Look for correlations between awareness, participation rates, and feedback to understand the impact of the marketing strategy.

To measure the success of the marketing strategy for the Rental Rights Program, it is crucial to track key metrics and collect relevant data. Here's a breakdown of how staff will go about measuring and evaluating the strategy:

Marketing Proposal
Evaluation and Feedback
14 276 of 289

Refinement and Optimization: Use the insights gained from data analysis to refine and optimize the marketing efforts. Adjust messaging, channels, or targeting strategies based on the data to maximize the impact of the campaign. Continuously test and experiment with different approaches to find the most effective methods for reaching and engaging the target audience.

Ongoing Evaluation: Establish a schedule for regular evaluation and review of the marketing strategy. Set milestones and checkpoints to assess progress and make necessary adjustments. Consider conducting periodic reviews with stakeholders to gather additional insights and perspectives.

Marketing Proposal
15 277 of 289

Month 1
Finalize the design and development of the Rental Rights Program website.

Begin optimizing the website for search engines and ensuring its responsiveness across different devices.

Develop and publish engaging and informative content on the website, including program details, tenant rights, landlord obligations, and frequently asked questions.

Conduct surveys to assess the community's current level of awareness and understanding of the Rental Rights Program.

Month 2
Launch the new Rental Rights Program website, making it accessible to the public.

Begin development of print material.

Develop a timeline of community meetings and begin booking venues.

Begin sending out monthly newsletters.

Month 3-4
Print and distribute educational materials, including brochures, pamphlets, and flyers.

Establish social media accounts (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) dedicated to the Rental Rights Program.

Develop a content calendar and create engaging posts to raise awareness, educate the community, and promote the benefits of the program.

Forge partnerships and collaborations with property management companies, Landlord/Tenant associations, and community
groups.
16 Marketing Proposal
Timeline
278 of 289

Month 5-6
Include program information and resources in GWP billings and new property owner welcome packets.

Begin Monthly community workshops and seminars in specific neighborhoods, ensuring comprehensive coverage across
Glendale.

Launch targeted social media advertising campaigns to reach a broader audience.

Month 7-8 Print and distribute educational materials, including brochures, pamphlets, and flyers.

Month 9-10
Evaluate the effectiveness of the marketing strategies through data analysis, including website analytics, social media engagement metrics, and workshop attendance records.

Gather feedback from program participants through surveys, focus groups, and interviews.

Compile evaluation reports and identify areas for improvement.

Month 11
Review the evaluation reports and make recommendations for optimizing the marketing plan.

Refine marketing strategies based on the insights and feedback gathered.

Prepare a summary report highlighting the achievements and impact of the marketing efforts.
17 Marketing Proposal
Timeline
279 of 289

Marketing Proposal
18 This marketing plan provides a comprehensive framework to promote the Rental Rights Program in Glendale. By implementing the outlined strategies and initiatives, we aim to raise awareness, educate the public, and ensure that tenants and landlords are well- informed about their rights and responsibilities. With effective marketing and outreach, we can foster a fair and equitable rental market in Glendale.

Conclusion
280 of 289

ANNUAL
2023 Community Development - Housing
01/07/2025
ATTACHMENT 3
Tenant Dispute
Resolution and
Mediation

CITY OF GLENDALE
281 of 289

1 Introduction
This report presents the findings and recommendations of the Ad-Hoc Committee's discussion on mediation programs and their potential implementation. The Ad-Hoc Committee was tasked with assessing the feasibility and desirability of establishing a mediation program to address various issues, including rent increases, security deposits, evictions, habitability, and relocations. The purpose of this report is to outline the committee's consensus, highlight differing perspectives on program parameters, and propose a way forward.

Background
Tenant-landlord mediation/or dispute resolution programs are services offered by government agencies or community organizations that aim to resolve disputes between tenants and landlords. These programs provide a neutral, third-party mediator who can help both parties to negotiate a resolution to issues such as rent increases, repairs, or changes to lease terms.

The cities that were identified as having these types of programs include:
• Berkeley
• Burbank
• Camarillo
• Campbell
• West Hollywood
• Los Gatos
• Marin County
• Mountain View
• Sacramento
• San Rafael
• Santa Barbara
• Santa Monica

Fearing that the report might become repetitive with multiple similar examples, staff has made a conscious decision to keep the report concise and avoid redundancies. Consequently, the report will primarily concentrate on three agencies with programs unique from one another.

Marin County
Marin County’s Rental Housing Dispute Resolution Program, also known as "Mandatory Mediation," assists landlords and tenants in resolving disputes related to rent increases. The program requires landlords to participate in mediation if they wish to raise rents by more than 5% over a 12-month period. The program covers residential dwelling units in the Town of Fairfax, Unincorporated Marin County, and the City of San Rafael.

The program not only addresses rent increase disputes but also handles other landlord-tenant issues, such as security deposit returns or necessary repairs to rental units, although participation in these cases is not mandatory.
282 of 289

2 To initiate mediation, individuals in Marin County can submit their requests online or through paper submission. The Consumer Protection Unit of the Marin County District Attorney's Office oversees the mediation process, which operates separately from the Housing Department. The expected timeline for resolution is approximately 8-12 weeks.

In 2022, Marin County received 287 mediation requests, and 118 cases were mediated in some form. There are no costs to residents associated with the program. The program is staffed with two mediators, including one bilingual mediator. The funding for the program comes from court filing fees and a Joint Powers Authority with the towns and cities in the county, although an exact budget estimate was not provided.

Similarly, LA County operates a comparable mediation program through the LA County Department of Consumer and Business Affairs (LACBA). LACBA provides mediation services for a variety of disputes, including those between landlords and tenants, businesses and customers, neighbors, family, and contracts. They offer telephone, online, and in-person mediation options, with bilingual services available to accommodate individuals with limited English proficiency.

Burbank
The City of Burbank operates an informational program through its Landlord-Tenant Commission, primarily focusing on resolving residential landlord-tenant disputes and serving as an informational resource. The commission serves as a resource for individuals seeking mediation services and information regarding residential properties.

The program addresses various types of disputes, including rent increases, evictions, relocation fees, habitability concerns, and lease agreements, among others. Individuals seeking assistance from the commission can submit an intake form online or in person. Eligibility requirements include not working with a lawyer and completing the form accurately.

The program is operated by the City of Burbank through its Landlord-Tenant Commission. A commissioner from the commission typically reaches out to members of the public within 24-48 hours of receiving the intake form. Resolutions may be achieved on the day of contact or within a week, depending on the complexity of the situation.

In 2022, the program received 87 intake forms involving evictions, rent increases, relocation fees, habitability concerns, and lease agreements. There are no costs associated with the program for members of the public.

The Landlord-Tenant Commission consists of volunteers appointed by the City Council. A city staff member acts as a liaison, overseeing form assignments, agendas, and meeting minutes.

The Housing Authority Manager and Housing Specialist attend meetings to review procedures and provide updates to the commission and members of the public.

283 of 289

3 The program is funded by the City of Burbank, as part of its larger housing program, and does not have separate funding. The staff involved in the program includes a Housing Authority Manager, a Housing Specialist, and an Intermediate Clerk. According to Burbank staff, the program requires minimal time and functions as an information-based program without providing legal advice. Ultimately, decisions are made by the tenant or landlord.

Santa Monica
The City of Santa Monica, as part of the rent control program, provides a mediation program to assist in resolving disputes between tenants and landlords.

The mediation program covers various types of disputes, including rent decrease petitions, construction-related rent decrease petitions, base rent, and amenities petitions, among other things.

To file a complaint, individuals must complete an online petition, which is then sent to either the Hearings Department or a mediation facilitator. Parties are notified of hearings at least ten days in advance, and if deemed appropriate for mediation, a trained mediator is assigned to the case. The mediator helps identify issues and facilitates a mutually acceptable solution. Appeals are heard by the Rent Control Board.

The mediation program is operated by the City of Santa Monica as part of its Rent Control program. The expected timeline for resolution is currently longer than their 180-day regulation requirement.

In terms of case numbers, there were 101 cases addressed in 2022.

The program is financed by annual registration fees paid by owners of rent-controlled units, with the option for owners to transfer half of the fee to the tenant. There are no additional costs for parties to utilize the program.

The staffing for the Rent Control department includes a Hearings Department Manager, an Office/Budget Coordinator, a Hearing Specialist, a Hearing Investigator, three Hearing Officers, and one as-needed Mediator. The budget and funding specifics for the mediation program within the Rent Control department are not specified, but the overall budget for Santa Monica's Rent Control program is over $5 million.

City of Glendale
Past Mediation efforts in Glendale
In early 2002, in response to concern for tenant and landlord relationships regarding matters of habitability and rent, a rent mediation program was pursued by the Glendale City Council. The program concept was to provide a City operated mechanism for review of rent increases, eviction notices, etc., in an effort to limit excessive increases or retaliatory actions that cause evictions. In response to a proposal from the then formed Glendale Apartment Association, a 284 of 289

4 voluntary rent mediation was formulated and partially funded by the City ($15,000 for education and outreach funded by CDBG).

However, in August 2002, the voluntary program had to be discontinued. The Glendale Apartment Association was unable to garner voluntary participation, leading to it’s discontinuation. The challenges in soliciting participation from landlords and tenants contributed to the program's inability to effectively operate and achieve its intended goals.

Current Process
While the report identifies several cities in California that have established mediation or tenant dispute resolution programs, it's important to note that Glendale's Rental Rights Program may be sufficient in addressing tenant-landlord disputes.

The Rental Rights Program in Glendale already provides assistance and counseling to tenants and landlords, as well as an informal process for resolving disputes related to rent increases, security deposits, and repairs. The program also offers education and outreach to both landlords and tenants to promote understanding of the rights and responsibilities of each party.

Through an informal process, Rental Rights staff has served as a mediator between Tenants and Landlords since the inception of the program. Introducing a separate mediation program would necessitate additional financial resources for its implementation and maintenance, including funding for staff salaries, training, administrative costs, and other program-related expenses.

Given that the Rental Rights Program is effectively fulfilling the role of mediation, allocating additional resources to duplicate the efforts seems unnecessary and inefficient.

Instead of introducing an additional mediation program, an alternative recommendation is to enhance the enforcement capabilities of the existing Rental Rights Program in Glendale. While the Rental Rights Program has been successful in mediating cases between tenants and landlords, bolstering its enforcement powers would provide a more comprehensive solution to address rental disputes effectively.

By granting the Rental Rights Program greater enforcement capabilities, it would have the authority to take stronger actions against parties who violate rental regulations or engage in unfair practices. This would empower the program to protect tenant and landlord's rights more effectively and discourage parties from engaging in illegal or exploitative behavior.

Enhanced enforcement capabilities could include:
• Increased Penalties: The program could propose the introduction penalties or fines for landlords found guilty of violations, ensuring that the consequences are more substantial and act as a deterrent.
• Compliance Inspections: Equipping the program with the ability to conduct inspections of rental units to ensure compliance with health, safety, and habitability standards would provide proactive measures to identify and rectify potential violations. 285 of 289

5 • Legal Support: Allocating resources for legal support within the Rental Rights Program would enable tenants to access legal advice and representation, enhancing their ability to navigate disputes and seek fair resolution.

By focusing on enhancing the enforcement capabilities of the Rental Rights Program, Glendale can ensure that tenant and landlord rights are protected and upheld in a more robust manner.

This approach leverages the existing infrastructure and expertise of the program while addressing the need for stronger enforcement measures to deter misconduct and ensure compliance with rental regulations.

Overview of Ad-Hoc Committee Discussion
During the committee's deliberations, it became evident that there was a consensus that a mediation program could bring benefits to the community. A majority of members agreed that such a program would be voluntary and non-binding in nature, aiming to facilitate constructive dialogue between parties involved in housing-related disputes.

A voluntary and non-binding program, as agreed upon by the majority of Ad-Hoc Committee members, refers to a mediation program that does not require participation. In this context, "voluntary" means that participation in the program is not mandatory or legally required. It is up to the parties involved, both tenants and landlords, to decide whether they want to engage in the mediation process.

The voluntary nature of the program allows parties to willingly enter into mediation, demonstrating their willingness to engage in dialogue and find a mutually acceptable resolution to their housing-related disputes.

Additionally, the program being "non-binding" signifies that the mediation outcomes and agreements reached through the process are not legally enforceable. Unlike a binding arbitration process where the decisions are legally binding and must be followed, a non-binding program encourages parties to reach a mutually satisfactory agreement through facilitated dialogue. The non-binding nature means that if either party is dissatisfied with the outcome, they are not legally obligated to adhere to it and can explore other avenues for resolution if necessary.

Although a few members expressed a desire for a mandatory binding program, the majority of the Ad-Hoc Committee agreed that a voluntary and non-binding approach would be more suitable for the mediation program. This type of a voluntary, non-binding program would be similar to the 2002 program established by the then City Council.

In contrast to a voluntary and non-binding program, a mandatory binding program would require all parties involved in housing-related disputes to participate in the mediation process.

Participation would be obligatory, and the decisions or agreements reached through mediation would be legally binding and enforceable by law.
286 of 289

6 There was a general agreement among committee members that the program should encompass a wide range of topics to address the diverse needs of the community. These topics included but were not limited to rent increases, security deposits, evictions, habitability, relocations, and other common housing-related disputes. By covering a broad scope, the mediation program would have the potential to address a variety of pressing issues faced by tenants and landlords alike.

The Ad-Hoc Committee felt that a mediation/dispute resolution program provides a structured and neutral environment for tenants and landlords to communicate and resolve their conflicts.

By fostering open dialogue and understanding, these programs can help preserve relationships between the parties involved.

Furthermore, it was the Ad-Hoc Committees view that mediation allows for more flexible and customized solutions compared to court-imposed decisions. Tenants and landlords can actively participate in crafting agreements that meet their specific needs and circumstances.

Mediation programs can expedite the resolution of disputes. By providing a structured process and dedicated mediators, these programs aim to reach agreements efficiently. Timely resolution is beneficial for all parties involved, as it reduces stress, uncertainty, and the prolonged disruption that can arise from unresolved conflicts.

Overall the Ad-Hoc Committee felt that tenant/landlord mediation/dispute resolution programs promote effective communication, collaborative problem-solving, and timely resolutions. By providing a constructive platform for dialogue, these programs can benefit tenants and landlords by preserving relationships, reducing costs, and offering tailored solutions to their specific disputes.

Unfortunately, some landlords may choose not to engage in the process, leaving tenants without access to the benefits of the program.

The success of voluntary mediation heavily depends on the cooperation and good faith of landlords. However, due to the power imbalance in rental relationships, tenants may feel pressured or intimidated, fearing potential retaliation or negative consequences if they engage in mediation. This power dynamic can influence the fairness of agreements reached during the mediation process, as landlords often possess more resources and leverage.

Another limitation of a voluntary mediation program is that the outcomes are typically not legally binding. This means that landlords may not be legally obligated to comply with any agreements made during the mediation sessions. As a result, tenants may face challenges in 287 of 289

7 enforcing their rights or seeking legal remedies if a landlord refuses to uphold the terms of the agreement.

Ad- Hoc Committee Recommendations
Based on the discussions held and the perspectives shared by committee members, the following recommendations are proposed:
• Establish a voluntary, non-binding mediation program to address housing-related disputes.
• Design the program to cover a wide range of topics, including rent increases, security deposits, evictions, habitability, relocations, and other relevant issues. • Consider a hybrid model for program administration, combining a board or commission with dedicated staff.
• Develop clear guidelines for mediator qualifications, ensuring a balance between formal training, certification, and ongoing professional development. • Designing a formal process for tenants and landlords to access mediation services, ensure a structured and effective approach to resolving their disputes. • Conduct further research and stakeholder consultations to refine program parameters, taking into account local housing market conditions, legal frameworks, and community needs.

Another recommendation put forth by the committee was to conduct a trial run of the mediation program to assess its effectiveness before fully implementing it.

Potential Costs
Implementing a mediation program with voluntary participation, as recommended by the Ad- Hoc committee, incurs certain costs. One of the primary expenses is hiring a professional mediator to facilitate the meetings and ensure a fair and effective mediation process.

According to data from Salary.com, the salary range for a Mediator in California is approximately $51,082 to $81,473 per year. However, if a Mediator is also an attorney with specialized expertise, the salary range increases to $110,081 to $152,383 per year.

Considering the potential need for administrative support and other operational costs associated with running the mediation program, it is important to account for additional expenses. These costs may include administrative staff salaries, training and development, office space, technology, and program promotion.

Taking these factors into consideration, it is reasonable to estimate the total annual costs of the mediation program to be between $120,000 to $210,000. This estimation provides a range that encompasses the mediator's salary, administrative expenses, and other associated costs. 288 of 289

8 However, it is essential to conduct a comprehensive budget analysis specific to the program's requirements and available resources to arrive at a more precise cost estimate.

Conclusion
The Ad-Hoc Committee has recognized the potential benefits of a mediation program for addressing housing-related disputes. While differing perspectives on program parameters were evident, the Ad-Hoc Committee reached a consensus on a voluntary non-binding approach, encompassing a wide range of topics. By implementing the recommendations outlined in this report, the members believe that the community can benefit from an effective and inclusive mediation program that promotes constructive dialogue and amicable resolutions in the realm of housing disputes.
289 of 289

Glendale City CouncilAugust 29, 2023

Glendale City Council
August 29, 2023