February 15, 2022
7:00 PM – Regular Meeting
Council Chambers
400 N. Douty St.
6:00 PM CALL TO ORDER STUDY SESSION AND CLOSED SESSION:
ROLL CALL BY THE CITY CLERK :
PUBLIC COMMENT :
Comments from the public are limited to items on the agenda (GC 54954 .3a). A maximum of three minutes is allowed for each speaker. Please begin your comments by stating your name and providing your city of residence.
STUDY SESSION :
Presentation and Update on the design of the new KART Transit Center in Downtown Hanford CLOSED SESSION FOR DISCUSSION OF THE FOLLOWING:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-INITIATION OF LITIGATION (GC 54956.9 (d)(4)):
One potential case.
CALL TO ORDER REGULAR SESSION:
ROLL CALL:
INVOCATION:
Frank Saldana
Council Members will meet in-person in the Council
Chambers. The meeting will also be lived streamed on the City’s website: http://livestream.hanford.city/
FLAG SALUTE:
CLOSED SESSION ACTION REPORT:
COUNCIL REPORTS/GENERAL REPORTS:
Brief information-only reports from City Council and/or Staff, including committee reports and reports by City Council related to meetings attended at City expenses (AB1234).
PUBLIC COMMENT:
This is the time for citizens t o comment on subject matters within the jurisdiction of the Hanford City Council. This is also the public’s opportunity to request an item from the Consent Calendar be pulled for discussion purposes or to comment on any item on the agenda. State law does not allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights (GC 54954.2). A maximum of three minutes is allowed for each speaker. Please begin your comments by stating your name and providing your city of residence.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted in one m otion. There will be no separate discussion of these matters unless a request is made and then the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar to be discussed and voted upon by a separate motion.
A. PROCEDURAL WAIVER: Waive reading in full of resolutions and ordinances and approval and adoption of same by reading title the only.
B. City Clerk: Approval of the Minutes of the June 15, 2021 Meeting C. City Clerk: Approval of the Minutes of the July 6, 2021 Meeting D. Public Works: Authorization to adverti se for bids for the FY 21/22 Pa vement Resurfacing Treatment Project, and Pre -Authorize the City Manager to award and execute the contract on behalf of the City to the lowest responsible bidder providing project bid is within current budget appropriation.
E. Public Works: Approval of a p ayment to King's Petroleum, for the purchase of diesel fuel for Fleet Operations, in the amount is $31,826.76.
GENERAL BUSINESS:
A. Public Works: Authorization to Reject the bid from Maggiora Bros. Drilling as a non -responsive bid; Award a contract to Zim Industries, of Fresno CA, in the amount of $3,588,500.00 for the Well No. 51 and Well No. 52 Drilling Project; Establish a construction contingenc y of $358,850.00; and Approve an additional appropriation of $867,350.00 from the Water Impact Fee Reserves to fully fund this project.
B. Council: Adoption of Resolution No. 22 -06-R, expressing the City’s opposition to the Statewide Initiative 21-0042A1, billed as the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act, and consistent with the Policy direction from the League of California Cities.
COUNCIL COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS :
At this time, any Council Member may ask a question for clarification , make an announcement, or report briefly on their activities. In addition, subject to Council Policies and P rocedures, they may request staff to report back to the Council at a subsequent meeting concerning any matter or take action to direct staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. (GC 54954.2) Council Future Agenda Items
Upcoming Events and Important Dates:
February 18: Deadline for the public to submit draft maps for consideration at the 3 rd Redistricting Public Hearing
February 21: Holiday – City offices will be closed
March 1: City Council Meeting - 3rd Redistricting Public Hearing at 8:00 p.m.
March 15: City Council Meeting - 4th Redistricting Public Hearing at 8:00 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT:
Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available to public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at 319 N. Douty Street, Hanford, California 93230, during normal business hours. Such agendas are also available at the city’s website, www.cityofhanfordca.com subject to staff’s ability to post the agenda before the meeting.
If you need a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s office, 559-585-2515, 319 N. Douty Street, Hanford, California 93230, at least 2 days prior to the meeting {28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II}
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 2/15/2022
AGENDA SECTION: B
SUBJECT:
City Clerk: Approval of the Minutes of the June 15, 2021 Meeting
Recommendation:
Approve the minutes of the June 15, 2021 Meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT:
ATTACHMENTS:
6.15.2021
13.B
Packet Pg. 4
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
June 15, 2021 7:00 PM
Council Chambers
400 N. Douty St.
4:30 PM CALL TO ORDER STUDY SESSION AND CLOSED SESSION:
Mayor Ramirez called the meeting to order at 4:31 p.m.
ROLL CALL BY THE CITY CLERK:
Present: Francisco Ramirez, John Draxler, Kalish Morrow, Art Brieno
Late: Diane Sharp
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Comments from the publi c are limited to items on the agenda (GC 54954.3a). A maximum of three minutes is allowed for each speaker. Please begin your comments by stating your name and providing your city of residence.
None.
STUDY SESSION :
A. FIRE: Report and Overview of the City of Hanford Fire Department Suppression Division Fire Chief Pendergrass presented an overview of the roles and responsibilities of the Fire Department and the Fire Supp ression Division. He also handed out a FAQ sheet that was not included in the st aff report. Chief Pendergrass will present the Guiding Documents and Fire Master Plan at a future meeting for the Council's review and direction. Chief Pendergrass answered questions from the Council.
B. Study Session: Presentation by the Hanford C hamber of Commerce regarding accomplishments for the prior contract year and goals for the upcoming year.
The Hanford Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Amory Marple presented the organizat ions' accomplishments, events, and activities. Ms. Marple also discusse d the organizations' future goals and answered questions from the Council. The Council commended Ms. Marple on her success with the organization.
Mayor Ramirez adjourned to Closed Session at 5:30 p.m.
CLOSED SESSION FOR DISCUSSION OF THE FOLLOWING:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL- PUBLIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (GC 54957(b)(1))
Title: City Attorney
13.B.a
Packet Pg. 5
Attachment: 6.15.2021 (Clerk: 6.15.2021 Meeting)
CALL TO ORDER REGULAR SESSION:
Mayor Ramirez called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
John Draxler Council Member Present 4:25 PM
Diane Sharp Vice Mayor Late 4:35 PM
Art Brieno Council Member Present 4:29 PM
Kalish Morrow Council Member Present 4:25 PM
Francisco Ramirez Mayor Present 4:10 PM
INVOCATION:
The invocation was led by Pastor Mark Curts.
FLAG SALUTE:
The flag salute was led by Council Member Brieno.
CLOSED SESSION ACTION REPORT:
None.
RECOGNITIONS/PROCLAMATIONS:
A. Recognition of Curtis Marple for his emergency awareness during a residential fire Chief Pendergrass and Senator Melissa Hurtado presented Curtis Marple with certificates of recognition.
B. Recognition of Departing Council Member John Draxler Each of the Council Member s thanked Council Member Dr axler. Mayor Ramirez presented Council Member Draxler with a plaque in recognition of his service to the community.
SPECIAL BUSINESS ITEM:
A. Appointment of Amanda Saltray to the District A City Council Seat for the remainder o f the unexpired term.
City M anager Cifuentez provided a brief overview of Council Member Draxler's resignation and the appointment process of Amanda Saltray to the District A seat for the remainder of the term.
Motion to approve Resolution 21- 25-R, appointi ng Amanda Saltray to ser ve the remainder of the unexpired term of Council Member Draxler.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Francisco Ramirez, Mayor
SECONDER: Diane Sharp, Vice Mayor
AYES: Draxler, Sharp, Brieno, Morrow, Ramirez
B. Administration of the Oath to Council Member Amanda Saltray Senator Melissa Hurtado administered the oath of office to Amanda Saltray.
13.B.a
Packet Pg. 6
Attachment: 6.15.2021 (Clerk: 6.15.2021 Meeting)
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS:
City Manager Cifuentez discussed the meetings he attended and upcoming events.
COUNCIL REPORTS/COMMENTS:
Vice Mayor Sharp discussed the events and meetings that she attended.
Council Member Morrow commended the Public Works Department for their responsiveness to the community.
Council Member Brieno had nothing to report.
Council Member Saltray discussed the community events that she attended.
Mayor Ramirez had nothing to report.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
This is the time for citizens to comment on subject matters not on the agenda within the jurisdiction of the Hanford City Council. This is also the public’s opportunity to request an item from the Consent Calendar be pulled for discussion purposes or to comment on any item on the agenda. Comments related to Public Hearing items will be heard at the time the item is discussed.
A maximum of three minutes is allowed for each speaker. Please begin your comments by stating your name and providing your city of residence.
Bob Ramos commented on consent I tem C and requested that it be pulled from the cons ent calendar . He also commented on the censure of Council Member Brieno.
Jerry Irons commented on his past proposal for the Bastille.
Rene Irons commented on behalf of Mr. Iron's past proposal for the Bastille.
Greg Enloe expressed his interest in the Bastille.
Nancy Silva, Spencer Hoash, and Stan Billswalley commented on the Bastille and spoke highly of Greg Enloe.
Nathan Vosburg, former mayor of Coalinga, shared his thoughts on th e im portance of public comment at a city council meetings.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted in one motion.
There will be no separate discussion of these matter s unless a request is made and then the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar to be discussed and voted upon by a separate motion.
13.B.a
Packet Pg. 7
Attachment: 6.15.2021 (Clerk: 6.15.2021 Meeting)
Motion to approve the Consent Calendar except for the items pulled for separate consideration.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Art Brieno, Council Member
SECONDER: Diane Sharp, Vice Mayor
AYES: Saltray, Sharp, Brieno, Morrow, Ramirez
A. PROCEDURAL WAIVER: Waive reading in full of resolutions and ordinances and approval and adoption of same by reading title the only.
B. Administration: Adopt ion of R esolution No, 21- 24-R, delegating authority for determining Industrial Disability pursuant to Government Code Sections 21156 and 21173.
C. Public Works: Authorization f or the Director of Public Works to send a letter to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), requesting the Extension of Services to the proposed dwelling unit in the County without annexation by the City of Hanford. (11530 10 1/2 Ave south of Hanford-Armona Road)
PULLED ITEMS:
1. City Attorney: Approval of the Exclusive Negoti ating Agreement between 4Creeks, Inc., and the City of Hanford for the property more commonly referred to as the Bastille [Item C]
Item pulled by the public (Bob Ramos).
City Attorney Ty Mizote provided a background of the item. He also addressed Mr. Ir ons comm ent made during public comment and answered questions from the C ouncil. Mayor Ramirez, Vice Mayor Sharp, and Council Member Morrow spoke in favor of the agreement.
Motion to table the item was introduced by Council Member Brieno. Motion not seconded. Motion died.
Motion to approve as presented.
RESULT: APPROVED [4 TO 1]
MOVER: Kalish Morrow, Council Member
SECONDER: Diane Sharp, Vice Mayor
AYES: Saltray, Sharp, Morrow, Ramirez
NAYS: Brieno
GENERAL BUSINESS:
A. Community Development: Council Review and Consideration of Substantial Amendment No.4 to the City of Hanford Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) 2019-2020 Action Plan Administrative Analyst Sandra Lerma-Martinez provided an overview of the 2019-2020 Action Plan Substantial Amendment No. 4 fo r th e Council's review and direct ion. Ms. Ler ma-Martinez invited questions from the Council.
Motion to approve.
13.B.a
Packet Pg. 8
Attachment: 6.15.2021 (Clerk: 6.15.2021 Meeting)
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Diane Sharp, Vice Mayor
SECONDER: Amanda Saltray, Council Member
AYES: Saltray, Sharp, Brieno, Morrow, Ramirez
B. FIRE: Approval of an annual contract with Lexipol, LLC for reviewing, developing, and updating the Fire Department policy and procedures; Authorization for the City Manager t o execute the required Agreement for $51,902; and Appropriation of $42,000 f rom the City's General Fund in 2020/2021 to cover the cost of the implementation
Fire Chief Pendergrass discussed the annual contract with Lexipol, LLC and answered questions from the Council. Chief Pendergrass and Police Captain Karl Anderson answered questions from Council Member Brieno.
Motion to approve.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Art Brieno, Council Member
SECONDER: Kalish Morrow, Council Member
AYES: Saltray, Sharp, Brieno, Morrow, Ramirez
C. Council: Receive and discuss the list of comm ittees and boards that have City Counci l representation directly appointed by the Council and make new Appointments as appropriate.
City Manager Cifuentez provided an updated representati on list to the Council . The Council discussed appointments to the various committees and boards . The Counci l also discussed the p ossibility of Council Member Brieno participating on the com mittees or b oards. City Attorney Ty Mizote clarified the censu re resolution indicates that Council Member Brieno will not serve on any boards or committees until further action is taken by the Council. The Council came to a consensus on the selection of the Council representation for the various boards and committees.
Updated representation:
Parks and Recreation Commission Amanda Saltray Rep Kalish Morrow Alt
Parking and Traffic Commission Francisco Ramirez Rep Amanda Saltray Alt
Kings County Association of Governments Kalish Morrow Rep Kings County Area Public Transit Agency (KART) Diane Sharp Alt Kings County Abandoned Vehicle Authority
Kings Community Action Organization (KCAO) Amanda Saltray Rep Diane Sharp Alt
Kings Waste and Recycling Authority (KWRA) Diane Sharp Rep Francisco Ramirez Alt
Kings County Homeless Commission Amanda Saltray Alt
(Police Chief Sever is the Rep)
Special City Selection Committee Francisco Ramirez Rep (Mayor)
13.B.a
Packet Pg. 9
Attachment: 6.15.2021 (Clerk: 6.15.2021 Meeting)
COUNCIL FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
None.
ADJOURNMENT:
Mayor Ramírez adjourned the meeting at 8:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Natalie Corral
City Clerk
13.B.a
Packet Pg. 10
Attachment: 6.15.2021 (Clerk: 6.15.2021 Meeting)
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 2/15/2022
AGENDA SECTION: C
SUBJECT:
City Clerk: Approval of the Minutes of the July 6, 2021 Meeting
Recommendation:
Approve the minutes of the July 6, 2021 Meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT:
ATTACHMENTS:
7.6.2021
13.C
Packet Pg. 11
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
July 6, 2021 7:00 PM
Council Chambers
400 N. Douty St.
5:30 PM CALL TO ORDER STUDY SESSION:
Mayor Ramirez called the Study Session to order at 5:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL BY THE CITY CLERK:
Present: Francisco Ramirez, Diane Sharp, Kalish Morrow, Art Brieno
Late: Amanda Saltray
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Comments f rom the publ ic are limited to items on the agenda (GC 54954.3a). A maximum of three minutes is allowed for each speaker. Please begin your comments by stating your name and providing your city of residence.
None.
STUDY SESSION:
A. Discussion and direction from the Council regarding the annexation of industrial property into the Kings Industrial Park
Senior Planner Gabrielle Myers discussed the background and the process of annexation of industrial land and presented three annexation options for the Counc il's review and direction. Staff answered questions from the Council. Vice Mayor Sharp, Council Member Morrow, and Council Member Saltray spoke in favor of option 1.
Public Works Director John Doyel provided his requested feedback from Mayor Ramirez. Mayor Ramirez spoke in favor of option 3. The Council briefly discussed options 1 and 2. It was a consensus to direct staff to move forward on options 1 and 2 to be brought back to the Council for further review and discussion.
B. Update to the City Council regarding the upcoming City of Hanford's 130th Birthday Celebration Parks and Community Services Director Brad Albert, Hanford Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Amory Marpel, and Carnegie Museum of Kings County Pre sident Jack Schwartz provided the details and pl ans for the upcoming Hanford's 130th Birthday Celebration event. The Council thanked everyone for participating in the event. Dir. Albert answered questions from the Council.
Mayor Ramirez adjourned the Study Session at 6:20 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER REGULAR SESSION:
Mayor Ramirez called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
13.C.a
Packet Pg. 12
Attachment: 7.6.2021 (Clerk: 7.6..2021 Meeting)
ROLL CALL:
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Diane Sharp Vice Mayor Present 5:16 PM
Art Brieno Council Member Present 5:29 PM
Kalish Morrow Council Member Present 5:28 PM
Amanda Saltray Council Member Late 5:31 PM
Francisco Ramirez Mayor Present 5:10 PM
INVOCATION:
Pastor Mark Curts led the invocation.
FLAG SALUTE:
Mayor Ramirez led the flag salute.
RECOGNITIONS/PROCLAMATIONS:
A. Proclamation for Parks and Community Services “Parks Make Life Better!” Month Mayor Ramirez presented the “Parks Make Life Better!” Month proclamation to Parks and Community Services Director Brad Albert.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS:
City Manager Mario Cifuentez announced the cooling center operating hours an d provided departmental updates. He also discussed ARPA funding grants.
COUNCIL REPORTS/COMMENTS:
Vice Mayor Sharp discussed the meetings she attended.
Council Member Morrow discussed the meetings she attended.
Council Member Brieno discussed the events he attended.
Council Member Saltray had nothing to report.
Mayor Ramirez discussed the events that he attended.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
This is the time for citizens to comment on subject matters not on the agenda within the jurisdiction of the Hanford City Council. This is also the public’s opportunity to request an item from the Consent Calendar be pulled for discussion purposes or to comment on any item on the agenda. Comments related to Public Hearing items will be heard at the time the item is discussed.
A maximum of three minutes is allowed for each speaker. Please begin your comments by stating your name and providing your city of residence.
Travis Paden, Bob Ramos, Lou Martinez, Tammy Wheatley, Emily Burnias, and Jerry Irons commented on Gene ral Business Item B and the censure of Council Member Brieno.
13.C.a
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: 7.6.2021 (Clerk: 7.6..2021 Meeting)
Planning Commissioner Jason Kemp Van Ee addressed comments made by Mayor Ramirez.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted in one moti on.
There will be no separate discussion of these matters unless a request is made and then the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar to be discussed and voted upon by a separate motion.
Council Member Brieno requested to pull Item I [Approval of a sole-source contract with Telstar Inc. of Hanford, CA for the supply and installation of identified security measures at the City's Water Tank site No.4, No.5, and No. 6 in an amount of $255,878].
Motion to approve the Consent Calendar except for the items pulled for separate consideration.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Diane Sharp, Vice Mayor
SECONDER: Kalish Morrow, Council Member
AYES: Sharp, Brieno, Morrow, Saltray, Ramirez
A. PROCEDURAL WAIVER: Waive reading in full of resolutions and ordinances and approval and adoption of same by reading title the only.
B. City Clerk: Approval of the Minutes of the April 6, 2021 Meeting C. City Clerk: Approval of the Minutes of the April 20, 2021 Meeting D. Administration: Approval of a letter of suppor t, o n behalf of the City of Hanford, for SB619 (Laird) Organic Waste Budget Ask
E. Administration: Approval of a letter of support, on behalf of the City of Hanford, for AB122 - bicycle Stop as Yield Legislation.
F. Public Works: Authorization to Advertis e fo r Bids for the FY 20/21 Pavement Resurfacing Treatment: Fiberized Micro Surfacing Project
G. Public Works: Authorization to Award a contract to Talley Oil Inc. of Madera Ca, in the amount of $147,945.20, for the FY 20/21 Reclamite Seal Treatment Project.
H. Public Works: Authorization to award a contract to Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group of Clovis Ca, in the amount of $38,000.00, for the FY 20/21 Survey Monumentation / Benchmark Update Project.
PULLED ITEMS:
1. Public Works: Approval of a sole-source contract with Telstar Inc. of Hanford, CA for the supply and installation of identified security measures at the City's Water Tank site No.4, No.5, and No. 6 in an amount of $255,878.
[Item I]
Pulled by Council Member Brieno
13.C.a
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: 7.6.2021 (Clerk: 7.6..2021 Meeting)
Public Works Director John Doyel provided a summary of the staff report and answered questions from Council Member Brieno.
Motion to approve.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Kalish Morrow, Council Member
SECONDER: Art Brieno, Council Member
AYES: Sharp, Brieno, Morrow, Saltray, Ramirez
GENERAL BUSINESS:
A. City Attorney: Introduction of Ordinance No. 21- 01, Amending the Business License Ordinance and Municipal Code Chapters 5.04 and 5.08
City Attorney Ty Mizote provided a background and summarized the ordinance changes a nd a nnual fees.
Financial Analyst Destiny Borba answered Council Member Brieno's questions regarding the fees and fee schedule. The fee schedule will be presented to the Council for review and consideration at a future meeting.
City Attorney Mizote answere d questions from th e Council. Vice Mayor Sharp would like the listed business professions and job titles to be updated.
Motion to approve with the amendment of updating the business professions/job titles.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Diane Sharp, Vice Mayor
SECONDER: Art Brieno, Council Member
AYES: Sharp, Brieno, Morrow, Saltray, Ramirez
B. Council Discussion and Consideration of appropriating up to $2,000 from the City's General fund to the Council District E Travel Budget for FY 21/22
The City Council discussed appropriating up to of $2,000 from the City's General Fund to the Council District E Travel Budget for FY 21/22. Council Member Brieno expressed the importance of attending conferences and training opportunities. He also addressed the censure, his resignat ion, and comm ents made by the community.
Each of the Council Members also expressed their concerns about reinstating the District E travel budget. Vice Mayor Sharp, Council Member Morrow spoke in opposi tion of appropriating up to $2,000 from the City's General Fund to th e Council District E Travel Budget for FY 21/22. City Attorney Ty Mizote answered questions from the Council.
Motion to table was introduced by Council Member Brieno. Seconded by Mayor Ramirez. Motion failed (2/3).
Motion to deny appropr iating up to $2 ,000 from the City's General Fund to the Council District E Travel Budget.
RESULT: APPROVED [3 TO 2]
MOVER: Diane Sharp, Vice Mayor
SECONDER: Kalish Morrow, Council Member
AYES: Sharp, Morrow, Saltray
NAYS: Brieno, Ramirez
COUNCIL FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
13.C.a
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: 7.6.2021 (Clerk: 7.6..2021 Meeting)
It was a consensus of the Council for future discussion of two items:
Removal of Jason Kemp Van Ee from the Planning Commission, brought forth by Council Member Morrow, and the continued funding and potential amendment to the Hanford Chamber of Commerce agreement, brought forth by Mayor Ramirez.
ADJOURNMENT:
Mayor Ramirez adjourned the meeting at 8:44 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Natalie Corral
City Clerk
13.C.a
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: 7.6.2021 (Clerk: 7.6..2021 Meeting)
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 2/15/2022
AGENDA SECTION: D
SUBJECT:
Public Works: Authorization to advertise for bids for the FY 21/22 Pavement Resurfacing Treatment Project, and Pre-Authorize the City Manager to award and execute the contract on behalf of the City to the lowest responsible bidder providing project bid is within current budget appropriation.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council, by motion, authorize staff to advertise for bids for the FY 21/22 Pavement Resurfacing Treatment Project, and Pre-Authorize the City Manager to award and execute the contract on behalf of the City to the lowest responsible bidder providing project bid is within current budget appropriation.
BACKGROUND:
Pavement resurfacing treatment is a surface protection and pavement preservation treatment for city streets. The location of streets and the types of treatment processes will be determined by Public Works Department staff and is dependent on pavement conditions. Treatments may include slurry seal, cape seal or fiber seal coatings or other pavement preservation treatments needed to extend the useful life of roadways. See attached location maps for specific streets.
Asphalt concrete pavement surfaces deteriorate over time due to loss of oil content from naturally occurring processes and vehicular traffic loads. Pavement resurfacing treatments will extend the useful life of asphalt concrete pavement surfaces, thereby reducing street maintenance costs. This project will provide surface treatment for approximately seven miles of roadways (207,300 SY).
After bid opening, Staff will examine the bids, validate the lowest bidder's contractor's license status, and verify the contractor is in good standing. Staff is requesting the pre-authorization to award and execute the contract in order to expedite the process of delivery of projects to avoid winterization. With Council approval, staff will solicit bids for this project. If awarded, construction is anticipated to begin in June 2022.
13.D
Packet Pg. 17
FISCAL IMPACT:
The FY 21/22 Capital Improvement budget provides $996,850.00 for construction, including contingencies. A copy of Budget Page is attached for Council review.
ATTACHMENTS:
Budget Page
FY 21-22 Single and Double Fiber Locations
13.D
Packet Pg. 18
822615
823618
Project Background:
Existing Conditions:
Project Justification:
Fiscal Implications:
Project Budget Summary:
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Program or Project Construction Construction Construction Construction Construction Engineering / Inspection 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 Construction 850,000 850,000 850,000 850,000 850,000
Contingency 85,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 85,000
Department Overhead 49,850 36,690 3,000 3,000 3,000
Total Expenditure $996,850 $983,690 $950,000 $950,000 $950,000 Funding
0040 Gas Tax 367,261 362,412 350,000 350,000 350,000
0050 Gas Tax (TDA Transportation) 629,589 621,278 600,000 600,000 600,000 0045 Gas Tax (RMRA)
Total Funding $996,850 $983,690 $950,000 $950,000 $950,000 Pavement Resurfacing Treatment
Pavement resurfacing treatment is a surface protection and pavement preservation treatment for city streets. The location of streets and the types of treatment processes will be determined by Public Works Department staff and is dependent on pavement conditions. Treatments may include slurry seal, cape seal or fiber seal coatings or other pavement preservation treatments needed to extend the useful life of roadways.
Asphalt concrete pavement surfaces deteriorate over time due to loss of oil content from naturally occurring processes and vehicular traffic loads.
Pavement resurfacing treatments will extend the useful life of asphalt concrete pavement surfaces, thereby reducing street maintenance costs. This project will provide surface treatment for approximately seven miles of roadways (207,300 SY).
ExpenditureRevenue
Funding for this project will be allocated from Gas Tax Reserves. 5-Year Funding Allocation
13.D.a
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: Budget Page (PW: Permission to Advertise the FY 21/22 Pavement Resurfacing Treatment Project)
13.D.b
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: FY 21-22 Single and Double Fiber Locations (PW: Permission to Advertise the FY 21/22 Pavement Resurfacing Treatment Project)
13.D.b
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: FY 21-22 Single and Double Fiber Locations (PW: Permission to Advertise the FY 21/22 Pavement Resurfacing Treatment Project)
13.D.b
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: FY 21-22 Single and Double Fiber Locations (PW: Permission to Advertise the FY 21/22 Pavement Resurfacing Treatment Project)
13.D.b
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: FY 21-22 Single and Double Fiber Locations (PW: Permission to Advertise the FY 21/22 Pavement Resurfacing Treatment Project)
13.D.b
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: FY 21-22 Single and Double Fiber Locations (PW: Permission to Advertise the FY 21/22 Pavement Resurfacing Treatment Project)
13.D.b
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: FY 21-22 Single and Double Fiber Locations (PW: Permission to Advertise the FY 21/22 Pavement Resurfacing Treatment Project)
13.D.b
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: FY 21-22 Single and Double Fiber Locations (PW: Permission to Advertise the FY 21/22 Pavement Resurfacing Treatment Project)
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 2/15/2022
AGENDA SECTION: E
SUBJECT:
Public Works: Approval of a payment to King's Petroleum, for the purchase of diesel fuel for Fleet Operations, in the amount is $31,826.76.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council, by motion, approve a payment to King's Petroleum, for the purchase of diesel fuel for Fleet Operations, in the amount is $31,826.76.
BACKGROUND:
Section 2.48.060 of the Hanford Municipal Code governs how the City must process the purchase of any goods or services that exceed $20,000. As stated below, it requires that Council approve all purchases over that threshold. For the purpose of this invoice, it sets a different limit for Council's approval of fuels and other specific items:
Purchases exceeding twenty thousand dollars ($20,000.00) may be made either on an informal basis or on a formal competitive basis as identified below. In either case, however, the decision as to the acceptance or rejection of any bid shall be the responsibility of the council. The provisions of this section 2.48.060 shall not apply to the purchase of fuels, bituminous materials, and aggregate base for street purposes and related delivery costs provided that any such purchase shall not exceed the sum of thirty thousand dollars ($30,000.00).
The recent approval of the amended purchasing ordinance will make this practice obsolete but not until the Ordinance becomes effective on March 3, 2022. This approval is needed to get this invoice paid and allow for continued operations until that date.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Quotes were received from local vendors. There are sufficient funds available in the Fleet Operations account to fund this purchase.
13.E
Packet Pg. 27
ATTACHMENTS:
KING'S_PETROLEUM_INV#115918_W/QUOTES
13.E
Packet Pg. 28
13.E.a
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: KING'S_PETROLEUM_INV#115918_W/QUOTES (PW: Approve Fuel Purchase)
13.E.a
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: KING'S_PETROLEUM_INV#115918_W/QUOTES (PW: Approve Fuel Purchase)
13.E.a
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: KING'S_PETROLEUM_INV#115918_W/QUOTES (PW: Approve Fuel Purchase)
13.E.a
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: KING'S_PETROLEUM_INV#115918_W/QUOTES (PW: Approve Fuel Purchase)
13.E.a
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: KING'S_PETROLEUM_INV#115918_W/QUOTES (PW: Approve Fuel Purchase)
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 2/15/2022
AGENDA SECTION: A
SUBJECT:
Public Works: Authorization to Reject the bid from Maggiora Bros. Drilling as a non-responsive bid; Award a contract to Zim Industries, of Fresno CA, in the amount of $3,588,500.00 for the Well No. 51 and Well No. 52 Drilling Project; Establish a construction contingency of $358,850.00; and Approve an additional appropriation of $867,350.00 from the Water Impact Fee Reserves to fully fund this project.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council, by motion,
1. Reject the bid from Maggiora Bros. Drilling as a non-responsive bid.
2. Award a contract to Zim Industries of Fresno CA in the amount of $3,588,500.00 for the Well No. 51 and Well No. 52 Drilling Project
3. Establish a construction contingency of $358,850.00
4. Approve an additional appropriation of $867,350.00 from the Water Impact Fee Reserves to fully fund this project.
BACKGROUND:
This project funds the installation of (2) new deep water wells and associated pumping equipment to provide additional City water supply and service reliability. The City water system currently has 13 active water supply wells and one stand-by emergency well. The wells have a total production capacity of approximately 26 million gallons per day.
These wells will replace City Wells 33 and 44. Well No. 33 (located at the City Corporation Yard) has Arsenic levels that are above the standard, is nearly 40 years old, and has been repaired numerous times. Well No. 44 (located at Tank 6 on Fargo Avenue) failed last year due to subsidence and was unable to be repaired.
There were two bids received for this project. The lowest bid from Maggiora Bros. Inc., did not include the Non-Collusion affidavit, which is required to be included in the bid documents at the time of submittal of bid by Public Contract Code Section 7106 and cannot be waived by the
14.A
Packet Pg. 34
City. Accordingly, Staff recommends the Council reject this bid as non-responsive.
As a result, staff has examined and validated the lowest bidder's contractor's license status, and verified the contractor is in good standing. With Council approval, If awarded, drilling and development is anticipated to begin in Spring 2022.
The approval of all actions will result in the additional appropriation of $867,350.00 from the Water Impact Fee Reserves to fully fund this project. There is currently an unencumbered fund balance of $3,924,364.98 in the Water Impact Fee Reserves, which will leave $3,057,014.98 remaining in that fund for future projects.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The FY 21/22 Water Capital Budget and the FY 19/20 Water Capital Budget provides $3,080,000.00 for and construction, including contingencies. An additional appropriation of $867,350.00 from the Water Impact Fee Reserve is needed to fully fund the project. There is currently an unencumbered fund balance of $3,924,364.98 in the Water Impact Fee Reserves. A copy of the budget pages are attached for Council review.
ATTACHMENTS:
Well 51 Fargo & BNSF
Well 52 Public Works Corp Yard
Budget Page FY 21.22 New Water Supply Well
FY20 New Water Well Budget Page
14.A
Packet Pg. 35
14.A.a
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Well 51 Fargo & BNSF (PW: Authorization to Award the FY
14.A.b
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Well 52 Public Works Corp Yard (PW: Authorization to Award the FY 20/21 New Water Supply
14.A.c
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Budget Page FY 21.22 New Water Supply Well (PW: Authorization to Award the FY 20/21 New Water Supply Wells ( Drilling & City of Hanford Capital Improvement Projects Fiscal Years 2020 to 2024 Project Background:
Existing Conditions:
Project Justification:
Fiscal Implications:
Project Budget Summary:
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Program or Project Design Construction Design Construction Engineering 70,000 35,000
Consultant 100,000 50,000
Equipment 350,000 350,000 350,000
Construction 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000
Contingency 140,000 140,000 140,000
Department Overhead 40,000 10,000 25,000 10,000
Total Expenditure $2,100,000 $1,900,000 $0 $460,000 $1,550,000 Funding
0391 Water Capital 2,100,000 460,000 550,000
0185 Water Impact Fees 1,900,000 1,000,000
Total Funding $2,100,000 $1,900,000 $0 $460,000 $1,550,000 New Water Supply Well
This project funds the installation of a new deep water well and associated pumping equipment to provide additional City water supply and service reliability.
The City water system currently has 13 active water supply wells and one standby emergency well. The wells have a total production capacity of approximately 26 million gallons per day.
As development occurs the need to provide additional water capacity and service reliability is necessary. This project would provide funding to install a new deep well as needed.
Revenue
Funding for the new water supply well will be allocated from water capital reserves. 5-Year Funding Allocation
Expenditure
CIP0000023
246
14.A.d
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: FY20 New Water Well Budget Page (PW: Authorization to Award the FY 20/21 New Water Supply Wells ( Drilling & Development)
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 2/15/2022
AGENDA SECTION: B
SUBJECT:
Council: Adoption of Resolution No. 22-06-R, expressing the City’s opposition to the Statewide Initiative 21-0042A1, billed as the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act, and consistent with the Policy direction from the League of California Cities.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council, by motion, adopt Resolution No. 22-06-R, expressing the City’s opposition to the Statewide Initiative 21-0042A1, billed as the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act, consistent with the Policy direction from the League of California Cities.
BACKGROUND:
On September 21, 2021, Council adopted Resolution No. 21-42-R, expressing support for actions to further strengthen local democracy, authority, and control. This initiative, while billed as a taxpayer protection bill, will remove local control by creating loopholes for large corporations to avoid paying their fair of taxes and, therefore, placing that burden on local residents and taxpayers.
In 2018, the “Tax Fairness, Transparency and Accountability Act” or (AG# 17-0050 Amdt. #1), was being circulated to qualify for the November 2018 ballot. This initiative would have drastically limited local revenue authority.
Through the successful work and advocacy of the League of California Cities and its coalition, the measure’s proponents withdrew the initiative from the ballot in June 2018.
On Jan. 4, 2022, the California Business Roundtable filed the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act or AG# 21-0042A1. This measure is far more detrimental to cities than the measure filed in 2018, because it would decimate vital local and state services to the benefit of wealthy corporations.
14.B
Packet Pg. 40
Cal Cities, along with a broad coalition of local governments, labor and public safety leaders, infrastructure advocates, and businesses, strongly oppose this initiative.
SUMMARY
The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act limits voters’ authority, adopts new and stricter rules for raising taxes and fees, and makes it more difficult to hold violators of state and local laws accountable.
WHAT WOULD THIS MEASURE SPECIFICALLY DO?
1) Limit voter authority and accountability
· Limits voter input. Prohibits local voters from providing direction on how local tax dollars should be spent by prohibiting local advisory measures. · Invalidates the Upland decision that allows a majority of local voters to pass special taxes. Taxes proposed by the Initiative are subject to the same rules as taxes placed on the ballot by a city council. All measures passed between January 2022 and November 2022 would be invalidated unless reenacted within 12 months.
2) Restrict local fee authority to provide local services · Impacts franchise fees. Sets new standard for fees and charges paid for the use of local and state government property. The standard may significantly restrict the amount oil companies, utilities, gas companies, railroads, garbage companies, cable companies, and other corporations pay for the use of local public property. Rental and sale of local government property must be “reasonable” which must be proved by “clear and convincing evidence.”
· Except for licensing and other regulatory fees, fees and charges may not exceed the “actual cost” of providing the product or service for which the fee is charged. “Actual cost” is the “minimum amount necessary.” The burden to prove the fee or charge does not exceed “actual cost” is changed to “clear and convincing” evidence.
3) Restrict authority of state and local governments to issue fines and penalties for violations of law
· Requires voter approval of fines, penalties, and levies for corporations and property owners that violate state and local laws unless a new, undefined adjudicatory process is used to impose the fines and penalties.
4) Restrict local tax authority to provide local services · Requires voter approval to expand existing taxes (e.g., UUT, use tax, TOT) to new territory (e.g., annexation) or expanding the base (e.g., new utility service). · City charters may not be amended to include a tax or fee. · New taxes can be imposed only for a specific time period. · Taxes adopted after Jan. 1, 2022, that do not comply with the new rules, are void unless reenacted.
· All state taxes require majority voter approval.
· Prohibits any surcharge on property tax rate and allocation of property tax to state.
14.B
Packet Pg. 41
5) Other changes
· No fee or charge or exaction regulating vehicle miles traveled can be imposed as a condition of property development or occupancy.
TALKING POINTS
1) Gives wealthy corporations a major loophole to avoid paying their fair share - forcing local residents and taxpayers to pay more
· The measure creates new constitutional loopholes that allow corporations to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities, including local infrastructure, our environment, water quality, air quality, and natural resources - shifting the burden and making individual taxpayers pay more.
2) Allows corporations to dodge enforcement when they violate environmental, health, public safety, and other laws
· The deceptive scheme creates new loopholes that makes it much more difficult for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that violate laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods.
3) Jeopardizes vital local and state services
· This far-reaching measure puts at risk billions of dollars currently dedicated to critical state and local services.
· It could force cuts to public schools, fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, parks, libraries, affordable housing, services to support homeless residents, mental health services, and more.
· It would also reduce funding for critical infrastructure like streets and roads, public transportation, drinking water, new schools, sanitation, and utilities.
4) Opens the door for frivolous lawsuits, bureaucracy, and red tape that will cost taxpayers and hurt our communities
· The measure will encourage frivolous lawsuits, bureaucracy, and red tape that will cost local taxpayers millions - while significantly delaying and stopping investments in infrastructure and vital services.
5) Undermines voter rights, transparency, and accountability · This misleading measure changes our constitution to make it more difficult for local voters to pass measures needed to fund local services and local infrastructure. · It also includes a hidden provision that would retroactively cancel measures that were passed by local voters - effectively undermining the rights of voters to decide for themselves what their communities need.
· It would limit voter input by prohibiting local advisory measures, where voters provide direction to politicians on how they want their local tax dollars spent.
FISCAL IMPACT:
14.B
Packet Pg. 42
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution 22-06-R CBRT opposition
CBRT Measure Opposition Fact Sheet (1-11-22)
CBRT Fiscal Analysis (1-11-22)
Legal Analysis 01-20-22 AG FINAL
14.B
Packet Pg. 43
RESOLUTION 22-06-R
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANFORD STATING THE CITY’S OPPOSITION TO INITIATIVE 21-0042A1 AND
VOWING TO OPPOSE THIS DECEPTIVE PROPOSITION AIMED AT
ALLOWING MAJOR CORPORATOINS IN CALIFORNIA TO AVOID PAYING
THEIR FAIR SHARE OF TAXES AND THEREBY, FORCING LOCAL
RESIDENTS AND TAXPAYERS TO PAY MORE.
At a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford duly called and held on February 15, 2022, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Civic Auditorium, it was moved by Council Member ______ , and seconded by Council Member , and duly carried, that the following resolution be adopted:
WHEREAS, an association representing California’s wealthiest corporations is behind a deceptive proposition aimed for the November 2022 statewide ballot; and
WHEREAS, the measure creates new constitutional loopholes that allow corporations to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities, including local infrastructure, our environment, water quality, air quality, and natural resources; and
WHEREAS, the measure includes undemocratic provisions that would make it more difficult for local voters to pass measures needed to fund local services and infrastructure, and would limit voter input by prohibiting local advisory measures where voters provide direction on how they want their local tax dollars spent; and
WHEREAS, the measure makes it much more difficult for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that violate laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the measure puts billions of dollars currently dedicated to state and local services at risk, and could force cuts to public schools, fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, parks, libraries, affordable housing, services to support homeless residents, mental health services, and more; and
WHEREAS, the measure would also reduce funding for critical infrastructure like streets and roads, public transportation, drinking water, new schools, sanitation, and utilities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Hanford does hereby oppose Initiative 21-0042A1 and pledges to join the “NO on Initiative 21- 0042A1 coalition”, a growing coalition of public safety, labor, local government, infrastructure advocates, and other organizations throughout the state. Additionally, Council directs staff to email a copy of this adopted resolution to the League of California Cities at [email protected].
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford duly called and held on February 11, 2022, by the following vote:
14.B.a
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Resolution 22-06-R CBRT opposition (Admin: CBRT Opposition Resolution)
AYES:______________________________________________________________________ NOES:______________________________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: __________________________________________________________________ ABSENT: ___________________________________________________________________
APPROVED: __________________________
DIANE SHARP
MAYOR of the City of Hanford
ATTEST:
NATALIE CORRAL
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF KINGS ) ss
CITY OF HANFORD )
I, NATALIE CORRAL, City Clerk of the City of Hanford, do hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford held on the 15th day of February, 2022.
Date: ____________________
NATALIE CORRAL
CITY CLERK
2 14.B.a
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Resolution 22-06-R CBRT opposition (Admin: CBRT Opposition Resolution)
Stop the Corporate Loopholes Scheme
Deceptive Proposition Allows Major Corporations to Avoid Paying their Fair Share and Evade Enforcement when they Violate Environmental, Health & Safety Laws An association representing California’s wealthiest corporations — including oil, insurance, banks and drug companies — is behind a deceptive proposition aimed for the November 2022 statewide ballot. Their measure would create major new loopholes that allow corporations to avoid paying their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities; while also allowing corporations to evade enforcement when they violate environmental, health, safety and other state and local laws. Here’s why a broad coalition of local governments, labor and public safety leaders, infrastructure advocates, and businesses oppose the Corporate Loophole Scheme:
Gives Wealthy Corporations a Major Loophole to Avoid Paying their Fair Share - Forcing Local Residents and Taxpayers to Pay More • The measure creates new constitutional loopholes that allow corporations to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities, including local infrastructure, our environment, water quality, air quality, and natural resources – shifting the burden and making individual taxpayers pay more.
Allows Corporations to Dodge Enforcement When They Violate Environmental, Health, Public Safety and Other Laws
• The deceptive scheme creates new loopholes that makes it much more difficult for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that violate laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods.
Jeopardizes Vital Local and State Services
• This far-reaching measure puts at risk billions of dollars currently dedicated to critical state and local services.
• It could force cuts to public schools, fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, parks, libraries, affordable housing, services to support homeless residents, mental health services and more. • It would also reduce funding for critical infrastructure like streets and roads, public transportation, drinking water, new schools, sanitation, utilities and more.
Opens the Door for Frivolous Lawsuits, Bureaucracy and Red Tape that Will Cost Taxpayers and Hurt Our Communities
• The measure will encourage frivolous lawsuits, bureaucracy and red tape that will cost local taxpayers millions — while significantly delaying and stopping investments in infrastructure and vital services.
14.B.b
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: CBRT Measure Opposition Fact Sheet (1-11-22) (Admin: CBRT Opposition Resolution)
Undermines Voter Rights, Transparency, and Accountability • This misleading measure changes our constitution to make it more difficult for local voters to pass measures needed to fund local services and local infrastructure.
• It also includes a hidden provision that would retroactively cancel measures that were passed by local voters — effectively undermining the rights of voters to decide for themselves what their communities need.
• It would limit voter input by prohibiting local advisory measures, where voters provide direction to politicians on how they want their local tax dollars spent.
14.B.b
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: CBRT Measure Opposition Fact Sheet (1-11-22) (Admin: CBRT Opposition Resolution) CaliforniaCityFinance.Com
Fiscal and Program Effects of
Initiative 21-0042A1 on Local Governments
If Initiative 21-0042A1 is placed on the ballot and passed by voters, it will result in:
Billions of local government fee and charge revenues placed at heightened legal peril. Related public service reductions across virtually every aspect of city, county, special district, and school services especially for transportation, and public facility use. Hundreds of millions of dollars of annual revenues from dozens of tax and bond measures approved by voters between January 1, 2022 and November 9, 2022 subject to additional voter approval if not in compliance with the initiative.
Indeterminable legal and administrative burdens and costs on l ocal government from new and more empowered legal challenges, and bureaucratic cost tracking requirements. The delay and deterrence of municipal annexations and associat ed impacts on housing and commercial development.
Service and infrastructure impacts including in fire and emerg ency response, law enforcement, public health, drinking water, sewer sanitation, parks, libraries, public schools, affordable housing, homelessness prevention and mental health services.
1. Local Government Taxes and Services Threatened
With regard to taxes, Initiative 21-0042A1:
Prohibits advisory, non-binding measures as to use of tax proc eeds on the same ballot. o Voters may be less informed and more likely to vote against me asures. Eliminates the ability of special tax measures proposed by cit izen initiative to be enacted by majority voter approval (Upland).
o Because the case law regarding citizen initiative special taxe s approved by majority vote (Upland) is so recent, it is unknown how common these sorts of measures might be in the future. This initiative would prohibit such measures after the effective date of the initiative. Any such measures adopted after January 1, 2022 through November 8, 2022 would be void after November 9, 2023.
Requires that tax measures include a specific duration of time that the tax will be imposed. This seems to require that all tax increases or extensions contain a sunset (end date). o This would require additional tax measures to extend previousl y approved taxes at additional cost to taxpayers.
Requires that a tax or bond measure adopted after January 1, 2 022 and before the effective date of the initiative (November 9, 2022) that was not adopted in accordance with the measure be readopted in compliance with the measure or will be void twelve months after the effective date of the initiative (November 9, 2023).
o If past election patterns are an indication, dozens of tax and bond measures approving hundreds of millions of annual revenues may not be in compliance and would be subject to reenactment.
Most will be taxes without a specific end date. Because there is no regularly scheduled election within the 12 months following the effective date of the initiative, measures not in compliance would need to be placed on a special election ballot for approval before November 9, 2023 or the tax will be void after that date. General tax measures would require declaration of emergency and unanimous vote of the governing board.
2217 Isle Royale Lane • Davis, CA • 95616-6616
Phone: 530.758.3952 • Fax: 530.758.3952
Rev. January 7, 2022
14.B.c
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: CBRT Fiscal Analysis (1-11-22) (Admin: CBRT Opposition Resolution) – 2 – r e v J a n u a r y 7 , 2 0 2 2
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Requires voter approval to expand an existing tax to new terri tory (annexations). This would require additional tax measures and would deter annexations and land de velopment in cities. o If a tax is "extended" to an annexed area without a vote after January 1, 2022, it will be void 12 months later until brought into compliance. Because there is no regularly scheduled election within the 12 months following the effective date of the initiative, such extensions for general taxes would, under current law, each require unanimous vote of the agency board to be placed on a special election ballot or would be void after November 9, 20 23.
1.a. Number of Measures and Value of Local Taxes at Risk 1 In 2020, voters in California approved 293 local tax and bond m easures for cities, counties, special districts and schools (95 in March and 198 in November). The approved measures enacted $3.85 billion in new annual taxes including $1.3 billion for cities, $302 mil lion for counties, $208 million for special districts (fire, wastewater, open space and transit districts), and $2.037 billion for schools (including for school bonds).
Most tax measures go to the ballot during a presidential or gub ernatorial primary or general election in an even year. However, some tax measures are decided at other times. During 2019, there were 45 approved tax and bond measures (24 city, 14 special district, 7 school) adopting $154.0 million in new annual taxes ($124.0 million city, $10.5 million special district and $19.2 million school).
Most tax and bond measures comply with the new rules in Initiat ive 21-0042Amdt#1 except:
Dozens of taxes would require end dates. This would require ad ditional measures in future years to extend the taxes further. Very few extensions of existing local taxes fail. Majority vote general tax measures could not be accompanied on the same ballot with an advisory, non-binding measure as to use of tax proceeds. Special taxes placed on the ballot via citizen initiative woul d require two-thirds voter approval.
Bond measures have fixed terms. Historically, about 20 percent of other tax measures have included specific durations (i.e. sunsets). Advisory measures as to use of revenues are uncommon. I do not expect the provisions of 21-0042A1 to have any substantial effect on passage rates. However, some 2022 approved measures would likely have to put back on the ballot.
Based on history, a reasonable estimate of the annualized tax revenues estimated to be approved by
1 Source: Compilation and summary of data from County elections offices.
14.B.c
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: CBRT Fiscal Analysis (1-11-22) (Admin: CBRT Opposition Resolution) – 3 – r e v J a n u a r y 7 , 2 0 2 2
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
voters in 2022 and placed at risk by this initiative is at least $1.5 billion, including $1.0 billion from cities and $500 million from counties and special districts.2
1.b. Additional Costs and Public Service Effects of the Tax Provisions In addition to service delays and disruption due to new tax revenues placed at greater legal risk, there will be substantial additional costs for legal defense. The deterrence of taxes for annexations will delay and deter municipal annexations.
2. “Exempt Charges” (fees and charges that are not taxes) and Services Threatened With regard to fees and charges adopted after January 1, 2022, Initiative 21-0042A1:
Subjects new fees and charges for a product or service to a ne w "actual cost” test defined as “(i) the minimum amount necessary to reimburse the government for the cost of providing the service to the payor, and (ii) where the amount charged is not used by the government for any purpose other than reimbursing that cost. In addition, subjects these same charges to a new, undefined, “reasonable” standard.
Subjects fees and charges for entrance to local government pro perty; and rental and sale of local government property to a new, undefined, “reasonable” test. Subjects a challenged fee or charge to new, higher burdens of proof if legally challenged. Prohibits a levy, charge or exaction regulating or related to vehicle miles traveled, imposed as a condition of property development or occupancy.
2.a. Value on New Local Government Fees and Charges at Risk3 Virtually every city, county, and special district must regularly (e.g., annually) adopt increases to fee rates and charges and revise rate schedules to accommodate new users and activities. Most of these would be subject to new standards and limitations under threat of legal challenge. Based on the current volume of fees and charges imposed by local agencies and increases in those fees simply to accommodate inflation, the amount of local government fee and charge revenue placed at risk is about $1 billion per year including those adopted since January 1, 2022. Of this $1 billion, about $570 million is for special districts, $450 million is cities, and $260 million is counties.4
Major examples of affected fees and charges are:
1. Nuisance abatement charges - such as for weed, rubbish and g eneral nuisance abatement to fund community safety, code enforcement, and neighborhood cleanup programs.
2. Commercial franchise fees.
3. Emergency response fees - such as in connection with DUI.
4. Advanced Life Support (ALS) transport charges.
5. Document processing and duplication fees.
6. Transit fees, tolls, parking f ees, public airport and harbor use fees.
7. Facility use charges, fees for parks and recreation services , garbage disposal tipping fees.
In addition to fees and charges, the measure puts fines and penalties assessed for the violation of state and
2 This does not include citizen initiative special tax approved by majority but not two-thirds. Because this approach is new, th e number of these measures and amount of revenue involved cannot be estimated. 3 Source: California State Controller Annual Reports of Financial Transactions concerning cities, counties and special districts , summarized with an assumed growth due to fee rate increases (not population) of 2 percent annually. 4 School fees are also affected but the amount is negligible by comparison.
14.B.c
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: CBRT Fiscal Analysis (1-11-22) (Admin: CBRT Opposition Resolution) – 4 – r e v J a n u a r y 7 , 2 0 2 2
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
local law at risk, making them taxes subject to voter approval under certain circumstances.
2.b. Additional Costs and Public Service Effects of the Fee/Charge Provisions In addition to service delays and disruptions due to fee and charge revenues placed at greater legal risk, there would be substantial additional costs for legal defense. The risk to fees and charges will make infrastructure financing more difficult and will deter new residential and commercial development.
***********
mc
14.B.c
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: CBRT Fiscal Analysis (1-11-22) (Admin: CBRT Opposition Resolution)
The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act Initiative No. 21-0042A1
January 21, 2022
Summary: The measure limits the voters’ input, adopts new and stricter rules for raising taxes and fees, and makes it more difficult to hold state and local law violators accountable.
Limiting Voter Authority and Accountability
• Limits voter input. Prohibits local voters from providing direction on how local tax dollars should be spent by prohibiting local advisory measures.
• Invalidates Upland decision that allows majority of local voters to pass special taxes. Taxes proposed by the Initiative are subject to the same rules as taxes placed on the ballot by a city council. All measures passed between January 2022 and November 2022 would be invalidated unless reenacted within 12 months.
Restricting Local Fee Authority to Provide Local Services
• Franchise fees. Sets new standard for fees and charges paid for the use of local and state government property. The standard may significantly restrict the amount oil companies, utilities, gas companies, railroads, garbage companies, cable companies, and other corporations pay for the use of local public property. Rental and sale of local government property must be “reasonable” which must be proved by “clear and convincing evidence.”
• Except for licensing and other regulatory fees, fees and charges may not exceed the “actual cost” of providing the product or service for which the fee is charged. “Actual cost” is the “minimum amount necessary.” The burden to prove the fee or charge does not exceed “actual cost” is changed to “clear and convincing” evidence.
Restricting Authority of State and Local Governments to Issue Fines and Penalties for Violations of Law.
• Requires voter approval of fines, penalties, and levies for corporations and property owners that violate state and local laws unless a new, undefined adjudicatory process is used to impose the fines and penalties.
14.B.d
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: Legal Analysis 01-20-22 AG FINAL (Admin: CBRT Opposition Resolution)
Restricting Local Tax Authority to Provide Local Services
• Expanding existing taxes (e.g., UUT, use tax, TOT) to new territory (e.g., annexation) or expanding the base (e.g., new utility service) requires voter approval.
• City charters may not be amended to include a tax or fee. • New taxes can be imposed only for a specific time period. • Taxes adopted after January 1, 2022, that do not comply with the new rules, are void unless reenacted.
• All state taxes require majority voter approval.
• Prohibits any surcharge on property tax rate and allocation of property tax to state.
Other Changes
• No fee or charge or exaction regulating vehicle miles traveled can be imposed as a condition of property development or occupancy.
14.B.d
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: Legal Analysis 01-20-22 AG FINAL (Admin: CBRT Opposition Resolution)
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 2/15/2022
AGENDA SECTION:
SUBJECT:
Council Future Agenda Items
FISCAL IMPACT:
ATTACHMENTS:
Council Future Agenda Items
Packet Pg. 54
Council Future Agenda Items
Originated
Date Item Originator Staff Lead Date Estimate
4/7/20 Discussion of Pay for Parking Options
in the Downtown Area
Council
Consensus John Doyel After presentation of
Downtown Plan
9/9/20 Revised Refuse Ordinance Public
Works Jim Ross 12/21/2021
6/18/20
Discussion of Courthouse
improvements and financing options
Council
Consensus
Brad Albert
Delayed pending
additional building
review
12/21/21
Review of City Ordinance related to
property line setbacks for Patio
structures and Driveway Awnings
Council
Consensus
Mary Beatie
4/5/2022
1/18/22
Discussion of options for New
Business Incentives in the Downtown
District
Council
Consensus
Mario
Cifuentez
3/15/2022
15.a
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Council Future Agenda Items (Council: Future Agenda Items)