South Gate City Council Regular Meeting Agenda

SOUTH GATE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

Tuesday, August 14, 2018 at 6:30 p.m.

I. Call To Order/Roll Call With Invocation & Pledge

CALL TO ORDER Maria Belen Bernal, Mayor Pastor Anthony Kidd, Community INVOCATION of Faith Bible Church PLEDGE OF Virginia Johnson, Citizens' ALLEGIANCE Advisory Committee ROLL CALL Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

II. City Officials MAYOR CITY CLERK Maria Belen Bernal Carmen Avalos

VICE MAYOR CITY TREASURER Jorge Morales Gregory Martinez

COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY MANAGER Denise Diaz Michael Flad Maria Davila Al Rios CITY ATTORNEY Raul F. Salinas

III. Meeting Compensation Disclosure Pursuant to Government Code Section 54952.3: Disclosure of compensation for meeting attendance by City Council Members is $650 monthly regardless of the amount of meetings. IV. Comments From The Audience During this time, members of the public and staff may address the City Council regarding any items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council. Comments from the audience will be limited to five (5) minutes per speaker; unless authorized by the Mayor, the time limit may not be extended by utilizing another member's time. There will be no debate or action on items not listed on the agenda unless authorized by law.

Note: The City Council desires to provide all members of the public with the opportunity to address the Council. Nevertheless, obscene language, comments intended to disrupt or interfere with the progress of the meeting or slanderous comments will not be tolerated and may result in ejection and/or may constitute a violation of South Gate Municipal Code Section 1.04.110. V. Reports And Comments From City Officials During this time, members of the City Council will report on matters pertaining to their service on various intergovenmental boards and commissions as a representative of the City pursuant to Assembly Bill 1234. City Council Members will also have an opportunity to comment on matters not on the agenda.

Following the City Council Members, reports and comments will be heard by the City Clerk, City Treasurer, City Manager and Department Heads. VI. Consent Calendar Items Agenda Items 1, 2 and 3 are consent Calendar Items. All items including Ordinances, Resolutions and Contracts, may be approved by adoption of the Consent Calendar, individually and collectively by one (1) motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless Members of the City Council, the public, or staff request that specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion and action.

Any Motion to introduce or adopt an Ordinance on the Consent Calendar shall be: (1) a motion to waive the reading of the Ordinance and introduce the Ordinance or (2) a motion to waive the reading of the Ordinance and adopt the Ordinance, as appropriate. 1. Resolution Approving MOU And Access Agreement With LAUSD The City Council will consider: (PW)

a. Adopting a Resolution approving the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and Access Agreement (Contract ) with the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) to convey right-of-way easements for the construction of a new bus turnout and a dedicated right- turn lane within South Gate High School on the Firestone Boulevard Capacity Enhancement Project, City Project No. 476-TRF, Metro Call For Project ID No. F3124;

b. Authorizing the Mayor to execute the MOU and Access Agreement in a form acceptable to the City’s Special Counsel; and

c. Receiving and filing the Roadway Improvement Concept for the bus turnout and right-turn lane as accepted by LAUSD.

Documents:

ITEM 1 REPORT 081418.PDF

2. Comment Letter To Metro Regarding Potential Impacts Of The West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor Project The City Council will consider authorizing the Mayor to execute the comment letter regarding potential impacts related to the West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor Project to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority prior to August 24, 2018. (CD)

Documents:

ITEM 2 REPORT 081418.PDF

3. Minutes The City Council will consider: (CLERK)

a. Approving the Special Meeting minutes and Special Budget minutes of May 29, 2018; and

b. Approving the Special and Regular Meeting minutes of July 10 and July 24, 2018.

Documents:

ITEM 3 REPORT 081418.PDF

VII. Reports, Recommendations And Requests 4. City's Street Sweeping Evaluation Results And Proposed Service Alternatives The City Council will consider: (PW)

a. Receiving and filing a presentation from the Director of Public Works/City Engineer on the results of the Street Sweeping Evaluation Project Report; and

b. Approving “Alternative No. 2 - Outsourcing the Street Sweeping Program” and authorize the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to procure a contract for street sweeping services starting in Fiscal Year 2018/19.

Documents:

ITEM 4 REPORT 081418.PDF

5. Warrant Register For August 14, 2018 The City Council will consider approving the Warrants and Cancellations for August 14, 2018.(ADMIN SVCS)

Total of Checks: $7,380,381.51 Voids: ($ 1,796.46) Total of Payroll Deductions: $ 202,049.85 Grand Total: $7,176,535.20

Cancellations: 77606, 78236, 78256 and Various Stale Dated Checks as Listed in the Staff Report.

Documents:

ITEM 5 REPORT 081418.PDF

VIII. Adjournment Adjournment in memory of Doris Jeanette (Jean) Reed, former City Commissioner and long-time resident.

I, Carmen Avalos, City Clerk, certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Meeting Agenda was posted August 8, 2018 at 3:00 p.m., as required by law.

Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the City Clerk's Office

8650 California Avenue, South Gate, California 90280 (323) 563-9510 * fax (323) 563-5411 * www.cityofsouthgate.org

In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in the City Council Meetings, please contact the Office of the City Clerk.

Notification 48 hours prior to the City Council Meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility. SOUTH GATE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

Tuesday, August 14, 2018 at 6:30 p.m.

I. Call To Order/Roll Call With Invocation & Pledge

II. City Officials MAYOR CITY CLERK Maria Belen Bernal Carmen Avalos

VICE MAYOR CITY TREASURER Jorge Morales Gregory Martinez

COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY MANAGER Denise Diaz Michael Flad Maria Davila Al Rios CITY ATTORNEY Raul F. Salinas

b. Authorizing the Mayor to execute the MOU and Access Agreement in a form acceptable to the City’s Special Counsel; and

c. Receiving and filing the Roadway Improvement Concept for the bus turnout and right-turn lane as accepted by LAUSD.

Documents:

ITEM 1 REPORT 081418.PDF

Documents:

ITEM 2 REPORT 081418.PDF

3. Minutes The City Council will consider: (CLERK)

a. Approving the Special Meeting minutes and Special Budget minutes of May 29, 2018; and

b. Approving the Special and Regular Meeting minutes of July 10 and July 24, 2018.

Documents:

ITEM 3 REPORT 081418.PDF

VII. Reports, Recommendations And Requests 4. City's Street Sweeping Evaluation Results And Proposed Service Alternatives The City Council will consider: (PW)

a. Receiving and filing a presentation from the Director of Public Works/City Engineer on the results of the Street Sweeping Evaluation Project Report; and

Documents:

ITEM 4 REPORT 081418.PDF

5. Warrant Register For August 14, 2018 The City Council will consider approving the Warrants and Cancellations for August 14, 2018.(ADMIN SVCS)

Total of Checks: $7,380,381.51 Voids: ($ 1,796.46) Total of Payroll Deductions: $ 202,049.85 Grand Total: $7,176,535.20

Cancellations: 77606, 78236, 78256 and Various Stale Dated Checks as Listed in the Staff Report.

Documents:

ITEM 5 REPORT 081418.PDF

VIII. Adjournment Adjournment in memory of Doris Jeanette (Jean) Reed, former City Commissioner and long-time resident.

I, Carmen Avalos, City Clerk, certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Meeting Agenda was posted August 8, 2018 at 3:00 p.m., as required by law.

Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the City Clerk's Office

8650 California Avenue, South Gate, California 90280 (323) 563-9510 * fax (323) 563-5411 * www.cityofsouthgate.org

In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in the City Council Meetings, please contact the Office of the City Clerk.

Notification 48 hours prior to the City Council Meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility. SOUTH GATE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

Tuesday, August 14, 2018 at 6:30 p.m.

I. Call To Order/Roll Call With Invocation & Pledge

II. City Officials MAYOR CITY CLERK Maria Belen Bernal Carmen Avalos

VICE MAYOR CITY TREASURER Jorge Morales Gregory Martinez

COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY MANAGER Denise Diaz Michael Flad Maria Davila Al Rios CITY ATTORNEY Raul F. Salinas

b. Authorizing the Mayor to execute the MOU and Access Agreement in a form acceptable to the City’s Special Counsel; and

c. Receiving and filing the Roadway Improvement Concept for the bus turnout and right-turn lane as accepted by LAUSD.

Documents:

ITEM 1 REPORT 081418.PDF

Documents:

ITEM 2 REPORT 081418.PDF

3. Minutes The City Council will consider: (CLERK)

a. Approving the Special Meeting minutes and Special Budget minutes of May 29, 2018; and

b. Approving the Special and Regular Meeting minutes of July 10 and July 24, 2018.

Documents:

ITEM 3 REPORT 081418.PDF

VII. Reports, Recommendations And Requests 4. City's Street Sweeping Evaluation Results And Proposed Service Alternatives The City Council will consider: (PW)

a. Receiving and filing a presentation from the Director of Public Works/City Engineer on the results of the Street Sweeping Evaluation Project Report; and

Documents:

ITEM 4 REPORT 081418.PDF

5. Warrant Register For August 14, 2018 The City Council will consider approving the Warrants and Cancellations for August 14, 2018.(ADMIN SVCS)

Total of Checks: $7,380,381.51 Voids: ($ 1,796.46) Total of Payroll Deductions: $ 202,049.85 Grand Total: $7,176,535.20

Cancellations: 77606, 78236, 78256 and Various Stale Dated Checks as Listed in the Staff Report.

Documents:

ITEM 5 REPORT 081418.PDF

VIII. Adjournment Adjournment in memory of Doris Jeanette (Jean) Reed, former City Commissioner and long-time resident.

I, Carmen Avalos, City Clerk, certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Meeting Agenda was posted August 8, 2018 at 3:00 p.m., as required by law.

Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the City Clerk's Office

8650 California Avenue, South Gate, California 90280 (323) 563-9510 * fax (323) 563-5411 * www.cityofsouthgate.org

In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in the City Council Meetings, please contact the Office of the City Clerk.

Notification 48 hours prior to the City Council Meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility. SOUTH GATE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

Tuesday, August 14, 2018 at 6:30 p.m.

I. Call To Order/Roll Call With Invocation & Pledge

II. City Officials MAYOR CITY CLERK Maria Belen Bernal Carmen Avalos

VICE MAYOR CITY TREASURER Jorge Morales Gregory Martinez

COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY MANAGER Denise Diaz Michael Flad Maria Davila Al Rios CITY ATTORNEY Raul F. Salinas

b. Authorizing the Mayor to execute the MOU and Access Agreement in a form acceptable to the City’s Special Counsel; and

c. Receiving and filing the Roadway Improvement Concept for the bus turnout and right-turn lane as accepted by LAUSD.

Documents:

ITEM 1 REPORT 081418.PDF

Documents:

ITEM 2 REPORT 081418.PDF

3. Minutes The City Council will consider: (CLERK)

a. Approving the Special Meeting minutes and Special Budget minutes of May 29, 2018; and

b. Approving the Special and Regular Meeting minutes of July 10 and July 24, 2018.

Documents:

ITEM 3 REPORT 081418.PDF

VII. Reports, Recommendations And Requests 4. City's Street Sweeping Evaluation Results And Proposed Service Alternatives The City Council will consider: (PW)

a. Receiving and filing a presentation from the Director of Public Works/City Engineer on the results of the Street Sweeping Evaluation Project Report; and

Documents:

ITEM 4 REPORT 081418.PDF

5. Warrant Register For August 14, 2018 The City Council will consider approving the Warrants and Cancellations for August 14, 2018.(ADMIN SVCS)

Total of Checks: $7,380,381.51 Voids: ($ 1,796.46) Total of Payroll Deductions: $ 202,049.85 Grand Total: $7,176,535.20

Cancellations: 77606, 78236, 78256 and Various Stale Dated Checks as Listed in the Staff Report.

Documents:

ITEM 5 REPORT 081418.PDF

VIII. Adjournment Adjournment in memory of Doris Jeanette (Jean) Reed, former City Commissioner and long-time resident.

I, Carmen Avalos, City Clerk, certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Meeting Agenda was posted August 8, 2018 at 3:00 p.m., as required by law.

Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the City Clerk's Office

8650 California Avenue, South Gate, California 90280 (323) 563-9510 * fax (323) 563-5411 * www.cityofsouthgate.org

In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in the City Council Meetings, please contact the Office of the City Clerk.

Notification 48 hours prior to the City Council Meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility. OFF&TH 5 is FISCAL b. c. RECOMMENDED turnout no the a. proposed Project), PURPOSE: TURNOUT Department

CITY SCHOOL ACCESS RECEIVED CONVEY SUBJECT: LAUSD Professional Contingency City Construction Construction summarized cost,

proposed AUG Staff PROJECT accepted Receive Authorize City’s easements Agreement Project Adopt South on the

the 8 IMPACT: Costs Memorandum Firestone Time AGREEMENT ON portion RIGHT-OF-WAY Director. City improvements Services AND Special Management Gate below. As No. RESOLUTION a

and AGENJDD.A by THE Resolution is the for a NO. 476-TRF, with LAUSD. of proposing High file A part Boulevard, ACTIONS: Total Counsel; Mayor There land the It FIRESTONE DEDICATED 476-TRF, the of the is of School construction Understanding fully

that city Roadway and WITH the is Los For to Metro

approving

$ $

$ $ to no Metro and is execute at funded EASEMENTS Los APPROVING Firestone widen the Angeles necessary impact on METRO Dearborn Call Cervantes THE Angeles Regular Improvement the BOULEVARD

Call of with of the RIGHT-TURN the the

For CITY to (MOU) Firestone Unified Boulevard a LOS for roadway to the MOU Department: CALL Avenue, restricted Project new Memorandum Unified

Meeting South construct Project General MEMORANDUM

FOR COUNCiL ANGELES provides bus and School FOR Concept ID to Boulevard in 324,778 204,420 School Capacity funds. turnout oft 76,824 CAPACITY THE 12,804 15,365 Access 15,365 Funds construct No. the front Fund. City LANE PROJECT Public August District City improvements. F3 -

of B for District CONSTRUCTION Manager: of UNIFIED The 124;

and Agreement Gate Enhancement Understanding restricted Capacity South the a Works Measure WITHIN $ $

$ $

$ $ $

14. JILL dedicated cost a (LAUSD) bus ENHANCEMENT OF (LAUSD) dedicated ID 2018 Gate of turnout NO. SCHOOL UNDERSTANDING funds Enhancement the in M High SOUTH right-turn a Funds Project proposed F3124 Michal 202,529 to 114,887 43,176 form 20,000 conveys (MOU) right-turn for and 7,196 8,635 8,635 convey

School

Item J OF the right-turn acceptable DISTRICT (The Flad GATE pocket construction A improvements to and Project,

(SGHS). 1-

right-of-way

$ $ $ $ $

S $ PROJECT, NEW lane \ the Boulevard Total

and City, No. Access lane 527,307 319,307 HIGH 120,000 within to 20,000 24,000 20,000 24,000 AND

BUS / City The TO bus the as of

1 /

The

improvements

right-of-way

2QQ9

constructing

located Boulevard

capacity, This

Points

the

improvements

dedicated

improve

For

medians,

Firestone

BACKGROUND:

the

operation

establishes

These

way

Since

LAUSD’s

and ANALYSIS:

improvements

Program ALIGNMENT

‘Continuing

the

•

November

proposed

improvements

Project

LAUSD

MOU

easements

proposed

the

the improvements

LAUSD

other

The

the

The

Dearborn LAUSD

circulation

reduce interest

bus

rehabilitating

Boulevard.

right-turn

For

westbound

bus

City’s

permanent

LAUSD

SGIIS

City

the

City

provides

(Attachment raised

miscellaneous

the

grant

Infrastructure

have

consistent

pullout

are

improvements

turnout

complete

adding

will

Project

28,

improvements:

The

rights

will

shall

improvements shall shall

shall

congestion

Avenue,

construction

WITH

and

negotiated

was 2017,

center

the

City

and

pocket,

the

property,

enhance

provide

are

The

the fund

administer

and easement,

convey

reimburse installed.

right-turn

The

and

grant

along

proposed

used

the

corner construction

additional

proposed

with

travel

has

necessary

the

approve

project

COUNCIL

City

obligations

medians.

drop-off/right-turn

any

add

Improvements.”

expenses.

Boulevard

street,

the

turning

and

undertaken

traffic

the City

are

approval

the

LAUSD

front

and

construct

which

construct

fund

lane

the

safety

Firestone

the the

LAUSD

MOU

pocket

terms

entails

Firestone delay

grant

required

Council

and

lanes

the

all

collaboration

circulation

necessary

Since

project of

project.

movement

the

Firestone

cost

enhance

costs

Project

various

and

for

SGHS.

MOU

GOALS:

the

include

agreed

funds

each

and

adding project.

the

LAUSD

for

Boulevard

the

reduce

project

easements,

approved

Boulevard

congestion MOU

proposed

from

associated

bus

project.

City portion

increase

design

The

the

its

direction,

lane

received

traffic

plans

The

permanent

the

other will

and

capacity,

Boulevard

turnout

third

City.

design

secure

and

third goal

between

congestion.

Board participate

will

following:

reduce

This

for

increase

for

of required

secure

Spring

improvements.

circulation

corridor.

Change

pedestrian

party

LAUSD

and

with

both

traffic

for

identified

relief

the

both

and

through

modifying

step

approved

and

rights

MOU

the

constructed

Dearborn

congestion.

overall

the

easement

the

right-of-way

subject costs

the

2019.

drop-off/right

onsite

front

safety,

Order

lane

improvements

north

project.

design

City

the

improve

temporary

and

the

completion

meets

and

the

connection

associated

project

the

administrative

improvements

traffic

and

No.

Avenue

increase

side project

and

July

grant

each

reduce

the

and

motorist

SGI{S.

and

Below

requirement

land

the

offsite

traffic

easements

construction,

LAUSD.

property

Fiscal 2018.

2009,

that

right

construction

direction, turn

signals,

construction

this

with of

intersection. with

City

necessary

roadway

Firestone

congestion

such

add

This

are

includes

construction.

safety

circulation.

lane

improvements

providing

project

the

Year

plan

the

this

process

Council’s

are

owned

will

that The

bus

entry.

bus

City

raised

primary

along

project,

bus

capacity.

the

proposed

checks

completion

the

2018/19

Boulevard,

prevent

are

multiple

on must

turnouts,

easement

goals

turnout

and

The

received

the

intersection.

the

turnouts

Metro

landscaped

The

adjacent

which

Firestone

construct

LAUSD,

project.

increase

goal

right-of-

features

beautify and

prior

the

for

needed

buses

MOU

and

Work

street

and

Call

City any

the

and

the

and

the

for

to a from stopping on the third westbound travel lane during the time the lane is in operation, from 6 a.m. to 9a.m. This feature will lead to enhancing traffic circulation and reducing delay.

Under the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq., (“CEQA”) and the implementing regulations set forth at Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15000, et seq. (“Guidelines”), in particular Sections 15300, 15301(c), Existing Facilities, provide that improvement of existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities are categorically exempt and thereby will not result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment. The MOU (completing the Project) is categorically exempt under CEQA and the Guidelines and the attached proposed Resolution sets forth these findings and directs the Public Works Director (or his authorized designee) to prepare and file a Notice of Exemption under CEQA with the County of Los Angeles.

The design is completed and the next step is to begin the construction in August 2018.

ATTACHMENTS: A. Proposed Resolution B. Proposed MOU C. Proposed Access Agreement D. Street Dedication Exhibit E. Roadway Improvement Concept F. Firestone Boulevard Plans G. Notice of Exemption CEQA H. Location Map

KT:lc

3 ALIGNMENT WiTH COUNCIL GOALS: This MOU meets the City Council’s goal for “Continuing Infrastructure Improvements.” The goal identified in the Fiscal Year 2018/19 Work Program is to complete construction of the project in Spring 2019.

ANALYSiS: The City has undertaken the design for an overall project that includes multiple street improvements on and along the Firestone Boulevard corridor. In connection with this project. the City and LAUSI) have negotiated the terms of a MOU to secure right-of-way easements that are adjacent to LAIJSI)’s SGHS at the corner of F’irestoneBoulevard and Dearborn Avenue intersection. The right-of- way easements will he used to construct the bus turnout and drop-off/right turn lane at the intersection. These improvements are necessary to enhance traffic circulation and increase roadway capacity.

Since the bus turnout and drop-off/right-turn lane will he constructed on property owned by LAUSD, the MOU provides the City the necessary permanent easement and right of entry. The MOU establishes the rights and obligations of the City and LAUSD related to construction, completion and operation of the improvements which the LAUSD Board approved in July 2018.

BACKGROUND: The Boulevard Project will increase safety, reduce congestion and beautify Firestone Boulevard. The project entails adding a third traffic lane in each direction, raised landscaped medians, rehabilitating the street, and various other improvements. A requirement of the Metro Call For Project grant was to add safety and congestion relief improvements such as bus turnouts to improve circulation and additional lanes to reduce congestion.

On November 28, 2017, the City Council approved Change Order No. 1 to add a bus turnout and a dedicated right-turn pocket, in front of SGHS. The next step in the administrative process to construct the improvements is to approve the MOU to secure rights to the land necessary on which the improvements will be installed.

Points of interest in the proposed MOU include the following: • LAUSD shall convey the required easements, both the temporary construction easement and the permanent easement, at no cost to the City. • The City shall administer the project from design through completion of construction. • The City shall fund any and all costs associated with the design and construction of the project. • The City shall reimburse LAUSD for its third party costs associated with plan checks and any other miscellaneous expenses. • LAUSD shall provide approval for the plans for both onsite and offsite improvements prior to the City’s construction of the project.

This MOU is consistent with the grant funds received for the project. In 2009, the City received the 2009 Call For Project grant to fund the project. As required by the grant, this project must increase capacity, reduce congestion and delay and increase pedestrian and motorist safety along Firestone Boulevard by adding a travel lane in each direction, modifying traffic signals, bus turnouts, and constructing raised center medians. Since a portion of the subject improvements are proposed to he located on LAUSD property, LAtJSD agreed to participate in the project by providing the needed right-of-way (Attachment G) to construct the project.

The proposed improvements are a collaboration between the City and LAUSD. The goals for the improvements are to enhance traffic circulation and reduce congestion. Below are the primary features of the proposed improvements:

• A westbound right-turn pocket is proposed on the north side of Firestone Boulevard, at Dearborn Avenue, to turning movement capacity, and to improve traffic circulation. • A bus pullout is proposed on Firestone Boulevard in front of SGHS. This will prevent buses from stopping on the third westbound travel lane during the time the lane is in operation, from 6 a.rn. to 9a.m. This feature will lead to enhancing traffic circulation and reducing delay.

Under the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq., (“CEQA”) and the implementing regulations set forth at Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15000, ci seq. (“Guidelines’), in particular Sections 15300, 15301(c), Existing Facilities, provide that improvement of existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities are categorically exempt and thereby will not result in a potentially significant physical impact Ofl the environment. The MOU (completing the Project) is categorically exempt under CEQA and the Guidelines and the attached proposed Resolution sets forth these findings and directs the Public Works Director (or his authorized designee) to prepare and file a Notice of Exemption under CEQA with the County of Los Angeles.

The design is completed and the next step is to begin the construction in August 2018.

ATTACHMENTS: A. Proposed Resolution B. Proposed MOU C. Proposed Access Agreement D. Street Dedication Exhibit F. Roadway Improvement Concept F. Firestone Boulevard Plans G. Notice of Exemption CEQA H. Location Map

KT:lc

3 ___

RESOLUTION NO.

CITY OF SOUTH GATE LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH GATE, CALIFORNIA APPROVING MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AND AGREEMENT WITH THE LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT TO CONVEY RIGHT- OF-WAY EASEMENTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW BUS TURNOUT AND A DEDICATED RIGHT-TURN LANE WITHIN SOUTH GATE HIGH SCHOOL ON THE FIRESTONE BOULEVARD CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 476-TRF, METRO CALL FOR PROJECT ID NO. F3124

WHEREAS, the City of South Gate (“City”)is a California municipal corporation organized and existing pursuant to the laws of the State of California; and

WHEREAS, the Los Angeles Unified School District is a unified school district duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (“LAUSD”);and

WHEREAS, the City has undertaken the planning for and design of public improvements to construct and operate street improvements on and along the Firestone Boulevard corridor in the City (“Firestone Project”), in connection with such project the City and LAUSD have negotiated the terms of a Memorandum of Understanding and Agreement to Convey Right of Way Easement (LAUSD South Gate High School) (“MOU”) that addresses a particular section of such project, specifically, adding an approximately 300-foot long bus turnout and a dedicated approximately 100-foot long right-turn pocket at the corner of Firestone Blvd and Dearborn Avenue, implementing a traffic transition zone, and related road improvements that are on or adjacent to LAUSD’s South Gate High School (“SGHS”) located at the corner of Dearborn Avenue and Firestone Boulevard across the frontage of the school property on Firestone Boulevard and Dearborn Avenue (“SGHS Off-Site Improvements”), along with restoration improvements on the SGHS campus (“SGHS On-Site Improvements”) (together referred to herein and in the MOU as the “SGHS Improvements”); and

WHEREAS, the City and LAUSD have negotiated the terms of the MOU (Attachment 1 hereto and fully incorporated by this reference) to cause the conveyance of the LAUSD Easements and the construction, completion and operation of the Project, and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq., (“CEQA”) and the implementing regulations set forth at Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15000, et seq. (“Guidelines”), in particular Sections 15300, 15301(c), Existing Facilities, provide that improvement of existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities are categorically exempt and thereby will not result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment; and WHEREAS, the MOU and Project described therein is categorically exempt under CEQA and the Guidelines; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all terms and conditions of the proposed MOU, desires to approve the MOU, and believes the agreement is in the best interests of the community and the health, safety and welfare of its residents and in accord with the public purposes and provisions of applicable state and local laws and requirements.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH GATE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are incorporated into this Resolution by this reference, and constitute a material part of this resolution.

SECTION 2. The MOU is hereby approved, and if necessary, with such changes mutually agreed upon by LAUSD counsel and the City Attorney, or special counsel, as are minor and in substantial conformance with the MOU submitted with this Resolution. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute and attest, respectively, the MOU on behalf of the City. In such regard, the City Manager is authorized to cause the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the final version of the MOU after completion of non- substantive, minor revisions, if any, to the MOU have been completed. When fully executed, a true copy of the MOU shall be placed on file in the office of the City Clerk.

SECTION 3. In addition to the authorizations in Section 2 above, the City Council authorizes the City Manager, or designee(s), on behalf of the City, to sign all documents necessary or appropriate to carry out the MOU and to sign any other implementing documents, to cause the issuance of warrants, if any, and to administer the City’s obligations, responsibilities and duties to be performed under the MOU.

SECTION 4. Under CEQA and the Guidelines, the MOU and Project described therein meet the categorical exemption set forth in the Guidelines, Sections 15300, 15301(c), Existing Facilities, the MOU provides for the improvement of existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities and thereby willnot result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment.

[Remainder of page left blank intentionally]

5- SECTION 5. The Public Works Director, or his authorized designee, is hereby directed to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk of the County of Los Angeles under Public Resources Code Section 21084 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15062 and 15374.

SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, which shall be effective upon its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 14tF, day of August 2018.

CITY OF SOUTH GATE:

Maria Belén Bernal, Mayor

ATTEST:

Carmen Avalos, City Clerk (SEAL)

3 ATTACHMENT 1

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AND AGREEMENT TO CONVEY RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT (LAUSD SOUTH GATE HIGH SCHOOL)

(attached)

ATTACHMENT 1 Page [of 1 RIGHT entered DISTRICT, GATE, traffic Project”), project (“LAUSD”). plans Avenue. beautify and adding right-turn such Improvements”). South temporary Improvements”) as a between (“Contractor parts Company SGHS the more

construction

Parties; including impliedly, SGHS South

permanent

the

approved

overall

and particularly Gate

“SGHS circulation

Gate

Improvements,

Improvements

This

B. called,

into

provided sidewalk this

LAUSD

the California

Within which

the

specifications

HSMOUFInaI8-15-!8 “Contractor”),

pocket

construction

approximately

any

High

Firestone

MEMORANDUM

major

easement

and

City WAY

by SGHS

SGHS

Access school

Improvements”

The

Firestone

The The

will

AGREEMENT

LAUSD.

the

described

and which

final School,

however, the restoration,

and

August

arterial

City

portion

municipal

City

Project,

the

adding EASEMENT

enhance

segment

addition

campus (except

City

district

the

City’s

LAUSD

Agreement”),

Project.

(“LAUSD

use

MEMORANDUM

recordation

that

together

has

corner

Boulevard

City

300-foot

acknowledges

and

located

and

These

corridor

in 14,

are

and

planned,

General

duly

motorist

certain

Paragraph

the striped

that

to landscaping, would corporation the each

LAUSD

are

2018

(LAUSD including

or this

otherwise

one-hundred

with

is,

additional

City prepare

Easement”)

Firestone

“SGHS

organized

sometimes

long Firestone

of (LAUSD

and by of

MOU

Regional

parts

the require

3351 (“Effective

third

CONVEY UNDERSTANDING

Fund

which the

designed

under and

Contractor’s

the

landscaping

and

will

1.1 bus

subject South

SGHS

the

provided

(“City”),

for,

pedestrian travel

Project”.

RECITALS the

Firestone

Page! LAUSD

and

monies

between

improvements

herein. has

Project

this

remain, from

the

agreements

turnout

percent and

Blvd

referred

South

SGHS

Corridor

and

City

construct

UNDERSTANDING

and Gate

irrigation

Off-Site SGHS

RIGHT

obtained MOU of

lane

Date”)

existing

LAUSD

(ii)

herein).

and

to subcontractor(s) this

the

of and

does

LAUSD

responsible Easement

(100%) and

Blvd.,

Gate High safety ii

Project,

complete

which

entry would

campus

order

medians

Capacity

the Dearborn MOU,

each

together

will

Improvements by

the

a and

not under

would

full

(i)

School)

High LOS

dedicated

AND

South

and

into

complete

and the to WAY

construction

a the direction

perform

expressly

and

from

complete

adding

the

for funding roadway

and

construct

the

to between

ANGELES directly

SGHS in

between

that Enhancement the

SGHS

School)

Ave

AGREEMENT

the

Gate,

City

pay

this

EASEMENT

that

Firestone

other

design laws

City’s

AND

not

certain approximately

all raised

SGHS

and

for,

(together,

are MOU

proposes

Improvements

authorize

for dedication

require

the

campus CA,

benefit

restoration

Alameda

and

committing,

Firestone

agreements

phase the

that

(“MOU”)

referred

undertake

through contractor,

the

medians,

Project.

SGHS

UNIFIED

“Access

thereafter

90280

Project

CITY

have

Project

access

State

LAUSD’s

the

Firestone

(“SGHS

and

“SGHS

access

through

Street

a to

Blvd.,

“Parties”. improvements,

been

completion

Improvements

(“SGHS”)

100-foot

OF public

and

including is

of has

will

Agreement”

between expressly

The

are

onto

(“Firestone

operate

CONVEY

SCHOOL

made

California

this

and

onto reviewed

complete

designed

SOUTH

Off-Site

improve a and

On-Site

existing

grant

Project, Griffith

certain

part

works

MOU

Hunt

long

will

and

the the the

is D. LAUSI) supports the City’s efforts to enhance student and pedestrian safety and improve traffic conditions in and about the areas adjacent to SGFIS, and particularly the City’s efforts to undertake and complete the SGIIS Improvements.

E. 1,AUSI) supports the City’s actions to improve safety and secure funding necessary to undertake and complete the SGHS Improvements that are a part of the Project. LAUSD has reviewed and approved the preliminary concept plan. and, pending completion of the SGHS Improvements, acknowledges that the City will return to LAUSD to request LAUSD dedicate the LAUSD Easement to the City for the purposes of operation and maintenance of the SGHS Improvements, which process for grant of the LAUSD Easement is more fully described in this MOU.

F. As a part of undertaking and constructing the Project, LAUSD acknowledges that work will be conducted on the school grounds at SGHS to the extent agreed by the Parties and as permitted by each and every Access Agreement entered into between LAUSf) and City and LAUSD and each of the City’s Contractor and Contractor’s subcontractors.

G. The City caused to be prepared at its expense and presented to LAUSD two documents: (1) an engineering level concept plan lbr the SGHS Improvements generally titled Firestone Boulevard South Gate High School Improvements Exhibi1, Project No. 496-SI Project No. STPL-5257(030), and (2) a concept drawing with mark-up preliminarily and generally depicting some of the proposed on-site and off-site modifications to the area fronting and within the SGHS school property (together, “LAUSD Concept Plan”), both of which LAUSD reviewed and approved in concept. Copies of each drawing comprising that LAUSD Concept Plan are attached hereto as Exhibits A-i and A-2, respectively, and are fully incorporated by this reference. The City reaffirms to LAUSD that any and all third party invoices incurred and outstanding relating to preparing the LAUSD Concept Plan are and shall remain the City’s financial responsibility and shall not he the financial responsibility of LAUSD.

H. The City has informed LAUSD, and LAUSD acknowledges that full funding of the Firestone Project has been obtained by City through grants and other funding that is subject to certain laws, regulations and application mandates, including the latest Standard Specifications and plans for Public Works Construction (together, “Grant Requirements”).

1. In furtherance of the LAUSD Concept Plan, prior to the Effi.ctive Date the City caused to be prepared at its expense the precise design, depiction, plans, specifications thr the SGHS Improvements that, as April 6, 2018, were at the stage of “95% complete” (“95% Plans/Specs”). The 95% Plans/Specs were submitted to LAUSD on April 6, 2018 for its review, comments, requested changes, if any, afid writteli approval. -

J. The final form of LAUSD’s Access Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit B-I and incorporated by this reference. Not less than fifteen (15) days prior to the City (or its Contractor or subcontractors) needing access onto the SGHS property related to undertaking the SGHS Project, LAUSD and City, shall execute the Access Agreement substantially in the fbrm attached as Exhibit B-I. In this regard, the City and LAUSD desire and intend that the Contractor and subcontractors working on the Project that requires access onto the SGHS property he authorized by LAUSD to enter upon, to access and to conduct work on-site at the SGHS property in connection with the pre construction and construction of the Project, in particular the SGHS On-Site Improvements at SGHS. Therefore, not less than fifteen (15) days prior to the Contractor and each subcontractor needing Page2ofll

South Gate HS MOU Final 8-15-18 access onto the SGHS property related to undertaking the Project, LAUSD and such Contractor or applicable subcontractor shall execute a Contractor Access Agreement substantially in the form attached as Exhibit C-2. This form of the Contractor Access Agreement shall he entered into between the Contractor and each subcontractor and LAUSD prior to the applicable contractor entering upon or conducting work on-site at the SGI-IS property, and shall authorize such the Contractor and subcontractor(s) to access and conduct work on and at the SGHS property relating to the SGHS Improvements.

K. Prior to the Effective Date, City caused to be prepared the public works bid package for the Project and has undertaken the bid process in compliance with applicable federal, state and local requirements. The City shall provide the Contractor, without limitation, (i) a copy of or access to the 95% Plan/Specs and then the 100% Plan/Specs (“Final Plans/Specs”), when completed; and, (ii) a copy of the final form of LAUSD’s Contractor Access Agreement as such relates to the SGHS Improvements; further, the Contractor shall comply with the bonding and security requirements for the Project, which require the Contractor to provide a payment and performance bond from a City-approved surety for the full amount of the applicable contract, and each bond shall be required to name both the City of South Gate and the Los Angeles Unified School District as payees and intended beneficiaries.

L. LAUSD shall not unreasonably deny, condition or delay its review or approval of the Final Plans/Specs for the SGHS Improvements (or the material changes as described in Section 1.4) so long as such Final Plans/Specs comply with the foregoing standards.

M. When final and complete (including, without limitation, approved by LAUSD), the Final Plans/Specs for the SGHS Improvements shall be deemed to be fully incorporated herein by this reference, including all changes (other than material changes requiring LAUSD’s approval under Section 1.4 below) made by the City and all material changes approved by LAUSD under Section 1.4.

N. The City shall have entered into one or more public works contracts with the selected Contractor to construct and complete the overall Firestone Project, including the SGHS Project, in compliance with the Final Plans/Specs; provided however, the City shall have and retain sole discretion of the overall Firestone Project, the scope of the Firestone Project and all phases thereof exclusive of the scope of the SGHS Improvements and any plans and specifications therefor previously approved by LAUSD and the material changes, if any, as described in Section 1.4below.

0. The Parties desire to enter into this MOU to evidence their mutual objectives about the Project, the SGHS Improvements, the Access, the Access Agreement, and the LAUSD Easement.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and for good and valuable consideration, the Parties agree as follows:

Section 1. DEFINITIONS; SCOPE OF PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS; LAUSD EASEMENT; CONDITIONS PRECEDENT.

1.1 Firestone Project. The term “Firestone Project” shall mean the public works street improvement project that includes the SGIIS improvements described in Recital A. above relating to the widening of that portion of existing Firestone Boulevard located adjacent to the SGIIS property on Firestone Boulevard to provide thr, among other improvements, a dedicated right-turn lane from Page3ofll /0 South Gate HS MOU Final 8-15-18 west-bound Firestone Boulevard to north-bound Dearborn Avenue along with an extended length bus turnout pocket on Firestone Blvd., as more particularly shown in the LAUSD Concept Plan and in the 95% Plan/Specs.

1.2 SGHS Improvements. The term SGHS Improvements includes the SGHS On-Site Improvements and the SGHS Off-Site Improvements, which will be located on Firestone Boulevard and at or near the intersection of Dearborn Avenue and on. adjacent to, or along the SGIIS property (and are more particularly shown in the LAUSD Concept Plan and as updated in the 95% Plans/Specs).

1.2.1 The SGHS Off-Site Improvements include:

a. addition of a dedicated right-turn lane from west-bound Firestone Boulevard to north-bound Dearborn Avenue, including the ADA ramp located at the northeast corner of Firestone Boulevard and Dearborn Avenue;

b. relocation of existing traffic signals;

c. reconstruction of areas adjacent to the SGHS property that were removed, demolished, or otherwise damaged by the construction of the Project;

d. addition of a bus-turnout pocket of 300-feet in length on Firestone Blvd. for use by public transportation busses and LAUSD school busses;

e. street signage;

f. street striping;

g. installation of video detection equipment;

h. other peripheral off-site improvements as determined by the City to he reasonably necessary for the successful completion of the overall Project; and

i. design, planning, engineering, and, as applicable, removal and reconstruction of curb, gutter. paving, drainage, sidewalks, access ramps, handicap ramps, driveway approaches, catch basins, spandrels, softscapes, hardscapes, landscaping, street trees, all layers of pavement, street lighting, as necessary, and required work relating to utilities, realignment, and reconnection of existing utilities.

1.2.2 The SGHS On-Site Tmprovementsinclude:

a. reconstruction of areas on the SGHS property that were removed. demolished, or otherwise damaged by the construction of the Project;

b. other on-site work at the SGIIS property as determined by the City to be reasonably necessary for the successful completion of the overall Project; and

c. all design, planning, engineering, changes, additions, modifications, removal, reconstruction of improvements on-site at the SCIHS property, including, but not limited to, landscaping, paving, reconnection of existing utilities, and other improvements. Page4ofll

South Gate HS MOU Final 8- 15-18 Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 1.2, the final elements and construction work included in the SGHS Improvements shall he as set forth in the Final Plans/Specs hereafter approved by the City and LA(JSD pursuant to Section 1.3 below.

1.3 Commencement (f Work. City shall not commence any demolition for or construction of any portion of the SUIIS Improvements prior to (a) obtaining LAUSD’s written approval of the Final Plans/Specs for the SGHS Improvements. (b) the City obtaining full funding of the SGHS Improvements, and (c) satisfying all of the Conditions Precedent set forth in Section 1. 10 hereof.

a. In ihis regard, within fifteen (15) days of the City’s submittal of the 100% Plans/Specs for the SGIIS Improvements to LAUSD that are intended to be used by the selected Contractor for undertaking and completing the Project, LAUSD agrees to reasonably review and approve by signature (or, as applicable, notify the City of any reasonable comments and objections of LALISDto such 100% Plans/Specs for the SGHS Improvements (and if LAUSD has reasonable comments or objections thereto, the City shall remain required to obtain LAUSD’s reasonable written approval hereunder after receiving the same and prior to Contractor (and its subcontractor(s)) commencing work on the Project), and once approved shall become and be referred to the Final Plans/Specs.

1.4 Material Changes to Final Plans/Specs for SGHS Improvements Affecting LAUSD. After LAUSD initially approves the Final Plans/Specs for the SGHS Improvements in writing, if there are material changes thereto for the SGHS Improvements, then the City shall be required to obtain LAUSD’s written approval of material changes made; provided however, under this MOU the term “material” in relation to the City’s changes to the Final Plan/Specs for the SGHS Improvements and LAUSD’s review and approval rights thereto and shall mean and he limited to changes that would (a) block or otherwise materially impact access to or from SGHS, or (b) materially change the intended concept, scope. design or location of the SGHS Improvements, such as deleting from the scope of work the (i) the bus-turnout pocket, (ii) dedicated right-turn lane that is part of the traffic transition zone, or (iii) restoration of improvements removed from or requiring relocation on the SGHS site or restoration of improvements intended to benefit operations at SGHS; otherwise, LAUSD shall have no authority to approve changes to the final Plans/Specs.

1.5 (Itilities Relocation, Re-Installation and Installation. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the Project is located within an existing public roadway in the City of South Gate and that is and will remain a public street within the meaning set forth in California Public Utilities Code Section 6297, which provides as follows with respect to grantees of public utility franchises:

‘The grantee shall remove or relocate without expense to the municipalit-y any facilities installed, used, and maintained under the franchise if and when made necessary by any lawful change of grade. alignment, or width of any public street, way, alley, or place, including the construction of any subway or viaduct, by the municipality.”

a. The City agrees, in connection with causing the completion of the SGHS Improvements, to pay all costs to install new or relocate existing utilities required as part of the overall Project and in particular the SGHS Improvements, including, but not limited to, the design, alteration, installation, construction, relocation and installation of temporary utilities and services, as needed and commissioning of all utilities; provided however, LAUSD agrees to cooperate reasonably and in good faith with the City (and the utility company(ies), as applicable) in particular with regard

Page 5 of ii

SouthGateHS MOiJ Final 8-15-18 to the relocation, installation or re-installation of utilities if and to the extent LAUSI) has ‘prior rights” relating to the utility(ies) franchise(s) or over the utility(ies) company(ies).

the City’s Contractor for the 1.6 L1(J’D Access. I’he City agrees to cause 1 the Access Agreement with LAUSI) substantially in SGII S Improvements to enter into Contractor the form of Exhibit C-2. City and LAUSD each agree to pay for their respective in-house and third party costs incurred in connection with the review and preparation of the final form and content of both the Access Agreement and each Contractor Access Agreement.

a. The form of the Contractor Access Agreement shall be an attachment to the City’s public works contract(s) for undertaking and completing the Project.

b. In the event the Contractor requests certain modifications to the Contractor Access Agreement each and all modifications are subject to the written approval of LAUSU in its sole, reasonable discretion and any third-party costs incurred therefore shall he reimbursed by the City pursuant to Section 1.8.

c. City agrees to notify LAUSD at least fifteen (15) days prior to commencing demolition work for or construction of the SGFISImprovements so that LAUSD may verify that the proper Contractor Access Agreement has been executed by the Contractor; and, each Contractor Access Agreement shall only become effective upon the execution and delivery thereof by LAUSD after such execution by the applicable contractor(s).

i. In this regard, LAUSD acknowledges and agrees that it does not and shall not have review or approval rights relating in any manner to the Firestone Project, hut only as to the SGHS Improvements.

1.7 LAUSDIn-I-louse Costs or Expenses Not Eligible for Payment or Reimbursement by City. LAUSD acknowledges that the City has received full funding of the Project some funds are subject to certain Grant Requirements that generally prohibit the payment or reimbursement of any and all in-house fees, costs or expenses including without limitation time, materials, overhead, personnel or staffing. Therefore, LAUSD acknowledges and agrees as to this MOU, LAUSD is not entitled to and will not receive payment or reimbursement for any in-house fees, costs or expenses incurred in the undertaking and implementation of any aspect of the overall Project or in preparation of or carrying out this MOU, except and unless permitted by the Grant Requirements or other applicable laws and regulations. Further, except as otherwise provided under this MOIJ the City does not and is not committing, expressly or impliedly, any of the City’s General Fund monies for undertaking or completing the overall Project or the SGHS Improvements.

1.8 City Payment or Reimbursementfor Certain of LAUSD‘s Ihird Party Expenses. The City agrees to pay for or reimburse LAUSD for reasonable costs, fees and expenses incurred by LAUSD for third party consultants, engineers, attorneys and other professionals that provide professional services related to the implementation of this MOU or the construction and completion of the SGHS Improvements, such as review and approval of the drawings, plans, specifications, the Plans/Specs, legal descriptions, and other construction documents that relate directly to the SGHS Improvements and IAUSD’s performance of its duties and obligations under this MOU.

a. LAUSD shall provide City with legible, complete and true copies of invoices along with reasonable supporting documentation and any other supporting documentation that may Page 6ofll

South Gate HSMOUFinaI8-15-18 be required by the Grant Requirements for LAUSD’s third party expenses and the (‘ity shall pay or reimburse to LAUSD therefor within forty-five (45) days of each complete submittal, hut not more often than quarterly during the term of this MOU.

1.9 LAUSI) Easement Deed for SGHS improvements Easement. The City and LAUSD acknowledge that after the completion of the SGHS Improvement it will be necessary for LAUSI) to convey by deed a permanent easement and vest with the “City of South Gate, a California municipal corporation”, the LAUSD Easement over a portion or portions of the existing SGIIS property for public right-of-way, street, roadway, sidewalk, utility and other public purposes. The form of the LAUSD Easement Deed under and by which LAUSD will convey to City the permanent easement for right-of-way to the City is attached hereto as Exhibit I) and fully incorporated by this reference.

Section 2. COMPLETION OF SGHS iMPROVEMENTS; INTERFERENCE WITH SCHOOL ACTIVITIES. City shall cause the SGHS Improvements to be constructed and completed as a part of the overall Project in accordance herewith, through final inspection and sign-off by City as required by applicable law. City acknowledges that SGHS will be a regularly functioning public high school throughout the course of construction, and City shall use diligent efforts to perform (and shall cause all personnel performing the construction of the SGHS Improvements to perform) all work with respect to the SGHS Improvements with as minimal impact as commercially, reasonably practicable to student instruction (or any other on-site student activity) at SGHS. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to City, LAUSD may, in its reasonable discretion, require that construction of the SGHS Improvements be temporarily suspended during standardized or district- or school-wide testing periods (including, without limitation, for any standardized or district- or school-wide testing programs of which LAUSD timely gives City the notice required hereunder) conducted on-campus at SGHS if the construction would unreasonably disrupt or affect such testing.

2.1 Calendar and Information about Planned l.AUSD Testing for inclusion, as applicable, Appended to Public Works Contract for each City Contractor and Subcontractor Undertaking Workon the SGHS Improvements. Within forty-five (45) days of the Effective Date, LAUSD shall provide the City with a reasonably detailed description and estimated calendar of specific days that are planned for standardized or district- or school-wide testing periods for both the 2018-2019 academic year and the 2019-2020 academic year so that the City may include such detailed and estimated testing days in the public works contract(s) for the Project. Nothing in this Section 2.1 shall limit the rights and obligations of the City and LAUSD under the first paragraph of Section 2 above.

Section 3. COOPERATION BETWEEN LAUSD AND CITY. Subject to their respective rights and obligations in ‘this MOU and under applicable laws, rules and regulations, I.AUST)arid City agree to reasonably cooperate in good faith and to share documents and information available to the Parties relating to the SGHS Improvements and LAUSD Easement.

3.1 LAUSD Per,firmance under MOU. City agrees to pay for and cause construction and completion of the SGHS Improvements; in all cases, City is and shall remain solely responsible for undertaking and completing the overall Firestone Project subject to the terms and conditions of this MOU.

Section 4. SUBJECT TO CITY COUNCIL AND LAUSD BOARD OF EDUCATION APPROVAL. ‘ThisMOU shall be effective only upon (a) consideration, action and approval of this Page7ofll

SouthGateHS MOU Final 8-15-18 MOU by LAUSD’s Board of Education and the execution and delivery of this MOU by an authorized signatory of LAUSD, and (b) consideration, action and approval of this MOU by the City Council of the City of South Gate and the execution and delivery of this MOU by an authorized signatory of the City.

Section 5. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.

5.1 Entire MOU. The Recitals are incorporated herein and made a part of this MOU. This MOU (including the attachments hereto) constitutes the full and entire agreement between the Parties, and they acknowledge that there is no other contract, oral and/or written, between the Parties hereto, relating to the SGHS Improvements and LAUSD Easement.

5.2 Binding Agreement. This MOU (in particular that LAUSD agrees to make the LAUSD Easement and that the City agrees to complete the Project, in each case subject to the terms and conditions hereunder) is and shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the predecessors, subsidiaries, successors, assigns, parties, agents, officers, employees, associates, legal representatives, heirs, executors and/or administrators of each of the Parties hereto.

5.3 Interpretation of MOU. This MOU is made and entered into in the State of California and shall, in all respects, he interpreted, enforced and governed by and under the laws of the State of California. Any statute or rule of construction that provides that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party should not be employed in the interpretation of this MOU, and is hereby waived.

5.4 Modifications. This MOU may be amended or modified only by a writing duly signed and delivered by all Parties to this MOU.

5.5 Dispute Resolution; Arbitration. Except as otherwise provided herein, any controversy, claim, or dispute arising out of, or relating to, this MOU, or any breach thereof, which cannot be settled amicably by the Parties shall be resolved by arbitration under the Comprehensive Arbitration Rules and Procedures of JAMS then prevailing (“Rules”), which arbitration shall be held in the County of Los Angeles, California. Arbitration shall be by a single arbitrator chosen by the Parties, provided that, if the Parties fail to agree and to appoint such single arbitrator within 30 days after a demand for arbitration, the arbitrator shall be chosen in accordance with the Rules. The cost of such arbitration shall initially be borne equally by the Parties; however, the arbitrator, upon final decision on the matter, may require a different allocation. The decision of the arbitrator shall he final and binding on the Parties, and any arbitral award may he entered in any court of competent jurisdiction.

5.6 Counterparts. This MOU may be executed in counterparts with the same effect as if all original signatures were placed on one document, and all of which together shall be one and the same agreement. A facsimile or e-mailed PI)F signature shall be deemed and construed as an original.

5.7 Authority to Execute MOU. The Parties, and each of them, expressly represents that it has the authority to execute this MOLJand agrees that this MOU as so executed will be binding upon each of the Parties (subject to Section 5 hereof).

Page8oCll

South Gate HS MOU Final 8-15-18 5.8 Severability. In the event that any provision of this MOU should he held to be void, voidable or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions hereof shall remain in full force and effect.

5,9 Waiver, Modification and Amendment. No breach of this MOU or of any provision can be waived except by an express written waiver executed and delivered by the Party waiving such breach. Waiver of any one breach shall not be deemed a waiver of any other breach of the same or other provisions of this MOU. This MOU may be amended. altered, modified or otherwise changed in any respect or particular only by a writing duly executed and delivered by each of the Parties hereto or their authorized representatives.

5.10 Cooperation re Additional Documents. Without limitation of the Parties’ respective rights and obligations hereunder, each Party agrees, upon the reasonable written request of the other Party, to promptly execute any reasonable document which may be necessary to carry out and effectuate the provisions of this MOU and/or modify any prior document in conflict herewith.

5.11 Force Majeure. Any prevention, delay or stoppage due to strikes, lockouts, labor disputes, acts of God. inability to obtain labor or materials or reasonable substitutes therefor. governmental restrictions, regulations or controls, judicial orders, enemy or hostile governmental action, civil commotion, terrorist activities, fire or other casualty, and other causes (except financial) beyond the reasonable control of the Party obligated to perform hereunder, shall excuse the performance by that Party for a period of time equal to the prevention, delay or stoppage, provided the affected party gives the other party notice within fifteen (15) days of the commencement of the event causing the prevention, delay or stoppage.

Section 6. DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES. City designates Arturo Cervantes, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer, City of South Gate, as its lead and day-to-day first point of contact under this MOU, and LAUSD designates Albert Grazioli, Asset Development Director, as its lead and day-to-day first point of contact under this MOU.

Page9of 11

South Gate HSMOUFiiiaI8-15-18 Section 7. NOTICES. Any notice sent in accordance herewith shall be deemed to be received as follows: (i) three (3) days after mailing of the notice first class United States certified mail, postage prepaid. or (ii) the next business day after the notice or communication has been delivered by hand or sent by telecopy or reputable overnight delivery service, addressed as specified below to the appropriate Party (with electronic confirmation of successful transmission. if by telecopy). Any notice, request, demand, consent, approval or other communication desired to he given hereunder shall be required to be given as follows:

To City: To LAUSD: City of South Gate Los Angeles Unified School District 8650 California Avenue 333 South Beaudry Avenue. d23 Floor South Gate, CA 90280 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Attn: Arturo Cervantes, P.E., Attn: Albert Grazioli, Asset Dev. Director Director of Public Works/City Engineer Phone: (213) 241-6457 Phone: (323) 563-9512 Fax: (213) 241-8386 Fax: (323) 569-9572 With copy to: With copy to: Los Angeles Unified School District Stradling Yocca Carison & Rauth Office of the General Counsel 660 Newport Center Drive, Suite 1600 333 South Beaudry Avenue, 23rd Floor Newport Beach, CA 92660 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Attn: Celeste Stahl Brady, Special Counsel to City Attn: Team Leader, Facilities Legal Team

jSignatures begin on next pagel

Page lOofil

SouthGateuS MOU Final 8-15-18 Easement and

ATTEST:

Carmen

Celeste

South

conditions

Gate

O4S

Stahl

Avalos,

(‘LA

WITNESS

Brady,

USD MOU

City

this South Final

Special

Clerk

WHEREOF,

Memorandum

Gate

8-1518 ___

Counsel

High

School)

the

RAUTH

City

Parties

Understanding

Page

“CITY” a By:______CITY

Name:______LOS By:______a its:______laws

“LAUSD”

affixing

California

school

hereby

Maria

ANGELES of

the

district

their

Belén

enter

SOUTh

and

State

municipal

signatures

Agreement

duly

into,

Bernal,

UNIFIED

California

GATE,

organized

execute,

corporation

Mayor

below.

SCHOOL

and

Convey

and

agree

existing

Right

DISTRICT,

under the

terms

Wrn’

the EXHIBIT A-i and EXhIBIT A-2

LAUSD CONCEPT PLAN

(attached)

EXHIBITS A-i and A-2 LAUSD CONCEPT PLAN

South Gate HSMOUFinaI8-15-18 EXHIBIT A-i and EXHIBIT A-2

LAUSD CONCEPT PLAN

(attached)

EXHIBITS A-i and A-2 LAUSD CONCEPT PLAN

South Gate HSMOUFina18-15-18 — —— .— 1 — , . --IIcI.-- Wi South Gate N LEGEND High School j Road Widening Dedication

Dedication _::z::: iL... 10’ New Sidewalk 13’ Loading Zone

20d’ Student Loading Zone 1OO’ Bus Stop

-t t --‘V

i3 J ‘

South Gate High School Bus Turnout I,, a 1 .1 + Page 1 of 8 ‘ZZ saaasisr %56 a siawn

SDaJSISNVW.J%56 a sxaiun NDEX OF SHEETS (HE[TI DESCRIP11ON PLAN NO. I TILE NIttY

OCIISY1OCITOU WrEN 4ISREYDAI1OIIS AND LEWIS

YSPICAL RECT1&,S MS TITLES U—I

4—11 PIOUS C—I TO c—S 13—14 STREET RITERRECTON P14115 C—IO 10 C—lI

C—Il TO c—ID 22-23 I EPIISIOUCYIS REPAIrS Dr 100—U 50—1 10 51—3 ij‘ iur 17 REtt4Jl SAltY ftAN NOT U DRIll 01 — 26—36 I STRICT 010111110 PLANS RE—I TO 5—6

37—45 OCNNO 4140 SIPPING PLANS 53—I 10 55—0

44-53 20Ml1C SOLAR. 014,10 15—i 10 15—6 I LOCATiON MAP 54-50 Lk’OISCAPC CO,SIOUC1ICLI PLAItS IC—I 10 14—6 N0TTISCALE CITY OF SOUTH GATE 60—65 1011354410 WGUOCI, 1116)10 LI—I 10 li—U

06-60 LANDSCAPE PLANIII,G PLANS P—I 1041—U JJLDSCRPE CCHSTRIICYON 0111115 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 70—74: 10-I TOW-S 75—06 I),’,OSCOI’t UCCTT1ICAP PLANS I P—i TOt—IL j PLANS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF

FIRESTONE BOULEVARD REGIONAL CORRIDOR CAPACITY ENHANCEMENTS ( JTILTY AGENCIES P’-ONE NO L ALAMEDA STREET TO ANNETTA AVENUE OIlS 1141 4 SIN’,, 0lwll MLlINN’, THOMAS GUIDE: 704- H3, J3 METRO PROJECT ID NO. F3124 (560) 641—OSlO 705- A3, 83, C3, D3, E3, F3 CITY PROJECT NO. 476-TRF DECEMBER, 2017

10,. SNNF P.015 AR,SNI O155I41,’ 6l,,..t (ISO) 206-2615 .0l• 045,415’ (SIP) 620—0115

0,14 (P5,5 0,’ P (386) 000-1501

(003) flI-5150 6,,PS — 011 CITY OP SOUTH 6810 UlA’, P.460 665004 REVISIONS ‘BASIS BEARING AND DATUM I IULO I 68

N lTYON* LA “ON 2 , ‘ . loll 10004 III L°APPROLYD a” IO5 J 040rJIq1615 (FEET 1 OF 86 SHEEiD ______J______

A • ST 00 901115 13 10 24004 1.001 03*61 011015 STATE DEARBORN AVE 0.’ 611 9(1115 20 10 53 006 IOIFFIC R0.t66Nl5 3 321 *11115 54 0084 F04 (.23416*310 160*004010115 4. 91344411.01.0.41106*1.01011 *00804 3111405031 PIOIECI011 06 P1001 00410440110 10 60(001013161132 01 1(0,06. 01400.441501 POOl. 3- 00*144 0061.1*0.31 503110 31 P6*03(141 P11 14011 IS 26 II. 1.1*41041.126 6*06.1 313110 5010)416* P660111111 *511(55 6126 0t). 04510.0 P014560416*1.11261 9313152 £6100415 01ST 940.0. 01 0064.6010 FF1132 10 1144516011110 416614 014.AY

640310 - c10olrci 04 P*31 70 ‘4 ) BY 316166C100 ()cC*1S1TIJCt *1—6 0100050 165100* SIll P16* 40 20—2 ®00I401€ 010 0t011.21R10.1 6-6.04 II- CO FCC TIXPI.1J4 POP S’P6C OlD 01.104 63 112—20,500.60316.1.1026*

0)0040151.1.3 6001100TOIJCT 62-8(1432)31066,311101 FIR 50*0 510 P1014 00 20* 0,321001 1900.010 004005 [1051 500*400. 6*0060 620 *001000(0561300410111.19110-2 03)600910.0360 2—0104 I3ILF0114 11.1*605

®040516uC1 1.4116362 1101111155 411*1. 3—1626 10 2—0004 p VJ*41L0 *00-0.000*1644410 (.3)00.09 iLLS 64 2-4.04103-6.21*6*40.6. T1100135

) ()DaaL 631151 (34966060 *62116131102650 I01) 146. Oar *2.01016311 0144031.310*111. In c*.ont 04066*4060 10020116.010 160104*314.0510102 4. 3140.1 Oil_-SI 09*64101 02409 40.0 00030 001630

(j0lY 01160*0601 26 S.3141Y930.64061

VIRGINLA AVE ((i) .-14011CNlS FIB 3110001101.2166*0 10969 000 LIII. 1,6510.6 POt P6.1,6460. 26*141 V0 6610 0101(2*’ ç) 1.000 16.1 £6153-S FCC P6.500411411 03110 1131’

‘ã) 0055161(1 S 111116 *911460.160.264* 00016610 14111605140 0606 66’ 51.10014 08*04055 632,00.1 60160IL C 0*1106* (3156140.311 3-1626 60166 0431*0 POt P61101041 61.040 TIlE 0451642 01696*2011166 210031066 asO rA6* 00*3491 010S10.0 00000 52110 0610 PIlL 105*101’ (j)C0E.SI600I 411.01 00166 FCC 5340*4.0 POp 91060.510 P1006 40 112—2 0450 6’ CC66PACIID *2 001.S10IJCY42-60119 641111101 P00 50010 ‘510 31106 60 20—2

1 141*101 P1)160 P01 91*00. 41-C 0. 11 6660 P0,04

I1 I 1- IIII

-r 1.3.0 lOlL 616 AC, 1.0151030.1 6*414. (1,10.1344055 P00 P16* 00451031.101600.314003. 60.3 651646 604211 30 41.0 *0146 0(0 66011 6 1*001 1.00.0 132510710 PCI *6*0040 11 - ‘ 1481501555 0-3’ 0406663 *16 16011 20

5 01164.0 0-22 0.3

DR1EWAYETML 8915 ELIZABET046 AVE

001063 5 FiRESTONE 8OLJLEVARI REGIONAL CORRIDOR 96011 NO 7 01 80

5110110. FLAb — 10RCSTONE 0OULEVAOD 100 11111 9661 .9 5Th 64+50 TO 516* 83+00 m 0000. C-4 0 CITY OF SOUTH GATE :;;;. OEPARTMEI(T OF P0166011 906060!

3)5101011010040

10 010510100 0(00000

13’lo*S’330i) oi10000

075*0.0—01

00505100511300030

l003d jSOO 6 0040*S *0’5

0.014 101 0113044 0140301000001 130013100333

0111-0 00400010531(100*

110 0300 0* 015 04014 0-10) 0313*40003.0 3,014

1,30*305 00* 130*1500 08303

3330015

00,

0’O 0*05 0*10 *1011

4000)00*10 30015-11)38403

0150 0014 503*11

00 300 0014 3014 0(3* *111 00*0 034 lZ00lS00()

0—On

‘01,fl83 0314034003133011

- 30000 131 70100

034 0000’. 913000

13r00S’03 50 311050 04014

.13])4S tANO

Sdl*d

0010 01010153034 0001000 $31130 01350)71 ON110fl nu 5 , 010340133001 0

01, 0 5101 5401104 33000 0000131 0101010110 (0os4j031_53_fl000O030

00 303 13107? 0380715 0001010 1310003 133000 0(0034 0000fl0 541004 33001

.0. .0 *34 00 *110 .52 0100 01400 011* 00 110130 005V0’03 30010)6

&itS0 01 0(015000010 11148 3000100* 01,0000 0103100 130010151001

I 50 30*4 0730 010)6 311*08 5.0314 30(11001 0(1314010

050 011*501 313140003 300*705 31100000 50081330 3010000 00150330(111

01 00710*0 1031,5 5800310000

010 .000 0*14 55 10 004 0411)3 0(1013010 03100 1513*300 ‘OOlw 5010*131

153

DIII .0 034 330 1)1,31103 011003

0110 00150100 001*301533 110*30) 0*0011101 11

10 .0 00100 0900 0,311 .1—00 11105 101001300 070*00) 31010010 3105031

(1 00)4 110 310 0100 111-0 0130 *yC5rW 3104) o3a 005 0110 (9000) *00031

01 01 0011 031 0144)0 110 30301010 30311*010 001113030 10*5300111 403301703

3131dfl 01 0100 50 3000 0.05110 05000 500)6 3810510111

50 *0’ (‘5313 00010310

01 0040005 01007001 011*003 3(14101 ON104 33700 3801000

‘ 01 001 1003 30)05 0700 .0 0*30 00*3 31’0 3*1001010 1,31001 0310013313 O’.15 13

Oslo’.’)”’ 01 03133 (9e010 50030

011 000 3139 7001 ‘ 01141 34105 ,*0fl 03)01*330 3111100100100360

3l3h” 0110 (00,)) 0000 0300100

SdI93d £31130 33001 01’3.103 31311501 ScIlCO *300404 04080 ,3101*03104

30 01 01 SdflISd

5103 33fl01 01000111 03000*10 .0 3030

(4,4)331_530101000o110

Nod 0109 0*1010 004 .01 330)71 1)000)00 00 030,05 4dIlld *3)0000 03000’11l

03,030 j0105iflhOl *003100 0300404 0300484 fl0S 030071540004 00 (IHDfl

oa,oyu 01 .0 oafll*d ,a,,m p4403 3001 030100

13005,1 (090)30131031410b040113

000011 .10 111 034 0)0497103 030000 13)0*80 130030 000111 440534 537001

0,00 4100 .1-fl 1500’ 083*

anrwn’ 310000)71 03100113’) 40l4 040404

00 031 l0_1*—l0011”t”5’ *0130 510)131 (000*) 3*105131 30(0101 \% ______

ROIL I. LEE LASLZSCTPE P1*1*5 FONT BUS 0)0.100 0+0001*5

GALUONICOI*L 0170 ITTTOIECT IN PINTO

BY WLIP,NPIINT

(iIcLOLSIOLTI Al—F Oils PCI 5000+ NIl jiLl 10 120—A

15050 TIN 5000 NIl 00*1

OOPIJOL AN 001511050)0000 OCALI000TI0 POT

IT)LAJAO *U.,Sl ElM *0151010 TPULE 1070*00

001*510201 CMLSITUCI 00*0 001;N 150 LUET *01+1 DRIVEWAY DETAIL T010IoNE TOll P06 ANPNCNIO ISO—S L)0t005E JAW T000ILSITUCT floP *1500*6 PCI SlY 0050111 CAlF STMLOO2TD 91)0 411 0+0 POT 0*0700* 0*1+0 01*105 *5500*0.01 5001LOAINI 0553 FIT 5000000. *0*1)015 4 COLS1TACI 4—00* 1)0*1 900 50+0201 PEN 50050 515 FlAIL NO 112—20107 V 00*1*0106 *0 cOoSINUCT 0-NOT 1010* POt PA*1NESI 910 SPAt SID P1)1* 50111—A LIAr C0IS110J01 *1—SPOt EllIS POP 50*1+ 510 PLAN 00 120—2 LII 1000*10 ILUASAPPO SPUD 50*00 56+00 +0 RESOLE *110 000SI1100T P0000*0 00*1* P0* 00110.0 7 515 ___ j PL1U 151—2 SoOLE FIRESTONE BLVD

BUS TURN OUT #4-WESTBOUND, BETWEEN GARDEN VIEW AVE AND SOUTH GATE AVE

PEE IOPOOVEMENIS

61*1*0170 605TT*ClIOT IN SUPPLY IU006ILT*L 1005*000 NETONSPPY 10 *560+. LIT ) LLIILINAO1E 600PLEIE FUSE OAThS AND 0 OF LID $ AS 000*1. r,ALTOOJIE EL0010WET 000PIEIT 50070 DOSYILU

+51*0. 55 PULL. 001+ U%LESS 015701*50 60110 P66 CALUTTAIS 650 SILL PLAN NO

+ST*IL2CASOUIT LLTI* 2550 cOUDUCTASS AMA 1510 01*0100 00+000100 PEN NEC

< [Iii) z°1.00I / LEAN? 00 COIITACIOT 10 SUPPLY 110005510. 00000*150 N000$IPJTT IN INSTALL LCD LULL 10*1St CCMPLEIL FUSE TOTING SOLO 5 OF 0305 OS *70*5 STREET LIGHTING LEGEND ITHIS SHEET ONLY)

i LAS — No OF LOS S EUSTOG

0100:5001 011

B—LOT (1*15) US LUAU 10 50 *050700 P0*0*570 PINESPI 0* UOATNA P0000500 PlAiDS ALLOT CAPNLLU NOTION LOU MALI! I I *000. 10JUN90 CPUS 6003506610—fl-LEAF(AOOUT TORE *01001651 164 PIALIPS LEASE P05005011 FIlLED *0511* ORACAEF MOOSE NLIL000 PCA 0* AC PIAAPS LU*LCC POLO MOON. SALTER A101ATI

PER 1TFFtFUA1L -— - - — — PO00WN03;SE OASTUUTS 010011*1ST OTOOLLIS 54170 OAST *01*010090000000

BUS TURN OUT #5 WEST OF ELIZABETH AVE

£01001 *1010 aDs OVAl LUllS IT 101110oOOICNIS AU OILY P0110+. PALSOVT5 POT APPROLTE PLANE *51*11*011 U*I15 500*5. GALA TINT

ROAA(CAI EXHIBIT C-i

LAUSD ACCESS AGREEMENT WITH CITY

(attached)

EXHIBIT C ACCESS AGREEMENT C-i CONTRACTOR ACCESS AGREEMENT C-2 2. South Gate HSMOUFina18-15-18 ACCESS AGREEMENT (Firestone/Dearborn Improvement Project Affecting South Gate High School)

This ACCESS AGREEMENT (Firestone/Dearborn Improvement Project Affecting South Gate High School) (“Agreement”) is made and entered into as of August 14, 2018 by and between the LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DiSTRICT, a school district duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (“LAUSD”) and the CITY OF SOUTH GATE, a California municipal corporation (“City”) (each a “Party” and together the “Parties”) with respect to the following:

RECITALS

WHEREAS, the City and LAUSD entered into that certain Memorandum of Understanding and Agreement to Convey Right of Way Easement (LAUSD South Gate High School) (“MOU”), dated as of August 14, 2018 attached as Exhibit A, executed under approval from the LAUSD Board of Education and approval from the City Council of the City of South Gate (“City Council”), which approvals authorize the City and LAUSD (the “Parties”), among other things, to enter into and execute an access agreement (referred to also in the MOU as a right of entry and temporary access for construction work, and herein this “Access Agreement”) that would permit the City to conduct the Scope of Work (as defined below) on, and adjacent to, South Gate High School (“SGHS”) located at 3351 Firestone Boulevard, South Gate, CA, 90280. Capitalized terms used in this Agreement are as defined in the MOU, unless otherwise defined herein.

WHEREAS, City has undertaken the planning for and design of certain overall public improvements to construct and operate multiple street and ancillary improvements on and along the Firestone Boulevard Regional Corridor Capacity Enhancement Project in the City (“Firestone Project”) that include planning, constructing and completing certain on-site and offsite improvements as further described and defined in the MOU as the SGHS Improvements.

WHEREAS, City has undertaken the planning for and design of additional improvements at SGHS that include the SGHS On-Site Improvements, as defined in the MOU, that are a necessary part of the Firestone Project.

WHEREAS, City has submitted the Final Plans/Specs to LAUSD and LAUSD has reviewed and approved the Final Plans/Specs relating to the SGHS Off-Site and On-Site Improvements

WHEREAS, the pre-construction, construction and completion by the City of both the SGHS Off-Site Improvements and the SGHS On-Site Improvements require the City to enter into an agreement with LAUSD for access to SGHS.

WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Parties to return to the LAUSD Board of Education (“Board”) when the SGHS Improvements are completed to have the Board approve a Resolution of Intention to Dedicate Easement and Authorization to Execute Agreements with the City of South Gate for the SGHS Improvements (both On-Site and Off-Site work) at SGHS.

Page 1 of6

South Gate HS_Access Agreemenl_Final_8- 15-18 ACCESS AGREEMENT

NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned Parties as follows:

1. TEMPORARY ACCESS. Under this Agreement LAUSD grants to City, its employees, agents, representatives, contractors and subcontractors to enter onto any and all portions of SGHS as necessary to conduct, construct and complete the “Scope of Work” for the SGHS Improvements (both On-Site SGHS improvements and Off-Site SGHS Improvements work), which for purposes of this Agreement shall be defined as follows:

(a) Scope of Work: The Scope of Work is depicted in the MOU and in the Final Plans/Specs attached hereto as Exhibit B and hereby incorporated herein by this reference.

(b) Term of Temporary Access. This temporary access shall begin on August 15, 2018 and end and terminate on the recordation of a notice of completion of the SGHS Improvements (both On-Site and Off-Site work related thereto) as described in the MOU, but no later than August 1, 2020.

2. SCHEDULE AND MANNER OF WORK. City will provide LAUSD a minimum of seventy-two (72) hours’ advance written notice directed to the attention of the SGHS Principal or his/her designee and the District’s Asset Development Director of the proposed date of commencement of the Scope of Work. If the proposed dates of commencement of the Scope of Work is unacceptable to the SGFIS Principal or LAUSD District’s Asset Development Director, City will propose an alternate date acceptable to LAUSD in its reasonable discretion. City agrees to utilize its reasonable efforts not to unreasonably interfere with the operations at SGHS.

3. INDEMNIFICATION. CITY shall indemnify, defend. protect and hold harmless LAUSD and Board, officers, agents, employees, and independent contractors (collectively, the “LAUSD Parties”) from and against any and all loss, cost, damage, expense, claims and liability, including, court costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees (collectively “Claims”), to the extent incurred in connection with or arising directly or indirectly from the negligence or willful activities or misconduct of City or its contractors, consultants, employees or subcontractors in performing the Scope of Work or otherwise exercising its rights or performing its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. This indemnification excludes pre-existing conditions such as Hazardous Materials that existed on SGHS prior to the date of this Agreement and that are discovered during the performance of the Scope of Work. Further and notwithstanding the foregoing to the contrary, the terms of the foregoing indemnity shall not apply to any claims resulting from the negligence or willful misconduct of LAUSD or the LAUSD Parties.

4. INSURANCE. City shall cause its contractors who will perform any of the Scope of Work at the Subject Site to first take out and maintain in full force and effect certain insurance policies and coverage amounts as set forth in this Paragraph 4. Such insurance coverage shall name LAUSD as an additional insured. City shall submit to LAUSD certificate(s) of insurance evidencing the existence of the insurance coverage required by this Paragraph 4. During the

Page 2 of 6

South Gate HS Access Agreement Final 8-15-18 term of this Agreement, City shall maintain on file current valid certificate(s) of insurance of each and all of its contractors performing the Scope of Work. All policies of insurance required to be maintained by City’s contractors shall be endorsed to provide that any other insurance maintained by City shall be excess of the contractors’ coverages. The additional insured coverage required by this Paragraph 4 shall also be primary to the indemnification provided by City to LAUSD under paragraph 3 of this Agreement.

(a) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, CITY discloses to LAUSD that it is a member entity in an Independent Cities Risk Management Authority fhr pooled insurance and risk management (“ICRMA”): and, thereby, CITY maintains in full force and effect general liability insurance and property insurance for properties used by the CITY sufficient for its responsibilities under this Agreement. The CITY’s self-insured retention coverage (deductible) (“SIR”) is $250,000; further, the CITY’s standard general liability coverage through the TCRMA is $3,000,000. Upon execution of this Agreement, CI’IY shall deliver to LAUSD a letter describing generally its insurance coverage as a member of the ICRMA, in particular related to general liability and property insurance coverage for LAUSD’s review and acceptance; provided, that if LAUSD does not accept CITY’s general liability and property insurance coverage, LAUSD shall explain its non-acceptance and LAIJSD and CITY, in good faith, shall mutually agree on the insurance coverage CITY shall obtain and maintain throughout the duration of the Term of this Agreement.

(b) In addition, City shall cause its contractors performing the Scope of Work to maintain in effect, during the term of this Agreement, the following insurance coverage to cover any claims, damages, liabilities, costs and expenses (including legal counsel fees) arising out of or in connection with City’s exercise of its rights or fulfillment of any of its obligations under this Agreement or either Party’s use of any work, component or part constituting part of the Scope of Work:

(i) General Liability Insurance, including both bodily injury and property damage, with limits as follows:

(A) $3,000,000 per occurrence

(B) $100,000 tire damage

(U) $1,000,000 ptôrtl & adv. Iiijuy -

(E) $3,000,000 general aggregate

(F) $3,000,000 products/completed operations aggregate.

(ii) Business Auto Liability Insurance for owned, scheduled, non owned or hired automobiles with a combined single limit of no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence.

Page 3 of 6

South Gate HS Access Agreement_Fina8- I5-18 (iii) Workers’ Compensation and Employers Liability insurance in a form and amount covering all of City’s and its contractors’ and subcontractors liability under the California Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Safety Act and in accordance with applicable state and federal laws.

(A) Part A — Statutory Limits

(B) Part B - Employer’s Liability, $1,000,000! $1,000,000! $1,000,000

(iv) Pollution Liability coverage - $2,000,000 per occurrence! $2,000,000 aggregate.

(c) As to the City’s contractor(s) under contract with the City prior to the Date of this Agreement, City shall concurrent with its execution of this Agreement furnish LAUSD with certificates of insurance evidencing the coverage required hereunder. As to the City’s contractor(s) that enter into contract with the City after the Date of this Agreement, City shall furnish to LAUSD within five (5) business days of such contract, and in all events prior to the contractor entering upon the SGHS, the certificates of insurance evidencing the coverage required hereunder. The certificate of insurance(s) shall include a thirty (30) day non renewal!cancellation notice provision. The General, Business Auto, and Pollution Liability policies shall name LAUSD and the Board of Education as additional insured.

5. REs’rORATION OF SGHS. Promptly after performing the Scope of Work, City shall restore all areas of SGHS not included in the Scope of Work, in accordance with the provisions of the MOU and to the condition that existed prior to the execution of this Agreement (to the extent such areas were affected by the City’s performing of the Scope of Work or exercising its rights or performing its obligations under this Agreement) to the reasonable satisfaction of LAUSD.

6. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS. City agrees that all activities performed by or on its behalf under this Agreement shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws, including, hut not limited to, statutes, regulations, codes, rules and ordinances.

7. GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement shall he governed by and interpreted pursuant to California law.

8. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. The terms and conditions set forth herein constitute the entire understanding of the Parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument duly signed and delivered by both Parties.

9. RELATiONSHIP OF THE PARTIES. The Parties expressly disavow any intent or desire to create a partnership, joint venture, joint enterprise, principal and agent, or any or other business relationship by entering into this Agreement other than that of licensor and licensee.

Page 4 of 6

South (late FIX_Access Agreement_Final - 8-15.18 10. APPROVAL AND NOTICES. Any approval. disapprovaL demand or other notice which either party may desire or is required to give to the other party must be in writing and delivered by personal delivery, first-class mail, reputable overnight courier or electronic mail (email) transmission.

To LAUSD:

Los Angeles Unified School District 333 South Beaudry Avenue, 23rd Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Attn: Asset Development Director Phone: (213) 241-6457 Fax: (213)241-8386

With a Copy to:

Office of General Counsel, Facilities Services Los Angeles Unified School District 333 South Beaudry Avenue, td23 Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Attn: Chief Facilities Counsel Phone: (213) 241-4968 Fax: (213) 241-8386

To City:

City of South Gate 8650 California Avenue South Gate, CA 90280 Attn: Arturo Cervantes, RE. Director of Public Works/City Engineer Phone: (323) 563-9512 Email: acervantessogate.org

With a Copy to:

Raul F. Salinas, City Attorney 8650 California Avenue South Gate, CA 90280 Phone: (323) 563-9538 Email: [email protected]

11. COUNTERPARTS. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall he deemed an original, but all of which, taken together. shall constitute one and the same instrument.

ISIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE]

Page 5 of 6

South Gate HS Access Agreement Final 8-15-18 executed

ATTEST:

Carmen

Celeste

South

Gate

Stahl

(SEAL)

Avalos,

WITNESS

their

Access Brady,

City

respective

AgreementFinal_8-

Special

Clerk

WhEREOF,

duly

Counsel

authorized

15-18

LAUSD

City

Page

representative

“CITY” CITY a By:

“DISTRICT” the LOS DISTRICT, By:_____ a Name:

Its:______

California

school

MarIa

6 laws

and

ANGELES

district

City

Belén

SOUTh!

the

municipal

have

State

duly

Bernal,

UNIFIED

the

GATE,

caused

organized

corporation

dates

California

Mayor

this

set

SCHOOL

and

forth

Agreement

existing

below.

under

he Exhibit A

Attach Copy of Fully Executed Memorandum of Understanding and Agreement to Convey Right of Way Easement (LAUSD South Gate High School)

[Attached}

South Gate HS_Access Agreement_Final 8-15-18 Exhibit B

Scope of Work

[Please See Attached)

South Gate HS Access Agreement Final 8-1518 3 Exhibit A

Attach Copy of Fully Executed Memorandum of Understanding and Agreement to Convey Right of Way Easement (LAUSD South Gate High School)

[Attached]

South Gate HS_Access AgreementFinal_8- 15-18 Exhibit B

Scope of Work

[Please See Attached]

South Gate HS_Access AgreementFina1_8-15-18 EXHIBIT C-2

LAUSD FORM OF CONTRACTOR ACCESS AGREEMENT

(attached)

EXHIBIT C ACCESS AGREEMENT C-i CONTRACTOR ACCESS AGREEMENT C-2

South Gate HSMOUFina1_8-15-18 When Recording

Attn: City

8650 City South

GRANTOR(S)

existing

real street to fully

shall

South

said

of Engineer

property

California

incorporated Arturo Recorded have Gate,

Gate

improvement,

THE

South

ROW

For LOS

Does

CITY

under

Requested

FIS

all

valuable

California

UNDERSIGNED

Cervantes,

Gate

hereby

as ANGELES

Easement

and

maintenance,

MOU

the

DECLARE(S):

Permanent

Avenue

Mail

legally

LAUSD

Director

laws

SOUTH

Final

utilities, consideration,

GRANT

By To:

this

90280

described

P.E. and

and

LAUSD

the

8-15-18

reference UNIFIED

SAMPLE

Easement.

the

repair,

PERMANENT GATE,

and

Public

State

AND

improvements

SAMPLE other

receipt

replacement

CONVEY

“ROW

Works

Exhibit

FORM

California SCHOOL

California

customary

permanent

EXHIBIT

Easement”).

EXHIBIT

FORM —

Page DOCUMENTARY _X__ _X__ which

PERMANENT

EASEMENT

within

and

to:

and

(“LAUSD”

DISTRICT, ______

public municipal

easement

of2

other

EASEMENT

and

This of depicted Code

Easement City

hereby

purposes

recording

document

responsibilities

Section

said

between

corporation, acknowledged: GRANT

South

for

EASEMENT

grantor), a

interest

TRANSFER

right-of-way, school ROW

6103.

Exhibit

ancillary

DEED fee

Gate,

exempt

LAUSD

pursuant

DEED

Easement.

only

district —,

County

and

(“City”

Consideration

thereto,

both

DEED from

TAX

liabilities

public

and to

duly

attached

the of Government

the

Los

over

payment

road, grantee):

organized

City,

with Angeles

that

hereto

parkway,

the

respect

certain

City

and

and Dated: ,20 LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, a school district duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California

By:

Name:______

Its:______

EXHIBIT D

LAUSD SAMPLE FORM EASEMENT DEED Page 2 of 2

South Gate US MOU Fa1 8-15-18 0 DISTRICT, conveyed the the dated City Easement

LAUSD Dated:

ATTEST:

Carmen

South

undersigned

CITY

Gate

This

South ______

of______

Avalos, Easement

under

Deed

HSMOUFina18-15-18

Gate

school

SOUTH

by to

officer

the

City

Deed.

its on

certify

foregoing

Clerk district ______,

duly

GATE,

LAUSD

agent

that

authorized

2018

duly

CERTIFICATE

PERMANENT

CERTIFICATE

the

organized

California

conveyed

SAMPLE

behalf permanent

Easement

officer

2018 of

and

Page

and

municipal

the FORM

CITY By:______a

California EASEMENT easement

and existing

Grant

granted

shall

City

ACCEPTANCE

the

ACCEPTANCE

EASEMENT

pursuant

comply

Deed

corporation

City

SOUTH by under

______,Mayor deed

municipal

LOS

consents

GRANT with

the

ANGELES

GATE,

action

laws

the

and

(“City”),

DEED

corporation

terms

DEED

over

recordation

the

and

UNIFIED

certain

State

(“Easement

hereby City

conditions

Council

real

California,

this

accepted

SCHOOL

property

LAUSD

Deed”)

such

the

to ______

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss

On , before me, , Notary Public, (Print Name of Notary Public)

personally appeared_

who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature of Notary Public

OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form.

CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT

Q Individual D Corporate Officer

Title Or Type Of Document Title(s) Q Partner(s) lLimited QGeneral D Attorney-In-Fact Q Trustee(s) Number Of Pages Q Guardian/Conservator O Other:

Signer is representing: Date Of Documents Name Of Person(s) Or Entity(ies)

Signer(s) Other Than Named Above 4a SouthGateHSMOUFina18-15-18 EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION

PERMANENT RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT FOR APNs

(to be prepared and inserted by City and LAUSD)

EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR PERMANENT EASEMENT DEED

South Gate HSMOUFina18-15-18 EXHIBIT B

ENGINEERING DRAWING(S) FOR PERMANENT EASEMENT RIGHT OF WAY RE SOUTH GATE HIGH SCHOOL IMPROVEMENTS

(to be prepared and inserted by City and LAUSD)

EXHIBIT B ENGINEERING DRAWINGS TO PERMANENT EASEMENT DEED

South GateHS MOU Final 8-15-18 Those

of Thence Thence Commencing of to

Thence Dearborn 7°58’29’ non-tangent of

Thence central Thence

Thence curve right 6°07’42” angle 104.00 having Thence Beginning.

Prepared

David

Maps, said Los said

‘4’

angles,

concave of

Angeles,

portions

point

Firestone

a angle feet;

along at

easterly

along easterly southeasterly

non-tangent

14°15’OO”

to records

radius

Knell

Avenue

under I

right

the

said

thence

curve

bears

at ‘

said

southwesterly

beginning of

said

angles

PLS of

State

the 18°55’28”

northerly

along

of Boulevard

Lots

(50

151.00

concave

centerline to South

parallel

said

easterly

centerline

supervision:

northerly

5301

along

the

feet

along

to said

said 100

California,

county,

beginning

said

3°58’32”

I line

feet;

to wide);

line,

said

and

curve

northwesterly

and

said

along

Portion

of -. and line

reverse centerline,

intersection

line

117 South

North

Firestone

the

described

Firestone

curve

an of an

having

said Date East;

822OI8

parallel

Legal

True

Firestone

EXHIBIT

arc

83°03’30”

curve a 83°03’30” per

Tract

APN

curve

reverse

length

North Description a

Point

and

Boulevard,

map

arc

Boulevard;

with

radius

No.

concave

6210-022-901

Firestone

follows:

length having

Boulevard;

recorded of

6°56’30”

of and of “A”

curve West,

3477,

East, arc

Beginning,

11.27

16.15

8.50

length

174.00

South southerly

concave

160.00

263.28

Boulevard

43.28 radius

feet

East,

feet

the

Book

83°03’30”

feet;

through

City

being

northerly,

feet

34.35

feet

of 50.00 feet

and

northeasterly

81.00

38,

(100

through

the

having

South

feet

pages

the

East,

central

feet, the

beginning

feet

measured

through

beginning

True

Gate,

northerly

wide)

412.73

central

radius

and

radial

angle

angle Point

and

County

and

of 12,

feet;

line of

line

&rr758

.27

AREA

DESCRIBED

4100

APN

N8Y03’30”W

ARESTONE

FRES0

6210_022_901

EXHIBIT

“B”

26.28’

BLVD

SQ.

BOULEVARD

SCALE:

6O742,

L6 5 -

LI)

AREA

FIRESTONE

37 52 8.75

PROPERl’

DESCRIBED

N83’03’30”W

EXHIBfTB

4’lOO 20”E

UNE

pPN

(7W.) SCB

EXHiBIT

FREST0

6210_022_901

ogE:

126.10’

BOULEVARD

3 ._ 3 _2Oi8

969

D=20’46’4Q”

SQ.

BLVD

5’50’

L7 56

56”

SCALE:

J!I

/ i’3 ______- ______

NOTICE OF EXEMPTION (California Environmental Quality Act Section 15062)

To: Officeof Planning and Research From: City of South Gate 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Public Works Department Sacramento, CA 95814 8650 CaliforniaAvenue South Gate, CA90280-3075 County Clerk-Recorder County of Los Angeles E] $50 Filing Fee Attached 12400 E. ImperialHighway Norwalk, CA90650 No Fee — City projects exempt from filing fee Project Title: Memorandum of Understanding and Agreement to Convey Right-of-Way Easement (LAUSD South Gate High School) between the City and Los Angeles Unified School District Project Location: Area adjacent to South Gate High School and the intersection of Firestone Boulevard and Dearborn Avenue, City of South Gate

Project Location — City: South Gate Project Location — County: Los Angeles Description of Nature, Purpose, and Beneficiaries of Project: The MOU provides for the conveyance by LAUSD to the City of the necessary right-of-way easements to construct, complete and operate a new right-turn pocket adjacent to South Gate High School and right turn only lane on the Dearborn Avenue and Firestone Boulevard as part of the Firestone Boulevard Capacity Enhancement Project, Project Number 476-TRF (“Project”). The City will cause construction of the Project subject to full funding. Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City Council, City of South Gate Name and Address of Person or Agency Carrying Out City of South Gate, 8650 California Avenue Project: South Gate, CA 90280-3075 Exempt Status: (Check One)

1 Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 15268); 0 Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a)); Li Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c)); X Categorical Exemption. State type and section CEQA Guidelines § 15300 number*: 15301(c) (Existing Facilities) Li Statutory Exemptions. State code number: Reasons why project is exempt: The MOU meets the categorical exemption of Section 15301(c), Existing Facilities, as LAUSD’s conveyance of the easements are in furtherance of public improvement of “existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities”; the Project has a goal of increasing safety, reducing congestion and beautifying Firestone Boulevard Lead Agency Contact Person: Arturo Cervantes, P.E. Ph.:323.5639567 Public Works Director? _City_Enineer______If filed by 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. cc of City Council Resolution Approving MOU attached 2. Has Notice of Exemption been filed by public Yes No ,çncy approving project( — —______Signature: /‘ltJç Date: July 30, 2018 Title: Assistant City Engineer FISH & GAME FEE: to Section 711.4(c)(2)(A) of the California Fish and Game Code, the project is exempt from fees since it is exem’pt from CEQA. Signed by Lead Agency Date received for filing at OPR: J Signed by Applicant Filed with the County Clerk: Yes Li No Date Filed: August 1, 2018 > South Gate High SchOO’ I ‘I) First a) Segment a) $9.6M Second C Segment 0 IC $6o M C) — 1< a 0) I -J 0) Firestone Boulevard C C) > a.’ z > C a) I 4 IC Project ConstrUCti°l impadedA FIRESTONE BOULEVA REGIONAI- CORRIDOR CAPACITY ENHANCEMENTS PROJECT RECEIVED Item No. 2 i\W 7 Z018

CITYOFSOUTHGATE City of South Gate WFICEOFTHECITYMANAGER 3bpm CITY COUNCIL ATN]ThA Lll]L]L For the Regular Meeting of August 14, 2018 Orj4ating Deartment: Department Director ftZ4’ ’frC Manager Joe Perez! 71 SUBJECT: COMMENT LETTER FOR itTHE WEST SANTA ANA BRANCH TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT

PURPOSE: To submit comments and concerns to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) regarding potential impacts related to the West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor Project. Metro is receiving public input until August 24, 2018, which marks the end of their formal public comment period for a revised Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the Mayor to execute the comment letter regarding potential impacts related to the West Santa Branch Transit Corridor Project to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority prior to August 24, 2018.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

ANALYSIS: Metro is evaluating a new light rail transit line that would connect downtown Los Angeles to southeast LA County, serving the cities and communities of downtown Los Angeles, unincorporated Florence-Graham community of LA County, Vernon, Huntington Park, Bell, Cudahy, South Gate, Downey, Paramount, Bellflower and Artesia. The West Santa Ana Branch (WSAB) Transit Corridor Project is a 20-mile corridor that is undergoing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Environmental Impact Report (EIR) process to prepare the corridor for light rail use. The project’s name originates from the southern portion of the route south of the Metro Green Line that follows the old Pacific Electric streetcar alignment known as the West Santa Ana Branch Corridor.

It is recommended that the City submit a formal comment letter to Metro to have the City’s concerns regarding the project’s potential impacts addressed as part of the revised EIS/EIR process. Attached is a draft comment letter which addresses primary areas of concern which include rail alignment alternatives, at-grade crossings, bike and pedestrian access to stations, maintenance yard location, station design, economic development, construction impacts and safety/security issues.

BACKGROUND: Metro’s project to build the West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor is in the planning stages.

1 Updated Scoping Meetings have provided the public opportunities to learn more about the project, including the two northern route options the Metro Board selected in May 2018 for further study. The public can also comment on anything related to the project verbally or in writing. The formal public comment period began on Wednesday July 11, 2018 and runs through Friday, August 24, 2018.

ATTACHMENT: Draft Comment Letter

2 August 14, 2018

Ms. Teresa Wong, Transportation Planning Manager LA County Metropolitan Transportation Authority One Gateway Plaza, MIS 99-22-4 Los Angeles, CA 90012

RE: CITY OF SOUTH GATE’S SCOPING COMMENTS FOR THE WEST SANTA ANA BRANCH TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT

Dear Ms. Wong:

Thank you for this opportunity to provide input during the lbrmal public comment period for the West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor Project. Based on our review of the scoping documents as well as the revised and recirculated Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Environmental Impact Report (EIR), we are requesting the following City comments be considered and addressed:

Crossings at Roadway Intersections

1. Elevated/At-Grade Crossings: In the current project concept, at-grade crossings are proposed at intersections south of Atlantic Avenue. Due to the close proximity of these arterials along the alignment, crossings at these locations would require closure of streets to traffic operations, causing significant interruption to traffic flow and adjacent intersection operations. These concerns are exacerbated during peak travel periods where vehicle queuing from the intersections may extend to the crossings. Moreover, these intersections are heavily traversed by pedestrians going to and from school, work and commercial destinations thereby creating a hazardous environment. To mitigate these conditions and safeguard the public, it is imperative that crossings at Firestone Boulevard, Garfield Avenue and Imperial Highway be a grade separated configuration. Some discussion regarding the frequency of crossings that will be anticipated during operation will be helpful to assess the impacts upon the intersections and other City facilities along the alignment.

3 City of South Gate’s WSAB Scoping Comments August 14, 2018 Page 2of 13

There needs to be a careful examination of creating an alignment profile that can accommodate the estimated ridership and maintain or mitigate impacts on community character. The alignment profile chosen to accommodate demand may include significant grade separated crossings and grade separated segments. Both elevated track as well as trenched or cut and cover profiles should be examined to integrate the alignment into the built environment. Most of the PEROW runs through low profile built-out urban environments where an aerial structure might impact the community aesthetic as well as create privacy issues for backyards and windows that are immediately adjacent to the ROW. At-grade or elevated structures potentially may divide communities through the creation of barriers. In addition to considering all potential project profiles to minimize community separation; the use of landscaping and screening, pedestrian pathways and bike trails may mitigate this effect.

Bike/Pedestrian Access along WSAB Line and Parking

2. Bike/Pedestrian Access and Parking.. It is critical that pedestrian and bike access be provided along the rail alignment to enable the public to safely access the WSAB stations in and around South Gate. This is particularly necessary for the station at Firestone Boulevard and Atlantic Avenue, which is expected to be one of the busiest stations along the line and is located at an intersection with high volumes of automobile/truck traffic. Again, a bike/pedestrian facility that runs parallel with the WSAB line is needed to ensure the public has both safe and convenient access to the stations along the WSAB line.

The City has several planned Class’J and II bike facilities to build out its bicycle network. The City believes it is critical that Metro construct a Class I bike path along the proposed rail alignment to supplement the build out of the City’s bike network. Such a bike facility would offer greater options for multi-modal access between the three stations while promoting greater transit access from the LA River as well as providing a more safe and convenient access from different parts of the City to the new stations. This additional bike path would help solve critical first and last mile issues for transit users who are more likely to use pedestrian and bike access and thereby reduce parking demand at LRT stations.

The WSAB project, where it has an exclusive alignment must include the addition of a Class I bike lane wherever feasible. There is currently a class I in Bellflower and another planned in the City of Paramount and Artesia along with a number of regional bike projects currently underway. Active Transportation facilities need to be planned within or adjacent to the alignment wherever feasible. The Gateway Cities Strategic Transportation Plan Active Transportation element should be integral to the planning for any facility.

To minimize impacts to the surrounding communities within the vicinity of the proposed stations, the City is concerned that adequate infrastructure facilities for parking and pedestrian/bike access will be sufficient to support future transit demand at the new stations. As such, please include bike sharing program/facilities and other TDM

4 City of South Gate’s WSAB Scoping Comments August 14, 2018 Page3ofl3

type improvements (bike lockers, bike racks, information kiosks, etc.) to support future multi-modal access to these stations.

Station locations and station access including first/last mile considerations and their impact to the built environment and potential for development. The WSAB differs from other lines in that most station areas have development plans associated with them that were developed with the TOD and TOC planning efforts. The environmental review should include these city plans to the greatest extent possible.

Follow Metro Board direction, Eco-Rapid Transit Guidelines and City specific plans, safe and accessible first/last mile routes need to be studied and implemented as part of the station area construction

There are opportunities for shared transit/cornitercial parking and other first/last mile improvements. We would like to see plans that include ride-share or car-share into station area environments as well as bike stations and opportunities for shared ride drop off. Station areas should also be planned with personal electric vehicles in mind (bicycles, Segways, skateboards) as well as traditional active transportation modes.

Wayfinding to and from the station areas must be incorporated into the station area plans. We must not assume that people will be using their smartphones to orient and navigate themselves.

The issues raised in this section have the potential to create significant impacts in Air Quality, Land Use and Planning, and Public Services and must be analyzed.

Eco-Rapid Transit has already established the principle of comprehensive on-street and off-street parking policies which support transit oriented development and the use of parking demand, location, time, price and supply parking management strategies. The parking program needs to be developed in partnership with the local communities in the corridor, supporting local economic development opportunities while protecting existing residential neighborhoods that are adjacent to the proposed station areas. This policy must be taken into account when analyzing potential effects in Land Use and Planning and Parking.

Maintenance Yard Location

3. Proposed Maintenance Yard: The maintenance facility is critical to the operations of the transit system. A feasibility study was conducted to identify potential sites. Eco Rapid Transit commissioned AECOM to prepare report, dated June 14, 2017, which recommended that 41 acres located east of the 1-710 Freeway in the City of South Gate (Option 17B) be acquired and developed into a light rail transit maintenance yard for the West Santa Ma Branch transit line. This area is comprised of industrial businesses that are longstanding, valued members of the South Gate community. These businesses are also significant employers of residents in South Gate as well as those in surrounding communities. The loss of these companies would conflict with the City’s goal of

5 Cityof South Gates WSAB Scoping Comments August 14, 2018 Page4ofl3

reducing the City’s 5% unemployment rate, which is higher than the unemployment rates of Los Angeles County and the State of California. Furthermore, a large portion of the recommended area is owned by the City of South Gate and leased to an existing landscaping waste recycling business, Universal Waste Systems. The lease to Universal Waste Systems of the 14.6 acre site extends to 2028, with possible extensions of up to 10 additional years, and is a significant revenue generator for the City. In order to preserve the existing businesses, jobs and revenue produced by businesses in this area, the City of South Gate opposes the acquisition and development of this area as a light rail transit maintenance yard for the West Santa Ana Branch transit line. Therefore, South Gate Site (Option 17B) should be removed from consideration as a possible light rail maintenance yard site. Also, the City of South Gate will not support the use of eminent domain powers to acquire a potential site (See Comment 6). The consultant team should look at other sites and try and refine potential alternatives.

During the recent scoping meetings, maps were shown which identified potential sites for maintenance facilities in the Cities of South Gate, Paramount, Beliflower and Cudahy. The map showing the proposed South Gate maintenance yard highlighted a smaller area than that identified by the Eco-Rapid Transit/AECOM report. We understand the location of maintenance yard sites are in flux and that the final location for a maintenance site is still under consideration; however, the City of South Gate remains opposed to the proposed South Gate site for the reasons stated above.

WSAB Alignment

Northern Alignment: The recent scoping meetings addressed two northern alignment options: Alameda Underground (Option E) and Downtown Transit Core (Option G). Of the two options, the City of South Gate prefers Alameda Underground (Option E) since it meets our objective of connecting our line from Artesia to Los Angeles Union Station, and best serves the communities in the Industrial and Little Tokyo area and ultimately north to Glendale and the Hollywood Burbank Airport. The City’s position is consistent with that of the Eco-Rapid Transit Board of Directors’ WSAB position, as well as that of Metro staffs recently released recommendations to the Metro Board of Directors.

If the Downtown Transit Core (Option G) is selected, the City of South Gate prefers that this alignment terminate adjacent to the 7thlMetro Center Station because of better connectivity to the Metro Rail Network.

4. Alignment Alternatives: Each station area in the WSAB corridor is unique. The communities they serve vary greatly. The communities have grown from farm lands and dairies to industrial centers and residential communities with close knit neighborhoods. Almost each neighborhood represents a different era with various cultural backgrounds and developed cultural centers. Several of these neighborhoods have significant buildings, historic shopping districts and neighborhoods that will be affected by the transit line. A thorough analysis of the project alternatives, alignment profiles and

6 City of South Gates WSAB Scoping Comments August 14, 2018 Page 5of13

design elements relative to potential effects on individual communities must be done using criteria from the FHWA CommunityImpact Assessment guide.

The analysis of the project alternatives and design options relative to potential effects on individual communities includes a combination of several social and psychological criteria:

• Changes in population-whether the project will cause redistribution, an influx, or loss of population; • Community cohesion and interaction-the degree of attraction among the parts of a neighborhood (i.e., individual groups and institutions). In addition, cohesion relates to the level of interaction and interdependence present within a community; • Isolation-whether people of a community will be separated or set apart from others; • Social values-whether the project will cause a change in social values; and • Quality of life-what is the perceived impact on quality of life.

The analysis should help determine the potential effects of each project alternative, alignment profile and designoption, as well as the proposed maintenance and operations facility on the social and psychological aspects of the local established communities.

Land Use and Development

5. Station Compatibility with City’s Land Use and Development Plans: The station at Firestone Boulevard and Atlantic Avenue needs to be designed with the direct input of the City South Gate to ensure a high quality facility that is safe, functional, compatible with the surrounding development, and meets the City’s aesthetic standards. Three of the planned light rail stations (LRT) are located within or near the City’s soon to be adopted Gateway District Specific Plan (which includes the Firestone station) or the Hollydale Area Specific Plan (which includes the Gardendale station on the north boundary and the 1-105/Green Line station located just outside of the plan boundary in the City of Downey). These City-initiated plans were developed to guide the future redevelopment of a model mixed-use, pedestrian- and transit-oriented community, based on planned future transit service to these areas. Hence, we request that analyses of these future LRT Stations within the EIS/EIR acknowledge and incorporate the framework of these comprehensive specific plan documents. Both of these specific plans are further supported by the City’s 2035 General Plan that will enhance multi- modal access and increase future development opportunities to other parts of the city. For your convenience, both Specific Plan documents and the General Plan are available on the City’s website at the following link: http://www.cityofsouthgate.org/185/Planning.

Building on the unique characteristic of each station, each station needs to be analyzed by potential use as neighborhood stations or destination or transfer station. The land

7 Cityof South Gate’s WSAB Scoping Comments August 14, 2018 Page 6of13

uses, market/development potential is impacted by the location and configuration of the station at a particular site. Placement of the station within the proposed site, impacts potential joint development opportunities, station safety, ridership and use. Underground stations provide more opportunity for development. An at grade station, may provide possibilities of integration into new development. An elevated station limits connectivity to development, unless designed to allow for development adjacent to and/or under station structure. We ask that station area TOD plans and development plans for the jurisdiction be taken into account with the development of each station.

An analysis should be performed of the underlying transit system and a bus restructuring plan for serving the stations to help determine the rail/bus interface at each station.

Additionally, the City has several development projects that will be affected by the alignment which include the Urban Orchard, a linear park proposed along the east side of the Los Angeles River and a recently approved 244-unit apartment project at Garfield Avenue and Imperial Highway. The City would like to include these projects in the environmental analysis to address any impacts associated with any environmental effects caused by the project (i.e., noise, traffic, pedestrian access, etc.). Please contact the City’s Community Development Department at (323) 563-9529 for further project information.

6. Consistency with Other RegionL Projects: Presently, the City is engaged in the planning stages of several regionally significant projects within the vicinity of the alignment. Implementation of these regional projects may have significant impacts to the community in future years and should be addressed and analyzed in the EIS/EIR as to whether such impacts in concert with the project may have cumulative, temporary or long term impacts. The projects currently in the planning process would include the I- 710 Corridor Realignment, the Los Angeles River Revitalization, and the Metro Regional Bike Network. Due to the relative proximity of these projects to the alignment, impacts to local businesses and residents as well as accommodating multi- modal access should be considered including an evaluation of an aerial alignment as an alternative.

7. Eminent Domain: As stated above, the City will not support the use of eminent domain powers on any properties located within the city. Any proposed property acquisitions must include feasible alternatives and meet the full review by the City and its staff and satisfy all regulatory requirements before such acquisitions may begin negotiations with affected property owner(s).

8. Other Land Use Impacts: We are particularly interested in the potential impacts from the possible alignment profiles that may be considered for the project and any physical barriers that may result from at-grade, below grade or elevated structures and crossings.

There have been many studies and transit oriented development plans done in preparation for the integration of this rail line into the land use and economic fabric of

8 City of South Gates WSAB Scoping Comments August 14, 2018 Page 7of13

the twelve host cities; these plans will help guide development and may influence the design of the project. Thus, close coordination between the environmental inquiry and the Transit Oriented Community study is necessary. Key assumptions regarding the project’s cost, scope and schedule that may emerge from the environmental review process should be aligned with the TOC scope as the planiilng and implementation of viable transit oriented developments necessarily pivots on the scope and timing of the transit investment.

Many existing right-of-ways (ROW) being proposed for use do not currently physically divide the communities in which they are located. Any changes in elevations, either above or subterranean, must be analyzed based on whether the new crossings physically divide an established community. When a change in elevation is being proposed, the analysis should include a comparison between the existing condition of the ROW crossing(s) and the proposed improvements. Significant impacts in this area should not be included in overriding considerations but should be mitigated to the fullest extent possible.

In addition to coordination and collaboration with the TOC effort the environmental inquiry shall build upon the framework developed in the WSAB Sustainable Transit Corridor — Phase 1 Near-term Agreement regarding pre-development Transit-oriented Communities. Examination of environmental impacts shall be coordinated with the preparation of the Project and complement the recommendations and findings from all prior studies including the WSAB TOD Guidelines; Caltrans Environmental Justice Assessment, South Gate Station Conceptual Plan, Bellflower Mixed Use Zone Plan, Cerritos Station TOD District, Huntington Park Focused General Plan Update; Rancho Los Amigos South Campus Specific Plan; Beliflower Station Specific Plan; Artesia International Downto Specific Plan; AECOM Land Use Studies located in Cudahy, Downey, South Gate, and Huntington Park; Conceptual Land Use Planning Studies for stations in Cerritos, South Gate, and Paramount; and Visioning Planning Studies for the City of Vernon Station.

The development potential and accompanying ridership inducing impacts needs to be incorporated into the environmental impact and project design. There will be a much wanted and needed symbiotic relationship between the introduction of rail service and increased development. We anticipate that the growth-inducing impacts of high-quality transit service will require special attention.

Community and Neighborhood Impacts

9. Residential Impacts: Although the project will affect mostly industrial areas of the city, there are sensitive uses along the alignment that consists mostly of single-family homes. The City would like to emphasize that noise/vibration and lighting/glare impacts resulting from the alignment including any alternative alignment must be analyzed and determine what if any mitigations may be necessary to reduce such impacts to less than significant levels.

9 City of South Gates WSAB Scoping Comments August 14, 2018 Page8ofl3

With a total of seven planned crossings in the City, four of those crossing will be located near or adjacent to residential uses. If feasible, the City would like to establish “Quiet Zones” to minimize intrusive alarms adjacent to residential uses. The noise analysis should consider all feasible options that would ensure the safety of pedestrian and vehicle traffic at crossings while also minimizing the use of loud and intrusive alarms that may unduly disturb the peace and well-being of adjacent residences.

10. Contaminated Sites: Within the vicinity of the project, three superfund sites are located on or near the alignment and are identified as Cooper Drum, Jervis Webb and Southern Avenue Industrial Area. These superfiind sites are located mostly in the industrial area east of Atlantic Avenue, south of Firestone Boulevard and west of the Los Angeles River, encompassing an area of approximately 10 acres. All sites are currently administered by the USEPA and have undergone investigation and/or have completed limited remediation. For further information, please contact Ms. Karen Jurist, (415) 972-3219 or Jurist.Karenepa.gov.

11. Public Outreach: As part of the community outreach program to inform and educate residents and businesses in the community, the City would prefer that such efforts will be bilingual to reach the widest audience as possible in all media communication. Similarly, it has been our experience that presentation renderings supplemented with physical models has been the most effective communication tool to convey the project intent based on previous outreach efforts performed on past City projects.

12. Historic/Cultural Resources: We request that close attention be made to historic and cultural resources located along the alignment. Both the San Pedro Branch and the Pacific Electric ROW (PEROW or Red Cars) were active rail lines for decades. As such it passed in close proximity to many historic and cultural resources in the communities it traverses, such as the Beliflower Train Station. Additionally, as the line leaves the PEROW it follows a rail spur that also goes by historic and cultural resources in South Gate, Cudahy, Huntington Park, Bell, Bell Gardens, and Vernon.

13. Schools: The City request that Metro coordinate with all local schools including LAUSD regarding which of their schools or facilities will be impacted by the implementation of the project for both construction and operation. Such outreach efforts will help minimize any inconvenience to students, parents and staff.

14. Air quality: Many cities located along the alignment of the proposed project and project activities are environmental justice areas as defined by the EPA and other policy documents. Therefore, AQMD standards alone should not be used when determining air quality impacts. Any increase in the degradation of air quality should be considered significant and mitigations should be considered to address environmental effects that return the air quality to the baseline, or better, number of particulates. Additionally, air quality measurements should be taken in all areas within the proposed alignment study area and not just adjacent to the ROW. Further, analysis on the potential effect on low income and minority communities must be taken into consideration in the analysis.

10 City of South Gate’s WSAB Scoping Comments August 14, 2018 Page9ofl3

15. Noise: The WSAB will be integrated into a built-out urban environment. In many cases the alignment abuts or is within close proximity to sensitive receptors such as residential or educational uses. Special attention must be paid to mitigating any potential adverse impacts associated with potential noise from the alignment as well as the noise potential generated by the different alignment profiles, the train running on steel rails and warning devices that are associated with each profile crossing, such as wayside bells, train gongs and other CPUC required devices.

The proposed alignment traverses a variety of noise environments included environments already impacted by traffic and freeway noise. There are areas where freight trains currently operate - although infrequently: We ask that noise studies be conducted that evaluate day and night time ambient noise levels and predict the impact of at-grade and elevated alignment profiles as well as the crossing warning systems associated with each. There can be acute differentials between day and night noise levels through most of the WSAB communities and detailed analysis will help identify potential impacts and help formulate mitigations. The environmental documents should include evaluations of noise attenuating barriers, landscaping and rail dampening technology to address potential noise impacts. Given the proximity of the line to residential, schools, some business, industrial and other sensitive receptors, vibration studies should be conducted to identify impacts and suggest appropriate mitigation.

There are numerous church run or other private hools/daycare/preschools located within a 2Y mile of the alignment, these uses may or may not be indicated on land use maps due to their secondary, yet permitted, land use status—these uses should be identified for safety, air quality, and noise consideration. Sound walls with attenuation may be required for these existing facilities. Within the City of South Gate, there are several LAUSD facilities which include three elementary schools, two middle schools and one high school located within approximately one half mile from the alignment. However, these facilities are not inclusive of private schools that may be located within proximity to the alignment.

Safety

16. Safety and Security: The City has safety concerns regarding the operation of the crossings for pedestrians and cyclists, particularly for students where such crossings are located along existing Safe Routes to School. It is crucial to identify various safety measures that will be employed at each crossing location and provide outreach to schools and the local community to address safety issues including potential traffic and environmental impacts associated with construction and transit operation. Given the heavy vehicular traffic on Firestone and Atlantic and the unsafe pedestrian environment, it is imperative that the routes to the Firestone station include mitigation measures to safeguard pedestrian safety.

One of the biggest perceived and real impediments to transit utilization is safety and security. Access to station areas, security monitoring and lighting help to ensure rider safety and encourage transit usage and mitigate potential negative impacts.

11 City of South Gates WSAB Scoping Comments August 14, 2018 Page lQofl3

Additionally, we cannot stress that identification of pathways to schools and other activities centers are a huge safety concern. It is critical that an individual can leave the station area and safely walk to the surrounding neighborhood, or other transit modes.

We ask that the consultant team meet with each jurisdiction to identify safety concerns beyond traffic queuing such as the potential for “gate drive-arounds” with diagonal crossings, pathways to school, school access, and truck traffic/truck access to driveways near the alignment. Potential grade separations should include analysis of below-grade options as well as aerial configurations.

Transportation Impacts

17. Other Traffic Issues: To accommodate the project, existing transportation facilities will need to be modified or maintained to support the additional demand on these facilities such as signal preemption at crossings or additional repaving/resurfacing on roadways to support the increased travel demand near LRT stations or along other roadway segments. Will these local implementation efforts be subsidized with future funding from Metro?

Congestion impacts at proposed rail crossing. of the streets — The analysis has to provide current traffic counts (i.e., nornore than two years old) and project the future traffic to the year expected to be the ‘opening date of operations (i.e., 2026). Traffic counts shall be reported for the am and pm peak hours as well as daily traffic. Traffic counts shall report truck movements separately as well as automobile movements. The congestion analysis shall be consistent with operation methods described in the most current edition of the Transportation Research Board (TRB) Highway Capacity Manual (HCM6, 2016 Edition). Arterials with major truck movements have different traffic flow characteristics affecting rail operations and capacity evaluation. Significant impacts must be evaluated according to local jurisdiction levels of thresholds.

Traffic impacts need to be evaluated based upon projected rail crossing arm operations and deployment — There are a number of crossings on the proposed rail project that operate on the diagonal of the local street system --- sometimes diagonally across an intersection and sometimes across very closely spaced intersections. Traffic safety mandates that the rail crossing arms be modified from standard practice to account for these unusual intersections and thus the amount of time traffic signals can devote to the movements of competing automobiles and trucks.

Grade separation of the rail system over arterials needs to consider unique characteristic of the WSAB corridor — The current Metro Grade Separation policy was adopted by the Metro Board in December 2003. This policy is very considerate of a multitude of impacts in determining final recommendations for grade separation. The scope of the DEIR must collect data to feed into that consideration. Important unique characteristics that must be noted include the large proportion of truck movements as well as the historical vehicle and pedestrian crash data in the corridor. Also of importance is the increase in bicycle traffic due to existing and planned bikeways along the corridor.

12 Cityof South Gates WSAB Scoping Comments August 14, 2018 Page 11 of 13

Industrial site access - Since this is generally an industrial area, looking at the traffic impacts at intersections alone, is not enough. There is a need to evaluate truck traffic impacts along the streets that are heavily industrial and receive major truck pick up and drop off during train operating hours. Adjacent commercial and residential areas must also have streets analyzed to ensure that re-routed truck traffic does not impact businesses nor end up on residential streets that do not have the capacity to be collector streets or secondary highways.

Bus operations - Low/moderate income population in this corridor are more likely to be transit dependent. There are numerous bus routes that serve and traverse the corridor. These bus routes need to be integrated into the regional rail system through a rail bus interface program. Analysis must occur to assess impact and potential route disruption during construction and transit operations. The plan must include what will be built to create safe passage for transit patrons and pedestrians during construction as well as between the buses and the trains.

Transit impacts on truck traffic and freeway access -There are a number of instances where the transit corridor coincides with Freeway access routes that are heavily relied upon by rail. Atlantic Boulevard in the South Gate/Cudahy area and RandolphlPacific in Huntington Park are good examples of potential conflicts.

Spur Line Access: Currently, there are several businesses in the City that maintain a spur line access as part of their business operation. Ensure that these spur lines continue to operate with project implementation. These rail spurs must be identified clearly to document conflicts and incorporate necessary design improvements for traffic mitigation.

Construction Impacts

18. Construction Impacts: Project construction will require review and coordination with the City to minimize impacts to residents and businesses. Discuss how outreach efforts will be implemented for the different phases of construction. Some of the critical issues to be addressed as part of the construction mitigation plans include traffic impacts, staging areas, and potential impacts to residences and local businesses (such as parking, access, and noise/dust abatement).

Economic Impacts

19. Economic Analysis: An economic analysis should be performed to document potential adverse fiscal impacts to local businesses as a result of construction activities and, conversely, discuss any associated benefits leading to future economic activity resulting from TOD development and increased business activities.

The WSAB project traverses the subregion of Los Angeles County known as the Gateway Cities with the exception of the City of Los Angeles. The Gateway Cities

13 City of South Gates WSAB Scoping Comments August 14, 2018 Page 12 of 13

Region has a higher percentage of low-income households compared to the County and the State. Almost 50% of the Gateway Cities Region population earned less than $50,000 in household income, and about two-thirds of the Gateway Cities Region’s household incomes totaled less than $75,000. Only 21% of the households earned more than $100,000 in the Gateway Cities Region compared to 29% of households in California. In 2013, the median household income for California was $61,094 and $55,909 for LA County. The Gateway Cities Region exhibits a wide range of household incomes from a low of $32,188 in Vernon, $35,985 in Bell to a high of $89,594 in Cerritos. Twenty of the 27 cities in the Gateway Cities Region had their household income well below the state level. Clearly, there is a huge income disparity between the Gateway Cities Region and California.

Income inequity is further exacerbated by the lack of quality, rapid transit. Commute to work pattern for the Region’s workers is different from the County. In 2013, approximately 87% of the working population over 16 years of age in the Gateway Cities Region reported to either driving alone or carpooling, compared to 83% in LA County. The proportion of workers taking public transportation to work was lower in the Gateway Cities Region, 6.1%, compared to 7.0% for the County. Fewer households in the Gateway Cities Region had no vehicle available when compared to the County. The proportion of households with one or two vehicles available in the Region is less than the County average. However, 38.2% of the households in the Region had three or more vehicles available, higher than the County average of 33.7%. Although lower household incomes are strongly correlated with fewer vehicles per household, other factors such as the size of the household and transit availability affect vehicle ownership. Many of the communities along the transit line are single family neighborhoods. However, these neighborhoods also consist of some of the most densely populated areas in the state due to a different family living in each room of every home. The potential increased value of the land around the station may change the economic dynamics of the area and displace a number of these very low-income families. This potential impact for inducing overcrowding should be examined as an environmental impact with project implementation.

In any area of environmental review, should it be found that the proposed project has an environmental effect which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, financial feasibility should not be used as the only factor to eliminate -potentialmitigations. This -isbecause the proposed project and -actionsneeded to construct the proposed project have the possibility of a disproportionately high and adverse effect on low income or minority populations.

Economic analysis should be done to determine the impact of introducing this important link to the regional transportation system providing southeast LA County residents an alternative to multiple auto ownership. The impact of phasing the line should be analyzed as well.

For the property owners, their land may become more valuable and would be interested in either redeveloping their land to increase their density/income or selling to a

14 City of South Gates WSAB Scoping Comments August 14, 2018 Page 13 of 13

developer or Metro for fair market value. For the existing businesses, they may face displacement. Perceived increased value, could push the owners to charge higher rents to the local businesses and cause them to relocate or close. There have been a number of case studies on the above-mentioned impacts of new transit development. We ask that analysis be done to assess the potential impacts of the alignment on property values, employment creation/retention, and impact on property values in addition to exploring the use of economic development strategies such as those that are being utilized with the Crenshaw/LAX project to assist local businesses,

Existing Business Improvement Districts (BIDS) and other economic development policies within individual cities must be considered, in the Land Use and Planning environmental analysis, as applicable land use policies where conflicts with the proposed project and project activities must be fully mitigated.

20. Local Employment: In order to support the local economy, the City recommends that Metro include a provision in its construction contracts to hire locally when possible.

The City of South Gate appreciates the opportunity to comment on the project. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Joe Perez, Director of Community Development, at (323) 563-9566 or by email at jperezsogate.org.

Sincerely,

Maria Belén Bemal, Mayor

CC: Janice Hahn, LA County Supervisor Gateway Council of Governments Eco Rapid Transit, Board of Directors

15 ______

Item No. 3 RECEIVED- City of South Gate AUG6 CITY COUNCIL ITYL41’RATE ( iTN \ TD TflT QEOThECI7YMANAGR JJJLj LJb icJLJL - IL3OcuY For the Regular Meeting of August 14, 2018 Originating Department: Office of the City Clerk

Ci Clerk: Ci Manager: Carmen Avalos Michael Flad

SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES.

PURPOSE: To historically preserve the events of the City Council Meetings.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

a. Approve the Special Meeting minutes and Special Budget minutes of May 29, 2018; and b. Approve the Special and Regular Meeting minutes of July 10 and July 24, 2018.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

ANALYSIS: The minutes are provided to the City Council on the Wednesday prior to their regular business meeting. Amendments should be provided to the City Clerk’s Office within 24 hours of a City Council Meeting so that verification of the record and corrections are made accordingly. A revised document will be provided to the City Council prior to the Meeting.

BACKGROUND: The minutes typically describe the events of the meeting and may include a list of attendees, a statement of the issues considered by the participants, and related responses or decisions for the issues.

ATTACHMENTS: City Council Minutes

1 CITY OF SOUTH GATE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, MAY 29, 2018

CALL TO ORDER Mayor Maria Belén called a Special City Council meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.

ROLL CALL Sonia Guerrero, Recording Secretary

PRESENT Mayor Maria Belén Bernal, Vice Mayor Jorge Morales, Council Member Denise Diaz, Council Member Maria Davila and Council Member Al Rios; City Manager Michael Flad, Special Legal Counsel Jerry Ruiz

ABSENT City Clerk Carmen Avalos and City Attorney Raul Salinas

LATE City Treasurer Gregory Martinez

CLOSED SESSION The Council Members recessed into Closed Session at 5:34 p.m. and reconvened at 6:29 p.m. with all Members of Council present. Special Legal Counsel Ruiz reported the following:

1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8

a) Property APN: 6233-003-902 Property Address: 10120 Miller Way, South Gate, CA 90280 City Negotiator: Michael Flad, Cit.yManager Negotiating with: Green Wise Soil Technologies, LLC Under Negotiation: Terms of Lease

b) Property APN: 6233-003-903 Property Address: 10120 Miller Way, South Gate, CA 90280 City Negotiator: Michael Pad, City Manager Negotiating with: Green Wise Soil Technologies. LLC Under Negotiation: Terms of Lease

C) Property APN: 6233-002-900 Property Address: 10120 Miller Way, South Gate, CA 90280 City Negotiator: Michael Flad. City Manager Negotiating with: Green Wise Soil Technologies, LLC Under Negotiation: Terms of Lease

2 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 29, 2018

Property APN: 6233-002-901 Property Address: 10120 Miller Way, South Gate, CA 90280 City Negotiator: Michael Flaci, City Manager Negotiating with: Green Wise Soil Technologies. LLC Under Negotiation: Terms of Lease

C) Property APN: 6233-002-903 Property Address: 10120 Miller Way, South Gate, CA 90280 City Negotiator: Michael Flad. City Manager Negotiating with: Green Wise Soil Technologies. LLC Under Negotiation: Terms of Lease

f) Property APN: 6233-001-902 Property Address: 10120 Miller Way. South Gate, CA 90280 City Negotiator: Michael Flad, City Manager Negotiating with: Green Wise Soil Technologies, LLC Under Negotiation: Terms of Lease

g) Property APN: 6233-001-903 Property Address: 10120 Miller Way, South Gate, CA 90280 City Negotiator: Michael Flad, City Manager Negotiating with: Green Wise Soil Technologies, LLC Under Negotiation: Terms of Lease

On item la-g guidance was given to City Council but there was no reportable action taken.

ADJOURNMENT Mayor Bernal unanimously adjourned the meeting at 6:30 p.m. and seconded by Council Member Davila.

PASSED and APPROVED this day of , 2018.

ATTEST:

MarIa Belén Bernal, Mayor Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

Page2of2 3 CITY OF SOUTH GATE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, MAY 29,2018

CALL TO ORDER Mayor Maria Belén called a Special City Council meeting to order at 6:31 p.m.

ROLL CALL Gregory Martinez, City Treasurer

ABSENT City Clerk Carmen Avalos and City Attorney Raul Salinas

1 BUDGETADMIN The City Council:

a. Heard a presentation on the proposed Fiscal Year 2018/19 Municipal Budget; and

h. Heard presentations from the Director of Administrative Services, the City Clerk, and the City Manager on their proposed Fiscal Year 2018/19 departmental budgets; and

c. Opened the Continued Public Hearing, took public testimony, and continued the Public Hearing to the next meeting.

Greg Martinez. City Treasurer presented an overview of the City Clerk’s Office budget for FY 2018/19.

Council Member Davila asked how many passports has been processed since the program was introduced.

Mr. Martinez stated that in 2017/18 the number of passport applications processed is 160.

Council Member Dai1a asked if the City is receiving any revenue.

Mr. Martinez believed the City is not permitted to receive any revenue.

Mike Flad, City Manager stated that the City is receiving revenue and asked Mr. Acosta if she has the intbrrnation.

Jackie Acosta, Administrative Services stated that about $5,000 this year and we are projecting $7,000 next year in total revenue. 4 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 29, 2018

BUDGET ADMIN CONT’D Mr. Flad asked for the position cost for the hourly part-time.

Mr. Martinez stated salary wage is S16284 and including the benefit package would he $16520, plus equipment (scanner and omni page software) at $953.

Council Member Davila asked if the Clerks Office doesn’t have a scanner.

Mr. Martinez stated that the City Clerk’s Office has a scanner, hut it is used for agendas.

Mayor Bernal stated that this is a presentation and any questions would he asked next week.

Mr. Flad stated that the plan was to meet on June th12 but if Council request’s another meeting, we can have another meeting before the 12th• Council can always approve the budget, hold this item or fund this item and we will not expand any dollars until we return to Council with a plan or return with a budget amendment.

Mayor Bernal asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak on this item.

Person in the audience introduced himself to be the City’s resource when it comes to evaluating or comparing technologies. He invited Council and City staff to an open house regarding document security.

Having no one else come forward, Mayor Bernal closed the audience portion.

Mayor Bernal stated that after reviewing the proposed budget provided to Council it states a decrease in the proposed budget even though the City Clerk is requesting an additional position. Mayor Bernal asked Ms. Acosta about the decrease.

Ms. Acosta stated that the decrease is in a couple places. There is a little decrease on the first line item salary full-time and the very last item under supplies and services (capital asset & equipment replacement).

Council Member Rios asked if the position the City Clerk is requesting included in the proposed budget.

Ms. Acosta state that it is on the supplemental list. It hasnt been added to the proposed budget until Council approves the request.

Page2ofl2 5 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 29, 2018

BUDGET ADMIN CONT’D Jackie Acosta. Director of Administrative Services presented an overview oCthe Administrative Services Department.

Mayor Bemal asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak on this item. Seeing no one step forward; Mayor Bernal closed the audience portion.

Vice Mayor Morales asked about the SCE audit.

Ms. Acosta stated that the City did this about 7 or 8 years ago. SCE reviews the City’s utility bills to make certain the City isn’t being billed for anything the City isn’t using anymore.

Vice Mayor Morales asked if this audit is only for municipal properties and not residential.

Ms. Acosta stated that was correct.

Mayor Bernal asked if the City is hiring an outside audit firm.

Ms. Acosta stated that was correct. An item will be on the th12 or th26 June agenda for Council’s consideration. Ms. Acosta is recommending a firm called Utility Cost Management.

Council Member Davila would like to see staff/employees wear name tags.

Mr. Flad stated it will be looked at.

Ms. Acosta stated name tags are provided to employees, but it hasn’t been enforced.

Mayor Bernal is recommending staff/employees have generic business cards.

Council Member Rios questioned the significant changes/requests.

Ms. Acosta stated it would be an ongoing affect and Mr. Flad stated that it would come out of the water fund not the general fund.

Council Member Rios questioned the reductions.

Ms. Acosta stated the insurance premiums have gone down a little bit for the liability insurance for the City. A few vacant positions are being budgeted at six months instead of full year. In IT, we had some capital equipment budgeted for this year that was not re-budgeted for next year. Page3ofl2 6 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 29, 2018

BUDGET ADMIN cD0NT’I) Mayor Bernal would like to keep the goals that were presented last year and compare to today’s goals. Mayor Bernal is concerned the employee handbook and HR policies haven’t been completed in a one year period. Mayor Bernal asked who’s working on the update.

Ms. Acosta stated that Ms. Cobos worked on it and the draft has been completed. It just needs legal review.

Mayor Bernal asked that copies be provided to Council after it has been completed.

Mayor Bernal asked if the financial policies and procedures are completed.

Ms. Acosta stated that the reserve policy, debt management policy and continuing disclosure policy will be presented to Council in the next couple of meetings.

Mayor Bernal asked that the discretionary amounts where contracts do not need to be brought before Council be added to that list too.

Mr. Flad stated that there is a one page document showing amounts and the City Manager’s discretion.

Mayor Bernal questioned the part-time accounting staff.

Ms. Acosta stated that she had budgeted for a full-time secretary position, but decided that a full-time employee is not needed at this time.

Mayor Bemal noticed that HR has had a consultant for some time.

Ms. Acosta stated that the consultant only works when needed on special assigmnents.

Mayor Bernal questioned the scheduling software. Would this allow employees from off-site clock-in from their phones?

Ms. Acosta stated everything would be done mobile or laptop. There will be no more printed timesheets. Many employees use their personal cell phones and receive an allowance.

Council Member Rios commended Ms. Acosta on her accomplishments on the on-line payments.

Ms. Acosta stated that it has been a huge success.

Page4ofl2 7 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 29, 2018

BUDGET ADMIN CONT’D Council Member Rios questioned the updated 5-year financial forecast.

Ms. Acosta stated that it was a citywide 5 year forecast and will try to update it this year too.

Mayor Bernal asked if Council ever received the final CAFR.

Ms. Acosta stated Council has not received the final CAFR. It is on the City’s website. Council Member Rios received a hard copy because he asked about it.

Mike Flad, City Manager presented an overview of the City Manager’s Department which covers the City Council and City Attorney’s Office.

Mayor Bernal asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak on this item. Seeing no one step forward; Mayor Bernal closed the audience portion.

Mayor Bernal asked about the main services the City out sources currently. She knows the street sweeping item will be coming before Council.

Mr. Flad stated electric utilities, refuse services, landfill services, fire services, and SEAACA.

Council Member Davila asked if the football games are included in PAC budget.

Mr. Flad stated that the PAC budget is status quo.

Council Member Davila asked how many games were recorded last year.

Mr. Flad will provide that information to Council.

Mayor Bernal informed Council Member Davila that the PAC Members authorized $64,000 for PAC fund last year and staff is currently proposing $51,926.

Ms. Acosta presented an overview of the general fund balance.

Mr. Flad explained that the separate funds are for rainy days. In case any facilities need repairs.

Ms. Acosta stated that in FY 17/18 the City received a $5.1 million from the Azalea project and their proposal for this year is an additional million to the Employee Resource Center, $2.1 million to the Emergency Reserve, Page5ofl2 8 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 29, 2018

BUDGET ADMIN CONT’D $1 million to start an OPEB Section 115 trust and $1 million to the Economic Development Revolving Loan Fund and reallocate some of the $18 million that is unassigned and suggest $2.9 million to the Emergency Reserve. In total $5 million would be in the Emergency Reserve, $6 million in the Ca1PERSRate Stabilization account and at the end of June 30, 2018 we will end up about ½ million dollars of revenue over expenditures.

Mr. Flad stated that the $5.1 million is opened for policy direction from Council and explained staff’s recommendation on the allocations.

Mr. Flad asked Ms. Acosta which the irreversible accounts are.

Ms. Acosta stated the OPED Trust is not reversible. The Emergency Reserve, Employee Resource Center and Ca1PERSRate Stabilization are the irreversible accounts.

Ms. Acosta stated that last year’s budget was adopted at $47.9 million in general fund revenues and this year’s prediction is $48.3 million.

Ms. Acosta stated that carry-overs are an accounting/clean-up item that will be going before Council.

Mayor Bernal asked what types of tools we use to keep track of cash flow.

Ms. Acosta responded that it is done internally by looking at what revenues are coming in and what the estimated expenditures are. We do not like to leave too much money in our checking accounts at one time, and when there is additional cash flow it is invested.

Mayor Bernal asked that Ms. Acosta explain what the 2 million in debt services was for and how does that relate to our current liability for pensions.

Ms. Acosta responded that was for our pension obligation bonds that were issued in 2005. These monies were used to pay down a big chuck of the unfunded liability, it didn’t pay it off completely and it was all put into the safety account. So at Ca1PERSwe have miscellaneous for all of our general employees and then safety is in their own account which is for all of our sworn officers.

Ms. Acosta introduced Ira Summer, Govlnvest who gave the City Council a presentation on Ca1PERSand the OPEB debit.

Ms. Acosta informed Council that she will be coming back with actual recommendations but with Ca1PERSwe are committed to pay what they Page6ofl2 9 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 29, 2018

BUDGET ADMIN CONT’D ask for. If we make a recommendation to you that we want to start a 115 trust and we suggest that we put 1 million dollars in it, we are not committed to that. Once we set up a 115 trust we fund it when we can. Ms. Acosta will present to Council some policy guidelines where we could say every year that our revenue exceeds our expenditures; we will take 50% of that amount and put it in OPEB. We can fund it when the monies are available; it is not a commitment just because we set up the 115 trust.

Mayor Bernal stated that out of the 5 million that is received from the azalea, your recommendation would be to take 1 million for the OPEB trust. Which could be invested in different types of funds and the return would be used to pay off the same.

Ms. Acosta explained that if we invest ourselves we can only earn small interest because we can only put it in government securities but if we put it in an irrevocable 115 trust then it gets invested at higher earnings.

Mayor Bernal asked if out of the unassigned fund balance 6 million for Ca1PERSstabilization is to have in order to make upfront payments.

Ms. Acosta answered that is completely separate. This would stay as part of our reserves, so that next year if we are looking at a shortfall because our revenues do not meet our expenditures then we have somewhere to drawn from to meet that shortfall. We expect that will probably happen next year and possibly the year after until we renegotiate our labor contracts.

Mayor Bernal asked if Ca1PERSdoes ask for another 3 million are we prepared for that.

Ms. Acosta explained that we are budgeting each year but it is becoming more than we can cover with our ongoing incoming revenues. So then that is why that amount is set aside specifically in our fund balance. We would still have 9 million dollars in unassigned fund balance set aside.

Mayor Bernal asked if anyone in the audience wishes to speak on this item.

Nick Godoy 8611 San Gabriel Avenue spoke on Ca1PERSand their policies.

Council Member Rios asked what most entities consider best practices moving forward.

Mr. Flad stated that the best way to handle this is to pay at the front end, but by doing this you are giving up the ability to use those dollars for other Page7ofl2 10 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 29, 2018

BUDGET ADMIN CONED things. The best practices depends on the organization and have Council decide how much are you willing to sacrifice on the front end by paying on some of these long term debts. On the Ca1PERSside we will have the option during labor negotiations to have our employees contribute to their retirement as part of the next package.

Ms. Acosta stated that a lot of cities are moving towards employees picking up a little bit of the City’s share. The employee’s already pay their 8% share and the City pays their 10% or 24% for the police officers but a number of cities are negotiating with their employees to not only pay their 8% but maybe pay a 1 or 2% of the Cities side of the liability and on the OPEB side the best option is to start prefunding and investing with a 115 trust.

Mayor Bernal asked when this item will be back before Council.

Ms. Acosta stated that staff will make a recommendation on what 115 trust to use as we are looking over the different options we have, policy recommendations on how you want to fund and the criteria for you to continue to add money to the trust.

Mr. Flad said that the current recommendation is 1 million dollars.

Ms. Acosta said that staff is asking for Council direction on how we are going to allocate the 5.1 million from the azalea funds and if you approve taking some out of the unassigned fund balance and adding it to the emergency reserves and the Ca1PERSstabilization. These items will need a decision either tonight or on the 12th• Also, we need to know if we are going to hire and fund three new police officers, one police dispatcher. Do you want to fund the one clerical assistant that the City Clerk is requesting and the forklift that we need to replace in the purchasing area?

Mayor Bemal asked that in the current budget we had allocated some monies for Streetclosures and that is still something that she wants to see. Something along the line of National Night Out and would like to continue at least four of those events a year.

City Treasurer Greg Martinez responded that just this year Tweedy Mile alone has done, the Street Fair, the Posada and we have included the Dia De Los Muertos.

Mr. Flad stated that money was appropriated but not spent.

Ms. Acosta said that we put that money in the Non-departmental account and it was $20,000 and it has not been spent.

PageXofl2 11 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 29, 2018

BUDGET ADMIN cONT’D Mayor Bemal inquired about that expenditure.

Ms. Acosta responded that it goes back into the fund balance, although it can be carried over with the June 2018 carryovers.

Mayor Bernal asked in regards to staff time can we commit to doing this. She noted that the money had been set aside, yet it did not occur.

Mr. Flad stated that what might help is if we get more specific direction and sit with the Mayor to get more information on the types of events.

Mayor Bernal said that she is thinking of events in the different areas of the City something like a neighborhood event with the schools and local businesses.

Mr. Flad stated that we can make this happen.

City Treasurer Martinez said that maybe we can partner with Tweedy Mile or Chamber of Commerce as to not put the impact on staff.

Mayor Bernal stated that would be fine as long as we had staff as the liaison for the events.

Mr. Flad stated that through the budget process I believe we have approval on the police officers, and forklifts.

Mayor Bernal is fme with incorporating everything into the budget and then we can review the final numbers. She then asked Ms. Acosta what she means by the next project she wants to work on is classifications.

Ms. Acosta responded that as part of the overall study we have looked at and basically rewritten every single job spec. Our job specs are very old and out dated. They do not have ADHD requirements and also people’s jobs have changed. We have between 100 and 120 different classifications and we have rewritten each of these to come before Council for approval.

Mayor Bernal asked why the classification number for the City Clerk has changed.

Ms. Acosta explained that it means that she is an elected official. In years past the City Clerk had been classified similar to the directors, so the number that was assigned to her is what we called top management but truly she is an elected official. Basically, we just changed the coding the way it is set up in payroll.

Page9ofl2 12 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 29, 2018

BUDGET ADMIN cONT’D Mayor Bernal asked about the code for City Council.

Ms. Acosta explained that in the payroll system Council does have a code. She was not sure why it was not on the spreadsheet but there is a code.

Mayor Bemal asked if this changed the access to benefits and asked to have a side conversation on the matter. She was on the committee along with Council Member Davila to understand and define that role a little bit more. Obviously, it is an elected position and is also considered to be a full time position so she expressed her interest at that point solidifying what is this going to be because no matter who holds the position it could be switched around and it is going to be up to the City Manager at the time or not and she personally doesn’t want that. She would rather have a solidified position.

Mr. Had said that the Clerk is elected independently and does not report to the Council and she does not report to the City Manager. She is elected independently yet you control the budget. So what value is a clerk if you eliminate her entire budget? The electorate wants an independent elected to run the elections that is not beholden to Council or to a bureaucrat so that independence is what he feels is the higher value versus all these little internal problems that we need to work out. There is often the debate should it be an appointed position, should it report to the City Manager or the City Council and he thinks independence always wins out. In terms of how you classify it as some of her benefits are structured as she is an executive yet she is truly an independent elected official.

Ms. Acosta said that a couple of months ago we did solidify the position when you gave the increase as Ms. Acosta prepared for you an actual document that was a salary and benefits for the City Clerk which was adopted as part of the resolution where it clearly says salary, health insurance, car allowance and details all of the benefits.

Council Member Rios and Mayor Belen asked about the possibility of having a fiscal impact committee and the possibility of having meetings throughout the year to review the budget and not just during the budget process.

Ms. Acosta responded that all Cities do it a little different. Some have a sub-committee of the Council that would work with the Director of Finance and the City Treasurer. Some Cities have appointments from the public, just like a Planning Commission.

Council Member Davila stated that she is in support of the additional staff for the Police Department and does not mind including the hourly City Clerk’s Office position but would like to see a sign in list of the PagelOofl2 13 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 29, 2018

BUDGET ADMIN CONT’D people that come in and ask for information and also a sign in sheet or a quarterly update on how many passports are being processed. There are other pilot projects that the City Clerk is looking into also. She has three full time employees and she does not want to see something coming back later on making it a full-time, part-time is fine. She is also willing to approve the forklift.

Mayor Bernal suggested that the Director of Community Development look at the possibility of hiring another staff member to assist with the counter.

City Treasurer Martinez stated that his personal experience while sharing an office at the City Clerk’s finds that a majority of the residents come through these doors because parking is over here and finds the first door they see is Carmen’s. He agrees that having a sign in sheet quantifies how many people come in but the challenge becomes when the person comes in and wants to know where to pay a ticket but wait you have to sign here before I give you any information.

Council Member Davila clarified that she is only requesting information on passports.

Mr. Flad stated that at this point we will add to the budget these items and then again on the th12 the Council is free to change or allocate whichever items you choose.

CITY COUNCIL The City Council considered discussing and providing input on the following strategic planning topics:

a. City Council expectations of staff;

h. How the City Council works together: and

c. City Council goals for Fiscal Year 2018/19.

Item 2 was continued to the City Council Meeting of June 12, 2018.

Pagellofl2 14 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 29, 2018

ADJOURNMENT Mayor Bernal unanimously adjourned the meeting at 9:26 p.m. and seconded by Council Member Rios.

PASSED and APPROVED this day of , 2018.

ATTEST:

MarIa Belén Bernal, Mayor Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

Pagel2ofl2 15 CITY OF SOUTH GATE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 10, 2018

CALL TO ORDER Mayor Maria Belén called a Special City Council meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.

ROLL CALL Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

PRESENT Mayor Maria Belén Bernal, Vice Mayor Jorge Morales, Council Member Denise Diaz, Council Member Maria Davila and Council Member Al Rios; City Manager Michael Flad, City Attorney Raul Salinas

ABSENT City Treasurer Gregory Martinez

CLOSED SESSION The Council Members recessed into Closed Session at 5:33 p.m. and reconvened at 6:33 p.m. with all Members of Council present. City Attorney Salinas reported the following:

I. CONFERENCEWITHLEGALCOUNSEL - PENDINGLITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a), 54954.9(b)(3)(c)

a. Path Vi]las South Gate, LP; PV South Gate GP LLC; Path Ventures: and Amy Anderson v. City of South Gate

On Item la the City Council received a presentation by the City Attorney’s Office with insight to the nature of the claim and upon completion of that presentation and on a motion made by Council Member Davila and seconded by Vice Mayor Morales on a vote of 5 to 0 the City Council denied the claim.

ADJOURNMENT Council Member Davila motioned to adjourn the meeting at 6:34 p.m. and seconded by Council Member Rios.

PASSED and APPROVED this th14 day of August, 2018.

ATTEST:

Maria Belén Bemal, Mayor Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

16 CITY OF SOUTH GATE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 10, 2018

CU. TO ORDER Mayor Maria Belén called a Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:35 p.m.

INVOCATION Pastor Trejo, South Gate Church of Christ

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Police Department Citizen Academy Graduate

ROLL CALL Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

PRESENT Mayor Maria Belén Bernal. Vice Mayor Jorge Morales, Council Member Denise Diaz, Council Member Maria Davila. and Council Member Al Rios; City Treasurer Greg Martinez, City Manager Michael Flaci,City Attorney Raul Salinas

1 PSEATIONS The City Council presented Certificates of Appreciation to the sponsors of 2018 Spring Fit 5K in recognition of their generous donations for the event.

DEVIATE FROM THEAGEA At this time, there being no objections, Mayor Bernal stated that conunents from the audience would be considered out of its regular agenda order.

COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE Virginia Johnson, 5751 McKinley Avenue spoke on an article in the Wave Newspaper of a possible new homeless project at Gardendale Avenue and Garfield Avenue.

Maria Navarro, 9411 San Antonio Avenue she is in support of the instructor at the Sports Center returning to teach the spin class.

Guadalupe Chavez, 9300 Annetta Avenue she is in support of the instructor at the Sports Center and wants to know why she was tenninated.

Karma Franco, 10237 Downey Avenue she is also in support of the instructor at the Sports Center. She witnessed the event and felt the instructor was treated unfairly.

Angela Lesero, 103 1I San Jose Avenue spoke in support of Marina. instructor at the Sports Center. 17 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 10, 2018

COMMENTS FROM TI AIENCE cONT’D Sylvia Segura, 9331 Madison Avenue spoke iii support of Marina. instructor at the Sports Center and witnessed the incident. She felt the instructor was treated unjustly.

Angela Alvarez, 9401 Bowman Avenue spoke in support of Marina. instructor at the Sport Center.

Gabriela Cid, Congresswomen Nanette BalTagans Office gave a report on the events coming up that will he hosted by the Congrcsswoman s office.

Juana Cuellar, 11113 State Street spoke in support of Marina, instructor at the Sports Center. She feels that the supervisors at the Sports Center do not do a good job. They do not have the rooms available and ready for the classes. For the most part I do not want to even step foot in the Sports Center because she feels that the staff has targeted her as a problem.

Julissa Cuellar, 4907 Southern Lane spoke in support of Marina, instructor at the Sports Center. it feels that the Sports Center staff is not thinking about the community instead they focus on petty arguments that have nothing to do with our fitness goals.

Rick Morton. resident of South Gate spoke in support of Marina. instructor at the Sports Center.

Sandra Aguilar, 2445 Hope Street spoke in support of Marina, instructor at the Sports Center. All she would like to see a fair process because everyone deserves that.

Nick Godoy, 811 San Gabriel Avenue spoke about fireworks and said that he called the police due to illegal fireworks and the solider from South Gate that was recently killed in Afghanistan.

Mayor Bernal explained to the public that during comments from the Audience the City Council is not allowed to conduct a back and forth conversation, but she and Council Member Davila met with the City Manager and the Parks Director to request that an investigation be conducted to be sure there was a thorough investigation was conducted.

TITLE 11 DESIGN RE1EW The City Council conducted a Public Hearing to consider waiving the reading in full and introducing an Ordinance amending Table 11.51-1 (Application and Review Authority), of Section 11.51.030 (Review Types and Responsibilities), and 11.51.060 (Design Review), of Chapter 11.51 (Permits and Procedures. of Title 11 (Zoning), of the South Gate Municipal Code adopting a revised discretionary review process and thresholds for potential new development projects citywide.

Page2of9 18 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 10, 2018

TITLE ii CONTD Joe Perez. Director of Public Works gave a presentation on this item.

Mayor Bernal opened the Public Hearing. Seeing no one step forward; Mayor Bemal closed the public hearing.

Mayor Bernal asked how the review process would he handled at the beginning before going to the Planning Commission.

Mr. Perez stated that most large developments begin with him and after the initial meeting then the Senior Planner comes in to work out the nuts and bolts. After this the process would begin and referred to the Planning Commission.

Mayor Bernal and Vice Mayor Morales would like to see a published document that details the time lines and requirements for projects.

Mayor Bernal asked for clarification on what would conic before Council.

Mr. Perez stated that these are identified in the code. Each project is designated by area, zone and usage. There are very specific identified usages that already require a review by the Planning Commission as opposed to administrative overlook. We are not recommending any changes to those.

Council Member Rios stated that in his understanding the threshold of responsibility is being shifted from administrative to the Planning Commission.

Mr. Perez stated that any item that would go to the Planning Commission, it is staff’s job to vet whatever the use is and place the conditions of approval to make sure that it is a successful project and is not going to negatively impact surrounding usage. We then take that to the Planning Commission. arid have a recommendation. In some cases it might need additional studies like a traffic study or an environmental analysis.

Council Member Rios askd how this change affects the Community Development Department.

Mr. Perez stated that if this were adopted it would be the time to prepare an agenda bill to send notices out to surrounding property owners and present at the Planning Commission meetings.

Council Member Rios asked what would be the delay time for the projects.

Page3of9 19 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 10, 2018

TITLE U (‘ONT’D Mr. Perez answered that it would depend on the project. Usually when staff completes their analysis. it is simply putting together the report and noticing. That is usually a matter of weeks not months.

Mike Flad, City Manager added that not only do businesses and residents have the right to appeal the Planning Commission bitt so does the City Council.

Mayor Bernal stated that if we can commit to having updates for the City Council on a regular basis and have this update added to the process.

Mayor Bernal motioned to approve amending the ordinance to keep the design review process at the administrative level however bring forward the density bonus specific plan zoning amendments to the City Council. He noted that there is a process that is publicized online and that a quarterly report will be brought to the City Council.

Mr. Flad clarified that instead of adding time to a project you will get a quarterly update on what project are coming forward. In terms of the administrative side, one of the main concerns was the lack of certainty and lack of understanding that there is a set process but by putting it on the website makes it available to everybody. This makes the process more understandable and provides the Council and the public with what is happening.

Raul Salinas, City Attorney stated that this item is before City Council as an introduction of an Ordinance. if you decide to make changes to the motion, you should bring it back with the guidance that you are giving staff and City Manager because you would have to publish the reading again. At that time you can decide if you would like to vote on the item.

Vice Mayor Morales asked Mayor Bernal what portion she wanted to bring before the City Council and not the Planning Commission.

Mayor Bemal responded that whenever development wants to bring a density bonus to the current development for a change in the specific plan or zoning amendment. She feels that those are significant enough to where they should come back to the City Council.

Mr. Perez stated that is consistent with what is in the zoning code and what is required. Essentially there would be no change.

Mr. Flad said that we are “daylighting the process” with the addition of the quarterly report and the addition of onlinc documentation.

Page4of9 20 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 10, 2018

rrrLh ii CONTD Mayor Bernal said that we will bring this item back with the additions that were discussed tonight.

Council Member Rios asked if this item will go before the Planning Commission again.

Mr. Perez stated he will make certain it happens.

This item was continued to a future City Council Meeting.

COMMENTS FROM STAFF Carmen Avalos, City Clerk will be attending a City Clerk’s seminar as part of a review of election procedures.

Mike Flad, City Manager stated that Funeraria Del Angel South Gate across the street from City Hall will be hosting a BBQ for Public Servants Appreciation.

Council Member Diaz attended the League Conference for new elected officials.

Council Member Davila shared that at the Council of Governments meeting she was elected to the executive board as second Vice President and also she received a text from Speaker Anthony Rendon indicating he had appointed her to the California Transit Financing Authority.

Council Member Rios also attended the League Conference for new elected officials.

Council Member Davila also invited everyone to the Relay for Life on July 21stat South Gate Park.

Vice Mayor Morales stated that he attended the League of California Cities Board of Directors meeting where they went over their strategic goals and discussed legislature matters including taxes, SB1 transportation funds, and Prop 47 and 57

Mayor Bernal spoke on the relationship between residents, staff and the City Council. She attended the Independence Day Celebration and said that it was very well attended and very beautiful. She believes it is not always necessary to buy the boxes of fireworks when you can visit the park and see the beautiful fireworks. She understands that there is not a report tonight but is hoping the Chief will have an update soon.

Page5of9 21 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 10, 2018

COMMENTS FROM STAFFCONT’D Randy Davis, Chief of Police stated that his report will be done by the end of the week but he will say that as of the last couple of years we have seen a reduction. Even though in some areas there does not appear to be a reduction, there has been a 43% reduction in calls for service.

Mayor Bemal attended the County Sanitation District meeting, where they are discussing labor negotiations. The Sanitation District wants to meet with Cities that are working on recycled water projects.

CONSENT CALENDAR Agenda items 3. 4, 1. 7, 8, and 9 were unanimously approved by motion of Mayor Bernal and seconded by Council Member Rios. Item 6 was pulled for separate discussion.

3 TITLE11-SIGNS The City Council waived further reading and adopted Ordinance No. 2353 entitled — Ordinance of the City Council of the City of South Gate, California, adding Section 11.36 (Signs- General Policies, Provisions, and Procedures), and Sections of Title 11 (Zoning), of the South Gate Municipal Code implementing signage regulations citywide during consideration of the Consent Calendar.

4 LEASE AGREEMENT The City Council unanimously approved A and B during consideration of the Consent Calendar.

a. Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. 2931 with Green Wise Soil Technologies, LLC to allow Compressed Natural Gas fueling stations at 10120 Miller Way; and

b. Authorized the Mayor to execute Amendment No. 1 in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.

5 CDBG The City Council unanimously approved A and B during consideration of the Consent Calendar.

a. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Subrecipient Agreements for Fiscal Year 2018/19 with:

1. Fair Housing Foundation (Contract No. 3452); 2. Southern California Rehabilitation Services (Contract No. 3453); 3. The Salvation Army (Contract No. 3454); 4. Helpline Youth Counseling (Contract No. 3455); 5. Tweedy Mile Association (Contract No. 3456); 6. HIJB Cities (Contract No. 3457); and

Page6of9 22 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 10, 2018

5 CDBG CONT’D b. Authorized the Mayor to execute the Agreements in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.

() ANIMAL CONTROL The City Council unanimously approved A and B by motion of Council Member Davila and seconded by Mayor Bernal.

a. Amendment No. 4 to Contract No. 3026 with the Southeast Area Animal Control Authority for animal control and sheltering services for Fiscal Year 20I8/1): and

h. Authorized the Mayor to execute the Agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.

7 WATER The City Council unanimously approved A, B, and C during consideration of the Consent Calendar

a. Agreement (Contract No. 3458) with Steven Doreck Equipment Rentals, Inc., to construct the California Water Main Crossing at Firestone Boulevard (Water Main), City Project No. 594-WTR, in an amount not-to-exceed $157,395;

b. Authorized the Mayor to execute the Agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney; and

c. The Notice of Exemption for the replacement of the Water Main and direct the City Clerk to file it with the Los Angeles County Recorder’s Office.

8 LA1UVER The City Council unanimously approved A and B during consideration of the Consent Calendar.

a. Agreement (Contraci No. 3459) with the Los Angeles Gateway Regional Integrated Regional Water Management Joint Powers Authority for the cost sharing for the installation of monitoring equipment and monitoring pursuant to the Harbor Toxic Pollutants Total Maximum Daily Loads for a five-year term, for an amount not to exceed $816 annually; and

b. Authorized the Mayor to execute the Agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.

Page7of9 23 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 10, 2018

9 MINUTES The City Council unanimously approved the Special and Regular Meeting minutes of June 12, 2018 during consideration of the Consent Calendar.

DEVIATE FROM ‘rilEAGENDA At this time, there being no objections, Mayor Bernal stated that item 11 would be considered out of its regular agenda order.

11 CITYCOUNCIL The City Council considered:

a. Selecting a color scheme for the new City logo and tagline to begin the City’s branding initiative;

h. Providing direction on the roll out plan for the new City logo; and

c. Authorizing the City Attorney to file the trademark application for the new City logo and tagline.

The City Council unanimously approved the Blue Color Palette and recommended the tag line of “So Gate, So Great” by motion of Mayor Bernal and Council Member Davila.

10 CITYCOUNCIL The City Council considered discussing and providing input on the following strategic planning topics:

a. City Council expectations of staff;

b. How the City Council works together; and

c. City Council goals for Fiscal Year 2018/19.

This subject was thoroughly discussed, but no action taken.

12 WARRANTS The City Council unanimously approved the Warrants and Cancellations for July 10, 2018 by motion of Council Auditor Davila and seconded by Council Member Rios.

Total of Checks: $5,221,024.12 Voids: ($ 0.00) Total of Payroll Deductions: $ 290,374.54 Grand Total: $4,930,649.58

Page 8 of 9 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 10, 2018

ADJOURNMENT Mayor Bernal unanimously adjourned the meeting at 9:52 p.m. and seconded by Council Member Davila.

PASSED and APPROVED this th14 day of August, 2018.

ATTEST:

MarIa Belén Bernal, Mayor Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

Page9of9 25 CITY OF SOUTH GATE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 24, 2018

CALL TO ORDER Mayor MarIa Belén called a Special City Council meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.

ROLL CALL Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

PRESENT Mayor MarIa Belén Bernal, Vice Mayor Jorge Morales, Council Member Denise Diaz, Council Member Maria Davila and Council Member Al Rios; Acting City Manager Art Cervantes, City Attorney Raul Salinas

ABSENT City Treasurer Gregory Martinez and City Manager Michael Flad

CLOSED SESSION The Council Members recessed into Closed Session at 5:32 p.m. and reconvened at 6:38 p.m. with all Members of Council present. City Attorney Salinas reported the following:

I. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - PENDING LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a), 54954.9(b)(3)(c)

a. Rodolfo Jaurigui Jr. v. City of South Gate

In Closed Session the City Council met with Legal Counsel on a case that had been filed against the City. The claim is that Mr. Jaurigui was injured allegedly as the result of a police chase here within the City of South Gate. The City Council received a report by the City Attorney and the Chief of Police. Upon completion of that report there was a motion made by Council Member Davila and seconded by Vice Mayor Morales. On a vote of 5 to 0, the City Council voted to reject that claim.

2. CONFERENCE WiTH LABOR NEGOTIATOR Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6

Agency Representation: Michael Flad, City Manager

Employee Organizations: SGPMMA

The City Council met with their labor negotiator to discuss an item of labor negotiation for one of the City’s bargaining units, South Gate PMMA. That item is also going to be before the City Council in the open agenda and is item number 5. Upon completion of the presentation by the 26 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 24, 2018

CLOSED SESSION CONT’D labor negotiatiator, Ms. Acosta there was no vote taken by the City Council in connection with this item.

ADJOURNMENT Council Member Davila unanimously motioned to adjourn the meeting at 6:40 p.m. and seconded by Council Member Rios.

PASSED and APPROVED this th14 day of August, 2018.

ATfEST:

MarIa Belén Bernal, Mayor Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

Page2of2 27 CITY OF SOUTH GATE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 24, 2018

(ALl. 10 ORDER Mayor MarIa Belén called a Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:41 p.m.

IN VO(’ATTON Joe Perez. Director of Coinmunity Development

PLEDGE OF ALLEG1AMi Christian Martinez. Public Works Employee

ROLL CALL Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

PRESENT Mayor Maria Belén Bernal, Vice Mayor Jorge Morales, Council Member Denise Diaz. Council Member Maria Davila, and Council Member Al Rios; City Treasurer Greg Martinez, Acting City Manager Art Cervantes, City Attorney Raul Salinas

ABSENT Michael Flad, City Manager

PRESENTATIONS The City Council allowed staff to introduce the new and promotional full- time employees hired or promoted between April 1, 2018 and June 30, 2018.

COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE Virginia Johnson, 5751 McKinley Avenue expressed her concerns about the proposed homeless facility at 11269 Garfield Avenue, Downey.

Angela Lucero, San Jose Avenue requested an update for the issue regarding the Parks instructor.

Vice Mayor Morales asked the City Attorney to explain to the audience the laws pertaining to comments made by the audience and the ability of the City Council to respond.

City Attorney Salinas explained to the public that by California law the City Council is very limited to what they can discuss and respond to at these meetings. When the public comes and raises comments that are not on the actual agenda the common practice is to allow all the speakers to make their comments and once the opportunity ends for the comments then the Council will attempt to briefly address each one. We are not allowed to do a back and forth answer session.

28 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 24, 2018

COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE CONT’D Bryan Ramirez, 9310 Virginia Avenue would like an update on the Parks instructor.

Veronica Ruiz, 10631 Stanford Avenue expressed her concerns about the homeless situation and the safety of the residents.

Juan Martinez, 10246 San Jose Avenue expressed his concerns about safety in the City of South Gate.

Ms. Cuellar, 1113 State Street, Lynwood also would like an update on the Parks instructor.

Mayor Bernal asked the City Attorney for an overview for the public on the process and what we expect to see.

City Attorney Salinas stated that this is in the case of the instructor Marina Rolf and as many people know we had a very large crowd that came to City Council to express their support and following that meeting the City Council did direct the City Manager to initiate a review of the decision process. The City Manager requested that the City Attorney make the review and the City Attorney gave a brief response on the review. Art Cervantes, Acting City Manager and Randy Davis Chief of Police gave a brief response to the matters brought up in Open Session regarding the homeless.

COMMENTS FROM STAFF Carmen Avalos, City Clerk provided Council with an overview on the meetings she attended at the Los Angeles County Registrar Recorder’s Office regarding elections.

Council Member Diaz reported on her meeting at the Vector Control and controlling the mosquitos. She also visited the transfer center here in South Gate and the HUB Cities committee meeting. She thanked the volunteers that worked the Relay for Life event and attended the Arts Event on the River. She would like to see more events like this to our South Gate Community.

Council Member Rios attended a census meeting in South Gate and explained the process and importance of a census. He also attended the Relay for Life and the Art Festival.

Council Member Davila was part of the Relay for Life and entered in a team. She also attended the Art Festival and felt it was a great event that should he held every year. She also shared that she is expecting her first grandchild. Page2of8 29 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 24, 2018

COMMENTS FROM STAFFCONT’D Vice Mayor Morales attended the Los Angeles County Board Meeting to testify as part of the Safe Cleanup Water Program which will be on the November ballot. He also attended the Independent Cities Association Conference.

Mayor Bernal attended the Los Angeles County Sanitation District Board meeting and they are in the middle of labor negotiations. She also attended the Independent Cities Association Conference. They had presentations on the homeless and urban planning. She stated that unfortunately the homeless problem is a regional issue and that California has one of the largest homeless problems in the Country. The Police Department cannot arrest someone just because they are homeless. There has to be a violation of some sort for the Police Department to become involved. She stated that staff is working with the City of Downey and we can be reassured that we are part of the process. She also requested that staff look into the Clean Power Alliance stating that our neighboring cities are also part of this alliance and if it could be more cost effective for us.

Council Member Davila informed every one of a meeting regarding the West Santa Ana Branch trains that will be held in Huntington Park and a second meeting in Beliflower. This is part of the process for the environmental studies.

CONSENT CALENDAR Agenda Items 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 were unanimously approved by motion of Council Member Davila and seconded by Mayor Bemal. Items 2, 3. and 9 were pulled for separate discussion.

2 URBAN GREENING The City Council unanimously approved A. B and C by motion of Mayor Bernal and seconded by Council Member Davila.

a. Adopted Resolution No. 7823 entitled — Resolution of the City Council of the City of South Gate approving a Funding Agreement (Contract No. 3464) with the California State Water Resources Control Board and designating the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to represent the City in carrying out the responsibilities of the Funding Agreement for the South Gate Urban Orchard Demonstration Project. as necessary to receive a 57,975.100 Proposition I Grant for the construction of the South Gate Urban Orchard Demonstration Project;

b. Appropriated $7,975,100 in Proposition I Grant Funds to the South Gate Urban Orchard Demonstration Project (City Project No. 539-PRK). Account No. 311-790-31-9214: and

c. Authorized the Mayor to execute the Funding Agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.

Page3of8 30 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 24, 2018

ENERGY SAVINGS The City Council unanimously approved A, B, and C by motion of Mayor Berenal and seconded by Council Member Rios.

a. Adopted Resolution No. 7824 entitled — Resolution of the City Council of the City of South Gate adopting the Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (MSRC) Local Government Partnership Program requirements to receive grant funds and committing to fuiiding the local match requirement;

h. Upon notification of the award of grant funding, authorized the Director of Administrative Services to appropriate S50,000 in MSRC Grant Funds to Account 223-610-49-9003 to fund the purchase of five electric vehicles, and appropriated $77,400 in MSRC Grant Funds and $22.600 in AQMD Subvention Funds, to Account 223-610-49-9005. to fund the purchase and installation of three electric vehicle charging stations: and

c. Authorized the Mayor to execute the Funding Agreement (Contract No. 3465), in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.

4 LEAGUE OF CA CITIES The City Council unanimously adopted Resolution No. 7825 entitled - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of South Gate, California, designating Vice Mayor Jorge Morales to serve as the City’s voting delegate and Mayor Maria Belén Bernal as the City’s alternate voting delegate during the 2018 League of California Cities Annual Business Meeting/General Assembly on September 14, 2018 was a unanimously approved during consideration of the Consent Calendar.

SGPMMA The City Council unanimously approved A and B during consideration of the Consent Calendar.

a. Approved Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 3395 with the South Gate Professional and Mid Management Association regarding Fair Labor Standards Act implementation issues: and

h. Authorized the Mayor to execute the Amendment No. 2 in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.

Page4of8 31 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 24,2018

WORKERS’ coiip The City Council unanimously approved A and B during consideration of the Consent Calendar.

a. Approved Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 2232 with AdminSure Inc.. for workers’ compensation self-insurance services; and

b. Authorized the Mayor to execute Aniendment No, 2 in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.

7 s’roRMDRU The City Council unanimously approved A and B during consideration of the Consent Calendar.

a. Approved an Agreement (Contract No. 3463) with Ron’s Maintenance, Inc., for catch basin maintenance services for an amount not-to-exceed $301,500 for a three-year term; and

h. Authorized the Mayor to execute the Agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.

8 EMERGENCY PLANNING The City Council unanimously approved A and B during consideration of the Consent Calendar.

a. Accepted the completion of construction, effective April 24, 2018, of the Emergency Operation Center Remodel Project, City Project No. 582-ARC constructed by R Dependable Const Inc.; and

b. Directed the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion with Los Angeles County Recorder’s Office.

9 MINUTES The City Council approved A and B.

a. The Special Meeting minutes and Special Budget minutes of May 15, 2018.

ROLL CALL: Mayor Bernal. yes: Vice Mayor Morales, yes; Council Member Diaz, yes; Council Ivlember Rios, yes: Council Member Davi]a, absent.

h. The Special and Regular Meeting minutes of June 26, 2018.

ROLL CALL: Mayor Bernal, yes; Vice Mayor Morales, abstain; Council Member Diaz, yes; Council Member Rios, yes: Council Member Davila, yes.

Page 5 of 8 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 24, 2018 w4uoN [[EM The City Attorney requested that the City Council consider two walk on items. There will be one item for Open Session and one item for Closed Session. The Brown Act allows us to walk on items that are not on the agenda when certain conditions are met. Namely, that the matter arose after the posting of the agenda and also the matter cannot wait until the Council has their next regular scheduled niecting.

in the case of the open session agenda, yesterday it was announced that one member of the Los Angeles Unified School District, Ref Rodriguez had pled guilty to a felony and has resigned. LAUSD is making plans to replace him or consider how to replace him and the City of South Gale should have a voice in that and the matter should he considered this evening. City Attorney Salinas recommended to the Mayor that we have a motion that would allow us to walk this matter onto the agenda. We would need 4 or 5 Council Members to vote for the affirmative so this item could be considered.

This item was approved to he walked on the agenda by Council Member Davila and seconded by Council Member Rios.

ROLL CALL: Mayor Bernal, yes; Vice Mayor Morales, yes Council Member Diaz. yes; Council Member Rios. yes: Council Member Davila, yes.

City Attorney Salinas stated that in addition to this item we received a claim for potential litigation against the City that would allow us to consider this matter. The item came tip after the posting of the agenda and it is also a matter that cannot wait until the next regular City Council Meeting and would like the matter of threatened litigation discussed in closed session again based on a 4 to 5 Council Members to vote for the affirmative so this item could be considered.

This item was approved to be walked on the agenda by Council Member Davila and seconded by Mayor Bernal.

ROLL CALL: Mayor Bernal, yes: Vice Mayor Morales, yes: Council Member Diaz, yes: Council Member Rios, yes; Council Member Davila, yes.

In regards to the discussion to consider what if any action the City CoLincil would like to take in light of the announcement yesterday of the resignation of office by the member of the Los Angeles Unified School Board the City Council would like a letter sent to the Los Angeles Unified School Board stating that the Board take into consideration that outside of the City of Los Angeles that South Gate has more LAUSD students than any other City within the LAUSD boundary line and that if the Board decides to create an appointing panel that the City of South Gate would

Page6of8 33 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 24, 2018

W M.k4> 1TE[’i (ONT’D like to be a part of the panel by motiou of Council Member Davila and seconded by Mayor Bernal.

ROLL CALL: Mayor Benial, yes: Vice Mayor Morales. yes: Council Member Diaz, yes• Council Member .Rios. yes: Council Member Davila. yes.

I0 PRESENTArIONS The City Council considered providing staff with direction regarding the proposed Home Recognition Program.

The City Council directed staff to assign the Planning Commission to decide from the selection of homes to be recognized. Distribudon of the awards will be done throughout the entire community and in addition to the City Council recognition and lawn sign the selected home will receive an azalea plant was unanimously approved by motion of Council Member Davila and seconded by Mayor Bernal.

11 BUDGET The City Council unanimously authorized the carryover of unspent budget appropriations from FY 2016/17 to FY 2017/18 for the funds detailed in Exhibit A by motion of Mayor Bernal and seconded by Council Member Davila.

12 WARRANTS The City Council unanimously approved the Warrants and Cancellations for July 24. 2018 by motion of Council Member Davila and seconded by Council Member Rios.

Total of Checks: $3,177,503.89 Voids: ($ 16,900.14) Total of Payroll Deductions: $ 334,937.79 Grand Total: $2,825,665.96

Cancellations: 77645. 78122, 78215

CLOSED SESSION The Council Members recessed into Closed Session at 9:02 p.m. and reconvened at 9:37 p.m. with all Members of Council present. City Attorney Salinas reported the following:

The City Council received a presentation from the City Attorney’s Office in regards to a walk-on case of threatened litigation and there was no action taken in Closed Session.

Page7of8 34 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 24, 2018

ADJOURNMENT Mayor Bemal unanimously adjourned the meeting at 9:38 p.m. in memory of Army Soldier and South Gate resident Joseph Maciel and Angel Luis Colon, seconded by Council Member Davila.

PASSED and APPROVED this th14 day of August, 2018.

ATTEST:

Maria Belën Bernal, Mayor Carmen Avalos, City Clerk

Page8of8 35 ______

City of South Gate Item No. 4 CITY COUNCIL MiCi ZOIS CiLJ JEA fliiLE.1L For the Regular Meeting oft AufmcI 14.4 201R &:oopq in ing Department: Public Works /) /i//j Department Director: - City Manager(;7, L V - 4r’uro CFi”antes “MichaelFlad

SUBJECT: REPORT ON THE CITY’S STREET SWEEPING EVALUATiON RESULTS AND AUTHORIZATION TO OUTSOURCE STREET SWEEPING SERVICES

PURPOSE: This item was continued from the City Council Meetings of May 8, May 22. June 12, and June 26, 2018. The Public Works Department in-house street sweeping servicesprogram is experiencingchallenges that have been comprehensively analyzed in the Street Sweeping Evaluation Project Report. In light of the findings, staff is recommending that the City Council authorize outsourcing street sweeping services. Staff is putting forth a proposal that is multi-faceted strategy to increase efficiency,enhance qualityand servicelevels, reduce liability, protect jobs, and create succession planning; subsequently, reducing costs. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: a. Receive and file a presentation from the Director of Public Works/City Engineer on the results of the Street Sweeping Evaluation Project Report; and b. Approve “Alternative No. 2 - Outsourcing the Street Sweeping Program” and authorize the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to procure a contract for street sweeping services starting in Fiscal Year 2018/19.

;AL IMPACT: There is a funding deficit in the street sweeping program. Street sweeping revenue, projected to be collected in Fiscal Year 2017/18, is approximately $293,766 lower than the amount needed to fully fund the in-house street sweeping services program. The budget needed to run the program is $999,786 while the revenue collected is $706,020 (Street Sweeping Budget). Staff has evaluated two alternatives to deliver the street sweeping program within budget. Alternative No. 1 is to increase the revenue to fully fund the in-house street sweeping services program. Alternative No. 2 is to decrease expenditures by outsourcing the street sweeping services program. The following is a summary of fiscal impacts of the two alternatives:

• Alternative No. 1 — Fully fund the in-house street sweeping services program: The total cost of this alternative is $999,786 annually, plus a one-time cost Of$1.125million in Street SweepingFunds.

Selecting this alternative requires; (1) increasing the Street Sweeping Fund revenue by $293,766 to fully fund the $999,786 in-house street sweeping servicesprogram to resolve the deficit,(2)budgetthe replacement of three outdated street sweepers for a total, one-time cost of $1.125 million in General Funds, and (3) consider increasing street sweeping service fees by an estimated 42%. This couldresult in increasing street sweeping fees as noted on the table in the following page. Re;idential Multi-Residential Multi-Residential Commercial? (for first uni lditional units) Industrial Current MonthjyRate $2.58 $2.58 $1.55 $6.45 Possible Monthyjate $3.66 $3.66 $2.20 $9.16

IL • Alternative No. 2 — Outsource Street Sweeping Services: The total cost of this alternative is $718,909 annually. This annual amount represents a savings of $280,877 per year, and a one-time savings of $1.125 million, as compared to Alternative 1.Under this alternative, the annual cost of the street sweeping program ($630,000) is less than the annual revenue of the Street Sweeping Fund ($706,020) by $76,020. Also, the annual cost of the street sweeping program is $369,786 less as compared to Alternative No. I ($999,786).

Selecting this alternative would result in: (1) a $530,000 contract (approximately) to outsource street sweeping services plus $100,000 in supporting costs, (2) a $190,340 cost in Gas Tax funds as two Equipment Operators (Street Sweeping Operators) would be reassigned to other street maintenance services, (3) a $30,216 cost in Sewer Funds (approximate) to fund a succession plan in the Sewer Division negotiated with the Municipal EmployeeAssociation as a part of this proposal, (4) a one-time savings of $1.125 million that would be achieved by not replacing the aging street sweepers, (5) an estimated $48,000 in annual savings achieved from eliminating certain contracted services,and (6) an annual $83,647 savings that will be achieved by eliminating the vacant Equipment Operator position (Street Sweeping Fund).

ALIGNMENT WITH COUNCIL GOALS: The proposed action meets the City Council’s goal of “Continue Refining the Five-Year Budget Forecast, Adopting a Responsible Budget and Funding Reserves.” ANALYSIS: The street sweeping services program has three issues that are at the root of staff’s recommendation: costs. staffing, and equipment.

Costs — The Street Sweeping Evaluation Project Report identifies several findings. Among those were: (1) expenditures exceed annual revenues by approximately $293,766; (2) an estimated $94,838 in personnel charges for supervisory and management staff has not been budgeted or allocated to the street sweeping program; (3) an additional $62,145 in personnel charges for back-up operators (non-supervisory staff) has been incorrectly allocated to other programs when performing street sweeping activities; (4) an estimated $100,714 in equipment maintenance costs has not been budgeted or allocated to the program; (5)the City does not budget for future equipment replacements, which are estimated at $129,873 annually;(6) the Cityis facing significant equipment replacement costs in the near term at $1.125 million for three sweepers; and (7) the City’s costs to operate the in-house street sweeping services program is high, compared to neighboring cities. The figure below is a breakdown of revenues and expenditures. i:pe FY 2017/18 Budget Revenues Street_Sweeping_ServiceFee $699,590 NPDES1nspcfions $4,664 UtiyStatement Fee Interest $816 Total Revenues $706,020 Expenditures Bu4gedFY2017/18StreetSeping Program $674,361 Additional Salaries and Benefits (not allocated) $94,838 Ad nal Equipment Maintenance Costs (not allocated) $100,714 Equipment Replacement Contributions (not allocated) $129,873 Total Expenditures Program Costs Over Revenues ($293,766) One-Time Costs pers(3 (not allocated) $1,125,000 I Staffing - There are inconsistencies with staffing. For example, the street sweeping crew is made up of three full-time employees and there is one vacancy. With said vacancy and when absences occur, staff from other divisions is often required to cover street sweeping shifts. This disrupts and reduces the productivity of the street maintenance operations, forces employees to reluctantly provide coverage for the street sweeping program, especially for the night shift, as it results in disrupted sleep patterns. Staff reports that night routes and parking lots sometimes go un-swept when a regular street sweeping employee is absent.

Equipment — The in-house street sweeping services program operates with four street sweepers. The street sweepers are operated daily, and reliability is the key to a successfulprogram. The primary challengeswith the street sweepers include, (1) all of the sweepers have exceeded their expected lifespan, (2) frequent breakdowns, (3) high annual maintenance costs, (4) sweepersare of an uncommon design due to their propane (LPG) fueling system, which requires frequent maintenance, (5) due to limited knowledge within the mechanic field, there is difficultly in acquiring services for diagnostic and repair, and (6) rarity of sweepers create difficulty in acquiring parts which are also expensive. Below is a summary of cost associated with our current street sweepers. Street Sweeper Year Miles Annual Annual Replacement Fstimated Annual Service Maint. Cost Cost Replacement 1 Needs Costs jco 600 2010 68,931 70 - $25,500 $375,000 $43,291 Tymco 600 2010 63,423 77 $24,300 Keep as spare unit Elgin Pelican 2005 71,246 60 $28,130 $375,000 $43,291 ElginCrosswind 2000 113,984 50 $22,780 $375,000 — $43,291

Alternative No. 2 results in, (1) increasing efficiency as street sweeping and other services will be provided at a lower cost, (2) provide higher services levels as the frequency for sweeping alleyways and parking lots will increase, (3) enhanced quality and efficiency as new equipment is more effective and better equipped with technology, (4) reducing liability as the specialty crew will remove tripping hazards from Citysidewalksyear- round, (5) protecting jobs as, in lieu of a lay-offs, the street sweeping services employees will be reassignedto a specialty crew, and (6) create succession planning because the Maintenance Worker positions in the Sewer Division will be re-structured to allow for employee growth.

BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department (“Department”) is responsible for providing street sweeping services. The Department currently sweeps approximately 125miles of streets, 12miles of alleys,or 17,631 lane miles per year. The Department also sweeps the City parking lots (i.e., Parks, Tweedy Mile Commercial District, and other City facility parking lots). Sweeping is performed by three equipment operators assigned to the Street and Sewer Division: Two equipment operators work the day shift and the third works the night shift.

The street sweeping services program is experiencing challengesthat were preliminarily analyzedunderthe 7- City survey. According to the 7-City Survey, the City’s program was the second highest in cost to operate, as compared to other cities in the study. The Department commissioned Management Partners to prepare a Street Sweeping Evaluation Project Report to comprehensively evaluate the street sweeping services program. ‘the report identifies the three primary issues to be related to costs, aging equipment and staffing.

Alternatives: The Street Sweeping Evaluation Project Report indicates that exploring the option of outsourcing the street sweeping services program through a competitive bid process has merit for the City. The report recommends one of two approaches: increase revenues or decrease expenditures. 3 Alternative No. 1 — Fully fund the in-house Street Sweeping Services Program This approach requires increasing revenues to fully fund the program. If the City implemented an increase or new street sweeping fees, there will likely he legal implications. For example, the City would have to follow Proposition 218 requirements to increase fees, as well as, policy considerations that come with fee increases. Another alternative is to allocate additional General Fund monies to subsidize the street sweeping services program. This is not feasible considering current demands on the General Fund.

Alternative No. 2 - Outsource Street Sweeping Services Expenditures can be decreased by outsourcing street sweeping services. The report indicates that competitive rates are offered by the private sector. Under Alternative No. 2 the two employees (Heavy Equipment Operator) that currently staff the street sweeping services program will be re-assigned to a specialtycrew.The vacant Heavy Equipment Operator position will be replaced with a succession plan that entails adding merit increases to the Maintenance Worker positions in the Sewer Division, based on their ability to secure certain certifications. Among the possible duties of the specialty crew are grinding concrete to eliminate tripping hazards, removing tree stumps, striping and operating heavy equipment.

As a note, if the City Council selects Alternative No. 2, the City will work with Management Partners to prepare an RFP. The cost to prepare an RFP will be for a not-to-exceed amount of $19,000 which will be partially funded with $12,000 in Gas Tax Funds, Account No. 212-713-31-6101 and $7,000 in Street Sweeping Funds, Account No. 214-730-31-6101.

Municipal Employees Association — The findings of the Street Sweeping Evaluation Project Report and the proposal to outsource street sweeping services has been discussed with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the City Employees’ Union, in a Meet and Confer meeting held on April 19, 2018. SEIU understands the reasons why outsourcing the street sweeping services program is recommended. SETUis supportive of the proposal with the condition that, (1) street sweeping services employees are not laid-offand they maintain their salaries, (2) are re-assigned to new duties such as those identified within this report, and (3) establish a succession plan for the Street Maintenance Workers in the Sewer Division.

Management Partners used a variety of analytical and management techniques in completing this study, as well as, our knowledge of municipal street sweeping best practices. They examined a range of documentsand conducted interviews with staff from the Departments of Public Works, Administrative Services, and Parks and Recreation. Additionally, Management Partners secured interviews with six cities, of which, four were chosen based on comparability and availability of data. Among the four cities were Orange. San Mateo, Palo Alto, and Downey.

It is also important to note that staff would not take any action when receiving bids for street sweeping services until it is presented to the City Council, who will give final approval on any of these matters.

ATTAChMENTS: A. Street Sweeping Evaluation Project Report B. July 28, 2015 Agenda Bill — Street Sweeping Rates

VHF:lc

Management Partners

1730

This

from

making

evaluation sweeping

lack Management

program

are

Executive

Date:

Subject: From:

MADIsoN

To:

provided

memorandum the

2107

associated Ongoing

program

are Total

•

operational

The •

ROAD

the

analysis

and

the

revenues

subsiding

$129,873

The

allocated staff)

An has

sweeping

An of

NORTH

City

operation

Summary program

•

Street

the

identify

Partners estimated

CINcINNATI,

estimated

additional

not

City

residents

costs is

revenue has 3152

FIRST

current

are:

with

not

April

Street

Ten

Mr. been

Andy

equipment

Sweeping provides to

annually.

does

been

the activities. STREET,

RED

are

available

revenues

support

allocating

was

Arturo

the-program.

the Cable,

budgeted

25,

$100,714

HILL sweeping

Sweeping $94,838

Belknap,

from

not program,

$62,145

estimated

and incorrectly

45206

street engaged

SUITE

efficient, 2018

AVENUE,

budget

our

businesses

Senior

Fund.

Cervantes,

have

the the

470

revenue are

•

sweeping in

all

analysis

Regional current

513

total

SUITE program.

options

personnel

Evaluation estimated

•

personnel program

presented

equipment

for

allocated

Management

including allocated SAN

861

be conduct

210

cost

future and

JOSE,

using $999,786.

5400

Public

and

fee

program for

•

Vice

of service CALIFORNIA

COSTA

costs

structure

charges

recommendations.

charges challenges.

•

the

closing

Project

equipment

City

an maintenance

FAx

Works

President

competitive

the other

MESA,

program.

analysis

associated

Advisor As

513

$706,000

staff

delivery

are street

95131

Report for

the

a for

861

programs is

CALIFORNIA

Director/City

result,

being

and

insufficient

supervisory

funding back-up

3480

replacements,

sweeping of

•

City

addition, options.

408

costs

sourcing

equipment.

with

the

allocated

personnel the 92626 MANAGEMENTPARTNERS.COM

437

leaders

South

Major when

gap,

the

current

has operators

5400

program.

Engineer

to Street

•

and

the

street

alternative.

not

and performing

949

Gate’s

support

observations

were which

•

and

Staffing

City

other

management

been fiscal FAx

222

methods

sweeping

(non-supervisory equipment

408

interested

street has

1082

are

budgeted

year

funds, ongoing

453

issues

insufficient

estimated street

•

sweeping

for

and 6191 resulting

FAx

services

program

which

staff and

408

costs

costs.

total

or an

453

the at 6191

Management

range this

Administrative

Project

South

This Reducing

service

street

work currently

Management

considered

could

for

These, include

other

addition $56.71

curb The

street

Based

service

Mr.

existing

• •

•

• •

•

South •

study

Arturo

City’s

memorandum

mile

oversight

Public

sweeping

Gate’s

sweeping

Alternative

when

plus

Conclusion. Program

Case Service Staffing,

Background,

Project

fee.

estimated

the The

delivery

parking

documents

Approach

expected

has

this

Gate;

program

for

staff

cost Cervantes

primary

since

normal

contract

City

Study

well

Works

the

annual

Partners

the

vacancies

Parthers

analysis

the

Approach,

Delivery

per Services

however,

performed

members.

program

services,

Revenues

lots,

option

estimated

cities

estimated

with

Research,

Service

facing

curb

costs

street

staff

and

sweepers

our

$1,125,000.

management

street

emergency

organized

used

as recommends

a where

Department,

and

mile knowledge

conducted

costs) may

well

outsourcing

contract.

could

sweeping

these

significant

South While

interviewed

iJelivety

sweeping

and

additional

Metrics, cost

cost-effective

and

swept

variety

delay

are

the

displaced

are

Costs,

are

Gate.

contract

response

the

due

foreman

costs,

managed

included.

not

the

interviews

about

covered

Options,

that

financial

equipment

revenue

and

program

street or

approximately

mitigate

municipal

following

likely

that

analytical

may

overdue outsourcing

employees

management

Parks

$30

services

method

who

are

sweeping

under

This

increase

may

successes

per

with

costs

currently

the

existing

substantially

already

and replacement

major

street

compares

for

curb

and

(typically

these

need

staff

could

Recreation

(i.e.,

replacement.

the

$38.25

sufficient delivering

the

may

management

mile

would

areas:

sweeping

reported

provides

Public

contracts,

from

contracting street

overall

full

increase

provide

with

swept

when

hourly),

increase

costs

reassigned,

equipment

still

the

Works

sweeping

Department.

services.

cost

oversight

best

support

Public

using

in among

Replacement

range

other

the

techniques

street

the

required,

cost-effective

and

the

managers

practices.

current

budgeted

sweeping

near

Works

replacement

thus

The

program cities

cost

special

case

the

sweeping

outsourcing

$13.04

department

term.

sweeping per

current

avoiding

study

that

street

costs

Department,

with

contracted

event

curb

completing

be costs

services

alternative

contract

All

examined

$32.42

cities,

services.

sweeping

are

the

program.

costs

mile

three

support.

layoffs

contract

work.

and

field

Page

may

and

per

that

for

a 2

hours.

Table week

frequency miles

providing

The

Background

studies

interviews,

From

interview

outsourced

Mr.

Arterials

Collector

Local

Attachment

addition,

South

•

• • Arturo

between

Streets

those

Commercial,

Sweeping

along

• •

•

• •

•

Palo

San

Orange,

San

Inglewood,

Downey,

Hawthorne,

alleys,

Streets

Street

and

requests

sweeping

Gate’s

Cervantes

Habra,

Parks

Senior

Customer

Deputy

Equipment

Equipment Street Field

Public

four

cities,

Mateo,

Bernardino,

interviews

Alto,

with

considered

Christmas

sweeping

Type

cities

Orange

Program

Operations

Public

and

Los

and

17,631

six

Accountant Works

Santa

Orange

were

Director

San

Los

industrial

services.

Los

description

agreed

Service

Angeles

Recreation

provided

Sewer

Maintenance

Operator

for

Mateo

Angeles

Works

Clara

County

lane

San

sent

Angeles

hours

Day

Director/City

Service

outsourcing

County

case

Manager

Foreman Bernardino

miles

Supervisor

The

and

streets

County

Miles/Acres

Approximate County

Administrative

Department’s

studies

the

information

Overview

County

Director

County

City

interviewed.

street

New

per

their

per

following

Superintendent

6,395 8,884

1,765

and

Year’

their

currently

year.

Engineer

were

Year’s

operations,

type.

County

Swept

alleys

Lane

sweeping

that

Residential

completed

Street

eight

Services/Finance

Day.

After

are

sweeps

would

Three

Sweeping

cities:

swept

and

Table

decisions

reviewing

Once

operation.

times

with

Sewer

streets

approximately

per

at per

valuable

Frequency

provides

night.

individuals

per

week

and

Division

are

the

week

Case

experiences

swept

Sweeping

available

study

South

breakdown

125

during

responsible

cities

miles

surveys

Gate.

data

are

Day/Nights

suspended

Nights

Hours

daytime

that

Days

from

summarized

The

streets,

and

miles,

have

for

case

the

Page

the

12 3 Mr.Arturo Cervantes Page 4

Alleys 587 Once per week Nights Total Miles 17,631 Parking Lots 264 acres Once per month Nights ‘Assumes sweeping 51 weeks of the year on both sides of the street, except alleys which are swept in the middle. Does not include non-sweeping miles.

Parking lot sweeping at City parks is coordinated with Parks and Recreation staff and is completed before parks are open to the public. Staff estimates that 264 acres of parking lot surfaces are swept each year. Street sweeping is also performed before and after public events and in response to emergencies and accidents, as needed.

Street sweeping removes unsightly debris from roadways and is considered a best management practice for reducing pollutants in storm water runoff. Sweeping is coordinated with refuse collection, provided pursuant to an agreement with Waste Management, which is also a best practice. Typically, but not always, the street sweeper follows the refuse collection vehicle. Staffing Figure 1 shows the current organization structure of the street sweeping program.

Figure 1. Street Sweeping Program Organization Chart

Ptlic Works Department DW.ctorlOty Biiw

Field Operbns Mag.r (I OFTE)

StreetlS.wer Division Sup.n dent (I OFTE. vacant)

I- StmetlS.w.r Foreman (1.0 FTE)

Sewer Crew Estreet Sweeping Crew Tree Crew

Equinent Operator 3O FTE, 10 vacant) Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page 5

Sweeping is performed by three equipment operators assigned to the Street and Sewer Division. • Two equipment operators work the day shift, from 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. • The third equipment operator works the night shift, from 2:30 a.m. to 10:30a.m.

When absences occur due to paid or unpaid leave, staff from other street maintenance operations are often required to cover street sweeping shifts. This disrupts and reduces the productivity of the street maintenance operations. In interviews, employees commented that staff members dislike providing coverage for the street sweeping program, especially for the night shift, as it results in disrupted sleep patterns. Staff report that night routes and parking lots sometimes go un-swept when a regular street sweeping employee is absent.

The City does not maintain records that show actual hours worked in the sweeping program. However, payroll records indicate hours allocated or charged to street sweeping activities. Full- time employees are typically paid for 2,080 hours in a year, excluding any overtime. Regular hours include paid leave time for holidays, vacation and sick leave. As Table 2 shows, one of the daytime equipment operators allocated only 1,064 hours in the streets program in FY2015-16 and 78 hours in FY 2016-17 due to a work injury. This employee recently retired.

Regular and overtime hours allocated to the street sweeping fund for the operators during the last three years are shown in Table 2. Hours spent on sweeping activities in FY2016-17 appear to be markedly reduced from prior years. However, interviews with staff confirm that the day shifts are routinely swept, even when a vacancy occurs. Therefore, it is likely that approximately 1,500hours spent by back-up operators performing street sweeping activities have been incorrectly allocated to another fund, most likely the City’s general fund.

Table 2. Operators’ Hours Allocated to the Street Sweeping Fund for FY 2014-15 through FY 2O16171

FY2014-15 FY2015-16 FY2016-17

Day Operator 1 Regular 2,080 [ 2,1602 2,080 Overtime 1 0 48 Totals 2,081 2,160 2,128 Day Operator 2 Regular 2,080 1,064 78 Overtime 3 0 0 Totals 2,083 1,064 78 Night Operator Regular 2,080 2,1602 2,080 Overtime 45 49 110 Totals 2,125 2,209 2,190 Back-up Operators Regular 0 560 160 Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page 6

FY2014-15 FY2015-16 FY2016-17 Overtime 187 345 3433 Totals 187 905 503 AllStaff Hours Regular 6,240 5,944 4,398 Overtime 237 394 501 GRANDTOTAL 6,477 6,338 4,899 lncludes paid leave time Regular hours shown are in excess of 2,080 2Hours are likely to by t be understated approximately 3 1,500 hours due to incorrect charging to other funds.

Service Delivery and Metrics The Public Works Department has 16 sweeping routes, one for each day of the week (Monday through Friday) for the two daytime operators, one for each day of the week (Monday through Friday) for the night operator, and one map of alleys that are swept at night. The department does not record statistics about the number of routes completed as compared with routes scheduled, so fluctuations or decreases in service levels are not easily discemable. Through interviews, staff indicated that parking lots and the commercial and industrial streets were missed when other staff are unavailable to cover shifts of absent employees. Residential sweeping is the priority.

The permanent sweeping staff are customer-oriented, performing added sweeps at the request of residents, even when it can be substantiated (through viewing the street cam) that missed sweeps were caused by ifiegafly parked cars or improperly placed trash carts. Sweeping is also performed on holidays. This practice is not a cost-effective use of resources as sweepers are paid on holidays based on an overtime pay scale.

Requests for services (resweeps or complaints) are most often telephoned into the Public Works Department. That request is taken by public works support staff who contact the street and sewer foreman to address the request. Based on interviews with staff, the City receives approximately 10 to 15 calls from the public each week about street sweeping issues.

The City provided a list of work orders completed for the street sweeping operation from January 112001 through October 26, 2017. The data indicate: • Thirteen work orders were completed during that time (almost eight years) for issues reported in the street sweeping field operation; and • Thirteen work orders were completed by the equipment shop for sweeper problems during the same timeframe.

Based on the limited data provided in the work order system, it appears staff do not use it. Because service calls or requests for service from the public are not adequately recorded, it is Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page 7 difficult to ascertain public satisfaction levels and objectively address sweeping issues that require improvement.

Program Revenues and Costs This section provides an analysis of program revenues and costs associated with the City’s street sweeping operation. Revenue Funding for street sweeping activities is provided through allocations from the City’s Street Sweeping Fund. Revenue to support street sweeping is generated primarily from street sweeping service fees paid by residents and businesses on their monthly water bill. Current monthly sweeping service fees are shown in Table 3.

Table3. Monthly SweepingServiceFeesby Property Type

Property Type Monthly Service Fee Single-Family Residence $2.58 Multi-Family Residence (per unit) First unit: $2.58 Additional units: $1.55 Commercial/Industrial (per unit) $6.45

National Pollution Discharge and Elimination System (NPDES) inspection fees and the Utility City Statement fee also generate some minor revenue for the sweeping operation. Table 4 shows revenues collected during the last three fiscal years.

Table4. Street SweepingFund Revenues

Street Sweeping Service Fee $689,600 $685,436 $688,285 $699,590 NPDESInspections $5,121 $4,829 $5,552 $4,664 Utility City Statement Fee $315 $948 $934 $950 Interest Earnings $0 $791 $1,997 $816 Totals $695,035 $692,004 $696,768 $706,020

Based on City records, street sweeping service fees have remained consistent since FY 2014-15.

discussed

charged based

the

While superintendent

sweeping

Hours

supervisors

swept

sweeping

Unallocated

Employee

allocated expenditures

provides Street

the

Expenditures

Table Mr. Includes Public Public Customer Public

Customer

program

street

Arturo

result,

sweeping spent Works Works Works

$80,000

Street

elsewhere).

$38.25

staffs’

allocation expenses.

customer

operation.

in Service sweeping

Service

services.

Services

Cervantes

approximately

and

the

budget. on — —

— Sweeping Services in Debt

Employee

Staff

and

estimates

the (based

rentalfees,

Equipment managers —

— expenditures Employee Services

Service

The

reflect

service

street Projected

services.

street

This

These Full

and

Costs

staffs’ on

Services

Fund Services

$134,831 calculation

Supplies

costs

sweeping of

and

employee

foreman

$94,838 in support

Services

include

Costs

time

Expenditures

time

These estimated

the budgeted

Supplies

are

are and in

Totals

department

spent

recorded section

administrative

not

and time

(billing

are

program

salaries

Supplies

does

costs

perfect

being

shown

17,631

additional

program spent

below

not

the

and in Actual 2014-15 $641,852 $279,441

$274,136

and

effectively

not

and reflection

$88,275 are

overhead

accounts

two include

sweeping

lane

collection)

benefits

being

Table

not

costs

the the $0

departments:

time

miles being

allocation

public

associated

the

of charged

reflect

spent captured.

program,

swept

$674,361

for allocation

Actual time

2015-16 and $606,707 $337,520

$269,187

budgeted

works those

and

program

Public

spent,

per to

$22,286

Administrative salaries $0 $0

the

result

the

relative

staff

director,

year).

field

(or

Table

Works, program

FY fleet

support providing

Actual

and in vehicle

2016-17 charged) $585,695 $318,571

$252,987 operations

$13,632

staffing

street/sewer

benefit cost

$505

what

shows which maintenance

(and

costs

Services,

per

direct

costs

provides

allocations is

manager.

the

included curb

Projected

and being $328,665’ 2017-18 $674,361 $329,859

allocation street

$15,021

street

which

other

mile Page $816

in 8 Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page 9

Table6. Unallocated TimeSpent by Public Works Supervisors and Managers on the Street Sweeping Program in FY 2017-18

Current Adopted Estimated Actual Estimated Allocation Allocation Estimated Funding Gap Position Classification! (salaries and (salaries and Salary (with salary and Overhead Allocation percent of time) percent of time’) Funding Gap benefits Position ClassificatIons )2 Public Works Director/City $0; $5,331, Engineer 0.0% 3.0% $5,331 $7,362 Field Operations Manager $6,565; $16,412; 5.0% 12.5% $9,847 $13,599 Street/Sewer Superintendent $0; $16,682; 0.0% 15.0% $16,682 $23,038 Street Foreman $0, $48,194; 0.0% 60.0% $48,194 $66,556 Subtotals $6,565 619 $80,054 $110,555 Overhead Allocation Current Overhead Allocation for Public Works Administration $15,717 N/A N/A $15,717 TOTALS $22,282 $86,619 $80,054 $94,838 ‘Based on staff-estimated percentage of time spent on sweeping program. Estimated at 38.1%; the same percentage reflected in the total FY2017-18 budget for public worksstreet sweeping salaries and benefits.2 3Excludes mechanics’ costs which would traditionally be charged to the program as part of equipment maintenance allocation. As mentioned previously, it is also likely that back-up operators who cover sweeper operator absences are not correctly charging their hours performing sweeping activities to salary accounts already budgeted in the street sweeping fund. An estimated 1,500hours at $41.43 per hour ($30 per hour salary plus 38.1% in benefits) would result in additional charges of $62,145 for sweeping activities that were incorrectly charged to other funds. Equipment Costs City staff members indicate there are four sweepers in the fleet, as listed in Table 7. Only three are currently listed in the City’s vehicle inventory. The Elgin Crosswind is not listed but according to staff, this vehicle is retained and used as a backup.

Table 7. Status of Street Sweeping Equipment

Expected Clean Air Year Useful Age in (AQMD Vehicle Purchased Life (Years) 2018 Compliant) Status 600 2010 8 8 No Due for replacement Tymco 600 2010 8 8 No Due for replacement Elgin Pelican 1992 8 26 No Overdue for replacement Elgin Crosswind 1999 8 19 No Retained as a backup vehiclej Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page 10

The City does not have an equipment replacement fund to fund the replacement costs for the sweeping equipment. All of the sweepers are beyond their useful life and are in need of replacement. New vehicles are required to use alternative fuel and comply with strict air quality emission standards. Consequently, the replacement cost is expensive, approximately $375,000 each. Replacing three sweepers would require an investment of $1,125,000.

Purchasing alternative fuel sweepers would be complicated by two additional factors. The nearest compressed natural gas (CNG) facility is in Compton, 15 miles away from South Gate, which would make fueling time-consuming and costly. In addition, to service CNG vehicles, upgrades to the garage facility would be required. The estimated cost of upgrades is between $5,000 and $10,000 to maintain and repair CNG sweepers. The use of liquified natural gas (LNG), another alternative fuel option, would not be ideal as the fuel is more costly and has a shorter shelf life. In addition, LNG vehicles are not offered by many sweeper manufacturers.

The City has experienced frequent equipment breakdowns with its older sweeping equipment. Two of the four vehicles are currently inoperable and have been set aside, waiting for parts. These breakdowns have required the department to rent equipment from a local sweeping company to continue providing service. Monthly sweeper rental costs are currently $9,000 per month. These expenditures are shown in Table 8 below. Money previously set aside by the City to begin saving for sweeper replacements has been diverted to pay for rented equipment.

Table8. Sweeper Rental Expenditures

FY2015-16 FY2016-17 FY2017-18 Actual Actual Budgeted Sweeper Rental Expenditures $47,367 $80,926 $80,000 I

Having equipment that is at or close to the end of its useful life has the effect of increasing vehicle maintenance time. The fleet manager estimates that 80% of one mechanic’s time is spent maintaining the four vehicles allocated for street sweeping. The division does not maintain data on the actual time spent per vehicle to support this estimate. Additional maintenance is provided by each of the equipment operators who assist with maintenance of his sweeper by changing brooms once per week.

The total vehicle allocation for street sweeping in FY 2017-18is $22,286. This amount is inadequate and does not represent the fleet operation’s labor, equipment parts, maintenance, fuel and fleet overhead costs. Further, the City does not have a vehicle replacement fund so there is currently no money set aside to replace the sweeping vehides. Fleet replacements are paid for from a general fund allocation each year to replace vehicles citywide.

Management Partners has developed an estimate of equipment operating costs (parts and labor), fuel and equipment replacement costs needed to operate a program of this size (shown in Attachment B. We believe that at a minimum: ______

Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page ii

• Vehicle maintenance, parts, and fuel, should be budgeted at an estimated $123,000 per year. This estimate shows that approximately $100,714 in costs are not being charged to the program. • Replacement funds for the three sweepers should be budgeted at $129,873 per year. Program Costs Exceed Revenues/Resources Table 9 compares street sweeping program revenues with estimated annual street sweeping costs. The data indicate that the City of South Gate’s estimated annual street sweeping program costs exceed available revenues by about $293,766 annually and no funding has been identified to close the gap.

Table9. Street Sweeping Estimated Annual Program Costs and Revenuesfor FY 2017-18

Type FY2017-18 Budget REVENUES Street Sweeping Service Fee $699,590 NPDESInspections $4,664 Utility City Statement Fee $950 Interest $816 TOTALREVENUES $706,020 COSTS

Budgeted FY2017-18 Street Sweeping Program $674,361’ Additional Salaries and Benefits (not allocated) $94,838 Additional Equipment Maintenance Costs (not allocated) $100,714 Equipment Replacement Contributions (not allocated) $129,873 TOTALCOSTS $999,786

‘Many of these costs may continue to be incorrectly charged to other cityfunds.

When the additional program costs are included, the total estimated annual program cost is $999,786. This results in a cost per curb mile swept of $56.71 based on an estimated 17,631 lane miles swept per year. In addition, as shown in Table 10, one-time funding of $1,125,000 would need to be allocated to purchase new vehicles to sustain the current in-house sweeping program.

Table 10. Street Sweeping One-Time Costs

Purchase of New Sweepers (3) $1,125,000

I I Mr.Arturo Cervantes Page 12

Alternative Service Delivery Options There are basically two options to address the program funding needs: increase revenues or decrease expenditures. As mentioned previously, to support the ongoing annual charges required to sustain the program, revenues would need to be increased by approximately 42%or $293,766.Based on the implementation of the City’s street sweeping fee, there will likely be Proposition 2181 implications as well as policy considerations that come with fee increases. Another alternative is to allocate additional General Fund monies to support the sweeping program. This is not likely feasible considering current demands on the General Fund.

One alternative for decreasing expenditures may be to lease-purchase new sweepers. This would eliminate the need to allocate such a large sum for new sweeping equipment. However, this would not bring total program expenditures into alignment with total revenues or resolve the issues associated with maintaining and fueling new CNG vehicles.

Alternatively, South Gate may be able to sustain its current revenue and expenditure allocations and level of service using alternative service delivery methods. Street sweeping is a service offered by the private sector at competitive rates. The best time to evaluate alternatives to street sweeping is when the majority of an organization’s street sweepers need to be replaced, thus allowing the jurisdiction to avoid the cost of purchasing and maintaining the new equipment. Such is the case with South Gate, since all its sweepers are at or past their useful life.

Service delivery alternatives include outsourcing existing services, sharing services with other agencies under a regionalized service delivery system, or consolidating services with one or more agencies. Each is discussed below. Outsourcing Cities have always relied on the private sector to deliver some services. Starting in the 1970s wholesale contracting for services such as refuse collection became commonplace. The concept caught on widely in the 1980s and 1990s, as did a hybrid approach called managed competition or competitive sourcing (public and private services providers compete to discover the best value proposition). Most cities in the United States contract for some services. Many municipal services are currently contracted or subject to market competition.

The underlying principles of this approach include:

• A shift from a monopoly to a competitive environment is positive because the presence of competition (or the realistic potential for it) forces innovation and lowers costs. • Competition must be structured around the best value, not simply the lowest cost. One of the lessons learned is that best value is not always delivered by the lowest bidder. • A competitive environment does not mean that government gives up control or management responsibility. Even if a service is delivered by a private contractor, the

Proposition 281, approved by voters in 1996,amended the California Constitution and requires voter approval prior to1 imposition or increase of general taxes, assessments and certain user fees. Mr.Arturo Cervantes Page 13

government remains responsible and must provide strong oversight and contract management. • Performance must be measured, and the metrics agreed on before contracting. Both cost and performance must be continuously monitored and reported.

Competition for delivery of municipal services is not just a theory. In southern California, many jurisdictions are “contract cities” where most, if not all, basic services are provided by another public agency or a private provider, including police and fire services. Contracts are used by many cities for refuse collection, street sweeping, traffic signal maintenance, landscape maintenance, water treatment and distribution, construction plan checking, planning, engineering, payroll and investment management.

Introducing competition to municipal service delivery has consistently shown that either outsourcing or competitive sourcing will result in efficiencies. Costs are reduced and better contained over time if they are influenced by the competitive marketplace. The dynamics of a competitive environment and the economies of scale of a contractor that serves multiple clients typically results in savings between 20% and 40% of the cost of municipal service delivery. In some cases, the savings are higher.

Despite the potential for cost savings, in numerous cases, cities make a determination that it is better to provide the service directly with city employees. This determination is usually anchored in concerns about the quality of service obtainable via a contract and/or concerns about control over service delivery. Regionalization and Service Sharing Providing services regionally and sharing services have become concepts more cities have implemented because of financial conditions. Local government leaders have asked if service sharing between cities can reduce expenditures while maintaining quality services delivery. The answer to this question is yes, in some cases, with cost savings varying depending on the specific municipal service examined.

Departmental programs being carried out by a modern municipal corporation have different economies of scale and savings potential. Services such as fire, planning, utilities, and administration vary widely and have vastly different cost structures. With municipal services, bigger may sometimes be better, but this is not always the case. For some services, increasing size may introduce inefficiencies. The proper answer and policy direction are highly dependent on the type and nature of the service being delivered. Case Study Research As part of our review, we prepared case studies that show the experience of other California cities that have outsourced their street sweeping operation or considered contracting pursuant to a competitive bid process. We included cities that have contracted services in the last ten years, considered but did not change service delivery methods, or provide street sweeping services through a contract. We also identified cities with a similar population size as South -

Mr.Arturo Cervantes Page 14

Gate in Los Angeles or Orange counties. We reached out to eight cities as detailed in Table 11 below.

Table11. Cities Consideredfor Case Study

Criteria Cities Contracted services in last 20 years San Bernardino (San Bernardino County) Orange (Orange County) Palo Alto (Santa Clara County) Considered but did not change service San Mateo (San Mateo County) delivery methods in last 10 years Hawthorne (LosAngeles County)

Similar population size in LosAngeles or LaHabra (Orange County) Orange County Inglewood (LosAngeles County) Downey (LosAngeles County)

We conducted interviews with San Bernardino, Orange, Palo Alto, San Mateo, Hawthorne, and Downey. The objective was to learn about the cities’ experiences, understand the operational context, decision-making process, and lessons learned.

After conducting the interviews, we decided to focus on Orange, Palo Alto, San Mateo, and Downey. San Bernardino had extenuating circumstances due to its bankruptcy. Hawthorne’s interview had limited information available because the City’s transition took place more than 30 years ago. The individual case studies are included in Attachment A.

As shown in Table 12, three of the four cities currently contract street sweeping services. San Mateo ultimately decided to continue providing services using city staff. Of the three cities that contract, all indicate that the savings were significant. Estimated savings were available for Palo Alto and Orange. Because Downey has provided services through a contractor for many years, the difference in the costs to move to contracted services was not discernable.

Table 12. Case Studies: Summary Data

City Provider RFP Decision Savings through Contracting Orange CR&R Yes Outsource $2.3 million (cost avoidance) San Mateo In-house Yes Remain In-house N/A’

Palo Alto CSS Yes Outsource $700,000+ Downey Nationwide Yes Outsource Unknown ‘Staff reported they willbe requesting additional sweeping staff in the FY2018-19budget

As part of our case study development, we gathered the following contract cost data from the five cities that currently contract street sweeping services or have recently requested contract proposals. Table 13 shows that the cost per curb mile for contracting cities varies between $13.04 Mr.Arturo Cervantes Page 15 and $32.42except when the jurisdiction has had the opportunity to combine sweeping with its refuse collection operation, as in San Bernardino.

Table13. Case Studies: Contract Cost per Curb Mile

City Total Annual Curb Miles Swept Cost Per Curb Mile Swept Contracts in Effect

San Bernardino 27,648 Included at no cost in solid waste franchise Orange 33,000 $15.43’ Palo Alto 17,272 $32.42 Downey 28,392 $13.04 Contract Proposals Received in 2016 San Mateo 12,417 $28.88 to L $30.00 Contract Cost Range $15.42 to $32.42 ‘Next lowest bid was $34.41 per lane mile. Contractor underbid according to city representatives.

Of the cities above, the most recent contract price was received by San Mateo in 2016 at $28.88 to $30.00 per lane mile. Using $30.00 per lane mile, South Gate’s annual cost under a contracted service arrangement would be approximately $528,921 (based on 17,631scheduled lane miles), depending on the contract scope and performance standards. The relatively less expensive contract costs, as well as current challenges that South Gate is experiencing in maintaining staffing and street sweeper equipment, indicate that competitive sourcing is a viable alternative. This may be a particularly attractive option, especially compared with increasing street sweeping service fees to support total program costs. Implementing Best Management Practices Management Partners’ team members have identified best management practices in six areas through our previous work with jurisdictions that have evaluated sweeping operations. Implementing them may reduce costs and increase program effectiveness. 1. Policy and Program Objectives Policies and program objectives are established for the following: • Appearance (debris and trash removal) of streets and alleys, • Air quality, • Roadway maintenanceand cleanup, • Safety, • Water quality, • Turnaround time to address service requests from the public, and • Sweeping schedules and equipment support storm water quality outcomes. 2. Equipment Selection The equipment selected for use: • Maximizes program objectives, • Has the ability to pick up debris efficiently, Mr. Arhiro Cervantes Page 16

• Is appropriate for the street surface type, • Has the hopper capacity needed and preferred dumping style, • Meets alternative fuel requirements, and • Has been evaluated to identify the cost to service the equipment over its life. 3. Operator Training Operator training has included: • A review of sweeping program objectives; • Factory-provided training of equipment, when possible; • Training for new hires and backup operators; • Implementation of daily operations and checklist procedures; • Troubleshooting minor repairs; • A review of daily cleanup requirements; and • Preventive equipment maintenance. 4. Equipment Maintenance Ongoing equipment maintenance practices include: • Adherence to scheduled maintenance, and • A requirement that equipment be taken off-line when repairs are indicated. 5. Program Costs Monitoring of program costs include: • Revenue and expenditure analyses to ensure a balanced fund, • A comprehensive cost allocation program, • An adequate replacement fund to replace sweeping equipment, • Labor hour and cost monitoring, and • Designation of alternative debris disposal method(s).

6. Performance Management Performance measurements and standards for the operation of the program are maintained that include: • Number of scheduled routes completed, • Curb miles swept, • Debris disposal locations and volume of debris disposed, • Catch basin monitoring, • tiitothg (Gi’Said visual monitoring), • Program supervision, • Monitoring of interdepartmental coordination with police department for parking enforcement, • Monitoring of coordination with refuse hauler for refuse collection, • Tracking of customer complaints, requests for service and resolution of requests, and • Periodic customer surveys to determine level of customer satisfaction. Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page 17

Conclusion This analysis indicates that exploring the option of outsourcing the street sweeping program through a competitive bid process has merit for the City of South Gate. The issues that suggest this as a viable alternative include the following.

• Staffing issues in street sweeping have resulted in staffing resources being allocated from other street maintenance activities. Outsourcing would allow the City to retain expected sweeping levels and avoid increasing employee-related costs. Additionally, there are vacancies in the department where displaced employees could be reassigned, thus avoiding layoffs. • Staffing and maintenance costs have been undercharged, thus program costs have been underestimated. • The City has insufficient revenue to support the full cost of its street sweeping program and generating additional revenue for this purpose will be complex and challenging. • All street sweeping equipment is at the end of its useful life and the City does not have an equipment replacement fund to replace sweeping equipment. Outsourcing the operation would allow this capital cost to be avoided. • Based on the most recent bid of $30 per curb mile received by cities that were part of the case studies, it is likely that the City would have sufficient annual revenue to support its current street sweeping program.

would The

Tnble14. reduce

operations

Alternatives

reasons:

explore

Based

sixth

replacement. Sweeper

time

street

and The

right-of-way bids

Background

the

evaluate

street

Works In

Introduction

Mr.

City

Weekly

Bi-weekly

2012,

street

City

Arturo

equipment. City’s

position

sweeping.

sweeping. of

service

Annual

and

The

staff

consider

the

sweeping

considered

Operator

SfreetSwee

outsourcing

Orange

the

sweeping

competitive

placed

sweeping

goal

in-house.

Cervantes

the

decision,

City

to analysis

was

frequency

midst

look

savings

for

enhance

The

could

outsourcing

Before

The

vacant.

Case

positions.

its

other

operation, option, City

and

Retain

three

the

Options

City

City’s

six

provided

bidding

street

igAlternatives

ways

avoid

from

the

did

contracting,

replace

Option

City

public

Study

maintenance

levels

vacant

swept

the

alternatives,

Streets

not

economic

sweepers

sweeping

$2.1

contracting

Five

the had

program

In-house

consider

the

reduce

process

Management

Attachment

and

N/A

safety

(status

33,000

positions

operation.

million

were

eight

sweepers.

half.

Management

the

CôJtsidered

the

in-house

downturn,

were

this

costs

required

and

program

quo)

operations

for

annual

swept

street

For

City

positions

were

new

shown

its

improve

all

and

both

Partners

the

provided

street

sweepers,

once

equipment

due

estimated

curb

competitive

staff.

the

every-two-weeks schedule

Competitively Competitively

per

department.

Partners,

the

options

Case

were

the

for

per

sweeping

circulation

miles Table

week

level

the

Orange

ensure

The

CitijofOninge

recommended

replacement

street

week

ifiled

Public all

for

Studies

sweeping

between

costs

City

14.

it service

and

residential

year

sourcing,

adequate

was

source

City

source

sweeping

Option

program

which

hired

Works

through

schedule.

with

long-term

recommended

cost

schedule.

Council

providing

$64,000

current

its

half.

were

Management

sweeping

the

sweeping

that

but six

maintenance

Option

Contract

Department,

based

services

was

For

competitive

$26.03

City

authorized

option

due asked

time.

and

street

example,

employees

sufficient

would

solicit

operation

$389,000.

retain

per

using

After

that

sweeping

the

overdue

Partners

the

would

mile.

including

competitive

Public

following

sourcing,

the

full-time

the

changed

analyzing

the

city

once

with

and

levels

City

public

Page

for

reduce

staff

the

per

the

week

once

18 an Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page 19

To evaluate Options B and C, the City issued a detailed request for proposals (REP)seeking competitive bids for its street sweeping services. Proposers were asked to submit costs for both alternatives.

The City received seven responses to its REP. Prices for annual sweeping services varied substantially, from $509,140 to $1,542,519. The second lowest bid was $1,049,625 or 106% higher than the lowest bidder. Decision The evaluation team, comprised of members from the Public Works Department, evaluated the proposals using the following criteria: • Cost: 40%; • Professional and technical experience: 20%; • References: 20%; and • Management and quality control plan: 20%.

After evaluating the proposals, the evaluation team interviewed the lowest bidder to confirm its ability to perform the required work. Once confirmed, the City awarded a five-year contract to the lowest bidder. The contract was awarded to its refuse hauler, a company already known to the City. The contract allowed a 2% maximum increase per year in years two through five. The selection process took approximately four months.

The primary reason for moving ahead with the decision to contract the operation was to avoid approximately $2.3 million by not having to replace sweepers. The resulting staffing changes were considered cost-neutral by City of Orange managers. Two employees from the street sweeping operation were transferred to fill frozen positions (which would have otherwise been eliminated), and three employees into existing vacancies.

City managers decided to maintain the once-per-week sweeping schedule to avoid creating any issues with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements for reducing pollutants in storm water runoff. Implementation Contracted sweeping service started five to six months after the City Council’s contract award. The contract required -the-contractor-to-purchase--anduse -new-sweepers.-The -purchase -ofall--- new sweepers took approximately a year to complete. The City auctioned off six of its sweepers and retained two for emergencies.

The transition from using in-house staff to contract staff took more work than anticipated for management staff. City sweepers had been performing extra sweeping based on their knowledge and familiarity with the routes. This was not incorporated into the sweeping routes of the original contract. The extra services took months to include in the contractor’s sweeping routes. Mr.Arturo Cervantes Page 20

Orange incorporated a best management practice into its program oversight with the use of a formalized rating system to monitor sweeping effectiveness. This was to ensure the services provided by the contractor consistently met expectations as a condition of payment.

The formalized rating system was used frequently in the first six to twelve months. When services performed were inadequate, the City reduced its payments to the contractor. The use of the rating system became a source of friction between the City and the contractor and the system is no longer being used on a regular basis.

Most of the implementation issues with the contractor, including issues related to service levels, have now been resolved through close contract monitoring. However, the City continues to have issues with the contractor’s response to emergencies, especially those that occur at night. Management estimates that the contractor is currently responding to eight out of ten events. Staff are required to respond when the contractor doesn’t.

Former sweeping staff have been asked to sweep during emergencies, but those requests have been met with resistance. Currently when a staff member is needed to operate a sweeper, it is assigned to an Equipment Operator (a higher-level position than the Sweeper Operator) in the City.

The street sweeping contract in Orange is managed by the Field Services Manager. The Assistant Manager is responsible for checking the contractor’s performance in the field. Lessons Learned/Recommendations The City has found it is less costly to contract sweeping services. The City savings of $2.3 million were primarily in avoided vehicle replacement costs. By eliminating regular City staff positions, they have likely avoided increasing benefit costs, which have escalated faster than the 2% maximum contractual rate increase.

Contractors require more oversight because they do not generally have the same level of commitment to the City as staff. Because of this, staff indicate they have lowered their expectations regarding service levels.

The City initially required the contractor to use equipment that was no older than one year, while waitingior its new sweepersto arrive. Once new sweepers were putinto operation, the City required that the sweepers be replaced every five to six years. In addition, it has been a good practice for the City to require the contractor to report equipment breakdowns to the City’s contract manager. These practices help ensure that the contractor uses new and/or working equipment to provide services to the City.

Operations are optimized when there is good communication and limited turnover of the contractor’s project manager and lead driver. Public Works managers meet once a month with the contractor’s project manager. Mr.Arturo Cervantes Page 21

City staff recommend having a clear contract provision regarding dumping of street sweeping debris, specifically stating where street debris should be dumped and who (staff or the contractor) is responsible for loading the debris into the trash roll-offs or bins, It is recommended that the contractor use a site not owned by the City for dumping to avoid conflicts.

Finally, the staff recommend having clear contract provisions regarding the contractor’s water usage. It is recommended that the contractor pay for water using their own water meter.

Data Contractor: CR&R Inc. Contract Amount: $509,140 (FY 2013/14); maximum increase of 2% per year Annual Miles Swept: 33,000 Cost per Mile: $15.43 City of San Mateo Case Study Introduction In 2015, the City of San Mateo decided to consider competitively sourcing its street sweeping operation. The City’s sweepers were due for replacement and the City Manager asked the Public Works Department to consider available alternatives before spending a significant amount of money to replace them.

The City hired Management Partners to conduct a cost of service analysis of its street sweeping program. After analyzing the operation, Management Partners recommended that the City solicit competitive bids to consider outsourcing its street sweeping operation. Background The City’s goal for its street sweeping program is to reduce trash and litter in the streets. Street sweeping is regarded as an integral part of the City’s storm water program.

The City has provided street sweeping services using city staff and equipment for as long as existing staff can recall. The City sweeps 12,417 annual curb miles a year with two full-time sweeper operators. Staff absences are covered by staff from other public works operations. Part- time staff from other maintenance operations supplement the program by providing leaf pickup during four to five months a year.

The City has three sweepers, one of which is retained as a backup vehicle when one of the regular sweepers requires repair. In addition, they have a pick-up truck, leaf vacuum and dump truck used for leaf pickup. Both primary sweepers, the leaf vacuum, and dump truck were due for replacement in 2015.

In San Mateo, the streets are swept every two weeks, except in areas with heavy debris where they are swept once a week. The City has received complaints from the public about unequal Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page22 service in areas from some residents but increases in services were unrealistic given the budget constraints.

Revenue to support the street sweeping program is provided by a surcharge to the City’s solid water collection rates. The total amount allocated to street sweeping was a flat amount that had not been increased since 1999.Thus, as costs increased, sweeping revenue levels stayed the same and became increasingly insufficient.

To address the revenue/expenditure imbalance, an internal committee reviewed the City’s sweeping areas to determine if they had heavy or light debris. Based on their assessment, this committee recommended altering street sweeping schedules so that some streets are swept less often, and some are swept more often than the standard once-every-two-weeks schedule.

Based on the cost analysis provided by Management Partners, it was recommended that the City explore a competitive bidding process for its street sweeping program based on the following issues:

1. Program expenditures exceeded revenues. 2. Some personnel time spent on sweeping was not being charged to the fund. 3. Equipment maintenance costs were not being charged to the fund. 4. Equipment replacement cost allocations were insufficient to cover replacement costs. An additional $172,000would be required to replace the sweepers. 5. The City could avoid $490,000in equipment costs in the sweeping fund and $75,700 in other funds altogether by not purchasing the equipment through competitive sourcing. Alternatives The City considered four alternatives, as shown in Table 15. Option A was to retain sweeping operations in-house and to bear the equipment replacement costs. Option B was to retain sweeping in-house and implement a variable schedule based on the volume of debris. Options C and D required competitive sourcing. Option D would alter the service frequency to reflect the recommendations of the in-house committee. For both options C and D, current street sweeping staff would be placed in other vacant positions in the department. Table15. Street SweepingAlternatives Consideredly the City ofSan Mateo

In-house Contract Existingschedule - Option A (status quo) Option C (once-every-two weeks) Retain the street sweeping program Competitively source street sweeping in-house and replace the sweepers operation retaining the once-every- and other equipment. two-weeks schedule. Variable schedule Option B Option D (based on the volume of Retain the street sweeping in-house Competitively source street sweeping debris) and implement a variable schedule. operation and implement a variable The Cityconsidered this option before schedule. evaluating contracting options. Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page 23

To evaluate alternatives C and D, the City issued a detailed RFP seeking competitive bids for its street sweeping services. Proposers were asked to submit costs for the current schedule (Option C). Within six months, proposers would be required to submit a revised sweeping plan based on their assessment of the debris found in various areas of the comrmmity (Option D).

The City received only one response to its RFP. Other companies declined to provide a proposal because their operations were located too far away. Decision The proposal was evaluated using the following criteria by a team comprised of managers and supervisors from the Public Works and Parks Departments:

1. Cost: 50%; 2. Professional and technical experience: 25%; 3. Management and quality control plan: 15%; and 4. References: 10%.

The City ultimately decided to keep its sweeping services in-house. The reasons stated in the staffs’ report that followed the RFP process were:

1. A single proposal made it difficult to substantiate that contracting cost would be cost- effective. 2. With outsourcing, there would be a loss of in-house expertise. 3. Outsourcing would result in the loss of ability to efficiently and effectively modify the street sweeping program. 4. The savings from contracting over a six-year period of $370,100 would be reduced by the contractor’s increase based on the Consumer Price Index.

The staffs’ report did not address the costs of the program that were being charged to other funds, the increases in City costs expected in future years or the City’s ability to avoid vehicle replacement costs ($490,000in equipment costs in the sweeping fund and $75,700 in other funds).

The anticipated pushback from the union and protest at the Council meeting for the award of a contract were also elements of the City’s decision-making process, but not documented in writing, Implementation Since the decision was made to retain the program in-house, the City has made various changes to its program, as detailed below.

1. Public Works staff are currently in the process of implementing a modified schedule, so some streets are swept less often than two weeks during non-leaf season and some are swept weekly. This action may result in additional complaints from the community related to unequal service levels. Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page24

2. Staff are currently negotiating with their refuse hauler to use a portion of the trash fees to supplement the sweeping program. 3. City managers have added flexibility in assigning replacement staff to fill in when a regular staff member is out by reclassifying the sweeper operator positions to maintenance workers with a pay differential when they are working as sweeper operators. 4. Department managers indicate they will be requesting one additional position in the FY 2018-19budget for sweeping to cover operators when they are sick or on vacation. When the new position is not sweeping, s/he will assist in other maintenance areas. Lessons Learned/Recommendations City staff recommend using a comprehensive, detailed REP that addresses all sweeping issues when seeking competitive proposals. Data Annual Miles Swept: 12,417 Cost per Mile: $48.79 City of Palo Alto Case Study Introduction Tn2011,the Palo Alto City Council asked the Public Works staff to explore options for balancing the Refuse Fund after losing a portion of the refuse revenue as a result of the City’s landfill closure. The street sweeping program, which was funded through the Refuse Fund at the time, was one of the areas that staff were tasked with researching. Background The City’s goal for the street sweeping program is to remove 90% to 95% of the debris from streets. The remaining 5% to 10% of debris is due to parked cars remaining during the street sweeping operations. Staff noted that a stronger parking enforcement program would be required to improve operations to remove 100% of the debris.

Prior to contracting, 11 full-time positions in the Public Works Department annually swept approximately 17,000miles. The positions and operations related to street sweeping were annually funded by the Refuse Fund, at about $2 million (FY2011 adopted budget).

The staff implemented a pilot program to see how much reduction of services would impact savings. Streets were swept less frequently (once a week to once every other week) during the non-leaf season for six months, from April to September of 2012. At the end of the pilot, the results were presented to the City Council. Although service levels were not significantly affected, the cost savings were not significant enough to address the budget issues. The Council directed staff to further research ways to balance the Refuse Fund. Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page 25

Alternatives When the City Council directed staff to review street sweeping operations to balance the Refuse Fund budget, the staff explored several options, as shown in Table 16. A. By default, the first option was to maintain the status quo by continuing services in- house and look for alternative options to raise Refuse Fund revenues. However, this was not a feasible option given Council direction to reduce street sweeping expenditures. B. The second option was to keep operations in-house but reduce service delivery frequency during the non-leaf season from every week to every other week. This option was explored through the pilot program conducted from April 2012 to September 2012. Service levels with this option were satisfactory, but cost savings were not signfficant. C. The third option was to contract operations, but maintain service delivery frequency at once a week, even during the non-leaf season. This option was not desirable because the pilot program showed that less frequent sweeping services during the non-leaf season yielded satisfactory results. D. The fourth option was to contract operations and continue the frequency of the pilot program (i.e., every other week during the non-leaf season). This was determined to be the best alternative for the City.

Table 16. Street SweepingAlternatives Consideredby the City ofPalo Alto

In-house Contract Weekly sweeping Option A Option C during non-leaf season Instituted prior to 2011 Not instituted because bi-weekly Savings: none sweeping during non-leaf season yielded Service levels: good satisfactory service levels (shown in Option B) Savings: unknown Service levels: unknown Bi-weekly sweeping Option B Option D during non-leaf season Instituted as a pilot program between Instituted after 2014 as the best April to September 2012 alternative to balance the Refuse Fund Savings: not significant Savings: high Service levels: satisfactory Service levels: satisfactory

In early 2013, the City designed and released a request for proposals (RFP) to obtain proposals to consider for Option D for street-sweeping services Decision As a result of the RFP process, the City received two proposals. A panel comprised of Public Works managers evaluated the proposals and interviewed the potential contractors. The proposals were evaluated using the following criteria: 1. Quality, performance, and effectiveness of solution (20 points possible) a. Debris removal b. Street sweeping 2. Ability to hire displaced workers/phasing option (5 points possible) Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page 26

3. Proposer’s prior record of performance with others (10 points possible) a. Qualifications b. Previous experience on similar projects 4. Proposer’s financial stability (5 points possible) 5. Cost (30 points possible) 6. Quality and completeness of proposal (5 points possible) 7. Proposer’s experience (10 points possible) 8. Proposer’s ability to provide future maintenance/services (5 points possible) 9. Proposer’s ability to work within time specified (5 points possible) 10. Proposer’s compliance with applicable laws, regulations, policies, and guidelines (5 points possible)

As shown above, price was the greatest determining factor, followed by the firm’s ability to perform the work. For the manager of Maintenance Operations, key considerations included the ability to do the job in a timely manner with proper equipment use, but also the contractor’s ability to provide customer service. Checking references was a key part of verifying the contractor’s qualifications.

Based on the evaluation, the panel made the recommendation of the contractor to the Public Works Director, who then made the recommendation to Council. The Council approved the staffs’ recommendation in 2013. Implementation After the contractor was selected in 2013, it became apparent that staff would be affected so labor issues needed to be addressed. Meet and confer considerations took a year to resolve. The issues were addressed by the City Manager’s Office and the Human Resources Department.

As a result of the negotiations process, the Public Works Department went from 11 full-time positions to four full-time positions for the street sweeping function (primarily for sweeping of parking lots and contract management). Of the seven positions eliminated, three employees were placed in other positions within the City.

Once the labor issues were resolved, the Manager of Maintenance Operations and the Project Manager, who reports to the Manager of Maintenance Operations, spearheaded the transition in the Public Works{)epartment. The contractor’s service delivery bga in Spten1ber uf 2014.

There has been significant savings since the contract was implemented in 2014. Staff estimate a minimum ongoing annual savings of $700,000not induding the impacts of savings from long- term liabilities (e.g., health care and pension costs). FY 2015 actual expenditures for street sweeping was $1 million, approximately half of the in-house service delivery cost.

The Project Manager monitors and manages the streçt sweeping contracts. Any missed routes, complaints, or issues with cleanliness are reported to the Project Manager. The administrative

0 Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page 27 staff are trained to provide customer service for simple issues or questions. The Project Manager conducts random visual inspections to make sure performance standards are met. Lessons LearnedJRecommendations The City’s decision to contract street sweeping services has fully balanced the Refuse Fund. The decision has increased productivity; services that were delivered by 11 employees are now provided by four employees at a lower cost with good service levels. The streets are clean; the contractor regularly sweeps at the designated frequency. In cases where the contractor misses elements of any routes, the contract allows the contractor 24 hours to go back and finish the missed elements before a penalty is imposed. Residents have not expressed additional grievances since the service has been contracted to a private company.

The biggest challenge implementing the contract was the resolution of labor issues, which the City’s labor team addressed. In terms of department staff, some members were initially resistant to the change since the City has been providing the services for a long time. The limited fiscal impact of the pilot program (in-house services with less frequent routes) helped staff realize contracting was the best fiscal option. Furthermore, once the contractor proved to be a qualified service provider, staff became more supportive of the decision to contract the service.

There are no major chaflenges with the contractor currently, especially in terms of service delivery or customer service. The City has experienced a minor issue with the turnover of the contractor’s drivers, but new drivers have been trained quickly to meet the City’s needs.

Some of the biggest success factors for the City’s selection of the contractor are 1) thoughtful planning in the early stages for exploring options (e.g., research, and pilot program), 2) incorporating the learnings from the research and exploration phase in the design of the REP and 3) checking references to verify the contractor’s qualifications. Data Contractor: Contract Sweeping Services (CSS) Contract Amount: $598,661.20 Annual Miles Swept: 17,272.48 Cost per Mile: $34.66 City of Downey Case Study Introduction The City of Downey has provided street sweeping service through contract agencies for at least the last three decades. Currently, the City provides its street sweeping services through Nationwide Environmental Services (NES). The contract began in 2003 and was renewed in 2008 and 2012. The current contract is set to expire in 2020. Background The City’s goal for the street sweeping program is to meet the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements by reducing litter in the street. Staff noted that

a The Whether

take viable

Costs.

usable employee

effective

The

Decision

contract,

services

Table

and

Assuming exploring

The Alternatives

effective

Downey’s

mosquitos,

functions,

reducing Mr. Company Provide Contract

(Current

contract, Contract

current

City

Arturo

is City

17.

minimum

way

for unlikely

Services

in-house option. Contract)

with

the

with Street

issue

now and

street

costs

other

alternative

and

has

Superintendent

the Cervantes

likely

which

contract City Another

NES

systematic

make

has

been

current

implement a

Sweeping to

In-House

required

litter

Public

The

request

will

discontinue

the

six

sure

keep

with

that

costs

purchase

aggravated

also

service

choose

option

contract

months Works

Alternatives

for

the

performance

time.

the

benefits

approximately it. operations Continue

Continue of until Continue until

current until

operate

proposal

City

services

delivery

Maintenance

functions,

the

The

and

for is contract contract

contract

retaining

extend by

Keep

retained for

contract.

contract

the

staff

options maintenance with with

with

getting

the

stagnant Considered

in-house.

two

(RFP) provided

Contract

community

monitoring methods. expires expires

expires

equipment. to the the

the the Option

Option Option

$13

the

years.

develop until current current

current

unless

available

the

current

and

the

for

water contract and and

and per Until A C

most

return

Facilities,

The

cost competitive bring issue extend

contractor street contractor

contractor

expires,

the

system by

2020

its

and

contract

created

Street

sufficient

value

City

for

reducing

City contractor

RFP.

until

issue

the

mile

equipment

the

investment

who

through

sweeping

the

for

City

satisfied

Downey

process

swept.

expires

cause

bidding

City

its

litter

issue

oversees

the

RFP,

are

because

investment.

random

rodent

can

outlined

Issuing

equipment

with

evaluate

does

presented.

process,

high,

the

extend

instituting

RFP

discontinuing

the

population

catch

not

inspections.

street

remains

the

However,

current

proposals,

generally

or RFP

are

Table

basins.

most

modify

provide

sweeping

not

long-term

may

unclear.

17.

contractor

as usually

cost-

well

and

cover

the

award

would

Page

as 28 Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page 29

Implementation/Current Operations The street sweeping function and contract is managed by the Maintenance Division, although contract negotiations are handled by the Public Works Director and his/her delegate. The current operation is monitored based on the number of complaints. Residents seem to be satisfied with the service levels, aside from the occasional complaint during leaf season. In the case of a complaint, a staff member of the Maintenance Division inspects the complaint and asks the contractor to address the issue if necessary.

To improve the management of the program, the Superintendent of Maintenance and Facilities is in the process of instituting a more effective and systematic performance monitoring system through random inspections. The process would require a member of the Maintenance Division to complete a formalized rating sheet to record performance data.

The City has the ability to obtain information about the amount of sweeping debris that is dumped at the Downey Area Recycling and Transfer facility (DART) to inform performance measures, but the data are not being requested at this time. Lessons Learned/Recommendations Contracting is cost-effective because the option saves on the investment required for street sweeping equipment, which is costly. Use of street sweeping equipment is limited solely to the street sweeping function; other Public Works divisions cannot use the equipment for other purposes in most cases.

Issuing an RFP is a good way to make sure the City is getting the best deal and updating its price schedule to meet its changing needs. Including a contract ending date that requires the contract to be rebid if sweeping services are unacceptable is one method of ensuring the City obtains the best service delivery for its investment.

In addition, incorporating a per-unit cost (e.g., cost per additional acre, street mile, or hour of service) into the contract would allow flexibility in adjusting services as the City’s needs change during the contract period. The necessity to renegotiate minor service additions or revisions can be resource consuming.

Cross-training city staff allows for reallocation of resources when a service is contracted. Once the functionis contracted, the employees who are left in the -PublicWorks Department-can focus on other needs/priorities of the City that the department lacked the capacity to address before (e.g., parks and street patching). Data Contractor: Nationwide Environmental Services Contract Amount: $370,179 (with CPI and fuel adjustments) Annual Miles Swept: Approximately 28,392 Cost per Mile: Approximately $13.04 Mr. Arturo Cervantes Page 30

Attachment B: Estimated Equipment Operating and Replacement Costs

Estimated Estimated Age in 2018 Current Annual Annual Estimated Total Sweeper (Year Replacement Replacement Operating Replacement Operating and Unit Purchased) Date Cost’ 2Costs 3Costs Replacement Costs Elgin 4Pelican 26 (1992) Overdue $375,000 $41,000 $43,291 $84,291 Tymco 600 8 (2010) Due Keep as spare unit Tymco 600 8 (2010) Due $375,000 $41,000 $43,291 $84,291 Elgin Crosswind 19 (1999) Overdue $375,000 $41,000 $43,291 $84,291 6 Totals $1,125,000 $123,000 $129,873 $252,873 ‘Replacement estimate based on City-provided purchase quotation. No alternative fuel grants available at this time according to California Department of Energy. lncludes estimated annual parts/labor costs of $6,000 and fuel costs of $35,000. Current2 cost inflated annually by 3% over 10-year life expectancy, less salvage (15%), plus auction fees of 6% 3 ElginPelican is Estimated salvage value of $10,000. 4Estimated salvage value of Tymco 600 is $20,000. 56Estimated salvage value of Elgin Crosswind is $5,000. ______

City RECEIVED of South Gate Item No. 16

JUL21 ?O1 / :

. . ClTYOFSOUTHGAT THECITYMAG 28, OFFICEOFq:sw\ For the Regular Meeting oft July 2015 0 mating Department: Pubik Works J Deparirnen head: (ity Manager: rt ro (e antes Michael Ia SUBJECT: ADDITIONAL STREET SWEEPING DAYS AD RATE STUDY FOR STREET SWEEPING SERVICES

ACTIONS: a. l)iscuss the possibility of providing street sweeping services during the holidays, when City 1[all is closed; and b. Authorize staff to procure a specialty consultant to conduct a street sweeping services rate study necessary to develop a service rate capable of fully funding, as well as enhancing, existing street sweeping services.

FISCAL IMPACT: A total of $10,000 in Street Sweeping Funds are budgeted in the Fiscal Year 2015-2016 Budget for the preparation of a street sweeping rate study (Account No. 214-730-31- 6101).

REPORT SUMMARY: This item was continued from the July 14, 2015 City Council meeting. This item was added to the agenda at the request of Councilman Gil Hurtado to consider providing street sweeping services on holidays, when City Hall is closed (street sweeping service is not provided for 13 holidays). Staff is recommending that a Streetsweeping rate study be prepared to evaluate the operational and financial impacts of providing Streetsweeping services on holidays, as well as to evaluate other financial issues being experienced in the Street Sweeping Services Program.

For decades, the Public Works Department has been managing and operating the City’s Street Sweeping Service Program. This program services streets, alleyways, parking lots. City events, and provides special sweeps and emergency service callouts. Residential areas are swept during the day and the commercial and industrial areas are swept at night, on a weekly basis. Some parking lots and alleyways, such as those that service the Tweedy Mile, are swept three times per week. All other alleys are swept twice per month. Street sweeping services are essential to complying with the storm water mandates made by the State Water Réoüices Càniio[ Roard under the WationaFPoIluton Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program.

Street sweeping services are funded through a special street sweeping services fee that was originally adopted on September 10, 1991. The fee has been increased several times. The following page contains a comprehensive summary of the history of the service fees.

The annual service fees arc billed monthly through the water bill. The monthly fee remains uniform even though the services performed monthly may vary from month to month. For example, street sweeping services in one month might include several special events, a holiday, some emergencies and sweeping some residential streets more than once a week. Street sweeping services in another month might not include any holidays, special events, or emergencies. In both cases, the monthly service fec will remain the same given that the goal of the monthly service fees is to collect the total amount in fees needed annually to fully fluidthe street sweeping services program. SUMMARY OF STREET SWEEPING SERVICE FEES

SingleFamily Multi-Family Industrial/ Per Unit(1 to Per Unit (5 or Commercial ALtsL more units) Resolution 4980 to 1991-2003 $1.00 $0.60 $2.50 9/10/1991 establishFeesfor Street —______SweepingServices Ordinance2143 Adjust 2003-2009 $2.00/$1,20 $1.20 $5.00 100% 8/12/2003 — —______Feeannuallyper CPI Resolution7313-New 2009-2010 $2.14 $1.28 $5.35 7% 6/09/2009 Scheduleof Fees Resolution7373-New 2010-2014 $2.48 $1.49 $6.20 16% 6/08/2010 Scheduleof Fees Resolution7557-New 2014-2015 $2.55 $1.53 $6.39 3% 6/25/2014 Schedule_ofFees

The annual revenue from street sweeping service fees is approximately $650,000; however, the FY 2013-2014 budget for staffing, materials, and vehicle maintenance was $712,649. The FY 2014- 2015 budget was reduced to $595,032, but the Street Sweeping Fund started with a $60,754 deficit. The FY 2015-2016 adopted budget is $698,225, with only $650,000 estimated in street sweeping service fees.

The budgetary needs of the Street Sweeping Services Program changes annually while the annual revenue remains fairly constant. Currently, there is a projected deficit in the Street Sweeping Fund. The existence of a deficit suggests that, over time, expenditures have exceeded revenues. This means that the General Fund is subsidizing the deficit.

Staff is proposing that a street sweeping services rate study be prepared to address the cost issues on the Street Sweeping Services Program. Below is a summary of the known issues: Currently, there are certain program costs that are subsidized by the General Fund because certain program costs are not charged to the Street Sweeping Fund (e.g. management, administrative, substitute staffing and dumping costs). The study would quantify total amount of such costs; • Thestreet sweeping vehicle fleet is aging and there are no funds in the Street Sweeping Fund to replace any of the fleet. The current street sweeping services rate is not sufficient to fund a vehicle replacement program. A vehicle replacement program would allow for the timely replacementof aging street sweepingvehicles; • At least one street sweeping vehicle must be replaced on a high priority basis but there is no funding in the Street Sweeping Fund to purchase a new vehicle. Staff has acquired two quotes for the purchase of one street sweeper unit. The estimated replacement cost is approximately $379,000 inclusive of a five percent (5%) contingency; • A rate study could identify options for reducing operational costs so as to maximize the efficiencyand cost effectiveness of the street sweepingservices program.; • Street sweeping services are not provided during holidays. The rate study would assess the cost of providing street sweeping services during holidays. There are a handful of cost elements that must be quantified financiallysuch as the following; o Additional labor costs (e.g. (a) Standby Street Sweeper Operator Services, (b) funding for overtime pay at a holiday rate of 2.5 times the hourly rate, (c) funding for City mechanics that must be on standby for possible breakdowns, etc.); o I‘abor and material costs to modify/replace the existing street sweeping signs to removethe “ExceptIlolidays”language; o AdditionalFuel Costs; o Rental agreement costs for holiday servicesthat will need to be procured in case (here is an emergency need to rent a street sweeperduring a holiday; and o Labor costs from the Police Departmentto enforce “No Parking”on holidays.

There may be more cost issues than those listed above. The street sweeping services rate study would identify all cost issues, and develop a recommended fee structure that could fully fund the street sweepingservices program and be sustainableover time.

ATTACHMENTS: A. Resolution No. 4980 EstablishingStreet Sweeping Fees in 1991 B. Ordinance No. 2143 Increasingthe Street Sweeping Fees in 2003 C. Resolution No. 7313 Increasingthe Street Sweeping Fees in 2009 D. Resolution No. 7373 Increasingthe Street Sweeping Fees in 2010 H. Resolution No. 7557 Increasingthe Street Sweeping Fees in 2013

AC:ar/ew/lc 1 RESOLUTION NO. 4980 CITY OP SOUTH GATE 2 3 LOS ANGELES cXUNTY, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TilE CITY OF SOUTH GATE, ESTABLISHING FEES FOR STREET SWEEPING SERVICES 6 WHEREAS, It is necessary, desirable and In the publie Interest to establish fees for street sweeping services provided by the City of South Gate; and WHEREAS, The City Council has determined that the fees as

11 hereinafter set forth do not exceed the reasonable of such sweeping and 12 cost providing street services; WHEREAS, a public on been 13 hearing this matter has held as required by law; 14 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH GATE 15 HEREBY FINDS, AND AS 16 DETERMINES, RESOLVES ORDERS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. 17 TheCityCouncil herebyestablishes the following monthly for in 18 tees Street sweeping services the 19 City of South Gate, effective as of the first 20 day of July, 1991: 21 (I) Single—Family One Dollar ($1.00) Per Residential Unit Unit (1 to 4 UnIts) 22 (ii) Multiple-Residential Unit Sixty Cents ($0.60) Per Unit (5 or more 23 Units) 24 (Iii) Commercial/Industrial Unit Two Dollars & Fifty Cents (*2.-SO-)- Per Un14

SECTION 2. The 1 26 fees established in Section above shall 27 be invoiced and collected In the same manner as 28 the water and refuse collection charges now bilLed by the City of South Gate or In such 29 1 other manner as may be determined by the 30 Department 31 of Finance. 32 -1- ______

SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall to the passage and 1 certify adoption of this Resolution. 2

Passed, approved end adopted this 10th day of June

ATTEST:

8 JA)i STUBBS, CITY CLERk (SEAL) 10 APPROVED AS TO FORM:

CITY ATTORNEY 13 14 15 16 17

181 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 —2— ORDINANCE NO. 2143

CITY OF SOUTH GATE LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

AN ORDINANCE OF THE SOUTH GATE CITY COUNCIL AMENDING SEcTION 6.65.030 AND 6.65.060 OF THE SOUTH GATE MUNICIPAL CODE AUTHORIZING A RATE INCREASE OF THE STREET SWEEPING SANITATION FEES

WHEREAS, Section5471 of the Healthand SafetyCode provides that the City may establish monthly fees to be used for street sweepingsanitation fees to remove refuse in the City of South Gate; and

WHEREAS, the City Council of the Cityof South Gate adopted Ordinance No. 2014 on September 10, 1997which reservedthe rightof the City to adjust all or part of the Street sweepingsanitation service fees provided for in Section6.65.030of the City of South Gate Municipal Code; and

WHEREAS, the fees for Streetsweepingsanitation fees have not been adjusted since 1991; and

WHEREAS, the cost for the City to provideStreetsweepingsanitation service has risen significantlysince 1991causing the City to divert other fundsnot intended for street sweeping sanitation fees; and

WHEREAS, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) has increasedapproximately 35% since the street sweeping fees were last adjusted.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH GATE ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Section 6.65.030of the City of South Gate Municipal Code shall be revised to read as follows:

The City Council by authorityof Section5471 of the Health and Safety Code, establishes the followingmonthly fees for street sweepingsanitationservice to remove refuse in the City of South Gate, effective on the operationdate of the ordinancecodified in this chapter.

LAND USE MONTHLY FEE Single-Family Residential Unit $2.00 for the first unit and $1.20 for ,,n,* i.*r. t,, r,,,r a..i;t. $‘,I

40 SECTIO4 2. Review or Fe. Section6.65.02 is revised to read as follows: The amount of each fee set forth in this Chapter shall be increased automaticallyeach year as follows:

A. By calculating the percentage movement between April of the previous year and Marchof the current year in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for all urban consumers in the LosAngeles,Anaheim,and Riverside metropolitan areas as published by the United States Government Bureau of Labor Statistics, and adjustingeach fee by such percentageamount.

B. On the limi anniversaryafterthe adoptionof this ordinance,the Finance Director is directed to schedule a Street SweepingSanitation Fund Status Report on the next succeedingCity Councilmeetingagenda(aftersuch anniversary)forCityCouncilto consider appropriatefee schedulechanges.

Notwithstandingthe foregoing,no such adjustmentshall decrease any fee, and no fee shall exceed the actual cost of providingthe services for whichthe fee is collected.

SECTION 3. ResolutionNo. 4980, passed and adopted on June 10, 1991by the City, shall be and is herebyrepealed in its entirety.

SECT ION 4. The City Clerk shallcertifyto the passage and adoption of this ordinance,causing it to be posted as required by law, and it shall be effective thirty (30) days alter its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this th12 day of August2003. /4zc HECTORDE l.A&iTORRE, MAYOR

A’flEST:

CARMENAVALOS,C.T CLERK (SEAL)

APP OVED TO FORM:

L F. SAL AS, INTlRlM SPECIALLEGALCOUNSEL 41 RESOLUTION CERTIFICATION PAGE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS

CITY OF SOUTH GATE )

1,Carmen Avalos. City Clerk of the Cityof SouthGate,California,hereby certify that the whole number of Membersof the CityCouncilof said City is five; that Ordincç No. 2i 43 was adopted by the City Council at their RegularMeeting held on August 12,2003, by the following vote:

Ayes: Council Members: De La Torrc, Gonzalez,Guticrrcz, Martinez and Davila

Noes: Council Members: None

Absent: Council Members: None

Witness my hand and the seal of said City on October 2, 2003.

Carmen Avalos, City CIerE City of South Gate, California

42 RESOLUTION NO. 7313

CITY OF SOUTh GATE I.OS ANGELES COUNTY, CALl FORNIA

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF SOUTH GAlE ESTABLISHING A NEW SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR SERVICE AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 7265

WHEREAS, a duly noticed pubhc hearing concerning this matter has been held as required by law; and

WHEREAS, the City incurs costs for providing services and is required to recover the cost of providing such services tlirouh fees and charges; and

WHEREAS, it is necessary to adjust and/or establish certain fees to recover the cost of providing services; and

WHEREAS, the proposed feesdo not exceed the actualcost of providing the service.

NOW, THEREFORE, TIlE CITY COUNCiL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH GATE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The fee schedule attachcd hereto as Exhibit A is hereby adopted and shall be adjusted animally, subject to City Council approval, for inflation and other cost incases.

SECTION 2. The new fees provided for in this schedule will be effective immediately upon adoption of this Resolution.

SECTION 3. Resolution No. 7265 is hereby rescinded in its entirety.

SECTION 4. Fees and charges maybe waived onlyby the authority and uppiova) of the City Council, with the exception of Facihty Use Permit Fees,which may be waived by timeParks and Recreation Director uiidercritettuspeeifled in ih Adiitntst?aiie GüideThe adopted b the City Council on February 28, 2006.

SECTION 5. Penalty charges may be applied every 30 day period tbr nonpayment of fees as indicatcd in this fee schedule, hut may not at any time exceed the amount of the original fcc.

43 SECTION 6. The City Manager shall have the authorityto interpret the provisions of this Resolution for purposesof resolvingambiguitics.

SICTION 7. The CityClerk shall certify to the adoptionof this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 9th day of June, 2009.

CITY OF SOUTH GATE: Gonza1ez,Mayo ATTEST:

Carmen Avalos, City Cldc..}

(SEAL)

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

—i R ul F. Salinas, City Attorney

4t CITYOF SOUTH GATE SCHEDULEOF FEES 2009-2010

DESCRIPTION OF FEE - UTILITIES CURRENT PROPOSEO

WA’ERSERVICF PAYMFNI • NON.SLFFICIFNr FUNDS S 8.13 18.67 WATERSERVICE.LATEPAVMENTPENAL.TY $ 567 583 WATER SERVICE - TURN OFF FOR Z)ELIOUEN’PAYMENT $ 3059 31 51 wArER SERVICE - TURNOFF FOR DELIQUEN’ PAYMENT(oQertn1el $ 141 63 14587

SEWER(redantI.cmmerciaIorInd..straI) $ 0.33 $ 0.33 110061

STREET SWEEPING SirgIe.&omdyResdentiat $ 214 $ 2,14 Irro MUll-Family ResIdential S 1 28 S 1.28 lmo Comma ciaIIIndI.sIndI S 5.35 5 5 35 lrno

REFUSE AND RECYCLINGCOLLECTIONSERV CES 101 qaIlon bin 16 44 sOIby contraGi Se -ior vale 10 40 sot by contract Extrabin 993 salbycontract 64 gaIon ba 14.00 sal by contract Senlol rate 8.98 set by con tract Extra b,n 6 l2 sat by ccntrxct

GOLOEN STATE WATER CO. BILLINGFEE 1.80 lmo added to properties billed by GokWn State Waler Co.

PENALlY FEES, 567 584 Imo

46 RESOLIT tON NO. 7373

CITY OF SOUTH GATE LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF I{E CITY OF SOUTH GATE ESTABLISHING A NEW SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR SERVICE AND RECINDING RESOLUTION NO. 7313

WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing concerning this matter was held as required by aw on June 8, 2010; and

WHEREAS, because of convernence.clarit, case of reference. or similar factors, parking tine updates are being ,resented to the City Council in a separate resolution as permitted by South Gate Municipa Code Scction 2.76Mb; and

WHEREAS, the City incurs costs for providing scrviccs and is required to recover the cost of providing such services il,rough fces and charges; and

WHEREAS, it is necessary to adjust and/or establish certain fees to recover the cost of providing services: and

WHEREAS, the proposed fees do not exceed the actual cost of providing the service;

NOW THEREFORE TIlE CITY COUNCIL OF TUE CITY OF SOUTH GATE DOES FIERFHY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The Schedule of Fees attached hereto as Exhibit A is hereby adopted and shall be adjusted annually, subject to City Council approval for inflation and other cost factors.

SECTION 2. i’lie new tcs proidcd in this schedule will be ctThctie immediateLyupon adoption of this Resolution,

[Remainderif page len blank intcntianalIy

X)CSU(”j343DI6v2 O2342-ui)I 2 4& SE(i’lOiN 3. Resolution No. 7313 is hereby rescinded in its entirety.

SECTION 4. Fees and charges may be saived only by the authority and approval of the City Council, with the exception of Facility Use Permit Fees, which may be waived by the Parks and Recreation Director under criteria specified in Ike Administra(ivi Guidelines udopted by the City Council on February 28, 2006.

SECTION 5. Penalty charges may be applied every 30 day period thr nonpayment of lees as indicated in this fee schedule, hut may not at any time exceed the amount of (tieoriginal fee.

SECTION 6. The City Manager shall have the authority to interpret the provisions of this Resolution for purposes of resolving ambiguities.

SECTION 1. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution sliich shall be effective upon its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this th day of June, 2010.

CITY OF SOUTTE:

Gregory Martin ayor ATTE$

/ I — Carmen Avahis. City (‘lark (SlAL) APPROVEDf2RkQgLAS TO FORM: Ruth4F. Salinas City Attorney

r>ocsnt: 343l)I6s2O24432-)t 47- ATTACHMENTA CITYOF SOUTHGATE SCHEDULEOF FEES 2010-201I

OESCPTION OF FEE . UTILITIES ..... PROPOSED I WIiTER CONSUMPTIONRATES w.tlenC.Iylimt. Residential 311 1$QOc.f. 3.11 R.s4ctentil (Senior te4dents) 1.56 hOOd ISO Commerciaillraluslrlal 3.26 ‘lOOc., 328 Recyded water 201 110001 2.01 Miflfnum Base Rate Charge 13.53 110001 13.53 WATER CONSUMPTIONRATES - outs4a CitybasIs 31:) hOOd. 373

WATER SERVICE RECYCI FO WATER 1 72 hOOd fn9i Si/nc 112 WATER SERViCEANDINSTALlATION: ResettiRg a meter not exceOdingtwo inches (21 where *etwca connection existS 175,05 115.05 Resetting meters larger than two nones(2” Actual Coat ActualCost New customer aac. tumn 1150 1750 Setting and r.mo ng mater for temporary service fromfire hydrant 291? 29 11 vTER cusrou SERVICE OEPOSIS Allmeters between 518”-314” meter and F meter ii 175.05 175.05 WATER FIRE LINESERVICE: Twa-Inch (2”) 28.01 ti-monthly 26.01 Three-inch (3) 42 01 ti-monthly 4201 Four-inch (4) 56.02 bi-nionlniy 5802 51*-Inch(6) 84.02 ti-monthly $402 Eight-inch (5”) 112.03 bj’nlonthly 112.03 Ten tiid (IC”) 140.04 b.-nionthly 14004

WATER DEVELOPMENTIMPACTFEES: 314’meter 7,056.75 8,195.45 314’ meter - single family residence on one parcel and not part of new subdIvision 3,978.38 4,097 13 1’ meter 17,154 30 17,61923 1”meter single familyresidence en one parcel and not pail of new aubdlwelen 0.385,40 6,55630 i-iir meter 41.11300 42,34645 2”maler 54,78215 58,426 24 3’ meter 119,94041 123,544.81 3 4”meter 205,584.23 211.131 15 r meter 46251951 476.395 10 a- meter 548.13026 564,580.35

WATER SERVICE PAYMENT- NON-SUFFCIENTFUNDS 16,07 186? WATER SERVICE - LATEPAYMENTPINALTY 583 5,63 WAT#tIl SERVICE . TURNOFF FOR DELICUENIPAYMENT 31.51 31 51 TER SERVICE- TURN OFF FOR OELOUENTPAYMENT(overt me) 145.07 145.87

SEWER (residential. commerdal or industrial) $ 0.34 1100c.f $ 034 /lOClcf

STREET SWEEPING Smçhle-Fa’nIyResidential $ 246 nu S 248 /mu Multi-FamilyResidential $ 1.49 lma $ 149 hinD Commerctal/lndustnel $ 020 Alia 5 620 Ime

REFUSE ANDRECYCENO COLLECTIONSERVICES 15.44 setbyconirad ‘544 set by centract”l Senior rate 10.40 setbycontract ‘040 set by cOnt’act1 Extra bin 9.93 sal by Contract 9.93 set by conlract “1 64 gallon bin 14.00 sat by contract 1400 sal by cenliscri Senior rate 6.98 set by COnPad 8.98 set by Contract“1 EstralJin 612 set by cot’acI 6.92 set by contractl

GOLDEN STATE WATER CO BILLINGFEE 1 00 mo 1.00 mo added to prngeshes bided by Golden State Wafer Ci,. PENALTYFEES. 5.64 mo 584 ImO .1] “1-bbeieuaIi

22 47 RESOLUTION NO. 7551

CITY OF SOUTH GATE 105 ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

A RESOlUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH GATE ESTABLISHING A NEW SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR SERVICES FOR FISCAL VI.AR 2013-2014 AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO.750011

WHEREAS. the City incurs costs tir providnig services and is required to recover the cost of providing such services through les and charges;and

WHEREAS, it is necessary to adjust and/or establish certain fees to recover the cost of providing services; and

WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing cstabhshing a new Schedule of Fees to be charged for services and rescinding ResolutiotiNo. 750013as held on June 25. 2013 as required by law: and

WHEREAS, the proposedfeesdo not exceed the actualcost of providing the service

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTh GATE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The Schedule of Fees attached hereto us Fxhibit A is hereby adopted and shall he a.jjusted annually. sueet o City Council approval for inflation and other cost flictors.

SECTION 2. The new fees proided in this Schedt.leof Fees will be effective immediately upon adopflon of this kesolutton.

SECTION 3. The Schedule of Fees sbal be adjusted annually lr inflation and other cost factors. subject to City Council approval.

SECTION 4. Fees and clurcs may be waived only by the authority and approval of the City Council, with the exception of Facility Use Permit Fees, which may be waived by the ParLsand Recreation Director under criteria specified in the AdministrativeGuidelines adopted by the City Council on February 28. 2006.

SECTION 5. Penalty charges may be applied every 30 day period for nonpayment of fees as indicated in this Schedule of Fees, but may not at any time exceed the amount of the original fee.

[Remainder of page left blank intentlo.iallyI

49 SECTION 6. [he City Manager shall haaw tlw authority to interpret the proiions f tlii Restlutivn 1ir purposes ot reotving anibiguities.

SECTION 7. Ihe City Clerk shall ertiI to the adoption of tins Resolution hich shall be etTetie upn its adoption.

PASSED. APPROVED and ADOPTED this 25” day nf Junc 2013.

CITY OF SOt’TII GATE:

(iii Hurtado. Mayor AEST: 4

(armen Avatos. (.tty Ckrl... (SFAI,) AEDF14 rj Ratt F Salinas City AtLome

3 50 g

03 ‘JDM 0015 l;0O AOp.tpQ ,10J100aN e p 0419 GOlf 04ll Go.$ doNrr0 03 1W10 Nmcz

40*0244114 SOdS 0.411004400 ot*i 100 0*13 o.o.0244,11 lies *116.4044410 445$ 001 40011$ 12140’Aq111 01541$ 00*1105*41110 004111 00110410* P04 0*411410*401 411311 0544044410 100040$ 40*1011413*45*0 0* III 1*41100*4110 (41051 1004 0002*0610101 01415$ (*4.00*41411 104011 wpVGqiG sQi W%)j4S NU4 33rT3 uNnDs530ONV$Sfl*$l4

*44110*.011 $ (14101.800 (41’4$flp110 Wb4SU*IlD JIG 3$o ONld10flO wD?1s 1144101040j 11)110*.40 CI Ao* 5 lflO *1041104111A8uos,p00401 .o* Ads fl4 Od$flO wor, OW, 5$f$ 0.11 f$ 01*0001111400,#W1003 0u *110541041 1001*4GW, 1511 OIls LIII 40IIl0N 4100d1r40 out 51,1 qs.004044 ur-*t ON1d33M$.L$

10Gob 5*01 1200,1 5101 JI 00WU30 *41SS4041IJ(U3$J$

IC 0111 1(19141 *00110005 P43l41A41dodfl0 3O Nod 440 W$fl4 $3ss0S VM a i 01511 N310Atd.N303 13041404 ddDtdNfl4 fP$$ LI.’ f 11 4N10410d fiY) $PM35 W3LW0 015 $ONI)o 3144fl5*l04 LN41AVd 33sAbfl $)LrM p

uz I

dO WflO)U Old 41511150*141104 WLVOtuflol dO WARRANT REGISTER COUNCIL MEETING 08/14/2018 REC!IVEDT I apChkLst Final Check List 2018 Page: 1 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate AUG 8 iiuiuuiWGit Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER Check 11 Date Vendor Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total 47 7/20/2018 00004266 U.S. BANK CORPORATE PAYI 0005305 PAYPAL 05/30/18 5/30/2018 REPLACEMENT RADIO ANTEI 28.95 0007615 KUBOTA TRACTOR CORPORCT96045 6/5/2018 REPLACEMENT RADIO ANTEI 207.05 00000209 JHM SUPPLY, INC. 36414/3 6/13/2018 IRRIGATION SUPPLIES 966.36

0011324 RENAISSANCE HOTEL ZARAGOZA, DII 5/20/2018 CCC 2018 CONFERENCE - DII 502.22

0011324 RENAISSANCE HOTEL MORALES, JOR 5/20/2018 CCC 2018 CONFERENCE - JC 753.33 00003996 OFFICE MAX 006440 6/6/2018 APC BATTERY BACKUP FOR 84.49 0009675 SKETCHUP 806531 6/11/2018 SKETCHUP PRO FOR 3D MOl 120.00 0005295 WALMART 021253 6/18/2018 TELEPHONE FOR TESTING A 11.00 0005516 HOLLYWOOD HISTORY MUSE 1 315-0721-7141. 6/12/2018 HOLLYWOOD MUSEUM TRIP 456.00 0008186 JACOBSEN WEST 10855634 7/5/2018 MOWER PARTS 232.64 0008186 JACOBSEN WEST 10869450 7/3/2018 SKIP LOADER SWITCH- MOV 137.74 0010524 UNION STATION 06/07/18 6/7/2018 PARKING 06107118-M.FLAD, LI 6.00

0010815 THE PARK DTLA 06/15/2018 - M.F 6/15/2018 PARKING 06/1 511 8- M.FLAD, C 32.50 0010009 CATALINA LANDING 06/16/18 6/16/2018 CATALINA LANDING PARKING 17.00 0009888 CHEAP AIRPORT PARKING TM938048 6/10/2018 PARKING FOR VIVIAN GARCI1 78.33 0010956 L.A. TIMES 784636-4160677 6/5/2018 06/07/1 8-07/04/1 8- MONTHLY I 15.96 00003960 MAJESTIC TROPHY & AWARDOI 8447 5/21/2018 EMPLOYEE PLAQUES (JC GC 102.30

0011324 RENAISSANCE HOTEL DAVIS, RANDY 5/20/2018 CCC 2018 CONFERENCE - R/ 1,004.44

0011324 RENAISSANCE HOTEL DAVILA, MARIA 5/20/2018 CCC 2018 CONFERENCE - MI 1,004.44

0011324 RENAISSANCE HOTEL BERNAL, BELE 5/20/2018 CCC 2018 CONFERENCE - BE 753.33 00000209 JHM SUPPLY, INC. A36700/3 6/20/2018 IRRIGATION PARTS 645.93 0009649 AT&T 06/21/18-07/20/1 5/28/2018 ACCT# 143648353, 06/21/18-0 116.13 00002588 DELL MARKETING LP 2006828593504 6/4/2018 LAPTOP BATTERY REPLACEF 121.26 0008335 ALL IN ONE POSTER COMPAM 52960 6/6/2018 ALL IN ONE POSTER CALIFOI 241.64 0010278 FROMYOUFLOWERS 405223384 6/18/2018 FLOWERS FOR ARMANDO A’ 84.83 0010307 BNIBOOKS N-00290804 6/7/2018 2015 CALTRANS STANDARD I 118.89 0010168 NARAI THAI 07/03/18 7/3/2008 LUNCH FOR MGMT ANALYST 49.50 0006108 STARBUCKS COFFEE 05/24/18 5/24/2018 REFRESHMENTS/CRIME PRE 50.85 0009727 ELIZABETH BAKERY INC. 029317 6/1/2018 REFRESHMENTS/CRIME PRE 9.05 0006108 STARBUCKS COFFEE 05/31/18 5/31/2018 REFRESHMENTS/CRIME PRE 33.90 0006108 STARBUCKS COFFEE 06/01/18 6/1/2018 REFRESHMENTS/CRIME PRE 33.90 0006925 ARROWHEAD SCIENTIFIC 77554 6/11/2018 INK REMOVAL TOILETTES FC 49.94 0005295 WALMART 4341881-029008 6/14/2018 STANDING FAN FOR DETECT 60.65

Page: 1 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 2 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued)

Check # Date Vendor Invoice Inv Date Descriotion Amount Paid Check Total 00004234 CHANDLER’S AIR CONDITION 149096 5/8/2018 SENIOR CTR ICE MACHINE R 452.90 0011618 TORQUE 13439 6/4/2018 FITNESS CENTER EQUIPME 1,538.00 0007857 ME ATHLETIC S043658 -2 6/6/2018 FITNESS CENTER EQUIPMEI” 606.38

0005368 PRINTCO DIRECT 80789 6/7/2018 PARK BANNERS - CONCERT/ 2,331.79 00003997 PAPA COVARRUBIAS. 6/8/2018 PESTICIDE LICENSE RENEW 60.00 0005295 WALMART 4421885-8740Th 6/21/2018 TEEN CENTER FURNISHINGS 51.77 0005371 MARRIOTT HOTEL KENDALL,M.- 0 5/22/2018 PARKING FEE FOR TRAINING 40.00

0005495 HOLIDAYINN CANCIO, R.-613 5/22/2018 LODGING (R.CANCIO) - TRAIF 749.05 00002308 RHYME UNIVERSITY 3843298 5/25/2018 CREDIT RETURNED MERCHA -526.35 0007857 MF ATHLETIC S043658 5/29/2018 FITNESS CENTER EQUIPME 832.12 0011617 INC STORES 1516215 5/30/2018 FOLDING MATS & BALANCE E 704.86 0011042 RELIAS LEARNING MONTERROZA 5/25/2018 TRAINING- STC- PREA REPOI 15.95 00004092 CHEROKEE PRODUCTIONS, 1374672 5/29/2018 TRAINING- PUBLIC SAFETY F” 295.00 0009569 PCMG, INC. B0856912 6/13/2018 INSTALL TWO 2.5” SOLID STI 152.63 0010168 NARAI THAI 14526 6/13/2018 LUNCH FOR MECHANIC PANt 41.74 0005450 C & J LIFT TRUCKING INC R-3321 7 3/27/2018 RENTAL OF FORKLIFT FOR U 964.69 0005450 C &J LIFTTRUCKING INC R-33214 3/22/2018 RENTAL OF FORKLIFT FOR U 238.25 0008222 JCL TRAFFIC SERVICES 94609 3/21/2018 COMBO ANCHORS FOR STR1 1,247.73 0008222 JCL TRAFFIC SERVICES 94356 3/1/2018 RENTAL OF FORKLIFT FOR U 1,847.81

0009160 DAVEY’S LOCKER SPORT FIS! 101285171 5/23/2018 ADMISSIONS - WHALE WATC 468.00 00002988 SUSY’S FLOWERS 05/23/18 5/23/2018 WREATH FOR MEMORIAL DA 148.84 0008993 LUCILLE’S SMOKEHOUSE BB(011933 5/29/2018 TELECOMMUNICATIONS REC 355.27 0005305 PAYPAL SWIFT- HUFFM 6/15/2018 TRAINING- TACTICAL CASUA 325.00 0005305 PAYPAL KAGWERKSFIR 6/19/2019 TRAINING- FIREARMS TRAIN 500.00 0005305 PAYPAL KAGWERKSFIR 6/19/2018 TRAINING- FIREARMS TRAIN 500.00 00004854 SMART & FINAL 06/07/18 6/7/2018 REFRESHMENTS FOR RECRI 210.00 0005372 SUBWAY 06/07/18 6/7/2018 REFRESHMENTS FOR RECRI 107.01 0005481 HILTON HOTELS 06/07-09/2018 6/10/2018 TRAINING- SUPERVISORY LE 281.74 0008584 SERRATO TRAINING 06/12/2018 6/12/2018 TRAINING- HUMAN TRAFFICI’ 70.00 0010827 CARD 1 NTEGRATORS C0RP00098037-I N 6/15/2018 ID PRINTER SUPLIES: RIBBOI 128.25 0010827 CARD INTEGRATORS CORP0009I 942-IN 3/23/2017 ID PRINTER SUPLIES: PVC C1 202.97 00000322 SAM’S CLUB 005669 6/4/2018 GOLF COURSE CONCESSIOI 328.45 0005644 UNITED AIR MORALES,J-6/2 6/12/2018 FLIGHT FOR J.MORALES (06/ 25740 0005644 UNITED AIR RIOS,A-06/27-2 6/15/2018 FLIGHT FOR A.RIOS (06/29-3C 573.40 00002387 PK: GLENDALE CENTRE THE/SALE# 864786 6/21/2018 ADMISSIONS 8/25/18 MARY P 234.00

Page: 2 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total 0011619 MORLEY ATHLETIC SUPPLY C4845 6/21/2018 HYDRATION STATION- GOLF 284.94

0005723 SOUTHWEST AIRLINES FLAD, M - 06/28 6/28/2018 FLIGHT FOR M.FLADATTENC 141.96 0005723 SOUTHWEST AIRLINES FLAD,M- 09I23- 6/4/2018 FLIGHT FOR M.FLADATTENC 403.96 0005347 AMAZON.COM 113-70511 85-35E 5/23/2018 AMAZON MKTPLACE- ERGOF’ 89.11

0009420 SPARKLETTS 16963364 05311 5/31/2018 05/31/18 - CUST# 7425571169 31.53 0008153 TIME WARNER CABLE- 0490384051718 5/17/2018 ACCT # 844830 017 0490384-’ 103.01 00000322 SAM’S CLUB 005730 6/4/2018 SENIORSPECIALEVENT 59.88 0005372 SUBWAY 06/06/2018 6/6/2018 STAFF TRAINING: SANDWICI 210.00 00003955 GALLS/QUARTERMASTER 10511166-2 5/31/2018 CEO DATKINS UNIFORM SHII 63.92 0005295 WALMART 05/22/2018 5/22/2018 LIL CHEFS SUPPLIES 88.94 0005295 WALMART 05/29/18 5/29/2018 SENIOR LUNCH PROGRAM: C 70.08 0005295 WALMART 06/04/18 6/4/2018 SENIOR LUNCH PROGRAM: C 75.62 0011611 UNITED SITE SERVICES 114-6112593 11/30/2017 STREET SUPPLIES FOR CVS 563.18 0011614 QUILL CORPORATION ITEM# 901-3339 5/26/2018 VACANT/IN USE SIGN FOR CI 31.40 00002337 ALBERTSONS 06/07/2018 6/7/2018 STAFF TRAINING: FRUIT 85.94 00003996 OFFICE MAX 025461 6/7/2018 STAFF TRAINING: CERTIFICA 19.34 00003730 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITI DIAZ,D-06/27-28 5/29/2018 D. DIAZ REGISTRATION FOR 375.00 0005644 UNITED Al R DIAZ, D-06/27-2E 6/7/2018 FLIGHT D.DIAZ TO ATTEND T 612.40

0010169 MIRAMONTE RESORT & SPA DIAZ,D-05/2-3/1 6/8/2018 CREDIT - CHARGED TWICE F -214.75 0005495 HOLIDAY INN DAVILA,M-06/14 6/12/2018 HOTEL FOR M.DAVILA (06/14- 245.71 0005495 HOLIDAY INN BERNAL,M-06/1 5/12/2018 HOTEL FOR M.BERNAL (06/1’ 245.71 0011612 JORGENSON INDUSTRIAL C0S045777 6/7/2018 GUN LOCKERS FOR JAIL 1,035.00 00003723 MMASC BETANCOURT, 4/24/2018 MMASC MEMBERSHIP FORA 85.00 0011489 RAMON SALOMON ENTERPRII598 5/22/2018 REPLACEMENT OF TALAVER 850.00 0011195 DISCOUNTMUGS DM3295882A 6/14/2018 CEHAT GIVEAWAYS FOR UPC 630.18 0005295 WALMART 007039 6/7/2018 STEAMER FOR TABLE CLOTF 71.28 00000643 IAPMO R123641859543 5/22/2018 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL, INT 300.00 0010273 GREEK LIFE, INC 72364 5/23/2018 CEO DATKINS UNIFORM CIT 65.40 0008153 TIME WARNER CABLE- 0013582051918 5/18/2018 ACCT# 844830 017 0013582- C 149.65 0008153 TIME WARNER CABLE- 0435603050418 5/4/2018 ACCT #844830 017 0435603-’ 93.15 0008153 TIME WARNER CABLE- 0586017050818 5/8/2018 ACCT #8448 30 017 0586017- 591.65 0005294 WALGREENS 06/14/18 6/14/2018 SENIOR SUPPLIES 7.92 0005339 FRY’S ELECTRONICS 22438431 5/30/2018 GIRLS CLUB HOUSE- AUDIO 47.46

0006782 THE FLAG SHOP 871595 4/21/2018 PARK BUILDINGS - INDOOR F 287.19 0008153 TIME WARNER CABLE- 0500034051718 5/17/2018 ACCT #8448 30 017 0500034- 182.31

Page: 3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total 0008153 TIME WARNER CABLE- 0426602051618 5/16/2018 ACCT # 844830 017 0426602- 182.31 0008153 TI ME WARN ER CABLE- 0426628052018 5/20/2018 ACCT # 844830 017 0426628- 113.15 0008153 TIME WARNER CABLE- 0586090051618 5/16/2018 ACCT # 844830 017 0586090- 205.65 0008153 TIME WARNER CABLE- 0490491051718 5/17/2018 ACCT # 844830 017 0490491- 182.31 0008153 TIME WARNER CABLE- 0495151042718 4/27/2018 ACCT# 844830 017 0495151-C 119.99 0008153 TIME WARNER CABLE- 0600966051218 5/12/2018 ACCT #844830 017 0600966- 104.99 00003870 LOS ANGELES DODGERS 1NC17596189 6/19/2018 REIMBURSEMENT FOR UNSC -1,240.00 0009367 NETFLIX 06/20/2018 6/20/2018 MONTHLY SVCS FOR TEEN C 7.99 00002832 HUNTINGTON PARK RUBBER RGCOI 1398 5/30/2018 REFRESHMENTS OF RUBBEF 53.48 00002832 HUNTINGTON PARK RUBBER JC011412 5/31/2018 REFRESHMENTS OF RUBBEF 128.55 0005549 LUCKY 8146 5/31/2018 REFRESHMENTS/CRIME PRE 25.27 0007077 BARNES AND NOBLE 06/07/18 6/7/2018 PLANNING MADE EASY BOOF 63.10 0008456 NSCA 1001633702 6/6/2018 NSCA-MEMBERSHIP FOR JAI’ 120.00 0011615 TAXI SVC PORTLAND 06/10/18 6/10/2018 TRANSPORTATION FROM All 49.32 0011616 BLACK TOWN CAR 06/13/18 6/13/2018 TRANSPORTATION FROM H( 56.25 00004003 BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS TRNG If0522201 801 5/22/2018 TRAINING- INVESTIGATIVE IF 481.00 0011610 SECURITY OPERATIONS GRC000021 5/24/2018 TRAIN ING: COVERT METHOC 195.00 0011042 RELIAS LEARNING PLEAK 5/24/2018 TRAINING- STC- JAIL OPERA 214.65 0011042 RELIAS LEARNING EDMONDS 5/25/2018 TRAIN ING- STC- JAIL OPERA 57.45 0009569 PCMG, INC. B0856899 6/13/2018 WINPRO 10 SINGLE UPGRD F 134.99 0011324 RENAISSANCE HOTEL 16150 5/20/2018 VALET- CHARGED TO TO PEF -28.00

0011324 RENAISSANCE HOTEL FLAD, MICHAEL 5/20/2018 CCC 2018 CONFERENCE - MI 1,004.44

0011324 RENAISSANCE HOTEL ESTRADA, ALIC 5/20/2018 CCC 2018 CONFERENCE - AL 1,004.44

0011324 RENAISSANCE HOTEL DIAZ, DENISE 5/20/2018 CCC 2018 CONFERENCE - DE 781.33

0011324 RENAISSANCE HOTEL PEREZ, JOE 5/20/2018 CCC 2018 CONFERENCE - JC 1,004.44 0011324 RENAISSANCE HOTEL GALVEZ, VEROI 5/20/2018 CCC 2018 CONFERENCE -VE 502.22

0011324 RENAISSANCE HOTEL MARES, GISELL 5/20/2018 CCC 2018 CONFERENCE - Gi 502.22 0007615 KUBOTA TRACTOR CORPOR?CT96064 6/5/2018 SKIP LOADER PARTS 7.76 00002832 HUNTINGTON PARK RUBBER JC011183 5/23/2018 REPLACEMENT OF RUBBER 586.49 00000322 SAM’S CLUB 001119- 05/24/1 5/24/2018 REFRESHMENT/CRIME PRE 26.34 0005454 RALPHS 05/24/18 5/24/2018 FAMILY VIOLENCE PROGRAft 50.00 0005291 PARTY CITY 062903 5/24/2018 DECORATIONS/SUPPLIES CF 41.75 0007418 U-HAULT 016051 5/21/2018 RENTAL OF EQUIPMENT FOF 613.48 0005347 AMAZO N. COM 112-6471428-781 5/24/2018 PURCHASE OF MAGNIFYING 39.95 0009026 TGI FRIDAY’S RESTAURANT 023792 6/4/2018 LUNCH MEETING WITH JAN11 65.71

Page: 4 ______

apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued)

Check # Date Vendor Invoice - mv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total 0010571 UBER CONFERENCE 06/09/18 6/9/2018 CONFERENCE CALLING FOR 16.60 0011613 TRAXX RESTAURANT 051065 6/5/2018 LUNCH MEETING WITH MAN 100.32 0010524 UNION STATION 06/05/2018 6/5/2018 PARKING 06/05/18- M.FLAD, L 12.00 0010090 HYATT SANTA BARBARA HALEY & COOK 5/29/2018 TRAINING- TASER INSTRUCT 254.92 0005372 SUBWAY 05/30/18 5/30/2018 TRAINING-ACTIVE SHOOTEF 102.22 0005549 LUCKY 06/05/18 6/5/2018 TRAINING-ACTIVE SHOOTEF 52.13 0005372 SUBWAY 06/06/18 6/6/2018 TRAINING-ACTIVE SHOOTEF 119.97 0005481 HILTON HOTELS 06/06-07/2018 6/8/2018 TRAINING- SUPERVISORY LE 140.87 40,705.32 78592 7/24/2018 0011253 R DEPENDABLE CONST INC 003 7/18/2018 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES F 1,282.44 1,282.44 Voucher:

78596 7/26/2018 00004865 SO CALIF EDISON 07/26/2018 7/26/2018 BILLING PRD - JUNE 2018 & E 89,286.59 89,286.59 Voucher: 78600 8/14/2018 00002706 AC&C NETWORK SERVICES 3013599-IN 7/27/2018 AC&C PREPAID SERVICE UNI 7,000.00

Voucher: 3013446-IN 6/26/2018 AC&C CAT6 CABLING - PW/CI 2,781.07 9,781.07

78601 8/14/2018 00004372 AIRGAS USA, LLC 1601405789 4/30/2018 LATE FEES - POOL CHEMICA 14.12

Voucher: 1601416668 5/31/2018 LATE FEES - POOL CHEMICAi 5.01 9076678790 6/1/2018 POOL CHEMICAL SUPPLY CC 108.95 128.08 78602 8/14/2018 00000185 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SER’55457 6/20/2018 SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD 7,329.00 7,329.00 Voucher: 78603 8/14/2018 00000706 ALTEC INDUSTRIES, INC. 8200636 3/21/2018 AERIALTRUCK FOR ELECTR 120,472.55 120,472.55 Voucher: 78604 8/14/2018 00001727 AMERICAN RED CROSS 22101896 5/9/2018 LIFE GUARD TRAINING 351.00 351.00 Voucher: 78605 8/14/2018 00000018 AMERICAN RENTAL INC. 418901 5/30/2018 CEMENT FOR STREET LIGHT 192.72 192.72 Voucher:

78606 8/14/2018 00003098 AMERINATIONAL COMMLJNrn18-00568 7/1/2018 JUNE 2018 - MNTHLY SRVC F 109.20 109.20 Voucher: 78607 8/14/2018 0007290 APW KNOX-SEEMAN 13185666 6/27/2018 AC CONDENSER AND CONTF 373.81 373.81 Voucher:

Page: 5 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Invoice mv Date Descrintion Amount Paid Check Total 78608 8/14/2018 00005075 AT&T 11493368 6/13/2018 BAN: 9391034765- BP-05/1 3/1 1,577.16 Voucher: 11493369 6/13/2018 BAN: 9391034762- BP- 05/13/1 2,840.48 11424417 6/1/2018 BAN: 9391034759- BP- 05/01/1 38.88 11493372 6/13/2018 BAN: 9391034758- BP- 05/13/1 20.27 11493373 6/13/2018 BAN: 9391034761- BP- 05/13/1 79.45 11493371 6/13/2018 BAN: 9391034766- BP- 05/13/1 103.19 11493370 6/13/2018 BAN: 9391034760- BP- 05/13/1 35.17 11493366 6/13/2018 BAN: 9391034764- BP- 05/13/1 2,618.54 11493367 6/13/2018 BAN: 9391034763- BP- 05/13/1 2,085.73 9,398.87 78609 8/14/2018 0009196 ATKINSON, ANDELSON, LOYA547999 6/30/2018 SRVS THRU 06/30/18- RE: IN\ 3,306.00 3,306.00 Voucher: 78610 8/14/2018 00000201 ATLANTIC LOCK & KEY 16831 6/28/2018 DUPLICATE KEYS 59.40 Voucher: 16830 6/28/2018 SPECIALIZED KEYS FOR THE 167.20 226.60 78611 8/14/2018 0011336 AVANT-GARDE INC. 4967 7/2/2018 JUNE2OI8-CONSULTANTSE 1,370.00 1,370.00 Voucher: 78612 8/14/2018 0010615 BEARCOM 4706161 6/22/2018 EOC EQUIPMENT 3,921.48 3,921.48 Voucher:

78613 8/14/2018 0009876 BIGGS CARDOSA 74219 6/5/2018 MAY2018 - DESIGN OF THE 6,534.77 6,534.77 Voucher: 78614 8/14/2018 0011601 BU FERNANDEZ, NERY Ref000238519 6/28/2018 UB REFUND CST#00061305- 22.79 22.79 Voucher: 78615 8/14/2018 0005554 CALIFORNIA BLDNG STANDAFAPRIL-JUNE 20 7/2/2018 BLDG STANDRDS AMINSTRN 594.90 594.90 Voucher: 78616 8/14/2018 0011624 CALPACS FY2018/2019 7/11/2018 FY2018/2019-COMPENSATIC 275.00 275.00 Voucher:

78617 8/14/2018 00004433 CARPENTER, ROTHANS & DU31286 7/16/2018 SRVS FOR 06/30/18 - RE: LAU 122.00

Voucher: 31287 7/16/2018 SRVS FOR 06/30/18 - RE: J.H. 148.00 270.00 78618 8/14/2018 00000898 CENTRAL BASIN MUNI WATEFSG-JUNI8 7/16/2018 JUNE 2018- WATER USAGE- 19,243.30 19,243.30 Voucher: 78619 8/14/2018 00005073 CITY OF DOWNEY 232236 6/18/2018 07/01/17-12/31/17- SHARED TI 243.14 243.14 Voucher:

78620 8/14/2018 00005073 CITY OF DOWNEY 232346 6/29/2018 01/01/18-03/31/18 - SHRD TRA 162.01 162.01 Voucher: 78621 8/14/2018 0008971 CMR: DELGADO, JOSE G. 06/19/2018 7/9/2018 PLANNING COMMISSION MEl 125.00 125.00 Voucher:

Page: 6 ______

apChkLst Final Check List Page: 7 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued)

Check # Date Vendor Invoice Inv Date Descriotion Amount Paid Check Total 78622 8/14/2018 0010933 CMR: FIURTADO, GIL 06/19/2018 7/9/2018 PLANNING COMMISSION MEl 125.00 125.00 Voucher: 78623 8/14/2018 0010131 CMR: PEREZ, JENNY 06/19/2018 7/9/2018 PLANNING COMMISSION MEl 125.00 125.00 Voucher: 78624 8/14/2018 0010626 CMR: VELASQUEZ, CARLOS 06/19/2018 7/9/2018 PLANNING COMMISSION MEl 125.00 125.00 Voucher: 78625 8/14/2018 00005149 COUNTY OF LOSANGELES DJRE-PW-180611C 6/11/2018 THROUGH MAY2O18-TS MA 699.87 699.87 Voucher:

78626 8/14/2018 00004656 CREATIVE WASTE SOLUTION738-1 030 4/1/2018 APR/MAY/JUNE 2018 - AIR FIL 300.00 300.00 Voucher: 78627 8/14/2018 0011602 CUEVAS, LIDUVINA Ref000238520 6/28/2018 UB REFUND CST#00051632- 65.03 65.03 Voucher: 78628 8/14/2018 0009390 D.C. DRILLING, INC 4753 2/27/2018 BUDGETTED BORING NEEDS 3,000.00 Voucher: 4833 5/1/2018 BUDGETTED BORING NEEDS 3,000.00 6,000.00 78629 8/14/2018 0005392 DAVID VOLZ DESIGN 421667 6/19/2018 HOLLYDALE COMMTY PARK I 45,375.19 45,375.19 Voucher: 78630 8/14/2018 00003724 DAVIS BLUE PRINT COMPANVDBP11578 5/3/2018 5 SETS OF PLANS & 2 SETS C 311.95 311.95 Voucher: 78631 8/14/2018 00002588 DELL MARKETING LP 10249450991 6/20/2018 DELL POWEREDGE R330 SEE 6,528.55 Voucher: 10248144831 6/13/2018 DELLAPC UPS BATTERY BAC 2,718.88 9,247.43

78632 8/14/2018 00000696 DEPT OF CONSERVATION DI\APRIL-JUNE 20 7/2/2018 APRIL-JUNE 2018 - STRONG 1,439.60 1,439.60 Voucher: 78633 8/14/2018 00001565 DEPT OF JUSTICE-(DOJ) CEN313463 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018- FINGERPRINTAF 934.00 934.00 Voucher:

78634 8/14/2018 0009785 DMS FACILITY SERVICES, INCRC-D083648 5/1/2018 MAY 2018- DMS - RENEWAL ( 13,619.90 13,619.90 Voucher: 78635 8/14/2018 00000619 FALCON FUELS, INC. 238964 6/26/2018 REGULAR UNLEADED FUEL 3,888.59 Voucher: 239133 6/27/2018 ULTRA LOW SULFUR DIESEL 5,078.40 8,966.99 78636 8/14/2018 00002026 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPOR6-243-96773 7/13/2018 FEDEX PRIORITY & FIRST O 211.93 211.93 Voucher:

78637 8/14/2018 0010930 FORBES TRAFFIC SOLUTIONFTS227 6/28/2018 6/15/18-6/19-18 - AS-NEEDED 937.50 937.50 Voucher:

78638 8/14/2018 0008331 FORENSIC NURSE RESPONSIO6-12-18 7/1/2018 SART EXAM - AGENCY CASE 2,040.00 2,040.00 Voucher:

Page: 7 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued)

Check # Date Vendor Invoice mv Date DescriDtion Amount Paid Check Total 78639 8/14/2018 0009042 FORTEL TRAFFIC, INC. 9137-2 6/20/2018 FORTEL- FY 2017-18 ANNUAL 4,103.50 4,103.50 Voucher:

78640 8/14/2018 00004934 GAS COMPANY 013 900 7300 3-I 7/13/2018 BILLING PRD- 06/10/18 - 07/11 526.41

Voucher: 126 300 9600 1-i 7/13/2018 BILLING PRD- 06/11/18 - 07/11 18.51

186 100 7200 3-I 7/1 312018 BILLING PRD- 06111118 - 07I11 417.94

113 798 0362 7-( 7/5/2018 BILLING PRD- 06)01/18 - 07/01 1,175.64

045 400 7300 6-I 7/13/2018 BILLING PRD- 06/11/18 - 07/11 20.35 2,158.85 78641 8/14/2018 0006852 GOALS SOCCER CENTER SUMMER FY 17, 7/18/2018 SOCCER- 06/20/18-06/28/18 818.69 818.69 Voucher: 78642 8/14/2018 00002890 GRAI NGER 9809350987 6/5/2018 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES FOR 429.01 Voucher: 9809170294 6/5/2018 MAIN DOMESTIC WATER VAL 74.20 503.21 78643 8/14)2018 00000534 GRANDE VISTA STEEL 160059 6/27/2018 VALVE ADAPTER FOR ROUN[ 145.95 145.95 Voucher: 78644 8/14/2018 0006639 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO. 9304613910 6/18/2018 STREET LIGHT CIRCUIT RER 1,328.31 Voucher: 126299080 CREDIT FOR RETURNED ITEI -9.62 991748561 CREDIT FOR RETURNED ITEI -122.55 1,196.14 78645 8/14/2018 0011526 HASA, INC. 600330 5/24/2018 BULK CHLORINE FOR WATEF 370.85 Voucher: 542760 5/3/2018 BULK CHLORINE FOR WATEF 391.81 603313 6/14/2018 BULK CHLORINE FOR WATEF 256.61 603314 6/14/2018 BULK CHLORINE FOR WATEF 393.87 600333 5/24/2018 BULK CHLORINE FOR WATEF 977.36 600334 5/24/2018 BULK CHLORINE FOR WATEF 617.28 3,007.78 78646 8/14/2018 0005767 HERTZ EQUIPMENT RENTAL (30040568-001 6/5/2018 06/04)18- VEHICLE RENTAL F 1,072.06 1,072.06 Voucher:

Page: 8 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Invoice mv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total 78647 8/14/2018 00000268 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVI(0350801 6/27/2018 SUPPLIES TO REPAIR FAUCE 43.96 Voucher: 9234478 6/28/2018 BUILDING AND TRAFFIC SlG 524.04 2014507 6/25/2018 ELECTICAL REPAIR AT SPOR 107.81 9362730 6/28/2018 BUILDING AND TRAFFIC SIG 945.23 1362581 5/7/2018 STREET LIGHT REPAIRS 257.35 2362549 4/26/2018 DRILL BITS, MARKER, BLADE 57.97 2362615 5/16/2018 GRAFFITI PAINT FOR GREEt’ 348.34 9234404 6/18/2018 STRANDED WIRE 319.46 0343489 6/27/2018 HUSKY HANGALLS 30.67 0350799 6/27/2018 EQUIPMENT FOR SHOP 109.98 0343491 6/27/2018 PAINT 85.21 6350792 6/21/2018 EQUIPMENT FOR SHOP TO C 335.83 6234372 6/11/2018 ELECTRICAL- MISC SUPPLIE 158.90 6234427 6/21/2018 CHLORINE TO REMOVE MOL 27.15 9350696 5/9/2018 PRIMER AND PAINT FOR RES 337.40 3,689.30 78648 8/14/2018 00000428 IMSA QUINTERO, JOF 5/3/2018 QUINTERO, JORGE 2018 REt’ 40.00 4000 Voucher: 78649 8/14/2018 00004578 INTERWEST CONSULTING GF42091 7/9/2018 JUNE 2018- PLAN CHECK SE 16,131.50 16,131.50 Voucher:

78650 8/14/2018 0009455 JMD 042 (18-085) 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018 - PROF SERV FOF 6,915.86

Voucher: 040 (18-057) 4/30/2018 APRIL 2018 - PROF SERV FOF 5,828.02

041 (18-071) 5/31/2018 MAY2018 - PROF SERV FOR 5,524.58 18,268.46

78651 8/14/2018 00000430 JOHN L. HUNTER AND ASSOCSGNPO518 6/25/2018 MAY2018 - PROF SRVS FOR 5,029.93

Voucher: SGBCRO5I8 6/25/2018 MAY2018 - BEVERAGE CONT 285.00

SGIWO518 6/25/2018 MAY2018 - INDUSTRIAL WAS 3,442.50

SGUOO518 6/25/2018 MAY 2018 - USED OIL RECYCI 2,043.75 10,801.18 78652 8/14/2018 00003725 KENNEDY/JENKS CONSULTAF123O48 7/9/2018 THRU 06/29/18-PROF SRV FO 6,382.50 6,382.50 Voucher: 78653 8/14/2018 0010099 L.G.P. EQUIPMENT RENTALS, 104594 4/30/2018 RENTAL OF BOBCAT AUGER4 1,573.50 Voucher: 105466 6/14/2018 READY MIX CONCRETE FOR 431.16 2,004.66 78654 8/14/2018 00000675 LACONSULTING, INC 0014536 7/2/2018 06/01/18-06/30/18-CONSULT 4,967.50 4,967.50 Voucher:

78655 8/14/2018 00005175 LA COUNTY METROPOLITAN 102158 6/30/2018 TAP BUS PASSES - MAY 2018 4,982.00 4,982.00 Voucher:

Page: 9 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued)

Check# Date Vendor —Invoice mv Date Descriøtion Amount Paid Check Total 78656 8/14/2018 0006905 LACOUNTY SHERIFFS DEPAI1845O2LA 7/5/2018 JUNE 2018- FOOD FOR THE 1,003.45 1,003.45 Voucher: 78657 8/14/2018 00001149 LAC/USC MEDICAL CENTER 60012 6/29/2018 SART TEST- 05/19/18- ACCNT 730.00 730.00 Voucher: 78658 8/14/2018 0005400 LACPCA 1-2350 7/9/2018 REGISTRATION FEE FOR R.ID 200.00 200.00 Voucher: 78659 8/14/2018 00003986 LAYTON TECHNOLOGY, INC. 005183251 5/22/2018 LAYTON TECHNOLOGY SER\ 1,490.00 1,490.00 Voucher: 78660 8/14/2018 00003754 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORI1456461 2/28/2018 SRVS THRU 02/28/1 8- RE: AD’ 16,339.50 Voucher: 1457592 3/31/2018 SRVS THRU 03/31/1 8- RE: AD’ 3,417.50 1462906 6/30/2018 SRVS THRU 06/30/1 8- RE: LUI 1,809.00 1462907 6/30/2018 SRVS THRU 06/30/1 8- RE: AC 2,716.00 24,282.00 78661 8/14/2018 00004729 LONG BEACH PRESS TELEGF0000389343 6/30/2018 PUBLIC NOTICE FOR COSG C 837.41 837.41 Voucher: 78662 8/14/2018 0010411 MANN, JOHN 1814 6/26/2018 VIDEO TAPING AND PRODUC 450.00 450.00 Voucher: 78663 8/14/2018 0006106 MAR-CO E QUIPMENT COMPA153324 6/18/2018 SUCTION TUBE LINERS FOR 851.03 851.03 Voucher: 78664 8/14/2018 0011433 MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, 30999 6/29/2018 04/30/18-06/03/18- PROFESSU 10,959.06 Voucher: 30775 6/25/2018 04/02/18-04/29/1 8-PROFESSIC 4,350.87 30391 4/11/2018 02/05/18-03/04/18- PROFESSI 1,216.92 16,526.85 78665 8/14/2018 0011605 MARTINEZ, FERNANDO & LOFRef000238523 6/28/2018 UB REFUND CST#00055383- 132.75 132.75 Voucher:

78666 8/14/2018 00000447 MISC - BLDG PERMITS 18-1589 BUILDE 7/16/2018 18-1589 BUILDERS OFAMERI 308.49 308.49 Voucher:

78667 8/14/2018 00000447 MISC - BLDG PERMITS 18-1011/12 MOF 7/16/2018 18-1011/12 MORENO, JUAN 146.00 146.00 Voucher:

78668 8/14/2018 00000447 MISC - BLDG PERMITS 18-035/363 MAR 7/16/2018 18-035/18-363 MARAVILLA FO 32.00 32.00 Voucher:

78669 8/14/2018 00004397 MISC - EDUCATIONAL REIMBIJIMENEZ,J.-F17 6/30/2018 EDUC. REIMB. JESSICAJIMEI 1,691.00 1,691.00 Voucher:

78670 8/14/2018 00000449 MISC - EMPLOYEE REFUND QUINTERO,JOF 5/9/2018 REIMB. JORGE QUINTERO- R 385.68 385.68 Voucher:

78671 8/14/2018 00000449 MISC - EMPLOYEE REFUND SEKIYA, J-6/5/1 6/5/2017 REISSUE CHK# 71974- REIME 100.00 100.00 Voucher:

Page: 10 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 11 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check It Date Vendor Invoice mv Date DescriDtion Amount Paid Check Total

78672 8/14/2018 00000170 MISC - PKS & REC REFUND 118123- DELGAI 6/18/2018 REIS CK# 78256 TO ANA MAR 78.00 78.00 Voucher:

78673 8/14/2018 00000170 MISC - PKS & REC REFUND 128653- BERUM 7/5/2018 128653 - BERUMEN, CLAUDh 46.00 46.00 Voucher:

78674 8/14/2018 00000170 MISC - PKS & REC REFUND 124583 -ARELL 6/18/2018 124583 -ARELLANO, GLORIA 45.00 45.00 Voucher:

78675 8/14/2018 0008506 MUNITEMPS 128471 7113/2018 06/25/18-06/28/18 - PW PROJE 4,000.00

Voucher 128429 6/29/2018 06/10/18-06/24/18 - HR ANALY: 3,897.25

128472 7/13/2018 06/25/18-06/31/18 - HR ANALY: 1,933.75

128388 6/15/2018 05/28/18-06/09/18 - HRANALY: 2,885.75 12,716.75 78676 8/14/2018 00004620 MUTUAL LIQUID GAS & EQU1F340353 6/26/2018 PROPANE GAS AND COMPLII 565.42 565.42 Voucher:

78677 8/14/2018 00004200 NATIONAL PLANT SERVICES, 14146 6/30/2018 03/05/18-05/24/18 - CCTV SER 91,734.19 91,734.19 Voucher: 78678 8/14/2018 0011603 NAVARRO, ANDRE Ref000238521 6/28/2018 UB REFUND CST#00061089- 101.03 101.03 Voucher: 78679 8/14/2018 0006418 ORANGE COUNTY TREASURESH5O439 7/27/2018 TACTICAL RANGE FEES FOR 1,385.30 1,385.30 Voucher: 78680 8/14/2018 00003542 ORANGELINE DEVELOPMENTSUMMIT 2018 7/25/2018 ECO-RAPID TRANSIT SUMM 100.00 100.00 Voucher: 78681 8/14/2018 00002817 OSCARS PRINTING INC. 4824 7/17/2018 2500 #10 WINDOW SECURFfl 749.70 Voucher: 4823 6/22/2018 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & ASS 148.84 898.54

78682 8/14/2018 0010104 OWEN GROUP, INC 4047 11/27/2017 OCTOBER 2017 - PROF SRW 736.50 Voucher: 3890A 7/24/2017 JUNE2OI7-PROFSRVS, PRI 3,216.50 3,953.00 78683 8/14/2018 0009569 PCMG, INC. 807598050101 6/27/2018 AUTOCAD LT 2018 SOFTWAR 2,475.00 2,475.00 Voucher: 78684 8/14/2018 00001297 PD: ARANA, MANUEL 1-2212- REISSU 11/20/2017 REIS CK# 75088- TRAINING- F 224.56 224.56 Voucher: 78685 8/14/2018 00002527 PD: BROWN, SAMUEL 1-2341 6/4/2018 TRAINING- SUPERVISORY LE 229.38 229.38 Voucher: 78686 8/14/2018 0007772 PD: D-PREP, LLC 1-2355 7/25/2018 TRAINING- CRIME PREVENTI 578.00 578.00 Voucher:

78687 8/14/2018 0010857 PD: GONZALEZ, ALEXIS 1-2035 - REISSI. 4/24/2017 RI CK#75538- TRAINING- LEG 44.27 44.27 Voucher:

Page: 11 ______

apChkLst Final Check List Page: 12 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Invoice mv Date DescriDtion Amount Paid Check Total 78688 8/14/2018 0009812 PD: MAClAS, ARTURO 1-2219 REIS 1/8/2018 RI CK#75696 -TRAINING- ADL 56.00 56.00 Voucher:

78689 8/14/2018 0008712 PD: MARIN, DERRICK 1-2202 REI 1/8/2018 REIS CK#75697 - TRAINING- C 123.05 123.05 Voucher: 78690 8/14/2018 00001358 PD: SBSD-EVOC TRAINING CEEVC53698 7/3/2018 TRAINING- DRIVER TRAINING 700.00 700.00 Voucher: 78691 8/14/2018 0010935 PD: SOSA, AARON 1-2357 7/30/2018 TRAINING- STANDARDIZED F 204.20 204.20 Voucher:

78692 8/14/2018 00000269 PD: TEEPLES, JAMES 1-2351 7/9/2018 TRAINING - SENIOR MANAGE 246.00 246.00 Voucher: 78693 8/14/2018 00004717 PETTY CASH- GENERAL FUNLO6/26/2018 7/17/2018 PETTY CASH RECEIPTS- 06/1 337.29 337.29 Voucher: 78694 8/14/2018 00004713 PETTY CASH- PARKS & REC.E06/19/18-06/24/1 6/28/2018 PETTY CASH RECEIPTS- 06/1 143.79 143.79 Voucher: 78695 8/14/2018 00004714 PETTY CASH- POLICE DEPT. .JM05/30/1806/ 7/26/2018 PETTY CASH- POLICE DEPT- 318.18 318.18 Voucher: 78696 8/14/2018 00001921 PK: ALCANTARA, RAUL SUMMER FY 17. 7/17/2018 PIANO/GUITAR CLASSESS- 01 436.22 436.22 Voucher:

78697 8/14/2018 00004271 PK: BETANCOURT, CRYSTAL SUMMER FY 17. 7/16/2018 DANCE - 06/18/18-06/21/18 835.16 835.16 Voucher: 78698 8/14/2018 00001643 PK: DIAZ, VANESSA SUMMER FY 17, 7/17/2018 BALLET/MEX FOLK CLASSES 707.37 707.37 Voucher: 78699 8/14/2018 0010952 PK: GANDARA, MARIBEL SUMMER FY 17, 7/16/2018 SCIENCE CAMP- 06/18/18-06/: 627.94 627.94 Voucher: 78700 8/14/2018 0005732 PK: GONZALEZ, JESSICA SUMMER FY 17. 7/17/2018 CHEERLEADING- 06/20/2018- 373.12 373.12 Voucher: 78701 8/14/2018 0006250 PK: GUTIERREZ, LAZARO SUMMER FY 17. 7/18/2018 TENNIS LESSONS- 06/18/18-0 664.09 664.09 Voucher: 78702 8/14/2018 0008741 PK: HINDU, CLAUDIA SUMMER FY 17. 7/17/2018 ART CLASSES- 06/19/18-06/2E 225.43 225.43 Voucher: 78703 8/14/2018 00003708 PK: LASTRA, MARY SUMMER FY 17, 7/17/2018 MEX. FOLK CLASSES- 06/20/1 334.25 334.25 Voucher: 78704 8/14/2018 0010824 PK: RENTERIA, CAMILO SUMMER 20181 7/18/2018 DURONADULT BASEBALL-Of 1,354.74 1,354.74 Voucher:

Page: 12 ______

apChkLst Final Check List Page: 13 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Invoice mv Date Descrintion Amount Paid Check Total 78705 8/14/2018 0011175 PK: ROJAS-SEITZ, NEREIDA SUMMER FY 17, 7/17/2018 HULA- 06/06/18-06/25/18 248.75 248.75 Voucher:

78706 8/14/2018 0010901 PLACEWORKS 65825 6/30/2018 06/1/18 - 06/30/18 - LOCAL HA 1,571.23 1,571.23 Voucher: 78707 8/14/2018 0011604 POITRAS, GEORGE Ref000238522 6/28/2018 UB REFUND CST#00062058- 102.34 102.34 Voucher: 78708 8/14/2018 0009511 PRADO FAMILY SHOOTING R14598 7/9/2018 TRAINING- RIFLE TACTICAL1 650.00 650.00 Voucher: 78709 8/14/2018 0005354 QUADRANT SYSTEMS 180124-1 1/1/2018 QUADRANT 6-MONTH MAINT 1,100.00 1,100.00 Voucher: 78710 8/14/2018 00000416 RAPID-O-PRINT 14983 7/2/2018 BUSINESS CARDS- BLUE LITI 22.05 Voucher: 14984 7/2/2018 BUSINESS CARDS- BLUE LITI 264.60 286.65 78711 8/14/2018 00002735 ROADLINE PRODUCTS, INC. 14172 5/30/2018 REPAIR OF GRAFFITI TRUCK 186.42 186.42 Voucher: 78712 8/14/2018 0011527 RS CONSTRUCTION & 50 7/3/2018 CONSTRUCTION OF THE SOI 16,838.75 16,838.75 Voucher: 78713 8/14/2018 0007637 RSG, INC 1003742 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018- SUCCESSOR AGI 28,088.75 28,088.75 Voucher: 78714 8/14/2018 00003882 SARENTERIA AUTO PARTS 417607 6/27/2018 STARTER FOR UNIT 639 97.98 97.98 Voucher: 78715 8/14/2018 0010999 SAFNA ENGINEERING SSG201806 7/3/2018 JUNE 2018- PROJECT MGMT 16,478.00 16,478.00 Voucher: 78716 8/14/2018 00000557 SAN DIEGO POLICE EQU1PME633336 7/2/2018 BALLASTIC HELMETS 4,851.00 4,851.00 Voucher: 78717 8/14/2018 0005808 SCOTCH PAINT CORPORATIO4I6255 5/1/2018 VARIOUS PAINTS, SPRAY TIP 264.90 264.90 Voucher: 78718 8/14/2018 0006911 SEQUOIA LIGHTING CORP 2457 6/6/2018 SEQUOIASL-VIZAOIL-QT OIL 820.26 Voucher: 2458 6/11/2018 STREET LIGHT CIRCUIT RER 1,540.32 2462 6/19/2018 STREET LIGHT CIRCUIT RER 1,749.67 4,110.25 78719 8/14/2018 0010126 SFG RETIREMENT PLAN 133 8/1/2018 2ND QUARTER 2018 ADVISOI 7,742.04 7,742.04 Voucher: 78720 8/14/2018 00002616 SHRED-IT USALLC 8125115408 6/30/2018 SRV DATE: 06111/18- SHREDC 72.00 72.00 Voucher: 78721 8/14/2018 00004884 SOUTH COAST A.Q.M.D. 3304418 6/21/2018 ICE (>500 HP) EM ELEC GEN- 647.31 Voucher: 3300635 6/19/2018 FLAT FEE FOR LAST FISCAL’ 131.79 779.10

Page: 13 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 14 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Invoice mv Date DescriDtion Amount Paid Check Total 78722 8/14/2018 00005096 SOUTH COAST A.Q.M.D. 3304496 6/21/2018 ICE (>500HP) EM ELEC GEN [ 406.79 Voucher: 3304411 6/21/2018 ICE (>500 HP) EM ELEC GEN- 527.05 3300621 6/19/2018 FLAT FEE FOR LAST FISCAL’ 131.79 3300835 6/19/2018 FLAT FEE FOR LAST FISCAL’ 131.79 1,197.42

78723 8/14/2018 00004873 SOUTH GATE CAR WASH INC 138 - 06/27/18 6/27/2018 CAR WASH SRVS- 05I01Il8-O 600.00 600.00 Voucher: 78724 8/14/2018 00004908 STATUS ONE MEDICAL INC 53862 5/21/2018 FIRST AID SUPPLIES 126.29 126.29 Voucher: 78725 8/14/2018 0005394 STEVE SWAIN INVESTIGATOFI3O5 6/16/2018 COMPLETED BCKGRND INVE 1,300.00 1,300.00 Voucher: 78726 8/14/2018 00002639 STRADLING YOCCACARLSOI343605-0018 4/30/2018 SRVSTHRU 04/30/18- RE: SU 2,751.20 Voucher: 343606-0025 4/30/2018 SRVSTHRU 04/30/18- RE: LAI 181.00 344399-0027 5/31/2018 SRVS THRU 04/30/1 8- RE: MC 3,873.40 6,805.60 78727 8/14/2018 00003795 TANGENT COMPUTER, INC. S1093240 10/6/2017 TANGENT HOSTED INBOUND 1,435.00 1,435.00 Voucher:

78728 8/14/2018 0009039 TETRATECH 51331686 7/13/2018 PERIOD ENDING 6/29/18 - CR 7,384.73

Voucher: 51320175 6/7/2018 THRU 05/25/18 - DESIGN SER 7,349.00 51324371 6/20/2018 THRU 05/25/1 8- PROPOSAL F 1,478.00 16,211.73 78729 8/14/2018 0009874 THE WALKING MAN, INC. E8877 6/27/2018 DELIVERY OF ANNUAL WATE 3,175.00 3,175.00 Voucher: 78730 8/14/2018 0008153 TIME WARNER CABLE- 0008335062018 6/20/2018 CCT#8448300170008335-07 161.26 161.26 Voucher: 78731 8/14/2018 00004947 TOMARK SPORTS EQU1PMEN902488073 6/27/2018 SPORTS ACTIVITY SUPPLIES 792.56 792.56 Voucher: 78732 8/14/2018 00003438 TRANS UNION-SOUTHERN C?06806441 6/27/2018 CREDIT CHECKS- PERIOD: 0 233.07 233.07 Voucher: 78733 8/14/2018 00005220 TROY GROUP, INC. 1NV428551 6/12/2018 TROY PRINTERS MAINTENM 840.00 840.00 Voucher:

78734 8/14/2018 0005474 U.S. HEALTHWORKS MED1CA3356677-CA 7/5/2018 JUNE 2018 - DOT RENEWALS 3,098.00 3,098.00 Voucher:

Page: 14 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 15 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check# Date Vendor Invoice mv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total

78735 8/14/2018 0006481 UNITEb RECORDS MANAGE0036887 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018 - AR DOCUMENT 8.14

Voucher: 0036883 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018 - ACCT: 3295 DOC 20.90

0036884 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018 - PERS DOCUMEI% 33.44

0036886 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018 - AP DOCUMENT 36.61

0063885 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018 - ACCNT DOCUME 12.54 0036889 6/30/2018 JUNE2O18-PAYROLLDOCUF 12.54

0036888 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018 - MISC\... DOCUMI 54.42 178.59 78736 8/14/2018 00004975 US ARMOR 19677 7/27/2018 VEST- ENFORCER CONCEAL 527.80 527.80 Voucher:

78737 8/14/2018 0011422 VELASQUEZ, ROGELIO Ref000235635- I 5/10/2018 REIS CK# 77606 - UB REFUNE 116.54 116.54 Voucher: 78738 8/14/2018 00001848 VERIZON WIRELESS 9809668052 6/23/2018 ACCT# 572436405-00001- BILl 13,415.90 13,415.90 Voucher: 78739 8/14/2018 00004323 VK IT CONSULTANTS, LLC 181263 7/15/2018 REPAIR SERVICE ON EXCHAI 593.75 593.75 Voucher: 78740 8/14/2018 00004423 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECS110693217.001 6/4/2018 HVAC EQUIPMENT REPAIR 72.76 72.76 Voucher: 78741 8/14/2018 00000028 WATER REPLENISHMENT DISMAY 2018 5/31/2018 MAY2018- GROUNDWTR PR( 222,253.38 222,253.38 Voucher: 78742 8/14/2018 00002593 WAXIE’S SANITARY SUPPLY 77547842 6/25/2018 CARPET CLEANER REPAIR 399.04 Voucher: 77581250 CREDIT FOR RETURNED ITEI -81.04 318.00 78743 8/14/2018 0010476 WECK LABORATORIES INC W8G0208-COSC 7/5/2018 WATER QUALITY SAMPLING 200.00 200.00 Voucher:

78744 8/14/2018 00000482 WEST COAST ARBORISTS, IN 134691 2/15/2018 02/01/18-02/15/18 - ANNUAL T 10,900.00

Voucher: 137902 6/30/2018 06/16/18-06/30/18 - ANNUAL T 16,330.80

136723 5/15/2018 05/01/18-05/15/18 - ANNUAL T 31,370.00

137670 6/15/2018 06/01/18-06/15/18 - ANNUAL T 18,845.00

137170 5/31/2018 05/16/18-05/31/18 - ANNUAL T 41,950.00 119,395.80

Page: 15 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 16 0810712018 6:00:02PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Invoice lnv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total 78745 8/14/2018 00000032 WEST COAST MAILERS 9585 7/19/2018 BILLS CYCLES 3 & 4 JOB# 6-1 1664.36 Voucher: 9584 7/19/2018 BILLS CYCLES 5 & 6 JOB# 6-1 1,767.38 9572 7/18/2018 BILLS CYCLES 7 & 8 JOB# 6-1 1,550.62 9570 7/18/2018 BILLS CYCLES # 10 JOB# 7-1( 161.92 9569 7/18/2018 BILLS CYCLES 1 & 2 JOB# 7-1 2,078.42 9574 7/19/2018 BILLS CYCLES 5 & 6 JOB# 6-1 322.29 9571 7/18/2018 LATE NOTICES 7 & 8 JOB# 7- 314.07 9583 7/19/2018 LATE NOTICES CYCLES 3 & 4 286.47 8,145.53 78746 8/14/2018 00004593 WESTERLY METER SERVICE 15817 5/24/2018 METER TEST 30.00 30.00 Voucher: 78747 8/14/2018 00000561 WESTERN EXTERMINATOR C6151751 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018 - WESTERN EXTE 275.00 Voucher: 6204621 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018 - WESTERN EXTE 200.00

6216202 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018 - WESTERN EXTE 195.00 6204622 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018- WESTERN EXTE 78.00 6190052 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018- WESTERN EXTE 280.00 6151752 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018- WESTERN EXTE 149.00 6222775 6/30/2018 JUNE 2018- WESTERN EXTE 114.50 1,291.50 78748 8/14/2018 00003442 YOUNGBLOOD & ASSOCIATE3288A 7/2/2018 PRE-EMPLOYMENT POLYGR 300.00 Voucher: 3289A 7/2/2018 PRE-EMPLOYMENT POLYGR, 375.00 675.00 78749 8/14/2018 00000062 ZIEGLER’S HARDWARE& SUP6567 6/25/2018 CLAMPS FOR SPORTS CENT 39.60 Voucher: 6508 6/12/2018 COUPLING, BUSHING, CEMEI 9.89

6459 - 06/05/18 6/5/2018 KEY DUPLICATED 6.59 6535 6/19/2018 MATERIALS FOR GIRLS CLUE 51.21 6552 6/21/2018 FOLDING TORX SET FOR PD 37.46 6584 6/28/2018 DUPLICATE KEYS 29.34 6571 6/26/2018 DEADBOLTS FOR BOARD UP 38.54 6437 5/30/2018 HOSE BIBB 33.05 245.68 Sub total for BANK OF THE WEST: 1,145,435.56

153 checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks: 1,145,435.56

Void Checks

Bank code: botw

Page: 16 WARRANT REGISTER COUNCIL MEETING 08/14/2018 PART II apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 0810712018 6:54:27PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST Check # Date Vendor Invoice mv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total 78599 8/2/2018 00004865 SOCALIFEDISON 08/01/18 8/1/2018 BILLINGPRD-JULY2018 16,878.13 16,878.13 Voucher: 78750 8/14/2018 00004166 4 SERVICE INC. 180750 7/1/2018 JULY 2018- OFFSITE DATAST 2,230.00 2,230.00 Voucher: 78751 8/14/2018 00003971 ADMINSURE INC. 11289 7/15/2018 JULY 2018- WORK COMP CLP 9,224.00 9,224.00 Voucher:

78752 8/14/2018 00003399 ALVARADOSMITH 326388 7/31/2018 SRVS THRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 5,925.00

Voucher: 326377 7131/2018 SRVS THRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 4,418.00

326382 7/31/2018 SRVS THRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 4,286.66

326402 7/31/2018 SRVS THRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 4,136.50

326399 7/31/2018 SRVS THRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 3,272.50

326385 7/31/2018 SRVS THRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 2,888.90

326376 7/31/2018 SRVS THRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 2,878.60

326400 7/31/2018 SRVS THRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 2,640.00

326398 7/31/2018 SRVSTHRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 2,215.00

326396 7/31/2018 SRVS THRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 2,182.50

326386 7/31/2018 SRVS THRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 2,062.50

326379 7/31/2018 SRVSTHRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 1,815.00

326395 7/31/2018 SRVSTHRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 1,575.00

326397 7/31/2018 SRVSTHRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 976.10 326374 7/31/2018 SRVSTHRU 07/31/2018-RE: 825.00 326389 7/31/2018 SRVSTHRU 07/31/2018-RE: 742.50 326380 7/31/2018 SRVSTHRU 07/31/2018-RE: 741.40

326401 7/31/2018 SRVS THRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 175.00

326387 7/31/2018 SRVS THRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 110.00

326390 7/31/2018 SRVS THRU 07/31/2018 - RE: 14,134.00

326373 7/31/2018 SRVS THRU 07/31/2018 - RE:• 8,942.50 66,942.66 78753 8/14/2018 0011608 ASTORGA, MARIA Ref000238715 7/23/2018 UB REFUND CST #00055114- 123.59 123.59 Voucher: 78754 8/14/2018 00003529 AT&T 248-134-3274-0 7/7/2018 BILLING PRD- 07/07/18 - 08/0E 9.36 9.36 Voucher: 78755 8/14/2018 0011591 AYALA, RENEA Ref000238252 7/10/2018 UB REFUND CST#00059676 - 118.79 118.79 Voucher:

Page: 1 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 2 0810712018 6:54:27PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check# Date Vendor Invoice Inv Date DescriDtion Amount Paid Check Total 78756 8/14/2018 00001102 CENTRAL BASIN WATER ASS(FY 18/19 7/2/2018 MEMBER DUES / ASSESSMEI 5,641.50 5,641.50 Voucher: 78757 8/14/2018 0008971 CMR: DELGADO, JOSE G. 07/17/2018 7/18/2018 PLANNING COMMISSION MEl 125.00 125.00 Voucher: 78758 8/14/2018 0010933 CMR: HURTADO, GIL 07/17/2018 7/18/2018 PLANNING COMMISSION MEl 125.00 125.00 Voucher: 78759 8/14/2018 00001242 CMR: MASUSHIGE, SYLVIA 07/17/2018 7/18/2018 PLANNING COMMISSION MEl 125.00 125.00 Voucher: 78760 8/14/2018 0010131 CMR: PEREZ, JENNY 07/17/2018 7/18/2018 PLANNING COMMISSION MEl 125.00 125.00 Voucher: 78761 8/14/2018 00001423 DAILY JOURNAL CORPORATI(B3151 307 7/12/2018 CITY HALL LIGHTING IMPRO\ 508.20 Voucher: B31 55793 7/26/2018 CUP NO. 829 CHUZE FITNES 201.60

B3151114 7/12/2018 ORDINANCE 2351 - ORD-ORE 92.40

B3151105 7/12/2018 ORDINANCE 2350 - ORD-ORE 84.00

B3151121 7/12/2018 ORDINANCE 2352 - ORD-ORE 79.80

B31 55453 7/26/2018 ORDINANCE 2353 - ORD-ORE 79.80 1,045.80

78762 8/14/2018 0011590 DAYRIT, PEDRO Ref000238251 7/10/2018 UB REFUND CST #00062010 - 117.44 117.44 Voucher: 78763 8/14/2018 00004746 ELECSYS CORPORATION 180362 7/28/2018 SEPTEMBER 2018- UMS SOF 350.00 350.00 Voucher: 78764 8/14/2018 0010014 FARMERS STATE BANK OF H1(1) 2568 IOWA 7/19/2018 1ST- HOMEOWNER REHAB P 32,500.00 32,500.00 Voucher: 78765 8/14/2018 0010014 FARMERS STATE BANK OF HJ(4)- 10126 ANNE 7/12/2018 4TH- HOMEOWNER REHAB F 6,500.00 6,500.00 Voucher: 78766 8/14/2018 00002026 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPOR6-243-59591 7/13/2018 FEDEX STANDARD OVERNIG 13.02 13.02 Voucher:

78767 8/14/2018 0010237 FRONTIER COMMUNICATION:562-923-9514-0 7/10/2018 BILLING -07/10/2018 - 08/09/2( 104.34

Voucher: 562-928-0039- 0 7/25/2018 BILLING - 0/25/2018 - 08/24120 59.16

562-622-5327-0 7/19/2018 BILLING- 07/19/2018 - 08/18/2( 59.16 222.66

78768 8/14/2018 00004934 GAS COMPANY 189 300 9500 7-i 7/18/2018 BILLING PRD- 06/14/18 - 07/IE 1,135.99

Voucher: 083 407 6536 4-I 7/23/2018 BILLING PRD- 06/19/18 - 07/1 17.62 1,153.61 78769 8/14/2018 0006852 GOALS SOCCER CENTER SUMMER ‘18 F’Y 7/18/2018 SOCCER- 07/05/18-08/28/18 2,865.43 2,865.43 Voucher:

78770 8/14/2018 0011593 IBARRA, JESSE Ref000238254 7/10/2018 UB REFUND CST #00054390 - 145.64 145.64 Voucher:

Page: 2 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 0810712018 6:54:27PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Invoice Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total 78771 8/14/2018 0011606 LOPEZ, MELINA Ref000238713 7/23/2018 UB REFUND CST #00057774- 38.83 38.83 Voucher:

78772 8/14/2018 0011596 LYONS JR, CHARLES J Ref000238257 7/10/2018 UB REFUND CST #00058673 - 17493 174.93 Voucher:

78773 8/14/2018 0011595 LYONS, CHARLES JR Ref000238256 7110/2018 UB REFUND CST #00054972 - 160.00 160.00 Voucher:

78774 8/14/2018 0011597 LYONS, JR, CHARLES J. Ref000238258 7/10/2018 UB REFUND CST #00058674 - 174.93 174.93 Voucher: 78775 8/14/2018 0009213 MARTINEZ. GILBERT 07/17/18 7/17/2018 DJ SRVS- 8/24/18 SUMMER Y 300.00 300.00 Voucher:

78776 8/14/2018 00000449 MISC - EMPLOYEE REFUND TANG,KENNET[ 7/7/2018 REIMBURSE KENNETH TANG 450.00 450.00 Voucher:

78777 8/14/2018 00000170 MISC - PKS & REC REFUND GOLDEN WEST 7/18/2018 101430- GOLDEN WEST CAT 43000 430.00 Voucher:

- 78778 8/14/2018 00000170 MISC - PKS & REC REFUND RODRIGUEZ, B 7/10/2018 116183 RODRIGUEZ, BEATR 277.00 277.00 Voucher:

- - 78779 8/14/2018 00000170 MISC - PKS & REC REFUND OROZCO, J 4/19/2018 112729 OROZCO, JOSE RE 277.00 277.00 Voucher:

- - REFI 48.00 48.00 78780 8/14/2018 00000170 MISC - PKS & REC REFUND ORTEGA, L 7/16/2018 126063 ORTEGA, LUZ Voucher:

- 48.00 78781 8/14/2018 00000170 MISC - PKS & REC REFUND RAMIREZ, G 7/16/2018 126503 RAMIREZ, GLORIA R 48.00 Voucher: 48.00 78782 8/14/2018 00000170 MISC - PKS & REC REFUND MORENO, Y 7/16/2018 126079 MORENO, YOLANDA 48.00 Voucher:

- 48.00 48.00 78783 8/14/2018 00000170 MISC - PKS & REC REFUND HERNANDEZ, L 7/16/2018 126339 HERNANDEZ, LETICI Voucher:

- 48.00 48.00 78784 8/14/2018 00000170 MISC - PKS & REC REFUND LOZANO, R 7/16/2018 126339 LOZANO, ROSALBA Voucher:

- HELEN - REFI 35.00 35.00 78785 8/14/2018 00000170 MISC - PKS & REC REFUND COLE, H 7/9/2018 128992 COLE, Voucher: 78786 8/14/2018 00004180 MISC: EVIDENCE REFUND 15-10911-MELEI 7/17/2018 CASE#15-10911-EDGARDO M 1,390.75 1,390.75 Voucher: 78787 8/14/2018 0008506 MUNITEMPS 128471-201 9 7/13/2018 07/01/18-07/07/18 - PW PROJE 3,000.00 Voucher: 128472-2019 7/13/2018 07/01/18-07/07/18 - HR ANALY: 1,457.75 4,457.75

Page: 3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 0810712018 6:54:27PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Invoice Inv Date DescriDtion Amount Paid Check Total 78788 8/14/2018 0009426 MVCHENG &ASSOCIATES, II’0731/18 8/1/2018 JULY2018- INTERIM SENIOR 10,360.00 10,360.00 Voucher: 78789 8/14/2018 00004713 PETTY CASH- PARKS & REC.C07/05/18-07/09-1 6/28/2018 PETTY CASH RECEIPTS- 07/C 53.29 53.29 Voucher: 78790 8/14/2018 00001921 PK: ALCANTARA, RAUL SUMMER ‘18 F’Y 7/17/2018 PIANO/GUITAR CLASSESS- 0 1,417.72 1,417.72 Voucher:

78791 8/14/2018 00004271 PK: BETANCOURT, CRYSTAL SUMMER ‘18 F”Y 7/16/2018 DANCE - 07/07/18-08/16/18 5,846.14 5,846.14 Voucher: 78792 8/14/2018 00001643 PK: DIAZ, VANESSA SUMMER ‘18 FY 7/17/2018 BALLET/MEX FOLK CLASSES 2,475.81 2,475.81 Voucher: 78793 8/14/2018 0010952 PK: GANDARA, MARIBEL SUMMER ‘18 F’i’ 7/16/2018 SCIENCE CAMP- 07/02/18-07/ 837.26 837.26 Voucher: 78794 8/14/2018 0005732 PK: GONZALEZ, JESSICA SUMMER ‘18 F’Y 7/17/2018 CHEERLEADING- 07/11/2018- 1,305.92 1,305.92 Voucher: 78795 8/14/2018 0006250 PK: GUTIERREZ, LAZARO SUMMER’18 F’Y 7/18/2018 TENNIS LESSONS- 07/02/18-C 1,180.61 1,180.61 Voucher: 78796 8/14/2018 0008741 PK: HINDU, CLAUDIA SUMMER ‘18 FY 7/17/2018 ART CLASSES- 07/03/18-08/1 788.99 788.99 Voucher: 78797 8/14/2018 00003708 PK: LASTRA, MARY SUMMER ‘18 F”Y 7/17/2018 MEX. FOLK CLASSES- 07/11/1 1,169.89 1,169.89 Voucher: 78798 8/14/2018 0009212 PK: RAMOS, GUNTHER H. AL(SUMMER 2018 7/17/2018 DOG OBEDIENCE- 07/07J201 554.40 554.40 Voucher: 78799 8/14/2018 0010824 PK: RENTERIA, CAMILO SUMMER 20181 7/18/2018 DURON ADULT BASEBALL- 0 2,605.26 2,605.26 Voucher: 78800 8/14/2018 0011175 PK: ROJAS-SEITZ, NEREIDA SUMMER ‘18 F”Y 7/17/2018 HULA- 07/02/18-07/30/18 310.93 310.93 Voucher: 78801 8/14/2018 00000339 POSTMASTER PRMT#2280- FA 7/31/2018 PERMIT#2280, TYPE P1- FALL 5,325.11 5,325.11 Voucher: 78802 8/14/2018 0006933 PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTI523364 7/16/2018 SRVS: 7/09-10/18, PRE-EMPL( 800.00 800.00 Voucher: 78803 8/14/2018 0010122 R & M SERVICE SOLUTIONS, 12975 7/6/2018 VIDEO INSPECTION - 10” PIPI 5,250.00 5,250.00 Voucher: 78804 8/14/2018 0011589 ROCHA, FRANCES Ref000238250 7/10/2018 UB REFUND CST#00058870 - 15.28 15.28 Voucher:

Page: 4 ______

apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 0810712018 6:54:27PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Invoice mv Date DescriDtion Amount Paid Check Total

78805 8/14/2018 0011598 RUIZ, ANGELICA Ref000238259 7/10/2018 UB REFUND CST#00062269 - 177.54 177.54 Voucher:

78806 8/14/2018 0011588 SALGADO JR, MIGUEL Ref000238249 7/10/2018 UB REFUND CST#00036291 - 12.65 12.65 Voucher: 78807 8/14/2018 0011607 SANDOVAL, DAYRA Ref000238714 7/23/2018 UB REFUND CST#00054813- 56.77 56.77 Voucher:

78808 8/14/2018 0011594 SOUTH GATE FOOD INC. Ref000238255 7/10)2018 UB REFUND CST#00047741 - 155.31 155.31 Voucher: 78809 8/14/2018 0011622 THE JANICE M. BELLUCCI JANICE M. BELl. 7/24/2018 PAYMENT OF SETTLEMENTP 5,000.00 5,000.00 Voucher: 78810 8/14/2018 0006990 TRADEWINDS INTERNATION?18-183-1 7/2/2018 GRAFFITI REMMOVING GEL? 398.00 398.00 Voucher: 78811 8/14/2018 00005245 TWEEDY MILE ASSOCIATION 07/18/18 7/18/2018 TMA- FY2017-2018 COLLEC1 23,936.89 23,936.89 Voucher: 78812 8/14/2018 0008005 U.S. BANK-PARS ACCT#6746OSEPTEMBER 2C 9/1/2018 PARS SUPPLMNTL RETIREM 5,601.85 5,601.85 Voucher: 78813 8/14/2018 0008005 U.S. BANK-PARS ACCT#674600CT 2018- R.BP 10/1/2018 OCTOBER2018- RON BATES. 160.00 160.00 Voucher: 78814 8)14/2018 00001928 U.S. POSTAL SVC/PITNEY BOSEPTEMBER 2C 9/1/2018 POSTAGE- SEPTEMBER 2018 2,500.00 2,500.00 Voucher: 78815 8/14/2018 00003928 US BANK TRUST N.A. 788757000- 08/2 8/1/2018 AUGUST2018 -2005 PERS 01 167,703.25 Voucher: 165017000- 08/2 8/1/2018 AUGUST 2018 - SERIES 2012 146,004.17

94431820- 09/2C 9/1/2018 SEPTEMBER 2018 - 2001 SER 115,416.67 429,124.09

78816 8/14/2018 00000379 VERIZON BUSINESS 05356086 7/25/2018 BILLING PRD- 06/15/2018 - 07 55.10 55.10 Voucher: 78817 8/14/2018 0011592 WANG, HONG FANG Ref000238253 7/10/2018 UB REFUND CST#00062360 - 143.21 143.21 Voucher: 78818 8/14/2018 0011609 ZECENA, CHRISTOPHER Ref000238716 7)23/2018 UB REFUND CST#00062406- 124.12 124.12 Voucher: 7312018 7/31/2018 00004309 AMERIFLEX JULY2018 7/31/2018 JULY2018- ACH DEBITS BOV 1,465.88 1,465.88 Voucher: )1129905 7)30/2018 00000343 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIRETO7OII8 7/30/2018 UNFUNDED LIABILITY- SAFE 1,032.00 1,032.00 Voucher: )1 129906 7/30/2018 00000343 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREI 1001129906 7/30)2018 UNFUNDED LIABILITY- SAFE 2,690,918.00 2,690,918.00 Voucher:

Page: 5 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 0810712018 6:54:27PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Invoice mv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total )1 129907 7/30/2018 00000343 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREI1 001129907 7/30/2018 UNFUNDED LIABILITY- MISC 2,063,674.00 2,063,674.00 Voucher: Sub total for BANK OF THE WEST: 5,419,819.84

74 checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks: 5,419,819.84

Void Checks

Bank code: botw (none)

Page: 6 WARRANT REGISTER COUNCIL MEETING 08/14/2018 PART III

apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 0712512018 3:20:57PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST

Check # Date Vendor Invoice — Inv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total 1518 7/26/2018 00002370 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE Ben238657 7I26I2018 MEDICARE: PAYMENT 144,615.10 144,615.10 Voucher: 1519 7/26/2018 00000343 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMEFBen238659 7/26/2018 PERS RETIREMENT PAYMENT & 221,243.46 221,243.46 Voucher: 1520 7I26I2018 00001186 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DBen238661 7/26/2018 SDI: PAYMENT 46,665.82 46,665.82 Voucher: 1521 7/26/2018 00000004 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLLBen238663 7/26/2018 DEF COMP NATIONWIDE: PAYME 49,325.83 49,325.83 Voucher: 1522 7/26/2018 00004836 SEIU LOCAL 721 CTWCLC-23900Ben238665 7/26/2018 SEIU DUES: PAYMENT 3,175.80 3175.80 Voucher: 1523 7/26/2018 00004996 SEIU-COPE LOCAL 721, LA/OC CI Ben238667 7/2612018 SEIU- COPE LOCAL 721 DEDUC1 46.50 46.50 Voucher: 1524 7/26/2018 00004988 CHILD SUPPORT ON-LINE, STATEBen238669 7/2612018 CHILD SUPPORT-ONLINE: PAYMI 1,941.70 1,941.70 Voucher: 1525 7/26/2018 00000343 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMEBen238708 7/26/2018 PERS RETIREMENT: PAYMENT 6,742.86 6,742.86 Voucher: 1526 7/26/2018 00001186 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DBen238710 7/26/2018 SDI: PAYMENT 985.12 985.12 Voucher: 1527 7/26/2018 00002370 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE Ben238712 7/26/2018 MEDICARE: PAYMENT 3,765.27 3,765.27 Voucher: 78593 7/26/2018 0009920 OCSE CLEARINGHOUSE SDU 8en238655 7/26/2018 GARNISHMENT-AR CHILD SUPF 324.00 324.00 Voucher: 78594 7/26/2018 0008951 SENCION, CARMEN Ben238653 7/26/2018 SPOUSAL SUPPORT-E. SENCIOI 553.85 553.85 Voucher: 78595 7/26/2018 0008005 U.S. BANK-PARS ACCT#67460225Ben238651 7/26/2018 PARS 11.87%: PAYMENT 749.66 749.66 Voucher: Sub total for BANK OF THE WEST: 480,134.97

13 Checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks: 480,134.97 Void Checks

Bank code: bot• (r iur Page: 1 WARRANT REGISTER COUNCIL MEETING 08/14/2018 PART IV apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 0711912018 8:29:55AM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST Check # Date Vendor Invoice mv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total

78590 7/19/2018 0005450 C & J LIFT TRUCKING INC R-33427 6/19/2018 06/19/18 - 07/16/18 - C&J LIFT 964.69

Voucher: R-33361 5/22/2018 05/22/18 - 06/18/18 - C&J LIFT 964.69 1,929.38 Sub total for BANK OF THE WEST: 1,929.38

I checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks: 1,929.38

Void Checks

Bank code: botw (none)

Page: 1 WARRANT REGISTER COUNCIL MEETING 08/14/2018 PART V apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 0712312018 1:21:56PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST Check # Date Vendor Invoice mv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total 78591 7/23/2018 0010126 SFG RETIREMENT PLAN 117 5/14/2018 1ST QUARTER 2018 NATlONj 7,660.21 Voucher: 116 5/14/2018 4TH QUARTER 2017 NATlON 7,551.45 115 5/14/2018 3RD QUARTER 2017 NATlON 7,380.87 114 5/14/2018 2ND QUARTER 2017 NATlON 1,680.18 113 5/14/2018 1ST QUARTER 2017 NATIONd 1,519.96 112 5/14/2018 4TH QUARTER 2016 NATlON 796.72 26,589.39 Sub total for BANK OF THE WEST: 26,589.39

I checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks: 26,589.39

Void Checks

Bank code: botw (none)

Page: 1 WARRANT REGISTER COUNCIL MEETING 08/14/2018 PART VI apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 0713112018 5:43:15PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST Check # Date Vendor Invoice mv Date Description Amount Paid Check Total 78597 7/31/2018 0008914 AMERICAN EXPRESS 00004000 WASTE MANAGEMENT 1176232-2684-4 7/1/2018 JULY 2018- 263-1669: RESDTL 304,896.00

00004000 WASTE MANAGEMENT 1175652-2684-4 6/18/2018 06101118-06115/18 - 00019-758 249.96

00004000 WASTE MANAGEMENT 1173433-2684-1 5/1/2018 04/16/18-04/29/18 - 00019-758 24764

00004000 WASTE MANAGEMENT 1173499-2684-2 5/16/2018 05/01/18-05/15/18 - 00019-758 24672

00004000 WASTE MANAGEMENT 1175521-2684-1 6/1/2018 05/16/18-05/30/18 - 0001 9-758 235.23 305,875.55 Sub total for BANK OF THE WEST: 305,875.55

I checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks: 305,875.55

Void Checks

Bank code: botw (none)

Page: 1 WARRANT REGISTER COUNCIL MEETING 08/14/2018 PART VII apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 0810112018 4:42:10PM City of South Gate

Bank: botw BANK OF THE WEST Check # Date Vendor Invoice mv Date DescriDtion Amount Paid Check Total 78598 8/1/2018 00002005 PACIFIC PLUMBING SPECIALT4439-1 6/19/2018 REPLACE FAUCET IN SENIOF 302.82 Voucher: 4439-0 6/13/2018 SPARE TOILET SEATS FOR P 294.00 596.82 Sub total for BANK OF THE WEST: 596.82

I checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks: 596.82

Void Checks

Bank code: botw (none)

Page: 1 WARRANT REGISTER COUNCIL MEETiNG 08/14/2018 TOTALS FISCAL YEAR 20 18/2019

TOTAL AP PART I - FY 201 7I2018 1,145,435.56

TOTAL AP PART II - FY 201812019 5,419,819.84

TOTAL PAYROLL PART III - 07I26I2018 480,134.97

TOTAL PREPAIDS PART IV-0711912018 - FYI 7118 1,929.38

TOTAL PREPAIDS PART V - 0712312018 - FYI 7118 26,589.39

TOTAL PREPAIDS PART VI - 07I31I2018 305,875.55

TOTAL PREPAIDS PART VII - 08I01I2018 - FYI 7118 596.82

TOTAL 7,380,381.51

VOIDS ($1796.46)

LESS: EMPLOYEE PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS ($202,049.35) TOTAL 7,176,535.20 SOUTH GATE CITY COUNCIL WARRANT APPROVAL AND CANCELLATION

Warrant Number 78590 to Number 78818 Inclusive, Totaling $ 7,176,535.20 as listed on the accompanying Accounts Payable Warrant Register of August 14, 2018 and approved as presented, with the exception of the following warrants:

CHECKWAS LOSTIN 77606 VELASQUEZ, ROGELIO 05/22/2018 116.54 MAIL. WILLBE REISSUED CHECKNEEDS TO BE 78236 LAKESHORE 07/10/2018 469.71 VOIDEDDUETO DUPLICATEPAYMENT CHECKNEEDSBE ISSUE TN 78256 DELGADO, DYLAN 07/10/2018 78.00 PARENT’SNAMEiNSTEAD OF THE CHILD’SNAME “ SEE NEXT PAGE FOR STALE 1,092.21 DATED CHECKS”

GRAND TOTAL OF VOiDED CHECKS $ 1,796.46

CITY AUIMTOR CITY MANAGER

DIRECTOR4/ OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES

Pursuant to action of the City Council on August 14 , 2018 at a regular or adjourned meeting, the City Treasurer was ordered to pay andlor cancel the above demands, as approved. STALE DATED CHECKS FOR 0811412018

Cancelled Warrant# Payee Date Amount Description

74541 MAGALLONPISANO, MARIA 11/14/2017 67.73 STALE DATED

74568 BRUCKI, RAQUEL 11/14/2017 31.00 STALE DATED

74633 RODRIGUEZ, LETICIA 11/14/2017 103.62 STALE DATED

74858 RET: DODSON, TIMOTHY 11/28/2017 150.00 STALE DATED

75088 PD: ARANA, MANUEL 12/12/2017 224.56 STALE DATED (WILL BE REISSUED)

75298 NUNEZ, JOSE 12/20/2017 56.90 STALE DATED

75418 SMITH, ERIKA 12/20/2017 28.15 STALE DATED

75523 MENDOZA, BRIAN 01/09/2018 106.93 STALE DATED

75525 SEKIYA, JONATHAN 01/09/2018 100.00 STALE DATED (WILL BE REISSUED)

75538 PD: GONZALEZ, ALEXIS 01/09/2018 44.27 STALE DATED (WILLBE REISSUED)

75696 PD: MAClAS, ARTURO 01/23/2018 56.00 STALE DATED (WILL BE REISSUED)

75697 PD: MARIN,DERRICK 01/23/2018 123.05 STALE DATED (WILLBE REISSUED)

TOTAL: 1,092.21