Gloria Olmos, Mayor
Manuel Acosta, Mayor Pro Tem
Richard Angel, Councilmember
Hector Delgado, Councilmember
Gracie Retamoza, Councilmember
Rene Salas, Interim City Manager
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
Anthony R. Taylor, City Attorney
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTH EL MONTE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
September 13, 2022, 6:00 PM
1415 Santa Anita Avenue, South El Monte, CA 91733
***SPECIAL NOTICE REGARDING COVID-19***
On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed AB 361, which modified the Brown Act to allow for teleconferencing participation at local legislative body public meetings during a proclaimed state of emergency. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e) as amended by AB 361, City Council is authorized to hold public meetings via teleconferencing and to make public meetings accessible telephonically or otherwise electronically available to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the local legislative body. Public participation will be allowed via the information below.
PUBLIC COMMENT
To participate during public comment via teleconference, see below:
Link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86581711880
Webinar ID: 865 8171 1880
Or Call In: 1 669 900 6833, when prompted, enter 86581711880#
LIVE STREAMING OF MEETINGS
The City of South El Monte live streams the City Council Meetings over the Internet at https://www.cityofsouthelmonte.org/129/City-Council-Agendas-Minutes after the meetings, recordings are immediately posted. NOTE: Your attendance at this public meeting may result in the streaming and recording of your image and/or voice.
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, if you require a disability-related modification or accommodation to attend or participate in this meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, please call the City Clerk’s office at (626) 579-6540 ext. 3280 or ext. 3220 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.
GENERAL COMMENT
Members of the public wishing to submit a general comment or a comment on an agenda item, can email [email protected] or call (626) 579-6540 ext. 3280 to leave a voicemail message. All comments received an hour before the scheduled meeting will be read during public comment and made part of the record.
MEETINGS
The City Council holds regular meetings on the second and fourth Tuesday of every month. Regular meetings start at 6 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1415 Santa Anita Avenue, South El Monte, California. Special and Adjourned Regular meetings start time are to be determined.
POSTING LOCATIONS OF AGENDA AND/OR CANCELLATION NOTICES Regular meeting agendas will be posted at least 72 hours before the meeting (GC 54954(a)(1)).
Agenda and Cancellation Notices can be viewed online and are also posted at the following three (3) locations: City Hall located at 1415 Santa Anita Avenue, Senior Center located at 1556 Central Avenue and the Community Center located at 1530 Central Avenue, South El Monte, California.
VIEWING OF AGENDA PACKETS
Full agenda packet can be viewed either at www.cityofsouthelmonte.org/129/CityCouncil-Agendas-Minutes or in the City Clerk’s Office during normal business hours Monday through Thursday 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Closed on Fridays and major holidays.
ISSUES RELATED TO AGENDA
For issues related to the agenda, including a disability-related accommodation necessary to participate in this meeting, please contact:
Donna G. Schwartz, CMC, City Clerk
Ph (626) 579-6540 ext. 3280
Cell (626) 274-4842
Paola Lara, Deputy City Clerk
Ph (626) 579-6540 ext. 3220
Cell (626) 374-1998
AGENDA BEGINS ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE
1. ROLL CALL
Councilmembers: Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta and Mayor Olmos
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pro Tem Manuel Acosta
3. INVOCATION
Pastor Benjamin Garrett, Faith Dominion Church
4. PRESENTATIONS - None
5. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AND WAIVER OF FULL READING OF
ORDINANCES
By motion of the City Council, this is the time to notify the public of any changes to the agenda, remove items from the consent calendar for individual consideration and/or rearrange the order of the agenda.
6. PUBLIC COMMENT
Speakers may provide public comments on any matter within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council, including items on the agenda. Each speaker will be limited to five minutes. Unless a majority of the Council objects, the Mayor may provide speakers more or less time to speak. All comments or queries shall be addressed to the Council as a body and not to any specific member thereof.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2(a)(2), the Ralph M. Brown Act, no action or discussion by the City Council shall be undertaken on any item not appearing on the posted agenda, except to briefly provide information, ask for clarification, provide direction to staff, or schedule a matter for a future meeting.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and customary and are enacted by a single motion with the exception of items previously removed by a member of the City Council during "Approval of the Agenda" for individual consideration. Any items removed shall be individually considered immediately after taking action on the Consent Calendar.
7.a. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR CITY
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 26, 2022 AND SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 2, 2022
Staff is requesting approval of Minutes for the July 26, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting and August 2, 2022 Special City Council Meeting.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of July 26, 2022 and Special City Council Meeting of August 2, 2022.
7.b. - 7.d. next page.
CONSENT CALENDAR (CONTINUED)
7.b. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22-71, APPROVING WARRANTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 27, 2022,
THROUGH SEPTEMBER 13, 2022
Authorizing payment of City expenditures for the period of July 27, 2022 through September 13, 2022 totaling $3,276,712.16.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22-71, authorizing payment of City expenditures.
7.c. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE 2022 "CHRISTMAS WISH
TOY GIVEAWAY' EVENT DONATION LETTER, AUTHORIZATION TO
INCLUDE THE CITY COUNCILMEMBERS' SIGNATURES, AND THE
DISTRUBUTION OF LETTERS TO THE SOUTH EL MONTE BUSINESS
COMMUNITY
The Parks and Recreation Division is requesting approval of the 2022 "Christmas Wish Toy Giveaway" donation letter, authorization to include the City Councilmembers' signatures, and the distribution of the letters to the South El Monte business community.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council approve the 2022 "Christmas Wish Toy Giveaway'' donation letter, authorization to include the City Council members' signatures, and distribution of the donation letters to the South El Monte business community.
7.d. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 1259, AMENDING THE SOUTH EL
MONTE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING COMPENSATION OF MAYOR
AND COUNCILMEMBERS
At a regular City Council meeting on Tuesday, July 26, 2022 City Council waived first reading and introduced Ordinance No. 1259, amending the South El Monte Municipal Code regarding compensation of Councilmembers. California Government Code Section 36516(a)(4) provides that cities may increase the salary of councilmembers five percent (5%) for each calendar year from the operative date of the last adjustment. The proposed amendment for the change in salary shall become effective when one or more councilmembers commences a new term on or about December 13, 2022.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council waive second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1259, regarding the compensation of Mayor and Councilmembers.
7.e. and 7.f. next page.
CONSENT CALENDAR (CONTINUED)
7.e. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22-72,
PROCLAIMING A LOCAL EMERGENCY PERSISTS AND
AUTHORIZING THE USE OF REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETING
PROCEDURES BY THE CITY'S LEGISLATIVE BODIES AS
AUTHORIZED BY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953(e) ET SEQ.
FOR THE PERIOD OF SEPTEMBER 13, 2022 THROUGH OCTOBER 12, 2022
On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed AB 361 into law. AB 361 was made effective October 1, 2021. Pursuant to AB 361, staff recommends consideration of Resolution No. 22-72, proclaiming a local emergency persists and authorizing the use of remote meeting procedures by the City’s legislative bodies, which can include meetings held via a virtual platform (e.g. Zoom), for the period of September 13, 2022 through October 12, 2022.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22-72, proclaiming a local emergency persists and authorizing the use of alternative meeting procedures by the City’s legislative bodies, such as utilizing a virtual platform (e.g. Zoom) for the period from September 13, 2022 through October 12, 2022.
7.f. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22-73,
APPROVING ACCOUNTING POLICIES AS RECOMMENDED BY
EXTERNAL AUDITORS
As a result of the completion of the June 30, 2021 Single Audit report covering financial statements and federal grant awards, it was identified by the external auditing firm, Vasquez & Company LLC, that there were improvement opportunities regarding implementing policies and procedures in three areas. These areas are capital assets, accounts receivables, and interfund activities. Based upon the recommendations received, the City developed policies and procedures following Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and best practices. These have been brought forward to the City Council for approval prior to implementation.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22-73, approving the three proposed policies and procedures covering fixed assets, accounts receivables, and transactions be approved for implementation.
7.g. next page.
CONSENT CALENDAR (CONTINUED)
7.g. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22-74,
ADOPTING AND APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING (MOU) BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
AND THE SOUTH EL MONTE EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (SEMEA)
The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of South El Monte Employees’ Association (SEMEA) for the period beginning July 1, 2022 and ending June 30, 2024 has been agreed to, subject to City Council approval.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22-74, approving the MOU between the City of South El Monte and SEMEA..
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None
9. GENERAL BUSINESS
9.a. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22-75, APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT WITH TOWNSEND
PUBLIC AFFAIRS LLC FOR CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
In March 2022, the City entered into an agreement with Townsend Public Affairs LLC (Townsend) for ongoing consulting services related to obtaining grant funding and legislative advocacy. The initial agreement was for a term of four months, ending June 30, 2022, with a provision to extend for an additional six-month period. Based upon the initial results, it was determined that entering into a one-year extension, with a City option for two additional one-year extensions, was a prudent course of action.
This would allow Townsend to continue to work on grant funding opportunities that are currently in process, as well as further identify additional ones. The new agreement will cover the period from July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023. In addition, the City has, at its option, the right to renew for an additional two one-year terms covering a twelvemonth period covering the 1st day of July, 2023 through the 30th day of June, 2024 and the 1st day of July 2024 through 30th day of June 2025.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22-75, approving Amendment No. 1 to agreement with Townsend Public Affairs LLC for consulting services related to grant funding and legislative advocacy.
9.b. and 9.c. next page.
GENERAL BUSINESS (CONTINUED)
9.b. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22-76,
APPROVING THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE'S LOCAL ROADWAY
SAFETY PLAN (LRSP)
For South El Monte to be eligible for Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Cycle 11 grant funds, the City must complete a Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) or an equivalent of the LRSP, such as Systemic Safety Analysis Report (SSAR) or Vision Zero Action Plan. The LRSP or its equivalent must be updated and validated at least every five (5) years. The preparation of the LSRP was funded by State grant funds and will support the City's future grant funding applications.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22-76, approving the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP).
LRSP is a requirement for public agencies to be eligible to apply for future Highway Safety Improvements Program (HSIP) funding.
9.c. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22-77,
APPROVING PROJECT ACCEPTANCE AND NOTICE OF
COMPLETION OF THE FERN STREET SIDEWALK INSTALLATION
PROJECT BY GRIGOLLA & SONS CONSTRUCTION CO. INC.
The Fern Street Sidewalk Installation Project was completed in compliance with the plans and specifications by Grigolla & Sons Construction Co Inc.
The project scope included construction of concrete sidewalk, driveway approaches, curb ramps and related work on Fern Street between Doreen Avenue and Santa Anita Avenue. The final cost for the construction work completed by Grigolla & Sons Construction Co Inc. is $70,499.00.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 22-77, accepting the improvements to the Fern Street Sidewalk Installation Project by Grigolla & Sons Construction Co. Inc.;
2. Authorize the City Clerk to send the Notice of Completion for recordation to the Los Angeles County Recorder’s Office; and
3. Release retention accordingly.
9.d. next page.
GENERAL BUSINESS (CONTINUED)
9.d. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22-78,
AWARDING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (PSA) TO
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR
TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS AT VARIOUS SIGNALIZED
INTERSECTIONS HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
(HSIP) CYCLE 9 PROJECT
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. has been selected by staff as the most responsive and qualified consultant to provide design services for various traffic signal improvements within the HSIP Cycle 9 Project. The HSIP Cycle 9 Project includes safety improvements at various signalized intersections, including hardware modifications to the traffic signal lenses, backplates with retroreflective borders, mounting, size, and number, as well as installation of pedestrian countdown signal heads. The project improvements will involve a total of eleven signalized intersections throughout the City.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 22-78, Awarding a professional services agreement to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for Design Services for Traffic Signal Improvements at Various Signalized Intersections HSIP Cycle 9 Project in the amount of $56,526.94; and
2. Approve $1,926.94 in Measure R Funds for the project design phase.
10. COMMITTEE REPORTS, INCLUDING AB 1234 REPORTS
AB 1234, section 53232.3(d) requires Members of a legislative body to provide brief reports on meetings attended at the expense of the local agency (i.e., League of California Cities Conferences, ICSC conferences, etc.) at the next regular meeting of the legislative body.
11. CORRESPONDENCE - None
12. COUNCILMEMBERS’ AGENDA
12.a. Mayor Gloria Olmos
1. Sponsorship for Epiphany Catholic Church 2nd Annual Car and Bike Show.
2. Sponsorship for South El Monte High School Robotics Club.
13. CLOSED SESSION - None
14. ADJOURNMENT
Tuesday, September 27, 2022, at 6:00 p.m.
I Donna G. Schwartz, hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted not less than 72 hours at the following locations: City of South El Monte City Hall, Senior Center and Community Center and made available at www.cityofsouthelmonte.org on this 8
th day of September 2022.
City Clerk, CMC
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a.
DATE: September 13, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rene Salas, Interim City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Donna Schwartz, City Clerk
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 26, 2022 AND
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST
2, 2022
SUMMARY: Staff is requesting approval of Minutes for the July 26, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting and August 2, 2022 Special City Council Meeting.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of July 26, 2022 and Special City Council Meeting of August 2, 2022.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
DISCUSSION: None.
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. July 26, 2022 Minutes
B. August 2, 2022 Minutes
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY, JULY 26, 2022 - 6:00 PM
1. ROLL CALL
Mayor Olmos called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM
PRESENT: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, and Mayor Olmos
STAFF PRESENT: Rene Salas, Interim City Manager; Anthony R. Taylor, City Attorney; Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk; Colby Cataldi, Community Development Director; William Fox, Interim Finance Director; and Paola Lara, Deputy City Clerk.
Zoom was provided for the Public to participate during public comment via teleconference.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Councilwoman Gracie Retamoza led the Pledge of Allegiance.
3. INVOCATION – Ingrid Aguilar, Community Services Commissioner, offered the Invocation.
4. PRESENTATIONS:
4.a. Tom Love, General Manager, Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District presented a PowerPoint on Emergency Water Conservation Plan.
Ed Chavez, Board President, introduced himself.
4.b. Mayor Olmos read a proclamation proclaiming the month of July as “Parks Make Life Better Month.”
4.c. City Council received a report from the Sheriff’s Department and discussed matters concerning law enforcement in the City for the month of May.
4.d. City Council received a report from Code Enforcement/Public Safety Supervisor Joe Martinez on code enforcement and public safety activities for the month of May.
Mayor Olmos requested that all stop signs have solar lights with the orange reflective strip.
5. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AND WAIVER OF FULL READING OF
ORDINANCES
City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor read the title of Ordinance No. 1259 for item 7.f. and requested to pull item 7.g. from the consent calendar for discussion.
A motion was made by Councilmember Delgado, seconded Councilmember Angel to approve the agenda as amended with item 7.g. pulled for discussion. Motion carried 5-0, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
6. PUBLIC COMMENT
Mayor Olmos opened public comment.
1. Victor Manzo, Resident, voiced concern that a rumor was going around about the closing of the mobile home park where he resides and requested transparency from the City.
2. Mark Ramos, United Food & Commercial Workers Union, commented on the citizen initiative agenda item 7.g. and offered suggestions to City Council for the proposed ordinance on item 9.b. He stated he emailed a redlined ordinance to Mayor Olmos. City Council requested he email the redlined ordinance to the City Clerk for distribution to City Council.
There being no further comment, Mayor Olmos closed public comment.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
A motion was made by Councilmember Delgado, seconded by Councilmember Angel to approve the Consent Calendar except item 7.g. Motion carried 5-0 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
7.a. Approved Minutes for the Regular City Council meeting held July 12, 2022.
7.b. Adopted Resolution No. 22-59, authorizing payment of City expenditures for the period of July 13, 2022, through July 26, 2022, totaling $837,348.26.
7.c. Adopted Resolution No. 22-60, authorizing the City Manager to execute a letter agreement to memorialize a temporary arrangement for meal service with Huntington Culinary.
7.d. Adopted Resolution No. 22-61, approving the City's Title VI Program to reaffirm that the City meets the requirements set forth in the FTA's Title VI Circular 4702.1B.
7.e. Approved the Classification specification and corresponding compensation level for the Planning Manager and authorized to proceed with recruitment.
7.f. Waived first reading and introduced Ordinance No. 1259, regarding the compensation of Mayor and Councilmembers and set adoption of said ordinance at the next regular City Council meeting.
ITEM PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION
7.g. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO 22-63,
SUBMITTING AN INITIATIVE MEASURE THAT, IF APPROVED,
PERMITS/REGULATES CERTAIN CANNABIS BUSINESSES,
REGULATES PERSONAL CANNABIS USE, AND IMPOSES A 6%
EXCISE TAX ON RETAIL SALES OF CANNABIS/EDIBLES TO THE
NOVEMBER 8, 2022, GENERAL ELECTION; RESOLUTION NO. 22-64,
AUTHORIZING DIRECT ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST THE
INITIATIVE MEASURE AND DIRECTING CITY ATTORNEY TO
PREPARE AN IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS; AND RESOLUTION NO. 22-65,
AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS FOR SAID
MEASURE
Mayor Olmos announced the item.
City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor presented the staff report and informed City Council that they have the authority to authorize certain Councilmembers to prepare a written argument for this initiative measure, which would be reflected as an amendment to Section 1 of Resolution No. 22-64.
Mayor Olmos and Mayor Pro Tem Acosta volunteered to be those Councilmembers that will prepare a written argument. Council concurred.
A motion was made by Councilmember Angel, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Acosta to submit the Measure without alteration to the voters at a general municipal election on November 8, 2022, and adopted Resolution Nos. 22-63, 22- 64 as amended and to include the authorization for Mayor Gloria Olmos and Mayor Pro Tem Acosta to prepare a written argument and adopt Resolution No. 22-65.
Motion carried 5-0 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
8.a. CONSDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22-62,
APPROVING THE ANNUAL LEVY OF THE SEWER SERVICE FEE FOR
FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2022-23
Mayor Olmos announced the item.
Interim City Manager Rene Salas introduced Community Development Director Colby Cataldi who presented the staff report.
Mayor Olmos opened the public hearing, there being no public comment, closed the public hearing.
A motion was made by Councilmember Angel, seconded by Councilmember Delgado to adopt Resolution No. 22-62, approving the annual levy of the Sewer Service Fee for Fiscal Year 2022-23, at $35.37 per sewer unit. Motion carried 5-0 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
9. GENERAL BUSINESS
9.a. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL TO REJECT BIDS AND REBID THE
MERCED GREENWAY AVENUE PROJECT
Mayor Olmos announced the item.
Interim City Manager Rene Salas introduced Community Development Director Colby Cataldi who presented the staff report.
A motion was made by Councilmember Delgado, seconded by Councilmember Retamoza to approve to re-advertise the Notice Inviting Bids (NIB) for the Merced Avenue Greenway Improvements Project. Motion carried 5-0 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
9.b. CCITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION CONCERNING
POTENTIAL FUTURE CANNABIS REGULATIONS AND TAXES
Mayor Olmos announced the item.
City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor presented the staff report.
City Council and City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor entered into a discussion regarding the options to adopt an ordinance to allow cannabis businesses in the city or the option to prepare a measure to be placed on the ballot for the November 8, 2022, Election. City Council voiced concern with the draft ordinance the City Attorney’s office prepared for a ballot measure and how it closely related to another city’s ordinance and not showing the benefits to the City of South El Monte.
City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor announced a special meeting would need to be held should City Council wish to proceed with the option to place a measure on the ballot.
A motion was made by Councilmember Delgado, seconded by Councilmember Angel, to hold a special meeting on Tuesday, August 2, 2022, at 6:00 p.m. to discuss further.
10. COMMITTEE REPORTS, INCLUDING AB 1234 REPORTS
Mayor Pro Tem Acosta announced his attendance at the City’s Concert in the Park, San Gabriel Valley Economic Partnership event, City’s Farmers Market Grand Opening, and City’s Movie in the Park.
Councilmember Retamoza announced her attendance at the City’s Concert in the Park, City’s Movie in the Park, and the City’s Brunch Discussion for the Ongoing Creation of a Commission for the Advancement of Women and Girls.
Councilmember Delgado announced his attendance at the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District Meeting and the City’s Farmers Market Grand Opening.
Councilmember Angel announced his attendance at City’s Concert in the Park, City’s Movie in the park, City’s Farmers Market Grand Opening, and San Gabriel Valley Partnership event.
Mayor Olmos announced her attendance at the City’s Concert in the Park, San Gabriel Valley Economic Partnership event, City’s Farmers Market Grand Opening, City’s Brunch Discussion for the Ongoing Creation of a Commission for the Advancement of Women and Girls, Vons Credit Union 73rd Annual Meeting, California Joint Powers Insurance Authority Conference, and announced SEAACA still has pets for adoption.
11. CORRESPONDENCE: None
12. COUNCILMEMBERS’ AGENDA:
12.a. Councilwoman Gracie Retamoza
1. Discussion on Allowing Walk-In Hours for Planning and Building Department.
Councilwoman Retamoza spoke of complaints she has received from the public for being turned away by the Planning and Building Department at City Hall for not having an appointment.
Community Development Director Colby Cataldi announced Planning and Building Department will hold walk-in hours Monday through Thursday from 2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. for those who do not have appointments.
13. CLOSED SESSION:
At 7:28 p.m. City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor recessed Council into closed session.
13.a. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6
City Negotiator: City Manager
Employee Organizations: South El Monte Employees Association and the South El Monte Executive Management Team Association
At 8:17 p.m. Mayor Olmos reconvened to open session.
City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor announced City Council discussed items 13.a.
No action taken, nothing to report.
14. RECESS COUNCIL MEETING
Mayor Olmos recessed the meeting at 8:17 p.m. to the Successor Agency meeting.
Mayor Olmos adjourned the Successor Agency meeting at 8:19 p.m.
Mayor Olmos reconvened the City Council meeting at 8:19 p.m.
15. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business coming before this body, at 8:19 p.m. Mayor Olmos adjourned the meeting to a special meeting on Tuesday, August 2, 2022, at 6:00 p.m.
______________________________ ______________________
Donna G. Schwartz, CMC, City Clerk Gloria Olmos, Mayor
ATTACHMENT B
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY, AUGUST 2, 2022 - 6:00 PM
1. ROLL CALL
Mayor Olmos called the meeting to order at 6:02 PM
PRESENT: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, and Mayor Olmos
ABSENT: Councilmember(s): Retamoza
STAFF PRESENT: Rene Salas, Interim City Manager; Anthony R. Taylor, City Attorney; Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk; Colby Cataldi, Community Development Director; William Fox, Interim Finance Director; and Nancy Rodriguez, Recreation Specialist.
STAFF ABSENT: Paola Lara, Deputy City Clerk.
Mayor Olmos announced Councilmember Retamoza was ill and had an excused absence.
Zoom was provided for the Public to participate during public comment via teleconference.
2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AND WAIVER OF FULL READING OF
ORDINANCES
City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor announced there was an attachment to the Memorandum of Understanding for item 4.b. Additionally, there were revisions to pages 24, 51 and 52 of Ordinance No. 1260 for item 5.a. which were made available to City Council and to the public online.
City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor announced there was an urgency closed session item to be added to the agenda as item 6, Conference with Labor Negotiator Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6, City Negotiator: City Manager, for the South El Monte Employees Association.
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, seconded Councilmember Angel to approve the agenda as amended with the addition of item 6, urgency closed session. Motion carried 4-0-1, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
ABSENT: Councilmember(s): Retamoza
3. PUBLIC COMMENT
Mayor Olmos opened public comment, there being none, closed public comment.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
A motion was made by Councilmember Delgado, seconded by Councilmember Angel to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 4-0-1 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
ABSENT: Councilmember(s): Retamoza
4.a. Adopted Resolution No. 22-66, proclaiming a local emergency persists and authorizing the use of alternative meeting procedures by the City’s legislative bodies, such as utilizing a virtual platform (e.g. Zoom) for the period from August 2, 2022 through August 31, 2022.
4.b. Adopted Resolution No. 22-67 approving the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of South El Monte and the South El Monte Executive Management Team Association.
GENERAL BUSINESS
5.a. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTIONS, SUBMITTING
A CITY BALLOT MEASURE THAT, IF APPROVED BY THE VOTERS,
WOULD REGULATE ILLEGAL AND LEGAL CANNABIS USES IN THE
CITY AND TAX THE SAME; OR, ALTERNATIVELY, PROVIDE
DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION ON A ILLEGAL AND LEGAL CANNABIS
LAND USE ORDINANCE
Mayor Olmos announced the item.
City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor presented the staff report and Robert Khuu, Attorney with Aleshire & Wynder, LLP, presented a PowerPoint on the proposed cannabis ballot measure.
Mayor Olmos opened public comment.
1. Mark Ramos, United Food & Commercial Workers Union, commented on the proposed ballot measure and ordinance and offered suggestions to City Council.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Mayor Olmos closed public comment.
City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor read the title of Ordinance No. 1260.
Discussion ensued between City Council and City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor on the regulations for a city ballot measure, general business tax percentage, set back from any sensitive uses, and the number of cannabis businesses that would be allowed to operate.
Mayor Olmos recommended setting the general business tax at 10%. Mayor Pro Tem Acosta and Councilmember Angel concurred. Councilmember Delgado voted no.
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, seconded by Councilmember Angel to approve the ballot measure as amended: Shall the measure, permitting and thoroughly regulating limited cannabis retail businesses (1 adult-use/medical with option to add 1 adult-use/medical in the measure’s second year), establishing a general tax at a maximum 8% of noncultivation cannabis business proceeds and $15/square foot of cultivation space (with CPI increases) applicable to permitted/unpermitted businesses, generating approximately $480,000 annually until ended by voters, for general City services (e.g., police, maintenance), be adopted?
Motion failed by 3-1-1 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, and Mayor Olmos NAYS: Councilmember(s): Delgado
ABSENT: Councilmember(s): Retamoza
Second motion was made by Councilmember Angel, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Acosta to approve the ballot measure as amended: Shall the measure, permitting and thoroughly regulating limited cannabis retail businesses (1 adult-use/medical with option of up to 3 total after the measure’s 1st year), establishing a general tax at a maximum 8% of noncultivation cannabis business proceeds and $25/square foot of cultivation space (with CPI increases) applicable to permitted/unpermitted businesses, generating approximately $720,000 annually until ended by voters, for general City services (e.g., police, maintenance), be adopted? Motion carried by 4-0-1 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
ABSENT: Councilmember(s): Retamoza
City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor and Attorney Robert Khuu went through the ordinance with City Council for any changes or edits and any direction to sections
5.26.060(A) and 5.26.060(B) Maximum Number of Commercial Cannabis Operation Permits; 5.26.100(B) Change in Location; Transfer, Updated Application Information; 5.26.120(C)(1) and 5.26.120(C)(2) Retailer Operating Standards and Restrictions; 5.26.130 Community Benefit Agreement; 5.26.260 City Councilmember Conflicts of Interests; 3.40.020(A) and 3.40.020(B) Tax; 3.40.110 City Councilmember Conflicts of Interests; and edit the ordinance title.
A motion was made by Councilmember Delgado, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Acosta to amend Ordinance No. 1260 as discussed, and authorize the City Attorney and the City Clerk to modify the accompanying resolutions accordingly.
Motion carried by 4-0-1 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
ABSENT: Councilmember(s): Retamoza
City Council discussed the selection of a Letter Designation for the measure for submission to the County. There was a consensus to submit letter “C” as the first choice and “CC” as the second choice.
A motion was made by Councilmember Delgado, seconded by Councilmember Angel, to approve Resolution No. 22-68, Resolution No. 22-69, and Resolution No. 22-70 as amended by the prior motions of the City Council.
Motion carried by 4-0-1 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
ABSENT: Councilmember(s): Retamoza
6. CLOSSED SESSION
At 9:35 p.m. City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor recessed Council into closed session.
6.a. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6
City Negotiator: City Manager
Employee Organizations: South El Monte Employees Association and the South El Monte Executive Management Team Association
At 9:47 p.m. Mayor Olmos reconvened to open session.
City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor announced City Council discussed items 13.a.
No action taken, nothing to report.
7. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business coming before this body, at 9:48 p.m. Mayor Olmos adjourned the meeting in memory of Vin Scully, former Los Angeles Dodgers game broadcaster.
______________________________ ______________________
Donna G. Schwartz, CMC, City Clerk Gloria Olmos, Mayor
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.b.
DATE: September 13, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rene Salas, Interim City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: William Fox, Interim Finance Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22- 71, APPROVING WARRANTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 27,
2022, THROUGH SEPTEMBER 13, 2022
SUMMARY: Authorizing payment of City expenditures for the period of July 27, 2022 through September 13, 2022 totaling $3,276,712.16.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22- 71, authorizing payment of City expenditures.
FISCAL IMPACT:
DISCUSSION:
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Resolution No. 22-71
B. Warrants
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 22-71
A RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTH EL MONTE CITY COUNCIL
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS FOR THE
PERIOD OF JULY 27, 2022, THROUGH SEPTEMBER 13, 2022,
TOTALING $3,276,712.16
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That in accordance with Section 37202 of the Government Code, the Finance Director hereby certifies to the accuracy of the following demands and the availability of funds for payment thereof.
_____________________________________
Finance Director
SECTION 2: That the following claims and demands have been audited as required by law and that the same are hereby allowed in the amount hereafter set forth.
CLAIMANT CLAIM PERIOD WARRANT #’S AMOUNT
FY 21/22 $19,419.25
FY 22/23 Electronic Warrants 07/26/2022-09/13/2022 DFT0000226-276 $345,932.78 FY 21/22 $69,436.35
FY 22/23 Hand Typed Warrants 07/26/2022-09/13/2022 10702-10715, 10782- 10790, 10872-10886 $134,167.40
FY 21/22 $1,062,836.36
FY 22/23 Regular Warrants 07/26/2022-09/13/2022 10716-10781, 10791- 10871, 10887-10950 $1,061,126.51
Payroll Check PPE 07/23/2022 1118-1131 $10,834.09
Payroll Direct Deposit PPE 07/23/2022 1898-2004 $132,863.04 Payroll Check PPE 08/06/2022 1132-1146 $11,825.61
Payroll Direct Deposit PPE 08/06/2022 2005-2117 $146,493.78 Payroll Check PPE 08/20/2022 1147-1157 $8,868.39
Payroll Direct Deposit PPE 08/20/2022 2118-2227 $135,890.77 Payroll Manual Check PPE 08/26/2022 1158-1163 $1,697.66 Payroll Manual Check PPE 09/03/2022 1164-1165 $2,549.04 Payroll Check PPE 09/03/2022 1166-1174 $7,698.72
Payroll Direct Deposit PPE 09/03/2022 2228-2333 $125,072.41 TOTAL EXPENDITURES RESOLUTION NO. 22-71 $3,276,712.16
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 13th day of September 2022. __________________________________
Gloria Olmos, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS:
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE )
I, Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk of the City of South El Monte, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. 22-71, was duly passed and approved by the City Council of the City of South El Monte at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 13th day of September 2022, and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT B
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.c.
DATE: September 13, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rene Salas, Interim City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Rene Salas, Interim City Manager
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE 2022
"CHRISTMAS WISH TOY GIVEAWAY' EVENT DONATION
LETTER, AUTHORIZATION TO INCLUDE THE CITY
COUNCILMEMBERS' SIGNATURES, AND THE
DISTRUBUTION OF LETTERS TO THE SOUTH EL MONTE
BUSINESS COMMUNITY
SUMMARY: The Parks and Recreation Division is requesting approval of the 2022 "Christmas Wish Toy Giveaway" donation letter, authorization to include the City Councilmembers' signatures, and the distribution of the letters to the South El Monte business community.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council approve the 2022 "Christmas Wish Toy Giveaway'' donation letter, authorization to include the City Council members' signatures, and distribution of the donation letters to the South El Monte business community.
FISCAL IMPACT: The "Christmas Wish Toy Giveaway" donation letter has been budgeted in the Fiscal Year 2022/2023 General Fund Budget. The estimated cost to produce and distribute the donation letter is in the amount of $1,857.00. Please find a chart below detailing the estimated cost.
Cost Associated with the Donation Letters
Item Description and Units Amount
Letter Supplies Paper, Envelops, Labels $1,000.00
Postage $0.51 x 1680 Businesses $857.00
Total Cost $1,857.00
DISCUSSION: The City of South El Monte strives to provide families with the most entertaining and memorable holiday experience at the annual "Christmas Wish Toy
Giveaway" event. The goal is to enhance morale for the upcoming holiday season by rewarding needy families with joyful activities, a snow play area, and wrapped gifts for all the children in attendance. Contributions from local businesses will be utilized to purchase toys for registered children between the ages of two and thirteen and a warm meal for all in attendance.
The 2022 Christmas Wish Toy Giveaway event will be held on Saturday, December 17, 2022, from 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. at the South El Monte Community Center. The event is subject to change based on COVID-19 Pandemic restrictions at the time of the event.
Staff report prepared by: Jayson Perez
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. 2022 Christmas Wish Toy Giveaway Donation Letter
B. 2022 Christmas Wish Toy Giveaway Donation Form
ATTACMENT A
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
1415 SANTA ANITA AVENUE
South EL Monte, CA 91733
(626) 579-6540
September 13, 2022
Dear Community Partners:
The City of South El Monte strives to provide families with the most entertaining and memorable holiday experience at our annual “Christmas Wish Toy Giveaway” event. Our goal is to enhance morale for the upcoming holiday season by rewarding needy families with joyful activities and gifts for all the children in attendance.
As the holiday season approaches, expectations in the children’s hearts begin to rise. The City of South El Monte is seeking assistance from our business community to help spread a bit of holiday cheer to these needy families. Any monetary donation will be appreciated and used to purchase gifts for underprivileged children. We are also accepting any unwrapped, new toy donations that can be dropped off at the South El Monte Community Center located at 1530 Central Avenue.
Please save the date of Saturday, December 17, 2022, from 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. for our annual Christmas Wish Toy Giveaway event. We invite you to come see the joy and happiness your donation brings to our families at the South El Monte Community Center.
On behalf of the City of South El Monte and the families of our community, we would like to thank you in advance for your consideration. Should you have any questions regarding the “Christmas Wish Toy Giveaway” or any of the donation process please contact the Recreation Division at (626) 579-2043.
Thank you for your consideration, and we look forward to meeting you at the event.
Sincerely,
_______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor, Gloria Olmos Mayor Pro Tem, Manuel Acosta
_____________________ ______________________ ________________________ Councilmember Councilmember Councilwoman
Richard Angel Hector Delgado Gracie Retamoza
ATTACHMENT B
City of South El Monte
Community Services Department
My Company/I wish to donate the following amount for the “Christmas Wish Toy Giveaway”
Bringing joy to underprivileged families in our community.
Please accept my donation in the amount of:
$50.00 _______ $75.00 _______ $100.00 _______
$200.00 _______ $500.00 _______ Other $ _______
Company Name/ Person Name:_______________________________________ Address:__________________________________________________________ Phone:___________________________________________________________ Email:____________________________________________________________ Please Make Checks Payable to:
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Attention:
South El Monte Christmas Wish Toy Giveaway
1415 Santa Anita Ave.
South El Monte, CA 91733
Please mail back check and form in a different envelope than the one received in. Thank you.
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.d.
DATE: September 13, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rene Salas, Interim City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Donna Schwartz, City Clerk
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 1259, AMENDING THE
SOUTH EL MONTE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING
COMPENSATION OF MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS
SUMMARY: At a regular City Council meeting on Tuesday, July 26, 2022 City Council waived first reading and introduced Ordinance No. 1259, amending the South El Monte Municipal Code regarding compensation of Councilmembers. California Government Code Section 36516(a)(4) provides that cities may increase the salary of councilmembers five percent (5%) for each calendar year from the operative date of the last adjustment. The proposed amendment for the change in salary shall become effective when one or more councilmembers commences a new term on or about December 13, 2022.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council waive second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1259, regarding the compensation of Mayor and Councilmembers.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Fiscal Impact will be included in the FY 2022/23. This includes the 5% increase per year for the years as stated in California Government Code Section 36516(a)(4) from the operating date of the last adjustment. The years stated will be 2016- 2022, totaling a compounded 35%, with a cumulative increase of sixteen-thousand ninehundred seventy-five dollars and forty cents. This increase will be incorporated into the Fiscal Year 2022-23 Annual Budget.
DISCUSSION: The last increase to the salary of councilmembers occurred on April 14th, 2015, with the adoption of Ordinance No. 1196.
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Ord No. 1259 Approving Increase to Council Compensation
01257.0001/805464.2
ORDINANCE NO. 1259
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
REGARDING COMPENSATION OF COUNCILMEMBERS
AND AMENDING THE SOUTH EL MONTE MUNICIPAL
CODE
RECITALS
A. California Government Code Section 36516(a)(4) provides that cities may increase the salary of councilmembers five percent for each calendar year from the operative date of the last adjustment.
B. California Government Code Section 36516.5 allows for an increase in compensation for the entirety of the Council “whenever one or more members of the city council becomes eligible for a salary increase by virtue of the council member beginning a new term of office.” The new term of office for newly elected council members (after the November election) will begin on December 13, 2021.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE SOUTH EL MONTE CITY COUNCIL ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Council hereby deletes and replaces in its entirety Subsection B of Section 2.04.160 of Chapter 2.04 (City Council) of Title 2 (Administration and Personnel) of the South El Monte Municipal Code relating to councilmember salary to read as follows:
“B. Effective on or about December 13, 2022, the monthly salary for each member of the city council shall be one thousand-one-hundred thirty-three dollars and forty-three cents.”
Section 2. The change in salary shall become effective when one or more councilmembers commences a new term on or about December 13, 2022.
Section 3. The City Clerk shall attest and certify to the passage and adoption of the Ordinance.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 13th day of September 2022.
Gloria Olmos, Mayor
ATTEST:
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________
Anthony R. Taylor, City Attorney
01257.0001/805464.2 -2-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS:
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE )
I, Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk of the City of South El Monte, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance being Ordinance No. 1259, was duly passed and approved by the City Council of the City of South El Monte, at a regular meeting of said Council held the 13th day of September 2022 and that said Ordinance was passed by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
_____________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.e.
DATE: September 13, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rene Salas, Interim City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Anthony R. Taylor, City Attorney
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22- 72, PROCLAIMING A LOCAL EMERGENCY PERSISTS AND
AUTHORIZING THE USE OF REMOTE TELECONFERENCE
MEETING PROCEDURES BY THE CITY'S LEGISLATIVE
BODIES AS AUTHORIZED BY GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54953(e) ET SEQ. FOR THE PERIOD OF
SEPTEMBER 13, 2022 THROUGH OCTOBER 12, 2022
SUMMARY: On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed AB 361 into law. AB 361 was made effective October 1, 2021. Pursuant to AB 361, staff recommends consideration of Resolution No. 22-72, proclaiming a local emergency persists and authorizing the use of remote meeting procedures by the City’s legislative bodies, which can include meetings held via a virtual platform (e.g. Zoom), for the period of September 13, 2022 through October 12, 2022.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22- 72, proclaiming a local emergency persists and authorizing the use of alternative meeting procedures by the City’s legislative bodies, such as utilizing a virtual platform (e.g. Zoom) for the period from September 13, 2022 through October 12, 2022.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
DISCUSSION: In March 2020, at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency in California, and issued Executive Order N25-20 to facilitate the ability of legislative bodies to meet using virtual platforms to comply with health orders. Since that time, several other Executive Orders have been issued that further modified the requirements related to the conduct of teleconference meetings and the right of public participation during the State of Emergency. The Executive Orders collectively operated to remove certain requirements for teleconference meetings, including that each teleconference location be accessible to the public, and that members of the public be able to address the legislative body at each teleconference location.
The Executive Orders allowed the City Council and each of the City’s legislative bodies, commissions, and committees subject to the Brown Act to modify how meetings were conducted to protect the health and safety of the legislative bodies, staff, and the public, while ensuring transparency and accessibility for open and public meetings. However, those executive orders expired on October 1, 2021.
On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed AB 361 into law. AB 361 was made effective October 1, 2021, to correspond to the timing of expiration of the executive orders.
AB 361 allows legislative bodies to continue to utilize remote/virtual platforms for meetings during a State of Emergency proclaimed by the Governor, provided that one of the following three criteria is met with respect to the meeting:
i) State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing;
ii) The legislative body is meeting for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the State of Emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees; or
iii) The legislative body has previously determined, by majority vote, that, as a result of the State of Emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
These provisions of AB 361 are effective until January 1, 2024. This means these provisions may be invoked any time there is a proclaimed State of Emergency by the Governor (e.g., wildfires) and the City Council can make at least one of the enumerated findings.
On October 26, 2021, City Council adopted Resolution No. 21-69 proclaiming a local emergency persists and authorizing the use of remote teleconference procedures by the City’s legislative bodies for the period of October 26 through November 25, 2021. To avoid a lapse in time between meetings and the effective date of Resolution No. 21-69, on November 9, 2021, City Council adopted Resolution No. 21-72 proclaiming a local emergency persists and authorizing the use of remote teleconference procedures by the City’s legislative bodies for the period of November 9 through December 9, 2021. Since then, City Council has adopted the following resolutions authorizing the same: Resolution No. 21-78 adopted on December 14, 2021 for the period of December 14, 2021 through January 12, 2022; Resolution No. 22-02 adopted on January 11, 2022 for the period of January 11, 2022 through February 9, 2022; Resolution No. 22-11 adopted February 8, 2022 for the period of February 8, 2022 through March 9, 2022; Resolution No. 22-18 adopted March 8, 2022 for the period of March 8, 2022 through April 6, 2022; Resolution No. 22-23 adopted April 12, 2022 for the period of April 12, 2022 through May 12, 2022; Resolution No, 22-33 adopted May 10, 2022 for the period May 10, 2022 through June 8, 2022; Resolution No. 22-39 adopted June 14, 2022 for the period of June 14, 2022 through July 13, 2022; Resolution No. 22-54 adopted July 12, 20222 for the period of July 12, 2022 through August 10, 2022; and Resolution No. 22-66 adopted August 2, 2022 for the period through August 31, 2022.
In large part due to the Omicron variant, there has been a sharp surge of Covid-19 cases since December 2021. The CDC indicators and thresholds measuring community transmission of COVID-19 within the County of Los Angeles continue to be at a substantial level. The Omicron variant is the predominant strain in Los Angeles County
and spreads more easily than the original virus. While the Omicron BA.1 variant is currently the dominant variant in Los Angeles County, there is a gradual increase in the level of the BA.2 subvariant in the County. The BA.2 subvariant is highly transmissible, and has become the dominant variant in many countries, including some that are facing renewed surges in cases and increased hospitalizations.
In light of the continuing COVID-19 emergency, and the continued threats to health and safety posed by indoor meetings with large attendance, staff recommends adoption of the proposed resolution making the findings required to invoke AB 361. Doing so will allow the meetings of the City Council and each of the City’s legislative bodies to continue to occur by teleconference, without adhering to the teleconferencing requirements set out in Government Code Section 54953(b)(3) that would otherwise apply absent invocation of AB 361.
Continued reliance on AB 361 will require adoption of a new resolution making the required findings every 30 days.
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Resolution No. 22-72
RESOLUTION NO. 22-72
A RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTH EL MONTE CITY COUNCIL
PROCLAIMING A LOCAL EMERGENCY PERSISTS AND
AUTHORIZING THE USE OF REMOTE TELECONFERENCE
MEETING PROCEDURES BY THE CITY’S LEGISLATIVE
BODIES, AS AUTHORIZED BY GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54953(e) ET SEQ., FOR THE PERIOD OF
SEPTEMBER 13, 2022 THROUGH OCTOBER 12, 2022
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of South El Monte is committed to preserving and nurturing public access, transparency, observation and participation in its meetings and the meetings of each of its legislative bodies (as that term is defined in Government Code section 54952, including commissions, boards and committees subject to the Brown Act); and WHEREAS, all meetings of the City’s legislative bodies are open and public, as required by the Ralph M. Brown Act, codified as Government Code section 54950 et seq., so that any member of the public may attend, participate, and observe the City’s legislative bodies conduct their business; and
WHEREAS, the Brown Act, as amended by Assembly Bill 361 (2021), amending Government Code section 54953(e) et seq., allows for remote teleconferencing observation and participation in meetings by members of a legislative body and members of the public, without compliance with the requirements of Government Code section 54953(b)(3) regarding, subject to the existence of certain conditions; and
WHEREAS, the initial required condition is a declaration of a state of emergency by the Governor pursuant to the California Emergency Services Act, Government Code section 8625, proclaiming the existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the state and within the boundaries of the City, as provided in Government Code section 8558; and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, pursuant to Government Code section 8625, Governor Newsom declared the existence of a state of emergency for the State of California, in response to the outbreak of respiratory illness due to a novel coronavirus (a disease now known as COVID19); and WHEREAS, also on March 4, 2020, the County of Los Angeles followed suit and declared the existence of a state of emergency for the County of Los Angeles; and WHEREAS, on March 12, 2020, out of an abundance of caution to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community, the Mayor of the City of South El Monte proclaimed a local emergency due to the public health threat caused by COVID-19; and WHEREAS, the Mayor’s proclamation found that conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property have arisen within the City as a result of the COVID-19 virus and that these conditions are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of the City; and
WHEREAS, on March 16, 2020, the City’s Director of Emergency Services declared a local emergency for the City pursuant to Chapter 2.32 of the South El Monte Municipal Code, finding that conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property have arisen within the City as a result of the COVID-19 virus and that these conditions are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of the City; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 20-24, ratifying the proclamation of a local emergency in response to COVID-19; and WHEREAS, Government Code section 54953(e) further requires that state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; or, the legislative body of the City finds that meeting in person would present imminent risk to the health and safety of attendees; and
WHEREAS, the State of California and County of Los Angeles Department of Public Health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, County officials are requiring masking in an effort to slow the continuously high level of transmission of COVID-19 throughout Los Angeles County, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) continue to recommend physical distancing; and
WHEREAS, in large part due to the Omicron variant, there has been a sharp surge of Covid-19 positive cases since December 2021. The CDC indicators and thresholds measuring community transmission of COVID-19 within the County of Los Angeles continue to be at a substantial level. The Omicron variant is the predominant strain in Los Angeles County and spreads more easily than the original virus. While the Omicron BA.1 variant is currently the dominant variant in Los Angeles County, there is a gradual increase in the level of the BA.2 subvariant in the County. The BA.2 subvariant is highly transmissible, and has become the dominant variant in many countries, including some that are facing renewed surges in cases and increased hospitalizations; and
WHEREAS, the Council hereby finds that such emergency conditions persist in the City, such that meeting in person for the meetings of the legislative bodies of the City would present imminent risk to the health and safety of attendees as a result of the increased risk of the spread of the COVID-19 virus among those in attendance; and
WHEREAS, the Council hereby finds that the state of emergency due to the COVID-19 virus and the conditions related thereto has caused, and will continue to cause, conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons within the City that are likely to be beyond the control of services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of the City, and thereby affirms, authorizes, and proclaims that the existence of a local emergency persists throughout the City, and ratifies the proclamation of state of emergency by the Governor of the State of California; and WHEREAS, the Council hereby finds that, as a consequence of the existing local emergency, the legislative bodies of the City shall conduct their meetings without compliance with Government Code section 54953(b)(3), and shall instead comply with the remote teleconference meeting requirements as authorized by Government Code section 54953(e) et seq.; and WHEREAS, the Council affirms that the City will allow for observation and participation by Councilmembers, members of the City’s legislative bodies, and the public by allowing public participation and comment in real time via Zoom or by telephone, as well as allowing limited inPage 53 of 358 person attendance for certain legislative bodies of the City, as will be duly indicated in the agendas of the legislative bodies, respectively, in an effort to protect the constitutional and statutory rights of all attendees.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE FINDS, RESOLVES, AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein Resolution by reference.
Section 2. The Council hereby recognizes and affirms the existence and conditions of a state of emergency as proclaimed by the Governor, the existence of emergency conditions in the City, and affirms, authorizes, and proclaims that the existence of a local emergency persists throughout the City.
Section 3. The Council hereby ratifies the Governor of the State of California’s Proclamation of State of Emergency, effective as of its issuance date of March 4, 2020.
Section 4. Further, the Council finds that holding the meetings of the City’s legislative bodies in person with no limitations to attendance would present imminent risk to the health and safety of attendees as a result of the increased risk of the spread of the COVID-19 virus among those in attendance, and that the State of California and County of Los Angeles Department of Public Health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing in connection with the COVID-19 emergency, as required by Government Code section 54953(e) et seq.
Section 5. The Interim City Manager and legislative bodies of the City are hereby authorized and directed to take all actions necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this Resolution including, conducting open and public meetings via teleconference in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e) et seq. and other applicable provisions of the Brown Act.
Section 6. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption and shall be effective until the earlier of (i) October 12, 2022, or (ii) such time the Council adopts a subsequent resolution in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e)(3) to extend the time during which the legislative bodies (as that term is defined in Government Code §54952, including commissions, boards and committees subject to the Brown Act) of the City may continue to teleconference without compliance with Government Code section 54953(b)(3).
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of September, 2022.
____________________________
Gloria Olmos, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS:
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE )
I, Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk of the City of South El Monte, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. 22-72, was duly passed and approved by the City Council of the City of South El Monte at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 13th day of September, 2022, and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
______________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.f.
DATE: September 13, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rene Salas, Interim City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: William Fox, Interim Finance Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22- 73, APPROVING ACCOUNTING POLICIES AS
RECOMMENDED BY EXTERNAL AUDITORS
SUMMARY: As a result of the completion of the June 30, 2021 Single Audit report covering financial statements and federal grant awards, it was identified by the external auditing firm, Vasquez & Company LLC, that there were improvement opportunities regarding implementing policies and procedures in three areas. These areas are capital assets, accounts receivables, and interfund activities. Based upon the recommendations received, the City developed policies and procedures following Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and best practices. These have been brought forward to the City Council for approval prior to implementation.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22- 73, approving the three proposed policies and procedures covering fixed assets, accounts receivables, and transactions be approved for implementation.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact on the implementation of the proposed polices and procedures.
DISCUSSION: The City exceeded the $750,000 Federal Grant expenditure threshold during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. The City's total expenditures were $1,275,411, which consisted of 13 Federal Grants. As a result, the external auditors, Vasquez & Companny, LLC, performed a separate organization-wide financial statement and federal grant awards audit. This type of audit is referred to as a Single Audit. A Single Audit is where a professional auditor goes over a grantee's financial management processes, including its financial management system and its compliance with federal grant requirements. It is known as a Single Audit because it combines into one audit all of a grantee's federal grants. During the course of the City's Single Audit, recommendations were made to improve operations. Three recommendations involved the need to develop written policies and procedures where they previously were not memorialized and existing practices required strengthening. The three areas identified
were capital assets, accounts receivables, and Interfund activities. Finance staff developed the policies and procedures following the guidance provided by the external auditors. The City has developed policies and procedures that provide increased accountability and follow best practices. They have been attached as part of this report. Each year, the City's policies and procedures are re-examined by the external auditors for compliance and to ensure operations are being run efficiently and effectively. Should there be any subsequent changes to the policies and procedures, they will be brought back to City Council for review and approval.
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Resolution No. 22-73
B. Capital Asset Policy
C. Accounts Receivable Policy and Procedures
D. Interfund Activity Policy
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 22-73
A RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTH EL MONTE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR
CAPITAL ASSESTS, ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLES, AND
INTEFUND ACTIVITIES
WHEREAS, during the course of the Single Audit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021 the external auditors, Vasquez & Company LLC, identified improvement opportunities where policies and procedures are required; and
WHEREAS, a capital assets policy and procedures is recommended for implementation that will improve financial reporting and accountability; and WHEREAS, an accounts receivable policy and procedures is recommended for implementation that will improve financial reporting and accountability; and WHEREAS, an interfund activities policy and procedures is recommended for implementation that will improve financial reporting and accountability.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Approve the adoption of the capital assets policy and procedures.
SECTION 2. Approve the adoption of the accounts receivable policy and procedures.
SECTION 3. Approve the adoption of the interfund activities policy and procedures.
SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of September, 2022. ______________________________
Gloria Olmos, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS:
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE )
I, Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk of the City of South El Monte, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. 22-73, was passed and approved by the City Council of the City of South El Monte at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 13th day of September 2022 and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT B
1 CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Capital Assets Policy & Procedures
I. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this document is to state the policies and procedures to be used in managing the capital assets owned and maintained by the City of El Monte.
II. SCOPE
It is intended that this policy cover all capital assets for all funds under the direct authority of the City taking into consideration Federal, State, and Local Laws, and ordinances or Resolutions that may restrict their use and disposal.
III. OBJECTIVES
The City has established this policy to:
a) Safeguard the significant investment in capital assets and establish a capitalization policy whereby dollar values assigned to capital assets are permanently recorded. b) Identify all capital assets in order to provide a management tool for the replacement of re-occurring items avoiding duplication and inefficient use of capital assets. c) Comply with State laws and regulations concerning governmental accounting, auditing, and reporting requirements and, thereby providing information for the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
d) Work in conjunction with the City's Risk Management Program to ensure that capital assets are insured adequately to cover losses.
IV. DEFINITIONS
The following words when used in connection with this policy shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them herein:
ANTICIPATED USEFUL LIFE: The time allotment in years of the estimated time the asset will be in use.
BUILDINGS: All permanent walled and/ or roofed structures.
CAPITAL ASSETS: Land, improvements to land, easements, buildings, building improvements, vehicles, machinery, equipment, and historical treasures, infrastructure, and all other tangible or intangible assets that are used in operations and that have initial useful lives extending beyond a single reporting period.
2 CAPITALIZATION THRESHOLD: Dollar value at which the City elects to capitalize tangible or intangible assets that are used in operations and that have initial useful lives extending beyond a single reporting period. Generally, capitalization thresholds are applied to individual items rather than groups of items, unless the result would be to exclude items that would clearly be material to the financial statements in the aggregate.
DEPRECIATION: Depreciation is the systematic and rational allocation of the cost of a capital asset over its estimated useful life. Depreciation normally begins when an asset is purchased or substantially completed and accepted.
FURNISHINGS/EQUIPMENT: Movable personal property and distinguished from supply items with the following characteristics:
a) It retains its original shape and appearance with use. b) It is non-expendable; that is if the article is damaged or some of its parts are lost or worn out, it is usually more feasible to repair it rather than replace it with an entirely new unit.
c) It represents an investment of money which makes it feasible and advisable to capitalize the item.
d) It does not lose its identity through incorporation into a different or more complex unit or substance.
e) It is not permanently incorporated into the structure of a building.
GAAP: Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. A widely accepted set of rules, conventions, standards, and procedures for reporting financial information as established by the Financial Accounting Standards Board.
INFRASTRUCTURE: Long-lived capital assets that normally are stationary in nature and normally can be preserved for a significantly greater number of years than most capital assets. Examples of infrastructure assets include streets, bridges, storm drains, water distribution lines, and waste water collection lines.
LAND: All real estate owned by the City, exclusive of improvements.
V. PROVISIONS
This policy is based on generally accepted accounting principles and generally accepted auditing standards, and should be interpreted in accordance therewith.
3 VI. PROCEDURES
a) Capitalization:
1. In determining whether assets, as defined above,should be capitalized, the following items should be considered: cost, estimated cost, or market value (when acquired by gift).
2. Land assets will always be capitalized without regard to cost; and will not be depreciated.
3. Infrastructure will be capitalized if it has a life expectancy of seven (7) years or greater and a designated value exceeding $100,000.
4. Assets other than land or infrastructure will be capitalized if the asset has a useful life of two (2) years or more and a designated value exceeding $5,000. (See Estimated Useful Life of Capital Assets, Attachment A)
b) Valuation of Capital Assets:
Capital asset accounting maintains total capital asset costs rather than current market or replacement cost. Capital assets which are to be capitalized shall be assigned a dollar value in accordance with one of the following bases:
1. Actual historical cost: This cost can be obtained by reference to documents such as invoices, checks, vouchers, contracts, or purchase orders.
2. Estimated historical cost: Although historical costs are more desirable, they may be impossible or impractical to obtain. In this case, an estimated fair market value (estimated cost) as of the date of acquisition should be placed on each item.
Estimated costs may be obtained from such sources as minutes, contracts, purchase orders, bond indentures, vendors or appraisers.
3. Estimated fair market value: Gifts or donations shall be valued at fair market value at the time of receipt. This value can generally be obtained from the donor.
4. Capital versus Non -Capital Assets: An asset will be classified as a capital asset (capitalized under generally accepted accounting principles), if it is a non-consumable, tangible item, valued at a single amount greater than $5,000 and with a useful life of at least two (2) years. Tangible items valued at single amounts less than $5,000 will be classified as a non-capital asset.
5. Purchased Assets: The capitalized cost of most purchased assets includes the purchase or acquisition price and related freight, installation, customs charges, taxes (net of rebates) and other direct costs of getting the asset into condition. This can also include items that are not initially ordered as a single amount, but may be included as part of the historical cost. Other direct costs may include interest if included with the physical capitalized equipment, and warranty costs for the first year only, if included in the acquisition price. Costs that will not be capitalized include training and maintenance unless these costs cannot be separated from the
4 acquisition cost.
6. Construction in Progress: Capital assets that are construction related (e.g. buildings, streets or constructed equipment) are capitalized as work in progress and amortization commences "when work is substantially complete” and the building or other constructed asset is ready for occupancy or use. Construction costs include all direct costs associated with the project that are incurred during the period when planning for the construction begins and ends when the construction project is substantially complete. Costs also include any overhead directly attributable to the construction or development activity. Project Managers are to inform the Finance Department when work is substantially complete so that it can be an asset placed in service.
At a minimum, at fiscal year-end, each project is to be reviewed for proper classification.
7. Donated Assets: Donated or contributions of capital assets are capitalized at the appraised fair market value at the date of contribution.
8. Building Improvements versus Repairs and Maintenance: Expenditures made to maintain an existing capital asset that restores the capital asset to working condition but does not extend the life of the capital asset, regardless of the amount, will be considered repairs and maintenance expenditure s. These may include such examples as, repairs to the roof, repainting of a building, or painting of interior offices. Building improvements which increase the value of the asset or extends the useful life will be added as a capital asset.
9. Value of Infrastructure Assets: This process is completed annually at calendar year end. Infrastructure total costs include all direct costs associated with the project that are incurred during the period when planning or construction begins and ends when the project is substantially complete. Costs also include any overhead directly attributable to the project. Finance is to be notified when the asset is to be placed in service so that proper asset classification takes place. c) Disposition of Capital Assets:
1. Surplus property is defined as any unnecessary, obsolete or excess supplies, materials, tools, vehicles., equipment or furniture that has been replaced or retired due to damage, age or change in the City's standards and or specifications.
2. Items with an estimated book value of $5,000 or more must be declared surplus by the City Council and disposed of by means of formal sale, informal sale, auction, exchange, or trade. The selected method is deemed appropriate, taking into consideration market trends, demands, economics and convenience.
3. Items with a book value of under $5,000 must be declared surplus by the City Manager prior to disposal and may be disposed of by means of formal or informal sale or auction, exchange or trade, whichever is deemed appropriate, taking into consideration market trends, demands, economics and convenience.
d) Financial Reporting:
1. Disclose requirements: 1) the historical cost of capital assets (or their fair value at the time of donation), 2) accumulated depreciation, 3) additions during the period, and 4) deletions during the period in a format that demonstrates the change between the beginning and ending book values. Capital assets will be reported in the government wide financial statements.
e) Depreciation:
1. Capitalized assets, other than land,will be depreciated using the straight-line depreciation method.
f) Impairment
1. Asset impairment occurs when there is a sudden and permanent decrease in the value of an asset below its recorded cost. When an assed has been identified as impaired, an adjustment will be made to the assets recorded value and the impairment loss will recorded. The review for possible impairments will occur during the inventory process.
g) Inventory
1. All capitalized assets shall be recorded and inventoried. P e r i o d i c physical inventories will be required. The Finance Department will coordinate the physical inventory process. Departments may choose to maintain an inventory listing of non-capital assets in its possession for control purposes.
VII. RESPONSIBILITY FOR ENFORCEMENT
The enforcement and records management of the Capital Asset Policy shall be under the jurisdiction of the Finance Director, with day-to-day assistance from individual Department Heads and managers.
Noncapitalized assets should be controlled by Department Managers and Supervisors by establishing and maintaining adequate control procedures at the departmental level. s
2 Attachment "A"
Estimated Useful Life of
Capital Assets
Buildings and Improvements 15 to 50 Years
Vehicles, computers and Equipment 3 to 10 Years
Infrastructure
Roadway networks 10 to 100 Years
Storm drain network 30 to 100 Years
Parks & Recreation Network 25 Years
_
6
ATTACHMENT C
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Accounts Receivables Policy & Procedures
I. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this policy is to ensure that all reasonable diligence has been used to collect accounts receivable and ensure the most efficient use of City revenue collection resources.
II. SCOPE
It is the intent of the City of South El Monte to reflect the accurate value of its accounts receivable. All accounts receivable should be entered into the City’s financial software system to allow for an aging analysis. Outstanding accounts receivable are reviewed on a monthly basis. Efforts will be made for the timely collection of all accounts receivable in the manner stated in this policy.
This policy applies to all City departments and funds. Types of receivables covered by this policy include but are not limited to: certain delinquent items in regards to business license tax; transient occupancy tax; regulatory and development impact fees; fees for services; recovery for damage to City property; fines and penalties; benefit payments, rents, leases; contract payments and Legal judgments.
III. OBJECTIVES:
The City has established this policy to:
a) Ensure billings for City services are timely.
b) Ensure follow up on unpaid amounts.
c) Investigate unpaid amounts for collection activity or write-off.
IV. PROCEDURES:
A. RevenueBillings
The timely identification of outstanding revenue owed and/or losses is an essential element in accurately measuring the value of the City’s assets.
1. Customer statements: customers have 30 days from Statement date to ensure timely payment with no late fees assessed; unless a date is specified differently in an individual contract.
2. 1
st Overdue Notice: over 30 days; notice statement, late fees, penalties and/or interest assessed.
3. 2
nd Overdue Notice: 60-90 days; late notice statement; additional fees, penalties, interest.
4. Collection and/or Legal Notice: 90 days and over. Submit account to Collection Agency for revenue collection or Legal Department to initiate legal proceedings.
B. Uncollectable Receivables
An account may be considered uncollectible after the appropriate collection procedures have been followed if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
a) The debt is disputed and the City has insufficient documentation to pursue collection efforts;
b) The cost of further collection efforts will exceed the estimated recovery amount; c) The account remains unpaid after the lesser of four years or the applicable statutory period for commencement of a recovery action;
d) The debtor cannot be located, nor any of the debtor’s assets; e) The debtor has no assets and there is no expectation they will have any in the future; f) The debtor has died and there is no known estate or guarantor; g) The debt is discharged through legal action (bankruptcy or court judgment); h) The debt has been forgiven by action of the City Council.
B. Write-Off Thresholds
Uncollectible receivables will be written off following the write-off authority thresnholds in the manner stated below:
a) Director of Finance may approve write off transactions up to $2,500. b) City Manager may approve write off transactions over $2,500 up to $5,000. c) City Council authorization required for transactions over $5,000.00. d) It is the responsibility of the Finance Department to provide the City Manager and/or the City Council with an aging report as needed, identifying all outstanding receivables with a value of $5,000.00 or more per transaction determined to be delinquent or uncollectible, including the basis for collection and the actions taken. A write-off of uncollectible accounts receivable from the City’s accounting records does
not constitute forgiveness of the debt or gift of public funds C. AccountingProcedures
a. Once an account is determined to be uncollectible, the invoice is reversed off the system.
b. Accounts written off will be charged back to the accounts credited/debited when the invoice was generated.
c. Revenue received from Collection Agency will be deposited into the account the invoice was originally generated.
ATTACHMENT D
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Interfund Transfers and Borrowing Policy & Procedures
I. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this policy is to ensure the proper accounting and reporting over interfund activity.
Interfund transfers reflect activities such as reciprocal interfund activity including interfund loans, interfund services provided and used. They can also be nonreciprocal interfund activity including interfund transfers and interfund reimbursements.
II. SCOPE
It is intended that this policy covers accounting, reporting, and City Council approval of required transactions on an annual basis in conjunction with the annual audit. Interfund activity will be provided to City Council covering the fiscal year in conjunction with the annual audit. Those items requiring explanations will be provided along with those transactions requiring approval and a loan payback.
III. OJBECTIVES
The City has established this policy to:
a) Establish the basis of interfund transfers that are allowable in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
b) Identify interfund transfers that may require special attention. Such transactions must be reviewed by the Finance Director. The Finance Department has the authority and responsibility to request explanations regarding any unusual or non-routine interfund transfers. Such transfers will be reviewed by the City Manager and approved by City Council as part of the annual staff report.
A. Interfund Borrowing
Three types of interfund borrowing are permitted:
1. Internal loans that are approved as a necessary part of normal business operations. For example:
a) Bond covenants require fund balances of a certain amount that will require the infusion of working capital at the start of each fiscal year. This infusion shall be treated as a short-term loan. Interest shall be paid on any such loan at a rate equivalent at the City’s average investment portfolio yield.
b) Loans to provide working capital to other funds may be approved by the City Manager. Such approval must be in writing, specify maximum allowable amounts, time limit, other terms and conditions as recommended by the Finance Director.
2. Internal loans that provide for advance spending for a capital project. Such loans must be approved by the City Manager, whose approval must be based on the interfund principles articulated below. In all cases, documentation is required that specifies a repayment schedule and the interest rate to be charged. Copies of such documentation must be filed with the Finance Department before a loan can go forward. Interfund loans shall not hinder the accomplishment of any function or project for which the lending fund was established.
a) Repayment schedules shall be expected not to exceed ten years. Exceptions to this rule require approval by the City Council.
b) Interest rates shall be expected to approximate the yield on the City’s investment portfolio from short-term investments at the time when the loan is originated.
Interest rates will be reset each year (effective July 1) for loan repayment schedules exceeding two years. Any exceptions require approval of the City Manager.
3. In extraordinary circumstances, loans may be made on a prospective basis from the City’s short-term investments. Such loans must be approved by the City Council, upon the recommendation of the City Manager. Documentation is required that specifies a repayment schedule and the interest rate to be charged. The amount of all such loans shall not exceed 20 percent of the City’s average cash balance from the prior fiscal year.
Compliance with this requirement will be monitored by the Finance Director for t h e C i t y M a n a g e r . A status report will be provided to the City Council at least annually.
IV. Procedures
A. Procedures (n/a)
B. Guidelines (n/a)
C. Other Related Resource Materials (n/a)
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.g.
DATE: September 13, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rene Salas, Interim City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: William Fox, Interim Finance Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22- 74, ADOPTING AND APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING (MOU) BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH
EL MONTE AND THE SOUTH EL MONTE EMPLOYEES’
ASSOCIATION (SEMEA)
SUMMARY: The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of South El Monte Employees’ Association (SEMEA) for the period beginning July 1, 2022 and ending June 30, 2024 has been agreed to, subject to City Council approval.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22- 74, approving the MOU between the City of South El Monte and SEMEA..
FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact covers two fiscal years and will be accounted for in both the 2022-23 fiscal year budget as well as the 2023-24 fiscal year budget. The fiscal impact of the first year is $197,200 and $99,600 in the second year, for a two-year total of $296,800. The costs will be budgeted within the General Fund and Special Revenue funds where employees charge their time.
DISCUSSION: The City and SEMEA have come to an agreement based on negotiations regarding the previous 2020-2022 MOU. The attached MOU covers fiscal years 2022- 2024 and reflects the changes that have been made.
1st Contract Year Cost of Living Adjustment of 5%, retroactively applied back to July 1, 2022.
2nd Contract Year Cost of Living Adjustment of 3%.
Juneteenth Day will be earned as a Floating Holiday.
A one-time five percent (5%) equity adjustment will be provided to employees identified in the classification and compensation study as being five percent or greater underpaid. There were nine qualifying job titles as follows: Administrative Clerk - Community Development, Administrative Clerk - Public Works, Driver
Class B, Public Safety Officer, Public Works Analyst, Receptionist, Recreation Coordinator, Recreation Specialist, and Senior Services Coordinator. The parties agree to the right to meet and confer on the results and implementation of the classification and compensation study during the term of the agreement.
Bonus totaling $2,500 is to be paid in two separate installments as follows: at the beginning of the first contract year at $1,250 and the beginning of the second contract year at $1,250.
Employees leaving during the first year of the agreement are subject to paying back 100% of the education funds paid by the City. In the event an employee leaves during year two of the agreement, 50% of the funds paid by the City will be reimbursed by the employee back to the City.
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Resolution No. 22-74
B. SEMEA MOU Agreement 2022-24
C. SEMEA MOU Agreement Redline Verison
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTIONNO.22-74
A RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTH EL MONTE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPTING AND APPROVING THE TERMS
AND PROVISIONS OF THE 2022-2024 MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH EL
MONTE AND THE SOUTH EL MONTE
EMPLOYEES’ASSOCIATION
WHEREAS, the City of South El Monte ("City") is a general law city and a public agency as defined in Government Code Section 350l(c); and WHEREAS, Teamsters Local 911 is the Joint Majority representative employee organization for the City's recognized employee bargaining unit, the South El Monte Employees’ Association( SEMEA) and is a recognized employee organization within the meaning of Government Code Section 3501 (b); and
WHEREAS, the previous two-year Memorandum of Understanding between the City and SEMEA had an effective date of July 1, 2020 and expires on June 30, 2022; and WHEREAS, representatives of the City and representatives of SEMEA met and conferred in good faith on a successor agreement on the terms and conditions of employment, within the meaning of Government Code Section 3505, by and between the City and members of SEMEA for two fiscal years of 2022-23 and 2023-24; and WHEREAS, on August 11, 2022, members of SEMEA ratified the FY2022 – 23 and FY2023-24 Memorandum of Understanding prepared to memorialize the deal points agreed upon by the parties.
NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED that by the adoption of the Resolution, the City of South El Monte hereby approves:
SECTION 1. That pursuant to Government Code Section 3505.1, as the terms of the "Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of South El Monte and the South El Monte Employees’ A ssociation, July 1, 2022 - June 30, 2024 ("2022-2024 Memorandum of Understanding"), attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A, was reached by representatives of the City and SEMEA, representatives of the City and SEMEA have jointly prepared the 2022-2024 Memorandum of Understanding, which agreement is not binding until approved by the City Council of the City and the members of SEMEA. Said agreement may be amended and approved as to form by the City Attorney.
SECTION 2. That the 2022-2024 Memorandum of Understanding, which has been approved by SEMEA, is hereby adopted by the City of South El Monte for fiscal years 2022-2024.
SECTION 3. That all provisions contained in the 2022-2024 Memorandum of Understanding attached hereto shall, where any conflict exists, supersede all previously adopted memoranda of understanding between SEMEA and the City.
SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of September, 2022.
Donna G. Schwartz,City Clerk
ATTEST:
Donna G. Schwartz,City Clerk
STATEOFCALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OFLOSANGELES ) SS:
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE )
I, Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk of the City of South El Monte, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. 22-74, was passed and approved by the City Council of the City of South El Monte at an adjourned regular meeting of said Council held on the 13th day of September, 2022 and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Donna G. Schwartz,City Clerk
ATTACHMENT B
ATTACHMENT C
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE AND THE
SOUTH EL MONTE EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION,
FOR THE PERIOD BEGINNING JULY 1, -2022
AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2024
2 PREAMBLE
Pursuant to Chapter 10 (Section 3500 et seq.) of Division 4, Title 1 of the Government Code and the Employer-Employee Relations Resolution of the City of South El Monte, the matters within the scope of representation that are set forth in this Memorandum of Understanding have been discussed by the representatives of the City of South El Monte (“City”) and representatives of the South El Monte Employees’ Association (“Association”).
The matters within the scope of representation that are set forth in this Memorandum of Understanding have been discussed in good faith and agreed to by the City and the Association as constituting an equitable adjustment to present wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment as evidenced by the signatures of the duly authorized representatives of the City and the Association.
The provisions of the City’s Personnel Rules and/or Municipal Code shall be modified as follows for those employees subject to this Memorandum of Understanding.
3 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Article I: Definition of Terms…………………………….…………… 4
Article II: Compensation………………………………………………. 5
Article III: Leave Procedures…………………………………………... 7
Article IV: Insurance and Retirement Benefits………………………. 9 Article V: City Rights…………………………………………………... 12
Article VI: Association Security………………………………………... 14
Article VII: Other matters within the scope of representation………. 15 Article VIII: Modification and Duration…………………………………. 17 Article IX: Employee Benefits…………………………………………. 18
Article X: Probationary Procedures…………………………………... 21
Article XI: Termination Procedures…………………………………… 21
Article XII: Disciplinary Procedures……………………………………. 21
Article XIII: Appeal Procedures…………………………………………. 24
Article XIV: Grievance Procedures……………………………………... 26
Attachment A: Fiscal Year 20202022-21 23Compensation
Schedule……………………………………………………. 32
Attachment B: Fiscal Year 202123-202224 Compensation
Schedule……………………………………………………. 33
4 ARTICLE I
DEFINITION OF TERMS
The following terms, whenever used in this Memorandum of Understanding, shall have the meaning set forth in this article.
SECTION 1 – BUSINESS DAY: Business day shall mean days that are neither weekends nor holidays. Work day shall mean the same as business day.
SECTION 1 - CLASSIFICATION: A position or positions assigned to the same job title.
SECTION 2 - DAY: Day shall mean calendar days except, where specified in this agreement.
SECTION 3 – EMPLOYEE: An individual compensated through the City payroll and appointed to one of the classifications represented by the Association as set forth in Attachment A.
SECTION 4 – LEAVE: An authorized absence from work.
SECTION 5 - POSITION: The duties and responsibilities assigned to an employee within a classification.
SECTION 6 – PAY RATE: The regular monthly or hourly rate of pay that is assigned to an employee.
SECTION 7 – SENIORITY: The total time employed as a full-time employee of the City and the time employed as a part-time or interim employee if such time was spent working the duties of a full-time position.
SECTION 8 – SERVICE: Employment with the City.
SECTION 9 – ADVANCE WRITTEN NOTICE: A request for leave submitted on a recognized leave form of the City and approved by the employee’s Department Head.
SECTION 10 – PERSONNEL RULES/EMPLOYEES’ MANUAL: References policies and procedures, Federal and State Laws on Sexual Harassment, NonDiscrimination Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
SECTION 11 – ANNIVERSARY DATE: The date of full-time employment, reinstatement, or promotion that is observed on an annual basis for salary increases and benefits.
5 ARTICLE II
COMPENSATION
SECTION 1 – PREPARATION OF COMPENSATION PLAN: The City Manager shall be responsible for the maintenance of the City’s compensation plan. The compensation schedule shall contain a list of the job classifications represented by the Association and their corresponding salary range attached hereto as Attachment A.
SECTION 2 – ESTABLISHMENT OF PAY RATES: Upon appointment, an individual shall be assigned to a step on the salary range established for the classification. An employee will be eligible for an increase at first satisfactory evaluation (at or following six months of service for new-hire probationary employees).
Annually thereafter (effective July 1, 2018), on their anniversary date, an employee shall advance to the next higher step within their salary range as long as said employee is performing at a satisfactory or above level. A promotion results in a new anniversary date.
SECTION 3 – WAGES: General salary increases are as follows and are attached hereto as Attachments A and B:
A. Effective July 1, 20202022, salary ranges will be increased by
1.5%.5%
B. Effective July 1, 20212023, salary ranges will be increased by
1.5%3.0%.
SECTION 4 – LONGEVITY PAY: Except as provided below, bargaining unit employees shall not be eligible for longevity pay.
A. An employee appointed to a full-time position in this bargaining unit before October 11, 2011 and who is not receiving longevity pay on October 11, 2011 shall be eligible to receive longevity pay calculated from date of hire, as long as said employee is performing at a satisfactory, or above, level as follows:
1. Completion of fifteen (15) years of continuous service as a full-time employee: two and one-half percent (2½%) of base salary.
2. Completion of twenty (20) years of continuous service as a full-time employee: two and one-half percent (2½%) of base salary.
B. Employees who, on October 11, 2011, are receiving longevity pay at a rate greater than three percent (3%) of base salary shall continue to receive such percentage of longevity pay but shall not be eligible for any increase in such longevity pay percentage.
6 C. Employees who, on October 11, 2011, are receiving longevity pay at a rate of three percent (3%) of base salary shall continue to receive such percentage of longevity pay and shall be eligible for an increase in such longevity pay percentage under subsection A.2., upon meeting its requirements. Thus, the maximum rate of total longevity pay for employees covered by this subsection C is five and one-half percent (5½ %).
D. An individual appointed to a full-time position in this bargaining unit after October 11, 2011 will not be eligible for longevity pay.
SECTION 5 – BILINGUAL SKILL PAY: Effective 11/1/10, the parties agree to suspend bilingual skill pay indefinitely.
SECTION 6 – OVERTIME COMPENSATION: The City shall provide nonexempt employees with compensation or compensatory time off in lieu of compensation, at the discretion of the employee, for overtime worked subject to the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), including the maximum limit on accumulation of compensatory time. If the City suspends operations due to a State or federal holiday, employees who would otherwise have been scheduled to work on that day shall have the number of hours in their scheduled shift added to the number of “hours worked” for the purpose of calculating overtime.
A. Meal Allowance: An employee recalled to work due to an emergency shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of a meal purchased by the employee up to a maximum of $10.00. The employee must submit a receipt for the meal in order to be entitled to reimbursement.
SECTION 7 – DISTRIBUTION OF OVERTIME: The assignment of overtime work shall be the responsibility of the division head and the department head.
The City Manager shall have the exclusive authority to authorize overtime work.
All overtime work shall receive prior authorization in order for the employee to receive compensation.
A. Emergency Work/Storm Patrol: Emergency work related to call-outs on off-hours and storm patrol work will be assigned as follows:
1. When emergency needs are assigned, personnel will be contacted to work in the following order:
(a) Personnel that is uniquely qualified for the needed response.
(b) Personnel that have the shortest response time.
B. General Guidelines: At all times, whenever feasible, based on seniority, overtime will be assigned on an equal opportunity basis.
7 SECTION 8 – ALLOWANCE FOR MILEAGE: The City shall reimburse employees for use of their personal vehicles for official City business to match the amount allowed by the regulations of the Internal Revenue Service.
SECTION 9 – CALL BACK: Employees who are called back to work after completion of their regular shift shall receive three (3) hours of compensation or compensatory time off in lieu of compensation, or time actually worked, whichever is greater.
SECTION 10 – NIGHT SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL: Night shift differential shall be paid to any regular full-time employee whose schedule requires the employee to work between the hours of 6:00 PM and 6:00 AM provided that either:
A. The employee is regularly scheduled to work ½ (50%) or more of his/her shift between the hours of 6:00 PM and 6:00 AM. These employees shall be paid an additional monthly allowance of $50.00 per month; or
B. The employee is NOT regularly scheduled but on individual work days of their work week they are required to work ½ (50%) or more of the scheduled work day shift between the hours of 6:00 PM and 6:00 AM.
These employees shall be paid an additional allowance of $1.00 per hour for all hours worked on the qualifying work day.
SECTION 11 – BOOT/INSOLE ALLOWANCE: Every calendar year, all employees required to wear safety-type work shoe/boot shall be entitled to reimbursement for safety-type shoe/boot or insoles for such shoe/boot from the City for an amount up to $200.00 provided that the employee has provided management with verification or receipt within 6 months of purchase.
SECTION 12 ONE-TIME Equity Adjustment: There is a one-time five percent (5%) equity adjustment for employees identified in the classification and compensation study as being under paid by 5% or more. This adjustment is retroactively applied back to July 1, 2022. The City and Association agree the right to meet and confer on the results of the implementation of the classification and compensation study during the term of the agreement.
SECTION 13 – ONE TIME BONUS: A One-time bonus of $2,500 is to be paid at the beginning of first contract year of $1,250 and at the beginning of the second contract year of $1,250.
ARTICLE III
LEAVE PROCEDURES
SECTION 1 – HOLIDAY:
8 A. Employees in the classified service shall be provided with the following holidays with pay subject to the provisions of the South El Monte Municipal Code.
1. New Year’s Day
2. Martin Luther King Day
3. Presidents’ Day
4. Cesar Chavez Day
5. Memorial Day
6. Independence Day
7. Labor Day
8. Columbus Day
9. Veterans’ Day
10. Thanksgiving Day
11. Christmas Day
12. Employee’s Birthday
12.13. Juneteenth Day
Cesar Chavez Day and Juneteenth Day will be earned as a Floating Holidays.
With prior approval, employees may use the Cesar Chavez Floating Holiday and Juneteenth Day on the day of the Cesar Chavez birthday celebration and Juneteenth Day celebration or any other scheduled workday. The Each holiday must be used in the calendar year granted. It may not be accrued or carried over to a subsequent year and is not subject to cash payment at termination.
If an employee is scheduled to work on a Holiday, other than a Floating Holiday, in lieu of receiving holiday leave, employee assigned to work shall receive premium pay at the rate of time and one-half for hours actually worked.
Employees shall receive holiday pay whether they work the holiday or not so long as they work the scheduled day before and after the holiday.
SECTION 2 – COMPENSATORY LEAVE: The City shall provide employees with compensatory leave subject to the following conditions:
A. Upon advance written notice and provided that the employee’s absence does not interfere with the City’s operations, the City Manager shall permit an employee to use compensatory leave at the employee’s discretion. An employee may use compensatory leave along with any other authorized paid leave with the approval of the City Manager.
B. Compensatory Leave may be accrued up to a maximum of 160 hours of unused compensatory leave. Upon reaching 160 hours, employees shall earn no additional compensatory accrual until their balance of accrued but unused compensatory leave is reduced below 160 hours; as an alternative for employees who have accrued the maximum
9 compensatory leave hours and are being requested to work overtime they will receive compensation for such services. Employees who are currently over the maximum of 160 hours of unused compensatory leave will be paid for the excess compensatory leave on a dollar-for dollar basis.
C. When an employee separates from City service for any reason, the employee shall be compensated for any accrued compensatory leave.
The value of accrued compensatory leave shall be calculated using the employee’s pay rate on the date of the employee’s separation from City service. The employee shall be compensated for one hundred percent (100%) of any accrued compensatory leave.
SECTION 3 – MILITARY LEAVE: The City shall grant military leave to employees as required by law. All employees entitled to military leave shall give the City Manager an opportunity within the limits of military regulations to determine when such leave shall be taken.
SECTION 4 – TIME OFF FOR VOTING: The City shall provide employees with time off for voting subject to the following conditions:
A. When an employee claims not to have sufficient time outside of working hours to vote at a statewide election, the employee may, without loss of pay, with the approval of the City Manager, take off no more than two (2) hours from work. Time off for voting shall be at the beginning or end of a work period, whichever time allows the employee the most time for voting and the least time off from work.
B. If the employee knows or has reason to believe that time off for voting will be necessary on election day, the employee shall notify the City Manager of that fact at least two (2) work days in advance.
SECTION 5 – BEREAVEMENT LEAVE: The City Manager shall grant an employee bereavement leave for a period not exceeding three (3) work days for deaths within the employee’s immediate family. Immediate family is defined as any relative by blood or marriage who is a member of the employee’s household, and the employee’s spouse, registered domestic partner; parents or stepparents; spouse’s parents or step-parents; brothers, step-brothers or halfbrothers; sisters, step-sisters or half-sisters; employee’s grandparents; spouse’s grandparents; grandchildren; aunts and uncles, in-laws, regardless of the residence of the deceased.
SECTION 6 – TIME OFF FOR JURY DUTY: The City shall grant up to twentytwo (22) business days off to an employee required to serve on jury duty with compensation at the employee’s existing pay rate. The employee will remit to the City any money paid to him/her by the court for jury service.
10 SECTION 7 – FAILURE TO RETURN FROM LEAVE: An employee who fails to return to work within three working days after the conclusion of a leave provided for under this Article or a vacation leave without an authorized extension of such leave shall be considered to have voluntarily resigned from City service.
ARTICLE IV
INSURANCE AND RETIREMENT BENEFITS
SECTION 1 – HEALTH BENEFITS: The City, on a conditional basis, will make available, to all members of the designated appropriate bargaining unit the Public Employees’ Retirement System Medical and Hospital Care Plan (PERS Plan).
The Association on behalf of itself and all members of the designated appropriate bargaining unit acknowledges, understands and agrees the City is conditioning its willingness to allow employees to enroll in the PERS Plan on the basis the City retains the sole and absolute discretion to withdraw from the PERS Plan without meeting and conferring with the Association and without the agreement of the Association should anything occur that would modify the premium contribution format described in Section 2 of this Article. Should the City withdraw from the PERS Plan for the aforesaid reason, the City shall meet and confer with the Association related to a replacement Medical and Hospital Care Plan, pursuant to Article VII, Section 1 of this Memorandum of Understanding.
The City will meet and confer with the Association prior to determining whether to increase the City’s contributions towards the PERS Reserve Fund charges or the PERS Administrative charges upon receiving written notification of any increases in those charges.
The City shall continue to make available to employees and their eligible dependents the City’s current group dental and vision care plans or other plans of equal benefit. The City shall meet and confer with the Association to review alternative affordable dental and vision plans when the Association presents such plans to the City.
If an employee does not enroll in any medical insurance plan offered by the City, the employee shall receive a deferred compensation payment of $100 per month.
To be eligible for the $100 deferred compensation payment the employee must submit to the City written proof of duplicate medical insurance coverage or evidence that enrollment in a medical insurance plan would violate the employee’s religious beliefs.
SECTION 2 – CITY CONTRIBUTIONS: The City for the term of this agreement and only while the City participates in the PERS Plan, shall make the following contributions towards the cost of medical insurance for active employees:
11 For all active employees who join the PERS Plan, the City will contribute directly to PERS an amount to be applied to the applicable PERS Plan monthly premium. The City’s contribution will be equal to the monthly premium rate established by Kaiser Permanente for its Family Health Plan.
SECTION 3 – VISION AND DENTAL INSURANCE: The City shall pay the monthly premiums for employees and their eligible dependents. The City and the Association agree to develop a labor-management committee to evaluate efficiency of current vision, dental and other City paid benefits. Committee will determine if any recommendations for future changes are to be communicated to the City Manager.
SECTION 4 – NOTIFICATION OF INCREASE IN PREMIUM: The City shall advise the Association in writing of increases in insurance premiums and the effective date(s) of the increase(s) within two weeks of receiving notice of the increase(s).
SECTION 5 – LIFE INSURANCE, ACCIDENTAL DEATH INSURANCE AND LONG-TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE: The City shall pay one hundred percent (100%) of the cost for each employee in providing term life insurance equal to the employee’s annual salary, accidental death and dismemberment insurance equal to the employee’s annual salary, and long-term disability insurance equal to two-thirds (2/3) of the employee’s monthly salary. The longterm disability plan shall provide for thirty (30) day benefit exclusion and benefit payments until the age of seventy (70) years of age.
SECTION 6 – PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM (PERS): The City shall include eligible employees in the Public Employees’ Retirement System
2.5% at 55 plan, with the highest year and social security offset or the Public Employees’ Retirement System 2% at 60 plan, depending upon the employee’s hire date as provided below. Effective completion of the process required by CALPERS, the City will not pay a portion of an employee’s contribution to the applicable Public Employees’ Retirement System plan.
SECTION 7 – EMPLOYEE REQUIRED PERS CONTRIBUTION:
A. For those employees covered by the 2.5% at 55 PERS retirement plan, the City will no longer pay a portion of the required PERS employee contribution. The employee will be required to pay the individual maximum employee contribution of eight percent (8%); B. For those covered by the 2% at 60 PERS retirement plan, the City will no longer pay a portion of the required PERS employee contribution.
The employee will be required to pay the individual maximum employee contribution of seven percent (7%).
12 D. For employees covered by the 2% at 62 PERS retirement formula, effective January 1, 2013 Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) prohibited employers from paying any portion of a “new member’s” member contribution rate, the employee will be required to pay the individual maximum employee contribution of sixpoint two five percent (6.25%) or such different amount as determined by PERS.
SECTION 8 – RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS:
A. The City will contribute $1.00 per month towards PERS Medical and Hospital Care plan premium costs of annuitants. This amount will be upwardly adjusted by five percent (5%) of the amount of the City’s direct contribution for active employees on an annual basis, or such other amount required by statute, until the contributions are equal.
B. Employees fifty (50) years of age and older, who retire under PERS, shall be eligible to continue in the City’s group dental and vision care plans until age sixty-five (65) contingent upon the health provider’s acceptance of the individual. The full cost of any insurance selected by the retiree shall be borne by the retiree. As long as the retiree is enrolled in an insurance plan his/her eligible dependents may also enroll in the insurance plans as provided above. The retiree and/or dependent shall pay the cost of dependent insurance benefits. During the term of this agreement and while the City participates in the PERS medical and hospital care program, the City will contribute an amount toward the PERS medical premium for eligible annuitants that is equal to the amount required under the Public Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act and the City’s resolution electing coverage under that act.
SECTION 9 – EMPLOYER MATCHING RETIREMENT PROGRAM: The City and the Association agree, in accordance with applicable Internal Revenue Service rules and regulations to identify and establish a program for individual Retirement Savings Account (RSA) that will allow pre-tax contributions. The purpose of the RSA is to provide for a supplemental retirement program. Upon identification and establishment of an RSA, eligible employees will have the option of contributing pre-tax earnings into the RSA. To be eligible for the RSA, individual employees must have fifteen (15) years or more of City service. The City will match up to one hundred dollars ($100) of the individual employees’ contributions to the RSA.
ARTICLE V
CITY RIGHTS
SECTION 1 – EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS AND AUTHORITY:
13 A. In order to ensure that the City is able to carry out its functions and responsibilities imposed by law, the City has and will retain the exclusive right to manage and direct the performance of City services and the work force performing such services. Therefore, the following matters shall not be subject to the meet and confer process, but shall be within the exclusive authority of the City. The consideration of the merits, necessity, or organization of any service activity conducted by the City shall include but not be limited to the City’s right to:
1. Determine issues of public policy;
2. Determine and change the facilities, methods, means, and personnel by which the City operations are to be conducted;
3. Expand or diminish services;
4. Determine and change the number of locations, relocations, and types of operations and the processes and materials to be employed in carrying out all City functions, including but not limited to the right to subcontract any work or operation;
5. Determine the size and composition of the work force to assign work to employees in accordance with requirements as determined by the City, and to establish and change work assignments;
6. Determine job classifications;
7. Appoint, transfer, promote, demote and lay off employees for lack of work or other appropriate reasons;
8. Initiate disciplinary action for legitimate reasons;
9. Determine policies, procedures and standards for selection, training and promotion of employees;
10. Establish employee performance standards, including but not limited to quality and quantity standards;
11. Maintain the efficiency of governmental operations;
12. Exercise complete control and discretion over the
organization and the technology of performing its work and services;
14 13. Establish reasonable work and safety rules and regulations in order to maintain the efficiency and economy desirable in the performance of City services;
14. Determine any and all necessary actions to carry out its missions in emergencies.
15. Contract or subcontract for any work or operation without the obligation to meet and confer regarding the decision or process to be used. (However, in the event the decision to contract out bargaining unit work results in the layoff of members of the bargaining unit, the City agrees to meet and confer with the Association beginning at least 20 working days prior to the effective date of layoff regarding impacts that are not already addressed by City rules or procedures.) B. The exclusive decision-making authority of the City Council and City Manager on matters involving City rights and authority shall not be in any way, directly or indirectly, subject to the grievance procedure. The employee may grieve the impact of the exercise of exclusive City rights and authority that directly relate to matters within the scope of representation.
ARTICLE VI
ASSOCIATION SECURITY
SECTION 1 – RECOGNITION:
A. Pursuant to the provisions of the Employer-Employee Relations Resolution and state law, the City recognizes the South El Monte Employees’ Association as the exclusive representative for all employees in the classifications listed in Attachment A of this Memorandum of Understanding.
B. The Association recognizes the City Manager as the exclusive representative for the City for purposes of entering into this Memorandum of Understanding.
SECTION 2 - UNION RESPONSIBILITIES:
A. Union Responsibilities: The Association shall keep an adequate itemized record of its financial transactions and shall make available annually to the City and to all Unit employees, within sixty (60) days after the end of its fiscal year, a detailed written financial report thereof in the form of a balance sheet and an operating statement, certified as to its accuracy by its president and its treasurer or corresponding principal officer, and a certified public accountant.
15 B. Implementation: Any employee hired by the City subject to this Memorandum of Understanding on or after the date of implementation of this Article shall be provided with an authorization form by the Association’s representative. The Human Resources Division shall notify the Association of any new employee subject to this Memorandum of Understanding. It is up to the Association to ensure the new employee is contacted to further explain the Association and its role in servicing members of this Unit. If an employee chooses to join the Association, they must return said form to the Association or departmental payroll office. The effective date of Association dues, service fee deductions or charitable contributions for such employees shall be the beginning of the first pay period of employment or the pay period this Article becomes effective for current employees, whichever is later. Nonunion members are still covered by this collective bargaining unit. Those procedures shall be in accordance with the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Mark Janus, v.
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, et al. (2018) No. 16-1466.
C. The City shall abide by the terms and conditions outlined in AB 119.
ARTICLE VII
OTHER MATTERS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION
SECTION 1 – MEET AND CONFER IN GOOD FAITH - SCOPE: The City shall not be required to meet and confer in good faith on any subject preempted by federal or state law. The City shall meet and confer in good faith with the Association on all matters related to salaries, fringe benefits and other terms and conditions of employment. The City agrees to provide the Association or its designee, at no cost, each draft City budget as it is presented for review, the adopted City budget, and the annual audit, to assist the Association in its representational duties pursuant to the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act. All other documents shall be made available pursuant to the provisions of the Public Records Act.
SECTION 2 – DUES DEDUCTION: The City agrees to deduct from the salary of each Association member the amount of monthly Association dues owed by the employee as certified by the Association’s treasurer. The amount of dues deducted shall be forth with transmitted to the Association.
SECTION 3 – REIMBURSEMENT FOR DAMAGE TO EMPLOYEE VEHICLES:
The City agrees to reimburse full-time employees in an amount not to exceed two hundred and fifty dollars ($250) per fiscal year for damages due to or caused by vandalism to the employee’s vehicle during working hours, or when the employee is using their personal vehicle for City business. In order to be eligible for reimbursement, the employee must submit an incident report and a Sheriff’s
16 report to the City Manager and Risk Manager regarding the incident causing the damage to the vehicle.
SECTION 4 – EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT: The City shall reimburse employees for the cost of all books and tuition incurred by the employee while attending an accredited educational institution for those courses directly related to the employee’s scope of employment or which are contained within an approved curriculum of study that is directly related to the employee’s scope of employment. Tuition shall be reimbursed at rates up to the tuition rates of the California State University system. The City shall reimburse the employee for all classes the employee completes with a grade of “C” or better provided the employee provides a list of classes prior to each quarter or semester; provides verification of the cost for tuition and books; and provides a certification of completion. Upon completion of receiving a community college degree, Bachelor’s degree, Master’s degree, or certificate program, the employee agrees to remain employed with the City during the terms of this agreement. In the event the employee leaves during the 1st year of this agreement, 100% of the funds paid by the City is reimbursable back to the City. In the event the employee leaves during year 2 of this agreement, 50% of the funds paid by the city will be reimbursed by the employee back to the city.
SECTION 4 – EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT: The City shall reimburse a fulltime employee who has passed the initial probationary period, who is in good standing, and who has received a satisfactory performance evaluation from their supervisor, for the cost of books and tuition incurred by the employee while attending an accredited educational institution for those courses that are directly related to the employee’s job functions. Prior to each quarter, semester or the first day of the course, the employee must complete the Education Reimbursement Application, and receive written approval from the City Manager.
The application may be obtained from the office of the City Manager or the Human Resources/Risk Manager. Should the employee resign from City service within three years of completing coursework, the employee must reimburse the City the amount received for that coursework.
Approval by the City Manager will be given for courses that are directly related to the employee’s job functions as determined by the City Manager. The courses must not interfere with the employee’s scheduled work hours.
Tuition shall be reimbursed for accredited institutions. Tuition reimbursement shall not exceed two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) in any fiscal year.
Reimbursement for books shall not exceed five hundred dollars ($500.00) in any fiscal year. The total educational reimbursement for an employee in good standing shall not exceed ($2,500.00) in any fiscal year.
Upon completion of the Education Reimbursement Application and approval by the City Manager, the employee shall receive tuition reimbursement provided the employee completes the approved courses with a grade of “C” or better and provided the employee produces verification of course completion. The City
17 Manager may request a copy of the employee’s transcript to verify course completion. Applications for Education Reimbursement forms shall be available from the City Manager’s Office or the Human Resources/Risk Manager’s Office.
SECTION 5 – UNIFORMS: The City shall provide uniforms for all employees required to wear a uniform immediately after the employee completes their probationary period, and as required throughout the employee’s service with the City.
SECTION 6 – USE OF CITY SUPPLIES: The City agrees the Association may use the City’s copying machines, faxes and e-mail. E-mail usage shall be for Union correspondence only; members shall sign and follow the guidelines set forth in the E-mail, and Internet policy.
SECTION 7 – USE OF CITY RESOURCES: Access to City work locations and the use of City paid time and facilities by the Association and those representing it shall be authorized only to the extent provided in the City’s administrative procedures and shall be limited to activities pertaining directly to the employeremployee relationship and not such internal employee organization business as the solicitation of membership, campaigning for office, organization meetings and elections. Association activities shall not interfere with the efficiency, safety and security of City operations.
SECTION 8 – AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAM ALLOWANCE: The City shall reserve a combined total of ten (10) slots at 50% of the regular rate in the AfterSchool Program and Extended Day Care programs for use by employees for the care of their children or children for whom they are the primary caretaker. Should more than ten (10) of said children seek enrollment at any one time, priority for enrollment shall be based on the employee’s seniority.
An employee enrolling any child other than their natural, adopted or stepchild shall be required to execute an “Affidavit of Eligibility” declaring under penalty of perjury that the child being enrolled is a member of their household and that they provide fifty percent (50%) or more of the child’s financial support and maintenance.
ARTICLE VIII
MODIFICATION AND DURATION
SECTION 1 – MODIFICATION AND WAIVER: The City and the Association agree that this Memorandum of Understanding contains all of the covenants, stipulations, and agreements of the parties. The City and the Association understand that provisions contained in the Municipal Code, personnel rules, or administrative orders that directly relate to matters within the scope of representation are a part of this Memorandum of Understanding. Except as
18 otherwise provided, the City and the Association agree, understand and reserve the right, upon mutual agreement, to meet and confer in good faith with respect to any subject or matter covered in this Memorandum of Understanding.
SECTION 2 – SEVERABILITY: Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Memorandum of Understanding, in the event that any article, section, or subsection of this Memorandum of Understanding shall be declared invalid by any court or by any state or federal law or regulation, or should a decision by any court or any state or federal law or regulation diminish the benefits provided by this Memorandum of Understanding, or impose additional obligations on the City, the City and the Association shall meet and confer on the affected article, section, or subsection. In such event, all other articles, sections or subsections of this Memorandum of Understanding not affected shall continue in full force and effect.
SECTION 3 – DURATION:
A. This Memorandum of Understanding shall be binding on the City and the Association when approved and adopted by the City Council.
B. Except as otherwise provided herein, this Memorandum of Understanding shall be in full force and in effect from July 1, 2020 2022 and shall remain in full force and in effect until and including the 30th day of June 2022.2024.
C. The Association shall present a proposal for a successor Memorandum of Understanding to the City by March 31, 2022.2024.
SECTION 5 - EMPLOYEE RIGHTS: The City and the Association recognize the right of employees to form, join and participate in lawful activities of employee organizations, and the equal alternative right of employees to refuse to form, join and participate in employee organizations. Neither party shall exert pressure upon nor discriminate against an employee in the exercise of these alternative rights.
A. Employees in positions contained within the Association’s bargaining unit shall not be able to represent themselves for the purposes of negotiating revisions to the terms of this agreement.
B. No employee will be interfered with, intimidated, coerced, restrained or discriminated against by any employee organization because of the exercise of his/her employment rights.
C. Employees may discuss matters regarding items contained in this Memorandum of Understanding or conditions of employment with the
19 officers of the Association for clarification or assistance during off-duty hours or during lunch hours and breaks or upon authorization according to administrative orders.
D. Management and confidential employees may not represent any employee organization that represents other employees of the City on matters within the scope of representation.
ARTICLE IX
EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
SECTION 1 – ALTERNATIVE WORKWEEK: The City shall continue a 4/10 work week for all classified employees.
SECTION 2 – VACATION TERMS: Bargaining unit members will be subject to the following vacation provisions:
A. Employees may accrue up to a maximum of 320 hours of unused vacation leave. Upon reaching 320 hours, employees shall earn no additional vacation accrual until their balance of accrued but unused vacation leave is reduced below 320 hours. Upon a written administrative determination of the City Manager that work demands prevent an employee from using vacation time on a timely basis, the City Manager may permit an employee to exceed the maximum accrual cap by a specified amount and for a specified time, not to exceed 40 hours of vacation time and six (6) months. The City Manager may also require a plan designed to bring the employee back into compliance with vacation accrual limitations. It is the responsibility of each employee to arrange for timely use or, to the extent available, cash conversion of vacation time well in advance of reaching the maximum accrual limit.
B. All employees who have accrued in excess of 250 hours will be paid for the excess vacation on a dollar for-dollar basis on June 30, or the last day in which City Hall is open prior to June 30 if June 30 is on a day in which City Hall is closed. Cash out request forms are due to the Finance Department no later than two business days prior to when checks will be issued to eligible City employees. Additionally, employees can be paid for the excess vacation on December 31, or the last day in which City Hall is open prior to December 31 if December 31 falls on a day in which City Hall is closed. Cash out request forms are due to the Finance Department no later than two business days prior to when checks will be issued to eligible City employees.
20 1. Must have taken minimum hours of vacation in the fiscal year so that at the end of the fiscal year the vacation accrual does not exceed 320 hours.
2. The request must otherwise comply with reasonable rules and procedures established by the City Manager.
3. A qualifying employee may elect to be paid effective on either date referenced in Article IX, Section II, Item B, but may only be paid for excess vacation twice per fiscal year.
C. If vacation time is not taken due to administration determination, the employee shall be entitled to the stated cash-out provisions, as determined by the City Manager in his or her sole discretion.
D. Employees appointed to a full-time position in this bargaining unit after October 11, 2011 shall be credited with vacation leave at the following rates based upon the length of service:
1. Eight (8) hours per month or ninety-six (96) hours per year (accrued at the rate of 3.692 for 26 pay periods annually) during the first five (5) years of service;
2. Ten (10) hours per month or one hundred twenty (120) hours per year (accrued at the rate of 4.615 for 26 pay periods annually) during the sixth (6th) through the tenth (10th) years of service;
2.3. Twelve (12) hours per month or one hundred forty-four (144) hours per year (accrued at the rate of 5.538 for 26 pay periods annually) during the eleventh (11th) through fifteenth (15th) years of service;
3.4. Thirteen (13) hours and twenty (20) minutes per month or one hundred fifty-six (156) hours per year (accrued at the rate of
6.000 for 26 pay periods annually) during the sixteenth (16th) through the twentieth (20) years of service; and
E. Employees appointed to a full-time position in this bargaining unit before October 10, 2011 shall be credited with vacation leave at the following rates based upon the length of service:
1. With the leave accruals in Article IX, Section II, Item D, Numbers 1 – 4; and
2. Sixteen (16) hours and forty (40) minutes (16.66 hours) per month or one hundred ninety-nine point two (199.92) hours per year (accrued at the rate of 7.689_hours bi-weekly for 24 of the
21 26 pay periods annually) after the twenty-first year and following years of service.
F. City Hall will be closed on all days between the Christmas Eve and New Year Holidays. Except as otherwise determined by the City Manager, City services will be suspended and employees will not be scheduled to work during this time. Employees shall be allowed to utilize available vacation hours or compensatory leave to remain in paid status while City services are suspended during this time.
SECTION 3 – SICK LEAVE: Bargaining unit members will be subject to the following sick leave policy:
A. Employees may accrue an unlimited number of sick leave hours; B. All employees who have accrued in excess of 330 hours may opt to be paid for up to 80 hours on a dollar for-dollar basis one-time per fiscal year during the payroll that includes March 31st;
C. Employees leaving City employment shall be eligible to receive monetary compensation for any unused sick leave. The value of the accrued sick leave shall be calculated based on the employee’s anniversary date as illustrated in the chart below:
Years of Service Value of Sick
Leave
0 – 10 years 0%
10 years plus 10%
SECTION 4 – HOLIDAY LEAVE: If a holiday falls on a day on which an employee is not scheduled to work, that employee shall be entitled to a floating holiday which must be utilized within one year of its accrual.
ARTICLE X
PROBATIONARY PROCEDURES
SECTION 1 – DURATION OF PROBATIONARY PERIOD: An employee appointed or promoted to a position in the classified service shall serve a probationary period of not less that six (6) months beginning on the effective date of appointment or promotion. The City shall evaluate a probationary employee during the probationary period. The City shall conduct the evaluation at approximately the mid-point of the probationary period.
Non-promotional probationary employees shall not be entitled to bereavement leave, personal leave or religious leave during the probationary period. NonPage 135 of 358 22 promotional probationary employees shall earn sick leave and vacation leave, but may not use such leave until successful completion of the probationary period.
ARTICLE XI
TERMINATION PROCEDURES
SECTION 1 – RESIGNATION: An employee absent from work without authorization for three consecutive working days or more shall be considered to have voluntarily resigned from City service.
ARTICLE XII
DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES
SECTION 1 – LEGITIMATE REASON FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION:
Disciplinary action consists of the discharge, involuntary demotion or suspension of an employee. An employee shall not be discharged, involuntarily demoted or suspended except for a legitimate reason. A legitimate reason for disciplinary action may include, but shall not be limited to the following:
1. Violation of administrative orders;
2. Failure to properly perform assigned duties;
3. Theft of City property;
4. Insubordination;
5. Conviction of a felony or conviction of a misdemeanor relating to the employee’s fitness to perform assigned duties;
6. Unauthorized absence from employment;
7. Tardiness;
8. Failure to maintain satisfactory working relationships with other employees or the public;
9. Reporting for work, or being at work under the influence of or in possession of alcohol, or non-prescribed controlled substances;
10. Improper use of City funds;
23 11. Unauthorized use of City property;
12. Failure to properly care for City property;
13. Misstatement of a material fact;
14. Failure to maintain any employment qualification;
15. Willful falsification of any City report or record;
16. Failure to comply with health and safety standards;
17. Other failure of good behavior either during or outside of employment such that the employee’s conduct causes discredit to the City.
SECTION 2 – DISCIPLINING AUTHORITY: The City Manager or his/her designee shall have the responsibility to institute a disciplinary action, to schedule and conduct any pre-disciplinary conference and to impose disciplinary action.
SECTION 3 – NOTICE OF DISCIPLINE: Except as otherwise provided in the Personnel Rules, prior to imposing any disciplinary action, the Disciplining Authority shall notify the employee in writing of the nature of the proposed disciplinary action and its proposed effective date; the reason for the proposed disciplinary action; any specific charges against the employee; of the employee’s right to receive copies of the written documents and materials upon which the proposed disciplinary action is based; and of the employee’s right to respond to the charge, either orally or in writing.
SECTION 4 – REPRESENTATION: Employees are entitled to have an Association representative present during any interview that may result in discipline. Employees:
A. Must request an Association representative to be called into the meeting.
B. Must have a reasonable belief that discipline will result from the meeting.
SECTION 5 – EMERGENCY SUSPENSION: When the Disciplining Authority determines that an employee’s conduct threatens or has caused injury to persons or property, or presents the possibility for additional misconduct, the Disciplining Authority may impose a suspension against the employee, effective immediately, until a pre-disciplinary conference is conducted pursuant to the Personnel Rules.
24 Within three (3) business days of such emergency suspension, the Disciplining Authority shall issue the employee the written notification specified in Section 3, above. The Disciplining Authority, unless otherwise requested by the employee, shall conduct a pre-disciplinary conference in not less than ten (10) days after the effective date of the emergency suspension.
The imposition of an emergency suspension against an employee does not preclude the Disciplining Authority from proposing a more severe disciplinary action against the employee receiving an emergency suspension.
The appeal rights of an employee receiving an emergency suspension shall be governed by the procedures provided for in the Personnel Rules for employees disciplined in a non-emergency situation.
SECTION 6 – REPRIMAND: A reprimand is a written criticism of an employee’s work performance or conduct and may be issued to an employee in accordance with Article XII, Section 1, of this agreement. While a reprimand in and of itself is not a disciplinary action, it may form the basis of subsequent disciplinary action.
SECTION 7 – ORAL WARNING: An oral warning is a private conference between an employee and a Supervisor or Disciplining Authority at which the employee is informed of a deficiency in performance or conduct and advised as to corrective action which should be taken to improve the performance or conduct in question.
SECTION 8 – PERSONNEL FILES:
A. Upon request, a personnel file shall be open for inspection by the employee or by his/her representative with the written consent of the employee concerned.
B. When adverse material is to be placed in a personnel file, the City shall (1) notify the employee, (2) upon request, discuss the matter with the employee, and (3) request the employee to initial such material merely to confirm he/she has seen it. This shall not apply to the records of an employee relating to the investigation of a possible criminal offense or apply to letters of reference.
C. Any adverse material, except above mentioned, withheld from the employee or the representative by management may not be used in any disciplinary proceedings.
ARTICLE XIII
APPEAL PROCEDURES
SECTION 1 – REQUEST FOR DISCIPLINARY HEARING: Employees shall have the right to appeal the imposition of disciplinary action. When an employee
25 requests a disciplinary hearing, the request shall be in writing, signed by the employee, and presented to the City Manager within ten (10) days after the effective date of the imposition of the disciplinary action. Any such request shall be addressed to the City Manager and shall identify the subject matter of the appeal, the grounds for the appeal, and the relief desired by the employee. All disciplinary hearings shall be conducted in private unless the employee requests, in writing, a public hearing. If the employee fails to request a disciplinary hearing within the prescribed time, the employee shall have waived the right to a hearing and all rights to further appeal of the disciplinary action.
SECTION 2 – SCHEDULING OF DISCIPLINARY HEARING: The City Manager shall schedule any disciplinary hearing within a reasonable time after the filing of the employee’s request, considering the availability of a hearing officer and the convenience of the employee and the witnesses.
SECTION 3 – HEARING OFFICER: The City Manager may be the Hearing Officer for a disciplinary hearing or the City Manager may designate any third party as the Hearing Officer.
SECTION 4 – REPRESENTATION AT DISCIPLINARY HEARING: At the disciplinary hearing, the employee may appear personally and may be represented by counsel or other representative. The employee and the City shall have the right to produce and confront witnesses, and to present any relevant oral or documentary evidence.
SECTION 5 – BURDEN OF PROOF AND EVIDENCE: The City shall have the burden of proof at the disciplinary hearing and shall be required to prove the charges against the employee by a preponderance of the evidence. The disciplinary hearing shall not be conducted according to the technical rules of evidence.
SECTION 6 – CONDUCT OF DISCIPLINARY HEARING: The conduct of the disciplinary hearing shall be under the control of the Hearing Officer with due regard for the rights and privileges of the parties. The City Manager shall promulgate reasonable rules and regulations governing the conduct of the disciplinary hearings. The rules and regulations shall be available to employees.
During the examination of a witness, the Hearing Officer may exclude from the hearing any and all other witnesses. The Hearing Officer shall have the power to issue subpoenas to compel the attendance of witnesses or the production of documents.
SECTION 7 – HEARING OFFICER’S DECISION: Within a reasonable time after the disciplinary hearing, the Hearing Officer shall issue a written decision containing findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Hearing Officer shall have the authority to affirm, revoke or reduce the disciplinary action imposed against the employee. Except as otherwise provided for in this Memorandum of Understanding, the Hearing Officer’s decision constitutes a final resolution of any
26 disciplinary action and no further appeal shall be permitted within the City’s administrative process.
SECTION 8 – APPEAL OF HEARING OFFICER’S DECISION: If the disciplinary action reviewed by the Hearing Officer constitutes discharge or a suspension of more than ten (10) working days, the Disciplining Authority or the employee may request an appeal hearing before the City Council to review the Hearing Officer’s decision. If the employee fails to request an appeal hearing within the prescribed time, the employee shall have waived the right to an appeal hearing and all rights to further appeal of the disciplinary action.
SECTION 9 – REQUEST FOR APPEAL HEARING: When an employee requests an appeal hearing, the request shall be in writing, signed by the employee and filed with the City Council within ten (10) business days after the notification of the Hearing Officer’s decision. The appeal shall be addressed to the City Council and shall identify the decision appealed from the grounds for the appeal and the relief requested by the employee. All appeal hearings shall be conducted in private unless the employee requests, in writing, a public hearing.
The City Council shall schedule any appeal hearing within a reasonable time and conduct any appeal hearing within fifteen (15) business days after the filing of the appeal.
SECTION 10 – REPRESENTATION AT APPEAL HEARING: At the appeal hearing, the employee may appear personally and may be represented by counsel or other representative. The employee and the City shall have the right to present oral and written arguments to the City Council.
SECTION 11 – CITY COUNCIL’S DECISION: The decision of the City Council shall be in writing and contain findings of fact and conclusions of law within ten (10) working days following the hearing. The City Council may affirm, revoke or reduce the decision of the Hearing Officer. Except as otherwise provided for in these Memorandum of Understanding, the City Council’s decision shall constitute a final resolution of any disciplinary action and no further appeal shall be permitted within the City’s administrative process.
SECTION 12 – BINDING ARBITRATION: If the decision of the City Council constitutes the discharge of an employee or the suspension of an employee for more than ten (10) working days, the Association president, or his/her designee, may request that the City Council’s decision be submitted to arbitration as provided within Personnel Rule XIV, Section 5.
ARTICLE XIV
GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES
SECTION 1 – PURPOSE OF GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES: The grievance procedures shall be used to resolve employee complaints concerning the
27 express terms and conditions of employment with the City. The grievance procedures shall not be used for:
A. The resolution of any complaint concerning any disciplinary action; or B. The resolution of any complaint concerning any aspect of the– employment examination process.
SECTION 2 – MATTERS SUBJECT TO GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE:
A. Violation of a specific term of this Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the Association;
B. Improper application of rules, regulations and procedures; C. Unfair treatment, including coercion, restraint or reprisal; D. The impact of a reduction in force action (layoff);
E. Promotion procedures unfairly implemented;
F. Discrimination because of race, religion, color, creed, disability, sex, marital status, national origin or sexual orientation; or G. Any other matter affecting the terms and conditions of employment.
SECTION 3 – GENERAL PROCEDURES:
A. Any grievance not filed or appealed to the next step within the time limits established in the grievance procedures shall be deemed settled on the basis of the last decision and not subject to further appeal or reconsideration.
B. Failure by City to reply to a grievance within the time limits established in the grievance procedures shall automatically grant the right to process the grievance to the next level.
C. By mutual agreement and for good cause, any level of review, or any time limits established in these procedures, may be waived or reasonably extended in writing at any step in the grievance procedure.
D. By mutual agreement, the grievance may revert to a prior level for reconsideration.
E. If a grievance is returned to the employee for insufficiency, the City will state in writing the reasons for the return. If the grievance was timely filed initially, new time limits for filing a revised grievance shall commence in accordance with Section 5 (B) of these procedures.
28 F. The settlement of any specific complaint(s) or grievance(s) shall not constitute a precedent for settlement of complaints or grievances, nor for the interpretation of this Memorandum of Understanding to other individuals or circumstances.
SECTION 4 – RIGHTS, RESPONSIBILITIES AND RESTRICTIONS:
A. Employees have the right to the assistance of a representative of their choice in the preparation of their written grievance and to represent them in formal or informal grievance meetings. The grievant may be required by either party to be present in any or all meetings, related to their grievance.
B. Employees selected as a representative in a grievance must obtain the permission of his/her supervisor to be absent from his/her duties to attend a grievance meeting. The employee representative shall provide his/her supervisor with reasonable advance notice to ensure that his/her absence will not interfere with Departmental operations.
C. Grievances may be submitted on City time. In scheduling the time, place and duration of any grievance meeting, the operational needs of the City shall be of paramount consideration. Neither the grievant nor the City shall lose their rights because of limitations in scheduling meetings or limitations placed on the release of an employee representative due to the operational needs of the City.
C.D. Only a person selected by a grievant and made known to the City two (2) business days prior to a scheduled formal grievance shall have the right to represent or advocate as an employee’s representative.
D.E.The City shall notify the president of the Association of any grievance involving the terms and conditions of this Memorandum of Understanding. The president, or his or her designee, with the permission of the grievant, may be present as an observer at any formal grievance meeting concerning a grievance that directly involves the interpretation or application of the specific terms of this Memorandum of Understanding. If the Association representative is permitted by the grievant to attend any formal grievance meeting, he/she must obtain his/her supervisor’s prior permission to be absent from his/her assigned duties.
E.F. Only persons who have direct, first-hand knowledge of the event(s) giving rise to the grievance may be called as witnesses.
29 F.G.Supervisors and department heads have the responsibility to inform an employee of any limitation of their authority to fully resolve a grievance. Employees have the responsibility to state clearly and concisely the specific action(s) being grieved, the article(s) allegedly violated, and the specific remedy requested.
SECTION 5 – GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES:
A. Informal Discussion of Grievance: Within seven (7) business days from the occurrence of the matter on which a complaint is based, or within seven (7) business days from his/her knowledge of such occurrence, an employee shall informally discuss the matter with their immediate supervisor. If after such a discussion, the grievance has not been satisfactorily resolved, the employee shall have the right to file a formal grievance.
B. First Level of Review: Within seven (7) business days after the informal discussion of the grievance with the employee’s immediate supervisor, the employee shall have the right to file a formal written grievance with the employee’s immediate supervisor. All formal grievances shall comply with the requirements of Section 4.G, above.
Within seven (7) business days of receiving a formal written grievance, the immediate supervisor shall render a decision in writing to the employee on the original copy of the grievance. Should the grievance contain more than one issue, the grievant may accept any decision in part, and may continue the grievance process until all issues are resolved.
C. Second Level of Review: Within seven (7) business days from his/her receipt of the immediate supervisor’s written decision, and using the returned original copy of the grievance form, the employee may appeal the supervisor’s decision to the City Manager, using the original copy of the grievance form. Within ten (10) business days from receipt of the employees’ grievance, the City Manager or his/her designee who has not been involved in the grievance in the prior two (2) levels shall review the grievance and render a written decision and the reasons therefore to the employee. The decision of the City Manager shall conclude the administrative procedures for the grievance. Again, should the grievance be partially resolved at this level, the grievant may accept the partial resolution and continue the grievance process until all issues are resolved.
SECTION 6 – BINDING ARBITRATION:
A. Within seven (7) business days from his/her receipt of the City Manager’s or his/her designee’s written decision, or should the City Manager or his/her designee fail to render a decision within the time period provided by these procedures, the Association president, or
30 his/her designee, may request that a grievance be submitted to arbitration as provided for hereinafter.
B. Only those grievances that directly concern or involve the interpretation or application of the specific terms and conditions of this Memorandum of Understanding may be submitted to arbitration hereunder. In no event shall such arbitration extend to:
1. The interpretation, application, merits or legality of any federal, state or local law or ordinance, including specifically all ordinances adopted by the City Council. The interpretation, application, merits or legality of the exercise of the City’s exclusive rights and authorities as specified in Article V of this Memorandum of Understanding.
C. In the event the Association desires to request that a grievance, which meets the requirements of Section 6.B here of, be submitted to arbitration, it shall, within the time requirements set forth above, transmit a written request to the State Mediation & Conciliation Service with a copy thereof simultaneously transmitted to the City Manager.
D. The parties shall select a mutually acceptable arbitrator. If the parties cannot agree on an arbitrator, they shall notify the State Mediation & Conciliation Service and request that it provide the parties with a list of five names from which the parties will attempt to mutually select an arbitrator. If the parties cannot mutually agree upon an arbitrator from the list of arbitrators provided by the State Mediation & Conciliation Service, they will select an arbitrator through an alternate striking of names from that list. The last remaining name on the list will be the selected arbitrator. The party to strike the first name will be determined by chance.
E. Arbitration of a grievance hereunder shall be limited to the formal grievance as originally filed by the employee to the extent that said grievance has not been resolved. Arbitration hereunder shall be conducted in accordance with applicable rules and procedures adopted or specified by the State Mediation & Conciliation Service unless the parties hereto agree to other rules or procedures for the conduct of such arbitration. The parties involved shall share the fees and expenses of the arbitrator equally.
All other expenses including but not limited to fees for witnesses, transcripts and similar costs incurred by the parties during such arbitration will be the responsibility of the party incurring such cost, unless otherwise agreed by the parties. The parties involved shall share the costs of transcripts and similar materials required or requested by the arbitrator equally.
31 F. Prior to a hearing by an arbitrator, a representative of the City and the Association shall meet and prepare a joint statement setting forth the issue(s) to be determined which shall be submitted to the arbitrator. In the event the City and Association cannot agree on the joint statement, each party shall present to the arbitrator, at the hearing, its own submission statement; in which case the arbitrator shall determine which of the submitted issues are to be resolved.
G. The decision of the arbitrator resulting from any arbitration of grievances hereunder shall not add to, subtract from, or otherwise modify the terms and conditions of this Memorandum of
Understanding. The decision of the arbitrator shall be binding upon the Association to the extent the decision and award of the arbitrator does not require action by the City Council, such decision and award shall be binding upon the City. If within sixty (60) business days of receiving notice of a decision and award requiring action by the City Council, such action is not taken, the Association may then resort to a court of competent jurisdiction to pursue whatever other legal remedies are available to it under this Memorandum of Understanding.
32 THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING is hereby executed by the authorized representatives of the CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE and the SOUTH EL MONTE EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION and shall become effective when the same has been ratified and adopted by resolution of the City Council of the City of South El Monte.
Representatives of the South El Monte Management Representatives of Employees’ Association South El Monte
SEMEA Representative Date Rachel BarbosaRene Salas
Date
Interim City Manager
SEMEA Representative Date
SEMEA Representative Date
SEMEA Representative Date
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a.
DATE: September 13, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rene Salas, Interim City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: William Fox, Interim Finance Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22- 75, APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT WITH
TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIRS LLC FOR CONTRACTUAL
SERVICES
SUMMARY: In March 2022, the City entered into an agreement with Townsend Public Affairs LLC (Townsend) for ongoing consulting services related to obtaining grant funding and legislative advocacy. The initial agreement was for a term of four months, ending June 30, 2022, with a provision to extend for an additional six-month period. Based upon the initial results, it was determined that entering into a one-year extension, with a City option for two additional one-year extensions, was a prudent course of action. This would allow Townsend to continue to work on grant funding opportunities that are currently in process, as well as further identify additional ones. The new agreement will cover the period from July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023. In addition, the City has, at its option, the right to renew for an additional two one-year terms covering a twelve-month period covering the 1st day of July, 2023 through the 30th day of June, 2024 and the 1 st day of
July 2024 through 30th day of June 2025.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22- 75, approving Amendment No. 1 to agreement with Townsend Public Affairs LLC for consulting services related to grant funding and legislative advocacy.
FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact for fiscal year 2022-23 is $81,000. This is based upon the contract rate of $6,750 per month. The General Fund budget for this service is $60,000. The additional unfunded amount of $21,000 will be brought forward to the City Council in the upcoming first quarter budget amendment.
DISCUSSION: On March 23, 2022, the City entered into a short-term agreement to cover the balance of fiscal year 2021-22 with Townsend to provide consulting services related to obtaining grant funding and legislative advocacy. Townsend is a well known firm that provides consulting services related to state and federal legislative advocacy and grant funding advocacy. The existing contract has a contract provision for a six-month
extension. The City has determined that Townsend's services should continue for the entire fiscal year 2022-23. As a result, budget amendment 1 has been developed. The rate for the current fiscal year is $6,750 per month, totaling $81,000. This is an increase over the initial agreement, where a discounted rate was provided, since the initial effort was to focus solely on one Federal earmark for the Merced Project. The $6,750 per month rate is inline with other cites that receive full service.
Townsend's approach in serving the City is based upon conducting a detailed orientation; developing a legislative strategy; implementing the legislation strategy; providing progress reports; and filing lobbying disclosure reports as required by law. Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into the one-year extension to the initial agreement at a total cost-not-to exceed $81,000. This will also include a provision for two additional one year options for continued services at the same rate.
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Resolution No. 22-75
B. Amendment No. 1
C. Townsend Public Affairs Agreement
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 22-75
A RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTH EL MONTE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE
AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACTUAL SERVICES WITH
TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIRS LLC
WHEREAS, the existing four month agreement for contractual services expired on June 30, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City and Townsend Public Affairs have agreed on a one-year extension at an annual amount not-to exceed $81,000; and WHEREAS, the City and Townsend Public Affairs have agreed, at the City’s option, that two additional one-year terms can extend the agreement covering the twelve month period of the 1st day of July, 2023 through the 30th day of June, 2024 and the 1st day of July 2024 through the 30th day of June 2025 at the same annual rate.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City and Townsend Public Affairs have agreed to enter Amendment No. 1 providing services on an Annual basis covering July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023 for $81,000; and
SECTION 2. The City and Townsend Public Affairs have agreed that Amendment No. 1 provides, at the City’s option, to secure Townsend Public Affairs services for two additional one year extensions covering the period 1st day of July, 2023 through the 30th day of June 2024 and 1 st day of July, 2024 through the 30th day of June 2025.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of September, 2022. ______________________________
Gloria Olmos, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS:
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE )
I, Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk of the City of South El Monte, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. 22-75, was passed and approved by the City Council of the City of South El Monte at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 13th day of September 2022 and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT B
01257.0001/695527.1 Page 1 of 4
AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
THIS AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES
(“Amendment”) by and between the CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE (“City”) and _TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFIARS LLC (“Consultant”) is effective as of the 1st day of July, 2022.
RECITALS
A. City and Consultant entered into that certain Agreement for Contract Services dated 23rd day of March 2022, (“Agreement”) whereby Consultant agreed to provide legislative advisory services through June 30, 2022.
B. City and Consultant now desire to amend the Agreement to cover the twelve month period covering 1st day of July, 2022 through the 30th day of June, 2023.
C. City and Consultant agree that the City, at the City’s election, can extend an additional two one year terms covering twelve month period covering 1st day of July, 2023 through the 30th day of June, 2024 and 1st day of July 2024 through 30th day of June 2025.
D. City and Consultant agree that the monthly rate for services from 1 st day of July 2022
through the 30th day of June 2023 and going forward will be $6,750 per month, with an annual amount not-to-exceed $81,000.
E. City and Consultant agree that the two one year extension periods covering the twelve month period of 1
st day of July, 2023 through the 30th day of June, 2024 and 1st day of July 2024 through 30th day of June 2025 will be $6,750 per month, with an annual amount not -to-exceed $81,000.
TERMS
1. Contract Changes. The Agreement is amended as provided herein. Deleted text is indicated in strikethrough and added text in bold italics.
A. Compensation
2.1 Contact Sum. For the services rendered pursuant to this Agreement, Consultant shall be compensated in accordance with the “Schedule of Compensation” attached hereto as Exhibit “C” and incorporated herein by this reference, but not exceeding the maximum amount of TWENTYTHOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($20,000) EIGHTY ONE THOUSAND AND NO CENTS
($81,000) (Contract Sum).
B. Term
3.4 Term. Unless earlier terminated in accordance with Article 7 of this Agreement, this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect until completion of the services
01257.0001/695527.1 Page 2 of 4
and during the time period of July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023 but not exceeding four months from the date hereof, except as otherwise provided in the Schedule of Performance (Exhibit “D”). The City may, in its sole discretion, extend the Term for six additional months. two additional one year terms.
C. Exhibit “C” Schedule of Compensation
I. Consultant shall perform the following Services at the following rates:
Legislative Advocacy Services
$5,000 Per Month* Term: March 23, 2022 - June 30,
2022
Term: July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023 $6,750 Per Month
State and Federal Legislative Advocacy
• Conduct Detailed Orientation Included
• Develop Legislative Strategy Included
• Implement the Legislative Strategy Included
• Build and Strengthen Relevant Relationships Included
• Leverage Relationships for Strategic Advocacy Plan Included • Coordinate Advocacy Trips Included
• Track Legislation Included
• Craft Testimony and Position Letters Included
• Draft Bill Language Included
• State Budget Funding Opportunities Included
• Federal Earmark Opportunities Included
• Provide Progress Reports Included
• Prepare and File Lobbying Disclosure Reports Included
01257.0001/695527.1 Page 3 of 4
* The monthly fee includes all reasonable business and travel expenses D. Exhibit “D” Schedule of Performance
I. Consultant shall perform all services timely in accordance with the following schedule:
Project term is March 23, 2022 – June 30, 2022. Consultant shall complete all services rendered hereunder no later than June 30, 2022. All services conducted shall be timely and in accordance with the schedule agreed to by both Parties.
2. Continuing Effect of Agreement. Except as amended by this Amendment, all provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. From and after the date of this Amendment, whenever the term “Agreement” appears in the Agreement, it shall mean the Agreement, as amended by this Amendment to the Agreement.
3. Affirmation of Agreement; Warranty Re Absence of Defaults. City and Consultant each ratify and reaffirm each and every one of the respective rights and obligations arising under the Agreement. Each party represents and warrants to the other that there have been no written or oral modifications to the Agreement other than as provided herein. Each party represents and warrants to the other that the Agreement is currently an effective, valid, and binding obligation.
Consultant represents and warrants to City that, as of the date of this Amendment, City is not in default of any material term of the Agreement and that there have been no events that, with the passing of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a material default under the Agreement.
City represents and warrants to Consultant that, as of the date of this Amendment, Consultant is not in default of any material term of the Agreement and that there have been no events that, with the passing of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a material default under the Agreement.
4. Adequate Consideration. The parties hereto irrevocably stipulate and agree that they have each received adequate and independent consideration for the performance of the obligations they have undertaken pursuant to this Amendment.
5. Authority. The persons executing this Amendment on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that (i) such party is duly organized and existing, (ii) they are duly authorized to execute and deliver this Amendment on behalf of said party, (iii) by so executing this Amendment , such party is formally bound to the provisions of this Amendment , and (iv) the entering into this Amendment does not violate any provision of any other agreement to which said party is bound. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
01257.0001/695527.1 Page 4 of 4
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year first-above written.
CITY:
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE, a municipal
corporation
____________________________________
Rene Salas, Interim City Manager
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP
_________________________________
Anthony R. Taylor, City Attorney
CONTRACTOR:
CONSULTANT
By: ________________________________
Name: Christopher Townsend
Title: President
By: ________________________________
Name: Christopher Townsend
Title: Secretary
Address: Townsend Public Affairs
1401 Dove Street, Suite 330
Newport Beach, CA 92660
IF APPLICABLE: Two corporate officer signatures required when Contractor is a corporation, with one signature required from each of the following groups: 1) Chairman of the Board, President or any Vice President; and 2) Secretary, any Assistant Secretary, Chief Financial Officer or any Assistant Treasurer. CONTRACTOR’S
SIGNATURES SHALL BE DULY NOTARIZED, AND APPROPRIATE ATTESTATIONS SHALL BE
INCLUDED AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE BYLAWS, ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, OR OTHER RULES OR REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO CONTRACTOR’S BUSINESS ENTITY.
ATTACHMENT C
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.b.
DATE: September 13, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rene Salas, Interim City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Colby Cataldi, Community Development Director SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22- 76, APPROVING THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE'S LOCAL
ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN (LRSP)
SUMMARY: For South El Monte to be eligible for Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Cycle 11 grant funds, the City must complete a Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) or an equivalent of the LRSP, such as Systemic Safety Analysis Report (SSAR) or Vision Zero Action Plan. The LRSP or its equivalent must be updated and validated at least every five (5) years. The preparation of the LSRP was funded by State grant funds and will support the City's future grant funding applications.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22- 76, approving the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP). LRSP is a requirement for public agencies to be eligible to apply for future Highway Safety Improvements Program (HSIP) funding.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact in adopting the LRSP. The cost of implementing the recommendations in the LRSP depends upon the initiative, such as availability of grant funding, and whether the recommendation is an infrastructure or noninfrastructure treatment. The recommendations would be budgeted in future fiscal years for City Council consideration and approval.
DISCUSSION: The LRSP provides a framework for identification, analysis, and prioritization of roadway safety improvements on local roads. The LRSP was developed using the process outlined by Caltrans to provide a systematic approach to providing safety improvements. The plan is data driven, using a comprehensive analysis of five years of collision data. The collision analysis provides various citywide collision statistics, such as collisions per year; collisions involved with vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles, or property; types of injury collisions; and collision causes. The process results in a list of improvements and actions that address the areas of highest need, as supported by the data.
The LRSP identifies emphasized areas to inform and guide further safety evaluation of the City’s transportation network. The LRSP will guide the City to look at ways to set goals and measures that encourage a safe, well-connected transportation network for people using all modes of transportation and prioritizes safe travel of people over expeditious travel of motor vehicles that will achieve significant declines in roadway fatalities and serious injuries by the year 2050.
In order to apply for the local Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds, an agency must have completed their Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) or an equivalent of the LRSP, such as Systemic Safety Analysis Report (SSAR) or Vision Zero Action Plan. The LRSP or its equivalent must be updated and validated at least every five (5) years.
Caltrans recommends that the LRSP (or its equivalent) and its update be approved by the agency's Board or Council. The LRSP enables the City to apply for grant funding through the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) so long as the City (a) selfcertifies that an LRSP or its equivalent has been completed; and (b) provides a copy of the safety plan upon request.
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Resolution No. 22-76
B. Draft LRSP
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 22-76
A RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTH EL MONTE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPTING AND APPROVING THE LOCAL
ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN (LRSP)
WHEREAS, a Local Road Safety Plan (“LRSP”) is a road safety planning document that provides a holistic analysis of vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle crash data, and provides a roadmap for implementation of safety improvements; and
WHEREAS, it is required that all state, county, and local agencies adopt a LRSP and update and validate the LRSP at least every five years to be eligible to receive Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant funds; and
WHEREAS, the LRSP was developed using the process outlined by Caltrans to provide a systematic approach to providing safety improvements and guide the City to look at ways to set goals and measures that encourage a safe, well-connected transportation network for people using all modes of transportation and prioritizes safe travel of people over expeditious travel of motor vehicles that will achieve significant declines in roadway fatalities and serious injuries by the year 2050.
THE SOUTH EL MONTE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: The City Council hereby adopts and approves the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP).
SECTION 2: The City Clerk is directed to certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 13rd day of September, 2022. _____________________________
Gloria Olmos, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS:
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE )
I, Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk of the City of South El Monte, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution being Resolution No. 22-76, was passed and approved by the City Council of the City of South El Monte at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 13th day of September 2022 and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT B
ES-1
ES-2
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 1
2. Vision and Goals ....................................................................................................................................... 2
3. Process ..................................................................................................................................................... 4
3.1 Guiding Manuals.................................................................................................................................. 4
3.1.1 Local Roadway Safety Manual ..................................................................................................... 5
3.1.2 Highway Safety Manual ................................................................................................................ 5
3.2 Analysis Techniques............................................................................................................................ 6
3.2.1 Collision Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 6
3.2.2 Network Screening Analysis ......................................................................................................... 6
3.3 Future Analysis.................................................................................................................................... 7
4. Safety Partners ......................................................................................................................................... 8
4.1 Stakeholder Meeting #1....................................................................................................................... 8
4.3 Stakeholder Meeting #2....................................................................................................................... 8
5. Existing Efforts .......................................................................................................................................... 8
6. Data Summary ........................................................................................................................................11
6.1 Roadway Network .............................................................................................................................11
6.2 Collision Data ....................................................................................................................................11
7. Crash Safety Trends ...............................................................................................................................15
7.1 All Collisions ......................................................................................................................................15
7.2 Fatalities & Severe Injuries................................................................................................................16
7.3 Injury Levels ......................................................................................................................................16
7.4 Cause of Collision..............................................................................................................................17
7.5 Vulnerable Users ...............................................................................................................................17
7.5.1 Pedestrian Collisions ..................................................................................................................17
7.5.2 Bicycle Collisions ........................................................................................................................17
7.6 Other Significant Trends .............................................................................................................19
7.7 Collision Network Screening Analysis Results............................................................................19
8. Best Practices Evaluation and Emphasis Areas.....................................................................................32
8.1 Best Practices Evaluation..................................................................................................................32
8.2 Emphasis Areas ................................................................................................................................35
8.2.4 Emphasis Area #1: Vulnerable Road Users (Pedestrians & Bicyclists) .....................................35
8.2.1 Emphasis Area #2: Commercial Vehicles ..................................................................................36
8.2.2 Emphasis Area #3: Intersection Improvements..........................................................................36
9. Countermeasure Toolbox........................................................................................................................38
ES-3
9.1 Infrastructure Improvements .............................................................................................................38
9.1.1 Countermeasure Selection Process ...........................................................................................38
9.1.2 Safety Project Case Studies .......................................................................................................39
9.2 City-wide Countermeasure Toolbox ..................................................................................................50
10. Funding Sources & Next Steps.............................................................................................................53
10.1 Funding............................................................................................................................................53
10.1.1 Highway Safety Improvement Program....................................................................................53
10.1.2 Caltrans Active Transportation Program ..................................................................................53
10.1.3 California SB 1..........................................................................................................................54
10.1.4 California Office of Traffic Safety Grants ..................................................................................54
10.1.5 SCAG Sustainable Communities Program...............................................................................55
10.1.6 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Grant Program............................................................55
10.1.7 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act ....................................................................................55
10.2 Implementation Plan........................................................................................................................56
10.2.1 Monitoring .................................................................................................................................56
10.2.2 Analysis Update........................................................................................................................56
10.2.3 Implementation Strategies ........................................................................................................56
10.3 Next Steps .......................................................................................................................................57
ES-4
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 : Functional Classification & Signalized Intersections..........................................11 Figure 2: All Collisions (2017-2021).......................................................................................13 Figure 3: Fatal & Severe Injury Collisions (2017-2021).........................................................14 Figure 4: Collision Type by Year (2017-2021)........................................................................15 Figure 5 – Collisions by Injury Levels (2017-2021) ...............................................................16 Figure 6 – Pedestrian & Bicycle Collisions (2017-2021).......................................................18 Figure 7 – Collision Network Screening Analysis Results (2017-2021)...............................20
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 – Review of Existing City Plans ................................................................................. 9 Table 2 – Review of Existing City Projects............................................................................10 Table 3 – Fatal and Severe Injury Collisions Categorized by Modes Involved ...................16 Table 4– Analysis Rankings: Intersections (Top 10 Per Type) ............................................28 Table 5 – Analysis Rankings: Segments (Top 10 Per Type) ................................................30 Table 6 – Summary of Program, Policies, and Practices .....................................................32 Table 7 - Citywide Safety Countermeasure Toolbox ............................................................51
ES-5
Executive Summary
The City of South El Monte Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) identifies emphasis areas to inform and guide further safety evaluation of the City’s transportation network. The emphasis areas include type of crash, certain locations, and notable relationships between current efforts and crash history. The LRSP analyzes crash data on an aggregate basis as well as at specific locations to identify high-crash locations, high-risk locations, as well as city-wide trends and patterns. The analysis of crash history throughout the City’s transportation network allows for opportunities to:
1. Identify factors in the transportation network that inhibit safety for all roadway users,
2. Improve safety at specific high-crash locations, and
3. Develop safety measures using the four E’s of safety: Engineering, Enforcement, Education, and Emergency Response to encourage safer driver behavior and better severity outcomes.
With this LRSP, the City continues its safety efforts by identifying areas of emphasis and systemic
recommendations to enhance safety.
The City’s vision is to enhance the transportation network and reduce traffic fatalities and serious injury related crashes, and the goals for the City of South El Monte include the following:
Goal #1: Identify areas with a high risk for crashes.
Goal #2: Illustrate the value of a comprehensive safety program and the systemic process.
Goal #3: Plan future safety improvements for near-, midand long-term.
Goal #4: Define safety projects for HSIP and other
program funding consideration.
This LRSP analyzes the most recent range of crash data
(January 1, 2017 – December 31, 2021) and roadway
improvements to assess historic trends, patterns, and areas of increasing concern.
Further, the collision history was analyzed to identify locations with elevated risk of collisions either through their collision histories or their similarities to other locations with more active collision patterns. Using a network screening process, locations were identified within the City that will most likely benefit from safety 1,431 5-year
collisions
Fatalities 8
15 Serious
Injuries
44%
Occurred at
Signalized
Intersections
43%
Occurred at
Unsignalized
Intersections
8.3%
Due to
Agressive
Driving
6.9% Aging Drivers
6.8% Involving
Pedestrians &
Bicyclists
Source: South El Monte Collision Database (2017- 2021)
ES-6
enhancements. Using historic collision data, collision risk factors for the entire network were derived. The outcomes informed the identification and prioritization of engineering and noninfrastructure safety measures to address certain roadway characteristics and related behaviors that contribute to motor vehicle collisions with active transportation users. Active transportation includes any self-power mode of transportation, including walking or bicycling.
Emphasis areas were developed by revisiting the vision and goals developed at the onset of the planning process and comparing them with the trends and patterns identified in the crash analysis.
Emphasis Area #1: Vulnerable Road Users (Pedestrians & Bicyclists) Emphasis Area #2: Commercial Vehicles
Emphasis Area #3: Intersection Improvements
The following 5 locations were chosen to be representative of the corridor and intersection configurations throughout the City.
1. Signalized Intersection: Rosemead Blvd & Garvey Ave
2. Signalized Intersection: Durfee Ave/Peck Rd & Michael Hunt Dr
3. Signalized Intersection: Merced Ave & Rust St
4. Unsignalized Intersection: Troy Ave & Fern St
5. Roadway Segment: Chico Ave – Rush St to Fern St
These locations were identified through the analysis process based on their crash histories, stakeholder engagement, the observed crash patterns, and their different characteristics to provide the most insight into potential systemic safety countermeasures that the City can employ to achieve the most cost-effective safety benefits. Countermeasures were subjected to a benefit/cost assessment and scored according to their potential return on investment. These case studies can be used to select the most appropriate countermeasure, and to potentially phase improvements over the longer-term. The potential benefit of these countermeasures at locations with similar design characteristics can then be extrapolated regardless of crash history, allowing for proactive safety enhancements that can prevent future safety challenges from developing.
Additionally, this information can be used to help the City apply for grants and other funding opportunities to implement these safety improvements. These opportunities were assembled into the “countermeasure toolbox” shown below.
ES-7
Citywide Countermeasure Toolbox
ID Potential Countermeasures Where to apply?
Crash
Reduction
Factor
Per Unit
Cost Unit
S02 Improve signal hardware: back-plates with
retroreflective borders
Signalized intersections with significant broadside
and rear-end collisions due to signal visibility
15% $12,000 per intersection
S04 Provide Advanced Dilemma Zone Detection for
high-speed approaches
Signalized intersections with significant right-angle
and rear-end collisions due to unsafe stopping
during yellow phases
40% $34,000 per intersection
S08 Convert signal to mast arm (from pedestal
mounted)
Signalized intersections with crash causes
including Traffic Signals and Signs
30% $400,000 per signal
S09 Install raised pavement markers and striping
(through intersection)
Signalized intersections with sideswipe collisions
due to improper turning, auto R/W violation,
unsafe starting
10% $20,000 per intersection
S18PB Install pedestrian crossing (S.I.) Intersections with or without existing pedestrian crossing striping
25% $32,000 per intersection
S20PB Install advance stop bar before crosswalk
(Bicycle Box)
Intersections with high volumes of vulnerable
users
15% $30,000 per approach
S21PB Modify signal phasing to implement a Leading
Pedestrian Interval (LPI) with new controller
Signalized Intersections – especially those with
high pedestrian activity
60% $8,000 per intersection
NS06 Install/upgrade larger or additional stop signs or other intersection warning/regulatory signs at
unsignalized intersections
Unsignalized intersections with crash history
showing running stop signs 15% $2,000 per sign
NS20PB Install pedestrian crossing at uncontrolled
locations (new signs and markings only)
Intersections with no pedestrian crossing striping 25% $22,000 per intersection R08 Install raised median Locations with collisions with motor vehicles on other roadway, improper turning or driving, auto
R/W violation
25% $840 per LF
ES-8
ID Potential Countermeasures Where to apply?
Crash
Reduction
Factor
Per Unit
Cost Unit
R26 Install dynamic/variable speed warning sign Roadway segments with a significant number of collisions due to unsafe speeds.
30% $16,000 per sign
R28 Install safety edges Roadway segments with collisions that resulted in run-off-road right/left, head-on, or oppositedirection-sideswipe. 25% $70,000 per mile
ES-9
Near-term action items were identified to accelerate the City’s achievement of the goals and vision of this LRSP. The City can:
• Actively seek other funding opportunities to improve safety for all modal users, • Collaborate with established safety partners & neighboring municipalities as improvements are made to create a cohesive transportation network, and • Iteratively evaluate existing and proposed transportation safety programs and capital improvements to design a safer transportation network in South El Monte.
The City will regularly monitor and update the analysis performed in this plan. A full plan update will completed five years from the City Council’s adoption of this plan which will maintain eligibility for HSIP funding.
1 1. Introduction
Located in Los Angeles County in the heart of the San Gabriel Valley just 12 miles from downtown Los Angeles, South El Monte is a suburban city with a population of 19,5567 according to the 2020 census. The City is a tight knit community and offers various community programs for residents of various ages, as well as having a viable commercial and industrial base. Based on University of California Berkeley’s Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Vehicle Operation Cost Parameters, South El Monte’s economic losses due to traffic injuries amounted to almost $104M from 2017 to 2021 This Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) identifies emphasis areas to inform and guide further safety evaluation of the City’s transportation network. The emphasis areas include the type of crash, certain locations, and notable relationships between current efforts and crash history. The LRSP analyzes crash data on an aggregate basis as well as at specific locations to identify high-crash locations, high-risk locations, and city-wide trends and patterns. The analysis of crash history throughout the City’s transportation network allows for the following opportunities:
1. Identify factors in the transportation network that inhibit safety for all roadway users,
2. Improve safety at specific high-crash locations, and
3. Develop safety measures using the four E’s of safety (Engineering, Enforcement, Education, and Emergency Response) to encourage safer driver behavior and better severity outcomes.
South El Monte has taken steps to enhance all modal safety throughout the City and with this LRSP, South El Monte is continuing to prioritize safety in its planning processes. The Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) most recently ranked South El Monte 37 out of 103 peer cities for traffic injuries after normalizing for population and VMT in 2019. With number one (1) in the OTS crash rankings considered the highest, or “worst,” this positions the City at slightly below average for roadway safety performance. This LRSP analyzes the most recent range of crash data from Crossroads, a software for reporting and analytics of traffic collisions and citations, from January 1, 2017 – December 31, 2021 and roadway improvements to assess historic trends, patterns, and areas of increasing concern.
The intent of the LRSP is to:
• Create a greater awareness of road safety and risks
• Reduce the number of fatal and severe-injury crashes
• Develop lasting partnerships
• Support for grant/funding applications, and
• Prioritize investments in traffic safety.
2 2. Vision and Goals
The South El Monte LRSP evaluates the transportation network as well as non-infrastructure programs and policies within the City. Mitigation measures are evaluated using criteria to analyze the safety of road users (drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians), the interaction of modes, the influences on the roadway network from adjacent municipalities, and the potential benefits of safety countermeasures. Through historical data and trends, proactive identification and safety opportunities can be identified and implemented without relying solely on a reaction and response to crashes as they occur.
As cities across the country have implemented LRSPs and systemically addressed the conditions leading to fatal and severe-injury crashes, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has found that LRSPs effectively improve safety. LRSPs provide a locally developed and customized roadmap to directly address the most common safety challenges in the given jurisdiction. This project’s vision, goals, and objectives have been established to reflect discussions with South El Monte staff, various stakeholders identified by City staff, and a review of existing plans/policies in the area.
VISION: To enhance the transportation network for all users to reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries
Goal #1: Identify areas with a high risk for crashes.
Objectives:
• Identify intersections and segments that would most benefit from mitigation. • Identify areas of interest with respect to safety concerns for vulnerable users (pedestrians and bicyclists).
Goal #2: Illustrate the value of a comprehensive safety program and the systemic process.
Objectives:
• Demonstrate the systemic process’ ability to identify locations with higher risk for crashes based on present characteristics closely associated with severe crashes. • Demonstrate, through the systemic process, the gaps and data collection activities that can be improved upon.
Goal #3: Plan future safety improvements for near-, mid- and long-term.
Objectives:
• Identify safety countermeasures for specific locations (case studies). • Identify safety countermeasures that can be applied city-wide.
3 Goal #4: Define safety projects for future Highway Safety Improvement Plan (HSIP) and other program funding consideration.
Objectives:
• Create the outline for a prioritization process that can be used in this and forth-coming cycles to apply for funding.
• Use the systemic process to create Project Case Studies. • Use Case Studies to apply for HSIP and other funding consideration. • Demonstrate the correlation between the proposed safety countermeasures with the Vision Zero Initiative and the California State Highway Safety Plan.
4 3. Process
The primary goal for the City of South El Monte and their safety partners is to provide safe, sustainable, and efficient mobility choices for their residents and visitors. Through the development and implementation of this LRSP, the City will continue its collaboration with safety partners to identify and discuss safety issues within the community.
Guidance on the LRSP process is provided at both the national (FHWA) and state (Caltrans) level, and both agencies have developed a general framework of data and recommendations for a LRSP.
FHWA encourages the following:
• The establishment of a working group (stakeholders) to participate in developing an LRSP • A review of crash, traffic, and roadway data to identify areas of concern • The identification of goals, priorities, and countermeasures to recommend improvements at spot locations, systemically, and comprehensively
Caltrans guidance follows a similar outline with the following steps:
• Establish leadership
• Analyze the safety data
• Determine emphasis areas
• Identify strategies
• Prioritize and incorporate strategies
• Evaluate and update the LRSP
This LRSP documents the results of data and information obtained, including the preliminary vision and goals for the LRSP, existing safety efforts, initial crash analysis, and developed emphasis areas. The LRSP recommendations consider the four E's of traffic safety defined by the California Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP): Engineering, Enforcement, Education, and Emergency Response.
3.1 Guiding Manuals
This section describes the analysis process undertaken to evaluate safety within South El Monte at a systemic level. This report identifies specific locations within the City that will benefit from safety enhancements and derives crash risk factors based on historic crash data using a network screening process. The outcome will inform the identification and prioritization of engineering and non-infrastructure safety measures by addressing certain roadway characteristics and related driving behaviors contributing to crashes. This process uses the latest national and state best practices for statistical roadway analysis described.
5 3.1.1 Local Roadway Safety Manual
The Local Roadway Safety Manual: A Manual for California’s Local Road Owners (Version 1.5, April 2020) encourages local agencies to pursue a proactive approach when identifying and analyzing safety issues and preparing to compete for project funding opportunities. A proactive approach is the analyzation of safety in an entire roadway network through either a one-time network wide analysis or a routine analysis of the roadway network.1 According to the Local Roadway Safety Manual (LRSM), “the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) – Division of Local Assistance is responsible for administering California’s federal safety funding intended for local safety improvements.” To provide the most beneficial and competitive funding approach, the analysis leading to countermeasure selection should focus on both intersections and roadway segments and maintain consideration of roadway characteristics and traffic volumes. The result should reflect a list of locations that are most likely to benefit from cost-effective countermeasures, preferably prioritized by benefit/cost ratio. The manual suggests using a mixture of quantitative and qualitative measures to identify and rank locations using both crash frequency and crash rates.
These findings should then be screened for crash type and severity patterns to determine the cause of crashes and the potential effective countermeasures. Qualitative analysis should include field visits and a review of existing roadway characteristics and devices. The specific roadway context can then be used to assess conditions that may decrease safety at the site and at systematic levels.
Countermeasure selection should be supported using Crash Modification Factors (CMFs). These factors are a peer reviewed product of research quantifying the expected rate of crash reduction expected from a given countermeasure. If more than one countermeasure is under consideration, the LRSM provides guidance on appropriate application of CMFs.
3.1.2 Highway Safety Manual
The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Highway Safety Manual (HSM), published in 2010, presents a variety of methods for quantitatively estimating crash frequency or severity at a variety of locations.2 This four-part manual is divided into the following parts: A) Introduction, Human Factors, and Fundamentals, B) Roadway Safety Management Process, C) Predictive Method, D) Crash Modification Factors.
In Chapter 4 of Part B in the HSM, the “Network Screening Process” is a tool for an agency to analyze the entire network and identify/rank locations that are most likely or least likely to realize a reduction in the frequency of crashes.
1 Local Roadway Safety Manual (Version 1.5) 2020. Page 5. 2 AASHTO, Highway Safety Manual, 2010, Washington D.C., http://www.highwaysafetymanual.org/Pages/About.aspx
6 The HSM identifies five steps in this process:3
1. Establish Focus: Identify the purpose or intended outcome of the network screening analysis. This decision will influence data needs, the selection of performance measures and the screening method that can be applied.
2. Identify Network and Establish Reference Populations: Specify the types of sites or facilities being screened (i.e., segments, intersections, geometrics) and identify groupings of similar sites or facilities.
3. Select Performance Measures: There are a variety of performance measures available to evaluate the potential to reduce crash frequency at a site. In this step, the performance measure is selected as a function of the screening focus and the data and analytical tools available.
4. Select Screening Method: There are three principal screening methods described in this chapter (i.e., ranking, sliding window, peak searching). Each method has advantages and disadvantages; the most appropriate method for a given situation should be selected.
5. Screen and Evaluate Results: The final step in the process is to conduct the screening and analysis and evaluate the results.
The HSM provides several statistical methods for screening roadway networks and identifying high risk locations based on overall crash histories.
3.2 Analysis Techniques
3.2.1 Collision Analysis
The initial steps of a collision analysis involve establishing sub-populations of roadway segments and intersections that have similar characteristics. For this LRSP, intersections were grouped by their control type (signalized and unsignalized), and segments were grouped by their roadway category (primary arterial, secondary arterial, collector, local). Individual collision rates were then calculated for each sub-population. The population level collision rates were used to assess the number of collisions at a specific location. These sub-populations were also used to determine typical collision patterns to highlight locations where an unusual number of specific collision types occurred.
3.2.2 Network Screening Analysis
The network screening process lists intersections and roadway segments by the number of collisions over the analysis period and identifies areas with a higher number of a given collision type than would be expected for the location.
The different collisions were organized by the following categories:
3 AASHTO. Highway Safety Manual. 2010. Washington, DC. Page 4-2.
7 1. Collision injury (fatal, serious injury, other visible injury, complaint of pain, property damage only),
2. Collision type (broadside, rear-end, sideswipe, head-on, hit object, overturned, bicycle, pedestrian, other),
3. Environmental factors (lighting, wet roads), and
4. Driver behavior (impaired, aggressive, and distracted driving).
3.3 Future Analysis
The City can plan to conduct regular collision monitoring as described in Section 10.2. The City will then refresh the analysis and update the LRSP every 5 years to maintain eligibility for HSIP funding, as described in Section 10.2.
8 4. Safety Partners
Local stakeholders were included in the development of this report to ensure the local perspective was maintained at the forefront of planning efforts. A stakeholder group of City staff and external partners consisted of representatives from the City economic development staff, LA County Sherrif’s Dept, LA County Fire Department, the El Monte Union High School District, and other community members
The local stakeholders were called together to offer insight on the safety issues present in the City’s transportation network. After the initial network screening and safety analysis, the stakeholder group met to discuss potential case study locations and emphasis areas. Following the selection of the case study locations, potential countermeasures were determined for each location and shared with the stakeholder group in the 2nd stakeholder meeting.
4.1 Stakeholder Meeting #1
The first stakeholder meeting was conducted virtually on August 10, 2022. At the meeting, stakeholders were introduced to the project and provided an overview of the data used, the required outputs, and the potential outcomes of the study.
In addition to the overview, stakeholders were asked to provide local insight and knowledge at five potential “case study” locations that were identified after the initial network screening and crash analysis process.
4.3 Stakeholder Meeting #2
The second stakeholder meeting was conducted virtually on August 30, 2022. During this meeting case study locations were presented to the stakeholders with a list of observations and potential countermeasures. Emphasis/challenge areas were also discussed.
Stakeholder feedback was reviewed and incorporated into the study process for the development of the LRSP.
5. Existing Efforts
Existing plans, policies, and projects that were recently completed, planned, or on-going were compiled at the start of the LRSP process to gain perspective on the existing efforts for transportation-related improvements within the City. High-level key points regarding transportation improvements and safety-related topics were identified to inform decision making in this LRSP.
Table 1 outlines the relevant existing City plans and their improvements and funding sources.
Table 2 outlines the relevant existing City projects and their timelines.
9 Table 1 – Review of Existing City Plans
Document Name Transportation Policies/Improvements
City of South El Monte
General Plan 2020
(Circulation Element)
• Outlines City’s transportation network, including functional classifications, the public transportation network, and alternate modes of transportation available • Goals include providing a safe and convenient transportation network, encouraging the use of transit and alternative modes of transportation, maximizing efficiency through ITS strategies, and maintaining safety from through traffic in local neighborhoods
City of South El Monte
Sidewalk Policy
• Outlines City’s policy on construction and improvements of City sidewalks • Sidewalks should be standardized to allow for a more comfortable pedestrian experience
• Accessible ramps or routes must be available for entry to streets from a pedestrian walkway
• Existing sidewalks will be inventoried and analyzed based on the policy City of South El Monte
Bicycle Master Plan • Map of existing bicycle facilities and recommended bike routes/lanes City of South El Monte
Pedestrian Master Plan • Map of existing bicycle/pedestrian facilities and recommended bike routes/lanes Revitalizing Durfee
Ave/Peck Road
Corridor Plan
• Corridor designs for revitalizing Durfee Ave/Peck Rd including multimodal road treatments, crosswalk and sidewalk improvements for ADA accessibility and pedestrians, and landscaping
San Gabriel Valley
Regional Bicycle
Master Plan
• Overview of existing bicycle infrastructure and plans for the City • Recommended bicycle facilities and programs, including new bikeways/bike routes and parking infrastructure
10 Table 2 – Review of Existing City Projects
Project Name Timeline Transportation Policies/Improvements Merced Avenue
Greenway Project
Phase I
constructed by
Winter 2022;
Phase II needs
funding
Green Streets and Road Diet treatments; Elevated bike
lanes along Merced Ave
Caltrans – Pomona
Freeway (SR-60)
Pavement
Rehabilitation
Through Winter
2024/2025
Road rehabilitation with new pavement between Long Beach I-710 and San Gabriel River I-605
LA Metro – Eastside
Transit Corridor
Phase 2
Forecasted
Opening: 2035 Extension of the L Line (Gold) east towards Whittier Santa Anita Avenue
Traffic Signal
Modification
Improvement
Ongoing
Traffic signal modification at intersections with Klingerman St, Rush St, and Central Ave; Sidewalk, signing, and striping improvements
Reimagine
Rosemead Blvd Ongoing
Planning study to identify opportunities for complete streets treatments and improvements for pedestrian safety along Rosemead Blvd
Revitalize Rush St Ongoing Enhancement plan including improved bike and transit lanes, bus stops, and widened sidewalks
Fern St/Elliott Ave
Improvement Summer 2021
Sidewalk, pavement, and ramp reconstruction, and
striping/signing improvements on Fern St/Elliott Ave from Sastre Ave to Mountain View Rd
2020 Street
Rehabilitation 2020 Street rehabilitation and pedestrian accessibility improvements in various parts of city
11 6. Data Summary
This section describes the data sources used for the analysis process of this LRSP.
6.1 Roadway Network
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) California Road System (CRS) GIS database was used to build the base roadway network used for this analysis. Intersections and roadway segments were divided into control and classification categories so that each set could have its own crash rates and be compared with similar facilities or control type. Functional Classifications were imported from Caltrans CRS system. Information on intersection traffic control was provided by the city and included in the analysis network. The collision analysis requires each intersection to be classified by type: Signalized or Unsignalized. Figure 1 illustrates the City of South El Monte’s roadway functional classification and intersection control type, respectively, as used for this study.
6.2 Collision Data
Collision data was collected from Crossroads software for the period from January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2021, displayed in Figure 2. Five years of data are utilized instead of the standard three years to provide more history to evaluate trends or patterns. Analysis of the raw collision data is the first step in understanding the specific and systemic challenges faced throughout the city. Analyzing the five years of data provided insight on the collision trends and patterns detailed in Section 7. The locations of fatal and severe injury collisions are displayed in Figure 3.
12 Figure 1 : Functional Classification & Signalized Intersections
13 Figure 2: All Collisions (2017-2021)
14 Figure 3: Fatal & Severe Injury Collisions (2017-2021)
15 7. Crash Safety Trends
The analysis was conducted using a network screening process for the City-maintained roadway system based on collision records spanning from January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2021.
This section contains the results of the analysis, which included the evaluation of South El Monte’s fatal and serious injury (generally denoted as K+SI) collisions, statewide K+SI collisions, pedestrian collisions, bicycle collisions, collision severity levels, and collision causes.
7.1 All Collisions
This report utilized collision data for a five-year period to provide a better understanding of trends and to reflect the patterns in crashes that have occurred on city streets. Data used for this report was extracted from Crossroads Software on June 13, 2022 and was current as of that date.
Collision data from January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2021 as reported to Crossroads from the local enforcement indicated that during this time there were 1,431 collisions recorded within South El Monte.
During this time, the most common occurring collision types were Broadsides (27%) and RearEnds (23%). The total number of collisions varied throughout the study period, with an increase during the last year, 2021, as shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4: Collision Type by Year (2017-2021)
Source: South El Monte Crossroads Database (2017-2021)
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Broadside
Rear-End
Sideswipe
Hit Object
Other
Head-On
Vehicle - Pedestrian
Not Stated
Overturned
16 7.2 Fatalities & Severe Injuries
During the study period, 8 fatal collisions and 15 severe injury collisions occurred during the study period, as seen in Figure 3. Table 3 outlines the fatal collisions categorized by modes involved.
Table 3 – Fatal and Severe Injury Collisions Categorized by Modes Involved (2017- 2021)
Involved With # of Fatal
Collisions
# of
Severe
Injury
Collisions
Other Motor Vehicle 3 7
Pedestrian 2 3
Fixed Object 2 1
Bicycle 1 2
Other - 2
7.3 Injury Levels
As shown in Figure 5, 67% of the collisions reported during the time-period resulted in property damage only. Fatalities and severe injuries totaled 1.6% of all collisions.
Figure 5 – Collisions by Injury Levels (2017-2021)
Source: South El Monte Crossroads Database (2017 – 2021)
67.3%
25.6%
5.5%
1.0%
0.6%
Property Damage Only
Complaint of Pain
Other Visible Injury
Severe Injury
Fatal
17 7.4 Cause of Collision
The highest recorded cause of collisions in South El Monte during the study period is Improper Turning at 26.6%, followed by Automobile Right-of-Way Violation at 15.7% and Unsafe Speed at
9.5%. Figure 6 shows the distribution of collision cause.
Figure 6 - Cause of Collisions (2017-2021)
Source: South El Monte Crossroads Database (2017 – 2021)
7.5 Vulnerable Users
7.5.1 Pedestrian Collisions
44 pedestrian involved collisions occurred during the study period, resulting in 2 fatal collisions, 3 severe injuries, and 36 collisions with some form of reported injury or pain. Figure 7 shows the locations of pedestrian collisions during the study period.
7.5.2 Bicycle Collisions
During the study period, 54 collisions involving bicycles were reported. There was 1 fatal injury and 2 resulted in severe injuries. Figure 7 shows the location of bicycle collisions during the study period.
26.6%
15.7%
9.5%
9.4%
9.3%
7.7%
5.9%
5.2%
2.7%
2.5%
1.2%
0.9% 0.9%
0.7% 0.7%
0.6%
0.3%
0.1%
Improper Turning
Auto R/W Violation
Unsafe Speed
Traffic Signals and Signs
Other Improper Driving
Unsafe Starting or Backing
Unknown
Following Too Closely
Unsafe Lane Change
Driving Under Influence
Wrong Side of Road
Improper Passing
Pedestrian Violation
Other Than Driver
Ped R/W Violation
Hazardous Parking
Other Hazardous Movement
Other Equipment
18 Figure 7 – Pedestrian & Bicycle Collisions (2017-2021)
19 7.6 Other Significant Trends
In addition, the following trends were observed:
• 36% of collisions occurred at night or during the dusk/dawn hours. • Drivers aged 15-20 were at fault in 6.4% of all collisions. • Drivers aged 65+ were at fault in 9.6% of all collisions.
7.7 Collision Network Screening Analysis Results
Figure 8 below show the results of the collision network screening analysis, with the number of collisions at both intersections and mid-block roadway segments.
20 Figure 8 – Collision Network Screening Analysis Results (2017-2021)
28 Table 4 and 5 show the number of crashes occurring at the top ten locations in South El Monte by crash type for the locations that will be studied further in the Report, and highlights locations in which the probability of those crash types exceeding the threshold proportion is greater than 33%.
The tables are ordered by the number of collisions that occurred at that segment or intersection.
To be statistically significant, only locations where more than two collisions occurred are represented. At locations with two or less collisions, random chance can account for crash history as much or more than specific roadway characteristics.
After this analysis was completed, the locations were ranked against other similar locations within the City by their categories according to the expected proportion of that crash type within South El Monte Locations with higher-than-expected crashes of that type were identified by the probability that random chance would not account for exceedances.
Additionally, it should be noted that the columns for Collision Severity, Type, Involved With, and Behavior are additional characteristics of the collisions and should not be counted as a separate collision.
The following provides an example of how to read Tables 4 and 5.
Table Definitions:
• Total Collisions: Number of collisions observed at the intersection or segment from January of 2017 through December of 2021.
• Local Critical Crash Rate (CCR) Differential: The Critical Crash Rate specific to the intersection or segment. This is the difference between local (actual) crash rate and the critical crash rate, which is how many collisions per million vehicle miles are expected for a location of this type and volume. This tells us how many more collisions are occurring more than is expected. Locations with positive values have more collisions than expected, while locations with negative values have less collisions than expected. • Equivalent Property Damage Only (EPDO): This method assigns weighting factors to crashes based on injury level (severe, injury, property damage only) to develop a property damage only score. In this analysis, the injury crash costs were calculated for each location (based on the latest Caltrans injury costs) and then normalized by dividing by the value of a property damage only collision. Fatal and severe injury collisions are estimated at $2.19 million, Other Visible Injury (OVI) collisions at $142,300, Complaint of Pain (COP) collisions at $80,900, and Property Damage Only (PDO) collisions at $13,300.
• Severity: The number of severe injury and fatal collisions that occurred at this location in the study period.
• Fatality: The number of fatal collisions that occurred at this location in the study period.
29 • Broadside, Sideswipe, Rear-End, Head-On, Hit Object, Overturned, Other, Pedestrian, Bicycle: The number of these types of collisions that occurred at this location in the study period.
• Other: The number of miscellaneous collision types (mostly single vehicle) that occurred at this location in the study period.
• Aggressive, Dark, Wet: The number of the collisions with this factor identified as the cause of collision.
28 Table 4– Analysis Rankings: Intersections (Top 10 Per Type) Intersection
Crashes
Local CCR Differential1
EPDO2
Fatal
Serious Injury
Other Visible Injury
Complaint of Pain
PDO
Broadside
Sideswipe
Rear End
Head On
Hit Object
Overturned
Other
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Aggressive
Distracted
Impaired
Dark
Wet
Signalized Intersections
Rosemead Blvd & Garvey Ave 73 0.95 615 1 1 8 27 36 22 14 26 1 4 0 3 1 7 29 0 5 0 8 Durfee Ave & Michael Hunt Dr 55 0.33 631 1 2 3 11 38 12 14 17 5 3 0 1 2 3 27 0 2 1 4 Rosemead Blvd & Rush St 49 0.47 308 0 1 3 13 32 12 10 21 0 3 0 0 0 2 24 0 0 0 4 Santa Anita Ave & Rush St 36 0.01 137 0 0 1 18 17 17 4 5 3 3 0 4 0 3 16 0 0 0 1 Fawcett Ave & Santa Anita Ave 32 0.70 271 0 1 2 11 18 11 6 7 4 2 0 0 1 1 10 0 0 0 0 Lee Ave & Garvey Ave 26 -0.09 254 0 1 3 7 15 7 5 9 1 1 1 0 1 1 14 0 0 0 4 Merced Ave & Rush St 25 -0.11 407 1 1 3 5 15 12 2 5 3 0 0 2 0 1 5 0 1 0 1 Durfee Ave & Rush St 23 -0.25 68 0 0 2 5 16 7 3 6 2 1 0 3 0 2 6 0 1 0 2 Peck Rd & Rush St 23 0.35 93 0 0 2 10 11 8 4 2 2 6 0 1 0 1 5 0 1 0 1 Durfee Ave & Thienes Ave 22 -0.15 93 0 0 1 12 9 8 3 5 0 5 0 0 1 4 10 0 0 0 4 Unsignalized Intersections
Lashbrook Ave & Garvey Ave 28 0.91 79 0 0 0 10 18 7 4 10 2 0 0 2 2 3 8 0 0 1 0 Rosemead Blvd & Fern St 24 9.89 90 0 0 1 11 12 8 7 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 3 0 1 0 3 Santa Anita Ave & Weaver St 19 0.49 59 0 0 1 6 12 9 1 4 1 2 0 0 0 2 3 0 1 0 1 Rosemead Blvd & Mabel Ave 19 0.00 44 0 0 0 5 14 8 2 6 2 0 0 1 0 1 4 0 0 1 1 Bruin Ave & Garvey Ave 18 0.18 48 0 0 1 4 13 5 4 4 3 2 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 Rosemead Blvd & Klingerman St 16 0.83 200 1 0 1 2 12 4 1 6 0 1 0 3 1 1 2 0 1 0 0
29 Intersection
Crashes
Local CCR Differential1
EPDO2
Fatal
Serious Injury
Other Visible Injury
Complaint of Pain
PDO
Broadside
Sideswipe
Rear End
Head On
Hit Object
Overturned
Other
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Aggressive
Distracted
Impaired
Dark
Wet
Peck Rd & Farndon St 14 0.16 55 0 0 0 8 6 4 1 5 1 3 0 0 0 1 4 0 1 0 0 Humbert Ave & Garvey Ave 13 0.08 197 0 1 0 4 8 7 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 Adelia Ave & Garvey Ave 11 0.05 31 0 0 1 2 8 6 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 Broadmead St & Durfee Ave 10 0.00 45 0 0 1 5 4 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0
1. Local Critical Crash Rate
Differential
2. Equivalent Property Damage
Only Crashes
30 Table 5 – Analysis Rankings: Segments (Top 10 Per Type) Facility Limits
Crashes
Local CCR Differential1
EPDO2
Fatal
Serious Injury
Other Visible Injury
Complaint of Pain
PDO
Broadside
Sideswipe
Rear End
Head On
Hit Object
Overturned
Other
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Aggressive
Distracted
Impaired
Dark
Wet
Principal
Arterial
Durfee Ave Thienes Ave - Rush St 17 0.61 225 1 0 3 3 10 3 3 2 2 6 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 Rosemead Blvd North City Limits -
Garvey Ave 10 -0.01 30 0 0 0 4 6 0 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 Rosemead Blvd Klingerman St - Rush
St 9 -0.16 29 0 0 1 2 6 0 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 1
Durfee Ave Michael Hunt Dr -
Broadmead St 8 0.17 42 0 0 3 1 4 1 3 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 Rosemead Blvd Fern St - Klingerman
St 5 -0.27 25 0 0 1 2 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
Minor Arterial
Santa Anita
Ave
Alley W of Santa
Anita Ave - Fawcett
Ave
9 2.80 34 0 0 0 5 4 2 1 5 0 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 0 0 0
Santa Anita
Ave Central Ave - Vacco St 4 0.30 9 0 0 0 1 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Santa Anita
Ave
Alley W of Santa
Anita Ave - Central
Ave
4 0.49 168 0 1 0 0 3 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Garvey Ave Humbert Ave -
Potrero Ave 3 0.12 13 0 0 1 0 2 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tyler Ave Thienes Ave - Rush St 3 0.03 18 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Durfee Ave Barringer St - Rush St 3 0.07 18 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Collector
Chico Ave Rush St - Fern St 9 0.26 29 0 0 0 4 5 4 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Potrero Ave Alpaca St - Rush St 3 0.07 8 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
31 Facility Limits
Crashes
Local CCR Differential1
EPDO2
Fatal
Serious Injury
Other Visible Injury
Complaint of Pain
PDO
Broadside
Sideswipe
Rear End
Head On
Hit Object
Overturned
Other
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Aggressive
Distracted
Impaired
Dark
Wet
Local
Weaver St Central Ave
- Santa
Anita Ave
5 2.46 200011312110000000100
Humbert Ave Fern St - Garvey Ave4 1.7390001310000021010000 Continental
Ave
Klingerman St - Elliott
Ave
4 2.8540000421100000000000
Troy Ave Klingerman St
- Fern
St
4 1.7490001301001020000000
Marybeth Ave Giovane St
- Giovane
St (Loop)
3 0.5330000300000030000100
Adelia Ave End of Road - Fern St3 1.4880001211000010000000 Klingerman St Central Ave
- Santa
Anita Ave
3 0.7880001201200000010000
Weaver Ave Continental Ave
-
Tyler Ave
3 2.2930000301200000010002
El Poche St Chico Ave
- End of
Road
3 2.3330000301101000000011
1. Local Critical Crash Rate Differential
2. Equivalent Property Damage Only
Crashes
32 8. Best Practices Evaluation and Emphasis Areas
8.1 Best Practices Evaluation
Table 6 identifies existing plans and policies that were recently completed, or are planned, or on-going within the City of South El Monte. The intent of this review is to provide an idea of the types of strategies in place or encouraged by the City that may impact the safety analysis process. It will also identify opportunity areas where the City could adopt non-infrastructure countermeasures. This table also ties each topic and enhancement to the emphasis areas that are laid out in Section 8.2.
Table 6 – Summary of Program, Policies, and Practices
Topic Initiatives/ Current Status Opportunities for
Implementation or Enhancement
COMMITTEES / ROLES
Does the City have an
Active Transportation
Coordinator?
City does not currently have an
active transportation coordinator
Create and formalize active
transportation coordinator
Does the City have a
Safety or Active
Transportation Advisory
Committee?
City does not currently have a
safety/active transportation
advisory committee
Create committee or include in
other committee, such as traffic
commission
Does the City have an
Active Transportation
Safety Education
Program?
City does not have an Active
Transportation Safety Education
Program
Implement an Active
Transportation Safety Education
program
POLICY / PLANS
Does the City have a
Complete Streets Plan?
City has a Complete Streets
Ordinance
Implement a Complete Streets
Plan to formalize complete streets
policies. ‘Complete Streets’ are
streets that are designed and
operated to enable safe usage and
support mobility for all users.
Develop guidelines for
implementation going forward.
Does the City assess
Traffic Impact Fees?
The City does not currently assess
traffic impact fees
Consider assessing traffic impact
fees at major developments to help
pay for transportation safety
improvements
Does the City have a Safe
Routes to School
program?
City does not have a safe routes to
school program
Implement a Safe Routes to
School program to reflect changing
trends
Does the City implement
Traffic Calming Policies?
City does not have a formal traffic
calming policy, follows CA MUTCD
guidelines
Formalize Traffic Calming Policies
and implement where appropriate
33 Does the City regularly
conduct Speed Surveys?
City completes citywide speed
surveys at required intervals, City
performs speed surveys at
locations where there is a
speeding issue or request
Continue to conduct speed
surveys every 7 years as required
by the CA MUTCD
Is the City planning for
Density and Walkable
Areas?
City has some dense and walkable
areas, no formal policy
Consider updating general plan
and zoning to allow for high
density and additional mixed-use
developments
Does the City have
Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) or
Vehicle Miles Travelled
(VMT) Reduction
policies?
SGVCOG is developing a regional
program/ Traffic city guidelines
allows for VMT
Continue implementing TDM and
VMT policies
Does the City perform
Traffic Crash Monitoring? City does not monitor collisions Regularly monitor crash data to identify any trends or hotspots
Does the City have an
Active Transportation
Master Plan?
City has performed the South El
Monte High School Mobility and
Active Transportation Plan in 2021
Consider creating a Citywide
Active Transportation Master Plan
Does the City have
MUTCD-compliant
Pedestrian Signal
Timing?
Any upgrades to city signals the
timing is checked and compliant.
There are a lot of older signals that
may need to be checked for
compliance.
Continue to implement MUTCD
compliant pedestrian signal timing
where appropriate
Does the City implement
Crosswalks at high
pedestrian locations?
The City has been awarded past
ATP projects that provided sign
and crosswalk upgrades at a
significant portion of locations
around city schools.
Continue to implement crosswalks
at high pedestrian volume
locations as trends change
What type of traffic
enforcement does the
City conduct?
LA County Sheriff’s Department
provides traffic enforcement
Continue to enforce traffic laws in
collision and aggressive driving
hotspots
What is the City's Bicycle
Policy?
City is included in the San Gabriel
Valley Regional Bicycle Master
Plan in 2014
Formalize bicycle policies in City’s
transportation element
What types of transit
does the City have?
Foothill Transit, LA Metro buses,
and Norwalk Transit
Coordinate with transit agencies to
identify any transit-related
improvements to traffic safety
What types of wayfinding
does the City have?
Some wayfinding exists at city
entrances
Identify areas where wayfinding
signage could contribute to
increased roadway safety
DATA COLLECTION / INVENTORY
Does the City have an
Inventory of Pedestrian
Signs and Signals?
City does not have an inventory of
pedestrian signs and signals
Create GIS database of pedestrian
signals and signs
34 Does the City have an
Inventory/Mapping of
Active Transportation
Routes?
City does not have an inventory of
active transportation routes
Consider creating an inventory of
active transportation routes,
including bicycle lanes and
pedestrian paths; assemble in GIS
if appropriate
Does the City utilize
Crossroads Database for
collisions?
City utilizes Crossroads Continue to utilize Crossroads database and regularly update
Does the City have Active
Transportation Volume
Counting?
City does not have active
transportation volume counting
program
Implement Active Transportation
Volume counting at key locations
to gauge active transportation
usage
COORDINATION / FEEDBACK
What ways can citizens
give feedback about
roadway safety?
City Website offers an anonymous
online service request (Go Gov),
Newsletter has City Hall phone
number for reporting concerns.
Facebook and Instagram are
platforms a percentage of
residents use to inform City staff of
opinions and requests.
Continue to solicit citizen feedback
on traffic safety and transportation
planning efforts
What types of
Coordination with other
City organization does
your department
perform?
City coordinates with Regional ,
County, Local and State agencies
related to Transportation Safety.
Continue coordinating with
development department and other
City departments
What types of School
Engagement does the
City perform?
City engages regularly with school
districts for safety issues.
Continue to identify areas of
coordination with local schools
What types of Law
Enforcement/Emergency
Service Engagement
does the City perform?
City partners with Temple Station -
Los Angeles County Sheriff
Department. The City has a
C.E.R.T (Community Emergency
Response Team) composed of city
residents and volunteers.
Continue to identify areas of
coordination with police and fire
department
35 8.2 Emphasis Areas
Emphasis areas represent crash factors that are common in the City and provide the opportunity to reduce the largest number of traffic injuries with strategic investment. Emphasis areas were developed by revisiting the vision and goals of this planning process and comparing them with the trends and patterns identified in the crash analysis.
8.2.4 Emphasis Area #1: Vulnerable Road Users (Pedestrians & Bicyclists) Description: Pedestrians and bicyclists are classified by Caltrans as vulnerable users, meaning they possess the highest potential for severe harm during a crash. These groups need appropriate infrastructure to travel to key destinations such as schools, workplaces, and core commercial areas. The City’s Circulation element lays out plans and standards for non-motorized transportation. Of the 98 crashes involving vulnerable road users, 3 resulted in a fatal injury and 5 resulted in a severe injury. The City should aim to implement countermeasures to further protect these users from injury.
Goals for Emphasis Area #1:
• Improve active transportation infrastructure by adding pedestrian facilities, bike lanes, and other amenities to make it safer for employees and community members to get to key destinations such as school, commercial centers, transit centers, and recreation areas • Encourage healthier lifestyles through active transportation infrastructure • Apply for HSIP and other funding to implement countermeasures to address vulnerable road user crashes
Strategies for Emphasis Area #1:
• Provide outreach, education, and enforcement to encourage more separation between vehicular and pedestrian traffic
• Install high-visibility crosswalk markings at the intersection of key destinations • Ensure all signalized intersections have completed crosswalks • Provide dedicated pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure to and from bus stops • Install adequate street lighting
• Widen street shoulders
• Provide signage (e.g., pedestrian crossing ahead) to help drivers expect to slow down for pedestrians and bikes
• Install bicycle lanes along key corridors
• Install bicycle storage facilities in public areas, such as parks and schools, to encourage bicycle use
• Install curb extensions
36 • Install ADA ramps
• Modify signal phasing to implement a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) with new controller • Install/upgrade pedestrian crossing at uncontrolled locations • Establish rotating enforcement targets for high visibility campaigns These strategies will be implemented by the City, law enforcement, and community organizations, such as CalWalks, and Active SGV. Funding sources for these strategies may include OTS, NHTSA, and SB1 grant programs.
8.2.1 Emphasis Area #2: Commercial Vehicles
Description: Collisions which involve a truck, truck tractor, school bus or other buses. The City has a significant number of collisions involving commercial vehicles that needs to be addressed.
13.1% of fatal and severe injuries in the City involved commercial vehicles, compared to 6.4% statewide.
Goals for Emphasis Area #2:
• Reduce the number of collisions involving commercial vehicles. • Identify hot spots and priority corridors to address collisions involving commercial vehicles.
• Apply for funding and implement countermeasures to improve commercial vehicles collisions.
Strategies for Emphasis Area #2:
• Engineering improvement may include truck route designation, and wider turning radii at intersections.
• Raise awareness of work/rest implementation to reduce driver fatigue.
8.2.2 Emphasis Area #3: Intersection Improvements
Description: Collisions involved at intersections, interchanges, and other roadway access. About 86% of total of collisions took place at or near intersections. 29.5% of the fatal and severe injury collisions in South El Monte involved intersections, compared to 23.6% statewide.
Goals for Emphasis Area #3:
• Reduce the number of crashes at intersections, interchanges, and other roadway access. • Identify hot spots and prioritize locations for intersection improvements. • Apply for funding and implement countermeasures to address collisions at intersections for improvement.
37 Strategies for Emphasis Area #3:
• Engineering improvements are not limited but could include backplates with reflective borders, left-and right turn lanes at two-way controlled intersections, and improvements to left turn conflict, such as protected left-turn movements.
38 9. Countermeasure Toolbox
This section provides information on general identified issues, crash reduction factors, improvements, and countermeasures identified for the City of South El Monte, as well as for specific project locations identified as part of this analysis. Countermeasures for each of the Safety Project Case Studies are based on data analysis, stakeholder input, and site visits.
9.1 Infrastructure Improvements
9.1.1 Countermeasure Selection Process
Part D of the HSM provides information on CMFs for roadway segments, intersections, interchanges, special facilities, and road networks. CMFs are used to estimate the safety effects of highway improvements, specifically to compare and select highway safety improvements. A CMF less than 1.0 indicates that a treatment has the potential to reduce crashes. A CMF greater than 1.0 indicates that a treatment has the potential to increase crashes. A Crash Reduction Factor (CRF) is directly connected to the CMF and is “mathematically defined as (1 – CMF) (the higher the CRF, the greater the expected reduction in crashes) 4 .” CMFs can help decision makers
weigh potential alternative projects, but are only one measure of a project's value and should be considered part of a larger decision making process. Furthermore, it is important to note that not all CMFs are as reliable as others. The FHWA maintains a federal depository of CMFs and includes a star rating system to help users determine which CMFs are bolstered by the best and most thorough research. Key factors to consider when applying CMFs include:
1. Selection of an appropriate CMF;
2. Estimation of crashes without treatment;
3. Application of CMFs by type and severity; and,
4. Estimation of the combined effect for multiple treatments.
Examples of Safety Countermeasures can be found through several sources. This Report utilizes the countermeasures found in the California LRSM and the CMF Clearinghouse (CMF CH) website. Countermeasures for each of the Safety Project Case Studies are based on the data analysis and site visits. Additional countermeasures were identified for the high-level issues on a city-wide level and are discussed in Section 9.2.
4 Local Roadway Safety Manual (Version 1.5) 2020. Page 27.
39 9.1.2 Safety Project Case Studies
From the city-wide analysis, eleven (10) project case study locations were selected for further evaluation and countermeasure development. For each of these locations, Safety Project Case Studies were developed to provide a balanced understanding of common safety patterns at a variety of location types that can be used to associate countermeasures with specific roadway configurations and conditions. These locations were identified through the analysis process based on their crash histories, stakeholder engagement, the observed crash patterns, and their different characteristics to provide the most insight into potential systemic safety countermeasures that the City can employ to achieve the most cost-effective safety benefits.
A Safety Project Case Study was developed for each of the following locations:
1. Signalized Intersection: Rosemead Blvd & Garvey Ave
2. Signalized Intersection: Durfee Ave/Peck Rd & Michael Hunt Dr
3. Signalized Intersection: Merced Ave & Rust St
4. Unsignalized Intersection: Troy Ave & Fern St
5. Roadway Segment: Chico Ave – Rush St to Fern St
The following pages summarize conditions at each location, and potentially beneficial countermeasures. Countermeasures were subjected to a benefit/cost assessment and scored according to their potential return on investment. These case studies can be used to select the most appropriate countermeasure, and to potentially phase improvements over the longer-term.
These case study sheets can also be used to position the City for future grant funding opportunities.
The potential benefit of each countermeasure was calculated using each countermeasure’s Crash Reduction Factor (CRF) and the latest Caltrans injury level cost data. Fatal and severe injury collisions are estimated at $2.19 million, Other Visible Injury collisions at $142,300, Complaint of Pain collision at $80,900, and Property Damage Only collisions at $13,300. The 5-year benefit is extrapolated out to a 20-year safety benefit.
The 20-year safety benefit was then compared to the 20-year cost estimates, which is used to calculate a benefit-cost ratio. The benefit-cost ratio can be used to compare different countermeasures for their effectiveness and competitiveness for grant funding.
Case Study Sheet: Location #1
Project Location, Description & Maps
Intersection: Rosemead Blvd and Garvey Ave
Example of Similar Intersections: Rush St and Rosemead Blvd; Marshall St and Rosemead Blvd
SIGNALIZED
INTERSECTION
Project Name: South El Monte LRSP
Agency Name: City of South El Monte
Prepared by: Kimley-Horn
Project Location, Description & Maps
Collision Data
Total Collisions 73
Fatal and Severe Injury
Collisions
2 Top 3 Collision Types (%) Rear-End (36%)
Broadside (30%)
Sideswipe (19%)
Dark Collisions 35
Impaired Collisions 5
Collision Data
Number of Approaches 4
Total Entering Vehicles 27,500
Crosswalk Condition Painted
Control Type Signalized
Lighting Yes
Highest Posted Speed
Limit
35 Collisions Involved With
Vehicular Pedestrian Bicycle
59 1 7
Countermeasure Evaluation
Potential
Countermeasures
Crash Reduction
Factor
(LRSM/CMF ID)
20 Year Safety
Benefit
Total 20-Year Costs Safety Related B/C
Ratio
Install retroreflective
backplates
15%
(S02)
$1,227,225 $26,400 46.49
Provide Advanced
Dilemma Zone
Detection system
40%
(S04)
$3,272,600 $76,800 42.61
Raised pavement
markers
10%
(S09)
$818,150 $32,400 25.25
Install raised median 25%
(R08)
$2,045,375 $192,240 10.64
Modify signal
phasing to
implement a Leading
Pedestrian Interval
(LPI)
60%
(S21PB)
$4,908,900 $45,600 107.65
Case Study Sheet: Location #1
Case Study Sheet: Location #2
Project Location, Description & Maps
Intersection: Peck Rd/Durfee Ave and Michael Hunt Dr
Example of Similar Intersections: Durfee Ave & Fineview St; Durfee Ave & Magnolia St
SIGNALIZED
INTERSECTION
Project Name: South El Monte LRSP
Agency Name: City of South El Monte
Prepared by: Kimley-Horn
Project Location, Description & Maps
Collision Data
Total Collisions 55
Fatal and Severe Injury
Collisions
3 Top 3 Collision Types (%) Rear-end (31%)
Sideswipe (26%)
Broadside (22%)
Dark Collisions 20
Impaired Collisions 2
Collision Data
Number of Approaches 4
Total Entering Vehicles 37,048
Crosswalk Condition Painted
Control Type Signalized
Lighting Yes
Highest Posted Speed
Limit
40 Collisions Involved With
Vehicular Pedestrian Bicycle
46 2 3
Countermeasure Evaluation
Potential
Countermeasures
Crash Reduction
Factor
(LRSM/CMF ID)
20 Year Safety
Benefit
Total 20-Year Costs Safety Related B/C
Ratio
Install retroreflective
backplates
15%
(S02)
$1,258,830 $26,400 47.68
Modify signal
phasing to
implement a Leading
Pedestrian Interval
(LPI)
60%
(S21PB)
$5,035,320 $45,600 110.42
Install
dynamic/variable
speed warning signs
30%
(R26)
$2,517,660 $45,600 55.21
Install
Bicycle Box
15%
(S20PB)
$1,258,830 $160,800 7.83
Convert signal to
mast arm (from
pedestal mounted)
S08
(30%)
$2,517,660 $400,000 6.30
Case Study Sheet: Location #2
Case Study Sheet: Location #3
Project Location, Description & Maps
Intersection: Merced Ave and Rush St
Example of Similar Intersections: Rush St and Potrero Ave; Rush St and Central AVe
SIGNALIZED
INTERSECTION
Project Name: South El Monte LRSP
Agency Name: City of South El Monte
Prepared by: Kimley-Horn
Project Location, Description & Maps
Collision Data
Total Collisions 25
Fatal and Severe Injury
Collisions
2 Top 3 Collision Types (%) Broadside (48%)
Rear-End (20%)
Head-On (12%)
Dark Collisions 8
Impaired Collisions 1
Collision Data
Number of Approaches 4
Total Entering Vehicles 37,324
Crosswalk Condition Painted
Control Type Signalized
Lighting Yes
Highest Posted Speed
Limit
35 Collisions Involved With
Vehicular Pedestrian Bicycle
23 0 1
Countermeasure Evaluation
Potential
Countermeasures
Crash Reduction
Factor
(LRSM/CMF ID)
20 Year Safety
Benefit
Total 20-Year Costs Safety Related B/C
Ratio
Install retroreflective
backplates
15%
(S02)
$811,635 $26,400 30.74
Modify signal
phasing to
implement a Leading
Pedestrian Interval
(LPI)
60%
(S21PB)
$3,246,540 $45,600 71.20
Install pedestrian
crossing
25%
(S18PB)
$1,352,725 $74,400 18.18
Case Study Sheet: Location #3
Case Study Sheet: Location #4
Project Location, Description & Maps
Intersection: Troy Ave and Fern St
Example of Similar Intersections: Fern St and Lee Ave; Fern St and Loma Ave
TWO-WAY-STOP
INTERSECTION
Project Name: South El Monte LRSP
Agency Name: City of South El Monte
Prepared by: Kimley-Horn
STOP
STOP
Project Location, Description & Maps
Collision Data
Total Collisions 8
Fatal and Severe Injury
Collisions
0 Top Collision Type (%) Sideswipe (50%)
Broadside (50%)
Dark Collisions 2
Impaired Collisions 1
Collision Data
Number of Approaches 4
Total Entering Vehicles 18,750
Crosswalk Condition Not painted
Control Type Stop sign
Lighting Yes
Highest Posted Speed
Limit
30 Collisions Involved With
Vehicular Pedestrian Bicycle
7 0 0
Countermeasure Evaluation
Potential
Countermeasures
Crash Reduction
Factor
(LRSM/CMF ID)
20 Year Safety
Benefit Total 20-Year Costs Safety Related B/C
Ratio
Raised pavement
markers
10%
(S09) $24,160 $32,400 0.75
Install/upgrade
larger or additional
stop signs or other
intersection
warning/regulatory
signs
15%
(NS06) $36,240 $16,800 2.16
Install pedestrian
crossing at
uncontrolled
locations (new signs
and markings only)
25%
(NS20PB) $60,400 $34,800 1.74
Case Study Sheet: Location #4
Case Study Sheet: Location #5
Project Location, Description & Maps
Segment: Chico Ave: Rush St to Fern St
Example of Similar Segments: Potrero Ave: Fern St to Rush St; Seaman Ave: Fern St to Rush St
ROADWAY
SEGMENT
STOP
Project Name: South El Monte LRSP
Agency Name: City of South El Monte
Prepared by: Kimley-Horn
Project Location, Description & Maps
Collision Data
Total Collisions 9
Fatal and Severe Injury
Collisions
0 Top 2 Collision Types (%) Broadside (44%)
Rear-end (33%)
Dark Collisions 1
Impaired Collisions 0
Collision Data
Average Daily Traffic
(ADT)
16,250
Lighting Yes
Median No
Highest Posted Speed
Limit
30 Collisions Involved With
Vehicular Pedestrian Bicycle
9 0 0
Countermeasure Evaluation
Potential
Countermeasures
Crash Reduction
Factor
(LRSM/CMF ID)
20 Year Safety
Benefit Total 20-Year Costs Safety Related B/C
Ratio
Install
dynamic/variable
speed warning signs
30%
(R26) $117,030 $45,600 2.57
Install edge-lines
and centerlines
25%
(R28) $97,525 $5,000 19.51
Case Study Sheet: Location #5
50 9.2 City-wide Countermeasure Toolbox
This evaluation considered citywide trends to identify countermeasures that would likely provide the most benefit with widespread implementation. Table 9 outlines the citywide safety project opportunities, which is also referred to as the “Countermeasure Toolbox”. Within the toolbox, the description of the countermeasure along with its Local Roadway Safety Manual (LRSM) ID number is listed. The next column, Crash Reduction Factor (CRF), are “multiplicative factors used to estimate the expected reduction in number of crashes after implementing a given countermeasure at a specific site (the higher the CRF, the greater the expected reduction in crashes).” For each of these countermeasures, a planning level benefit/cost analysis was completed.
Applying the benefit/cost at the citywide level was estimated assuming some randomness in crash distribution. The location characteristics, such as whether there is a traffic signal, and the type of crashes, were used at the citywide level to calculate an average cost of crashes that the countermeasure might reduce. The benefit per location was then factored out to a 20-year lifecycle savings, with an Opinion of Project Probable Cost (OPCC) for the initial installation costs and a per-year maintenance cost estimate. The cost shown in Table 9 should be considered initial planning costs using 2022 dollars and not assumed final.
51 Table 7 - Citywide Safety Countermeasure Toolbox
ID Potential Countermeasures Where to apply?
Crash
Reduction
Factor
Per Unit
Cost Unit
S02 Improve signal hardware: back-plates with
retroreflective borders
Signalized intersections with significant broadside
and rear-end collisions due to signal visibility
15% $12,000 per intersection
S04 Provide Advanced Dilemma Zone Detection for
high-speed approaches
Signalized intersections with significant right-angle
and rear-end collisions due to unsafe stopping
during yellow phases
40% $34,000 per intersection
S08 Convert signal to mast arm (from pedestal
mounted)
Signalized intersections with crash causes
including Traffic Signals and Signs
30% $400,000 per signal
S09 Install raised pavement markers and striping
(through intersection)
Signalized intersections with sideswipe collisions
due to improper turning, auto R/W violation,
unsafe starting
10% $20,000 per intersection
S18PB Install pedestrian crossing (S.I.) Intersections with or without existing pedestrian crossing striping
25% $32,000 per intersection
S20PB Install advance stop bar before crosswalk
(Bicycle Box)
Intersections with high volumes of vulnerable
users
15% $30,000 per approach
S21PB Modify signal phasing to implement a Leading
Pedestrian Interval (LPI) with new controller
Signalized Intersections – especially those with
high pedestrian activity
60% $8,000 per intersection
NS06 Install/upgrade larger or additional stop signs or other intersection warning/regulatory signs at
unsignalized intersections
Unsignalized intersections with crash history
showing running stop signs 15% $2,000 per sign
NS20PB Install pedestrian crossing at uncontrolled
locations (new signs and markings only)
Intersections with no pedestrian crossing striping 25% $22,000 per intersection R08 Install raised median Locations with collisions with motor vehicles on other roadway, improper turning or driving, auto
R/W violation
25% $840 per LF
R26 Install dynamic/variable speed warning sign Roadway segments with a significant number of collisions due to unsafe speeds.
30% $16,000 per sign
52 ID Potential Countermeasures Where to apply?
Crash
Reduction
Factor
Per Unit
Cost Unit
R28 Install safety edges Roadway segments with collisions that resulted in run-off-road right/left, head-on, or oppositedirection-sideswipe. 25% $70,000 per mile
53 10. Funding Sources & Next Steps
10.1 Funding
Competitive funding resources are available to assist in the development and implementation of safety projects in South El Monte. The City should continue to seek available funding and grant opportunities from local, state, and federal resources to accelerate their ability to implement safety improvements throughout South El Monte. This section provides a high-level introduction to some of the main funding programs and grants for which the City can apply.
10.1.1 Highway Safety Improvement Program
The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a Federal program that apportions funding as a lump sum for each state, which is then divided among apportioned programs. These flexible funds can be used for projects to preserve or improve safety conditions and performance on any Federal-aid highway, bridge projects on any public road, facilities for non-motorized transportation, and other project types. Safety improvement projects eligible for this funding include:
• New or upgraded traffic signals
• Upgraded guard rails
• Pedestrian warning flashing beacons
• Marked crosswalks
• Other projects listed in the Caltrans Local Road Safety Manual California’s local HSIP focuses on infrastructure projects with national recognized crash reduction factors. Normally HSIP call-for-projects is made at an interval of one to two years. The applicant must be a city, a county, or a tribal government federally recognized within the State of California.
Additional information regarding this program at the Federal level can be found online at:
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/. California specific HSIP information – including dates for upcoming call for projects - can be found at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/hsip.html.
HSIP Cycle 11 applications are due in September 2022.
10.1.2 Caltrans Active Transportation Program
Caltrans Active Transportation Program (ATP) is a statewide funding program, created in 2013, consolidating several federal and state programs. The ATP funds projects that encourage increased mode share for walking and bicycling, improve mobility and safety for non-motorized users, enhance public health, and decrease greenhouse gas emissions. Projects eligible for this funding include:
• Bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects
• Bicycle and pedestrian planning projects (e.g., safe routes to school) • Non-infrastructure programs (education and enforcement)
54 This program funding is provided annually. The ATP call for projects typically comes out in the spring. Information on this program and cycles can be found online at:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/atp/.
10.1.3 California SB 1
The California SB 1 is a landmark transportation investment to rebuild California by fixing neighborhood streets, freeways, and bridges in communities across California and targeting funds toward transit and congested trade and commute corridor improvements.
California’s state-maintained transportation infrastructure will receive roughly half of SB 1 revenue: $26 billion. The other half will go to local roads, transit agencies and an expansion of the state’s growing network of pedestrian and cycle routes. Each year, this new funding will be used to tackle deferred maintenance needs both on the state highway system and the local road system, including:
• Local Street and Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation: $1.5 billion o This funding is dedicated to improve local road maintenance, rehabilitation, and/or safety through projects such as restriping and repaving. • Bike and Pedestrian Projects: $100 million
o This will go to cities, counties, and regional transportation agencies to build or convert more bike paths, crosswalks, and sidewalks. It is a significant increase in funding for these projects through the ATP.
• Local Planning Grants: $25 million
10.1.4 California Office of Traffic Safety Grants
This program has funding for projects related to traffic safety, including transportation safety education and encouragement activities. Grants applications must be supported by local crash data (such as the data analyzed in this report) and must relate to the following priority program areas:
o Alcohol Impaired Driving
o Distracted Driving
o Drug-Impaired Emergency Medical Services
o Motorcycle Safety
o Occupant Protection
o Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety
o Police Traffic Services
o Public Relations, Advertising, and Marketing Program
o Roadway Safety and Traffic Records
55 10.1.5 SCAG Sustainable Communities Program
This program is an innovative vehicle for promoting local jurisdictional efforts to test local planning tools. The Sustainable Communities Program (SCP) provides direct technical assistance to SCAG member jurisdictions to complete planning and policy efforts to implement the regional Sustainable Communities Strategies (SCS). Grants are available in the following three categories:
• Integrated Land Use
o Sustainable Land Use Planning
o Transit Oriented Development (TOD)
o Land Use & Transportation Integration
• Active Transportation
o Bicycle Planning
o Pedestrian Planning
o Safe Routes to School Plans
• Green Region
o Natural Resource Plans
o Climate Action Plans (CAPs)
o Green House Gas (GHG) Reduction programs
10.1.6 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Grant Program This program has allocated $1B annually for the next 4 years for local cities, counties, MPOs, and other roadway owners (excepting state DOTs) for safety improvement grants for safety planning, education, enforcement, and roadway improvements. This program is not benefit / cost based.
Evaluation criteria are oriented to the project’s alignment with the Safe Systems approach. There is a 20% local match requirement (can be in-kind contribution via staff billable hours). Planning grants are open to any eligible agency and Implementation grants are open to agencies with a completed safety plan such as a Local Roadway Safety Plan. Planning grants are expected to range from $100K to $1M and Implementation grants are expected to range from $1M to $20M.
Grant applications are due in September 2022.
10.1.7 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
In November 2021, the President signed into law the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. In addition to the SS4A grant program described above, this law provides billions of dollars in additional funding for improvements and investment in the transportation sector nationwide. The law provides $30 billion in funding over 5 years for competitive RAISE grants for transportation projects, as well as additional funding for repair and environmental mitigation projects. As these grant programs continue to be developed, City can position itself by identifying potential projects and programs to pursue.
56 10.2 Implementation Plan
Once the Local Roadway Safety Plan has been completed, the City can plan to regularly review and monitor collision data for trends and changes. The City can also plan to prioritize and implement certain improvements that were identified in this plan.
10.2.1 Monitoring
The City can plan to regularly monitor the success of the LRSP and its related implementations by performing the following steps. This before and after analysis can be performed every second year. The City can also meet with the Sheriff department quarterly to discuss roadway safety issues and compare to the latest collision analysis.
• Pull yearly collision data from Crossroads database to determine year-over-year trend • Utilize Crossroads or GIS software to review the number of collisions occurring at specific locations. Locations where improvements have been made should receive priority for monitoring.
• Based upon changes in collision activity, determine efficacy of improvements and adjust strategies going forward
10.2.2 Analysis Update
The City can plan to update the analysis every two years as part of a monitoring program, as described in Section 10.2.1. Every 4 years the City will perform a major update to the analysis and the Local Roadway Safety Plan by performing the following steps. This update will maintain eligibility for the HSIP grant funding for the City. This analysis should continue to focus on both systemic and location-specific safety needs.
1. Obtain updated Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) collision data from the Crossroads database
2. Use Excel software to update the collision trend analysis completed in Section 7, continue to compare new collision to historic trends
3. Update the roadway shapefile with any new or upgraded roadways
4. Update the intersection shapefile with any new or upgraded intersections
5. Re-run the GIS collision tool to determine the number of collisions at intersections and roadways within the updated study period. The City can plan to run the collision tool for all collisions, as well as the collision types identified in Section 3.2.2 Network Screening Analysis.
6. Update the collision analysis performed in this report, including the collision analysis tables shown in Section 7.7 Collision Network Screening Analysis Report
7. Review the Collision Toolbox to determine if any additional countermeasures should be considered for implementation in the City
10.2.3 Implementation Strategies
The opportunities identified in this report provide systemic and location-specific countermeasures that can be implemented within the City. Implementation will be dictated by funding and available resources, this
57 guidance is preliminary and subject to change. Over the near-term and mid-term, the City can concentrate its efforts on the following emphasis areas. • Vulnerable Road Users (Pedestrians and Bicyclists)
• Commercial Vehicles
• Intersection Improvements
Analysis conducted at the citywide level indicated that these factors were some of the most frequent influences contributing to collisions within the City. The countermeasure opportunities previously discussed in this report for both systemic and project-specific improvements can be used as a basis for developing projects at locations where addressing these focus areas would be of the most benefit.
Projects that address these focused areas citywide can be developed with a high benefit-to-cost ratio (by applying City-wide collision rates), allowing competitive projects to be developed even at sites with little to no direct collision history, but with conditions that might contribute to future collisions. For location-specific improvements, the City can utilize benefit-cost ratio calculations to help prioritize projects as funding and resources become available. The countermeasure toolbox in Table 8 also identified a potential prioritization timeline for each improvement, based on cost, effectiveness and feasibility.
This project prioritization process will help the City be ready for the funding opportunities identified in Section 10.1. Project prioritization will also help to guide the projects as they are taking into the design and construction project. Coordination with City departments will be key in the completion of these implementations.
The City can also plan to implement the non-engineering improvements identified throughout this report, including actions related to Enforcement, Education, and Emergency Services. These actions will require coordination with internal and external stakeholders, such as City departments, law enforcement, local government organizations, and local community organizations. Early buy-in and engagement from these stakeholders will be key to the success of these actions.
To aid in these actions, the City can assemble a ‘Task Force’ of representatives from different City departments, such as Public Works, Development Services, and Public Safety. This task force will be instrumental in the monitoring, analysis update, project development and project implementation outlined in this plan.
10.3 Next Steps
The City has completed this LRSP to guide the process of future transportation safety improvements for years to come. In addition to the actions identified in the Implementation Plan, the City can perform the following to guide the success of this LRSP and the safety efforts overall. • Work with state and partner agencies on implementation of large-scale programs and policies • Incorporate safety analysis findings in future updates of safety programs • Monitor statewide safety priorities, guidance, and funding opportunities
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.c.
DATE: September 13, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rene Salas, Interim City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Colby Cataldi, Community Development Director SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22- 77, APPROVING PROJECT ACCEPTANCE AND NOTICE OF
COMPLETION OF THE FERN STREET SIDEWALK
INSTALLATION PROJECT BY GRIGOLLA & SONS
CONSTRUCTION CO. INC.
SUMMARY: The Fern Street Sidewalk Installation Project was completed in compliance with the plans and specifications by Grigolla & Sons Construction Co Inc. The project scope included construction of concrete sidewalk, driveway approaches, curb ramps and related work on Fern Street between Doreen Avenue and Santa Anita Avenue. The final cost for the construction work completed by Grigolla & Sons Construction Co Inc. is $70,499.00.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 22-77, accepting the improvements to the Fern Street Sidewalk Installation Project by Grigolla & Sons Construction Co. Inc.;
2. Authorize the City Clerk to send the Notice of Completion for recordation to the Los Angeles County Recorder’s Office; and
3. Release retention accordingly.
FISCAL IMPACT: The project was completed within the established budget, and there is no additional fiscal impact. The final cost for the construction work completed by Grigolla & Sons Construction Co Inc. is $70,499.00, which is within the approved contract amount.
DISCUSSION: On March 3, 2022, staff advertised Notice Inviting Bids for the Fern Street Sidewalk Installation Project in engineering plan rooms and trade journals.
On March 15, 2022 at 2:00 pm, three (3) bids were received by the City. Out of three bids received, Grigolla & Sons Construction Co Inc. was found to be the lowest responsive
bidder. The bid submitted by Grigolla & Sons Construction Co Inc is in the amount of $67,450.00.
On April 12, 2022, the City Council awarded the construction contract to Grigolla & Sons Construction Co Inc. for $67,450.00 and approved 15% contingency for a total construction budget of $77,567.50.
In May 2022, Grigolla & Sons Construction Co Inc. began construction of the project per plans, specifications and bid documents contained in its contract with the City. The work included construction of a concrete sidewalk, driveway approaches, curb ramps and related work on Fern Street between Doreen Avenue and Santa Anita Avenue. The project has been completed within the contract schedule and budget. Therefore, staff recommends that City Council approve issuance of a Notice of Completion.
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Resolution No. 22-77
B. Notice of Completion Fern Street Sidewalk Installation
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 22-77
A RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTH EL MONTE CITY COUNCIL
ACCEPTING THE FERN STREET SIDEWALK INSTALLATION
PROJECT AS COMPLETE AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
CLERK TO FILE THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION WITH THE
LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDER
WHEREAS, the final cost for the construction work completed by Grigolla & Sons Construction Co Inc. is $70,499.00, which is within the approved contract amount; and WHEREAS, the project was reviewed by City Staff and it is determined to be completed satisfactorily; and
WHEREAS, it is recommended that City Council accept the project as Complete and authorize staff to file the “Notice of Completion” with the Los Angeles County Recorder’s Office for this project.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: The City Council hereby adopts and approves this Resolution accepting the work performed by Grigolla & Sons Construction Co Inc. for the Fern Street Sidewalk Installation Project.
SECTION 2: The City Council hereby authorizes the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion with the Los Angeles County Recorder.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of September, 2022. _____________________________
Gloria Olmos, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS:
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE )
I, Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk of the City of South El Monte, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. 22-77, was passed and approved by the City Council of the City of South El Monte at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 13th day of September 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
_____________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT B
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPT C/O CITY CLERKS’ OFFICE
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
1415 Santa Anita Avenue
South El Monte, CA 91733
Free recording requested per Gov’t Code 27383 Space above this line for Recorder’s use
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
Notice, pursuant to Civil Code Section 9204, must be filed within 15 days after completion.
Notice is hereby given that:
1. The undersigned is owner and corporate officer of the owner of the interest or estate stated below in the property hereinafter described.
2. The full name of the owner is: CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
3. The full address of the owner is: 1415 Santa Anita Avenue, South El Monte, CA 91733
4. The nature of the title is: Fee
5. The full names and full addresses of all persons, if any, who hold this with the undersigned as joint tenants or as tenants in common are:
NAMES ADDRESSES
NONE
6. The full names and full addresses of the predecessors in interest of the undersigned. IF the property was transferred subsequent to the commencement of the work or improvements herein referred to:
NAMES ADDRESSES
NONE
7. A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was completed on 6/30/2022. The work was: Fern Street Sidewalk Installation Project.
8. The name of the contractor, if any, for such work of improvement was _____________________________________________________________________________ (IF NO CONTRACTOR FOR WORK OF IMPROVEMENT AS A WHOLE, INSERT ‘NONE’) (DATE OF CONTRACT)
9. The property on which the work of improvement was completed is in South El Monte, County of Los Angeles, State of California, and is described as follows: Fern Street Sidewalk Installation Project.
10. The street address of the property is _________________________________________________ (IF NO STREET ADDRESS HAS BEEN OFFICIALY ASSIGNED, INSERT ‘NONE’) Dated: _______________ CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
By:________________________
Colby Cataldi
Community Development Director
VERIFICATION
I, the undersigned, say: I am the Community Development Director of the City of South El Monte, the declarant of the foregoing notice of completion; I have read said notice of completion and know the content thereof; the same is true of my own knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on: ___________________, at _____________________________________________________________ (CITY) (STATE)
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ (PERSONAL SIGNATURE OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO IS SWEARING THAT THE CONTENTS OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION ARE TRUE.)) Grigolla & Sons Construction Co Inc 04/12/2022
Fern St. between Doreen Ave. and Santa Anita Ave., South El Monte