CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA

Monday, March 24, 2014

REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 PM

COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3575 PACIFIC AVENUE LIVERMORE, CA 94550

CITY COUNCIL

John Marchand, Mayor Bob Woerner, Vice Mayor Stewart Gary, Councilmember Doug Horner, Councilmember Laureen Turner, Councilmember

Regular City Council meetings are broadcast live on Channel 29 and videotaped for local television and for replay. For a schedule of City Council meeting replay airtimes or to access videos of previous meetings, log onto www.tri-valleytv.org. City Council meetings are also streamed live on the web at www.tri-valleytv.org/live-tv29.html.

1 HOW TO PARTICIPATE IN YOUR CITY COUNCIL MEETING

You can participate in the meeting in a number of ways:

Speaker Cards - If you wish to address the Council, you must complete a speaker card for each item about which you want to speak. The speaker card box is located in the Council Chambers lobby. Place your speaker card in this box behind the tab that corresponds to the agenda item number. Staff will collect the cards for each item immediately before the item is to be considered and gives the speaker cards to the Mayor. The Mayor will call speakers to the public lectern. No cards will be accepted once the presentation on that item has commenced.

Citizens Forum is an opportunity for the public to speak regarding items not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to a maximum of three minutes per person. The Mayor may reduce the amount of time based on the number of persons wishing to speak. You should be aware that the City Council is prohibited by State law from taking action on any items that are not listed on the agenda. However, if your item requires action, the City Council may place it on a future agenda or direct staff to work with you and/or report to the City Council on the issue.

Public Hearings - The topic of the hearing is typically summarized by staff, followed by questions from the City Council and a presentation by the applicant. The Mayor will then open the hearing to the public and offer an opportunity for public comments. You may take a maximum of three minutes to make your comments.

Other Agenda Items are also open for public input including Consent Calendar or Matters for Consideration items. These comments are also subject to the three minute limit.

Written Materials may be submitted by the public. If you wish your materials to be sent to the City Council prior to the City Council meeting, they must be submitted to the City Clerk’s Office no later than noon on Friday, ten days prior to the Monday meeting. Those items will be copied and sent to the City Council with the agenda packet. Materials submitted after noon on Friday, ten days prior to the meeting will be copied and given to the City Council the night of the meeting; however, it is unlikely that the City Council will be able to read the materials before the start of the meeting. Therefore, it is suggested that you give a verbal summary of your materials at the meeting.

The City Council Agenda and Agenda Reports are prepared by City staff and are available for public review on Friday evening, ten days prior to the City Council meeting in the Civic Center Library, 1188 South Livermore Avenue, Livermore, and at the City Clerk’s Office, 1052 South Livermore Avenue, Livermore. The Agenda is also available on the City’s website, http://cityoflivermore.net.

Under Government Code §54957.5, any supplemental material distributed to the members of the City Council after the posting of this agenda will be available for public review in the City Clerk’s Office, 1052 South Livermore Avenue, Livermore, and on the City’s web site http://cityoflivermore.net.

If supplemental materials are made available to the members of the City Council at the meeting, a copy will be available for public review at the Council Chambers, 3575 Pacific Avenue, Livermore.

PURSUANT TO TITLE II OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (CODIFIED AT 42 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 12101 AND 28 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 35), AND SECTION 504 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973, THE CITY OF LIVERMORE DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, ANCESTRY, SEX, DISABILITY, AGE OR SEXUAL ORIENTATION IN THE PROVISION OF ANY SERVICES, PROGRAMS, OR ACTIVITIES. TO ARRANGE AN ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PUBLIC MEETING, PLEASE CALL (925) 960-4200 (VOICE) OR (925) 960-4104 (TDD) AT LEAST 72 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING.

2 CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA

MONDAY, MARCH 24, 2014

REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 PM

COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3575 PACIFIC AVENUE LIVERMORE, CA 94550

REGULAR MEETING

1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 PM

1.01 Roll Call Councilmember Stewart Gary Councilmember Doug Horner Councilmember Laureen Turner Vice Mayor Bob Woerner Mayor John Marchand

1.02 Pledge of Allegiance

2. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

2.01 Proclamation Declaring April Community Service Recognition Month in Livermore.

Document PAGE 9

3. CITIZENS FORUM

• In conformance with the Brown Act, no City Council action can occur on items presented during Citizens Forum. • Please complete a speaker card. When the Mayor calls your name, walk to the lectern to address the City Council.

Livermore City Council Agenda March 24, 2014

3 • Speakers are limited to a maximum of three minutes per person. The Mayor may reduce the amount of time based on the number of persons wishing to speak. • Citizens Forum will conclude after 30 minutes; however, if there are additional speakers, Citizens Forum will reconvene at 9:30 pm, or following the Public Hearings, whichever occurs first.

4. CONSENT CALENDAR

Consent Calendar items are considered routine and are acted upon by the City Council with a single action. Members of the audience wishing to provide public input must complete a speaker card.

4.01 Approval of minutes - March 10, 2014 regular City Council meeting.

Draft Minutes PAGE 10

4.02 Resolution authorizing execution of a cooperative agreement with Alameda County Housing and Community Development Department for participation in the Alameda County Home Investment in Affordable Housing Program (HOME) Consortium for Fiscal Years 2015-2016, 2016-2017, and 2017- 2018.

Staff Report PAGE 17 Attachment 1 - HOME Funded Projects Resolution Agreement

4.03 Resolution authorizing execution of an agreement with WLC Architects in the amount of $388,700, for design services for Fire Station No. 9 located at 1919 Cordoba Street, Project No. 1994-55.

Staff Report PAGE 24 Resolution Agreement

4.04 Resolution authorizing execution of an Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreement with WRA, Inc., environmental consultants, to assess the opportunity for establishing a conservation and/or mitigation bank on City- owned properties in Doolan Canyon and the Springtown Alkali Sink.

Staff Report PAGE 60 Attachment 1 - Location Map Attachment 2 - Request for Proposals

Livermore City Council Agenda March 24, 2014

4 Attachment 3 - WRA Proposal Resolution Agreement

4.05 Resolution accepting for permanent maintenance and releasing of security for the Building Demolition & Asbestos Abatement at 50 South L Street, Project No. 586003.

Staff Report PAGE 157 Resolution

4.06 Resolution accepting for permanent maintenance and releasing of security for Parcel Map 9046 public improvements, located on the Southwest corner of National Drive and Greenville Road.

Staff Report PAGE 160 Attachment 1 - Location Map Resolution

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS

5.01 Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) hearing regarding the issuance of tax exempt bonds by the Public Finance Authority for and on behalf of, and for the benefit of, Educational Media Foundation, a California nonprofit corporation. (This item was continued from the March 10, 2014 City Council meeting.)

Recommendation: Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution approving the issuance and sale of tax exempt bonds by the Public Finance Authority for and on behalf of, and for the benefit of, Educational Media Foundation, a California Nonprofit corporation, in one or more series and in the aggregate principal amount of approximately $30,000,000.

Staff Report PAGE 165 Resolution

6. MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

6.01 Discussion and direction regarding City Council appointments to Intergovernmental Agencies. A verbal report may be given.

6.02 Discussion and direction regarding City Council benefits.

Recommendation: Staff recommends the City Council provide direction.

Livermore City Council Agenda March 24, 2014

5 Staff Report PAGE 170 Attachment 1 - Benefits Summary

6.03 Update on the Crime Free Multi-Housing Program.

Recommendation: This report is for information only.

Staff Report PAGE 174

6.04 Discussion and direction regarding pending State or Federal legislation.

Note: Bills affecting local government operations may be discussed if they were introduced or amended after posting of the Agenda.

7. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND MATTERS INITIATED BY CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY, STAFF, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS

7.01 Council Committee Reports and Matters Initiated by City Manager, City Attorney, Staff, and Councilmembers. A verbal report may be given.

8. ADJOURNMENT – To a regular City Council meeting on April 14, 2014 at 7:00 pm, Council Chambers, 3575 Pacific Avenue, Livermore.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS DOCUMENT

Livermore City Council Agenda March 24, 2014

6 Table of Contents

Agenda 1 Proclamation Declaring April Community Service Recognition Month in Livermore. Document 9 Approval of minutes - March 10, 2014 regular City Council meeting. Draft Minutes 10 Resolution authorizing execution of a cooperative agreement with Alameda County Housing and Community Development Department for participation in the Alameda County Home Investment in Affordable Housing Program (HOME) Consortium for Fiscal Years 2015-2016, 2016-2017, and 2017-2018. Staff Report 17 Attachment 1 - HOME Funded Projects 19 Resolution 20 Agreement 21 Resolution authorizing execution of an agreement with WLC Architects in the amount of $388,700, for design services for Fire Station No. 9 located at 1919 Cordoba Street, Project No. 1994-55. Staff Report 24 Resolution 27 Agreement 28 Resolution authorizing execution of an Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreement with WRA, Inc., environmental consultants, to assess the opportunity for establishing a conservation and/or mitigation bank on City-owned properties in Doolan Canyon and the Springtown Alkali Sink. Staff Report 60 Attachment 1 - Location Map 64 Attachment 2 - Request for Proposals 65 Attachment 3 - WRA Proposal 79 Resolution 130 Agreement 131 Resolution accepting for permanent maintenance and releasing of security for the Building Demolition & Asbestos Abatement at 50 South L Street, Project No. 586003. Staff Report 157 Resolution 159 Resolution accepting for permanent maintenance and releasing of security for Parcel Map 9046 public improvements, located on the Southwest corner of National Drive and Greenville Road. Staff Report 160 Attachment 1 - Location Map 162 Resolution 163

7 Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) hearing regarding the issuance of tax exempt bonds by the Public Finance Authority for and on behalf of, and for the benefit of, Educational Media Foundation, a California nonprofit corporation. (This item was continued from the March 10, 2014 City Council meeting.) Staff Report 165 Resolution 168 Discussion and direction regarding City Council benefits. Staff Report 170 Attachment 1 - Benefits Summary 173 Update on the Crime Free Multi-Housing Program. Staff Report 174

8 ITEM 2.01

PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL COMMUNITY SERVICE RECOGNITION MONTH IN LIVERMORE

(The Proclamation will be presented at the meeting.)

9 ITEM 4.01

DRAFT MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL MARCH 10, 2014 ______

CLOSED SESSION

CALL TO ORDER – The Closed Session of the City Council was called to order by Vice Mayor Bob Woerner at 6:02 pm, in the City Administration Building, Cabernet Room, 1052 South Livermore Avenue, Livermore, California.

ROLL CALL – Present: Mayor John Marchand, Vice Mayor Bob Woerner, and Councilmembers Stewart Gary, Doug Horner and Laureen Turner.

Mayor Marchand participated by teleconference from the following location: Washington Marriott Wardman Park Hotel, 2660 Woodley Road NW, Washington, District of Columbia.

OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING CLOSED SESSION ITEMS.

ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION

1. Conference with Real Property Negotiator. To meet with J. Morrow Otis of Moscone, Emblidge, Sater & Otis, the City’s negotiator pursuant to Government Code section 54956.8, regarding the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of real property known as the Bankhead Theater, located at 2400 First Street, Livermore, CA 94550, Assessor's Parcel Number 098-0407-028- 01. The City negotiator may negotiate with Ed Willig on behalf of the Livermore Valley Performing Arts Center. The instructions will concern price and terms of payment.

2. Existing Litigation. To meet with the City Attorney regarding existing litigation pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1). Discussion in open session would prejudice the position of the City in litigation. Two cases.

a. City of Livermore, et al. v. All Persons Interested, Sacramento County Superior Court Case No. 34-2012-00132727

b. LVPAC v. State of CA Dept. of Finance; Ana J. Matosantos; Does 1-50, RPI The Successor Agency to the Livermore Redevelopment Agency, Sacramento County Superior Court Case No. 34-2013-80001370

MARCH 10, 2014 Minutes CM/71/215

10 ______

REGULAR MEETING

1. CALL TO ORDER – The meeting of the City Council was called to order by Vice Mayor Bob Woerner at 7:05 pm, in the City Council Chambers, 3575 Pacific Avenue, Livermore, California.

1.01 ROLL CALL – Present: Vice Mayor Bob Woerner, and Councilmembers Stewart Gary, Doug Horner, and Laureen Turner.

Mayor Marchand was absent/excused.

VM Woerner said Mayor Marchand participated in the Closed Session via teleconference; he would not be participating in the regular meeting.

1.02 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

City of Livermore Girl Scouts conducted the flag ceremony.

1.03 REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION

City Attorney Jason Alcala said there was no reportable action.

2. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

2.01 Proclamation declaring March 9-15, 2014 Girl Scout Week.

Vice Mayor Woerner presented a proclamation to members of Livermore Girl Scouts declaring March 9-15, 2014 Girl Scout Week.

3. CITIZENS FORUM

Steve Goodman, Livermore, said Granada High School was celebrating its 50th birthday Memorial Day Weekend and invited all to attend the golf tournament at Las Positas on Friday, May 23rd, and other events during the day on Saturday, May 24th.

Mitchell Abdallahl, Sacramento, spoke regarding the Tree of Life Group, and submitted a letter requesting the City change the ban on medical marijuana dispensaries in the City.

Ramin Ahmed, CEO, Tree of Life, said Tree of Life was a non-profit medical collective that served the community.

Andrea Sarbak, Livermore, spoke in support of the Tree of Life. She asked the Council to provide the service of a medicinal marijuana dispensary in the City to serve its residents.

CM/71/216 Minutes MARCH 10, 2014

11

Jeff Sarbak, Livermore, spoke in support of the Tree of Life and said using medical cannabis helped reduce dangerous chemicals in his body.

Jim Schmidt, Livermore, spoke regarding the high cost of closing the Bankhead Theater and the depressing effect on the surrounding businesses and the arts and culture in the community.

Pat Ferguson, Livermore, spoke regarding special funds used for the Bankhead Theater. She said the Council should try and purchase the Bankhead at the lowest cost possible.

Ryan Jones, spoke in support of the Tree of Life and that marijuana helped him to focus in school better. He said closing the dispensary could create more problems than it solved.

Don Meeker, Livermore, spoke regarding the sewer systems in 1908 to 1914.

Elizabeth Reynolds, spoke regarding her personal need and benefit from medical marijuana.

Deanne VanKirk spoke regarding her personal need and benefit from medical marijuana, hemp seeds and hemp hearts.

Taylor Yapp spoke in support of the Tree of Life and his personal benefit from medical marijuana.

Judy Galletti, Livermore, spoke regarding the Constitutional Champions Camp.

4. CONSENT CALENDAR

CM Turner requested Item 4.06 be removed from the Consent Calendar and voted on separately.

Item 4.06 Pat Ferguson spoke regarding homelessness, the economy, government funding and services.

ON THE MOTION OF CM GARY, SECONDED BY CM HORNER AND CARRIED ON A 4-0 VOTE, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED ITEMS 4.01-4.05 ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

ON THE MOTION OF CM GARY, SECONDED BY CM HORNER AND CARRIED ON A 3-1 VOTE, CM TURNER VOTING NO, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED ITEM 4.06.

4.01 Approval of Minutes - February 24, 2014 regular City Council meeting.

4.02 Resolution 2014-029 declaring non-complying parcels a public nuisance requiring abatement, directing staff to proceed with the 2014 Fire Hazard

MARCH 10, 2014 Minutes CM/71/217

12 Abatement Program, and setting a public hearing date of April 28, 2014.

4.03 Resolution 2014-030 authorizing execution of an agreement with DeSilva Gates Construction LP in the amount of $2,319,838, for construction of the El Charro Specific Plan Infrastructure Phase 2A, Project No. 2007-2044.

4.04 Resolution 2014-031 authorizing execution of a Low Income Housing Agreement with SummerHill Brisa, LLC for the subdivision located at the intersection of Vasco Road and Brisa Street (VTTM 7870).

4.05 Resolution 2014-032 authorizing execution of the first amendment to the lease agreement with Livermore Premium Outlets, LLC for overflow parking on Livermore Municipal Airport property.

4.06 Resolution 2014-033 approving the Guidelines for Implementation of the Camping Ordinance.

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS

5.01 Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) hearing regarding the issuance of tax exempt bonds by the Public Finance Authority for and on behalf of, and for the benefit of, Educational Media Foundation, a California nonprofit corporation.

Recommendation: Staff recommended this item be continued to the March 24, 2014 City Council meeting.

ON THE MOTION OF CM HORNER, SECONDED BY CM GARY AND CARRIED ON A 4-0 VOTE, THE CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED THE HEARING TO THE MARCH 24, 2014 CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

6. MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

6.01 Discussion and direction regarding City Council appointments to Intergovernmental Agencies. None.

6.02 Discussion and direction regarding City Council benefits.

Recommendation: Staff recommended the City Council provide direction.

THE CITY COUNCIL RESCHEDULED THIS ITEM TO THE MARCH 24, 2014 CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

6.03 Discussion and direction regarding the approval of the 2014 Alameda County Transportation Expenditure Plan (TEP) and request that the County Board of Supervisors place the TEP on the November 4, 2014 ballot. The ballot measure supported by the TEP will augment and extend the existing half-cent sales tax for transportation in Alameda County, for a 30-year term to fund the transportation programs and projects described in the TEP.

CM/71/218 Minutes MARCH 10, 2014

13

Recommendation: Staff recommended the City Council adopt a resolution approving the 2014 Alameda County Transportation Expenditure Plan (TEP) and request that the County Board of Supervisors place the TEP on the November 4, 2014 ballot.

Assistant City Engineer Bob Vinn presented the staff report. Alameda County Transportation Commission Executive Director Art Dao presented an overview of the Transportation Expenditure Plan.

VM Woerner invited public comment.

In response to questions by CM Horner, Mr. Dao said there had not been an analysis done on how much sales tax would be generated from the City of Livermore. He said during the period of 2000-2014, the ACTC had invested over $1 billion of capital investment in the Tri-Valley area which included BART to Pleasanton, widening of State Route 84 twice, and improvements to I-580. He said Livermore’s sales tax dollars had been leveraged with state and federal dollars to accomplish these improvements.

In response to questions by CM Turner, Mr. Dao said there was $251 million to complete the three major multi-use trails in the County.

VM Woerner invited public comment.

Ron Williams, Amalgamated Transit, Local 192, spoke in support of Measure B and the many benefits expanded public transportation and trailways would provide to the community.

Pat Ferguson, Livermore, said public transportation was more expensive than single family cars and there should be more money for roads.

Joyce Willis, Amalgamated Transit, Local 192, spoke in support of Measure B stating buses provided needed transportation to students, disabled individuals, seniors and the working poor to locations not served by BART.

Judy Galletti, Livermore, said the TEP looked like a combination of One Bay Area and Measure B1. She spoke about increased car and truck traffic and the negative impact on air quality.

Dave Campbell, Bike East Bay, spoke in support of the TEP. He said it was important for the County to step up and fund the needed transportation projects.

Peter Marlow, Dublin, spoke in support of the TEP and said the passage of the measure would make his daily bicycle commute to Sandia National Labs much safer.

MARCH 10, 2014 Minutes CM/71/219

14 CM Gary said he supported placing the TEP on the November 4, 2014 ballot. He said leveraging local sales tax with state and federal dollars over the past twenty years had improved transportation in the tri-valley. He said in balance, this was a different project with the perpetuity clause being removed. He said there were many in the community that would have supported the previous measure had it not contained the perpetuity clause.

IT WAS MOVED BY CM GARY AND SECONDED BY CM TURNER TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

VM Woerner said the TEP was a balanced measure with something for everybody. He said passage of the TEP would provide funding for SR84 and I- 580 improvements as well as money to improve major commuter routes such as Greenville Road or Vasco Road. The TEP also included the much needed funding for maintaining local streets, funding for public transportation – ACE and Wheels, funding for pedestrian facilities and trails. Most importantly, the TEP would provide a major investment of $400 million toward bringing BART to Livermore along I-580 to Isabel. He said the TEP was the first opportunity to get real significant money to get BART to Livermore after 40 years. He said this ballot measure included a sunset provision. He said it was very important to pass this measure for funding BART to Livermore along the I-580 corridor. He noted that any change of the alignment would require a vote of the citizens of Livermore.

VM WOERNER CALLED FOR THE VOTE.

THE MOTION CARRIED ON A 4-0 VOTE AND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING RESOLTUION:

Resolution 2014-034 approving the 2014 Alameda County Transportation Expenditure Plan and request that the County Board of Supervisors place the TEP on the November 4, 2014 ballot.

6.04 Discussion and direction regarding pending State or Federal legislation. None.

7. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND MATTERS INITIATED BY CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY, STAFF AND COUNCILMEMBERS

7.01 Council Committee Reports and Matters Initiated by City Manager, City Attorney, Staff, and Councilmembers.

CM Horner said he did not have a report.

Livermore Amador Valley Transportation Authority (LAVTA) CM Turner said on February 25, 2014 she attended a Financial Advisory Board meeting.

CM/71/220 Minutes MARCH 10, 2014

15 Stopwaste.org CM Turner said on February 26, 2014 she attended the meeting. She said there was a public hearing and discussion on the household hazardous waste fees and said there could be some changes to the fees forthcoming.

Medicinal Marijuana CM Turner spoke regarding her career as a nurse and the beneficial results to patients that used medical marijuana. She requested staff to conduct a study on the merits and drawbacks of amending the City’s code to allow for limited dispensary licenses.

CM Horner said he did not doubt the benefits of medicinal marijuana but was reluctant to have Livermore become a dispensary city and did not recommend staff spending time examining the issue further.

CM Gary said he medically and humanely agreed with CM Turner’s comments but suggested that due to the outcome of one or more initiatives pertaining to medicinal marijuana on the November 2014 ballot and limited bandwidth in staff, he suggested a memo outlining the needed research, timeline and projection of the next two ballots. He said the City needed to wait for the election outcome before proceeding.

VM Woerner said the testimony received during Citizens Forum was compelling and moving, and agreed with CM Gary’s comments to gather the facts and review the issue at the appropriate time.

The City Council directed staff to prepare a memo outlining current legislation, potential ballot measure(s), and input from the Police Chief on the impact of medicinal marijuana dispensaries.

CM Turner requested staff to investigate the delivery services in the City which were more concerning than the actual dispensary. She requested the memo include any other local dispensaries including the two in Pleasanton and one in Castro Valley.

CM Gary said he did not have a report.

Wheels VM Woerner said he attended the Board Meeting.

Homeless Issue VM Woerner said on March 9, 2014 he attended two meetings regarding the homeless issue with Police Chief Harris.

8. ADJOURNMENT – at 8:35 pm to a regular City Council meeting on Monday, March 24, 2014 at 7:00 pm, Council Chambers, 3575 Pacific Avenue, Livermore.

APPROVED: JOHN P. MARCHAND, MAYOR

ATTEST: SUSAN NEER, CITY CLERK

MARCH 10, 2014 Minutes CM/71/221

16 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ITEM 4.02

DATE: March 24, 2014

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council

FROM: Stephan Kiefer, Community and Economic Development Director

SUBJECT: Cooperative Agreement with Alameda County to participate in the Alameda County HOME Consortium for Fiscal Years 2015-2016, 2016-2017, and 2017-2018.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution confirming the execution of a cooperative Agreement with Alameda County Housing and Community Development Department for participation in the Alameda County Home Investment in Affordable Housing Program (HOME) Consortium for Fiscal Years 2015-2016, 2016-2017, and 2017-2018.

SUMMARY

Since 1993, the City of Livermore has been a member of the Alameda County HOME Consortium. The City receives HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development as a member of the Consortium. In previous years, HOME funds have been used to develop and preserve affordable housing throughout the City and to prevent families from becoming homeless through rental assistance programs. The City is required to enter into a three-year cooperative agreement with Alameda County to renew its participation in the Consortium.

DISCUSSION

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) allocates HOME funds to local jurisdictions for the purpose of expanding the supply of decent, safe, and affordable housing to persons and families with income that is less than 80% of median income (less than $67,600 for a family of four). HOME funds are allocated directly to local jurisdictions, based on size, that meet a threshold of affordable housing needs determined by a formula that considers the number of housing units that are overcrowded, substandard, or occupied by households living below the poverty level. Local jurisdictions that do not meet this threshold independently may elect to form a

17

Page 2

regional consortium in order to participate in the HOME Program and receive annual allocations of HOME funds. The Alameda County HOME Consortium has a membership of seven cities including Livermore, Pleasanton, Fremont, Hayward, Union City, San Leandro, Alameda, and the unincorporated County. Alameda County administers the Consortium’s HOME funds in accordance with the Federal regulations and allocates funds to Consortium members based on the HUD formula. Consortium members then allocate HOME funds to affordable housing projects and programs that address local priorities. In the past, the City has used HOME funds to support new construction, rehabilitation of affordable housing, the homeowner rehabilitation program, tenant-based rental assistance to prevent families from becoming homeless, and emancipated youth working towards self-sufficiency. The historical use of HOME funds has contributed significantly to the City’s ability to address its affordable housing needs.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

In FY 2013-2014, the City received an allocation of $84,121 in HOME funds for projects and $5,329 to pay for administrative costs. Similar amounts are expected to be allocated during each of the three years of this agreement. The City has up to two years to allocate these funds to a project and an additional three years to spend the funding. Funds are allocated based on goals described in the City’s 2010-2014 Consolidated Plan. The programs being funded with HOME dollars are listed in the City’s Annual Action Plan and Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER).

ATTACHMENTS

1. Home Funded Projects

Prepared by:

Jean Prasher Human Services Program Manager

Approved by: Fiscal Review by:

Troy Brown Douglas Alessio Acting City Manager Administrative Services Director

18 The following projects and Programs received an allocation from the City’s HOME Investment Partnership Program.

Affordable Multi-Family Housing BACS provides supportive services and employment assistance to 6 mentally disabled Kennedy House adults that reside at Kennedy House. HOME funds were used to rehabilitate the interior Bay Area Community Services and exterior of the home.

Carmen Avenue Apartments HOME was used to pay for a portion of the construction of Carmen Avenue Apartments. Affordable Housing Associates Carmen is a 30-unit development for families with income less than 50% of median.

Freeda Court HOME funds were awarded to Habitat for Humanity to construct 22 homeownership Habitat for Humanity units for low income families.

Vandenberg Villa Apartments Vandenberg Villas provides housing for low income seniors. HOME funds were used in Eden Housing the construction of this 40 unit rental project. Rental Assistance Programs Homeless Prevention ECHO utilizes HOME funding to provide rental assistance to families that are at risk of ECHO Housing becoming homeless. Using HOME funds, Housing Scholarship provides rental assistance to low income Housing Scholarship persons so that they can complete the job training or education necessary to earn a Abode Services living wage and attain self-sufficiency. Project Independence assists youth who have aged out of the foster care system and Project Independence are transitioning to independent living. HOME funding is used to provide rental Abode Services assistance to help the youth maintain stable housing while they are participating in the program. Housing Rehabilitation Program HOME funds are used to provide either a grant up to $5,000 or a low interest loan up to Loan and Grant Program $35,000 to help a low income homeowner repair their home. A majority of the program Neighborhood Solutions participants are senior women.

ATTACHMENT 1

19 IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT TO CONTINUE PARTICIPATION IN THE ALAMEDA COUNTY HOME CONSORTIUM FOR FYs 2015-2016, 2016-2017, AND 2017-2018

The U.S. Congress enacted the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 and Federal regulations have been adopted pursuant thereto (hereinafter called the “Act”).

Title II of the Act creates the HOME Investment Partnership Program (hereinafter called “HOME”) that provides funds to participating jurisdictions for acquisition, rehabilitation, new construction of affordable housing, homebuyer and tenant-based rental assistance.

The Act allows local governments to form consortia for the purpose of receiving and administering HOME funds and carrying out purposes of the Act.

Since 1993, the City of Livermore has been a member of the Alameda County HOME Consortium. The City receives HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development as a member of the Consortium. The City is required to enter into a three-year cooperative agreement with Alameda County to renew its participation in the Consortium.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Livermore authorizes the City Manager to execute a cooperative agreement, on behalf of the City of Livermore, with Alameda County to participate in the Alameda County HOME Consortium for FYs 2015-2016, 2016-2017, and 2017-2018.

On motion of Councilmember ______, seconded by Councilmember ______, the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on March 24, 2014, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_ Susan Neer Catrina Fobian City Clerk Deputy City Attorney

RESOLUTION NO. ______20 21 22 23

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ITEM 4.03

DATE: March 24, 2014

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council

FROM: Stephan Kiefer, Community and Economic Development Director Jim Miguel, Fire Chief

SUBJECT: Agreement with WLC Architects for design of New Fire Station No. 9, Project No. 1994-55

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the execution of an Agreement with WLC Architects in the amount of $388,700 for design of a New Fire Station No.9 located at 1919 Cordoba Street.

SUMMARY

In February 2013, Council authorized RRM Design Group to review and update the Conceptual Design for rebuilding a new station on the current site. The updated Conceptual Design concluded that an approximately 6,900 square foot single story facility can be constructed on the current site. Construction of the new Fire Station in the near term will save costs and improve logistics by allowing Fire Station No. 9 staff to lease the vacated Alameda County Fire Station on College Avenue during construction of the new facility.

On October 28, 2013 City Council directed staff to seek proposals for a design consultant for the new Fire Station No. 9. Staff received nine proposals, shortlisted three and conducted interviews. The final selection was based upon the interviews and reference checks. WLC Architects obtained the highest rating and is being recommended.

DISCUSSION

Since the late 1990s, the City has studied the possibility of upgrading and/or renovating Fire Station No. 9. This station serves the southwestern section of the City, bounded roughly by Isabel Avenue, Stanley Boulevard, Arroyo Road, and Wetmore Road. The station was built in 1976, expanded in 1986, and is deficient in several areas including ADA compatibility, facilities for co-gender habitation, and current technologies.

24 Page 2

A 2007 feasibility study, which explored several alternatives, revealed the lowest cost alternative was for upgrades at the current site; however logistical issues associated with operations during construction and site layout were less than ideal. The 2007 study therefore, concluded that the most ideal alternative would be to purchase a new site across the street and build at 945 Concannon Boulevard. After the 2007 study was completed, Alameda County Fire closed its College Avenue Fire Station, presenting an opportunity to temporarily relocate Fire Station No. 9 staff and equipment into the College Avenue Station while Station No. 9 is reconstructed. This significantly reduces the logistical issues and related impediments presented in the 2007 study.

In 2013, the updated Conceptual Design showed that a new 6,920 square foot fire station can be developed for approximately $4.53 million at the existing site, replacing the existing 3,200 square foot facility. The design of the replacement station will be sensitive to the surrounding residential neighborhood utilizing a single story design. It is anticipated that design could start in March 2014 and be bid out in October 2014. If funded in the upcoming 2014-2017 Capital Improvement Budget, construction could start as early as December 2014 and be completed approximately one year later.

On January 10, 2014 a Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued. Nine (9) design firms submitted proposals. The firms that submitted proposals were:

• ATI Architects + Engineers, Danville CA • Bull Stockwell Allen, San Francisco CA • Dahlin Group- Pleasanton CA • Glass Architects, Santa Rosa CA • Mary McGrath Architect, Oakland CA • RRM Design Group, San Luis Obispo CA • Shah Kawasaki Architects, Oakland CA • STK Architecture, Temecula CA • WLC Architects, Folsom CA

The fee proposals from the nine firms ranged from $333,300 to $534,850 for design services which includes schematic design, conceptual design, construction documents and design support during construction for demolition and hazardous materials abatement, geotechnical engineering, architectural building and civil design, topography and site survey, and public art.

A selection committee comprised of staff from the Fire Department and Engineering reviewed and rated each proposal and short listed three (3) firms for interviews. The three firms short listed were:

• RRM Design Group, San Luis Obispo, CA • WLC Architects, Folsom, CA • Mary McGrath Architects, Oakland CA

25

Page 3

Interviews with the finalists were conducted by the selection committee on February 18, 2014. After deliberation and reference checks, the selection committee chose WLC Architects as the highest ranked firm based on their overall experience in designing fire stations, completeness of proposal and fair and reasonable fee for the terms required under this design and construction administration service agreement. WLC Architects has over 75 employees and has been in business for 40 years. WLC has performed Fire Station designs in the Bay Area for Fremont, San Mateo, Hayward, Gilroy, and San Jose. References were checked from the Cities listed above and proved to be commendable.

The agreement with WLC Architects has been reviewed by staff and will provide services to prepare schematic design, design development, construction documents, and to perform design support services during construction for the new Fire Station No. 9.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

The contract amount for WLC Architects is $388,700. The Fire Station No. 9 project is included on page 281 of the Update to the 2012-2014 Capital Improvement Program with a budget amount of $580,000, for design, including consultant services and design oversight at this time. It is anticipated that construction funding would be considered in the new 2014-2017 Capital Improvement Budget.

Fire Station No.9, City Project 1994-55 Total Budget Fund FY 12-13 FY 13-14 FY 12/13 & Fund No. Name 13/14 General 001 Fund 0 $550,000 $550,000 2008 310 COPS $30,000 0 $30,000

Total Budget $30,000 $550,000 $580,000

ATTACHMENTS

None

Prepared by:

Michael Mikasa Associate Civil Engineer

Approved by: Fiscal Review by:

Troy Brown Douglas Alessio Acting City Manager Administrative Services Director

26 IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH WLC ARCHITECTS, INC. FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR FIRE STATION NO. 9

(WLC Architects, Inc. - Design Services for Fire Station No. 9, Project No. 1994-55 - $388,700)

BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Livermore authorizes the City Manager to sign, on behalf of the City of Livermore, an agreement, in the amount of $388,700 between WLC Architects, Inc. and the City of Livermore, for the design of a new Fire Station No. 9, located at 1919 Cordoba Street. A copy of the agreement is on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

On motion of Councilmember ______, seconded by Councilmember ______, the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on March 24, 2014, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

______Susan Neer Catrina Fobian City Clerk Deputy City Attorney

RESOLUTION NO. ______

27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ITEM 4.04

DATE: March 24, 2014

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council

FROM: Stephan Kiefer, Community & Economic Development Director

SUBJECT: Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreement with WRA, Inc. (PT12-019)

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of an Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreement with WRA, Inc., environmental consultants, to assess the opportunity for establishing a conservation and/or mitigation bank on City- owned properties in Doolan Canyon and the Springtown Alkali Sink.

SUMMARY

The City owns approximately 300 acres in the Springtown Alkali Sink and 198 acres in Doolan Canyon (Properties). The Properties’ General Plan land use designations, City ownership, and presence of Federal and State protected animal and plant species effectively excludes urban development. However, a plan for near and long-term management is necessary in order to permanently preserve their natural resources and biological diversity.

The proposal is to enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreement (Agreement) with WRA to assess the opportunity for establishing a mitigation and/or conservation bank (Bank) on the Properties. The six-month Agreement memorializes the obligations of the City and WRA for exploring the feasibility of partnering and establishing a Bank on the Properties. If a Bank is found to be feasible, staff will present a final Partnership Agreement for consideration by the City Council.

Establishment of a conservation and/or mitigation bank on the Properties would facilitate restoration and permanent preservation. The City could reserve Bank credits to cover environmental impacts from future capital projects and utilize revenue from credit sales to acquire additional open space.

60 Page 2

DISCUSSION

Conservation and Mitigation Banks: Environmental permits for capital improvements and development projects often require the City and other local entities (both public and private) to provide compensatory mitigation for impacts to species habitat and wetlands. A conservation bank offers compensatory mitigation for project impacts by permanently protecting and managing land for special status animal and plant species. A mitigation bank protects, restores, creates, and enhances wetlands for projects that result in the unavoidable loss of wetlands. The Properties likely offer opportunities to establish a conservation and mitigation bank.

Federal and state laws requiring compensatory mitigation include the Endangered Species Act, California Endangered Species Act, and Clean Water Act. Agencies administering these laws are the US Fish & Wildlife Service, US Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish & Wildlife, and California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Resource Agencies). Resource Agencies have provisions for establishing conservation and mitigation banks. Generally, the following components are necessary to establish a conservation/mitigation bank:

• Draft Prospectus: A brief, concept-level proposal to vet the approach with Resource Agencies.

• Final Prospectus: A blueprint level document that incorporates recommendations from the Resource Agencies on the Draft Prospectus and includes more details about the site, habitat, and species.

• Draft Bank Enabling Instrument: A draft legal instrument that outlines the bank approach and success parameters and includes a development plan, interim and long-term management plans, annual monitoring cost estimates, and draft templates for the conservation easement and transaction documents.

• Final Bank Enabling Instrument: Final legal instrument that incorporates recommendations from the resource agencies on the components in the Draft Bank Enabling Instrument.

Upon resource agency and City Council review and approval of the Final Bank Enabling Instrument, the bank is entitled which triggers recordation of the Conservation Easement. Operations then commence which include the following actions:

• Bank Development, Maintenance and Monitoring • Marketing and Sale of Credits • Financial Management, Reporting and Governance • Long Term Management

61

Page 3

Request for Proposal: WRA was one of two firms to respond to the City’s Request for Proposals. City staff chose WRA after reviewing their proposal and confirming their qualifications, conducting an interview with key staff, and speaking with former and current WRA clients. WRA’s proposal estimates approximately two years from starting the draft prospectus to the Bank opening.

Springtown Alkali Sink: The Springtown Alkali Sink (Sink) is located on the northeast side of the Livermore Valley and lies generally between urban development within the City of Livermore to the south and Brushy Peak and ridgelines to the north. The City owns three parcels that comprise approximately 300 acres within the southern portion of the Sink. The City acquired one of the parcels in the early 1970s and two in the early 1980s. The Springtown Alkali Sink supports a unique and rare alkali wetland complex that is also known habitat for several sensitive animal and plant species.

Although City-owned, the City’s properties in the Sink lack the protection and management typically found under a perpetual conservation easement and management plan with a supporting endowment. Damage from motorized off-road vehicle and bicycle use, excavation activities, and dumping continues to threaten sensitive resources. Damage from these activities is adverse. However, the most significant threat to ecosystems in the Sink is from invasive weeds. Establishing a Bank on the City’s properties in the Sink would enable protection from these man-made and natural threats.

The Sink’s unique hydrology, soils, plant and animal species have been the subject of scientific research and analysis. Currently, the City has been hosting quarterly, informal working group meetings with representatives from government agencies and environmental organizations sharing the interest of preserving the Sink. Working group members include representatives from the Alameda County Resource Conservation District, Audubon Society, California Native Plant Society - East Bay Chapter, City of Livermore, Christensen Middle School, Friends of the Springtown Preserve, Tri-Valley Conservancy, UC Berkeley/Jepsen Herbarium, US Fish & Wildlife Service, and Zone 7 Water Agency. The working group has been developing recommendations for near term protection measures and long term management goals. Near term protection measures include fencing, signage, invasive weed control, and community outreach. Long-term goals include development and implementation of a management plan for the entire Sink. Funding is the most significant constraint to developing and implementing near and long term protection measures.

Doolan Canyon: The approximately 3,000-acre Doolan Canyon area is within the Cottonwood Creek watershed, north of Highway I-580, between the City of Dublin and the City of Livermore. The City owns approximately 198 acres on the east side of Doolan Road at the gateway to Doolan Canyon. In April 2011, consultants for the City of Livermore conducted biological surveys of the Doolan Properties and confirmed the presence of California tiger salamanders.

62 Page 4

The Doolan Properties include two stock ponds and an approximately 1,500 foot long segment of Cottonwood Creek. A Bank with a management plan and funding would facilitate management and restoration activities to address stock pond siltation, bank erosion along the severely incised banks of Cottonwood Creek, and sedimentation at a culvert crossing beneath Doolan Road at the City’s property. Cattle grazing plays an important role in sustaining grassland for sensitive habitat and would be a part of the management plan.

East Alameda County Conservation Strategy: On July 25, 2011, the Livermore City Council accepted the East Alameda County Conservation Strategy as guidance for regional conservation and environmental permitting and as support for open space acquisitions as part of the City Council’s priority for Open Space Preservation. The Conservation Strategy identifies conservation and mitigation banks as implementation tools for regional conservation.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

WRA Environmental Consultants will bear the costs for assessing the Bank project. City staff time will be allocated to administer the Agreement and manage the work program. Following the assessment process, staff anticipates presenting a Partnership Agreement to the City Council. The Partnership Agreement would memorialize the obligations of the City and WRA moving forward. The City’s obligation would include contributing the land, while WRA would contribute the funding and staff necessary for fully entitling the Bank. Establishing a Bank on the Properties would likely provide savings to the City for future capital projects by providing certainty and turn-key environmental mitigation. The City could also utilize revenue from credit sales to augment other open space funding sources.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Location Map 2. Request for Proposals 3. WRA Proposal

Prepared by:

Steve Stewart Principal Planner

Approved by: Fiscal Review by:

Troy Brown Douglas Alessio Acting City Manager Administrative Services Director 63 Doolan and Springtown Properties

8,498.7 0 4,249.36 8,498.7 Feet This map is based on City of Livermore GIS Information and reflects the most current information at the time of this printing. The map is intended for reference NAD_1983_StatePlane_California_III_FIPS_0403_Feet 1: 50,992 purposes only and the City and its staff is not responsible for errors. Livermore IT, GIS Services 64 ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF LIVERMORE DOOLAN AND SPRINGTOWN PRESERVE MITIGATION BANK

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

The City of Livermore is requesting proposals from qualified firms, individuals, or organizations to enter into an agreement (i.e., “Public-Private Project Agreement”) with the City to develop a Species Conservation Bank and potentially a Wetland Mitigation Bank (“Project”) on the City-owned approximately 300 acres (“Springtown Property”) within the Springtown Alkali Sink, and 117-acre Doolan Road Property (“Doolan Property”) within Doolan Canyon. This Request for Proposal (RFP) describes the Project, the required scope of services, the selection and award process, and the minimum information that must be included in the RFP from any interested party. Failure to submit information in accordance with the RFP requirements and procedures detailed herein may be cause for disqualification.

I. INTRODUCTION

A. The City

The City of Livermore is located in northeast Alameda County along the north and south sides of Interstate 580. The current City Limits encompass approximately 25 square miles within a planning area of about 140 square miles. An Urban Growth Boundary that limits urbanization and preserves open space, habitat, and agriculture surrounds the City. The City population is approximately at 85,000. Major employers in the area include the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratory, Las Positas College, the Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District, and the City of Livermore. The Livermore Valley is home to over 50 wineries, a general aviation airport, four golf courses, and a vibrant downtown.

B. The Springtown Alkali Sink, Doolan Canyon and the Properties

The Springtown Property is located within the Springtown Alkali Sink and the Doolan Property is located in Doolan Canyon. The Springtown Property lies just over three and one-half miles east of the Doolan Property.

City Hall 1052 South Livermore Avenue Livermore, CA 94550 www.ci.livermore.ca.us

65 ATTACHMENT 2 June 1, 2013 Page 2 of 14

Springtown Alkali Sink and Springtown Property

The Springtown Alkali Sink is located on the northeast side of the Livermore Valley and lies generally between urban development within the City of Livermore to the south and Brushy Peak and ridgelines to the north. The Springtown Property consists of three City-owned parcels that comprise approximately 300 acres within the southern portion of the Springtown Alkali Sink. The City purchased one of the parcels in the early 1970’s and two in the early 1980’s.

The Springtown Property supports a unique and rare alkali wetland complex that is also known habitat for several sensitive species. Although City-owned, the Springtown Property lacks protection and management typically found under a perpetual conservation easement or long term management plan with a supporting endowment. Damage from motorized off-road vehicle and bicycle use, excavation activities, and dumping continues to occur on the Property and threatens sensitive resources.

The Property’s unique hydrology, soils, plant and animal species have been the subject of scientific research and analysis. Currently, the City has been hosting bi- monthly, informal working group meetings with representatives from government agencies and environmental organizations sharing the interest of preserving the Springtown Alkali Sink. Working group members include representatives from the Alameda County Resource Conservation District, Audubon Society, California Native Plant Society - East Bay Chapter, City of Livermore, Friends of the Springtown Preserve, Tri-Valley Conservancy, UC Berkeley/Jepsen Herbarium, US Fish & Wildlife Service, and Zone 7 Water Agency. The working group is developing near-term protection measures and long-term management goals for the Springtown Alkali Sink. Near term protection measures include fencing, signage, invasive weed control, and community outreach. Long-term goals include development and implementation of a management plan for the entire Springtown Alkali Sink.

Doolan Canyon and the Doolan Property

The approximately 3,000-acre Doolan Canyon area is within the Cottonwood Creek watershed, north of Highway I-580, between the City of Dublin and the City of Livermore. Doolan Canyon is framed on the west, north, and east by the rolling foothills of Mount Diablo. Cottonwood Creek flows north to south along Doolan Road through the heart of the canyon with stock ponds, natural springs, and seasonal wetlands dispersed throughout the canyon. Alkali meadows and scalds exist on the Alkali soils along the creek banks and floodplains. California annual grasslands are the predominant land cover.

Rural residential home sites on 5-, 10-, and 20-acre parcels flank Doolan Road in the center of the canyon area with larger parcels and home sites beyond. Cattle grazing occurs on most of the grasslands in the project area. The City of Livermore owns approximately 117 acres on the east side of Doolan Road at the gateway to Doolan Canyon. The City’s potable and recycled water tanks and

66 June 1, 2013 Page 3 of 14

regional emergency operation communication facilities occupy the peak of the City-owned property. The 633-acre Doolan Ranch, a recent East Bay Regional Park District acquisition, straddles the Alameda/Contra Costa County line at the head of Doolan Canyon.

In April 2011, consultants for the City of Livermore conducted biological surveys of the Doolan Property. The survey confirmed the presence of California tiger salamanders.

C. The Project

The Project is to partner with the City to develop a conservation and mitigation bank for the restoration, long-term preservation and protection of the Springtown Property and Doolan Property (Properties) in perpetuity. The Project is proposed only on the City-owned parcels. However, the Properties’ roles in the context of their environmental settings (Springtown Alkali Sink and Doolan Canyon) will be an important subject to address during the development of a conservation and mitigation bank.

Livermore’s 2003 General Plan includes the following goals, objectives and policies regarding the preservation and enhancement of Livermore’s natural environment:

Goal OSC-1 Conserve the value and function of Livermore’s open space as a biological resource.

Objective OSC-1.1 Maintain biodiversity within the Planning Area with special emphasis on species that are sensitive, rare, declining, unique or represent valuable biological resources.

P6. The City shall preserve and maintain Frick Lake and the Springtown Alkali Sink area as important wildlife and plant habitats through preservation of open space in and around these areas. (2003 General Plan, P. 4-3 and 4-4)

The City intends to implement the 2003 General Plan by establishing a Species Conservation Bank and potentially a Wetland Mitigation Bank to enable the protection and management of the sensitive resources on the Properties in perpetuity.

The City and other local entities (both public and private) are often required to provide compensatory mitigation for capital improvement and development project impacts to wetlands and species habitat. The Properties offer opportunities for the creation and restoration of wetlands and sensitive species habitat. Thus, the City is seeking Statement of Proposal from Consultants that are able to partner with the City to develop a mitigation and conservation bank on the Properties. Establishing a mitigation and conservation bank will result in available conservation and

67 June 1, 2013 Page 4 of 14

mitigation credits for capital and development project impacts, and the perpetual preservation and management of the Properties.

The City intends to develop the mitigation and conservation bank on the Properties in partnership with qualified firms, individuals, and/or organizations utilizing a cooperative approach. The City will provide the land resources and retain ownership while the selected Consultant will secure a funding partner (together the (“Consultant Team”). The Consultant will be responsible for the bank establishment with all funding to come from the funding partner. The Consultant Team will be the bank operator.

The aforementioned Springtown Preserve Working Group offers scientific expertise and extensive on-the-ground experience with the resources on the Springtown Property and within the larger Springtown Alkali Sink. Engaging this group during the bank development process will facilitate a collaborative and comprehensive exchange of research and information.

The Project is intended to provide perpetual conservation of the Properties through the development and implementation of a long-term management plan with an associated endowment, and the generation of conservation and wetland mitigation credits for sale by the Consultant Team.

The selected Consultant would conduct all necessary background studies (e.g. biological, cultural, and Phase I), prepare the Federal and State Resource Agency- required bank documents, and work with the regulatory agencies to permit and authorize the bank and associated habitat creation and/or enhancement as necessary. The City will not reimburse the selected Consultant for these services. Instead the City will provide access to the land and grant the Consultant credit sales rights. The City will retain an option to purchase some credits as necessary and available for City capital and development projects. The City may share in profits from credit sales as negotiated with the selected Consultant.

II. SCOPE OF SERVICES

A. Fee Estimate

The City does not intend to compensate the Consultant for the proposed services. Rather the City seeks to enter into an agreement with the Consultant where the Consultant provides services and is granted the right to sell bank credits by the City. Therefore, the Consultant is responsible for funding the work at their expense, either internally or through a funding partnership. The City will retain ownership of the land in fee title and retain rights to purchase bank credits as necessary and available. Note that during the Bank entitlement process City staff will be involved in report and document review. While this is not anticipated to be a large time commitment, City staff review time will be compensated for by the Consultant Team on a time and materials basis.

68

June 1, 2013 Page 5 of 14

B. Contractual Agreement

The specific contract duration, terms, conditions, provisions, and requirements is subject to negotiation between City and the selected Consultant based on the items discussed above.

III. SCOPE OF REQUIRED SERVICES

A. Project Description

The Consultant will conduct all necessary background studies and prepare all bank paperwork in order to obtain conservation and mitigation bank approvals from environmental regulatory agencies. The Consultant will provide their funding for this work. Specific required tasks include the following:

1. Funding – The selected Consultant will have six months to procure funding for the project. During this time, the Consultant will have access to the Preserve to collect information in order to put together an investment package as necessary. Upon identifying a funding partner, the City, Consultant, and the funding partner will further negotiate project specifics including project timeline and financial returns including sharing profits from credits sales.

2. Background Studies – The Consultant will conduct the appropriate background studies necessary for bank approval, including biological, cultural resources, and hazardous materials studies. These may include more specific and focused studies, surveys, and reports including sensitive plant and wildlife species surveys and a formal wetland delineation as necessary in support of Bank documents. Studies should also address the compatibility of providing access to the Properties for scientific research and passive recreation (e.g. wildlife observation, photography, and guided hiking) with permanent preservation and management. The City will review background study reports as necessary.

3. Prepare Bank Documents – The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (“CDFW”) in addition to other agencies have prepared a number of templates for conservation bank establishment necessary for authorizing a bank project. These documents are submitted to an interagency review team (“IRT”) who reviews and authorizes the bank statement of qualifications. These documents include a draft prospectus, final prospectus, draft bank enabling instrument (“BEI”), and final BEI. Copies of these templates and checklists are on the CDFW’s website: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/habcon/conplan/mitbank/ .

It is the Consultant’s responsibility to prepare these documents and to supply all of the supplementary information required therein. Examples include proposed bank service areas, credit release schedule, development plan, interim and long term management plans, title report, proof of water and mineral rights, funding and security analyses, wetland/habitat enhancement and/or creation design drawings, etc. The City will review major submittals prior to submitting to the regulatory agency personnel.

69

June 1, 2013 Page 6 of 14

4. Bank Approvals – The Consultant will work with the IRT to ensure that they receive all of the information necessary to review and approve the project. The Consultant will attend meetings with the IRT personnel as necessary, including both on- and off-site meetings during the Bank approval process.

5. Habitat Creation/Enhancement – Assuming that habitat enhancement or creation will occur, the Consultant will prepare bid documents and select a qualified contractor to conduct the habitat construction as necessary. The Consultant will be entirely responsible for funding the construction and for quality assurance of the constructed habitat. The Consultant will be responsible for any new fencing and access improvements that are required. The City will review drawings and contractor submissions prior to the Consultant selecting a contractor.

6. Bank Establishment – The Consultant will provide all securities, bonds, and endowments necessary to start bank operation. This includes but is not limited to the construction bond, performance bond, bond to cover the 1st year of annual monitoring, and the long-term management endowment. The Consultant will select an approved third party easement holder and long-term manager in accordance with agency requirements. All operation and maintenance costs will be covered by the Consultant until the endowment is fully funded. The City will be involved in easement holder and long-term manager negotiations since the City intends to hold fee title of the Properties after the Bank closes.

7. Bank Operation – The Consultant will operate the bank in accordance with the agreements reached with the IRT and associated agencies. The Consultant will be responsible for providing annual monitoring, management, and reporting activities until the endowment is fully funded and proceeds of which are released for long- term management. The latter of which is dependent on meeting success criteria set forth during the Bank Approval process.

The Consultant will market and sell the bank’s available mitigation credits and fulfill all mandatory reporting and ledger requirements. The Consultant will provide an annual report to the City that specifies the number of credits available and sold over the previous year until all credits are sold. The Consultant will comply with all other agency reporting requirements as identified in the Bank agreements.

IV. PROJECT SCHEDULE

Due to the long-term nature of the conservation and mitigation bank approval process the City realizes that specific schedules may be uncertain. However, the City wishes to move this project along in a timely manner and the Consultant shall provide services to facilitate bank establishment in such a manner to move the project along accordingly.

Specific project milestones and deliverables will be mutually negotiated between the City and the selected Consultant.

70

June 1, 2013 Page 7 of 14

V. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

A. Response

Describe your firm’s understanding of the process necessary to establish a species conservation bank and wetland mitigation bank. The response should include information regarding your firm's experience with establishing species conservation banks and wetland mitigation banks in California.

B. Qualifications

A. General

1. The proposal should be concise, well organized, and demonstrate the Consultant’s qualifications and experience applicable to the Project. The proposal shall be limited to 30 double-sided pages (8.5 inches x 11 inches), inclusive of resumes, graphics, forms, pictures, photographs, cover letter, etc.

2. The proposal must include a discussion of the Consultant’s approach to the Project, a breakdown and explanation of Project tasks, a proposed Project schedule, an estimate of costs and documentation of the Consultant’s (and its team’s) expertise, and qualifications for the scope of work specified herein.

3. The Consultant will be evaluated based upon the information submitted in accordance with RFP Content Requirements in Selection and Evaluation Criteria discussed below, and compliance with all requirements of this RFQ.

B. Specific Contents

Responses to this RFP shall be in the following order and shall include the specified elements listed below. Additionally, responses submitted shall be tabbed and labeled with the section number and titles specified below.

1. Executive Summary

In this section, the Consultant is to include a 1-2 page overview of the entire Project describing the most important elements.

2. Identification of the Consultant and Establishment of Consultant’s Fiscal Responsibility

In this section, please provide the following information regarding the Consultant, and if applicable, Consultant’s other team members:

a. Legal name and address of Consultant’s company.

b. Number of years Consultant’s company has been in business.

71

June 1, 2013 Page 8 of 14

c. Legal form of company (partnership, corporation, joint venture, etc.). If joint venture, identify the members of the joint venture and provide all information required within this section for each member. If a corporation, certify that the corporation is in good standing with the Secretary of State.

d. If Consultant is a wholly owned subsidiary of a “parent company,” provide the legal name and form of the parent company.

e. Tax Identification Number

f. Address(es) of office(s) that will work on this Project.

g. Name, title, address, e-mail address, and telephone number of the contact person

h. State whether the Consultant has filed bankruptcy in the last ten (10) years and provide any other relevant information concerning whether the Consultant is financially capable of completing this Project.

3. Experience and Technical Competence

In this section, Consultant shall describe its experience in designing, permitting, constructing, monitoring and managing large scale joint wetland/species compensatory mitigation projects. The Consultant must also demonstrate knowledge and experience with the IRT process for bank establishment. For each Project, provide the name of the agency/organization and project manager the Consultant performed work for or with, telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, type of work performed, and dollar value of the projects and/or contracts.

4. Knowledge and Understanding of the Region and Relevant Laws

Describe in this section the Consultant’s experience working in the greater San Francisco Bay Area region and in the vicinity of the Preserve, specifically. This includes experience with local regulatory agencies and policies, local species issues, and habitats. Describe Consultant’s experience with and knowledge of relevant state and federal laws, including, but not limited to, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Endangered Species Act, and wildlife and resource agency approvals. The Consultant shall also demonstrate familiarity with state and federal compensatory mitigation permitting procedures and rules. The Consultant shall describe experience designing, permitting, constructing and managing restored wetland complexes and endangered species habitat in the greater Bay Area.

5. Financial Strength

72

June 1, 2013 Page 9 of 14

The Consultant must demonstrate experience in raising financial resources sufficient to permit, operate, monitor, report, manage, endow and guarantee the performance of a conservation/mitigation bank.

6. Consultant’s Organization, Team Members, and Key Personnel

In this section Consultant shall provide the following responses:

a. Describe proposed Consultant’s organization, including identification and responsibilities of key personnel. Indicate role and responsibility of Consultants and all proposed team members.

b. Describe the experience of the Consultant’s project team in detail, including the team’s project manager and other key staff members on projects of similar size, capacity, and dollar value. For each similar project, include the client’s name and telephone number.

7. Consultants Proposed Work Plan

In this section the Consultant shall describe their proposed work plan they will use during the project. This includes a description of tasks, responsible parties, approximate schedule with task duration and milestones, and estimated completion.

8. Disclosure of conflict of interest

The Consultant is required to disclose involvement or interest held in a mitigation or conservation banks, either currently in operation or pending, that compete or could potentially compete with the Project.

VI. SUBMITTAL INFORMATION

Two (2) original signature hardcopies of the proposal, shall be submitted. Additionally, one (1) copy on a compact disc (CD) in pdf format of the proposal shall be submitted. Proposals submitted by facsimile or e-mail are not acceptable and will not be considered.

All responses must be received by Monday, July 1, 2013 at 5:00 p.m. Postmarks will not be accepted in lieu of this requirement.

All submittals shall be mailed or delivered to:

City of Livermore Community Development Department Attn: Steve Stewart, Senior Planner 1052 South Livermore Avenue Livermore, CA 94550

73 June 1, 2013 Page 10 of 14

Submittals received after this deadline will not be accepted. All questions should be directed to Steve Stewart, the project manager, by writing to the above address, by e- mail at [email protected], by telephone at (925) 960-4468, or by fax at (925) 960-4459.

VII. EVALUATION PROCEDURE

A. Selection Criteria

Proposals will be evaluated, negotiated, selected and any award made in accordance with the criteria and procedures described below. The City may or may not decide to interview one or more Consultants prior to awarding the Project. The Consultant(s) will be selected whose proposal is found to be most advantageous to City.

B. Consultant Responsibility

Proposals will be evaluated to determine the responsibility of Consultants. Any proposals from Consultants whom the City finds not to be responsible and finds cannot be made to be responsible within timelines set by City may not be considered. Final determination of a Consultant’s responsibility will be made upon the basis of information submitted in the proposal, any information submitted upon request by City, information received during a potential interview, and information resulting from City’s inquiry of Consultant’s references and its own knowledge of the Consultant.

C. Consultant Responsiveness

Each proposal will be evaluated for responsiveness. The following are the minimum requirements that must be met for a proposal to be considered. All of these requirements are relevant; they are not listed by any particular order of importance. Any proposal that City finds not to meet these requirements, and may not be made to meet these requirements within timelines set by City, may be determined by City to not be considered. The requirements are as follows:

1. Evidence of successful experience in raising capital for mitigation banking projects.

2. Evidence that the Consultant’s staff and physical resources are sufficient to perform the Project as specified and assure delivery of all deliverables within the time specified in the accepted proposal.

3. Evidence of satisfactory performance and integrity on contracts in making deliveries on time, meeting contractual provisions, staff availability, and steps Consultant took to resolve any judgments, liens, defects in performance, or claims.

74 June 1, 2013 Page 11 of 14

4. It is of paramount importance to the City that the Consultant is well regarded by the regulatory community that will be in charge of reviewing and approving the bank application documents.

5. The Consultant should demonstrate long-term experience with regulatory permitting in the region.

D. Consultant’s Experience

The Consultant will be selected based on successfully conducting mitigation solution projects of a similar nature. It is the policy of the City to conduct reference checks for Consultants. Reference check results will be considered during the evaluation and selection process. The Consultant’s experience with local regulatory issues is also important.

E. Conflict of Interest

If there is a potential or exiting conflict of interest, the Consultant will need to provide the City with a proposed written policy that addresses this conflict of interest. If the policy is not satisfactory to the City, the Consultant may be disqualified.

VIII. PROPOSED SCHEDULE

The following is the proposed schedule for the consultant selection process:

Task Date Circulate RFQ June 3, 2013 Submittals Due July 1, 2013 Pre-Proposal Meeting June 19, 2013 10:00am Interviews July 15-26, 2013 Staff Selection July 30, 2013 City Council Authorization of Agreement September 9, 2013

Attachments 1. Vicinity Aerial Photograph 2. Site Aerial Photographs

75 June 1, 2013 Page 12 of 14 Vasco Road Vasco North Livermore Avenue Livermore North

Springtown Property

City of Livermore Boundary Doolan Road Doolan 76

Doolan Property

I-580

N June 1, 2013 Page 13 of 14

Not Included 77

Doolan Property D oolan Road oolan

I-580 June 1, 2013 Page 14 of 14

Raymond Road Lorraine Road Lorraine

Springtown Property

Hartford Avenue 78 WRA Proposal 1 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

-XO\

Steve Stewart, Senior Planner City of Livermore Community Development Department 1052 South Livermore Avenue Livermore, CA 94550

Re: Proposal for City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

Dear Mr. Stewart:

On behalf of WRA, Inc. I would like to express our sincere enthusiasm with you and the City about the Doolan and Springtown Mitigation Bank Project. As you know WRA has been very interested in this project for several years and our interest has not waned.

WRA feels that due to the combination of the Bank properties/habitats/species and developmental climate in the greater Livermore Valley region, the Doolan and Springtown Preserve Bank Project is a real winner. The numerous species and sensitive habitats are ripe for protecting and the fast-paced regional growth will require diverse mitigation solutions. Add to that the EACCS and associated mitigation requirements and this project speaks for itself. On top of all of this, the regulatory agencies will want to see these rare habitats and species protected which will keep the banking document review moving along through the regulatory process.

WRA feels that we are the right team for the job given our solid mitigation solution experience, good relations with the regulatory staff, and knowledge with the local flora, fauna, and environmental regulations. Furthermore we have great connections with green business funders that will help the project be realized.

Enclosed is WRA’s proposed approach to provide the City with quality and timely consulting services to bring the Doolan and Springtown Preserve Banks into operation as quickly as possible. Our team of experts is eager to meet with the City and provide any additional information you may need.

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Geoff Smick Principal Biologist

79 $77$&+0(17

CITY OF LIVERMORE

DOOLAN & SPRINGTOWN PRESERVE MITIGATION BANK

July 1st, 2013

Proposal prepared by: Geoff Smick, Principal Biologist

2169-G Francisco Blvd. East | San Rafael, CA 94901

Phone: (415) 454-8868 | www.wra-ca.com

80 WRA Proposal 3 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank



Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... 3 SECTION 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 4 SECTION 2 – CONSULTANT ESTABLISHMENT AND FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ...... 6 SECTION 3 – EXPERIENCE AND TECHNICAL COMPETENCE ...... 7 SECTION 4 – KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING OF THE REGION AND RELEVANT LAWS ...... 15 SECTION 5 – FINANCIAL STRENGTH ...... 18 SECTION 6 – ORGANIZATION, TEAM MEMBERS, AND KEY PERSONNEL ...... 23 SECTION 7 – PROPOSED WORK PLAN ...... 27 SECTION 8 – DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST ...... 36 SECTION 9 – ATTACHMENTS ...... 37

       

81 WRA Proposal 4 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

SECTION 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

WRA, Inc. is very interested in assisting the City of Livermore through a Public-Private Partnership to complete the Doolan and Springtown Mitigation Bank Project. The Bank Project will not only enhance and preserve some very unique and sensitive habitats, but it will also provide the funding necessary to properly manage and protect the sensitive species and habitats in perpetuity. Both of these are goals that the City has desired to accomplish for some time but has not had the resources to do so. A banking project on these lands is ideal because it accomplishes the City’s goals, allows other development in the region to occur in less sensitive habitats, and provides additional business opportunity and revenues for the City of Livermore.

While mitigation banking is not new, it is far more common now than it was a decade ago, especially in California. The regulatory agencies have been working together over the past several years in an attempt to make the banking process more transparent and streamlined. The components that make up a legal bank agreement combine biology, land management, permitting, landscape architecture, real estate, and financial documents. And this is why WRA is so well-suited for the job. A biology and permitting firm for over 30 years, over the past several years WRA has also established a bona fide mitigation banking department that is specifically geared towards fulfilling these other non-biological niches. There are banking-specific firms out there built on a foundation of business-minded folks with financial and real estate backgrounds, but they all lack the years of biological and regulatory experience (which includes agency negotiations) that comes with WRA. And of course there are other environmental consulting firms that dabble in banking that have the biological technical and regulatory experience, but lack the detailed real estate and financial specialties.

The team of specialists we have put together under one roof at WRA brings all of these specialties together. Every specialist has a niche that they fulfill on our banking projects. Our biological staff manage the comprehensive biological studies that the agencies require for a banking projects. Our financial specialists prepare detailed pro-formas that our banking clients and financial partners require to understand the upfront costs balanced with the investment rate of return. Our real estate specialists understand the nuances of title reports and easements that come with every banking project. Our landscape architect staff bring an ecological focus to their approach and design appropriate solutions given the site specific ecology which means less regulatory push back and more success. This results in faster credit releases with less maintenance costs. Our land management team understands the appropriate balance of grazing and habitat management for species; they work with instead of against the ranchers to promote passive habitat management through grazing, again reducing maintenance costs. And finally our banking project management staff bring the experience it takes to manage large and complex projects with multiple stakeholders and regulatory agency staff. Maintaining project timelines and budgets is critical and a role that we take very seriously, in addition to managing the desires of our clients with the expectations of the regulatory agencies.

The WRA package brings many value-added components. Almost 95% percent of the non-construction tasks are handled in-house at WRA, which speaks volumes to the breadth of our services. Our financial specialists come from a background of ecosystem-related fundraising, and the connections they bring with them have benefited many banking projects and the corresponding conservation of thousands of acres of sensitive habitats across California. We have a proven track record of successfully designing and managing construction of wetland/vernal pool habitats that support listed species. Our long- standing regulatory background and commercial and residential development client base brings a ready

82 WRA Proposal 5 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

source of clients with credit purchasing needs. And our land management group has prepared and implemented countless long term resource management plans.

One of the most recent developments at WRA is the formation of a sister corporation, Mitigation and Conservation Solutions (MCS). This is the credit sales and brokerage arm of our company that was established to provide the appropriate legal and insurance coverage needed for brokering land credit sales. We have credit sales agreements for several of our banking projects where WRA markets and manages credit sales. This includes marketing to those that are impacting resources in addition to regulatory resource agencies who are issuing the permits. The credit marketing and sales is a natural role for us given our position in the deal flow. Between our permitting, mitigation, and CEQA departments we have a solid understand of the pulse of the Bay Area and where the projects are happening and mitigation needed.

An additional and important component about WRA is our local experience in the greater Livermore Valley area. With several dozen projects completed in the region over the years we have a solid grasp of the unique biological habitat and species issues the present themselves. WRA completed a very similar project in western Alameda County where we constructed over 100 acres of seasonal wetlands and vernal pools that support California Tiger Salamander (CTS) and vernal pool fairy shrimp (VPFS). We recently completed the 10-year monitoring of those mitigation wetlands which were so successful, the adjacent USFWS Don Edwards refuge has taken over management of them. Our local experience also exhibits itself through our experience in working through the relatively recent Eastern Alameda Conservation Strategy. We have had to guide several clients through the implementation of this new guiding document and its associated mitigation ratios. In the end this document will be a major driver of mitigation credits to the Doolan Canyon/Springtown Bank.

The actual banking project tasks and schedule are identified and explained in Section 7 of the proposal. WRA as Bank Sponsor and consultant envisions an efficient process where the City is an active partner in the project. This Public-Private partnership is unique compared to a typical Client/Consultant relationship. This partnership has both entities (in addition to a potential funding partner) being stakeholders and very interested in a timely and informed process. It will be important that the appropriate communication channels be established early on so City staff is kept abreast of the project schedule and important milestones and involved in major decision making. This will allow the City to be involved at a staff level and to provide updates to their supervisors or the City Council as needed, and so the process is transparent to the public and other stakeholders.

The following detailed proposal outlines the WRA team, our experience, and potential teaming partners. In addition it provides a detailed overview of the Banking process as required by the regulatory agencies including a list of tasks and estimated costs and schedule. We would be happy to provide any additional information in writing or in an interview format.

83 WRA Proposal 6 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

SECTION 2 – CONSULTANT ESTABLISHMENT AND FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY

a. Consultant:

WRA, Inc. 2169 East Francisco Blvd. Suite G San Rafael, CA 94901

b. Established in 1981, WRA has been working on wetland and endangered species regulatory issues for over 30 years.

c. WRA is a California S-Corporation in good standing with the Secretary of State (State ID #: C1085358).

d. WRA is not a wholly owned subsidiary of a parent company.

e. Tax Identification Number: 94-2765386

f. All work will be conducted out of WRA’s San Rafael office in Marin County. Ten of WRA’s 57 staff live in Contra Costa or Alameda County.

g. WRA Contact: Geoff Smick, Principal 2169-G East Francisco Blvd. San Rafael, CA 94901 [email protected] 415-454-8868 ext. 150

h. WRA has never filed bankruptcy. WRA has seen essentially constant growth since its founding in the form of revenue and size. We have more than doubled our number of employees in the last eight years. Our annual revenue is on the order of $10,000,000, and we have a $1,000,000 credit line. WRA is a California S-Corporation whose ownership is split between 11 shareholders, further strengthening our financial backbone.

84 WRA Proposal 7 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

SECTION 3 – EXPERIENCE AND TECHNICAL COMPETENCE

Company Profile:

WRA provides professional consulting services in plant, wildlife, and wetland ecology, regulatory compliance, mitigation banking, CEQA/NEPA, GIS, and landscape architecture. Formed in 1981, we are a certified small business (OSBCR ref. #13333) with 57 professionals who have completed over 2,000 projects for public agencies, non-profit, and private organizations. We have a wide range of project experience throughout California in a variety of region-specific habitats: we are experienced in the application of federal and state wetland and endangered species regulations; our biologists are trained in habitat evaluation methods and survey protocols used by resource agencies; we routinely conduct a broad range of plant and wildlife habitat evaluations, habitat/species monitoring and wetland and riparian studies; and we provide evaluation, planning, implementation, and monitoring of wetlands and endangered species for habitat restoration and mitigation projects.

Our professional and technical services include: x Aquatic resources permitting (wetlands, streams, riparian, marine resources) x California Coastal Zone biological surveys and permitting x CEQA/NEPA Analysis x Certified arborist services x Conservation and mitigation bank planning and design x Expert testimony services x GIS analyses and remote sensing x Landscape architecture x Preserve management and conservation planning x Rare and endangered plant and wildlife surveys and permitting x Trail and open space design x Vegetation mapping and biological inventories x Watershed assessments and planning x Wetland and endangered species construction and post-construction monitoring x Wetland and stream delineation and functional assessment

WRA has assisted with dozens of wetland and species mitigation projects and is currently working on ten wetland or species banking-specific projects in addition to several non-banking mitigation solutions (i.e. turn-key mitigation projects). These projects typically include a combination of habitat preservation, restoration, and creation of a variety of habitat types. WRA is involved in all stages of the project starting with initial site biological reconnaissance and ending with long term land management. Interim steps include focused species surveys, agency permitting, management plan preparation, habitat restoration/creation design drawings, and credit sales and marketing.

WRA’s technical competence is founded on a suite of technical experts in biology, regulatory permitting, mitigation, real estate, finance, GIS, CEQA, and landscape design. This broad range of in- house focused specialties sets us apart from our competitors of a similar size. We have the breadth of expertise more typical of a larger firm with the flexibility and personal attention of a smaller firm. Therefore our clients receive principal-level involvement in their projects.

85 WRA Proposal 8 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

We have extensive experience conducting all of the steps required in the banking process. The best way to describe this experience is through specific project examples. The following pages include several project descriptions that summarize several specific mitigation and banking projects. These projects cover all facets of the process that the Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank project will encounter. Included are a mixture of non-banking mitigation projects and bank-specific projects, including two Alameda County projects and two projects with very similar alkali vernal pool/seasonal wetland habitats analogous to the Springtown Preserve.

86 PACIFIC COMMONS VERNAL POOL AND ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITAT MITIGATION AND PRESERVE MANAGEMENT GOALS o Securing and compliance with regulatory permit requirements for the development of the Pacific Commons retail project o Design and construct vernal pool habitat for endangered species, and monitoring and management of the Pacific Commons Preserve

PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Pacific Commons project is located on 875 acres in a redevelopment area of Fremont, California. A 444-acre portion of the site has been preserved for ecosystem protection and restoration.

The Preserve consists of a wetland-upland mosaic comprising vernal pools, connecting swales, other seasonal wetlands, and grasslands which includes occupied habitats for vernal pool tadpole Created Vernal Pool at Pacific Commons Preserve shrimp, California tiger salamander, burrowing owl, and several rare plant species including the endangered Contra Costa goldfields.

EXPERIENCE AND TECHNICAL COMPETENCE WRA developed and implemented an ecological restoration and Long-term Management Plan for the Preserve that restored vernal pool topography and re-established the federal endangered vernal pool tadpole shrimp. Overall, this project involved the creation of an open space preserve including designing and constructing 174 vernal pools. The project required close coordination with local, state, and federal agencies, and has been reviewed favorably by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game.

WRA continues to provide monitoring services for these restored and created habitats and works with USFWS staff on weed Goldfields and Downingia Establishment in the Pools monitoring and control and a coordinated grazing operation on the Preserve and adjacent Wildlife Refuge.

CONTACT DELIVERABLES ProLogis o Federal and State Permits Bill Kennedy o Wetland Restoration and Fremont, California Management Plan (510) 661-4002 o Long Term Management Plan o Annual Monitoring Reports

BUDGET KEY STAFF $5,000,000 Michael Josselyn, PhD, Principal-in-Charge Phil Greer, Principal and Project Manager Jeff Dreier, Senior Wildlife Ecologist

87 CALLIPPE PRESERVE GOLF COURSE, PLEASANTON, CALIFORNIA ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITAT PRESERVATION, WETAND AND RIPARIAN MITIGATION AND MONITORING GOALS o Obtain necessary resource agency permits prior to construction of an 18-hole municipal golf course o Develop a balanced approach between avoidance and mitigation of sensitive habitats on-site to satisfy City and regulatory priorities

PROJECT DESCRIPTION Development of the 346-acre Callippe Preserve Golf Course site in Pleasanton involved impacts to approximately one-third of the five miles of intermittent streams in the project area.

EXPERIENCE AND TECHNICAL COMPETENCE WRA prepared Corps, RWQCB, and CDFG permit applications for these project impacts. In support of a Federal Endangered Species Act consultation, WRA conducted California Tiger Salamander and Callippe silverspot butterfly host plant, Viola California Red-Legged Frog surveys within the project site, and pedunculata, in Conservation Area ongoing bullfrog eradication. Habitats for CTS and callippe silverspot butterfly were identified and preserved within the project open space areas.

Mitigation for stream impacts includes creation of 8,540 linear feet of new stabilized seasonal stream channels and the enhancement of 11,600 linear feet of created and existing stream channels. In addition, 1.0 acre of wetland mitigation areas were created in the 168-acre open space portion of the project site to compensate for project impacts to 0.5 acres of the 1.9 acres of wetlands on the site.

WRA prepared a wetland and riparian mitigation plan to describe post- construction management and monitoring efforts on the site. WRA prepared grading and planting plans and specifications for the created wetlands and streams in consultation with a hydrological engineer. Plan specifications included tree, shrub, herbaceous vegetation, and seed planting along the enhanced streams and in mitigation wetlands.

Typical Schematic Plan for Riparian Restoration Currently WRA conducts annual monitoring of mitigation wetland and riparian areas and preserved callippe silverspot butterfly habitat on the CONTACT site. DELIVERABLES City of Pleasanton Lisa Hagopian o Wetland and Stream Mitigation Plan Pleasanton, California o Irrigation Pond Management Plan (925) 931-5566 o Construction Drawings and Specifications for Wetland and Riparian [email protected] Mitigation o Construction Drawings for Stream Creation Mitigation o Annual Mitigation Wetland, Riparian, CTS, and Callippe Habitat Monitoring Report

BUDGET KEY STAFF $500,000 Tom Fraser, Project Manager and Principal-in-Charge Jeff Dreier, Senior Wildlife Biologist Giselle Goulette, Landscape Architect

88 LUCKY DAY RANCH BIOLOGICAL STUDIES AND CONSERVATION/MITIGATION BANK CREATION

GOALS o To identify the biological resources within the property and establishment of a financially feasible wetland/wildlife bank. o Create a large, diverse wetland/wildlife bank that would enhance the biological value of the property and preserve the existing functions of the created and existing habitats.

EXPERIENCE AND TECHNICAL COMPETENCE

Since August 2004, WRA has completed numerous biological studies within the 2000-acre Lucky Day Ranch property. The primary objective of these studies was to identify biological resources on the site and assess the need for further studies in order to fully evaluate the property’s use as a wetland mitigation and wildlife conservation bank.

Serpentine grassland and CTS breeding pond The property was determined to support two federally-listed species, California tiger salamander and Santa Clara Valley Dudleya. In addition, numerous other special status plant and wildlife species were observed within the property. Furthermore, a large wetlands system consisting of seasonal meadows, vernal pool/swales, freshwater marshes, seeps, ponds, and ephemeral drainages was delineated. Based upon the biological surveys, WRA developed a conceptual bank plan that consists of created vernal pools, amphibian breeding ponds, and enhanced riparian wetlands. Prior to designing the bank, we analyzed historic and potential future mitigation credit needs in the anticipated service areas to assist the client in estimating market demand and to appropriately mitigate for anticipated impacts. In addition, WRA prepared documentation supporting the inclusion of the property within the Santa Clara Habitat Conservation Plan and Bay Checkerspot Critical Habitat. Currently the project is seeking approval as a wildlife conservation and wetland mitigation bank. As such, WRA is conducting consultations with Serpentine outcrop the Army Corps, CDFG, and USFWS. Furthermore, we are developing the management plan for the property, calculating potential long-term management costs and determining the type and amount of wetland and wildlife credits that could be sold. CONTACT DELIVERABLES Lucky Day Ranch California Partnership o Biological Resources Assessment Gary Gillmor o California Tiger Salamander Survey and Burrow Analysis Sunnyvale, California o California Red-Legged Frog Survey (408) 246-5020 o Bay Checkerspot Survey o Vernal Pool Crustacean Survey o Wetland Delineation o Special Status Plant Survey o Conceptual Wetland Creation Plans o Agency Consultations o Wildlife/Wetland Conservation Bank Application

BUDGET KEY STAFF $372,000 Tim DeGraff, Principal-in-Charge and Project Manager Nate Bello, Biologist George Salvaggio, Assistant Principal and Project Manager

89 Ridge Top Ranch Conservation Bank Bank Development, Permitting, and Credit Sales

GOALS o Develop 750 acre ranch into conservation bank o Preserve and enhance habitat for two endangered species

PROJECT DESCRIPTION Ridge Top Ranch is a 750-acre cattle ranch in southern Solano County. Dominated by rolling grasslands, the property is ideal habitat for a major concentration of Callippe silverspot butterfly, a federally threatened species. The numerous stock ponds are also suitable yet degraded breeding habitat for the California red- legged frog, also a threatened species. Historic land practices on the property prevented the potential breeding habitat from being suitable; therefore no frogs were originally present on the property. Restored pond provides ideal CRLF breeding habitat EXPERIENCE AND TECHNICAL COMPETENCE WRA submitted a frog translocation plan to the US Fish and Wildlife Service that would bring fertile egg masses to the property into enhanced ponds managed to be suitable habitat for the frog. The translocation plan was approved and the first translocation of egg masses occurred in February 2012 and was very successful, with over 100 juvinile frogs observed in the two restored recipient ponds the following fall.

WRA also prepared a Bank Prospectus and Bank Enabling Instrument for Ridgetop Ranch to gain approval as a Bank with the US Fish and Wildlife Service. WRA is currently conducting annual land management tasks to ensure the enhanced habitats are meeting the needs of the species. We are also working with Harvested CRLF egg mass in hatch-out cage in the client to market frog and butterfly credits to projects that may recipient pond need species’ habitat conservation credits.

CONTACT DELIVERABLES Malcolm Jarrell o California Red Legged Frog Translocation Plan LandBank Properties, L.L.C. o Bank Prospectus 4171 Essen Lane o Bank Enabling Instrument Baton Rouge, LA 70809 o Annual Monitoring Reports 225-987-7772 o Quarterly Market Analysis Reports

KEY STAFF BUDGET Tim Degraff, Principal In Charge Geoff Smick, Project Manager and Butterfly Biologist $800,000 Rob Schell, Frog Biologist and Translocation Specialist

90 NORTH BAY MITIGATION BANK Baseline Surveys, Restoration Planning, and Bank Entitlement

GOALS o Identify the presence and extent of sensitive biological resources within the property o Establish a biologically and financially sound mitigation bank strategy o Obtain approval of a combined wildlife conservation and wetland/stream mitigation bank

PROJECT DESCRIPTION In 2011, WRA began working with Falling Springs to develop a combined wildlife conservation and wetland/stream mitigation bank. WRA completed numerous biological studies within the 840-acre Marin County property to identify sensitive biological California Red-legged Frog Breeding Pond resources with potential market value for mitigation credits. WRA identified several special-status species and sensitive habitats at the site. These resources include California red- legged frog, special status plants as well as wetlands, streams, riparian corridors, serpentine habitat, and oak woodland.

WRA determined the appropriate service area for these resources and conducted market feasibility studies to analyze the historic and future supply and demand for mitigation within this service area. Upon determining that there was sufficient demand for the bank’s resources and that the bank could be economically viable, WRA created a bank entitlement and crediting strategy to achieve project approval from the regulatory agencies. This bank is currently going through agency review and is expected to be approved in mid-2014.

Oak Woodland Habitat

CONTACT DELIVERABLES Duncan Heyward o Biological Resources Inventory Falling Springs LLC o Wetland Delineation 1100 Boulders Parkway Suite 100 o Special-Status Wildlife Surveys Richmond, VA 23225 o Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan 804.330.8094 o Bank Entitlement Documents o Agency Presentations o Long-term Management Plan

BUDGET KEY STAFF $532,000 Tim DeGraff, Principle-in-Charge Matt Richmond, Project Manager Megan Stromberg, Landscape Architect Aaron Arthur, Botanist Rob Schell, Wildlife Biologist

91 ELSIE GRIDLEY MITIGATION AND CONSERVATION BANK Mitigation and Conservation Bank Monitoring and Reporting

GOALS o Establish a successful mitigation and conservation bank o Preserve and restore unique habitat supporting native and rare species

EXPERIENCE AND TECHNICAL COMPETENCE The Elsie Gridley Mitigation and Conservation Bank was established in 2006 for the purpose of providing offsite mitigation opportunities for wetlands, vernal pools, riparian habitat, and special-status species. Establishment of the 1,815-acre bank included preservation of approximately 390 acres of existing wetlands, including seasonal wetlands, vernal pools, alkali playa pools, and marshes. In addition, over 60 acres of seasonal Pond D Spring Monitoring wetlands and vernal pools were restored on land previously converted to agriculture. Wetland and upland habitats within the site support numerous special-status wildlife species including California tiger salamander (Federal and State threatened), Swainson’s hawk (State threatened), vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Federal endangered), Conservancy fairy shrimp (Federal endangered), vernal pool fairy shrimp (Federal threatened), and Delta green ground beetle (Federal threatened). At least 11 special-status plants species have been observed at the site, including Boggs Lake hedge hyssop (State endangered). The bank is currently in operation and offers a number of different mitigation credit types.

WRA is the primary environmental consultant for the Elsie Gridley Mitigation and Conservation Bank. WRA biologists provide management guidance along with surveys and

California Tiger Salamander monitoring for numerous sensitive habitats and species, and also provide reporting services as required by regulatory agencies. CONTACT DELIVERABLES Wetland Resources Ben Winslow o Ongoing management guidance 3223 Webster Street o Special-status species surveys San Francisco, CA 94123 o Habitat assessments and surveys [email protected] o Annual monitoring reports

BUDGET KEY STAFF $500,000 Phil Greer, Principal Biologist Spencer Badet, Scientist and Project Manager Reuben Brandt, Technician

92 WRA Proposal 15 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

SECTION 4 – KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING OF THE REGION AND RELEVANT LAWS

WRA’s local Bay Area environmental regulatory experiences over the past 30 years has allowed us to grow into a regional leader in environmental regulatory issues and permitting, including mitigation. Our company is unique in the small environmental consulting firms in that we not only have the in-house wetland, botanical, and wildlife staff, but we also have an in-house CEQA group, landscape architects who specialize in designing created and restored aquatic habitats, and a mitigation department that specializes in mitigation banking and other creative mitigation solutions. The combination of front-end planning with long term, end of project mitigation solutions makes us an ideal candidate for this project.

In addition, we have substantial local experience in eastern Alameda County. We have conducted many projects in the greater Livermore Valley area of varying types and for a variety of public and private clients. This includes 18 projects in Dublin, 20 projects in Pleasanton, and 25 projects in Livermore, not to mention many in the greater, unincorporated areas of eastern Alameda County. While these projects represent a great variety of project types, most include some level of biological surveys and wetland delineations, many require permitting, and several included mitigation planning and design for impacts to sensitive species or habitats. Several of our more recent projects involve applying the Eastern Alameda Conservation Strategy for determining mitigation requirements for unavoidable impacts.

The current Bank project not only has to go through the Bank approval process, but assuming wetlands are constructed and/or enhanced, wetland impact permits may also be required from the regulatory agencies. While obtaining permits for a Banking project is much easier than for a development project, the overall process is still the same. WRA anticipates the project needing the following permits: Section 404 permit from Army Corps, Section 401 Water Quality Certification from SFRWQCB, and Section 7 Consultation and Biological Opinion from USFWS. Since no work within stream courses per se is currently proposed, a 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW is presumed to not be needed for the project. We regularly consult with the standard regulatory agencies including: CDFW, Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and US Fish and Wildlife Service. Our length of time in the field combined with our objective, unbiased and scientific approach to project permitting has allowed us to maintain an excellent rapport with regulatory agency staff.

Since grading will occur, a grading permit will be needed from the City. This qualifies the Bank project as a project needing environmental review under CEQA. Therefore a CEQA Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration will be needed. WRA recommends starting the permitting and CEQA processes during the draft BEI phase once the overall concept of the Bank is vetted with the agencies. These items are discussed in more detail in the Scope of Work section, below.

A few example projects from the region are discussed below to provide a better flavor of some of the work WRA has been involved in over the years.

Staples Ranch, Alameda County Surplus Land Authority, Pleasanton, California The 125-acre Staples Ranch is a remnant ranch situated at the southwest corner of Interstate-580 and El Charro Road in Pleasanton. The City of Pleasanton plans to develop a senior residence facility, auto mall, recreation center, and public park on the lands.

93 WRA Proposal 16 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

WRA conducted various biological studies at Staples Ranch in support of project design and environmental approvals. Initial studies at Staples Ranch included a Biological Resources Assessment and Wetland Delineation. Further specialized studies required by some regulatory agencies included focused rare plant surveys, California Tiger Salamander surveys, California Red-legged Frog surveys, and Western Pond Turtle surveys. During the rare plant surveys, a population of San Joaquin spearscale, a species considered locally rare, was mapped. Since this population could not be avoided by the proposed project, WRA worked with the client to identify potential mitigation opportunities for the species in the region.

WRA attended public hearings and presented their findings in front of the Planning Commission in support of the project.

East Dublin Resource Management Plan, City of Dublin, California WRA conducted studies and analyses for 13 properties in Eastern Dublin for the City of Dublin in order to prepare a Resource Management Plan for the biological resources present on these properties. WRA conducted site studies on one of the properties and peer-reviewed previously-conducted studies from the other properties. All of this information was compiled into a Geographic Information System (GIS) database used to depict resources, analyze habitat and regulatory constraints (including federal, state and EIR guidelines and requirements), and prepare a conservation/development opportunities maps for the entire suite of parcels.

The Resource Management Plan evaluates potential impacts from anticipated development activities according to these opportunities and recommends appropriate on- or off-site mitigation strategies, including resource management measures such as grazing and exotic species control, restoration guidelines, and monitoring goals and guidelines. WRA collaborated with Zander Associates, and managed cultural and hydrological subconsultants. WRA worked closely with the City of Dublin, regulatory agencies, and the landowners and their consultants to ensure the accuracy and value of the RMP for future land planning.

Oak Grove Residential Development, Pleasanton, California WRA biologists conducted a biological assessment, wetland delineation, rare plant survey, California Red-legged Frog surveys, California Tiger Salamander surveys, and Callippe silverspot habitat survey on the 560-acre Oak Grove site in the southern portion of the City of Pleasanton, Alameda County, California. These studies were conducted to provide information for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed 100-home Oak Grove project. The Oak Grove site is undeveloped ranchland in the foothills just south of the Amador Valley in Pleasanton. The site is currently used for livestock grazing.

No special status plant species having a moderate or high potential to occur within the Study Area were observed on site. California Red-legged Frogs, California Tiger Salamander, and Callippe silverspot were found on the site. Several miles of ephemeral and intermittent drainages and a few seep wetlands are also present. WRA prepared the biological resources section and graphics for the project EIR. Due to the extent of sensitive species and habitat, WRA is currently working with the project proponent to redesign the development plan to reduce and avoid impacts to the greatest extent practicable.

94 WRA Proposal 17 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

North Livermore residential development, Livermore, California WRA conducted an assessment of a 1,392-acre site located near the intersection of North Livermore Avenue and Hartford Road in Livermore, California. WRA staff determined habitat suitability for special status species and identified wetland areas. Sensitive resources identified by WRA between 2003 and 2004 include federal endangered, threatened and CNPS listed plant species such as Palmate bracted- bird’s beak, Brittlescale and San Joaquin spearscale. Additionally, WRA identified breeding habitat for the federal threatened California red-legged frog and the federal endangered California tiger salamander. WRA also performed a wetland delineation re-verification on the site which was subsequently verified by the Army Corps of Engineers. Due to the extent of sensitive habitat and species, the project was never developed.

95 WRA Proposal 18 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

SECTION 5 – FINANCIAL STRENGTH

WRA has an entire group dedicated to the development, management and financing of mitigation banks. We are regularly approached by landowners interested in developing a mitigation bank on their property, but with limited financial capacity. We have developed a network of sophisticated investors that understand this innovative asset class and are attracted by the ecological and financial benefit it can procure. Over the past 5 years, WRA has helped landowners successfully raise upward of $40 million for mitigation banking projects.

Ben Guillon, the director of the Department, spent most of his career working for private equity investors interested in ecosystem markets, particularly in mitigation banks. Over the past 5 years, Ben has personally channeled over $20 million into mitigation banking projects. In addition, Ben regularly teaches a 4 hour workshop focused on fundraising and financial analysis at the annual convention of the mitigation banking industry.

With this experience, WRA’s staff is able to propose innovative structures for the financing of the management of the projects that allow managing the parties’ main objectives. For example, it may be possible to structure the transaction contemplated here as to limit the City potential liability in case the project is not successful, without sacrificing the potential return.

WRA has letters of interest from two potential investors for this project (see following pages). These groups are experienced with mitigation banking which is important since mitigation banking is such a unique financial model. The upfront investment combined with the calculated risk and length of return is balanced by the investment rate of return. The Corps of Engineers’ 2008 mitigation rule that preferentially utilizes mitigation banking over alternative modes of mitigation has greatly benefited the industry in the respect and made investors much more comfortable with the investment model by reducing risk.

We propose to use the first four months of the project (or less) to prepare a draft Prospectus and investment package for the investors. The investment package will include a refined pro-forma with an inventory of the proposed credits, their market values and estimated rates of sale, balanced with entitlement, construction, and management costs. This information, combined with the regulatory agencies’ blessing of the Draft Prospectus will provide the level of comfort they need to pursue the project. Based on WRA’s initial calculations and knowledge of the importance of the habitats on the properties we feel confident that this not be a challenging exercise.

96 97 98 99 100 WRA Proposal 23 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

SECTION 6 – ORGANIZATION, TEAM MEMBERS, and KEY PERSONNEL

Lead consultant and Bank Sponsor: WRA, Inc.

The WRA team we have assembled for this project brings together a suite of experts chosen specifically for their expertise in wetland/conservation mitigation projects and in the unique habitats and species known from the sensitive habitats in North Livermore. The following short biographies outline the roles of each staff person with a major role in the Bank project and their relevant experience. Long resumes for these staff are included in Section 9: Attachments. A company organizational chart is also included there for reference. Additional technical staff not mentioned here will assist with a variety of project components.

Principal in Charge: Geoff Smick, MA Ecology

Responsibilities: Principal level oversight, client and agency meetings as needed, overall project schedule and budget adherence.

Experience: Mr. Smick is completing a 745-acre CRLF and Callippe silverspot butterfly bank this summer. He is also currently Principal in charge of an 1,100 acre vernal pool and fairy shrimp bank in western Placer County. He is a Principal at WRA and shareholder who manages complex regulatory projects in a variety of market segments. He specializes in mitigation, trail/open space planning, City infrastructure, and quarry projects throughout the greater Bay Area.

Project Manager: Ben Guillon, MA, DVM

Responsibilities: Day to day project management, client and agency meetings, project schedule and budget adherence, task management, financial partnerships.

Experience: Ben oversees WRA’s work on the financial and strategic aspects of rural land management and ecosystem conservation. In this position, he helps clients to develop innovative financing strategies to acquire, conserve, and manage large tracts of land in the US and abroad. In addition, Ben leads WRA’s newly founded asset management group, which allows investors and land owners to unlock the value of their land assets through ecosystem markets, such as mitigation banks or carbon offset projects.

Lead Wetland Scientist and Botanist: Aaron Arthur, MS Geography

Responsibilities: Manage and coordinate wetland delineation, habitat mapping, rare plant surveys, weed mapping and associated reports.

Experience: Aaron has over eight years performing field biological studies. His project focus is in habitat mitigation and monitoring plans, and he regularly coordinates and implements protocol-level rare plant surveys, biological resource assessments, wetland delineations, and management plans with specialization in the vegetation and flora of grasslands, chaparral, oak woodlands, mixed conifer forests, serpentine habitats, and seasonal and tidal wetlands of Northern and Central California. Aaron has led wetland delineation and rare plant survey

101 WRA Proposal 24 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

efforts for four of our banking projects, two of which are vernal pool and fairy shrimp banks with habitats very similar to the Springtown Preserve.

Lead Wildlife Biologist: Rob Schell

Responsibilities: Manage and coordinate wildlife habitat assessments and surveys (fairy shrimp, California tiger salamander, California red-legged frog, burrowing owl).

Experience: Rob has over seven years of experience both managing and performing key technical wildlife roles in dozens of projects throughout California. In his role at WRA, Rob works alongside his clients to come up with efficient and cost effective solutions to complex and diverse environmental challenges. Most recently, he has been the lead wildlife biologist on multiple conservation banking projects, one of which involved the first successful translocation of CRLF eggs to expand the extent of the species’ occupied habitat. In tandem with WRA’s Senior Project Managers, Rob’s work has led to the preservation of thousands of acres of habitat for threatened and endangered species.

Bank Document Preparation: Kelly Sands

Responsibilities: Manage and coordinate draft and final Prospectus and draft and final BEI.

Experience: Kelly Sands has eight years of experience in land conservation, environmental consulting, and mitigation and conservation banking with an emphasis on market and policy research. With the Environmental Policy Award from the Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia to her credit, Kelly received her Master’s of Science in Conservation Ecology and Sustainable Development while concurrently working as a Graduate Research Assistant for the River Basin Center.

Lead Landscape Architect: Mark Brandi, MLA

Responsibilities: Wetland schematic design, construction drawings, planting plans, contractor bid process and selection, construction management.

Experience: Mark is a Landscape Architect & Ecologist, and is involved with project management, schematic design, design development, construction documentation, and construction administration for a wide array of environmental design projects. These projects include the restoration of seasonal wetlands, tidal marshes, and riparian systems. Mark’s technical background as an ecologist paired with a graduate degree in Landscape Architecture makes him a key staff member in WRA’s Banking projects with habitat restoration design components.

Lead CEQA: Geoff Reilly

Responsibilities: CEQA IS/MND

Experience: Geoff is a Senior Associate Environmental Planner at WRA, Inc. He has over 20 years of experience in the preparation and management of environmental review documents pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental

102 WRA Proposal 25 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

Policy Act (NEPA). He has a broad knowledge of environmental and regulatory issues that affect land development and has successfully managed the environmental review process for many complex and controversial projects. Geoff has supervised the preparation of all types of CEQA and NEPA documents for both public and private sector clients, including initial studies, mitigated negative declarations, environmental assessments, EIRs, EISs, constraints analyses, technical background reports, and third party review.

Proposed Teaming Partners/Subconsultants:

In addition to the WRA team, a few additional persons or firms will be needed to round out the full project team. WRA has a select team of subconsultants that we regular use for assisting us with specialized tasks outside of our own expertise. These roles are primarily in specialized niche sectors and include: Cultural Resources, Hazardous Materials, Land Surveying/Topography/LIDAR, and wetland construction/planting. Below is a select list of firms that WRA regularly teams with for each of these specialties. Depending on specific site conditions or constraints and other specialized site factors that may arise during the Bank entitlement process, one or another of these firms may be best suited to a particular task. This is only a partial list of firms that WRA regularly teams with. If the City has a preference or opinion about certain firms within specific specialties, we have likely worked with them at some point or would be willing to investigate the potential for teaming with a new partner. For some tasks, especially related to wetland construction, WRA envisions a bidding process in order to fully understand the differences in estimated task costs between different contractors. Following is a list of firms for a variety of specialty services:

Financial Partners:

x New Forests x Falling Springs

Further information on these potential financial teaming partners and letters of interest from them on the project are provided in Section 5: Financial Strength.

Cultural Resources: x Basin Research Associates x Origer and Associates x Littlefield Historical Research

Hazardous Materials/Phase I Site Assessment: x ENGEO x EKI x Fugro West

Land Surveying/Topography/LIDAR: x Kier and Wright x Aerometric Surveys

Wetland Construction: x Restoration Resources

103 WRA Proposal 26 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

x HRS (Habitat Restoration Sciences) x Hanford ARC x Clearwater Hydrology

Wetland Vegetation Planting: x Shelterbelt Builders x Green Valley Landscape x The Watershed Nursery (nursery only)

104 WRA Proposal 27 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

SECTION 7 – PROPOSED WORK PLAN

The environmental regulatory agencies involved in Banking in California have prepared a set of document templates and checklists in an attempt to streamline and demystify the banking process. Based on those documents and their submissions, we have broken the project up into phases. The phases and associated products and general tasks are described below. Following these textual descriptions is a task list with estimated start dates and durations, a proposed project schedule, and estimated task costs.

Phase I: Draft Prospectus

WRA proposes to take the first four months of the project schedule to vet the bank approach with the appropriate regulatory agencies. This will be done by preparing a Draft Prospectus, a brief, concept- level proposal submitted when scoping the concept of a mitigation bank. While WRA feels strongly that the agencies will agree that this is an ideal bank site and property, and an important property for conservation, we want to ensure they are on-board with the proposed approach, work plan, and credit development outline. The results of this first step will not only provide important feedback for further developing and refining the banking documents, but it will also provide the necessary assurance to potential financial partners that the investment is a sound one.

The Draft Prospectus is an ideal first step for this project as it does not require extensive pedestrian surveys for species or habitats. Instead it provides a basic overview of the properties, their habitats, species known to exist on site, and past land uses. The necessary components of the Draft Prospectus can be prepared entirely by WRA in-house. The following information is included in the Draft Prospectus:

x Proposed Bank Name, Bank contacts (Bank Sponsor, Property Owner) x General location map and address of the proposed Bank Property and accurate current site map; x Color aerial photographs that reflect current conditions of the proposed Bank Property and surrounding properties and a brief discussion of compatibility of proposed bank with adjacent property land uses including known present and proposed zoning designations; x Proposed credit types and maps of the proposed bank service areas, description of the general need for the bank and basis for such determination; x Site conditions description, including a brief description of site conditions; habitats and species known or potentially present; photos of the Bank Property; description and acreage of existing wetlands and other waters of the U.S. present on the proposed Bank Property; hydrology; methods for establishing, restoring, rehabilitating, and/or preserving wetlands and other waters of the U.S., and habitat for federal, and state listed species; and site history, including past and present land uses, surrounding land uses and zoning along with the anticipated future development in the area; x Details including ownership information on interest of surface and sub-surface mineral rights and surface water rights;

105 WRA Proposal 28 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

x Details regarding public funding received (if applicable) for restoration, acquisition or other purposes on all or a portion of the proposed Bank Property (e.g., funding source, amount received, purpose, # of acres affected by each purpose, etc.).

Preparing the Draft Prospectus is estimated to take WRA six to eight weeks. Upon completion it will be submitted to the City for review. The final Draft Prospectus will then be submitted to the IRT for review and consideration. Their review will likely take approximately four weeks, after which time WRA will have a meeting with them to discuss the proposed Bank project.

WRA proposes to combine the Draft Prospectus Phase with a fundraising effort for the project. WRA will prepare an investment memorandum describing the project and the potential returns and risks for an investor. WRA will reach out to the two financial partners that have already expressed an interest in the project in addition to other capital partners we regularly work with. Once an appropriate financial partner has been identified, WRA will work in coordination with the City to finalize a structure and terms that would be acceptable to all parties involved in the project. WRA will take the lead on drafting the operating and investment agreements and will work in close coordination with the City legal staff as necessary.

Phase II: Final Prospectus

The second stage in the Bank development and entitlement process is the Final Prospectus. While this is still a schematic, blueprint-level document for the Bank, it incorporates any modifications the IRT may have had on the Draft Prospectus while also adding additional site information gathered from detailed pedestrian surveys. Several technical studies occur during this stage to better characterize the species and habitats on the site in addition to assessing other potential constraints. The types of studies that are typically conducted to support the Final Prospectus include a Biological Resources Inventory, Wetland Delineation, Hydrology Study if wetland creation is proposed, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, and Cultural study. While WRA will conduct most of this work in-house, some outside specialists will be hired for some tasks (i.e. Cultural Resources, Phase I ESA). Focused surveys for species proposed for banking are also typically conducted during this stage if the seasonal timing is appropriate. However, given the detailed knowledge of species occurrences at both Springtown and Doolan Canyon – some of these survey efforts may be able to be reduced or omitted altogether. While all of the information presented in the Draft Prospectus in included in the Final Prospectus, the following additional information is included in the Final Prospectus:

x Description of how the mitigation bank will be established and operated, including the proposed ownership arrangements and long-term management strategy, and any phases planned [include description of phases, boundaries, target habitat/species, and the number of credits associated with each phase]; x Qualifications of the Bank Sponsor to successfully complete the type(s) of mitigation project(s) proposed, including information describing any similar activities by the Bank Sponsor; x Approved or preliminary jurisdictional determination (JD) of on-site wetlands and other waters of the U.S; x Preliminary Biological Resources Survey(s) - This section describes the biotic and abiotic baseline of the proposed Bank Property and includes descriptions of the following, with maps: a) Bank geographic location and features, including topography, hydrology, soils, and vegetation;

106 WRA Proposal 29 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

b) current functions and services of aquatic resources; c) inventory of all biological resources, including description of vegetation communities and a complete plant species list, presence of federally threatened or endangered species, and/or their habitats, as determined by protocol surveys or other appropriate survey methodology, state-listed threatened and endangered species and other species of special concern, other wildlife species that may be present, and presence of non-native species; and d) past and present land uses, including grazing practices; x A map depicting other conserved lands in the vicinity of the proposed Bank Property; x Bank Objectives/Development Plan - This document describes the objectives of the mitigation bank and activities and methods for establishing, restoring, rehabilitating and/or preserving wetlands and other waters of the U.S. and habitat for federal and state listed species. The plan details anticipated increases in functions and services of existing aquatic resources and their corresponding effect within the watershed (i.e., habitat diversity and connectivity, floodplain management, or other landscape scale functions). Describe ecological suitability of the site to achieve the objectives of the mitigation bank (i.e., watershed/hydrology analysis, soils, topography, compatibility with adjacent land uses, watershed management plans). Proposed Performance Standards and monitoring methods for assessing how the objectives of the mitigation bank will be met are also included; x Real Estate Records and Assurances: o Current (within one year of submittal) Preliminary Title Report indicating any easements or other encumbrances and a figure depicting all relevant property lines, easements, dedications, etc. on the proposed Bank Property; o Assurance of sufficient water rights to support the long-term sustainability of the mitigation bank; o Provide details including ownership information on interest of surface and sub-surface mineral rights; o Identification and description of access to the proposed Bank Property; o An affirmative statement that a conservation easement covering the proposed Bank Property in perpetuity will occur as part of the mitigation bank establishment. x A list of federal, state, and local permits required for construction and operation of the mitigation bank.

Given that the Final Prospectus includes significant on-site field work, some of which must be appropriately timed based on blooming period (plants), wet season (wetland delineation, CRLF/CTS/fairy shrimp surveys), the timing for completion of the Final Prospectus is dependent on the completion of the field studies. Given WRA’s understanding of the current schedule, if the project starts in Fall 2013, receiving agency approval and input on the Draft Prospectus should be accomplished in time to begin wet-season surveys in early 2014 to keep the Bank project moving along at the quickest pace possible. Therefore the biological studies would occur through winter to spring of 2014 and the draft Final Prospectus would be submitted to the City for review upon their completion. It is likely that some studies may need to be finalized in the summer (e.g. late-season rare plant surveys), but to keep the schedule moving along results from these studies will be incorporated into the Bank documents during the following phase. Any City edits or comments will be incorporated into the final version of the Final Prospectus which will then be submitted to the IRT for review. Review of the Final Prospectus will

107 WRA Proposal 30 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

likely take the IRT six weeks upon which time a meeting between all parties will be had. A joint agency site visit typically takes place during this period which WRA would facilitate, but the presence of a City staffer to represent the Property Owner would be requested.

Phase III: Draft Bank Enabling Instrument

Upon receiving comments on the Final Prospectus, the next set of documents produced is the Draft Bank Enabling Instrument (BEI). The Draft BEI expands on the final Prospectus and includes several additional reports and analyses that provide a much more detailed approach to developing the bank as a mitigation site. The BEI itself is a legal instrument that outlines the bank approach and success parameters. The BEI includes several appendices that are themselves significant reports to this end. These include:

x Development Plan, which describes how the species’ habitats will be preserved, restored, or created, success criteria that describes how monitoring will document that they have been achieved, and a credit release table that includes credit release milestones tied to the success criteria. If wetland creation/grading is proposed, 30 percent schematic wetland grading plans and planting plans would be included as part of the development plan. x Interim Management Plan, which describes how the site will be managed during the bank development phase when habitat restoration and/or creation is occurring, and until all success criteria outlined in the Development Plan have been achieved. x Long Term Management Plan, which is the document that identifies regular monitoring requirements and maintenance activities that must be conducted in perpetuity to maintain the Bank as suitable habitat for the covered species/habitats for which is was developed. x Property Analysis Record, which is the long term budgeting instrument used to calculate annual monitoring expenses which in turn informs the endowment principal required that will generate sufficient proceeds from the annual interest to fund the annual Long Term Management Plan tasks. x Several template documents such as a draft credit purchase agreement, payment receipt template, draft conservation easement, and credit transfer ledgers.

The Draft BEI is a large document with several ancillary reports in addition to wetland grading schematic designs and planting plans. The development of these documents typically takes several months. The products in the BEI are all prepared in-house by WRA, although this is typically a good time to have a boundary survey conducted which would be completed by a subconsultant. The total estimated timeline from receiving input from the agency personnel on the Final Prospectus to having a draft BEI for City review is estimated to be about three to four months. Prior to submittal to the IRT, WRA recommends submitting the draft BEI to the proposed Conservation Easement holder for review so they can vet any language prior to submittal to the IRT. The IRT will likely need six to eight weeks to review the DBEI.

Concurrently with completion of portions of the Draft BEI, the CEQA process and regulatory agency permitting should begin. To the extent that minor impacts to wetlands are necessary to facilitate wetland restoration and creation on the Bank, Section 404 and 401 permits will be necessary, in addition to a supporting CEQA document. A Mitigated Negative Declaration should be sufficient for a

108 WRA Proposal 31 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

Banking project of this scale. Section 7 consultation with the USFWS and a Biological Opinion will be needed if a Corps permit is needed. The permitting process for a habitat creation/restoration project for a Bank is more straightforward than a typical permitting process, partly because the agencies are already involved in the project. But getting an early start on this part of the project will ensure that the Bank opening is not delayed due to permitting and CEQA hold-ups.

Phase IV: Final Bank Enabling Instrument

The Final BEI has the same components as the Draft BEI but the content is revised based on input received from the Banking IRT. Completion of the BEI depends on the amount of comments received by the IRT, but can typically be accomplished in two months. Wetland design drawings are typically taken from the 30 percent schematic design phase to the 60 or 90 percent design stage during this time while addressing agency comments in the process; this is one of the more labor intensive aspects of the Final BEI process. The IRT typically needs four weeks to review the Final BEI. Upon completion of their review, the Bank is entitled which triggers the recordation of the Conservation Easement and funding of several temporary security deposits. The completion of CEQA would likely occur during the Final BEI phase. WRA assumes that the project would go before the City Council at this time and the CEQA document would be approved simultaneous with the approval of the Bank documents themselves. WRA will work with the City planning staff to prepare the necessary staff reports and schedule the meeting to ensure a timely approach to the end of the Bank entitlement process.

Phase V: Bank Operations

x Construction, Maintenance and Monitoring of the Bank

Once the Bank is fully entitled and permitted, WRA, in coordination with the City, will decide on the appropriate schedule to construct the Bank. Seasonal limitations are obviously a factor as construction will need to occur in the dry season. WRA will select the contractors through a competitive bid process and will direct and oversee their work. Wetland vegetation planting (likely a combination of seeds and plugs) will occur in the fall following the completion of construction. WRA will then manage the regular maintenance of the Bank during Bank development and the interim management period. The interim management period is the time during which the bank performance criteria are being assessed. For most banks this is typically five years. Created habitat credits are released piecemeal during this time based on annual performance standard milestones that demonstrate successful habitat establishment. Upon completion of the interim management period Bank development is complete, security deposits are refunded, and the Bank enters the long term management period which is funded through annual endowment proceeds.

As directed by the BEI, WRA will submit the as-built report to the IRT as well as annual monitoring reports. WRA will provide the same documents to the City as part of its regular reporting.

x Marketing and Sale of the Credits and Turn Keys

WRA would be conducting its marketing effort through Mitigation and Conservation Solutions. This company is a wholly owned subsidiary of WRA dedicated to the marketing and sale of mitigation banking credits and of land to be used for mitigation. This company is insured and licensed in California to conduct this business.

109 WRA Proposal 32 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

WRA is uniquely positioned to capture a large market share of the mitigation banking credits sales. It is one of the leading environmental and permitting consultants in the Livermore/ Dublin area, and many of the potential buyers of mitigation banking credits are already clients of WRA. In addition to credit sales, WRA has demonstrated its capacity to sell ‘turnkey’ mitigation solutions in advance of the bank being approved. These opportunities create an early cash flow that reduces the investment needs and the overall risk of the project.

x Financial Management, Reporting and Governance

Funds generated by the Bank would be kept in a separate account and not be commingled with the rest of the assets of WRA. WRA has 4 accountants on staff. They are intimately familiar with GAAP and use leading financial management software. WRA would provide to the City an annual financial statement compiled by a third party CPA. The governance structure will need to be negotiated. WRA expects that an executive committee, including a member of the City, would meet every year to review the monitoring reports, the annual financial statement as well as the general strategy for the Bank. WRA would be in charge of coordinating the work of the executive committee.

x Long Term Management

WRA has extensive experience working with land trusts in the Bay Area and could help identify potential partners. We would coordinate with the easement holder; the endowment holder and the long term land manager to ensure that the properties will be manage according to the long term management plan negotiated with the agencies. Based on the City needs, WRA could take the role of the long term land manager and implement the maintenance and monitoring actions on the long term.

110 Durationin Task StartDate Task# Days 1 PhaseI 10/1/2013 120 2 DraftProspectus 10/1/2013 45

3 BeginHydrologyMonitoring 10/15/2013 240

4 CityReviewDraftProspectus 11/15/2013 14 5 FinalizeDraftProspectus 12/1/2013 7

6 IRTReviewDraftProspectus 12/7/2013 50 7 PhaseII 2/1/2014 210 8 BeginFinalProspectus 2/1/2014 100 9 WetlandDelineation 3/1/2014 30 10 BioResourcesInventory 2/1/2014 90 11 SpeciesSurveys 2/1/2014 90

TopographicSurvey (Optionaldependingon 12 existingCountyLIDARdata) 3/1/2014 30 13 CulturalResourcesStudy 3/1/2014 30 14 PhaseIESA 3/1/2014 30 15 TitleReport 3/1/2014 15 CityReviewDraftFinal 16 Prospectus 5/10/2014 14

17 FinalizeFinalProspectus 5/25/2014 14

18 IRTReviewFinalProspectus 6/9/2014 90

19 IRTFinalProspectusMeeting 7/15/2014 1 20 PhaseIII 9/1/2014 175 21 BeginDraftBEI 9/1/2014 45 22 DevelopmentPlan 9/1/2014 45

23 WetlandDesignSchematics 9/1/2014 45

24 InterimManagementPlan 9/15/2014 30 LongTermManagement 25 Plan 9/15/2014 30 City/CEHolderReviewDraft 26 BEI 10/15/2014 21 27 FinalizeDraftBEI 11/7/2014 14 IRTReviewDraftBEIand 28 AgencyNegotiations 11/21/2014 90

111 29 PhaseIV 2/21/2015 190 30 BeginFinalBEI 2/21/2015 60 31 BeginCEQA 2/21/2015 60 Begin404/401/Section7 32 Permitting 2/21/2015 60 33 60%WetlandDesign 3/1/2015 60 UpdateBEIperIRT 34 comments 3/1/2015 60 35 BoundarySurvey 3/1/2015 30

City/CEHolderReviewdraft FinalBEI(includesCityLegal 36 review) 5/5/2015 14 37 FinalizeFinalBEI 5/21/2015 14 38 IRTReviewFinalBEI 6/7/2015 45 39 UpdateFinalBEI 7/21/2015 7 CityCouncilHearingto 40 ApproveCEQA/BEI 8/1/2015 1 41 RecordCE 8/1/2015 30 42 FundSecurities 8/1/2015 30

43 PhaseV 9/1/2015 0

44 BankOpening 9/1/2015 1 FinalizeWetland 45 ConstructionDocs 9/1/2015 90

46 ObtainCityGradingPermit 10/1/2015 30 47 ConstructionBids 11/1/2015 90 48 SelectContractor 2/1/2016 5 49 WetlandConstruction 5/15/2016 120 50 WetlandPlanting 10/1/2016 45

112 113 Topographic Survey (Optional depending on existing County LIDAR City/CE Holder Reviewdraft Final BEI (includes City Legal revi Springtown/Doolan Bank Estimated Project Schedule Springtown/Doolan Bank EstimatedProjectSchedule IRT Review Draft BEI and Agency Negotiations Agency and BEI Draft Review IRT City Council Hearing to Approve CEQA/BEI Approve to Hearing Council City Finalize Wetland Construction Docs Construction Wetland Finalize Begin 404/401/Section 7 Permitting City Review Draft Final Prospectus Final Draft Review City City/CE Holder Review Draft BEI Review Holder City/CE Update BEI per Update BEI IRT Review Draft Prospectus IRT FinalProspectus Meeting City Review Draft Prospectus Long Term Management Plan IRT Review Final Prospectus Final Review IRT Begin Hydrology Monitoring Hydrology Begin Wetland DesignWetlandSchematics Obtain City GradingPermit Cultural ResourcesStudy Interim Management Plan Finalize Draft Prospectus Draft Finalize Finalize Final Prospectus Final Finalize Bio Resources Inventory Resources Bio Begin Final Prospectus WetlandConstruction IRT Review Final BEI Final Review IRT 60% Wetland Design Wetland Delineation Wetland Development Plan Construction Bids Construction Select Contractor Select BoundarySurvey Finalize Draft BEI Draft Finalize Finalize Final BEI Final Finalize Wetland Planting Wetland Draft Prospectus Species Surveys Species Update Final BEI Final Update Fund Securities Fund Begin Draft BEI Draft Begin Begin Final BEI Final Begin IRTcomments Bank Opening Begin CEQA Begin Phase I ESA I Phase Title Report Title Record CE Phase IV Phase III Phase V Phase Phase II Phase I data) ew)

7/1/13

8/30/13 Subconsultant Work Period Period Subconsultant Work WRA Work Period 10/29/13 Draft BEI Submitted BEISubmitted Draft 12/28/13

2/26/14

4/27/14 Final BEISubmitted 6/26/14

8/25/14 Bank Opening 10/24/14

12/23/14

2/21/15 City Review Period City Review Period Fixed Agency ReviewPeriod 4/22/15

6/21/15

8/20/15

10/19/15

12/18/15

2/16/16

4/16/16

6/15/16

8/14/16 Schedule Phase Overall

10/13/16

12/12/16

2/10/17 WRA Proposal 36 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

SECTION 8 – DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

WRA is currently working on four Bank projects in the greater Bay Area. These are listed below and we have provided some basic additional information about each.

x Elsie Gridley Conservation and Mitigation Bank: This Solano County bank is approved and WRA is involved in credit sales/marketing of existing credits and entitlement/design/permitting of a second phase. Species/habitats include wetlands, vernal pool preservation and creation, and CTS habitat.

x Ridge Top Ranch Wildlife Conservation Bank: This Solano County bank is on track for approval in late summer of 2013. The 745 acre bank supports CRLF and Callippe silverspot butterfly habitat credits.

x North Bay Bank: This Marin County bank will likely be approved in the early 2014. It supports CRLF habitat credits. A second phase is being worked on by WRA that will also include wetlands and riparian/stream habitat credits, but the approval timeline for this phase is still a couple of years out.

x Day Ranch Conservation and Mitigation Bank: This Santa Clara County bank is scheduled for approval in late 2014. It supports wetlands, CTS, burrowing owl, and a variety of CEQA- habitat credit types.

While all of these banks share at least one species or credit type that may also exist at the Springtown Preserve/Doolan properties, none are in Alameda or Contra Costa County. None of the service areas of these Banks include the Livermore Valley or Contra Costa/Alameda Counties in general. Therefore there will be no direct competition between these banks and the proposed Springtown/Doolan Canyon Banks in Livermore.

114 WRA Proposal 37 City of Livermore Doolan and Springtown Preserve Mitigation Bank

SECTION 9 – ATTACHMENTS

Enclosed are resumes for key staff in addition to a company organizational chart.

115

Geoff Smick received his Bachelor’s degree in Biology, with honors, from the University of Oregon prior to obtaining a Master’s degree in Ecology and Systematic Biology from San Francisco State University. During his graduate studies Geoff worked as a biologist for the National Park Service at Point Reyes National Seashore and held Curatorial Assistant positions with both the Botany and Entomology departments at the California Academy of Sciences in San Francisco.

Geoff is a project manager at WRA and focuses on federal, state and local environmental regulatory compliance and permitting for a variety of clients at the private, commercial and public sector levels. His project management experience includes sensitive habitat inventorying and management, conservation banking, and development, restoration and GEOFF A. SMICK, MA mitigation projects in a variety of California’s habitat types including Principal coastal, wetland, grassland, riparian, woodland, chaparral, and montane communities. Senior Ecologist [email protected] Geoff is very involved in endangered species preserve management and o: 415.454.8868 x150 open space and trail planning projects. Over the past few years he has c: 415.306.4003 worked on several projects that combine these two disciplines through planning public access and trails in sensitive natural habitats that support

(GXFDWLRQ MA Ecology and Systematic Biology, 5HSUHVHQWDWLYH3URMHFWV San Francisco State University, 2004 %UHXQHU 0DUVK %D\ 7UDLO DQG +DELWDW 5HVWRUDWLRQ 5LFKPRQG BS Biology, with Honors, University of &DOLIRUQLD Oregon, 1998 WRA is teamed with DC&E, Questa, Inc. and 2M associates on this San

3URIHVVLRQDO$IILOLDWLRQV&HUWLILFDWLRQV Francisco Bay Trail and habitat restoration project for the East Bay California Native Plant Society Regional Parks District. Geoff is the biological resources project manager and is responsible for assessing the existing conditions and mapping Society of Professional Wetland sensitive biological resources. The latter includes many acres of tidal Scientists marsh wetlands and associated federally endangered species such as Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse and California Clapper Rail. WRA is designing a 6SHFLDOL]HG7UDLQLQJ habitat restoration component of the project that includes restoring 30 40-Hour Wetland Delineation Training acres of tidal marsh habitat. We are also working closely with the trail

Poaceae Class, Jepson Herbarium planning team to design a sensitive public access component that avoids impacting sensitive habitats and provides as much buffer as possible for the sensitive wildlife. WRA prepared the biological resources section of the project EIR and has participated in several public outreach and CEQA scoping meetings during the project planning phase.

San Rafael | Los Angeles | Fort Bragg (415) 454-8868 [email protected] www.wra-ca.com

116

GEOFF A. SMICK Page 2

0DULQ&RXQW\2SHQ6SDFH'LVWULFW5RDGDQG7UDLO0DQDJHPHQW3ODQ0DULQ&RXQW\&DOLIRUQLD WRA is working with Planning Partners and MIG to assist the Marin County Open Space District in preparing a Road and Trail Management Plan and associated programmatic CEQA document. With over 100 miles of roads and trails, many of which are in close proximity to sensitive biological resources and protected species habitat, the District is preparing a program-wide management plan to address road and trail maintenance, construction, and decommissioning. The District’s lands are diverse and spread throughout the County. The open space preserves support diverse natural habitats and many harbor sensitive biological communities and federal listed species such as California Red-Legged Frog and anadromous fish such as steelhead and Coho. Regular maintenance of their facilities has the potential to degrade this sensitive habitat. Therefore the management plan will have impact avoidance and minimization measures incorporated into it to protect these sensitive resources.

0DULQ&RXQWU\'D\6FKRRO&UHHN5HVWRUDWLRQ&RUWH0DGHUD&DOLIRUQLD As the biology project manager, Geoff’s work included conducting a wetland delineation, biological resources assessment, and coordinating the environmental permitting required for this Tiburon Peninsula creek restoration project. Tasks required for this project include permit applications with the Corps, San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). The creek restoration project will reduce local flood hazards while improving the habitat values of the seasonal creek by removing non-native species and replacing them with native plants typical to the area. The restored creek will include a living classroom where students can explore the local environment and assist with long-term monitoring of the creek revegetation. Geoff is now assisting the staff at MCDS with incorporating the agency mandated 5- year monitoring of the creek vegetation into the student’s curriculum.

&RQILGHQWLDO&RQVHUYDWLRQ%DQN6RODQR&RXQW\&DOLIRUQLD WRA is assisting a landowner to preserve their 750 acre property under a conservation easement and develop it into an endangered species conservation bank. The property supports two federal listed species: CRLF and Callippe Silverspot Butterfly. Geoff is the project manager for the project which involves habitat restoration, sensitive species surveys, negotiations with the USFWS, and preparing a long term management plan for the preserve. WRA is working with the grazing lessee to develop a grazing plan that will promote the habitat of the specie while assisting with weed and fire management.

'RDQ5DQFK:HWODQG'HOLQHDWLRQ*LOUR\&DOLIRUQLD Geoff conducted a wetland delineation on the 574 acre Doan Ranch east of Gilroy. Working for the Santa Clara County Open Space Authority to preserve additional agricultural lands in the Mt. Hamilton Range, Geoff conducted the delineation to provide a regulatory framework for future development of the Ranch as a recreational facility. Geoff led a delineation verification with the Corps of Engineers and the client to complete the project.

&DOOLSSH3UHVHUYH*ROI&RXUVH3OHDVDQWRQ&DOLIRUQLD The Callippe Preserve Golf Course is situated in a valley surrounded by hills supporting oak savannah with large patches of Viola pedunculata, the larval host plant of the endangered Callippe Silverspot butterfly. Geoff conducted a butterfly habitat assessment and mapped approximately 12.5 acres of grasslands supporting the larval host plant. The golf course was designed to avoid impacting this sensitive habitat which was preserved in a conservation easement. Annual monitoring continues to ensure the high quality habitat is preserved.



San Rafael | Los Angeles | Fort Bragg (415) 454-8868 [email protected] www.wra-ca.com

117 Dr. Ben Guillon oversees WRA’s work on the financial and strategic aspects of rural land management and ecosystem conservation. In this position, Ben helps a wide range of clients -- including investment funds, infrastructure developers, public agencies, private land owners, NGOs and philanthropic donors – to develop innovative financing strategies to acquire, conserve, and manage large tracts of land in the US and abroad. In addition, Ben leads WRA’s newly founded asset management group, which allows investors and land owners to unlock the value of their land assets through ecosystem markets, such as mitigation banks or carbon offset projects.

DR. BEN GUILLON Ben has 10 years of experience developing and managing projects for Director, Mitigation Banking some of the most renowned green investors. In his former capacity as & Environmental Finance Manager of Acquisitions at New Forests, Inc. Ben led the origination, [email protected] underwriting, acquisition and asset management for the Eco Product Fund, o: 415.454.8868 x151 a $50 million private equity investment fund focused on mitigation banking and carbon offsets. In this position, Ben developed New Forests’ Years of Experience: 10 investment strategy in the mitigation banking space and assembled a pipeline of projects worth well over $100 million. Prior to working with New Education Forests, Ben worked at the World Bank and at the International Finance Corporation on projects aimed at creating economic incentives to improve Masters in Environmental Economics biodiversity conservation in Africa and in Asia. 2005 INA-PG FR. Recognized as an expert in emerging ecosystem markets, Ben regularly Masters in Public Policy presents at conferences in the U.S. and in Europe. 2005 ENGREF, FR.

Doctorate in Veterinary Medicine 2003, ENVA, FR. Representative Projects

Masters in Rangeland and New Forests: Acquisition and Asset Management of a Portfolio of Wildlife Management Mitigation Banks 2003 CIRAD, FR. At New Forests, Ben led the team in charge of investing in mitigation banks Professional Affiliations/ across the U.S. and abroad. In this position, Ben originated and reviewed Certifications over 50 different mitigation banks. Within 2 years, Ben successfully deployed $20 million of investments in 7 banks, including the largest National Mitigation Banking Association – Board Member and wetland bank in the country (19,000 acres). Ben worked closely with the Treasurer local agencies and New Forests’ partners to obtain the different permits for these banks, to manage the operation of the banks and market and sale Chartered Financial Analyst the credits. (Candidate Level 3)

Specialized Training New Forests: Mitigation Banking Fund and Investor Relation Public Policy and Regulatory At New Forests, Ben was in charge defining the investment strategy for the Analysis company in mitigation banks. In this position, Ben developed analytical tools to assess the mitigation banking market dynamic in the U.S. He Financial and Economic Analysis designed a proprietary database coupled with a GIS interface that will allow New Forests to quickly identify opportunities for investment in the mitigation Fluent in French banking space. Using his extensive network in the industry, Ben was able to assemble a pipeline of investable deal worth over $100 million. Ben also co-lead New Forests’ fundraising efforts in mitigation banking and was involved in investor relations.

San Rafael | Los Angeles | Fort Brag (415) 454-8868 [email protected] www.wra-ca.com

118

Aaron Arthur has over eight years performing rare plant surveys, botanical assessments, vegetation and habitat mapping, vegetation change analysis, and wetland delineations. His project focus is in habitat mitigation and monitoring plans, conservation and mitigation banking, long-term management plans, grazing management plans, and timber resources. Aaron regularly coordinates and implements protocol-level rare plant surveys, biological resource assessments, wetland delineations, and management plans with specialization in the vegetation and flora of grasslands, coastal chaparral, oak woodlands, serpentine habitats, and seasonal and tidal wetlands of Northern and Central California.

AARON ARTHUR, MS Aaron’s technical training includes the flora of Northern California, the flora of Botanist / Wetland Scientist the Pacific Northwest, agrostology (grasses, rushes, and sedges), aquatic botany, plant ecology, and soil science. Additionally, he has attended the 40- [email protected] hour U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Course, and Vernal o: 415.454.8868 x153 Pool Module of the California Rapid Assessment Method (CRAM). Aaron c: 707.490.5880 received his Bachelor of Arts in Geography from UC Berkeley, where he studied the biogeography and historical ecology of California and Mexico.

3URIHVVLRQDO$IILOLDWLRQV Inc. where he is tasked with providing technical guidance for an array projects &HUWLILFDWLRQV requiring botanical, vegetation, and wetland expertise. California Native Plant Society 5HSUHVHQWDWLYH3URMHFWV California Native Grasslands Association 5DUH 3ODQW 6XUYH\V DQG (QYLURQPHQWDO $VVHVVPHQW 'RWWD &DQ\RQ DQG 5RZODQG&UHHN3OXPDV&RXQW\&DOLIRUQLD±6XPPHU California Botanical Society WRA was contracted by Plumas Corporation to survey over 500 acres of Sierra Association of American Geographers meadow, scrub, and Ponderosa Pine stands for sensitive plant species as part of a meadow restoration project. The projects are in both private and Forest 6SHFLDOL]HG7UDLQLQJ Service lands. Aaron was the botanical tech for the project conducted protocol- 40-Hour Wetland Delineation Training level rare plant surveys and vegetation community mapping. During the surveys tens of thousands of individuals of three different Forest Service CRAM Vernal Pool Module Sensitive species were mapped in the various project areas. Aaron provided Poaceae (Grass) Workshop support for the drafting of an Environmental Assessment for the Forest Service that evaluated impacts to the plants through the project. Juncaceae (Rush) Workshop

40-Hour HAZWHOPR Training

San Rafael | Los Angeles | Fort Bragg (415) 454-8868 [email protected] www.wra-ca.com

119 AARON S. ARTHUR Page Two

5DUH 3ODQW 6XUYH\V DQG 5DUH 3ODQW &HQVXV /XFN\ 'D\ &RQVHUYDWLRQ %DQN *LOUR\ 6DQWD &ODUD &RXQW\ &DOLIRUQLD±6XPPHU Aaron conducted focused rare plant surveys and census on the 1800 acre Lucky Day Ranch in Gilroy, California. Habitats include oak woodland, non-native grassland, seasonal wetlands, serpentine grassland, and serpentine outcrops. Focused censuses for several rare plants were conducted in serpentine outcrop habitat and vernal pool habitat.

:HWODQG'HOLQHDWLRQDQG9HULILFDWLRQ/XFN\'D\&RQVHUYDWLRQ%DQNSURSRVHG*LOUR\&DOLIRUQLD The Lucky Day Ranch is a proposed conservation and mitigation bank for wildlife and wetlands. Aaron conducted a significant nexus evaluation and feasibility analysis of serpentine habitat for Bay checkerspot butterfly. Aaron applied his cartography experience by creating interactive maps for wetland delineation and wildlife/rare plant sightings to better assist the Corps and Santa Clara County in their decision making process. Aaron coordinated the hydrologic monitoring to assess the potential for wetland restoration and expansion. Additionally, Aaron assists with ongoing bank management plans and wildlife surveys. Coordination, monitoring and management plans effort are ongoing.

5DUH3ODQW6XUYH\VDQG9HJHWDWLRQ&RPPXQLW\0DSSLQJ&RQFRUG1DYDO:HDSRQV6WDWLRQ&RQFRUG&RQWUD &RVWD&RXQW\&DOLIRUQLD±6XPPHU Aaron conducted focused rare plant surveys, and vegetation community mapping in a 200 acre coastal brackish marsh in Concord, California. Twenty vegetation communities were assigned and mapped in the field with a hand- held GPS unit and finalized in ArcGIS. Protocol-level rare plant surveys were conducted in 2005 and follow-up focused surveys were conducted by Aaron in 2008. A suite of Delta rare plants were located, counted, and mapped.

:HWODQG 'HOLQHDWLRQ DQG 5DUH 3ODQW 6XUYH\V %RGHJD ,QWHUWLH 3URMHFW %RGHJD %D\ 6RQRPD &RXQW\ &DOLIRUQLD±6SULQJ  Aaron conducted a protocol-level rare plant survey and Myrtle’s Silverspot Butterfly (MSB) host and nectar plant surveys for a pipeline installation in Sonoma County in spring 2009 and spring 2010. Habitats surveyed included coastal scrub, remnant coastal prairie, willow riparian scrub, and Monterey cypress groves. Aaron conducted field survey preparation, including a review of rare plant species and MSB host and nectar plant species of the region, and conducted field surveys over a two day period. Through this project, Aaron has become familiar with MSB host and nectar plant species, as well as common species and plant communities of coastal Sonoma County, California.

&DOOLSSH6LOYHUVSRW+RVW3ODQW6XUYH\V&DOOLSSH3UHVHUYH3OHDVDQWRQ$ODPHGD&RXQW\&DOLIRUQLD ±6SULQJ  Aaron conducted Callippe Silverspot Butterfly (CSB) host and nectar plant surveys in Alameda County in spring 2011. Habitats surveyed included non-native annual grassland and native serpentine grassland. Aaron conducted field survey preparation, including a review of CSB host and nectar plant species in the region, and conducted field surveys over a two day period. Through this project, Aaron has become familiar with CSB host and nectar plant species, as well as other habitat requirements for CSB in Alameda County, California.

%LRORJLFDO 5HVRXUFHV ,QYHQWRU\ 5DUH 3ODQW 6XUYH\V :HWODQG 'HOLQHDWLRQ DQG *UD]LQJ 0DQDJHPHQW XQLQFRUSRUDWHG0DULQ&RXQW\±6SULQJ&XUUHQW Aaron coordinated and conducted a biological inventory, protocol-level rare plant surveys, wetland delineations, and grazing management evaluation and plan in unincorporated northern Marin County. Habitats at this site include serpentine outcrops, serpentine native grassland, serpentine chaparral and scrubs, coastal scrub, oak woodlands, California bay forest, riparian woodland, seasonal and perennial wetlands, and non-native grasslands. Through this project, Aaron has become familiar with several diverse vegetation communities and wetland habitats as well as the common and rare flora of Marin and Sonoma counties.

120

Rob Schell has over seven years of experience both managing and performing key technical roles in dozens of projects throughout California. In his role at WRA, Rob works alongside his clients to come up with efficient and cost effective solutions to complex and diverse environmental challenges. Most recently, Rob has been the lead wildlife biologist on multiple conservation banking projects. In tandem with WRA’s Senior Project Managers, his work has led to the preservation of thousands of acres of habitat for threatened and endangered species.

Rob is a herpetologist and ecologist by training. He is considered an expert on the California red-legged frog, which he is currently undertaking a first of its kind translocation. Rob also has extensive experience with California tiger salamander and vernal pool branchiopods, for which he also holds federal recovery permits. Additionally, he performs surveys and assessments for many other special status species. ROB SCHELL, BS  Wildlife Biologist  [email protected] 5HSUHVHQWDWLYH3URMHFWV o: 415.454.8868 x149 &DOOLSSH3UHVHUYH3OHDVDQWRQ&DOLIRUQLD c: 530.220.9622 The Callippe Preserve was established as mitigation for the construction of

the Pleasanton Municipal (Callippe) Golf Course. As a component of the

40-Hour HAZWOPER Certification

Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC)

San Rafael | Los Angeles | Fort Bragg (415) 454-8868 [email protected] www.wra-ca.com

121

ROB SCHELL Page 2

&DOOLSSH3UHVHUYH3OHDVDQWRQ&DOLIRUQLD The Callippe Preserve was established as mitigation for the construction of the Pleasanton Municipal (Callippe) Golf Course. As a component of the wildlife management plan and USFWS Biological Opinion, Rob has conducted hydrological monitoring, annual sampling for California Tiger Salamander, and required predator monitoring and removal within the Preserve Conservation Areas. In 2009, Rob discovered a new population of California Red-legged Frog within a Preserve Conservation Area pond. Predator removal via hand capture, hook and line, gigging, shooting, and dipnet capture continued throughout 2009 and 2010. Successful breeding of California Red-legged Frog was confirmed in 2010. In October 2010, Rob, with approval of the USFWS and the landowner, dewatered the pond using a gasoline-powered trash-pump to rid it of bass and bullfrogs. Monitoring is ongoing, however CRLF breeding success is expected to improve in 2011.

3ODFHU&RXQW\:DWHU$JHQF\)HGHUDO(QHUJ\5HJXODWRU\&RPPLVVLRQ5HOLFHQVLQJ0D\6HSWHPEHU 3ODFHU&RXQW\&DOLIRUQLD As part of the FERC relicensing for Placer County Water Agency, Rob helped lead field surveys and habitat assessments on the American and Rubicon Rivers for Foothill Yellow-legged Frog. Surveys resulted in positive detections of the species and assisted in management decisions relating to flow releases from hydroelectric facilities.

7ULQLW\$OSV%DVLQ6WXG\7ULQLW\DQG6LVNL\RX&RXQWLHV&DOLIRUQLD The Trinity Alps Basin Study was a four year, joint venture between the University of California at Davis and the Forest Service’s Redwood Science Lab to examine the effect of an introduced aquatic predator on terrestrial food webs in the Trinity Alps Wilderness. As a Crew Leader on this study, Rob supervised a team of three biologists over two-study years, and collected data on Cascades Frogs (Rana cascade) using visual encounter surveys and mark recapture using Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tags. He handled and processed more than 500 adults and subadults and PIT tagged approximately 150 Cascades frogs. This study has led to the publication of multiple scholarly articles in which Rob is recognized for his contributions.

%ROLQDV5HVLGHQFH(QYLURQPHQWDO6HUYLFHV±&DOLIRUQLD Rob was contacted by a single family home owner excited about prospect of constructing an outbuilding to serve as a music studio at his Bolinas home. The homeowner had installed a trench to underground a PG&E electrical line in order to power the outbuilding, without first obtaining a Coastal Development Permit. The County of Marin had issued a cease and desist letter until an assessment of the impacts could be performed. Rob negotiated with the County Supervisor on behalf of the homeowner to allow completion the trenching component of the project under WRA’s guidance. Once the trenching component was complete and in coordination with the homeowner and the County, Rob prepared an impact assessment, remediation plan and implemented a monitoring program to the satisfaction of the County that led to the issuance of the homeowners retroactive Coastal Development Permit in May of 2012.

3DFLILF&RPPRQV%LRORJLFDO0RQLWRULQJDQG0DQDJHPHQW)UHPRQW&DOLIRUQLD Pacific Commons is a 444-acre preserve which is adaptively managed and monitored for performance of wetland parameters, vegetation, and special status wildlife. Rob has participated in surveys for special status wildlife including federally listed California Tiger Salamander and Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp and Western Burrowing Owl, a state species of concern. This project has been regarded as a success, creating a functional mosaic of wetland habitat supporting robust populations of protected species.

San Rafael | Los Angeles | Fort Bragg (415) 454-8868 [email protected] www.wra-ca.com

122

Kelly Sands has eight years of experience in land conservation, environmental consulting, and mitigation and conservation banking with an emphasis on market and policy research. With advanced research, writing, and communications skills to her credit, Kelly received her Master’s of Science in Conservation Ecology and Sustainable Development from the Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia where she concurrently worked as a Graduate Research Assistant for the River Basin Center authored a thesis on integrating a watershed approach into compensatory mitigation. In this capacity, she also assisted with research, technical assistance, presentations and outreach to increase capacity for watershed management in local communities. KELLY M. SANDS, MS Mitigation Banking Analyst Most recently, Kelly has been responsible for credit sales management for [email protected] mitigation banks in Georgia and Virginia; she has developed spatial optimization models for mitigation bank site selection and evaluation of o: 415.454.8868 x176 ecosystem markets in the southeast; and she has performed market and policy research and analysis in support of mitigation, nutrient, and

BS, Biology (Chemistry Minor), markets. She is also proficient in analyzing data from RIBITS and ORM, the Oglethorpe University, 2005 United States Army Corps of Engineers tracking databases.

6SHFLDOL]HG7UDLQLQJ Texas Conservation Banking 5HSUHVHQWDWLYH3URMHFWV Training Course, Conservation Fund  and USFWS, 2012. 'HHUOHDS3UHVHUYH3URSRVHG&RQVHUYDWLRQ%DQN

Environpreneur Institute Fellow, /DZUHQFHYLOOH*HRUJLD Property and Environment Research At Corblu Ecology, LLC, Kelly worked to develop a conservation banking Center, 2011 program for three federally listed fish species in the Etowah River basin. Kelly coordinated closely with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Regulatory In-lieu Fee and Bank partners to draft the Conservation Banking Agreement and supporting Information Tracking System Training, US Army Corps of documents, including the Interim and Long-term Management Plan and Engineers, 2010 Baseline Documentation Report, for Deerleap Preserve, the first proposed conservation bank in Georgia. Endangered Species Act Training Course, Georgia Department of )RUHVWZLGH$VVHVVPHQW*HRUJLDDQG$ODEDPD Transportation, 2008 At Wildlands Inc., Kelly performed a high level environmental mitigation

6SHFLDO5HFRJQLWLRQV feasibility study across a 200,000-acre landholding in the southeast to Environmental Policy Award, Odum evaluate ecosystem restoration and market opportunities. Kelly relied on School of Ecology, University of data on past permit impacts and other geospatial data to perform a market Georgia, 2008 analysis for key markets for generating revenue from environment resources. Kelly used Spatial Analystin ArcGIS 10.0 to create a model of optimal sites for mitigation and conservation banking opportunities.

 

San Rafael | Los Angeles (415) 454-8868 [email protected] www.wra-ca.com

123

KELLY M. SANDS Page 2

5HVHDUFKDQG3UHVHQWDWLRQV

Sands, Kelly. 2012. Deerleap Preserve Conservation Bank – Endangered Species Protection in Georgia. Presentation at the 2012 National Mitigation and Ecosystem Banking Conference, National Mitigation Banking Association. Sacramento, California.

Glickauf, Steven and Kelly S. Siragusa. 2011. Making Water Quality Markets Work Ǧ Little River Nutrient Bank Case Study. Presentation at the Georgia Water Resources Conference, Georgia Water Resources Institute. Athens, Georgia.

Peevy, Matt and Kelly S. Siragusa. 2010. Trends in the Savannah District before and after the New Rule. Presentation at the 2010 National Mitigation and Ecosystem Banking Conference, National Mitigation Banking Association. Austin, Texas.

Fowler, L., R. Jackson, K. Kirkman, H. Neuhauser, and K. S. Siragusa. 2008. Integrating a Watershed Approach into Section 404 Compensatory Mitigation. Thesis for completion of a Master’s of Science, Odum School of Ecology, The University of Georgia.

Siragusa, K.S. 2008. Section 404 Compensatory Mitigation: Balancing Requirements for Functional Lift with Existing Watershed Objectives. Presentation, Graduate Student Symposium, Odum School of Ecology, The University of Georgia.

Berahzer, S.I., E. Brown, L. Fowler, K. Siragusa. 2008. Funding Water Quality Improvements: A Guidebook for Local Communities. The River Basin Center, The University of Georgia.

San Rafael | Los Angeles (415) 454-8868 [email protected] www.wra-ca.com

124

Mark Brandi is a Landscape Architect & Ecologist with 12 years of experience in the field. He received a Master of Design Studies in Landscape Planning and Ecology from Harvard University, and a BS in Landscape Architecture from the University of California, Davis. His graduate research focused on balancing conservation and development, and on designing landscapes in the context of surrounding ecological systems.

Mark’s primary responsibilities include project management, schematic design, design development, construction documentation, and construction administration for a wide array of environmental design projects. These projects include the restoration of seasonal wetlands, tidal marshes, and riparian systems. In addition, Mark routinely performs biological assessments  and site surveys, maps and analyzes environmental resources with GIS,  prepares permit applications and mitigation plans, and monitors wetland and riparian projects to ensure that the goals and objectives of the project are MARK C. BRANDI, BSLA, achieved. MDesS Landscape Architect & 5HSUHVHQWDWLYH3URMHFWV Ecologist [email protected]

Qualified Water Efficient Landscaper, Sonoma-Marin Water Saving Partnership & U.S. EPA

Member, California Native Plant Society

San Rafael | Los Angeles | Fort Bragg (415) 454-8868 [email protected] www.wra-ca.com

125

MARK C. BRANDI Page 2   5RVV9DOOH\)ORRG'DPDJH$QG&UHHN0DQDJHPHQW&DSLWDO,PSURYHPHQW3ODQ0DULQ&RXQW\&DOLIRUQLD As a part of the Ross Valley Flood Damage And Creek Management Capital Improvement Plan, Mark worked with the project engineers to identify locations for marsh restoration along Corte Madera Creek in Marin County. Mark performed an ecological site analysis and habitat evaluation, developed a conceptual design for the restoration areas that would help to maximize flood control for the area, and documented the restoration opportunities as a part of the larger Capital Improvement Plan.

1RUWK

.LUE\&DQ\RQ5HF\FOLQJDQG'LVSRVDO)DFLOLW\ .&5') 0LWLJDWLRQ3URMHFW6DQWD&ODUD&RXQW\&DOLIRUQLD The KCRDF is a functioning landfill in the South Bay that has required additional environmental permits to continue planned operations. Mark has assisted with this environmental permitting process, including the creation of a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Individual Permit Application and detailed Mitigation Summary Plan for proposed on-site mitigation features. In addition, Mark has helped identify opportunities for additional off-site mitigation on nearby Santa Clara County Open Space Authority land, where he has created conceptual plans for the conversion of a failing stock pond into a functional and manageable breeding pond for the federal-threatened California Red-legged Frog. Having recently acquired all necessary permits for the project, Mark will be also be preparing construction plans and overseeing construction for both the on-site and off-site mitigation areas.

126

Geoff Reilly is a Senior Associate Environmental Planner at WRA, Inc. He has over 21 years of experience in the preparation and management of environmental review documents pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). He has a broad knowledge of environmental and regulatory issues that affect land development and has successfully managed the environmental review process for many complex and controversial projects. He has acted both as project manager and principal writer for a wide variety of projects, including residential subdivisions, commercial retail and office developments, mixed-use projects, institutions, recreational amenities, industrial facilities, and roadway improvements.

GEOFF REILLY, BA Geoff has supervised the preparation of all types of CEQA and NEPA Senior Associate documents for both public and private sector clients, including initial Environmental Planner studies, mitigated negative declarations, environmental assessments, [email protected] EIRs, EISs, constraints analyses, technical background reports, and third o: 415.454.8868 x140 party review. He also has prepared many Program EIRs for Master Plans, Specific Plans and General Plan Updates throughout California. His responsibilities include marketing, client and subcontractor liaison, project San Diego State University  5HSUHVHQWDWLYH3URMHFWV 3URIHVVLRQDO$IILOLDWLRQV &HUWLILFDWLRQV 1DSD9DOOH\&ROOHJH)DFLOLWLHV0DVWHU3ODQ(QYLURQPHQWDO&RQVWUDLQWV Association of Environmental $QDO\VLVDQG(,51DSD9DOOH\&ROOHJH&DOLIRUQLD Professionals (AEP) Geoff prepared and managed the Napa Valley College Facilities Master Plan Environmental Constraints Analysis and EIR. The Facilities Master American Planning Association (APA) Plan is both a conceptual architectural build-out plan of the 7,500-student 2013 NWETC NEPA Certification: campus and a statement about the buildings and their function. This Writing the Perfect EA/FONSI or EIS comprehensive plan includes building locations, expected uses, traffic circulation, parking, utilities, drainage, environmental issues, and a 6SHFLDOL]HG7UDLQLQJDQG discussion about the future appearance and character of the campus. 3UHVHQWDWLRQV Geoff supervised in-house staff and technical subconsultants in the Annual AEP Advanced CEQA identification of key environmental constraints at the campus, including Workshops wetlands, cultural resources, flooding and liquefaction. 2012 Lorman Education Services  CEQA Presentation (“Completing the &LW\RI&RWDWL'RZQWRZQ6SHFLILF3ODQ)LQDO(,5&RWDWL&DOLIRUQLD CEQA Process”) Presentation Prior to joining WRA, Geoff served as Principal-In-Charge for the preparation of the City of Cotati Downtown Specific Plan Final EIR. This Fall 2012 AEP CEQA Basics Workshop effort included but was not limited to: a) meetings with City staff; b) Presentation management of EIR staff and subcontractors; c) review of the responses to comments submitted on the Draft Environmental Impact Report and the overall adequacy of the Final Environmental Impact Report; and d) attendance at public hearings on the Final EIR and Downtown Specific Plan.

San Rafael | Los Angeles (415) 454-8868 [email protected] www.wra-ca.com

127

GEOFF REILLY Page 2

&LW\RI&RWDWL'RZQWRZQ6SHFLILF3ODQ)LQDO(,5&RWDWL&DOLIRUQLD FRQWLQXHG  The Downtown Specific Plan area encompasses approximately 59.5 acres, oriented mainly along Old Redwood Highway from northbound Highway 101 on-ramp south to Page Street. The project area is currently designated in the General Plan as General Commercial, Parks and some Residential. The Downtown Specific Plan area is intended to assist with the revitalization of the downtown. Commercial and Residential land uses are expected to predominate the development mix in the area. The proposed Downtown Specific Plan anticipates that approximately 331 additional residential units could be built in the area. The proposed Downtown Specific Plan also anticipates construction of 237,050 square feet of new commercial space.

&LW\RI+HDOGVEXUJ*HQHUDO3ODQ8SGDWH(,5&LW\RI+HDOGVEXUJ&DOLIRUQLD Prior to joining WRA, Geoff served as Principal-in-Charge for the Healdsburg General Plan Update EIR. The Healdsburg General Plan is a comprehensive revision and update of the 1987 General Plan and consisted of updates to the Land Use, Economic Development, Transportation, Public Services, Natural Resources, Safety, Community Design, Historic and Cultural Resources, and Administration and Implementation Elements. These revisions included updating the General Plan planning background information, and changes to General Plan policies, General Plan land use designations, and the General Plan Land Use Map. Key issues included traffic/transportation, noise, cultural resources, hazards, solid waste, land use, water supply, sewer services, air quality, housing, and biological resources.

6DQWD5RVD'RZQWRZQ6WUHHW)XUQLWXUH3DOHWWH,QLWLDO6WXG\1HJDWLYH'HFODUDWLRQ Geoff is currently acting as Project Manager and preparing an Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the Santa Rosa Downtown Street Furniture Palette Project. In October 2007, the City of Santa Rosa adopted the Downtown Station Area Specific Plan. Centered on a proposed Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) station site and encompassing most of Santa Rosa’s Downtown, the Specific Plan defines the framework for future development in the Plan area. A priority implementation step called for by the Specific Plan is the development of Street Furniture Palettes. The Specific Plan defines a “palette” as a group of predetermined specifications that will be applied along individual corridors or in individual subareas within the Specific Plan area. The Palettes will provide guidance for street furniture purchases in association with new development and capital improvement projects, and for purchases made by both the public and private sectors. The Specific Plan identified seven unique subareas within approximately ½ mile of the SMART station site. The two subareas for which Street Furniture Palettes are to be prepared at this time are the Courthouse Square and Railroad Square commercial districts.

6RQRPD9LOODJH:HVW0L[HG8VH'HYHORSPHQW([SDQGHG,6&LW\RI6RQRPD&DOLIRUQLD Geoff served as the Project Manager for an Expanded Initial Study for the proposed Sonoma Village West Mixed Use Development. Located in the City of Sonoma, the site is a long rectangular parcel with an area of 1.74 acres. It is developed with a bungalow that has been converted to a veterinary clinic, a single-family home, several accessory buildings, including a large barn, and associated off-street parking. The residence/cat clinic was built in 1910 and has been identified as a potentially significant historic structure. The proposal involves the development of a mixed-use project on the property, including two commercial buildings with three upstairs apartments, four detached live/work units, and eight detached single-family homes. The project requires public improvements including extension of utilities and service systems, and would entail subdivision of the property into 14 lots. An urban park separates the single-family residents from the commercial-residential development.

San Rafael | Los Angeles (415) 454-8868 [email protected] www.wra-ca.com

128 Tom Fraser President/CEO

Doug Spicher Mike Josselyn Vice President Chairman

Sherry Maloney Tim DeGraff CFO Sr Vice President

Geoff Reilly Holly Barrett CEQA Laura Thiel Executive Assistant Andrea Kloh Perrine Portillo Joel Ruiz Administrative Asst Contracts Manager Accountants Joan Douglas-Fry Environmental Planner

Jonathan Hidalgo Asst Environ Planner Liston Witherill Business Development 129

George Salvaggio Dana Riggs Phil Greer Landscape Design Wildlife Environmental Services Ben Guillon Environmental Finance

Justin Semion Amanda McCarthy Geoff Smick Associate Principal Sr Associate Principal

Leslie Lazarotti Matt Osowski Matt Richmond Associate Associate Sr Associate Mark Brandi Rob Schell Jeanna Menze Chris Zumwalt Dan Chase Ingrid Morken Mark Kalnins Sundaran Gillespie Jason Yakich Spencer Badet Nate Bello Megan Stromberg Morgan Trieger Michael Rochelle Kate Allan Sean Avent Bianca Clarke Biologist/Mit Specialist Landscape Architects Aaron Arthur GIS Professionals Scientists Scientists Scientist Tanner Harris Scientists

Scott Batiuk Laura Steger Tiffany Edwards Reuben Brandt Lauren Kerr Justin Derby Catherine Sherraden Patricia Valcarcel Erich Schickenberg Gwen Santos Stephanie Freed Derek Chan Kelly Sands Landscape Designer Technicians Technicians Technicians Technicians GIS/Auto CAD Technician Mitigation Specialists

June 2013 IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH WRA, INC. TO ASSESS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ESTABLISHING A CONSERVATION AND MITIGATION BANK ON CITY-OWNED PROPERTIES IN DOOLAN CANYON AND THE SPRINGTOWN ALKALI SINK

BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Livermore authorizes the City Manager to sign, on behalf of the City of Livermore, an Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreement between environmental consultants WRA, Inc. and the City of Livermore for consulting services to assess the opportunity for establishing a conservation and/or mitigation bank on City-owned properties in Doolan Canyon and the Springtown Alkali Sink. A copy of the agreement is on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

On motion of Councilmember ______, seconded by Councilmember ______, the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on March 24, 2014, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

______Susan Neer Amara Morrison City Clerk Assistant City Attorney

RESOLUTION NO. ______

130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ITEM 4.05

DATE: March 24, 2014

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council

FROM: Stephan Kiefer, Community & Economic Development Director

SUBJECT: Acceptance for Permanent Maintenance and Release of Security for the Building Demolition & Asbestos Abatement at 50 South L Street, Project No. 586003

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the acceptance for permanent maintenance and release of the security bonds for the Building Demolition & Asbestos Abatement at 50 South L Street.

SUMMARY

On December 9, 2013, the City Council awarded the contract for construction of the Building Demolition & Asbestos Abatement at 50 South L Street to Valley Demolition Inc. The contractor substantially completed the work on February 13, 2014.

DISCUSSION

The Building Demolition & Asbestos Abatement at 50 South L Street consisted of the removal and off-site disposal of the building and its contents, including asbestos containing materials, and the building foundation. The project was completed in accordance with the contract documents in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer.

The contractor provided a faithful performance bond guaranteeing completion of the project, and that bond must now be released. Six months after the date of the resolution, the labor and materials bond guaranteeing the improvements should be reduced to an amount equal to any claims filed and of which notice has been given. The balance of the bond will be released upon the settlement of all claims and obligations for which the security was given (there are no claims at this time). The security for the guarantee and warranty of work shall remain in effect for one year from the date of the resolution.

157

Page 2

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

The original construction contract amount was $21,926 plus a 10 percent construction contingency. The final project amount was $21,926. There were no change orders

There will be no added expenses required to maintain these improvements.

ATTACHMENTS

None.

Prepared by:

Robert Tingley Associate Engineering Technician

Approved by: Fiscal Review by:

Troy Brown Douglas Alessio Acting City Manager Administrative Services Director

158 IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE FOR PERMANENT MAINTENANCE AND RELEASE OF SECURITY

(Building Demolition & Asbestos Abatement at 50 South L Street, Project No. 586003)

The City Engineer of the City of Livermore has filed with the City Clerk her report in writing that all work on the Building Demolition & Asbestos Abatement at 50 South L Street, Project No. 586003 (“Project”), has been completed to City standards. The Project is ready for acceptance by the City of Livermore for routine maintenance.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore that:

1. The faithful performance bond guaranteeing the Project is hereby released;

2. The labor and materials bond guaranteeing the Project shall, six months after the date of this resolution, be reduced to an amount equal to the amount of all claims filed and of which notice has been given. The balance of the bond shall be released upon the settlement of all such claims and obligations for which the security was given;

3. The security for the guarantee and warranty of work shall remain in effect for one year from the date of this resolution. The contractor is required to reconstruct any deficiencies that occur and to repair or replace defective materials during the maintenance period; and

4. The City hereby accepts the improvements.

On motion of Councilmember ______, seconded by Councilmember ______, the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on March 24, 2014, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

______Susan Neer Catrina Fobian City Clerk Deputy City Attorney

RESOLUTION NO. ______159

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ITEM 4.06

DATE: March 24, 2014

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council

FROM: Stephan Kiefer, Community & Economic Development Director

SUBJECT: Acceptance for Permanent Maintenance – Parcel Map 9046

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution:

1. accepting Parcel Map 9046 public improvements for permanent maintenance; 2. accepting on behalf of the public all real property offered for dedication within Parcel Map 9046 including Emergency Vehicle Access Easement; and 3. authorizing release of security bonds.

SUMMARY

Parcel Map 9046 consists of an industrial subdivision, located at the southwest corner of National Drive and Greenville Road. The property owner has completed all of the public improvements for Parcel Map 9046, including completing all of the obligations under the Subdivision Improvement Agreement, and all conditions of approval except for a private on-site fire loop system, which will be constructed with development of lots 2, 3, or 4. The City can now accept Parcel Map 9046 for permanent maintenance, accept the offers of dedication that were previously rejected, and release the surety bonds for these public improvements as specified in the Subdivision Improvement Agreement.

DISCUSSION

Parcel Map 9046 consists of 4 industrial lots, located at the southwest corner of National Drive and Greenville Road. On November 26, 2007, the Final Map for Parcel Map 9046 was approved by the City Council with a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and security for public improvements. At that meeting, the Council also rejected the following easement dedication made on Parcel Map 9046:

Emergency Vehicle Access Easement.

The City Council retained the right to accept the offer of dedication at a later date when the improvements were complete.

160 Page 2

The property owner has completed all of the public improvements for Parcel Map 9046 as described in the Conditions of Approval and Subdivision Improvement Agreement to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A private fire loop system will be required of future development of lots 2, 3 or 4 for proper on–site fire hydrant pressure. The City can now accept Parcel Map 9046 for permanent maintenance, accept the offer of dedication that was previously rejected, and release the surety bonds for these public improvements as specified in the Subdivision Improvement Agreement.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

The City is responsible for the costs of operation and maintenance of the additional public infrastructure. The estimated annual maintenance cost for the public infrastructure, which includes curb, gutter, and storm drain piping is $3,000. These costs are funded by the General Fund, which derives from property taxes generated from the new development.

Parcel Map 9046 is within Landscape Maintenance District LL-2, Annexation 1997-4. All public landscape improvements within this district will be funded and administered by this Landscape Maintenance District. For Fiscal Year 2013/2014, the annual assessment was $71.20 per acre for a total of $12,095.48 for the entire annexation.

ATTACHMENT

1. Location Map

Prepared by:

Debbie Salgado Associate Civil Engineer

Approved by: Fiscal Review by:

Troy Brown Douglas Alessio Acting City Manager Administrative Services Director

161 162 ATTACHMENT 1 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

City Clerk City of Livermore 1052 South Livermore Avenue Livermore, California 94550 /

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE FOR PERMANENT MAINTENANCE AND RELEASE OF SECURITY

(Parcel Map 9046 – Livermore NBP, LLC)

The City Engineer of the City of Livermore has filed with the City Clerk her report in writing that all work on Parcel Map 9046 has been completed to City standards. The project is ready for acceptance by the City of Livermore for routine maintenance.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore that:

1. The faithful performance bond guaranteeing the Subdivision Improvement Agreement is hereby released;

2. The labor and materials bond guaranteeing the Subdivision Improvement Agreement is hereby released;

3. The security for the guarantee and warranty of the work under the Subdivision Improvement Agreement is hereby released;

4. Pursuant to Streets and Highways Code section 1806, the City hereby accepts the improvements for permanent maintenance; and

5. Pursuant to Government Code sections 7050 and 66477.2, the City hereby rescinds its earlier rejection of the Emergency Vehicle Access Easement on November 26, 2007 and accepts the offer of dedication for Emergency Vehicle Access Easement for public purposes made on Parcel Map 9046, recorded in the Office of the County Recorder on December 27, 2007, under Series Number 2007432261.

The City Clerk is directed to record this resolution in the Office of the County Recorder.

RESOLUTION NO. ______163

On motion of Councilmember , seconded by Councilmember ______, the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on March 24, 2014, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

______Susan Neer Catrina Fobian City Clerk Deputy City Attorney

RESOLUTION NO. ______164

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ITEM 5.01

DATE: March 10, 2014

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council

FROM: Douglas Alessio, Administrative Services Director

SUBJECT: Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) Hearing Regarding the Issuance of Tax Exempt Bonds by the Public Finance Authority for the Benefit of the Educational Media Foundation

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council conduct a public hearing, receive public comment, and approve the issuance of a maximum of $30,000,000 in tax-exempt bonds through the Public Finance Authority to assist the Educational Media Foundation, the proceeds of which will be used to refinance the acquisition of a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) license to operate a radio station, the cost to refinance related equipment for the radio station, and to pay certain costs of issuing the bonds.

SUMMARY

The Educational Media Foundation has requested the Public Finance Authority to issue tax-exempt bonds in the amount of $30,000,000 for the purpose of refinancing the cost of acquiring an FCC license to operate a radio station, refinance the cost of acquiring certain related equipment, and pay certain costs of issuing bonds. Although the City would not be party to the financing documents, in order to allow the financing, Educational Media Foundation must meet a requirement of Internal Revenue Code Section of 1986 that requires for federal income tax purposes, that the "applicable elected representatives" of the host governmental unit must approve the issuance of the bonds.

DISCUSSION

The City Council is being asked to adopt a resolution which would approve the Educational Media Foundation’s (EMF) request for the Public Finance Authority to issue tax-exempt bonds for the purpose of refinancing the costs associated with acquiring an

165

Page 2

FCC license to operate a radio station, refinance the cost of acquiring certain related equipment, and to pay certain costs of issuing the bonds.

The Public Finance Authority (PFA) is a municipal corporation of the State of Wisconsin which intends to issue tax exempt bonds for the benefit of the EMF. EMF is a California non-profit corporation whose primary educational and cultural benefits include the direct broadcast of educational programs, extensive promotion of cultural and charitable opportunities. EMF operates radio stations in several states and is an organization described in Section 501 (3) (c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, based on its educational mission which it furthers with these stations. The FCC license is assigned to the City of Livermore, California, and the radio antenna relating to the station is located approximately 300 feet northeast of Whipsnake Trail in Contra Costa County.

The purpose of the resolution is to allow the financing to meet a requirement of Internal Revenue Code (IRC) of 1986, Section 147(f)(2) which requires that in order for the interest on the Bonds to be excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes, the "applicable elected representative" of the host governmental unit must approve the issuance of the Bonds.

As stated in the published notice, a form of which is attached, this hearing is simply an opportunity for all interested parties to make statements about the project or the bonds. There is no obligation on the part of the City Council to respond to any specific comments made or submitted nor does it require the City Council to make a determination on the merits of the project.

The City would not be party to any financing documents or agreements. There are no direct or indirect financial implications to the City of Livermore as a result of this proposed financing. The PFA will issue tax-exempt revenue bonds on behalf of the EMF. The approval given by the City Council is merely needed to meet the IRC requirements. Such approval does not obligate the City to make any payments with respect to the bonds, nor will the bonds become the indebtedness of the City.

Such approval must follow a public hearing that has been preceded by reasonable public notice. This hearing and approval process is referred to as "TEFRA" approval (an acronym for the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982). Proper notice has been made concerning this hearing.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

The City is not a party to the financing or any agreements associated with the bonds. There is no direct or indirect financial implication to the City as a result of the proposed financing.

ATTACHMENTS

None.

166

Page 3

Prepared by:

Douglas Alessio Administrative Services Director

Approved by: Fiscal Review by:

Troy Brown Douglas Alessio Acting City Manager Administrative Services Director

167

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF TAX EXEMPT BONDS BY THE PUBLIC FINANCE AUTHORITY IN AN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $30,000,000 FOR THE EDUCATIONAL MEDIA FOUNDATION

Educational Media Foundation, a California nonprofit corporation (the "Foundation"), intends to operate a non-commercial radio station (the "Radio Station") that has been assigned a license by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) License (the "License") within the jurisdiction of the City of Livermore, California (the "City"). The radio antenna and other related equipment for Radio Station and License are located outside the City’s jurisdiction approximately 300 feet northeast of Whipsnake Trail within Contra Costa County, California.

The Radio Station will offer public affairs programming, contemporary Christian music, public service announcements, and off-the-air personal counseling by phone to listeners.

The License and the Radio Station will initially be owned and operated by the Foundation.

The Foundation has requested the Public Finance Authority, a joint exercise of powers agency established pursuant to the laws of the State of Wisconsin, (the "Authority") to issue its tax exempt obligations (the "Bonds") for the benefit of the Foundation, in one or more series and in the aggregate principal amount of approximately $30,000,000, approximately $5,500,000 of which will be used to refinance: (a) the cost of acquiring the License to operate the Radio Station; (b) the cost of acquiring certain related equipment; and, (c) certain costs of issuing the Bonds (collectively, the "Project"). The remainder of the bond proceeds would be used to refinance the costs of other radio stations across the United States. In order to issue the Bonds as tax-exempt bonds for the purpose of interest cost savings, the Internal Revenue Code requires the Foundation get local approval from each jurisdiction where a project being financed by the Bonds are located.

In order to achieve interest savings, the Foundation desires that the Bonds be issued in compliance with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), so that interest on the Bonds may be excludible from the gross income of the owners of the Bonds.

The City Council noticed a public hearing for 7:00 p.m. on March 10, 2014, which was continued to March 24, 2014 at 7:00 p.m., after reasonable public notice was given in accordance with applicable law, and at such public hearing no objections were raised with respect to the proposed issuance of the Bonds or the financing of the Project.

168 RESOLUTION NO. ______Section 147(f) of the Code requires, as a condition to receiving tax exempt treatment of the interest on the Bonds, that an authorized, elected representative approve the Project, the issuance of the Bonds and the plan of finance to be effectuated thereby (the "Plan"), and the City Council, constitutes such an authorized, elected representative; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Livermore hereby approves the issuance and sale of the Bonds by the Authority. It is the purpose and intent of the City Council that this resolution constitutes approval of the Bonds by the applicable elected representative of the governmental unit having jurisdiction over the area in which the Project is located in accordance with Section 147(f) of the Code.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that the approval of the issuance and sale of the Bonds by the City is neither an approval of the underlying credit issues of the proposed Project nor an endorsement of the financial structure of the Bonds.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that the approval of the issuance and sale of the Bonds by the City is not an approval of the proposed Project for any purposes other than for purposes of Section 147(f) of the Code. Prior to issuing any approvals for the Project in the City’s jurisdiction, the City must review the application from Foundation when submitted for the Project, including the analysis of any potential environmental impacts as required by CEQA and must conduct public hearings if required pursuant to state law.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that this resolution shall take effect, and be in full force immediately after its adoption, and that the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution.

On motion of Councilmember ______, seconded by Councilmember ______, the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on March 24, 2014, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

______Susan Neer Jason R. Alcala City Clerk City Attorney

RESOLUTION NO. ______169

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ITEM 6.02

DATE: March 24, 2014

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council

FROM: Douglas Alessio, Administrative Services Director

SUBJECT: Discussion and Direction Regarding City Council Benefits

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council provide direction regarding City Council benefits.

SUMMARY

The City Council requested staff provide a review and comparison of the current benefits available to elected officials in the Tri-Valley cities.

DISCUSSION

In fall 2013 the City Council requested staff to provide a review and comparison of the current benefits provided to elected officials in the Tri-Valley cities of Danville, Dublin, Pleasanton, San Ramon, and Livermore.

The Mayor and City Council members are eligible to receive health benefits available to all city employees which include: • Medical Insurance – The City provides two Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) plans, one through Kaiser and the other through Health Net. The City also provides a Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) through Health Net and an Account Based Health Plan through Kaiser. • Dental Insurance – The City is self-funded for dental. We have contracted through CSAC for Delta Dental to be our claims administrator. • Vision Insurance – The City provides a VSP vision benefit plan through CSAC. • Life Insurance – The City has contracted with ING for life insurance through CSAC. • Long Term Care – The City has contracted with UNUM for a long term care policy.

170

Page 2

A summary of the current benefits and associated costs available to Councilmembers is included as Attachment 1.

Below is a recap of benefits provided to the elected officials in the Tri-Valley cities.

Benefit Danville Dublin Livermore Pleasanton San Ramon Medical √* √ √ √ √ Dental √ √ √ √ Vision √ √ √ √ Life Insurance √ √ Long Term Care Insurance √ *The Town of Danville reimburses their elected officials $208 per month.

The City of Livermore will contribute up to $2,394 per month towards coverage for medical dental and vision. The City provided life insurance costs $19.26 per month and the long term-care insurance costs $86.40 per month. The total maximum amount of benefit per council member is currently $2,499.66 per month.

San Ramon and Dublin allow qualifying elected officials to participate in their retiree medical programs. Livermore allows a qualifying elected official to enroll in a retiree medical plan on a self-paid basis with no City contribution. None of the other cities listed allow for this benefit.

As required by law, all of the cities provide retirement benefits either through CalPERS or an alternate program.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

This report was for informational purposes only, therefore there are no fiscal or administrative impacts associated with providing this information.

ATTACHMENTS

1. City of Livermore Benefits Summary – Mayor and Councilmembers

171 Page 3

Prepared by:

Douglas Alessio Administrative Services Director

Approved by: Fiscal Review by:

Troy Brown Douglas Alessio Acting City Manager Administrative Services Director

172 Attachment 1 CITY OF LIVERMORE BENEFITS SUMMARY Mayor and Councilmembers Updated: 1/2014 BENEFIT DESCRIPTION SALARY Effective 12/2/2007

Mayor - $1,400/mo. Councilmembers - $980/mo. MEDICAL, DENTAL, AND May elect to enroll in the City’s medical, dental, and vision VISION INSURANCE plans. Participation is optional.

Up to $2,394/month City pays LIFE & AD&D INSURANCE May elect to enroll in life insurance coverage of: $100,000 basic term life insurance policy & $19.26/month $1,000 dependent coverage. City pays

LONG TERM CARE May elect for Long Term Care Insurance coverage of: INSURANCE Long Term Care Facility and 100% Home Care to $3,000/month with 90-day elimination period; 6 year $86.40/month duration. (average cost–varies by age) City pays

173 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ITEM 6.03

DATE: March 24, 2014

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council

FROM: Lieutenant Matt Sarsfield

SUBJECT: Crime Free Multi-Housing

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends that the City Council receive this informational report on the Crime Free Multi-Housing Program, and provide any comments to staff.

SUMMARY

The Crime Free Multi-Housing Program (CFMH) is a voluntary crime prevention program designed to reduce crime, drugs and gangs residing in apartment properties. CFMH programs are in place in numerous cities across the United States, including the communities of Pleasanton, Dublin and San Ramon.

The Mesa Police Department in Arizona initiated the Crime Free Multi-Housing Program as a test project in July 1992. Other programs had failed in apartment communities due to renters not having a financial investment, equity or long-term residency in any particular apartment. They found renters were quick to break leases and move to another rental property when crime problems occurred. Recognizing that it was the owner and management company that had all of the financial interest in the rental property, the Crime Free Programs were created for the property owners and on-site property managers.

The Crime Free Multi-Housing Program was an instant success, with extensive help from the Arizona Multi-housing Association, large property management companies, the Attorney General’s Office and prominent, local landlord/tenant attorneys.

DISCUSSION

174 Page 2

The Crime Free Programs consist of three-phases that are completed under the supervision of local law enforcement. The cornerstone of the Crime Free Programs is the partnership between law enforcement and the community working together to prevent crime. Law enforcement coordinators are certified trainers of the Crime Free programs and provide the initial program training and property survey. Property owners and managers make the commitment to learn and apply the Crime Free Programs to help keep illegal activity off their rental property. This combination of resources has proven to be successful in fighting crime.

Property managers can become individually certified after completing training in each phase while the physical property itself can only be certified upon completion of all three phases. The anticipated benefits of a fully certified property are reduced crime, a more stable resident base, and reduced exposure to civil liability. Fully certified properties have reported reductions in police calls for service up to 70% over previous years.

The heart and soul of the program is in the correct implementation and use of the Crime Free Lease Addendum. A lease addendum is a civil contract between a landlord and tenant whereby the rental applicant agrees prior to tenancy to abide by the rules of the property and not to participate in or allow criminal activity to occur within their sphere of influence.

The program consists of three phases that must be completed under the supervision of the local police department.

Phase I - Management Training (8-Hours) Taught by the Police

• Crime Prevention Theory • CPTED Theory (Physical Security) • Benefits of Resident Screening • Lease Agreements and Eviction Issues • Crime Free Lease Addendum • Key Control and Master Key Use • On-Going Security Management Monitoring and Responding to Criminal Activity • Gangs, Drugs Activity, and Crime Prevention • Legal Warnings, Notices & Evictions Working Smarter With the Police Fire and Life Safety Training Community Awareness

Phase II – Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) - Survey by the Police

• CPTED Design Survey (CPTED) • Minimum door, window, and lock standards compliance inspection • Minimum exterior lighting standards evaluation

175 Page 3

• Key Control procedures evaluation • Landscape maintenance standards compliance

Phase III - Community Awareness Training

• Annual crime prevention social taught by property management and police • Community awareness and continuous participation is encouraged

The purpose of implementing this voluntary program is to improve the quality of neighborhood livability in the community. This will be achieved by a reduction in crime and disorder, a reduction in police calls for service at multi-family properties, and improved personal safety for tenants, landlords, and managers.

Nicole Aguon, LPD’s Crime Prevention Specialist, has attended the training necessary to administer the CFMH program in Livermore. The first 8-hour Property Training (this is Phase 1 of CFMH) was completed on January 14, 2014. Of the 10 properties that were invited, the following apartment complexes were represented:

Carmen Avenue – 2091 Carmen Avenue - 20 Units Driftwood Apartments – 851 Las Flores - 50 Units Briarwood Apartments – 3819 East Avenue - 64 Units Royal Garden & Alderwoods Apartments – 434 Junction Avenue - 46 Units

Staff will be looking to certify additional properties and have planned a second Phase 1 Management Training class on May 14, 2014.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

Staff time for managing the program are absorbed through the Crime Prevention Specialist and on-duty patrol officers assigned to assist in the program.

Actual costs would consist of a yearly $50 membership fee to the International Crime Free Association which allows access to copyrighted materials, logos and information. Reproduction costs for Phase 1 Management Training, certificates and hosting trainings would cost $350 a year. After the completion of the 3rd Phase of the program, the apartment properties would be authorized to display the CFMH Certification Property Sign which costs $25.00 per sign. These signs will be manufactured through the City’s Public Works Department. Total yearly costs for the program would be approximately $500.00.

ATTACHMENTS

1. None.

176 Page 4

Prepared by:

Matt Sarsfield Police Lieutenant

Approved by: Fiscal Review by:

Troy Brown Douglas Alessio Acting City Manager Administrative Services Director

177 ADJOURNMENT

TO A REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON

APRIL 14, 2014 AT 7:00 PM

COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3575 PACIFIC AVENUE LIVERMORE

178