HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - April 5, 2010 * V400 0a * -4W'!*.!A
f
-14/F004
us .
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL,
AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AZUSA AUDITORIUM MONDAY, APRIL 5, 2010
213 EAST FOOTHILL BOULEVARD 6:30 P.M.
AZUSA CITY COUNCIL
JOSEPH R. ROCHA
MAYOR
KEITH HANKS ANGEL CARRILLO
COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER
URIEL E. MACIAS ROBERT GONZALES
COUNCILMEMBER MAYOR PRO-TEM
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the Agenda
are on file in the Office of the City Clerk and are available for public inspection at the City Library.
Persons who wish to speak during the Public Participation portion of the Agenda, shall fill out a card requesting to
speak and shall submit it to the City Clerk prior to the start of the City Council meeting. When called, each person
may address any item on or off the agenda during the public participation.
6:30 P.M.
CLOSED SESSION
1. REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Gov. Code Sec. 54956.8)
Agency Negotiators: City Manager Delach and Assistant City Manager Makshanoff
Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment
a. ATLANTIS GARDEN SITE
Address: 633 E. Lime Avenue, Azusa, CA 91702
Negotiator: Maria E. Chase
04/05/10 - 1 -
2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov. Code Sec. 54956.9(a) '
Case Name: Lucy Valenzuela v. City of Azusa, Case Number: Los Angeles County Superior Court Case
No. KC055842
3. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE DISCIPLINE/DISMISSAL/RELEASE (Gov. Code Sec. 54957).
Any person wishing to comment on any of the Closed Session items listed above may do so now.
7:30 P.M. - REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
1. Call to Order
2. Pledge to the Flag
3. Invocation—Pastor Dale Winslow of Foothill Community Church
A. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
(Person/Group shall be allowed to speak without interruption up to five(5)minutes maximum time, subject
to compliance with applicable meeting rules. Questions to the speaker or responses to the speaker's
questions or comments shall be handled after the speaker has completed his/her comments. Public
Participation will be limited to sixty (60) minutes time.)
B. REPORTS, UPDATES, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM STAFF/COUNCIL
1. MAYOR ROCHA—a. Request for certificate of recognition to the students of Gladstone High School. b.
Request for proclamation for Jane Luna in celebration of her forty years of service as an employee of Lee
School.
2. PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST TO THE CITY OF DUARTE REGARDING DOCUMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH VULCAN MATERIALS PROJECT.
C. SCHEDULED ITEMS
1. CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION REGARDING THE ADDITION OF AN ADDITIONAL
WEEKEND FOR YARD SALES/GARAGE SALES THIS YEAR DUE TO CONFLICT IN
SCHEDULE WITH EASTER WEEKEND.
04/05/10 _ 2 _
. D. CONSENT CALENDAR
The Consent Calendar adopting the printed recommended actions will be enacted with one vote. If
Councilmembers or Staff wish to address any item on the Consent Calendar individually, it will be
considered under SPECIAL CALL ITEMS.
1. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 15, 2010.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Minutes as written.
2. HUMAN RESOURCES ACTION ITEMS.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Personnel Action Requests in accordance with the City of Azusa Civil Service Rules and applicable
Memorandum of Understanding(s).
3. AUTHORIZATION OF PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF AN ELECTRONIC
SCOREBOARD AT THE MEMORIAL PARK-SOUTHEAST BALL DIAMOND.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Authorize the purchase and installation of an LED electronic scoreboard at the Memorial Park-Southeast ball
diamond in the amount of$13,115.00.
4. AUTHORIZATION OF PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF ELECTRONIC MARQUEE
MESSAGE BOARD AT THE AZUSA SENIOR CENTER.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Authorize the purchase and installation of an electronic marquee at the Azusa Senior Center in the amount of
$34,346.65.
5. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT AS OF FEBRUARY 28, 2010.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive and file the Report.
6. CIP PROJECT#66110A—CITRUS AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION FROM ALOSTA AVENUE TO
THE NORTHERLY CITY BOUNDARY: AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT REQUEST FOR
PROPOSALS—PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Authorize staff to solicit proposals to obtain professional construction management services for Citrus
Avenue from Alosta Avenue to the northerly city boundary.
04/05/10 - 3 -
7. CIP#66110A,CITRUS AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION; CIP#66110B FOOTHILL BOULEVARD
RECONSTRUCTION; REQUEST TO APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND
AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT BIDS FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve the Plans and Specifications and authorize staff to solicit bids for street improvements on Citrus
Avenue from Alosta Avenue to the northerly city limits (CIP #6611OA) and Foothill Boulevard from
Rockvale Avenue to Citrus Avenue (CIP #66110B).
8. CIP PROJECT #66110F: TARGET SEWER LINE IMPROVEMENTS - NOTICE OF
COMPLETION.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve a Notice of Completion for the following project and authorize staff to file the Notice of
Completion with the Los Angeles County Clerk: Target Sewer Line Improvements Project No. 66110F—
$25,005.00—Whiting Turner Contracting Company, Irvine, CA.
9. TEMPORARY PARKING LOT AT BLOCK 36.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Temporary Parking Lot at Block 36 - Alternative B and authorize staff to proceed with
construction.
10. LETTER OF SUPPORT TO CONGRESSWOMEN JUDY CHU REQUESTING INSTALLATION
OF AUTOMATIC DOOR AT AZUSA POST OFFICE.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Submit a letter to Congresswoman Judy Chu,requesting assistance in promoting the Architectural Barrier's
Commission's petition for the installation of an automatic door system at the U.S.Post Office located at 110
West 6th Street, Azusa.
11. REQUEST TO ADOPT RESOLUTION APPOINTING AND APPROVING AUTHORIZED
AGENTS TO EXECUTE FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF AZUSA FOR THE
PURPOSES OF OBTAINING STATE AND FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Resolution No. 10-C20, which reflects current City Staff to serve as Authorized Agents to execute
for and on behalf of the City of Azusa for the purpose of obtaining federal financial assistance or grants
through California State or Federal assistance programs. The Authorized Agents will be City Manager,
Director of Finance, Chief of Police, and Emergency Services Coordinator.
04/05/10 - 4 -
, 12. WARRANTS. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF WARRANTS BY THE CITY.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Resolution No. 10-C21.
E. AGENCY SCHEDULED ITEMS
1. EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
THE CITY OF AZUSA AND HOPKINS REAL ESTATE GROUP FOR THE DOWNTOWN
NORTH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Authorize the Executive Director to enter into an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with Hopkins Real
Estate Group for the development of the Downtown North Redevelopment Project.
F. AGENCY CONSENT CALENDAR
The Consent Calendar adopting the printed recommended actions will be enacted with one vote. If
Boardmembers or Staff wish to address any item on the Consent Calendar individually, it will be
considered under SPECIAL CALL ITEMS.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 15, 2010.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Minutes as written.
2. AGENCY TREASURER'S REPORT AS OF FEBRUARY 28, 2010.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive and file the Report.
04/05/10 - 5 -
3. WARRANTS. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF WARRANTS BY THE AGENCY.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Resolution No. 10-R15.
G. ORDINANCES/SPECIAL RESOLUTIONS
1. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE AZUSA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING
RECOVERY OF COSTS FOR REMOVAL OF GRAFFITI.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 10-C3, entitled:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA AMENDING AND
RESTATING SECTIONS 46-238 AND 46-240 OF CHAPTER 46 OF THE AZUSA MUNICIPAL CODE
REGARDING RECOVERY OF COSTS FOR REMOVAL OF GRAFFITI"
H. ADJOURNMENT
1. Adjourn.
UPCOMING MEETINGS:
April 19, 2010, City Council Meeting—6:30 p.m. Azusa Auditorium
April 26, 2010, Utility Board Meeting—6:30 p.m. Azusa Light and Water Conference Room
May 3, 2010, City Council Meeting—6:30 p.m. Azusa Auditorium
May 17, 2010 City Council Meeting—6:30 p.m. Azusa Auditorium
In compliance with Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials are available for inspection by
members of the public at the following locations: Azusa City Clerk's Office-213 E. Foothill Boulevard,Azusa
City Library- 729 N.Dalton Avenue,and Azusa Police Department Lobby- 725 N.Alameda,Azusa, California.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in a city
meeting,please contact the City Clerk at 626-812-5229. Notification three(3)working days prior to the meeting
when special services are needed will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to
provide access to the meeting.
04/05/10 - 6 -
si441 al egiee
REPORTS AND UPDATES
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: F.M. DELACH, CITY MANAGER
DATE: APRIL 5, 2010
SUBJECT: PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST TO THE CITY OF DUARTE REGARDING
DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH VULCAN MATERIALS PROJECT
As the Council is aware, on February 25, 2010, the City Attorney filed a Public Records Act request
with the City of Duarte for documents associated with their review of the Vulcan Materials proposal
currently being processed by the City of Azusa. This was based on(1)the fact that Duarte had sent the
City of Azusa a"settlement"communication on January 21,2010,asking for control of land,access and
jurisdictional authority and (2) our fear that Duarte officials were secretly asking Vulcan for money
while presenting a face to their residents that they were fighting this project for environmental reasons.
Based on the written response we received from Duarte's attorneys, I wrote a letter to Darrell George,
City Manager of Duarte, on March 24,2010, expressing my hope that Duarte officials not hide behind
attorney-client privilege and provide us with an answer as to whether or not they have made a settlement
offer to Vulcan and if so, the exact specifics of that request.
On March 25, 2010, Mr. George responded to my letter with a 12-page letter drafted by their attorney
but signed by Mr. George. In this letter which did not answer the question asked of him, he raises a
number of his own concerns with our processing of the Vulcan application. His subsequent comments
in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on March 26,2010, "We have talked to Vulcan,sure,about a number
of things, but nothing materialized or came of this," and "We are trying to approach this from many
different levels"leads me to personally conclude that the rumors that they have made a settlement offer
to Vulcan are true.
Further, the comments by the Vulcan representative in the same article, "'We are legally unable to
confirm or deny if we have received a confidential document from the city of Duarte,' Vulcan
Spokesman Todd Priest said. He said Duarte officials 'have been acting in secret and have been more
concerned with financial and political gain over the facts associated with our project" only add to the
suspicion that Duarte has been actively protesting before our Planning Commission all the while trying
to negotiate a payment from Vulcan to withdraw their opposition, as was done in the case of the City of
Industry football stadium settlement talks with Diamond Bar and Walnut.
While Mr. George is trying to downplay the significance of a potential settlement offer to Vulcan from
Duarte, it is actually very important to the larger question of credibility. I am very proud of the open
and transparent manner in which Azusa staff has conducted ourselves in the processing of this project.
On two separate occasions,both the Deputy City Manager from Duarte and a representative from Save
our Canyon publicly recognized Azusa for being open and transparent. The notion that Duarte officials
would not reciprocate is disturbing to say the least.
On March 31, 2010, the City of Duarte's attorneys made documents available to us pursuant to our
February 25, 2010, request. Duarte contended in their letter that "literally thousands of pages of
documents that are responsive to our request" were reviewed and roughly 2,200 pages of documents
were provided; however, at least half of the documents provided to staff were duplicates (multiple
copies of the identical document). Further, a significant number of pages reviewed by staff were
documents that the City had previously seen or generated (comments from Duarte's attorneys on the
project's Draft EIR, City of Azusa letters, comments from the public, etc.).
Given that the Council will be hearing the Vulcan matter at your April 19,2010,meeting, I asked staff
to review the documents provided to us as well as the assertions in Mr. George's March 25,2010,letter.
Below, please find our findings:
Claims in Duarte's March 25, 2010, Letter
Mr. George(through his attorney)makes a number of accusations throughout the letter. Evidently,in
preparation for their release of public documents, Mr. George read into the record at the March 23,
2010,Duarte City Council meeting a"lengthy City Council-authorized statement"explaining where the
City stands. The individual components of that statement (as we know it) and staff's responses are
analyzed below.
1. The City of Duarte completely and unequivocally opposes the Vulcan mining expansion. The
project is bad land use policy, and Duarte and other members of the San Gabriel Valley
community have expended a great deal of time and effort attempting to convince Azusa to reject
the proposal.
Staff has a number of concerns with this statement, given(1)that the proposed project does not
call for an expansion but a relocation of mining and (2) the appearance that Duarte has been
attempting to negotiate a back room payoff from the applicant. Unless and until Duarte waives
attorney-client privilege and releases information about any potential payment they have
requested from Vulcan, credibility will continue to remain an issue. As staff demonstrated to
the Planning Commission at the March 10,2010,meeting where the Commission recommended
approval of the EIR, Use Permit and Reclamation Plan, the project will actually improve the
appearance of the mining site from throughout the San Gabriel Valley. To date,no other City in
the San Gabriel Valley has voiced opposition to the proposed project despite numerous lobbying
attempts by the Duarte staff and Council.
2. The City of Duarte attached an article for the stated purpose of proving that Vulcan made
"grand promises"about providing state of the art reclamation and did not deliver.
The 2008 article from an aggregate research website appears to discuss a limestone-mining pit
in Florida and has no comparative basis with the Azusa application. Vulcan is required every 2
years to submit a report ensuring compliance with their conditions of approval. For the past 23
years, on-site operators have always been in compliance with their conditions of approval. In
December of 2009,the Planning Commission reviewed the most recent report and found Vulcan
in compliance. It is important to note that the City of Duarte was asked in advance of the
December meeting whether or not they had concerns that Vulcan was out of compliance and
they chose not to provide any input or attend the meeting. As indicated to the Planning
Commission at the March 10,2010,meeting,the compliance reporting would still be required as
part of the current project and the City would have the ability to repeal the approval if they are
found to be out of compliance.
3. Azusa staff has engaged in a series of actions to ensure that the mining project gets approved
including changing the composition of the Planning Commission, refusing to allow the
Planning Commission to consider thorough responses to public comments, allowing the
community to speak but refusing to listen, proceeding under threat of litigation from Vulcan,
and recommending the acceptance of millions of dollars of advanced mining tax payments in
exchange for approval.
Staff disagrees with each and every of these contentions. Azusa staff has no ability to impact
the composition of the Planning Commission. It should be noted that Daniel Tedford from the
San Gabriel Valley Tribune also had serious concerns with Mr. George's allegations, calling
them "misleading, if not wrong." The process of seating Commissions is done by the City
Council and has always been accomplished in an open and transparent manner. To assert
otherwise is simply factually incorrect and an attempt to discredit our open process. The claim
that the Commission has been stacked to favor Vulcan reeks of a City Manager who could not
sway discussion at the Planning Commission away from objective science and into the realm of
emotion, theatrics and over-exaggeration.
At the March 10, 2010, Planning Commission meeting, staff gave a lengthy response and
presentation refuting the incorrect information presented by the City of Duarte. The Planning
Commission asked questions of staff and staff gave thorough responses, allowing the
Commission to take a vote. The Commission held five meetings and public testimony was
taken at all meetings. Staff not only listened to these comments but also responded to each of
the issue areas addressed by the public(and City of Duarte). While the City of Duarte might not
agree with staff's answers, that does not make the document or the responses bad or incorrect.
Azusa has always proceeded under threat of litigation; however,the primary threat has always
been the City of Duarte. Staff was advised that Duarte set aside $700,000 years ago to"fight"
this project. This is evidenced by the fact that we have never received any comments from the
City of Duarte's planning staff, only from their attorneys. Lastly,as indicated numerous times
during the Planning Commission hearing process,the Development Agreement is a requirement
of the City's Municipal Code and functions as a"contract"between the City and the applicant.
Staffs recommendation to support the project revolves around the numerous environmental
benefits of the project,not the financial elements. The proposed Development Agreement does
not increase the extraction tax rate,solidifying staff's position that the project has been weighed
on its environmental merits rather than financial benefits.
4. Given Azusa's conduct and Duarte's belief that the Environmental Impact Report does not meet
their expectation, litigation may be one of Duarte's only options. Duarte will continue to
attempt in good faith to hold dialog with Azusa.
As previously indicated, Duarte set aside a significant amount of money and retained legal
counsel years ago in an attempt to "fight"this project rather than hold good-faith constructive
dialog with us. Litigation or the threat of litigation (evidently) to achieve financial
compensation appears to have always been their aim, as evidenced by the fact that we have
never received any comment letters from their planning staff nor have we received any credible
studies from any respectable consulting firms on any issue associated with this project. Multiple
meetings have been held with the City of Duarte at their request and they have never offered any
constructive input into the project, process or environmental review. Prior to receiving Mr.
George's 12-page letter on March 25,2010,implying that Duarte wants financial compensation,
their only official request had been for Azusa to give up jurisdictional rights over land directly
adjacent to the proposed mining site.
5. Azusa requested that Duarte participate in negotiations to explore what steps could be taken to
`partially and imperfectly address"the City of Duarte's concerns about the mining project's
approval.
As previously indicated, Azusa staff never initiated any "settlement" or "negotiation"
discussions with Duarte. The thought that we would participate in negotiations with anyone
who only sought to"partially and imperfectly address"their concerns,would be irresponsible at
best, foolhardy at worst. Furthermore, if we had initiated settlement dialogue, why would
Duarte try to keep their"settlement offer" confidential? At Duarte's request, the Azusa staff
attended two meetings; however, Duarte gave little input until sending the City a preliminary
settlement agreement letter. Mr. George attempted to keep this letter secret from Duarte
residents by labeling the letter"confidential;"however,we have continued to maintain an open
and transparent process, responding back to his letter that settlement dialogue was premature
and that Duarte's requests for control of land and access to Vulcan's private property is
inappropriate at this time. It is interesting to note that two of the four bullet points in Mr.
George's letter were never mentioned to us in Duarte's original"settlement"letter. This could
be because they are items requested of Vulcan by Duarte in their private settlement discussions.
Mr. George states that "there is no guarantee that the Duarte City Council will approve any
proposal. The City (of Duarte) staff is merely investigating how to make the best of a bad
situation." Evidently, this is done with bullying tactics and backroom deals hidden from
residents and designed to line the City's coffers and provide political fodder for Council re-
election campaigns. Duarte"staff'has never been involved in this process as far as we know. It
has been attorneys, elected officials, and the City Manager driving these objections. It is my
opinion that,as a result of the City of Azusa's rebuffing of their attempted power and land grab
in the January 21, 2010, "settlement letter," the City of Duarte barraged the City's
environmental review process with numerous letters attempting to scare the Planning
Commission into recommending denial of the project. If the City of Duarte appears placed in a
negative light, it is because they have placed themselves as such. Again,the City of Azusa has
been open,transparent and respectful of every individual involved in this process,regardless of
their position on the application.
6. Duarte will produce all "responsive, non privileged documents"requested by Azusa. Duarte is
handling our Public Records Act request, as Azusa handled theirs. Thousands of pages of
documents are being reviewed to comply with the request.
As indicated previously, the purpose of the March 24, 2010, letter to Mr. George was to again
ask that they come clean to the residents of both of our communities with discussions they have
had with Vulcan. The Duarte City Council,Planning Commission and City Manager have made
credibility a major issue during their campaign to deny this project. As we have been honest,
open and transparent with them throughout the process, we believe that their position to
comment on this project is compromised by the specter of back room dealing and
misrepresentation. This was the reason for the March 24, 2010, letter that prompted a 12-page
response but no answer. We are not begrudging them the time it takes to respond but the
openness and honesty of the response.
7. The City of Duarte's actions are not intended to antagonize or embarrass Azusa but to
communicate their contention that the environmental document is flawed and that the relocation
of mining is a bad idea.
As previously stated,the City of Duarte appropriated funds years ago and retained attorneys to
litigate this project or threaten litigation to achieve financial gain. Throughout the public
hearing process, Duarte officials have attempted to scare the Planning Commission and
residents with claims that are not substantiated by facts. Duarte officials refused to comment in
the Tribune article that called to light the fact that the South Coast Air Quality Management
District found no significant,unavoidable impacts with the proposed project and concurred with
staffs analysis. One official later went on to call a Pasadena Star News photographer to have a
photo opportunity while dumping a bag of form letters on the City of Azusa's public counter.
Mr. George contacted every City Manager and Planning Director in the San Gabriel Valley as
well as numerous elected officials spreading misleading and inaccurate information and asking
them to comment on a project that,in some cases,is at the opposite end of the County from their
jurisdiction. Duarte City officials have also actively promoted a boycott of Azusa businesses.
Staff believes that Duarte's actions have been one of emotion and political opportunity and not
of substance and science. Azusa staff clearly indicated to the Planning Commission how and
why the Draft EIR was complete, thorough and responsive to all issues. Again, the
environmental document is not flawed simply because the Duarte City Manager, and or City
Council does not like its findings.
Presently, the City of Duarte has orchestrated a "town hall" meeting with State and County
elected officials and the South Coast Air Quality Management District no doubt for the purpose
of pressuring the District to change the findings in their independent review of the Vulcan Draft
EIR. It is worth noting that Azusa staff not only gave the South Coast Air Quality Management
District the reports prepared for the Draft EIR but also the raw data so that they could run their
own models. Again, this resulted in a finding of no significant impact.
Review of Duarte's Documents
As previously indicated, on March 31, 2010, Duarte finally provided staff the documents which were
requested in February. It is clear from staff's review that:
• Duarte officials have orchestrated a thorough campaign of information/misinformation
dissemination to government agencies,private businesses,environmental groups,and residents,
even going so far as using the Los Angeles County Sheriff Neighborhood Watch broadcast e-
mails to solicit attendance at Azusa Public Hearings and complaining to the Pasadena Star News
when they felt that they were not getting the media coverage they wanted.
• Duarte planning staff had little or no involvement in the"review"of the proposed project, the
City relying instead on attorneys hired long before the EIR was released for public review. This
• supports our contention that"working"with Azusa was never part of Duarte's game plan,which
instead focused on threats of litigation in the pursuit of financial gain.
• No outside consultants or experts were consulted and no reports, findings or documentation
supporting Duarte's claims were ever presented to City staff even attempting to refute the
objective scientific analysis presented in the Draft EIR.
• Duarte City officials have misled Duarte residents, Azusa residents, elected officials and the
Azusa Planning Commission. We believe that Duarte representatives have initiated secret
negotiations with Vulcan Materials and have asked for money in return for removing opposition
to the project,all of this occurring while innocent Duarte residents spent countless hours at late-
night Planning Commission meetings unaware of their leaders playing"both sides of the coin."
Duarte's attorney continues to dance around this important question citing attorney-client
privilege but disclosed in a March 30, 2010, letter to the Azusa City Attorney that certain
records are not being produced including"materials that pertain directly to the City's strategy
for potential litigation against the City of Azusa...as well as City efforts to avoid that outcome
through negotiations." Since there are no negotiations currently underway between the Cities of
Azusa and Duarte, this can only mean that they are hiding documents that prove they have had
settlement discussions with Vulcan.
Conclusion
I am personally concerned about the City of Duarte's credibility to be making most of the claims made
to date. The vast majority of issues they have raised are not supported by science and generally refuted
outright in the EIR. Furthermore, their unwillingness to be straightforward and honest and show the
residents of our Valley what they are doing behind closed doors demonstrates not only their lack of
respect for our residents but the entire public review process. While we will continue to treat them with
the same courtesy as we have, it will be with the understanding that there is information they are
withholding and this is not the action of a neighbor or friend(as they have portrayed themselves to be).
On April 19, 2010, the Council will hold a public hearing on the Vulcan application. Prior to this
meeting,the Final Environmental Impact Report will be released. This document will respond to every
comment received during the 60-day public review period and will address (through science and
objectivity) the issues raised during this process. We fully expect the chambers to be packed with
people who were notified through Duarte mass mailings and to hear from Duarte officials and attorneys
who will testify that the EIR is the worst document that they have ever seen. As the Planning
Commission did, I know the Council will listen to testimony from all sides before making an open and
objective decision.
rgr
�yT lG
us,
AGENDA ITEM
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: F. M. DELACH, CITY MANAGERf�,2
DATE: APRIL 5, 2010
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION REGARDING THE
ADDITION OF AN ADDITIONAL WEEKEND FOR YARD
SALES/GARAGE SALES THIS YEAR DUE TO CONFLICT IN
SCHEDULE WITH EASTER WEEKEND.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council consider approving an additional weekend for yard sales/garage
sales due to this year's conflict with Easter Weekend.
BACKGROUND
Previously, the City has each year used the first weekend in April as the kick off of"Clean and Green"
month, in conjunction with "Earth Day" April 22, 2010. The City's practice has been to use the first
weekend for free yard sales/garage sales to encourage residents to clean up their properties, and discard
unneeded items and trash. This year the traditional weekend coincides with Easter Weekend. Mayor
Rocha requested consideration of allowing an additional weekend for free sales due to Easter Weekend
being the same weekend of our traditional free yard sale for"Clean and Green"month.
Should Council so direct, in the future we can adjust the kick-off weekend for"Clean and Green"month
to the following week, when Easter falls on the first weekend in April.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no known cost impact unless Council desires public notice or promotion of this action.
•
1110
$e"'?O +tP5''' € .k� 9LlFORx.0-
AZUSA!.
CITY OF AZUSA
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY,MARCH 15,2010—6:30 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Azusa met in regular session at the above date and time in the Azusa
Auditorium located at 213 E.Foothill Boulevard,Azusa,CA 91702.
CLOSED SESSION Closed Session
Closed Session portion of the Agenda was deferred to the end of the City Council meeting to discuss the
following:
1. REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS(Gov.Code Sec.54956.8) Downtown
Agency Negotiators: City Manager Delach and Assistant City Manager Makshanoff Properties
Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment A3 Sites
a.DOWNTOWN NORTH A3 Site
Addresses:
809 N.Dalton Avenue,Azusa,CA
813 N.Dalton Avenue,Azusa,CA
The City Council recessed to Closed Session at 6:31 p.m. The City Council reconvened at 7:30 Reconvd No
p.m.City Attorney Martinez advised that there was no reportable action taken in closed session Reports
Mayor Rocha called the meeting to order. Call to Order
Mr.Louie Miranda led in the salute to the Flag. Flag Salute
INVOCATION was given by Miss Azusa Chrisy Alcaraz and Miss Outstanding Teen Marisa Piceno Invocation
ROLL CALL Roll Call
PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: MACIAS,HANKS,ROCHA
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: GONZALES,CARRILLO
ALSO PRESENT: Also Present
City Attorney Martinez, City Manager Delach, Assistant City Manager Makshanoff, Azusa Police Chief
Garcia,Director of Public Works/Assistant City Manager Haes, Economic and Community Development
Director Christiansen, Administrative Services Director/Chief Financial Officer Kreimeier,City Engineer
Hassel, Assistant Director of Economic and Community Development McNamara, Utilities Director
Morrow,Public Information Officer Quiroz,City Clerk Mendoza,Deputy City Clerk Toscano.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Pub Part
Mr. Mike Lee addressed Council expressing his opinion on the following: The 2010 Census, Vulcan M.Lee
Mining Company,Save the Canyon,T-Burgers,Dahlia's,Target,Funds for Education and asked all to pray Comments
for our troops.
Ms.Gloria Romero addressed Council presenting a petition to obtain speed bumps on the 100-300 block of G.Romero
South Pasadena Avenue in Azusa. She stated that there is constant speeding/racing for the last couple of Comments
months and expressed her concerns regarding area residents and possible accidents.
Ms.Pamela Barilari addressed Council expressing her concerns regarding speeders on Pasadena and noted P.Barilari
that many animals have been killed due to the problem. She provided many suggestions and requested that Comments
Council help them.
Mr.Fred Marquez,Chairman of the 2010 Relay for Life,addressed Council announcing the event on April F.Marquez
24th and 25th and invited all to come out and participate. He talked about fundraisers held and others that Comments
will be held at.the event,i.e.car show and raffles.
Ms. Diana Sorges-Alkana addressed Council regarding the issue of yard sales. She expressed her D.Sorges-Alkana
frustration regarding the current process of quarterly free yard sales due to holidays that sometimes fall Comments
within those week ends. She asked that Council re-think the current process.
Mr.Michael Paisner of Duarte addressed Council expressing his disappoint with the Planning Commission M.Paisner
decision regarding Vulcan Mining Company and talked about his expertise on the subject. Comments
Miss Azusa Chrisy Alcaraz and Miss Azusa Outstanding Teen Marisa Piceno addressed Council stating C.Alcaraz
that they will be competing in the Miss California and Miss California Outstanding Teen. If they sell three M.Piceno
ads they will be able to receive a scholarship in the amount of$500;they requested that Council donate Comments
towards the purchase of an ad in order to assist.
Mr.Steven O'Bryant addressed Council stating that he resides at 813 N.Dalton Avenue. He stated he sent S.O'Bryant
the Redevelopment Agency an assignment agreement he had with Lewis and asked that Council review it Comments
before action is taken on the proposed item.
Mr. Ronnie Blackburn of Duarte addressed Council in opposition to Vulcan's mining of the west side of R.Blackburn
the canyon. He talked about the money the City would be getting and detailed his experience while in Comments
attendance at the Planning Commission meeting.
Mr. Matt Bruce of Azusa Pacific University addressed Council to promote the middle school Boys Night M.Bruce
Out event to be held on Friday,March 19,2010 at the Teen Center of the Homework House on the campus Comments
of Foothill Community Church located at 777 East Alosta. The event is being put on as part of Azusa
Pacific University Master of Social Work Program and Homework House;he detailed the event.
Ms.Xilonin Cruz-Gonzalez of Save Our Canyon addressed Council thanking them for the extension of the X. Cruz-
comment period of the Vulcan EIR. She asked when the final public hearing is scheduled and that the final Gonzalez
EIR and Development Agreement be made available to the public as soon as they are completed. Comments
Mr. Frank Park addressed Council stating that there is a recently formed gang at the Azusa Garden F.Park
Apartments causing crime in the area and the negative impacts on the whole city as well as visitors and Comments
students.
Mr. Jorge Rosales addressed Council requesting that staff be instructed to look into the weed problem J.Rosales
behind Citrus Crossing shopping Center in the two large vacant lots. He thanked staff for addressing the Comments
green covering over the temporary fence.
Mr. Dennis Willut addressed Council expressing his concern regarding the following: 8th Street issues, D.Willut
wall at senior complex, landscaping, threats, trash, higher fences, Vulcan, Enterprise, GMAC and Comments
Rosedale,funds spent on purchase of properties,outside consultants for Vulcan,community meetings,and
litigation regarding Vulcan.
Mr. Michael Sandoval of Arcadia addressed Council with suggestions on yard sale issues, speeders on M.Sandoval
Pasadena,and Vulcan. Comments
Responses to comments: Issue of Speeders on Pasadena was referred to the Service Area Policing Responses
Representative who will work with the residents to solve this problem. Yard Sales issue will be brought To questions
back to another meeting with suggestions for discussion and when all Council members are present. Ad for
Miss Azusa is usually purchased and$100 scholarship can be donated to Miss Outstanding Teen. Vulcan
Public Hearing is tentatively scheduled for April 5,2010. Chief of Police Garcia will discuss the issues at
Azusa Garden Apartments with Mr.Parks. Weed problem at Citrus Crossing will be addressed according
to code enforcement processes. Discussions regarding Vulcan as well as budgets for funding Enterprise
can be found on the City website.
REPORTS,UPDATES COUNCIL BUSINESS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS-STAFF Updates/Rpts
Moved by Councilmember Hanks, seconded by Mayor Pro-Tem Macias and unanimously* carried to Sponsorship
approve request for sponsorship of $100 to the Sunbirds Softball Team of Azusa to purchase Sunbirds Softball
equipment.
Moved by Mayor Pro-Tern Macias, seconded by Councilmember Hanks and unanimously carried Sponsorship
to approve request to donate$100 to the Azusa High School Marching Band as an honorarium for AHS Marching
playing at the Gold Line sign unveiling on March 20th. Band
03/15/10 PAGE TWO
Mayor Pro-Tem Macias announced the following: Gold Line sign unveiling at 10 a.m.on March 20th at Macias
Azusa Avenue and Santa Fe,and April 1,2010 Gold Line Workshop at the Azusa Senior Center at 10 am. Comments
He expressed concern regarding the graffiti on the walls of the County Flood Control Wash at 5th Street and
Lee Place asking if there is a way to go in and remove the graffiti as soon as possible and suggested to
install surveillance cameras or ivy on the wall to deter graffiti and staff responded there is a need to get
permission from the County Flood Control to enter the property,are working on both surveillance cameras
and an artificial ivy to place there,and will remove the graffiti as soon as possible.
Councilmember Hanks stated that he is very pleased that the Ninth Circuit Court has agreed to leave the Hanks
words"under God"in the Pledge of Allegiance. Comments
Mayor Rocha asked to adjourn in memory of Philip Pardo. He announced the following:Saturday at 9 a.m. Rocha
Women of Achievement for the 57th Assembly District at the City of Hope honoring Azusa's Peggy Comments
Martinez and Barbara Dickerson and asked for certificates of recognition,on March 27th Census Regional
Meeting at the Senior Center at 10 a.m., from 12 — 2 p.m. help to fill out the Census form in areas
throughout the City; notices will be posted. He talked about the former problems with yard sales and
current problems with street vendors. He thanked Sal Martinez and Arthur Vasquez Jr. for the success of
both American and National Little Leagues Opening Day Ceremonies.
City Manager Delach responded to question regarding code enforcement stating that Code Enforcement City Mgr
and Police Department are working hand in hand to work weekends and address any problems that arise. Response
SCHEDULED ITEMS Sched Items
Discussion was held regarding the selection of a Mayor Pro-Tem and the resolution that establishes the Mayor Pro-Tern
criteria for the selection. It was the consensus of Council to bring back a resolution with a revised policy Selection R.
clarifying the intent to select a Mayor Pro-Tern. Moved by Councihnember Hanks, seconded by Mayor Gonzales
Pro-Tem Macias and unanimously* carried to appoint Councilmember Robert Gonzales as Mayor Pro-
Tem.
PUBLIC HEARING — FOR THE CLOSURE OF A PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY BETWEEN Pub Hrg
CITRUS AVENUE AND VICEROY AVENUE Walkway Citrus
Viceroy
City Engineer Hassel addressed the Hearing presenting information regarding the history of the pedestrian C.Hassel
walkway, residents request for closure due to illicit activities and crime, and the current request for Comments
resolution quitclaiming the easement and removing the City's interest in the property. The walkway will
not be closed until the traffic signal/controlled crosswalk at Mauna Loa and Citrus is installed.Director of
Public Works Haes responded to question regarding signal at Baseline and Citrus that a sign can be placed
there encouraging them to use the crosswalk at Mauna Loa and Citrus.
The Mayor declared the Hearing open. The City Clerk read the affidavit of proof of publication of notice Hrg open
of said hearing published in the Azusa herald on March 4,2010.
Mr.Raul Barcenas addressed the Hearing and thanked the Council and staff for starting the process and for Testimony
responding to the community. R.Barcenas
Mr. Mel Foy addressed the Hearing stating that although the closure of the walkway will be an M.Foy
inconvenience to him,he is in favor of the closure and suggested explorers or someone be stationed at the M.Lee
former walkway to direct people to the new route. R.Rodriguez
Mr.Mike Lee addressed Council in favor of the closure. M.Sandoval
Mr. Richard Rodriguez addressed Council stating that the project on PI Street looks great, expressed
concern about crime in the area.
Mr.Mike Sandoval addressed Council with suggestion for the residents who live in that area.
Moved by Councilmember Macias,seconded by Councilmember Hanks and unanimously*carried to close Hrg Clsd
the Public Hearing.
Councihnember Macias offered a Resolution entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA CLOSING THE PEDESTRIAN Res. 10-C17
WALKWAY BETWEEN CITRUS AVENUE AND VICEROY AVENUE AND APPROVING A Closure of
QUITCLAIM OF EASEMENT. Ped Walkway
And Quitclaim
Moved by Councilmember Macias, seconded by Councilmember Hanks to waive further reading and Easement
adopt. Resolution passed and adopted by the following vote of the Council:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: HANKS,MACIAS,ROCHA
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: GONZALES,CARRILLO
03/15/10 PAGE THREE
ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE AZUSA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING Prop Ord
RECOVERY OF COSTS FOR REMOVAL OF GRAFFITI. Graffiti Removal
Cost Recovery
Councilmember Macias offered an Ordinance entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA AMENDING AND I"Rdg Ord
RESTATING SECTIONS 46-238 AND 46-240 OF CHAPTER 46 OF THE AZUSA MUNICIPAL CODE Removal of
REGARDING RECOVERY OF COSTS FOR REMOVAL OF GRAFFITI Graffiti
Moved by Councilmember Macias, seconded by Councilmember Hanks and unanimously* carried to
waive further reading and introduce the proposed ordinance.
The CONSENT CALENDAR consisting of Items D-1 through D-7 was approved by motion of Consent Calendar
Councilmember Hanks,seconded by Councilmember Macias and unanimously*carried with the exception DI—D-8
of item D-6 which was handled under the Special Call portion of the Agenda. Staff removed item D-8 D-8 rmvd D-6
from the Agenda. Spec Call
1. The minutes of the regular meeting of March 1,2010,were approved as written. Min appvd
2. Human Resources Action Items were approved as follows: HR Action
Merit Increase and/or Regular Appointment: L.Gonzales,C.Davis,J.Picazo,and J.Sanchez. Items
3. Approval was given for the purchase of an Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR)System ALPR
from PIPS TECHNOLOGY at the cost of$23,112 and approval for the purchase from the stated PD
vendor per Azusa Municipal Code Section 2-523 (d) — sole source vendor. The purchase price
includes installation,hardware,software,training and 30 months maintenance.
4. Authorization was given to staff to award CIP#6611 OG,Target Intersection Improvements Project, Target Intersec
to CT&F,Incorporated and CIP#66110H,Target Pedestrian Improvements Project,to Sully-Miller Improvements
Contracting Company.
5. Staff was authorized to solicit proposals to obtain topographic survey and mapping services for Topographic
intersections requiring street improvements to prepare for the traffic signal and/or striping Survey Rosedale
modifications included in the Rosedale Traffic Mitigation. Traffic Mit
6. SPECIAL CALL ITEM. Spec Call
7. The following resolution was adopted and entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA ALLOWING CERTAIN Res. 10-C19
CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AND SPECIFYING THE FUNDS OUT OF WHICH THE SAME Warrants
ARE TO BE PAID.
8. The proposed "Agreement to Satisfy Conditions of Development" and the proposed Agmt GMAC
"Reimbursement Agreement"with GMAC Residential Capital LLC(GMAC)regarding the sale and REMOVED
development of 98 units in the master-planned community of Rosedale, was REMOVED FROM FROM
AGENDA AGENDA
SPECIAL CALL ITEMS Special Call
Councilmember Macias asked the status of Caltrans grant for on and off ramps and Director of Public Macias
Works Haes stated that it was approved and will be put into next years budget as a project. Comment
Councilmember Macias offered a Resolution entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA, CALIFORNIA, Res. 10-C18
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO APPLY,ACCEPT,AND EXECUTE A CONTRACT FOR Dept Trans
A CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION COMMUNITY-BASED Planning Grant
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010-11.
Moved by Councilmember Macias, seconded by Councilmember Hanks to waive further reading and
adopt. Resolution passed and adopted by the following vote of the Council:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: HANKS,MACIAS,ROCHA
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: GONZALES,CARRILLO
03/15/10 PAGE FOUR
THE CITY COUNCIL RECESSED AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CONVENED AT CRA convened
9:23 P.M. THE CITY COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 9:26 P.M. Cncl reconvened
It was consensus of Councilmember to adjourn in memory of Philip Pardo. Adjourn in
Memory of
P.Pardo
TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 9:26 P.M.
CITY CLERK
NEXT RESOLUTION NO.2010-C20.
NEXT ORDINANCE NO.2010-03.
*Indicates Gonzales and Carrillo absent.
03/15/10 PAGE FIVE
OD 111
JO7
us
CONSENT CALENDAR
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: KERMIT FRANCIS, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES/PERSONNEL OFFICER
VIA: F.M. DELACH, CITY MANAGERAD
DATE: April 5, 2010
SUBJECT: HUMAN RESOURCES ACTION ITEMS
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve the following Personnel Action Requests in accordance with the
City of Azusa Civil Service Rules and applicable Memorandum of Understanding(s).
BACKGROUND
On March 23,2010 the Personnel Board confirmed the following Department Head recommendations regarding the
following Personnel Action requests.
A. MERIT INCREASE AND/OR REGULAR APPOINTMENT:
DEPARTMENT NAME CLASSIFICATION ACTION/EFF RANGE/STEP
DATE BASE MO SALARY
PD Rosa Sok Police Records Specialist I Merit Increase 9140/5
03/15/2010 $3,500.99
PD Lauren Ferrari Police Officer Regular Appt. 6101/2
11/21/2009 $5,771.73
UTL Richard Water Dist. Merit Increase 5178/4
Gonzales Worker II 03/06/2010 $4,636.75
UTL Larry Corrales Water Dist. Merit Increase 5188/5
Equipment Op. 03/05/2010 $5,357.05
B. FLEXIBLE STAFFING PROMOTION:The following flexible staffing promotional appointments have been requested
by department head(s)pursuant to the Rules of the Civil Service System.
DEPARTMENT NAME CLASSIFICATION EFFECTIVE RANGE/STEP
FROM/TO DATE BASE MO. SALARY
UTL Paul Branconier From: Water Prod. Op. II 04/04/2010 5255/5
To: Water Prod. Op. III $5,694.33
C. RECLASSIFICATION—The following reclassification has been requested by the department head and are being made in
accordance with the City of Azusa Rules of the Civil Service System,
DEPARTMENT NAME CLASSIFICATION EFFECTIVE RANGE/STEP
FROM/TO DATE BASE MO. SALARY
PD Monica Orta From: Community Service 04/06/2010 9170/5
Officer—Administration $4,620.31
To: Community Service Officer
-Field
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact, as positions listed are funded in approved department budgets.
Allir
,r. itiFORS
us
CONSENT CALENDAR
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JOE JACOBS, DIRECTOR OF RECREATION AND FAMILY SERVICES
VIA: F. M. DELACH, CITY MANAGER itTAAO
DATE: APRIL 5, 2010
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION OF PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF AN ELECTRONIC
SCOREBOARD AT THE MEMORIAL PARK-SOUTHEAST BALL DIAMOND.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that City Council authorize the purchase and installation of an LED electronic
scoreboard at the Memorial Park-Southeast ball diamond in the amount of$13,115.00.
BACKGROUND:
As budgeted in the 2009-2010 Light and Water Public Benefit Fund Fiscal Budget for Energy
Conservation Projects,the LED electronic scoreboard replaces a unit that is nearly 30 years old and
no longer energy efficient. It represents the last scoreboard in the city park system that has yet to be
replaced with a more efficient and technically accentuated unit. The funding of the scoreboard is
courtesy of the Azusa Light and Water Public Benefit Fund,citing energy conservation measures of
the unit's L.E.D. display. Three bids were solicited in the process and it is recommended that the
project be awarded to Daktronics of Anaheim, CA in the amount of$13,115.00.
Bidder Amount
1. Daktronics, Anaheim, CA $13,115.00
2. Sports Facility Group, Riverside, CA $13,523.88
3. Custom Signs, Inc., Azusa, CA $13,900.00
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds have been budgeted in account#24-40-73 9-082-6625/MMUNIB-6625 specifically for this
purpose.
0 a° # 4.--‘;:_:. —
c),,,elir":1:, - T
c„,„,,,,,, ,,
9t/fOR,\F'
us
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JOE JACOBS, DIRECTOR OF RECREATION AND FAMILY SERVICES
VIA: F. M. DELACH, CITY MANAGER
/1SO
DATE: APRIL 5, 2010
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION OF PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF ELECTRONIC
MARQUEE MESSAGE BOARD AT THE AZUSA SENIOR CENTER.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that City Council authorize the purchase and installation of an electronic marquee
at the Azusa Senior Center in the amount of$34,346.65.
BACKGROUND:
As budgeted in the 2009-2010 Light and Water Public Benefit Fund Fiscal Budget for Energy
Conservation Projects, the electronic marquee message board replaces an antiquated model just
outside of the Azusa Senior Center. Funding for the state of the art marquee will be provided by the
Azusa Light and Water Public Benefit Fund, citing energy conservation measures of the units LED
matrix display. Three bids were solicited in the process and it is recommended that the project be
awarded in the amount of$34,346.65 to Custom Signs Inc of Azusa,CA. The current marquee will
be salvaged and refurbished and moved to the James Slauson Park Aquatics Center.
Bidder Amount
1. Custom Signs, Inc., Azusa, CA $34,346.65
2. Daktronics, Anaheim, CA $36,233.55
3. Sports Facilities Group, Riverside, CA $36,975.00
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds have been budgeted in account # 24-40-739-082-6625/MMUNIB-6625 specifically for this
purpose.
I - 5: OF
r ': rly
,,.. ._. 1.11 3w�0'
US
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MARCENE HAMILTON, CITY TREASURER yrs,e
DATE: APRIL 5, 2010
SUBJECT: CITY TREASURER'S STATEMENT OF CASH AND INVESTMENT
BALANCES FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2010
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Council Members receive, review, and file the City Treasurer's
Report for the City of Azusa for the month of February 2010.
BACKGROUND:
Transmitted herewith is the City Treasurer's Statement of Cash Balances for the City of Azusa
for the month of February 2010. City investments are made in accordance with the City's
Investment Policy adopted and approved with Resolution No. 05 — C16 dated, October 5, 2009
and Government Code Section 53600 et seq.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The balances of cash, investments, and projected revenues for the next six months are expected
to be sufficient to meet cash disbursement requirements of the City for at least the next six
months.
The change in total cash in bank and investments from January 31, 2010 to February 28, 2010 is
a net decrease of$5,896,780.59.
CITY OF AZUSA TREASURER'S REPORT
Treasury Checking Accounts and Certificates of Deposit February 28, 2010
Held in Wells Fargo Bank
Prepared by: Marcene Hamilton, Treasurer
Face Maturit Interest or Balance
Y Coupon Description Account Number or
Amount Date or CUSIP
Rate Market Value
Checking Accounts
General Checking Account XXX-XXX1244 50,746.00
Overland Sweep Account DDA XXX-XXX 1244 1,150,997.17
Worker's Compensation Checking XXXX-XX0318 0.00
Flexible Reimbursement XXXX-XX5036 0.00
Payroll Checking (ZBA account) XXXX-XX1393 0.00
Police Petty Cash Fund XXX-XXX0334 189.12
Section 108
0.970% Choice IV-Public Fund Account XXX-XXX2239 30,849.94
200,000 11/14/06 3.060% FHLB 3.060 11/14/06 (Matured) 3133X6PD2 0.00
ISO Collateral Account
300,000 Every 30 Days 0.050% Certificate of Deposit XXX-XXX1658 314,017.49
1,975,001 04/07/07 3.748% Certificate of Deposit XXX-XXX2840 2,359,938.98
Covington Endowment
Money Market Mutal Funds WFB XXXX7554 17,689.55
100,000 06/29/09 4.200% Certificate of Deposit-25467JG21 WFB 25467JG21 100,000.00
TOTALS 4,024,428.25
CITY OF AZUSA TREASURER'S REPORT
TREASURY INVESTMENTS February 28,2010
Prepared by: Marcene Hamilton.Treasurer
Coupon Maturity Settlement Market Price
Broker Face Amount Description Rate Date AcctiCusip No. Date Principal* (Changes Market Value"
Monthly)
City of Azusa Investments - AAA Rated Federal Agency Bonds
Wachovia Sec 2,000,000 FHLB 3.12511/17/11 3.125% 11/17/11 3133XSM70 11/17/08 2,000,000.00 101.719000 2,034,380.00
Wachovia Sec 2,000,000 FFCB 2.250 02/17/12 2.250% - 02/17/12 31331GND7 03/16/09 1,999,000.00 102.219000 2,044,380.00
Wachovia Sec 1,000,000 FHLB 2.25004/13/12 2.250% 04/13/12 3133XTAW6 03/16/09 999,500.00 102.594000 1,025,940.00
Wachovia Sec 4,000,000 FHLB 3.45005/14/12 3.450% 05/14/12 3133XQTD4 _ 05/14/08 4,000,000.00 100.563000 4,022,520.00
Higgins Capital 2,000,000 FHLB 1.125 Step Up 4.000 1.125% 11/27/12 3133XVU25 11/27/09 2,000,000.00 100.000000 . 2,000,000.00
Higgins Capital 2,000,000 FHLMC 2.500 04/08/13 2.500% 04/08/13 3128X8TZ5 04/08/09 2,000,000.00 100.952000 2,019,040.00
Gilford Sec 2,000,000 FFCB 2.500 05/20/13 2.500% 05/20/13 31331GVS5 05/20/09 1,998,500.00 100.500000 2,010,000.00
Wachovia Sec 1,000,000 FHLMC 2.250 7/29/13 2.250% 07/29/13 31331JBT9 01/29/10 1,000,000.00 100.344000 1,003,440.00
Gilford Sec 2,000,000 FFCB 2.300 09/03/13 2.300% 09/03/13 31331G4J5 12/03/09 2,000,00000 100.031000 2,000,620.00
Gilford Sec 2,000,000 FHLB 2.500 12/23/13 2.500% 12/23/13 3133XW7E3 12/23/09 1,997,000.00 100.188000 2,003,760.00
Wachovia Sec 1,000,000 FFCB 2.700 1/21/14 2.700% 01/21/14 3128X9UU2 01/21/10 1,000,000.00 100.563000 1,005,630.00
Gilford Sec 1,000,000 FFCB 2.42002/11/14 2420% 02/11/14 31331JDL4 02/11/10 1,000,000.00 100.406000 1,004,06000
Gilford Sec 2,000,000 FFCB 3.750 06/17/14 3.750% 06/17/14 31331GYT0 06/18/09 2,000,000.00 101.063000 2,021,260.00
Higgins Capital 2,000,000 FFCB 3.680 08/18/14 3.680% 08/18/14 31331GJ59 08/18/09 2,000,000.00 101.563000 2,031,260.00
Wachovia Sec 1,000,000 FHLB 2.000 Step Up 6.000 2.000% 08/26/14 3133WWH8 02/26/10 1,000,000.00 100.000000 1,000,000.00
Gilford Sec 1,000,000 FNMA 3.30001/15/15 3.300% 01/15/15 3136F11(83 01/15/10 1,000,000.00 100.719000 1,007,190.00
Gilford Sec 1,000,000 FFCB 2.950 02/02/15 2.950% 02/15/15 31331JCX9 02/02/10 1,000,000.00 100.750000 1,007,500.00
Higgins Capital 2,000,000 FHLMC 3.050 02/24/15 3.050% 02/24/15 3128X9XE5 02/24/10 2,000,000.00 100.558000 2,011,160.00
TOTALS 31,000,000 30,994,000.00 31,252,140.00
WFB-CITY THIRD PARTY CUSTODIAL TRUST ACCT 0.150% N/A N/A N/A 584,800.00 100.000000 584,800.00
Light&Water Fund Investments - AAA Rated Federal Agency Bonds
Higgins Capital 1,215,000 FHLB 2.100 09/06/11 2.100% 09/06/11 3133XTA97 03/06/09 1,215,000.00 102.094000 1,240,442.10
Higgins Capital 2,000,000 FNMA 2.25002/24/12 2.250% 02/24/12 3136FHCF0 02/27/09 2,000,000.00 101.656000 2,033,120.00
Higgins Capital 3,000,000 FFCB 3.68008/18/14 3.680% 08/18/14 313316/59 08/18/09 3,000,000.00 101.563000 3,046,890.00
Higgins Capital 3,000,000 FNMA 3.00001/29/15 3.000% 01/29/15 31398AE81 01/29/10 3,000,000.00 100.624000 3,018,720.00
TOTALS 9,215,000 9,215,000.00 9,339,172.10
WFB-L&W THIRD PARTY CUSTODIAL TRUST ACCT 0.150% N/A N/A N/A 77,700.00 100 000000 77,700.00
LAIF-CITY LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND 0.577% N/A N/A N/A 10,388,930.02 100.000000 10,388,930.02
TOTAL INVESTMENTS IN FEDERAL AGENCIES,WFB INSTITUTIONAL TRUSTS,and LAIF 51,260,430.02 51,642,742.12
INTEREST RECEIVED FROM INVESTMENTS FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE (From July 1,2009) 1,022,327.75
.The"Principal"column reflects the balance on the last day of the month or the"historical cost"spent to purchase a security.
"The"Market Value" is the current price at which a security can be traded or sold.
Treasurer Report February 2010 Times Roman.xls 3/22/2010 3:55 PM
CITY OF AZUSA TREASURER'S REPORT
INVESTMENT INTEREST EARNINGS Thru February 28,2010
Prepared by: Marcene Hamilton,Treasurer
Scheduled Scheduled Interest
Face Amount Net Amount Coupon Maturity Date Acct/Cusip No. Payment 2009/2010 Semi-Annual Received
Rate Schedule Interest Payment Fiscal Year to
Earnings Amount Date*
City of Azusa Investments - AAA Rated Federal Agency Bonds
2,000,000 2,000,000 4.300% MATURED 3133XCDQ3 7/14&1/14 43,000.00 43,000.00 43,000.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 2.375% CALLED 3133XSRF7 7/9&1/9 23,750.00 23,750.00 24,541.67
2,000,000 2,000,000 2.550% CALLED 31331GSD2 10/8&4/9 14,733.33 14,733.33, 14,733.33
2,000,000 2,000,000 2.350% CALLED 3133XSXQ6 8/6&2/6 47,000.00 23,500.00 23,500.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 2.875% CALLED 3133IGUE7 11/6&5/6 57,500.00 28,750.00 22,201.39
2,000,000 2,000,000 3.875% CALLED 31331GEG0 11/10&5/10 77,500.00 38,750.00 38,750.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 3.375% CALLED 31331GEW5 11/18&5/18 67,500.00 33,750.00 33,750.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 4.200% MATURED 3133X9N48 12/15&6/15 84,000.00 42,000.00 42,000.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 2.000% CALLED 3136FHXH3 12/10&6/10 40,000.00 20,000.00 20,000.00
1,000,000 1,000,000 3.950% CALLED 31331Y3E8 7/15&1/15 39,500.00 19,750:00' 39,500.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 2.550% CALLED 3133XT2P0 8/24&2/24 51,000.00 25,500.00 51,000.00
1,000,000 1,000,000 3.000% SOLD 3128X9SD3 12/30&6/30 15,000.00 15,000.00 4,500.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 3.125% 11/17/11 3133XSM70 11/17&5/17 62,500.00 31,250.00 31,250.00
2,000,000 1,999,000 2.250% 02/17/12 31331GND7 8/16&2/17 45,000.00 22,500.00 :` `45,000.00
1,000,000 999,500 2.250% 04/13/12 3133XTAW6 9/16&3/16 22,500.00 11,250.00 11,250.00
4,000,000 4,000,000 3.450% 05/14/12 3133XQTD4 11/14&5/14 138,000.00 69,000.00 69,000.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 1.125% 11/27/12 3133XVU25 5/27&11/27 11,250.00 11,250.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 2.500% 04/08/13 3128X8TZ5 10/8&4/8 50,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 2.500% 05/20/13 31331GVS5 11/20&5/20 50,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00
1,000,000 1,000,000 2.250% 07/29/13 31331JBT9 7/29&1/29 0.00 11,250.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 2.300% 09/03/13 31331G4J5 12/3&6/3 23,000.00 23,000.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 2.500% 12/23/13 3133XW7E3 12/23&6/23 25,000.00 25,000.00
1,000,000 1,000,000 2.700% 01/21/14 3128X9UU2 7/21&1/21 0.00 13,500.00
1,000,000 1,000,000 2.420% 02/11/14 31331JDL4 8/11&2/11 0.00 12,100.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 3.750% 06/17/14 31331GYTO 12/17&6/17 75,000.00 37,500.00 37,500.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 3.680% 08/18/14 31331GJ59 8/18&2/18 36,800.00 36,800.00'' 36,800.00
1,000,000 1,000,000 2.000% 08/26/14 3133WWH8 8/26&2/26 0.00 10,000.00
1,000,000 1,000,000 3.300% 01/15/15 3136FJK83 7/15&1/15 0.00 16,500.00
1,000,000 1,000,000 2.950% 02/15/15 3133IJCX9 8/2&2/2 0.00 14,750.00
2,000,000 2,000,000 3.050% 02/24/15 3128X9XE5 8/24&2/24 0.00 30,500.00
31,000,000 ACTIVE INVESTMENTS 1,099,533.33 754,633.33 638,276.39
CITY-Wells Fargo Bank Institutional Third Party Custodial Money Market Account-Liquid Asset
584,800.00 0.150% n/a N/A Monthly Per.Balance and Rate 2,923.17
Light&Water Fund Investments-AAA Rated Federal Agency Bonds
3,000,000 3,000,000 2.350% , CALLED 3133XSXQ6 8/6&2/6 70,500.00 35,250.00 35,250.00
3,000,000 3,000,000 4.150% _ CALLED 3133XNZC6 7/29&1/29 124,500.00 62,250.00 124,500.00
1,215,000 1,215,000 2.100% 09/06/11 3133XTA97 9/6&3/6 25,515.00 12,757.50 12,757.50
2,000,000 2,000,000 2.250% 02/24/12 3136FHCF0 8/24&2/24 45,000.00 22,500.00 45,000.00
3,000,000 3,000,000 3.680% 08/18/14 31331GJ59 8/18&2/18 55,200.00 55,200.00 55,200.00
3,000,000 3,000,000 3.000% 01/29/15 31398AE81 7/29&1/29 0.00 0.00
9,215,000.00 ACTIVE INVESTMENTS 320,715.00 187,957.50 272,707.50
Light&Water Stablization-Wells Fargo Bank Institutional Third Party Custodial Money Market Account-Liquid Asset
77,700.00 0.150% N/A N/A Monthly Per Balance and Rate 155.22
0.00
CITY-Local Agency Investment Fund-Liquid Asset
10388,930.02 0.577% N/A N/A QuarterlyPer Balance and Rate
108,265.47
*Fiscal Year: July 1-June 30 TOTAL INTEREST EARNED YTD 1,022,327.75
i4
r, of_ ,N
t a„ U
[IS�
CONSENT CALENDAR
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: TITO HAES, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
VIA: F.M. DELACH, CITY MANAGER`
DATE: APRIL 5, 2010
SUBJECT: CIP PROJECT #66110A — CITRUS AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION FROM
ALOSTA AVENUE TO THE NORTHERLY CITY BOUNDARY:
AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS —
PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize staff to solicit proposals to obtain professional
construction management services for Citrus Avenue from Alosta Avenue to the northerly city
boundary.
BACKGROUND
CIP Project #66110A will reconstruct Citrus Avenue from Alosta Avenue to the City's northerly
boundary with the City of Glendora. Citrus Avenue has deteriorated over the years due to heavy
traffic, utility trenching and poor surface drainage. The project will reconstruct the street
surface, replace traffic loops and reinstall all striping. The project will be funded with Prop 1B
funds and the savings obtained from the Foothill Boulevard Reconstruction project of
approximately $540,000 from the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act funds (ARRA) or
stimulus funds. The Public Works Department is requesting the support services of a
Professional Construction Management Team since the project will be afederally funded project.
The additional services are required to manage the construction, provide the testing, inspection
and to prepare the daily documents. These are additional services required by Caltrans for the
ARRA funds and cannot be handled by the City's Public Works Inspector.
FISCAL IMPACT
Staff estimates these services would cost approximately $120,000. Funds for the construction
management services will be funded by Prop 1B, Fund 12.
S`
u
n1-4 oltiFoce
lAzuSAt
CONSENT CALENDAR
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: TITO HAES, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
VIA: F. M. DELACH, CITY MANAGERA
DATE: APRIL 5, 2010
SUBJECT: CIP #66110A, CITRUS AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION; CIP #66110B
FOOTHILL BOULEVARD RECONSTRUCTION; REQUEST TO APPROVE
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT BIDS
FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS
RECOMMENDATION
Staff requests that the City Council approve the Plans and Specifications and authorize staff to
solicit bids for street improvements on Citrus Avenue from Alosta Avenue to the northerly city
limits (CIP #66110A) and Foothill Boulevard from Rockvale Avenue to Citrus Avenue (CIP
#66110B).
BACKGROUND
In February 2009, Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)
which provided funding for job preservation and creation, infrastructure investment, and other
purposes. The City was awarded $1,431,000 of ARRA stimulus funds to reconstruct Foothill
Boulevard from Todd Avenue to Orange Avenue. This project was completed in January 2010
with a total construction cost of$879,841.11.
In January 2010, Caltrans authorized the City to use $540,000 of the Foothill Boulevard Project
remaining funds on the Citrus Avenue Reconstruction Capital Improvement Program Project
(CIP #66110A). This project will reconstruct Citrus Avenue from Alosta Avenue to the northern
city limit and Foothill Boulevard from Rockvale Avenue to Citrus Avenue.
The ARRA requirements include very comprehensive inspections and reports that require hiring
an additional consultant to provide. As such, Citrus Avenue (CIP #66110A) will be partially
funded using ARRA funds and Foothill Boulevard (CIP #66110B) will be funded solely using
Proposition lB funds. The projects will be bid as separate projects. However, to minimize
impacts to the community, the projects will be constructed simultaneously.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The project is listed in the approved FY 2009-2010 Capital Improvements Plan as "Citrus Ave
Reconst (Alosta — Foothill)." The improvements on Citrus Avenue (CIP #66110A) will be
funded with ARRA and Proposition 1B funds and the engineer's estimate for that portion is
$790,000. The improvements on Foothill Boulevard (CIP #66110B) will be fully funded using
Proposition 1B funds and the engineer's estimate for that portion is $710,000.
A 4P A
•
►zusq�-
CONSENT CALENDAR
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: TITO HAES, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
VIA: F.M. DELACH, CITY MANAGER`pv
DATE: APRIL 5, 2010 ��
SUBJECT: CIP PROJECT#66110F: TARGET SEWER LINE IMPROVEMENTS - NOTICE OF
COMPLETION.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City Council approve a Notice of Completion for the following project and
authorize staff to file the Notice of Completion with the Los Angeles County Clerk:
• Target Sewer Line Improvements Project No. 66110F — $25,005.00 — Whiting Turner
Contracting Company, Irvine, CA.
BACKGROUND
The project was awarded to Whiting-Turner Contracting Company by the City Council on December 21,
2009 in a total amount of $25,005.00. The improvements involved removal and relocation of the
existing 8-inch City sewer pipe that runs through the future home of the Target Store. Work on this
project began on January 20, 2010 and all work was completed on March 31, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT
The project was completed within budget with a total construction cost of$25,005.00.
Attachment:
Notice of Completion
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
NAME CITY OF AZUSA
STREET ADDRESS 213 E.FOOTHILL BLVD
CITY,STATE ZIP AZUSA,CA 91702 SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
Notice pursuant to Civil Code Section 3039,must be filed within 10 days after completion.Notice is hereby given that:
1. The undersigned is owner or corporate officer of the owner of the interest or estate stated below in the property hereinafter described:
2. The full name of the owner is The City of Azusa
3. The full address of the owner is 213 E.Foothill Boulevard,Azusa,CA 91702
4. The nature of the interest or estate of the owner is: In fee.
(IF OTHER THAN FEE,STRIKE"IN FEE"AND INSERT,FOR EXAMPLE,"PURCHASER UNDER CONTRACT OF PURCHASE",OR"LESSEE"
5. The full names and full addresses of all persons,if any,who hold title with the undersigned as joint tenants or as tenants in common,
are:
NAMES ADDRESSES
NONE
6. The full names and full addresses of the predecessors in interest of the undersigned,if the property was transferred subsequent to the
commencement of the work or improvements herein referred to:
NAMES ADDRESSES
NONE
7. A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was completed on March 31,2010 . The work done was:
Target Store Sewer Improvements, CIP Project No,66110F
8. The name of the contractor,if any,for such work of improvement was:
Whiting Turner Contracting Co.,Suite 100,3 Corporate Park, Irvine,CA 92606 January 20,2010
(IF NO CONTRACTOR FOR WORK OF IMPROVEMENT AS A WHOLE,INSERT"NONE") (DATE OF CONTRACT)
9. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Azusa,County of Los Angeles,California and as
described as follows:
Sewer main on the west side of Azusa Avenue and within an easement provided by the owners of the Target Parcel.
10. The street address of said property is None
(IF NO STREET ADDRESS HAS BEEN OFFICIALLY ASSIGNED,INSERT"NONE")
Dated: Joseph R.Rocha,Mayor
(SIGNATURE OF OWNER OR CORPORATE OFFICER OF OWNER NAMED IN PARAGRAPH 2 OR HIS AGENT)
1,the undersigned,say:I am the person who signed the foregoing notice of completion. I have read said notice of completion and know its
contents,and the facts stated therein are true of my own knowledge.I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on at
(DATE) (CITY,COUNTY,&STATE)
(SIGNATURE)
___ „
3
i„,
9. ,
...:,
„.„,,:
� �` ,,
s
,,,..,(..„. . ,„,,,,,„,,
„.,„,,,,,,,,,7,,,,,,,.„.„,,,,...,,,,,„:„,,,,,,,,,„„.„. „,:,,,,,
us
CONSENT CALENDAR
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: TITO HAES, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
VIA: F.M. DELACH, CITY MANAGERA/t7
DATE: APRIL 5, 2010
SUBJECT: TEMPORARY PARKING LOT AT BLOCK 36
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve Temporary Parking Lot at Block 36 —Alternate
B and authorize staff to proceed with construction.
BACKGROUND
In 2008, as part of the Pavement Management contract, the City paved a portion of the Block 36
lot as additional temporary downtown parking. The current temporary lot provides 26 parking
spaces and the remainder of the Block 36 property is fenced and screened off. At a previous
Council meeting, the City Council directed staff to pursue options for expanding the existing
temporary parking lot at Block 36. Staff has developed three different alternates and estimated
costs.
• Alternate A includes paving the majority of the lot and striping for a total of 111 spaces
(net gain of 85 spaces). This alternate is estimated to cost $42,000.
• Alternate B includes paving an additional 12,480 sf north of the existing lot and stripe
providing an additional 24 parking spaces. The southerly portion of the lot would be
graded with the existing dirt remaining in place. This alternate is estimated to cost
$13,400.
• Alternate C would be the same as Alternate B with the exception that the southerly
portion would be graded and compacted aggregate would be installed. This alternate is
estimated to cost $26,500.
Staff recommends Alternate B as the most cost effective alternative. In addition to temporary
parking, the entire lot, including the graded, unpaved portion, could be used for special events
such as a farmer's market or car show.
FISCAL IMPACT
Alternate B is estimated to cost $13,400. There are sufficient funds in the Redevelopment
Agency to cover this cost.
Attachments: Temporary Parking Lot at Block 36 options
EXISTING PARKING
1.2(y
ccQI
w
J t
0
CO
J ,
J ^ �
o 125'
8
37' '
w
i N UCL
xa ?-•
rnC/) �
57'a er-R
201 —- 104' 77 249
AZUSA AVENUE
EXISTING SPACES: 26 EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
SCALE: 1"=50'
DATE: MAR 2010 AZUSA AVENUE AT BLOCK 36 PARKING LOT
DRN BY: H GONZALEZ CONSTRUCTION PROJECT
CHKD BY: C CURIEL CITY OF AZUSA
ENGINEERING DIVISION
ALTERNATE A
1 II
I
CONSTRUCT RIVER ROCK LANDSCAPE/INFILTRATION AREA
1
e:70 IVO••V. • �• ••• •0,• �•'.
•••... • •5 ••••••••5-,5.5 20'
5••45.5 -0.04+5• ..•5 , cs.•• ..0cU'c'Uc)LZ5t G -------------------- ---- -- -
IP a ! is d. *.
'vi t•• _• ` ,;5 +r 'a ' • ••• s�� EXISTING ALLEY 20'
'Y., -(11:4_, .' iy); c _ __ _ _ 15'
�c� • •4. • ...• s•o v�0 0 4s•^• •� • .. - rai -"`,.vVC%UOUOy� �UC50 r- Lr• -~ -S 1 --—
.4
L4, 1
_Iv
4111- ."--j
D �•
< Y.,o
0 s 30' 1
--> —> ••�
0 J _ I .`
27' V� 27� l'111!,. ��125'
_ < < -u�
6 EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY 30'
b607:0, 1b6` 1 X if - \off
1 Lsa i r�Y n4 a 1 L ! -_—- a ._ —L-`4_ x47 )s.._J�—� .1ST-L�1 J—+7 1s-Y A.Z.r! - 1
—20' 104' - 77' `AZUSA AVENUE 224' --1--25--'
TOTAL SPACES: 111
EXISTING STRIPING TO BE REMOVED: 480'
TOTAL AREA TO BE PAVED: 39,360 SQ FT
ESTIMATED COST FOR A.C.: $42,155 00 SCALE: 1"=50'
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST: $42,155 00
DATE: MAR2010 AZUSA AVENUE AT BLOCK 36 PARKING LOT
DRN. BY: H GONZALEZ CONSTRUCTION PROJECT
CHKD. BY: C CURIEL CITY OF AZUSA
ENGINEERING DIVISION
ALTERNATE B
I I I
Ai a IP` 01 ,,pr CONSTRUCT RIVER ROCK LANDSCAPE/INFILTRATION AREA
ociu g • •i! •is•is. cA:+.• -Y �E
_ _ ,�! i
Oa ' S.. T. \
6(5 l.o 6•6•c Q • • -,• -•c'
Obi i �•v•� „•.iv dp �• •i•- -O61.4C ` -1--• _ EXISTING ALLEY 2{ 15
L• •• c ,L li • �y �-01 1 JO c t�� Q -) c�vUUUc�U-Uva t'= 7C5. v(,Jvt..}i
ALTERNATE C
CONSTRUCT RIVER ROCK LANDSCAPE!INFILTRATION AREA
/ra 54' ..,': dicks 'AP.. wil; Oa '
0., "
xY . � r I COMPACTED AGREGATE
ati• •c3 • �•+i • I 20-q
0.
�� i ',• •' i.•-t-?-,-- - ��: fi � # .� -- -- ----------- -------
EXISTING ALLEY :al•"• 15i��iiP +�� " L� s+/ �� f 1�� - - - -ice -- - -- - --
1• � � +i i�1 ,i + �i�i+• �r�i+�ics i+ + c • : i `r1�'. i i+ • ] iv'^�
a p__I -..j°N
c4 litimqO
Wqc§ <---- ••••,....,•. ,:- , .,..: i::',.- '..• :."..: ..!•': :-. .:...:.• :: : :• ,, • :.: •*-,! - r••-::':•;. ! ••-. - 41; if
E- �� 25' ., s. - .r. r 1
i r f '. ,�,.• 1f�' .� •� 1 5.
O �Y • :A< ric
V-r
5 Q r' i •
^•� \s, O V U N. ,� Vii- •.i. .tl. :('1- Jr �• ,
EL-
10.
Y lS.I C7 15�/� tLY �_�I `_ - a —- - .17�1S" •iS• •IS :. . ._ . .-L J .4/�Y_�47^.15-.. .. ._._". �-` +r7
s
20'-- 104' — 7T 224' 25'
AZUSA AVENUE 5'
TOTAL SPACES: 50 EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
EXISTING STRIPING TO BE REMOVED: 365'
TOTAL AREA TO BE PAVED: 12,480 SQ FT
ESTIMATED COST FOR A.0 $13,367.00 SCALE: 1"=50'
ESTIMATED COST FOR COMPACTED AGGREGATE: $13,160.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST: $26,527.00
DATE: MAR2010 AZUSA AVENUE AT BLOCK 36 PARKING LOT
DRN BY: H GONZALEZ CONSTRUCTION PROJECT
CHKD BY: C CURIEL CITY
ENGINEERINGOF DIVISION AZUSA
-/00.
IAZUSAk
CONSENT CALENDAR
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: TITO HAES, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
VIA: F.M. DELACH, CITY MANAGER/,A
DATE: APRIL 5, 2010
SUBJECT: LETTER OF SUPPORT TO CONGRESSWOMEN JUDY CHU REQUESTING
INSTALLATION OF AUTOMATIC DOOR AT AZUSA POST OFFICE
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council submit a letter to Congresswomen Judy Chu, requesting
assistance in promoting the Architectural Barrier's Commission 's petition for the installation of
an automatic door system at the U.S. Post Office located at 110 West 6th Street, Azusa.
BACKGROUND
The Architectural Barriers Commission has expressed concern that the lack of an automatic door
entrance at the local Post Office has posed a significant barrier of accessibility. Due to
inaccessibility, disabled residents are often forced to go to third party post offices or other U.S.
Post Offices outside of Azusa. On several occasions, the Architectural Barriers Commission has
petitioned its request for the installation of an automatic door to the Azusa U.S. Postmaster with
little response.
The U.S. Post Offices and other federal facilities are not covered by the Americans with
Disability Act, but by an earlier accessibility law, the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968.
Although not legally obliged, the installation of an automatic door system will yield vast benefits
to the residential and business community of Azusa.
Other communities, such as Monrovia, have been successful in promoting their petitions for
wheel-chair accessibility retrofits to U.S. Post Offices through the efforts of their local
congressional office.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact.
Attachments: Letter to Congresswomen Judy Chu
April 5, 2010
Congresswomen Judy Chu
4401 Santa Anita Avenue , Suite 211
El Monte, CA 91731
Re: Request for Automatic Door Entrance to Azusa U.S. Post Office
Honorable Judy Chu:
On behalf of the City of Azusa, I would like to request your support in promoting our petition for
the installation of an automatic door system at our local U.S. Post Office located at 110 West 6th
Street, Azusa, California.
Azusa's Architectural Barriers Commission has expressed concern that the lack of an automatic
door entrance at the local Post Office has posed a significant barrier of accessibility. Due to
inaccessibility, disabled residents are forced to go to third party post offices or accessible U.S.
Post Offices outside of Azusa. The Architectural Barriers Commission has petitioned its request
to the local Azusa Postmaster with little response.
I understand that U.S. Post Offices and other Federal facilities are covered by an earlier
accessibility law, the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968. Although not legally obliged, we feel
the installation of an automatic door system will yield vast benefits to the residential and
business community of Azusa.
The City of Azusa appreciates the constant support your office has given. If our staff can be of
any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact Israel Del Toro at (626) 812-5261.
Sincerely,
Joseph R. Rocha
Mayor
cc:Architectural Barriers Commission
ON
of,,4 ,pe:
„„rop,4- , '
CONSENT CALENDAR
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: ROBERT B. GARCIA, CHIEF OF POLICE
VIA: F.M. DELACH, CITY MANAGER
DATE: APRIL 5, 2010
SUBJECT: REQUEST TO ADOPT RESOLUTION APPOINTING AND
APPROVING AUTHORIZED AGENTS TO EXECUTE FOR AND ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY OF AZUSA FOR THE PURPOSES OF
OBTAINING STATE AND FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve the adoption of a Resolution that
reflects current City Staff to serve as Authorized Agents to execute for and on behalf of
the City of Azusa for the purpose of obtaining federal financial assistance or grants
through California State or Federal assistance programs. The Authorized Agents will be
City Manager, Director of Finance, Chief of Police, and Emergency Services
Coordinator.
BACKGROUND
The City of Azusa has long been a participant in Emergency Management Programs
established through the State of California Emergency Management Agency and other
U.S. Federal Government Agencies, and had submitted an Authorized Agent Resolution
in 2002. Due to a change in City Personnel, an updated resolution is required for the
purposes of pursuing disaster-related reimbursement funds.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the proposed action.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA,
CALIFORNIA, APPOINTING AND APPROVING AUTHORIZED AGENTS TO
EXECUTE FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF AZUSA FOR THE
PURPOSES OF OBTAINING STATE AND FEDERAL FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE THROUGH EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE
PROGRAMS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA, CALIFORNIA, DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the City of Azusa, has been a participant in Emergency
Management Programs established through the State of California Emergency
Management Agency (formerly the Office of Emergency Services) and U.S. Federal
Government Agencies for many years.
WHEREAS,this resolution is established for the purposes of pursuing disaster-
related reimbursement funds, and; disaster management grant programs for the
development of plans and programs for disaster preparedness, prevention, and Homeland
Security.
WHEREAS, financial assistance will likely come in the form of contributions,
temporary housing, relief programs, loans, programs in support of economic recovery,
training opportunities, and access to resources and equipment, to name a few, as provided
under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief Act.
BE IT RESOLVED THAT
CITY MANAGER
CHIEF OF POLICE
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR-CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER
EMERGENCY SERVICES COORDINATOR
Is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of the City of Azusa,
applications and file them in the State of California, California Emergency Management
Agency, for the purpose of obtaining certain federal financial assistance under P.L. 93-
288 as amended by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act
of 1988, and/or state financial assistance under the Natural Disaster Assistance Act.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA,
CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the City of Azusa, a public entity established under the laws
of the State of California, hereby authorizes its agent(s) to provide to the California
Emergency Management Agency for all matters pertaining to such state disaster
assistance the assurances and agreements required.
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
resolution and shall enter the same in the Book of Original Resolutions.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of April, 2010.
JOSEPH R ROCHA, MAYOR
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the
City Council of the City of Azusa at a regular meeting held on 5th day of April, 2010, by
the following vote of the Council:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
VERA MENDOZA, CITY CLERK
Eir' 41/
1/41
OF q,;
•
h
us
AGENCY AGENDA ITEM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRPERSON AND AGENCY BOARD
FROM: KURT CHRISTIANSEN, DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
VIA: F.M. DELACH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTORI.O
DATE: APRIL 5, 2010
SUBJECT: EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF AZUSA AND HOPKINS
REAL ESTATE GROUP FOR THE DOWNTOWN NORTH
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Agency Board authorize the Executive Director to enter into an
Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with Hopkins Real Estate Group for the development of the
Downtown North Redevelopment Project.
BACKGROUND
On February 16, 2010, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Azusa ("Agency") adopted
Resolution 10-R10 which dissolved the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement ("ENA") that the
Agency had entered into on December 21, 2009 with Lewis Investment Company, LLC
("Lewis") for the development of a master planned retail/commercial development entitled the
"Downtown North Project." The proposed Downtown North Project is generally bounded by
Azusa Avenue on the west, 9th Street on the north, Dalton Avenue on the east, and the
Metropolitan Transit Authority right-of-way on the south ("Site"). The original ENA with Lewis
for the Downtown North Project was entered into in February of 2009 and provided a timeframe
for negotiating a Disposition and Development Agreement ("DDA"). However, despite the
second ENA that was executed last December to provide additional time, Lewis was unable to
secure a major retail anchor tenant for the project_
r .
Shortly after the second Lewis ENA was dissolved, Agency staff met with representatives of
Hopkins Real Estate Group ("Hopkins") to ascertain the firm's interest in proceeding with the
Downtown North Project. Hopkins was one of the firms that had responded to the Agency's
original developer Request for Proposal for this project. Like Lewis, Hopkins is an established,
experienced commercial real estate developer. with extensive contacts with potential retail
tenants. Agency staff believes that this experience will allow Hopkins to effectively pick up the
project and carry it forward towards construction.
The Objective: To continue the process of bringing a commercial shopping center to the
Downtown North Project Area that will complement the new Target Store development and
provide a quality grocery store and other retail businesses to the community.
EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT
The ENA proposes that the Agency and Hopkins negotiate diligently and in good faith towards
the goal of producing a mutually acceptable DDA. The term of the proposed ENA is 180 days.
Within the term of the ENA, Hopkins shall prepare and present all of the following:
(a) A proposed complete conceptual development plan for the Project on the
Property that describes and depicts: (1) the location and placement of proposed buildings and (2)
the architecture and elevations of the proposed buildings;
(b) Any proposed zoning change or changes to the City's General Plan, if any,
necessary to accommodate the Project on the Property;
(c) A proposed financing plan and pro forma identifying financing sources for
the development of the Project on the Property;
(d) A financial commitment from a leading grocery store chain to serve as the
anchor tenant for the Project;
(e) Executed letters of intent with future tenants to lease no less than thirty
percent(30%) of the gross leaseable area of the retail component of the Project;
(f) A preliminary financial analysis demonstrating the costs and benefits to
the City and the Agency regarding all construction, maintenance and operations of all proposed
public improvements, the costs of additional or increased levels of public services and any new
public revenues anticipated to be generated by the Project;
(g) A list of potential users or tenants and anticipated lease rates and resale
land prices for the Property, as developed with the Project; and
(h) A proposed time schedule and cost estimates for the development of the
Project.
In terms of the Project's anchor tenant, it is envisioned that Hopkins will make contact with
supermarket retailers such as Stater Bros, Ralphs Grocery Company, Food for Less, Fred Meyer,
or other supermarket retailer, or a specialty food retailer such as Sprouts, Smart& Final, or other
specialty food retailer, with a total of at least 15 stores in Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and
Riverside Counties. The ENA requires Hopkins to secure meetings between executives of these
various potential supermarket chains and members of the City Council's Downtown North
Project Committee and Agency staff. These meetings are to take place within 60 days of the
Effective Date of the ENA.
FISCAL IMPACT
All expenses incurred by the Developer for consultants retained by the Developer will be the sole
responsibility of the Developer. The Developer is also responsible for paying all costs for the
City/Agency to process any CEQA documentation. The ENA also provides that the Developer
will pay the Agency a non-refundable deposit of $15,000 to defray the Agency's costs. All other
financial terms and conditions associated with the Downtown North Project will be determined
as part of the DDA negotiations process.
Attachments
1. Exclusive Negotiation Agreement
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OFAZUSA
EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT
(HOPKINS REAL ESTATE GROUP)
THIS EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is dated as of April 5, 2010, for
reference purposes only, and is entered into by and between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of
Azusa, a public body corporate and politic ("Agency"), existing and acting pursuant to the California
Community Redevelopment Law(Health and Safety Code Sections 33000, et seq.)("CRL"), and Hopkins
Real Estate Group, a California corporation ("Developer"), to provide a specified period of time to
attempt to negotiate a disposition and development agreement. The Agency and the Developer are
sometimes referred to in this Agreement individually, as a "Party" and, collectively, as the "Parties."
This Agreement is entered into by the Parties with reference to the following recited facts (each, a
"Recital"):
RECITALS
A. The City of Azusa, California ("City"), approved and adopted the redevelopment plan
("Redevelopment Plan") for the redevelopment project area known as the "Downtown North
Redevelopment Project Area" covering a certain geographic area within the City ("Project
Area"); and
B. The Agency has adopted owner participation rules ("OP Rules") for the Redevelopment Plan
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Sections 33339, 33345 and 33380 and an implementation
plan ("Implementation Plan") for the Redevelopment Plan pursuant to Health and Safety Code
Section 33490 or 33352 and will comply therewith as applicable; and
C. The Developer is in discussions with the Agency for the purpose of acquiring certain real
property located within the Downtown North Project, generally bounded by Azusa Avenue on
the west, 9th Street on the north, Dalton Avenue on the east, and the Metropolitan Transit
Authority right-of-way on the south, and graphically depicted on Exhibit "A" attached to and
incorporated into this Agreement by this reference ("Property"). The Agency currently owns
certain parcels necessary for the potential development ("Agency Parcels"). The Agency
Parcels are identified on Exhibit B. Following negotiation of a Disposition and Development
Agreement("DDA"), Developer may attempt to acquire certain parcels to facilitate the proposed
development("Developer Parcels")as identified on Exhibit B; and
D. The Developer has proposed the redevelopment of the Property as an urban retail project
("Project"), but the Project is still in the conceptual stage and subject to change and
modification; and
E. The intent of both the Agency and the Developer in entering into this Agreement is to establish a
specific, limited period of time to negotiate regarding a future agreement between them
governing the potential sale of the Property from the Agency to the Developer and the potential
redevelopment of the Project on the Property by the Developer, all subject to mutually agreeable
terms,conditions, covenants, restrictions and agreements to be negotiated and documented in the
future DDA.
1
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
NOW, THEREFORE,IN VIEW OF THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE AGENCY RELATING
TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE PROMISES OF THE
AGENCY AND THE DEVELOPER SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT,THE AGENCY AND THE
DEVELOPER AGREE,AS FOLLOWS:
1. Incorporation of Recitals. The Recitals of fact set forth above are true and correct and are
incorporated into this Agreement, in their entirety, by this reference.
2. Deposit. Concurrent with the Developer's execution of this Agreement,the Developer shall pay
to the Agency a deposit in the amount of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000) in immediately
available funds ("Initial Deposit") to ensure that the Developer will proceed diligently and in
good faith to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement during the "Negotiation Period" (as
defined in Section 3(a)), as part of the consideration for the Agency's agreement not to negotiate
with other"Persons" during the Negotiation Period, and to defray certain costs of the Agency in
pursuing the contemplated otiations with the Developer during the Negotiation Period,
pursuant to this Agreement. it shall be made in three (3) equal installments of Five
Thousand Dollars ($5,000) with the first insta merit due upon execution of this Agreement, the
second installment due on ore t ee 61 day after the Effective Date,and the third installment
on or before the 1215` day after the Effective Date. Each of these installment deposits shall be
fully earned by the Agency when made and shall be non-refundable to the Developer absent a
default under this Agreement by the Agency. For purposes of this Agreement, the term
ddititi "Person(s)" means any one or mo vide s, partnerships (whether general or limited),
hmite a mall companies,—trusts, estates, associations, corporations, or any other entities
recognized by law or custom.
3. Term of Agreement.
(a) The rights and duties of the Agency and the Developer established by this Agreement
shall commence on the first date on which all of the following have occurred (the
"Effective Date"): (1) execution of this Agreement by the authorized representative(s)
of the Developer and delivery of such executed Agreement to the Agency, (2)payment
of the Initial Deposit to the Agency by the Developer, in accordance with Section 2
("Deposit"), and (3) approval of this Agreement by the Agency governing body and
execution of this Agreement by the authorized representative(s) of the Agency and
delivery of such executed Agreement to the Developer. The Agency shall deliver a
fully executed counterpart original of this Agreement to the Developer, within ten(10)
calendar days following the Agency governing body's approval of this Agreement, if
approved, and the execution of this Agreement by the authorized representative(s) of
the Agency. This Agreement shall continue in effect for the period of one hundred
eighty (180) consecutive calendar days immediately following the Effective Date
("Negotiation Period").
(b) This Agreement shall automatically expire and be of no further force or effect at the
end of the Negotiation Period, unless, prior to that time, both the Agency and the
Developer approve and execute a separate DDA acceptable to both the Agency and the
Developer, in their respective sole and absolute discretion, in which case this
Agreement will terminate on the effective date of such DDA.
4. Performance Milestone Schedule. The Developer shall prepare and present to
Agency staff for review and approval, all of the documents provided for in Exhibit"C"
("Milestone Schedule) within the timeframes provided for therein. For purposes of the
2
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
•
Milestone Schedule, an Anchor Retail Tenant shall be a supermarket retailer such as
Stater Bros, Ralphs Grocery Company, Food for Less, Fred Meyer, or other
supermarket retailer, or a specialty food retailer such as Sprouts, Smart & Final, or
other specialty food retailer, with a total of at least 15 stores in Los Angeles, San
Bernardino, and Riverside Counties. Developer shall secure meetings between
executives of these various potential supermarket chains and members of the City
Council's Downtown North Project Committee and Agency staff. As described in
Section 1.1 of the Milestone Schedule,these meetings are to take place within 60 days
of the Effective Date of this Agreement.
5. Negotiation of DDA. During the Negotiation Period, the Agency and the Developer shall act
diligently and in good faith to negotiate a DDA between them. The Agency and the Developer
shall generally cooperate with each other and supply such documents and information as may be
reasonably requested by the other to facilitate the conduct of the negotiations. Both the Agency
and the Developer shall exercise reasonable efforts to complete discussions relating to the terms
and conditions of a DDA and such other matters, as may be mutually acceptable to both the
Agency and the Developer, in their respective sole and absolute discretion. The exact terms and
conditions of a DDA, if any, shall be determined during the course of these negotiations.
Developer acknowledges that as a term of the DDA, Developer will be required to pay the
Agency for any land conveyed by the Agency to the Developer. Nothing in this Agreement shall
be interpreted or construed to be a representation or agreement by either the Agency or the
Developer that a mutually acceptable DDA will be produced from negotiations under this
Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall impose any obligation on either Party to agree to a
definitive DDA in the future. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted or construed to be a
guaranty, warranty or representation that any proposed DDA that may be negotiated by Agency
staff and the Developer will be approved by the Agency governing body. The Developer
acknowledges and agrees that the Agency's consideration of any DDA is subject to the sole and
absolute discretion of the Agency governing body and all legally required public hearings, public
meetings,notices, factual findings and other determinations required by law.
6. Restrictions Against Change in Ownership,Management and Control of Developer and
Assignment of Agreement.
(a) The qualifications and identity of the Developer and its principals are of particular
concern to the Agency. It is because of these qualifications and identity that the
Agency has entered into this Agreement with the Developer. During the Negotiation
Period, no voluntary or involuntary successor-in-interest of the Developer shall acquire
any rights or powers under this Agreement, except as provided in Section 6(c).
(b) The Developer shall promptly notify the Agency in writing of any and all changes
whatsoever in the "Control" (as defined in Section 6(c)) of the Developer. Upon the
occurrence of any significant or material change, whether voluntary or involuntary, in
the Control of the Developer (other than such changes occasioned by the death or
incapacity of any individual) that has not been approved by the Agency, prior to the
time of such change,the Agency may terminate this Agreement,without liability to the
Developer or any other Person, by sending written notice of termination to the
Developer,referencing this Section 6(b).
(c) Except as provided in this Section 6,the Developer may not assign its rights under this
Agreement without the prior express written consent of the Agency, which consent
shall not be unreasonably withheld, limited, conditioned, or delayed. No such consent
3
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
shall be required if the Developer assigns its rights under this Agreement to a
subsidiary limited liability company in which the Developer holds more than fifty
percent (50%) of the voting interest ("Control"). Upon any permitted assignment by
the Developer, the Developer and its assignee shall execute and deliver to the Agency
such documentation as the Agency may reasonably require to reflect such assignment
and the assignee's assumption of the Developer's obligations under this Agreement,
and upon the execution and delivery of such documentation, such assignee shall
thereafter be deemed the "Developer" under this Agreement for all purposes, and its
assignor shall be released of all liability arising under this Agreement.
7. Developer Obligations to Review Draft Agreements and Attend Meetings.
(a) During the Negotiation Period, the Developer shall diligently review and comment on
drafts of a DDA prepared by the Agency's legal counsel and, if the terms and
conditions of such a DDA are fully agreed upon between Agency staff and the
Developer, submit the DDA executed by the authorized representative(s) of the
Developer to the Agency Executive Director for submission to the Agency governing
body for review and approval or disapproval. Any future DDA shall consist of terms
and conditions acceptable to both the Developer and the Agency governing body, in
their respective sole and absolute discretion.
(b) During the Negotiation Period, the Developer shall also keep Agency staff advised on
the progress of the Developer in performing its obligations under this Agreement, on a
egular basis or as reasonably requested by Agency staff, including,without limitation,
having one or more of the Developer's employees or consultants who are
knowledgeable regarding this Agreement, the design and planning of the Project and
ki)-9)) the progress of negotiation of a DDA, such that such Person(s) can meaningfully
respond to Agency and/or Agency staff questions regarding the progress of the design
and planning of the Project or the negotiation of a DDA, attend both: (1) meetings or
conference calls every other week with Agency staff or its agents, as reasonably
scheduled by Agency staff during the Negotiation Period (each, a"Meeting"), and (2)
meetings of the Agency governing body, when reasonably requested to do so by
Agency staff.
8. Developer to Pay All Costs and Expenses. All fees or expenses of appraisers, brokers,
engineers, architects, financial consultants, legal, planning or other consultants or contractors,
retained by the Developer for any appraisal, study, analysis, evaluation, report, schedule,
estimate, environmental review, planning and/or design activities, drawings, specifications or
other activity or matter relating to the Property or the Project or negotiation of a DDA that may
be undertaken by the Developer during the Negotiation Period, pursuant to or in reliance upon
this Agreement or in the Developer's discretion, regarding any matter relating to a DDA, the
Property or the Project, shall be the sole responsibility of and undertaken at the sole cost and
expense of the Developer and no such activity or matter shall be deemed to be undertaken for the
benefit of, at the expense of or in reliance upon the Agency. The Developer shall also pay all
fees, charges and costs, make all deposits and provide all bonds or other security associated with
the submission to and processing by the City and/or the Agency of any and all applications and
other documents and information to be submitted to the City and/or the Agency by the Developer
pursuant to this Agreement or otherwise associated with the Project. The Agency shall not be
obligated to pay or reimburse any expenses, fees, charges or costs incurred by the Developer in
pursuit of any study, analysis, evaluation, report, schedule, estimate, environmental review,
planning and/or design activities, drawings, specifications or other activity or matter relating to
4
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
the Property or the Project or negotiation of a DDA that may be undertaken by the Developer
during the Negotiation Period, whether or not this Agreement is, eventually, terminated or
extended or a DDA is entered into between the Agency and the Developer, in the future.
9. Agency Not To Negotiate With Others.
(a) During the Negotiation Period, the Agency and Agency staff shall not negotiate with
any other Person regarding the sale or redevelopment of the Property. The term
"negotiate," as used in this Agreement, means and refers to engaging in any
discussions with a Person other than the Developer, regardless of how initiated, with
respect to that Person's redevelopment of the Property to the total or partial exclusion
of the Developer from redeveloping the Property, without the Developer's prior
express written consent, subject to the provisions of Section 9(b) and further provided
that the Agency may receive and retain unsolicited offers regarding redevelopment of
the Property, but the Agency shall neither negotiate with the proponent of any such
offer during the Negotiation Period nor solicit any such non-Developer offers during
the Negotiation Period; provided, however, that the Agency may discuss the fact that
the Agency is a party to this Agreement.
(b) Implementation of the Redevelopment Plan shall be and remain in the sole and
exclusive purview and discretion of the Agency. Nothing in this Agreement shall
limit, prevent, restrict or inhibit the Agency from providing any information in its
possession or control that would customarily be furnished to Persons requesting
information from the Agency concerning the Agency's activities, goals, matters of a
similar nature relating to implementation of the Redevelopment Plan or as required by
law to be disclosed, upon request or otherwise.
(c) The Developer acknowledges and agrees that the Agency has certain obligations
pursuant to CRL, the Redevelopment Plan, the Implementation Plan and the OP Rules
to solicit and consider proposals from owners of real property located within the
Project Area for redevelopment of their real property and that nothing in this
Agreement shall limit the Agency's solicitation or consideration of such proposals,
including, without limitation, proposals for redevelopment of all or any portion of the
Property from an owner or owners or real property comprising the Property. Agency
has extended all required Owner Participation Rights prior to the execution of this
Agreement.
10. Intentionally Omitted.
11. Acknowledgments and Reservations.
(a) The Agency and the Developer agree that, if this Agreement expires or is terminated
for any reason, or a future DDA is not approved and executed by both the Agency and
the Developer,for any reason, neither the Agency nor the Developer shall be under any
obligation, nor have any liability to each other or any other Person regarding the sale or
other disposition of the Property or the redevelopment of the Project or the Property.
(b) The Developer acknowledges and agrees that no provision of this Agreement shall be
deemed to be an offer by the Agency, nor an acceptance by the Agency of any offer or
proposal from the Developer for the Agency to convey any estate or interest in the
5
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
Property to the Developer or for the Agency to provide any financial or other
assistance to the Developer for redevelopment of the Project or the Property.
(c) The Developer acknowledges and agrees that the Developer has not acquired, nor will
acquire, by virtue of the terms of this Agreement,any legal or equitable interest in real
or personal property from the Agency.
(d) Certain development standards and design controls for the Project may be established
between the Developer and the Agency, but it is understood and agreed between the
Agency and the Developer that the Project and the redevelopment of the Property must
conform to all Agency, City and other applicable governmental development, land use
and architectural regulations and standards. Drawings, plans and specifications for the
Project shall be subject to the approval of the Agency and the City, through the
standard development application process for redevelopment projects within the
Project Area. Nothing in this Agreement shall be considered approval of any plans or
specifications for the Project or of the Project itself by either the Agency or the City.
(e) The Agency reserves the right to reasonably obtain further information, data and
commitments to ascertain the ability and capacity of the Developer to lease, develop
and operate the Property and/or the Project. The Developer acknowledges that it may
be requested to make certain financial disclosures to the Agency, its staff, legal counsel
or other consultants, as part of the financial due diligence investigations of the Agency
relating to the potential sale of the Property and redevelopment of the Project on the
Property by the Developer and that any such disclosures may become public records.
The Agency shall maintain the confidentiality of financial information of the
Developer to the extent allowed by law, as determined by the City Attorney.
(f) The Agency shall not be deemed to be a Party to any agreement for the acquisition of,
lease of or disposition of real or personal property,the provision of financial assistance
to the Developer or development of the Project on the Property or elsewhere, until the
terms and conditions of a complete future DDA are considered and approved by both
the City Council and the Agency governing body, in their respective sole and absolute
discretion, following the conclusion of one or more duly noticed public hearings, as
required by law. The Developer expressly acknowledges and agrees that the Agency
will not be bound by any statement, promise or representation made by Agency staff or
representatives during the course of negotiations of a future DDA and that the Agency
shall only be legally bound upon the approval of a complete DDA by both the City
Council and the Agency governing body, in their respective sole and absolute
discretion, following one or more duly noticed public hearings, as required by law.
12. Nondiscrimination. The Developer shall not discriminate against nor segregate any person,or
group of persons on account of race, color, creed,religion, sex,marital status,handicap,national
origin or ancestry in undertaking its obligations under this Agreement.
13. Limitation on Damages and Remedies.
(a) THE DEVELOPER AND THE AGENCY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IT IS
EXTREMELY DIFFICULT AND IMPRACTICAL TO ASCERTAIN THE
AMOUNT OF DAMAGES THAT WOULD BE SUFFERED BY THE DEVELOPER
UPON THE BREACH OF THI S AGREEMENT BY THE AGENCY. HAVING
MADE DILIGENT BUT UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPTS TO ASCERTAIN THE
6
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
ACTUAL DAMAGES THE DEVELOPER WOULD SUFFER UPON THE BREACH
OF THIS AGREEMENT BY THE AGENCY, THE DEVELOPER AND THE
AGENCY AGREE THAT A REASONABLE ESTIMATE OF THE DEVELOPER'S
DAMAGES IN SUCH EVENT IS TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($10,000) AND
THE RETURN OF THE DEVELOPER'S INITIAL DEPOSIT (COLLECTIVELY,
"LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AMOUNT"). THEREFORE, UPON THE BREACH
OF THIS AGREEMENT BY THE AGENCY, THE AGENCY SHALL PAY THE
LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AMOUNT TO THE DEVELOPER AND THIS
AGREEMENT SHALL TERMINATE. RECEIPT OF THE LIQUIDATED
DAMAGES AMOUNT SHALL BE THE DEVELOPER'S SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE
REMEDY ARISING FROM ANY BREACH OF THIS AGREEMENT BY THE
AGENCY.
Initials of Authorized Initials of Authorized
Representative of Representative of
Agency Developer
(b) THE AGENCY AND THE DEVELOPER EACH ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE
THAT THE AGENCY WOULD NOT HAVE ENTERED INTO THIS
AGREEMENT, IF IT WERE TO BE LIABLE TO THE DEVELOPER FOR ANY
MONETARY DAMAGES, MONETARY RECOVERY OR ANY REMEDY OTHER
THAN TERMINATION OF THIS AGREEMENT AND PAYMENT OF THE
LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AMOUNT. ACCORDINGLY, THE AGENCY AND
THE DEVELOPER AGREE THAT THE DEVELOPER'S SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE
RIGHT AND REMEDY UPON THE BREACH OF THIS AGREEMENT BY THE
AGENCY IS TO TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT AND RECEIVE THE
LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AMOUNT.
(c) THE DEVELOPER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT IS AWARE OF THE MEANING
AND LEGAL EFFECT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE SECTION 1542, WHICH
PROVIDES:
A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH
THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS
OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE,
WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM OR HER WOULD HAVE MATERIALLY
AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR.
(d) CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE SECTION 1542 NOTWITHSTANDING, IT IS THE
INTENTION OF THE DEVELOPER TO BE BOUND BY THE LIMITATION ON
DAMAGES, RECOVERY AND REMEDIES SET FORTH IN THIS SECTION 12,
AND THE DEVELOPER HEREBY RELEASES ANY AND ALL CLAIMS
AGAINST THE AGENCY FOR MONETARY DAMAGES, MONETARY
RECOVERY OR OTHER LEGAL OR EQUITABLE RELIEF RELATED TO ANY
BREACH OF THIS AGREEMENT, EXCEPT RECEIPT OF THE LIQUIDATED
DAMAGES AMOUNT, WHETHER OR NOT ANY SUCH RELEASED CLAIMS
WERE KNOWN OR UNKNOWN TO THE DEVELOPER AS OF THE EFFECTIVE
DATE OF THIS AGREEMENT. THE DEVELOPER SPECIFICALLY WAIVES
THE BENEFITS OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE SECTION 1542 AND ALL
7
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
OTHER STATUTES AND JUDICIAL DECISIONS (WHETHER STATE OR
FEDERAL) OF SIMILAR EFFECT WITH REGARD TO THE LIMITATIONS ON
DAMAGES AND REMEDIES AND WAIVERS OF ANY SUCH DAMAGES AND
REMEDIES CONTAINED IN THIS SECTION 13.
Initials of Authorized Initials of Authorized
Representative of Representative of
Agency Developer
14. Default.
(a) Failure or delay by either Party to perform any material term or provision of this
Agreement shall constitute a default under this Agreement. If the Party who is claimed
to be in default by the other Party cures, corrects or remedies the alleged default within
twenty-one (21) calendar days after receipt of a written "Notice of Default" (as
defined in Section 14(b), such Party shall not be in default under this Agreement. The
notice and cure period provided in the immediately preceding sentence shall not, under
any circumstances, extend the Negotiation Period. If there are less than twenty-one
(21)days remaining in the Negotiation Period, the cure period allowed pursuant to this
Section 0 shall be automatically reduced to the number of days remaining in the
Negotiation Period.
(b) The Party claiming that a default has occurred shall give written notice of default
("Notice of Default") to the Party claimed to be in default, stating, with reasonable
specificity, the nature of the alleged default and the actions necessary to cure such
allege default. However, the injured Party shall have no right to exercise any remedy
for a default under this Agreement, without first delivering such written Notice of
Default.
(c) Any failure or delay by a Party in asserting any of its rights or remedies as to any
default shall not operate as a waiver of any default or of any rights or remedies
associated with a default.
(d) If a default of either Party remains uncured for more than twenty-one (21) calendar
days following receipt of a written Notice of Default, a"breach"of this Agreement by
the defaulting Party shall be deemed to have occurred. In the event of a breach of this
Agreement,the sole and exclusive remedy of the Party who is not in default shall be to
terminate this Agreement by serving written notice of termination ("Notice of
Termination") on the Party in breach, effective upon receipt, and, in the case of a
breach by the Agency, the Developer shall also be entitled to receive the Liquidated
Damages Amount. Upon receipt by the breaching Party of the Notice of Termination
(and in the case of a breach by the Agency, receipt by the Developer of the entire
Liquidated Damages Amount), neither Party shall have any further rights against or
obligation to the other Party.
15. Compliance with Law. The Developer acknowledges that any future DDA, if approved by the
governing body of the Agency, will require the Developer (among other things)to carry out the
development of the Project in conformity with all applicable laws, including all applicable
8
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
building, planning and zoning laws, environmental laws, safety laws and federal and state labor
and wage laws.
16. Press Releases. The Developer agrees to obtain the approval of the Agency Executive Director
or his or her designee or successor in function of any press releases Developer may propose
relating to the redevelopment of the Property or negotiation of a DDA with the Agency, prior to
publication.
17. Notice. All notices required under this Agreement shall be presented in person, by nationally
recognized overnight delivery service or by facsimile and confirmed by first class certified or
registered United States Mail, with return receipt requested, to the address and/or fax number for
the Party set forth in this Section 17. Notice shall be deemed confirmed by United States Mail
effective the third (3rd) business day after deposit with the United States Postal Service. Notice
by personal service or nationally recognized overnight delivery service shall be effective upon
delivery. Either Party may change its address for receipt of notices by notifying the other Party
in writing. Delivery of notices to courtesy copy recipients shall not be required for valid notice
to a Party.
TO DEVELOPER: Hopkins Real Estate Group
17461 Derian Avenue, Suite 106
Irvine, CA 92614
Attention: Jeff Hopkins
Facsimile: (949)644-8631
• Email: jhopkins@hopkinsgroup.com
COPY TO: Hopkins Real Estate Group
233 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 515
Santa Monica,CA 90401
Attention: Robert Exel
Facsimile: (310)393-2551
Email: bexel@hopkinsgroup.com
TO AGENCY: Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Azusa
213 East Foothill Boulevard
Azusa,California 91702
Attention: Fran Delach, Executive Director
Facsimile: (626)334-5464
COPY TO: Best Best&Krieger, LLP
5 Park Plaza
Irvine ,California
Attention: Elizabeth Hull
Facsimile: (949)260-0972
18. Warranty Against Payment of Consideration for Agreement. The Developer warrants that it
has not paid or given, and will not pay or give, any third party any money or other consideration
for obtaining this Agreement. Third parties, for the purposes of this Section 18, shall not include
Persons to whom fees are paid for professional services, if rendered by attorneys, financial
9
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
consultants, accountants, engineers, architects and other consultants, when such fees are
considered necessary by the Developer.
19. Acceptance of Agreement by Developer. The Developer shall acknowledge its acceptance of
this Agreement by delivering to the Agency three(3)original counterpart executed copies of this
Agreement signed by the authorized representative(s)of the Developer.
20. Counterpart Originals. This Agreement may be executed by the Agency and the Developer in
multiple counterpart originals,all of which together shall constitute a single agreement.
21. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to benefit any Person
other than the Agency or the Developer.
22. Governing Law. The Agency and the Developer acknowledge and agree that this Agreement
was negotiated, entered into and is to be fully performed in the City of Azusa, California. The
Agency and the Developer agree that this Agreement shall be governed by, interpreted under, and
construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without
application of such laws' conflicts of laws principles.
23. Waivers. No waiver of any breach of any term or condition contained in this Agreement shall be
deemed a waiver of any preceding or succeeding breach of such term or condition, or of any
other term or condition contained in this Agreement. No extension of the time for performance
of any obligation or act, no waiver of any term or condition of this Agreement, nor any
modification of this Agreement shall be enforceable against the Agency or the Developer, unless
made in writing and executed by both the Agency and the Developer.
24. Construction. Headings at the beginning of each section and sub-section of this
Agreement are solely for the convenience of reference of the Agency and the Developer
and are not a part of this Agreement. Whenever required by the context of this
Agreement, the singular shall include the plural and the masculine shall include the
feminine and vice versa. This Agreement shall not be construed as if it had been
prepared by one or the other of the Agency or the Developer, but rather as if both the
Agency and the Developer prepared this Agreement. Unless otherwise indicated, all
references to sections are to this Agreement. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement
are attached to this Agreement and incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. If
the date on which the Agency or the Developer is required to take any action pursuant to
the terms of this Agreement is not a business day of the Agency, the action shall be taken
on the next succeeding business day of the Agency. The Parties hereto acknowledge and
agree that each has been given the opportunity to review this Agreement independently
with legal counsel and other professionals of each Party's own choosing, and/or has the
requisite experience and sophistication to understand, interpret, and agree to the
particular language of the provisions hereof. All words, unless otherwise specifically
defined in this Agreement, shall have their ordinary meanings as set forth in any
dictionary of American English in common usage; there are no secret or code words.
Any capitalized word, term, or phrase not otherwise defined in any Exhibit shall have the
meaning assigned to it in this Agreement. The Parties have equal bargaining power, and
intend the plain meaning of the provisions herein. In the event of an ambiguity in or
dispute regarding the interpretation of same, the interpretation of this Agreement shall
10
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
not be resolved by any rule of interpretation providing for interpretation against the Party
who causes the uncertainty to exist or against the draftsman.
25. Attorneys' Fees. If either Party hereto files any action or brings any action or proceeding
against the other arising out of this Agreement, then the prevailing Party shall be entitled to
recover as an element of its costs of suit, and not as damages, its reasonable attorneys' fees as
fixed by the court, in such action or proceeding or in a separate action or proceeding brought to
recover such attorneys' fees. For the purposes hereof the words "reasonable attorneys' fees"
mean and include, in the case of Agency, salaries and expenses of the lawyers employed by
Agency (allocated on an hourly basis) who may provide legal services to Agency in connection
with the representation of Agency in any such matter.
[Signatures on Following Page]
11
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Agency and the Developer have executed this Exclusive Negotiation
Agreement on the dates indicated next to each of the signatures of their authorized representatives, as
appear below.
DEVELOPER:
HOPKINS REAL ESTATE GROUP,
a California corporation
Dated: By:
Name: Stephen C. Hopkins
Its: President and CEO
AGENCY:
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF AZUSA
Dated: By:
Name: F. M. Delach
Its: Executive Director
ATTEST:
By:
Agency Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
BEST BEST&KRIEGER, LLP
By:
Agency Counsel
LIST OF EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A - Depiction of Project Area
Exhibit B - Agency&Developer Parcels
Exhibit C - Milestones
12
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
EXHIBIT"A"
TO
EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT
(HOPKINS REAL ESTATE GROUP)
Depiction of Site
13
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
• 9TH ST
•w
N
N
A3�
1 inch = 200 feet
A2
SP��PVE 8TH ST
PN1
w
w Z
0
Q J
Q Q
O O
w
5
FOOTHILL BLVD
FOOTHILL BLVD
Exhibit A =�
Downtown North
A2/A3 Downtown North Redevelopment Area
Carrot ENA
Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (Hopkins Real Estate Group)
•
EXHIBIT"B"
TO
EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT
(HOPKINS REAL ESTATE GROUP)
Agency Parcels:
Address APN
1. 805 N. Dalton(Mortiz) 8608-027-905
2. 803 N. Dalton(Ramirez) 8608-027-906
3. 826 N. Azusa(Habern) 8608-025-902
4. 812 N. Azusa(Cortez) 8608-025-906
5. 801 N. Azusa(Cortez) 8608-025-905
6. No Situs(Cortez) 8608-025-903
7. No Situs(Cortez) 8608-025-904
8. 810 N. Alameda(Nunez) 8608-027-907
9. 830 N. Azusa(Matson) 8608-025-013
10. 858 N. Azusa(Choi) 8608-025-016
11. 832 N. Azusa(Vagenas) 8608-025-011
12. No Situs(Vagenas) 8608-025-012
13. 809 N. Dalton(O'Bryant) 8608-027-003
14. 813 N. Dalton(O'Bryant) 8608-027-002
Developer Parcels (To Be Acquired):
1. 824 N. Alameda(Arzate) 8608-027-005
2. 262-284 E. 9th(Jackson) 8608-027-001
3. 820-822 N. Alameda(Garcia) 8608-027-006
14
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
Exhibit C
Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Hopkins Development LLC
Performance Milestone Schedule
(Effective Date:
MILESTONE DESCRIPTION
1 -Within 60 Days of Effective Date of ENA
1.1 Meetings with Developer shall arrange meeting between representatives of prospective major
Prospective Anchor supermarket Anchor Retail Tenant and members of the Azusa City Council Downtown
Retail Tenants North Advisory Committee and Agency staff as provided for in Section 4 of the
Agreement.
1.2 Site Plan Alternatives Developer shall submit a minimum of 2 site plan alternatives. These site plans should
depict what the developer believes are the optimal development opportunities within
the project area as described in Exhibit A of this ENA. One alternative should assume
the acquisition of the Developer Parcels and the other should assume that these
Parcels will not be acquired. Each Site Plan Alternative should also include a
development proforma.
1.2 Zoning Developer shall consider relevant regulatory and environmental conditions and submit,
application for any necessary changes to the City's Zoning or General Plan to
accommodate the Project on the Property.
2 -Within 75 Days of Effective Date of ENA
2.1 Approve Conceptual Agency staff will approve the preferred Site Plan Alternative.
Site Plan Proposal
3 -Within 90 Days of Effective Date of ENA
3.1 Design Plans Based on the approved Site Plan Alternative, Developer shall submit a complete
conceptual development plan for the Project on the Property that describes and
depicts: (1) the location and placement of proposed buildings and (2) the architecture
and elevations of the proposed buildings
4 -Within 120 Days of Effective Date of ENA
4.1 Design Plan The proposed Design Plan for the project will be submitted to the City Council's
Approval Downtown North Advisory Committee for review and preliminary approval.
4.2 Tenant Letters of Developer shall submit Letters of Interest from potential retail tenants representing a
Interest minimum of 30% of the leaseable project space, exclusive of the Anchor Retail
Tenant.
5 -Within 150 Days of Effective Date of ENA
5.1 Anchor Retail Tenant Developer shall submit evidence that that it has secured a meeting date with the
CEC Meeting Capital Expenditure Committee ("CEC") of the proposed Anchor Retail Tenant.
5.2 Revised Site Plan Following plan review per any changes per 4.2 above, Developer shall submit any
required revisions to site plan and elevations.
5.3 Revised Developer shall submit updated development pro forma reflecting revised
Development Pro development plan.
Forma
5.4 Proposed Developer shall submit a proposed time schedule, including demolition and
Development Time construction phasing, and cost estimates for the development of the Project on the
Line Property.
5.5 Financing Plan Developer shall submit a proposed financing plan identifying financing sources for all
private and public improvements proposed for the Project.
5.6 Agency Developer shall submit a financial analysis demonstrating the costs and benefits to
Costs/Benefits the City and the Agency regarding all construction, maintenance and operations of all
proposed public improvements, the costs of additional or increased levels of public
services and any new public revenues anticipated to be generated by the Project.
5.7 Development Developer shall submit a letter identifying development partners, if applicable.
Partners and
Structure
15
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
Exhibit C
Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Hopkins Development LLC
Performance Milestone Schedule
(Effective Date:
MILESTONE DESCRIPTION
5.8 Funding Partners Developer shall submit a letter identifying lenders and proof of ability to obtain
and Structure financing, if applicable.
6 -Within 180 Days of Effective Date of ENA
6.1 Draft DDA Complete negotiations and final draft of Disposition and Development Agreement
6.2 Redevelopment Present development proposal and DDA to Agency and/or City Council for final review
Agency/City Council and approval
Hearing
16
ORANGE\EHULL\66830.3
o
"�*�,� ...�` M` t* G n ob �* ya
sr �� *�, 'w 'v.d �� Nt �#'�4� �"
USfy
CITY OF AZUSA
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY,MARCH 15,2010—9:23 P.M.
The Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Azusa met in regular session at the
above date and time in the Azusa Auditorium,213 E.Foothill Blvd.,Azusa CA.
Chairman Rocha called the meeting to order. Call to Order
ROLL CALL Roll Call
PRESENT: DIRECTORS: MACIAS,HANKS,ROCHA
ABSENT: DIRECTORS: GONZALES,CARRILLO
ALSO PRESENT: Also Present
General Counsel Carvalho, Executive Director Delach, Assistant Executive Director Makshanoff,
Department Heads,Secretary Mendoza,Deputy Secretary Toscano.
AGENCY SCHEDULED ITEMS Sched Items
PUBLIC HEARING - TO CONSIDER PROPOSED LEASE AGREEMENT FOR CERTAIN Pub Hrg
REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 813 NORTH DALTON AVENUE,IN THE CITY OF AZUSA 813 Dalton
Economic and Community Development Director Christiansen addressed the Public Hearing stating that K.Christiansen
since there is no signed agreement from the applicant, he recommended opening the public hearing, Comments
receiving testimony and continuing the hearing to the meeting of April 19,2010.
The Chairman declared the Hearing open. The Secretary read the affidavit of proof of publication of said Hrg open
hearing published in the San Gabriel Valley on February 25th and March 4th 2010.
Mr.Steve O'Bryant of 813 N.Dalton Avenue stated that since there is an issue of ownership of the house S.O'Bryant
on that property,he asked that the Board take no action until the agreement is decided upon. Comments
Moved by Director Macias,seconded by Director Hanks and unanimously*carried to continue the Public Continued to
Hearing to the meeting of April 19,2010. April 19,2010
The CONSENT CALENDAR consisting of items F-1 and F-2 was approved by motion of Consent Cal.
Director Macias,seconded by Director Hanks and unanimously*carried. Approved
1. Minutes of the regular meeting of March 1,2010,were approved as written. Min appvd
2. Resolution authorizing payment of warrants by the Agency was adopted and entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF AZUSA ALLOWING Res.No. 10-R14
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS TO BE PAID OUT OF REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FUNDS. Warrants
SPECIAL CALL ITEMS Spec Call Items
None. None
It was consensus of the Redevelopment Agency Board Members to adjourn. Adjourn
TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 9:26 P.M.
SECRETARY
NEXT RESOLUTION NO. 10-R15.
*Indicates Gonzales and Carrillo absent.
03/15/10 PAGE TWO
4 �
AZUSA`
AGENCY CONSENT ITEM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRPERSON AND AGENCY MEMBERS
FROM: MARCENE HAMILTON,REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TRE R
DATE: APRIL 5, 2010
SUBJECT: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF AZUSA TREASURER'S
STATEMENT OF CASH BALANCES FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2010
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Agency Members receive and file the Agency Treasurer's Statement of
Cash Balances for the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Azusa for the month of February 2010.
BACKGROUND
Transmitted herewith is the Agency Treasurer's Statement of Cash Balances for the Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Azusa("Agency") for the month of February2010. Agency investments are
made in accordance with the Redevelopment Agency Investment Policy approved and adopted with
Resolution No. 09-R53 dated October 5, 2009, and Government Code Section 53601. Investment
activity is summarized in the "Treasury Book Balances-Cash and Investments" schedule, attached
herewith and an integral part of this report.
Agency cash and investment balances decreased by $755,835.70. Cash received totaled
$802,261.93, and disbursements of$1,558,097.63 were made.
The Agency is the issuer of several Merged Project Tax Allocation Bonds. Of the total cash and
investments of$17,278,817.94,Wells Fargo Bank,the fiscal agent,held$8,583,101.45 on behalf of
the Agency. These funds are restricted for payment of debt service on the bonds and special bond-
funded projects. The remaining $8,695,716.49 was available for Agency operating, debt service,
restricted expenses, and outstanding liabilities.
FISCAL IMPACT
The balance of cash and investments and projected revenues for the next six months is expected to
be sufficient to meet cash disbursement requirements for at least the next six months.
MH EG
CITY OF AZUSA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENCY TREASURER'S STATEMENT OF CASH
AND INVESTMENT COST BALANCES
FEBRUARY 2010
Beginning Cash Balance $18,034,653.64
(All Restricted and Unrestricted Accounts&Investments)
Receipts(All Sources) 802,261.93
Disbursements (1,558,097.63)
Ending Cash Balance $17,278,817.94
(All Restricted and Unrestricted Accounts&Investments)
Marcene Hamilton,Agency Treasurer
CITY OF AZUSA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TREASURY BOOK BALANCES - CASH AND INVESTMENTS
FEBRUARY 2010
Maximum
Deposits Cost Interest Mkt
Bank Accounts Allowed Amount Pledged Securities Maturity Rate Value*
CASH AND INVESTMENTS HELD BY AGENCY TREASURER
Wells Fargo Bank
Government Checking No limit $1,614,397.43 FDIC up to$100,000.00 Ongoing 0.000% $1,614,397.43
>$100,000 collaterized by 110%in govn't securities
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) $20,000,000.00 7,081,319.06 Backed by faith &credit of the State of California Ongoing 0.577% 7,088,030.91
SUBTOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENTS
HELD BY AGENCY TREASURER: $8,695,716.49
$8,702,428.34
Interest Collections: $0.00
CASH AND INVESTMENTS HELD BY FISCAL AGENT
2003 Merged Project Tax Allocation Bonds
2003A Special Fund
AIM Gov't Portfolio No limit 0.40 Investments in direct obligations of the U.S. Treasury Ongoing 0.000% 0.40
2003A Interest Account
AIM Gov't Portfolio No limit 0.00 Investments in direct obligations of the U.S.Treasury Ongoing 0.000% 0.00
2003A Principal Account
AIM Gov't Portfolio No limit 1.97 Investments in direct obligations of the U.S. Treasury Ongoing 0.000% 1.97
2003A Reserve Account
Reliance Certificate of Deposit No limit 1,085,192.59>$100,000 collaterized by 110% in govn't securities 12/04/14 0.010% 1,085,192.59
Reliance Trust Co.Cash Equivalent Mmkt No limit 1,110.04 N/A Ongoing 0.000% 1,110.04
AIM Gov't Portfolio No limit 1,149.72 Investments in direct obligations of the U.S.Treasury Ongoing 0.000% 1,149.72
2003 Merged Project Tax Allocation Bonds Subtotal: $1,087,454.72 $1,087,454.72
Interest Collections: $1.82
2005 Merged Project Tax Allocation Bonds
2005 Special Fund
Wells Fargo Advantage Gov't Mmkt No limit $0.19 N/A Ongoing 0.000% $0.19
2005 Interest Account
Wells Fargo Advantage Gov't Mmkt No limit 0.00 N/A Ongoing 0.000% 0.00
2005 Redevelopment Fund
AIM Institutional Prime-Cash Mgmt/MMk No limit 50,375.20 N/A Ongoing 0.020% 50,375.20
2005 Reserve Account
Reliance Certificate of Deposit No limit 869,259.17 >$100,000 collaterized by 110%in govn't securities 12/04/14 0.010% 869,259.17
Reliance Trust Co. Cash Equivalent Mmkt No limit 910.95 N/A Ongoing 0.000% 910.95
2005 Merged Project Tax Allocation Bonds Subtotal: $920,545.51 $920,545.51
Interest Collections: $2.18
2007A Merged Project Tax Allocation Bonds
2007A Bond Fund
Wells Fargo Advantage 100%Treasury Mmkt No limit $0.87 N/A Ongoing 0.000% $0.87
2007A Interest Account
Wells Fargo Advantage 100% Treasury Mmkt No limit $0.00 N/A Ongoing 0.000% $0.00
2007A Principal Account •
Wells Fargo Advantage 100%Treasury Mmkt No limit $0.00 N/A Ongoing 0.000% $0.00
2007A Merged Project Tax Allocation Bonds Subtotal: $0.87 $0.87
Interest Collections: $0.87
2007B Merged Project Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds
2007B Bond Fund
Wells Fargo Advantage 100%Treasury Mmkt No limit $372.89 N/A Ongoing 0.000% $372.89
2007B Interest Account
Wells Fargo Advantage 100%Treasury Mmkt No limit $0.00 N/A Ongoing 0.000% $0.00
CITY OF AZUSA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TREASURY BOOK BALANCES-CASH AND INVESTMENTS
FEBRUARY 2010
Maximum
Deposits Cost Interest Mkt
Bank Accounts Allowed Amount Pledged Securities Maturity Rate Value*
2007B Principal Account
Wells Fargo Advantage 100%Treasury Mmkt No limit $0.00 N/A Ongoing 0.000% $0.00
2007B Reserve Fund
Reliance Certificate of Deposit No limit 325,042.50>$100,000 collaterized by 110%in govn't securities 12/04/14 0.010% 325,042.50
Reliance Trust Co.Cash Equivalent Mmkt No limit 0.00 N/A Ongoing 0.000% 0.00
2007B Merged Project Tax Allocation Bonds Subtotal: $325,415.39 $325,415.39
Interest Collections: $0.43
2008A Merged Proiect Tax Allocation Bonds
2008A Bond Fund
Wells Fargo Advantage 100%Treasury Mmkt No limit $17,779.69 N/A Ongoing 0.010% $17,779.69
2008A Interest Account
Wells Fargo Advantage 100%Treasury Mmkt No limit $0.00 N/A Ongoing 0.000% $0.00
2008A Reserve Fund
Reliance Trust Co.Savings and Cert.of Deposit No limit $655,240.76 >$100,000 collaterized by 110%in govn't securities 12/19/13 2.650% 655,240.76
Reliance Trust Co.Cash Equivalent Mmkt No limit $0.15 N/A Ongoing 0.000% 0.15
2008A Redevelopment Fund
Wells Fargo Advantage 100%Treasury Mmkt No limit $3,670,329.89 N/A Ongoing 0.010% $3,670,329.89
2008A Merged Project Tax Allocation Bonds Subtotal: $4,343,350.49 $4,343,350.49
Interest Collections: $31.90
2008B Merged Proiect Tax Allocation Housing Bonds
20086 Bond Fund
Wells Fargo Advantage Government Mmkt No limit $44,677.03 N/A Ongoing 0.010% $44,677.03
2008B Interest Account
Wells Fargo Advantage Government Mmkt No limit $0.00 N/A Ongoing 0.000% $0.00
2008B Reserve Fund
Reliance Trust Co.Savings and Cert.of Deposit No limit $1,123,482.50 >$100,000 collaterized by 110%in govn't securities 11/21/13 4.000% 1,123,482.50
Reliance Trust Co.Cash Equivalent Mmkt No limit $0.00 N/A Ongoing 0.000% 0.00
20086 Low&Moderate Income Housing Fund
Reliance Trust Co.Cash Equivalent Mmkt No limit 0.02>$100,000 collaterized by 110%in govn't securities Ongoing 0.000% 0.02
Wells Fargo Advantage Government Mmkt No limit $738,174.92 N/A Ongoing 0.010% 738,174.92
2008B Merged Project Tax Allocation Bonds Subtotal: $1,906,334.47 $1,906,334.47
Interest Collections: $7.26
SUBTOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENTS
HELD BY FISCAL AGENT: $8,583,101.45 $8,583,101.45
Total-Azusa Redevelopment Agency
Cash and Investments: $17,278,817.94 $17,285,529.79
Total Interest Collections: $44.46
Source of Market Value Information:
Wells Fargo Corporate Trust,Trustee
Local Agency Investment Fund(LAIF)
Wells Fargo Institutional Securities
Tax Allocation Bond Data is based on Trustee-generated Statements;bond funds listed
herein are restricted for payment of debt service and eligible projects and governed by
strict regulations described in the Trust Indentures.
*Market Value is the current price at which a security can be traded or sold.
I I a:I 3
WARRANT REGISTER NO. 17
FISCAL YEAR 2009-10
WARRANTS DATED 03/01/10 THROUGH 03/15/10
FOR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OF 04-05-10 4
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF AZUSA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS
TO BE PAID OUT OF REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FUNDS
THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF AZUSA DOES RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the following claims and demands have been audited as required by law and that
the same are hereby allowed in the amounts and ordered paid out of the Redevelopment Agency Funds as
hereinafter set forth: •
80-110-REDEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION FUND $ 9,960.57
80-125-CBD CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 3,335,231.69
80-135-WED CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
80-185-RANCH CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
80-165-624-2008A TAX ALLOCATION BONDS
81-155-TAX INCREMENT SET-ASIDE FUND 36.18
82-125-CBD DEBT SERVICE FUND
82-135-WED DEBT SERVICE FUND
82-165-MERGED PROJECT TAX ALLOCATION BONDS
82-185-RANCH CENTER DEBT SERVICE FUND
TOTAL ALL FUNDS: $3,345,228.44
SECTION 2. That the Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall deliver a
certified copy thereof to the Agency Treasurer and shall retain a certified copy thereof in his own records.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS DAY OF 2010.
Chairman
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Azusa at a regular meeting thereof,held on the day of 2010.
AYES: AGENCY MEMBERS:
NOES: AGENCY MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: AGENCY MEMBERS:
ABSENT: AGENCY MEMBERS:
Secretary
City of Azusa HP 9000 03/30/10 OPEN HO LD DB LISTING By Person/Entity Narre Page 1
NAR 30, 2010, 1:07 FM ---req: ROSE leg: GL JL---loc: BI-TECH job: 732045 #J4570---pgm: CH400 <1.34> rpt id: CHFL'IR02
SELECT FUND Codes: 80-82 ; Check Issue Lates: 030110-031510
PE i i) PE Narre AC�TI' NCIABER / JOB NCMBER Invoice Nr flrber Description St Disc. Ant. Dist. Ant.
V00363 AZUSA CHAMBER OF 8010110000-6601 1106 DVD PROD BUS ACT PD 0.00 3,000.00
PEIDd: 0.00
Paid: 3,000.00
Total : 3,000.00
V01305 AZUSA CITY FED C 8000000000-3035 2610/1001005 PY#5/10 PD 0.00 311.25
PEID Ureid: 0.00
Paid: 311.25
Total: 311.25
V10604 AZUSA MIDDLE NPT 8000000000-3020 2618/1001005 PY#5/10 PD 0.00 35.00
PEIDd: 0.00
�d: 35.00
Total : 35.00
V10782 CASTLEROCKENVIR 8010125000-2745 8948 Contracts Pbl/Co PD 0.00 -7,024.90
V10782 CASTLERECKENVIR 8010125000-7110/505800-7110 8948 DFM3/ASBSICSIWV Hi 0.00 70,249.00
PEID aid: 0.00
Paid: 63,224.10
Total: 63,224.10
V06783 CITISIRFET 8000000000-3010 1310/1001005 PY#5/10 PD 0.00 266.57
V06783 C111STREET 8000000000-3010 2315/1001005 PY 5/10 PD 0.00 124.71
V06783 C111S1REET 8000000000-3010 2310/1001005 PY#5/10 PD 0.00 720.92
Phil) Ile: 0.00
Paid: 1,112.20
Total: 1,112.20
V09727 CU'NIERCE ESCPOW 8010125000-7105/504700-7105 09-54818-RZ Land Aoqui.sitiai Hi 0.00 9,368.69
V09727 CI CS ESI 8010125000-1198 09-54818-RZ Cish/Escrow Peen PD 0.00 -100,000.00
V09727 cEMVERCE ESQtW 8010125000-1198 09-54818-RZ 09-54818-RZ PD 0.00 50,000.00
V09727 CEVMEFZCI ESCROW 8010125000-7105/504700-7105 09-54818-RZ Lard Acquisition PD 0.00 6,200.00
V09727 OSCE ESCOW 8010125000-7105/504700-7105 09-54818-RZ Land Acquisition PD 0.00 3300,000.00
PEID LTi- d: 0.00
Paid: 3265,568.69
Total: 3265,568.69
City of Azusa HP 9000 03/30/10 OPEN HOLD DB LISTING By Ferson/Entity Naim Page 2
ILJE, MAR 30, 2010, 1:07 FM ---rte: ROSE leg: GL JL---lcc: BI-TECH---job: 732045 #J4570---pgm: OH400 <1.34> rpt id: OHFEIR.02
SELEET FUND Codes: 80-82 ; CI-Eck Issue Dates: 030110-031510
PE ID YE Nacre =NT NCI121T. / JOB NUMBER Invoice Numter Inscription St Disc. Amt. Dist. Ant.
V00348 CCNSHO HEALTH I 8000000000-3054 2435/1001005 PY#5/10 PD 0.00 20.21
PEID Unpaid: 0.00
Paid: 20.21
Total: 20.21
V08658 CROSBY, C. 8010110000-6625 10300264 SMALL CLAIMS CRT PD 0.00 35.00
V08658 CROSBY, C. 8010110000-6625 10J00266 SELL CLAIMS CRT PD 0.00 35.00
V08658 CROSBY, C. 8010110000-6625 10300265 SMALL CLAIMS CRT YD 0.00 35.00
PEID Uiaid: 0.00
Paid: 105.00
Total: 105.00
V00331 FETERPJJ E FREES 8110155000-6625/505320-6625 700337928 117052788/P.SILV PD 0.00 36.18
V00331 FEDERAL EZFRESS 8010125000-6625/505800-6625 700337928 117052788/T.REEV PD 0.00 18.35
V00331 FEDERAL EXPRESS 8010125000-6625/505800-6625 700337928 117052788/R.HAHN PD 0.00 20.55
PEIDd: 0.00
�d: 75.08
Total: 75.08
V01646 HDL COREN & CINE 8010110000-6493 0016226IN FY 09/10 PROPIY PD 0.00 1,502.32
V01646 HDL COREN & CONE 8010110000-6493 0015526IN FY 09/10 PROPTY HD 0.00 2,700.00
Phil) d: 0.00
Paid: 4,202.32
Total: 4,202.32
V96319 LAURAIN & ASSOCI 8010125000-6325 8456 APPRSL/242 S AZU PD 0.00 2,400.00
REID Unpaid: 0.00
Paid: 2,400.00
Total: 2,400.00
V03126 LINCOLN NATIONAL 8000000000-3010 2325/1001005 PY=5/10 PD 0.00 365.00
V03126 LINCOLN NATIONAL, 8000000000-3010 1320/1001005 PY=5/10 PD 0.00 68.62
PEW d: 0.00
Raid: 433.62
Total : 433.62
City of Azusa HP 9000 03/30/10 OPEN HOLD DB LISTING By /Entity Nacre Page 3
TUE, NAR 30, 2010, 1:07 FM ---reg: ROSE leg: CT, JL---lcc: BI-TECH---jab: 732045 #J4570---fin: CH400 <1.34> rpt id: �TR02
SELEET FUND Cues: 80-82 ; Check Issue Dates: 030110-031510
PE ID H Na17e ACC= UMBER_ / JOE UMBER. Invoice Nurrieer D?scripticn St Disc. Art. Dist. Aut.
V10322 M & T RAMC 8000000000-3010 MIBANC-3/4/10 Tefrd Carp Pbl/P PD 0.00 369.17
PE,I I) d: 0.00
aid: 369.17
Total: 369.17
V04138 RELT1-\.S1'AR LaE I 8000000000-3054 2410/1001005 PY=5/10 PD 0.00 1.97
V04138 RELIAS'ThR LIFE I 8000000000-3053 2215/1001005 PY=5/10 PD 0.00 2.62
PhIU1d d: 0.00
4.59
'Total: 4.59
V03157 SCS ENGINEERS 8010125000-6493/504700-6493 0147138 PH 1 IlW ASSESS- PD 0.00 4,000.00
Ph;l D U paid: 0.00
PPaaiid: 4,000.00
Total : 4,000.00
V10053 STANDARD SAN 8000000000-3044 1221/1001005 PY#5/10 PD 0.00 132.59
PEIDd: 0.00
�d: 132.59
Total: 132.59
V00876 WASFINGICN MUTUk 8000000000-3010 1330/1001005 PY=5/10 Hi 0.00 15.00
V00876 WASEINGRWMUILA. 000000000-3010 2331001005 PY=510 PD 0.00
V00876 MUTUk 8000000000-3010 2330/1001005 PY=5/10 PD 0.00 183.11
PED d: 0.00
d: 234.62
Total: 234.62
GRAND TOTAL LTi d: 0.00
Paid: 3345,228.44
Total: 3345,228.44
ORDINANCE NO. GIOP /
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF AZUSA AMENDING AND RESTATING
SECTIONS 46-238 AND 46-240 OF CHAPTER 46 OF
THE AZUSA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING
RECOVERY OF COSTS FOR REMOVAL OF
GRAFFITI
WHEREAS, the City of Azusa spends a significant amount of public funds and
other resources to remove graffiti; and
WHEREAS, in March 2006, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 06-02
which declared graffiti a public nuisance and amended Chapter 46 of the Azusa
Municipal Code and to add graffiti removal tools and provide for the recovery of City
funds expended on graffiti removal and abatement programs; and
WHEREAS, California Civil Code section 1714.1 provides for periodic increases
in the amount of damages that may be recovered from the parent of a minor whose willful
misconduct results in damage to property, including placement of graffiti; and
WHEREAS, since the passage of Azusa Ordinance No. 06-02, the California
Judicial Council has twice increased the amount of damages that may be recovered
regarding removal of graffiti, in accordance with the provisions of California Civil Code
section 1714.1; and
WHEREAS, to be consistent with the above described increases by the California
Judicial Council, the City Council now wishes to amend Chapter 46 of the Azusa
Municipal Code to increase the amount that the City may seek from parents and minors
in recovering the costs for removal of graffiti; and
WHEREAS, as a further deterrent the City wishes to amend the administrative
penalty amounts that are applicable to violations of this Section.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of
Azusa as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 46-238 of Division 2,Article VI, Chapter 46 of the Azusa
Municipal Code is hereby amended in its entirety and restated to read as follows:
"Sec.46-238. Additional remedies; recovery from minors and parent.
The following additional remedies may be pursued in addition to or as an
alternative to any other remedy authorized by this Division:
ORANGE\MMARTTNEZ\65730.2
a. Pursuant to California Civil Code section 1714.1(b), any parent or legal
guardian having custody or control of a minor who knowingly permits, or by insufficient
control, allows the minor to possess a graffiti implement without supervision thereof shall
be jointly and severally liable with such minor for any and all costs incurred in
connection with the removal of any graffiti caused by the minor, including all abatement
costs, attorney's fees and court costs resulting from the civil prosecution of any claim for
damages. The amount of the penalty shall not exceed thirty-seven thousand dollars
($37,000.00), pursuant to the amount set by the California Judicial Council in accordance
with California Civil Code section 1714.1(c). The City, including the Azusa Police
Department, shall be entitled to seek full cost recovery from the parent or legal guardian
of a minor found to be guilty of violating any provision of this Division.
b. Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 594, a person convicted for acts
of vandalism including defacing property with graffiti may be subject to additional
punishment imposed by the court. Such punishment imposed by the court may include
the following:
(1) If the amount of defacement, damage or destruction is four hundred
dollars ($400) or more, vandalism is punishable by imprisonment for up to one year, and/
or by a fine of up to ten thousand dollars ($10,000).
(2) If the amount of defacement, damage or destruction is less than four
hundred dollars ($400), vandalism is punishable by imprisonment for up to one year, or
by a fine of up to one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both the fine and imprisonment.
(3) If the amount of defacement, damage or destruction is less than four
hundred dollars ($400) and the defendant has been previously convicted of vandalism or
affixing graffiti, the vandalism is punishable by imprisonment of up to one year, or by a
fine up to five thousand dollars ($5,000), or by both the fine and imprisonment.
These remedies are in addition to any other costs incurred or recovered by the
City, and payment of these costs shall not in any way limit, preclude or restrict any other
right, remedy or action otherwise available to the City.
c. Pursuant to California Government Code, Section 38772, the City may
make the expense of the abatement of graffiti committed by minors: (1) a personal
obligation of the minor causing the graffiti nuisance and a personal obligation of the
parent or guardian having custody and/or control of the minor; and (2) a lien against the
property of the minor or a lien against the property of the parent or guardian having
custody and/or control of the minor. In accordance with California Government Code,
Section 38772(c), the County probation officer shall be requested to report the names and
addresses of the parent or guardian having custody and control of the responsible minor
to the city clerk.
-2-
ORAN GE\MMARTIN EZ\6 5730:2
(1) Should the City Manager or designee be required to abate any
graffiti committed by a minor the City Manager or designee shall track and account for
the abatement costs.
(2) The minor or parent or guardian having custody of the minor shall.
then be sent a Notice of the Abatement Costs and Proposed Lien Assessment Against
Property. The Notice of the Abatement Costs and Proposed Lien Assessment Against
Property shall be substantially similar to the Notice of Lien shown in section 46-246. If
the applicable party desires to protest the lien assessment, the party may do so by
requesting an informal hearing before the City Manager, (or his/her designee), in writing
within two (2) calendar days from receipt of the Notice of the Abatement Costs and
Proposed Lien Assessment Against Property. The City Manager, or designee, shall then
render a final decision on the assessment in writing within five(5)calendar days and mail
it by first class mail to the party. The affected party shall then have five (5) calendar days
to appeal the City Manager, or hearing officer's decision to the City Council. The appeal
shall be in writing.
(3) The proposed lien assessment shall be calendared for approval and
confirmation by the City`Council, whether an appeal has been filed or not.
(4) The Notice of the Abatement Costs and Proposed Lien Assessment
Against Property shall be served in the same manner as a summons in a civil action in
accordance with the requirements of the California Code of Civil Procedure. At a
minimum, the Notice of the Abatement Costs and Proposed Lien Assessment Against
Property shall be personally served on the minor and/or parent or guardian having
custody and control of the minor at least seven (7) calendar days prior to the city council
meeting. If after diligent search,the minor,parent or guardian, as the case may be, cannot
be found, the notice may then be served by: (i) posting a copy of the notice in a
conspicuous place upon the property owned by the applicable party for a period of ten
(10) days; and (ii)the notice shall be published in a newspaper by the city clerk pursuant
to Government Code Section 6062. Notice of the city council consideration of the
proposed adoption of the assessment shall be served by first class U.S. Mail.
(5) The City Council shall have the authority to adopt a resolution
confirming the lien assessment, which, following adoption, shall be recorded by the city
clerk in the county recorder's office in which the parcel of land is located pursuant to
Government Code Section 38773.2(c). From date of recording, the lien shall have the
force, effect and priority of a judgment lien. If the lien assessment is discharged,released,
or satisfied, either through payment or foreclosure, notice of the discharge shall be
recorded by the City. The lien assessment and the release of the lien shall be indexed in
the grantor-grantee index. A nuisance abatement lien may be satisfied through
foreclosure in an action brought by the City. The City may also recover from the minor,
parent or guardian of the minor any costs incurred regarding the processing and recording
of the lien in the event the County Recorder's Office imposes a fee upon the City for
processing and recording the lien, and shall provide notice to the minor, parent or
guardian of its foreclosure action to enforce the lien.
-3-
ORANGE\MMARTINEZ\65730.2
(6) Pursuant to Government Code Section 38773.2(d), the resolution
confirming the abatement lien shall specify the amount of the lien; the name of the
agency on whose behalf the lien is imposed; the date of the abatement order; the street
address, Iegal description, and assessor's parcel number; and the name and address of the
recorded owner of the parcel.
d. As an alternate lien abatement procedure to that procedure set forth in
Government Code Section 38773.2, the City Council also establishes the following
optional lien abatement procedure resulting in a special assessment against a parcel of
land owned by a property owner upon which graffiti has been placed and not removed or
a responsible party. This optional lien procedure is established pursuant to Government
Code Section 38773.6. To establish a lien abatement assessment against land, the same
procedural steps set forth in this section shall be followed. However, the Notice of Lien
Assessment shall include a statement specifying that the property may be sold after three
(3) years by the tax collector for unpaid delinquent taxes. The tax collector's power of
sale shall not be affected by the failure of the minor, parent or guardian to receive any
notice required by this Chapter. Further, when the City uses the alternate lien abatement
procedures contained in this section, attorney's fees shall be awarded to the prevailing
party, but only in circumstances when the City seeks recovery of its own attorney's fees.
The assessment against land shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner
as municipal taxes.
e. Pursuant to sections 1-24 through 1-34 of this Code, whenever a peace
officer charged with the enforcement of any provision of this chapter determines that a
violation of this chapter has occurred, the peace officer shall have the authority to issue
an administrative citation to any person responsible for the violation, or in the case of a
minor, to such minor's parent or legal guardian having custody or control of the minor.
(1) Whenever a peace officer charged with the enforcement of this
chapter deteumines that a violation of the article has occurred, the peace officer may issue
an administrative citation for each violation found to have occurred.
(2) Citations issued pursuant to this article shall carry administrative
fines of$250, for first violation, and$500 for second and subsequent violations.
(3) Violations of this chapter may also be cited as criminal
misdemeanor violations in accordance with chapter 1 of this Code."
SECTION 2. Section 46-240 of Division 2, Article VI, Chapter 46 of the Azusa
Municipal Code is hereby amended in its entirety and restated to read as follows:
"Sec. 46-240. Violation; penalties.
a. Any person in violation of this article, or in the case of a minor, such
minor's parent or Iegal guardian having custody or control of the minor, is subject to
-4-
ORAN GE\MMARTINEZ\65730.2
criminal citations and administrative fines and penalties as set forth in Division 2 of this
Article as described in this chapter.
b. In addition to the administrative and other penalties identified in this
chapter, violation of any of the provisions of this chapter is a misdemeanor. Any person
convicted of violation of any of the provisions of this chapter who is granted probation,
and any person who is found to be a person described in California Welfare and
Institutions Code Section 602 as a result of committing an offense set forth in this chapter
shall, in addition to any other penalties prescribed by law, make restitution to the victim
and, at the request of the city, may be required to provide community service within the
city for not less than 125 hours and not more than 250 hours.
c. In accordance with California Vehicle Code Section 13202.6, upon the
conviction of any person for the application of graffiti committed while the person was
13 years of age or older in violation of California Penal Code Section 594, the city may
request the court to suspend the person's driving privilege for one year.
If the person convicted does not yet have the privilege to drive, the city may
request that the court order the California Department of Motor Vehicles to delay issuing
the privilege to drive for one year subsequent to the time the person becomes legally
eligible to drive. For each successive offense, state law requires that the court suspend the
person's driving privilegefor those possessing a driver's license or delay the eligibility for
those not in possession of a driver's license at the time of their conviction for one
additional year.
c. Notwithstanding any penalty provision provided in this Code, any person
violating any such provision in this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor; provided,
that where the city attorney or city prosecutor (or in the case of a notice to appear, the
citing official) determines that such action would be in the interests of justice, the city
attorney or city prosecutor may prosecute any such offense as an infraction. In the event a
notice to appear is prepared as a misdemeanor, the city attorney or city prosecutor may
nonetheless prosecute any such offense as an infraction. Each and every day that a
violation of this chapter is committed shall be deemed a separate offense and shall be
punishable as herein provided.
d. Nothing in this chapter shall prevent the city initiating civil, criminal or
other legal or equitable proceedings against any person violating this division as an
alternative or in addition to the proceedings set forth in the administrative fine and
penalty provisions of this Code."
SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or
portion of this Chapter is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the
decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity
of the remaining portions of this Chapter.
-5-
oRANGE\MMARTINEZ\65730.2
SECTION 4. The City Council finds that based on the entire record before it,
including all written and oral evidence presented, the City Council finds the proposed
Ordinance is exempt from the requirement of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA)pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
ordinance, causing it to be posted as required by law, and it shall be effective (30) days
after its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 15th day of March, 2010.
Joseph R. Rocha, Mayor
ATTEST:
Vera Mendoza, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Best Best&Krieger LLP, City Attorney
-6-
ORANGE\MMARTINEZ\65730.2