HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006/02/01 - Agenda Packet
5:30 p.m.
7:00 p.m.
THE CITY OJF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
10500 Civic Center Drive ~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730-3801
AGENDAS
. R~cdI~v~~(Q)[p)ITiTiJlall1l~ Ag~ll1lcy
. CD~Y CmJJll1lCD~
REGULAR MEETIlNGS
1st and 3'd Wednesdays ~ 7:00 p.m.
FEBIUJARY Jl~ 2006
AGENCY, BOARD &, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
William J. Alexander.................... Mayor
Diane Williams............... Mayor Pro Tem
Rex Gutierrez........................... .Member
L. Dennis Michael .....................Member
Sam Spagnolo.......................... Member
Jack Lam......................... City Manager
James L. Markman.............City Attorney
Debra J. Adams..................... City Clerk
ORDER OF ]BUSINESS
Closed Session. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Tapia Conference Room
Regular Redevelopment Agency Meeting. .. Council Chambers
Regular City Council Meeting. . . . . . . . . . . .. Council Chambers
~
INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC
.
R,\NCHO
CUCAMONGA
TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
The City Council encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length
of the Agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply
indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your
entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping,
booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience.
The public may address the City Council on any agenda item. Please sign in on the clipboard located at the desk
behind the staff table. It is important to list your name, address and phone number. Comments are generally
limited to 5 minutes per individual.
If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Communications". There
is opportunity to speak under this section at the beginning and the end of the agenda.
Any handouts for the City Council should be given to the City Clerk for distribution.
To address the City Council, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your
name for the record and speak into the microphone.
All items to be placed on a City Council Agenda must be in writing. The deadline for submitting these items is 6:00
p.m. on Tuesday, one week prior to the meeting. The City Clerk's office receives all such items.
AGENDA BACK-UP MATERIALS
Staff reports and back-up materials for agenda items are available for review at the City Clerk's counter and the
Public Library. A complete copy of the agenda is also available at the sign in desk located behind the staff table
during the Council meeting.
LIVE BROADCAST
Council meetings are broadcast live on Channel 3 for those with cable television access. Meetings are
rebroadcast on the second and fourth Wednesdays of each month at 11 :00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. The City has
added the option for customers without cable access to view the meetings "on-demand" from their computers.
The added feature of "Streaming Video On Demand" is available on the City's website at www.ci.rancho-
cucamonga.ca.us/whatsnew.htm for those with Hi-bandwidth (DSUCable Modem) or Low-bandwidth (Dial-up)
Internet service.
The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers Located at 10500 Civic Center Drive.
Members of the City Council also sit as the Redevelopment Agency and the Fire District Board.
Copies of City Council agendas and minutes can be found at http://www.ci.rancho-cucamonga.ca.us
I) If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please
contact the City Clerk's office at (909) 477-2700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the
meetin9 will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility.
Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session.
G CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
FEBRUARY 1,2006 -7:00 P.M. 1
THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCil CHAMBERS, CITY
RANCHO HAll, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
_CUCAMONm
A. CALL TO ORDER
I
1.
Roil Cail: Alexander _' Gutierrez_,
Michael _' Spagnolo _' and Williams
!II
B. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTA TIONS
]
1. A presentation of a Proclamation to the American Heart Association in
recognition of "American Heart Month" and their "Go Red Day for
Women" campaign.
2. A presentation of Certificates to the RC Broncos Pee Wee Football
Team in recognition of winning their first youth football championship
title.
II
C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
II
This is the time and place for the general public to address the City
Council. State law prohibits the City Council from addressing any
issue not previously included on the Agenda. The City Council may
receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.
Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual.
II
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
II
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and
non-controversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time
without discussion. Any item may be removed by a Councilmember
or member of the audience for discussion.
1.
Approval of Warrants, Register Nos. 1/11/06 through 1/24/06 and
Payroll ending 1/24/06 for the total amount of $5,561 ,286.01.
1
2.
Approval to authorize the advertising of the "Notice Inviting Bids" for
the Bridge Maintenance and Rehab Project at Heritage Park, to be
funded from Park Fees.
29
G CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
FEBRUARY 1,2006-7:00 P.M. 2
THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCil CHAMBERS, CITY
RANCHO HAll, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
~CUCAMON'"
RESOLUTION NO. 06-023
32
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFI CATIONS FOR THE "BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE AND REHAB PROJECT AT
HERITAGE PARK" AND AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE
TO RECEIVE BIDS
3.
Approval to authorize the advertising of the "Notice Inviting Bids" for
the Fisher Drive Landscape Improvements, to be funded from
Beautification Fees and Developer Trust Deposit.
36
RESOLUTION NO. 06-024
38
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE "FISHER DRIVE
LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS" AND
AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY
CLERK TO ADEVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS
4. Approval to appropriate an additional $110,000 from Community
Development Technical Services Fund 016 into Acct. No. 1001314-
5303 (Contract Services Reimbursable) to continue contract terms for
two (2) contract planners through the end of FY 2005-2006.
42
5. Approval of an appropriation in the amount of $25,000 from Measure
I Fund Balance to Account No. 11763035650/1532176-0 for the
Base Line Road and East Avenue Street Rehabilitation
Improvements in cooperation with the City of Fontana.
43
6. Approval to accept grant revenue in the amount of $19,514.00 from
the United States Department of Justice 2006 Justice Assistance
Grant (JAG) Award into Acct. No. 13540000-4740 (Grant Income) for
use by the Police Department for the purchase of police-related
equipment and technology (14 hand-held radar guns for use by the
Traffic Division to enforce vehicle code violations).
46
7. Approval to appropriate the Animal Care and Services Departmental
Budget for partial year operations for FY 2005/06 (personnel costs of
$466,060 and operating costs of $224,980) for one-time start-up costs
($1,381,230) and for capital costs ($1,996,900) in the total amount of
$4,069,170 into various accounts as detailed in the attached budget
summary which was approved by City Council on December 13,
2005.
48
8. Approval of the execution of various contracts for the purchase of
furniture, fixtures, equipment and professional services for the
Rancho Cucamonga Animal Care and Services Department.
48-6
" CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
FEBRUARY 1,2006 -7:00 P.M. 3
THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCil CHAMBERS, CITY
RANCHO HAll, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
_t UCAMON-'
c
9. Approvai of a Resolution authorizing the emergency procurement of
construction and construction management services for facility
repairs, modifications and improvements to the Rancho Cucamonga
Animal Sheiter (CO Nos. 06-005, 06-006, 06-007).
48-14
RESOLUTION NO. 06-025
48-17
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE EMERGENCY
PROCUREMENT OF CONSTRUCTION AND
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES
WITHOUT COMPETITIVE BIDDING FOR
FACiLITY REPAIRS, MODIFICATIONS AND
IMPROVEMENTS TO THE 'RANCHO
CUCAMONGA ANIMAL SHELTER, LOCATED
AT 11780 ARROW ROUTE
10. Approval of the Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District Nos. 1
and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 2 for 8395
Chaffee Street located on the south side of Chaffee Street west of
Baker Avenue, submitted by Miguel Rodriguez.
49
RESOLUTION NO. 06-026
51
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION
OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
NOS. 1 AND 2 FOR 8395 CHAFFEE STREET
(APN: 0207-541-52)
11. Approval of Map and Ordering the Annexation to Landscape
Maintenance District No. 7 and Street Lighting Maintenance District
Nos. 1 and 7 for Tract No. 14759-2 iocated at Wardman Bullock Road
and Wiison Avenue submitted by Pulte Homes -APN: 226-102-17
59
RESOLUTION NO. 06-027
62
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TRACT MAP
NUMBER 14759-2
-
RANCHO
CUCAMONG
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
FEBRUARY 1,2006 -7:00 P.M.
THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCil CHAMBERS, CITY
HAll, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
4
RESOLUTION NO. 06-028
63
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION
OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAiNTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 7 AND
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
NOS. 1 AND 7 FOR TRACT MAP NO. 14759-2
12. Approval of Improvement Agreement, Improvement Security and
Ordering the Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 7
and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 7 for Tract No.
14759-3, located at Wardman Bullock Road and Wilson Avenue,
submitted by Pulte Homes-APN: 226-102-17.
70
RESOLUTION NO. 06-029
71
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENTS AND IMPROVEMENT
SECURITIES FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 14759-
3
RESOLUTION NO. 06-030
72
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION
OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 AND
STREET LIGHTING MAITNENANCE DISTRICT
NOS. 1 AND 7 FOR TRACT NO. 14759-3 (APN:
226-102-17)
13. Approval to accept Improvements, retain the Faithful Performance
Bond in lieu of a Maintenance Bond, and file a Notice of Completion
for improvements for DRC2002-00864, located on the west side of
White Oak Avenue north of Elm Avenue, submitted by Allyn B. Scheu
and L. & J Scheu Living Trust.
79
RESOLUTION NO. 06-031
81
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC
IMRPVOEMENTS FOR DRC2002-00864 AND
AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF
COMPLETION FOR THE WORK
m CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
FEBRUARY 1,2006 -7:00 P.M. 5
THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCil CHAMBERS, CITY
RANCHO HAll, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
_CUCAMONm
14. Approvai to release all Maintenance Guarantee Bonds for Tract 82
15727, 15727-6 and 15727-8 located north of Fourth Street and east
of the Cucamonga Creek Channel, submitted by Cornerpointe 257,
LLC.
15. Approval to release Maintenance Guarantee Cash Deposit for DR 84
00-19, located at 10905 Jersey Boulevard, submitted by Hoffinger
Industries, Incorporated.
II E. CONSENT ORDINANCES II
The following Ordinances have had public hearings at the time of first
reading. Second readings are expected to be routine and non-
controversial. The Council will act upon them at one time without
discussion. The City Clerk will read the title. Any item can be
removed for discussion.
No Items Submitted.
II F. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS II
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public
hearings as required by law. The Chair will open the meeting to
receive public testimony.
1. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION
DECISION AMENDING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR 86
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-01 AND ENTERTAINMENT
PERMIT 91-03 FOR MARGARITA BEACH. LOCATED AT 9950
FOOTHILL BOULEVARD APN: 1077-621-34 (CONTINUED
FROM JANUARY 18, 2006)
2. APPROVAL TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH AND/OR 87
INCREASE THE FOLLOWING ENGINEERING-RELATED FEES
AND FEES IN THE FOLLOWING FEE CATEGORIES:
APPLICATION FEES (MISCELLANEOUS). UTILITY
UNDERGROUNDING FEES. PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES
(INCLUDING "QUIMBY" AND IMPACT FEES). PUBLIC WORKS
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FEES. MAP AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN
CHECKING FEES AND ETIWANDA DRAINAGE AREA (MASTER 9)
FEES
Ct CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
FEBRUARY 1,2006 -7:00 P.M. 6
THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCil CHAMBERS, CITY
RANCHO HAll, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
_CUCAMONn.
RESOLUTION NO. 06-032
92
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A RESOLUTION TO
ESTABLISH AND/OR INCREASE THE
FOLLOWING ENGINEERING-RELATED FEES
AND FEES IN THE FOLLOWING FEE
CATEGORIES: APPLICATION FEES
(MISCELLANEOUS), UTILITY UNDER-
GROUNDING FEES, PARK DEVELOPMENT
FEES (INCLUDING "QUIMBY" AND iMPACT
FEES), PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION
PERMIT FEES, MAP AND IMPROVEMENT
PLAN CHECKING FEES AND ETIWANDA
DRAINAGE AREA (MASTER 9) FEES
Iii
G. PUBLIC HEARINGS
I
The following items have no legal publication or posting
requirements. The Chair will open the meeting to receive public
testimony.
No Items Submitted.
II
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS
II
The following items do not legally require any public testimony,
although the Chair may open the meeting for public input.
No Items Submitted.
II
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
II
The following items have been requested by the City Council for
discussion. They are not public hearing items, although the Chair
may open the meeting for public input.
1. LEGISLATIVE UPDATE (Oral)
- CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
FEBRUARY 1,2006 -7:00 P.M. 7
THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCil CHAMBERS, CITY
RANCHO HAll, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
_CUCAMOW:A
J. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT
MEETING
K. ADJOURNMENT
]
I, Debra J. Adams, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my
designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing
agenda was posted on January 26, 2006, seventy-two (72) hours prior
to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center
Drive.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A2enda Check Re2ister
1/11/2006 through 1/2412006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00231889 1111/2006 A AND A AUTOMOTIVE 50.00
AP - 00231890 1111/2006 A AND R TIRE SERVICE 3,774.98
AP - 00231891 1111/2006 A A VIS PLUMBING HEATING & AIR CONDITlm 72.00
AP - 00231892 1111/2006 AAVCO 4,113.00
AP - 00231893 1/11I2006 ABLAC 274.94
AP - 00231894 1/11/2006 ACCELA 1,750.00
AP - 00231894 1111/2006 ACCELA 1,006.91
AP - 00231894 1111/2006 ACCELA 875.00
AP - 00231894 1111/2006 ACCELA 800.00
AP - 00231895 1111/2006 ACUTlNT AND GRAPHICS 115.00
AP - 00231896 1/1112006 ADAMSON, RONALD 198.00
AP - 00231896 1/11/2006 ADAMSON, RONALD 594.00
AP - 00231897 1111/2006 ADRIAN ERWIN PHOTOGRAPHY 118.53
AP - 00231898 111112006 ADV ANT AGE PLUMBING INC. 169.20
AP - 00231902 1111/2006 AJILON FINANCE 1.114.56
AP - 00231903 1111/2006 AKM CONSULTING ENGINEERING INC 9,166.90
AP - 00231904 1111/2006 ALL CITIES TOOLS 32.33
AP - 00231905 1111/2006 ALL WELDING 244.65
AP - 00231905 1111/2006 ALL WELDING 260.00
AP - 00231905 1111/2006 ALL WELDING 135.00
AP - 00231905 111112006 ALL WELDING 309.78
AP - 00231907 1111/2006 ALMAN INTERNATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATI 94.56
AP - 00231908 1111/2006 ALPHA COMPOSITE SYSTEMS INC. 112.60
AP - 00231909 1/11/2006 AL T A FIRE EQUIPMENT CO 77.62
AP - 00231909 1111/2006 AL T A FIRE EQUIPMENT CO nlO
AP - 00231911 1/11/2006 ANAHEIM, CITY OF 227,555.04
AP - 00231912 1111/2006 ANDREWIN, MELISSA 281.93
AP - 00231913 1111/2006 APPLIED METERING TECHNOLOGIES INC 22,316,26
AP - 00231915 1111/2006 ARMSTRONG CONSTRUCTION 162.00
AP - 00231916 1111/2006 ASSI SECURITY 145.00
AP-00231917 1111/2006 ASSOCIATED GROUP 1,986.59
AP - 00231918 1111/2006 ASTRUM UTILITY SERVICES 6,750.00
AP - 00231919 1111/2006 AUTO SPECIALISTS 29.95
AP - 00231919 1111/2006 AUTO SPECIALISTS 49.87
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 BAND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 94.42
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 BAND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 49.06
AP - 00231920 1/ 11/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 308.17
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 BAND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 140.98
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 21.91
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 87.42
AP - 00231920 1/ 1112006 BAND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 20.00
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 16.28
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 40.00
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 15.00
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 30.00
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 14.87
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 14.80
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 BAND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 294.07
AP - 0023 I 920 1/ 11/2006 BAND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 129.14
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 108.29
AP - 00231920 1/ 11/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 99.78
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 BAND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 303.05 }
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 4402
------ ------- ---
User: KFINCHER - Ka,en Fincher Page: I Current Date: o 1/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Registe, Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Al!enda Check Rel!ister
1/11/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 109.95
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 357.23
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 269.38
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 609.56
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 524.00
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 83.37
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 505.08
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 BAND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 167.68
AP - 0023 I 920 1/ 1112006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 75.03
AP - 00231920 1111/2006 BAND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 30.63
AP - 00231920 1/ 11I2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 19.90
AP - 00231920 111112006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 248.14
AP - 00231920 1/ 11I2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 48.70
AP - 00231920 111112006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 35.17
AP - 00231921 1111I2006 BABCO CONSTRUCTION INC 156.25
AP - 00231922 1/11I2006 BACKGROUNDS UNLIMITED 750.00
AP - 00231923 1/ 11I2006 BALDWIN PARK, CITY OF 36.00
AP - 00231924 1111/2006 BERGELECTRIC CORPORATION 21,807.11
AP - 00231924 1111/2006 BERGELECTRIC CORPORATION 66,747.91
AP - 00231924 1111I2006 BERGELECTRIC CORPORATION 1,380.00
AP - 00231924 1/ 11/2006 BERGELECTRIC CORPORATION -2,180.71
AP - 00231924 1111/2006 BERGELECTRIC CORPORATION -6,674.79
AP - 00231924 1111/2006 BERGELECTRIC CORPORATION -138.00
AP - 00231925 1111/2006 BERNELL HYDRAULICS INC 459.22
AP - 00231925 1111/2006 BERNELL HYDRAULICS INC 459.22
AP - 00231925 1111/2006 BERNELL HYDRAULICS INC 13.82
AP - 00231925 1/1112006 BERNELL HYDRAULICS INC 573.79
AP - 00231926 111112006 BHANV ADIA, BHUPATLAL V 250.00
AP - 00231927 1111/2006 BISHOP COMPANY 701.58
AP - 00231928 111112006 BIT BY BIT ENTERPRISE INC. 194.40
AP - 00231929 1111/2006 BODY SHOP, THE 16.70
AP - 00231931 1111/2006 BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAIL 2,766.16
AP - 00231932 111112006 BUSINESS AND LEGAL REPORTS INC 320.00
AP - 00231933 111112006 BUTSKO UTILITY DESIGN INC. 440.08
AP - 00231933 1111/2006 BUTSKO UTILITY DESIGN INC. 423.59
AP - 00231934 1111/2006 BUTSKO UTILITY DESIGN INC 6,257.74
AP - 00231936 1/11/2006 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 37.50
AP - 00231937 1111/2006 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 22.50
AP - 00231938 1111/2006 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 219.00
AP - 00231939 1/11/2006 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 2,750.87
AP - 00231940 111112006 CALSENSE 2,203.52
AP - 00231941 111112006 CASK N CLEAVER 34.00
AP - 00231942 1111I2006 CASTILLO, JESSIE 200.00
AP - 00231943 1/11I2006 CERTIFIED AUTOMOTIVE GROUP 400.66
AP - 00231943 1/11/2006 CERTIFIED AUTOMOTIVE GROUP 530.04
AP - 00231944 111112006 CHARTER MEDIA INC. 342.00
AP - 00231944 1111/2006 CHARTER MEDIA INC. 345.40
AP - 00231944 1111/2006 CHARTER MEDIA INC. 1,313.00
AP - 00231944 111112006 CHARTER MEDIA INC. 1,535.00
AP - 00231944 1/1112006 CHARTER MEDIA INC. 673.00
AP - 00231945 1111/2006 CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC 11,661.50
AP - 00231945 1111/2006 CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC 10,084.50 d
AP - 00231945 1/1112006 CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC 207.50
User: KFINCHER - Karen Finche, Page: 2 Current Date: o 1/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG]ORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
Check No.
AP - 00231945
AP - 00231946
AP - 00231947
AP - 00231948
AP - 00231949
AP - 00231949
AP - 00231950
AP - 00231952
AP - 00231953
AP - 00231954
AP - 00231955
AP - 00231956
AP - 00231957
AP - 00231958
AP - 00231960
AP - 00231961
AP - 00231962
AP - 00231963
AP - 00231963
AP - 00231963
AP - 00231963
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
AP - 00231966
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Al!enda Check Rel!ister
1/11/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check Date Vendor Name
Amount
1/11/2006 CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC
1/11/2006 COAST RECREATION INC
1/11/2006 COLTON TRUCK SUPPLY
1/11/2006 COMMUNICATION BRIEFINGS
1/11/2006 COMMUNITY BANK
1/11/2006 COMMUNITY BANK
1/11/2006 COMMUNITY SENIOR SERVICES
1/11/2006 CORAL POWER
1/11/2006 CORAL POWER
1/11/2006 CORAL POWER
1/11/2006 CORAL POWER
1/11/2006 CORAL POWER
1/11/2006 CORAL POWER
1/11/2006 CORONA CLAY COMPANY
1/11/2006 COURT TRUSTEE
1/11/2006 COURT TRUSTEE
1/11/2006 CPRS NPSI
1/11/2006 CROWNER SHEET MET AL
1/11/2006 CROWNER SHEET METAL
1/11/2006 CROWNER SHEET METAL
1/11/2006 CROWNER SHEET METAL
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/1112006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/1112006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/1112006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
1,687.50
308.23
63.48
79.00
30,428.50
836.67
200.00
181,324.70
15,546.64
14,618.24
154,020.37
176,653.49
10,879.82
732.88
200.00
118.50
130.00
4,038.12
621.26
-403.81
-62.13
1,442.59
1,257.79
663.68
1,590.08
368.48
1,194.08
73.48
937.28
91.88
238.88
1,372.88
740.72
842.48
67.48
565.76
725.60
440.48
220.28
1,861.03
1,429.28
733.28
339.68
218.48
505.28
703.28
500.48
1,022.35
72.28
967.28
1,335.68
242.48 ~
26.18....:/
User: KFINCHER - Ka,en Fincher Page: 3
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG~PORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
Current Date: 01/25/20C
Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Al!enda Check Rel!ister
1/11/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 27.38
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 22.58
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 33.38
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 222.08
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 30.98
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 325.28
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 157.28
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 115.28
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 66.68
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 128.48
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 740.47
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 2,533.39
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 66.68
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 49.28
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 91.28
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 64.88
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 102.68
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 142.88
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 89.48
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 544.28
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 90.08
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 24.98
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 249.68
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 56.18
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 67.28
AP - 00231966 1/ ll/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 147.68
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 46.88
AP - 00231966 1/ ll/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 116.48
AP - 00231966 1/ 11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 44.48
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 299.48
AP - 00231966 1/ 11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 994.88
AP - 00231966 1/ll/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 96.68
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 175.28
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 325.88
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,683.68
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 250.28
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,412.48
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 329.83
AP - 0023.1966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 418.88
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 193.28
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 396.68
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 115.28
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 331.28
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 117.08
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 247.88
AP - 00231966 1/ ll/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 22.58
AP - 00231966 1/ ll/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 27.38
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 45.68
. AP - 00231966 1/ll/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 397.88
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 476.48
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 116.48
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 106.28
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,220.23 if
User: KFINCHER - Ka,en Fincher Page: 4 Current Date: 01/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A2enda Check Re2ister
1/1112006 through 1/24/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,064.48
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 242.48
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 57.68
AP - 00231966 1111/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 93.08
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 126.08
AP - 00231966 II 11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 241.88
AP - 00231966 1/11/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 93.08
AP - 00231967 1111/2006 CYBERCOM RESOURCES INC 700.00
AP - 00231967 1111/2006 CYBERCOM RESOURCES INC 175.00
AP - 00231967 1111/2006 CYBERCOM RESOURCES INC 175.00
AP - 00231967 1/11/2006 CYBERCOM RESOURCES INC 3,850.00
AP - 00231969 1/11/2006 DAPPER TIRE CO 78.45
AP - 00231970 1/11/2006 DAVIDSON, SHERRIE 76.00
AP - 00231971 II 11/2006 DESIGNIT INC 946.58
AP - 00231972 1/11/2006 DGO AUTO DET AlLING 200.00
AP - 00231972 1/11/2006 DGO AUTO DETAILING 100.00
AP - 00231973 1111/2006 DIETERICH INTERNATIONAL TRUCK 306.74
AP - 00231974 1111/2006 DURAN, DORA 2,827.14
AP - 00231976 1111/2006 ELLISON-SCHNEIDER & HARRIS L.L.P. 3,273.43
AP - 00231977 1/11/2006 EMPIRE MOBILE HOME SERVICE 1,375.00
AP - 00231979 1111/2006 ESGlL CORPORATION 21,830.62
AP - 00231980 1/11/2006 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 36.33
AP - 00231980 1/11/2006 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 246.74
AP - 00231980 1111/2006 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 340.79
AP - 00231980 1111/2006 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 1,155.97
AP - 00231981 1/11/2006 EXCLUSIVE EMAGES 137.92
AP - 00231982 1/11/2006 EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY 95.47
AP - 00231982 1/11/2006 EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY 249.39
AP - 00231982 1/11/2006 EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY 27.54
AP - 00231982 1/11/2006 EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY 88.24
AP - 00231983 1/11/2006 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 14.74
AP - 00231983 1/11/2006 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 19.20
AP - 00231983 1111/2006 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 16.18
AP - 00231985 1111/2006 FILTER RECYCLING SERVICE INC 137.55
AP - 00231986 1111/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 297.00
AP - 00231986 1/11/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 640.15
AP - 00231986 II 11/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 297.00
AP - 00231986 1/11/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 694.40
AP - 00231986 1/11/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 396.00
AP - 00231986 1/11/2006 . FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 520.80
AP - 00231986 II 11/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 868.00
AP - 00231986 1/11/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 868.00
AP - 00231986 1/11/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 1,037.28
AP - 00231986 1/11/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 6.72
AP - 00231986 1/11/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 974.00
AP - 00231986 1/11/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 2,217.71
AP - 00231986 1/11/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 250.00
AP - 00231986 1111/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 1,404.00
AP - 00231988 1111/2006 FOOTCHESTERPARTNERSLLC. 10,052.00
AP - 00231988 1/11/2006 FOOTCHESTER PARTNERS LLC. 1,305.00
AP - 00231989 1/11/2006 FORD OF UPLAND INC 37.21
AP - 00231989 1/11/2006 FORD OF UPLAND INC 80.55 .5
AP - 00231991 II 11/2006 FRAZIER INDUSTRIAL 29.75
User: KFINCHER - Karen Fincher Page: 5 Current Date: o 1/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Port,ait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
1/11/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00231992 1/11/2006 FRONT BRIDGE TECHNOLOGIES 850.00
AP - 00231993 1/11/2006 FUKUSHIMA, JUDITH 1,575.00
AP - 00231995 1/11/2006 GEORALINTERNATIONAL 367.77
AP - 00231996 1/11/2006 GOLF VENTURES WEST 8.36
AP - 00231996 1/1112006 GOLF VENTURES WEST 22.65
AP - 00231996 1/ 11/2006 GOLF VENTURES WEST 132.19
AP - 00231996 1/11/2006 GOLF VENTURES WEST 43.47
AP - 00231997 1/11/2006 GRAINGER 1,314.98
AP - 00231997 1/11/2006 GRAINGER 370.93
AP - 00231998 1/ 11/2006 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 107.75
AP - 00231999 1/11/2006 HAMILTON, DEBBIE 62.00
AP - 00232000 1/11/2006 HANSON, BARRYE 3,360.00
AP - 00232000 1/11/2006 HANSON, BARRYE 1,440.00
AP - 00232001 1/1112006 HA TT AR, WILLIAM 250.00
AP - 00232001 1/1112006 HATTAR, WILLIAM 33.25
AP - 00232002 1/1112006 HILLBRECK LP 911.82
AP - 00232003 1/1112006 HILLS BROTHERS CHEMICAL COMPANY 74.77
AP - 00232004 1/11/2006 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 239.21
AP - 00232005 1/11/2006 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 194.18
AP - 00232005 1/11/2006 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 16.33
AP - 00232006 1/11/2006 HOSE MAN INC 20.08
AP - 00232007 1/11/2006 HOT SHOTS ATHLETIC APPAREL INC 11,377.22
AP - 00232009 1/11/2006 HSU MD, ANDREW S 73.25
AP - 00232010 1/11/2006 HURST, CHERYL 288.50
AP - 002320 II 1/11/2006 HYDROSCAPEPRODUCTSINC 350.19
AP - 002320 II 1/11/2006 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 799.23
AP - 00232012 1/11/2006 lFEA 142.00
AP - 00232014 1/11I2006 INLAND EMPIRE TOURS AND TRANSPORTATIC 926.00
AP - 00232014 1/11/2006 INLAND EMPIRE TOURS AND TRANSPORT ATIC 1,215.00
AP - 00232015 1/11I2006 INLAND MEDIATION BOARD 25.00
AP - 00232016 1/11/2006 INSIGHT DIRECT 12,333.62
AP - 00232016 1/1112006 INSIGHT DIRECT 214.14
AP - 00232016 1/11/2006 INSIGHT DIRECT -825.00
AP - 00232017 1/11/2006 INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CHIEFS OF 100.00
AP - 00232018 1/ 11/2006 INTRA V AlA ROCK AND SAND INC 160.00
AP - 00232018 1/11/2006 INTRA V AlA ROCK AND SAND INC 169.30
AP - 00232019 1/11/2006 IRON MOUNTAIN OSDP 406.00
AP - 00232020 1/11/2006 JOBS AVAILABLE INC 220.32
AP - 00232020 1/11/2006 JOBS AVAILABLE INC 643.50
AP - 00232021 1/11/2006 KANA PIPELINE 130.Dl
AP - 00232022 1/11/2006 KLAUS AND SONS 3,200.00
AP - 00232024 1/11/2006 KONICA MINOLT A BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 255.31
AP - 00232024 1/11/2006 KONICA MINOL T A BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 142.50
AP - 00232025 1/11/2006 LAND L BUILDING MATERIALS INC. 56.44
AP - 00232025 1/11/2006 LAND L BUILDING MATERIALS INC. 348.79
AP - 00232026 1/11/2006 LANCE, BRETT 145.00
AP - 00232028 1/11/2006 LETNER ROOFING CO INC 2,007.13
AP - 00232028 1/11/2006 LETNER ROOFING CO INC -200.71
AP - 00232029 1/11/2006 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 375.00
AP - 00232031 1/11/2006 LOS ANGELES FREIGHTLINER 594.55
AP - 00232032 1/11/2006 MAJOR MARKET SERVICES INC. 158.37
AP - 00232033 1/11/2006 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT INC 3,407.42
AP - 00232033 1/11/2006 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT INC 6,070.93 ~
-- - ----- --- ----
User: KFINCHER - Ka,en Finche, Page: 6 Current Date: o 1/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Regisler Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
1/11/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232033 1/11/2006 MARIPOSA HORTiCULTURAL ENT INC 2,789.17
AP - 00232033 1111/2006 MARIPOSA HORTiCULTURAL ENT INC 1,090.61
AP - 00232033 1111/2006 MARIPOSA HORTiCULTURAL ENT INC 542.19
AP - 00232033 1111/2006 MARIPOSA HORTiCULTURAL ENT INC 5,078.68
AP - 00232033 1/11/2006 MARIPOSA HORTiCULTURAL ENT INC 9,093.84
AP - 00232033 1111/2006 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT INC 17,462.73
AP - 00232033 1111/2006 MARIPOSA HORTiCULTURAL ENT INC 8,801.15
AP - 00232033 1111/2006 MARIPOSA HORTiCULTURAL ENT INC 130.61
AP - 00232033 1111/2006 MARIPOSA HORTiCULTURAL ENT INC 3,464.17
AP - 00232033 111112006 MARIPOSA HORTiCULTURAL ENT INC 1,263.37
AP - 00232033 1/11/2006 MARIPOSA HORTiCULTURAL ENT INC 3,681.56
AP - 00232033 1/11/2006 MARIPOSA HORTiCULTURAL ENT INC 803.53
AP - 00232033 1111/2006 MARIPOSA HORTiCULTURAL ENT INC 4,668.58
AP - 00232033 1111/2006 MARIPOSA HORTiCULTURAL ENT INC 13,136.59
AP - 00232034 1/11/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING 109.00
AP - 00232034 1111/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING 157.00
AP - 00232034 1111/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING -39.25
AP - 00232034 1111/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING -147.84
AP - 00232034 1/1lI2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING -39.47
AP - 00232034 1/11/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING -31.56
AP - 00232034 1111/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING 126.25
AP - 00232034 1111/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING 157.89
AP - 00232034 1111/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING 591.36
AP - 00232034 1111/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING -27.25
AP - 00232035 1111/2006 MARTiNEZ UNION SERVICE 45.00
AP - 00232036 1111/2006 MATTHEW BENDER AND CO. INC. 176.20
AP - 00232037 1/1lI2006 MCGALLIARD & SONS INC, J B 41,235.58
AP - 00232037 1/11/2006 MCGALLIARD & SONS INC, J B 25,493.72
AP - 00232037 111112006 MCGALLIARD & SONS INC, J B 5,100.20
AP - 00232037 1111/2006 MCGALLIARD & SONS INC, J B -4,123.56
AP - 00232037 1111/2006 MCGALLIARD & SONS INC, J B -2,549.37
AP - 00232037 1111/2006 MCGALLIARD & SONS INC, J B -510.02
AP - 00232038 1111/2006 MCI 409.20
AP - 00232039 1111/2006 MICHAELS STORES INC 291.88
AP - 00232041 1111/2006 MMASC 65.00
AP - 00232042 1/11/2006 MOUNTAIN VIEW SMALL ENG REPAIR 45.27
AP - 00232043 111112006 MSA 25.00
AP - 00232043 1111/2006 MSA 25.00
AP - 00232043 1111/2006 MSA 25.00
AP - 00232044 111112006 MURADIAN, LESLIE 400.00
AP - 00232045 1111/2006 MURRAY & ASSOCIATES, BOB 157.54
AP - 00232046 1111/2006 MYERS TiRE 118.49
AP - 00232047 1111/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS -137.73
AP - 00232047 1111/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS -2.67
AP - 00232047 111112006 NAPA AUTO PARTS -25.05
AP - 00232047 1111/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS -24.05
AP - 00232047 1111/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS 258.74
AP - 00232047 1111/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS 7.28
AP - 00232047 111112006 NAPA AUTO PARTS 6.25
AP - 00232047 1 1l1/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS 48.49
AP - 00232047 1/11/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS 34.44
AP - 00232047 III 1/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS 90.66
AP - 00232047 1111/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS 143.37 ?
User: KFINCHER - Ka,en Fincher Page: 7 Current Date: o 1/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Registe, Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Al!:enda Check Rel!:ister
1/1112006 through 1/24/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232047 1111/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS 21.00
AP - 00232048 1111/2006 NATIONAL DEFERRED 25,889.77
AP - 00232049 1111/2006 NATIONAL STORMW ATER CENTER 2,472.00
AP - 00232051 111112006 NEC BUSINESS NETWORK SOLUTIONS INC 4,370.02
AP - 00232052 111112006 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS 46.28
AP - 00232052 1111/2006 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS 46.28
AP - 00232052 1111/2006 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS 185.12
AP - 00232052 1111/2006 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS 46.28
AP - 00232052 1111/2006 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS 130.15
AP - 00232052 1111/2006 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS 46.28
AP - 00232052 1/11/2006 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS 46.28
AP - 00232052 1111/2006 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS 53.03
AP - 00232053 1111/2006 NINYO AND MOORE GEOTECHNICAL 764.50
AP - 00232053 111112006 NINYO AND MOORE GEOTECHNICAL 5,553.00
AP - 00232054 111112006 OFFICE DEPOT 2,275.90
. AP - 00232054 111112006 OFFICE DEPOT 2,797.19
AP - 00232054 111112006 OFFICE DEPOT 119.53
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 48.84
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 6.69
AP - 00232054 1/11/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 29.38
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 29.10
AP - 00232054 1/11/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 20.30
AP - 00232054 1/1lI2006 OFFICE DEPOT 33.71
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 13.47
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 338.74
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 336.95
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 143.81
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 64.62
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 119.25
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 34.99
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT -7.32
AP - 00232054 111112006 OFFICE DEPOT 7.32
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT -18.94
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 22.88
AP - 00232054 1/1112006 OFFICE DEPOT 4.89
AP - 00232054 111112006 OFFICE DEPOT 10.78
AP - 00232054 111112006 OFFICE DEPOT 14.68
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 6.97
AP - 00232054 1111/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 1,060.08
AP - 00232055 111112006 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 39.70
AP - 00232056 1111/2006 OWEN ELECTRIC 440.98
AP - 00232057 1111/2006 PAL CAMPAIGN 164.87
AP - 00232059 1/1112006 PEP BOYS 40.46
AP - 00232060 1/11/2006 PERFORMANCE AUTO BODY 3,677.83
AP - 00232060 1/11/2006 PERFORMANCE AUTO BODY 5,811.60
AP - 00232061 111112006 PETES ROAD SERVICE INC 766.37
AP - 00232062 1111/2006 PETTEREZ, VINCENT 250.00
AP - 00232064 1111/2006 PMI 1,058.40
AP - 00232065 1111/2006 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 18,348.83
AP - 00232065 1111/2006 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 1,295.46
AP - 00232065 111112006 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 18,028.23
AP - 00232065 1111/2006 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 19,693.65
AP - 00232066 1111/2006 PRAXAlR DISTRIBUTION INC 92.93 ~
----
User: KFINCHER - Ka,en Fincher Page: 8 Current Date: o 1/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Po,t,ait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A2enda Check Re2ister
1111/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232067 1/11/2006 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 394.11
AP - 00232068 1111/2006 PRESSLEY, CARMEN 500.00
AP - 00232069 1111/2006 PROMOTIONS TEES & MORE 623.35
AP - 00232070 1111/2006 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 7.00
AP - 00232070 1111/2006 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 7.00
AP - 00232071 1111/2006 QUINT ANA, ZIT A 193.00
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 1,767.20
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 244.91
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 32.89
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 32.89
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 76.13
AP - 00232072 1/11/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 402.79
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 246.72
AP - 00232072 1/11/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 234.88
AP - 00232072 1/11/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 55.00
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 33.74
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 32.89
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 297.59
AP - 00232072 1/11/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 334.93
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 234.55
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 39.72
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 337.30
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 47.89
AP - 00232072 1/11/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 546.49
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 144.32
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 387.37
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 62.44
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 49.14
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 227.D4
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 215.16
AP - 00232072 1/11/2006 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 32.89
AP - 00232072 1111/2006 RAND R AUTOMOTIVE 190.36
AP - 00232073 1111/2006 RANCHO 2004 LLC 3.90
AP - 00232075 1/11/2006 RANCHO SMOG CENTER 27.00
AP - 00232076 1111/2006 RASMUSSEN, MILT 400.00
AP - 00232077 1/11/2006 RBF CONSULTING 4,153.12
AP - 00232078 1111/2006 RDO EQUIPMENT COMPANY 146.11
AP - 00232078 1111/2006 RDO EQUIPMENT COMPANY 79.25
AP - 00232079 1111/2006 RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB 224.00
AP - 00232080 1111/2006 REINHARDTSEN, DEBRA 282.50
AP - 00232081 1111/2006 RELIABLE GRAPHICS 31.10
AP - 00232082 1111/2006 REXEL CALCON 181.70
AP - 00232083 1111/2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 1,723.53
AP - 00232083 1111/2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 1,918.63
AP - 00232083 1111/2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 8,094.09
AP - 00232083 1111/2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 735.20
AP - 00232083 1111/2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 2,690.80
AP - 00232083 1111/2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 11,472.00
AP - 00232083 1111/2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 4,632.47
AP - 00232083 1/11/2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 3,503.45
AP - 00232083 1111/2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 35,016.99
AP - 00232083 1111/2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 1,034.89 CJ
AP - 00232083 1/11I2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 284.00
User: KFINCHER - Karen Finche, Page: 9 Current Date: o 1/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG]ORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A2enda Check Re2ister
1111/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232083 1111/2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 21,313.75
AP - 00232083 1/11/2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 17.00
AP - 00232083 1111/2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 750.00
AP - 00232083 1111/2006 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 306.80
AP - 00232084 1/11I2006 RITZ CAMERA CENTERS 43.67
AP - 00232085 1111/2006 RIVERSIDE CO DEPT CHILD SUPPORT 250.00
AP - 00232086 1/11/2006 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 304,285.03
AP - 00232086 1/11/2006 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY -836.67
AP - 00232086 1111/2006 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY -30,428.50
AP - 00232086 1111/2006 RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 8,366.67
AP - 00232087 1/11/2006 ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY 1,036.00
AP - 00232088 1111/2006 ROBLES SR, RAUL P 60.00
AP - 00232088 1111/2006 ROBLES SR, RAUL P 60.00
AP - 00232088 1111/2006 ROBLES SR, RAUL P 140.00
AP - 00232088 1/11/2006 ROBLES SR, RAUL P 60.00
AP - 00232088 1111/2006 ROBLES SR, RAUL P 85.00
AP - 00232088 1111/2006 ROBLES SR, RAUL P 60.00
AP - 00232089 1/11/2006 RODRIGUEZ INC, R Y 190.00
AP - 00232089 1111/2006 RODRIGUEZ INC, R Y 240.00
AP - 00232090 1111/2006 ROMERO, AMBER 40.00
AP - 00232091 1111/2006 RUANE HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING 21.25
AP - 00232092 1111/2006 S B AND 0 INC 99.00
AP - 00232093 1111/2006 SAN ANTONIO MATERIALS 466.29
AP - 00232094 1111/2006 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 353.22
AP - 00232095 1111/2006 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 3,360.44
AP - 00232096 1111/2006 SAN BERNARDINO CTY CHILD SUPPORT PA YM 408.00
AP - 00232097 1111/2006 SAN BERNARDINO CTY CHILD SUPPORT PA YM 322.50
AP - 00232098 1111/2006 SAN BERNARDINO CTY CHILD SUPPORT PA YM 213.50
AP - 00232099 1111/2006 SAN BERNARDINO CTY DEPT OF PUBLIC WOR] 7,541.39
AP - 00232100 1111/2006 SAN BERNARDINO CTY DEPT OF PUBLIC WOR] 4,000.00
AP - 00232101 1111/2006 SAXE-CLIFFORD, SUSAN 350.00
AP - 00232101 1111/2006 SAXE-CLIFFORD, SUSAN 350.00
AP - 00232101 1111/2006 SAXE-CLIFFORD, SUSAN 350.00
AP - 00232102 1111/2006 SBC 1,360.93
AP - 00232102 1111/2006 SBC 2,923.40
AP - 00232103 1111/2006 SCCCA 35.00
AP - 00232104 1/11/2006 SCOTT, DIANA 500.00
AP - 00232105 1111/2006 SEARS AUTO CENTER #2768 159.24
AP - 00232106 1111/2006 SERNA, MARCELINO J. 120.00
AP - 00232107 1111/2006 SESACINC 1,100.00
AP - 00232108 1/11/2006 SHEA HOMES INLAND EMPIRE DIVISION 573.82
AP - 00232109 1/11/2006 SHERIFFS COURT SERVICES 368.79
AP - 00232110 1111/2006 SIMPLOT PARTNERS 1,000.00
AP - 00232110 1111/2006 SIMPLOT PARTNERS 1,000.00
AP - 00232110 1111/2006 SIMPLOT PARTNERS 2,000.00
AP - 00232110 1111/2006 SIMPLOT PARTNERS 93.96
AP - 00232111 1/11/2006 SMART AND FINAL 256.46
AP - 00232111 1111/2006 SMART AND FINAL 112.19
AP - 00232112 1111/2006 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 5,031.92
AP - 00232113 1/11/2006 SOCIAL VOCATIONAL SERVICES 213.68
AP - 00232113 1111/2006 SOCIAL VOCATIONAL SERVICES 427.36
AP - 00232113 1111/2006 SOCIAL VOCATIONAL SERVICES 1.368:40
AP - 00232113 1111/2006 SOCIAL VOCATIONAL SERVICES 1,282.08 ID
--~---
User: KFINCHER - Karen Finche, Page: 10 Current Date: o 1/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
1/11/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232113 1/11/2006 SOCIAL VOCATIONAL SERVICES 213.68
AP - 00232113 1/11/2006 SOCIAL VOCATIONAL SERVICES 213.68
AP - 00232114 1/ 11/2006 SONITROL OF SAN BERNARDINO 140.00
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 1,381.40
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.74
AP - 00232117 1/ 11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.16
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.33
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.68
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.10
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 55.85
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.10
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.16
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 1/ 11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.73
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 77.21
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 95.12
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 83.42
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 58.42
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 75.88
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.39
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.91
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.09
AP - 00232117 1/ 11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 40.48
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 53.67
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 825.59
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 93.12
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.61
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON l.ll
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 94.76
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 109.66
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 34.93
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 8,627.95
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 84.98
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 6,287.50
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 47.57
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 21.78
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 25.61
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.09
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 49.32
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.51
AP - 00232117 1/ 11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.16
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 37.96
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 60.24
AP - 00232117 1/1112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 155.36
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 27.83 U
-~- -----~~-
User: KFINCHER - Karen Fincher Page: 11 Current Date: o 1/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Po,trait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Al!enda Check Rel!ister
II 1112006 through 1124/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 118.04
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.62
AP - 00232117 II 11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 3,517.20
AP - 00232117 1/ll/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.83
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 20.16
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 34.81
AP - 00232117 II 1112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.44
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.98
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.98
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 110.45
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.09
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 237.93
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 100.56
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 108.64
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 24.80
AP - 00232117 II 1l/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 46.92
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 20.50
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,477.33
AP - 00232117 II 1l/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 93.62
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.10
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 71.55
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 47.08
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.10
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.16
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 1/11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 II 11/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.98
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 64.96
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 68.79
AP - 002321 17 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 90.68
AP - 002321 17 II 1112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 24.10
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.98
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 50.05
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 8.69
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.10
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.03
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.68
AP - 00232117 II 1l/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 119.49
AP - 00232117 1Ill/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 91.49
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.73
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232117 111112006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63 Id-_
------ --
User: KFINCHER - Karen Fincher Page: 12 Current Date: o 1125/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A2enda Check Re2ister
1111/2006 through 1/2412006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 582.79
AP - 00232117 1111/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 5,332.40
AP - 00232118 111112006 SOUTHWEST MOBILE STORAGE INC 175.60
AP - 00232118 1111/2006 SOUTHWEST MOBILE STORAGE INC 175.60
AP - 00232118 1/1112006 SOUTHWEST MOBILE STORAGE INC 175.60
AP - 00232118 1/11/2006 SOUTHWEST MOBILE STORAGE INC 175.60
AP - 00232118 1111/2006 SOUTHWEST MOBILE STORAGE INC 175.60
AP - 00232118 1111/2006 SOUTHWEST MOBILE STORAGE INC 175.60
AP - 00232119 1/11I2006 STANDARD DRYWALL INC 84,489.29
AP - 00232119 1111/2006 STANDARD DRYWALL INC 214,799.78
AP - 00232119 1111/2006 STANDARD DRYWALL INC 13,338.80
AP - 00232119 1111/2006 STANDARD DRYWALL INC -8,448.93
AP - 00232119 1111/2006 STANDARD DRYWALL INC -21,479.98
AP - 00232119 1111/2006 STANDARD DRYW ALL INC -1,333.88
AP - 00232120 1111/2006 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 367.46
AP - 00232121 1111/2006 STERLING COFFEE SERVICE 547.52
AP - 00232122 1111/2006 STOFA, JOSEPH 14.00
AP - 00232123 111112006 STOVER SEED COMPANY 5,152.61
AP - 00232124 1111/2006 SUNRISE FORD 37.00
AP - 00232125 1111/2006 SUNSHINE GROWERS 109.96
AP - 00232127 1/1112006 T AND D INSTALLATIONS 492.77
AP - 00232127 1/11/2006 T AND D INSTALLATIONS 492.04
AP - 00232127 1111/2006 T AND D INST ALLA TIONS 317.73
AP - 00232127 1111/2006 T AND D INSTALLATIONS 461.46
AP - 00232127 1111/2006 T AND D INSTALLATIONS 225.32
AP - 00232127 1/11/2006 T AND D INST ALLA TIONS 110.39
AP - 00232127 111112006 T AND D INSTALLATIONS 467.54
AP - 00232127 1111/2006 T AND D INSTALLATIONS 1,026.90
AP - 00232128 1111/2006 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCTS -72.19
AP - 00232128 1111/2006 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCTS 404.72
AP - 00232128 1111/2006 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCTS 265.27
AP - 00232129 1/11/2006 TOBIN, RENEE 8.38
AP - 00232130 1/1112006 TRANSAMERICAN SOIL SERVICES INC 529.97
AP - 00232131 111112006 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 150.00
AP - 00232132 1111/2006 TURFSTARINC 273.44
AP - 00232133 1111/2006 ULTIMATE STAFFING SERVICES ABACUS STAF 466.42
AP - 00232134 1/11/2006 UNDERGROUNDTECHNOLOGYINC 495.85
AP - 00232134 1111/2006 UNDERGROUND TECHNOLOGY INC 568.15
AP - 00232134 111112006 UNDERGROUND TECHNOLOGY INC 344.60
AP - 00232135 1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 44.86
AP - 00232135 1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 196.93
AP - 00232135 1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 711.90
AP - 00232135 1/1112006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 92.04
AP - 00232135 1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 44.86
AP - 00232135 1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 31.82
AP - 00232135 1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 773.03
AP - 00232135 1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 31.32
AP - 00232135 1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 44.86
AP - 00232135 1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 97.03
AP - 00232135 1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 723.05
AP - 00232135 1/11/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 887.38
AP - 00232135 1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 728.09
AP - 00232135 1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 44.86 !-L
User: KFINCHER - Ka,en Fincher Page: 13 Current Date: o 1/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
Check No.
AP.00232135
AP - 00232135
AP - 00232135
AP - 00232135
AP - 00232135
AP - 00232135
AP - 00232136
AP - 00232137
AP - 00232138
AP - 00232138
AP - 00232138
AP - 00232138
AP - 00232138
AP - 00232139
AP - 00232139
AP - 00232140
AP - 00232140
AP - 00232140
AP - 00232140
AP - 00232140
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232141
AP - 00232142
AP - 00232143
AP - 00232144
AP - 00232144
AP - 00232145
AP - 00232146
AP - 00232146
AP - 00232146
AP - 00232146
AP - 00232147
AP - 00232148
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A2enda Check Re2ister
1111/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check Date Vendor Name
Amount
1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE
1/1112006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE
1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE
1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE
1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE
1111/2006 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE
1111/2006 UNITED TRAFFIC
1111/2006 UNITED WAY
1/1112006 UPS
1111/2006 UPS
1111/2006 UPS
111112006 UPS
1/11/2006 UPS
1111/2006 V ANDERHA WK CONSULTING LLC
111112006 V ANDERHA WK CONSULTING LLC
1/ 11/2006 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
111112006 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
1/11/2006 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
1111/2006 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
1111/2006 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
111112006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1/1112006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1/11/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VERIZON
1111/2006 VIGILANCE, TERRENCE
1111/2006 VOLM, LIZA
1/11/2006 VORTEX INDUSTRIES
1/11/2006 VORTEX INDUSTRIES
1111/2006 VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY
1/ 11/2006 WAND W STEEL COMPANY
1111/2006 WAND W STEEL COMPANY
1111/2006 WAND W STEEL COMPANY
1111/2006 WAND W STEEL COMPANY
1/11/2006 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO
1/11/2006 WARD, DESIREE
35.68
31.82
31.82
44.86
97.03
92.04
91.70
467.82
21.60
28.06
22.60
31.96
20.27
287.50
9,377.45
8,773.66
930.82
150.19
700.13
66.87
58.58
1,243.57
159.89
44.38
148.26
29.28
29.28
29.28
90.58
90.58
29.28
28.32
90.58
90.58
30.39
90.58
90.58
90.58
90.58
59.65
28.32
6,927.48
350.00
112.50
1,500.00
823.30
80.80
16,654.36
-1,665.44
-681.16
6,811.63
48.49
452.50 I {
Current Date: 01/25/20C
Time: 14:06:3
User: KFINCHER - Karen Finche, Page: 14
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Al!:enda Check Rel!:ister
1/11/2006 through 1/24/2006
. Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232149 1/11/2006 WARREN & CO INC, CARL 248.63
AP - 00232150 1/1112006 W AXlE SANITARY SUPPLY 432.62
AP - 00232150 1/11/2006 W AXlE SANITARY SUPPLY 293.37
AP - 00232150 1/11/2006 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 323.12
AP - 00232150 1/11/2006 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 409.73
AP - 00232150 1/11/2006 W AXlE SANITARY SUPPLY 516.38
AP - 00232150 1/1112006 W AXlE SANITARY SUPPLY 1,283.91
AP - 00232150 1/1112006 W AXlE SANITARY SUPPLY 772.69
AP - 00232150 1/ll!2006 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 901.54
AP - 00232150 1/1112006 W AXlE SANITARY SUPPLY 25.56
AP - 00232150 1/11!2006 W AXlE SANITARY SUPPLY 1,035.97
AP - 00232150 1/11/2006 W AXlE SANITARY SUPPLY 680.93
AP - 00232150 1/11/2006 W AXlE SANITARY SUPPLY -175.07
AP - 00232150 1/1112006 W AXlE SANITARY SUPPLY 631.46
AP - 00232150 1/1112006 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 45.34
AP - 00232150 1/11/2006 W AXlE SANITARY SUPPLY 774.51
AP - 00232151 1/11/2006 WELLS FARGO BANK 2,300.00
AP - 00232151 1/11/2006 WELLS FARGO BANK 2,300.00
AP - 00232152 1/11/2006 WEST COAST TURF 3,648.00
AP - 00232152 1/1112006 WEST COAST TURF 456.00
AP - 00232152 1/11/2006 WEST COAST TURF 3,648.00
AP - 00232153 1/11/2006 WEST END MATERIAL SUPPLY 920.78
AP - 00232154 1/11/2006 WHITTIER FERTILIZER 429.92
AP - 00232155 1/11/2006 WILSON AND BELL 1,104.15
AP - 00232155 1/11/2006 WILSON AND BELL 191.24
AP - 00232155 11 1112006 WILSON AND BELL 250.23
AP - 00232155 1/11/2006 WILSON AND BELL 444.12
AP - 00232155 1/1112006 WILSON AND BELL 71.00
AP - 00232158 1/12/2006 LEMKE, MILA 2,500.00
AP - 00232159 1/12/2006 LEMKE, MILA 2,500.00
AP - 00232160 11 12/2006 HAKIMI, SUSAN 279.00
AP - 00232161 1/1812006 80 VGL LLC AND 20 VGL LLC 67,673.00
AP - 00232162 1/1812006 A L M PAINTING 39.96
AP - 00232163 1/1812006 AA EQUIPMENT 78.34
AP - 00232164 1/1812006 ABC LOCKSMITHS 91.59
AP - 00232164 1/18/2006 ABC LOCKSMITHS 8.19
AP - 00232164 1/18/2006 ABC LOCKSMITHS 90.51
AP - 00232165 1/1812006 ABLAC 16.39
AP - 00232166 1/1812006 ABLETRONICS 18.38
AP - 00232167 1/1812006 ACCELA 662.50
AP - 00232168 1/1812006 AGUILAR, REBECCA 3.75
AP - 00232168 1/1812006 AGUILAR, REBECCA 250.00
AP - 00232169 1/1812006 AJILON FINANCE 928.80
AP - 00232169 1/1812006 AJILON FINANCE 1,238.40
AP - 00232169 1/18/2006 AJILON FINANCE 619.20
AP - 00232170 111812006 ALL CITIES TOOLS 692.83
AP - 00232171 1/18/2006 ALL WELDING 90.00
AP - 00232172 111812006 ALTA AMMUNITION WORKS 11.50
AP - 00232173 1/18/2006 AMERICAN ASPHALT SOUTH INC 3,500.00
AP - 00232173 111812006 AMERICAN ASPHALT SOUTH INC -350.00
AP - 00232174 1/1812006 AMTECH ELEVATOR SERVICES 146.31
AP - 00232174 11 18/2006 AMTECH ELEVATOR SERVICES 146.31 L5
AP - 00232174 1118/2006 AMTECH ELEV A TOR SERVICES 195.97
--- -- ----
User: KFINCHER - Karen Finche, Page: 15 Current Date: o 1/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A2enda Check Re2ister
1111/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232175 1118/2006 ANDRADE, LAlN1 12.61
AP - 00232176 1/1812006 ARCHlTERRA DESIGN GROUP 600.00
AP - 00232176 111812006 ARCHlTERRA DESIGN GROUP 1,200.00
AP - 00232176 1/18/2006 ARCHlTERRA DESIGN GROUP 651.50
AP - 00232176 1/ 18/2006 ARCHlTERRA DESIGN GROUP 868.25
AP - 00232177 111812006 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 459.45
AP - 00232177 111812006 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 192.92
AP - 00232177 1118/2006 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 120.68
AP - 00232177 1118/2006 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 210.00
AP - 00232177 111812006 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 252.90
AP - 00232177 111812006 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 20.00
AP - 00232177 1118/2006 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 252.90
AP - 00232177 1118/2006 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 133.40
AP - 00232177 1118/2006 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 281.25
AP - 00232178 1/ 18/2006 ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS 22.65
AP - 00232179 1/ 18/2006 AUSTIN, DONNA 8.38
AP - 00232180 1/ 18/2006 AUTO SPECIALISTS 64.68
AP - 00232181 111812006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 105.55
AP - 00232182 111812006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 211.47
AP - 00232182 1118/2006 BAND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 228.49
AP - 00232182 1118/2006 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 101.34
AP - 00232182 1118/2006 BAND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 170.62
AP - 00232183 111812006 BAHlS OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 100.00
AP - 00232184 1/ 18/2006 BASELINE HARDWARE 7.74
AP - 00232186 1/ 18/2006 BETTEN, AMANDA 64.10
AP - 00232187 1/1812006 BOYLE ENGINEERING 3,268.50
AP - 00232188 1118/2006 BRAGG CRANE & RIGGING CO. 216.00
AP - 00232189 1/ 1812006 BRA WNCO CONSTRUCTION INC 80.51
AP - 00232191 111812006 BURR CYCLES INC, JOHN 856.96
AP - 00232191 111812006 BURR CYCLES INC, JOHN 608.44
AP - 00232191 1/18/2006 BURR CYCLES INC, JOHN 54.13
AP - 00232191 1/1812006 BURR CYCLES INC, JOHN 141.46
AP - 00232191 1118/2006 BURR CYCLES INC, JOHN 572.89
AP - 00232191 1118/2006 BURR CYCLES INC, JOHN 934.75
AP - 00232191 111812006 BURR CYCLES INC, JOHN 812.56
AP - 00232191 1118/2006 BURR CYCLES INC, JOHN 112.50
AP - 00232192 111812006 CAL PERS LONG TERM CARE 231.92
AP - 00232193 1118/2006 CALIFORNIA ELECTRONIC ENTRY 150.00
AP - 00232194 1/ 1812006 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 175.09
AP - 00232194 1118/2006 CALIFORNIA, ST ATE OF 39.25
AP - 00232194 111812006 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 71.03
AP - 00232194 111812006 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 211.00
AP - 00232194 111812006 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 451.05
AP - 00232195 1118/2006 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY 18.21
AP - 00232196 1118/2006 CBIZ ACCOUNTING TAX & ADVISORY OF ORAl 7,900.00
AP - 00232196 1/18/2006 CBIZ ACCOUNTING TAX & ADVISORY OF ORAl 3,400.00
AP - 00232196 1/ 18/2006 CBIZ ACCOUNTING TAX & ADVISORY OF ORAl 600.00
AP - 00232196 1118/2006 CBIZ ACCOUNTING TAX & ADVISORY OF ORAl 1,000.00
AP - 00232197 1118/2006 CED ONTARIO 1,355.50
AP - 00232198 1118/2006 CENTRAL CITIES SIGNS INC 161.63
AP - 00232198 1/1 812006 CENTRAL CITIES SIGNS INC 172.40
AP - 00232198 111812006 CENTRAL CITIES SIGNS INC 142.23
AP - 00232198 1/1 8/2006 CENTRAL CITIES SIGNS INC 43.10 /j~
--- _._._~-----_._- - - --
User: KFINCHER - Karen Finche, Page: 16 Current Date: o 1/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Al!enda Check Rel!ister
1/1112006 through 1124/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232198 II 18/2006 CENTRAL CITIES SIGNS INC 80.81
AP - 00232199 1/18/2006 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS 53.27
AP - 00232200 1/1812006 CITY RENTALS 417.00
AP - 0023220 I 1/1812006 CLABBY, SANDRA 1,000.00
AP - 00232202 1/1812006 CLEVENGER, KENNETH 500.00
AP - 00232203 1/1812006 COLEMAN, REBECCA 61.60
AP - 00232204 II 18/2006 COLTON TRUCK SUPPLY 38.90
AP - 00232204 1/18/2006 COLTON TRUCK SUPPLY 33.61
AP - 00232205 1/18/2006 COMBINED CLAIMS CONFERENCE 150.00
AP - 00232206 1/18/2006 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS 1 426.69
AP - 00232207 1/18/2006 CONTRERAS, LORNA 76.00
AP - 00232208 1/18/2006 COPIES & INK PRINTING 543.73
AP - 00232208 1/18/2006 COPIES & INK PRINTING 191.91
AP - 00232209 1/18/2006 CPRS NPSI 585.00
AP - 00232210 1/18/2006 CSMFO 300.00
AP - 00232210 1/18/2006 CSMFO 300.00
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 124.48
AP - 00232211 1/1812006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 117.28
AP - 00232211 II 18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 419.48
AP - 00232211 II 18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 270.68
AP - 00232211 1/1812006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 174.32
AP - 00232211 II 18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 36.80
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 149.48
AP - 00232211 1/1812006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 142.88
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 219.68
AP - 00232211 1/1812006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 451.28
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 31.28
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 405.08
AP - 00232211 1/1812006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 471.08
AP - 00232211 1/1812006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 55.28
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 361.88
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 242.48
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 213.08
AP - 00232211 1/1812006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 18.40
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 254.48
AP - 00232211 1/1812006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 360.68
AP - 00232211 1/1812006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 140.48
AP - 00232211 1/1812006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 148.88
AP - 00232211 111812006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 120.08
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 114.88
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 84.08
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 415.88
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 373.88
AP - 00232211 II 18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 119.42
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 46.88
AP - 00232211 1/18/2006 CUCAMONGA V ALLEY WATER DISTRICT 276.68
AP - 00232212 1/18/2006 DAPPER TIRE CO 114.20
AP - 00232214 1/18/2006 DEER CREEK CAR CARE CENTER 116.50
AP - 00232215 1118/2006 DELLHIME, SIGMUND 8.38
AP - 00232216 1/18/2006 DIRECTV 29.99
AP - 00232217 1118/2006 DISPUTE RESOLUTION SOLUTIONS 1,487.50
AP - 00232218 1/1812006 DUMBELL MAN FITNESS EQUIPMENT, THE 1,017.43
AP - 00232219 1/1812006 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATION 476.71 J'/
------
User: KFINCHER - Karen Finche, Page: 17 Current Date: o 1125120C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
1/1112006 through 1124/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232220 1/18/2006 EL DORADO MEXICAN FOOD PRODUCTS 9.00
AP - 00232221 1/1812006 EMCOR SERVICE 5,619.75
AP - 00232221 1/1812006 EMCOR SERVICE 4,883.32
AP - 00232222 1/1812006 ESPLIN, JILL 1,000.00
AP - 00232223 1/1812006 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 509.49
AP - 00232224 11 18/2006 EXCLUSIVE EMAGES 9.69
AP - 00232224 1/18/2006 EXCLUSIVE EMAGES 106.67
AP - 00232224 1/18/2006 EXCLUSIVE EMAGES 19.39
AP - 00232225 1/1812006 EXPERIAN 50.00
AP - 00232226 1/18/2006 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 21.39
AP - 00232226 1/18/2006 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 14.74
AP - 00232226 1/18/2006 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 12.64
AP - 00232226 1/18/2006 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 21.42
AP - 00232226 II 18/2006 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 25.38
AP - 00232226 II 18/2006 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 14.74
AP - 00232227 II 18/2006 FERNANDEZ, SUSAN 59.00
AP - 00232228 1/18/2006 FINCHER, KAREN 225.11
AP - 00232229 1/18/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 828.75
AP - 00232229 1/18/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 868.00
AP - 00232229 11 18/2006 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 455.70
AP - 00232230 1118/2006 FLEET GLASS 188.53
AP - 00232232 1/18/2006 FOOTHILL LA WNMOWER 290.73
AP - 00232232 II 18/2006 FOOTHILL LA WNMOWER 166.44
AP - 00232233 1/18/2006 FORD OF UPLAND INC 133.95
AP - 00232235 11 18/2006 G AND M BUSINESS INTERIORS 3,453.82
AP - 00232236 1/18/2006 GAIL MATERIALS 517.20
AP - 00232237 11 18/2006 GARNER, CATHLEEN 32.01
AP - 00232239 1/18/2006 GLAD LANDSCAPING ENTERPRISES 71.09
AP - 00232240 1/18/2006 GOLF VENTURES WEST 435.15
AP - 00232241 1/1812006 GONSALVES AND SON,JOE A 3,000.00
AP - 00232242 1/1812006 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIA TI 760.00
AP - 00232243 1/1812006 GOVERNMENTJOBS.COM INC. 850.00
AP - 00232244 1/1812006 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 106.20
AP - 00232244 1/18/2006 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 370.65
AP - 00232244 1/1812006 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 370.65
AP - 00232244 1/18/2006 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 93.82
AP - 00232244 1/1812006 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 105.83
AP - 00232244 1/1812006 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 103.73
AP - 00232244 1/1812006 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 120.81
AP - 00232245 1/1812006 GWCRYSTAL 2,639.34
AP - 00232246 1/18/2006 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO 460.98
AP - 00232246 1/18/2006 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO 79.24
AP - 00232246 1/1812006 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO 580.85
AP - 00232247 1/1812006 HADDON, DAWN 500.00
AP - 00232248 1/1812006 HADFIELD. SHALON 123.36
AP - 00232249 II 1812006 HAMPTON INN-SAN DIEGO 729.30
AP - 00232250 1/18/2006 HAMSIK, ANIT A 21.00
AP - 00232251 1/18/2006 HASSOUR, BAREA 140.64
AP - 00232252 11 18/2006 HCS CUTLER STEEL CO 53.00
AP - 00232252 1/18/2006 HCS CUTLER STEEL CO 35.20
AP - 00232253 1/18/2006 HENDERSON, MATTIE 75.00
AP - 00232255 1/18/2006 HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS AND ASSOCIATES 1,200.00
AP - 00232255 1/1812006 HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS AND ASSOCIATES 6,019.98 /8
User: KFINCHER - Karen Finche, Page: 18 Current Date: o 1125/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Al!enda Check Rel!ister
1111/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check No. Check Dale Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232257 111812006 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 463.49
AP - 00232257 111812006 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 346.10
AP - 00232257 111812006 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 2,246.40
AP - 00232257 1118/2006 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 346.53
AP - 00232258 1118/2006 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 302.67
AP - 00232258 1118/2006 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 12.02
AP - 00232259 1118/2006 HOYT LUMBER CO., SM 19.90
AP - 00232259 1118/2006 HOYT LUMBER CO., SM 21.01
AP - 00232260 1118/2006 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 570.95
AP - 00232260 1118/2006 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 123.23
AP - 00232261 111812006 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 26.55
AP - 00232263 1118/2006 INLAND EMPIRE BUILDERS 26,063.45
AP - 00232266 1118/2006 INLAND V ALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 1,317.60
AP - 00232266 1118/2006 INLAND V ALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 765.60
AP - 00232266 1118/2006 INLAND V ALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 140.40
AP - 00232266 1118/2006 INLAND V ALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 1,101.60
AP - 00232266 1118/2006 INLAND V ALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 154.80
AP - 00232266 1118/2006 INLAND V ALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 195.60
AP - 00232266 1118/2006 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 159.60
AP - 00232266 111812006 INLAND V ALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 151.20
AP - 00232266 111812006 INLAND V ALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 441.60
AP - 00232266 1118/2006 INLAND V ALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 98.40
AP - 00232266 1118/2006 INLAND V ALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 96.00
AP - 00232266 1118/2006 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 159.60
AP - 00232267 1118/2006 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 462.00
AP - 00232267 1118/2006 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 77.00
AP - 00232268 1118/2006 INTERSTATE BATTERIES -12.00
AP - 00232268 111812006 INTERSTATE BATTERIES -15.54
AP - 00232268 111812006 INTERSTATE BATTERIES -6.00
AP - 00232268 111812006 INTERSTATE BATTERIES -688.82
AP - 00232268 111812006 INTERSTATE BATTERIES 114.50
AP - 00232268 1118/2006 INTERSTATE BATTERIES 38.72
AP - 00232268 111812006 INTERSTATE BATTERIES 129.00
AP - 00232268 111812006 INTERSTATE BATTERIES 629.37
AP - 00232268 1118/2006 INTERSTATE BATTERIES 792.61
AP - 00232268 111812006 INTERSTATE BATTERIES -21.44
AP - 00232268 111812006 INTERSTATE BATTERIES 64.08
AP - 00232268 1/1812006 INTERSTATE BATTERIES 208.24
AP - 00232269 1118/2006 ISEC iNCORPORATED 46,804.37
AP - 00232269 1118/2006 ISEC INCORPORATED 29,285.25
AP - 00232269 111812006 ISEC INCORPORATED 7,054.21
AP - 00232269 1118/2006 ISEC INCORPORATED -4,680.44
AP - 00232269 1118/2006 ISEC INCORPORATED -2,928.52
AP - 00232269 111812006 ISEC INCORPORATED -705.42
AP - 00232270 1118/2006 J 0 C INC 29,771.90
AP - 00232271 1118/2006 JOHNSTON CONSULTING, CHRIS 675.00
AP - 00232272 1118/2006 JONES AND MAYER LAW OFFICES OF 2,799.02
AP - 00232273 111812006 KB HOME 2,450.00
AP - 00232273 111812006 KBHOME 2,600.00
AP - 00232274 1118/2006 KELLY EQUIPMENT 226,524.71
AP - 00232275 1118/2006 KOLA 99.9 4,680.00
AP - 00232276 1118/2006 KOSZUT, ERIC 79.00
AP - 00232277 1118/2006 KYPREOS, JAMES G 9,400.00 19
User: KFINCHER - Karen Finche, Page: 19 Current Date: o 1125/20C
Reporl:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
Check No.
AP - 00232278
AP - 00232278
AP - 00232279
AP - 00232279
AP - 00232279
AP - 00232279
AP - 00232279
AP - 00232279
AP - 00232279
AP - 00232279
AP - 00232279
AP - 00232279
AP - 00232279
AP - 00232279
AP - 00232281
AP - 00232283
AP - 00232283
AP - 00232283
AP - 00232283
AP - 00232283
AP - 00232283
AP - 00232283
AP - 00232284
AP - 00232285
AP - 00232285
AP - 00232285
AP - 00232285
AP - 00232285
AP - 00232285
AP - 00232285
AP - 00232286
AP - 00232287
AP - 00232288
AP - 00232289
AP - 00232290
AP - 00232291
AP - 00232292
AP - 00232293
AP - 00232294
AP - 00232295
AP - 00232296
AP - 00232296
AP - 00232296
AP - 00232296
AP - 00232296
AP - 00232296
AP - 00232296
AP - 00232296
AP - 00232298
AP - 00232299
AP - 00232299
AP - 00232300
AP - 0023230 I
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Al!enda Check Rel!ister
1/11/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check Date Vendor Name
Amount
1118/2006 LANCE SOLL AND LUNGHARD
1118/2006 LANCE SOLL AND LUNGHARD
1118/2006 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC.
1118/2006 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC.
1118/2006 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC.
1118/2006 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC.
1118/2006 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC.
1118/2006 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC.
1118/2006 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC.
1118/2006 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC.
1118/2006 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC.
1118/2006 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC.
1118/2006 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC.
1118/2006 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC.
1118/2006 MAIN STREET SIGNS
1/18/2006 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT INC
1118/2006 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT INC
1118/2006 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT INC
1118/2006 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT INC
1118/2006 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT INC
1118/2006 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT INC
1118/2006 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT INC
1118/2006 MARK CHRIS INC
1118/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING
1118/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING
1118/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING
1118/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING
1118/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING
1118/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING
1118/2006 MARSHALL PLUMBING
1118/2006 MARTINEZ UNION SERVICE
1118/2006 MATTHEW BENDER AND CO. INC.
1118/2006 MMASC
1118/2006 MOBILE MODULAR MANAGEMENT CORP
1118/2006 MONTGOMERY. MICHAEL
1118/2006 MOUNTAIN VIEW GLASS AND MIRROR
1118/2006 MOUNTAIN VIEW SMALL ENG REPAIR
1118/2006 MR TS 24HR TOWING
1118/2006 MR. CRANE INC.
1118/2006 MUNIZ, VICTOR
1118/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS
1118/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS
1118/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS
1118/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS
1118/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS
1118/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS
1118/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS
1118/2006 NAPA AUTO PARTS
1118/2006 NATIONAL DEFERRED
1118/2006 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS
1118/2006 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS
1118/2006 OBRIEN, GINGER
1118/2006 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO
2,000.00
3,700.00
58.70
16.65
68.25
286.44
26.91
38.70
85.68
99.86
62.78
112.20
326.27
36.57
716.54
1,138.91
322.19
403.75
284.49
462.58
1,370.09
3,010.09
657.09
351.00
493.00
-123.25
-451.05
304.20
1,500.00
-87.75
45.00
72.36
65.00
312.48
14.00
216.09
22.85
170.00
110.00
5.00
30.39
3.44
35.60
15.07
29.44
23.71
153.16
25.27
17,610.39
102.31
46.28
76.00
1,560.00 d0 _
Current Date: 01l2S/20C
Time: 14:06:3
User: KFINCHER - Ka,en Finche, Page: 20
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Registe, Portrait Layout
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Al!:enda Check Rel!:ister
1/11/2006 through 112412006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 0023230 I 1/1812006 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALlFO 348.58
AP - 0023230 I 1/18/2006 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 107.00
AP - 0023230 I 1/18/2006 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 46.00
AP - 0023230 I 1118/2006 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 59.29
AP - 00232301 1118/2006 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 199.29
AP - 0023230 I 1/18/2006 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 7.00
AP - 00232302 1118/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 182.33
AP - 00232302 1118/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 41.54
AP - 00232302 1118/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 155.85
AP - 00232302 1/18/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 88.73
AP - 00232302 1/1812006 OFFICE DEPOT 8.79
AP - 00232302 1/1812006 OFFICE DEPOT 108.72
AP - 00232302 1/1812006 OFFICE DEPOT 40.04
AP - 00232302 1/18/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 444.89
AP - 00232302 1/1812006 OFFICE DEPOT 14.89
AP - 00232302 1/1812006 OFFICE DEPOT 136.62
AP - 00232302 1/1812006 OFFICE DEPOT 17.07
AP - 00232302 1/1812006 OFFICE DEPOT 25.61
AP - 00232302 1/18/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 33.49
AP - 00232302 1/18/2006 OFFICE DEPOT -42.56
AP - 00232302 1/18/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 246.44
AP - 00232302 1/18/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 72.81
AP - 00232302 1/18/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 79.40
AP - 00232302 1/18/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 4.50
AP - 00232302 1/18/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 6.45
AP - 00232302 1/1812006 OFFICE DEPOT 29.48
AP - 00232302 1/1812006 OFFICE DEPOT 130.59
AP - 00232302 1118/2006 OFFICE DEPOT 25.92
AP - 00232302 1/1812006 OFFICE DEPOT 16.57
AP - 00232302 111812006 OFFICE DEPOT 152.99
AP - 00232302 1/18/2006 OFFICE DEPOT -4.11
AP - 00232302 111812006 OFFICE DEPOT 173.19
AP - 00232303 1/18/2006 OLLAR CONSTRUCTION CO INC 15,000.00
AP - 00232304 1118/2006 ONDAS HAIR DESIGN 14.50
AP - 00232306 1/18/2006 OPEN APPS 323.06
AP - 00232307 1/18/2006 ORACLE CORP 868.59
AP - 00232308 1/18/2006 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 300.58
AP - 00232308 1/18/2006 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 51.68
AP - 00232308 1/1812006 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 11.07
AP - 00232308 1/18/2006 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 72.79
AP - 00232308 1/1812006 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 515.30
AP - 00232308 1/1812006 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 13.99
AP - 00232308 1/1812006 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 12.90
AP - 00232309 1/18/2006 ORKIN PEST CONTROL 239.40
AP - 00232310 1/18/2006 OWEN ELECTRIC 37.13
AP - 00232310 1/1812006 OWEN ELECTRIC 28.40
AP - 00232310 1/18/2006 OWEN ELECTRIC 22.67
AP - 00232310 1/1812006 OWEN ELECTRIC 113.04
AP - 00232310 1/18/2006 OWEN ELECTRIC 564.87
AP - 00232310 1/1812006 OWEN ELECTRIC 150.00
AP - 00232310 1/18/2006 OWEN ELECTRIC 150.00
AP - 00232310 1118/2006 OWEN ELECTRIC 150.00
AP - 00232310 1/18/2006 OWEN ELECTRIC 22.54 ()/
-----.---
User: KFINCHER - Karen Fincher Page: 21 Current Date: o 1125/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Registe, Port,ait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A2enda Check Re2ister
1111/2006 through 1/2412006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232310 1/18/2006 OWEN ELECTRIC 96.41
AP - 00232312 1/1812006 PEP BOYS 15.70
AP - 00232313 1118/2006 PETERSON, ANGELA 25.49
AP - 00232315 1/18/2006 PHONG, BRYAN 80.00
AP - 00232315 1/18/2006 PHONG, BRYAN 80.00
AP - 00232317 1/18/2006 POUK AND STEINLE INC. 33,264.86
AP - 00232318 1/18/2006 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 34.20
AP - 00232319 1/18/2006 PREMIER RESOURCE 105.00
AP - 00232321 1/18/2006 RANCHO VISTA DEVELOPMENT CO 5,000.00
AP - 00232322 1/18/2006 RCPFA 6,527.40
AP - 00232323 1/1812006 REDWOOD CONSTRUCTION INC 240.70
AP - 00232324 1/1812006 REGENCY REALTY GROUP 1,865.54
AP - 00232324 1/1812006 REGENCY REALTY GROUP 3,401.62
AP - 00232324 1/1812006 REGENCY REALTY GROUP 2,895.22
AP - 00232326 1/1812006 RES COM OVERHEAD DOORS INC 52.89
AP - 00232327 1/1812006 RODRIGUEZ, NORMA LINDA 718.61
AP - 00232328 1118/2006 RYDER TRUCK RENTAL INC 210.03
AP - 00232330 1118/2006 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 24,836.46
AP - 00232331 1/1812006 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 125.00
AP - 00232331 1118/2006 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 4,124.78
AP - 00232332 1118/2006 SAN BERNARDINO CTY SHERIFFS DEPT 1,585,215.00
AP - 00232332 1118/2006 SAN BERNARDINO CTY SHERIFFS DEPT 13,642.00
AP - 00232332 1/1812006 SAN BERNARDINO CTY SHERIFFS DEPT 17 ,570.00
AP - 00232333 1/18/2006 SCACEO 225.00
AP - 00232334 1/1812006 SHIELD AND ASSOCIATES, T L 20.05
AP - 00232336 1/18/2006 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 780.96
AP - 00232336 1/1812006 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 387.72
AP - 00232336 1/1812006 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 540.18
AP - 00232336 1/18/2006 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 4,273.64
AP - 00232341 1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 73.57
AP - 00232341 1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 134.31
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 83.20
AP - 00232341 1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 3.55
AP - 00232341 1118/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 38.20
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 58.26
AP - 00232341 1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 146.20
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.57
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 367.33
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 478.25
AP - 00232341 1118/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 127.68
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 56.83
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.57
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 33.34
AP - 00232341 1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 43.49
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 50.13
AP - 00232341 1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 25.02
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.10
AP - 00232341 1118/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 38.63
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 21.38
AP - 00232341 1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 73.81
AP - 00232341 1118/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 55.62
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.45 dd
User: KFINCHER - Karen Fincher Page: 22 Current Date: o 1125120C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Registe, Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A2enda Check Re2ister
1/ 11/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 20.92
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.55
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.15
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.25
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 8.01
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 56.71
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 70.77
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 178.25
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 97.76
AP - 00232341 1/ 18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 88.21
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 29.52
AP - 00232341 1/ 18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.50
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 5.21
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 27.64
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 85.91
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 41.77
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 28.37
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 27.68
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 25.23
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 27.90
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 785.99
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 1,097.39
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 1,108.40
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 42.74
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.20
AP - 00232341 1/ 18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.67
AP - 00232341 1/ 18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.88
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.10
AP - 00232341 1/ 18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.10
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 67.45
AP - 00232341 1/ 18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 48.21
AP - 00232341 1/ 18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 93.05
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.10
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 91.76
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.10
AP - 00232341 1/ 18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 116.69
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 100.51
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.57
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.79
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.10
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.10
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.26
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.57
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.10
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 71.19
AP - 00232341 1/ 18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.10
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19.25
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.79
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 74.94
AP - 00232341 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 100.12 d3
User: KFINCHER - Karen Finche, Page: 23 Current Date: 01/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA~REG_PORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Registe, Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
Check No.
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232341
AP - 00232342
AP - 00232342
AP - 00232342
AP - 00232342
AP - 00232342
AP - 00232342
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
1/11/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check Date Vendor Name
Amount
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
14.10
15.02
23.25
969.87
51.96
14.92
15.02
14.10
14.33
14.10
58.89
50.48
14.10
14.45
89.79
115.76
71.49
125.96
26.14
14.20
15.26
59.50
14.10
113.19
14.57
14.10
14.10
35.04
42.68
92.75
13.63
13.63
69.00
14.45
74.03
24.07
66.01
114.05
14.10
15.14
14.10
14.32
15.61
14.10
14.33
14.10
14.10
19,429.89
14,992.80
12,120.96
4,212.90
2,868.67
2,727.75 d'l
Current Date: 01/25120C
Time: 14:06:3
User: KFINCHER - Ka,en Finche, Page: 24
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Registe, Portrait Layout
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
1/11/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232342 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 44.24
AP - 00232342 1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 181.47
AP - 00232342 1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 36,312.62
AP - 00232342 1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,458.60
AP - 00232342 1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 25.18
AP - 00232342 1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 9,378.98
AP - 00232342 1/1812006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,581.99
AP - 00232342 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 44.29
AP - 00232342 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 556.24
AP - 00232342 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 6,229.53
AP - 00232342 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 40.55
AP - 00232342 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 46.46
AP - 00232342 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 40.80
AP - 00232342 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 43.94
AP - 00232343 1/18/2006 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 888.10
AP - 00232345 1/1812006 STANLEY STEEMER CARPET CLEANER 39.97
AP - 00232346 1/18/2006 STERICYCLE INC 536.34
AP - 00232347 1/1812006 STOKES, HRIDGETTE 200.00
AP - 00232348 1/1812006 SUNGARD HI TECH INC 390.00
AP - 00232348 1/18/2006 SUNGARD HI TECH INC 3,450.00
AP - 00232348 1/1812006 SUNGARD HI TECH INC 450.00
AP - 00232348 1/18/2006 SUNGARD HI TECH INC 300.00
AP - 00232348 1/1812006 SUNGARD HI TECH INC 750.00
AP - 00232349 1/1812006 TALAMERA,METHUSELAH 415.00
AP - 00232350 1/18/2006 TAM, KAMAN 57.00
AP - 00232351 1/18/2006 TANNER RECOGNITION COMPANY, 0 C 701.58
AP - 00232351 1/18/2006 TANNER RECOGNITION COMPANY, 0 C 2,150.28
AP - 00232352 1/18/2006 TELE WORKS INC 5,200.00
AP - 00232353 1/1812006 TEMME, ED 162.00
AP - 00232354 1/1812006 TEMPLE, LARRY 41.66
AP - 00232355 1/1812006 TENEYCK, MICHAEL 65.00
AP - 00232357 1/18/2006 TERRAZAS, ELSA 76.00
AP - 00232360 1/18/2006 USA AIR CONCEPTS 810.00
AP - 00232361 1/18/2006 UMPS ARE US ASSOCIATION 2,231.00
AP - 00232362 1/18/2006 UNDERGROUND SVC ALERT OF SO CAL 96.10
AP - 00232363 1/18/2006 UNDERGROUND TECHNOLOGY INC 283.40
AP - 00232364 1/18/2006 UNION HANK OF CALIFORNIA TRUSTEE FOR P, 1,521.74
AP - 00232365 1/18/2006 UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CA INC 132.71
AP - 00232365 1/18/2006 UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CA INC 219.22
AP - 00232366 1/18/2006 UNITED WAY 41.00
AP - 00232367 1/18/2006 UPS 38.10
AP - 00232368 1/18/2006 US IDENTIFICATION MANUAL 88.48
AP - 00232369 1/18/2006 VALDEZ, DORENE 500.00
AP - 00232370 1/18/2006 VELOCIT A WIRELESS 806.48
AP - 00232370 1/1812006 VELOCIT A WIRELESS 374.44
AP - 00232370 1/18/2006 VELOCIT A WIRELESS 201.62
AP - 00232370 1/1812006 VELOCIT A WIRELESS 230.42
AP - 00232370 1/18/2006 VELOCIT A WIRELESS 921.69
AP - 00232370 1/1812006 VELOCIT A WIRELESS 172.82
AP - 00232370 1/1812006 VELOCIT A WIRELESS 28.80
AP - 00232370 1/18/2006 VELOCIT A WIRELESS 115.21
AP - 00232370 1/1812006 VELOCIT A WIRELESS 28.80
AP - 00232374 1/1812006 VERIZON 28.40 d5
User: KFINCHER - Ka,en Finche, Page: 25 Current Date: o 1125120C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Port,ait Layout Time: 14:06:3
Check No.
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
AP - 00232374
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
1/1112006 through 1/24/2006
Check Date Vendor Name
Amount
1/18/2006 VER1Z0N
1/18/2006 VER1Z0N
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VER1Z0N
1/1812006 VER1Z0N
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/1812006 VERIZON
1/18/2006 VERIZON
100.96
23.21
20.56
90.58
29.81
40.99
54.23
51.20
92.04
21.09
29.28
29.28
28.40
29.28
2.796.79
88.15
113.67
28.40
90.58
38.92
16.84
20.75
20.56
28.95
56.84
28.32
20.56
29.81
28.32
20.56
20.56
19.25
19.25
20.56
29.28
29.36
28.32
34.67
130.99
29.28
29.28
90.58
90.58
90.58
28.40
123.91
27.34
90.58
90.58
90.58
90.58
90.58
92.04 :)j,
Current Date: 01/25/20C
Time: 14:06:3
User: KFINCHER - Ka,en Fincher Page: 26
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
1/11/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00232374 1/18/2006 VERIZON 20.56
AP - 00232374 1/18/2006 VERIZON 148.05
AP - 00232374 1/18/2006 VERIZON 19.25
AP - 00232375 1/18/2006 VIRTUAL PROJECT MANAGER INC 500.00
AP - 00232376 1/18/2006 WARREN & CO INC, CARL 416.97
AP - 00232376 1/18/2006 WARREN & CO INC, CARL 543.55
AP - 00232377 1/18/2006 WEST V ALLEY SENIOR CONCERN 3,000.00
AP - 00232378 1/18/2006 WILLIAMS, BYRON 76.00
AP - 00232379 1/18/2006 XEROX CORPORATION 176.33
AP - 00232380 1/18/2006 Y AMAS CONTROLS SO CALIF 44.28
AP - 00232381 1/23/2006 BASAT, SHAPIRO-BEN 10,150.88
AP - 00232381 1/23/2006 BASAT, SHAPIRO-BEN -1,974.98
AP - 00232381 1/23/2006 BASAT, SHAPIRO-BEN -1,015.09
AP - 00232381 1/23/2006 BASAT, SHAPIRO-BEN 197.51
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 1,305.76
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 35.96
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 1.70
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 217.00
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 50.69
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 120.62
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 17.55
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 84.48
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 60.76
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 112.43
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 10.08
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 76.53
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 55.97
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 162.42
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, ST AT 352.63
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 957.13
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 36.74
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 61.69
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 12.24
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 12.49
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 813.73
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 16.95
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 2.47
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 2.87
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 4.09
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 34.12
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 15.89
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 6.12
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 3.41
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 4.79
AP - 00232383 1/2312006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 25.78
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 61.19
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 52.56
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 10.68
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 6.14
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 13.05
AP - 00232383 1/23/2006 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 10m
AP - 00232384 1/24/2006 US POSTMASTER 1,807.66
Total for Check ID AP: 4,759,441.26 J.?
User: KFINCHER - Karen Fincher Page: 27 Current Date: o 1/25/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:06:3
Check No.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
1111/2006 through 1/24/2006
Check Date Vendor Name
Current Date: 01/25/20C
Time: 14:06:3
User: KF1NCHER - Karen Fincher Page: 28
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Po,t,ait Layout
Total for Entity:
Amount
4,759,441.26
d<6
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Staff Report
DATE:
February 1, 2006
TO:
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM:
William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY:
Jerry Dyer, Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL TO AUTHORIZE THE ADVERTISING OF THE "NOTICE INVITING
BIDS" FOR THE BRIDGE MAINTENANCE AND REHAB PROJECT AT HERITAGE
PARK TO BE FUNDED FROM PARK FEES
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve the plans and specifications for the "Bridge
Maintenance and Rehab Project at Heritage Park" and authorize the City Clerk to advertise the
"Notice Inviting Bids."
BACKGROUND/ANAL YSIS
The project will renovate, remove and replace existing barrier fencing and wooden decking for five
(5) wooden bridges over Demens Channel within the confines of Heritage Park.
The project specifications were completed by staff and a bridge consultant and approved by the
City Engineer. The Engineer's estimate is $67,000, including a 10% contingency, plus an
additional $5,000 required for Construction Administration, which includes printing, survey, and
soils and material testing. Legal advertising is scheduled for February 7 and 14, 2006, with a bid
opening at 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 28, 2006.
Respectfully submitted,
; J
Wi~CJ~~I--e~jJ
City Engineer
WJO:JAD:ls
Attachments: Resolution and Vicinity Map
d9
I
8'
"'''I
i.t.
II
,I
iii:,
/il'\\
... ..41,\
<~<~1\
~:1r'- .'
;
I'
! .
/
;
- ---/
,
--~.
I
'"
'-i'! . "
I '\'~'~, :
k<ETIWANDA ~ .."\,+"
ill i' '\,
; I ~'.""'1.. __<_4'-~--""'~,') ,~
;:! "...-_~",~"....,p" --:r- '~~: I
li C I ( \~~
, .'/ i" \1 ~ : ,.'~~\,
-T........ ']J})/~A'dG+.--t- -.-, "-
'-:\,II'I'II"li'.'tr =":.L_--J!'=-=~,,.,., .-=-....~Ot-~~..-.....~~~."- --------
~.+-.:---'--~:tsH.<r
'i,) .(, r ,\-'
I ,1,\ I'" 1 '\ .' 'II--...--..---~ 1,
.} ... 'i? . MILU,IKEN-'T\'\ : ' ~ "',
~.<(--'~II " \ ( /)l' '\ 1<(
Dl '. ''--. ". / r - -~. r
; i,~ ,__,:~ _\.-.l----\..-:/jT-..( T--:
\\ \\:-" '\ ""~.'~-"\>,.(~_{./'./ 11...'''')-,;1
T' -~,',:'iD--;-<-:'"1 +.....L
"I 'I I -'-"L
':i II! ---"---..L_ _.
II
--:, "'r
. Jr
;\ I
I,.
--Hlt-
"',
----
L-
I
I
!
I
!
i
I
,
.~
.' "'-+jl
.c
a s:: a
_.~ a of.
o .- ...
EJ:;C:
Q) t
a :J OJ
uO"u
aWe
o.!l: s::
..s:: ~ OJ
ua...
s:: a. .5
a OJ a
c: O)~
_0..-
o t OJ
::>'OJO)
,- ---'---" ~ I :2
.t-- ........-, U ~
! HERMOSA \ m
/'
/
/
,
I
I ,
"~ENI-
i_
\//
:z
10
U)
,--'
,~-
't:
-I 1
:;.~ 1-1-
:: E ,
-.E,~-'-
a: O'a: '
.... I!II:' ,
:;::.0 i-Q.'~- .:
. -;,II" r~~YL i- OJ:
- __._..'.' ';~ ..' _:I\~_
III, . "1 CARNELIAN II
1->- " , I Ii
_ w
~. _~. ,I _ J
:J ~A~PHIR~~/
5: I >/,..~
.1
j. ...______---L-,_..._
, ARCHIBALD
I
. I
~...Lu
HELLMAN
I
- '1' I-
I
i'"
"
_R.1 _
..j
1
I
.1
.~./
!
j'
I
,
--"T
'-.-~T
/'.. t
_:;~;;/'T'--- "'-1"
,
/ 3^OllO
. I
~
!
/
~.. C~~"ORN,^
t~..{
u~
0+..) (....,...
NVU!lO "'~I::>
30
nTI\ \
I
I
I
I
!
I
~_____u__.
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
i
i
- !
I
I
,
I
I
I
- I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
N 0 I ~~ ~
~
l/Tl
(..1
o.
~lo'lrJOA.UJ
CU~O[?g
(W')
~ 2
.._.~_.
. ..... .... '.. ..
". . ..:..... ....
In
. ... =Ii:
"=t
=Ii:
U
:R
~
i f
RESOLUTION NO. O(P ~ Od-3
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE "BRIDGE MAINTENANCE AND
REHAB PROJECT AT HERITAGE PARK" AND AUTHORIZING
AND DIRECTING THE CITY. CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO
RECEIVE BIDS
WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council to
maintain certain improvements in the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council has prepared
specifications for the maintenance of certain improvements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the specifications presented by the
City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council be and are hereby approved as the plans and
specifications for the "BRIDGE MAINTENANCE AND REHAB PROJECT AT HERITAGE
PARK".
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and
directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for doing the
work specified in the aforesaid plans and specifications, which said advertisement shall be
substantially in the following words and figures, to wit:
NOTICE INVITING SEALED BIDS OR PROPOSALS
Pursuant to a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino
County, California, directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that said City of Rancho
Cucamonga City Council will receive at the OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK IN THE OFFICES
OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ON OR BEFORE THE HOUR OF 2:00 p.m. on
Tuesday, February 28, 2006, sealed bids or proposals for the "BRIDGE MAINTENANCE AND
REHAB PROJECT AT HERITAGE PARK" in said City.
Bids will be publicly opened and read in the office of the City Clerk, 10500 Civic Center Drive,
Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730.
Bids must be made on a form provided for the purpose, addressed to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga City Council, California, marked, "BRIDGE MAINTENANCE AND REHAB
PROJECT AT HERITAGE PARK".
Please purchase and/or direct requests for plans and specs regarding the "BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE AND REHAB PROJECT AT HERITAGE PARK" project to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, Engineering Counter, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California,
91729-0807.
PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California
Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the Contractor is required to pay not
less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the
3d-
Resolution No.
February 1, 2006
Page 2
locality in which the public work is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of
per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of
Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has deterrnined such general
prevailing rates of per diem wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on
file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic Center Drive,
Rancho Cucamonga, California, and are available to any interested party on request. The
Contracting Agency also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site.
Pursuant to provisions of Labor Code Section 1775, the Contractor shall forfeit, as penalty to the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, not more than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer,
workman, or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer,
workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages hereinbefore
stipulated for any work done under the attached contract, by him or by any subcontractor under
him, in violation of the provision of said Labor Code.
Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code
concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him.
Section 1777.5, as arnended, requires the Contractor or subcontractor employing tradesmen in
any apprenticable occupation to apply to the joint apprenticeship committee nearest the site of
the public works project and which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a
certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will
be used in the performance of the contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in such
cases shall not be less than one to five except:
A. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship
committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90 days prior to
the request of certificate, or
B. When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a ratio of
one to five, or
C. When the trade can show that .it is replacing at least 1/30 of its
membership through apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide
or locally, or
D. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered
apprentices on all of his contracts on an annual average of not less than
one apprentice to eight journeymen.
The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of
apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any
apprenticable trade on such contracts and if other Contractors on the public works site are
making such contributions.
The Contractor and subcontractor under him shall compiy with the requirements of Sections
1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices.
Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may
be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the Administrator of
Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and
its branch offices.
33
Resolution No.
February 1, 2006
Page 3
Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the
execution of this contract and the Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall comply with
and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours as set
forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as
amended.
The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars
($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by
him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each
calendar day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor
more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code. .
Contractor agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the
work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the
applicable collective bargaining agreement filed in accordance with Labor Code Section
17773.8.
The bidder must submit with his proposal, cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bidder's
bond, payable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for an amount equal to at least ten percent
(10%) of the amount of said bid as a guarantee that the bidder will enter into the proposed
contract if the same is awarded to him, and in event of failure to enter into such contract said
cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bond shall become the property of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
If the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the
amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to the
difference between the low bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any shall be
returned to the lowest bidder.
The amount of the bond to be given to secure a faithful performance of the contract for said
work shall be one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price thereof, and an additional bond
in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price for said work shall be
given to secure the payment of claims for any materials or supplies furnished for the
performance of the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, or any work or labor of any
kind done thereon, and the Contractor will also be required to furnish a certificate that he carries
compensation insurance covering his employees upon work to be done under contract which
may be entered into between him and the said City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction
of said work.
.No proposal will be considered from a Contractor to whom a proposal form has not been issued
by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
On the date and at the time of the submittal of the Bidder's Proposal the Prime Contractor shall
possess any and all contractor licenses, in form and class as required by any and all applicable
laws with respect to any and all of the work to be performed under this contract; including, but
not limited to a Class "A" License (General Engineering Contractor) or a combination of
Specialty Class "C" licenses sufficient to cover all the work to be performed by the Prime
Contractor in accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (California
Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and rules and regulations adopted
pursuant thereto.
!:JI
Resolution No.
February 1, 2006
Page 4
The Contractor, pursuant to the California Business and Professions Code, Section 7028.15,
shall indicate his or her State License Nurnber on the bid, together with the expiration date, and
be signed by the Contractor declaring, under penalty of perjury, that the inforrnation being
provided is true and correct.
The work is to be done in accordance with the profiles, plans, and specifications of the City of
Rancho Cucarnonga City Council on file in the Office of the City Clerk at 10500 Civic Center
Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Copies of the plans and specifications, available at the
office of the City Engineer, will be furnished upon application to the City of Rancho Cucamonga
and payment of $25.00 (TWENTY-FIVE DOLLARS), said $25.00 (TWENTY-FIVE DOLLARS) is
non-refundable.
Upon written request by the bidder, copies of the plans and specifications will be mailed when
said request is accompanied by payment stipulated above, together with an additional non-
reimbursable payment of $10.00 (TEN DOLLARS) to cover the cost of mailing charges and
overhead.
The successful bidder will be required to enter into a contract satisfactory to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
In accordance with the requirements of Section 9-3.2 of the General Provisions, as set forth in
the Plans and Specifications regarding the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, the
Contractor may, upon the Contractor's request and at the Contractor's sole cost and expense,
substitute authorized securities in lieu of monies withheld (performance retention).
The City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, reserves the right to reject any and all bids.
Questions regarding this Notice Inviting Bids for the "BRIDGE MAINTENANCE AND REHAB
PROJECT AT HERITAGE PARK" may be directed to: John Martin; Associate Engineer, at
(909) 477-2700, ext. 4077 or FAX (909) 477-2746.
By order of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California.
Dated this 151 day of February, 2006.
Publish Dates: February 7 and 14, 2006
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California,
this 1st day of February, 2006.
William J. Alexander, Mayor
ATTEST:
Debra J. Adams, City Clerk
~
-~
1/. '"
,,,,~a" \
r"'j:'-., ')'....,.
~ 1 (-.r (')
[25' -'~S5-
1-)1' ,
"-\...../_.Ao-_
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ESGINEERING DEPARTMENT
SiaffReport
DATE: February 1, 2006
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J, O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Jerry A Dyer, Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: APPROVAL TO AUTHORIZE THE ADVERTISING OF THE "NOTICE INVITING BIDS"
FOR THE "FISHER DRIVE LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS", TO BE FUNDED FROM
BEAUTIFICATION FEES AND DEVELOPER TRUST DEPOSIT
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve the plans and specifications for the "Fisher Drive
Landscape Improvements" and authorize the City Clerk to advertise the "Notice Inviting Bids."
BACKGROUND/ANAL YSIS
The project will complete the full street improvements for this exterior 'frontage road' adjacent to
Interstate 210 east of East Avenue leading to Mulberry Street. Street improvements were
completed after the Freeway was opened and landscaping was completed on the south side of
Fisher with the development of a residential neighborhood,
The project plans and specifications were completed by staff and approved by the City Engineer.
The Engineer's estimate is $145,000 including a 10% contingency, plus an additional $5,000
required for Construction Administration, which includes printing, survey, and soils and material
testing. Legal advertising is scheduled for February 7 and 14, 2006, with a bid opening at 2:00
p.rn. on Tuesday, February 28, 2006.
Respectfully submitted,
CJrt~l/ l~L~
William J. O'Neil
City Engineer
W JO:JAD
Attachments: Vicinity Map
3"
J
I
~
L il!lT! Fr/:":;;::<<><:"II
~ f-- /....:..}.:/.::...:::,...,.aif
, l I f-- '.'-:' ;.; ;~<;<:.:. o,c~,"','" :'..; ~(II"
:.~,..(t~, ;
','.'.' ,'<,;U'" o. ..~.;.," .
...." '97
(Y
z
<>:
---j::E
w
~ 'VV' N::.ruNt 6
I j OJJID~-
~I ~5V3 8
I tLm~ I
-
l
m
a.
:!;
~
'"
';" -
~~
-
w 1 899El
.... L 059El z
- ..
en I 9E9El ~
\ ,~" 7 "
nl~'
M .' . ' ~/--
I?Ir:::~
li'l~
OE5El ~
115El
I
-
r-<
u
i-I-li-I-l
>0'
-~
~o..
Oi-I-l
~o..
i-I-l<C;
~u
[J)[J)
-0
I-L<z
:51
-
7 '--
y
-----'
I
-
-
I 86vEl w ~ARSTUrJF
I ~
v8vEl I -=-
OLvEl
II ".~ 't -
I I I
lvvEl FI.AG5IONF :>:::
i 0 8lm f T r 0
,..; T -::E
N
, 1Il
~ vlvEl
-
OOvEl l
-
06EEl
9LEE! II
I I
I
c~ESTONE
I
I
L
M
'"
~
'"
ct:
w
--'
--'
w
:J
::E _,
I
~ -
-
C--
I
Ie
Ii I
-I.
IT T I I
-
-
-
---i
-
I
1
,
I I
o
z
:3
:r:
(9
~
:r:
" ,.
.'.','.' <....'
,','.', :
:,,"?'
e
OJ
'~~
...I
~7
RESOLUTION NO. 0(, '0.')</
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE "FISHER DRIVE LANDSCAPE
IMPROVEMENTS" AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING
THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS
WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City of Rancho Cucamonga City
Council to maintain certain improvements in the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council has prepared
specifications for the maintenance of certain improvements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the specifications presented
by the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council be and are hereby approved as the
plans and specifications for the "FISHER DRIVE LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS".
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and
directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for
doing the work specified in the aforesaid plans and specifications, which said
advertisement shall be substantially in the following words and figures, to wit:
NOTICE INVITING SEALED BIDS OR PROPOSALS
Pursuant to a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San
Bernardino County, California, directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that
said City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council will receive at the OFFICE OF THE CITY
CLERK IN THE OFFICES OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ON OR
BEFORE THE HOUR OF 2:00 P.M. ON Tuesday, February 28, 2006, sealed bids or
proposals for the "FISHER DRIVE LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS". in said City.
Bids will be publicly opened and read in the office of the City Clerk, 10500 Civic Center
Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730.
Bids must be made on a form provided for the purpose, addressed to the City of
Rancho Cucamonga City Council, California, marked, "FISHER DRIVE LANDSCAPE
IMPROVEMENTS". .
Please purchase and/or direct requests for plans and specs regarding the "FISHER
DRIVE LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS" project to the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
Engineering Counter, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91729-
0807.
3Z
Resolution No.
February 1, 2006
P"n" ?
. -0--
PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of
California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the Contractor is
required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per diern wages for work of a
similar character in the locality in which the public work is performed, and not less than
the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that
regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is
required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per diem wages..
Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the Office of the City
Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California, and are available to any interested party on request. The
Contracting Agency also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the
job site.
Pursuant to provisions of Labor Code Section 1775, the Contractor shall forfeit, as
penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, not more than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for
each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof,
if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of
wages hereinbefore stipulated for any work done under the attached contract, by him or
by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provision of said Labor Code.
Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code
concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor
under him.
Section 1777.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or subcontractor employing
tradesmen in any apprenticable occupation to apply to the joint apprenticeship
committee nearest the site of the public works project and which administers the
apprenticeship program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will
also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance of
the contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in such cases shall not be less
than one to five except: .
A. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint
apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90
days prior to the request of certificate, or
B. When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a
ratio of one to five, or
C. When the trade can show that it is replacing at least 1/30 of its
membership through apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide
or locally, or
D. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered
apprentices on all of his contracts on an annual average of not less than
one apprentice to eight journeymen.
The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the
administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or
39
Resolution No.
February 1, 2006
P",np ::l
- --~- -
journeymen in any apprenticable trade on such contracts and if other Contractors on the
public works site are making such contributions.
The Contractor and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of
Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices.
Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other
requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the
Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of
Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices.
Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in
the execution of this contract and the Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall
comply with and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with
working hours as set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of
the State of California as amended.
The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five
dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed in the execution of
the contract, by him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore
mentioned, for each calendar day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is
required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code.
Contractor agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to
execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are
defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreement filed in accordance with Labor
Code Section 17773.8.
The bidder must submit with his proposal, cash, cashier's check, certified check, or
bidder's bond, payable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for an amount equal to at
least ten percent (10%) of the amount of said bid as a guarantee that the bidder will
enter into the proposed contract if the same is awarded to him, and in event of failure to
enter into such contract said cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bond shall
become the property of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
If the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council awards the contract to the next lowest
bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City of Rancho
Cucamonga to the difference between the low bid and the second lowest bid, and the
surplus, if any shall be returned to the lowest bidder.
The amount of the bond to be given to secure a faithful performance of the contract for
said work shall be one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price thereof, and an
additional bond in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price
for said work shall be given to secure the payment of claims for any materials or
supplies furnished for the performance of the work contracted to be done by the
Contractor, or any work or labor of any kind done thereon, and the Contractor will also
be required to furnish a certificate that he carries compensation insurance covering his
employees upon work to be done under contract which may be entered into between
him and the said City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction of said work.
10
Resolution No.
February 1, 2006
Page 4
No proposal will be considered from a Contractor to whom a proposal form has not
been issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
Contractor shall possess any and all contractors licenses, in form and class as required
by any and all applicable laws with respect to any and all of the work to be performed
under this contract; including, but not limited to a "Class "C-27" (Landscaping
Contractor) license", in accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law
(California Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and rules and
regulations adopted pursuant thereto.
The Contractor, pursuant to the California Business and Professions Code, Section
7028.15, shall indicate his or her State License Number on the bid, together with the
expiration date, and be signed by the Contractor declaring, under penalty of perjury, that
the information being provided is true and correct.
The work is to be done in accordance with the profiles, plans. and specifications of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council on file in the Office of the City Clerk at 10500
Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Copies of the plans and
specifications, available at the office of the City Engineer, will be furnished upon
application to the City of Rancho Cucamonga and payment of $35.00 (THIRTY-FIVE
DOLLARS), said $35.00 (THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS) is non-refundable.
Upon written request by the bidder, copies of the plans and specifications will be mailed
when said request is accompanied by payment stipulated above, together with an
additional non-reimbursable payment of $15.00 (FIFTEEN DOLLARS) to cover the cost
of mailing charges and overhead.
The successful bidder will be required to enter into a contract satisfactory to the City of
Rancho Cucamonga.
In accordance with the requirements of Section 9-3.2 of the General Provisions, as set
forth in the Plans and Specifications regarding the work contracted to be done by the
Contractor, the Contractor may, upon the Contractor's request and at the Contractor's
sole cost and expense, substitute authorized securities in lieu of monies withheld
(performance retention).
The City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, reserves the right to reject any and all bids.
Questions regarding this Notice Inviting Bids for the "FISHER DRIVE LANDSCAPE
IMPROVEMENTS" may be directed to: John Martin, Associate Engineer, (909) 477-
2700. ext. 4077 or FAX (909) 477-2746.
By order of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California.
Dated this 1st day of February, 2006.
Publish Dates: February 7 and 14, 2006
'II
THE
C I T Y
o F
I
RANCUO CUCAMONGA
Staff Report
DATE: February 1 , 2006
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: Dan Coleman, Acting City Planner
BY: Jennifer Fechner, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO APPROPRIATE $110,000 FROM COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT TECHNICAL SERVICES FUND 016 INTO ACCOUNT
NUMBER 1001314-5303 (CONTRACT SERVICES - REIMBURSABLE) TO
CONTINUE CONTRACT TERMS FOR TWO (2) CONTRACT PLANNERS
THROUGH THE END OF FY2005-06.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize an appropriation in the
amount of $110,000 from Community Development Technical Services Fund into account
number 1001314-5303 (Contract Service - Reimbursable) to fund additional expenses in
connection with retaining two contract planners through the end of FY2005-06.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The Planning Department will use the funding to maintain current
staffing levels through the end of FY2005-2006. This continuing need is due to volume of
planning permi1 applications being received and processed. In 2005, our department processed
1,171 planning permit applications. These two contract planners are responsible for
development review processing, plan checks, and counter support.
Dan Coleman
Acting City Planner
DC:JF\ma
tf~
/-~'-,
/ ,-.'\, (,2, \
(";' <., lj){ ,~~
~J.f:".. .. 0.1
~rc){
Cy-(-: /
~-l(::J
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
E~CINEERINC DEP^RTMENT
Staff Report
DATE:
February 1, 2006
TO:
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM:
William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
Jerry A. Dyer, Senior Civil Engineer (jI)fJ
APPROVAL OF AN APPROPRIAT~N IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,000 FROM
MEASURE I FUND BALANCE TO ACCOUNT NO. 11763035650/1532176-0
FOR THE BASE LINE ROAD AND EAST AVENUE STREET
REHABILITATION IMPROVEMENTS IN COOPERATION WITH THE CITY
OF FONTANA
BY:
SUBJECT:
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve an appropriation in the amount of $25,000
from Measure I fund balance to Account No. 11763035650/1532176-0 for the Base Line
Road and East Avenue Street Rehabilitation Improvements in cooperation with the City of
Fontana.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The City of Fontana contacted the City in the desire to cooperate and jointly participate in a
project to construct street rehabilitation improvements on Base Line Road from East
Avenue to the easterly 700 feet and East Avenue from Base Line Road to the northerly 400
feet within the City limits of both Rancho Cucamonga and Fontana. Fontana is designated
as the lead Agency to coordinate and construct the street improvements. At the Council
meeting of June 1, 2005, the Cooperative Agreement was approved along with an
appropriation of $140,000 to cover the City share based on the estimate of costs.
The work is now complete and Fontana has submitted a "Final Project Cost Total and
Breakdown" of the work. The final project cost total is $410,412.28 and based on the
0/3
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Re: Cooperative Aweement with the City of Fontana
February 1, 2006
Page 2
Cooperative Agreement the City portion is $164,282.38. The appropriation is needed to
cover the additional cost and reimbursement to the City of Fontana.
Respectfully submitted,
jce ({(~.
William J. O'Neil
City Engineer
WJO:JAD
'Lfif
-zz-! I !
t, ~ ! i
. i, I !
~
c ~ i L~
"
i '.
CLW <:Y.y~ .
..J ~.:J-1-:
<( ~-k
>-U r,> <5>,y
t-(f)
~O $/";1
Uz
5>
f-Z
uO
Wf-
-:J<(
Ou
0::0
o...--.l
".
,.
"<!
~
t:
to
-
:s:
)(
uJ
'"
l;:
~
::I
tr
Itl
...
'"
oL
~
(
t ~~, ~
\ : ~~
"\ "'i,<='"
7...c
I
-:."," "~J?::":;~:::~rtt~~--- -
,O'2.f
001
I
-;z
: I :3''b.>
" ~
1 ~~:~
1 !.,)
"-
u
.
."
Aue
u
LfS
THE
C I T Y
o F
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Staff Report
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
February 1, 2006
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, A1CP, City Manager
Pete Ortiz, Chief of Police
Authorization to accept Grand Reserve in the amount of
$19,514.00 from the United States Department of Justice 2006
Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) award, into account number
1354000-4740 (Grant Income) for use by the Police Department for
the purchase of police related equipment and technology. The
equipment requested would be fourteen (14) hand held radar
guns, for use by our traffic division to enforce vehicle code
violations.
RECOMMENDATION
The Police Department staff recommends the Council grant authorization to accept
grant revenue in the amount of $19,514.00 from the United States Department of
Justice 2006 Justice Assistance Grant (JAG), into account #1354000-4740 (Grant
Income) for use by the police department for the purchase of police related
equipment and technology. The equipment requested would be fourteen (14) hand
held radar guns, for use by our traffic division to enforce vehicle code violations.
BACKGROUND ANALYSIS
The JAG award replaces the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) program,
which for a number of years has provided local jurisdictions money for the purchase
of equipment'by their police department. Although the award amounts have become
increasingly smaller year-by-year, they still provide some money for use by police
jurisdictions to purchase equipment they might not otherwise be able to afford.
Lf(;
FISCAL IMPACT
The current Justice Department award procedure is to have the county government,
in which the jurisdiction receiving the award is located, administer all grand
paperwork. The jurisdiction receiving the grant no longer has to provide a funding
match for the grant award. In accepting this grant, the City of Rancho Cucamonga
agrees to pay the San Bernardino County Law and Justice Group (the designated
grand administrative body) a fee of five percent (5%) of the award amount ($976.00)
for administrative costs. The net award amount will be $18,538.00.
Lf7
THE
C I T Y
o F
RIlNCUO CUCIlMONGIl
==:J
Staff Report
DATE: February 1, 2006
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: Pamela S. Easter, Deputy City Manager
Tamara L. Layne, Finance Officer
Kimberly S. Thomas, Management Analyst III, City Manager's Office
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO APPROPRIATE THE ANIMAL CARE AND
SERVICES DEPARTMENTAL BUDGET FOR PARTIAL YEAR
OPERATIONS FOR FY 2005/06 (PERSONNEL COSTS OF $466,060
AND OPERATING COSTS OF $224,980), FOR ONE-TIME/START-UP
COSTS ($1,381,230) AND FOR CAPITAL COSTS ($1,996,900) IN THE
TOTAL AMOUNT OF $4,069,170 INTO VARIOUS ACCOUNTS AS
DETAILED IN THE ATTACHED BUDGET SUMMARY WHICH WAS
APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 13, 2005
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the appropriation of the Animal Care
and Services Departmental Budget for partial year operations for FY 2005/06, for one-
time/start-up costs and for capital costs in the total amount of $4,069,170 into various
accounts as detailed in Exhibit A (attached).
BACKGROUND / ANALYSIS
In May 2005, the City Council made the decision to transition to a City operated Animal
Care and Services Program. To assist in the transition, the City Council retained
Nathan Winograd of No Kill Solutions. To date, Mr. Winograd has presented two
Reports to the City Council, Phase I in August 2005 and Phase II in December 2005.
The Phase II Report, which the Council approved, provided recommendations to the
Council for determining service levels, a recommended personnel and operating budget
as well as one time capital costs associated with creating a new Animal Care and
Services Department.
The recommended action being taken tonight is to have the City Council formally
authorize the appropriation of funds to establish a partial year operating budget
J-(/Z
PAGE 2
AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATION OF THE ANIMAL CARE AND SERVICES
DEPARTMENTAL BUDGET FOR PARTIAL YEAR OPERATIONS FOR FY 2005/06 AND
CAPITAL BUDGETS IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $4,035,170 INTO VARIOUS ACCOUNTS
AS DETAILED IN EXHIBIT A (ATTACHED)
(approximately four months of expenditures) for FY 2005106 and provide funding for
one-time/start-up and capital costs. The capital costs include both the items approved
by Council as first year capital costs, as well as those approved as second year capital
costs. Staff has proposed combining both years' capital costs for appropriation in the
current year to provide for a more efficient process in the overall completion of the
various improvements, although some work will overlap fiscal years. This appropriations
action is consistent with the Council's previous policy actions regarding the Animal Care
and Services Department.
Funding for these appropriations can be provided through a one-time "true-up" payment
by the State for Property Tax In-Lieu of VLF (approximately $600,000), with additional
projected recurring revenue growth in the City's Property Tax In-Lieu of VLF revenues
(approximately $1.5 million) and the usage of City reserves. However, if the current
fiscal year's operations result in an increase to fund balance, Staff is requesting that the
Council allow Staff discretion in utilizing any increase in fund balance in lieu of utilizing
reserves. The results of operations will not be known until the completion of the current
fiscal year.
Respectfully submitted,
c:p~~
~~
't1Ji!.~v
Management Analyst
Pamela S. Easter
Deputy City Manager
Tamara L. Layne
Finance Officer
Attachment
- Budget Summary - as approved on December 13, 2005 - with
Appropriations by Account Number
Lfg /1
ANJIMAL CAlRJE &. SERVJICES DEPARTMENT
BUDGET SUMMARY
AS APPROVED ON DECEMBER 13, 2005
APPROPRIATIONS BY ACCOUNT NUMBER
c "Baseline": necessary for the animal care and services program to meet statutory
requirements.
c "No Kill Enhancement": necessary for the animal care and services program to implement
No Kill programs.
BUDGET
TOTAL
Annual Department Personnel & Benefits
Partial Year Department Personnel & Benefits
$1.312.553
$ 466,060
Baseline: $1,043,244 (annual)
$ 368,190 (partial year)
No Kill Enhancement: $269,309 (annual)
$ 97,870 (partial year)
Appropriations: 1001104-5000 $293,640; 1001104-5005 $2,600; 1001104-5030 $143,880;
1001312-5000 $13,250; 1001312-5005 $1,880; 1001312-5010 $3,960; 1001312-5030
$6,850.
Annual Operatinl!: Costs $ 603.631
Partial Year Operating Costs $ 224,980
Includes on-going operations and maintenance, office supplies, and
equipment supplies, microchips (AVID program), as well as funding for
Facilities Maintenance personnel to maintain the facility and grounds.
Baseline: $ 454,231 (annual)
$ 168,740 (partial year)
No Kill Enhancement: $149,400 (annual)
$ 56,240 (partial year)
ADPropriations: 1001104-5102 $6,050; 1001104-5105 $2,600; 1001104-5150 $3,970;
1001104-5160 $1,050; 1001104-5161 $70; 1001104-5200 $55,090; 1001104-5300
$123,620; 1001104-5304 $23,940; 1001205-5151 $3,340; 1001317-5255 $5,250.
One-Time / Start-up Costs $1.381.230
Includes the start-up acquisition of: furniture; fixtures; cat cages; indoor and
outdoor signage; fencing; storage needs; animal care and services related
equipment and supplies; field services equipment and supplies; field vehicles
and radios; microchips (AVID program); computers and computer software;
office supplies and equipment; community information and website
development; contract services, training for new staff, etc.
Baseline: $1,356,230
No Kill Enhancement: $ 25,000
Lfg /;}
Appropriations: 1001104-5150 $3,790; 1001104-5152 $44,860; 1001104-5200 $81,340;
1001104-5300 $122,160; 1001104-5603 $491,050; 1001104-5604 $327,600; 1001104-
5605 $169,780; 1001104-5606 $140,650.
First Year Capital Costs
See attached list of recommended
improvements.
$1,072.900
building repairs, modifications, and
Appropriations: 1025001-5200 $15,600; 1025001-5204 $7,800; 1025001-5300 $600,000;
1025001-5304 $26,000; 1025001-5602 $379,180; 1025001-5603 $4,320; 1025001-5650/
1535025-0 $6,000. (Note: $34,000 of recommended improvements was budgeted as part of
the FY 2005/06 Adopted Budget).
Second Year Capital Costs
Replacement of HV AC
system.
$ 924.000
system and installation of energy management
Appropriations: 1025001-5602 $24,000; 1025001-5603 $900,000.
Attachment - Proposed Animal Shelter Building Modifications and Repairs
i:lfinancelbudget2006\Animal Shelter Budget Summary OI-25-06.doc
'1g3
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Proposed Animal Shelter Building Repairs,
Modifications and Improvements
Attachment A
1) Facility wide
. Multiphase medical type of cleaning of facility
. Recable building for City computer and telephone systems. Install facility
security system.
. Reevaluate options to upgrade generator to maintain vital systems in facility,
including use of portable generator
. Install City Radio System at Shelter
o Relocate antenna and install Radio System for Field Service Operations
o Purchase 800 MHz Radio for Field Service Operations
o Reprogram City radio system to incorporate animal services channel
. Redo exterior signage
. Replace roof, due to existing deterioration of roof and serious leak problems
. . Evaluate ways to improve functionality of existing HVAC System. After this
evaluation occurs, then decision on replacement of system (in second year of
capital program) can be better determined. Related energy management
systems would then be installed
o Note: Prospective "Second Year" Replacement of HVAC system and
installation of energy management system.
. Evaluate placement of eye wash locations
. Repaint interior of facility, replace flooring materials, and restain wood
. Upgrade lighting systems throughout facility
2) Lobby/Public Counter Area
. Reorganize public counter work area, to provide ADA accessibility,
accommodate entrance to adjacent dispatch room, add storage, and add
volunteer work area. Install doorway between public counter work area and the
Dispatch Room to allow access by personnel working at Front Counter who will
also dispatch work.
3) Acquaintance Rooms off of Lobby and Cat Kennel Areas
. Transition acquaintance rooms on south side of facility to cat condo areas,
including providing an indoor/outdoor cat room using the existing indoor/outdoor
acquaintance room. Evaluate feasibility and cost of altering access points to the
acquaintance rooms and cat kennel areas to create a Cat Suite area and
accommodate more cats in better environment, including possible expansion of
the cat kennel area into the existing exterior storage room on the south side of
the facility.
. Install foot-operated sink
4) Dog Kennel Area
. Evaluate options to refresh epoxy coating in kennel areas
. Install foot operated sink
. Install acoustical panels to assist with noise level abatement
Ljg /q
Proposed Animal Shelter Building Repairs,
Modifications, and Improvements
Page two
5) Interior Courtyard Area and Back Operational Area
. Transition interior courtyard to an acquaintance area for potential animal
adopters, including plant material removal, installation of pea gravel, benches,
shade structure, etc.
. Install door between interior courtyard to back operational area, to limit access of
public
. In the north dog exercise area, redo chain link area, remove existing rock, install
pea gravel, and consider adding more area to chain link area. Area to be used for
animal exercise areas. Install animal related equipment, benches, shade
structure, etc.
. Install storage racks in storage area near generator
. Relocate morgue from existing location to the north side of the back operational
area, with an addition of an adjacent medical room. Purpose would be to allow
more efficient use of existing exam area. (Due to the nature of this work, this
would most likely have to be completed after the May 1, 2006 transition.)
6) Exam Room/Washer & Dryer/Grooming Area
. Modify washer/dryer area to become an Animal Intake Room
7) Service Bay Area
. Consider options/feasibility for installation of bay roll-up doors, to allow area to be
used for dog intake, temporary holding area for non traditional animals, use for
behavioral work in inclement weather, etc
. Install washer/dryer and dishwasher from existing location to the service bay
area and replace cabinetry.
. Acquire a storage container for food storage and other materials/goods
. Remove existing wood storage racks on the west side of the service bay area
and install wire racking for various types of storage
. Evaluate feasibility and cost of relocation of truck wash off area to outside of the
service bay area to allow use of service bay area for alternative uses
8) Storage Area off of Service Bay Area
. Convert storage area to a cat infirmary and intake room. Will require extension of
utilities, drainage, and heating/cooling unit.
9) Exterior of Building
. Upgrade exterior lighting systems
. Replace and enhance exterior signage and directional signs to Shelter
. Landscape renovation and modifications
10) Staff Office Area
. Convert existing break room into Shelter Manager office.
qg/5
THE CITY OF
L
RANCUO CUCAMONGA
StaffRe.port
DATE:
February 1, 2006
TO:
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM:
Pamela S. Easter, Deputy City Manager
Tamara L. Layne, Finance Officer
Dawn Haddon, Purchasing Manager
Kimberly S. Thomas, Management Analyst III, City Manager's Office
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL OF THE EXECUTION OF VARIOUS CONTRACTS FOR THE
PURCHASE OF FURNITURE, FIXTURES, EQUIPMENT, AND
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA ANIMAL
CARE AND SERVICES DEPARTMENT
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve the execution of various contracts for the
purchase of furniture, fixtures, equipment, and professional services to be funded as detailed in
the Budget Summary and Appropriations by Account Number schedule (includes a 20%
contingency for capital outlay items and a 5% contingency for professional services). The
Budget Summary, as presented in the Animal Shelter Transition Phase II Report was approved
by the City Council at their December 13,2005 Council Meeting.
BACKGROUND I ANALYSIS
Per the approval and direction received at the December 13, 2005, Council meeting, an
emergency need exists for the City to proceed with purchasing the furniture, fixtures, and
equipment, and professional services necessary to operate and open a new City Department for
Animal Care and Services (with the Shelter to be operated by the City on May 1, 2006, and the
Field Program by July 1, 2006), that were approved in the Animal Shelter Transition - Phase II
Report, The approved Phase II Report from Nathan Winograd of No Kill Solutions provided
recommendations to the City Council for determining service levels, a recommended personnel
and operating budget, as well as one-time costs associated with creating a new Animal Care
and Services Department. This direction followed the previous recommendations contained in
the Phase I Report in August of 2005, Phase II Report in December of December 2005, and the
Council action in May of 2005, to transition from a County of San Bernardino contract to a City-
operated Animal Care and Services Program.
To develop a sound plan, and to expedite these recommendations as efficiently as possible, the
City has undertaken a series of analyses for the best plan of action. This process has included
gathering input from Staff and professionals in the field including: architects, engineers, and
Ijg~
PAGE 2
APPROVAL OF THE EXECUTION OF VARIOUS CONTRACTS FOR THE PURCHASE OF
FURNITURE, FIXTURES, EQUIPMENT, AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR THE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA ANIMAL CARE AND SERVICES DEPARTMENT
many in the animal care and services field; reviewing and discussing this project at Council
meetings; and incorporating the prior Animal Shelter Ad Hoc Subcommittee's direction and
input. The process also included touring animal shelters in Southern California and receiving
citizen input through community meetings and surveys. Overall, this process has enabled staff
to compile a plan and budget for the furniture, fixtures, equipment, and services necessary to
move beyond a traditional animal care program.
Given the need for ordering, receiving, and installing the items needed for the completion of the
Rancho Cucamonga Animal Shelter to be operated by the City on May 1, 2006 and the Field
Program by July 1, 2006, the City Manager and/or his Deputy and Purchasing Manager are
asking for the authority to address this urgent project in an expedited manner for essential
purchases and contracts needed (over the $20,000 existing authority). The authorization for
purchases of this nature is addressed in the Purchasing Ordinance 3288, Section 3.08.070,
Items A.1. and A.9. which reads:
Purchasing of supplies and equipment shall be by bid process pursuant to Sections
3.08.080 and 3.08.090 of this Chapter. However, bidding may be dispensed with upon
adequate, specific documentation when one of the following conditions exist:
A.1.) When, in the view of the City Manager or the person acting in that capacity, an
emergency requires that an order be placed with the nearest available source(s) of
supply.
A.9.) When there is a breakdown in essential machinery, essential services, or when
unforeseen circumstance arise including delays by contractors, delays in
transportation, and unanticipated volume of work, which requires the immediate
attention of a professional or immediate service/repair in order to protect public
health, safety and welfare.
Staff is requesting approval to proceed with acqUiring the various furniture, fixtures and
equipment (FF&E), and professional services through the many competitively bid contracts the
City now utilizes, as well as the use of quotes and bids with vendors still to be determined, when
appropriate. The Purchasing Manager for the items needed will make this determination, but
may not be limited to the submitted budget items noted below.
Listed below and attached are sections detailing the items needed, source selection, and the
recommended purchasing approach to obtaining the items in time for the opening of the facility
in ninety (90) days, by May 1, 2006 and by the commencement of field services by July 1, 2006.
8J:i:tIJ:i:t;j)@m@1S~~
~~@mw~
~~ . . . . . . . . . . . ~
~:-,'~"~-'---- .--..e ~.- ,'" ~~ -~
LANIWAN hardware & $178,200 Piggyback on existing contract
software; Servers; and bid with IS on the Cultural
Computers and monitors; Center
Printers; Software
(Chameleon Shelter
Management Software);
Trainino & Trainino
L(g/7
PAGE 3
APPROVAL OF THE EXECUTION OF VARIOUS CONTRACTS FOR THE PURCHASE OF
FURNITURE, FIXTURES, EQUIPMENT, AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR THE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA ANIMAL CARE AND SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Materials; eKiosk , etc.
(3) Field Trucks with animal
transport compartments with
air conditioning
(3) 800 MHZ Radios for
Field Operations
Portable Generator
Cat cages and Emergency
Kennels and Fencing
Medications and Controlled
substances-per No Kill
Solutions Recommendations
,__~~"-d~<;:~^;O;';;~~~"__:_,~,_~,, _~;.;~''^.__.
~@ ~~
$273,000 To be sourced by Purchasing
(Goal to use existing bids to
piggyback the purchase of the
truck and looking at Single Source
for compartment as needed)
Motorola (Existing City Contract)
$23,500
$250,000
$40,000
To Be sourced by Purchasing
To be sourced by Purchasing-
(Initial recommended vendor: that
meets needed requirements:
Shor -Line)
To Be sourced by Purchasing
$60,000
Temporary Animal $20,000-$40,000 To be sourced by Purchasing
Kennels/CoversfT ents
~tiliX!)~~.(?~~
~~--~-~--- ~ ~@ ~~
Workstations for staff to $10,375 (acc. GIM Interiors (Existing Contract)
include computer desks, 5606)
Lobby seating, field office, $64,083 (acc.
staff offices, Director and 5200)
Manager offices, reception
area, office support staff,
seating area, etc.
~fflml~~~
.~~~__n___ud'. ~@ ~~
Contract Veterinarian for
Animal Care Services
(partial year)
Contracts with local $15,000-$30,000 To be sourced by Purchasing
Veterinarian Hospital based
facilities for spay & neuter
(partial year)
$50,000
To be sourced by Purchasing, No
Kill Solutions, and staff.
L/f~g
PAGE 4
APPROVAL OF THE EXECUTION OF VARIOUS CONTRACTS FOR THE PURCHASE OF
FURNITURE, FIXTURES, EQUIPMENT, AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR THE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA ANIMAL CARE AND SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Communication and design $40,000 Geographics Communication Firm
services contract (one-time) on existing RateNendor List
Special Events (one-time) $20,000 To be sourced by Purchasing
Public Spay & Neuter $15,000-$20,000 To be sourced by Purchasing
Program Contracts to be
determined (partial year)
Many of the above items and associated expenditures are based on various existing City or
County contracts and bids, on past related purchases completed by the Purchasing staff and
professionals involved with this project development, as well as on initial quote research, in
preparation for the new Department's budget. Purchasing Staff will oversee all FF&E purchases
and work closely with the City Manager's Office, No Kill Consultant, Mr. Winograd, and the
Interdepartmental Shelter Transition Project Team to make efficient, sound purchases according
to applicable Purchasing guidelines.
CONCLUSION
It is recommended that the City Council approve the execution of various contracts for the
purchase of furniture, fixtures, equipment, and professional services to be funded as detailed in
the Budget Summary and Appropriations by Account Number schedule (includes a 20%
contingency for capital purchases and a 5% contingency for professional services). As noted
above, the Budget Summary was approved by the City Council on December 13, 2005.
Respectfully submitted,
~~~
Purchasing Manager
~~~
Tamara L. Layne
Finance Officer
tfrt;.i~
Management Analyst III
Pamela S. Easter
Q;~~
Attachment(s)
- Budget Summary (as approved on December 13, 2005)
with Appropriations by Account Number
- Refer to the previously approved Nathan Winograd--
Phase II Report and related attachments including the
Phase I Report-December 13, 2005
LI~-,1
ANIMAL CARE.& SERVICES DEPARTMENT
BUDGET SUMMARY
AS APPROVED ON DECEMBER :1.3, 2005
APPROPRIATIONS BY ACCOUNT NUMBER
o "Baseline": necessary for the animal care and services program to meet statutory
requirements.
o "No Kill Enhancement": necessary for the animal care and services program to implement
No Kill programs.
BUDGET
TOTAL
Annual Department Personnel & Benefits
Partial Year Department Personnel & Benefits
$1,312,553
$ 466,060
Baseline: $1,043,244 (annual)
$ 368,190 (partial year)
No Kill Enhancement: $269,309 (annual)
$ 97,870 (partial year)
Appropriations: 1001104-5000 $293,640; 1001104-5005 $2,600; 1001104-5030 $143,880;
1001312-5000 $13,250; 1001312-5005 $1,880; 1001312-5010 $3,960; 1001312-5030
$6,850.
Annual Operatine: Costs $ 603.631
Partial Year Operating Costs $ 224,980
Includes on-going operations and maintenance, office supplies, and
equipment supplies, microchips (AVID program), as well as funding for
Facilities Maintenance personnel to maintain the facility and grounds.
Baseline: $ 454,231 (annual)
$ 168,740 (partial year)
No Kill Enhancement: $149,400 (annual)
$ 56,240 (partial year)
Appropriations: 100 II 04-51 02 $6,050; 1001104-5105 $2,600; 1001104-5150 $3,970;
1001104-5160 $1,050; 1001104-5161 $70; 1001104-5200 $55,090; 1001104-5300
$123,620; 1001104-5304 $23,940; 1001205-5151 $3,340; 1001317-5255 $5,250.
One-Time / Start-up Costs $1,381.230
Includes the start-up acquisition of: furniture; fixtures; cat cages; indoor and
outdoor signage; fencing; storage needs; animal care and services related
equipment and supplies; field services equipment and supplies; field vehicles
and radios; microchips (AVID program); computers and computer software;
office supplies and equipment; community information and website
development; contract services, training for new staff, etc.
Baseline: $1,356,230
No Kill Enhancement: $ 25,000
Lj~ .,/0
Appropriations: 1001104-5150 $3,790; 1001104-5152 $44,860; 1001104-5200 $81,340;
1001104-5300 $122,160; 1001104-5603 $491,050; 1001104-5604 $327,600; 1001104-
5605 $169,780; 1001104-5606 $140,650.
First Year Capital Costs
See attached list of recommended
improvements.
$1.072.900
building repairs, modifications, and
Appropriations: 1025001-5200 $15,600; 1025001-5204 $7,800; 1025001-5300 $600,000;
1025001-5304 $26,000; 1025001-5602 $379,180; 1025001-5603 $4,320; 1025001-5650/
1535025-0 $6,000. (Note: $34,000 of recommended improvements was budgeted as part of
the FY 2005/06 Adopted Budget).
Second Year Capital Costs
Replacement of HV AC
system.
$ 924.000
system and installation of energy management
Appropriations: 1025001-5602 $24,000; 1025001-5603 $900,000.
Attachment - Proposed Animal Shelter Building Modifications and Repairs
i:lfinance\budget2006'tAnimal Shelter Budget Summary OJ-25-06.doc
Ljg /1 (
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Proposed Animal Shelter Building Repairs,
Modifications and Improvements
Attachment A
1) Facility wide
. Multiphase medical type of cleaning of facility
. Recable building for City computer and telephone systems. Install facility
security system.
· Reevaluate options to upgrade generator to maintain vital systems in facility,
including use of portable generator
. Install City Radio System at Shelter
o Relocate antenna and install Radio System for Field Service Operations
o Purchase 800 MHz Radio for Field Service Operations
o Reprogram City radio system to incorporate animal services channel
. Redo exterior signage .
· Replace roof, due to existing deterioration of roof and serious leak problems
· Evaluate ways to improve functionality of existing HVAC System. After this
evaluation occurs, then decision on replacement of system (in second year of
capital program) can be better determined. Related energy management
systems would then be installed
o Note: Prospective "Second Year' Rep/acement of HVAC system and
installation of energy management system.
. Evaluate placement of eye wash locations
. Repaint interior of facility, replace flooring materials, and restain wood
. Upgrade lighting systems throughout facility
2) Lobby/Public Counter Area
· Reorganize public counter work area, to provide ADA accessibility,
accommodate entrance to adjacent dispatch room, add storage, and add
volunteer work area. Install doorway between public counter work area and the
Dispatch Room to allow access by personnel working at Front Counter who will
also dispatch work.
3) Acquaintance Rooms off of Lobby and Cat Kennel Areas
· Transition acquaintance rooms on south side of facility to cat condo areas,
including providing an indoor/outdoor cat room using the existing indoor/outdoor
acquaintance room. Evaluate feasibility and cost of altering access points to the
acquaintance rooms and cat kennel areas to create a Cat Suite area and
accommodate more cats in better environment, including possible expansion of
the cat kennel area into the existing exterior storage room on the south side of
the facility.
. Install foot-operated sink
4) Dog Kennel Area
· Evaluate options to refresh epoxy coating in kennel areas
. Install foot operated sink
· Install acoustical panels to assist with noise level abatement
;jg /I~
Proposed Animal Shelter Building Repairs,
Modifications, and Improvements
Page two
5) Interior Courtyard Area and Back Operational Area
· Transition interior courtyard to an acquaintance area for potential animal
adopters, including plant material removal, installation of pea gravel, benches,
shade structure, etc.
· Install door between interior courtyard to back operational area, to limit access of
public
. In the north dog exercise area, redo chain link area, remove existing rock, install
pea gravel, and consider adding more area to chain link area. Area to be used for
animal exercise areas. Install animal related equipment, benches, shade
structure, etc.
. Install storage racks in storage area near generator
· Relocate morgue from existing location to the north side of the back operational
area, with an addition of an adjacent medical room. Purpose would be to allow
more efficient use of existing exam area. (Due to the nature of this work, this
would most likely have to be completed after the May 1, 2006 transition.)
6) Exam Room/Washer & Dryer/Grooming Area
· Modify washer/dryer area to become an Animal Intake Room
7) Service Bay Area
· Consider options/feasibility for installation of bay roll-up doors, to allow area to be
used for dog intake, temporary holding area for non traditional animals, use for
behavioral work in inclement weather, etc
. Install washer/dryer and dishwasher from existing location to the service bay
area and replace cabinetry.
· Acquire a storage container for food storage and other materials/goods
· Remove existing wood storage racks on the west side of the service bay area
and install wire racking for various types of storage
· Evaluate feasibility and cost of relocation of truck wash off area to outside of the
service bay area to allow use of service bay area for alternative uses
8) Storage Area off of Service Bay Area
· Convert storage area to a cat infirmary and intake room. Will require extension of
utilities, drainage, and heating/cooling unit.
9) Exterior of Building
. Upgrade exterior lighting systems
. Replace and enhance exterior signage and directional signs to Shelter
. Landscape renovation and modifications
10) Staff Office Area
. Convert existing break room into Shelter Manager office.
%13
THE
C I T Y
o F
I
RANCUO CUCAMONGA
Staff Report
DATE: February 1, 2006
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: Pamela S. Easter, Deputy City Manager
Tamara L. Layne, Finance Officer
Kimberly S. Thomas, Management Analyst III, City Manager's Office
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EMERGENCY
PROCUREMENT OF CONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION
MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR FACILITY REPAIRS,
MODIFICATIONS, AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE RANCHO
CUCAMONGA ANIMAL SHELTER
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving and
authorizing the emergency procurement of architectural and construction services as
well as construction management without competitive biding for facility repairs,
modifications, and improvements to the Rancho Cucamonga Animal Shelter to be
funded as detailed in the Budget Summary and Appropriations by Account Number
schedule (includes a 20% contingency for capital outlay items). The Budget Summary
was approved by the City Council at their December 13, 2005 meeting as part of the
Animal Shelter Transition Phase II Report presented by Nathan Winograd, of No Kill
Solutions.
BACKGROUND I ANALYSIS
Given the need for operating the Rancho Cucamonga Animal Shelter to be operated by
the City on May 1, 2006, and the Field Program by July 1, 2006, and per the approval
and direction received at the December 13, 2005, Council meeting, an emergency need
exists for the City to implement building repairs, modifications, and improvements-
many of which need to be done in a short timeframe in order to enable operating the
new City Department for Animal Care and Services. These services were approved in
the Animal Shelter Transition - Phase II Report. The Phase II Report presented and
approved by the Council not only recommended service levels and budgets, but also
outlined recommended facility modifications that would be necessary. This direction
L(/i ~/1
PAGE 2
APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EMERGENCY
PROCUREMENT OF CONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
SERVICES FOR FACILITY REPAIRS, MODIFICATIONS, AND IMPROVEMENTS TO
THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA ANIMAL SHELTER
followed the previous recommendations contained in the Phase I Report in August of
2005, and the Council action in May of 2005, to transition from a County of San
Bernardino contract to a City operated Animal Care and Services Program. To develop
a sound plan, and to expedite these recommendations as efficiently as possible, the
City has undertaken a series of analyses for the best plan of action.
This process has included gathering input from Staff and professionals in the field
including: architects, engineers, and many in the animal care and services field,
reviewing and discussing this project at Council meetings, and incorporating the prior
Animal Shelter Ad Hoc Subcommittee direction and input. The process also included
the touring of animal shelters in Southern California and receiving citizen input through
community meetings and surveys. Overall, this process has enabled staff to compile a
plan to move beyond a traditional animal care facility.
As part of this expedited plan, Staff is recommending that the City approve the
professional services contract with C.W. Driver for construction management services in
an amount not to exceed $ 125,000 and WLC Architects for architectural services in an
amount not to exceed $138,000. C. W. Driver was chosen as a result of their previous
work with the City on the construction of Central Park and the Cultural Center and their
familiarity with City staff and procedures. WLC Architects was chosen after interviewing
several architectural firms that have experience in constructing and modifying Animal
Shelters. In addition, at the request of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, C.W. Driver
interviewed five general contractors who expressed interest in the Animal Shelter
remodel project.
These interviews included a number of criteria, including each prospective contractor's
experience with similar type of work, public works experience, ability to self-perform as
many of the tasks as possible (as opposed to using subcontractors), experience/ability
and willingness to perform the required off-hours work, prevailing wage experience,
license status, litigation status, current backlog, available bonding capacity, ability to
meet schedule, and finally, their proposed estimated rates and fee structure. The
evaluation of all of these criteria led staff to a clear choice of the most qualified
candidate, T.B. Hayward. Authorization is requested to award a time and material (force
account) contract.
CONCLUSION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving and
authorizing the emergency procurement of construction and construction management
without competitive bidding for facility repairs, modifications, and improvements to the
Rancho Cucamonga Animal Shelter to be funded as detailed in the Budget Summary
and Appropriations by Account Number schedule (includes a 20% contingency for
capital outlay items). The Budget Summary was approved by the City Council on
L/g i~
PAGE 3
APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EMERGENCY
PROCUREMENT OF CONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
SERVICES FOR FACILITY REPAIRS, MODIFICATIONS, AND IMPROVEMENTS TO
THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA ANIMAL SHELTER
December 13, 2005, as part of their approval of the Animal Shelter Transition Phase II
Report presented by Mr. Winograd.
Respectfully submitted,
~~ /::::::::~Jf:!:'f:~~
Deputy City Manager Finance Officer Management Analyst
Attachments
Proposed Emergency Resolution
Proposed Animal Shelter Building Repairs, Modifications, and
Improvements - Attachment A (as approved on December 13,
2005)
T.B. Hayward General Contractor Services Construction Contract
(with Exhibits: Scope of Work Summary by WLC Architects & T.B.
Hayward Proposal with Rates)
WLC Architects Professional Services Agreement (with Exhibits:
WLC Exhibit "A" )
C.W. Driver Professional Services Agreement (with Exhibits: C.W.
Driver Exhibit "A" with rate schedule)
Budget Summary (as approved on December 13, 2005) and
Appropriations by Account Number
Refer to the previously approved Nathan Winograd--Phase II
Report and related attachments including the Phase I Report-
December 13, 2005
~.j~
Resolution No.
Page_of_
RESOLUTION NO. O~ .0;;5
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE EMERGENCY PROCUREMENT OF
CONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
SERVICES WITHOUT COMPETITIVE BIDDING FOR
FACILITY REPAIRS, MODIFICATIONS, AND
IMPROVEMENTS TO THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ANIMAL SHELTER LOCATED AT 11780 ARROW ROUTE
A. Recitals.
WHEREAS,
(i) The California Public Contract Code S 20168, permits that in the case of
an emergency, the legislative body may pass a resolution by a four-fifths
vote of its members declaring that the public interest and necessity
demand the immediate expenditure of public money to safeguard life,
health, or property. Upon adoption of the Resolution, it may expend any
sum required in the emergency without complying with public bid
processes.
(ii) Per the approval and direction received at the Dec 13, 2005, Council
meeting, an emergency need exists for the City to implement the
operation of a new City Department for Animal Care and Services,
wherein the City Council approved the recommendations contained in the
Animal Shelter Transition - Phase II Report. The Phase II Report provided
recommendations and guidance to the City Council for determining
service levels, a recommended personnel and operational budget, as well
as one-time costs associated with creating a new Animal Care and
Services Department. Of the most urgent nature, was an approved plan
for physical shelter building repairs, modifications, and improvements
needed due to the age of the building and those necessary for the facility
to meet more focused lifesaving goals. This direction followed the
previous recommendations contained in the Phase I Report in August of
2005, and the Council action in May of 2005, to terminate the existing
contract for services, and transition from a County of San Bernardino
contract to a City operated Animal Care and Services Program.
(iii) Due to these urgent circumstances for transitioning 'shelter services by
May 1, 2006, and field services by July 1, 2006, and formation of the new
City Department where time will not permit delays resulting from a
competitive solicitation for bids, and action is necessary to respond to
meet the public health related needs set for the new City operated
Program; the City Manager or his Deputy requires authorization to
L/g -17
Resolution No.
Page_of_
proceed with the needed building repairs, modifications, and
improvements in accord with the City Council goals without competitive
bidding.
(iv) It is the intent of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga in
adopting this Resolution to ratify and approve the emergency expenditure
of funds, the procurement of professional services, and building repairs,
modifications, and improvements, without competitive bidding, related to
the shelter facility as described in Recital (iii), Part A noted above, and in
Attachment A.
(v) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby
finds and resolves as follows:
1. All of the facts set forth in the Recitals (iii), Part A, and in Attachment A are
true and correct.
2. The City Council hereby finds that as a direct result of the Animal Shelter
Transition referred to herein, emergency circumstances necessitate immediate repairs,
modifications, and improvements to the City's Animal Shelter, including construction
activities, without competitive bidding.
3. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga hereby approves and authorizes the emergency expenditure of funds for
procurement of professional services, including construction and building repairs,
modifications, and improvements as described in Attachment A.
4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1Slday of February 2006.
William J. Alexander, Mayor
I, Debbie Adams, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the
City Council held on the 1st day of February 2006. By the following vote:
2
(j~ ~/ g
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
Attachment
Resolution No.
Page_of_
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ATTEST:
Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk
Proposed Animal Shelter Building Repairs, Modifications, and
Improvements - Attachment A
3
19 ~/7
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Proposed Animal Shelter Building Repairs,
Modifications and Improvements
Attachment A
1) Facility wide
. Multiphase medical type of cleaning of facility
. Recable building for City computer and telephone systems. Install facility
security system.
. Reevaluate options to upgrade generator to maintain vital systems in facility,
including use of portable generator
. Install City Radio System at Shelter
o Relocate antenna and install Radio System for Field Service Operations
o Purchase 800 MHz Radio for Field Service Operations
o Reprogram City radio system to incorporate animal services channel
. Redo exterior signage
· Replace roof, due to existing deterioration of roof and serious leak problems
. Evaluate ways to improve functionality of existing HVAC System. After this
evaluation occurs, then decision on replacement of system (in second year of
capital program) can be better determined. Related energy management
systems would then be installed
o Note: Prospective "Second Year" Replacement of HVAC system and
installation of energy management system.
· Evaluate placement of eye wash locations
. Repaint interior of facility, replace flooring materials, and restain wood
. Upgrade lighting systems throughout facility
2) Lobby/Public Counter Area
. Reorganize public counter work area, to provide ADA accessibility,
accommodate entrance to adjacent dispatch room, add storage, and add
volunteer work area. Install doorway between public counter work area and the
Dispatch Room to allow access by personnel working at Front Counter who will
also dispatch work.
3) Acquaintance Rooms off of Lobby and Cat Kennel Areas
. Transition acquaintance rooms on south side of facility to cat condo areas,
including providing an indoor/outdoor cat room using the existing indoor/outdoor
acquaintance room. Evaluate feasibility and cost of altering access points to the
acquaintance rooms and cat kennel areas to create a Cat Suite area and
accommodate more cats in better environment, including possible expansion of
the cat kennel area into the existing exterior storage room on the south side of
the facility.
. Install foot-operated sink
4) Dog Kennel Area
· Evaluate options to refresh epoxy coating in kennel areas
. Install foot operated sink
· Install acoustical panels to assist with noise level abatement
I!2?~Jc
Proposed Animal Shelter Building Repairs,
Modifications, and Improvements
Page two
5) Interior Courtyard Area and Back Operational Area
· Transition interior courtyard to an acquaintance area for potential animal
adopters, including plant material removal, installation of pea gravel, benches,
shade structure, etc.
.. Install door between interior courtyard to back operational area, to limit access of
public
· In the north dog exercise area, redo chain link area, remove existing rock, install
pea gravel, and consider adding more area to chain link area. Area to be used for
animal exercise areas. Install animal related equipment, benches, shade
structure, etc.
. Install storage racks in storage area near generator
· Relocate morgue from existing location to the north side of the back operational
area, with an addition of an adjacent medical room. Purpose would be to allow
more efficient use of existing exam area. (Due to the nature of this work, this
would most likely have to be completed after the May 1, 2006 transition.)
6) Exam Room/Washer & Dryer/Grooming Area
· Modify washer/dryer area to become an Animal Intake Room
7) Service Bay Area
· Consider options/feasibility for installation of bay roll-up doors, to allow area to be
used for dog intake, temporary holding area for non traditional animals, use for
behavioral work in inclement weather, etc
· Install washer/dryer and dishwasher from existing location to the service bay
area and replace cabinetry.
· Acquire a storage container for food storage and other materials/goods
· Remove existing wood storage racks on the west side of the service bay area
and install wire racking for various types of storage
· Evaluate feasibility and cost of relocation of truck wash off area to outside of the
service bay area to allow use of service bay area for alternative uses
8) Storage Area off of Service Bay Area
· Convert storage area to a cat infirmary and intake room. Will require extension of
utilities, drainage, and heating/cooling unit.
9) Exterior of Building
. Upgrade exterior lighting systems
· Replace and enhance exterior signage and directional signs to Shelter
· Landscape renovation .and modifications
10) Staff Office Area
. Convert existing break room into Shelter Manager office.
'1<6- .)/
T.B. Hayward
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
FOR THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA ANIMAL SHELTER
LOCATED AT 11780 ARROW ROUTE,
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENT: That the following agreement is made and
entered into, in duplicate, as of the date executed by Toby B. Hayward, Inc (Contractor),
hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor" and the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, hereinafter referred to as "City."
WHEREAS, City has authorized the "Contractor" to enter into a written contract with
Contractor for furnishing labor, equipment, and material for the construction for building
improvements at the Rancho Cucamonga Shelter located at 1 1780 Arrow Route, Rancho
Cucamonga, California and the location of the new Animal Care and Services
Department).
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual convenants herein contained, it is
agreed:
1. GENERAL SCOPE OF WORK: Contractor shall furnish all necessary labor,
tools, materials, appliances, and equipment for and do the work to be performed in
accordance with the written scope of work ("Summary" by WLC Architects, of Rancho
Cucamonga, California dated 1/25/06), General/Supplementary Conditions,
Attachments/Exhibits, Contractor proposal with rates (dated 1/19/06) on a Time and
Materials basis. Plans and specifications will be issued as the Architect completes them.
Contractor shall bond the Project in the budgeted amount of $500,000 (Five Hundred
Thousand Dollars), and in accordance with the instructions of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
2. IN CORPORA TED DOCUMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED
COMPLEMENTARY: The aforesaid written scope of work ("Summary" by WLC
Architects dated 1/25/06), General/Supplementary Conditions, Attachments/Exhibits,
Plans, Specifications, are incorporated herein by reference thereto and made a part hereof
with the force and effect as if all of said documents were set forth in full herein. Said
documents, the written scope of work ("Summary" by WLC Architects) attached hereto,
together with this written agreement, shall constitute the entire contract between the
parties. This contract is intended to require a complete and finished piece of work and
anything necessary to complete the work properly and in accordance with the law ad
lawful governmental regulations shall be performed by the Contractor whether set out
specifically in the contract or not. Should it be ascertained that any inconsistency exists
between the aforesaid documents and this written agreement, the provisions of this
written agreement shall control.
3. TERMS OF CONTRACT: The undersigned Toby B. Hayward, Inc. (TBH)
agrees to execute the contract on a Time and Materials basis (see attached TBH proposal
of 1/19/06 with rates) and within fifteen (15) days from the date of notice of award of the
qg / d;}-
contract or upon notice by City after the fifteen (15) days, and to complete his portion of
the work by May I, 2006, seventy (70) calendar days from the date specified in the
Notice to Proceed. The Contractor agrees further to the assessment of liquidated
damages in the amount of $800.00 (eight hundred dollars) for each calendar day the work
remains incomplete beyond the expiration of the completion date. The City may deduct
the amount thereof from any monies due or that may become due the Contractor under
this contract. Progress payments made after the scheduled date of completion shall not
constitute a waiver of liquidated damages. In the event that the City's project delivery
method which being processed on an "EmergencylUrgency Resolution" basis is
determined to be changed or terminated anytime during the course of the project, the
Contractor shall be entitled to receive payment for Work executed and performed to date
of termination or cessation of work.
4. INSURANCE: The Contractor shall not commence work under this contract until
he has obtained all insurance required hereunder in a company or companies acceptable
to City nor shall the Contractor allow any subcontractor to commence work on his
subcontract until all insurance required of the subcontractor has been obtained. The
Contractor shall take out and maintain at all times during the life of this contract the
following policies of insurance:
a) Workers' Compensation Insurance: Before beginning work, the
Contractor shall furnish to the City a certificate of insurance as proof that
he has take out full workers' compensation insurance for all persons whom
he may employ directly or through subcontractors in carrying out the work
specified herein, in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
Such insurance shall be maintained in full force and effect during the
period covered by this contract.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor
Code, every contractor shall secure the payment of Compensation to his
employees. Contractor, prior to commencing work, shall sign and file with
the City a certification as follows:
"I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which
require every employer to be insured against liability for worker's
compensation or to undertake self insurance in accordance with the
provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before
commencing the performance of the work of this contract."
b) For all operation of the Contractor or any subcontractor in performing the
work provided for herein, insurance with the following minimum limits
and coverage:
(I) Public Liability - Bodily Injury (not auto) $2,000,000 each person;
$2,000,000 each accident.
(2) Public Liability - Property Damage (not auto) $250,000 each accident;
$500,000 aggregate.
(3) Contractor's Protective - Bodily Injury $500,000 each person;
$1,000,000 each accident.
2
f6~)3
(4) Contractor's Protective - Property Damage $250,000 each accident;
$500,000 aggregate.
(5) Automobile - Bodily Injury $1,000,000 each person; $1,000,000 each
person; $1,000,000 each accident
(6) Automobile - Property Damage $250,000 each accident.
c) Each such policy of insurance provided for in paragraph "b." shall:
(I) Be issued by an insurance company approved in writing by City,
which is qualified to do business in the State of California;
(2) Name as additional insured the City, its elected officials, officers,
agents and employees, and any other parties specified in the
documents to be so included;
(3) SpecifY it acts as primary insurance and that no insurance held or
owned by the designated additional insured shall be called upon
to cover a loss under said policy;
(4) Contain a clause substantially in the following words:
"It is hereby understood and agreed that this policy may not be
canceled not the amount of the coverage thereof reduced until
thirty (30) days after receipt by City of a written notice of such
cancellation or reduction of coverage as evidenced by receipt
of a registered letter."
(5) Otherwise be in form satisfactory to City.
d) The policy of insurance provided for in subparagraph "a." shall contain an
endorsement which:
(1) Waives all right of subrogation against all person and entities
specified in subparagraph 4.d. (2) hereof to be listed as additional
insured in the policy of insurance provided for in paragraph "b."
by reason of any claim arising out of or connected with the
operations of Contractor or any subcontractor in performing the
work provided for herein;
(2) Provides it shall not be canceled or altered without thirty (30)
days' written notice thereof given to City by registered mail.
e) The Contractor shall at the time of the execution of the contract present
the original policies of insurance required in paragraphs "a." and "b."
hereof, or present a certificate of the insurance company, showing the
issuance of such insurance, and the additional insured and other provisions
required herein.
5. PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions
of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter I, Articles I and 2, the Contractor
is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of
a similar character in the locality in holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the
Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to
and has determined such general prevailing rates per diem wages. Copies of such
prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, and are
3
~9 / d'f
available to any interested party on request. City also shall cause a copy of such
determinations to be posted at the job site.
Pursuant to provisions of Labor Code Section 1775, the Contractor shall forfeit, as
penalty to City, not more than fifty dollars ($50.00) for each laborer, workman, or
mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof if such laborer, workman, or
mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate wages hereinbefore stipulated for
any work done under the attached contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in
violation of the provisions of said Labor Code.
6. APPRENTICESHIP EMPLOYMENT: In accordance with the provisions of Section
1777.5 of the Labor Code as amended by Chapter 971, Statutes of 1939, and in
accordance with the regulations of the California Apprenticeship Council, properly
indentured apprentices may be employed in the prosecution of the work.
Attention is directed to the provisions in Section 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code
concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under
him.
Section 1777.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or subcontractor employing
tradesmen in any apprenticable occupation to apply to the join apprenticeship committee
nearest the site of the public works project and which administers the apprenticeship
program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of
apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance of the contract. The ration
of apprentices to journeymen in such cases shall not be less than one to five except:
a. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship
committee has exceeded an average of IS percent in the 90 days prior to the
request for certificate, or
b. When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a ratio of one to
five, or
c. When the trade can show that it is replacing at least 1/30 of its membership
though apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide or locally, or
d. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered apprentices on
all of his contracts on an annual average of not less than one apprentice to eight
journeymen.
The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the
administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or
journeymen in any apprenticable trade on such contracts and if other contractors
on the public works site are making such contributions.
The Contractor and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements
of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices.
7. LEGAL HOURS OF WORK: Eight (8) hours oflabor shall constitute a legal day's for
all work all workmen employed in the execution of this contract, and the Contractor and
any subcontractor under him shall comply with and be governed by the laws of the State
4
V8 'd 5"
of California having to do with working hours set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter I,
Article 3, of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended
The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to City, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each
laborer, workman, or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any
subcontractor under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar
day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor
more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code.
8. TRAVEL AND SUBSISTENCE PAY: Contractor agrees to pay travel and
subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as
such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining
agreements filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 1773.8.
9. CONTRACTOR'S LIABILITY: The City of Rancho Cucamonga and its elected
officials, officers, agents and employees shall not be answerable or accountable in any
manner for any loss or damage that may happen to the work <?r any part thereof, or for
any of the materials or other things used or employed in performing the work; or for
injury or damage to any person or persons, either workmen,' employees of the Contractor
or his subcontractors or the public, or for damage to adjoining or other property from any
cause whatsoever arising out of or in connection with the performance of the work. The
Contractor shall be responsible for any damage or injury to any person or property
resulting from defects or obstructions or from any cause whatsoever, except the sole
negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its employees servants, or independent
contractors who are directly responsible to City during the progress of the work or at any
time before its completion and final acceptance.
The Contractor will indemnifY City against and will hold and save City harmless from
any and all actions, claims, damages to persons or property, penalties, obligations, or
liabilities that may be asserted or claimed by any person, firm, entity, corporation,
political subdivision, or other organization arising out of or in connection with the work,
operation, or activities of the Contractor, his agents, employees, subcontractors, or
invitees provided for herein, whether or not there is concurrent passive or active
negligence on the part of City, but excluding such actions, claims, damages to persons or
property, penalties, obligations, or liabilities arising from the sole negligence or willful
misconduct of City, its employees, servants, or independent contractors who are directly
responsible to City, and in connection therewith:
a) The Contractor will defend any action or actions filed in connection with any
of said claims, damages, penalties, obligations, or liabilities and will pay all
costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees incurred in connection therewith.
b) The Contractor will promptly pay any judgment or award rendered against the
Contractor or City covering such claims, damages, penalties, obligations, and
liabilities arising out of or in connection with such work, operations, or
activities of the judgment or award, and the Contractor agrees to save and hold
the City harmless there from.
c) In the event City is made a party to any action or proceeding filed or
prosecuted against the Contractor for damages or other claims arising out of or
5
f(i/;)fp
in connection with the project, operation, or activIties of the Contractor
hereunder, the Contractor agrees to pay to City any and all costs and expenses
incurred by City in such action or proceeding together with reasonable
attorneys' fees.
10. NON-DISCRIMINATION: No discrimination shall be made in the employment
of persons upon public works because of age, disability, race, color, religion, sex, sexual
orientation or national origin of such persons, and every contractor for public works
violating this section is subject to all the penalties imposed for a violation of Division 2,
Part 7, Chapter] of the Labor Code in accordance with the provisions of Section ] 735 of
said Code.
] ]. CONTRACT PRICE AND PAYMENT: City shall pay to the Contractor for
furnishing the materia] and doing the prescribed work the amount set forth in the
Contractor's Proposal/Scope of Work dated January 19,2006.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these present to be duly
executed with all the formalities required by law on the respective dates set forth opposite
their signatures.
CONTRACTOR
Tony B. Hayward, Inc.
General Contractors
] 95] S. Myrtle A venue
Monrovia, CA 9]0]6
(626) 303-5039 fax (626) 358-5]27
State of California Contractor's License #: 833458
By: Date:
Date:
By:
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, A Municipal Corporation
By: Date:
William J. Alexander, Mayor
Attest:
Approved as to Form:
Debra J. Adams, City Clerk
City Attorney
6
Lft /J7
Scope of Work Summary
by WLC Architects
W L C
Architects
. ____ umy Wain. AJA . George M_ \'Viens. AlA . Roberl J H.msley, AlA. James P. DiCamillo, AlA. Glenn Veda, AlA
~ I Mo~ M&dmp. AlA . ~lIey Needham, AlA. Kevin A. MocOuorrie. AlA
Revised January 25, 2006
January 17,2006
SUMMARY OF IMPROVEMENTS
Rancho Cucamonga Animal Shelter Renovation
Project 0612100.0 I
This summary of proposed improvements at the existing animal shelter is divided into three
categories, each representing a phase of construction to be completed with separate timelines.
This list only includes improvements that are to be part of the construction documents prepared
by WLC Architects, Inc. Additional improvements are being contracted for separately by the
City. The following is a list of improvements by category.
CATEGORY 1
Lobbv /Reception/Di spatch
I. Remodel existing reception counter including removal of oak top and casework
underneath. Existing stem wall to remain with new solid surface countertop added.
Remove and replace eastern portion of counter for accessibility. Reface existing stem
wall with cherry finish.
2. Remove casework at rear walls of reception area adjacent to Dispatch. Install new door
into dispatch area.
3. Replace existing overhead light fixtures.
4. Remove existing glazing and fill in wall openings in Dispatch Room. Provide new door
between Reception and Dispatch.
5. Remove existing carpeting and prepare/stain/seal concrete floor.
6. Paint walls and door frames.
7. Replace or resurface existing doors with cherry finish. Revise existing hardware.
Vlt9inio Dore Tower. 10470 Foothill Boulevard. Rancho Cucomongo, Colifornia 91730 . 3754. ph: 909 987 0909 1m: 909 980 9980
I J lQ Iron POinl Rood. Suite 200 . Folsom, Coliloln;o 95630 . 8301 . ph: 916 355 9922 Fox: 916 355 9950
1250 45th Slree' - SUIre 150 . Emeryville. California 94608 . 2901- ph: 510 450 1999 1m: 510 450 2525
Vi /J-~
Summary of Improvements
Rancho Cucamonga Animal Shelter Renovations
Project 0612100.0 I
January 25, 2006
Page 2
Prior Holding Room. Get Acquainted Indoor and Outdoor Rooms (New Cattery)
I. Provide roof over outdoor Get Acquainted area and enclose with mesh/fencing material
above existing masonry wall.
2. Cut opening in existing wall between previous Holding and Get Acquainted Room.
3. Provide floor drains in previous get acquainted indoor and outdoor areas.
4. In previous cat kennel area and night drop-offarea:cut opening in existing wall to
combine rooms. Provide glazing at existing exterior screened area in the night drop-off
kennel area to enclosed space. Provide new ceiling, lighting, and HV AC as necessary.
5. Paint walls, ceilings, and door frames.
Prior Staff Office
I. Remove westerly door in corridor and fill in opening. Easterly door on south wall to
remain.
2. Paint walls and door frames.
Staff Corridor to Dog Kennel Area
I. Provide infill wall and door to separate the staff corridor area from public area and
facilitate access to outdoor dog runs and get acquainted area.
2. Paint walls, ceiling, and door frames.
Previous Break Room
I. This room to become the Shelter Manager's Office.
2. Remove existing door on east wall and fill in.
3. Cut in new door at south wall to staff corridor.
4. Remove existing casework and sink. Patch walls as necessary.
yf/.) 9
Summary of Improvements
Rancho Cucamonga Animal Shelter Renovations
Project 0612100.0 I
January 25, 2006
Page 3
5. Remove existing tile floor and replace with stained concrete or other cleanable surface.
6. Paint walls and door frame.
Clinic/EuthanasialLaundry Area
1. In the Clinic Room, add an exam table and surgery light above.
2. In Euthanasia Room, add exam table and surgery light above.
3. Replace counter and casework in Euthanasia Room.
4. In Laundry Room, remove washer and dryer, relocate to the Unloading Bay, remove
casework, and replace FRP wall finish.
5. Paint walls, ceilings, doors and frames.
6. Install two emergency eyewash stations including plumbing.
Food PreD Room
I. Convert portion of room to prov ide for Staff Break Area.
2. Remove casework at north wall, portion of west wall and remove range. Patch walls as
necessary .
3. Paint walls, ceiling, door and frame.
Unloading Bav
I. Replace existing casework on south wall. New arrangement to include commercial
washer and dryer, commercial dishwasher, and stainless steel counter/base.
2. Provide Dog Kennel areas for temporary holding - either chain link fencing or rolling
cages at west side of bay storage.
3. Remove wood racks from west and east walls.
W'3D
Summary of Improvements
Rancho Cucamonga Animal Shelter Renovations
Project 0612100.0 I
January 25, 2006
Page 4
Cat Infirmary (Previous Food Storage Room)
I. Add floor drain and epoxy flooring.
2. Install exam table with surgery light and foot activated sink.
3. Install self-contained HV AC system for this room.
4. Provide accommodations for sanitation pans at door entry.
5. Paint walls, ceiling, doors, and frames.
6. Upgrade light fixtures and walllceiling finishes as necessary.
7. Provide emergency eyewash station including plumbing.
Dog Kennel Areas
I. Thoroughly clean all walls, floors, and ceilings.
2. Patch and repair epoxy wall finishes as necessary.
3. Repaint epoxy wall coating with new color scheme.
4. Replace acoustic ceiling panels. Consider acoustic wall panels.
5. Repaint ceilings.
Improvements Throughout Entire Building
I. Repaint all walls, ceilings, doors, and frames in all rooms.
2. Provide new, room door/signage including signage at exterior doors.
Ljg/~/
Summary of Improvements
Rancho Cucamonga Animal Shelter Renovations
Project 06121 00.0 I
January 25, 2006
Page 5
Outdoor Enclosed Yard Area
I. Provide a dog get acquainted area. New improvements to include decomposed granite
finish at planting areas and remove existing plants. Add fencing and gate at entrance to
area.
2. At existing chain link fenced dog run, remove existing peagravel and replace with
decomposed granite.
Building Exterior
I. Repair sheet metal roofing above new cattery rooms. Replace built-up roofing at all
locations.
CATEGORY 2
Outdoor Serv ice Bav
I. Enclose space by providing roll down doors.
2. Provide additional canopy extension to the north for new wash down area. Install new
sewer drain for area. .
Euthanasia/Freezer Area Relocation
1. Remodel existing covered trash enclosure area to be Euthanasia Room. Enclose walls and
construct new roof. Provide new finishes, HV AC, lighting, and plumbing.
2. Remove existing emergency generator and install new freezer with opening to new
Euthanasia Room.
3. Provide infrastructure for portable trailer mounted generator.
Indoor Dog Kennels
I. Upgrade/replace epoxy floors and walls in dog kennel areas.
Ljg ~3~
Summary of Improvements
Rancho Cucamonga Animal Shelter Renovations
Project 0612100.01
January 25, 2006
Page 6
CATEGORY 3
I. Revise/replace exterior lighting system, increase footcandles.
2. Construct east side dog exercise area and possible outdoor kennels.
3. Modify front entry plaza including bench replacement, new lighting, shade structures,
and human/dog drinking fountains.
4. Repaint building exterior at entry plaza.
END OF SUMMARY
Prepared by,
1;'
WIMy
I RGE M. WIENS
: A hitect, AlA
Principal
GMW:wq
P00612100x2-sum
cc: Dale Catron, Facilities Superyisor, City of Rancho Cucamonga
David Albright, Project Manager, C.W. Driver Contractors
Pamela Easter, Deputy City Manager, City of Rancho Cucamonga
Kimberly Thomas, Management Analyst III, City of Rancho Cucamonga
l/8,33
-7;B. Hayward Proposal
with Rates
tbh, inc.
Toby B. Hayward, Inc.
General Contractors
1951 S. Myrtle Avenue
Monrovia, CA 91016
(626) 303-5039 fax (626) 358-5127
January 19, 2006
David A. Albright
CW Driver
468 N. Rosemead Blvd.
Pasadena, CA 91107
Project: Rancho Cucamonga Animal Shelter
Dear David:
(
Reference is made to the above captioned project with regard to your request for
a proposal.
We hereby propose to complete the work on the project under the following
.. conditions:
TOBY B. HAYWARD, INC. (Hayward) will agree to work on a "time and material"
basis for all work performed on the project.
Hayward will bill for labor at the following rates:
Project Manager:
Superintendent:
Carpenter Foreman:
Journeyman Carpenter:
Cement Finisher:
Laborer:
Iron Worker:
$62.00
$56.00
$49.00
$47.00
$47.00
$40.00
$49.00
The hours spent on the project will be tracked on daily reports and such reports
will be the basis for the monthly billings as to labor. Labor that may be spent by
workmen fabricating or performing other work directly affecting the work on the
site will also be billed at the above stipulated rates.
Material and equipment will be furnished where necessary by Hayward and
such material and equipment costs, as invoiced by the vendor, will be invoiced
monthly and included in the monthly billing.
It may become necessary for Hayward to provide Hayward owned equipment to
complete the work. If this is the case, the rate that Hayward includes in its
monthly billing for any equipment furnished by Hayward will be at the generally
License No. 833458
Lis ~3<f
tbh, inc.
Toby B. Hayward, Inc.
General Contractors
1951 S. Myrtle Avenue
Monrovia, CA 91016
(626) 303-5039 fax (626) 358-5127
established rental rate for such equipment less 15%. Delivery of the equipment
to and from the site will be a reimbursable cost.
.
Any subcontractor work necessary will be subcontracted by Hayward to
qualified subcontractors. Such monthly amounts of subcontractors that
become due during the month shall be included in the monthly billing.
.,
Reimbursable costs shall include project related overhead such as office trailer,
if required, phones, truck expense, power, barricades, toilets, trash removal,
supervision, clean up, insurance, bonds and other things falling into this
category .
..
To the above costs a fee of 13% will be added to cover Hayward's home office
overhead and profit.
Finally, the requested performance bond in the amount of $500,000.00 is
acquirable.by our company.
We trust that the above proposal meets with your approval as we look forward
to working with you on this project. If you have any questions regarding the
above, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Sincerely,
TOBY B. HAYWARD, INC.
~ ,/.}; /~
Bruce D. Hill
VP Operations
BDH\
License No. 833458
t.;g/3~
WLC Architects
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
FOR RANCHO CUCAMONGA ANIMAL SHELTER RENOV A nON
This Agreement is made and entered into this 2nd day of February, 2006, between the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, a Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and
WLC Architects, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT").
A. Recitals.
(i) CONSULTANT has now submitted its proposal for the performance of such
services, a full, true and correct of which proposal is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and by
this reference made a part hereof.
(ii) CITY desires to retain CONSULTANT to perform professional services necessary
to render advice and assistance to CITY, CITY's Planning Commission, City Council and
staff in the preparation of Project.
(iii) CONSULTANT represents that it is qualified to perform such services and is willing
to perform such professional services as hereinafter defined.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between CITY and CONSULTANT as follows:
B. Agreement.
I. Definitions: The following definitions shall apply to the following terms, except
where the context of this Agreement otherwise requires:
(a) Proiect: The provision of architectural services for the Rancho Cucamonga
Animal Shelter Renovation described in Exhibit" A" hereto including, but not limited to, the
preparation of maps, surveys, reports, and documents, the presentation, both oral and in
writing, of such plans, maps, surveys, reports and documents to CITY as required and
attendance at any and all work sessions, public hearings, other meetings conducted by CITY
with respect to the project and on-site construction services..
(b) Services: Such professional services as are necessary to be performed by
CONSULTANT in order to complete the project.
(c) Completion of Proiect: The date of completion of all phases of the project,
including any and all procedures, maps, surveys, documents, technical reports, meetings, oral
presentations and attendance by CONSULTANT at meetings regarding the presentation of
items.
2. CONSULTANT agrees as follows:
(a) CONSULTANT shall forthwith undertake and complete the project in
accordance with Exhibit "A" hereto and all in accordance with Federal, State and CITY
statutes, regulations, ordinances and guidelines, all to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY.
(b) CONSULTANT shall supply copies of all maps, surveys, reports, plans and
GW;wq/06121 00.0 IIProfessional Service Agreement -City Anny 1
Ljg/3~
documents (hereinafter collectively referred to as "documents") including all supplemental
technical documents, as described in Exhibit "A" to CITY within the time specified in
Exhibit "A". Copies of the documents shall be in such numbers as are required by Exhibit
"A". CITY may thereafter review and forvvard to CONSULTANT comments regarding said
documents and CONSULTANT shall thereafter make such revisions to said documents as
are deemed necessary. CITY shall receive revised documents in such form and in the
quantities determined necessary by CITY. The time limits set forth pursuant to this Section
82. (b) may be extended upon written approval of CITY.
(c) . CONSULTANT shall, at CONSULTANT's sole cost and expense, secure and
hire such other persons as may, in the opinion of CONSULTANT, be necessary to comply
with the terms of this Agreement. In the event any such other persons are retained by
CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT hereby warrants that such persons shall be fully qualified
to perform services required hereunder. CONSULTANT further agrees that no subcontractor
shall be retained by CONSULTANT except upon the prior written approval of CITY.
3. CITY agrees as follows:
(a) To pay CONSULTANT a maximum sum of$138,000.00 for the performance of
the services required hereunder. This sum shall cover the cost of all staff time and all other
direct and indirect costs or fees, including the work of employees, consultants and
subcontractors to CONSULTANT. Payment to CONSULTANT, by CITY, shall be made in
accordance with the schedule set forth below.
(b) Payments to CONSULTANT shall be made by CITY in accordance with the
invoices submitted by CONSULTANT, on a monthly basis, and such invoices shall be paid
within a reasonable time after CITY receives said invoices. All charges shall be in
accordance with CONSULTANT's proposal either with respect to hourly rates or lump sum
amounts for individual tasks. In no event, however, will said invoices exceed 95% of
individual task totals described in Exhibit "A".
(c) CONSULTANT agrees that, in no event, shall CITY be required to pay to
CONSULTANT any sum in excess of 95% of the maximum payable hereunder prior to
receipt by CITY of all final documents, together with all supplemental technical documents,
as described herein acceptable in form and content to CITY. Final payment shall be made
not later than 60 days after presentation of final documents and acceptance thereofby CITY.
(d) Additional services: Payments for additional services requested, in writing, by
CITY, and not included in CONSULTANT'S proposal as set forth in Exhibit "A" hereof,
shall be paid on a reimbursement basis in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in said
Exhibit" A". Charges for additional services shall be invoiced on a monthly basis and shall
be paid by CITY within a reasonable time after CITY receives said invoices.
4. CITY agrees to provide to CONSULTANT:
GW:wq/0612100.0 I/Professional Service Agreement -City Attny 2
W~37
(a) Infonnation and assistance as set forth in Exhibit "A" hereto.
(b) Photographically reproducible copies of maps and other information, if
available, which CONSULTANT considers necessary in order to complete the project.
(c) Such information as is generally available from CITY files applicable to the
project:
5. Ownership of Documents: All documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps,
models, photographs and reports prepared by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement
shall be considered the property of CITY and, upon payment for services performed by
CONSULTANT, such documents and other identified materials shall be delivered to CITY
by CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT may, however, make and retain such copies of said
documents and materials as CONSULTANT may desire.
6. Termination: This agreement may be terminated by CITY upon the giving of a
written "Notice of Termination" to CONSULTANT at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date
of termination specified in said Notice. In no event, however, shall CONSULTANT receive
more than the maximum specified in paragraph 3 (a), above. CONSULTANT shall provide
to CITY any and all documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs
and reports, whether in draft or final form, prepared by CONSULTANT as of date oftermin-
ation. CONSULTANT may not terminate this Agreement except for cause.
7. Notices and Designated Representatives: Any and all notices, demands, invoices
and written communications between the parties hereto shall be addressed as set
forth in this Paragraph 7. The below named individuals, furthermore, shall be
those persons primarily responsible for the performance by the parties under this
Agreement:
GW:wq/0612100.0IlProfessional Service Agreement -City Attny 3
t;g.;3g
CITY
Pamela S. Easter, Deputy City Manager
10500 Civic Center Drive
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
CONSULTANT:
WLC Architects, Inc.,
104700 Foothill Boulevard,
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Any such notices, demands, invoices and written communications, by mail, shall be deemed
to have been received by the addressee forty-eight (48) hours after deposit thereof in the
United States mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed as set forth above.
8. Insurance: CONSULTANT shall not commence work under this contract until it has
obtained all insurance required hereunder in a company or companies acceptable to CITY nor
shall CONSULTANT allow any subcontractor to commence work on its subcontract until all
insurance required of the subcontractor has been obtained. The CONSULTANT shall take
out and maintain at all times during the life of this Contract the following policies of
insurance:
(a) Compensation Insurance: Before beginning work, the Contractor shall furnish
to the CITY a certificate of insurance as proof that it has taken out full compensation
insurance for all persons whom the CONSULT ANT may employ directly or through
subcontractors in carrying out the work specified herein, in accordance with the laws of the
State of California. Such insurance shall be maintained in full force and effect during the
period covered by this contract. Further, such policy of insurance shall provide that the
insurer waives all rights of subrogation against CITY and its elected officials, officers,
employees and agents.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code,
every contractor shall secure the payment of compensation to his employees.
CONSULTANT prior to commencing work, shall sign and file with CITY a certification as
follows:
"I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor
Code which require every employer to be insured against
liability for worker's compensation or to undertake self
insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code,
and I will comply with such provisions before commencing
the performance of work of this contract."
GW:wq/0612100.01/Professional Service Agreement -City Anny 4
L/607
(b) For all operations of the CONSULTANT or any subcontractor in performing the
work provided for herein, insurance with the following minimum limits and coverage:
(I) Commercial General Liability (occurrence) - for bodily injury, death and
property damage for products/completed operations and any and all other activities
undertaken by the CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement - - or -- :
(2) (Alternative to Commercial General Liability) - Comprehensive, broad form
General Public liability (occurrence) - for bodily injury, death and property damage arising
out of any activities undertaken by CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement.
(3) Comprehensive Automobile Liability (occurrence) - for bodily injury, death
and property damage insuring against all liability arising out of the use of any vehicle.
(4) Professional Errors and Omissions Liability - insuring against alIliability
arising out of professional errors and/or omissions, providing protection of at least
$\'000,000 per claim and aggregate for errors and/or omissions ("malpractice") of
CONSUL T ANT in the performance of this Agreement. Such policy may be subject to a
deductible or retention in an amount acceptable to CITY and shall further be subject to the
provisions of subsections (2) and 6) of Section c., below. If a "claims made" policy is
provided, such policy shall be maintained in effect from the date of performance of work or
services on CITY's behalfuntil three (3) years after the date the work or services are accepted
as completed. Coverage for the post-completion period may be provided by renewal or
replacement of the policy for each of the three (3) years or by a three (3) year extended
reporting period endorsement which reinstates all limits for the extended reported period. If
any such policy and/or policies have a retroactive date, that date shall be no later than the
date of first performance of work or services on behalf of CITY. Renewal or replacement
policies shall not allow for any advancement of ~uch retroactive date. Each such policy or
policies shall include a standard "Notice of Circumstances" provision.
(5) Other required insurance, endorsements or exclusions as required by the
request for proposal.
(6) The policies of insurance required in this Section b shall have no less than
the folIowing limits of coverage:
(i) $2,000,000 (Two Million Dollars) for bodily injury or death;
(ii) $1,000,000 (One Million Dollars) for property damage.
(iii) The total of the limits specified in subsections (i) and (ii), above, where
a combined single limit is provided.
(c) The policies of insurance required in subsections (I), and (2) and (3) of Section
b., above, shall:
(I) Be subject to no deductible amount unless otherwise provided, or approved
in writing by CITY;
GW:wq/0612100.01IProFessional Service Agreemenl-City Anny 5
L/g -I/b
(2) Be issued by an insurance company approved in writing by CITY, which is
admitted and licensed to do business in the State of California and which is rated "A" (seven)
or better according to the most recent A.M. Best Co. Rating Guide;
(3) Names as additional insured, the CITY, it elected officials, officers,
employees, attorneys and agents, and any other parties, including subcontractors, specified by
CITY to be included;
(4) SpecifY that it acts as primary insurance and that no insurance held or
owned by the designated additional insured's shall be called upon to cover a loss under said
policy;
(5) SpecifY that it applies separately to each insured against whom a claim is
made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability;
(6) Contain a clause substantially in the following words:
"It is hereby understood and agreed that this policy may not
be canceled nor the amount of coverage thereof reduced until
thirty (30) days after receipt by CITY of written notice of
such cancellation or reduction of coverage as evidenced by
receipt of a registered letter."
(7) SpecifY that any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the
required policy, including breaches of warranty, shall not affect the coverage required to be
provided;
(8) SpecifY that the insurer waives all rights of subrogation against any of the
named additional insured's; and
(9) SpecifY that any and all costs of adjusting and/or defending any claim
against any insured, including court costs and attorneys' fees, shall be paid in addition to and
shall not deplete any policy limits.
(10) Otherwise be in form satisfactory to CITY.
(d) Prior to commencing performance under this Agreement, the CONSULTANT
shall furnish the CITY with original endorsements, or copies of each required policy,
effecting and evidencing the insurance coverage required by this Agreement. The
endorsements shall be signed by a person authorized by the insurer( s) to bind coverage on its
behalf. All endorsements or policies shall be received and approved by the CITY before
CONSULTANT commences performance. If performance of this Agreement shall extend
beyond one (I) year, CONSULTANT shall provide CITY with the required policies or
endorsements evidencing renewal of the required policies ofinsurance prior to the expiration
of any required policies of insurance.
GW:wq/0612100.01/Professional Service Agreement -City Anny 6
if8/LfI
9. Indemnification: Other than in the performance of professional services and to the
fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend and hold free and
harmless CITY, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers from and
against all tort liability, including liability for claims, suits, actions, expenses or costs of any
kind, whether actual, alleged or threatened, actual attorney's fees incurred by CITY, court
costs, interest and defense costs including expert witness fees, where the same arise out of, or
are connected with, in whole or in part, the performance of this Agreement by
CONS UL T ANT, or any of CONSULTANT's officers, agents, employees or contractors, and
which result in bodily injury or property damage to any individual or entity, including the
employees or officials of CONSULTANT.
In addition to the foregoing, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend and hold free
and harmless CITY, its elected officials, officers and employees from and against any and all
losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees and costs
to the extent the same are caused by negligence of CONSULTANT, or any of
CONSULTANT's officers, agents, employees or contractors, in the performance of
professional services pursuant to this Agreement.
10. Assignment: No assignment of this Agreement or of any part or obligation of
performance hereunder shall be made, either in whole or in part, by CONSULTANT without
the prior written consent of CITY.
II. Damages: In the event that CONSULTANT fails to submit to CITY the completed
project, together with all documents and supplemental material required hereunder, in public
hearing form to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY, within the time set forth herein, or as
may be extended by written consent of the parties hereto, CONSULTANT shall pay to CITY,
as liquidated damages and not as a penalty, the sum of ~ dollars ($Q ) per day for each day
CONSUL T ANT is in default, which sum represents a reasonable endeavor by the parties
hereto to estimate a fair compensation for the foreseeable losses that might result from such a
default in performance by CONSULTANT, and due to the difficulty which would otherwise
occur in establishing actual damages resulting from such default, unless said default is caused
by CITY or by acts of God, acts of the public enemy, fire, floods, epidemics, or quarantine
restrictions.
12. Independent Contractor: The parties hereto agree that CONSULTANT and its
employees, officers and agents are independent contractors under this Agreement and shall
not be construed for any purpose to be employees of CITY.
13. Governing Law: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of California.
14. Pursuant to California Administrative Code, Title 8, Group 3, Payment of Prevailing
Wages Upon Public Works, updated March, 1986, Art 2, "Work Subject to Prevailing
GW:wq/0612100.01/Professional Service Agreement -City Attny 7
lfr ,-~
Wages", sub-paragraph (C) "Field Surveving Projects: Field survey work traditionally
covered by collective bargaining agreements is subject to prevailing wage rates when it is
integral to the specific public work project in the design, preconstruction, or construction
phase. "
15. Attornev's Fees: In the event any legal proceeding is instituted to enforce any term
or provision ofthe Agreement, the prevailing party in said legal proceeding shall be entitled
to recover attorneys' fees and costs from the opposing party in an amount determined by the
Court to be reasonable.
16. Entire Agreement: This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either
oral or in writing, between the parties with respect to the subject matter herein. Each party to
this Agreement acknowledges that no representation by any party, which is not embodied
herein, nor any other agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this Agreement shall
be valid and binding. Any modification of this Agreement shall be effective only ifit is in
writing signed by all parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day
and year first set forth above:
CONSULTANT
WLC ARCHITECTS, INC.
GEORGE M. WIENS, CFO
ARCHITECT, PRINCIPAL Cl4546
Date
Recommended for Approval:
Pamela S. Easter, Deputy City Manager
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A Municipal Corporation
William J. Alexander, Mayor
Date
ATTEST:
Approved as to Form:
Debra J. Adams, City Clerk
City Attorney
GW:wq/0612100.01/Professional Service Agreement -City Attny 8
L/B /'/3
WLC Exhibit "A"
W L C
A f chi tee t 5 ~~--~~:;i"~~c.:~.G atWifC~1E4#~W~1t~q}~~Ii~ ~i? _3._"""~~_ :it
Lorry WolfL AlA . George M. Wi€n~, AlA . Robert j, Hensler, AlA . James P. DiCamillo, AlA . Glenn Veda, AlA
A1ax Medina, AlA . KellfJY Needham, AlA . Kevin A, MocQuarrie, AlA
January 25, 2006
EXHIBIT A
Ms. Pamela Easter
Deputy City Manager
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807
Re: Fee Proposal
Rancho Cucamonga Animal Shelter Renovations
Project 0612100.06
Dear Ms. Easter:
It is my pleasure to provide you with this fee proposal for architectural and engineering services
for the renovations of the Rancho Cucamonga Animal Shelter. Our fees will be computed based
upon a percentage of the estimated construction cost for the project and also based upon the
summary of improvements dated January 24, 2006, as prepared by WLC Architects, Inc.
Fees for architectural and engineering services are computed as follows:
Description
Amount
1,150,000.00
Percentage
12%
Total Amount
Estimated Construction Cost
$
$
138,000.00
Included in this fee proposal arc services as required for architectural, structural, mechanical, and
electrical engineering. Seryices will include preparation of project scope, construction document
preparation, bidding/negotiation with contractor, construction administration, and record
documents.
Virgir1lo Dore Tower' 10-'70 foo!hill Boulevmd. Rancho Cucomong<1, Californio 91730.3754' ph~ 9099870909 foy.: 909 980 9980
1110 Iror> Point Rood. Suite 200 . folsom, California ~5630 . 8301 . ph: 916 355 9922 fax: 916 355 9950 L/ 0 -' /1"
J 250 A5~n Simer. SUllo 150 . Emeryvi!!"" Californio 94608 - 2901 . ph: 510 <150 1999 ;0>:;: 510.:502525 0" Tr
Ms. Pamela Easter
,Fee Proposal
Rancho Cucamonga Animal Shelter Renovations
Project 0612100.06
January 25, 2006
Page 2
Additional services beyond those outlined in this proposal will be negotiated and approved in
advance by both the City and WLC Architects, Inc. The following hourly rates are provided for
estimation of additional services.
HOURLY RATES
Principals of Firm ',....,............"....,....,.....,..,..".,.,....... $165.00
Associate PrincipallDirector .........."...............".....,..."...,... $155.00
Associate/Coordinator, , , . . . , . . . . . . . . , . . . , , , . . . . . , . . , , . . . , . , . , . , . . . . . , , , ,. $155.00
Senior Project Architect. , . , . . . , . . , . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . , . . . , . , . , . , . , . , . , , . .. $145.00
Senior Project Manager. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . . . , , . , , , . , . . . , , , , . .. $145.00
Project Architcct ...".,...,.,.,.,.".,.".".........,.,.,..,.""....,. $125.00
Project Manager. , , , . . . , . , . , . , . , . . . . . , . , . . , . . . . . . . , . , . . . , . , . , . , . . . . . , , , ,. $125.00
Technical Level I ...".......,...,...""..,.,.,...,..,."",.,.,."".... $85,00
Technical Level II ...".,...........,..,.,."".......,...",.",.",..... $75.00
Technical Support ............................................,........... $65.00
If you have any questions or comments regarding this fee proposal, please contact me at your
convenience. I look forward the successful completion of this project.
Sincerely,
,
tJ~
EORGE M. WIENS
Architect, AlA
Principal
GMW:fw
POO612100xl.ltr
L/l "L(5'
C.W. Driver
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
This Agreement is made and entered into this 2nd day of February, 2006, between the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, a Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY")
and C.W. Driver, Inc., (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT").
A. Recitals.
(i) CITY has heretofore received a Proposal pertammg to the performance of
professional services with respect to Construction Management Services for the retrofit of
the Animal Shelter ("Project" hereafter), a full, true and correct copy of which is attached
hereto as Exhibit" A" and by this reference made a part hereof.
(ii) CONSULTANT has now submitted its proposal for the performance of such
services, a full, true and correct of which proposal is attached hereto as Exhibit" A" and by
this reference made a part hereof.
(iii) CITY desires to retain CONSULTANT to perform professional services necessary
to render advice and assistance to CITY, CITY's Planning Commission, City Council and
staff in the preparation of Project.
(iv) CONSULTANT represents that it is qualified to perform such services and is willing
to perform such professional services as hereinafter defined.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between CITY and CONSULTANT as follows:
B. Agreement.
1. Definitions: The following definitions shall apply to the following terms, except
where the context of this Agreement otherwise'requires:
(a) Proiect: The provIsIOn of services
described in Exhibit" A" hereto including, but not limited to, the implementation of maps,
surveys, reports, and documents prepared by others, the presentation, both oral and in
writing, of such plans, maps, surveys, reports and documents to CITY as required and
attendance at any and all work sessions, public hearings and other meetings conducted by
CITY with respect to the project. The oversight of contractors and facilitation of
construction, regular progress meetings, payment applications, and contract prerogatives of
the CITY.
(b) Services: Such professional services as are necessary to be performed by
CONSUL T ANT in order to complete the project.
(c) Completion of Proiect: The date of completion of all phases of the project,
Lie /L/~
including any and all procedures, maps, surveys, documents, technical reports, meetirigs, oral
presentations and attendance by CONSULTANT at meetings regarding the presentation of
items as set forth in Exhibit" A" hereto.
2. CONSULTANT agrees as follows:
(a) CONSULTANT shall forthwith undertake and complete the project III
accordance with Exhibits "A" hereto and all in accordance with Federal, State and CITY
statutes, regulations, ordinances and guidelines, all to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY.
(b) CONSULTANT shall supply copies of all maps, surveys, reports, plans and
documents (hereinafter collectively referred to as "documents") including all supplemental
technical documents, as described in Exhibit "A" to CITY within the time specified in
Exhibit" A". Copies of the documents shall be in such numbers as are required by Exhibit
"A". CITY may thereafter review and forward to CONSULTANT comments regarding said
documents and CONSULTANT shall thereafter make such revisions to said documents as
are deemed necessary. CITY shall receive revised documents in such form and in the
quantities determined necessary by CITY. The time limits set forth pursuant to this Section
82. (b) may be extended upon written approval of CITY.
(c) CONSULTANT shall, at CONSULTANT's sole cost and expense, secure and
hire such other persons as may, in the opinion of CONSULTANT, be necessary to comply
with the terms of this Agreement. In. the event any such other persons are retained by
CONSUL T ANT, CONSULTANT hereby warrants that such persons shall be fully qualified
to perform services required hereunder. CONSULTANT further agrees that no subcontractor
shall be retained by CONSULTANT except upon the prior written approval of CITY.
3. CITY agrees as follows:
(a) To pay CONSULTANT a maximum sum of$125,000 for the performance of
the services required hereunder. This sum shall cover the cost of all staff time and all other
direct and indirect costs or fees, including the work of employees, consultants and
subcontractors to CONSULTANT. Payment to CONSULTANT, by CITY, shall be made in
accordance with the schedule set forth below.
(b) Payments to CONSULTANT shall be made by CITY in accordance with the
invoices submitted by CONSULTANT, on a monthly basis, and such invoices shall be paid
within a reasonable time after CITY receives said invoices. All charges shall be in
accordance with CONSULTANT's proposal.
(c) CONSULTANT agrees that, in no event, shall CITY be required to pay to
CONSULTANT any sum in excess of 95% of the maximum payable hereunder prior to
receipt by CITY of all final documents, together with all supplemental technical documents,
as described herein acceptable in form and content to CITY. Final payment shall be made
2
Ljf ,'17
not later than 60 days after presentation of final documents and acceptance thereofby CITY.
(d) Additional services: Payments for additional services requested, in writing, by
CITY, and not included in CONSULTANT'S proposal as set forth in Exhibit" A" hereof,
shall be paid on a reimbursement basis in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in said
Exhibit" A". Charges for additional services shall be invoiced on a monthly basis and shall
be paid by CITY within a reasonable time after CITY receives said invoices.
4. CITY agrees to provide to CONSULTANT:
(a) Information and assistance as set forth in Exhibit "A" hereto.
(b) Photographically reproducible copies of maps and other information, if
available, which CONSULTANT considers necessary in order to complete the project.
(c) Such information as is generally available from CITY files applicable to the
project.
(d) Assistance, if necessary, in obtaining information from other governmental
agencies and/or private parties. However, it shall be CONSULTANT's responsibility to
make all initial contact with respect to the gathering of such information.
(e) To cause all contractors and consultants on the project to indemnify and defend
C.W. Driver to the same extent provided City and to name C.W. Driver as an additional
insured.
5. Ownership of Documents: All documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps,
models, photographs and reports prepared by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement
shall be considered the property of CITY and, upon payment for services performed by
CONSULTANT, such documents and other identified materials shall be delivered to CITY
by CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT may, however, make and retain such copies of said
documents and materials as CONSULTANT may desire.
6. Termination: This agreement may be terminated by CITY upon the giving of a
written "Notice of Termination" to CONSULTANT at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date
of termination specified in said Notice. In the event this Agreement is so terminated,
CONSULTANT shall be compensated at CONSULTANT's applicable hourly rates as set
forth in Exhibit" A", on a pro-rata basis with respect to the work performed by
CONSULTANT. In no event, however, shall CONSULTANT receive more than the
maximum specified in paragraph 3 (a), above. CONSULTANT shall provide to CITY any
and all documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs and reports,
whether in draft or final form, prepared by CONSULTANT as of date of termination.
CONSULTANT may not terminate this Agreement except for cause.
7. Notices and Designated Representatives: Any and all notices, demands, invoices
and written communications between the parties hereto shall be addressed as set
3
I( ~ ~lf6
forth in this Paragraph 7. The below named individuals, furthermore, shall be
those persons primarily responsible for the performance by the parties under this
Agreement:
CITY
Pamela S. Easter, Deputy City Manager
P.O. Box 807
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
CONSULTANT
Dale Frisby, Vice-President
468 N. Rosemead Boulevard
Pasadena, CA 91107
Any such notices, demands, invoices and written communications, by mail, shall be
deemed to have been received by the addressee forty-eight (48) hours after deposit thereofin
the United States mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed as set forth above.
8. Insurance: CONSULTANT shall not commence work under this contract until it has
obtained all insurance required hereunder in a company or companies acceptable to CITY nor
shall CONSULTANT allow any subcontractor to commence work on its subcontract until all
insurance required of the subcontractor has been obtained. The CONSULTANT shall take
out and maintain at all times during the life of this Contract the following policies of
insurance:
(a) Compensation Insurance: Before beginning work, the Contractor shall furnish
to the CITY a certificate of insurance as proof that it has taken out full compensation
insurance for all persons whom the CONSULTANT may employ directly or through
subcontractors in carrying out the work specified herein, in accordance with the laws of the
State of California. Such insurance shall be maintained in full force and effect during the
period covered by this contract. Further, such policy of insurance shall provide that the
insurer waives all rights of subrogation against CITY and its elected officials, officers,
employees and agents.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code,
every contractor shall secure the payment of compensation to his employees.
CONSULTANT prior to commencing work, shall sign and file with CITY a certification as
follows:
"I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor
Code which require every employer to be insured against
4
Lfi/'/j
liability for worker's compensation or to undertake self
insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code,
and I will comply with such provisions before commencing
the performance of work of this contract."
(b) For all operations of the CONSULTANT or any subcontractor in performing the
work provided for herein, insurance with the following minimum limits and coverage:
(I) Commercial General Liability (occurrence) - for bodily injury, death and
property damage for products/completed operations and any and all other activities
undertaken by the CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement - - or -- :
(2) (Alternative to Commercial General Liability) - Comprehensive, broad form
General Public liability (occurrence) - for bodily injury, death and property damage arising
out of any activities undertaken by CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement.
(3) Comprehensive Automobile Liability (occurrence) - for bodily injury, death
and property damage insuring against all liability arising out of the use of any vehicle.
(4) Professional Errors and Omissions Liability - insuring against all liability
arising out of professional errors and/or omissions, providing protection of at least
$1.000,000 per claim and aggregate for errors and/or omissions ("malpractice") of
CONSUL T ANT in the performance of this Agreement. Such policy may be subject to a
deductible or retention in an amount acceptable to CITY and shall further be subject to the
provisions of subsections (2) and 6) of Section c., below. If a "claims made" policy is
provided, such policy shall be maintained in effect from the date of performance of work or
services on CITY's behalf until three (3) years after the date the work or services are accepted
as completed. Coverage for the post-completion period may be provided by renewal or
replacement of the policy for each of the three (3) years or by a three (3) year extended
reporting period endorsement which reinstates all limits for the extended reported period. If
any such policy and/or policies have a retroactive date, that date shall be no later than the
date of first performance of work or services on behalf of CITY. Renewal or replacement
policies shall not allow for any advancement of such retroactive date. Each such policy or
policies shall include a standard "Notice of Circumstances" provision.
(5) Other required insurance, endorsements or exclusions as required by the
request for proposal.
(6) The policies of insurance required in this Section b shall have no less than
the following limits of coverage:
(i) $2,000,000 (Two Million Dollars) for bodily injury or death;
(ii) $1,000,000 (One Million Dollars) for property damage.
5
tjg "g)
(iii) The total of the limits specified in subsections (i) and (ii), above, where
a combined single limit is provided.
(c) The policies of insurance required in subsections (I), and (2) and (3) of Section
b., above, shall:
(2) Be issued by an insurance company approved in writing by CITY, which is
admitted and licensed to do business in the State of California and which is rated "A" (seven)
or better according to the most recent A.M. Best Co. Rating Guide;
(3) Names as additional insured, the CITY, it elected officials, officers,
employees, attorneys and agents, and any other parties, including subcontractors, specified by
CITY to be included;
(4) Specity that it acts as primary insurance and that no insurance held or
owned by the designated additional insured's shall be called upon to cover a loss under said
policy;
(5) Specity that it applies separately to each insured against whom a claim is
made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability;
(6) Contain a clause substantially in the following words:
"It is hereby understood and agreed that this policy may not
be canceled nor the amount of coverage thereof reduced until
thirty (30) days after receipt by CITY of written notice of
such cancellation or reduction of coverage as evidenced by
receipt of a registered letter."
(7) Specity that any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the
required policy, including breaches of warranty, shall not affect the coverage required to be
provided;
(8) Specity that the insurer waives all rights of subrogation against any of the
named additional insured's; and
(9) Specity that any and all costs of adjusting and/or defending any claim
against any insured, including court costs and attorneys' fees, shall be paid in addition to and
shall not deplete any policy limits.
(10) Otherwise be in form satisfactory to CITY.
(d) Prior to commencing performance under this Agreement, the CONSULTANT
shall furnish the CITY with original endorsements, or copies of each required policy,
effecting and evidencing the insurance coverage required by this Agreement. The
endorsements shall be signed by a person authorized by the insurer( s) to bind coverage on its
behalf. All endorsements or policies shall be. received and approved by the CITY before
6
L(g ~~I
CONSULTANT commences perfonnance. If performance of this Agreement shall extend
beyond one (I) year, CONSULTANT shall provide CITY with the required policies or
endorsements evidencing renewal of the required policies of insurance prior to the expiration
of any required policies of insurance.
9. Indemnification: Other than in the performance of professional services and to the
fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnity, defend and hold free and
harmless CITY, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers from and
against all tort liability, including liability for claims, suits, actions, expenses or costs of any
kind, , actual attorney's fees incurred by CITY, court costs, interest and defense costs
including expert witness fees, where the same arise out of, or are connected with, , the
performance of this Agreement by CONSULTANT, or any of CONSULTANT's officers,
agents, employees or contractors, and which result in bodily injury or property damage to any
individual or entity, including the employees or officials of CONSULTANT.
In addition to the foregoing, CONSULTANT shall indemnity, defend and hold free
and harmless CITY, its elected officials, officers and employees from and against any and all
losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees and costs
to the extent the same are caused by negligence of CONSULTANT, or any of
CONSULTANT's officers, agents, employees or contractors, in the performance of
professional services pursuant to this Agreement.
10. Assignment: No assignment of this Agreement or of any part or obligation of
performance hereunder shall be made, either in whole or in part, by CONSULTANT without
the prior written consent of CITY.
II. Damages: In the event that CONSUL T ANT fails to submit to CITY the completed
project, together with all documents and supplemental material required hereunder, in public
hearing form to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY, within the time set forth herein, or as
may be extended by written consent of the parties hereto, CONSULTANT shall pay to CITY,
as liquidated damages and not as a penalty, the sum of JL dollars ($Q ) per day for each day
CONSULTANT is in default, which sum represents a reasonable endeavor by the parties
hereto to estimate a fair compensation for the foreseeable losses that might result from such a
default in performance by CONSUL T ANT, and due to the difficulty which would otherwise
occur in establishing actual damages resulting from such default, unless said default is caused
by CITY or by acts of God, acts of the public enemy, fire, floods, epidemics, or quarantine
restrictions.
12. Independent Contractor: The parties hereto agree that CONSULTANT and its
employees, officers and agents are independent contractors under this Agreement and shall
not be construed for any purpose to be employees of CITY.
7
yg /5" ~
13. Third Party Rights: Nothing in this Agreement shall operate rights or benefits on
persons or entities not party to this Agreement, and this Agreement shall not create any rights
in persons not party to this Agreement, whether third party beneficiary, or otherwise.
14. Governing Law: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of California.
15. Pursuant to California Administrative Code, Title 8, Group 3, Payment of Prevailing
Wages Upon Public Works, updated March; 1986, Art 2, "Work Subject to Prevailing
Wages", sub-paragraph (C) "Field Surveying Proiects: Field survey work traditionally
covered by collective bargaining agreements is subject to prevailing wage rates when it is
integral to the specific public work project in the design, preconstruction, or construction
phase."
16. Attorney's Fees: In the event any legal proceeding is instituted to enforce any term or
provision of the Agreement, the prevailing party in said legal proceeding shall be entitled
to recover attorneys' fees and costs from the opposing party in an amount determined by
the Court to be reasonable.
17.Entire Agreement: This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either
oral or in writing, between the parties with respect to the subject matter herein. Each
party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representation by any party, which is not
embodied herein, nor any other agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this
Agreement shall be valid and binding. Any modification of this Agreement shall be
effective only if it is in writing signed by all parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day
and year first set forth above:
CONSULTANT
Date
Recommended for Approval:
Pamela S. Easter, Deputy City Manager
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
A Municipal Corporation
8
L(~/G3
William J. Alexander, Mayor
ATTEST:
Debra J. Adams, City Clerk
Date
Approved as to Form:
City Attorney
9
78~5f
C.W. Driver Exhibit
"A" witb rate scbedule
COW Driver
BUILDEllS SINCE 1919
4f)H:'\:. Roscnll':td Boule\",lrd
hs;tdcna. C.\ 91107
1-'ax fl2(1.:..iI.HSHO
'j(.'kpl\llnc 1l21J.T~ 1.HHIJ(J
EXHIBIT "A"
January 20. 2006
Pamela S. Easter, Deputy City Manager
The City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91729-0807
Ref: Construction Management for the Animal Shelter
Dear Pam:
As previously discussed. C.W. Driver is pleased to present our proposal for services to
convert the facility referenced above. to a City run "No Kill" operation.
The scope of services is to b~ in keeping with those provided for the Central Park project
overseeing a general contractor with construction as anticipated in the 12113/05 Council
Study Session, memorialized by WLC 1117/06. the bulk of which is to occur by Summer 2006.
Attached is a billing rates schedule for C.W. Driver personnel which includes all ancillary in-
house support costs such as convenience photo copies, faxes, phone usage. mileage. etc.
which shall not exceed $125.000 for the scope defined. All third party external expenses are
to be pre-approved by the City and reimbursed to C.W. driver at cost plus 10% independent
of the labor.
Having worked successfully with both the City and WLC Architects in the past we look
forward to assisting in making this another success for all involved and appreciate the
opportunity to participate in such a worthwhile endeavor.
Sjoeere.ly.
C/Pijk-
Dale Fridy
Vice President
DF:dk
{~;
<~,
L",.\nl-:"ks
Ir\"inl'
1{:.l,u.:ho(;ULtIllOn~;l
Sa:\ IJi<:~"
!.;H'f\"";-":" IO~
W5'55
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT DIVISION
CM SERVICES BILLING RATES
EFFeCTIVE: IANUARY. LJECeMBW 2006
;'f.,' LABOR CLASSIFICATION ~\' '." , , ~:,' .' RATE
ACCOUNTING 69.00
ASSISTANT PROJECT MANAGER 89.00
ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT 93.00
CARPENTER 90.00
CARPENTER FOREMAN 95.00
CLERICAL 61.00
ESTIMATOR I COST ENGINEER 131.00
FIELD SUPERINTENDENT 128.00
GENERAL SUPERINTENDENT 189.00
LABORER 75.00
LABORER FOREMAN 78.00
PROJECT ENGINEER 67.00
PROJECT EXECUTIVE 182.00
PROJECT MANAGER 133.00
SCHEDULER I COST ENGINEER 115.00
SENIOR ESTIMATOR 143.00
SENIOR PROJECT ENGINEER .81.00
SENIOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT 145.00
TRUCKING I DELIVERIES 53.00
^bovt' f,Hes apply In st.lIluilrd WOrkWl'l'k hours. I\ltditillnal oYt'rtimt:' costs will apply to hourly cmploYl"t"S.
The ahnv{' nltes will bl' (h.1rgl'd including.m in("fcilSc of 4% pt:'r )'t'clr in subst'\llll:'llt calcnuilr )'l'nrs.
d,lla\ 121\pm175\nnrillt's
1/<[>5 ~
ANIMAL CARlE &. SERVICES DEPARTMENT
BUDGET SUMMARY
AS APPROVED ON DECEMBER 13, 2005
APPROPRIATIONS BY ACCOUNT NUMBER
a
"Baseline": necessary for the animal care and services program to meet statutory
requirements.
"No Kill Enhancement": necessary for the animal care and services program to implement
No Kill programs.
a
BUDGET
TOTAL
Annual Department Personnel & Benefits
Partial Year Department Personnel & Benefits
$1,312.553
$ 466,060
Baseline: $1,043,244 (annual)
$ 368,190 (partial year)
No Kill Enhancement: $269,309 (annual)
$ 97,870 (partial year)
ApDropriations: 1001104-5000 $293,640; 1001104-5005 $2,600; 1001104-5030 $143,880;
1001312-5000 $13,250; 1001312-5005 $1,880; 1001312-5010 $3,960; 1001312-5030
$6,850.
Annual Operatin2 Costs $ 603.631
Partial Year Operating Costs $ 224,980
Includes on-going operations and maintenance, office supplies, and
equipment supplies, microchips (AVID program), as well as funding for
Facilities Maintenance personnel to maintain the facility and grounds.
Baseline: $ 454,231 (annual)
$ 168,740 (partial year)
No Kill Enhancement: $149,400 (annual)
$ 56,240 (partial year)
Appropriations: 1001104-5102 $6,050; 1001104-5105 $2,600; 1001104-5150 $3,970;
1001104-5160 $1,050; 1001104-5161 $70; 1001104-5200 $55,090; i001104-5300
$123,620; 1001104-5304 $23,940; 1001205-5151 $3,340; 1001317-5255 $5,250.
One-Time I Start-up Costs $1.381.230
Includes the start-up acquisition of: furniture; fixtures; cat cages; indoor and
outdoor signage; fencing; storage needs; animal care and services related
equipment and supplies; field services equipment and supplies; field vehicles
and radios; microchips (AVID program); computers and computer software;
office supplies and equipment; community information and website
development; contract services, training for new staff, etc.
Baseline: $1,356,230
No Kill Enhancement: $ 25,000
1{6~57
I
Appropriations: 1001104-5150 $3,790; 1001104-5152 $44,860; 1001104-5200 $81,340;
1001104-5300 $122,160; 1001104-5603 $491,050; 1001104-5604 $327,600; 1001104-
5605 $169,780; 1001104-5606 $140,650.
First Year Capital Costs
See attached list of recommended
improvements.
$1.072.900
building repairs, modifications, and
Appropriations: 1025001-5200 $15,600; 1025001-5204 $7,800; 1025001-5300 $600,000;
1025001-5304 $26,000; 1025001-5602 $379,180; 1025001-5603 $4,320; 1025001-5650/
1535025-0 $6,000. (Note: $34,000 of recommended improvements was budgeted as part of
the FY 2005/06 Adopted Budget).
Second Year Capital Costs
Replacement of HV AC
system.
$ 924.000
system and installation of energy management
ApDropriations: 1025001-5602 $24,000; 1025001-5603 $900,000.
Attachment - Proposed Animal Shelter Building Modifications and Repairs
i:\financelbudget2006IAnimal Shelter Budget Summary OI-25-06.doc
Lf6 "'5'0
~.
IT@'"
, .
,
RAN C H 0
....---.-..-..
Cue A M 0 N G A
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
~.'-":::=-___-:.J
Staff Report
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
February 15, 2006
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
Vicki Chilicki, Engineering Technician
APPROVAL OF THE ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
DISTRICT NOS. I AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
NOS. I AND 2 FOR 8395 CHAFFEE STREET LOCATED ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF CHAFFEE WEST OF BAKER A VENUE, SUBMITTED
BY MIGUEL RODRIGUEZ
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution, ordering the
annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. I and Street Lighting Maintenance
District Nos. I and 2.
BACKGROUNDI ANALYSIS
8395 Chaffee Street, located on the south side of Chaffee Street, west of Baker A venue in the
Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), has applied for a building permit for a
new 800 square foot room addition, to an existing single- family residence. The developer is
required to fulfill certain conditions along with the normal processing. As part of those
conditions, the developer is required to have the project annexed into the appropriate lighting
and landscape maintenance district.
The Consent and Waiver to Annexation forms signed by the developer are on file in the City
Clerk's Office.
Respectfully Submitted,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
ENGINEERING DIVISION
1
Wi~f '~}-z LZ
City Engineer
WJO:VC:pjb
Attachments
LfI
~
>--
tt:
0:
>--
i ·
'- ~--' , ~J '-
~ ,
~ ~ CHAFFEE -
- -
"......, ''\''_1 -:a 1 8~~7 "'~"'7 ~~ ~~ -, - -STREET
~,~ ...... ~
...._sa~ 0:0 ." ." ." -.. -'$
." .. ." SL73 ;Z&~I
..~ ." ~ -~ -.
~""" ~1f~1 SS2S. $'0 ~1
~ . ,
,:; ~ " . . " " " " " . "
~ ~ .
i ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
@'9 @,. .
@20 @2' @22 @23 @24 @2~ @ZS @27 @28 ~ ~ "
703::> ." ." ." @29 @' @32 ~
." ." ." .. ." ." ." 30 @3'
.O.~e ~/e
6)47 @4. @45 @"4 @43 @42 @4/ @'fO @39 @)38 ~O.14 7"
~ 1337 @3. @35
~ . @34 @33
. ~ " " ~ " . ~
. ~ 0 . 0 ,
~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ Ii . '
, , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,
1-," ~
11;5a~ ." ." ~ ." ." ." ." .. . ~ ~-
...... ." ." Si'.'7/ '-;OS ~ ''<0
~.... ....... ..... "... - ,- f>- ...# - ~ S5~e '-\
. -- "'"'" S"
-. MA'N - .0 "- -~
~.
~f,
V>~,/-v$
::I.
I> 0"-79 r.::;::..
: I{?) ~
tZ":_~~O" 69-:i
'~J.9r.
@.
.8 .
"2"'o~
I
.13 .~.
,
'"
::>
"
'"
,.
i
,
,
".":z,, "'"
", ,,~ -, _07 ~ -- ,,~ -- - .....b ~ - , - TREET 3
,." ." ." ." ." ." ~~ -~ '-.. .
." .. <0 ." ." \"G." -. ..... ,,~= ,- ~....
~ ~ '" 64.8" ; " " ., SOO2--r
I , ~ " "
, ~ " . , . ".
0 ~ . ~ . ~ ,
" . . " ~
. , . . . ~
, " . , , , , , , . , . ~ ~ ~
. , ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, . . , " , ~
, , ~ . I> ~ . . , ~
, ~ ~ ~ ,
.
)'7 0.8 0.. @50 @5' @52 @53 @5. @55 @~. @57 @58 @5. @So @., @.2 @.3 @.. @.5 ,
" ~OOI ." ." .::o.cv ... ." .::0.(;' ... ." t:.OOI .. ." tf.OI'1 ., U670 ., '"z.o/ 70./5
5706
~ ASSESSED ON PAGE 207-25 ~
^ -
- I. S. ,. -- n. --n. --~
,.
.~ MAP 604-36-2 (SEE PO.Z7 & 811'. 209 -O/J \~ ~
I ~
@ ~V' Por. lol30
~ ..
, 2_3tAC. .
. ~
,
:!J'/,p
~
----
l , p
,
I tll @~
Q:: =.. 67"
~ 1;-".~9
'" ,
"'O~ 40 ~ @ ::
fU' r; \i 66'"
~' y.+J. .6"'''s~'''~~"
. ~~4 q
,
,
I
:z: tI
.~ i
o
"',.
..
1
-f
.
.
- - STREET
0:
'"
"
<(
'"
~
I
,
H
--"-EIGHTH
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ITEM: 8395 CHAF'sf:E.EcSi.
TlTLE:ANNaATIDN E"'" IS rr
~
N
ENGINEERING DMSlON
EXHIBIT: "/f'NITV MRP
Sb
RESOLUTION NO. Dre... Dd-'"
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE
ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND STREET LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 FOR 8395
CHAFFEE STREET (APN: 0207-541-52)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has
previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the "Landscaping and
Lighting Act of 1972", being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State
of California (the "72 Act"), said special maintenance district known and designated as
Landscape Maintenance District No.1, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and Street
Lighting Maintenance District No.2 (referred to collectively as the "Maintenance Districts"); and
WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the "Landscaping and Lighting
Acto of 1972" authorize the annexation of additional territory to the Maintenance Districts; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation of
resolutions, an assessment engineer's report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority
protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within
the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding the such provlSlons of the 1972 Act related to the
annexation of territory to the Maintenance District, Article XIIID of the Constitution of the State
of California ("Article XIIID") establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization
to levy assessments which apply to the levy of annual assessments for the maintenance Districts
on the territory proposed to be annexed to such districts; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference have requested that such property (collectively, the
"Territory") be annexed to the Maintenance Districts in order to provide for the levy of annual
assessments to finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto
(the "Improvements"); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly
executed forms entitled "Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A
Maintenance District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property" (the
"Consent and Waiver"); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act to the
5/
annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts and have expressly consented to the
annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts; and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act and/or
Article xmD applicable to the authorization to levy the proposed annual assessment against the
Territory set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and
have declared support for, consent to and approval of the authorization to levy such proposed
annual assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory
to the Maintenance Districts and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory
in amount snot to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1:
The above recitals are all true and correct
SECTION 2:
This City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the Territory do not
exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each such
parcel from the Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the
Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the cost of the
maintenance of the Improvements.
c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of the proposed
annual assessments.
SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation of the Territory to the
Maintenance Districts, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from
the proceeds of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders
the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set
forth in Exhibit B.
SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the Maintenance Districts, including levy of all
assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory.
2
8395 Chaffee Street
6;)
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property
To Be Annexed
The Owner of the Property is:
Miguel Rodriguez, a married man as his sole and separate property
The legal description of the Property is:
LOT 24 OF TRACT NO. 9446, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF
SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 131,
PAGE(S) 60 THROUGH 65, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
A-I
8395 Chaffee Street 53
EXHIBIT "A" - 2.-
ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. I
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 2
.~
I-
'"
'"
'"
I-
en
I i
9>~~~~
'- ~J \. ~J \
. ,
'. H
li"\1 CAFFEE - --
,~- a=, <9:'fJ7 '~"7 -~ -~ f_ ..... ~ -.. -. --- -STREET
<::_.1"a"l' .. ." '0 '0 ." ~~t ." .. ." ." '" SZ.74 'h,~" -= -.
.~~ ~ .iI~~;, ~S.2.s ." ".
. .;
it . . . ~ . . .
~ ~ 0 ~ 0 . ~
.~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ . ~
, , , @24 > , ,
@J8 @" @20 @.. @Z2 @23 @25 i&,; @" @28 @2. ~ ~
@ @31 @32
7a.3S ." ." ." ." ." ." ." ." ." ." 4.o."i'z 30
~-:/8 .., ,,,
@47 @4. @45 @'4 @43 @42 @4' @f0 @3' @38 @37 @3.~ @35 @34 @33
..
i~ . ~
0 . . . ? . . . . ti
~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .
~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ 0 ~
k ,. ~ l ~
" ." . ~-
'''''" ." '" ." .." ." ." ,. ." ." s..." "-7.5 ~ .~
s.s.2a~ ~
8_ ~- ~"" -= ..... - I- f.>- _R - -., -- ~ ."
. .Ii ,- -..
~.
~f,
~.
'"
~
g.. N....79~ I
" ~~ ~3 I
t-t .-.; I
.6~..~~o" 69 ~ ~
I ,,~.. "
~ I' @Q ~
.~ ;: m.~;: I
~ ~ .1.:>"'..:)9 67 " :
, en ..
Jc.~ ~o ~ @ ""
&S::;..1 66....
, ". "''''''''#'..
~TR~;;~ ~ .
,
I
'"
~
o
"',.
'"
'1__ MAIN
:,>\IJl~
---- --
,,~ 1~3Jr I~ -, #'.I':'? - .-.. "- ..... - -.& ~ -. - -
Q
." ." ." .. ." ." .,,~ ." .. ,. '0 ." . tl'c:;:/, '-~ '-"s -.. "'.~ ,-. --.,,'
M~ ~ ~ .... 66."" ., ... ., sao..
, ~.' "
, ".
, , ~ " . , , . ~ ,
" . ~ , . , . 't ~ . ~ . , t ~
. , , . . , . .. , , . , , , . ~ ::l
~ . ~ .' .
~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ \> t . ~ , ,
~ t '"
,
)/7 0.8 0.9 @50 @5' @52 @53 854 @55 @5. @57 @58 @59 @So @., @.2 @.3 e.. @.5
,. '::'Q~9 " ~2 610 " ~Z.OJ 70.15
"' ." ~aol '" '0 -:.o.&u ,.
0 CoOOI .0 ." .::aO/ 6706
~ AsseSSED ON PA" 207.25 ~
i. s. - r. - fI, -no .~
MAP 804-36-2 (SEE PG.27681(.209-o1) \~ ~
"
I' ~
@ ~'9' Por. Lol30
..
, ,
' . 2.3IAC. q;
,
,
.~
'<
'"
"
"'
lD
~
,
~EIGHTH u_h__
.
.
- - STREET
H
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
A.
C::'T'AT~ 1):;- f""lA T lvnn:-..n.l.
NORlfll
61
Exhibit B
To
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 200512006
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1 (GENERAL CITY):
Landscape Maintenance District No. I (LMD #1) represents 23.63 acres of landscape area, 41.88
acres of parks and 16.66 acres of community trails that are located at various sites throughout the
City. These sites are not considered to be associated with anyone particular area within the City,
but rather benefit the entire City on a broader scale. As such, the parcels within this district do
not represent a distinct district area as do the City's remaining LMD's. Typically parcels within
this district have been annexed upon development
The various sites maintained by the district consist of parkways, median islands, paseos, street
trees, entry monuments, community trails and parks. The 41.88 acres of parks consist of Bear
Gulch Park, East and West Beryl Park, Old Town Park, Church Street Park, Golden Oaks Park
and the Rancho Cucamonga Senior Center.
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1 (ARTERIAL STREETS):
Street Light Maintenance District No. I (SLD #1)) is used to fund the maintenance and/or
installation of street lights and traffic signals located on arterial streets throughout the City. The
facilities within this district, being located on arterial streets, have been determined to benefit the
City as a whole on an equal basis and as such those costs associated with the maintenance and/or
installation of the facilities is assigned to the City-wide district.
The sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on arterial streets and traffic signals on
arterial streets within the rights-of-way or designated easements of streets dedicated to the City.
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.2 (LOCAL STREETS):
Street Light Maintenance District No. 2 (SLD #2) is used to fund the maintenance and/or
installation of street lights and traffic signals located on local streets throughout the City but
excluding those areas already in a local maintenance.district. Generally, this area encompasses
the residential area of the City west of Haven Avenue. It has been determined that the facilities
in this district bcnefit this area of the City.
This sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on local streets and traffic signals (or
a portion thereof) on local streets generally west of Haven Avenue.
B-t
8395 Chaffee Street
S5'
Proposed additions to Work Program (Fiscal Year 2005/2006)
For Project: 8395 Chaffee Street
Street Lights
SLD# I
SLD # 2
5800L
Number of Lamps
9500L 16,OOOL 22,000L
Landscaping
Community Trail
DGSF
Turf
SF
Non-Turf
SF
27,500L
Trees
EA
LMD# I
'Existing items installed with original project
Assessment Units by District
Parcel DU or Acres
I DU
S 1
I
B-2
S2
I
L I
1
8395 Chaffee Street
5(:;
Fxhibit ('
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2005/2006
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1 (GENERAL CITY):
The rate per assessment unit (A.V.) is $92.21 for the fiscal year 2005/06. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Landscape Maintenance District No. I (General City):
# of Physical # of Rate Per
Units Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Type Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Single Parcel 7699 1.0 . 7951 $92.21 $733,161.71
Family
Multi- Units 7091 0.5 3570 $92.21 $329,189.70
Family
Comm/Ind. Acre 2 1.0 2 $92.21 $] 84.42
TOTAL $1,062,535.83
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (8395 Chaffee Street) is:
1 SFR x 1 A.U. Factor x $92.21 Rate Per A.V. = $92.21 Annual Assessment
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1 (ARTERIAL STREETS):
The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $17.77 for the fiscal year 2005/06. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District NO.1 (Arterial Streets):
# of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Unit Type Units Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Single Parcel 21,151 1.00 21,]51 $17.77 $375,853.27
Family
Multi- Unit 8,540 1.00 8,540 $17.77 $15],755.80
Family
Commercial Acre 2,380.36 2.00 4,760.72 $17.77 $84,597.99
TOTAL $612,207.06
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (8395 Chaffee Street) is:
1 SFR xl A.V. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $]7.77 Annual Assessment
C-l
8395 Chaffee Street
G7
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.2 (LOCAL STREETS):
The rate per assessment unit (A.u.) is $39.97 for the fiscal year 2005/06. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No.2 (Local Streets):
# of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Unit Type Units . Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Single Parcel 6050 1.00 6050 $39.97 $241,818.50
Family
Multi Unit 24 1.00 919 $39.97 $36,732.43
Family
Commercial Acre 19.05 2.00 19.05 $39.97 $1,522.86
Total $280,073.79
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (8395 Chaffee Street) is:
I Parcel x I A.u. Factor x $39.97 Rate Per A.U. = $39.97 Annual Assessment
C-2
8395 Chaffee Street
58'
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
,
I .___~ ... _
J
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Staff Report
DATE:
February I, 2006
TO:
Mayor and members ofthe City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM:
BY:
William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
Joe Stofa If., Associate Engineer
SUBJECf:
APPROVAL OF MAP AND ORDERING THE ANNEXATION TO
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 AND STREET LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 7 FOR TRACT NO. 14759-2
LOCATED AT WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD AND WILSON AVENUE
SUBMITTED BY PULTE HOMES - APN: 226-102-17
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolutions approving Tract No. 14759-
2, order the maintenance annexations and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said
resolution
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
Tentative Tract 14759, located at Wardman Bullock Road and Wilson Avenue was approved by
the City Planning Commission on November 10, 1999 with the approval of Resolution No. 99-11
for the development of358 single-family homes and 3 lettered lots for common open space/parks
totaling 18.3 acres on 132 acres ofland.
Pulte Homes, Developer, is submitting the second phase for approval that il)cludes 85 single-
family homes and I lettered lot for City Park. The first phase realigned Banyan Street from the
existing diagonal SummitlBanyan Street to the intersection of Wardman Bullock Road and
Youngs Canyon Road.
The Developer, Pulte Homes previously submitted an agreement and security on November 3,
2004 to guarantee the construction of the off-site improvements.
61
City Council Staff Report
TRACT 14759-2
February 1, 2006
Page 2
Copies of the consent and waiver to annexation forms signed by the Developer are on file in the
City Clerk's Office.
Respectfully Submitted,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
ENGINEERING DIVISION
(}dl~
William J. O'Neil
City Engineer
WJO:SH:pjb
Attachments
(po
~
~ . ~ ~ b!
;1 _ ;~~~
~ ... Cl..-. {!;
fj
I'~I -
':: "-- UIJ
I\\:~ ." ,~:'/ y. L~/~'~~-~-~~ii[ ~~h~,
~s "" ." ~ "., _ . ,'~v_,.
'\ . 'Aie'. ,'"" c/, . :1~1'.... . ,:, wO '":
''''1:/&''..<. -'II -" ~. " ~ <r:' '
~ :v.;4-~:" '" \l\~," ,\1' __''''-.,; ""'" II _ . ,
., q ."' ' ,\\" i\\J:/JP". "~ t:r\'l'I :i ~ I ~
.~ \\, ., "I cdiI".JG;. " . ",.
-'i ., "' \'1:- ~ ~"" .. I @tr ~ i' ~ "Oil
F ~\~ \ "' '. (d\\~'JXr. ,,<Ii ~ '~i ~I ii? li!~
\\ ~~;m 'll-li;;;A,'( 1J I!!;lf ~ Ii
~'\ ~ ~', f{~ ~ ~ .,d. '1J '~," ii
-J: \ . - --::c \ 1 "'~ \ \ C, '. """" \ =t:~ ::
""l\' .,U'~ \ '~ ';..." 'I =l~l P
~ \'\ \~ ri~ . . '". .~-- -- . ~:.~ r:-'Ju @i:Jtt- ~:i
:\ \ ~ , \ --= '. ~. --. .'" ~ ::
.' I If' IT' ~ '-';,J lriJl-!.L .t. "
i ;\ \~ ~\~ I~~ I~"ii
~ ~ i I \~~.* \\ ~~~I y \~i~~ kjw",1t- O-+f-ii@fii
,~ ~J,'j Et- 1~\0 ~ ' ~ '
'i ~!'. " Hf-~t r-' ~ '" Y" """" J ':1,l.iilil/ ii
' ~ i - CAge'WAY . ,< u:-r::.. ~I ~. :,< ~~ :'
"".... '1" -~f; 7 ~r r-I~~~r,.(: I; ,f~r !i
= . .~,( ~ r--_~/....-11~-1 I" ~ ::
1 j@!!.l,L.p'/ '1fA: I/~'< '~ 'i~ ~ ii
/ ' ~/ c,(~!}~ ~~r "
I @~.+ \. ~ )y, .\p/. 'I I jt.J@[ ii
J ~7~~~~~y~ ~,'~ '~~/ lBt'T;ii
' '"it' ''k-.~,;;fi~ ,'"" ~ Ii
. /fI7::&. ~, ~~ f~ ~ "
~~ ~""';t!r#a" [
" ~~.. :It-.:,,
~~___ ,"' :i
~f#l~~ 'r Ii
~~6& ~ ~" ii
~~~. 1- II
/"^"" G "
%;..- -li "
.-. II
~ II
~:
,
~, i
j,N H J
w
Z
o
~
~
o
z
'3
3
.
~~
~n' 'O/OL/O'
OJ ""\"""""'d\l'"'''"5'">UO~-.a''5\-O
.." ~ "" I ''"''''''$ \" d
&/
RESOLUTION NO. U~ ~ 0;). 7
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING TRACT MAP NUMBER
14759-2
WHEREAS, Tract 14759-2 submitted by Pulte Homes consisting of85 single family lots and
I-lettered lot for a City Park located at Wardman Bullock Road and Wilson A venue was approved by
the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the development of 358 single
family lots on November 10,1999 and is in compliance with the State Subdivision Map Act and
Local Ordinance No. 28 adopted pursuant to that Act; and .
WHEREAS, all ofthe requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the final map
by the City Council of said City have now been met by the entry into an Improvement Agreement on
November 3, 2004 with Pulte Homes, as developer; and
WHEREAS, said Developer submits for approval said Tract Map 14759-2 offering for
dedication, for street, highway and related purposes, the streets delineated thereon and the easements
dedicated thereon for storm drain, sidewalk, street tree and landscape purposes.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
HEREBY RESOLVES, that with said Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security
previously submitted by said developer and approved and signed by the Mayor, thett said Tract Map
14759-1 is hereby approved and the City Engineer is authorized to present same to the County
Recorder to be filed for record.
William J. Alexander, Mayor
ATTEST:
Debbie J. Adams, City Clerk
bd-
RESOLUTION NO. ~ ~ 0 d- <6
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE
ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.7 AND STREET LIGHT
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 7 FOR TRACT MAP
NO. 14759-2
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has
previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the "Landscaping and
Lighting Act of 1972," being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State
of California (the "72 Act"), said Landscape Maintenance District No.7, Street Lighting
Maintenance District No. I and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 7 (referred to
collectively as the "Maintenance Districts"); and
WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the 72 Act authorize the
annexation of additional territory to the Maintenance District; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation of
resolutions, an assessment engineer's report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority
protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within
the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding such provisions of the 72 Act related to the annexation of
territory to the Maintenance District, Article XnrD of the Constitution of the State of California
(" Article XIIID") establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization to levy
assessments which apply to the levy of annual assessments for the maintenance Districts on the
territory proposed to be annexed to such districts; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference have requested that such property (collectively, the
"Territory") be annexed to the Maintenance Districts in order to provide for the levy of annual
assessments to finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto
(the "Improvements"); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly
executed forms entitled "Consent and Waiver to Annexation of Certain Real Property to a .
Maintenance District and Approval of the Levy of Assessments on Such Real Property" (the
"Consent and Waiver"); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 72 Act to the
annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts and have expressly consented to the
annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts; and
t3
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 72 Act and/or
Article xmD applicable to the authorization to levy the proposed annual assessment against the
Territory set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and
have declared support for, consent to and approval of the authorization to levy such proposed
annual assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory
to the Maintenance Districts and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory
in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit B hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I: The above recitals are all true and correct
SECTION 2: This City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the Territory do not
exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each such
parcel from the Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the
Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the cost of the
maintenance of the Improvements.
c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of the proposed
annual assessments.
SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation of the Territory to the
Maintenance Districts, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from the
proceeds of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders the
levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth
in Exhibit B.
SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the Maintenance Districts, including the levy of all
assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory.
2
TR 14759-2
~1
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property to be Annexed
The Owners of the Property are:
PULTEHOMES
The legal description of the Property is:
Being a subdivision of a portion of Lots "A" and "B" of Tract 2428, Official Records of San
Bernardino County.
The above-described parcels are shown on sheet A-2 attached herewith and by this reference
made a part hereof.
A-I
TR 14759-2
06
Exhibit B
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 2005/2006
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.7 (NORTH ETIWANDA)
Landscape Maintenance District No. 7 (LMD #7) represents landscape sites throughout the
Etiwanda North Area. These sites are associated with areas within that district and as such any
benefit derived from the landscape installation can be directly attributed to those parcels within
that district. Because of this, assessments required for this district are charged to those parcels
within that district.
The various sites maintained by the district consist of parkways, median islands, paseos, street
trees, community trails and Etiwanda Creek Park.
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1 (ARTERIAL STREETS)
Street Light Maintenance District No. I (SLD #1)) is used to fund the maintenance and/or
installation of street lights and traffic signals located on arterial streets throughout the City. The
facilities within this district, being located on arterial streets, have been determined to benefit the
City as a whole on an equal basis and as such those costs associated with the maintenance and/or
installation of the facilities is assigned to the City-wide district.
The sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on arterial streets and traffic signals on
arterial streets within the rights-of-way or designated easements of streets dedicated to the City.
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.7 (NORTH ETIWANDA)
Street Light Maintenance District No. 7 (SLD #7) is used to fund the maintenance and/or
installation of street lights and traffic signals located on local streets in what is termed the North
Etiwanda area of the City. Generally, this area encompasses the area of the City east of Day
Creek Channel and north of Highland Avenuc within the incorporated area of the City. It has
been determined that the facilities in this district benefit the properties within this area of the
City.
The sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on local streets and traffic signals (or a
portion thereof) on local streets within the North Etiwanda area.
B-1
TR 14759-2
6~
Proposed additions to Work Program (Fiscal Year 2005/2006)
For Project: TR 14759-2
Number of Lamps
Street Lights 5800L 9500L 16,OOOL 22,OOOL 27,500L
SLD# I
SLD # 7 37
Community Trail Turf Non-Turf Trees
Landscaping DGSF SF SF EA
LMD#7 158
*Existing items installed with original project
Assessment Units by District
D.U. Acres
S I
S7
L7
B-1
TR 14759-2
67
Exhibit C
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2005/2006
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.7 (NORTH ETIWANDA)
The rate per assessment unit (AU.) is $307.05 for the fiscal year 2005/06. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Landscape Maintenance District No.7 (North Etiwanda):
# of Rate Per
# of Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Type Units Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Single Parcel 1572 1.00 1572 $307.05 $482,682.60
Family
Comm/Ind. Acre 5 2.00 10 $307.05 $3,070.50
TOTAL $485,753.10
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (TR 14759-2) is:
85 Parcels x 1.0 AU. Factor x $307.05 Rate Per AU. = $26,099.25 Annual Assessment
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1 (ARTERIAL STREETS)
The rate per assessment unit (AU.) is $17.77 for the fiscal year 2005/06. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. I (Arterial Streets):
#of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Unit Type Units Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Single Parcel 21,151 1.00 21,151 $17.77 $375,853.27
Family
Multi- Unit 8,540 1.00 8,540 $17.77 $151,755.80
Family
Commercial Acre 2,380.36 2.00 4,760.72 $17.77 $84,597.99
TOTAL $612,207.06
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Propcrty (TR 14759-2) is:
85 Parcels xl A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $1,510.45 Annual Asscssment
C-l
TR 14759-2
~g
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.7 (NORTH ETIWANDA)
The rate per assessment unit (A.u.) is $33.32 for the fiscal year 2005/06. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No.7 (North Etiwanda):
# of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Unit Type Units Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Single Parcels 1804 1.00 1804 $33.32 $60,109.28
Family
CommlInd Acre 5 2.00 10 $33.32 $333.20
TOTAL $60,442.48
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (TR 14759-2) is:
85 Parcels x 1 A.u. Factor x $33.32 Rate Per A.U. = $2,832.20 Annual Assessment
C-2
TR 14759-2
~9
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
...- ~ --.----..- ---.--...--.---.--
.---------.--------------------
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Staff Report
DAlE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
February I, 2006
Mayor and members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
Joe Stofa Jr., Associate Engineer
APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY
AND ORDERING THE ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
DISTRICT NO.7 AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I
AND 7 FOR TRACT NO. 14759-3 LOCATED AT W ARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD
AND WILSON AVENUE SUBMITTED BY PUL TE HOMES - APN:226-J02-17
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the subject agreements,
security and order the maintenance annexations and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign
said agreements.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
Tentative Tract 14759, located at Wardman Bullock Road and Wilson Avenue was approved by the
City Planning Commission on November 10, 1999 with the approval of Resolution No. 99-11 for the
development of 358 single-family homes and 3 lettered lots for common open space/parks totaling
18.3 acres on 132 acres of land.
The Developer, Pulte Homes is submitting agreements and security to guarantee the construction of
Tract 14759-3 in the following amounts:
Faithful Performance
Labor and Material
$
$
868,600.00
434,300.00
Copies of the agreement and security are available in the City Clerk's Office.
Respectfully Submitted,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
ENGINEERING DIVISION
w~ttJ~1:~IV-,L(
City Engineer
WJO:JS:pjb
Attachments
70
RESOLUTION NO. DCe-o,;)-/
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENTS AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT 14759-3
WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map 14759, submitted by Pulte Homes and consisting of358
single family homes located at Wardman Bullock Road and Wilson Avenue, was approved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on November 10, 1999 and is in
compliance with the State Subdivision Map Act and Local Ordinance No. 28 adopted pursuant to
that Act; and
WHEREAS, the requirement established as prerequisite to approval of the final map by the
City Council of said City have now been met by entry into an Improvement Agreement guaranteed
by acceptable Improvement Security by Pulte Homes, as developer.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
HEREBY RESOLVES, that said Improvement Agreement and said Improvement Security,
submitted by said developer be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby
authorized to sign said Agreements on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk
to attest.
William J. Alexander, Mayor
ATTEST:
Debbie J. Adams, City Clerk
7/
RESOLUTION NO. O~- 036
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE
ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 AND STREET LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 7 FOR TRACT NO.
14759-3 (APN: 226-102-17)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously
formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of
1972", being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code ofthe State ofCalifornia (the "72
Act"), said special maintenance district known and designated as Landscape Maintenance District
No.7, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. I and Street Lighting Maintenance District No.7
(referred to collectively as the "Maintenance Districts"); and
WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 ofthe "Landscaping and Lighting Acto
of 1972" authorize the annexation of additional territory to the Maintenance Districts; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation of
resolutions, an assessment engineer's report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority
protest maybe waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within the
territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding the such provisions of the 1972 Act related to the annexation of
territory to the Maintenance District, Article XIIID of the Constitution of the State. of California
("Article XIIID") establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization to levy
assessments which apply to the levy of annual assessments for the maintenance Districts on the
territory proposed to be annexed to such districts; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference have requested that such property (collectively, the "Territory")
be annexed to the Maintenance Districts in order to provide for the levy of annual assessments to
finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B. hereto (the
"Improvements"); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly executed
forms entitled "Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A Maintenance
District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property" (the "Consent and
Waiver"); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners ofthe Territory have expressly
waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act to the
7d-
annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts and have expressly consented to the
annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts; and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act and/or
Article XIIID applicable to the authorization to levy the proposed annual assessment against the
Territory set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and have
declared support for, consent to and approval of the authorization to levy such proposed annual
assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory to
the Maintenance Districts and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in
amount snot to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I:
The above recitals are all true and correct
SECTION 2:
This City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the Territory do not
exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each such
parcel from the Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the
Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the cost of the
maintenance of the Improvements.
c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of the proposed annual
assessments.
SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation of the Territory to the
Maintenance Districts, approves the financing ofthe maintenance ofthe Improvements from the
proceeds of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders the
levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth
in Exhibit B.
SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the Maintenance Districts, including levy of all
assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory.
2
TR 14759-3
]3
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property
To Be Annexed
The Owner of the Property is:
The legal description of the Property is:
Pulte Homes
Being a subdivision ofa portion of Lots "A" and "B" of Tract 2428, Official Records of San
Bernardino County.
A-I
TR 14759-3
7tf
Exhibit B
To
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 2005/2006
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.7 (NORTH ETIWANDA):
Landscape Maintenance District No.7 (LMD #7) represents landscape sites throughout the Etiwanda
North Area. These sites are associated with areas within that district and as such any benefit derived
from the landscape installation can be directly attributed to those parcels within that district.
Because ofthis, assessments required for this district are charged to those parcels within that district.
The various sites maintained by the district consist of parkways, median islands, paseos, street trees,
community trails and Etiwanda Creek Park.
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1 (ARTERIAL STREETS):
Street Light Maintenance District No. I (SLD #1)) is used to fund the maintenance and/or
installation of street lights and traffic signals located on arterial streets throughout the City. The
facilities within this district, being located on arterial streets, have been determined to benefit the
City as a whole on an equal basis and as such those costs associated with the maintenance and/or
installation of the facilities is assigned to the City-wide district.
The sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on arterial streets and traffic signals on
arterial streets within the rights-of-way or designated easements of streets dedicated .to the City.
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.7 (NORTH ETIWANDA):
Street Light Maintenance District No.7 (SLD #7) is used to fund the maintenance and/or installation
of street lights and traffic signals located on local streets in what is termed the North Etiwanda area
of the City. Generally, this area encompasses the area of the City east of Day Creek Channel and
north of Highland Avenue within the incorporated area ofthe City. It has been determined that the
facilities in this district benefit the properties within this area ofthe City.
The sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on local streets and traffic signals (or a
pOliion thereof) on local streets within the North Etiwanda area.
B-)
TR 14759-3
7b
Proposed additions to Work Program (Fiscal Year 2005/2006)
For Project: Tract 14759-3
5800L
Number of Lamps
9500L 16,000L 22,000L
Street Lights
SLD# 1
SLD # 7
40
Landscaping
Community Trail
DGSF
Turf
SF
LMD#7
'Existing items installed with original project
Assessment Units by District
Parcel DU or Acres
S I
B-2
Non-Turf
SF
S7
27,500L
Trees
EA
133
L7
TR 14759-3
7?,
Exhibit r:
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2005/2006
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT. NO. 7 (NORTH ETIWANDA):
The rate per assessment unit (AU.) is $307.05 for the fiscal year 2005/06. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Landscape Maintenance District No.7 (North Etiwanda):
# of Physical Assessment #of Rate Per
Units Units Factor Assessment Assessment
Land Use Type Units Unit Revenue
Single Parcel 1572 1.00 1572 $307.05 $482,682.60
Family
Conunllnd. Acre 5 2.00 10 $307.05 $3,070.50
TOTAL $485,753.10
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (TR 14759-3) is:
93 Parcels x 1.00 AU. Factor x $307.05 Rate Per A.U. = $28,555.65 Annual Assessment
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1 (ARTERIAL STREETS):
The rate per assessment unit (AU.) is $17.77 for the fiscal year 2005/06. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. I (Arterial Streets):
# of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Unit Type Units Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Single Parcel 21,151 1.00 21,151 $17.77 $375,853.27
Family
Multi- Unit 8,540 1.00 8,540 $17.77 $151,755.80
Family
Commercial Acre 2,380.36 2.00 4,760.72 $17.77 $84,597.99
TOTAL $612,207.06
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (TR 14759-3) is:
93 Parcels x 1.00 AU. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per AU. = $1,652.61 Annual Assessment
C-l
TR 14759-3
77
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.7 (NORTH ETIW ANDA):
The rate per assessment unit (AU.) is $33.32 for the fiscal year 2005/06. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No.7 (North Etiwanda):
# of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Unit Type Units Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Single Parcel 1804 1.00 1804 $33.32 $60,109.28
Family
Commllnd Acre 5 2.00 10 $33.32 $333.20
TOTAL $60,442.48
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (TR 14759-3) is:
93 Parcels x 1.00 AU. Factor x $33.32 Rate Per AU. = $3,098.76 Annual Assessment
C-2
TR 14759-3
7?
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
C-- u --...---- -- -"--'--::'~-- ..-..J
E NGI-NuE--E--i I--N~G D E PAR T MEN T
Staff Report
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
February 1, 2006
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
Tasha Hunter, Public Seryice Tech I
ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, RETAIN $2,160.00 OF THE FAITHFUL
PERFORMANCE CASH DEPOSIT IN LIEU OF A MAINTENANCE BOND AND
FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR DRC2002-
00864, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF WHITE OAK AVENUE NORTH OF
ELM AVENUE, SUBMITTED BY ALLYN B. SCHEU AND L. & J. SCHEU LIVING
TRUST
RECOMMENDATION:
The required improvements for DRC2002-00864 have been completed in an acceptable
manner, and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements, authorize the
City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to retain $2,160.00 of
the Faithful Performance Cash Deposit in lieu of a Maintenance Bond.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
As a condition of approval of completion of DRC2002-00864, located on the west side of White
Oak Avenue north of Elm Avenue, the applicant was required to complete street improvements.
The improvements have been completed and it is recommended that the City Council retain the
existing Faithful Performance Bond in lieu of a Maintenance Bond.
Respectfully submitted,
'\ '1
'-It ([ ~~C'V
William J. O'Neil
City Engineer
WJO:TCH
Attachment( s)
79
-
-
...~
~
) :
-------~
S;J-e
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ENGINEERING DIVISION
-
-, OJ
-
"
"
'\'
"v "<t
C
C'
...-:
C'
"
(
~ ,~~~~
LP CCC-hOVl ~
N
ITEM: J)~ C 1 O()? - ()()8Co1
TITLE; ANN EX G-D PARes L-
A .-,
EXHIBIT: .' - ,/
S'b
RESOLUTION NO. ore -03-/
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR
DRC2002-00864 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF
A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK
WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for DRC2002-00864
have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the
work is complete.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
hereby resolves, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is
authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of
San Bernardino County.
g/
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
c::~:::- -- - --
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
-.
Staff Report
DAlE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
February 1, 2006
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
Tasha Hunter, Public Svc. Tech I
RELEASE OF ALL MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BONDS FOR TRACT
15727, 15727-6 AND 15727-8 LOCATED NORTH OF FOURTH STREET
AND EAST OF THE CUCAMONGA CREEK CHANNEL, SUBMITTED BY
CORNERPOINTE 257, LLC
RECOMMENDATION
II is recommended that City Council authorize the City Clerk to release all Maintenance
Guarantee Bonds, for Tract 15727, 15727-6 & 15727-8, located north of Fourth Streel and
east of the Cucamonga Creek Channel, submitted by Cornerpointe 257, LLC
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The required one-year maintenance period has ended, and the street improvements remain
free from defects in materials and workmanship.
DEVELOPER
Release:
Cornerpoinle 257, LLC
24005 Venture Boulevard
Calabasas, Ca 91302
All Maintenance Guarantee Bonds
Respectfully submitted,
f~tt L~~Gl
William J. O'Neil
City Engineer
WJO:tch
Attachment
ctJ-
Vicinity Map
Tracts 15757, -6 & -8
'\fL1J1 D I II I I I I IVII I II111I1I11111 III11II ]1 I
II
OJ
)>
r
o
N
W.E
S
w
I:
(T3
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
.----~, ----. -~- -'-----~---- .~--
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Staff Report
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT:
February 1, 2006
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
Tasha Hunter, Public Svc. Tech I
RELEASE OF MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE CASH DEPOSIT FOR DR 00-
19, LOCATED AT 10905 JERSEY BOULEVARD, SUBMITTED BY
HOFFINGER INDUSTRIES, INCORPOARTED
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City Council authorize the City Clerk to release the Maintenance
Guaranlee Cash Deposit, for DR 00-19, located at 10905 Jersey Boulevard, submitted by
Hoffinger Industries, Incorporated
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The required one-year maintenance periOd has ended, and the street improvements remain
free from defects in materials and workmanship.
DEVELOPER
Release:
Schafer Development Group
27715 Jefferson Avenue
Temecula, CA 92590
Maintenance Guarantee Cash Deposit
Receipt #CR010877 $3,000.00
Respectfully submitted,
Cjf/UL-Z l~
William J. O'Neil
City Engineer
WJO:tch
Attachment
C('Lf
-~ : Lu
b
---- I 81,500----- 1:0
--II
, ~~
~: j I
~ I i I
~ 1,1
.~ ,I II
J I
: i I
I i ~-----
Cl'C"'/O,.
""Or~""""-.~.:.~C'
{~:j!~
@l21f ~
Ion
JERSEY BOULEVARD
--------
669.0'
---------------
66KV, E. T
17.50'
I
I
I ~
I I
i ~ ,
I
I
-----___J
SITE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAr-.'IONGA . ^
I ENGINEERING DIVISION I N
VICINITY MAP
85
title' .
,
DR 60 - I 9
I p',-
)
THE CITY OF
I
RANCtlO CUCAMONGA
Staff Report
DATE: February 1, 2006
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: Dan Coleman, Acting City Planner
BY: Michael Diaz, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION
AMENDING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 94-01 AND ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 91-03 FOR MARGARITA
BEACH, LOCATED AT 9950 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD - APN: 1077-621-34.
(CONTINUED FROM THE JANUARY 18, 2006, CITY COUNCIL MEETING.)
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
On January 18, 2006, the City Council (Mayor Alexander abstaining) held its second meeting on
the appeal and took testimony from the appellant, his attorneys, and supporters. At the end of
their presentation, the residents requested that the Council continue the hearing so that they
could prepare for their response. The Council unanimously (Mayor Alexander abstaining) voted
to continue the matter to their next meeting on February 1, 2006. After the conclusion of the
public hearing, staff will give an oral report summarizing the issues.
DC:MD:bt
&?o
.'
,"
~';;;
LAW OFFICES
WESTON. GARROU. DEWITT [5 WALTERS
.JOHN H. WESTON':
CLYDE OEWITT"""'"
G. RANDALl,. GARROU'i:
MARK P. BINOE:R't-
STEPHANIE: AMES""
A PARTNERSHIP or PRore:sS'ON....1.. BUSINESS ENTITIES
WILSHIRE BUNDY F='LAZA
12121 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, SUITE 900
LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90025-1168
F"I..ORICA OFFICE
LAWRENCE: G. WALTERS"""
MARC .J_ RANDAZZA",,5
DEREK B. eRE:TT2,e
01" COUNSEL
CATHY E. CROSSON"~
A. DALE MANICOM'
JEROME H. MOONEV'.7:j:
JOSEPH p, WOHRLE'
FAX (3101 442-0899
13101 442-0072
781 DOUGLAS AVE:NUE
ALTAMONTE SPRINGS. F'L 32714-25ee
FAX (407) 774-6151
(.q.07) 389-4529
I ADMITTED IN CAUFOI'INIA
Z AOMI'tTi:O IN I"LOR!OA
J AOMITTEO IN INDIANA
-4 ADMITTED IN TEXAS
5 ADMmED IN MASSACHUSETTS
6ADMrTTED IN DISTRICT 01" COUJMIilIA
7 A.DMrnEC IN UTAH
February 1, 2006
SAN DIEGO OPPleE:
laos J STREET, SUITE e
SAN DIEGO. CA 92101-7500
FAX (6191 239-1717
/619J 232-3255
; A CALIfORNIA PROfESSIONAl... CORPORATION
.. A fLOR'DJ>. ~OfE.SSIONAL ASSOCIATION
TRANSMITTED ON THIS DATE
VIA FAX TO: (714) 990-6230;
COPY SENT TODAY BY E-MAIL
James L. Markman, Esq.
Richards, Watson & Gershon, APC
I Civic Center Circle
P.O. Box 1059
Brea, California 92822-1059
Re: Rancho Cucamonga/Margarita Beach
Dear Mr. Markman:
In response to my recent letter, three historically vocal and active Rancho Cucamonga
residents - neighbors of Margarita Beach - met with Mark Davidson, Jim Reiss and me last
night at a local restaurant. This extraordinary meeting lasted for nearly three and a half
hours and from beginning to end was marked with civility, openness and a mutual exchange
of information, concerns and attempted solutions. At the end of the meeting, everyone
present agreed that the following steps, if implemented, would be very helpful with respect to
resolving the complained about problems:
1) Erect permanent, highly visible signs indicating a "dead end," or "no outlet," or
"not a through s.treet" or some other similar message, at the entrance to Estacia Court
from Ramona and at the entrance to the Pasito cul-de-sac from Estacia Court. There
is presently a "not a through street" sign at the entrance to Estacia Court, but this is
often somewhat obscured by foliage and should be re-Iocated to be more prominently
visible and/or replaced with a different (in size, color and/or message) sign.
/
/'
....-:;0..
LAW OFFICES
WESTON, GARROU, DEWITT Iii WALTERS
A PAFlTN.I;:RSHIP OF PROfESSION....1. 8USINESS ENTiTlES
James L. Markman, Esq.
Re: Rancho CucamongaIMargarita Beach
February I, 2006
Page 2
2) A temporary sign, approved by the City as to size, color and content, expressing one
of the following phrases (or a similar sentiment): "resident traffic only;" "no
commercial traffic;" or "no through traffic" should be created and temporarily placed
in a visible fashion at the northwest corner of Ramona and Estacia Court by Margarita
Beach personnel, during appropriate times.
3) The temporary sign described in number 2 above would be moved and placed at the
entrance to Estacia Court (from Ramona) from 1 :30 a.m. to 2: 15 a.m. on appropriate
evenings by Margarita Beach personnel, and the dedicated Margarita Beach security
staff member (who is stationed in that area) shall during the aforesaid time period
stand adjacent to the temporary sign at the entrance to Estacia Court.
4) U-turns and left turns should be prohibited to westbound Foothill Blvd. traffic at
the intersection of Ramona from midnight to 2:30 a.m., and appropriate signage
should be erected to convey that prohibition.
5) The jacket bearing the word "Security" currently worn by the Margarita Beach
security staff member stationed at the intersection of Ramona and the east - west alley
between the shopping center and the residential complex, shall be replaced by a dark
jacket bearing the word "Security" in contrasting light colored lettering on the back of
the jacket.
6) The business owner and interested neighbors should regularly meet with an
appropriate police official regarding patrol and related community issues,
7) The business owner shall contact individual neighbors who have indicated an
interest in the situation to arrange semi-monthly meetings to discuss matters of
mutual concern.
All present at last night's extraordinary meeting respectfully request the City's assistance in
quickly evaluating, supporting and adopting the relevant aforesaid measures. Margarita Beach
has indicated its willingness to pay the reasonable cost of all relevant signage. We all hope
that you can facilitate the acceptance and implementation of those above measures which
seem likely to significantly reduce the complained of problems.
.
.
,
<'"\. .
LAW OFFICES
WESTON. GARROU. DEWITT B WALTERS
.... PARTNE:RSH1P OF PROFESSIONAL BUSINESS [;NTITIES
James L. Markman, Esq.
Re: Rancho CucamongalMargarita Beach
February 1, 2006
Page 3
Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions. Thank you for your continuing
professional courtesies.
JHW:km
cc: Mark Davidson (via e-mail onh)
James V. Reiss, Esq. (via e-mail onlvl
K:\WP6O\fW\2006I,6JWOOl4-L-Markman.R;,nclm Cucam""Il"_MarllUira e.'Bell.do<:
Very truly yours,
By
JOHN
f': ~
.'
,'I'
ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT CONDITIONS (WITH MODIFICATIONS) CONTAINED IN
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 05-51 ACCEPTABLE TO MARGARITA
BEACH.
(THIS MATERIAL PREPARED BY MARGARITA BEACH'S COUNSEL AS REQUESTED AT
JANUARY 18, 2006 CITY COUNCIL MEETING.)
1) This approval is only for entertainment in conjunction with the
restaurant use. Entertainment is approved for small bands or individual
musicians, and a dance floor area. Any change of intensity or type of
entertainment shall require a modification to this permit.
2) The dance floor shall not exceed 150 square feet.
3) The provision of entertainment is limited to between 8:00 p.m. and 2:00
a.m., Sunday through Saturday. Any expansion of days and/or hours
shall require modification of this permit.
4) No adult entertainment, as defined in the Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Code, Section 17.04.090, shall be permitted at any time.
5) All entertainment shall be conducted entirely inside the building.
6) When entertainment is being conducted, doors and windows shall
remain closed for noise attenuation purposes. The rear (north) doors
shall be used only for emergencies from 8:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m.
7) No entertainment activity shall create any noise that exceeds an
exterior noise level of 60 dB during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to
7:00 a.m., or 65dB during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The
business owner shall not permit entertainment on the premises, except
as authorized by a valid Entertainment Permit.
8) Access to the lounge/entertainment area must be from the main
entrance to the primary use and not from a separate exterior entrance.
Other exits shall be for "Fire Exit" purposes only.
9) The applicant shall at all times fully comply with all applicable
regulations of the Department of Alcoholic and Beverage Control
(ABC), including those provisions regarding Attire and Conduct and
Entertainers and Conduct (specifically Sections 143.2, 143.3 otTitle 4
of the California Code of Regulations).
10) In the event the operation of the business while entertainment is being
provided causes adverse effects to nearby property owners or adjacent
businesses or operators, then the Entertainment Permit shall be
brought before the Planning Commission for consideration, including
possible modification, imposition of additional conditions, and/or
penalties and/or revocation of the Entertainment Permit.
/-
/,
~
ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN PLANNING COMMISSiON
RESOLUTION 05-51 ACCEPTABLE TO MARGARITA BEACH.
February 1, 2006
Page 2
11) The business owner, and all persons acting on behalf of the business,
shall with respect to the business at all times comply with any and all
local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, including, but not
limited to, requirements of the Foothill Boulevard Districts, all
applicable City Ordinances, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection
District, and Public Health Codes. The business owner shall provide
all employees with a copy of these Entertainment Permit conditions
and shall personally ensure that each employee understands and is
familiar with each Entertainment Permit condition.
12) The term of the Entertainment Permit is one year. The business owner
shall annually renew this Entertainment Permit per Municipal Code
Section 5.12.115. Renewal of said permit shall be based on full
compliance with all the conditions of this approval, as modified, and
those of the associated Conditional Use Permit for the premises.
13) The maximum number of occupants shall not exceed building and fire
codes. Unless revised by a change in or interpretation of any
applicable statute or regulation, the maximum occupancy for the use is
233 persons and the same shall be posted as determined by the
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and/or the City's Fire
Prevention Unit Department.
14) Uniformed security personnel shall be provided within the parking area
at all times during evening business hours (9:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m.) to
control parking and monitor crowd behavior. A minimum of one
member of the security team shall be continually present at all times.
When the front parking lot reaches 75 percent capacity, the number of
security personnel outside the establishment shall be increased to a
minimum of two persons patrolling the parking lot and one person on
Ramona Avenue directing patrons away from parking within the
adjacent residential neighborhood.
15) The business operator and/or its employees shall not direct patrons to
park in the rear parking areas on the north side of the building, in any
of the adjacent residential streets, or other off-site locations. On site
parking signs shall be installed by the applicant to instruct patrons not
to park anywhere but within the parking lot. The number, location and
language of said signs shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Planner.
16) The City Planner shall monitor the operation of the business with a
progress report being brought back to the Commission for two
successive 3-month reviews, beginning on the date of this Commission
action. The report shall indicate whether the business establishment
has been operating in compliance with all conditions of approval and
applicable City ordinances. A follow up progress report shall be
provided to the Commission one year from the date of the last 3-month
review. Failure by the operator to comply with all the conditions of
,.-.
of-'
ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION 05-51 ACCEPTABLE TO MARGARITA BEACH.
February 1, 2006
Page 3
approval, as amended, at any time, or because of continued
complaints from the publiC regarding excessive problems directly
attributable to the operation of the establishment, shall be cause for the
possible revocation of the Entertainment Permit by the Planning
Commission.
17) The business operator shall work with the property owner to establish a
Business Watch program for the commercial center to address issues
related to crime prevention and personal safety.
K\WP60WW\2006\Misc\Margarita Beach\Entertainment Permit Conditions (05-51) (2-1-oS).doc
:I'
C.U.P. CONDITIONS (WITH MODIFICATIONS) CONTAINED IN PLANNING
COMMISSION RESOLUTION OS-50 ACCEPTABLE TO MARGARITA BEACH.
(THIS MATERIAL PREPARED BY MARGARITA BEACH'S COUNSEL AS REQUESTED AT
JANUARY 18, 2006 CITY COUNCIL MEETING.)
1) The serying of alcoholic beverages shall be in conjunction only with a
restaurant use and the availability of all items listed on the menu. The
sale and/or serving of alcoholic beverages shall cease when full listed
menu items are not available to customers. At all times, menu items
shall include full, hot "meals," as defined in California Business and
Professions Code Section 23038.
2) The serying of alcohol in conjunction with restaurant usage may occur
only between the hours of 11 :00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m.
3) The business owner shall at all times fully comply with all applicable
regulations of the Department of Alcoholic and Beverage Control
(ABC), including, but not limited to, those provisions regarding Attire
and Conduct and Entertainers and Conduct (specifically Sections
143.2, 143.3 of Title 4 of the California Code of Regulations).
4) All revenue generating business activities involving patrons shall be
conducted inside the building. This shall not preclude patrons from
smoking outside the south side of the building.
5) All doors shall remain closed during entertainment for noise attenuation
purposes. The rear (north) doors shall be used only for emergencies
from 8:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m.
6) All customers shall use the front (south) entrance/exit, and use of the
rear (north) parking lot shall be limited to employees only.
7) No entertainment activity shall create any noise that exceeds an
exterior noise level of 60dB during the hours of 1 0:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.,
or 65dB during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The business
owner shall not permit entertainment on the premises, except as
authorized by a valid Entertainment Permit
8) The use of exterior search lights, or flashing or otherwise Iight-
animated signs which contain or are illuminated by flashing or moving
lights or lights which are intermittently on and off, change in intensity, or
which create the illusion of flashing in any manner, shall not be
permitted.
9) The business owner shall be responsible for the clean up and general
maintenance of the areas in front and behind the lease space, and in
any and all parking lot areas occupied by its patrons. All collected
lrash and debris shall be properly disposed in the trash receptacles
located on the site.
:'
C.U.P. CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 05-50
ACCEPTABLE TO MARGARITA BEACH.
February 1, 2006
Page 2
10) The business owner, and all persons acting on behalf of the business,
shall with respect to the business at all times comply with any and all
local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, including, but not
limited to, requirements of the Foothill Boulevard Districts, all
applicable City Ordinances, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection
District, and Public Health Codes. The business owner shall provide
all employees with a copy of these C.U.P. conditions and shall
personally ensure that each employee understands and is familiar with
each C.U.P. condition.
11) Any modification to the floor plan, expansion, or other change in
operation shall require a revision to this Conditional Use Permit and
associated Entertainment Permit.
12) All signage, including window signs, shall be in conformance with the
Comprehensive Sign Ordinance of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the
applicable Uniform Sign Program for the center, and shall require
review and approval by the Planning Department.
13) The dance floor maximum square footage shall not exceed 150 square
feet.
14) In the event the operation of the business causes adverse effects to
nearby property owners or adjacent businesses or operators, then the
Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the Planning
Commission for consideration, including possible modification,
imposition of additional conditions, and/or penalties and/or revocation
of the Conditional Use Permit.
15) The maximum number of occupants shall not exceed permissible limits
under the building and fire codes. The maximum occupancy for the
use is 233 persons and shall be posted as determined by the Rancho
Cucamonga Fire Protection District and/or the City's Fire Prevention
Unit Department.
16) No adult entertainment, as defined by the Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Code Section 17.04.090, shall be permitted.
17) Uniformed security personnel shall be provided within the parking area
at all times during evening business hours (9:00 p.m. t02:00 a.m.) to
control parking and monitor crowd behavior. A minimum of one
member of the security team shall be continually present at all times.
When the front parking lot reaches 75 percent capacity, the number of
security personnel outside the establishment shall be increased to a
minimum of two persons patrolling the parking lot and one person on
Ramona Avenue directing patrons away from parking within the
adjacent residential neighborhood.
,i
C.U.P. CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 05-50
ACCEPTABLE TO MARGARITA BEACH.
February 1, 2006
Page 3
18) The business operator and/or its employees shall not direct patrons to
park in the rear parking areas on the north side of the building, in any
of the adjacent residential streets, or other off-site locations. On site
parking signs shall be installed by the applicant to instruct patrons not
to park anywhere but within the parking lot. The number, location, and
language of said signs shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Planner.
19) The driveway entries/exits on Ramona Avenue shall be closed each
business day no later than 1 :00 a.m. to direct patrons leaving the site
to exit on Foothill Boulevard, subject to approval by the City's Traffic
Engineer.
20) The City Planner shall monitor the operation of the business with a
progress report being brought back to the Commission for two
successive 3-month reviews, beginning on the date of this City Council
action. The report shall indicate whether the business establishment
has been operating in compliance with all conditions of approval and
applicable City ordinances. A follow up progress report shall be
provided to the Commission one year from the date of the last 3-month
review.
22) The business owner shall work with the property owner to establish a
Business Watch program for the commercial center to address issues related to
crime prevention and personal safety.
K:\WP60\JW\2006\Misc\Margarita Beach\CUP Conditions (05-50) {2-1-06).doc
Page 1 of I
; COUNCIL E-MAIL
Distributed I ~3o -o&>
From: John H. Weston Uohnhweston@wgdlaw.com]
Sent: January 26, 2006 3:54 PM
To: Mayor; Council, City Council; Council, City Council; Council, City Council; Council, City Council
Cc: James L. Markman, Esq.; D. Craig Fox, Deputy City Attorney; Coleman, Dan; KamMachado
Subject: Margarita Beach
Attached is a copy of a letter which will be delivered today to all indicated recipients. It renews
Margarita Beach's previous request to meet and confer with its neighbors in order to ascertain
the respective sides' present positions and, if possible, to attempt to resolve amicably
whatever remains of the previously expressed concerns.
Respectfully,
JOHN H. WESTON
Attorney at Law
JOHN H. WESTON
Attorney at Law
Weston. Garrou. DeWitt & Walters
12121 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 900
Los Angeles, CA 90025
(310) 442.Q072
(310) 442.Q899 (fax)
~tQ.!:tnHWggon(cUwgQlaw--,-C9m
ISgmMiI.Gl:v;l9.Q.@yfgg.l;;tv.i.&Qffi
IMPORTANT NOTICE: Privileged andlor confidential information, including attomey-client communication andlor attorney work product may be
contained in this message. This message is intended only for the indjvjdual or individuals to whom it is directed. If you are not an intended recipient of
this message (or re.sponsible for delivery of this message to such person), any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited and may be a crime. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any misdirection of this message. If you received this message in
error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the sender by return e-mail.
1130/2006
J
LAW OI'"F'ICES
WESTON. GARROU. DEWITT & WALTERS
..JOHN H. WESTON'f
CLYDE Ot;Wl'rTt..:t
G. RANDALL. GARROU't
MARK P. elNDER't
$TE:PHAN'I!: AME:S'.I
A PARTNERSHIP OF PROF'E:SS'ONAI. BUSINESS ENTITIES
"'LORIO'" O"'''''CE
WILSHIRE BUNDY PLAZA
12121 WIL~HIRE BOULEVARD, SUITE 900
LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90025-1168
FAX 1310J 442-0agg
(310) 442-0072
LAWRENCE: G. WALTERSz..
MARC -J. RANOAZ%A~'&
DEREK e. el'tCTT~'O
01' COUNSItI.
CATHY E. CROSSON".)
A. DALE MANICO"'"
.JEROME H. MOONEy'.'t
JOSEPI-t P. WOHRLE'
781 DOUGL.AS A\lf:NUE
ALTAMONTE: SPRINGS, "'1.. 327'4.2561$
FAX 14071 77~6151
14071 3Sg.4521l
RENEWED REQUEST
to confer re
Margarita Beach
SAN DIEGO OFFICI:
1205 J STAEE:T, SUITE: B
SAN DIEGO, CA Q2101-7500
"AX {CJlg) 239-1'17
(SIQl 232-3255
. ADIoIIl'TD) IN CAUF"ORN1"
;!:AOMITTED'NFl.OIlI~
3 AC!MITT'ED IN lNOINU.
4ADIo4mE:O IN TEXAS
5AOMITTEO IN ~UStTTS
6A01011ITTW IN D1S1RICT OF COLUMBIA
, PoDMITl'EO IN UTAH
t A CAl.II'DRNIA PFI0F'E:SSlDNAL CDRF'OI'lA'tlON
* A f1.()AIOI\. I"ROI'ESSIONAL ASSOCIATIDN
January 25, 2006
Mr. Ed Sanchez
9869 Estacia Court
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Re: Margarita Beach
9950 West Foothill Blvd., Ranc/w Cucamonga, CA 91730
Dear Mr. Sanchez:
As you know by now, I am co-counsel for Margarita Beach in connection with its relationship with
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and indirectly, with you. I have been retained to deal with the
recent changes in Margarita Beach's conditional use and entertainment permits.
As you also know, in September I sought to establish a community meeting with many of Margarita
Beach's neighbors in order to discuss the current situation. Staff had suggested I do this - and we all
thought it was a great idea. I requested that a staff member chair the meeting, but my request was
denied (by Mr. Buller, I believe). I wrote to most of the neighbors, but some days later received a
rejection letter probably drafted by Mr. Sanchez but attached to a common signature line signed by
all.
I was bitterly disappointed because I thought that much could have been accomplished. No matter.
By now, we've all had a chance to listen carefully to everything that's been said at the City Council
meetings, and, once again, it seems to me that we ought to try to talk to see if we can reach
agreement or at least narrow some of the issues. The City Council is obviously busy with lots of
matters, so anything we can do to reduce its workload would be both civic minded and a general
good thing.
While there are some things on which Margarita Beach cannot compromise - you know that and you
know what they are - they are remarkably few in number. As to almost everything else, Margarita
Beach wants to know your perspectives and suggestions, and would very much like to try to
accommodate your reasonable requests. For so long now, people ha';e been talking at each other
instead of to each other. In the spirit of good neighborliness - and the great likelihood that you're all
. going to be living together fh the future '-' weagainrespectfuUysuggestthat we all meet.
LAW OFFICES
WESTON. GARROU. DEWITT Iii WALTERS
A P....RTNERSH.P QF" PROrESSIONAL BUSINESS ENT.TIES
Mr. Sanchez
Re: RENEWED REQUEST to confer re Margarita Beach
January 25,2006
Page 2
Last time, I suggested the time and place and the moderator - me. Apparently, people objected to
one or more aspects of the proposal. So, let me suggest the following: you all pick the time, place,
location and moderator. Give us 24 hours notice and we'll be there. We don't have much time, so
let us know by phone or e-mail. Even if we meet Tuesday night, January 31", it's worth it. None of
us can guarantee success, but we are guaranteed that if we don't ny, then for sure nothing will be
accomplished.
The Margarita Beach team has worked very hard in response to the neighbors' comments; won't you
take this last opportunity to meet us half way?
I hope we have the opportunity to try to resolve these matters.
Please RSVP to my assistant, Kam Machado. Feel free to contact her via telephone (310/442-0072)
or e-mail (KamMachado@wgdlaw.com).
Respectfully yours,
By
WESTON, GARROU, D
JHW:km
cc: Hon. William J. Alexander, City Mayor (via e-mail miliJ
Hon. Diane Williams, Council Member, Mayor Pro T em (via e-mail imb,)
Hon. Rex Gutierrez, Council Member (via e-mail miliJ
Hon. L. Dennis Michael, Council Member (via e-mail miliJ
Hon. Sam Spagnolo, Council Member (via e-mail miliJ
James L. Markman, Esq. (viae-mail~
D. Craig Fox, Deputy City Attorney (via e-mail miliJ
Dan Coleman, Acting City Planner (via e-mail miliJ
Mark Davidson
~
"
LAW OF'F'ICE:S
WESTON. GARROU. DEWITT 11 WALTERS
A PARTNERS"'!> 01" PROFESSIONAl,. eUSINE:SS ENTITle::S
Mr. Sanchez
Re: RENEWED REQUEST to confer re Margarita Beach
January 25, 2006
Page 3
cc: Neighbors (all via hand-delivery):
Elian Backhouse
L. Dustin Black
Marya Black
Chris Cameron
Shane Cameron
James Colbreath
Adam Evans
Rob Evans
Emily LaQuay
Larry Liberatore
David Mosher
Jean Mosher
. Sam Moussavi
Sarah Moussavi
Barbara Olson
Jim Olson
Hilda Phillips
Christine Reid
Ed Sanchez
Peggy Sanchez
Victoria Sanchez
Vicki Scimone
Pat Stevens
Trish Stevens
Rodney Trujillo
Betty Watkins
Kim Weishan
K:\WI'6O\JW\lOO6\Mis:\Matprira Bnch\EdSROChc1..oh:
I!/ .... 0,14,15
"J'"' ll?oil!OlQ
~/7(/- ry
1,);,<1/
C~"'- t~ 0-u~IzY-':J-
U;. 01t./'!/JL;",'; ..;'U, ;,~/
- /0
/".. ; . ;'
C<.j,.{ y; 11'-"-
IA~(/ yiLt! Illlty.);....
6J h (~I<./l {/,/ j 7~){C
VI/. .. . n /'r/ ::J /,;;, iv . , Vf
fhLJ /,L'.e~' . ,"/(",/0 ,
, " JJ i'J. 0. h /ft.i:t
~uc {/..%/ .~, /1~.J
1\' '0/ rl . (Jk J nI J'M.;'j~" .
.J142 :i,W q-
Mayor William Aleximder
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive,
Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91730
/
..;..(Q....II, '< j ../, . ~-
Mfa. Pal Stcvona
9999 Foothill Blvd. Spo. 1/137
Rancho Cucamonsa. CA 91730
Dear Mayor Alexander:
I would like to explain the side of the residents of the Pines Mobile Home Parkat 9999 Foothill
Boulevard to you and the City Council regarding the complaints associated with the Margarita
Beach Night Club, since to date you have really only heard those made by the residents of the
Estacia neighborhood.
Once again, we have had a lot of trouble with Margarita Beach for the past 7-8 years. I want to
make this clear, that we have tried to do everything possible to get help from the police chief and
the police department and the club owner. I was the first person back then to Walk into the police
station by myself, and I saw that there were already a lot of complaints from residents about
Margarita Beach registered on the police log.
This was followed by 3 meetings between myself and other park neighbors, the club owner, and
police chief, all which produced absolutely zero results. It was a bigjokel Then I started a
petition, which I turned into City Hall with over 40 signatures of residents requesting the city
take action to end this problem.
However. I already knew that we were in big trouble when I went to get on Foothill Boulevard
. one day and across the way there was a life-size plastic gorilla tied between 2 trees. Then a panel
truck opened will all kinds ofIights, playing very loud music, which carried all the way past the
pool in the southern area in the park..
This isjusI couple of the things thaI was happening. I have also often stood behind the park's
block wall facing Foothill Boulevard, where I can see whal is happening directly across the streel
at Margarita Beach on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights.
For example. I have observed thaI the security guards stationed in the Marsarita Beach parking
lot were of absolutely no use. Between Ramona A venue and Margarita Beach there was just 100
many people wandering anc;l horsing around. And there was no noise or crowd control with the
wild Iypes of customers thc$e are.
.
LAW OFFICES
WESTON. GARROU. DEWITT B WALTERS
A PARTNERSHIP OF PROFESSIONAl- eUSINESS ENTITIES
Pat Stevens
Re: RENEWED REQUEST to confer re Margaritlf Beach
January 25, 2006
Page 2
Last time, I suggested the time and place and the moderator - me. Apparently, people objected to
one or more aspects of the proposal. So, let me suggest the following: you all pick the time, place;
location and moderator. Give us 24 hours notice and we'll be there. We don't have much time, so
let us know by phone or e-mail. Even if we meet Tuesday night, January 31", it's worth it. None of
us can guarantee success, but we are guaranteed that if we don't try, then for sure nothing will be
accomplished.
The Margarita Beach team has worked very hard in response to the neighbors' comments; won't you
take this last opportunity to meet us half way?
I hope we have the opportunity to try to resolve these matters.
Please RSVP to my assistant, Kam Machado. Feel free to contact her via telephone (310/442-0072)
or e-mail (KamMachado@wgdlaw.com).
By
, DeWITT & W ALTERS
Respectfully yours,
. WESTON
JHW:km
cc: Hon. William J. Alexancier, City Mayor (Ilia ,-mail !WW
Hon. Diane Williams, Council Member, Mayor Pro Tern (Ilia e-mail!WW
Hon. Rex Gutierrez, Council Member (Ilia e-mail!WW
Hon. L. Dennis Michael, Council Member (Ilia e-mail~)
Hon. Sam Spagnolo, Council Member (via e-mail!WW
James L. Markman, Esq. (Ilia ,-mail!WW
D. Craig Fox, Deputy City Attorney (via e-mail!WW
Dan Coleman, Acting City Planner (via e-mail ~
Mark Davidson
LAW OFFICES
WESTON. GARROU. DEWITT 8 WALTERS
JOHN H. WESTON't
CL.YOE OE:WITT'....:t.
G. RANOAL.L. GARROU't
MARK P. BINOER'i
STEi='HANIE AMES...l
A PAFlTNEFlSHlP OF' PFlOF'ESSION...... BUS'NESS ENTITIES
FL.ORIDA OFFICE
WILSHIRE: BUNDY PLAZA
12121 WILSHIRE: BOULE:VARD. SUITE: 900
LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90025-1168
L.AWRENCe: G. WAL.TEAS2*
MARC J. RANDAZZA2..~
DEREK B. BRETTl!.e
FAX (3'0) 442-0899
(3101 442-0072
781 COUGL.AS AVENUE
AL.TA....ONTE SPRINGS. FL. 32714-2566
F'AX 14071 774-&151
14071 389-4529
Of" COUNSEl..
CATHY E. CROSSON1."
A. DAL.E MANICO"'"
JEROME H. MOONEyl.7*
JOSEPH P. WOHRL.E'
RENEWED REQUEST
. . to confer re
Margarita Beach
SAN OIl::GO OFFICE
1205 J STREET. SUITE B
SAN OIEGO. CA 92101-7500
FAX 16191' 239-1717
1619) 232-3255
I ADMITTED I'" c.-.uF'ORNlA
2 ADf'oIIlTTEO I'" F'LOR'DA
3 ADMrrTEO IN INDI.-.NA
4 ADf'oIIlTTED IN 1"EJo(p.S
'5 IIDMITTEO IN MASSACHUS!:TTS
eADMrrTED IN DISTRICT OF COWMBlA
7 ADf'oIIlTTEO 'N UTAH
January 25, 2006
* A CAUFORNlA PAOF'ESSIONAl... CORPOR.-.T'ON
. A F'\,.OAlDA PROFESSIONAl... ASSOCIATION
Pat Stevens
9999 Foothill Boulevard, # 13 7
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Re: Margarita Beach
9950 West Foothill Blvd., Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Dear Pat Stevens:
As you know by Il/JW, I am co-counsel for Margarita Beach in connection with its relationship with
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and indirectly, with you. I have been retained to deal with the
recent changes in Margarita Beach's conditional use and entertainment permits.
As you also know, in September I sought to establish a community meeting with many of Margarita
Beach's neighbors in order to discuss the current situation. Staff had suggested I do this - and we all
thought it was a great idea. I requested that a staff member chair the. meeting, but my request was
denied (by Mr. Buller, I believe). I wrote to most of the neighbors, but some days later received a
rejection letter probably drafted by Mr. Sanchez but attached to a common signature line signed by
all.
I was bitterly disappointed because I thought that much could have been accomplished. No matter.
By now, we've all had a chance to listen carefully to everything that's been said at the City Council
meetings, and, once again, it seems to me that we ought to try to talk to see if we can reach
agreement or at least narrow some of the issues. The City Council is obviously busy with lots of
matters, so anything we can do to reduce its workload would be both civic minded and a general
good thing.
While there are some things on which Margarita Beach cannot compromise - you know that and you
know what they are - they are remarkably few in number. As to almost everything else, Margarita
Beach wants to know your perspectives and suggestions, and would very much like to try to
accommodate your reasonable requests. For so long now, people have been talking at each other
instead of to each other. In the spirit of good neighborliness - and the great likelihood that you're all
going to be living together in the future - we again respectfully suggest that we all meet.
I'
LAW OFFICES
WESTON. GARROU. DEWITT /,\ WALTERS
A PARTNERSI-lIP OF PROFESSIONAL BUSINESS ENTITIES
Pat Stevens
Re: RENEWED REQUEST to confer re Margarita Beach
January 25, 2006
Page 3
cc: Neighbors (all via hand-delivery):
Elian Backhouse
L. Dustin Black'
Marya Black
Chris Cameron
Shane Cameron
James Colbreath
Adam Evans
Rob Evans
Emily LaQuay
Larry Liberatore
David Mosher
Jean Mosher
Sam Moussavi
Sarah Moussavi
Barbara Olson
Jim Olson
Hilda Phillips
Christine Reid
Ed Sanchez
Peggy Sanchez
Victoria Sanchez
Vicki Scimone
Pat Stevens
T rish Srevens
Rodney Trujillo
Betty Watkins
Kim Weishan
K:\WPOO\fW\2006\Mi$ClJ>.hrgariu Beaeh\Pa1 Stcvens.doc
",
,
G
~/J 'S
~~
~
o
1:1
-
;" z
" {:. m
~ C/J
1~
--
OJ
r
m
.::r:
o
~ ~.
"'0 0
~ $
^
_ 'O^1811IH100:J ..... -l..~. (,
"\ "''''os ..~ ~ r'....
. . k @)( '52 1/$ ?Ji1:.~
. x[j(' m. 8 .pC(9~S
.... ...
~ Ol
..... Ol
.... ....
.it 8:
~ I~
->
->
CD
->
->
-..j G'
::: j:
Ol :::,
-> \
-> (\
(Jl
....
->
.t>
->
->
w
->
....
"-l
~
\
~~~
~ P<~
~ )(~.
-> -"
~ ~
... -' .
~ ~
-' -'
~ ~
-'
~
-'
~
-'
~
-' .
w.
-'
.... ~........
o ~ t6 ~
~~~ ~ViQS
...
~ '...... ..... .....
~ ~ ~
'f
<0
W
<0
/oJ
<0
->
<0
o
CD
<0
CD
CD
CD
-..j
8l
CD
(Jl
CD
.t>
CD
W
~ ~
.
-..j
w
t:j
~
.t>
~.
-'
~
Ol
oo,J
Ol
oo,J
o
Ol
co
oo,J
oo,J
8l
oo,J
Ol
gj
oo,J
<0
.S!
~
~
~
Ol
-'
CD
N
gj
c;; r-- €; - f';J .. .
-' ) . "I"'''~(''~ '
-' \;,,' ""c
~ '\ -yrV
\ -' \")'0.'1") '''''PO':>
Ol ~.ly .
~. , b -+-1'
-' .~\ ""t r
~ S + "'-"1 -->,
-"') \" "l.~
.... ,
m
....
t Y.l-"\
~.~
~.~
Ol .
~ .~ ,oJ.. .. ..-.iIl
IY..~'
-, .... co.
. .t ~.\["o/_ . r
_ ~:jY cJ)~);
~s g .' 8
-' . ~
!S ~ $ 8
~
-..~ .
........ . -- -,. N
~.':;;- ......... : . W .t>/ (Jl I m
-' ~ -
~"t'- i' . w ~.....o~ '-
~.. . a) . co Ol ~
. 8: $
~
-.j
~
~
.~. A
Ol
.~
c
...{'
/""
2
-
-
-'
.t"
-
.... .... ....
Ol . oo,J CIl
.... N
co 0
;...
0'1
Ol
co
t
.t5
~
~
\)l ~ ~ !;3 ~
N
CIl
N (.ll W W W
co 0 .... tv W
8l.
A.
I\)
'-.I
~ ~
~8l~~~~
........
Ol Ol
N ....
NEWS rtlUM AROUNU
TH,!; iN\.AND VALLEY
Ranctib,j~Ura"t's . .
appl!~1 h3.~J:I~g:delaved
':., - -- ".' :'" .."
'RANCHOCUCAMONGA -:c'
Thepjiblic hemjng for the appeal
of,';Polts!iar~w: Beach to '
~~:;l,~Wi~~fh:"ca"ii~)>n I
attOnieyreiires~iitii1g the resta\t~ I
rant could not attend. The councd
decided to resume th'e hearing on :
Dec. 21; when Margarita Beach is '
expected to give testimony. ..:'.' i
lri July, the city's Planning .Com. .
mission voted to amend certam
provisions of the restauranes per- .
mits including liniiti!'g its hours of
service. Residents spoke a~ a pub-
lic hearing earlier this month
.' claiming Margarita: Beach is via- i
Iating its jieimits by operating liS a
nightetub and.not a restaurant, .
. _ Wendy leung, (909) 48~937~
1
i
'i
j
Ute"..
'pd.c6d:l.I~rt~,s~rie up heiting
i{~~le~~f~~\~r~~Ofi~pf~atci~ ~~ti~~
BYMOi'~R.Ok~~n~~j,;;; J:r r' 'lji~l!"pas~e~i: :Q;~ithVice' tends oth~. factors playhito the the Pines Mobile Home Park.
StaffW"ri1er..... ...0 '.' . ChairihanLa,r'ljMcl'{I~labsent. problems clteciby neIghbors. acro~Btheiltreetfrom the bar,
lW,j'qijo'J::UC~O~G1~;S?,v:'lft s~g~~il~dt~b;alls for ,', "1 don't}1<!J~i.~'~Jny business is said she is iiwakened between
;Thl'emR!it~""Margr!TI'MBeach }s.~f\11c,!ofr.m:p~h.ce;,",,~ifirebe4~l1e sole <ji,\1.. ,()r~he.proble'."s.. 2 andl! a:,,n~'fo#;~u.t "feeven'
bar"': accused of produCIng un- : dissected to provldefurther de,. ' III your neigh r!;ood,",he said. nights by pat1'orudIi' the' bar's
rUlypatronswhouririate~ vomit, . tail on incidents "at or. around However, Jle" added, "Since we parking 19t.' . '. . " .
drink.anq _,have sex inc~rs in : the. bar and, .epcpuraged city .have not 1?e.en. a good.neighbor . "Nobody could sle~pwith this
front' Qf,'neighb~rs'.:p.priie$- : staff to crelite acommb.nity- in the past," making changes, hom,ndous /loise,"she said,
. .CO~I..d..,..b~)n. ,.iI~. .,~e. r.,p./ h......~.~.in..;gj~~ .\".I1"..9.1.icin, .gse.r'f ic~ .i.n., ~h~ 1Ir.e.!..',.. She w..''''.'' "th~,~.. a.... .st.v(.e ~!\ll., ci 0 ,to. ~.. . thThe" I'e' gg~..i.~.C.'or'~..Meilfin.,g ~.j,I.Be. Vlea: e~.
doofS,dosed.:::",;;<fIl"',\': s"ld she hoped, the, problems g60d n~lg .bor~ In the f.uture: . l' ,~W" ~~.... en
'. :.Afte. ....rre.ti'Wl... '~.' 'po.'. ~c..e,.~..,.. dfire'co!ll~ b...e. .re~ol.ved,. .Ph.. .~~ to, the,. :1\1e stoes ~O..ld bY., uelghbQrs, ". is te~~fN!>lyB~i}!e~forthe .
'call~:;and,:p~~ ~ttf,!j~ll~)Ony i"P1J~Ji.c;:heanng,~!~nInIJ com- . v:ljlch a1\~<i!"er,paInted an. ~n~. Plal'\L.!i1.l:' .,Q~!"nn'~IO",'S April
'fr,,!1'l.thel>gs 0 , ..er,hl&!e:wyer ;;mlssl~ners tool(.'lIoteofbar..' slg~t1y pI,*ure of the bar shdlts. 27 meetmlf:'. .'~""'. ,
. ari~~eNlf#P:neigl>RO~~~gi.~eL,,~erMar.kPliY.i:~~on'sgood- patrons,~Il:~oIl:,~or_ahnosttwo... ."-,,,:?,,: .... ,. '.'
"esllib)~sh.n1e~tithe'Pj.!!l'lln,gI!,":'R"ttemPts to,h~.,.!!thte"se~u-,hP\lrS }Vellne. s. day mg. ht;. . '. MollyR. Okeon!;Q!l beieiu:hed
~"rl'inl1SSlOn on W~dnesd~yde-r.,tyaround ~he ~~r.bY postIIlg ,Vicki S?,,,!,oIle, who hve~ on. bye-!nriil'at'rn<!lly.dkeon@dai-
clded to call a pubhc heanng to more guards, partIcularly on nearby Paslto Avenue, SaId a lybulleiiTi.comor by pho!le at'.
review the conditional-use and nearbyEstacia Street, and turn. man once tried to break into her (909)483.'9376.
entertainme.nt 'perpli~$ .ofthe.i_ iI.l:g away C\lstorp.ers'who park hOl,lse via .t~e sliding glass door
bar,at 9950'F()oth.i!1.!l!v~;'l".f;9n 4',~t str7<1't-.i''''~ ',', '~','i:b?fs."se. ,e~",~,~odrunk, he .
. . CltyPI.llI1nerBraallOOJ<1r:r!'~-.:',. ..p~Ylcison's!l'c1.MJl11d hIS em",nlidn ~J<n . .'Wh~fe,h,e was. She
?mij1e~~~,c1,:1h,,: p:up)ic,;Maljri(';, plciY~s,clll;c~the.A.;ighb~rhoO<l \;Jtld he "roited '~!i . tiri!,ated
ml?is r~p~ft ~the.c~~mlsslon". ,thre<1times,~~al..;"nqplckup /!JI herbu pes an~;!eft-his c~
wljich gave],ackground 'on,.the :t1'asIJ.,He al~o, \'l81tednelghbors'y,keYS, wal et, andc!'lI,pp.one In
. situa'tionand provided materiJ . hOlries,when'I}e'flistr:ibut,ed let:'rlllir yard . i policeplc]ted him
,~~t\~rh~~~~:~'&1jg~~~~1}(;,t~~:~J~!}~5~~.r:;~ri~~~;ilU~Jri.ey> ~d to'nl~~~:W~ bar
'dh~~~rfrJif:..l':~"I:~~~U""'f:feli:l~i~~;{~t~~S~N'fU;'~~'~~~r" \1ci~i;o~Wf~:!-.
took the lead on.thematio;,,;. However ,'Davidson'stilleo!', ':dents,"'sh tOld tl;Iil;(:oiilmisSion.
, .." .. .IV. .. ,... .
. ,,'.~
\
:'.
~} i
Inla";d Vall",y Daily B;"lletin .
Inland V"II..\, Dailv 1I..1I..tll.
LOCAL
......
Friday, January 20: 2006 AS
ita Beach appeals limits on bar hours
.lANO
IMlrt.,.
tho .......I!j.
nt ..0,11111I '
ell ,.. VI
RootAIl ..'" , ," " .nd
hi. .It"n"", "j' ....."..'whl.h
Indud.d In"'!llttO"'"' dolml... u.. ....
IAhll.tun."IIlI....1ot ond ",..lIn_ \0 be
n wJOCl nol_"'IM,
"It1Y "to u,...". An apP"..1 tn . Plan~
ninK i~Uln",i..ifln decision m.de last
July dud p'nl"l'(l limits on tho business
indllfllult n I'tt(luction of its hours. At-
'..__0' .1..1... " W....tnn. V\lhn ....nl"PlU'!~b'l.
.. .-..
M"rKnritn A(IOch. !lOid on Wednesday
tho dKitrion would ahut down the local
bu.'n,.,,".
1n aMCncc we're faced with 8 Planning
" mJIJrfton'R c!t!cision (that is) tanta.
,~(:Ihount toa death pcnalty,"Weston said.
, ' R..ldent. living near the Foothill
Haulttyftrd eMtabliflhment complained
loot F.hruary that Margarita Beach CUB-
tAln",", hove brought unruly behavior to
thoir nflighborhood, including leaving
ht'4~r huUlea and urinating on their prop-
erly.
Last I>eccmber, residents Rave 2~
hours of testimony claiming Margarita
Beach is not operating in accordance
with its .existing restaurant pennit but
rRt,hoP'" "q.,. In,,,", ni....J.......l..h
On Wednesday, Martin D.. Newson,
an acoustic cnRineer, said he WBS hired
t.o measure the noise level of various ID-
eations near Margarita Beach and found
that the majority of his measurements
fell below the city limit of 55 decibels in
8 residential community.
Newson said in one instance, a mea-
sure taken at the property line near
Pines Mobile Home Park exceeded the
limit, but he attributed that \0 traffic
noise. Newson's findings were based on
tests conducted on Ocl. 20 and 22. '
Bill Rhetts, who was slso hired by
Margarita Beach to conduct an investi-
gation during weekend nights, said,
'~crickets were louder than any music
vnn Yniaht. J.....JlI...qn th... nA;P'hlv)"hnnd.
Davidson said complaints that the res-
iden18 have made did occur but. that he
has since addressed them. He said he has
instal led weather stripping to the edges
of doorways that would seal in sound
and alight indjcatingwhen an exit door
is left opened. Davidson said he has
changed the style of his advertisements
and eliminated theme parties, evidence
that residents have used to show that
Margarita Beach is operating like ~
adult cabaret.
"My Bole goal is to remain in business,"
Davidson said, "J remain willing to work
with my neighbors."
Margarita Beach employees also tes-
tified at the hearing, presenting a peti-
tion sUmed bv more than 850 Rancho Cu-
camonga rcsident.R who support Uw har.
.James Hernandez. ono IIf llll' two R~-
curit.y p~rBonncl hired lo pntrnl the
neighborhood afi.er residt!Du. nXII""umd
complaints. called hi. jllh "hnrinll" I...
cause there was not much nctivlty In tll'
area-to quell.
Residents in the community IUIYII Mid
they are not intereswd ,n IIhuttln, ft..."
the bUBiness bllt want MOl'JlorilA Io<M!Il
which only BerveB p"tro". ."" 21 ._
over, to operate a. ft ",_t.....,t"t. ..1'M
City Council will h,'.r ......101'...
tal at the next mooUnllllfll''' :I;;'~ii:j
":,-:;tI;'
Wendy LeufIII e"" I.. .-,it<d""
at wendy,kllll/llll/allyhllll."....,,;, ..:/\
phone at (909) 483.9378.
Margarita Beach appeals
litnitson bar hours
By Wendy Leung \).a.
Staff Writer \ I doO 10"""
RANCHO CUCAMONGA - Sup-
porters of Margarita Beach described
the sports bar and grill as well-behaved
at a public hearing before the City Coun-
cil on Wednesday.
Restaurant owner Mark Davidson and
his attorneys led the testimony, which
included investigators claiming the es.
tablishment is quiet and continues to be
a good neighbor.
They are urging an appeal to a Plan-
ning Commission decision made last
July that placed limits on the business
including a reduction of its hours. At-
torneyJohnH. Weston, who represents
Margarita Beach, said on Wednesday
the decision would shut down the local
business.
"In essence we're faced with a Planning
Commission's decision (that is) tanta-
mount to a death penalty," Weston said.
Residents living near the Foothill
Boulevard establishment complained
last February that Margarita Beach cus-
tomers have brought unruly behavior to
their neighborhood, including leaving
beer bottles and urinating on their prop-
erty.
Last December, residents gave 2\',
hours of testimony claiming Margarita
Beach is not operating in accordance
with its existing restaurant permit but
rather as a loud nightclub.
On Wednesday, Martin D. Newson,
an acoustic engineer, said he was hired
to measure the noise level of various lo-
cations near Margarita Beach and found
that the majority of his measurements
fell below the city limit of 55 decibels in
a residential community.
Newson said in one instance, a mea-
sure taken at the property line near
Pines Mobile Home Park exceeded the'
limit, but he attributed that to traffic
noise. Newson's findings were based on
tests conducted on Oct. 20 and 22.
Bill Rhetts, who was also hired by
Margarita Beach to conduct'an investi-
gation during weekend nights, said,
"crickets were louder than any music
you might hear" in the neighborhood.
Davidson said complaints that the res-
idents have made did occur but that pe
has since addressed them. He said he has
installed weather stripping to the ed~s
of doorways that would seal in sound
and a light indicating when an exit door
is left opened. Davidson said he has
changed the style of his advertisements
and eliminated theme parties, evidence
that residents have used to show that
Margarita Beach is operating like an
adult cabaret.
"My sole goal is to remain in business,"
Davidson said. "1 remain willing to work
with my neighbors."
Margarita Beach employees also tes-
tified at the hearing, presenting a peti-
tion signed by more than 850 Rancho Cu-
camonga resi~ents who support the bar.
James Hernandez, one of the two se-
curity personnel hired to patrol the
neighborhood after residents expressed
complaints, called his job "boring" be-
cause there was not much activity in the
area to quelL .
Residents in the community have said
they are not interested in shutting down
the business but want Ml!rgarita Beach,
which only serves patrons age 21 and
over, to operate as a restaurant. The
City Council will hear residents' rebut.
tal at the next meeting on Feb. 1.
Wendy Leung can be reached bye-mail
at wendy.leung@dailybulletin.comorby
phone at (909) 483.9376. '
\'?>
f/om. ~~oSt1flCo..
I ~.______,~
!\,' ,~
~.:<r'
.-". .
, .
./
,\
\. \
\ . \
, \
\ .
,<, \
\ '
\ '<
\, , \
\ \
. ,\
\ .. \
\ ~\
\ \
/
-
.;
.
.".'
/
~( ~
~ . -.
/'
//
",.~","-
......~.~
~'
...~-
\ \
. \
\ \
\ . \
\, \
, "
" '-.
o
,
,
. .
I; .
~~. lVov~ ;)..OJ :2-005' J...: 11M1'1
..
February 1,2006
Council Members:
Tonight marks one year since we first stood in these chambers to address the issues surrounding
Margarita Beach. There are several issues that will be addressed in my rebuttal.
There have been many attempts by members of the City Council and Planning Commission to thwart our
efforts. The first night that concerns about Margarita Beach were voiced, Councilman Rex Gutierrez gave
an unsolicited testimony for Mark Davidson. Further attempts to redirect and delay the hearings by
members ultimately failed. The dilatory tactics by the city forced an investigation of the Conditional Use
Permit and Entertainment Permit for Margarita Beach. That investigation defined the business as what it
should be, not what it had become over the years.
Subsequent to obtaining the permits, information was gathered from Margarita Beach's website.
Advertising flyers were also collected. Photographs from events and advertising for promotions made it
more than obvious what kind of business was being conducted within the walls of Margarita Beach. More
information was gathered and offered to the Planning Commission. Ultimately, the Planning Commission,
with legal advice from the city's attorney, formulated ResolutiolL'l 05-50 and 05-51.
The only issue that the City Council needs to consider in this matter is whether Margarita Beach is a
restaurant or a c1ub/bar. Clearly, the Conditional Use Permit (88-45) states that first and foremost the
business is to be operated as a restaurant. It should be more than obvious to everyone that has not been the
case. It has been operated as a nightclub/bar for a number of years. It is apparent that the business has been
unilaterally redefined. It appears that Margarita Beach has been operating primarily off of the entertainment
permit rather than the conditional use permit. Doing so clearly puts the business out of compliance with the
terms of the conditional use permit. Hypothetically, if the entertainment permit were revoked the business
could still operate because of the conditional use permit. However, if the conditional use permit were
revoked the business would be forced to close. Simply stated, the entertainment permit is ancillary to the
conditional use permit. Business cannot be conducted based solely on the entertainment permit.
Throughout these hearings, we have been asked to provide evidence in this matter. The City Council has
all the evidence it needs to pass the two Planning Commission Resolutions 05-50 and 05-51. All of the
evidence in this matter was generously supplied by Mark Davidson and his employees. The web site
(www.ieparty.com)was public domain and easily accessed over the internet. All of the photographs and
advertisements came from the business. The advertising flyers were strewn across the parking lot and
sidewalk in front of Margarita Beach. All we had to do was pick them up. Advertisements in
"entertainment magazines" were placed by the business. Listings for Margarita Beach are found under the
Club and Bar Directory. Listings for Margarita Beach can be found on page 992 under Nightclubs in the
2005 Clarke Phone Book for Rancho Cucamonga. The business is clearly being promoted as a club/bar.
There can be no argument as to the intent of the advertising and promotion of Margarita Beach.
The most damning piece of evidence is Mark Davidson's letter to the City of Rancho Cucamonga via
Brad Buller dated March 4, 1996. Mark Davidson states: "Pursuant to your request I have reviewed C. UP.
#88-45 for this location. I do hereby state that I am aware of all of the conditions set forth and do hereby
agree to comply with all said conditions." Two weeks ago, Mr. Reston attempted to convince the City
Council that subsequent resolutiolL'l superceded the original Conditional Use Permit. That is simply not true.
As evidenced in Mark Davidson's letter, it was not true ten years ago nor is it true today. Mark Davidson
signed and agreed to operate his business under the terms and conditions set forth in Conditional Use Permit
#88-45.
The City has an obligation to enforce its laws and codes. For whatever reasons, the Conditional Use
Permit for Margarita Beach has not been enforced. Individuals and agencies within the city simply have not
.
done their jobs. As the regulatory body and enforcement agency for the City, you have both the obligation
and opportunity to correct this problem by passing the Planning Commission's Resolutions 05-50 and 05-51.
These resolutions will accomplish two things. First, it will force Margarita Beach into compliance with its
Conditional Use Permit. Second, and just as important, it will mandate enforcement by the City.
Do not be fooled by the specious arguments offered by the appellant. The sole issue is whether
Margarita Beach is a restaurant or a c1ublbar. Substantial and significant evidence has been presented to
both the Planning Commission and City Council to prove that Margarita Beach is'a c1ublbar. That fact
clearly puts the business out of compliance with the Conditional Use Permit. Passage of Resolutions 05-50
and 05-51 will bring Margarita Beach into compliance to both the letter and intent of the Conditional Use
Permit (#88-45) agreed to by Mark Davidson in March 1996.
Jim Olson
~~?r~
www.ieparty.com - The Hottest Night Clubs
tll1ec~ billC~ soon. Xepillriv.com will be blllclt wi9:11 ill new loolc
http://www.ieparty.coml
Page I of 1
2/1/2006
"
'--' .
r(()//7- (JI(({(; ))(42.-
ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT APPLICATION
.
6( q/~{J3
,
Applicants for entertainment permits shall complete the following questionaire:
PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE
A. The name and permanent address of applicant:
,~~_~~__t__({~~:___~~_~~~~~__J:~__________________
Name
_-2:SL'J _ _ .lfsj/.i>.J~&:..._j:f..Y-~_1- _.I5~6!r:...4:J. __G..~~a<.. __~.J
Permanent Address
B. The name, proposed and current, if any, and business address of the applicant:
__~l~~_-~~~~-€~__-_~~~~&~J~l&-)--------------------
Name (Current and Proposed) ,
___________________~_p~~~--~~LLir-J56l~--~~~~~~~4)
Business Address cd "# '.
____________2:'.t'~~_~.f!~tL._~./J:~___~_fj?g~.L-/u;.-L~~~
C. A detailed description of the proposed entertainment, induding type o(
entertainment, and number of -persons engaged in the entertainment (may attach
seperate sheets if neCessary):
.
_G:!: !-"::.-t!!~ tY...~~..i::.._ _:zi2_ _ _1_"€:-_ _ _.02P_~J{;.d__ _~Q'!!~d!kt._- ~~ --
_ _;f i.lI#j~ _ - -f7.!;!:-~- t:~"!~__-/?L.~'d'!.' J __~~d/_ -~~ ~!~-~ -----
_ _(~~6.. _ _ "L-_-A. _ ,iZ~~<;~ -) -.T __d.k-_ -$f4)<-.7 - - .sp~!:-6. __rl"~____
_.s.f_~.J~-'-<2-!~5!dL~-J-ALL-.dpg~--./.e-~g!?d.-k~
_~~i!L___~~___~~~~_~~~___~d/~~~~~__~_____________
D. The date or day-of-week, hours and location of entertainment (attach floorplan),
and the admission fee, if any, to be charged:
_f.udl-.~.s;2.,-.,l----Ik'!'!:.~- _ _~~__ _ ..:1.u'::l-=-~<..~~_--2AiS--
_ AAtn.-'.>..f.i (,0:\.. __ __ &,-'L _ _L<:. q~ <7 _ _ }?~_~_ __ ~!21b.LV~ __-ta
_ l1L h !Cl:.t?..Yf.-'L __ j_,,?:_ _ _ _<1/-;<::- :!!-9.::i !J~? __ _ h_ _ _ ~.:~& _ _ ~~ -1:-_ -~~
_ 5:.. 'Y'ff-.f'=/::!(" ~ ..c?:!~~_ _~ d~€.~'{.~~ ~_.JI=. P.!'~~"::&. 9-""5f{ -- - -- - - - - - - - -
.
.
E. The name(s) of the person(s) responsible for the management or supervision of
applicant's business and of any entertainment:
,- A / ' <. I/ '-
---_~p-u~-~---C--~~4~----~~-~~~~~__~~______________
----------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------
F. A statement of the nature and character of applicant's business, if any, to be
carried on in conjunction with such entertainment, including whether or not
alcohol will be served as part of such business:
~-LY1'!:'~~--r<.-d<i:----0=-_.:..~'.A__A.~_~.s___~_k_~C!?l_t.~"C..l._.
--k---~~----~--ad:._~~.l_J/d___B_'?P::L~~~t_::_qdt;;...fJ..i,pl____
C2'iItL4.b:.{~-~-g.L"'-^'~.!~_/l:'_~__~__A.~__./~~d:!"~:f..J_19__~r;L<.....f-, ..,.,
G. Whether or not the applicant or 'any person responsible for the management or
supervision of applicant's business have been, within the previous ten years,
convicted of a crime, the nature of such offense, and the sentence received therefor
including conditions of parole or probation, if any:
------------~-~~~~-----------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------
H. Whether or not applicant has ever had any permit or license issued in
conjunction with the sale of alcohol or provision of entertainment revoked,
including the date thereof and name of the revoking agency:
--------------~~~------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------
Any false, misleading or fraudulent statement of material fact in the required
application shall be grounds for denial of the application for an entertainment
permit.
THE CITY OF
t' --.- -- - -~
RANCtlO CUCAMONGA
Staff Report
DATE:
TO:
February 1, 2006
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
Erica Darplee, Management Analyst I
FROM:
BY:
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH AND/OR INCREASE
THE FOLLOWING ENGINEERING-RELATED FEES AND FEES IN THE
FOLLOWING FEE CATEGORIES: APPLICATION FEES (MISCELLANEOUS),
UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING FEES, PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES (INCLUDING
"QUIMBY" AND IMPACT FEES), PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION PERMIT
FEES, MAP AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN CHECKING FEES AND ETIWANDA
DRAINAGE AREA (MASTER 9) FEES, AND APPROVE CONTRACT
AMENDMENTS TO CO 92-013 (DAN GUERRA & ASSOCIATES), CO 99-001
(AUFBAU CORPORATION) AND CO 98-021 (ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP)
FOR PLAN CHECK SERVICES.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council approve Resolution No. , which will establish
and/or increase fees administered by the Engineering/Public Works Division in the
categories of Application Fees, Utility Undergrounding Fees, Park Development
Fees ("Quimby" and Impact Fees), Public Works Construction Permit Fees, Map and
Improvement Plan Checking Fees and Etiwanda Drainage (Master 9) Fees, and
approve contract amendments to CO 92-013 (Dan Guerra & Associates), CO 99-001
(Aufbau Corporation) and CO 98-021 (Architerra Design Group) for plan check
services.
BACKGROUND:
The City's Engineering/Public Works Division is responsible for the collection and
administration of assorted development impact fees, as well as fees associated with
services rendered by Engineering staff pertaining to construction inspection, map
and plan checking, and application fees. As the entity responsible for managing
these funds, it is the obligation of engineering staff to update these fees to
correspond to current costs. It is also the responsibility of the Engineering/Public
~7
Page 2
A Resolution to establish and/or increase specified fees administered by the Engineering/Public
Works Division
Works Division to conduct appropriate fee studies for applicable fees. In the
following staff report, the status of each set of fees will be summarized.
Engineering Services-Based Fees
Application Fees (Miscellaneous)
Public Works Construction Permit Fees
Map and Improvement Plan Checking Fees
The above listed fees are all associated with services provided to the public by
Engineering/Public Works Division staff members. The California Government Code
allows the City to establish fees and charges for municipal services, provided such
fees and charges do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost to the City in
providing the service to which the fee or charge applies. These fees were last
updated in 1991 (Resolution 91-194).
The City hired an objective, third-party consultant, Maximus, Inc., to conduct a study
in order to determine the true cost of performing services related to the above listed
functions/fees. The study focused on the amount of staff time and resources
required to carry out each item listed in the categories of Application Fees and Map
and Improvement Plan Checking Fees, as listed on the Engineering/Public Works
Division Fee Schedule, attached as Exhibit "A". The complete User Fee Study-
Engineering Department report (from which Exhibit "A" is derived) dated January
2006 is. attached as Exhibit "B".
In the case of the Public Works Construction Permit Fees, these fees pay for
inspection related to new development projects. They have historically been a
valuation-based fee, a number derived from the total cost of a development project.
This type of fee has become a spot of contention in the courts, as the rising cost of
construction (steel and concrete-related prices) has driven the fees drastically
upward, while developers claim little or no relationship between those market trends
and the cost of providing inspection services to their projects. Due to the tenuous
legal status of these fees, staff opted for a new fee study that would objectively
examine the amount of time needed for inspection staff to carry out inspections on
all various aspects of construction projects. Those fees are also listed in Exhibit "A".
Park Development Impact Fees
These fees are development impact fees related to the City's parks and park
facilities infrastructure. Staff retained an objective, third-party consultant,
TischlerBise, to conduct the Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study, attached as
Exhibit "C". The study was conducted within the guidelines of California's impact fee
statute which originated in Assembly Bill 1600 (California Government Code Section
gg
Page 3
A Resolution to establish and/or increase specified fees administered by the Engineering/Public
Works Division
66000). The purpose of this fee is to ensure new development pays its fair share of
costs associated with building new park facilities and infrastructure. The fee was
calculated based on the incremental expansion, or standards-based, methodology.
The incremental expansion method documents the current level-of-service (LOS) for
the selected public facilities, based on current service standards such as park acres
per capita or recreational facility square feet per capita. A more detailed accounting
of the study formula, calculations and results is provided in Exhibit "C". The updated
proposed park impact fees are summarized in Exhibit "A".
Utility Under grounding Fees
The Utility Undergrounding Fees apply to the costs associated with undergrounding
new and existing overhead electric, telephone and cable services. These fees are
established in Planning Commission Resolution 87-96, and they have not been
updated since their inception. Per the resolution:
"The amount for in-lieu fees shall equal the length of the property
being developed from property line to property line, times the unit
amount as established by the City Council based upon information
supplied by the utility companies and as updated periodically as
deemed necessary. "
Staff has followed the instruction set forth in Resolution 87-96 and contacted
Southern California Edison, Verizon and Charter Communications to determine the
costs per linear foot to install these utilities underground. The updated fees are
included in Exhibit "A", attached to this report.
Etiwanda Drainage Area (Master 9) Fees
The City's drainage fees are all development impact fees associated with the need
for additional storm drain infrastructure due to new development citywide. There are
multiple drainage fees dependent on the location of the new development, and each
area has a corresponding study that lays out the framework of planned drainage
infrastructure and the resulting costs to development. In the case of the Etiwanda
Drainage Area Fee, the "Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Storm Drain Plan", Chapter
13.09 of the City's Municipal Code (City Ordinance 75), governs these fees and their
collection. These fees and an updated study were last brought before City Council
in March of 2001 in Resolution 01-067. That resolution called for the review and
adjustment of this fee annually by City Council:
"... on January 1 of each year by the Engineering News Record
Construction Cost Index (LA Area) of January 1 of that year in
0/
Page 4
A Resolution to establish and/or increase specified fees administered by the Engineering/Public
Works Division
proportion to a base index of 5771 (January 1, 1989). Upon review,
the Engineering Department shall report its findings to the City
Council at a noticed public hearing and recommend any adjustment
to this fee or other action as may be needed."
Engineering staff has reviewed this fee and determined that an adjustment is
necessary, in accordance with the predetermined method of adjustment via the
Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (LA Area). The new fee is listed
in Exhibit "A".
Contract Amendments for Plan Check Services
Dan Guerra & Associates, Aufbau Corporation and Architerra Design Group have
been providing plan check services for the City for twenty-two, five and four years,
respectively. Dan Guerra and Associates performs civil engineering plan checking.
Aufbau Corporation performs civil engineering and landscape plan checking.
Architerra Design Group performs landscape plan checking only. Plan checking is
assigned between the three consultants based upon type of project, consultant
availability and location of project. All three agreements include specific not-to-
exceed amounts. It is appropriate to modify these amounts at this time to maintain
consistency with the underlying calculations of the User Fee Study.
All three consultants are currently operating under agreements that were last
amended and approved by the City Council on July 7, 2004. These three
consultants have been contacted and all three companies have indicated that they
are agreeable to continue providing services at the proposed per-sheet and hourly
rates, terms, and conditions. These rates are listed on Exhibits "D", "E" and "F".
The City Attorney has reviewed the agreements and has indicated that they are still
valid. The adjustment for the proposed maximum charges is consistent with the
Maximus fee study (Exhibit "B"). For this reason, and in consideration of the existing
consultants' familiarity with the City of Rancho Cucamonga's design standards and
codes, and an established track record of exemplary service in meeting the City's
plan check needs, it is recommended that the City approve the proposed contract
amendments (attached as Exhibits "D", "E" and "F") modifying the not-to-exceed
amounts. All other terms of the contracts will remain unchanged.
Conclusion
Once again, staff recommends that Council approve Resolution No. , which
will establish and/or increase fees administered by the Engineering/Public Works
Division in the categories of Application Fees, Utility Undergrounding Fees, Park
16
Page 5
A Resolution to establish and/or increase specified fees administered by the Engineering/Public
Works Division
Development Fees ("Quimby" and Impact Fees), Public Works Construction Permit
Fees, Map and Improvement Plan Checking Fees and Etiwanda Drainage (Master
9) Fees, and approve contract amendments to CO 92-013 (Dan Guerra &
Associates), CO 99-001 (Aufbau Corporation) and CO 98-021 (Architerra Design
Group) for plan check services.
Respectfully Submitted, .
~/jd!U--
City Engineer
9/
RESOLUTION NO. f)(p- 63~
A RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH ANDIOR INCREASE
ENGINEERING-RELATED FEES AND FEES IN THE
FOLLOWING FEE CATEGORIES: APPLICATION FEES
(MISCELLANEOUS), UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING FEES,
PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES, PUBLIC WORKS
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FEES, MAP AND IMPROVEMENT
PLAN CHECKING FEES AND ETIWANDA DRAINAGE AREA
(MASTER 9) FEES.
A. Recitals.
(i) The California Government Code authorizes the City to establish fees,
costs and charges for municipal services and facilities, provided such fees, costs and
charges do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost to the City in providing the
service to which the fee, cost or charge applies.
(ii) The City Council has heretofore established fees, costs and charges for
municipal services provided by the City's Engineering Department, and for funding, in
whole or in part, the construction of public facilities. Costs to the City in providing these
services have increased since those fees and charges were last revised.
(iji) The City of Rancho Cucamonga has heretofore conducted thoroughgoing
and comprehensive studies, as identified in Section B of this Resolution, to determine
actual costs to the City in providing the various municipal services for which the fees
and charges set forth herein apply, and to determine the appropriate amount of
development fee to be charged to fund or partly fund construction of specified public
facilities.
(iv) The City of Rancho Cucamonga has heretofore established a program to
fund the undergrounding of electrical utility lines, as a condition of new development, in
order to promote a more aesthetic and desirable working and living environment within
the City, as provided in Planning Commission Resolution 87-96. Resolution 87-96
provides that the undergrounding fee amount shall equal the length of the property
being developed from property line to property line, times the unit amount (per linear
foot) as established by the City Council in City Council Resolution 88-180 based upon
information supplied by the utility companies and as updated periodically as deemed
necessary.
(v) The City of Rancho Cucamonga has heretofore established a drainage
plan for the City and has designated seven local drainage areas. Pursuant to Section
13.08.030 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, as a condition of development
approval, the City shall require the payment of a fee for the purposes of defraying the
actual or estimated costs of constructing drainage facilities for the removal of surface
and storm waters from the local drainage areas, made necessary by new development.
(vi) All data indicating the estimated or actual cost to the City to provide each
service for which the fees and charges set forth herein apply, and all other information
9~
utilized to establish appropriate development fees in accordance with State law, was
made available to the public at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date of the public
hearing referred to in Recital (vii), below.
(vii) On February 1, 2006, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public
hearing as required by law concerning the fees proposed to be established and/or
increased in this Resolution.
(viii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby
finds and resolves as follows:
1.
correct.
All facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and
2. The City Council has reviewed and considered the following: (a) the study
and analysis prepared by Maximus, Inc.. entitled "City of Rancho Cucamonga User Fee
Study - Engineering Department Final Report January 2006"; (b) the study and analysis
prepared by TischlerBise entitled "Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Study, January
2006"; (c) the study entitled "Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Master Plan of Drainage",
prepared by BSI Consultants, Inc. and approved in February 1989, subsequently
updated and approved in 2001 by the "Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Drainage Fees
Adjustment - March 21, 2001" in Resolution 01-067, and updated in Resolution 02-061;
(d) all reports, documentation and data provided by City staff in connection with the
proposed fees and charges; (e) City ordinances and resolutions authorizing collection of
fees, charges and lor other exactions; and (f) the testimony received at the February 1,
2006 public hearing. .
3. Based upon all of the documents, data, authorities, studies and other
evidence described in paragraph 2, above (collectively, "the Supporting
Documentation"), the City Council hereby finds and determines that the fees, costs and
charges for municipal services and facilities set forth in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and
incorporated by reference herein, do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of
providing the service or facility to which the fee, cost or charge applies. With respect to
development or impact fees, in accordance with Government Code Section 66001, et
seq., the City Council further finds that the Supporting Documentation: (a) adequately
identifies the purpose of each such fee; (b) establishes how each such fee reasonably
relates to the types of development projects upon which the fee is imposed; (c)
establishes how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public
facility to which each such fee applies and the types of development projects upon
which each fee is imposed; and (d) establishes how there is a reasonable relationship
between the amount of each such fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the
public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
2
93
4. Based upon paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, above, the City Council of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga hereby approves and adopts each of the fees set forth in Exhibit
"A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
5. All fee amounts, costs, and charges for City services, and impact or
development fee amounts or rates, identical to those contained in Exhibit "A", that were
previously adopted or established by resolution of the City Council, are hereby repealed
and replaced with and superceded by the fee amounts, costs and charges set forth in
Exhibit "A", provided, however, that such repeal shall not excuse or affect the failure of
any person or entity to pay any fee heretofore imposed upon such person or entity.
6. Subject to the provisions of Section 7, below, the fees, costs and charges
set forth in Exhibit "A" shall take effect immediately, except as hereinafter provided. In
accordance with Government Code Section 66017, those fees and charges set forth in
Exhibit "A" that constitute "a fee or charge... upon a development project... which
applies to the filing, accepting, reviewing, approving, or issuing of an application, permit,
or entitlement to use" shall become effective and payable sixty (60) days from the date
of adoption of this Resolution.
7. Each fee, cost and charge set forth in Exhibit "A" shall be adjusted
annually, commencing January 1, 2007, and each year thereafter on January 1 s"
without further action of the City Council, in proportion to the percentage change in the
following indexes:
a) Application Fees, Public Works Construction Permit Fees and Map and
Improvement Plan Checking Fees will all be adjusted according to the
percentage change in the Consumer Price Index, All Urban Consumers, for the
Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside statistical area, for the 12-month period
ending on December 31st of the immediately preceding year. If the Consumer
Price Index is discontinued, then the replacement index in use and accepted as
the industry and business standard for Southern California, as determined by the
City Council, shall be utilized.
b) Utility Undergrounding Fees, Park Development Fees and Etiwanda
Drainage Area (Master 9) Fees will each be adjusted according to the
percentage change in the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index for
the Los Angeles Area, for the 12-month period ending on December 31st of the
immediately preceding year. If the Engineering News Record Construction Cost
Index for the Los Angeles Area is discontinued, then the replacement index in
use and accepted as the industry and business standard for Southern California,
as determined by the City Council, shall be utilized.
3
9lf
8. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1ST day of February, 2006.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk
I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, so
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved and adopted by
the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting of
said City Council held on the 1st day of February 2006, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Executed this 1st day of February 2006, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk
4
c;~
~
~-.tfn'~'-.'. \
",,--.-:/,,"'-. -
..- . .~-
RANCHO
CUCAMONOA
CALIFORNIA
Exhibit "A"
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Engineering Fees
Revised and Adopted as of February 1, 2006
Applications
Amending Map ................................................................... $1,678.00
Bond Substitution ............................................................... $1,985.00
Certificate of Compliance................................................... $2,149.00
Certificate of Correction ..................................................... $1 ,337.00
Flood Hazard Letter ............................................................... $141.00
Lot Line Adjustment........................................................... $1,729.00
Private Street Designation .................................................. $2,999.00
Reapportionment Maps....................... ................................ $1,552.00
(Two sheet parcelltract map; $30.00 each additional sheet)
Reimbursement Agreement - Storm Drain ........................ $4,555.00
Reimbursement Agreement - Street and Utilities .............. $5,164.00
Release of Lien Agreement ................................................ $1,034.00
Standard AgreementJDocument Processing .......................... $989.00
Street Vacation ................................................................... $3,506.00
Traffic Study Review............................................................. $198.00
(Development Project)
Map and Improvement Plan Checking
Property Legal Description................................................. $1 ,242.00
Residential Parcel Map ....................................................... $3,856.00 +$217.00 per parcel
Tract Maps and Non-Residential Parcel Maps
over ten (10) lots................................................................. $4,506.00 +$268.00 per parcel or lot
Tract Maps and Non-Residential Parcel Maps
of ten (10) lots or less ......................................................... $4,854.00
Widening of Existing Streets...................................................... $ .59 per LF + sheet charge
for interior streets
Interior Streets - I Sheet ....._.............................................. $3,249.00 LS
Interior Streets - 2 Sheets ................................................... $3,939.00 LS
f(/a
Engineering Fees (continued)
Interior Streets - Sheets 3 and 4......................................... $1,132.00 EA
Interior Streets - 5 Sheets................................................... $7,041.00 LS
Interior Streets - Sheets 6 through 9 .................................. $1,132.00 EA
Interior Streets - 10 Sheets ....,.......................................... $13,209.00 LS
Interior Streets - Sheets II and more................................. $1,132.00 EA
Storm Drain Plans
Same as for Interior Streets
Landscaped and Irrigation Plans
for City-Maintained Areas.................................................. $1,154.00 EA
Hydrology Study Drainage Areas
up to 150 acres .................................................................... $2,870.00
Hydrology Study Drainage Areas
greater than 150 acres ......................................................... $3,913.00
For map and plan checking, the fees for rush checking, when approved by the City Engineer, will
be 50% greater than those listed above. The fees for checking the revisions to approved plans
will be on the basis of actual costs at hourly rates as determined by the City Engineer with a
minimum fee of$100.00
Undergrounding Overhead Utilities
Electric................................................................... ................ $250.00
Telephone ................................................................................ $50.00
Cable Television..................................................... ................. $27.00
Public Works Construction Permit
Inspection: Drainage Catch Basin W=4'.................................. $61.31 EA
Inspection: Drainage Catch Basin W=7'.................................. $61.31 EA
Inspection: Drainage Catch Basin W=21 '................................ $61.31 EA
Inspection: Drainage Collar Pipe PCC .................................... $20.44 EA
Inspection: Drainage Headwall 48" Wing ............................... $40.87 EA
Inspection: Drainage Junction Structure w/o Manhole ........... $27.25 EA
Inspection: Drainage Junction Structure with Manhole .......... $27.25 EA
Inspection: Drainage RCP 18"................................................. $12.26 LF
Inspection: Drainage RCP 24".................................................$12.26 LF
Inspection: Drainage RCP 36"................................................. $12.26 LF
2
97
Engineering Fees (continued)
Inspection: Drainage RCP 48"................................................. $12.26 LF
Inspection: Drainage RCP 54"................................................. $12.26 LF
Inspection: Drainage RCP 60"................................................. $20.44 LF
Inspection: Drainage RCP 72".................................................$20.44 LF
Inspection: Drainage RCP 84" ................................................. $20.44 LF
Inspection: Drainage RCP 96"................................................. $20.44 LF
Inspection: V -Ditch ................................................................... $4.09 LF
Inspection: Landscape Cobblestone/Boulders....................... $326.00 I" 2,000 SF + $81.75
each additional I ,000 SF
Inspection: Landscape Concrete Header ................................... $1.36 LF
Inspection: Landscape Decomposed Granite ..........................$81.75 Per Inspection Occurrence
Inspection: Landscape Fence Tubular Steel.............................. $5.45 LF
Inspection: Landscape Gates Tubular SteeL........................... $13.62 EA
Inspection: Landscape Irrigation System .................................. $2.04 LF
Inspection: Landscape Maintenance 180 Day....................... $653.00 EA
Inspection: Landscape Masonry Column/Pilaster ................... $10.90 EA
Inspection: Landscape Mulch Shredded 4" ............................... $2.86 CY
Inspection: Landscape Pavers.................................................... $2.72 SF
Inspection: Landscape Shrub 1 Gallon...................................... $1.36 EA
Inspection: Landscape Shrub 5 Gallon...................................... $1.36 EA
Inspection: Landscape Slope Erosion ControL........................ $ 0.68 SF
(Jute Malting)
Inspection: Landscape Trail Fence PVC 2-rail.......................... $5.45 LF
Iltspection: Landscape Trail Fence PVC 3-rail.......................... $5.45 LF
Inspection: Landscape Trail Gate ............................................ $81.75 EA
Inspection: Landscape Tree 5 Gallon ...................................... $12.26 EA
Inspection: Landscape Tree 15 Gallon .................................... $12.26 EA
Inspection: Landscape Tree 24" BOx.......................................$16.35 EA
Inspection: Landscape Tree Palm ............................................ $27.25 EA
Inspection: Landscape Vine 5 Gallon........................................ $1.36 EA
Inspection: Landscape Wall Garden 6' .................................... $10.90 LF
Inspection: Landscape Wall Retaining 3' ................................$10.90 LF
Inspection: Landscape Wall Retaining Drain............................ $6.81 LF
Inspection: Removal Clear and Grub ...................................... $61.31 EA
3
9g
Engineering Fees (continued)
Inspection: Removal of AC Berm ............................................ $ 0.68 LF
Inspection: Removal ofPCC Curb ........................................... $ 0.65 LF
Inspection: Removal ofPCC Sidewalk .................................... $ 0.33 SF
Inspection: Removal Tree........................................................ $29.92 EA
Inspection: Street AC (1,000 LF Paved Lane)............................... $61.31 EA
Inspection: Street Access Ramp .............................................. $27.25 EA
Inspection: Street Adjust Manhole to Grade ............................. $6.81 EA
Inspection: Street Adjust Valves/CO to Grade.......................... $6.81 EA
Inspection: Street Aggregate Base (per 1,000 LF) ...................... $61.31 EA
Inspection: Street Barricades ..................................................... $1.36 LF
Inspection: Street Berm AC....................................................... $1.36 LF
Inspection: Street Cross-gutter .................................................$ 0.41 SF
Inspection: Street Curb & Gutter 6" ......................................... $ 0.25 LF
Inspection: Street Curb & Gutter 8" ......................................... $ 0.29 LF
Inspection: Street Curb & Gutter 12" ....................................... $ 0.33 LF
Inspection: Street Curb & Gutter Cobble .................................. $2.04 LF
Inspection: Street Curb Core ................................................... $40.87 EA
Inspection: Street Curb Only.................................................... $ 0.34 LF
Inspection: Street Curb Rolled ................................................. $ 0.68 LF
Inspection: Street Curbside Drain STD 107-A...................... $122.00 EA
Inspection: Street Curbside Drain SID 107-B ...................... $122.00 EA
Inspection: Street Curbside Drain STD 107-C ...................... $122.00 EA
Inspection: Street Drive Approach Commercial..................... $61.31 Per Inspection Occurrence
Inspection: Street Drive Approach Residential....................... $30.00 Per Inspection Occurrence
Inspection: Street Light/Signal Interconnect Conduit .............. $ 0.49 LF
Inspection: Street Lights ............................................................ $6.81 EA
Inspection: Street Right Turn LanelBusbay PCC 8" ............. $408.00 EA
Inspection: Street Sidewalk PCC 4" ......................................... $ 0.15 SF
Inspection: Street Subgrade Preparation/Fine Grading ............ $ 0.16 LF
Inspection: Traffic Pavement Markings ................................... $ 0.68 EA
Inspection: Traffic Pavement Striping................................... $163.00 Per Inspection Occurrence
Inspection: Traffic Reflectors and Posts.................................. $40.87 Per Inspection Occurrence
Inspection: Traffic Signal................................................... $4,577.00 EA
4
91
Engineering Fees (continued)
Inspection: Traffic Signal Modification............................. $2,043.00 EA
Inspection: Traffic Street Sign................................................... $6.81 EA
Inspection: Utility Fiber Optic Conduit & Trench .................... $2.04 LF
Inspection: Utility Underground Existing Electrical................. $2.04 LF
Inspection: Utility Underground Existing Telecom .................. $2.04 LF
Inspection: Miscellaneous; Construction items not listed
above will be charged based iJpon an estimated hourly
inspection need at the rate of$81.75 per hour.
Park Improvement Impact Fees (Subdivisions = or > 49, and all other projects)
Single Family Detached ..................................................... $3,671.00
Single Family Attached ..................................................... $2,657.00
Duplex ........ ....................................................................... $3,058.00
Multiple 3-4 ....................................................................... $3,042.00
Multiple 5-9 ....................................................................... $2,120.00
Multiple 10+ ..................................................................... $2,317.00
Mobile Home ..................................................................... $2,230.00
Nursing/Assisted Living Facility (per room) ..................... $1,117.00
Etiwanda Drainage Area (Master 9) Fee
Etiwanda Drainage Area (Master 9) Fee....................... ....$26,900/acre
5
106
Exn i bit II 'E? I,
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Pinal Report
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
User Fee Study
Engineering Department
FINAL REPORT
Prepared by:
MAXIMUS
HELPING GOVERNMENT SERVE THE PEOPLE"
January 2006
Daniel B. Edds, MBA
4320 Auburn Blvd, Suite 2000
Sacramento, CA 95841
425.637.1919
1400 1 12th Ave SE, Bellevue, WA 98004
Page 1 of 20
*
M82SJ1Y.L~
10;
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................................. 2
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARy..................................................................................................... 3
1.1 BACKGROUNO ANO APPROACH ...................................................................................... 3
1.2 COSTING METHODOLOGIES ........................................................................................... 3
1.2.1 Process Analytics. .................... ......................... ........................... ................ ... 3
1.2.2 Productive Hourly Rates......................................................................................4
1.2.3 A Definition of Full Cost.............................................. .................... .................. 4
1.3 OPPORTUNITIES FOR REVENUE IMPROVEMENT ........................................................... 4
1.4 REVENUE PROJECTIONS FOR BUOGETING PURPOSES ............................................ 5
1.5 SUMMARY OF RESULTS .................................................................................................. 5
2. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .......................................................................... 6
2.1 BACKGROUND ANO PURPOSE ........................................................................................ 6
2.2 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT.............................................................................................6
2.3 ABOUT MAXI M US ..................................................................................... .............. ....... 6
3. FACTORS LIMITING THE FULL RECOVERY OF COSTS.......................................... 7
3.1 INACCURATE LABOR RATES............................................................................................ 7
3.2 RELIANCE ON TIME & MATERIAL (HOURLY) FEES ......................................................... 7
3.3 INCOMPLETE ESTIMATES OF LABOR UTILIZATION ......................................................... 8
3.4 INCOMPLETE FEE SCHEDULES ....................................................................................... 8
3.5 PAST PRACTICES TO SUBSIOIZE USER FEES ................................................................. 8
4. DEPARTMENTAL SPECIFIC FINDINGS & RESULTS................................................. 9
4.1 PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING DIVISION RESULTS ................................................9
4.1.1 Summary Description........................................................................................... 9
4.1.2 Steps in Analysis.. ........................................................ ................ ...................... 9
4.1.3 Quality Checks and Calculate Future Revenues........................................... 10
4.1.4 Findings................. .......................... ............................ ............. .................... //
5. USER FEE CONCEPTS AND PHILOSOPHy............................................................... 12
5.1 GENERAL FEE PRINCIPLES .......................................................................................... 12
6. MAINTAINING FEE SCHEDULES AND RELATED REVENUES............................. 14
6.1 BENEFITS OF REGULARLY UPDATE FEES..................................................................... 14
6.2 METHOOS OF UPOATING FEES ...................................................................:................. 14
6.2.1 Multi- Year Fees (Updates) .......................... ...................... ........ /4
6.2.2 Alternative 1: Update the Fee Model Annually....................................... /4
6.2.3 Alternative 2: City Labor Costs (Recommended Alternative) ............ /5
7. COSTING METHODOLOGIES ........................................................................................16
7.1 GENERAL COST ANALYSIS & APPROACH .................................................................... 16
7.1.1 Process Analytics.......... ......................................... ................ ...... 16
7.1.2 Definitions of Common Terms ................ ........ ................. .................... 17
7.1.3 Summary of the Process Analytics Approach .............. ................ ........ /8
7.1.4 Steps in the Process Analytics (methodology)............... ..................... /8
8. APPENDIX - DETAILED FEE SCHEDULES................................................................ 20
1400 112'h Ave SE, Bellevue, W A 98004
Page 2 of 20
*'
M.AX.!lY.UJ~
/7);)--
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 BACKGROUND AND APPROACH
The City of Rancho Cucamonga engaged MAXIM US, Inc. to
conduct a detailed review of its Engineering fees. As part of this
project, the City desired to reduce or eliminate its reliance on
valuation based fees, which are coming under legal challenge.
These valuation based fees are not standing up under challenge as
the "nexus" between price and cost is difficult, if not impossible, to
create.
MAXIMUS employed proven and objective methodologies to
calculate the actual cost of services, and used our experience to
guide the City regarding the appropriate costs to be included in the
development of full cost fees. City leaders can use this information
to make more informed decisions and set fees to meet the fiscal
and policy goals and objectives of the City.
Through this study, we determined the cost of services offered by
the specific areas for which user fees are currently being charged
or could be charged. This "cost," includes all legitimate direct and
indirect costs associated with providing each service, including
direct support costs from other divisions. However, it does not
include City Wide Overhead, as the City is not currently charging
these overhead expenditures against other services.
1.2 COSTING METHODOLOGIES
Detailed descriptions of the methodology used are available in
section 8 of this report. However, in summary the following
methodologies were utilized to arrive at the cost.
1.2.1 Process Analytics
For this study a methodology called Process Analytics was utilized.
Proce.ss Analytics is deeply rooted in the principles of Activity
Based Costing. It is a rigorous and superior methodology to a more
traditional approach, which utilizes direct and indirect costs only.
Process Analytics, which calculates indirect costs, has the added
benefit of mapping processes within a citywide system of service
1400 11l'h Ave SE, Bellevue, WA 98004
Page 3 of 20
*
Mfl2SJMJ.J~
/03
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report ~
MAXIMUS
delivery. For example, as part of this study MAXIMUS was able to ",-_.."._--,'
map the resources consumed by Engineering by the actual
processes that are used in the delivery of services. Process
Analytics has the following steps:
1. Identify of the work related processes required to
complete each service.
2. Defining each process by specific activities and tasks.
3. Develop time estimates with staff for each process as
it related to a specific fee.
4. Calculate a Productive Hourly Rate for each division
and by each position. These rates are then applied to
time estimates provided by staff. Assign overhead to
each fee.
5. Calculate the model.
1.2.2 Productive Hourly Rates
In all fees, Productive Hourly Rates were used to calculate the cost
of services. These costs included salary, benefits, vacation time,
sick leave, holiday time, training time, routine meetings,
administrative support, etc.
1.2.3 A Definition of Full Cost
For the purpose of this study and report, "Full Cost" shall mean all
program direct expenses, cross-departmental support, divisional
and department overhead. It does not include City Wide Overhead.
1.3 OPPORTUNITIES FOR REVENUE IMPROVEMENT
The results of this study revealed significant opportunities to
increase revenues through fees. Specifically, opportunities come
from a variety of factors, which are commonly found within these
studies:
1. Increasing Productive Hourly Rates to full cost.
2. Acknowledging the total time to provide a service from
the City wide system of service delivery.
3. Adding new fees, (while eliminating others).
1400 112'h Ave SE, Bellevue, WA 98004
Page 4 of 20
/D1
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report
1.4 REVENUE PROJECTIONS FOR BUDGETING
PURPOSES
As part of this study, the City and MAXIMUS recommend some new
fees and restructuring some existing fees. Specifically, valuation
based fees have been replaced by flat fees wherever feasible. The
reason for this is that the valuation model is proving difficult to
defend, as it does not create the required relationship between
price and cost.
Due to these many structural changes to the fees, it is imprecise to
compare the calculated costs with current fees to determine exact
existing subsidies or surpluses. For some fees, the fee
categoriesltypes are different, the existing activity volume statistics
no longer apply, and the current fee levels are no longer
comparable. This limitation affects the individual fee comparisons,
as well as the total revenue that results from all fees over time or
during a fiscal year.
As a result of these issues, there are some limitations to the utility
of the "potential revenue" figures indicated in our summary
worksheets. However, every effort has been made to make a
reasonable and conservative projection of new revenues if the City
adopts fees at full cost recovery.
1.5 SUMMARY OF RESULTS
In all departments and divisions studied, MAXIMUS identified an
overall current subsidy provided by the City to the fee-payers as a
whole, whereby the City was charging less than the full actual cost
of providing the services. The results of the MAXIMUS cost
analysis demonstrate the actual full cost of providing each of the
fee-related services included in the study. By annualizing and
combining the results for each fee, we identified the estimated
revenue from the current fees, the potential revenue if the fees
were set at the (100%) cost and the resulting subsidy. The
following table details this information:
Annual Revenue
(actual)
$ 1,379,684
Project Revenue at
Full Cost
$ 2,044,483
Current Over Recovery
or (Subsidy)
$ (664,798)
1400 112'h Ave SE, Bellevue, WA 98004
Page 5 of 20
*'
M8.o1M.lJ?
It>>'
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report
f,':"'"~
,_.. btf ~
- t>-- "
v' r' \ .<Oto--'
i. '~ ~ ,;,'~
",,", 1\ I. 2.1
4~.
2. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
The principal goal of this study was to calculate the cost of
providing the services, including all direct, indirect, and support
costs associated with individual services. Secondary objectives of
the study included:
. Restructure the fee schedule with an objective to
eliminate valuation based fees.
. Ensure a connection between fees and the cost of
services provided.
. Ensure the fees are logical and defensible.
. Provide a revenue projection based on the cost recovery
model.
2.2 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
The results of this study are documented in a series of worksheets
found in the appendix. This report summarizes the results of the
study, presents conceptual information regarding fee
establishment, and provides a description of the methodologies
used to conduct the analysis. As a summary document, this report
is not intended to provide all of the detail related to the study
process or outcomes. .
2.3 ABOUT MAXIM US
The Cost Services Division of MAXIMUS is part of a nationwide
consulting firm specializing in cost analysis and revenue
enhancement studies for state and local government. The Western
Region Office is headquartered in Sacramento, California, with
other offices in Oakland, Irvine, Denver, and Seattle. Our Western
Region has provided services to hundreds of cities and counties in
the West. In addition to being the industry's volume leader in cost
analysis studies, we have pioneered approaches to fee analysis.
1400 Iii" Ave 56, Bellevue, WA 98004
Page 6 of 20
*'
Mt\.l5JjYUJ~
Ivb
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report
3. FACTORS LIMITING THE FULL RECOVERY
OF COSTS
Several factors were found that limited the full recovery of costs. All
of these factors are commonly found in similar studies and
comparable jurisdictions.
3.1 INACCURATE LABOR RATES
One of the primary reasons limiting the full recovery of costs are
labor rates that do not capture 100% of costs. The following is a list
of costs that are commonly not fully accounted for in rate
calculations:
1. Annual accrual of sick leave.
2. Annual holiday leave.
3. Time associated with management leave.
4. Time associated with routine management & staff meetings.
5. Expenses associated with divisional andlor departmental
overhead.
6. Expenses associated with administrative staff support.
3.2 RELIANCE ON TIME & MATERIAL (HOURLY) FEES
Theory would suggest that the most equitable way to charge a
client for a service would be to track the total time and charge an
hourly rate based upon the personnel cost of the person(s)
providing the service. The reality is that this system is seriously
flawed. Several factors make this system unreliable.
1. Times assigned to projects are nearly always
underestimated without a precise time tracking and
automated tool that monitors 100% of staff time.
2. Hourly rates are habitually too low and fail to capture:
a. Overhead expenses, vacation, sick leave, holiday and
other "non-productive" time.
b. Time spent on support aGtivities such as counter duty,
database maintenance, general administration,
training and meetings.
3. Divisions are typically not asked to set measurable
objectives on billable hours that one might see in the
private sector with similar professional disciplines.
1400 Ilih Ave SE, Bellevue, W A 98004
Page 7 of 20
*'
Mb.o.l1Y.1Jl?
I'D 7
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report
While not all of the factors have been observed with all divisions of
the City in general, these are all contributing factors to the under
recovery of costs.
3.3 INCOMPLETE ESTIMATES OF LABOR UTILIZATION
There are two primary reasons why estimates of labor utilization for
any given service are inaccurate.
1. They fail to identify the work processes, activities and
tasks associated with the service. Therefore, estimates of
time are typically under estimated by a significant margin.
Because of this MAXIMUS takes an extra step to first
identify and define the work processes that actually
produce City services.
2. They fail to capture cross-departmental support or
system wide labor utilization. This was an important
factor in reviewing City services and every effort was
made to identify and capture these additional costs.
3.4 INCOMPLETE FEE SCHEDULES
Outdated or incomplete fee schedules are often a primary reason
why a City does not fully recover its costs. Because of this,
MAXIMUS spends additional time with each department to identify
those services that should be added, those that should be deleted
and splitting those large fees into sub categories that more
accurately reflect the City services.
3.5 PAST PRACTICES TO SUBSIDIZE USER FEES
Many jurisdictions establish unwritten policies or encourage a
practice of subsidizing user fees. Often the objective is to keep user
fees low to encourage economic development. While there is little
evidence that user fees on the whole have any impact on economic
development the result of these policies or practices is often the
inability for staff to keep up with workloads. As economic
development occurs, the ability for the City to finance these
services is severely constrained.
1400 112'h Ave SE, Bellevue, W A 98004
Page 8 of 20
*'
M6?SJOO.!J?.
l;Jt
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report
~
MM1~J&
~,,::;,~
.?;c;" '_', j
'~i' _ ~J
4. DEPARTMENTAL SPECIFIC FINDINGS &
RESULTS
4.1 PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING DIVISION RESULTS
4.1.1 Summary Description
The Land Development Section of the Engineering/Public Works
Division is responsible for the engineering review and inspection of
development projects submitted to the City from the initial concept
plan submittals, to the completion of construction of each public
infrastructure project. This process includes checking for
compliance with city codes and policies, protection from flood
hazards, compliance with. the City's Storm Drain Master Plan, and
technical checking of maps, street, storm drain and public
landscape plans. The development process also includes
construction permit issuance and inspection. The Land
Development Section provides public assistance related to plans,
documents, and construction standards associated with public
rights-of-way and improvements.
The goal of the Land Development team is to provide excellent
customer service assisting the development community, general
public, contractors and other agencies while ensuring the prudent
and equitable application of development-related codes, policies,
infrastructure design, and construction guidelines.
4.1.2 Steps in Analysis
As previously described, the methodology used to calculate the
cost of services is called Process Analytics and it is based on the
rigorous data requirements of Activity Based Costing. Specifically,
the project involved five steps:
1. Identification of division specific processes. In
addition, each process was defined so that all staff
estimated their time according to the same
understanding of what defined an activity.
2. Time estimates. Engineering staff were asked to
estimate the time required to complete each activity
relative to each service. This resulted in a
14001 12'h Ave SE, Bellevue, WA 98004
Page 9 of 20
/1/1
f I ~
The City 0 Rancho Cucamonga - Fina Report ~
MAXIMUS
comprehensive study of time utilization for the entire ."..-.....--..-,
division. For quality purposes, a check was made to
verify that estimated activity time was relatively equal
to actual time available for productive work.
3. Input labor and budget data. Computerized financial
models created in MS Excel assisted this project. Into
this model, time estimates were uploaded along with
all direct and indirect financial expenses.
4. Review of existing fees, add new fees and
eliminate fees. This step was actually a subset of
each and every part of the project. Throughout the
project, services were evaluated for current
applicability to the City.
5. Calculate Productive Hourly Rates. For those
services that cannot be calculated with a flat fee, an
hourly rate was established. This rate calculates the
cost of departmental time, less vacation time, sick
leave time etc and then removes additional hours for
activities that cannot be cost recovered such as
administration and public information. This becomes
the fully loaded hourly rate that will be charged to
users of Engineering services when a flat fee is not
possible.
6. Revenue projection. Once the cost of individual fees
were calculated a revenue estimate was prepared to
compare the revenue at the current fee level with the
potential revenue if fees were set at full cost.
4.1.3 Quality Checks and Calculate Future Revenues
MAXIM US prides itself in thorough analysis. Because of this, we
take extra steps to insure that total (potential) revenues match total
costs and that total time assigned matches total time available. If
time available does not match time assigned and total revenue
does not match total costs, then core data needs to be reviewed.
This activity has additional activities such as:
. Match service revenue with service costs to determine
subsidies andlor revenue surpluses.
. Review cost, revenue, and subsidies with department
leadership.
. Revise Analysis as required.
1400 112'h Ave SE, Bellevue, W A 98004
Page 10 of 20
110
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report
4.1.4 Findings
The analyses of Engineering services that are cost recoverable
indicate a significant opportunity to increase cost recovery.
Currently, the City is under recovering its costs by approximately
$817,949.
The actual summary and fee schedule can be found in the
appendix.
1400 112'h Ave SE, Bellevue, W A 98004
Page 11 of20
*-
M6?S.J1Yt~
111
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report
5. USER FEE CONCEPTS AND PHILOSOPHY
5.1 GENERAL FEE PRINCIPLES
Local governments are funded from a variety of sources, with the
primary sources being taxes, subventions, fees, special charges,
fines, and grants. As the traditional provider of basic services,
cities and counties are constantly struggling with securing sufficient
funding to pay for the services expected/demanded/desired by the
citizenry. Many local government services are "global" in nature
(e.g., police and fire protection, library, recreation, open space,
etc.). Other services benefit a particular segment of the population,
most often providing a direct monetary or personal benefit to the
recipient. It is in this latter group that subsidy and recovery issues
are brought to the fore. Given the nature of govemment financing,
if specialized services are not cost recovered sometimes there
must be a decrease in funding for other public good activities.
User fee services are those services provided by a governmental
agency on behalf of a private citizen or group. The assumption
underlying most fee recommendations is that costs of services
benefiting individuals, and not society as a whole, should be borne
by the individual receiving the benefit. Setting user fees, therefore,
is equivalent to establishing prices for services. Making a profit is
not an objective for local government in providing services to the
general public. It is commonly felt that fees should be established
at a level that will recover the cost of providing each service, no
more, and no less.
It is generally accepted that recovery of costs should be in direct
proportion to the individuallspecific gain for services. This means
that if a developer wants to rezone farm land for a housing
development, the City may not want to charge that business a fee
less than full cost, since to do otherwise would require a subsidy
paid by the general citizenry who do not share in the particular
benefit. Where new development causes an increase in
infrastructure requirements, that increase should logically be
shared pro rata with the existing area proportionate to the degree
that the new development benefits from the infrastructure.
Conversely, a recreation program could logically be subsidized
from the general tax base in order to promote the overall well being
1400 112'" Ave SE, Bellevue, W A 98004
Page 120f20
*'
M6.o1~JJ~
11;)-
of the general public, or to achieve specific
objectives.
~
M,8.?SJMlJ.?
socio-economic
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report
If there were alternative tax options available to fund government
services subsidy issues would not be stressed. However, this has
not been the case in recent years. MAXIMUS recognizes, however,
that there are circumstances and programs, which probably justify a
subsidy (e.g" youth, senior, and disadvantaged recreation
programs, certain classifications of code enforcement, library
services, etc.)
1400 ll2'h Ave SE, Bellevue, W A 98004
Page 130f20
/13
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report
L", <
~\.. ~
6. MAINTAINING FEE SCHEDULES AND
RELATED REVENUES
6.1 BENEFITS OF REGULARLY UPDATE FEES
Updated Master Fee Schedule. MAXIM US regularly and routinely
finds significant errors and/or omissions in fee schedules, For many
jurisdictions these errors contribute to significant under recovery of
costs and open the possibility of legal liability.
Maintaining Revenues. The traditional method of increases fees
with an annual CPI factor works for 2-3 years. Specific reasons are
elaborated below but in summary, increases based on inflation
factors fail to capture cost increase in workloads due to regulatory
requirements and the resulting changing processes,
6,2 METHODS OF UPDATING FEES
6,2,1 Multi-Year Fees (Updates)
MAXIMUs develops fee analysis on the most accurate up to date
budget data available. Once fee adjustments are implemented, we
recommend updating the fee calculations periodically to account for
changes in costs over time. The development and use of an
automatic fee increase mechanism normally provides a level of
convenience and efficiency, because staff does not have to take
the time to recalculate cost recovery percentages each year, yet
the fees will increase to recover some of the budget increases.
However, the use of a sub-optimal approach can result in cost
increases significantly outpacing the fee increases,
In order to ensure that jurisdictions receives appropriate fee
increases that reflect the actual growth in cost, MAXIMUs has
identified a series of alternatives:
6,2,2 Alternative 1: Update the Fee Model Annually
The most accurate method to ensure accurate fee increases is to
recalculate fees based upon new staffing and expenditure numbers
each year. However, this approach would likely be the most time
1400 IIZ'h Ave SE, Bellevue, WA 98004
Page 140fZO
*
MMJM.!.J?
)/'1
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report *
MAXIMUS
consuming (and expensive) of the alternatives, as it requires .._,---~.._-,
significant financial analysis and a repeat of the approval process.
6,2.3 Alternative 2: City Labor Costs (Recommended
Alternative)
Labor costs comprise the bulk of expenses for most government
services. Consequently, changes in labor costs drive the overall
change in division costs,
To better recover increased costs, jurisdictions can insert into the
rate schedule a fee increase factor that is based upon known and
anticipated labor cost increases, such as programmed cost of living
raises, association agreements, salary step increases, benefits
increases, and other salary or benefit enhancements.
Labor costs are generally easier to predict than most other costs,
since most agencies have greater control over its internal costs.
Furthermore, common CPI factors are not specific to the regional
economies of many communities, As a result, MAXIMUS believes
that a factor based upon specific labor costs would be the most
accurate indicator of overall divisional cost increases.
1400 112'h Ave SE, Bellevue, WA 98004
Page 150f20
I/S'
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - final Report
7. COSTING METHODOLOGIES
7,1 GENERAL COST ANALYSIS & APPROACH
The purpose of a user fee study is to determine the full cost of
services offered by the agency for which user fees are currently
being charged or could be charged, The full cost can usually be
compared to current revenues to determine the existing amount of
subsidy (or occasionally, overcharge). With this knowledge a City
can make informed decisions concerning appropriate fee
adjustments. MAXIMUS is able to assist in understanding fee-
related issues and trends. However, in the final analysis, the actual
decision to increase or decrease fees (or the costs included in a
fee) is a local decision.
The underlying rationale to charge full cost for services is simply
this: the City is providing a distinct service or product to a business
or individual who is gaining a monetary, personal, or recreational
benefit. Equity says that others who do not participate in that
benefit should not subsidize individuals or businesses who benefit
directly from services. For example, why should a long-term
resident living in a central part of a City contribute towards a
subsidy to a developer opening up a new subdivision on the edge
of a City?
Our methodology for developing fee-for-service calculations is to
create a standard cost model for each current and potential fee,
We believe that a service qualifies for the "fee" designation when
the activity primarily benefits a specific individual or group, as
opposed to the public at large. For example, a development activity
clearly fits the definition - whether the beneficiary makes a near-
term profit or not - as opposed to police patrol or parkland
maintenance, which benefit the community as a whole
7,1,1 Process Analytics
Process Analytics is an advanced costing methodology that
generates extraordinarily detailed and involved cost analysis.
Founded on the principals of Activity Based Costing (ABC) Process
Analytics, a powerful technique that measures the cost and
performance of activities and processes and the products or
1400 I 12th Ave SE, Bellevue, WA 98004
Page 160f20
*
M6.o.!M..l!~
//10
services generated from those activities.
seeks to answer these questions:
*
MAXIMUS
In very simple terms i("-"""'''-'-'--
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report
. What are the operational processes associated with
the output of any organization?
. What are the costs of those operational processes?
. What are the relationships of processes to
organizational output?
. What are the costs of organizational output based on
the work activities & processes?
Answering the first question identifies the work that staff provides
on a daily basis and provides the ability to calculate the cost of
activities that directly links to output. Answering the second
question calculates the costs of those processes for future
performance initiatives, The third question maps the relationships
between processes and output. The fourth question calculates the
cost of output.
7.1.2 Definitions of Common Terms
MAXIMUS uses some common terminology in the development and
discussion of costing models and results, including:
. Resources: Resources are the assets of the
organization and the costs incurred performing
various specific activities. Examples of resources
include dollars, personnel, facilities, and capital
equipment.
· Cost Drivers: The Cost Driver is the
measurable output identified for each activity. The
drivers determine how resources are consumed by
activities and how activities are consumed by the
services. Examples of drivers are the number of
hours to perform an activity or service, the number of
permits issued, or square footage occupied.
. Activities: An activity is the work or speCific task
performed within an organization. Examples include
purchasing supplies, plan check review/screen cheek,
general maintenance, and attending public meetings
1400 112'h Ave SE, Bellevue, W A 98004
Page 170f20
//7
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Pinal Report *
MMJM].J~
. Activity Driver: An Activity Driver is the measurable
output of an activity, It is the measure of consumption
by services of activities. An example might be the
number of times a public information counter is
accessed for information.
.' Service: A "service" is any product, customer,
work unit, or service that is to be analyzed. In this
study, likely services include, an hourly rate for plan
checking, project management, and issuing permits.
7.1.3 Summary of the Process Analytics Approach
The "Process Analytics" diagram below illustrates the components
of an ABC system and how costs flow through the model:
Process
Activities
Resources
Activity I
Services
General Ledger
Service I
Budget Unit I
Activity 2
Fixed Assets
Service 2
Budget Unil2
Activity 3
Personnel
Service 3
Budget Unit 3
Activity 4
Service 4
Activity 5
~
~
Costs start with the resources and then are assigned to the
activities via resource drivers. The costs in activities are then
assigned to the cost objects via the activity drivers. The diagram
also illustrates how a single resource or activity can be assigned to
multiple activities or cost objects.
7,1.4 Steps in the Process Analytics (methodology)
In order to conduct this portion of the study, MAXIMUS employed
the steps listed below:
1400 I 12th Ave SE, Bellevue, WA 98004
Page 180f20
liS
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report
1. Project kick-off and orientation meetings (to establish
project goals and identify unique services and
structures within the County);
2. Build the structure of the costing model in state of the
art modeling software (work with staff and
management to match the business processes of the
division);
3. Develop staff resource consumption data (determine
how much time it takes to perform specific tasks and
services);
4. Develop the cost of staff (hourly rate
5, Distribute other expenses (other direct and indirect
costs of providing services);
6. Collect volume data; and
7. Run the model (calculate the hourly rates and other
costs).
1400 ll2th Ave SE, Bellevue, W A 98004
Page 190f20
-*
M6?5,ltt1J,!5.
/19
The City of Rancho Cucamonga - Final Report
8. APPENDIX - DETAILED FEE SCHEDULES
1400 112'" Ave SE, Bellevue, W A 98004
Page 20 of 20
*-
M6..,l5J1YLlJ5..
I~
City of Rancho Cucamonga
USER FEE STUDY
ACTUAL COST RESULTS
ENGINEERING/PUBLlC WORKS DIVISION
UNIT COSTS REVENUE IMPACTS
Actual Annual Actual Annual
Unit Cost I Per Unit Revenue Annual Cost Revenue
Annual Current Potential Surplus I at Current 1 Potential Surplus I
Fee # Fee or Service Name I DescrlDtion Quantitv Unit Fee Fee ISubsidvl Fee Revenue (Deficit)
LD#1 Amending Map 1 Project $ 1,190 $1,678.56 $ (488.56) $ 1.190 $ 1,679 $ (489)
LD#2 Bond Substitution 0 Project $ 420 $1,985.86 $ (1.565.86) $ - $ - $ -
lD #3 Certificate of Compliance 30 Project $ 1.190 $2,149.48 $ 959.48) $ 35.700 $ 64.484 $ (28,784
LD#4 Certificate of Correction 6 Project $ 256 $1,337.85 $ (1.081.85) $ 1,536 $ 8,027 $ (6.491)
LD #5 Flood Hazard letter 0 Project $ 314 $ 141.75 $ 172.25 $ - $ - $ -
LD #6 Lot Line Adjustment 0 Project $ 1.190 $1.729.33 $ 1539.33) $ - $ , $ -
LD #7 Private Street Designation 0 Project $ 495 $2,999.23 $ (2.504.23) $ - $ - $ -
Reapportionment Map (two street parcelltrack
LD#8 map; $30 each additional sheet) 0 Project $ 600 $1.552.43 $ (952.43) $ - $ - $ -
LD#9 Reimbursement Agreement - Storm Drain 0 Project $ 2,227 $4,555.96 $ (2.328.96) $ - $ - $ -
Reimbursement Agreement - Slreet and $ 12,337.32)
LD#10 Utilities 0 Proiect $ 2.827 $5.164.32 $ , $ - $ ,
LD#11 Release of Lien Agreement 0 Project $ 298 $1.034.21 $ 1736.21) $ , $ , $ -
LD#12 Standard AgreemenVDocIDoc, Processing 29 Pro'eet $ 298 $ 989.87 $ 1691.87) $ 8,642 $ 28,706 $ 120,064)
LD#13 Street Vacation 1 Project $ 1,156 $3.506.08 $ (2,350.08) $ 1.156 $ 3.506 $ (2,350
LD #14 Traffic Study Review (Dev, Proj, 0 Project $ 751 $ 198.61 $ 552.39 $ , $ - $ -
LD #15 Plan Checking - Property Legal Description 58 Project $ 584 $1,242.05 $ (658.05 $ 33.872 $ 72,039 $ (38,167)
LD#16 Map Checking - residential parcel maps (base) 0 Project $ 1,370 $3,856.19 $ (2.486.19) $ - $ - $ -
Map Checking - residential parcel maps (per
LD#17 parcel) 2 Project $ 180 $ 217.04 $ 137.04 $ 360 $ 434 $ (74
Tract Maps & Non Residential (PM over 10
LD #18 lots) 22 Project $ 1,750 $4,506.27 $ (2.756.27) $ 38.500 $ 99.138 $ (60.638)
Map Checking - Track Maps and Non-
LD#19 Residential Parcel Map> 10 Lots (base) 25 Project $ 2,070 $4,854.65 $ (2,784.65) $ 51.750 $ 121.366 $ (69,616)
Map Checking - Track Maps and Non-
Residential Parcel Map> 10 Lots (per $ 1233.46)
LD #20 parcel/lot) 0 Project $ 35 $ 268.46 $ - $ - $ -
LD #21 Map Printing 0 Project $ 33 $ - $ 33.00 $ - $ - $ -
Improvement Plans - Widening of existing
LD #22 streets (per LF) 0 Project $ 1 $ 0.59 $ 0.76 $ , $ - $ -
Improvement Plans - Interior Streets 1-2 $ 11.879.16)
LD #23 sheets 74 Project $ 1,370 $3,249.16 $ 101,380 $ 240.438 $ (139,058)
Improvement Plans - Interior Streets 3-5
LD #24 sheets (sheets 1-2) 30 Project $ 2.740 $3,939.60 $ (1,199.60) $ 82,200 $ 118.188 $ (35.988)
LD #25 Interior Streets 3-5 sheets (sheets 3-5) 27 Project $ 3.600 $1.132.19 $ 2.467.81 $ 97,200 $ 30,569 $ 66.631
Improvement Plans. Interior Streets 6-10
LD #26 sheets (sheets 1-5) 70 Project $ 6.340 $7.041.57 $ (701.57) $ 443,800 $ 492,910 $ (49.110)
LD #27 Interior Streets 6-10 sheets (sheets 6-10) 0 Project $ - $1.132.19 $ (1.132.19) $ - $ $ -
Improvement Plans -Interior Streets >11
LD #28 sheets (sheets 1-10) 0 Project $11.815 . $ (1.394.86 $ $ - $ -
LD #29 Interior Streets >11 sheets 0 Project $ 1,025 $1,132.19 $ (107.19) $ - $ - $
Storm Drain Plans. Interior Streets 1-2 sheets
LD #30 (COMBINE) 0 Project $ 2,740 $ - $ 2,740.00 $ - $ - $ -
Storm Drain Plans - Interior Streets 3-5 sheets
LD #31 (sheets 1-2) (COMBINE) 0 Project $ 1,200 $ $ 1.200.00 $ $ $ -
Interior Streets 3-5 sheets (sheets 3-5)
LD #32 (COMBINE) 0 Project $ 6.340 $ - $ 6,340.00 $ - $ - $
MAXIMUS
Page 1 of4
Revenue Summary
Id/
Actual Annual Actual Annual
U nit Cost I Per Unit Revenue Annual Cost Revenue
Annual Current Potential Surplus I at Current I Potential Surplus I
Fee # Fee or Service Name I Description Quantity Unit Fee Fee (Subsidy) Fee Reven ue (D.fic~1
Storm Drain Plans -Interior Streets 6-10
LD #33 sheets (sheets 1-5) (COMBINE) 0 Project $ 1,095 $ - $ 1,095.00 $ - $ - $ -
Interior Streets 6-10 sheets (sheets 6-10)
LD #34 (COMBINE) 0 Project $11.815 $ - $ 11.815.00 $ - $ - $ -
Storm Drain Plans- Interior Streets >11 sheets
LD #35 (sheets 1-10) (COMBINE) 0 Project S 1.025 $ - $ 1,025.00 $ - $ - $ -
LD #36 Interior Streets> 11 sheets (COMBINE) 0 Project $ 400 $ - $ 400.00 $ $ $ -
landscape and Irrigation Plans for City-
LD #37 maintained areas 140 Project $ 400 $1,154.61 $ (754.61 $ 56,000 $ 161,645 $ (105.645
Hydrology Study: Drainage acres up to 150
LD #38 acres 47 Project $ 1,370 $2,870.46 $ (1,500.46) $ 64,390 $ 134,912 $ (70.522)
LD #39 Hydrology Study: Drainage acres> 150 acres 10 Project $ 2,740 $3,913.26 $ (1.173.26) $ 27,400 $ 39.133 $ (11,733)
LD #40 Monumentation (refundable) - base 0 Project $ 2,400 $ - $ 2.400.00 $ - $ - $ ,
lD#41 Monumentation (refundable) - per lot 0 Project $ 50 $ - $ 50.00 $ - $ - $ -
LD #42 Expedited Improvement Plans 0 Project $ 1 $ - $ 0.50 $ - $ - $ -
LD #43 Revisions to Approved Plans 66 Project $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
PW Construction Permit up to $25,000
LD #44 valuation (DELETE) 0 Project $ 0 $ - $ 0.05 $ - $ - $ -
PW Construction Permit next $75,000
LD #45 valuation 0 Project $ 0 $ - $ 0.04 $ - $ - $ -
PWConstruction Permit: > $100,000 valuation
LD #46 (DELETE) 0 Project $ 100 $ - $ 100.00 $ - $ - $ -
Undergrounding Overhead Utilities: 1986 or
LD #47 before (OELETE) 0 Project $ 135 $ - $ 135.00 $ - $ - $ -
LD #48 UndergroundinQ Overhead Utilities: 1987 0 Proiect $ 128 $ - $ 128.00 $ - $ - $ -
Undergrounding Overhead Utilities: 1988 and
LD #49 after 0 Project $ 75 $ - $ 75.00 $ - $ - $ -
LD #50 Undergrounding Overhead Utilities: Telephone 0 Project $ 10 $ - $ 10.00 $ - $ - $ -
LD#51 Undergrounding Overhead Utilities: Cable TV 0 Project $ 5,000 . - $ 5,000.00 . , . - . -
LD #52 Inspection: Drainage Catch Basin W=04' 3 EA . - . 61.31 $ (61.31) . - $ 184 . (184)
LD #53 Inspection: Drainage Catch Basin W=07' 21 EA $ , $ 61.31 $ (61.31) $ - $ 1,288 $ (1,288
LD #54 Inspection: Drainage Catch Basin W-21' 15 EA . , . 61.31 . (61.31) . , . 920 . (920)
lD #55 Inspection: Drainage Collar Pipe pee 15 EA $ - $ 20.44 $ (20.44) . - . 307 $ (307)
LD #56 Inspection: Drainage HeadwaU48" Wing 0 EA $ - . 40.87 $ (40.87) $ - . - $ -
Inspection: Drainage Junction Structure w/o
LD #57 Manhole 39 EA . - . 27.25 . (27.25) . - . 1,063 $ (1.063)
Inspection: Drainage Junction Structure with (1,144)
LD #58 Manhole 42 EA . $ 27.25 $ (27.25 $ - $ 1.144 $
LD #59 Inspection: Drainage RCP 18" 1614 LF . - . 12.26 . (12.26 $ - $ 19,791 $ (19,791
LD #60 Inspection: Drainage RCP 24" lB45 LF $ - $ 12.26 . (12.26) $ - $ 22,623 $ (22,623)
LD #61 Inspection: Drainage RCP 36" 7404 LF $ - . 12.26 $ (12.26) $ - $ 90.787 . (90,787
LD #62 Inspection: Drainage RCP 48" 330 LF . - $ 12.26 $ (12.26) $ - $ 4.046 $ (4.046)
LD #63 Inspection: Drainage RCP 54" 0 LF . - $ 12.26 $ (12.26) $ - $ - $ -
LD #64 Inspection: Drainage RCP 60" 0 LF $ , $ 20.44 $ (20.44 $ - $ - $ -
LD #65 Inspection: Drainage RCP 72" 0 LF $ - . 20.44 $ (20.44) $ - $ - $ -
LD #66 Inspection: Drainage RCP 84" 0 LF $ - $ 20.44 $ (20.44) $ - $ - . -
LD #67 Inspection: Drainage RCP 96" 0 LF $ - . 20.44 $ (20.44 $ - . - $ ,
LD #68 Inspection: V-Ditch 0 LF $ - $ 4.09 $ (4.09 $ $ - $ -
Per
Inspection: Landscape Cobblestone/Boulders occuran
LD #69 (first 200051, each additional 1 000 plus 1 hour) 9 co . . 326.99 $ (326.99) $ $ 2.943 $ (2,943
LD #70 Inspection: Landscape Concrete Header 0 LF $ - . 1.36 $ (1.36) $ $ - . -
Per
LD #71 Inspection: Landscape Decomposed Granite 0 occu ra n $ - $ 81.75 $ (81.75) $ $ - $ -
LD #72 Inspection: landscape Fence Tubular Steel 0 LF . - . 5.45 . (5.45 . . - . -
LD #73 Inspection: landscape Gates Tubular Steel 0 EA $ - $ 13.62 $ (13.62) $ - $ - $ -
LD #74 Inspection: Landscape Irrigation System 1947 LF $ $ 2.04 . (2.04) $ - $ 3.979 $ (3,979)
LD #75 Inspection: landscape Maintenance 180 Day 6 Tolal $ - $ 653.97 . (653.97) $ - . 3,924 . (3.924)
MAXIMUS
Page 2 of 4
Revenue Summary
/ :J-J-
Actual Annual Actual Annual
Unit Cost I Per Unit Revenue Annual Cost Revenue
Annual Current Potential Surplus I at Current I Potential Surplus I
Fee # Fee or Service Name I Descrilltion Quantltv Unit Fee Fee ISubsidvl Fee Revenue (Defic~1
Inspection: Landscape Masonry
LD #76 Column/Pilaster 0 EA $ - $ 10.90 $ (10.90 $ - $ - $ -
LD #77 Inspection: Landscape Mulch Shredded 04" 2070 CY $ - $ 2.86 $ (2.86 $ - $ 5.923 $ (5.923)
LD #78 Inspection: Landscape Pavers 0 SF $ - $ 2.72 $ (2.72) $ , $ - $ -
LD #79 Inspection: Landscape Shrub 01 Gallon 0 EA $ - $ 1.36 $ 11.36) $ - $ - $ -
LD #80 Inspection: Landscape Shrub 05 Gallon 96 EA $ - $ 1.36 $ 11.36) $ - $ 131 $ (131)
Inspection: Landscape Slope Erosion Control
LD #81 (Jute Matting) 0 SF $ $ 0.68 $ (0.68) $ $ - $ -
LD #82 Inspection: Landscape Trail Fence PVC 2-rail 0 LF $ - $ 5.45 $ (5.45) $ - $ - $ -
LD #83 Inspection: Landscape Trail Fence PVC 3-rail 0 LF $ - $ 5.45 $ 15.45 $ - $ - $ -
LD #84 Inspection: Landscape Trail Gate 0 EA $ - $ 81.75 $ 181.75) $ - $ - $ -
LD #85 Inspection: Landscape Tree 05 Gallon 120 EA $ $ 12.26 $ 112.26) $ - $ 1.471 $ 11.471)
LD #86 Inspection: Landscape Tree 15 Gallon 876 EA $ , $ 12.26 $ (12.26 $ - $ 10.741 $ 110.741)
LD #87 Inspection: Landscape Tree 24" Box 207 EA $ - $ 16.35 $ 116.35) $ - $ 3.384 $ 3,384)
La #88 Inspection: Landscape Tree Palm 21 EA $ - $ 27.25 $ 127.25) $ - $ 572 $ (572)
LD #89 Inspection: Landscape Vine 05 Gallon 0 EA $ - $ 1.36 $ (1.36 $ - $ - $ -
LD #90 Inspection: Landscape Wall Garden 06' 0 LF $ - $ 10.90 $ (10.90 $ - $ - $ -
LD#91 Inspection: Landscape Wall Retaining 03' 0 LF $ - $ 10.90 $ (10.90) $ - $ - $ -
LD #92 Inspection: Landscape Wall Retaining Drain 0 LF $ , $ 6.81 $ (6.81 $ - $ - $ -
LD #93 Inspection: Landscaping DELETE 6 DELETE $ - $ 2.72 $ (2.72 $ , $ 16 $ (16)
LD #94 Inspection: Removal Clear and Grub 9 LS $ - $ 61.31 $ (61.31) $ - $ 552 $ (552)
Inspection: Removal Cold Plane Existing
LD #95 Pavement 42420 SF $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
LD #96 Inspection: Removal of AC Berm 735 LF $ - $ 0.68 $ 10.68) $ - $ 501 $ (501)
LD #97 Inspection: Removal of AC Pavement 166077 SF $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
LD #98 Insoection: Removal of pce Curb 9018 LF $ - $ 0.65 $ 10.65) $ - $ 5,898 $ (5.898)
LD #99 Inspection: Removal of PCC Sidewalk 18363 SF $ - $ 0.33 $ 10.33) $ - $ 6.004 $ (6,004)
LD #100 Inspection: Removal Tree 147 EA $ , $ 29.92 $ (29.92) $ - $ 4,398 $ (4,398)
LD#101 Inspection: Street AC each 1000 LF 22 LF $ - $ 61.31 $ (61.31 $ - $ 1.349 $ (1,349
LD #102 Inspection: Street AC (per 100 ton) DELETE 1 TN $ - $ 61.31 $ (61.31) $ - $ 81 $ (61)
Inspection: Street AC (over 1300 tons)
LD #103 DELETE 1 TN $ - $ 61.31 $ (61.31 $ , $ 61 $ (61)
Inspection: Street AC (under 500 tons)
LD #104 DELETE 1 TN $ - $ 61.31 $ (61.31) $ - $ 61 $ (61)
LD #1 05 Insoection: Street Access Ramp 81 EA $ - $ 27.25 $ 127.25 $ - $ 2,207 $ 12,207)
LD #1 06 Inspection: Street Adjust Manhole to Grade 69 EA $ - $ 6.81 $ (6.81) $ - $ 470 $ (470)
LD #107 Inspection: Street Adjust Valves/CO to Grade 84 EA $ - $ 6.81 $ 16.81) $ - $ 572 $ (572)
Inspection: Street Aggregate Base (per 1000
LD #108 LF) 21.981 LF $ - $ 61.31 $ (61.31) $ - $ 1,348 $ (1,348)
LD #109 Inspection: Street Barricades 0 LF $ - $ 1.36 $ 1.36) $ - $ - $ -
LD#110 Inspection: Street Berm AC 78 LF $ - $ 1.36 $ 11.36 $ - $ 106 $ (106)
LD#111 Inspection: Street Cross-gutter 5556 SF $ - $ 0.41 $ (0.41) $ - $ 2.271 $ (2.271)
LD#112 Inspection: Street Curb & Gutter 06" 28374 LF $ , $ 0.25 $ (0.25) $ - $ 6,958 $ (6,958)
LD#113 Inspection: Street Curb & Gutter 08" 15393 LF $ - $ 0.29 $ 10.29) $ - $ 4,404 $ 14,404)
LD#114 Inspection: Street Curb & Gutter 12" 0 LF $ - $ 0.33 $ (0.33) $ - $ - $ ,
LD#115 Inspection: Street Curb & Gutter Cobble 0 LF $ - $ 2.04 $ (2.04) $ - $ - $ -
Inspection: Street Curb Core (30 min for first,
LD#116 5 minutes for each additional) 1 EA $ - $ 40.87 $ (40.87) $ - $ 41 $ (41)
LD#117 Inspection: Street Curb Only 1770 LF $ - $ 0.34 $ (0.34) $ - $ 603 $ (603)
LD#118 Inspection: Street Curb Rolled 0 LF $ - $ 0.68 $ (0.68) $ - $ - $ -
LD#119 Inspection: Street Curbside Drain STD 107-A 12 EA $ - $ 122.62 $ (122.62) $ - $ 1,471 $ (1,471)
LD #120 Inspection: Street Curbside Drain STD 107-6 9 EA $ - $ 122.62 $ (122.62) $ $ 1.104 $ (1.104)
LD #121 Inspection: Street Curbside Drain STD107-C 9 EA $ - $ 122.62 $ 1122.62) $ - $ 1.104 $ (1.104)
Per
LD #122 Inspection: Street Drive Approach Commercial 54 occuran $ - $ 61.31 $ (61.31) $ , $ 3.311 $ (3,311)
MAXIMUS
Page3of4
Revenue Summary
1J-3
Actual Annual Actual Annual
Unit Cost I Per Unit Revenue Annual Cost Revenue
Annual Current Potential Surplus I at Current I Potential Surplus I
Fee # Fee or Service Name I DescriDtlon Quantitv Unit Fee Foo ISubsidyl Foe Revenue lDeficit)
Inspection: Street Drive Approach ResIdential Per
(first drive = 30 plus 10 min for each accuran
lD #123 additional) 999 ce $ - $ 30.00 $ (30.00 $ - $ 29.971 $ (29,971)
Inspection: Street LighVSignallnterconnect
lD #124 Conduit 32190 IF $ - $ 0.49 $ (0.49) $ - $ 15.788 $ (15,788)
lD #125 Inspection: Street Lights 258 EA $ - $ 6.81 $ (6.81 $ - $ 1,758 $ (1,758)
Inspection: Street Right Tum Lane/Busbay Per
LD #126 PCC 06" 9 occuran $ - $ 408.73 $ (408.73) $ - $ 3,879 $ (3.879)
LD #127 Inspection: Street Sidewalk PCC 04" 280776 SF $ - $ 0.15 $ 0.15) $ - $ 41,314 $ 141.314
Inspection: Street Subgrade Preparation/Fine
lD #128 Grading 25232 IF $ - $ 0.16 $ (0.16) $ - $ 4,125 $ (4.125)
lD #129 Inspection: Traffic Pavement Markings 189 EA $ - $ 0.68 $ 10.68) $ - $ 129 $ 1129
Per
lD #130 Inspection: Traffic Pavement Striping 33 occuran $ - $ 163.49 $ (163.49) $ - $ 5,395 $ (5.395)
Per
lD#131 Inspection: Traffic Reflectors and Posts 3 occuran $ , $ 40.87 $ (40.87 $ - $ 123 $ (123)
lD #132 Inspection: Traffic Signal 3 EA $ - $4.577.79 $ (4,577.79) $ - $ 13,733 $ (13.733)
lD #133 Inspection: Traffic Signal Modification 9 lS $ - $2,043.66 $ 12,043.66) $ - $ 18.393 $ (18,393
LD #134 Inspection: Traffic Street Sign 96 EA $ - $ 6.81 $ (6.81 $ - $ 854 $ (654)
Inspection: Utility Fiber Optic Conduit & (2.04) 111,361
lD #135 Trench 5559 IF $ - $ 2.04 $ $ - $ 11.361 $
Inspection: Utility Underground Existing
lD #136 Electrical 14874 IF $ - $ 2.04 $ (2.04) $ - $ 30.397 $ (30.397)
Inspection: Utility Underground Existing
lD #137 Telecom 14874 IF $ - $ 2.04 $ (2.04 $ - $ 30.397 $ (30.397)
Other inspections not listed above, inspectors
lD #138 Hourly rate 0 $ - $ - $ - $ , $ - $ -
Inspection: Misc.
lD#139 B. 0 $ , $ - $ , $ - $ , $ -
Inspection: Misc.
lD#140C. 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ , $ -
Inspection: Misc.
lD#141 0 0 $ - $ - $ $ - $ - $ -
Inspection: Misc.
LO #142 E. 0 $ - $ , $ - $ - $ , $ -
Inspection: Misc.
LD #143 F. 0 $ , $ - $ - $ $ - $ -
Fee Non-User Fee Activities 1 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
LEGEND:
TOTALS:
ACTUAL PROJECTED T'
#__ $ 2,044,483 $ (999,407)
_#### $ 2,044,483 $ (664,798)
A reference number to facilitate discussion
The services and/or fees included in the MAXIMUS stud
The annual number of each service rovided, as re orted b the Ci
The actual cost of each service, as calculated by MAXIM US
The current fee charged by the City for each service, if applicable
The difference between the Actual Unit Cost and the Current Fee for each service
The potential revenue if the City charged the Actual Unit Cost for each service at the Annual Quantity
for that service (Unit Cost x Annual Quantity)
The potential revenue if the City charged the Current Fee for each service at the Annual Quantity for
that service (Current Fee x Annual QUanti )
The difference between the Total Annual CosVPotenlial Revenue and the Annual Revenue at Current
Fee. This figure represents the annual subsidy (based on actual cost), the City provides to fee-
a ers/customers for each service, or the amount of overcharge.
Volume Data Volume data is based on a 4 month sample.
Given the major restructuring of fees it is impractical to calculate current revenues based on current volume. Therefore, the projection in revenue is
based on budgeted revenue for the current fiscal year.
Fee #
Fee or Service Name I Description
Annual Quanti
Actual Unit Cost I Potential Fee
Current Fee
Per Unit Sur Ius I (Subsid )
Tolal Actual Annual Cost I Potential Revenue
Annual Revenue at Current Fee
Total Annual Revenue Surplus I (SubSIdy)
MAXIMUS
Page 4 of4
Revenue Summary
!J-Y
Exhibit lie, II
Park Impact Fee Study
Prepared for:
City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California
January 16, 2006
Prepared by:
1frn$Ch~(B)rl850$(ffi
rl~':l!. ~'u:"l<)rr'ir. &, Planning (OIl~ltlt.JI1~r,
1J-0
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
Table of Contents
Table of Contents.... ...... ................. .......... ....... .... ............... ... ....... ....... ........................ ..... ..........................2
Executive Summary.. .................. ..... ....... ......... ........ ............... .......... ......... ............. ............. .... .............. ..... 3
LEGAL FRAMEWORK.....,........................................................................................................ 3
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION METHODOLOGY..........................................................6
Parks ........................ ....... .......... ....... ...... ... ... ...... ........ ....... ............. ............ ....... ...... .......... ................ .......... 8
STUDY AREA ....................................................................................................,........................... 8
DEMAND VARIABLE AND METHODOLOGy................................................................ 8
PARKLAND - MAJOR SUBDIVISIONS.............................................................................. 10
Parkhnd (Mqjor Subdivisions) _ LOS Analysis........................................................................................................ 10
Parkland (Megor SubdiviIions) - Cosl AnalYsis .................................. ...... ............ ........ ..................... ............. ........... 13
PARK AMENITIES ......... ......,......................,.............................................................................14
Park AmC1lities (Minor Subdivisions and Non-Subdivision Projecls)- LOS Analysis................................................ 14
Park Amenities (Minor Snbdivisions and Non-Subdivision Projects) - COIl AnalYsis ................................................. 15
RECREATIONAL FACILITIES ....................................,......................................................... 16
&crealional Facilities (Minor Subdivisions and Non-subdivision projects) - LOS AnalYsis......................................... 16
Recreational Facilities (Minor Subdivisions and Non-subdivision projects) - Cost AnalYsis .......................................... 17
PARKLAND IN-LIEU FEE...............................................,......................................................17
PARK IMPROVEMENT IMPACT FEE...............................................................................19
Appendix 1: Implementation and Administration...................................................................................21
ADOPTION ................ ............................................................................... ...........,.......................21
ADMINISTRATION '......... ...........................................................,............................................ 21
2
/db
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16,2006
Executive Summary
The City of Rancho Cucamonga has retained TischlerBise to prepare this study to update the
City's Park Impact Fees. This report documents the data, methodology, and results of the
fee study. Impact fees are one-time payments used to fund system improvements needed to
accommodate development. As documented in this report, the methods used to calculate
impact fees in this study are intended to satisfy all legal requirements governing such fees,
including provisions of the U. S. Constitution, the California Constitution, and the California
Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000 et seq., including the Quimby Act
(Government Code Section 66477).
LEGAL FRAMEWORK
u. S, Constitution, Like all land use regulations, development exactions, including impact
fees, are subject to the Fifth Amendment prohibition on taking of private property for
public use without just compensation. Both state and federal courts have recognized the
imposition of impact fees on development as a legitimate form of land use regulation,
provided the fees meet standards intended to protect against regulatory takings. To comply
. with the Fifth Amendment, development regulations must be shown to substantially
advance a legitimate governmental interest. In the case of impact fees, that interest is in the
protection of public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring that development is not
detrimental to the quality of essential public services.
There is little federal case law specifically dealing with impact fees, although other rulings on
other types of exactions (e.g. land dedication requirements) are relevant. In one of the most
important exaction cases, the U. S. Supreme Court found that a government agency
imposing exactions on development must demonstrate an Hessential nexus" between the
exaction and the interest being protected (See Nollan v. California Coas/al Commission, 1987).
In a more recent case (Do/an v. City ofTigard, OR, 1994), the Court ruled that an exaction also
must be "roughly proportional" to the burden created by development. However, the Do/an
decision appeared to set a higher standard of review for mandatory dedications of land than
for monetary exactions such as impact fees. Constitutional issues related to impact fees will
be discussed in more detail below.
California Constitution, The California Constitution grants broad police power to local
governments, including the authority to regulate land use and development. That police
power is the source of authority for a wide range of regulations, including the authority to
impose impact fees on development to pay for infrastructure and capital facilities. Some
impact fees have been challenged on grounds that they are special taxes imposed without
voter approval in violation of Article XIIIA, which was added by Proposition 13 in 1978.
That objection is valid only if the fees exceed the cost of providing capital facilities needed
to serve new development. If that were the case, then the fees would also run afoul of the
U. S. Constitution and the Mitigation Fee Act. Articles XIIIC and XIIID, added by
Proposition 218 in 1996, require voter approval for some "property-related fees," but
exempt "the imposition of fees or charges as a condition of property development"
The Mitigation Fee Act, California's impact fee statute originated in Assembly Bill 1600
during the 1987 session of the Legislature, and took effect in January, 1989. AB 1600 added
several sections to the Government Code, beginning with Section 66000. Since that time
the impact fee statute has been amended from time to time, and in 1997 was officially titled
3
/0-7
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
the "!vlitigation Fee Act." Unless otherwise noted, code sections referenced in this report
are from the Government Code.
The Act does not limit the types of capital improvements for which impact fees may be
charged. It defines public facilities very broadly to include "public improvements, public
services and community amenities." Although the issue is not specifically addressed in the
Mitigation Fee Act, other provisions of the Government Code (see Section 65913.8) prohibit
the use of impact fees for maintenance or operating costs. Consequently, the fees calculated
in this report are based on capital costs only.
The Mitigation Fee Act does not use the term "mitigation fee" except in its official title.
Nor does it use the more common term "impact fee." The Act simply uses the word "fee,"
which is defined as "a monetary exaction, other than a tax or special assessment, ... that is
charged by a local agency to the applicant in connection with approval of a development
project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to
the development project. ..." To avoid confusion with other types of fees, this report uses
the widely-accepted term "impact fee," which should be understood to mean "fee" as
defined in the Mitigation Fee Act.
The Mitigation Fee Act contains requirements for establishing, increasing and imposing
impact fees, They are summarized below. It also contains provisions that govern the
collection and expenditure of fees, and require annual reports and periodic re-evaluation of
impact fee programs. Those administrative requirements are discussed in the
Implementation Chapter of this report. Certain fees or charges related to development are
exempted from the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act. Among them are fees in lieu of
park land dedication as authorized by the Quimby Act (Section 66477), fees collected
pursuant to a reimbursement agreement or developer agreement, and fees for processing
development applications.
Required Findings, Section 66001 requires that an agency establishing, increasing or
imposing impact fees, must make findings to:
I, Identify the purpose of the fee;
2. Identify the use of the fee; and,
3. Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed;
b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is
imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development
project. (Applies only upon imposition of fees.)
Each of those requirements is discussed in more detail below.
Identifying the Purpose of the Fees, The broad purpose of impact fees is to protect the
public health, safety and general welfare by providing for adequate public facilities. The
specific purpose of the fees calculated in this study is to fund the construction of certain
capital improvements identified in this report. Those improvements are needed to mitigate
(he impacts of additional development in the City, and thereby prevent deterioration in
public services that would result from additional development if impact fee revenues were
4
1d!6
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
not available to fund such improvements. Findings with respect to the purpose of a fee
should state the purpose of the fees as fInancing development-related public facilities in a
broad category) such as street improvements or water supply system improvements.
Identifjing the Use of the Fees, According to Section 66001, if a fee is used to fInance
public facilities, those facilities must be identifIed. A capital improvement plan may be used
for that purpose, but is not mandatory if the facilities are identifIed in the General Plan, a
SpecifIc Plan, or in other public documents. Impact fees calculated in this study are based on
specifIc capital facilities identifIed in this report, We recommend that this report be
designated as the public document identifying the use of the fees,
Reasonable Relationship Requirement. As discussed above, Section 66001 requires that,
for fees subject to its provisions) a "reasonable relationship" must be demonstrated between:
1. the use of the fee and the type of development on which it is imposed;
2. the need for a public facility and the type of development on which a fee is
imposed; and)
3. the amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development on
which the fee is imposed.
These three reasonable relationship requirements as defIned in the statute are closely related
to "rational nexus" or "reasonable relationship" requirements enunciated by a number of
state courts. Although the term "dual rational nexus" is often used to characterize the
standard by which courts evaluate the validity of development impact fees under the U. S.
Constitution, we prefer a formulation that recognizes three elements: "impact or need"
"benefIt," and "proportionality." The dual rational nexus test explicitly addresses only the
fIrst two, although proportionality is reasonably implied, and was specifIcally mentioned by
the U.S. Supreme Court in the Dolan case.
The reasonable relationship language of the statute is considered less strict than the rational
nexus standard used by many courts. Of course, the higher standard controls. We will use
the nexus terminology in this report for two reasons: because it is more concise and
descriptive, and also to signify that the methods used to calculate impact fees in this study
are intended to satisfy the more demanding constitutional standard. Individual elements of
the nexus standard are discussed further in the following paragraphs,
Demonstrating an ImDact. All new development in a community creates additional
demands on some, or all, public facilities provided by local government. If the supply of
facilities is not increased to satisfy that additional demand, the quality or availability of public
services for the entire community will deteriorate. Impact fees may be used to recover the
cost of development-related facilities, but only to the extent that the need for facilities is a
consequence of development that is subject to the fees. The Nol/an decision reinforced the
principle that development exactions may be used only to mitigate conditions created by the
developments upon which they are imposed. That principle clearly applies to impact fees.
In this study, the impact of development on improvement needs is analyzed in terms of
quantifiable relationships between various types of development and the demand for specific
facilities, based on applicable level-of-service standards. This report contains all information
needed to demonstrate this element of the nexus.
Demonstrating a Benefit A sufficient benefIt relationship requires that impact fee
revenues be segregated from other funds and expended only on the facilities for which the
5
lifj
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
fees were charged. Fees must be expended in a timely manner and the facilities funded by
the fees must serve the development paying the fees. Nothing in the U.S. Constitution or
California law requires that facilities paid for with impact fee revenues be available exclusivelY
to development paying the fees.
Procedures for earmarking and expenditure of fee revenues are mandated by the Mitigation
Fees Act, as are procedures to ensure that the fees are expended expeditiously or refunded.
All of those requirements are intended to ensure that developments henefit from the impact
fees they are required to pay. Thus, an adequate showing of benefit must address procedural
as well as substantive issues.
Demonstrating ProDortionaliry. The requirement that exactions be proportional to the
impacts of development was clearly stated hy the U.S. Supreme Court in the Do/an case
(although the relevance of that decision to impact fees has been debated) and is logically
necessary to establish a proper nexus. Proportionality is established through the procedures
used to identify development-related facility costs, and in the methods used to calculate
impact fees for various types of facilities and categories of development. In this study, the
demand for facilities is measured in terms of relevant and measurable attributes of
development, For example, the need for road improvements is measured by the number of
vehicle trips generated by development.
In calculating impact fees, costs for development-related facilities are allocated in proportion
to the service needs created by different types and quantities of development. The following
section describes methods used to allocate facility costs and calculate impact fees in ways
that meet the proportionality standard.
Impact Fees for Existing Facilities, It is important to note that impact fees calculated
using the cost recovery method (described below) may be used to pay for existing facilities,
provided that those facilities are needed to serve additional development and have the
capacity to do so. In other words, such fees must satisfy the same nexus requirements as any
other impact fee. -
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION METHODOLOGY
Anyone of several legitimate methods may be used to calculate impact fees. The choice of a
particular method depends ptimarily on the service characteristics and planning requirements
for the facility type being addressed. Each method has advantages and disadvantages in a
particular situation, and to some extent they are interchangeable, because they all allocate
facility costs in proportion to the needs created by development.
Reduced to its simplest terms, the process of calculating impact fees involves only two steps:
determining the cost of development-related capital improvements, and allocating those
costs equitably to various types of development. In practice, though, the calculation of
impact fees can become quite complicated because of the many variables involved in
defining the relationship between development and the need for facilities. The following
paragraphs discuss three basic methods for calculating impact fees and how those methods
can be applied.
Plan-Based Impact Fee Calculation, The plan-based method allocates costs for a
specified set of improvements to a specified amount of development. The improvements
6
/3D
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Srudy - January 16,2006
are Identified by a facility plan and the development is identified by a land use plan. In this
method, the total cost of relevant facilities is divided by total demand to calculate a cost per
unit of demand. Then, the cost per unit of demand is multiplied by the amount of demand
per unit of development (e.g. dwelling units or square feet of building area) in each category
to arrive at a cost per unit of development.
The plan-based method is often the most workable approach where actual service usage is
difficult to measure (as is the case with administrative facilities), or does not directly drive the
need for added facilities (as is the case with fire stations). It is also useful for facilities, such
as streets, where capacity cannot always be matched closely to demand. This method is
relatively inflexible in the sense that it is based on the relationship between a particular
facility plan and a particular land use plan, If either plan changes significantly, the fees
should be recalculated.
Cost Recovery Impact Fee Calculation, The rationale for the cost recovery approach is
that new development is paying for its share of the useful life and remaining capacity of
facilities from which new growth will benefit. To calculate an impact fee using the cost
recovery approach, facility cost is divided by ultimate number of demand units the facility
will serve.
Incremental Expansion Impact Fee Calculation, The incremental expansion method
documents the current level-of-service (LOS) for each type of public facility in both
quantitative and qualitative measures, based on an existing service standard such as square
feet per capita or park acres per capita. The level-of-service standards are determined in a
manner similar to the current replacement cost approach used by property insurance
companies. However, in contrast to insurance practices, Rancho Cucamonga will not use
the funds for renewal and/or replacement of existing facilities. Rather, the City will use the
impact fee revenue to expand or provide additional facilities, as needed, to accommodate
new development. An incremental expansion cost method is best suited for public facilities
that will be expanded in regular increments, with LOS standards based on current conditions
in the community. In this study, the incremental expansion method is used for all
components of the parks and recreation impact fee.
All costs in the impact fee calculations are given in current dollars with no assumed inflation.
rate over time. Necessary cost adjustments can be made as part of the recommended annual
evaluation and update of impact fees, One approach is to adjust for inflation in construction
costs by means of an index like the one published by Engineering News Record (ENR).
This index could be applied against the calculated impact fees. If cost estimates change
significantly, the fees should be recalculated.
7
/~J
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16,2006
Parks
This chapter presents the methodology used to update the 1991 City of Rancho Cucamonga
Park Impact Fees. Based on discussions with City staff, major subdivisions of more than 50
parcels will be assessed a parkland in-lieu fee and minor subdivisions of 50 or less parcels
will be assessed a park improvement impact fee.
The parkland in-lieu fee is governed by the State's Quimby Act. When acquiring parkland as
a condition of development approval, the Act allows the City to require either dedication of
land or payment of in-lieu fees based on the value of the land. The Act applies to
subdivisions of more than 50 parcels. Smaller projects (50 parcels or less) will be assessed the
park improvement impact fee, which includes park amenities and recreational facilities.
STUDY AREA
The study area for this update is the City of Rancho Cucamonga. As the City's parks all have
attributes that serve the City as a whole, impact fees are calculated on a citywide basis. The
City's existing and planned parks are well distributed throughout the City and it is assumed
that future parks will be sited so that all existing and new city residents will have reasonable
access to City parks.
DEMAND VARIABLE AND METHODOLOGY
The demand for parks is considered a function of population. In 2003, the California
Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit estimated population for the City of
Rancho Cucamonga at 146,700, a 15% increase from the 2000 Census. In 2005, the State
estimates a population of 161,830, an increase of 10% since 2003, As shown in Figures 1 and
2, all park capital costs are allocated to residential development only and standards are
shown on a per capita basis.
Figure 1: Parkland In-Lieu Fee Methodology Chart
Residential Development
I
Persons Per Housing Unit
I
multiplied by
Parkland Capital Cost Per Person
8
!3if
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
Figure 2: Park Improvement Impact Fee Methodology Chart
Residential Development
Persons Per Housing Unit
multiplied by
Capital Cost Per Person
t- Park Ameni ties
Cost Per Person
L- Recreational Facilities
Cost Per Person
The incremental expansion, or standards-based, methodology is used to calculate this fee.
The incremental expansion method documents the current level-of-service (LOS) for the
selected public facilities, based on current service standards such as park acres per capita or
recreational facility square feet per capita.
Persons per housing unit is used to differentiate the demand for parks by type of housing.
Figure 3 illustrates persons per housing unit in Rancho Cucamonga by housing type as
reported in the 2000 Census. For nursing/assisted living facilities, this figure is not available
through the Census. \'(Ihen calculating the impact fees, TischlerBise conservatively estimates
one person per nursing/ assisted living facility room or unit.
9
/33
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16,2006
Figure 3: Persons Per Housing Unit in Rancho Cucamonga
Combined Renter and Owner
Total SF3 Sample Data
SF11QO-Percent Data
Persons Vacant Total Persons
Persons Households p" HSl1:Units HSl1:Units p"
Household Housinl1: Unit
96,263 28,662 3.36 62 "."'6 3.29
6,037 2._ 2.47 2,5" 2.38
649 229 2.83 8 2.74
4,252 1,532 2.78 2 1,56] 2.72
4,711 2,321 2.03 161 2,48; 1.90
2,921 1,334 2.19 II 1,441 2.02
722 297 2.43 3 33< 2.15
6,210 2,820 2.20 14 2.%' 2.09
2,705 1,317 2.05 3 1.351 2.00
39 20 1.95 "l 1.95
124,509 40,976 3.04 1,253 42,22' 2.95
124,117 40,863 42.134
2.97% Vacancy Rate
Units in
Structure
I detached (SFD)
"1 attached (SFA)
2
3-4
5-9
10-19
20-49
50'
Mobile Home (MH)
Other
2000 Persons Per Housing Unit by Housing Type
Persons Households PPH Vacant Total PPHU Hsl1:UnitMix
Hsl!"Units Hsl!"Vnits
Single Family Detached 96,263 28,662 3.36 62' 29,286 3.29 69%
Single Family Attached 6,037 2,444 2.47 9' 2,538 2.38 6%
Duplex 649 229 2.83 8 237 2.74 1%
Multiple 3-4 4,252 1,532 2.78 29 1,561 2.72 4%
Multiple 5-9 4,711 2.321 2.03 161 2,482 1.90 6%
Multiple 10+ 9.853 4,451 2.21 299 4,750 2.07 11%
Mobile Home 2,705 1,317 2.05 38 1,355 2.00 3%
Other 39 20 1.95 0 20 1.95 0%
TOTAL Less Group Quarters 124,509 42,209 2.95 100%
Group Quarters 3,626
Sample Difference (392) (113) (95)
TOTAL ~
S,m,"',2000U.5.C"",",
PARKLAND - MAJOR SUBDIVISIONS (MORE THAN 50 PARCELS)
The Quimby Act provides that a City may require residential subdividers to dedicate land for
future parks or to pay fees in lieu of dedication. The Acts states thar requirements for land
dedication or in-lieu fees are to be based on a population ratio of 3.0 to 5.0 acres per
thousand added residents, depending on the existing ratio.
The incremental expansion methodology is used to calculate this in-lieu fee. The first step
of calculating the incremental expansion methodology measures the current level-DE-service
(LOS) being provided to existing development. The second step involves determining the
cost per person to provide this LOS.
Parkland (Major Subdivisions) - LOS Analysis
Figure 4 lists the City of Rancho Cucamonga's community, neighborhood and undeveloped
parkland, totaling 405 acres. The Quimby Act requires that the level-of-service calculation
be based on the City's population from the most recent Census. Therefore the 2000 Census
population of 127,743 is used. Since residential development creates 100% of the demand
for parkland, the residential proportionate share factor is 100%. To calculate the current
parkland LOS, the total park acreage of 405 acres is multiplied by a residential demand of
10
/3'1
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
100%. That number, 405, is divided by the 2000 Census population of 127,743. This results
in 3.17 acres parkland per 1,000 persons or .00317 acre per person. According to the
Quimby Act, the City is authorized to base its dedication/in-lieu fee requirement on this
ratio, as it does not exceed five acres per thousand residents.
11
135
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
Figure 4: Parkland LOS Standards
# of Acquisition Acquisition
Park acres Cost; AcreII' Cost
Community Parks
Etiwanda Creek Park 12 $425,000 $5,100,000
Heritage Community Park 40 $425,000 $17,000,000
Red Hill Community Park 44 $425,000 $18,700,000
Sports Complex 42 $425,000 $17,850,000
Central Park 20 $425,000 $8,500,000
Nei~hborhood Parks
Bear Gulch Park 5 $425,000 $2,125,000
Beryl Park East 10 $425,000 $4,250,000
Beryl Park West 10 $425,000 $4,250,000
Church Street Park 6.5 $425,000 $2,762,500
Coyote Canyon Park 5 $425,000 $2,125,000
Day Creek Park 11 $425,000 $4,675,000
Ellena Park 5 $425,000 $2,125,000
Golden Oak Park 5 $425,000 $2,125,000
Hermosa Park 10 $425,000 $4,250,000
Kenyon Park 6.5 $425,000 $2,762,500
La Mission Park ~ Ralph M. Lewis 8 $425,000 $3,400,000
Lions Park 1.5 $425,000 $637,500
MIlliken Park 10 $425,000 $4,250,000
Old Town Park 5 $425,000 $2,125,000
Spruce Ave. Park 5 $425,000 $2,125,000
Victoria Grove Park 6.5 $425,000 $2,762,500
Vintage Park 6.5 $425,000 $2,762,500
West Greenway Park 5 $425,000 $2,125,000
Windrows Park 8 $425,000 $3,400,000
Mountain View Park 5 $425,000 $2,125,000
Victoria Arbors Park 8 $425,000 $3,400,000
Undeveloped Parkland
Central Park 83 5425,000 $35,275,000
Etiwanda Creek Park 16 $425,000 $6,800,000
South Etiwanda 5.5 $425,000 $2,337,500
TOTAL 405 $172,125,000
12
/30
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
Proportionate Share
Residential
100%
Demand Units
Population (2000)
127,743
LOS
Acres per person
Acres per 1,000 persons
.00317
3.17
*Sonrce: Ci!J of Rancho Cucamonga, based on ItUrfy conducted ~ J. William Mup/ry andASJociatei
Parkland (Major Subdivisions) - Cost Analysis
The City estimates it costs $425,000 to acquire an acre of residential land for parkland. This
estimate is based on an August 1, 2005 appraisal study conducted by J. William Murphy and
Associates expressly for this purpose. The study presents an estimated value per acre for
undeveloped land in each of the City's residential land use zones, The City anticipates that in
the future it will acquire land in the areas zoned "very low" and "low" density. Therefore,
the midpoint of these two appraisal values is used - $425,000 ("very low" density had an
estimated value of $400,000 and "low" density a value of $450,000), Using this figure, the
total acquisition cost is $172,125,000 for 405 acres (405 acres x $425,000 = $172,125,000).
As shown in Figure 5, the total cost per person to provide additional parkland for new
residential development is $1,347.43. This is calculated by multiplying the current LOS of
.00317 acre per person by $425,000 per acre (.00317 x $425,000 = $1,347.43).
13
/37
City of Rancho Cucamong<l, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
Figure 5: Parkland Cost Standards (Subdivisions)
Level of Service
Acres per person
Acres per 1,000 persons
.00317
3.17
Cost Factor
Cost per acre
$425,000
Cost
Per Person
$1,347.43
PARK AMENITIES (MINOR SUBDIVISIONS OF 50 OR LESS
PARCELS. AND NON-SUBDIVSION PROJECTS)
The incremental expansion methodology is used to calculate the park amenities component
of the Parks Improvement Impact Fee. The fIrst step of calculating the incremental
expansion methodology measures the current level-of-service (LOS) being provided to
existing development. The second step involves determining the cost per person to provide
this LOS.
Park Amenities (Minor Subdivisions and Non-Subdivision Projects) - LOS Analysis
Figure 6 summarizes the acreage for the City's two developed park categories - community
and neighborhood - and provides the City's estimated cost per acre for park amenities.
Undeveloped park land is not included in this section as no amenities are provided on these
sites. The City estimates a cost of $400,000/acre for its prototype community park, which
typically include restroom facilities, play area/tot lot, exercise/jogging course, group picnic
shelter, 2 full basketball courts, 3 lighted ballfIelds and on-site parking. The City estimates a
cost of $300,000 an acre for neighborhood parks that typically include restrooms, 160'
unlighted ballfIeld, play area/tot lot, exercise/jogging course, 1 full basketball court, picnic
shelter with tables and barbeque grills and on-site parking, As neighborhood parks offer
amenities that are accessed by residents throughout the City, particularly for ballfIelds, these
parks are considered as serving the entire City, Of the City's developed park acreage,
community and neighborhood parks represent 158 and 142.50 acres, respectively.
Since residential development creates 100% of the demand for park amenities, a residential
proportionate share factor of 100% is used. To calculate the current park amenities LOS,
300.50 developed acres is multiplied by 100% residential demand. That number, 300.50, is
divided by 161,830 persons. This results in .00186 developed acres per person.
14
/33
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16,2006
Figure 6: Park Amenities LOS Standards
Acres
Park Type
Community Park
Neighborhood Park
TOTAL
Unit
replacement
cost'"
$400,000
$300,000
Total
replacement
cost
$63,200,000
$42,750,000
$105,950,000
158.00
142.50
300.50
Proportionate Share
Residential
100%
Demand Units 2005
Population
161,830
LOS
Developed acres per person
'" S 01lrce: City of Rancho C1Icamonga
.00186
Park Amenities (Minor S1Ibdivisions and Non-S1Ibdivision Projects) - Cost Analysis
As shown in Figure 6, the City estimates the current inventory of park amenities to have a
total replacement value of $105,950,000. As shown in Figure 7, this results in an average
amenity cost of $352,579 per acre ($105,950,000 / 300,5 acres = $352,579 per acre). The
cost per person is calculated by multiplying the current LOS of .00186 developed acres per
pcrson by the amenity cost of $352,579 per acre which results in a cost factor of $654.70 per
person.
Figure 7: Park Amenities Cost Standards
Level of Service
Developed acres per person .00186
Cost Faclor
Cost of amenities/ acre $352,579
Cost
Per Person $654.70
15
/39
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
RECREATIONAL FACILITIES (MINOR SUBDIVISIONS OF 50 OR
LESS PARCELS. AND NON-SUBDIVSION PROTECTS)
The incremental expansion methodology is used to calculate the recreational facilities
component of the Park Improvement Impact Fee. The City will use the impact fees to
provide new/expanded facilities of a similar type, The fIrst step of calculating. the
incremental expansion methodology measures the current level-of-service (LOS) being
provided to existing development. The second step involves detennining the cost per
person to provide this LOS.
Remational Facilities (Minor Subdivisions and Non-JIIbdivision projects) - LOS Analysis
Figure 8 lists the City's recreational facilities. As residential development creates 100% of
the demand for recreational facilities, a residential proportionate share factor of 100% is
used. To calculate the current recreational facilities LOS, 167,895 square feet of recreational
facility space is multiplied by 100% residential demand. That number, 167,895, is divided by
161,830 persons. This results in 1.037 square feet per person.
Figure 8:
Recreational Facilities LOS Standards
Square Replacement Cost
Feet Per Sq. Ft."
Facility""""
Lions West Community Center
Lions East Community Center
RC Family Sports Center
Central Park Community Center
Heritage Park Equestrian Center
Victoria Gardens Cultural Center
TOTAL
10,228 $439
12,000 $439
34,000 $439
57,000 $3n
3,045 $439
73,850 $506
167,895
Proportionate Share
Residential
100%
Demand Units
Population
161,830
LOS
Square feet per person
1.037
Replacement
Cost""
$4,487,223
$5,264,634
$14,916,464
$21,172,650
$1,335,901
$37,368,100
$74,793,132
:+: S ouree: City of Rancho Cucamonga
**j\reighborhood Center located at 9791 A"ow Highwqy (Former Senior Center) har not been included in the /ist of rrcrrational
fadldies pendingjurtherpoliry dedsions on use and final disposition of this jacili(y to be determined I?J the Ci(y CounciL
16
I (lD
City of Rancho Cucarnonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
Recreational Facilities (Minor Subdivisions and Non-subdivision projects) - Cost Analysis
As ~hown in Figure 8, the City estimates its recreational facilities have a total replacement
value of $74,793,132 or an average replacement cost of $445.48/square foot.' The cost per
person is shown in Figure 9 and is calculated by multiplying the current LOS of 1.037 square
feet per person by the average cost per square foot of $445.48 which results in a cost factor
of $462.17 per person.
Figure 9: Recreational Facilities Cost Standards
Level of Seroice
Square feet per person
1.037
Cost Factor
Cost Per Square Foot
$445.48
Cost
Per Person
$462.17
PARKLAND IN-LIEU FEES (FOR MAJOR SUBDIVISIONS)
Figure 10 provides a summary of the level of service and cost factors used to calculate the
Parkland In-Lieu Fee for subdivisions of more than 50 parcels, This component of the fee is
assessed on new development when the City opts to require payment in-lieu of land
dedication.
Per Quimby Act requirements, the level of service standard IS based on the ratio of current
parkland acreage to the 2000 Census population for the City. This results in 3.17 acres of
parkland per 1,000 persons. Figure 10 shows the capital cost for parkland for subdivisions is
$1,347 per person. Persons per housing unit (or per room for nursing/assisted living
facilities) are multiplied by the capital cost. Using single family housing units as an example,
3.29 persons per housing unit is multiplied by the cost per person. This results in a parkland
in-lieu fee of $4,429 for a single family detached housing unit (3.29 persons per housing unit
x $1,347 capital cost per person = $4,429). This calculation is repeated for the remaining
housing categories.
1 Replacement cost per square foot for the recently-constructed Central Park Community Center (I\fay 2005)
and the Victoria Gardens Cultural Center (currently under construction) are current construction costs plus
15% for design and construction management. Replacement costs for the orher facilities are an estimate based
on the average construction cost per sguare foot for the new Central Park and Victoria Gardens facilities, or
$381.50 ((5323 + $440)/2:::::$381.50). Fifteen percent is added to this figure to account for design and
construcrion management, resulting in an estimated replacement cost of$438.72 for the Lions \Vest and Lions
East Community Centers, the RC Family Sports Center and the Heritage Park Equestrian Center.
17
ICf/
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
Figure 10: Parkland In-Lieu Level of Service and Cost Summary (Major Subdivisions)
Standards:
Persons Per Housing Unit
Single Family Detached
Single Family Attached
Duplex
Multiple 3-4
Multiple 5-9
Multiple 10+
Mobile Home
Persons Per Room
Nursing/ Assisted Living Facility
Levet Of Service
Park Acreage per 1,000 People
Park Land Cost per Acre
Park Land Cost per Person
Capital Cost Per Person
Maximum Supportabte Impact Fee per Housing Unit
Single Family Detached
Single Family Attached
Duplex
Multiple 3-4
Multiple 5-9
Multiple 10+
Mobile Home
Nursing/ Assisted Living Facility (per room)
3.29
2.38
2.74
2.72
1.90
2.07
2.00
1.00
3.17
$425,000
$1,347
$1,347
$4,429
$3,205
$3,690
$3,670
$2,558
$2,795
$2,690
$1,347
18
/cjd-
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
PARK IMPROVEMENT IMPACT FEE (MINOR SUBDIVISIONS
AND NON-SUBDIVISION PROJECTS)
Figure 11 provide a summary of the level-of-service and cost factors used to calculate the
Park Improvement Impact Fee for minor subdivisions and non-subdivision projects. This
fee includes capital costs for recreational facilities and park amenities. As the Quimby Act
docs not apply to minor subdivisions of 50 parcels or less, the level of service standard is
developed using the 2005 estimated population for the City. Figure 10 shows the capital cost
for park improvements of $1,117 per person. Of this, $462 is for recreational facilities and
$655 for park amenities. Persons per housing unit (or per room or unit for nursing/assisted
living facilities) are multiplied by the capital cost. Using single family housing units as an
example, 3.29 persons per housing unit is multiplied by the cost per person. This results in a
park improvement impact fee of $3,671 for a single family detached housing unit (3.29
persons per housing unit x $1,117 capital cost per person = $3,671). This calculation is
repeated for the remaining housing categories.
19
Ic;3
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
Figure 11: Parkland Improvement Impact Fee Level of Service and Cost Summary
(Minor Subdivisions and Non-subdivision projects)
Standards:
Persons Per Housing Unit
Single Family Detached
Single Family Attached
Duplex
Multiple 3-4
Multiple 5-9
Multiple 10+
Mobile Home
Persons Per Room
Nursing/ Assisted Living Facility
Level Of Seroice
Recreational Facilities Cost per Person
Park Amenities Cost per Person
Capital Cost Per Person
Maximum Supportable Impact Fee per Housing Unit
Single Family Detached
Single Family Attached
Duplex
Multiple 3-4
Multiple 5-9
Multiple 10+
Mobile Home
Nursing/ Assisted Living Facility (per room)
3.29
2.38
2.74
2.72
1.90
2,07
2.00
1.00
$462
$655
$1,117
$3,671
$2,657
$3,058
$3,042
$2,120
$2,317
$2,230
$1,117
Developers may be eligible for site-specific credits or reimbursements only if they provide
system improvements that have been included in the fee calculation schedule. Project
improvements normally required as part of the development approval process are not
eligible for credits against impact fees.
20
!1~
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
Appendix 1: Implementation and Administration
This section of the report contains reconunendations for adoption and administration of a
impact fee program based on this study, and for the intetpretation and application of impact
fees recommended herein. Statutory requirements for the adoption and administration of
fees imposed as a condition of development approval are found in the Mitigation Fee Act
(Government Code Sections 66000 'I seq.).
ADOPTION
The form in which development impact fees are adopted, whether by ordinance or
resolution, should be determined by the City Attorney. Typically, it is desirable that specific
fee schedules be set by resolution to facilitate periodic adjustments. Procedures for adoption
of fees subject to the Mitigation Fee Act, including notice and public hearing requirements,
are specified in Government Code Section 66016. Such fees do not become effective until
60 days after final action by the Governing body. Actions establishing or increasing fees
subject to the Mitigation Fee Act require certain findings, as set forth in Government Code
Section 66001 and discussed in Section 1 of this report summarized below.
ADMINISTRATION
Several requirements of the Califomia Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections
66000 el seq.) address the administration of impact fee programs, including collection and
accounting procedures, refunds, updates and reporting. References to code sections in the
following paragraphs pertain to the California Government Code.
Imposition of Fees, Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act, when the City imposes an impact
fee upon a specific development project, it must make findings to :
1. Identify the purpose of the fee;
2. Identify the use of the fee; and
3. Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on
which it is imposed;
b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the
fee is imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost
attributable to the development project.
Most of those findings would normally be based on an impact fee study, and this study is
intended to provide a basis for all of the required findings. According to the statute, the use
of the fee (2., above) may be specified in a capital improvement plan, the General Plan, or
other public document. This study is intended to serve as a public document identifying the
use of the fees.
21
!t;5
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
In addition, Section 66006, as amended by SB 1693, provides that a local agency, at the time
it imposes a fee for public improvements on a specific development project, "... shall identify
the public improvement that the fee will be used to finance." For each type of fee calculated
in this report, the improvements to be funded by the impact fees are identified.
Consequently, this report provides a basis for the notification required by the statute. The
City Attorney should be consulted as to the specific method of notification to be provided.
Collection of Fees, Section 66007, provides that a local agency shall not require payment
of fees by developers of residential projects prior to the date of final inspection, or issuance
of a certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs fIrst. However, lIutility service fees" (not
defined) may be collected upon application for utility service. In a residential development
project of more than one dwelling unit, the agency may choose to collect fees either for
individual units or for phases upon final inspection, or for the entire project upon final
inspection of the first dwelling unit completed.
An important exception allows fees to be collected at an earlier time if they will be used to
reimburse the agency for expenditures previously made, or for improvements or facilities for
which money has been appropriated. The agency must also have adopted a construction
schedule or plan for the improvement. These restrictions on the time of collection do not
apply to non-residential development.
Notwithstanding the foregoing restrictions, many cities routinely collect impact fees for all
facilities at the time building permits are issued, and builders often find it convenient to pay
the fees at that time. In cases where the fees are not collected upon issuance of building
permits, Section 66007 provides that the city may require the property owner to execute a
cont.ract to pay the fee, and to record that contract as a lien against the property until the
fees are paid.
Credit for Improvements provided by Developers, If the City requires a developer, as a
condition of project approval, to construct facilities or improvements for which impact fees
have been, or will be, charged, the impact fee imposed on that development project, for that
type of facility, should be adjusted to reflect a credit for the cost of those facilities or
improvements. If the reimbursement would exceed the amount of the fee to be paid by the
development for that type of facility, the City may wish to negotiate a reimbursement
agreement with the developer.
Credit for Existing Development, If a project involves replacement, redevelopment or
intensification of previously existing development, impact fees should be applied only to the
portion of the project which represents an increase in demand for City facilities, as measured
by the demand variables used in this study. Since residential service demand is normally
estimated on the basis of demand per dwelling unit, an addition to a single family dwelling
unit typically would not be subject to an impact fee if it does not increase the number of
dwelling units in the structure. If a dwelling unit is added to an existing structure, no impact
fee would be charged for the previously existing units. A similar approach can be used for
other types of dcvelopment.
Earmarking of Fee Revenue, Section 66006 specifies that fees shall be deposited with
other fees for the improvement in a separate capital facilities account or fund in a manner to
22
/lIb
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16,2006
avoid any commingling of the fees with other revenues and funds of the local agency, except
for temporary investments. Fees must be expended solely for the purpose for which the fee
was collected. Interest earned on the fee revenues must also be placed in the capital account
and used for the same purpose.
The language of the law is not clear as to whether depositing fees "with other fees for the
improvement" refers to a specific capital improvement or a class of improvements '(e.g.,
street improvements). We are not aware of any city that has interpreted that language to
mean that funds must be segregated by individual projects. As a practical matter, that would
make it exceedingly difficult to accumulate enough funds to construct any improvements
funded by impact fees. Common practice is to maintain separate funds or accounts for
impact fee revenues by facility category (i.e., streets, traffic signals, or park improvements),
but not for individual projects. We recommend that approach.
Reporting, As amended by SB 1693 in 1996, Section 66006 requires that once each year,
within 180 days of the close of the fiscal year, the local agency must make available to the
public the following information for each separate account established to receive impact fee
revenues:
1. The amount of the fee;
2. The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund;
3. The amount of the fees collected and interest earned;
4. Identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the
amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the percentage of the
cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees;
5. Identification of the approximate date by which the construction of a public
improvement will commence, if the City determines sufficient funds have been
collected to complete financing of an incomplete public improvement;
6. A description of each inter-fund transfer or loan made from the account or fund,
including interest rates, repayment dates) and a description of the improvement on
which the transfer or loan will be expendcd;
7. The amount of any refunds or allocations made pursuant to Section 66001,
paragraphs (e) and (I).
That information must be reviewed by the City Council at its next regularly scheduled public
meeting, but not less than 15 days after the statements are made public.
Findings and Refunds. Prior to the adoption of Government Code amendments
contained in SB 1693, a local agency collecting impact fees was required to expend or
commit the fee revenue within five years or make findings to justify a continued need for the
money. Otherwise, those funds had to be refunded. SB 1693 changed that requirement in
material ways.
Now, Section 66001 requires that, for the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit of any
impact fee revenue into an account or fund as required by Section 66006, and every five
23
/tf7
City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Park Impact Fee Study - January 16, 2006
years thereafter, the local agency shall make all of the following findings for any fee revenue
that remains unexpended, whether committed or uncommitted:
1. Identify the purpose to which the fee will be put;
2. Demonstrate the reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which
it is charged;
3. Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing of
incomplete improvements for which impact fees are to be used;
4. Designate the approximate dates on which the funding necessary to complete
financing of those improvements will be deposited into the appropriate account or
fund.
Those findings are to be made in conjunction with the annual reports discussed above. If
such findings are not made as required by Section 66001, the local agency must refund the
moneys in the account or fund. Once the agency determines that sufficient funds have been
collected to complete an incomplete improvement for which impact fee revenue is to be
used; it must, within 180 days of that determination, identify an approximate date by which
construction of the public improvement will be commenced. If the agency fails to comply
with that requirement, it must refund impact fee revenue in the account according to
procedures specified in the statute.
Costs of Implementation, The ongoing cost of implementing the impact fee program is
not included in the fees themselves. Implementation costs would include the staff time
involved in applying the fees to specific projects, accounting for fee revenues and
expcndirures, preparing required an~ual reports, updating the fees, and preparing forms and
public information handouts. We recommend that those costs be included in user fees
charged to applicants for processing development applications.
Annual Update of the Capital Improvement Plan, Section 66002 provides that if a local
agency adopts a capital improvement plan to identify the use of impact fees, that plan must
be adopted and annually updated by a resolution of the governing body at a noticed public
hearing. The alternative is to identify improvements in other public documents. Since
impact fee calculations in this study include costs for future facilities to be funded by impact
fees, we believe it is to the City's advantage to use this report as the public document in
which the use of impact fees is identified. In that event, we believe the City would not be
rcquired to update its CIP annually to satisfy Section 66002.
Indexing of Impact Fee Rates, The fees recommended in this report are stated in
current dollars. Fees should be adjusted annually to account for construction cost escalation.
The Engineering News Record Building Cost Index is recommended as the basis for indexing
the cost of yet to be constructed projects. It is desirable that the ordinance or resolution
establishing the fees include provisions for annual escalation.
Updates of This Study. Generally, impact fees should be reviewed and updated about
every five years, unless significant changes in land use or facility plans make it necessary to
update the fees more often.
24
/(/8
EXHIBIT "D"
CONTRACT AMENDMENT A-OOl
CONTRACT NO. CO-92-013
Exhibit "A" of Contract CO-92-013 (Dated: March 4, 1992) is hereby repla,ced in its
entirety with Contract Amendment A-OOl
Hourly charges will be billed at the following rates, with maximum charges set forth below:
A, REGULAR
B. RUSH (Rates submitted by consultant)
MAXIMUM CHARGES
1, Residential Parcel Maps:..,.............................,..,...........,..,....$1,543.00 + 187.00pe' Pacee1
2. Tract Maps and Non-Residential
Parcel Maps over ten lots.........................,............................$1,802,OO +l107.00pe' 101 0' Paccel
3. Tract Maps and Non-Residential
Parcel Maps often lots or less ..,....,........,......,......,...............$1,942,00
4. Improvement Plans -
A. Widening of existing streets:...................,..,..,........,.........,..,..$ 0,24 pe, LF+ sheel chacge
B. Interior Streets -
Interior Streets - 1 Sheet...,..........................................,..$1,300.00 LS
Interior Streets - 2 Sheets ,..,.......,...............,......,..,.........$1,575,00 LS
Interior Streets - Sheets 3 and 4.........,........,..,.........:........$453,00 EA
Interior Streets - 5 Sheets ...........................,..........,........$2,816,00 LS
Interior Streets - Sheets 6 through 9............,...........,..,......$453.00 EA
Interior Streets - 10 Sheets ....,....,............,..................,..,$5,284,00 LS
Interior Streets - Sheets 11 and more ................................$453.00 EA
C, Storm Drain Plans: Same as for "Interior Streets"
D. Hydrology Study: Drainage areas up to 150 acres .........$1,148,00 (pe"ystcm)
Drainage areas over 150 acres ..........$1,565,00 (pe"ystcm)
E. Legal Descriptions:..,..........................................,...............$497.00 EA
5. Maximums for rush jobs will be 50% greater than those listed above.
6. These charges will be effective sixty (60) days from the City Council approval of the
contract amendment.
/V9
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Contract Amendment
this] 5t day of February 2006, .
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ENGINEER
Dan Guerra & Associates
William J, Alexander, Mayor
Daniel E. Guerra, Principal '
ATTEST:
Debra J, Adams, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
James L. Markman
City Attorney
/~'b
EXHIBIT "E"
CONTRACT AMENDMENT A-001
CONTRACT NO. CO-99-001
Exhibit "A" of Contract CO-99-001 (Dated: January 6, 1999) is hereby replaced in its
entirety with Contract Amendment A-001
Hourly charges will be billed at the following rates, with maximum charges set forth below:
A. REGULAR
B. RUSH (Rates submitted by consultant)
MAXIMUM CHARGES
I, Residential Parcel Maps:.............,.................,.......................$1 ,543,00 + $87.00 p" Parcel
2. Tract Maps and Non-Residential
Parcel Maps over ten lots..,...................................................$1,802,OO +$107.00 per 10' or Parcel
3, Tract Maps and Non-Residential
Parcel Maps often lots or less .....,........................,........,......$1,942.00
4, Improvement Plans -
A. Widening of existing streets:............,.....................................$ 0.24 per LF + sheet charge
B. Interior Streets -
Interior Streets - I Sheet.........,.......................................$1,300.00 LS
Interior Streets - 2 Sheets ................,.............,..,.............$1,575,00 LS
Interior Streets - Sheets 3 and 4 .........................,..........,..,$453,00 EA
Interior Streets - 5 Sheets ...............................................$2,816.00 LS
Interior Streets - Sheets 6 through 9........................,.........$453.00 EA
Interior Streets -10 Sheets ............................................,$5,284,00 LS
Interior Streets - Sheets II and more ....................,...........$453.00 EA
C. Storm Drain Plans: Same as for "Interior Streets"
D. Hydrology Study: Drainage areas up to 150 acres .........$1,148,00 (p,csystcm)
Drainage areas over 150 acres ,.........$1,565.00 (pecsyslem)
E. Legal Descriptions:.............................................................$497,OO EA
5. Maximums for rush jobs will be 50% greater than those listed above,
6. These charges will be effective sixty (60) days from the City Council approval of the
contract amendment.
/s/
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Contract Amendment
this 1 sl day of February 2006.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ENGINEER
AUFBAU CORPORATION
William J. Alexander, Mayor
Vartan V. Vartanians, President
ATTEST:
Debra 1. Adams, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
James L. Markman
City Attorney
/5>-
EXHIBIT "F"
CONTRACT AMENDMENT A-OOl
CONTRACT NO. CO-98-021
Exbibit "A" of Contract CO-98-021 (Dated: May 6, 1998) is bereby replaced in its entirety
with Contract Amendment A-OOl
Charges will be billed with maximum charges as set forth below.
MAXIMUM CHARGES
I. Regular
Landscape Architectural Plan Check: ,....,........,.................$462,00 per sheet
2. Rush
Landscape Architectural Plan Check: ................................$693,00 per sheet
3, Landscape plans and irrigation plans which occur on the same sheet shall be considered
two (2) sheets and charged accordingly.
4. These charges will be effective sixty (60) days from the City Council approval of the
contract amendment.
5. The "LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT" reserves the right to renegotiate billing and maximum
charge rates on an annual basis,
The above rates apply to those projects which take up to three plan check reviews of originally
submitted plans, Design changes to the original submittal may require additional plan checks. If
authorized by the CITY, additional plan checks will be billed at the hourly rates below submitted
by consultant. Maximums for rush jobs will be 50% greater than the hourly rates noted.
Consultant services will be at the hourly rate noted,*
Principal ,....,................,............,..........,.........$1 00,00 per hour
Senior Project Manager,..................................$75.00 per hour
Project Manager ..........................................,...$65,00 per hour
CAD Draftsman .......................,......................$55.00 per hour
Clerical.... ............... ....................... ................. .$35.00 per hour
*Hourly rates have not been amended. Rates reflected hereon are as approved by City Council
by Resolution No. 02-052, February 20,2002.
153
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Contract Amendment
this 1" day of February 2006.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
Architerra Design Group
William J, Alexander, Mayor
Richard W. Krumwiede, President
ATTEST:
Debra J. Adams, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
James L. Markman
City Attorney
/5Y