Seaside City Council
March 15, 2022

We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop the estimates described above and determined that they are reasonable in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole and in relation to the applicable opinion units.

Financial Statement Disclosures
Certain financial statement disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. There were no particularly sensitive financial statement disclosures.

The financial statement disclosures are neutral, consistent, and clear.

Difficulties Encountered during the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management relating to the performance of the audit.

Uncorrected Misstatements
Professional standards require us to accumulate all misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are clearly trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management. Management did not identify and we did not notify them of any uncorrected financial statement misstatements.

Corrected Misstatements
The following material and immaterial misstatements detected as a result of audit procedures were corrected by management:
 Decrease of $1,400,000 to cash and beginning net position in the Successor Agency Fund to accurately reflect beginning cash balance at July 1, 2020. This overstatement was caused by a $1,400,000 wire transfer to the Successor Agency for land sales which was subsequently transferred to the General Fund during the prior year and not properly adjusted in the private purpose trust fund to reflect the outflow of cash.
 Increase of $116,883,188 to reflect estimated value of land contributed to the City from Fort Ord Reuse Authority during the prior year.

Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, a disagreement with management is a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be significant to the financial statements or the auditors’ report. No such disagreements arose during our audit.

Representations Requested from Management
We have requested certain written representations from management, which are included in the management representation letters date February 24, 2022 for the City’s financial statements.

Packet Page 220
To the Honorable Mayor
Members of the City Council
City of Seaside

Management’s Consultations with Other Accountants
In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a “second opinion” on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to the entity’s financial statements or a determination of the type of auditors’ opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants.

Significant Issues Discussed with Management Prior to Engagement We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management each year prior to engagement as the entity’s auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our engagement.

Other Information in Documents Containing Audited Financial Statements With respect to the required supplementary information (RSI) accompanying the financial statements, we made certain inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the RSI, including whether the RSI has been measured and presented in accordance with prescribed guidelines, whether the methods of measurement and preparation have been changed from the prior period and the reasons for any such changes, and whether there were any significant assumptions or interpretations underlying the measurement or presentation of the RSI. We compared the RSI for consistency with management’s responses to the foregoing inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge obtained during the audit of the basic financial statements. Because these limited procedures do not provide sufficient evidence, we did not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the RSI.

With respect to the combining and individual fund statements and schedules (collectively, the supplementary information) accompanying the financial statements, on which we were engaged to report in relation to the financial statements as a whole, we made certain inquiries of management and evaluated the form, content, and methods of preparing the information to determine that the information complies with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, the method of preparing it has not changed from the prior period or the reasons for such changes, and the information is appropriate and complete in relation to our audit of the financial statements. We compared and reconciled the supplementary information to the underlying accounting records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves. We have issued our report thereon dated February 24, 2022.

The introductory and statistical sections accompanying the financial statements, which is the responsibility of management, was prepared for purposes of additional analysis and is not a required part of the financial statements. Such information was not subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the financial statements, and, accordingly, we did not express an opinion or provide any assurance on it. * * *
Packet Page 221
To the Honorable Mayor
Members of the City Council
City of Seaside

This communication is intended solely for the information and use of the Mayor and the members of City Council and management of the City of Seaside, is not intended to be, and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.

CliftonLarsonAllen LLP
Roseville, California
February 24, 2022
Packet Page 222
CliftonLarsonAllen LLP
CLAconnect.com
1 INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS’ REPORT

ON APPLYING AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES
Honorable Mayor and Council Members
City of Seaside, California
We have performed the procedures enumerated below on the Appropriations Limit calculation of the City of Seaside as of and for the year ended June 30, 2021. The City of Seaside management is responsible for the Appropriations Limit calculation.

The City of Seaside has agreed to and acknowledged that the procedures performed are appropriate to meet the intended purpose of presenting the Appropriation Limit calculation in accordance with the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIII-B of the California Constitution and Proposition 111. This report may not be suitable for any other purpose. The procedures performed may not address all the items of interest to a user of this report and may not meet the needs of all users of this report and, as such, users are responsible for determining whether the procedures performed are appropriate for their purposes.

The procedures and the associated findings are as follows:

1. Obtain the completed Appropriations Limit Calculation and compare the limit and annual adjustment factors in the calculation to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by resolution of the City Council.

Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.

2. Compute current year adjustments based on selected population and inflation options, using information provided by the State Department of Finance.

Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.

3. Compare the prior year appropriations limit presented in the Appropriations Limit Calculation to the prior year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council for the prior year.

Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.

CLA is an independent member of Nexia International, a leading, global network of independent accounting and consulting firms. See nexia.com/member‐firm‐disclaimer for details.

Packet Page 223
Honorable Mayor and Council Members
City of Seaside, California
2 4. Add results of step two (2) to the prior year Appropriations Limit and compare the resulting amount to current year approved limit.

Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.

We were engaged by the City of Seaside to perform this agreed-upon procedures engagement and conducted our engagement in accordance with attestation standards established by the AICPA. We were not engaged to and did not conduct an examination or review engagement, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion or conclusion, respectively, on the Appropriations Limit calculation of the City of Seaside. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion or conclusion. Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you.

We are required to be independent of the City of Seaside and to meet our other ethical responsibilities, in accordance with the relevant ethical requirements related to our agreed-upon procedures engagement.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City of Seaside and management of the City of Seaside and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties.

CliftonLarsonAllen LLP
Roseville, California
August 3, 2021
Packet Page 224

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.D.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Dominique Davis, City Clerk
DATE: March 15, 2022
SUBJECT: APPROVE APPOINTMENTS TO COMMUNITY SAFETY ADVISORY

COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION

RECOMMENDATION
Accept the appointments of Silia Foliaki and Hufemia Ruiz to the Community Safety Advisory Commission and Rita Burks to the Planning Commission as recommended by the Mayor.

BACKGROUND
The Mayor appoints members to the City's Boards, Commissions and Committees, which serve as advisory boards to the City Council. The purpose of the advisory boards is to supplement the City Council's skills and abilities to help guide the organization toward its mission. They also serve as an important link between the City Council and the Community by providing direct involvement in policy-making and communication of vital information.

The Mayor makes appointments to these advisory boards, while the City Manager designates Department Heads or other staff members to serve as staff liaisons that regularly attend meetings and provide technical support.

The Mayor has made the following appointments:

APPLICANT ADVISORY BODY
Silia Foliaki Community Safety Advisory Commission
Hufemia Ruiz Community Safety Advisory Commission
Rita Burks Planning Commission
Packet Page 225

Item No. 8.D. Page 2 of 2

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Appointee Application - Silia Foliaki

2. Appointee Application - Hufemia Ruiz Perez

3. Appointee Application - Rita Burks
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 226
City of Seaside
City Clerk's Office
Application for Appointment
to a City Board/Commission/Committee
City Clerk's Date Stamp

FORM IS FILLABLE ONLINE - IF FILLING BY HAND, PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY To serve on: ___________________________________________________ Please list the Board/Commission/Committee that you would like to be considered for Name: _______________________________________________________ Address:______________________________________________________ Email:_____________________________________Telephone:_____________________ Background/Education/Experience/Special Skills (attach additional pages if needed):
_________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Briefly describe your desire to be appointed to the above Board Commission or Committee:
__________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Other private and non-profit affiliations:
__________________________________________________________________________ If appointed, you will be subject to the following compliance requirements:
- File a Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700) to comply with the Fair Political Practices Commission.
- Undergo Ethics Training to comply with Assembly Bill 1234. - Attend meetings when scheduled. NOTE: Most Boards and Commissions meet after 5:00 p.m. - Review and Understand the Boards, Commissions and Committee’s Handbook found online here: http://bit.ly/BCCManual
- Accept the position in the event you are appointed:

Signature Date

Packet Page 227
Application for Appointment to a City Board/Commission/Committee Background/Education/Experience/Special Skills (continued):
worked towards my bachelor's degree. I worked at Microsoft as a financial analyst. Fast forward to my last 10 years of work, I worked as both an Administrator and Business Manager for the Diocese of Monterey, at St Francis Xavier Church. I worked for the Diocese of Monterey for 8 years. Following those 8 years, I took a hiatus due to familial reasons. Throughout my entire work career I have showcased not only my expertise/knowledge but also my skill sets. I am a diligent active listener, problem solver, and punctual team player. I believe with these skill sets (amongst many others of mine), I will be the best fit for this position.

Packet Page 228
Packet Page 229
Dominique Davis - Online Form Submittal: Application for Appointment to a City Board/Commission/Committee
From: <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Date: 2/18/2022 11:17 AM
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Application for Appointment to a City Board/Commission/Committee Application for Appointment to a City
Board/Commission/Committee
I'd like to serve on: Community Development Advisory Committee Name Rita L Burks
Email Address [email protected]
Address 1327 Kenneth St
City Seaside
State CA
Zip Code 93955
Phone Number 8318690032
Alternate Phone Number 8318991100
Please list your background,
education, experience, and
special skills:

Rita Burks is an experienced TK-8th grade Dual Immersion School principal, mother, and California native. She grew up in Los Angeles, and as a first-generation college graduate, she began her educational career at Santa Monica Community
College before earning a Bachelors in Liberal Studies from San Diego State University. Rita continued her education by earning a Multiple Subject Teaching Credential from Cal State Teach and a Masters in Educational Administration from Concordia University.

Driven by her belief in cultural diversity, social emotional learning, and bilingualism, her focus is helping all stakeholders develop a strong self identity, in order for them to understand their relationship to the world and to disrupt systemic racism in education. Rita strives to continually develop herself and others while keeping her focus on the equity gap that persists in underserved communities.

file:///E:/TEMP/XPgrpwise/620F8056COSIS_PO10013437361AC4D1/GW_00002.HTM 2/18/2022 Packet Page 230 Rita takes pride in developing systems to support a positive school climate, leadership development, and student
achievement. As an educational leader, her goals include equity and rigorous instruction for all students. In addition to her primary job functions, Rita Burks has been recognized by the Monterey Peninsula Unified School District for her
extraordinary commitment to enhancing student learning
environments through meaningful Dual Immersion practices.

Are you willing to file
Statements of Economic
Interest (Form 700)?
Yes
Are you able to attend
meetings during business
hours? (Most Boards and
Commissions meet after 5
pm)
Yes
Comments: I am also interested in working on increasing affordable housing in Seaside.

Electronic Signature
Agreement
I agree.

Electronic Signature Rita L Burks
Date 2/18/2022
Dear Applicant: As an employer with an Affirmative Action Program, we comply with Federal and State government record keeping, reports and other legal requirements. The completion of this data is voluntary and in no way affects your application to participate on any City Board, Commission or Committee. All data is kept in a separate confidential file by the Affirmative Action Office.

Name Rita L Burks
Ethnic Origin
Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.

file:///E:/TEMP/XPgrpwise/620F8056COSIS_PO10013437361AC4D1/GW_00002.HTM 2/18/2022 Packet Page 231

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.E.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Dominique Davis, City Clerk
DATE: March 15, 2022
SUBJECT: APPROVE PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE MEALS ON
WHEELS 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE NATIONAL SENIOR

NUTRITION PROGRAM

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a proclamation recognizing the 50th Anniversary of the National Meals on Wheels program.

BACKGROUND
March 1, 2022, begins a month-long "March for Meals" campaign honoring the 50th anniversary of the Older Americans Act Nutrition Program. This federal legislation provides funding for nutrition services for seniors and helps support programs like Meals on Wheels.

Each year, the March for Meals celebration commemorates the historic day in March of 1972 when President Nixon signed into law a measure that amended the Older Americans Act of 1965 to include a national nutrition program for seniors 60 years and older. This legislation supported the rapid growth of the nationwide network of senior nutrition programs – commonly referred to as Meals on Wheels – that collectively served more than 223 million meals to over 2.4 million seniors prior to the pandemic.

Locally, the Meals on Wheels of the Monterey Peninsula is an integral part of Seaside and has had a positive impact on our community since 1972.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

Packet Page 232

Item No. 8.E. Page 2 of 2

ATTACHMENTS

1. Proclamation
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 233
City of Seaside

PROCLAMATION
Meals on Wheels
National Senior Nutrition Program
50th Anniversary
WHEREAS, since 1972, the National Senior Nutrition Program has funded local agencies and organizations to serve home-delivered and congregate meals that help to ensure older adults have opportunities to stay healthy, independent, and connected; and
WHEREAS, more than 10 million older Americans face hunger each year; and WHEREAS, older Americans face malnutrition, isolation; and WHEREAS, local senior nutrition programs help older adults access healthy foods; nutrition screening, education, and counseling; social opportunities; and other supports that encourage well-being; and
WHEREAS, the Meals on Wheels of the Monterey Peninsula is an integral part of Seaside – providing sustenance and so much more to our older community members, especially those most vulnerable to social isolation; and WHEREAS, Meals on Wheels of the Monterey Peninsula is having a positive impact on our community and its senior members by:
• Nourishing their bodies, minds, and spirits
• empowering seniors, disabled adults, veterans to remain independent • driving out hunger and isolation in our region
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED, that, I, The Honorable Ian N.

Oglesby, Mayor of the City of Seaside, on behalf of the City Council, do hereby proclaim March 2022 to be the 50th Anniversary of the National Senior Nutrition Program. We urge every resident to recognize older adults and the people who support them through nutrition services as essential contributors to the strength of our community.
_________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
March 15, 2022
Packet Page 234

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.F.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Ernesto Altamirano, Communications & Community Engagement Specialist
DATE: March 15, 2022
SUBJECT: APPROVE PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING MARCH 2022 AS

AMERICAN RED CROSS MONTH

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a proclamation recognizing March 2022 as American Red Cross Month.

BACKGROUND
In 1881, Clara Barton founded the American Red Cross, and today we honor the kindness and generosity of Red Cross volunteers here in Seaside, who continue to carry out Clara's lifesaving legacy.

The contributions of local Red Cross volunteers (164 in the county) give hope to the most vulnerable in their darkest hours and join the millions of people across the United States who volunteer, give blood, donate financially, or learn vital life-preserving skills through the Red Cross.

FISCAL IMPACT
None

ATTACHMENTS

1. Proclamation
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:

Packet Page 235

Item No. 8.F. Page 2 of 2
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 236
City of Seaside

PROCLAMATION
AMERICAN RED CROSS MONTH 2022
Commemorative Observance
WHEREAS, In times of crisis, people in Seaside come together to care for one another.

This humanitarian spirit is part of the foundation of our community and is exemplified by American Red Cross volunteers and donors; and
WHEREAS, In 1881, Clara Barton founded the American Red Cross, and today we honor the kindness and generosity of Red Cross volunteers here in Seaside, who continue to carry out Clara’s lifesaving legacy; and
WHEREAS, The contributions of local Red Cross volunteers (164 in the county) give hope to the most vulnerable in their darkest hours and join the millions of people across the United States who volunteer, give blood, donate financially, or learn vital life-preserving skills through the Red Cross; and
WHEREAS, This work to prevent and alleviate human suffering is vital to strengthening our community’s resilience.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED, that I, The Honorable Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor of the City of Seaside, on behalf of the City Council, do hereby recognize March 2022 as American Red Cross Month in virtue of their humanitarian mission. _________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
March 15, 2022
Packet Page 237

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.G.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Dan Meewis, Recreation Director
DATE: March 15, 2022
SUBJECT: APPROVE A FEE WAIVER FROM BETHEL MISSIONARY BAPTIST

CHURCH FOR THE USE OF THE LAGUNA GRANDE HALL AND
KITCHEN FOR THE FAITH BASED LUNCHEON ON MARCH 23,
2022

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the fee waiver request from the Bethel Missionary Baptist Church for the use of Laguna Grande Hall and kitchen to hold the Faith Based Luncheon in the amount of $253.75, the Organization to provide the City with the non refundable portion of the deposit of $92.25.

BACKGROUND
The Bethel Missionary Baptist Church is requesting a fee waiver to help cover the cost associated with their Faith Based Luncheon in the Laguna Grande Hall at the Oldemeyer Center on Wednesday, March 23, 2022, from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. This event is free and open to the public.

Staff recommends that the fees be waived for the rental cost of the facility and that the organization pay only the non-refundable portion of the deposit of $92.25 to go towards the building maintenance fund.

FISCAL IMPACT
The approximate fees which are applicable to this request are:

Laguna Grande Hall & Kitchen Fee 3 Hours @ $56.25 $168.75 Insurance $ 85.00
Packet Page 238

Item No. 8.G. Page 2 of 2
Deposit Non Refundable Portion $ 92.25
TOTAL $346.00
Should the City Council approve the request with the staff recommendation to waive all rental fees but require payment for the non-refundable deposit only, the fiscal impact is $253.75.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Fee Waiver Request - Bethel Missionary Baptist Church 2022

2. Bethel Missionary Baptist Church 501 (c)(3)
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 239
Packet Page 240
Packet Page 241
Packet Page 242
Packet Page 243
Packet Page 244
Packet Page 245
Packet Page 246
Packet Page 247
Packet Page 248
Packet Page 249

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.H.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Dan Meewis, Recreation Director
DATE: March 15, 2022
SUBJECT: APPROVE CO-SPONSORSHIP OF SUSTAINABLE SEASIDE'S 2022 SUSTAINABLE SEASIDE EARTH DAY CELEBRATION AND

ELECTRIC VEHICLE TEST DRIVE/DEMO FAIR AT SEASIDE CITY
HALL LAWN ON APRIL 30, 2022

RECOMMENDATION
Approve a request from Sustainable Seaside to co-sponsor their Seaside Earth Day Celebration and Electric Vehicle Test Drive/Demo Fair at City Hall Lawn on April 30, 2022, from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Approval of this item will result in a waiver of all fees and costs in the approximate amount of $2,950.00.

BACKGROUND
Sustainable Seaside is requesting co-sponsorship to waive all fees related to their Seaside Earth Day Celebration and Electric Vehicle Test Drive/Demo Fair at City Hall Lawn on April 30, 2022. A Special Event application was submitted and reviewed by staff and the Special Event Committee.

This is a community celebration of arts, nature, and sustainability. This annual event focuses our attention on how we all can be more environmentally friendly in our neighborhoods, in the city, and the world. It is both a celebration and a educational event, meant to raise awareness of and foster sustainability locally and towards a healthy planet.

They are also requesting the use of a portable stage, electrical access, 20 tables, 90 chairs, and a sound system. This is the second request from Sustainable Seaside for cosponsorship of this event. The last fee waiver and co-sponsorship request was approved at the February 20, 2020, City Council meeting.

Packet Page 250

Item No. 8.H. Page 2 of 2

FISCAL IMPACT
Should the City Council approve the request for co-sponsorship of the Seaside Sustainable Earth Day Celebration and Electric Vehicle Test Drive/Demo Fair to waive all fees and costs, the approximate fiscal impact is as follows:

Public Works Staff/Set-up and Tear Down $2,521.00
Special Event Application Fee $ 110.00
Insurance Coverage $ 207.00
Rental Fee $ 112.00
TOTAL $2,950.00

ATTACHMENTS

1. Sustainable Seaside Special Event Application 2022

2. Sustainable Seaside Fee Waiver Request 2022

3. Sustainable Seaside Layout Map on City Hall Lawn 2022

4. Seaside Earth Day EV Test Drive Map 2022
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 251
Packet Page 252
Packet Page 253
Packet Page 254
Packet Page 255
Packet Page 256
Packet Page 257
Packet Page 258
Packet Page 259
Packet Page 260
Packet Page 261
Packet Page 262
Packet Page 263
Packet Page 264
Packet Page 265
Packet Page 266

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.I.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Dan Meewis, Recreation Director
DATE: March 15, 2022
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CLOSURE OF

GENERAL JIM MOORE BOULEVARD TO THROUGH TRAFFIC

FROM BROADWAY AVENUE TO SAN PABLO AVENUE FOR THE
SEASIDE EXOTICS EVENT ON AUGUST, 20, 2022.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution permitting the closure of General Jim Boulevard to through traffic from San Pablo Avenue to Broadway Avenue to ensure public safety during the Seaside Exotics event on Saturday, August 20, 2022.

BACKGROUND
Exotics on Broadway, LLC, has submitted an application to hold the Seaside Exotics event on General Jim Moore Boulevard on Saturday, August 20, 2022. When Exotics on Broadway last held their event in 2019, there were approximately 15,000 people in attendance throughout the duration of the event. Based on the turnout from 2019, the Exotics on Broadway team requested an expansion of the Broadway street closure to extend up Broadway past Fremont Boulevard.

The Special Event Committee determined that this event was too large to continue on Broadway Avenue and expanding beyond Fremont wasn't feasible. Moving the event to General Jim Moore Boulevard between San Pablo Avenue and Broadway Avenue will allow 200-300 exotic cars to be shown with a variety of other amenities to complement the event, such as: a stage for entertainment, local food trucks and vendors, adequate restroom facilities, and a VIP area for the car owners. The Seaside Exotics team is committed to offering Seaside businesses and restaurants the opportunity to have booths at the event. This location will also allow for plenty of space for the crowd to enjoy the event and take in the stunning views of the bay.

Packet Page 267

Item No. 8.I. Page 2 of 3
The Seaside Exotics team is requesting a closure from 4:00 a.m. on Saturday, August 20, 2022, until 12:00 a.m. on Sunday, August 21, 2022. The event will take place from 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. The Seaside Exotics event offers the community the opportunity to attend a free show, which is very popular with both locals and tourists. This event being held in Seaside has helped the City to become a popular destination during Car Week.

FISCAL IMPACT
All costs associated with this event will be reimbursed by Exotics on Broadway, LLC.

RECOMMENDATION
If the City Council approves the request for closure of General Jim Moore from San Pablo Avenue to Broadway Avenue on Friday, August 19, 2022, to Sunday, August 21, 2022, between the hours of 12:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. staff recommends the following conditions be met:

1. Submit a temporary traffic control plan and temporary traffic detour plan prepared by a registered traffic engineer. Reviewed and approved by Public Works.

2. Submit an encroachment permit.

3. No parking signs, morning closure and opening of the roadway in the evening need to be set out 3 days in advance.

4. Provide information on restrooms and trash control.

5. Organization to provide insurance coverage of the event in the amount of $3 million per occurrence and $5 million in the aggregate.

6. Pay all city-related costs associated with the event.

7. Hire a traffic management company to provide two-way traffic on the southbound side of General Jim Boulavard from 12:00 p.m. on Friday, August 19, 2022 to 5:00 a.m on Saturday, August 20, 2022, and for the complete road closure.

8. Invite Seaside businesses to participate and provide priority vendor spaces for Seaside businesses who are interested in vending at the event.

9. Provide a minimum of 15 security guards for the duration of the event.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Exotics on Broadway L.L.C. Special Event Application 2022

2. Exotic on Broadway, LLC -Seaside Encroachment Permit 2022

3. Exotics on Broadway, LLC - Seaside Tent Permit 2022

4. EOB-MAP-2
Packet Page 268

Item No. 8.I. Page 3 of 3

5. EOB-MAP-3

6. Exotics Resolution 2022

7. Exotics on Broadway - Signed & Completed Temporary Street Closure Policy 2022 Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 269
Packet Page 270
Packet Page 271
Packet Page 272
Packet Page 273
Packet Page 274
Packet Page 275
Packet Page 276
Packet Page 277
Packet Page 278
Packet Page 279
Packet Page 280
Packet Page 281
Packet Page 282
Packet Page 283
Packet Page 284
Packet Page 285
Packet Page 286
Packet Page 287
Packet Page 288
Packet Page 289
RESOLUTION 22-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE

APPROVING THE CLOSURE OF GENERAL JIM MOORE BOULEVARD TO THROUGH

TRAFFIC FROM SAN PABLO AVENUE TO BROADWAY AVENUE
WHEREAS, Exotics on Broadway, LLC will be holding their Exotics on Broadway event that is open to the public;
WHEREAS, the closing of General Jim Moore Boulevard from San Pablo Avenue to Broadway Avenue is necessary between the hours of 4:00 a.m. on Saturday, August 20, 2022 and 12:00 a.m. on Sunday August 21, 2022 to ensure the safety of the public; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Seaside hereby approves the closure of General Jim Moore Boulevard from San Pablo Avenue to Broadway Avenue to ensure the safety of the public using this portion of roadway during this event.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Seaside duly held on the 15th day of March 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

APPROVED:
______________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk
APPROVED TO FORM:
_____________________________
Sheri L. Damon, City Attorney
Packet Page 290
Packet Page 291
Packet Page 292
Packet Page 293
Packet Page 294
Packet Page 295

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.J.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Ashley Collick, Assistant City Manager
DATE: March 15, 2022
SUBJECT: APPROVE LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR VETERANS' HOME IN

MONTEREY COUNTY

RECOMMENDATION
Approve letter of support for Veterans' home in Monterey County to be sent to Monterey Bay Region State and Federal Legislators.

BACKGROUND
Currently, there are extended wait times to access the established Veterans Homes in the State for much needed services. If Veterans are unable to access Veteran Home services timely, they will have to seek other options, potentially out of the State of California or even risk becoming homeless.

Veterans in need of Skilled Nursing and Memory Care must wait years before they get admitted. The construction of a new Veterans Home in Monterey County would help to alleviate the long wait times and keep our Veterans in the State. Current wait times for these services are:
 Yountville: 5 years wait time for admittance.
 West Los Angeles: 2 years wait time for admittance.
 Fresno: 4 years wait time for admittance.
 Redding: 5 years wait time for admittance.

California is losing veterans at an alarming rate – much faster than the next 2 largest veteran population states (Texas and Florida). We owe all we have to the veterans of this Nation, and it is our joint obligation to do all we can to care for those who have selflessly served for the freedoms we have today.

Packet Page 296

Item No. 8.J. Page 2 of 3
Currently California Veterans receive more than 8 Billion in Federal VA Compensation and Pension Payments. In addition, many receive Post 9/11 GI Bill, Chapter 33 Education Benefits and DoD Retirements. If Veterans leave the state so will the need for Veteran Serving organizations that create high paying jobs with the Federal VA, State, Counties, Private Sector and Non-Profits that serve our Veterans. Veterans positively impact the California Ecosystem.

The construction of a new Veteran’s Home will lower or eliminate wait times for admittance into the CalVET Veterans Homes for services including combined skilled nursing & memory care services. Adding an additional Veteran's Home will increase the number of homes to 9 in the state. Homes are available to Disabled and Aged Veterans as well as spouses. This home will provide much needed care to our states heroes and decrease the risk of these veterans becoming homelessness.

In addition, the location in Monterey County, will provide an attractive geographical location with a rich Military History and current Military presence. Residents of the Veterans Home would have easy access to the Major General William H. Gourley VADoD Outpatient Clinic, Commissary’s, Post Exchanges, Military Gyms and other Military / Veteran accessible facilities. There are a large variety of beaches, walking / bike trails and County / State / National parks that will promote outdoor activity.

Additionally, Monterey County is interested in contributing land for a new CalVET Veterans Home and Federal Grants are available for 65% of construction costs of the new Veteran Home.

Once the letter is approved, staff will send letters to the following Monterey Bay Region State and Federal legislators:

The Honorable Dianne
Feinstein
331 Hart Senate Office
Building
Washington, DC 20510
The Honorable Alex Padilla
112 Hart Senate Office
Building
Washington, DC 20510
The Honorable Jimmy
Panetta
406 Cannon House Office
Building
Washington, DC 20515
The Honorable Anna
Caballero
12th Senate District
1021 O Street, Rm 7620
Sacramento, CA 95814
The Honorable John Laird
17th Senate District
1021 O Street, Rm 8720
Sacramento, CA 95814
The Honorable Robert Rivas
30th Assembly District
1021 O Street, Rm 5110
Sacramento, CA 95814
The Honorable Mark Stone
29th Assembly District
1021 O Street, Rm 5740
Supervisor Luis Alejo
168 West Alisal Street
Salinas, CA 93901
Packet Page 297

Item No. 8.J. Page 3 of 3
Sacramento, CA 95814

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact for this item.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Veterans' Home Support Letter

2. Veterans' Home Fact Sheet
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 298

OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
440 Harcourt Avenue Telephone 831-899-6703
Seaside, CA 93955 Fax 831-624-5839
www.ci.seaside.ca.us
Include, Innovate, Inspire
March 3, 2022
The Honorable Dianne Feinstein
331 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
The Honorable Alex Padilla
112 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
The Honorable Anna Caballero
12th Senate District
1021 O Street, Rm 7620
Sacramento, CA 95814
The Honorable Jimmy Panetta
406 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
The Honorable John Laird
17th Senate District
1021 O Street, Rm 8720
Sacramento, CA 95814
The Honorable Mark Stone
29th Assembly District
1021 O Street, Rm 5740
Sacramento, CA 95814
The Honorable Robert Rivas
30th Assembly District
1021 O Street, Rm 5110
Sacramento, CA 95814
Supervisor Luis Alejo
168 West Alisal Street
Salinas, CA 93901
Re: Support for a Veterans’ Home in Monterey County
Dear Monterey Bay Region Federal and State Legislators:

On behalf of The City of Seaside, we are writing to support Monterey County’s request for authorizing legislation allowing a Veteran’s Home to be built in the region.

Currently, there are extended wait times to access the established Veterans’ Homes in the State for much needed services. If Veterans are unable to access Veteran Home services timely, they will have to seek other options, potentially out of the State of California or even risk becoming homeless. For Veterans in need of Skilled Nursing and Memory Care must wait years before they get admitted. The construction of a new Veterans Home in Monterey County would help to alleviate the long wait times and keep our Veterans in the State. Current wait times for these services are:
 Yountville: 5 years wait time for admittance.
 West Los Angeles: 2 years wait time for admittance.
 Fresno: 4 years wait time for admittance.
 Redding: 5 years wait time for admittance.

Packet Page 299
California is losing veterans at an alarming rate – much faster than the next 2 largest veteran population states (Texas and Florida). We owe all we have to the veterans of this Nation, and it is our joint obligation to do all we can to care for those who have selflessly served for the freedoms we have today. Currently California Veterans receive more than 8 Billion in Federal VA Compensation and Pension Payments. In addition, many receive Post 9/11 GI Bill, Chapter 33 Education Benefits and DoD Retirements. If Veterans leave the state so will the need for Veteran Serving organizations that create high paying jobs with the Federal VA, State, Counties, Private Sector and Non-Profits that serve our Veterans. Veterans positively impact the California Ecosystem.

The construction of a new Veterans’ Home will lower or eliminate wait times for admittance into the CalVET Veterans’ Homes for services including combined skilled nursing & memory care services. Adding an additional Veterans’ Home will increase the number of homes to 9 in the state. Homes are available to Disabled and Aged Veterans’ as well as spouses. This home will provide much needed care to our states heroes and decrease the risk of these veterans becoming homelessness. In addition, the location in Monterey County, will provide an attractive geographical location with a rich Military History and current Military presence. Residents of the Veterans Home would have easy access to the Major General William H. Gourley VA-DoD Outpatient Clinic, Commissary’s, Post Exchanges, Military Gyms and other Military / Veteran accessible facilities. There are a large variety of beaches, walking / bike trails and County / State / National parks that will promote outdoor activity.

Additionally, Monterey County is interested in contributing land for a new CalVET Veterans’ Home and Federal Grants are available for 65% of construction costs of the new Veteran Home.

For these reasons, we support the Monterey County’s request for State authorization to build a Veterans’ Home in the region. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager at 831-899-6700 or [email protected] Sincerely,
Mayor Ian N. Oglesby
Packet Page 300
Packet Page 301

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.K.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Nisha Patel, Public Works Director/City Engineer
DATE: March 15, 2022
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A PROFESSIONAL

SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE WALLACE GROUP IN THE
AMOUNT OF $187,700.00 TO PERFORM ENGINEERING AND

GEOLOGICAL SERVICES FOR THE WATER AUGMENTATION

WELL SITING STUDY TO SUPPORT THE CAMPUS TOWN

PROJECT

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution authorizing a professional services agreement with Wallace Group in the amount of $187,700.00 to perform engineering and geological services for the water augmentation well siting study to support the Campus Town Project.

BACKGROUND
The City is required to provide water to the Campus Town development project which is in the process of being annexed into the Marina Coast Water District (MCWD) service area. The Campus Town project was approved contingent on substituting the potable water used on Blackhorse Golf Course with recycled water from MCWD. This exchange allows the City to pump groundwater from another location in the Seaside groundwater basin, treat it, and provide potable water for the Campus Town development.

In September 2021, the City contracted with the Wallace group to prepare a feasibility study of four scenarios for potentially providing potable water service to Campus Town from either a non-potable well located on the Blackhorse golf course, or the City's existing Well #4 (or replacement well). Based on the recommendations in the feasibility study, the City requested Wallace Group prepare improvement plans for using a new well to replace Well #4 and tie into MCWD's water distribution system so that they can provide water service to Campus Town. The goal is to design a full water augmentation project, but a groundwater siting study, alternative analysis for constructing the Packet Page 302

Item No. 8.K. Page 2 of 2
groundwater well, and development of some environmental documents in support of the project must be completed first. Wallace Group provided a proposal to perform the engineering and geologic services for the water augmentation well siting study.

Staff has reviewed the proposal and determined the scope and fee are appropriate. The consultant is on the City's on-call list of engineering consultants and has performed similar studies. Staff recommends adopting a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with the Wallace Group to perform engineering and geologic services for a water augmentation well siting study in the amount of $187,700.00 and amendments up to $18,770.00 for a total contract amount of $206,470.00.

FISCAL IMPACT
It is appropriate for a high level study to establish a contingency of 10% for a total potential contract value equal to $206,470.00. The professional service agreement will be charged to account 343-8910-9500 where there are sufficient funds.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Professional Services Agreement
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 303
RESOLUTION NO. 22-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $187,700.00 WITH THE WALLACE GROUP

TO CONDUCT A WATER AUGMENTATON WELL SITING STUDY
WHEREAS, the City of Seaside, similar to most of the communities of the Monterey Peninsula, does not have a sufficient and reliable source of water to meet its planned development and growth needs; and
WHEREAS, the City is seeking to augment its water supply by purchasing and using recycled water at its Blackhorse golf course to be able to supplement potable water to Campus Town and possibly other areas of the City; and WHEREAS, Wallace Group (Consultant) is on the City approved list of design consultants to perform professional and technical services; and WHEREAS, staff requested and the Consultant submitted a proposal in the amount of $187,700.00 to provide engineering and geological services for a water augmentation well siting study;
WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the proposal and determined the scope of fee are reasonable; and
WHEREAS, a contingency of 10% is appropriate for an engineering study; and WHEREAS, the professional services agreement will be assessed to account 343-8910-9550 which has sufficient funds.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Seaside does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute the Professional Services Agreement with the Wallace Group to conduct a water augmentation well siting study in the amount of $187,700.00 and amendments such that the total contract does not exceed $206,470.00.

Packet Page 304
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Seaside, State of California, on the 15th day of March, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:
________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
_____________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk
Packet Page 305
Rev. 1/18 Page 1 COS Design PSA

CITY OF SEASIDE

DESIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT

WALLACE GROUP WATER AUGMENTATION
THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective ____________________, between the City of Seaside, a municipal corporation ("Agency") and the Wallace Group, a California Corporation (“Consultant”). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:

1. TERM
This Agreement shall commence on _____________, 2022 and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2022, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement.

2. SERVICES
Consultant shall perform the tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A.

3. PERFORMANCE
Consultant shall perform all professional services in a manner consistent with that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the same profession currently practicing under similar circumstances at the same time and in the same or similar locality. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement.

4. AGENCY MANAGEMENT
Agency’s City Engineer shall represent Agency in all matters pertaining to the administration of this Agreement, review and approval of all products submitted by Consultant, but not including the authority to enlarge the Tasks to Be Performed or change the compensation due to Consultant. Agency’s City Manager shall be authorized to act on Agency's behalf and to execute all necessary documents which enlarge the Tasks to Be Performed or change Consultant's compensation, subject to Section 5 hereof.

Packet Page 306
Rev. 1/18 Page 2 COS Design PSA

5. PAYMENT
(a) The Agency agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. This amount shall not exceed One hundred eighty seven thousand and seven hundred Dollars (187,700.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement.
(b) Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the Agency City Manager. Consultant shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by Agency City Manager and Consultant at the time Agency's written authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services.
(c) Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed.

Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, or as soon thereafter as practical, for services provided in the previous month.

Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the Agency disputes any of Consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice.

6. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE (a) The Agency may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the Agency suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement.
(b) In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the Agency shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the Agency.

Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the Agency pursuant to Section 3.

Packet Page 307
Rev. 1/18 Page 3 COS Design PSA

7. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT
(a) The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, Agency shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default.
(b) If the Agency Manager or his/her delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, he/she shall cause to be served upon the Consultant a written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance.

In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the Agency shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement.

8. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
(a) Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts, and other such information required by Agency that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of Agency or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records; shall give Agency the right to examine and audit said books and records; shall permit Agency to make transcripts therefrom as necessary; and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to this Agreement.

Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment.

Packet Page 308
Rev. 1/18 Page 4 COS Design PSA
(b) Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the Agency and may be used, reused, or otherwise disposed of by the Agency without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files, Consultant shall make available to the Agency, at the Consultant's office and upon reasonable written request by the Agency, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring, and printing computer files.
(c) The city agrees to hold Consultant harmless from all damages, claims expenses, and losses arising out of any reuse of the plans, specifications, drawings, maps, models, computer files and other documents for purposes other than those described in this Agreement, unless written authorization of Consultant is first obtained.

9. INDEMNITY AND DEFENSE
(a) Indemnification and Defense for Professional Services To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Agency and any and all of its officials, employees and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, to the extent they arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant.

Consultant’s duty to defend shall consist of reimbursement of defense costs incurred by Agency in direct proportion to the Consultant’s proportionate percentage of fault. Consultant’s percentage of fault shall be determined, as applicable, by a court of law, jury or arbitrator. In the event any loss, liability or damage is incurred by way of settlement or resolution without a court, jury or arbitrator having made a determination of the Consultant’s percentage of fault, the parties agree to mediation with a third party neutral to determine the Consultant’s proportionate percentage of fault for purposes of determining the amount of indemnity and defense cost reimbursement owed to the Agency.
(b) For All Other Liabilities
Notwithstanding the foregoing and without diminishing any rights of Agency under Section 9.A, for any liability, claim, demand, allegation against Agency arising out of, related to, or pertaining to any act or omission of Consultant, but which is not a design professional service, Packet Page 309
Rev. 1/18 Page 5 COS Design PSA
Consultant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Agency, its officials, employees, and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all damages, costs, expenses (including reasonable attorney fees and expert witness fees), judgments, settlements, and/or arbitration awards, whether for personal or bodily injury, property damage, or economic injury, and arising out of, related to, any concurrent or contributory negligence on the part of the Agency, except for the sole or active negligence of, or willful misconduct of the Agency.

10. INSURANCE
Consultant shall maintain prior to the beginning of and for the duration of this Agreement insurance coverage as specified in Exhibit C attached to and part of this Agreement.

11. INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT
(a) Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the Agency a wholly independent Consultant. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither Agency nor any of its officers, employees, or agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees, or agents are in any manner officers, employees, or agents of the Agency. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability whatever against Agency, or bind Agency in any manner.
(b) No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, Agency shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for Agency.

Agency shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder.

12. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES
The Consultant shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The Agency, Packet Page 310
Rev. 1/18 Page 6 COS Design PSA
and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this Section.

13. UNDUE INFLUENCE
Consultant declares and warrants that no undue influence or pressure is used against or in concert with any officer or employee of the Agency in connection with the award, terms or implementation of this Agreement, including any method of coercion, confidential financial arrangement, or financial inducement.

No officer or employee of the Agency will receive compensation, directly or indirectly, from Consultant, or from any officer, employee or agent of Consultant, in connection with the award of this Agreement or any work to be conducted as a result of this Agreement. Violation of this Section shall be a material breach of this Agreement entitling the City to any and all remedies at law or in equity.

14. NO BENEFIT TO ARISE TO LOCAL EMPLOYEES
No member, officer, or employee of Agency, or their designees or agents, and no public official who exercises authority over or responsibilities with respect to the Project during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in any agreement or sub-agreement, or the proceeds thereof, for work to be performed in connection with the Project performed under this Agreement.

15. RELEASE OF INFORMATION/CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
(a) All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without Agency's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, or subconsultants, shall not without written authorization from the Agency Manager or unless requested by the Agency Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories, or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the Agency.

Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives Agency notice of such court order or subpoena. (b) Consultant shall promptly notify Agency should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, or subconsultants be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions, or other discovery request, court order, or subpoena from any person or party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the Agency. Agency retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any Packet Page 311
Rev. 1/18 Page 7 COS Design PSA
deposition, hearing, or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with Agency and to provide the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, Agency's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by Agency to control, direct, or rewrite said response.

16. NOTICES
Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, which provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by notice:

To Agency: __City of Seaside__________
__440 Harcourt Ave________
__Seaside, CA 93955_______
Attention: City Clerk
To Consultant: Wallace Group
612 Clarion Court
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Att: Kari E. Wagner. PE_

17. ASSIGNMENT
The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the Agency. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, Rick Riedl shall be the Project Manager and Engineer of Record for the services described in this Agreement.

Rick Riedl may use assistants, under its direct supervision, to perform some of the services under this Agreement. Consultant shall provide Agency fourteen (14) days' notice prior to the departure of Rick Riedl from Consultant's employ. Should he/she leave Consultant's employ, the Agency shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement, within three (3) days of the close of said notice period. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the Governing Board and the Consultant.

Packet Page 312
Rev. 1/18 Page 8 COS Design PSA

18. LICENSES
At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement.

19. GOVERNING LAW
The Agency and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties, and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with jurisdiction over the Agency.

20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations, and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material.

21. WORK SCHEDULED/TIME OF COMPLETION
Agency and Consultant agree that time is of the essence in this Agreement.

Consultant shall perform as described in Exhibit A.

22. CONTENTS OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL AND PROPOSAL
Consultant is bound by the contents of Agency's Request for Proposal, Exhibit "D" hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and the contents of the proposal submitted by the Consultant, Exhibit "B" hereto. In the event of conflict, the requirements of Agency's Request for Proposals and this Agreement shall take precedence over those contained in the Consultant's proposals.

23. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT
The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he/she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder.

Packet Page 313
Rev. 1/18 Page 9 COS Design PSA
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written.
(Signatures on next page)
CONSULTANT: Wallace Group________
A California Corporation
By: ______________________________ Date:_________________ Kari E. Wagner, Principal
City of Seaside_______________________
A Municipal Corporation
______________________________ Date:_________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Attachments: Exhibit A Scope of Work/Consultant Proposal Exhibit B Fee Schedule
Exhibit C Insurance Requirements
Exhibit D RFQ: On- Call Consultants – Engineering Services Exhibit E Resolution 18-39 On-Call Services
Packet Page 314
February 23, 2022
Nisha Patel
City of Seaside
440 Harcourt Ave
Seaside, California 93955
Subject: Water Augmentation Well Siting Study for Campus Town Dear Ms. Patel:

Wallace Group appreciates the opportunity to provide you with our proposal for engineering and geological services for the above referenced project.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
The City is currently in plan check review for the Campus Town development project. The City is required to facilitate water service to the development that currently has not been annexed into the Marina Coast Water District (MCWD) service area. The project was approved based on being able to serve Blackhorse Golf Course with recycled water in exchange for potable water service. In September 2021, Wallace Group submitted a feasibility study of four (4) scenarios for potentially providing potable water service from either a non-potable well located on Blackhorse golf course or the City’s existing Well #4. Based on the recommendations in the feasibility study, the City requested that Wallace Group prepare improvement plans for using the City’s Well #4 and tie into MCWD’s water distribution system so that they could provide water service to Campus Town.

On December 15, 2021, Wallace Group, along with staff from two firms, Cleath-Harris Geologists and Rincon Consultants, met via teleconference with city staff to discuss the steps necessary to effectively prepare the requested improvement plans. Since the proposed project would rely on an existing agreement with the Watermaster and on the Seaside Groundwater Basin Adjudication, the scope of this proposal has been reduced from designing a water augmentation project to providing a groundwater well siting study along with professional services to determine the best alternative for constructing a groundwater well and environmental documents required in support of the project. Based on our discussion, the following Scope of Services has been prepared for your consideration.

SCOPE OF SERVICES
Wallace Group has teamed with Cleath-Harris Geologists, Inc. (Cleath-Harris) and Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) to provide geotechnical consulting services and environmental consulting services, respectively. Proposed tasks to be performed by Wallace Group and subconsultants are outlined below.

Task 1.0: Project Management and Meetings
Subtask 1.1 Project Management
This task includes day-to-day coordination of project activities, including scheduling and budget controls, staffing needs and coordination, City coordination, monthly status updates and reporting, and other related project management activities. This effort is based on the schedule duration of ten (10) months.

Subtask 1.2 Kick-off Meeting
We will coordinate and attend a kick-off conference call meeting with key Wallace Group and City team members. We will prepare a meeting agenda and minutes for this meeting. This meeting will focus on the project objectives, scope of services, schedule, deliverables, and other components of the project so that the project direction is well defined. We request that

EXHIBIT A
Packet Page 315
PP21-7436
City of Seaside
February 23, 2022

any items that may be of importance for the completion of the report be provided to Wallace Group at the time of the kick-off meeting. For example, zoning requirements for the preferred well sites is required. In order to facilitate this, we will submit a preliminary list of requested items prior to the kick-off meeting to help facilitate the information collection process.

Subtask 1.3 Project Meetings
We will coordinate and attend up to nine (9) project conference calls with key Wallace Group and City team members. We will prepare a meeting agenda and minutes for the following meetings.

1. CE Report and NOE (see Task 2, below)

2. Draft Future CEQA Approach Memorandum (see Task 2, below)

3. 50% Progress (see Task 3, below)

4. Admin Report Review (see Task 3, below)

5. Grants Review (see Task 4, below)

6. Construction Documents Kick-Off (see Task 5, below)

7. Preliminary Design Review (see Task 5, below)

8. Draft Construction Documents Review (see Task 5, below)

9. Next Steps Project Review (see Task 7, below)
This task includes preparation for and attendance of up to nine (9), 2-hour meetings. Unless requested otherwise by the City, meetings would be attended via videoconference.

Task 1 Deliverables:
 Meeting Agendas (PDF)
 Meeting Minutes (PDF
Task 2.0: Environmental Review
Subtask 2.1 Test Well CEQA Review
Rincon anticipates the proposed test well will qualify for a Class 6 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15306 of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15306 applies to basic data collection, research, experimental management, and resource evaluation activities which do not result in a serious or major disturbance to an environmental resource. Accordingly, Rincon will prepare a Notice of Exemption (NOE) for the proposed project pursuant to Section 15306 of the CEQA Guidelines.

To document compliance with the Class 6 category, Rincon will prepare a memorandum (CE Report) to accompany the NOE, which briefly describes compliance of the project with the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15306. The CE Report will also address project compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2, which contains limitations on the use of Categorical Exemptions in certain circumstances. To support the determination that none of the exceptions to the use of a Categorical Exemption apply to the proposed project (in particular, a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances), Rincon will perform the following analyses:
 A Rincon biologist will conduct a literature/database review along with review of aerial photographs, topographic maps, and other readily available literature regarding biological resources present in the project area. Following the literature/database review, a qualified Rincon biologist will conduct a field reconnaissance survey to document existing biological conditions at the project site.

The survey will determine the potential presence of special-status biological resources, including plant and wildlife species, plant communities, jurisdictional waters and wetlands, and suitable habitat for nesting birds. The findings of the

EXHIBIT A
Packet Page 316
PP21-7436
City of Seaside
February 23, 2022

literature/database review and reconnaissance survey will be summarized in the CE Report.
 Rincon will conduct a California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) records search of the proposed project site and a 0.5-mile radius around the project site at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) located at Sonoma State University.

The records search will reveal the nature and extent of any cultural resources work previously conducted within the project site and adjacent vicinity. Because of the disturbed nature of the site, it is not anticipated that the site is sensitive for archaeological resources and therefore an archaeological survey is not proposed. The results of the NWIC search will be summarized in the CE Report.  Rincon will conduct a search of hazardous materials databases to determine if the project would be located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.

Should one of the exceptions prove applicable, we will contact the City immediately to discuss the appropriate path forward, which may include preparation of an Initial StudyMitigated Negative Declaration as an additional scope of work. Following the City’s review of the draft CE Report, Wallace Group and Rincon will attend one (1) conference call to discuss comments. Upon receipt of written comments and following the meeting, Rincon will incorporate written comments and feedback from the meeting into a final NOE and CE Report.

Subtask 2.2 Future CEQA Approach Memorandum
Rincon will review plans for the production well and associated infrastructure and assess the appropriate level of environmental review. Rincon will prepare a memorandum (Future CEQA Approach Memo) that outlines that most probable environmental document(s) required to support a decision to construct and operate a well in the Seaside Basin to deliver water to MCWD for serving potable water to the proposed Campus Town development and possible other developments, such as the proposed Main Gate development. The Future CEQA Approach Memo will also outline potential environmental resource permits for installing a new well to serve Campus Town. The memo will not outline any permits or agreements for additional proposed developments other than Campus Town. Following the City’s review of the memo, Wallace Group and Rincon will attend one (1) conference call to discuss comments. Upon receipt of written comments and following the conference call, Rincon will incorporate written comments and feedback from the conference call into a final CEQA Approach Memo.

Upon acceptance of the final CEQA Approach Memo, Rincon will prepare a detailed scope and cost estimate for preparation of the recommended CEQA document. This task includes preparation for and attendance of one, 2-hour meeting via videoconference to discuss the findings in the Future CEQA Approach Memo.

Task 2 Deliverables:
 Draft CE Report and NOE (Word)
 Final CE Report and NOE (PDF)
 Draft Future CEQA Approach Memorandum (Word)
 Final Future CEQA Approach Memorandum (PDF)
 Scope and Cost for Future CEQA Review (PDF)
Task 3.0: Well Siting Study
Cleath-Harris will complete a well siting study for up to three (3) sites identified by the City.

The purpose of this study is to:
 Establish the properties (City owned or where the City would consider an easement) where groundwater development could potentially take place;

EXHIBIT A
Packet Page 317
PP21-7436
City of Seaside
February 23, 2022

 Define the hydrogeology of these areas based on available information and site geologic/hydrologic reconnaissance;
 Determine what exploration may be necessary to verify the potential capacity and quality of groundwater resources in the project area and prepare an exploration program; and
 Provide the City with technical support in the test well drilling/construction specification/contract and bidding process.

The following subtasks will be performed by Cleath-Harris with support from Wallace Group.

Subtask 3.1 Meetings
Attend “Zoom” meetings with City to discuss issues related to the study and to update the City regarding progress. Periodic telephone conference calls with City staff are a part of the work scope. Anticipated formal meetings are as follows:
 Project kick-off meeting (see Subtask 1.2 Kick-off Meeting, above)  50% Progress Meeting
 Administrative Draft Report Review
Subtask 3.2 Hydrogeologic Research
Review Seaside Basin Watermaster reports, geologic maps, hydrogeologic reports, well completion reports, capacities and water quality information.

Subtask 3.3 Site Visits
Visit each site and vicinity to observe any geologic/hydrologic features. Estimated project fees are budgeted based on evaluating Lincoln Cunningham Park or Havana Soliz Park as one of the two most probable well sites.

Subtask 3.4 Estimated Capacity and Quality
Based on available information, estimate maximum potential capacity and resulting water quality of a new municipal well, as well as whether there could be potential impacts on other existing wells in the vicinity, when the new well is operated at that capacity.

Subtask 3.5 Perform short term pumping test on existing City Well #4.

The proposed 4-hour pumping test would be performed to determine the potential pumping rate and drawdown at a new well. This will require assistance from the City in operating the well during the test.

Subtask 3.6 Physical Constraints for Well Siting
Review site constraints and required setbacks, along with existing surface and underground constructed features, to identify the preferred location for a new municipal well.

Subtask 3.7 Exploratory Test Well
Determine the diameter for the test well for confirming the conditions anticipated to be accessed by a new municipal water supply well. Make recommendations as noted above for the drilling method and casing schedule required for the test well. Recommend the drilling method and preliminary casing and screen schedule for the test well to be used in the formal specification (The formal specification is not included this proposal scope).

Subtask 3.8 Potential Impacts Analysis Scope of Work
If it is anticipated that the new supply well could have adverse impacts on existing wells, formulate a scope of work with testing procedures to evaluate those impacts. Identify possible mitigation measures to address potential impacts.

EXHIBIT A
Packet Page 318
PP21-7436
City of Seaside
February 23, 2022

Subtask 3.9 Cost Estimate
Provide a budgetary estimated cost of the test well, including production testing.

Subtask 3.10 Report
Cleath-Harris will prepare a draft Technical Memorandum outlining the findings for the Well Siting Study (Siting Study Tech Memo). The Siting Study Tech Memo will include the following:
 A summary of the review of geologic/hydrogeologic reports and well logs;  An estimate of the maximum potential capacity and probable water quality of a new municipal well;
 Site constraints and required setbacks for the preferred well location;  Preferred well drilling method and preliminary well design  Recommendations for installing a test well;
 Recommendations for a scope of work to determine potential impacts to adjacent wells.

Following the City’s review of the memo, Wallace Group and Cleath-Harris will attend one (1) conference call meeting to discuss comments. Upon receipt of written comments and following the meeting, Cleath-Harris will incorporate the written comments and feedback from the meeting into a final Well Siting Study memo.

Task 3 Deliverables:
 Draft Technical Memorandum (Word)
 Final Technical Memorandum (PDF)
Task 4.0: Grants Review
Wallace Group will review the following grant opportunities that could potentially fund the installation of a water well.

1. DWR Small Community Drought Relief Program (see website at [email protected]

2. DWR Urban and Multibenefit Drought Relief Grant Program (see website at https://water.ca.gov/Water-Basics/Drought/urbanmultibenefitdrought) The DWR Small Community Drought Relief Program offers financial and technical assistance to small communities facing water supply challenges because of the current drought. DWR is currently accepting applications for eligible projects on a non-competitive first-come, firstserved basis. The DWR Urban and Multibenefit Drought Relief Program offers financial assistance to address drought impacts through implementation of projects with multiple benefits. We will prepare a memo summarizing these funding opportunities and possible application process. This task does not include time to prepare the grant application. A contract amendment will be required if a grant is determined to be feasible.

Task 4 Deliverables:
 Memo (PDF)
Task 5.0 Survey
Subtask 5.1: Research:

Wallace Group will review the City of Seaside Land Ordinance and discuss with City staff the options available for siting a municipal well on one of the two proposed parks that are currently owned by the City. This includes one virtual meeting with City engineering and planning staff to review City ordinance and discuss if any other projects like this have occurred in the City that we could use to model the proposed property development.

EXHIBIT A
Packet Page 319
PP21-7436
City of Seaside
February 23, 2022

We will also outline for the City’s need for title research and assist with the City ordering of a preliminary title report for the parks assessor parcel number (012-622-012. For budgeting purposes, we have assumed the City will be providing the required title research through a title company and no more than two easements will be listed in the exceptions that need to be plotted.

Subtask 5.2: Field Survey
Wallace Group will use the City’s current topographic survey and perform additional topographic survey in support of the test well design. The topographic survey will be mapped at two-foot contour intervals and will include major features such as, utility boxes and vaults, manholes, rim elevation and inverts, drop inlets, catch basins, approximate pipe sizes and direction of pipe, paint markings which indicate the presence of underground utilities, and other items according to standard practice.

Deliverables:
 Electronic files of the survey mapping in both PDF and Civil 3D 2021 file format Task 6.0: Preliminary Design Construction Contract Documents Wallace Group will prepare three (3) design deliverable packages of Construction Contract Documents consisting of a Preliminary Design Memorandum with 30% design, and 90% and Final Sets. The three (3) design deliverables are defined as follows:

Subtask 6.1: Preliminary Design Memorandum and 30% Design Deliverable:
1) Cover Sheet, Key Map, Vicinity Map, Limits of Work, Sheet Index, General and Construction Notes
2) Plan View with proposed sewer alignment, no profiles 3) Preliminary Front End Documents (It is assumed the City will furnish the Front-end Documents, Wallace Group will prepare the Bid Schedule and the Measure and Payment) 4) List of Technical Specifications
5) Preliminary Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Costs (EOPCC) Subtask 6.2: 90% Design Deliverable:
1) Cover Sheet (as above)
2) Existing Plan View:
a) Ownership Lines
b) Water Services and Appurtenances (does not include irrigation appurtenances) c) Sewer Services and Appurtenances
d) Storm Drain Services and Appurtenances
e) Electrical, Telephone, and Communication Lines, Boxes, and Services f) Street Names
3) Proposed Plan View:
a) Construction Callouts
a) Proposed Well Location
b) Well Development Water Tie-In location
i) Street gutter/storm drain tie-in
ii) Secondary sewer tie-in (if requested)
4) Draft Front-End Documents
5) Draft Technical Specifications (Reflective of 90% Design Inclusions) 6) Draft Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Costs (EOPCC)

EXHIBIT A
Packet Page 320
PP21-7436
City of Seaside
February 23, 2022

Subtask 6.3: 100% Design Deliverable:

1. Cover Sheet, Key Map, Vicinity Map, Limits of Work, Sheet Index, General and Construction Notes, Proposed Sewer Data Table, Reference Data, Abandonment/Retirement Data

2. Proposed Plan View:
a. 90% Design Deliverable Items
b. Special Plan Notes

3. Erosion & Sediment Control Plan with off-site storm drain inlet protection(s)

4. Technical Specifications (Reflective of 90% Design Inclusions)

5. Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Costs (EOPCC) Design Guidelines, Requirements, and Development
Wallace Group will design the Project in compliance with applicable laws, City (Seaside) and other local, state, and federal standards, and applicable industry standards and codes, including but not limited to those specifically set forth in the applicable noise and air pollution emissions regulations, applicable hazardous material handling and disposal regulations, the City’s policies, and other reference specifications. The work is assumed to be within Lincoln Cunningham Park or Havana Soliz Park adjacent to several residences. This may require residents to be relocated during construction and/or a sound wall to be constructed.

Wallace Group will work with City staff for possible relocation options for these residents under the Coordination and Compliance with Stakeholders task below, but the design may require noise monitoring for those residents not relocated during the construction phase.

Wallace Group will evaluate options at the 30% design submittal, including re-locating residents to a local hotel, such as the Embassy Suites in Seaside. The proposed budget does not include survey or design fees required for sidewalks, curb and gutters potentially damaged during construction.

Wallace Group will prepare and submit design deliverable packages for review and acceptance by the City in accordance with this Scope of Work and an agreed upon design schedule.

Wallace Group will revise plans and technical specifications to incorporate comments received from the City, City’s representative, other stakeholders, and permitting agencies. Wallace Group will respond in writing to all City comments on all three (3) submittals within ten (10) Working Days of the date of transmittal of the comments.

Assumptions:

1. Design documents do not include the following:
a. Modifying or restoring existing pedestrian pathways (e.g. sidewalks and curb ramps) that are not currently ADA compliant.
b. Modifying or restoring existing utilities, including irrigation systems c. Underground utilities profiles
d. Modeling of the storm drain or sewer system

2. The proposed well will be a test well located either within Lincoln Cunningham Park or Savana Soliz Park

3. Site Restoration will be limited to hydroseeding

4. SWPPP is not required because well installation would disturb less than 1 acre Deliverables:
 Preliminary Design Memorandum and 30% Design
 90% Design
 Final stamped Design, ready for bidding including:

1. Final Front-End Documents

2. Final Technical Specifications

3. Final Design Drawings

4. Final EOPCC

EXHIBIT A
Packet Page 321
PP21-7436
City of Seaside
February 23, 2022

Form of Final Design Deliverable will be:
 One (1) complete electronic file set of the final drawings in Adobe PDF format.  One (1) complete electronic file set of the final front-end and technical specifications in Adobe PDF and MS Word format.
 All AutoCAD files in the latest available version (unless otherwise requested).  One (1) complete set of engineering calculations, each wet stamped and signed by qualified responsible engineers registered in the state of California. All computer programs used in development of Project calculations will be Windows compatible.

Task 7.0 – Coordination and Compliance with Stakeholders Wallace Group will coordinate design requirements with governmental entities and agencies, private utilities, and all other parties either involved in infrastructure improvements or otherwise affected by the design of this Project.

Wallace Group has allocated 20 hours to coordinate with stakeholders. This includes various departments within the City of Seaside, including Planning Commission, if necessary.

Deliverables:
 Electronic copy of correspondence with third parties
Task 8.0 Next Steps Memorandum
We will prepare a Tech Memo outlining potential next steps for installing a new well to serve Campus Town. Our analysis will outline permitting issues for the Campus Town development and would highlight the potential issues for permitting a well to serve developments other than Campus Town. Permitting of wells to serve new developments are complicated by the multitude of permitting agencies that have oversight over the Seaside Groundwater Basin, the Monterey Subbasin, and by the unknown water demand and scope of future developments.

Following the City’s review of the memo, we will attend up to one (1) two-hour conference call to discuss comments. Upon receipt of written comments and following the meeting, we will incorporate written comments and feedback from the meeting into a final Tech Memo.

This task includes preparation for and attendance of one, 2-hour meeting via videoconference to discuss the findings in the Environmental Tech Memo.

Deliverables:
 Draft Technical Memo (Word)
 Final Technical Memo (PDF)
Task 9.0 Bid Phase Services
Wallace Group will be available to receive, review, and respond to requests for information (RFIs) during the bidding phase of the Project. These responses will be issued to plan holders and potentials bidders in the form of an addendum. It should be anticipated that two (2) formal addenda may be issued during the subject bidding phase services.

TO BE PROVIDED BY THE CLIENT
 Environmental documents prepared in support of Agreement(s) with the Seaside Basin Watermaster
 Seaside Municipal Water System Map (already provided)  Well production, water quality, and water levels (wells for SMWS, golf course and Laguna Grande)

EXHIBIT A
Packet Page 322
PP21-7436
City of Seaside
February 23, 2022

 Storage & Recovery Agreement with the Seaside Watermaster (already have agreement dated February 5, 2020).
 Agreements between City and MCWD to provide potable water, if any  Preliminary title reports for up to three (3) preferred sites for municipal well  Zoning requirements for preferred sites
 Water demand factors for Campus Town
 Control of Well #4 during pumping test

ASSUMPTIONS MADE IN PREPARING THIS PROPOSAL
 Environmental documents prepared in support of producing water from a well for use as potable or non-potable water
 No exceptions to the Categorical Exemption will apply to the test well project.  The test well will be sited in an existing public park, in an already disturbed area. The site does not contain sensitive habitat, recorded archaeological sites, or historic resources.
 Handling and disposal of drilling fluids and development water from the test well would occur on site with connection to the City’s storm drain.

ITEMS NOT INCLUDED IN SCOPE OF SERVICES
The following services may also benefit your project. Wallace Group can provide these services, directly or through sub-consultants, however, they are not included in the current Scope of Services or estimate of fees:
 Negotiations for permits or agreements with any third parties, such as the Seaside Basin Watermaster, the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, or others  Permits
 Protocol surveys to determine the presence/absence of special status species and/or biological resources monitoring is not included under this scope of work.  Permit fees (except NWIC direct expenses assumed not exceed $700).  Raw water from test well development would either percolate into the ground within the park or enter the City’s existing storm drain system.
 The test well will be funded entirely by the City General Fund.  Development of a hydraulic model or modeling of the storm drain or sewer systems  Development of a hydraulic model or modeling of a water delivery system  Confirmation of recycled water availability
 Confirmation of Well #4 capacity
 Confirmation of response retention time from the MPWMD wells  Environmental documents other than the CE outlined above  Water System Design documents
 Well installation
 Estimated costs of potential impacts to third parties or the Seaside Water Basin  Topographic Survey
 Review of existing water facilities
 Water quality and/or flow rate testing of Well #4
 Land acquisition or land use rights
 Construction phase services
 Resurfacing and Pavement Restoration Plans
 Anything not explicitly included in the scope of work is excluded

EXHIBIT A
Packet Page 323
PP21-7436
City of Seaside
February 23, 2022

PROJECT FEES
Wallace Group will perform the services denoted in Tasks 1 through 4 of the proposed Scope of Services in accordance with the attached Standard Billing Rates (Exhibits A). These services will be invoiced monthly on an accrued cost basis, and our total fees, including reimbursables will not exceed our estimated fee of $187,700 without receiving written authorization from the City.

At your request, additional services to the Scope of Services will be performed by Wallace Group following the signature of our Contract Amendment or the initiation of a new contract.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS
In order to convey a clear understanding of the matters related to our mutual responsibilities regarding this proposal, the attached Standard Terms and Conditions (Exhibit B) are considered a part of our proposal agreement. If this proposal meets with your approval, please sign where indicated and return to our office, which will serve as our notice-toproceed.

We want to thank you for this opportunity to present our proposal for engineering services. If you would like to discuss this proposal in greater detail, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,
WALLACE GROUP, a California Corporation TERMS AND CONDITIONS ACCEPTED:

Kari E. Wagner, PE C66026 ____________________________________ Principal Signature
612 Clarion Court ____________________________________
San Luis Obispo Printed Name
California 93401 ____________________________________
T 805 544-4011 Title
F 805 544-4294 ____________________________________
www.wallacegroup.us Date
Attachments
GGM: PP21-7436, 2021, std
Exhibits A
Exhibit B
THIS PROPOSAL IS VALID FOR 60 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS DOCUMENT.

EXHIBIT A
Packet Page 324
Exhibit A
Standard Billing Rates
Engineering, Design & Support Services:

Assistant Designer/Technician ......................................... $ 95 Designer/Technician I – IV ............................................ $100 - $130 Senior Designer I – III .................................................... $143 - $157 GIS Technical Specialist ................................................. $140 Senior GIS Technical Specialist ........................................ $150 Associate Engineer I – III ............................................... $ 122 - $142 Engineer I – IV ............................................................. $154 - $169 Senior Engineer I - III .................................................... $177 - $187 Director .................................................................... $192 Principal Engineer/Consulting Engineer .............................. $228 Principal ................................................................... $238 Surveying Services:

Associate Survey Technician ........................................... $105 One-Person Survey Crew ................................................ $170 ................................ $205 Two-Person Survey Crew ................................................ $225 ................................ $297 Three-Person Survey Crew .............................................. $290 ................................ $370 Survey Technician I – IV ................................................. $120 - $147 Land Surveyor I – III ...................................................... $150 - $166 Senior Land Surveyor I - III .............................................. $169 - $179 Director .................................................................... $192 Principal Surveyor ........................................................ $228 Principal ................................................................... $238 Planning Services:

Associate Planner I - II ................................................... $ 98 - $106 Planner I – IV .............................................................. $130 - $160 Senior Planner I - III ...................................................... $160 - $170 Director .................................................................... $175 Principal Planner ......................................................... $228 Principal ................................................................... $238 Landscape Architecture Services:

Associate Landscape Designer I – II .................................... $ 90 - $110 Designer I – IV ............................................................. $115 - $130 Landscape Architect I - IV .............................................. $134 - $149 Senior Landscape Architect I - III ...................................... $152 - $162 Director .................................................................... $175 Principal Landscape Architect ......................................... $228 Principal ................................................................... $238

EXHIBIT B
Packet Page 325
Construction Management / Field Inspection Services:

Construction Office Tech I-III .................................. ...... $ 95 - $115 Construction Inspector I - II ............................................. $120 - $135 .............. $155 - 162 Senior Construction Inspector .......................................... $147 ..................... $165 Assistant Resident Engineer I - II....................................... $147 - $152 Resident Engineer I - III ................................................. $157 - $167 Senior Resident Engineer ............................................... $175 Director .................................................................... $187 Principal Construction Manager ........................................ $228 Principal ................................................................... $238 Public Works Administration Services:

Project Analyst I - IV ..................................................... $112 - $142 Senior Project Analyst I - III ............................................ $147 - $157 Senior Environmental Compliance Specialist I - III .................. $163 - $173 Support Services:

Office Assistant ........................................................... $ 94 Project Assistant I – III ................................................... $ 97 - $117 Additional Professional Services:

Fees for expert witness preparation, testimony, court appearances, or depositions will be billed at the rate of $300 an hour. If required to meet schedule requests, overtime on a project will be billed at 1.5 times the employee’s typical hourly rate.

Direct Expenses:

Direct expenses will be invoiced to the client and a handling charge of 15% may be added. Sample direct expenses include, but are not limited to the following:
 travel expenses  sub-consultant services  agency fees  delivery/copy services  mileage (per IRS rates)  other direct expenses Invoicing and Interest Charges:

Invoices are submitted monthly on an accrued cost basis. A finance charge of 1.5% per month may be assessed on all balances that are thirty days past due.

Right to Revisions:

Wallace Group reserves the right to revise our standard billing rates on an annual basis, personnel classifications may be added as necessary.

WALLACE GROUP 2
2021 Standard Billing Rates Amended 2021-05-07

EXHIBIT B
Packet Page 326

EXHIBIT C

EXHIBIT C

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Without limiting Consultant’s indemnification of Agency, and prior to commencement of Work, Consultant shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to Agency.

General liability insurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. The policy must include contractual liability that has not been amended. Any endorsement restricting standard ISO “insured contract” language will not be accepted.

Automobile liability insurance. Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with Work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non-owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident.

Professional liability (errors & omissions) insurance. Consultant shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the effective date of this Agreement and Consultant agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three (3) years after completion of the services required by this Agreement.

Workers’ compensation insurance. Consultant shall maintain Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employer’s Liability Insurance (with limits of at least $1,000,000).

Consultant shall submit to Agency, along with the certificate of insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of Agency, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers.

Umbrella or excess liability insurance. [Optional depending on limits required].

Consultant shall obtain and maintain an umbrella or excess liability insurance policy with limits that will provide bodily injury, personal injury and property damage liability coverage at least as broad as the primary coverages set forth above, including Packet Page 327

EXHIBIT C
commercial general liability, automobile liability, and employer’s liability. Such policy or policies shall include the following terms and conditions:
 A drop down feature requiring the policy to respond if any primary insurance that would otherwise have applied proves to be uncollectible in whole or in part for any reason;
 Pay on behalf of wording as opposed to reimbursement;  Concurrency of effective dates with primary policies;  Policies shall “follow form” to the underlying primary policies; and  Insureds under primary policies shall also be insureds under the umbrella or excess policies.

Other provisions or requirements
Proof of insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance to Agency as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement for workers’ compensation. Insurance certificates and endorsements must be approved by Agency’s Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance.

Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with Agency at all times during the term of this contract. Agency reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.

Duration of coverage. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Work hereunder by Consultant, his agents, representatives, employees or subconsultants.

Primary/noncontributing. Except for Professional Liability and Workers Compensation, Coverage provided by Consultant shall be primary and any insurance or self-insurance procured or maintained by Agency shall not be required to contribute with it. The limits of insurance required herein may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of Agency before the Agency’s own insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.

Agency’s rights of enforcement. In the event any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, Agency has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by Agency will be promptly reimbursed by Consultant or Agency will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from Consultant payments.

In the alternative, Agency may cancel this Agreement.

Packet Page 328

EXHIBIT C
Acceptable insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance or is on the List of Approved Surplus Line Insurers in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders’ Rating of A- (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VI (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best’s Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the Agency’s Risk Manager.

Waiver of subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against Agency, its elected or appointed officers, agents, officials, employees and volunteers or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery against Agency, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants.

Enforcement of contract provisions (non estoppel). Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of the Agency to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on the Agency nor does it waive any rights hereunder.

Requirements not limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. If the Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the Agency requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the Agency.

Notice of cancellation. Consultant agrees to oblige its insurance agent or broker and insurers to provide to Agency with a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation (except for nonpayment for which a ten (10) day notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each required coverage.

Additional insured status. General liability policies shall provide or be endorsed to provide that Agency and its officers, officials, employees, and agents, and volunteers shall be additional insureds under such policies. This provision shall also apply to any excess/umbrella liability policies.

Prohibition of undisclosed coverage limitations. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting Packet Page 329

EXHIBIT C
endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to Agency and approved of in writing.

Separation of insureds. A severability of interests provision must apply for all additional insureds ensuring that Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the insurer’s limits of liability. The policy(ies) shall not contain any cross-liability exclusions.

Pass through clause. Consultant agrees to ensure that its subconsultants, subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project who is brought onto or involved in the project by Consultant, provide the same minimum insurance coverage and endorsements required of Consultant. Consultant agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. Consultant agrees that upon request, all agreements with consultants, subcontractors, and others engaged in the project will be submitted to Agency for review.

Agency’s right to revise specifications. The Agency reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the Consultant, the Agency and Consultant may renegotiate Consultant’s compensation.

Self-insured retentions. Any self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by Agency. Agency reserves the right to require that self-insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self-insurance will not be considered to comply with these specifications unless approved by Agency.

Timely notice of claims. Consultant shall give Agency prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from Consultant’s performance under this AGREEMENT, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies.

Additional insurance. Consultant shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the work.

Packet Page 330

ON-CALL CONSULTANTS - ENGINEERING SERVICES
PROPOSAL DUE APRIL 10, 2018
The City of Seaside (City) seeks Statement of Qualifications from qualified consulting firms, teams and individual consultants to provide engineering services on an on-call basis for miscellaneous undetermined projects. The selected engineering firms may be requested to help with the design of federal, state and locally funded capital improvement projects. The City intends to select multiple consultants for a three-year period, with the option of two (2) one-year extensions through mutual consent between the City and the chosen Consultant(s). Consultants do not need to be able to provide all services described in the “Preliminary Scope of Services,” below. Selection will be based on demonstrated experience in providing cost effective professional services to public works departments.

I. BACKGROUND
The City of Seaside is located approximately 115 miles south of San Francisco and 73 miles south of San Jose. The City of Seaside encompasses a total area of approximately nine square miles and is the largest city on the Monterey Peninsula with just over 34,000 residents. The City has developed a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) annually that identifies capital improvements for government facilities, parks, storm water, transportation, water and special projects. Most project design budgets will be less than $25,000.

II. PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK
The City will provide a request for services for each project to the consultant which may include engineering design services outlined below. The consultant will, in turn, provide a fixed fee cost estimate and scope of work based upon the requested services. Projects may cover a broad of range professional engineering services in support of CIP implementation, and possible other park improvements, Americans with Disability Act (ADA) evaluation and modifications, drainage studies and improvements, street, bicycle and pedestrian projects, and various other municipal related projects. Below is a general overview of services that may be requested.

A. Engineering Services B. Professional Services
Design, Survey and Geometrics
Pavement Evaluation and Design
Hydrology/Hydraulic Analyses
Structural Analysis and Design
Well Design and Rehabilitation
Water System Design & Rehabilitation
Value Engineering
Seismic Evaluations
Disabled Accessibility Evaluations & Mitigation
Preliminary Engineering Studies
Technical Studies & Reports
Peer Reviews
Coordination w/Other Agencies & Utilities
Constructability/Bidability Reviews
On-Call Services
Construction Phase Services
Packet Page 331
The ideal candidate has a good working knowledge of the following documents:
a. City of Seaside Capital Improvement Program (Attachment A), as may be amended.
b. California Department of Transportation Standard Plans and Specifications, 2015 or most recent edition.
c. California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD), latest edition.
d. Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution R3-2013-0032, Post Construction Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region
III. FORM AND CONTENT OF PROPOSAL
Proposals should clearly state respondent’s qualifications. In reviewing the proposals, the City of Seaside considers the quality of the proposal to be reflective of the potential quality of the work the Consultant is able to perform. The ability of the Consultant to clearly and concisely convey information will be considered in the review process. Consultants are encouraged not to submit lengthy and overly wordy proposals.

The SOQ must be concise (maximum 10 written pages) and include, at a minimum, the following information:

A) A brief description of the consultant’s firm, including the year the firm was established, type of organization (partnership, corporation, etc.), and a statement of the firm’s qualifications for performing the subject consulting services.

B) A brief summary of the qualifications and experience of each member proposed to provide professional services.

C) A project summary list with descriptions of the proposed team’s experience. Projects showing experience on public works projects is a plus.

D) A list of references of relevant clients, including a contact person with their current telephone number and email address. At least 3 references shall be on projects listed for item C above.

E) Standard Rate Schedule
All proposing firms must be professionally engaged in the design of capital improvement projects with experience in the public sector for a minimum of five (5) years. At a minimum, Consultants must employ qualified individuals who are licensed and/or otherwise qualified in project management.

Packet Page 332
IV. QUESTIONS AND ADDENDA
Please direct any questions you may have regarding this RFQ, including any request for the City of Seaside to issue a formal written clarification or correction of a discrepancy or an omission in this RFQ, via email to:

Mr. Scott Ottmar, P.E.
[email protected]
Any request for a formal written clarification or correction of a discrepancy or an omission in this RFQ must be received by the City of Seaside per the schedule below. Any City response to such a request will be made in the form of an addendum to this RFQ and will be posted on the City’s website; www.seaside.ca.us per the schedule below. All addenda shall become part of this RFQ.

V. SUBMITTAL OF PROPOSALS
Please submit an electronic copy in Adobe ® PDF format of your Proposal, identified in the subject line as "Proposal for Engineering Design Services” no later than 4:00 p.m. Pacific Time on Wednesday, April 10, 2018.

Proposals received by the City after this deadline will not be accepted and will not be accepted if submitted by FAX. Emailed submissions cannot contain zipped files or files larger than 5 Mbytes.

All material submitted in accordance with this RFQ becomes property the City of Seaside and will not be returned.

VI. EVALUATION PROCESS
City staff will review each SOQ for completeness and content. Each SOQ will be evaluated based upon the relevant qualifications and experience of the consultant. Staff may conduct interviews if necessary. References will also be verified. The SOQ review will focus upon the following criteria:

1. Organization: Does the firm offer the breadth and quality of services required for the types of services listed in the Scope of Work?

2. Staff: Do the qualifications of key personnel to be assigned to the anticipated projects coincide with tasks listed in the Scope of Work? Do assigned personnel have requisite education, experience, and professional qualifications?

3. Experience: Has the firm demonstrated the ability to successfully provide services for projects of a similar complexity and nature as described herein?

4. Professional Standing: Are the firm’s references from past clients and associates favorable? Are deliverables submitted on time and within budget? Packet Page 333

5. Proposal: Organization, presentation, and content of proposal. Conformance to the specified proposal format.

6. Responsiveness. Ability to respond to request for service in a timely manner. Ability to attend meetings at the City of Seaside’s City Hall and performs project site inspections in a timely manner and at a fair and reasonable cost.

Proposals will be ranked on the basis of qualifications. The City of Seaside may conduct interviews with some or all of the firms who submit proposals, or it may complete its evaluation based on the proposals alone. If interviews are conducted, firms selected for interview will be contacted at that time to arrange the date and time for their interview.

VII. SELECTION PROCESS
Based on staff recommendation, the City of Seaside will consider approval of consultant(s). The City of Seaside may select up to three firms or choose to determine that no SOQ proposal exhibits adequate qualifications.

Upon the selection by the City of Seaside, consultant(s) may or may not be called upon by the City of Seaside to provide services.

VIII. SCHEDULE
The anticipated schedule for award of this project is as follows:

Release of RFQ March 20, 2018
Last Day To Submit RFI March 30, 2018
Response to RFI posted ` April 3, 2018
Receipt of Proposals April 10, 2018 at 4 PM
Interview Consultant(s), if necessary TBD (if needed)
Select Short List May 3, 2018
IX. ACCEPTANCE OR REJECTION OF PROPOSAL
The City of Seaside reserves the right to accept or reject any and all proposals. The City of Seaside also reserves the right to waive any informality or irregularity in any Proposals.

Additionally, the City of Seaside may, for any reason, decide not to award an agreement as a result of this RFQ or cancel the RFQ process. The City of Seaside shall not be obligated to respond to any proposal submitted, nor be legally bound in any manner by the submission of the proposal. The City of Seaside reserves the right to negotiate project deliverables and associated costs.

X. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED AGREEMENT
Upon conclusion of the RFQ process, the City of Seaside will select a Consultant with which to enter into negotiations for the assignments described. The selected Consultant shall enter into contract negotiations with the City of Seaside in substantial conformity with the selected proposal and the form of the Consultant Agreement, which is contained in Attachment B.

Packet Page 334
XI. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
The selected Consultant, at Consultant’s sole cost and expense and for the full term of the Agreement or any extension thereof, shall obtain and maintain all of the insurance requirements outlined in the Consultant Agreement (Attachment B).

All policies, endorsements, certificates, and/or binders shall be subject to approval by the City of Seaside as to form and content. The selected Consultant agrees to provide the City of Seaside with a copy of said policies, certificates and/or endorsements.

The selected Consultant shall satisfy these insurance requirements prior to approval of the Agreement. Please address any issues with respect to insurance requirements in your response to the corresponding question in the RFQ.

XII. EXAMINATION OF PROPOSED MATERIAL
The submission of a proposal shall be deemed a representation and certification by the Consultant that they have investigated all aspects of the RFQ, that they are aware of the applicable facts pertaining to the RFQ process, its procedures and requirements, and that they have read and understood the RFQ. No request for modification of the statement shall be considered after its submission on grounds that the Consultant was not fully informed as to any facts or condition.

XIII. PUBLIC NATURE OF PROPOSAL MATERIAL
Responses to this RFQ become the exclusive property of The City of Seaside. All proposals received in response to this RFQ become a matter of public record and shall be regarded as public records, with the exception of those elements in each proposal which are defined by the Consultant as business or trade secrets and plainly marked as “Confidential,” “Trade Secret,” or “Proprietary.” The City of Seaside shall not in any way be liable or responsible for the disclosure of any such proposal or portions thereof, if they are not plainly marked as “Confidential,” “Trade Secret,” or “Proprietary” or if disclosure is required under the Public Records Act. Any proposal which contains language purporting to render all or significant portions of the proposal “Confidential,” “Trade Secret,” or “Proprietary” shall be regarded as non-responsive.

Although the California Public Records Act recognizes that certain confidential trade secret information may be protected from disclosure, the City of Seaside may not be in a position to establish that the information that a Consultant submits is a trade secret. If a request is made for information marked “Confidential,” “Trade Secret,” or “Proprietary,” the City of Seaside will provide the Consultant who submitted the information with reasonable notice to allow the Consultant to seek protection from disclosure by a court of competent jurisdiction.

XIV. DISQUALIFICATION
Factors such as, but not limited to, any of the following may be considered just cause to disqualify a proposal without further consideration:

Packet Page 335
A. Evidence of collusion, directly or indirectly, by Consultants in regard to the amount, terms, or conditions of this proposal;
B. Any attempt to improperly influence any member of the selection staff; C. Existence of any lawsuit, unresolved contractual claim or dispute between Consultant and the City of Seaside;
D. Evidence of incorrect information submitted as part of the proposal; E. Evidence of Consultant’s inability to successfully complete the responsibilities and obligations of the proposal; and
F. Consultant’s default under any agreement, which results in termination of the Agreement.

XV. NON-CONFORMING PROPOSAL
A proposal shall be prepared and submitted in accordance with the provisions of these RFQ instructions and specifications. Any alteration, omission, addition, variance, or limitation of form or to a proposal may be sufficient grounds for non-acceptance of the proposal, at the sole discretion of the City of Seaside.

XVI. PROHIBITION OF GIFTS
The City of Seaside officials are subject to several legal and policy limitations regarding receipt of gifts from persons, firms, or corporations either engaged in business with the City of Seaside, or proposing to do business with the City of Seaside. The offering of any illegal gift shall be grounds to disqualify a Consultant. To avoid even the appearance of impropriety, Consultants should not offer any gifts or souvenirs, even of minimal value, to the City of Seaside officers or employees. The Consultant shall be subject to the City of Seaside’s prohibition.

XVII. NON-DISCRIMINATION/NON-PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT
The successful Consultant shall not discriminate, in any way, against any person on the basis of race, sex, color, age, religion, sexual orientation, actual or perceived gender identity, disability, ethnicity, or national origin, in connection with or related to the performance of the City of Seaside contracts.

XVIII. ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
The following additional terms and conditions are applicable to this RFQ process:

A. It is anticipated that the award of the Agreement resulting from the RFQ shall include terms and conditions similar to those referenced in the City of Seaside’s Standard Consultant Agreement (Attachment B). Exceptions proposed by the Consultant, if any, to the terms and conditions included in the City of Seaside’s Standard Consultant Agreement should be included in the proposal. The City of Seaside reserves the right to consider any proposal exceptions during its evaluation of the acceptability of a proposal.

Packet Page 336
B. This RFQ does not commit the City of Seaside to pay any costs incurred in the submission of the proposal or in making any necessary studies or analysis in preparation of submission of the proposal.

C. The City of Seaside reserves the right without limitation to:

1. Enter into an agreement with another Consultant in the event that the originally selected Consultant defaults or fails to execute an agreement with the City of Seaside;

2. Modify and re-issue the RFQ;

3. Take action regarding the RFQ as may be deemed to be in the best interest of the City of Seaside.

D. The City of Seaside reserves the right to verify any information provided during the RFQ process. The City of Seaside may contact references listed or any other person known to have contracted with Consultant.

E. An agreement shall not be binding or valid with the City of Seaside unless and until it is executed by authorized representatives of the City of Seaside, and of the Consultant.

F. While it is the intent of the City of Seaside is to proceed with this project, this solicitation does not obligate the City of Seaside to enter into an Agreement. The City of Seaside retains the right to cancel this RFQ at any time should the project be cancelled, the City of Seaside loses the required funding, or it is deemed in the best interest of the City of Seaside. No obligation either expressed or implied, exists on the part of the City of Seaside to make an award or to pay any cost incurred in the preparation or submission of an RFQ.

G. Failure to execute the agreement within the time frame identified above shall be sufficient cause for voiding the award.

H. Failure to comply with other requirements within the set time shall constitute failure to execute the Agreement. If the selected respondent refuses or fails to execute the Agreement, the City of Seaside may award the contract to the next qualified highest ranked Respondent.

XIX. ATTACHMENTS
A – City of Seaside Six Year Capital Improvement Program B – Professional Services Agreement
Packet Page 337
RESOLUTION NO. 18-39

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE

APPROVING AN ON-CALL LIST FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
WHEREAS, a formal on-call list is needed to 1) provide an opportunity for qualified professionals to provide professional and technical services of a temporary nature, and 2) ensure consultants have demonstrated the necessary qualifications and experience to provide the requested services; and
WHEREAS, on March 19, 2018, staff issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to solicit proposals from eligible firms to provide engineering services; and WHEREAS, on April 13, 2018, proposals where received from seven firms offering professional services; and
WHEREAS, proposals from Rana Creek and Turf Image were determined to not provide minimum services outlined wifhin the RFQ and were disqualified; and WHEREAS, a selection committee reviewed and identified the five firms shown in Exhibit 'A', attached, qualified to perform professional engineering services based upon experience and overall qualifications.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Seaside City Council approve the firms listed in Exhibit 'A' are hereby approved to provide engineering services on an as needed basis for projects within the City for the next three years with two optional one year extensions.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Seaside duly held on fhe 17fh day of May, 2018 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAD4:

ATTES
5 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Alexander, Campbell, Jones, Pacheco, Rubio 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
), Mayor
Lesley Milton-Rerig, City ^S-k
Exhibit E
Packet Page 338
EXHIBIT "A"
On-CalI List for Engineering Services
May 2018
City of Seaside
Harris & Associates
450 Lincoln Avenue, Suite 103
Salinas, CA 93901
Primary Contact: Frank Lopez, PE, Project Director
(831) 233-9242 Fraiik. Lopez@weareharris. com
List Engineering
9699 Blue Larkspur Lane, Suite 203
Monterey CA, 93940
Primary Contact: Ronald Blue, PE, Principal
(831)373-4390 Ron@listengmeering. com
Schaaf& Wheeler
3 Quail Run Circle, Suite 101
Salinas, CA 93907
Primary Contact: Andy Sterbenz, Project Manager
(831) 883-4848 [email protected]
Wallace Group, A California Corporation
612 Clarion Court
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Primary Contact: Kari Wagner, PE, Director of Water Resources (805)544-4011 KariW@wallacegroup. us
Whitson Engineers Inc.
6 Harris Court
Monterey, CA 93940
Primary Contact: Richard Weber, PE, Principal
(831) 649-5225 RWeber@whitsonengineers. com
Exhibit E
Packet Page 339

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 9.A.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Dan Meewis, Recreation Director
DATE: March 15, 2022
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CLOSURE OF

BROADWAY AVENUE TO THROUGH TRAFFIC FROM FREMONT

BOULEVARD TO CALAVERAS STREET FOR THE OTHER BROTHER
BEER COMPANY EVENT ON MARCH 19, 2022

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution permitting the closure of Broadway Avenue to through traffic from Fremont Boulevard to Calveras Street to ensure public safety during the Other Brother Beer Company event on Saturday, March 19, 2022.

BACKGROUND
Other Brother Beer Company has submitted an application to hold their event "2022 Spring Market" on Broadway Avenue on Saturday, March 19, 2022, from 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. with setup and clean up hours from 8:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. They are requesting the closure of Broadway Avenue from Fremont Boulevard to Calaveras Street. The closure of Broadway Avenue from Fremont Boulevard to Calaveras Street will allow 20-30 local vendors as well as amenities to complement the event.

The "2022 Spring Market" is a part of Other Brother's quarterly markets where local vendors and artists have the opportunity to showcase their talents and crafts. The event will feature 20-30 vendors and live music on Broadway Avenue, along with food and beverage purchases from the taproom with the addition of alcohol consumption services. They are applying for an ABC license to allow their participants to have alcohol in the road closure area on Broardway Avenue between Fremont to Calaveras. They are required to contact the police department and get prior approval for this.

As a condition of the event permit, Other Brother Beer Company is required to notify Broadway businesses of their intention to expand their fall market outdoors, closing Packet Page 340

Item No. 9.A. Page 2 of 2
Broadway from Fremont - Calaveras; and that the road closure is being heard before the City Council on March 15, 2022.

FISCAL IMPACT
Other Brother Beer Company will reimburse the City for all costs associated with this event. The estimated cost for staff time and resources for the road closure is $1,717.66.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Other Brother Beer Co. - Special Event Application 2022

2. Other Brother Beer Co. - Alcoholic Beverage License 2022

3. Other Brother Beer Co. - Cost Estimate for Road Closure 2022

4. Other Brother Beer Co. - Insurance 2022

5. Other Brother Beer Co. - Notification to Neighbors about their event 2022

6. Resolution Other Brothers Beer Co. 2022

7. Other Brother Beer Co. - Beer Garden Site Map 2022

8. Other Brother Beer Co. - Signed & Completed Temporary Street Closure Policy 2022
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 341
Packet Page 342
Packet Page 343
Packet Page 344
Packet Page 345
Packet Page 346
Packet Page 347
Packet Page 348
Packet Page 349
Packet Page 350
Packet Page 351
Packet Page 352
Packet Page 353
Packet Page 354
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE

APPROVING THE CLOSURE OF BROADWAY AVENUE FROM HILLSDALE

STREET TO CALAVERAS STREET
WHEREAS, Other Brother Beer Co. will be holding their 2022 Spring Market Event that is open to the public;
WHEREAS, the closing of Broadway Avenue from Fremont Boulevard to Calaveras Street is necessary between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. on March 19, 2022 to insure the safety of the public;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Seaside hereby approves the closure of Broadway Avenue from Fremont Boulevard to Calaveras Street to ensure the safety of the public using this portion of roadway during this event.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Seaside duly held on the 15th day of March 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

APPROVED:
______________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk
Packet Page 355
Packet Page 356
Packet Page 357
Packet Page 358
Packet Page 359
Packet Page 360
Packet Page 361
Packet Page 362

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 9.B.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Nisha Patel, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Leslie Llantero, Assistant Engineer
DATE: March 15, 2022
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REDUCED SCHOOL

ZONE SPEED LIMITS TRAFFIC ENGINEERING STUDY AND

ESTABLISHING SCHOOL ZONE SPEED LIMITS

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution approving the Reduced School Zone Speed Limits Traffic Engineering Study and establishing school zone speed limits on 21 roadway segments.

BACKGROUND
Upon completion of the Citywide Speed Survey, the traffic engineering consultant, Parisi Transportation (Parisi), evaluated all school zones within the City for reduced speed limits in accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 321. This bill was adopted in 2008 and it allows local jurisdictions, through an ordinance or resolution, to extend the 25 mph prima facie speed limit in school zones from 500 feet to 1,000 feet from the school grounds and to reduce the speed limit to 15 or 20 mph up to 500 feet from the school grounds, under certain roadway conditions and taking into consideration the provisions of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) 627. A full Engineering & Traffic Survey is not necessary under AB 321, however the provisions of CVC 627 shall be taken into consideration when determining the school speed limit reductions. The provisions of AB 321 apply to public, charter, and private schools.

The establishment of reduced speed limits in the vicinity of all qualified schools will help address community and parent concerns about vehicle speeds around schools, particularly during the busy pickup and drop-off items and to enhance the safety of children walking and biking to school.

California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 627 and AB 321 aims to enhance the safety of Packet Page 363

Item No. 9.B. Page 2 of 5
children walking and bicycling to school by permitting the lead agency to consider pedestrian and bicyclist safety when establishing speed limits in school zones. As documented in the September 2021, update to Seaside’s Engineering and Traffic Surveys report, the prevailing speeds, collision records and residential density on streets in school zones justify the recommendation to reduce the speed limits to 20 mph on streets that front schools within 500 feet of the school grounds and create an extended 25 mph speed limit between 500 and 1,000 feet of the school grounds.

To be eligible for reduced or extended school zone speed limits, the following conditions must be met:
1) Within a residential district that has a posted speed limit no greater than 30 mph, and
2) No more than a total of two through lanes of traffic.

Parisi evaluated fourteen (14) schools and identified 21 street segments that qualify for reduced speed limits and prepared the City of Seaside Reduced School Zone Speed Limits Traffic Engineering Study (Attachment 3). Having evaluated the streets adjacent to all public, private and charter schools within Seaside, it is recommended that all of Seaside's two-lane, residential-district roadways that front a school within school zones and are signed at 30 mph or less be declared by ordinance or resolution to have a reduced 20 mph school zone speed limit within 500 feet of the school grounds and an extended 25 mph school zone speed limit between 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the school grounds. The recommended actions are consistent with the City of Seaside 2003 General Plan Circulation Element and the Seaside and Marina Safe Walking and Biking to School: Complete Streets Plan adopted by City Council on February 6, 2020.

Per the guidance from AB 321 and the provisions of CVC 627, the recommendation is supported by the following:
 The collision rates for many streets in Seaside are higher than the statewide average rates for roadways of the same type;
 Unsafe speed is a primary collision factor for many streets in Seaside;  The prevailing speeds, as determined by traffic engineering measurements, are higher than the posted speed limits; and
 The roadways consider residential density as defined by CVC 627.

The following table identifies schools with recommended school zones and reduced speed limits on 21 roadway sections:

Packet Page 364

Item No. 9.B. Page 3 of 5
Packet Page 365

Item No. 9.B. Page 4 of 5
The following identifies the schools that did not meet the criteria for reduced speed limit zones:

Packet Page 366

Item No. 9.B. Page 5 of 5
To implement the slower speeds in school zones and approaching school zones, City staff will order the signs and contact school principals in the spring and install signs in July after school is out for summer break.

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution approving the Reduced School Zone Speed Limits Traffic Engineering Study (Study) and establishing school zone speed limits as recommended in the Study conducted by Parisi Transportation dated December 2021.

FISCAL IMPACT
The cost to purchase and install school zones speed limit signs is approximately $50,000.00, and it will be funded through Measure X account 212-8960-9600 Street Sign Upgrades. The signs will be ordered in Fiscal Year 2021/ 22, and paid for and installed in Fiscal Year 2022/ 23.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A Seaside School Zone Speed Limits Final Draft Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 367
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE

APPROVING THE REDUCED SCHOOL ZONE SPEED LIMITS TRAFFIC

ENGINEERING STUDY AND ESTABLISHING SCHOOL ZONE SPEED LIMITS ON

VARIOUS STREETS WITHIN THE CITY
WHEREAS, on May 6, 2021, the City approved a professional service agreement with Parisi Transportation Consulting (Parisi) to conduct an Engineering and Traffic Survey and Reduced Speed Zoning Adjacent to Schools; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the requirements set forth in the California Vehicle Code, Parisi evaluated the streets adjacent to all the schools within Seaside and prepared the Reduced School Zone Speed Limits Traffic Engineering Study (Study); and WHEREAS, the Study was conducted in accordance with the California Vehicle Code 627 and Assembly Bill 321 for reduced speed limits within school zones; and WHEREAS, the Study conducted by Parisi were presented for review and approval by the City Council of the City of Seaside for the street segments that are set forth in Exhibit A, entitled City of Seaside Reduced School Zone Speed Limits Traffic Engineering Study dated December 2021, which is incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that reduced speeds enhance the safety of children walking and bicycling to school.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Seaside hereby adopts the City of Seaside Reduced School Zone Speed Limits Traffic Engineering Study dated December 2021, prepared by Parisi Transportation Consulting.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the speed limits are established within the school zones as identified on Table 2 attached hereto; and
Packet Page 368
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the reduced speed limits will go into effect when signs have been erected.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular City Council meeting of the City of Seaside duly held on the 15th day of March, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

APPROVED
______________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk
Packet Page 369
Packet Page 370
Packet Page 371
FEBRUARY 2022

CITY OF SEASIDE

REDUCED SCHOOL ZONE SPEED LIMITS
Traffic Engineering Study
SW24-3(CA)
SR4-1(CA)
SR4-1(CA)
(optional)
25 MPH Residential Street
1000 ft Maximum
100 ft
100 ft
1000 ft Maximum
500 ft Maximum
500 ft Maximum See section
2C.05
SR4-1(CA)
SR4-1(CA) SR4-1(CA)
SR24-2(CA)
R1-9
R1-1
R2-1
*See Note 3
*See Note 5
*See Note 3
S5-3
OR OR
S5-3
R2-1
R1-1
Assembly D
Assembly D
Assembly E
Assembly B
Assembly C
Assembly C
Assembly C
Assembly C
Assembly C
See section
2C.05
SCHOOL
Packet Page 372
2 Reduced School Zone Speed Limits: State of California On January 1, 2008, California Assembly Bill (AB) 321 went into effect. The bill allows local jurisdictions – through an ordinance or resolution – to extend the 25 mph prima facie speed limit in school zones from 500 feet to 1,000 feet from the school grounds and to reduce the speed limit to 15 or 20 mph up to 500 feet from the school grounds, under certain roadway conditions and taking into consideration the provisions of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) 627. A full Engineering & Traffic Survey is not necessary under AB 321, however the provisions of CVC 627 shall be taken into consideration when determining the school speed reductions. One of the considerations in CVC 627 is pedestrian and bicyclist safety. The provisions of AB 321 apply to public, charter, and private schools.

California’s reduced or extended school zone speed limits are applicable on streets that meet the following conditions: 1) Within a residential district that has a posted speed limit no greater than 30 mph, and 2) No more than a total of two through lanes of traffic.

Similar to the reduced 25 mph school zone speed limit on streets with higher posted streets, the reduced 15 or 20 mph school zone speed limit would only be in effect when children are present (going to or leaving school, either during school hours or during the noon recess hour). However, if a fence, gate or other physical barrier does not surround a portion of the school grounds, the 15 or 20 mph limit would be in effect at all times.

Appendices A and B provide relevant excerpts from AB 321 and CVC 627.

Appendix C provides additional guidance from Section 7B.15 of the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices on School Speed Limit Assembly. Figure 7B-103(CA) illustrates the use of extended and reduced school zone speed limits.

Packet Page 373
3 Case Studies to Support Reduced School Speed Limit
One of the intentions of the new law was to enhance the safety of children walking and bicycling to school. If a vehicle driving at a slow speed collides with a child on a bicycle or on foot, it will generally result in less severe injuries than a vehicle traveling at a faster speed.

In 1999 the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration published a “Literature Review on Vehicle Travel Speeds and Pedestrian Injuries.”1 According to NHTSA’s study, fatality and serious injury rates increase substantially when travel speeds rise. For example, for children ages 14 or younger, 20.2 percent suffer fatal or serious injuries when struck by a vehicle traveling 1-20 mph, while 32.8 percent are killed or seriously injured when hit by a vehicle traveling 21-25 mph.

Per the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Safe Routes to School’s “Reduced School Area Speed Limits” briefing sheet, slower speeds in school zones are often warranted because children do not have the same ability as adults in:2 • Seeing and evaluating traffic conditions due, in part, to their height; • Processing information because of their limited peripheral vision and visual acuity; • Perceiving correctly the direction and sound of traffic; and • Understanding the use of traffic control devices and crosswalks.

Safe Kids Worldwide echo similar conclusions. This organization states that children are impulsive and have difficulty judging speed, spatial relations, and distance. Auditory and visual acuity, depth perception and proper scanning ability develop gradually and do not fully mature until at least age ten.3 Additionally, their smaller bodies are less able to physically withstand the impact with a vehicle than an adult.

1 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, “Literature Review on Vehicle Travel Speeds and Pedestrian Injuries”, 1999 [http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/pub/HS809012.html]. 2 Safe Routes in conjunction with the Institute of Transportation Engineers, “Safe Routes to School Briefing Sheets: Reduced School Area Speed Limits”, 2013 [http://www.saferoutesinfo.org/sites/default/files/resources/ ITE_SRTS_Briefing_Sheet_08_ReducedSchoolAreaSpeedLimits.pdf]. 3 U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, “Child Pedestrian Safety Rules”, 2015, [http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/ hslc/tta-system/family/for-families/safety/safety-prevention/ChildPedestrian.htm].

Packet Page 374
4 City of Seaside – 15/20 MPH Eligible Roadways
Table 1 includes the schools in the City of Seaside and the associated access roadways for each of the schools that were considered for a school zone speed limit reduction and the eligibility of each of those roadways.

Table 1: Streets Evaluated for School Zone Speed Limits School/Street Posted Speed
Limit
Total
Travel
Lanes
Between Eligible for
School Zone
Speed Limit?
Central Coast High School – 200 Coe Avenue
Coe Avenue 30 MPH 2 Monterey Road and 200’ W of Hibiscus Heights
Yes
Del Rey Wood Elementary School – 1281 Plumas Avenue
Tweed Street 25 MPH 2 Plumas Avenue and 500’ N of Plumas Avenue Yes Kimball Avenue 30 MPH 2 120 W of Shafer Street and 100’ E of Madera Court
Yes
Noche Buena Street 25 MPH 2 Kimball Avenue and Plumas Avenue Yes Plumas Avenue 25 MPH 2 Tweed Street and approximately 200’ E of Noche Buena Street
Yes
Highland Elementary School – 1650 Sonoma Avenue
Sonoma Avenue 25 MPH 2 Yosemite Street and Mescal Street Yes Yosemite Street 25 MPH 2 Valencia Court and 500’ north of the midblock crosswalkYes Marshall Elementary School – 300 Normandy Road
Normandy Road 25 MPH 2 300’ E of intersection with General Jim Moore Blvd and 500’ E of sidewalk entry/school
parking lot
Yes
Ord Terrace Elementary School – 1755 La Salle Avenue
Ord Grove Avenue 25 MPH 2 500’ W of Buchanan Street and 500’ E of Buchanan Street
Yes
La Salle Avenue 30 MPH 2 Mendocino Court and Havana Street Yes International School of Monterey – 1720 Yosemite
Yosemite Street 25 MPH 2 San Pablo Avenue and 370’ S of Mingo Avenue
Yes
Mescal Street / San
Pablo Avenue
25 MPH/ 30
MPH
2 50’ E of Highland Street and 500’ S of Mescal /
San Pablo intersection
Yes
Monterey Bay Christian School – 1184 Hilby Avenue
Hilby Avenue 30 MPH 2 Siddall Street and Noche Buena Street Yes Peninsula Adventist School – 1025 Mescal Street
Mescal Street / Plumas
Avenue
25 MPH 2 500’ N of school driveway (Mescal Street) and
225’ E of Mescal Street (Plumas Avenue)
Yes
Packet Page 375
5 School/Street Posted Speed
Limit
Total
Travel
Lanes
Between Eligible for
School Zone
Speed Limit?
Seaside High School – 2200 Noche Buena Street
Noche Buena Street 25 MPH 2 Ord Avenue and Circle Avenue Yes Ord Avenue 15 MPH 2 500’ W of Noche Buena Street and 500’ E of Noche Buena Street
No – street is
gated and
signed for 15
mph
Monterey Bay Charter School – 1450 Elm Avenue
Waring Street (one-way
N/B)
25 MPH 1 500’ N of Elm Avenue and 500’ S of school
entrance
Yes
Flores Street 25 MPH 2 500’ S of Sonoma Street and 500’ N of Elm Avenue
Yes
Sonoma Avenue 25 MPH 2 500’ W of Waring Street and 500’ E of Harding Street
Yes
Elm Avenue 25 MPH 2 500’ W of Waring Street Yes
Darwin Street / St Elmo
Street / Harding Street
(one-way loop)
25 MPH 1 Between Sonoma Avenue Yes
Harding Street / Elm
Avenue / Darwin Street
(one-way loop)
25 MPH 1 Between Broadway Avenue Yes
Seaside Middle School – 999 Coe Avenue
Coe Avenue 35 MPH 2 500’ W of school driveway and 500’ E of school driveway
No – Coe
Avenue has a
35 mph speed
limit
MLK School of the Arts – 1713 Broadway
Broadway Avenue 30 MPH 4 Yosemite Street and Mescal Street No – roadway contains 4
travel lanes
Chartwell School – 2511 Numa Watson Road
Numa Watson Road 25 MPH 2 Chartwell School and School Parking Lot No – land uses around
roadway are
undeveloped
Dual Language Academy Middle School – 225 Normandy Road Normandy Road 25 MPH 2 General Jim Moore Boulevard and 500’ W of school driveway
No – Roadway
not under City
jurisdiction
It should be noted that in the absence of regular enforcement, the 20 mph speed limit signs could have limited potential in reducing speeds. Increased periodic enforcement should be provided within reduced speed zones.

Reducing school zone speed limits below 25 mph is not allowable on roadways with more than two vehicular travel lanes, within non-residential districts, or when non-school speed Packet Page 376
6 limits exceed 30 mph. For such roadways, it is suggested that other measures be considered, such as using larger school speed limit assembly signs (i.e., SCHOOL SPEED LIMIT 25 WHEN CHILDREN ARE PRESENT) and driver speed feedback signs (which cost up to $10,000 per sign).

Packet Page 377
7 City of Seaside – Recommendation
It is recommended that all of Seaside’s two-lane, residential-district roadways that front a school within school zones and that are signed at 30 mph or less be declared by ordinance or resolution to have a reduced 20 mph school zone speed limit within 500 feet of the school grounds and an extended 25 mph school zone speed limit between 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the school grounds.

Per the guidance from AB 321 and the provisions of California Vehicle Code (CVC) 627, this recommendation is supported by the following:
• The collision rates for many streets in Seaside are higher than the statewide average rate for roadways of the same type;
• Unsafe speed is a primary collision factor for many streets in Seaside; • The prevailing speeds, as determined by traffic engineering measurements, are higher than the posted speed limits; and
• The roadways consider residential density as defined by CVC 627 CVC 627 and AB 321 aims to enhance the safety of children walking and bicycling to school by permitting the lead agency to consider pedestrian and bicyclist safety when establishing speed limits in school zones. As documented in the September 2021 update to Seaside’s Engineering and Traffic Surveys report, the prevailing speeds, collision records and residential density on streets in school zones justify the recommendation to reduce the speed limits to 20 mph on streets that front schools within 500 feet of the school grounds and an extended 25 mph speed limit between 500 and 1,000 feet of the school grounds.

Table 2 includes school zone speed limit recommendations for each of the roadways eligible for 20 mph speed limits and the locations of the required transition zones of 25 mph on those roadways with existing speed limits in excess of 25 mph.

Appendix D includes maps that illustrate the locations of the recommended residential district street speed limit zones.

Packet Page 378
8 Table 2: Recommended School Zone Speed Limits
School/Street Posted
Speed
Limit
85th
Percentile
Speed
Total Travel
Lanes
Start End Recommendation
Central Coast High School
Coe Avenue 30 MPH 35 MPH 2 Sea Ridge Court 100’ E of Dahlia Drive
Reduce to 20
MPH
Coe Avenue 30 MPH 35 MPH 2 Monterey Road Sea Ridge Court 25 MPH Transition Zone
Coe Avenue 30 MPH 37 MPH 2 600’ E of Dahlia
Drive
100’ E of Dahlia
Drive
25 MPH Transition
Zone
Del Rey Wood Elementary School
Tweed Street 25 MPH 31 MPH 2 Plumas Avenue 500’ N of Plumas Avenue
Reduce to 20
MPH
Kimball
Avenue
30 MPH 34 MPH 2 500’ W of San
Lucas Street
500’ E of San Lucas
Street
Reduce to 20
MPH
Kimball
Avenue
30 MPH 34 MPH 2 120 W of Shafer
Street
500’ W of San Lucas
Street
25 MPH Transition
Zone
Kimball
Avenue
30 MPH 34 MPH 2 100’ E of Madera
Court
500’ E of San Lucas
Street
25 MPH Transition
Zone
Noche Buena
Street
25 MPH N/A * 2 Kimball Avenue Plumas Avenue Reduce to 20 MPH
Plumas
Avenue
25 MPH N/A * 2 Tweed Street 500’ E of sidewalk
entry/driveway
(Approximately 200’
E of Noche Buena
Street)
Reduce to 20
MPH
Highland Elementary School
Sonoma
Avenue
25 MPH 27 MPH 2 Yosemite Street Mescal Street Reduce to 20 MPH
Yosemite
Street
25 MPH 32 MPH 2 Valencia Court 500’ north of the
mid-block crosswalk
Reduce to 20
MPH
Marshall Elementary School
Normandy
Road
25 MPH 27 MPH 2 300’ E of
intersection with
General Jim Moore
Blvd
500’ E of sidewalk
entry/school
parking lot
Reduce to 20
MPH
Ord Terrace Elementary School
Ord Grove
Avenue
25 MPH 35 MPH 2 500’ W of
Buchanan Street
500’ E of Buchanan
Street
Reduce to 20
MPH
La Salle
Avenue
30 MPH 30 MPH 2 100’ W of Mariposa
Street
100’ W of Napa
Street
Reduce to 20
MPH
La Salle
Avenue
30 MPH 35 MPH 2 Mendocino Court Yosemite Street 25 MPH Transition Zone
La Salle
Avenue
30 MPH 30 MPH 2 Havana Street 100’ W of Napa
Street
25 MPH Transition
Zone
Packet Page 379
9 School/Street Posted
Speed
Limit
85th
Percentile
Speed
Total Travel
Lanes
Start End Recommendation
International School of Monterey
Yosemite
Street
25 MPH 33 MPH 2 San Pablo Avenue 370’ S of Mingo
Avenue
Reduce to 20
MPH
Mescal Street
/ San Pablo
Avenue
25 MPH/
30 MPH
29 MPH 2 500’ N/W of
Mescal / San
Pablo intersection
500’ S of Mescal /
San Pablo
intersection
Reduce to 20
MPH
San Pablo
Avenue
30 MPH 35 MPH 2 50’ E of Highland
Street
500’ N/W of Mescal
/ San Pablo
intersection
25 MPH Transition
Zone
Monterey Bay Christian School
Hilby Avenue 30 MPH 36 MPH 2 50’ W of Shafer
Street
50’ E of Fargo Court Reduce to 20
MPH
Hilby Avenue 30 MPH 36 MPH 2 Siddall Street 50’ W of Shafer Street
25 MPH Transition
Zone
Hilby Avenue 30 MPH 36 MPH 2 Noche Buena
Street
50’ E of Fargo Court 25 MPH Transition
Zone
Peninsula Adventist School
Mescal Street
/ Plumas
Avenue
25 MPH N/A * 2 500’ N of school
driveway (Mescal
Street)
225’ E of Mescal
Street (Plumas
Avenue)
Reduce to 20
MPH
Seaside High School
Noche Buena
Street
25 MPH N/A** 2 Ord Avenue Circle Avenue Reduce to 20
MPH
Monterey Bay Charter School
Waring Street
(one-way N/B)
25 MPH N/A** 1 500’ N of Elm
Avenue
500’ S of school midblock entranceReduce to 20
MPH
Flores Street 25 MPH N/A** 2 Sonoma Street 500’ S of Sonoma Street
Reduce to 20
MPH
Flores Street 25 MPH N/A** 2 Elm Avenue Broadway Street Reduce to 20 MPH
Sonoma
Avenue
25 MPH N/A** 2 Waring Street 500’ W of Waring
Street
Reduce to 20
MPH
Sonoma
Avenue
25 MPH N/A** 2 Harding Street 500’ E of Harding
Street
Reduce to 20
MPH
Elm Avenue 25 MPH N/A** 2 Waring Street 500’ W of Waring Street
Reduce to 20
MPH
Darwin Street
/ St Elmo
Street /
Harding Street
25 MPH N/A** 1 Sonoma Avenue Sonoma Avenue Reduce to 20 MPH
Harding Street
/ Elm Avenue
/ Darwin
Street
25 MPH N/A** 1 Broadway Avenue Broadway Avenue Reduce to 20 MPH
* Traffic volumes on these street segments are too low to conduct accurate speed surveys. ** Traffic surveys were not conducted at this location.

Packet Page 380
10 Appendix A
Assembly Bill No. 321
CHAPTER 384
An act to amend Section 22358.4 of the Vehicle Code, relating to vehicles. [Approved by Governor October 10, 2007. Filed with Secretary of State October 10, 2007.] AB 321, Nava. Vehicles: prima facie speed limits: schools. (1) Existing law establishes a 25 miles per hour prima facie limit when approaching or passing a school building or the grounds thereof, contiguous to a highway and posted up to 500 feet away from the school grounds, with a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign, while children are going to or leaving the school either during school hours or during the noon recess period. The prima facie limit also applies when approaching or passing school grounds that are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier while the grounds are in use by children and the highway is posted with a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign. A violation of that prima facie limit is an infraction.

Existing law allows a city or county, based on an engineering and traffic survey that the prima facie speed limit of 25 miles per hour is more than is reasonable or safe, by ordinance or resolution, to determine and declare a prima facie speed limit of 20 or 15 miles per hour, whichever is justified as the appropriate speed limit by that survey.

This bill would additionally allow a city or county to establish in a residence district, on a highway with a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour or slower, a 15 miles per hour prima facie limit when approaching, at a distance of less than 500 feet from, or passing, a school building or the grounds thereof, contiguous to a highway and posted with a school warning sign that indicates a speed limit of 15 miles per hour, while children are going to or leaving the school, either during school hours or during the noon recess period. The prima facie limit would also apply when approaching, at that same distance, or passing school grounds that are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier while the grounds are in use by children and the highway is posted with one of those signs.

The bill would provide that a 25 miles per hour prima facie limit in a residence district, on a highway with a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour or slower, applies, as to those local authorities, when approaching, at a distance of 500 to 1,000 feet from, one of those areas where children are going to or leaving the school, either during school hours or during the Packet Page 381
11 noon recess period, that is posted with a school warning sign that indicates a speed limit of 25 miles per hour.

The bill would require that these prima facie speed limits apply only to highways that meet certain conditions.

The bill would require a city or county that adopts a resolution or ordinance establishing revised prima facie limits to reimburse the Department of Transportation for any costs incurred by that department in implementing the bill.

By authorizing a change in the prima facie limits, the bill would expand the scope of an existing crime, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. (2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 22358.4 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read:
22358.4. (a) (1) Whenever a local authority determines upon the basis of an engineering and traffic survey that the prima facie speed limit of 25 miles per hour established by paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 22352 is more than is reasonable or safe, the local authority may, by ordinance or resolution, determine and declare a prima facie speed limit of 20 or 15 miles per hour, whichever is justified as the appropriate speed limit by that survey.
(2) An ordinance or resolution adopted under paragraph (1) shall not be effective until appropriate signs giving notice of the speed limit are erected upon the highway and, in the case of a state highway, until the ordinance is approved by the Department of Transportation and the appropriate signs are erected upon the highway. (b) (1) Notwithstanding subdivision (a) or any other provision of law, a local authority may, by ordinance or resolution, determine and declare prima facie speed limits as follows:
(A) A 15 miles per hour prima facie limit in a residence district, on a highway with a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour or slower, when approaching, at a distance of less than 500 feet from, or passing, a school building or the grounds of a school building, contiguous to a highway and posted with a school warning sign that indicates a speed limit of 15 miles per hour, while children are going to or leaving the school, either during school hours Packet Page 382
12 or during the noon recess period. The prima facie limit shall also apply when approaching, at a distance of less than 500 feet from, or passing, school grounds that are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier while the grounds are in use by children and the highway is posted with a school warning sign that indicates a speed limit of 15 miles per hour.
(B) A 25 miles per hour prima facie limit in a residence district, on a highway with a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour or slower, when approaching, at a distance of 500 to 1,000 feet from, a school building or the grounds thereof, contiguous to a highway and posted with a school warning sign that indicates a speed limit of 25 miles per hour, while children are going to or leaving the school, either during school hours or during the noon recess period. The prima facie limit shall also apply when approaching, at a distance of 500 to 1,000 feet from, school grounds that are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier while the grounds are in use by children and the highway is posted with a school warning sign that indicates a speed limit of 25 miles per hour. (2) The prima facie limits established under paragraph (1) apply only to highways that meet all of the following conditions:
(A) A maximum of two traffic lanes.
(B) A maximum posted 30 miles per hour prima facie speed limit immediately prior to and after the school zone.
(3) The prima facie limits established under paragraph (1) apply to all lanes of an affected highway, in both directions of travel.
(4) When determining the need to lower the prima facie speed limit, the local authority shall take the provisions of Section 627 into consideration. (5) (A) An ordinance or resolution adopted under paragraph (1) shall not be effective until appropriate signs giving notice of the speed limit are erected upon the highway and, in the case of a state highway, until the ordinance is approved by the Department of Transportation and the appropriate signs are erected upon the highway. (B) For purposes of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1), school warning signs indicating a speed limit of 15 miles per hour may be placed at a distance up to 500 feet away from school grounds.
(C) For purposes of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1), school warning signs indicating a speed limit of 25 miles per hour may be placed at any distance between 500 and 1,000 feet away from the school grounds.

Packet Page 383
13 (D) A local authority shall reimburse the Department of Transportation for all costs incurred by the department under this subdivision.

SEC. 2. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution.

Packet Page 384
14 Appendix B
California Vehicle Code 627
DIVISION 1. WORDS AND PHRASES DEFINED [100 - 680]
(Division 1 enacted by Stats. 1959, Ch. 3. )
627.
(a) “Engineering and traffic survey,” as used in this code, means a survey of highway and traffic conditions in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation for use by state and local authorities.
(b) An engineering and traffic survey shall include, among other requirements deemed necessary by the department, consideration of all of the following:
(1) Prevailing speeds as determined by traffic engineering measurements. (2) Accident records.
(3) Highway, traffic, and roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver. (c) When conducting an engineering and traffic survey, local authorities, in addition to the factors set forth in paragraphs (1) to (3), inclusive, of subdivision (b) may consider all of the following:
(1) Residential density, if any of the following conditions exist on the particular portion of highway and the property contiguous thereto, other than a business district:
(A) Upon one side of the highway, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 13 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures.
(B) Upon both sides of the highway, collectively, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 16 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures.
(C) The portion of highway is longer than one-quarter of a mile but has the ratio of separate dwelling houses or business structures to the length of the highway described in either subparagraph (A) or (B).
(2) Pedestrian and bicyclist safety.
(Amended by Stats. 2000, Ch. 45, Sec. 1. Effective January 1, 2001.) Packet Page 385
15 Appendix C
California MUTCD 2014 Edition (Revision 6)
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1 and 2, as amended for use in California)
Section 7B.15 School Speed Limit Assembly
EXTENDED 25 MPH AND/OR REDUCED SPEEDS IN SCHOOL ZONES
Option:

A local authority may declare a 20 or 15 mph prima facie speed limit within 500 feet of a school building or school grounds and an extended 25 mph prima facie speed limit within 500 to 1000 feet from a school or school grounds.

Support:

The extended 25 mph school speed zone can provide a progressive speed reduction.

Standard:

If the local authority declares by ordinance or resolution the above prima facie speed limits, all of the following criteria shall be met:

A. Street (or highway) is in a residential district.

B. Street (or highway) outside of a school zone has a posted speed limit no greater than 30 mph.

C. Street (or highway) has no more than a total of two through traffic lanes (one in each direction or two in one direction).

D. The reduced school zone speed limit of 20 or 15 mph is within 500 feet of school grounds.

E. The extended school zone speed limit of 25 mph is within 500 to 1000 feet of school grounds.

When used, a local ordinance or resolution adopted to establish a 20 or 15 mph reduced school zone speed limit and/or an extended 25 mph school zone speed limit shall not be effective until School Speed Limit Assembly C (CA) giving notice of the speed limit(s) is erected upon the highway.

On a State highway, the ordinance or resolution shall not be effective until the ordinance or resolution has been approved by Caltrans and appropriate school zone speed signs are erected upon the State highway.

For purposes of a 20 or 15 mph reduced prima facie speed limit, School Speed Limit Assembly C (CA) indicating a speed limit of 20 or 15 mph shall be placed at a distance up Packet Page 386
16 to 500 feet away from school grounds. For purposes of an extended 25 mph prima facie speed limit, School Speed Limit Assembly C (CA) indicating a speed limit of 25 mph shall be placed at any distance between 500 to 1,000 feet away from school grounds. Refer to Figure 7B-103(CA).

The established school speed limits shall be effective when children are going to or leaving the school, either during school hours or during the noon recess hour. The school speed limits shall also apply when the school grounds are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier while the grounds are in use by children (this condition can apply at any time of day or any day of the week).

The determination to reduce a prima facie speed limit to 20 or 15 mph and/or extend a 25 mph school zone speed limit, as described above, shall be documented in writing, in an engineering study. The engineering study shall identify the provisions of Section 627 of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) that support the reduced and/or extended school zone speed limit(s).

Guidance:

When preparing an engineering study pursuant to the Standard above, the local authority should cite all elements of an Engineering and Traffic Survey, as discussed in CVC Section 627 of the Vehicle Code, that support the need for a reduced speed limit of 20 or 15 mph and/or an extended 25 mph school zone speed limit.

Support:

The documentation of prevailing speeds found in CVC Section 627 can be used to establish an existing speed profile for the school zone, but the 85th percentile speed is not used to set the reduced or extended school speed limit.

Standard:

The local authority shall reimburse Caltrans for all costs incurred by Caltrans under this section.

Section 7B.16 Reduced School Speed Limit Ahead Sign (S4-5, S4-5a) Guidance:

A Reduced School Speed Limit Ahead (S4-5, S4-5a) sign (see Figure 7B-1 or 7B-1(CA)) should be used to inform road users of a reduced speed zone where the speed limit is being reduced by more than 10 mph, or where engineering judgment indicates that advance notice would be appropriate for the School Advance Warning Assembly D (CA).

Standard:

If used, the Reduced School Speed Limit Ahead sign shall be followed by a School Speed Limit sign or a School Speed Limit Assembly C (CA).

Packet Page 387
17 The speed limit displayed on the Reduced School Speed Limit Ahead sign shall be identical to the speed limit displayed on the subsequent School Speed Limit sign or School Speed Limit Assembly C (CA).

EXTENDED 25 MPH AND/OR REDUCED SPEEDS IN SCHOOL ZONES
Guidance:

For school area traffic control with a reduced school zone speed limit of 20 mph and/or an extended school zone speed limit of 25 mph in a residential district, the Reduced Speed School Zone Ahead (S4-5, S4-5a) sign should be used to give advance notice of a reduced 15 mph school zone speed limit and/or an extended school zone speed limit of 25 mph.

Option:

For school area traffic control with a reduced school zone speed limit of 20 mph and/or an extended school zone speed limit of 25 mph in a residential district, the Reduced Speed School Zone Ahead (S4-5, S4-5a) sign may be used to give advance notice of a reduced 20 mph school zone speed limit and/or an extended school zone speed limit of 25 mph.

Packet Page 388
18 Packet Page 389
19 Appendix D
Packet Page 390
Central Coast High School, Seaside, Ca
Central Coast
High School
P ac fi ciC er s D t
r vi e
Pac fi c C er
s
Dt
r vi
e
Coe Avenue
Dahlia Drive
Sea R di ge C tSea R di ge Ct
Monterey R oadMonterey Road
LEGEND Primary School Zone (20 MPH) 25 MPH Transition Zone Pedestrian access point to school campus Packet Page 391
Del Rey Woods Elementary School, Seaside, Ca
Del Rey Woods
Elementary School
Plumas Avenue
Tweed Street
San Lucas StreetShafer StreetModoc Street
Madera CourtWaring Street
Noche Buena Street
H gi
l h ander D ir
ev
H gi
l h ander D
ir
ev
Kimball Avenue
LEGEND Primary School Zone (20 MPH) 25 MPH Transition Zone Pedestrian access point to school campus Packet Page 392
Highland Elementary School, Seaside, Ca
Highland
Elementary School
Sonoma Avenue
Ancon Street
Wanda Avenue
Wanda Avenue
Yosemite Street
Mescal Street
General Jim Moore Boulevard
LEGEND Primary School Zone (20 MPH) 25 MPH Transition Zone Pedestrian access point to school campus Valencia C t. Valencia Ct.

Packet Page 393
George C. Marshall Elementary School, Seaside, Ca
General Jim Moore Boulevard
George C. Marshall
Elementary School
Normandy Road
nat ner aC
oR
da
n
at n
er a
C
oR
da
hC
vir D l epa
e
hC
vir Dl e
p
a
e
LEGEND Primary School Zone (20 MPH) Pedestrian access point to school campus Packet Page 394
Ord Terrace Elementary School, Seaside, Ca
Ord Terrace
Elementary
School
Ord Grove Avenue Yosemite Street
Mendocino Street
St Helena Street
Highland StreetMariposa StreetLincoln Street
Napa Street
Havana StreetLisbon Court
Juarez Street
Baldwin Court
Buchanan St
LEGEND Primary School Zone (20 MPH) 25 MPH Transition Zone Pedestrian access point to school campus La Salle Avenue
Packet Page 395
International School of Monterey, Seaside, Ca
General Jim Moore Boulevard
International
School of Monterey
San Pablo Avenue
Mingo Avenue
Yosemite Street
Granada Street
San Pablo Avenue
Mescal Street
Mescal Stre
et
LEGEND Primary School Zone (20 MPH) 25 MPH Transition Zone Pedestrian access point to school campus Packet Page 396
Monterey Bay Christian School, Seaside, Ca
Monterey
Bay
Christian
School
Hilby Avenue
Rousch Avenue
Siddall Street
Shafer Street
Wheeler Street
San Lucas Street
Fargo Court
Noche Buena Street
Prospect Street
Harcourt Avenue
LEGEND Primary School Zone (20 MPH) 25 MPH Transition Zone Pedestrian access point to school campus Packet Page 397
Peninsula Adventist School, Seaside, Ca
Plumas Avenue
Kimball Avenue
La Honda Court
Highland Street
Mescal Street
General Jim Moore Boulevard
Peninsula Adventist
School
LEGEND Primary School Zone (20 MPH) Pedestrian access point to school campus Packet Page 398
Monterey Bay Charter School, Seaside, Ca
Monterey
Bay
Charter
School
Sonoma Avenue
Elm Avenue
Broadway Avenue Flores Street Flores Street Harding Street Harding Street Darwin Street Darwin Street
Luzen Street
Vallejo Street
Waring Street
Judson Street
Luxton Street
Noche Buena Street
Yosemite Street
LEGEND Primary School Zone (20 MPH) Pedestrian access point to school campus Packet Page 399

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 9.C.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Victor Damiani, Finance Director
DATE: March 15, 2022
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE ANNUAL MID-YEAR

FINANCIAL REPORT AND ADOPTING PROPOSED CHANGES TO

THE BUDGET OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
2021-2022

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution accepting the annual mid-year financial report and adopting proposed changes to the budget for the Fiscal Year 2021-2022.

BACKGROUND
This item provides the City Council with an opportunity to review the Annual Operating and Capital Budgets as of mid-year and amend the budget as deemed necessary. The City's Finance Director will provide a presentation summarizing the mid-year financial report which is attached to the agenda item.

FISCAL IMPACT
The City's general fund fiscal year operating budget is projected to produce a surplus of approximately $4 million. Staff are requesting budget increases in the general fund of approximately $1.7 million.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Mid Year Report 2021-22
Packet Page 400

Item No. 9.C. Page 2 of 2
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 401
RESOLUTION NO. 22- XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE

ACCEPTING THE ANNUAL MID YEAR FINANCIAL REPORT AND ADOPTING

PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE BUDGET OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022
WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Seaside reviewed and adopted the 2021-2022 Annual Operating Budget in June of 2021; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducts an annual mid-year review of the Operating Budget; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Seaside has considered the mid-year review and the proposed changes to the FY 2021-2022 Annual Budget; and WHEREAS, the City Council is required to approve changes to the 2021-2022 Operating Budget by resolution.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Seaside accepts the annual Mid-year Financial Report and adopts the proposed modifications to the 2021-2022 Annual Operating Budget, as detailed in the Mid-year Financial Report, attached, as may be modified and incorporated by staff, as authorized.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Seaside duly held on the 15th day of March 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:
__________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk
APPROVED TO FORM:
______________________________
Sheri L. Damon, City Attorney
Packet Page 402

Mid-Year FY 2021-22 Financial
Report
(Unaudited)

Packet Page 403

CITY OF SEASIDE
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 2-3 General Fund FY 2021-22 Budget Recap………………………………………………………………............. 4 General Fund Revenues Summary......................................................................................... 5-7 General Fund Expenditure Summary..................................................................................... 8-10 Budget Amendments............................................................................................................. 10 Long Term Forecast................................................................................................................ 11-12 General Fund Net Results and Budget Outlook..................................................................... 13 Budget Amendment Requests............................................................................................... 14-15 Other Funds ........................................................................................................................... 16 Packet Page 404

CITY OF SEASIDE
2 INTRODUCTION
This is the second quarterly report for Fiscal Year 2021- 22, and comprises results for the six month period
ending December 31, 2021. While a few other notable
funds are reviewed, this report focuses primarily on the City’s general fund. General Fund operating revenues
and expenditures as compared to previous years are
presented, and any notable changes or trends in these
numbers are explained. The report is presented on a
cash basis, which means that revenues are recognized
at the time revenues are received and expenditures are
recognized at the time payment is processed. The City
does not accrue any revenues or expenditures in the
second quarter.

The purpose of this report is twofold. First, it ensures that the City is consistently monitoring its revenues and expenditures so that it may proactively respond to
unanticipated changes or emerging trends. Second, and
equally important, consistent reporting increases the
transparency of the City’s finances. Quarterly reporting provides the City Council, City Administration, taxpayers and ratepayers with information that demonstrates the
City is meeting this standard.

The information in this report is the most accurate and up-to-date information available at the time of
publication. It is not meant to be inclusive of all financial and accounting transactions. It is intended only to
provide the Council, Management and the public with
an overview of the state of the City’s general fiscal
condition. It should be noted that this report is not an audited financial statement, and the numbers provided
herein are preliminary and subject to change as the year progresses. No data on revenues and expenditures are
final until the City has completed its annual audit and finalized its Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
(ACFR), which is released in the winter of each year for the prior fiscal year

ECONOMIC OUTLOOK
In March of 2020, the City declared a local emergency in response to the COVID-19 worldwide pandemic. The
ensuing statewide shelter in place orders coupled with
various levels of “reopening” created financial turmoil in the fourth quarter of FY 2019-20 and continues to wreak havoc on the U.S. and worldwide economies at all levels.

The second quarter of fiscal year 2022 represents the
seventh quarter of the COVID-19 pandemic. Till now, the economy has recovered surprisingly well due to two
prime factors; the development and distribution of a
vaccine for the virus and federal stimulus dollars.

Unfortunately as 2021 has progressed, infection,
hospitalization, and death rates have fluctuated to the positive with the rollout of the vaccine and then again to the negative with the delta and omicron variant surges
coupled with vaccine hesitancy and in some cases
refusal. Even with some level of fluctuation and
hesitancy, the distribution of highly effective vaccines has considerably reduced the economic risks from
COVID-19.

NATIONAL & STATE ECONOMIC OUTLOOK
Hdl (The City’s revenue enhancement consultant)
anticipates the national economy will grow 3% in
FY21-22, with a forecast of slowing to 2.0% in FY 22-

23. • California’s unemployment rate is expected
to continue declining from 7.6% in FY 20-21
to 6.0% in FY 21-22 and further declining to

5.2% in FY 22-23
• Sales & Use Tax growth is expected to remain
high at 10.8% in FY 21-22 before declining to

3.5% in FY 22-23
• California’s median existing home price is
expected to increase from $662k in FY 21-22
to $681k in FY 22-23
Source: Hdl
Since the start of the pandemic the Federal Government
has passed and implemented five economic stimulus
packages totaling over $5 trillion. The Federal Reserve also lowered the Federal Funds rate to between 0% and
.25% where it remains today. In many ways the federal
stimulus may have slowed the economic damage caused
by the health and safety response to the pandemic and
stabilized the economy. With some signs of rising
inflation the Federal Reserve is expected to begin raising the Federal Funds rate in 2022. Many economists believe inflation in the economy will be short lived and comes as Packet Page 405

CITY OF SEASIDE
3 Q2 FY 2021-22 FINANCIAL REPORT
a result of supply chain bottle necks and staffing
shortages which will recede with time.

LOCAL ECONOMIC OUTLOOK
At the local level, the City of Seaside unemployment rate increased from 3.1% in March of 2020 to 19.0% in April
of 2020 and currently stands at 2.2% . Many of the City’s small businesses continue to struggle due to various
factors including staffing shortages and lost revenue
during times of required closures. In response, the City of Seaside City Council approved a $150k façade
improvement program to help businesses improve their
store fronts and attract more business. Additionally, the City was awarded $8.9M of American Rescue Plan Act
funding and continues to assess ways to further assist
local businesses.

Additionally the City will continue to pursue FEMA
reimbursement for emergency response costs as
appropriate as well as various other grant sources.

The City of Seaside unexpectedly experienced strong
results in several business sectors thoughout the
pandemic, including Auto Sales, Online Sales, and
Building and Construction Materials. Not all sectors of the local economy fared as well. One major sector of
Seaside’s local economy is based on tourism. Early in the pandemic the the local Hotel Tax (Transient Occupancy
Tax) dropped off severly and served as a clear indicator of just how hard that sector was hit. With the lifting of many travel restrictions beginning in June of 2021,
however, this sector experienced some much needed
relief. TOT collections showed strong signs of recovery throughout the 2021 Summer months.

Even as some particular small businesses continue to
struggle, overall the local economy has recovered from
it’s pandemic era lows and is now showing signs of
growth beyond it’s pre-pandemic levels.

Packet Page 406

CITY OF SEASIDE
4 Q2 FY 2021-22 FINANCIAL REPORT

GENERAL FUND
FY 2021-22 BUDGET RECAP:

In June of 2021, the City of Seaside City Council adopted the FY 2021-22 annual budget. Due to a projection of significant Revenue recovery and growth, a surplus budget was adopted including an operating surplus of $107k and a capital budget surplus of $3.8M.

The operating budget showed a surplus even while planning to re-staff the City’s workforce, return pandemic era labor concessions, and provide for a cost of living adjustment. Personnel costs, the City’s largest cost, were budgeted to increase by approximately $5.1M over the previous fiscal year budget. The staffing plan included the addition of 28 positions that were either new or had been frozen in the previous fiscal year. The City also committed to continue recruiting for 17 positions that were budgeted but remained vacant. Budget line items such as equipment, supplies and vehicles were increased to coincide with the staffing ramp up. For a second year running, the City appropriated funds ($320k) for grants to support community non-profits and also funded the Family and Community Support Program with an allocation of $179k.

The capital budget likewise showed a surplus. The City originally expected to receive a one-time land sale revenue of $9M.

That land-sale revenue is now expected to be realized in FY 2022-23. Additionally funding for the City’s CIP (Capital Improvement Program) in the amount of $5.2M is budgeted to come from the City’s from the City’s general fund balance.

Projects in the CIP include government buildings, parks water infrastructure, and storm water.

RESERVES:

The City’s reserve accounts are fully funded in the fiscal year 2021-22 budget at the following amounts:

Emergency Reserve - 15% $ 5,879,859
Special Reserve - 10% 3,919,906
Capital Reserve - 5% 1,959,953
Total Reserves $ 11,759,718
Operating Capital Total Budget
FY22 FY22 FY22
Revenues $ 39,306,339 $ 9,000,000 $ 46,837,410
Expenditures (39,199,061) (5,214,617) (37,994,160)
Net Transfers - - (4,950,589)
Surplus (Deficit) $ 107,278 $ 3,785,383 $ 3,892,661
General Fund Changes in
Fund Balance:

Packet Page 407

CITY OF SEASIDE
5 Q2 FY 2021-22 FINANCIAL REPORT
Q2 GENERAL FUND REVENUES:

Total budgeted revenues for FY 2021-22 including one-time sales and transfers are $48.6M. Excluding the one-time sales the budget is $39.6M. This compares to a FY 2020-21 budget of $30.7M; a budgeted revenue increase of nearly $8.9M.

The following table and chart compares second quarter results for FY22 with second quarter results for FY20 and FY21.

FY21 is the pandemic year while FY20 may be considered pre-pandemic.

As can be seen in the table, revenues in the second quarter totaled $20.4M which is 19% or $3.2M higher than the second quarter of the previous year and 21% or $3.5M higher than FY 2019-20. The $20.4M equals 51% of total budgeted revenue. By comparison, at the same time in the previous year, the City had realized 56% of total budgeted revenue. This indicates that actual revenue collections are once again trending better than budgeted revenue. To be above 50% at the mid-point of the year bodes very well in light of the fact that certain major revenue sources are received two full months in arears.

Results:

Q2 - 50% Q2 Year-End Vaiance vs.

Budget
FY22 FY22 $ % $ % FY22 $
Sales and Use Tax $ 8,015,583 $ 7,401,958 $ 585,360 9% $ 1,116,204 18% $ 18,697,536 $ 2,666,370 Property Tax 2,768,016 2,710,279 240,631 10% 637,962 31% 5,515,349 (20,682) Transient Occupancy Tax 1,291,373 1,945,084 810,708 71% (263,055) -12% 4,052,259 1,469,513 Business License Tax 355,948 668,249 66,160 11% (52,820) -7% 759,374 47,478 Utility User Tax 1,300,692 1,222,876 (126,839) -9% (68,860) -5% 2,601,383 - Transfer In 883,749 983,684 983,684 n/a 983,684 n/a 1,767,498 - Licenses & Permits 198,207 457,558 233,554 104% 154,541 51% 655,765 259,350 Miscellanous-Other Revenue 312,487 411,088 256,485 166% 216,075 111% 648,682 23,708 Marijuana Receipts Tax 641,617 648,229 (41,642) -6% 307,618 90% 1,296,458 13,224 Fees & Charges 389,500 379,354 218,834 136% (72,070) -16% 704,158 (74,843) Income from Investments 241,622 157,833 98,012 164% 143,187 978% 429,711 (53,533) Grant Revenue 326,168 487,390 (139,677) -22% 335,006 220% 1,369,778 717,442 Fines & Forfeitures 34,958 64,514 251 0% (8,768) -12% 99,472 29,556 Other Agency Revenue 245,538 84,232 (491,326) -85% (516,939) -86% 205,383 (285,693) Franchise Fees 721,687 676,314 420,808 165% 397,415 142% 1,443,374 - Motor Vehicle In-Lieu 2,075,309 2,089,039 105,375 n/a 208,676 n/a 4,178,077 27,460 Revenues by Source $ 19,802,454 $ 20,387,679 $ 3,220,377 19% $ 3,517,858 21% $ 44,424,257 $ 4,819,349 Budget Projection
General Fund Revenues:

Variances:

Year over Year
Vs. FY21
Year over Year
Vs. FY20
$7.4
$2.7 $1.9
$0.7 $1.2
$6.8
$2.5
$1.1 $0.6 $1.3
$6.3
$2.1 $2.2
$0.7 $1.3
$-
$2.0
$4.0
$6.0
$8.0
Sales and Use Tax Property Tax Transient Occupancy Tax Business License Tax Utility User Tax Millions
Three Year Comparison - Top Five Revenues
FY22 FY21 FY20
Packet Page 408

CITY OF SEASIDE
6 Q2 FY 2021-22 FINANCIAL REPORT
DISCUSSION OF SIGNIFICANT REVENUE VARIANCES:
 Sales and Use Tax
In the second quarter of the fiscal year $7.4M of sales and use taxes were collected. This equatesto a $585k or 9% increase over the same quarter in the previous year. Sales and Use Tax projections are provided to the City by Hdl, which is a revenue enhancement consultant used widely by Cities throughout California.

The City’s sales and use taxes continue to perform quite well particularly in the areas of auto sales, cannabis retail and online sales. Demand for and sales of new and used vehicles remained high despite rising prices related to supply shortages. This continues the trend that emerged in the previous fiscal year. Sales tax generated by building and construction remain strong and the restaurants and hotels sector has begun to recover. With more people travelling and prices up at the pumps, the fuel and service stations category is likewise on the rise. As the year progresses it is expected that sales and use tax will remain strong but begin to level out in the following year. Year-end projections are $2.7M above budget.
 Property Tax
In the second quarter of the fiscal year $2.7M of property taxes were collected. This equates to a $241k or 10% increase over the same quarter in the previous year. Property tax projections are provided to the City by Hdl, which is a revenue enhancement consultant used widely by Cities throughout California.

The City of Seaside experienced a net taxable value increase of 5.3% for the 2021/22 tax roll, which was modestly more than the increase experienced countywide at 3.9%. Growth in home sales strengthened in the summer of 2020 and many cities in California saw an increase in properties for sale. Sales price increases in 2020 were reflected on the 2021/22 tax rolls. Sale prices grew due to low inventory and the declining mortgage rates. These conditions have continued to cause prices to rise in 2021. The median sale price of a detached single family residential home in Seaside from January through November was $702,500. This represents a $103,500 (17.28%) increase in median sale price from 2020.

While these results are certainly good for the City’s finances, they also further exacerbate the home affordability challenge in Seaside and throughout the state. Year-end projections are on target for the budgeted amount.  Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)
In the second quarter of the fiscal year $1.9M of TOTs were collected. This equates to an $810k or 71% increase over the same quarter in the previous year. It is important to note that this increase is in comparison to a time of imposed capacity restrictions as well as a high level of caution (related to perceived level of trust) on the part of potential tourists. Recent results from hotels and entertainment venues demonstrate consumer desire to travel and spend more and likely is a reaction to the long months of COVID related restrictions. When compared to the pre-pandemic year of FY20 there is a decrease of $263 thousand or 12%. While this sector is recovering faster than the City predicted at the time of budget preparation, it is still not quite recovered to pre-pandemic levels. Year-end projections are $1.5M above budget.
 Business License Tax
In the second quarter of the fiscal year $668k of Business License Taxes were collected. This represents an increase of $66k or 11% over the previous fiscal year. When compared to the pre-pandemic year of FY2019-20, the result is a decrease of $53k or 7%. This indicates that local businesses on the whole are on track to recover to pre-pandemic levels. Year-end projections are $47k above budget.

Packet Page 409

CITY OF SEASIDE
7 Q2 FY 2021-22 FINANCIAL REPORT
 Utility User Tax (UUT)
In the second quarter of the fiscal year $1.2M of Utility User Taxes were collected. This represents a decrease of $127k or 9% over the previous year. As compared to FY 2019-20 the result is $69k lower or 5%. Year-end projections are on target with budget.
 Marijuana Receipts Tax
The Marijuana Receipts Tax was a new tax revenue for the City beginning in FY 2019-20. The second quarter of FY 2019- 20 showed a relatively modest $140k in receipts as operations got under way. The following three quarters ballooned significantly so that the fiscal year total was $1.2M. Second quarter receipts for FY2021-22 were $648k and represents a small decrease of $42k over the previous fiscal year second quarter. This indicates that this new revenue source has leveled off and is likely no longer in a growth phase. Year-end projections are on track with budget with a modest increase anticipated or $13k.
 Licenses & Permits
In the second quarter of the fiscal year $458k of Licenses & Permits were collected. This equates to a $233k or 104% increase over the same quarter in the previous year. Much of this revenue increase is due to the Shea Homes housing development in progress at the Golf Course. As the development is completed these new homes will also drive new property tax for the City. Year-end projections are $259k above budget.  Fees and Charges
In the second quarter of the fiscal year $379k of Fees and Charges were collected. This equates to a $218k or 136% increase over the same quarter in the previous year. Much of this revenue recovery is due to the lifting of restrictions on gatherings. Programs that were unable to operate when pandemic restrictions were in place such as the community center, swim center and recreational day camps have begun generating revenue. When compared to FY20 it is clear that this revenue source has improved but has yet to fully recover. Year-end projections are $75k under budget. While this revenue source has recovered significantly, the original budget forecast appears to have been overly optimistic.

Packet Page 410

CITY OF SEASIDE
8 Q2 FY 2021-22 FINANCIAL REPORT
Q1 GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES:

Total budgeted expenditures for FY 2021-22 including transfers are $48.3M. This compares to a FY 2020-21 budget of $33.8M; a budgeted expenditure increase of nearly $14.5M. As mentioned previously personnel cost were increased by approximately $5.1M on a year over year basis. Additionally, non-personnel costs were increased by $9.4M.

EXPENDITURES BY TYPE:

As can be seen in the table, expenditures in the second quarter totaled $22.6M which is 45% or $7.1M higher than the second quarter of the previous year and 18% or $3.5M higher than FY 2019-20. Second quarter expenditures were 47% of the total fiscal year 2021-22 budget. For comparison, second quarter expenditures in the prior year were similar at 46% of the fiscal year 2020-21 budget.

DISCUSSION OF SIGNIFICANT EXPENDITURE VARIANCES BY TYPE:
 Personnel Services
As expected, Personnel Services were up $3.4M or 29% on a year over year basis considering the City’s efforts to rebuild its workforce. Also contributing to the increase are the return of pandemic era labor concessions and a cost of living adjustment. Personnel costs appear to be on target for the year, both as of mid-year and projected at year-end. Personnel Services is the largest expenditure type for the City at 61% of the total budget.

Results:

Q2 - 50% Q2 Year-End Vaiance vs.

Budget
FY22 FY22 $ % $ % FY22 $
Personnel Services $ 14,760,562 $ 14,912,432 $ 3,354,259 29% $ 508,692 4% $ 29,243,577 $ 277,547 Services & Supplies 4,323,506 3,160,377 821,633 35% 983,953 45% 8,276,881 370,131 Capital Outlay-Projects 697,462 212,888 8,967 4% (851,627) -80% 1,392,550 2,374 Debt Service 179,031 181,893 40,877 29% (485,374) -73% 360,925 (2,862) Internal Service Charge 1,061,747 1,063,505 (143,926) n/a 260,269 n/a 2,125,252 (1,759) Transfer Out 3,778,218 3,778,218 3,643,218 n/a 3,778,218 n/a 7,556,435 - Administrative Allocation (665,769) (665,736) (665,736) n/a (665,736) n/a (1,331,505) (33) Expenditures by Type $ 24,134,757 $ 22,643,578 $ 7,059,293 45% $ 3,528,395 18% $ 47,624,116 $ 645,398 General Fund Expenditures by Type:

Variances: Projection
Year over Year
Vs. FY21
Year over Year
Vs. FY20
Budget
$14.9
$3.2
$0.2
$11.6
$2.3
$0.2
$14.4
$2.2 $1.1
$-
$2.0
$4.0
$6.0
$8.0
$10.0
$12.0
$14.0
$16.0
Personnel Services Services & Supplies Capital Outlay-Projects Millions
Three Year Comparison - Top Three Expenditure Types
FY22 FY21 FY20
Packet Page 411

CITY OF SEASIDE
9 Q2 FY 2021-22 FINANCIAL REPORT
 Services & Supplies
Services and supplies were up 35% on a year over year basis yet under budget by 27%. Some high dollar items have yet to be purchased, including the Fire Department engine ($300k) and the Police Department radios ($400k). Additional expenditures expected in the second half of the year include the Sustainability & Climate Action Plan ($120k), the Plastics Ordinance Support for Small Businesses ($30k) and Police Department Body Cameras ($60k). Additionally, project work tends to pick up in the spring months. Service and Supplies costs are projected to come closer in line with budget at year-end with a 4% positive variance expected.

EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT:

As can be seen in the table above, nearly all departments were under budget in the second quarter of the year.

DISCUSSION OF SIGNIFICANT EXPENDITURE VARIANCES BY DEPARTMENT:
 Legislative Body
The Legislative Body is approximately $10k above the amount that would be expected as of the second quarter of the year. This is largely due to an inaccurate forecast of benefits costs at time of budget preparation. The department is projected to end the year $13k over budget.  Administration
The administration department is approximately $74k above the amount that would be expected as of the second quarter of the year. This is largely due to the unforeseen departure of the City Manager and the resulting payout of accrued leave. Additionally, cost are high as the HR Director fills the position of Acting City Manager. This budget overage is offset by personnel cost savings of $48k in the Human Resources/Risk Management department. The department is projected to end the year $74k over budget.  Fire Department
The Fire Department is approximately $305k above the amount that would be expected as of the second quarter of the year when compared to the adopted budget. The budget overage is largely due to overtime costs as the Results:

General Fund Expenditures by Q2 - 50% Q2 Year-End Vaiance vs.

Budget
Department: FY22 FY22 $ % $ % FY22 $
Legislative Body $ 75,719 $ 85,550 $ (57,199) -40% $ (209,227) -71% $ 163,958 $ (12,521) Administration 115,349 188,946 (23,711) -11% (52,049) -22% 304,295 (73,596) City Clerk 87,566 81,618 (89,820) -52% (106,349) -57% 160,733 14,398 City Attorney 238,629 144,071 (71,686) -33% (233,914) -62% 432,700 44,558 Human Resources 125,148 87,285 (212,431) -71% (277,272) -76% 144,764 105,532 Finance Department (11,202) (17,055) (516,513) -103% (695,091) -103% (23,859) 1,456 Police Department 7,942,849 7,653,961 1,829,092 31% 962,524 14% 15,765,092 120,606 Fire Department 4,985,777 5,290,940 1,452,398 38% 80,921 2% 9,991,815 (20,261) Building and Code Enforcement 619,746 538,702 236,837 78% 274,892 104% 1,158,200 81,293 Community, Housing & Economic Development 2,044,237 1,248,807 622,248 99% 323,642 35% 4,009,387 79,088 Public Works/Engineering 1,808,387 1,514,498 (861,301) -36% (857,829) -36% 3,396,324 220,450 Public Works/Engineering (Transfers) 3,778,218 3,778,218 3,607,114 2108% 3,778,218 n/a 7,556,435 - Recreation 2,324,334 2,048,038 1,144,265 127% 539,930 36% 4,564,272 84,396 Expenditures by Department $ 24,134,757 $ 22,643,578 $ 7,059,292 31% $ 3,528,395 18% $ 47,624,116 $ 645,398 Variances: Projection
Year over Year
Vs. FY21
Year over Year
Vs. FY20
Budget
Packet Page 412

CITY OF SEASIDE
10 Q2 FY 2021-22 FINANCIAL REPORT
department has struggled to realize full staffing levels. The department is expected to come closer in line with budget by year-end due to a few successful recruitments for firefighters. This should help reduce overtime costs as the year progresses. Additionally, a request will be made at mid-year to increase the department’s overtime budget by $200k. At year-end the Fire department is expected to be over budget slightly by $20k.

BUDGET AMENDMENTS:

Below is a summary of budget amendments appropriated by the City Council in the first half of the year:

While some of the amendments were needed due to unforeseen costs or costs that were inadvertently omitted from the FY 2021-22 budget, others were needed due to increased construction costs (Highland Otis Park and Ellis Park).

Further, some increases were a result of Council’s decision to use unassigned fund balance to meet strategic long term goals (Broadway parking lot). As will be seen later in the report, use of fund balance will have an effect on the City’s five year forecast.

Aprroval Date Aprroval Date
MCWD Application (40,000.00) 8/19/2021 Highland Otis Park (62,669.00) 8/19/2021 Forklift (35,027.00) 9/2/2021 Ellis Park (390,818.00) 10/7/2021 Disaster Kleenup (50,000.00) 10/7/2021 Parking Lot (1,240,000.00) 10/7/2021 Parking Enforcement Vehicle (80,525.67) 11/4/2021 Laguna Grande Improvements (55,100.00) 11/18/2021 Increase CSS grant (105,459.00) 12/2/2021 Fire Station #1 improvements (329,761.30) 12/16/2021 City Attorney - personnel budget (16,721.75) 12/2/2021
Cannabis audit and consulting (75,000.00) 12/2/2021
Grant Writing Support (60,000.00) 2/3/2022
Running total : $(462,733.42) Running total : (2,078,348.30) Operating Budget Capital Budget/Unassigned Fund Balance City of Seaside
FY 22 Running Budget totals - budget amendments
As of 02/03/2022
Packet Page 413

CITY OF SEASIDE
11 Q2 FY 2021-22 FINANCIAL REPORT

LONG TERM FORECAST
On the following page may be found the City’s five year long-term forecast (LTF). The forecast provides 5 years of historical data as context, the amended budget for FY 2021-22 and five years of forward looking projections. The LTF was developed at a high level (low level of detail). The City’s major sources of revenue were grouped into categories and projected. Likewise, the City’s major expenditures were grouped into categories and projected. The majority of the assumptions used in the report were based on a five-year historical trend or provided by outside consultants. Some projections however are based on known payment or increase percentages. Pension costs for example are expected to increase 14% each year for the next four years. This is due to the decreased discount rate adopted by CalPERS. Likewise, the City’s capital costs were input according to the five-year CIP.

The following updates were made to the LTF for the Q1 report:
• FY2020-21 projections were updated with final audited results • FY2021-22 budget amendments were added
The LTF indicates that the City is in a good financial position for the next five years and will be able to accomplish much of the capital needs detailed in the City’s five year Capital Improvement Plan. Due to the exceptionally strong results for FY2020-21, the long term forecast has improved since it was first presented to the City Council in the spring of 2021.

This is true even with the $1.2M appropriation in FY2021-22 for the downtown parking lot and increases to two parks capital projects.

The following capital items that are included in the City’s five year Capital Improvement Plan were not included in the long term forecast:

The City will need to seek funding sources other than the general fund for these projects.

Project
Possible
Funding
Source
CIP
Fire Station #2 CFD/Debt $9,000,000*
Stormwater Capital Grants 12,070,000
Connection fee to MCWD Debt/Grants 8,000,000
Alternative Water Source Grants 32,000,000
Total $61,070,000
* Although this project is listed in the CIP @ $9M, recent estimates are running double this amount.

Packet Page 414

CITY OF SEASIDE
12 Q2 FY 2021-22 FINANCIAL REPORT
43 48 49 50 51 52
Actual Actual Actual Actual Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

REVENUES
Sales and Use Tax 7,249,770 8,354,999 7,544,612 9,700,113 10,018,464 10,589,516 10,875,433 11,092,942 11,314,801 11,541,097 Transaction Tax 5,425,678 6,479,786 6,206,631 8,094,864 8,679,072 9,173,779 9,421,471 9,609,901 9,802,099 9,998,141 Property Tax 7,390,572 7,110,419 8,485,271 9,399,662 9,690,925 10,296,608 10,787,756 11,291,545 11,813,214 12,350,715 Transient Occupancy Tax 2,922,110 3,424,302 3,038,525 2,662,172 4,052,259 4,660,098 4,753,300 4,848,366 4,945,333 5,044,240 Utility User Tax 2,512,175 2,415,132 2,405,125 2,803,550 2,601,383 2,705,439 2,813,656 2,869,929 2,927,328 2,985,874 Franchise Fees 1,428,149 1,725,050 1,288,511 1,764,355 1,443,374 1,468,633 1,498,006 1,527,966 1,558,525 1,589,696 Miscellaneous-Other Revenue 729,249 557,626 769,267 1,152,980 2,715,806 8,394,463 1,028,217 1,034,491 1,040,890 1,047,417 Business License & Permits 733,301 820,067 843,833 630,058 759,374 804,937 829,085 845,666 862,580 879,831 Fees & Charges 840,846 746,003 592,904 414,590 693,000 734,580 756,617 771,750 787,184 802,928 Marijuana Receipts Tax 171,800 514,565 1,209,596 1,416,668 1,296,458 1,374,245 1,415,472 1,443,782 1,472,657 1,502,111 Grant Revenue 541,540 86,419 193,524 2,442,171 1,369,778 153,686 153,686 153,686 153,686 153,686 Reimbursements 425,467 257,957 608,049 245,389 205,383 217,706 224,237 228,722 233,296 237,962 Fines & Forfeitures 57,340 85,306 72,272 89,791 86,631 91,829 94,187 96,071 97,992 99,952 Income from Investments 2,394,748 149,437 3,244,712 1,071,180 133,244 9,128,170 128,812 129,253 129,704 130,163 Central Service Charge 17,994 16,096 16,970 16,611 15,155 16,065 16,547 16,878 17,215 17,559 Licenses & Permits 487,116 484,697 545,334 683,166 663,950 703,787 724,901 739,399 754,187 769,270 Total Revenues 33,327,853 33,227,860 37,065,136 42,587,321 44,424,257 60,513,540 45,521,383 46,700,345 47,910,691 49,150,643

EXPENDITURES BY TYPE
Personnel Services
Salaries 12,037,951 13,732,613 14,623,636 12,591,115 15,853,781 17,043,449 17,574,421 18,003,206 18,542,262 18,977,781 Overtime 1,746,123 1,405,858 1,325,957 1,068,154 1,847,258 2,050,410 2,111,922 2,175,270 2,240,528 2,307,733 Health Insurance 1,550,323 1,779,257 1,976,415 1,961,685 2,417,527 2,744,242 3,115,916 3,538,840 3,716,850 3,936,120 Dental/Vision Insurance 141,676 138,065 136,821 130,140 146,685 155,486 164,414 173,729 177,239 184,042 Other Benefits 1,155,567 1,229,210 1,604,042 1,835,900 2,266,229 2,490,167 2,565,151 2,643,160 2,725,339 2,802,447 Retirement 3,925,787 4,486,506 5,098,131 5,113,279 6,053,563 6,375,017 6,171,527 6,489,560 5,832,185 5,839,529 Retiree Health Insurance 395,115 359,431 376,718 533,489 675,974 716,532 759,524 805,096 845,351 879,165 Total Personnel Services 20,952,541 23,130,940 25,141,720 23,233,762 29,261,017 31,575,303 32,462,876 33,828,859 34,079,753 34,926,817 Services & Supplies 4,859,055 4,506,135 4,532,224 5,591,424 8,409,685 5,677,094 5,846,808 5,963,344 6,082,211 6,203,455 Internal Service Charge 1,942,776 2,387,516 2,024,982 2,414,863 2,125,252 2,252,767 2,320,350 2,366,757 2,414,093 2,462,374 Transfer Out 223,333 2,807,803 3,182,506 1,657,365 7,177,124 19,775,463 8,617,847 7,836,222 8,053,908 5,251,970 Debt Service 246,390 318,773 977,331 283,846 740,236 823,993 881,289 895,735 924,316 883,673 Capital Outlay 475,197 998,214 1,176,915 282,296 1,242,306 1,231,064 1,267,996 1,293,355 1,319,223 1,345,607 Total Expenditures 27,240,317 33,145,229 35,731,352 32,119,510 47,624,116 59,857,714 49,874,856 50,616,294 51,258,485 49,410,428 Net Change in Fund Balance 6,087,536 82,631 1,333,784 10,467,811 (3,199,859) 655,826 (4,353,472) (3,915,949) (3,347,794) (259,785) End of Year Fund Balance 18,889,035 18,974,801 19,815,169 30,282,980 27,083,121 27,738,947 23,385,474 19,469,526 16,121,732 15,861,947 Less Rainy Day Reserves 6,120,075 12,340,000 9,045,764 11,459,000 12,160,857 12,098,747 12,453,397 12,916,409 13,050,112 13,342,896 Less Restricted Balances 3,490,235 3,221,633 2,425,725 2,655,428 2,655,428 2,655,428 2,655,428 2,655,428 2,655,428 2,655,428 Unassigned Fund Balance 9,278,725 3,413,168 8,343,680 16,168,552 12,266,836 12,984,771 8,276,650 3,897,689 416,192 (136,377) Long Term Forecast
$27.2 $33.1
$35.7 $32.1
$47.6
$59.9
$49.9
$50.6 $51.3 $49.4
$33.3 $33.2
$37.1
$42.6 $44.4
$60.5
$45.5 $46.7 $47.9 $49.2
-$10.0
$0.0
$10.0
$20.0
$30.0
$40.0
$50.0
$60.0
$70.0
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Total Fund Balance Expenditures Revenues Rainy Day Reserves (policy level) Unassigned Fund Balance Packet Page 415

CITY OF SEASIDE
13 Q2 FY 2021-22 FINANCIAL REPORT
GENERAL FUND NET RESULTS & BUDGET OUTLOOK:

Overall, the second quarter showed expenditures of $22.6M (47% of the annual budget) in comparison with revenues of $20.4M resulting in a decrease to fund balance of $2.2M. This is not a cause for concern in light of the fact that certain revenues are not received at all in the second quarter (Franchise Fees and Motor Vehicle in-Lieu Fees) and others run two months in arears (Sales, Use & Transaction Taxes). Furthermore, revenue is now projected to end the year significantly higher than originally budgeted with a positive variance of $4.8M.

Following are some observations from the first half of the year:
• Fiscal year 2020-21 realized a greater surplus than projected at time of budget preparation ($10.5M) • Sales and Use taxes continue to outpace budget and prior year results • TOTs are recovering from pandemic era lows
• Property taxes continue to be strong
• Marijuana Receipts tax, while flattening, continue to be robust • Personnel costs are up as expected with the City rebuilding its workforce • The City is strategically spending accumulated fund balance for capital improvements As can be seen, the results of the second quarter indicate that to date the economic impacts of the coronavirus pandemic have not been as bad as imagined in 2020 and while the City’s general fund is projected to decrease in FY2021-22 the decrease is due to a strategic spending of fund balance and does not indicate an operating deficit. On the contrary, from an operating perspective, the City is expecting a $4M surplus.

Headwinds:
• The nation is currently experiencing high inflation rates. Many economists, however, believe inflation will recede once temporary supply chain bottlenecks unwind. Still, interest rates are likely to rise. • PERS unfunded liabilities continue to grow.
• International conflict and imposed sanctions have the potential to worsen the current microchip shortage in the automotive industry.

Operating Capital
Total
Budget
FY22 FY22 FY22
Revenues $ 44,424,257 $ - $44,424,257
Appropriation of Fund Balance - 7,292,965 7,292,965
Expenditures (40,331,150) (7,292,965) (47,624,116)
Surplus (Deficit) $ 4,093,106 $ (0) $ 4,093,106
General Fund Projected
Results:

General Fund Changes in
Unassigned Fund Balance:

Beginning Unassigned Fund Balance $ 16,168,552
Operating Surplus (Deficit) 4,093,106
Capital Budget (Fund Balance) (7,292,965)
Increase Rainy Day Reserves (701,857)
Ending Unassigned Fund Balance $ 12,266,836
Projected Budget
FY22
Packet Page 416

CITY OF SEASIDE
14 Q2 FY 2021-22 FINANCIAL REPORT
Budget Amendment Requests:

Description Funding Source Fiscal Impact Amount
Building - Administrative Assistant General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus $ 22,693 CHED - Fiscal impact consultant for CFD formation General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 19,950 CHED - Housing Element - increase consulting budget General Fund operating revenues Sufficient funds are available 80,000 Finance Dept - Financial Analyst (grants management) General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 27,527 Fire Dept - CSA 74 purchases General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 15,000 Fire Dept - drone repair General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 6,000 Fire Dept - equipment for new type 3 engine General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 60,000 Fire Dept - increase account for medical physicals General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 18,000 Fire Dept - increase overtime budget General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 200,000 HR Dept - increase consulting budget General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 50,000 HR Dept - increase police and fire exams General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 5,000 HR Dept - part time admin assistant General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 12,000 HR Dept - Risk management technician General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 32,000 Police Dept - administrative overtime General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 25,000 Police Dept - increase consultant costs for internal affairs investigations (coding) General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 7,000 Police Dept - increase lateral hiring bonus due to budgeting error General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 25,000 Police Dept - part-time Records Technician General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 9,000 Police Dept - part-time Records Technician - training General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 1,000 PW Engineering - increase consutling budget for plan review General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 60,000 PW Engineering - Modular Trailier General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 382,800 PW Engineering - Upgrade playground equipment at Laguna Grande Park General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 50,000 PW Maintenance - Admin Assistant General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 22,919 PW Engineering - Administrative Analyst II General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 26,678 PW Engineering - Administrative Analyst II (supplies/equipment) General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 3,000 PW Engineering - Broadway lights General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 15,000 PW Engineering - stormwater permit compliance program General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 25,000 PW Engineering - vehicle maintenance shop roof General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 90,000 PW Maintenance - Building Maintenance Specialist General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 36,518 PW Maintenance - Maintenance Supervisor General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 23,602 PW Maintenance - Maintenance Worker II General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 30,767 PW Maintenance - Maintenance Worker II General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 30,767 PW Maintenance - Maintenance Worker II General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 30,767 PW Maintenance - new christmas decorations General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 45,000 PW Maintenance - street sweeping General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 50,000 PW Maintenance- facility repairs General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 40,000 Recreaction - after school and summer program equipment General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 9,000 Recreaction - water filling stations at parks General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 15,000 Recreation - Custodian General Fund operating revenues Projected operating surplus 19,009 Recreation - Administrative Assistant existing budget existing budget - Recreation - Youth Center Supervisor existing budget existing budget - CHED - Housing Dept - training General Fund operating revenues Sufficient funds are available 6,000 CHED - Housing Dept - equipment General Fund operating revenues Sufficient funds are available 3,000 PW - Engineering - traffic calming program Measure X Sufficient funds are available 50,000 Total $1,679,997
Packet Page 417

CITY OF SEASIDE
15 Q2 FY 2021-22 FINANCIAL REPORT
City Manager’s Budget Request Message:

Recruitment and Retention
The strong economy and housing shortage have created an unprecedented crisis with respect to hiring and retaining staff. The City has 39 vacant positions across the City (24% of full-time staff). For many years, the City has had difficulty hiring police officers and the hiring difficulties have extended into all City departments including engineering, human resources and planning. As a result, staff is proposing to increase consulting and overtime budgets as well as adding administrative and analytical level support positions to take the load off professional staff to keep projects moving forward.

Space Needs
Although we have had a difficult time with recruitment and retention, we have we have been successful in adding additional staff in code enforcement, we’ve filled our vacancies in Finance, added a communication outreach coordinator in the City Manager’s Office, and we will be adding staff to the building division in the near future. The mid-year budget proposes one additional modular office building to provide space for the already approved staff as well as the staff proposed in the mid-year budget. The office space is being requested now because it is anticipated that it will take as long as seven months to obtain the trailer.

Staffing Needs
Staff is recommending the addition of a number of positions to enable the City to move forward both efficiently and effectively.
• Financial Analyst (Grant Manager)
We currently have millions of dollars of grants and we are actively applying for grants to obtain grants in many areas including water, infrastructure, parks, and public safety. A grant manager will be critical to ensure we are appropriately tracking, reporting, and managing those grants. • Maintenance & Utilities Staff
We are recommending the addition of five new positions in the Maintenance & Utilities Division.

These positions will enable staff to be more pro-active and to implement preventative maintenance programs that have suffered with current staffing levels. • Risk Management Technician
This position will perform critical tasks in the areas of employee safety, workers’ compensation, and liability claims management. Currently these tasks are performed by the Human Resources Director / Risk Manager, which is ineffective and inefficient.
• Youth Center Supervisor
The Youth Center Supervisor has been vacant since the 2019/2020 when the Recreation Department was restructured. This position is needed to manage the expansive level of programs being offered by the City.
• Custodian
The Custodian position has been vacant since 2017. We have been relying on part-time positions to fill the void. However, a full-time position is needed to help with the cleaning and sanitization of all of the buildings throughout the City.
• Administrative Analyst & Administrative Assistant
An Administrative Analyst is being proposed in the Engineering Department to perform technical work which is currently being performed by engineers, but is more appropriately performed by an analyst.

Packet Page 418

CITY OF SEASIDE
16 Q2 FY 2021-22 FINANCIAL REPORT
The Administrative Assistant positions will result in part-time positions being converted to full-time.

There is also a need for an Administrative Assistant in the Recreation Department.

OTHER FUNDS
In addition to the General Fund, the budget includes funds from a range of restricted sources as well as business-type activities that are used to provide specific services, including:

WATER FUND:

The Water Enterprise Fund
appears to be functioning as
designed. Recent rate
increases have increased
revenues putting the
enterprise in a much better
position. Revenue from the
City’s water fund ratepayers
increased on a year over year
basis from $528k to $580k. Per the City’s approved rate structure, rates will increase 15% on January 1, 2022. Staff are exploring debt financing for the Enterprise’s capital needs in the years to come. Second quarter results indicate the fund is on track to collect revenues in line with budget and expenditures are within budget as well.

STORM WATER FUND:

The Storm Water fund expenditures in the second quarter were $161k consisting mostly of personnel costs ($73k). The total personnel cost budget for the year is $359k indicating second quarter results are within budget. The adopted budget envisioned four capital projects in the fiscal year but due to staff turnover only one is likely to commence. This will cause a substantial positive variance at year end of approximately $650k. Currently the primary source of funding for the Storm Water fund is the City’s General Fund. City staff continues to seek grant funding when available as a supplemental funding source. As indicated in the Long Term Forecast, grant funding for Storm Water capital improvements will be crucial in the years to come.

STREETS (SPECIAL REVENUE):

Capital projects aimed at improving the City’s streets were budgeted for fiscal year 2021-22 at $7.7M. Streets improvement projects draw on multiple funding sources, including: Measure X tax collections, Measure X bond proceeds, Highway User taxes, Transportation Agency of Monterey County grant funds, as well as the City’s general fund. The fiscal year work plan for street improvement was not under way at mid-year and is scheduled to begin noticeably in the spring.

Requests for additional financial information may be directed to:

City of Seaside, Finance Department, 440 Harcourt Avenue, Seaside CA, 93955 Attention: Victor Damiani, Finance Director| Email; [email protected]| Phone; (831) 899-6718 Budget
Q2
FY22 FY22 FY21 $ %
Revenues $ 638,528 $579,705 $527,822 $ 51,883 10%
Expenditures (476,681.50) (265,699) (185,792) 79,907 43% Net Revenues $ 161,846 314,006 $342,030 $ (28,024) -8%
Year over Year
Variances:

Water Enterprise
Q2 Results
Results:

Q2
Packet Page 419

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 10.A.1.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Ashley Collick, Assistant City Manager
DATE: March 15, 2022
SUBJECT: NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION MAYOR'S MONARCH

PLEDGE (OGLESBY)

RECOMMENDATION
Receive presentation on the National Wildlife Federation's Mayor's Monarch Pledge

BACKGROUND
The National Wildlife Federation (NWF) is the United States' largest private, nonprofit conservation education and advocacy organization, with over six million members and supporters, and 51 state and territorial affiliated organizations (including Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands).

The purpose of the NWF is to increase America's fish and wildlife populations, enhancing their capacity to thrive in a rapidly changing world.

Goals for the NWF include,
 Protecting wildlife habitats by restoring damaged habitats, which include protected lands, working lands, waterways, coasts, and communities.  Transforming wildlife conservation by advancing wildlife management and fighting for issues such as climate change and wildlife diseases  Connecting Americans with wildlife by informing the world about the issues that are occurring, specifically by inspiring the next generation of conservationists and supporting legislation that advocates saving wildlife.

The Mayor's Monarch Pledge program was created by NWF to call to action cities, municipalities, and other communities across North America, committed to creating Packet Page 420

Item No. 10.A.1. Page 2 of 3
healthy, sustainable habitat for the monarch butterfly and pollinators while educating residents about how they can make a difference at home and in their community.

Steps for participating in the program include,
 Taking the Pledge and Specifying Your Actions
 Take Action With Support From the National Wildlife Federation  Report Progress
Mayors or their staff point of contact can take the pledge online between December 1 and March 31 each year. Mayors will commit to at least three action items (out of 30) that the community will initiate throughout the year to support monarch conservation.

Mayors who complete eight or more actions will receive special recognition and become a member of the Mayors' Monarch Pledge Leadership Circle and those that complete 24 or more actions will become a Monarch Champion City.

Staff has identified five actions that the City will be able to commit to initiating throughout the year:

1. Issue a Proclamation to raise awareness about the decline of the monarch butterfly and the species’ need for habitat.

2. Launch or maintain a public communication effort to encourage residents to plant monarch gardens at their homes or in their neighborhoods.

3. Engage with community garden groups and urge them to plant native milkweeds and nectar-producing plants.

4. Engage with city parks and recreation, public works, sustainability, and other relevant staff to identify opportunities to revise and maintain mowing programs and milkweed / native nectar plant planting programs.

5. Create a community art project to enhance and promote monarch and pollinator conservation as well as cultural awareness and recognition.

Staff will work to determine if there are additional action items to initiate.

If approved, staff will place a proclamation on the 3/17 Council Agenda.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Mayors-Monarch-Pledge-Action-Items

2. Mayors-Monarch-Pledge-Sample-Survey
Packet Page 421

Item No. 10.A.1. Page 3 of 3

3. Mayor's Monarch Pledge
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 422
1 Action Items
Communications and Convening:

Action # Action
1 Issue a Proclamation to raise awareness about the decline of the monarch butterfly and the species’ need for habitat. 2 Launch or maintain a public communication effort to encourage residents to plant monarch gardens at their homes or in their neighborhoods. (If you have community members who speak a language other than English, we encourage you to also communicate in that language; Champion Pledges must communicate in that language.) 3 Engage* with community garden groups and urge them to plant native milkweeds and nectar-producing plants. 4 Engage* with city parks and recreation, public works, sustainability, and other relevant staff to identify opportunities to revise and maintain mowing programs and milkweed / native nectar plant planting programs. 5 Engage* with gardening leaders and partners (e.g., Master Naturalists, Master Gardeners, Nature Centers, Native Plant Society Chapters, other long-standing and influential community leaders) to support monarch butterfly conservation. 6 Engage* with Homeowners Associations (HOAs), Community Associations or neighborhood organizations to identify opportunities to plant monarch gardens and revise maintenance and mowing programs.

Packet Page 423
2 Action # Action
7 Engage* with developers, planners, landscape architects, and other community leaders and organizers engaged in planning process to identify opportunities to create monarch habitat.
8 Create a community-driven educational conservation strategy that focuses on and benefits local, underserved residents. 9 Create a community art project to enhance and promote monarch and pollinator conservation as well as cultural awareness and recognition.
*Engage includes: in-person meetings, conferences and summits, trainings, or regular communication through email, phone, social media, etc.

Program and Demonstration Gardens:

Action # Action
10 Host or support a native seed or plant sale, giveaway or swap. 11 Facilitate or support a milkweed seed collection and propagation effort. 12 Plant or maintain a monarch and pollinator-friendly demonstration garden at City Hall or another prominent or culturally significant community location.
13 Convert vacant lots to monarch habitat.
14 Plant milkweed and pollinator-friendly native nectar plants in medians and public rights-of-way.

Packet Page 424
3 Action # Action
15 Launch or maintain an outdoor education program(s) (e.g., at schools, after-school programs, community centers and groups) that builds awareness and creates habitat by engaging students, educators, and the community in planting native milkweed and pollinator-friendly native nectar plants (i.e., National Wildlife Federation’s Eco-Schools USA Schoolyard Habitats program and Monarch Mission curriculum).
16 Earn or maintain recognition for being a wildlife-friendly city by participating in other wildlife and habitat conservation efforts (i.e., National Wildlife Federation’s Community Wildlife Habitat program). 17 Host or support a monarch neighborhood challenge to engage neighborhoods and homeowners’ associations within the community to increase awareness, support community unity around a common mission, and/or create habitat for the monarch butterfly. 18 Initiate or support community science (or citizen science) efforts that help monitor monarch migration and health. 19 Add or maintain native milkweed and nectar producing plants in community gardens. 20 Launch, expand, or continue an invasive species removal program that will support the re-establishment of native habitats for monarch butterflies and other pollinators.
21 Host or support a monarch butterfly festival that is accessible to all residents in the community and promotes monarch and pollinator conservation, as well as cultural awareness and recognition. 22 Display educational signage at monarch gardens and pollinator habitat.

Systems Change:

Packet Page 425
4 Action # Action
23 Remove milkweed from the list of noxious plants in city weed / landscaping ordinances (if applicable). 24 Change weed or mowing ordinances to allow for native prairie and plant habitats. 25 Increase the percentage of native plants, shrubs and trees that must be used in city landscaping ordinances and encourage use of milkweed, where appropriate.
26 Direct city property managers to consider the use of native milkweed and nectar plants at city properties where possible. 27 Integrate monarch butterfly conservation into the city’s Park Master Plan, Sustainability Plan, Climate Resiliency Plan or other city plans.
28 Change ordinances so herbicides, insecticides, or other chemicals used in the community are not harmful to pollinators. 29 Adopt ordinances that support reducing light pollution. 30 California Specific: Pass a resolution to protect over-wintering monarch butterfly habitat on public or private lands.

Packet Page 426
1 Mayors’ Monarch Pledge Survey
Open Pledge Period: December 1 – March 31
*THIS IS A SAMPLE PLEDGE SURVEY ONLY. TO OFFICIALLY PLEDGE, COMPLETE OUR ONLINE SURVEY AT NWF.ORG/MAYORSMONARCHPORTAL*
Thanks for your interest in taking the National Wildlife Federation Mayors’ Monarch Pledge this year. Only mayors and heads of local and tribal government (or their staff designees) may fill out this pledge form. Please note: the survey will not save and will need to be completed in one sitting.

Information from this form will be used to create a public community profile page to showcase your mayor’s progress and efforts in the program.

Please be sure to read the pledge language and FAQ before taking the pledge. If you have any questions, you can email us at [email protected].

Mayor’s Basic Information
If you are not a “mayor,” or the head of local or tribal government, please enter your name and appropriate title here.

Title
First Name
Last Name
Email Address
Packet Page 427
2 Community Name
If your community doesn’t have an official name, consider using the following formats:

Town of Herndon, City of Fairfax, etc.

City
State
Mayor’s Mailing Address
Address Line 1
Address Line 2
City
State
Zip Code
Packet Page 428
3 Staff Point of Contact Information
Please provide your professional title in the space below.

Please note that the Staff Point of Contact you entered below will be the default user for your community profile. Please make sure you enter a valid email address.

Title
First Name
Last Name
Email
Note: This email address is your log in account.

Phone Number
Pledge Summary
Please type a description of your community, your community’s efforts and/or interest in committing to monarch and pollinator conservation. This information will populate on your community’s profile page, but can be updated and edited after this survey is submitted. See below for a sample description.

Example Description: Exampleville is a city in central Virginia with a population of roughly 50,000. The city is nestled in the Green Ridge Mountains and is home to the beautiful Exampleville Regional Park and many community gardens. Mayor Smith of Exampleville, VA has committed to saving the monarch butterfly and other pollinators with their signing of the Mayors’ Monarch Pledge and looks forward to engaging residents in building more pollinator habitat throughout the city.

Packet Page 429
4 Action Item Selections
Each year, you must commit to at least 3 Action Items from this list which you will report on at the end of the year. At least 1 action must be taken from the “Program & Demonstration Gardens” section.

Communications and Convening
 Issue a Proclamation to raise awareness about the decline of the monarch butterfly and the species’ need for habitat.

Example Activities:

1. Issue a Monarch Day Pledge

2. Incorporate monarchs into your Earth Day, Pollinator Week or other proclamation
 Launch or maintain a public communication effort to encourage residents to plant monarch gardens at their homes or in their neighborhoods. (If you have community members who speak a language other than English, we encourage you to also communicate in that language; Champion Pledges must communicate in that language.)
 Engage with community garden groups and urge them to plant native milkweeds and nectar-producing plants.
 Engage with city parks and recreation, public works, sustainability, and other relevant staff to identify opportunities to revise and maintain mowing programs and milkweed / native nectar plant planting programs.  Engage with gardening leaders and partners (e.g., Master Naturalists, Master Gardeners, Nature Centers, Native Plant Society Chapters, other long-standing and influential community leaders) to support monarch butterfly conservation.

Example Activities:

1. Develop community gardens with local gardening leaders

2. Host programming and other activities with Nature Centers

3. Coordinate and collaborate with local gardening groups at schools, colleges, and universities
 Engage with Homeowners Associations (HOAs), Community Associations or neighborhood organizations to identify opportunities to plant monarch gardens and revise maintenance and mowing programs.
 Engage with developers, planners, landscape architects, and other community leaders and organizers engaged in planning processes to identify opportunities to create monarch habitat.

Packet Page 430
5  Create a community-driven educational conservation strategy that focuses on and benefits local, underserved residents.

Example Activities:

1. Conduct outreach and support habitat / green space improvements in underserved communities.

2. Develop brochures in different languages
 Create a community art project to enhance and promote monarch and pollinator conservation as well as cultural awareness and recognition.

Example Activities:

1. Host photo contests

2. Commission murals

3. Create and show films and documentaries

4. Support public art installations

5. Collaborate with local artists, including school, college, and university art departments to create community-wide art
Program and Demonstration Gardens
 Host or support a native seed or plant sale, giveaway or swap.  Facilitate or support a milkweed seed collection and propagation effort.  Plant or maintain a monarch and pollinator-friendly demonstration garden at City Hall or another prominent or culturally significant community location.  Convert vacant lots to monarch habitat.
 Plant milkweed and pollinator-friendly native nectar plants in medians and public rights-of-way.

Packet Page 431
6  Launch or maintain an outdoor education program(s) (e.g., at schools, afterschool programs, community centers and groups) that builds awareness and creates habitat by engaging students, educators, and the community in planting native milkweed and pollinator-friendly native nectar plants (i.e., National Wildlife Federation’s Eco-Schools USA Schoolyard Habitats program and Monarch Mission curriculum).

Example Activities:

1. Eco-Schools USA Schoolyard Habitats

2. PK-12 Monarch Mission Curriculum (English and Spanish)

3. National Wildlife Federation Campus Pollinator Pledge  Earn or maintain recognition for being a wildlife-friendly city by participating in other wildlife and habitat conservation efforts (i.e., National Wildlife Federation’s Community Wildlife Habitat program).

Example Activities:

1. Join the Community Wildlife Habitat
 Host or support a monarch neighborhood challenge to engage neighborhoods and homeowners’ associations within the community to increase awareness, support community unity around a common mission, and/or create habitat for the monarch butterfly.

Example Activities:

1. Host photo challenges

2. Create property certification challenges

3. Collaborate with schools, universities, and colleges to host joint awareness and habitat creation challenges
 Initiate or support community science (or citizen science) efforts that help monitor monarch migration and health.

Example Activities:

1. Community Science Opportunities (Monarch Joint Venture)

2. NWF’s Monarch Stewards Program Certification

3. Engage with local colleges and universities science departments to host community-wide opportunities

4. Monarch Migration Tracking (Journey North)
 Add or maintain native milkweed and nectar producing plants in community gardens.
 Launch, expand, or continue an invasive species removal program that will support the re-establishment of native habitats for monarch butterflies and other pollinators.

Packet Page 432
7  Host or support a monarch butterfly festival that is accessible to all residents in the community and promotes monarch and pollinator conservation, as well as cultural awareness and recognition.
 Display educational signage at monarch gardens and pollinator habitat.

Example Activities:

1. Neighborhood Garden Signs (Victory Garden of Tomorrow)

2. Create plant labels or interpretive language for community gardens, parks, prairie habitat, rights-of-way, etc.

Systems Change
Please select the actions that you will begin to work on this year, are in progress, or have already been completed.
 Remove milkweed from the list of noxious plants in city weed / landscaping ordinances (if applicable).
 Change weed or mowing ordinances to allow for native prairie and plant habitats.
 Increase the percentage of native plants, shrubs and trees that must be used in city landscaping ordinances and encourage use of milkweed, where appropriate.
 Direct city property managers to consider the use of native milkweed and nectar plants at city properties where possible.
 Integrate monarch butterfly conservation into the city’s Park Master Plan, Sustainability Plan, Climate Resiliency Plan or other city plans.  Change ordinances so herbicides, insecticides, or other chemicals used in the community are not harmful to pollinators.

Example Activities:

1. Work with local school districts to eliminate or minimize the use of pesticides, herbicides, and insecticides on school properties

2. Adopt Integrated Pest Management (IPM) practices
 Adopt ordinances that support reducing light pollution.  California Specific: Pass a resolution to protect over-wintering monarch butterfly habitat on public or private lands.

Packet Page 433
8 Questions or Comments
Do you have any questions or comments?
Packet Page 434
Packet Page 435