COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
STATEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
REGULAR MEETING - PLANNING AND LAND USE MATTERS
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2005, 9:00 AM
Board of Supervisors North Chamber
1600 Pacific Highway, Room 310, San Diego, California
MORNING SESSION: - Meeting was called to order at 9:04 a.m.
Present: Supervisors Pam Slater-Price, Chairwoman; Bill Horn, Vice-Chairman; Greg Cox; Dianne Jacob; Ron Roberts; also Thomas J. Pastuszka, Clerk.
Board of Supervisors’ Agenda Items
|1. |CONTINUED NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING: |
| |HAUGH TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP; TPM 20610RPL1, LOG NO. 01-02-024, FALLBROOK COMMUNITY PLAN |
| |(CARRYOVER FROM 10/27/04, AGENDA NO. 2) |
|2. |NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING: |
| |4S RANCH PLANNING AREA 40; ZONE RECLASSIFICATION R04-005, SAN DIEGUITO COMMUNITY PLAN AREA |
|3. |SET HEARING FOR 3/23/05 |
| |VALLEY CENTER - ACQUISITION OF 154.64 ACRES (BROWN) FOR INCLUSION IN THE HELLHOLE CANYON OPEN SPACE PRESERVE |
| |[FUNDING SOURCE(S): ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT AND MITIGATION PROGRAM GRANT FUNDS; HABITAT CONSERVATION FUND GRANT FUNDS; COUNTY |
| |MULTIPLE SPECIES CONSERVATION PLAN/OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION GENERAL FUNDS] |
| |(4 VOTES) |
|4. |ESTABLISHMENT OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO FALLBROOK COMMUNITY CENTER PARK AND RAINBOW PARK, FALLBROOK |
| |[FUNDING SOURCE(S): FALLBROOK AREA PARK LAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE FUNDS] |
| |(4 VOTES) |
|5. |ADVERTISE AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF MISSION ROAD, PHASE II, IMPROVEMENTS IN FALLBROOK |
| |(4 VOTES) |
|6. |ADVERTISE AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF KENWOOD DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS IN SPRING VALLEY |
| |[FUNDING SOURCE(S): GAS TAX] |
| |(CARRYOVER FROM 1/5/05, AGENDA NO. 4) |
| |(4 VOTES) |
|7. |NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING: |
| |FORMATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT FOR PARKSIDE STREET IN LAKESIDE |
|8. |AUTHORIZATION AND RATIFICATION OF GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, WEIGHTS & MEASURES |
| |[FUNDING SOURCE(S): FISH AND WILDLIFE ADVISORY COMMISSION] |
|9. |TRAFFIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS |
|10. |APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES INC. TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN OF THREE ROUNDABOUTS IN |
| |RANCHO SANTA FE |
|11. |APPROVAL OF CONSULTANT AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE BURNSITE AND LANDFILL ENGINEERING SERVICES ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS |
|12. |AGREEMENTS WITH THREE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING FIRMS TO PROVIDE SERVICES ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS |
|13. |ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: |
| |COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TRACT NO. 4995-1: EXTEND LIEN CONTRACT AND APPROVE FIRST AMENDMENT FOR IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED IN MOUNTAIN EMPIRE |
| |SUBREGIONAL PLAN AREA |
|14. |ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: |
| |COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TRACT NO. 5229-2: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP AND SECURED AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED IN SAN|
| |DIEGUITO COMMUNITY PLAN AREA |
| |(RELATES TO FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT AGENDA ITEM NO. 1) |
|15. |ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: |
| |COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TRACT NO. 5108-4: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP AND JOINT AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS IN LAKESIDE |
| |COMMUNITY PLAN AREA |
|16. |ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: |
| |COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TRACT NO. 5154-1: APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO JOINT AGREEMENT (SUBSTITUTION OF PARTIES, EXTENSION OF TIME) LOCATED |
| |IN JAMUL-DULZURA |
|17. |ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: |
| |COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TRACT NO. 5334-1: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP AND SECURED AGREEMENTS FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED IN |
| |SAN DIEGUITO COMMUNITY PLAN AREA |
|18. |ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: |
| |COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TRACT NO. 5291-1: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP AND SECURED AGREEMENTS FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED IN |
| |SAN DIEGUITO COMMUNITY PLAN AREA |
|19. |VENDOR SELECTION AND FINANCING OF INTEGRATED PROPERTY TAX SYSTEM |
| |(4 VOTES) |
| |(CARRYOVER FROM 2/8/05 (16)) |
|20. |TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES CONTRACT RE-COMPETITION |
| |(Carryover from 2/8/05 (17)) |
|21. |VEHICLE LICENSE FEE (VLF) GAP LOAN FINANCING PROGRAM |
| |(4 VOTES) |
| |(CARRYOVER FROM 2/8/05 (18)) |
|22. |CLOSED SESSION |
| |(CARRYOVER FROM 2/8/05 (24)) |
|1. |SUBJECT: |CONTINUED NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING: |
| | |HAUGH TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP; TPM 20610RPL1, LOG NO. 01-02-024, FALLBROOK COMMUNITY PLAN (DISTRICT: 5) |
| | |(CARRYOVER FROM 10/27/04, AGENDA NO. 2) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |On October 27, 2004 (2), the Board of Supervisors continued the item until February 9, 2005 to allow the applicant time to work with the |
| |Department to resolve the project issues related to an inadequate open space preserve design. |
| |This is an appeal filed by the applicant of the Planning and Environmental Review Board’s (PERB) decision to deny the applicant’s appeal of|
| |the Director’s decision to adopt a Notice of Decision denying TPM 20610RPL1. The project is a minor subdivision of 8.74 gross acres that |
| |proposes 4 parcels ranging in size from 2.0 to 2.17 net acres. The project is subject to the (17) Estate Residential Land Use Designation |
| |(1 dwelling unit per 2 or 4 acres) of the General Plan and is zoned A70, Limited Agriculture Use Regulation which requires a minimum net |
| |parcel size of 2 acres. The project is located on the east side of Gird Road, approximately 0.5 miles north of the intersection of Highway|
| |76 and Gird Road, within the Fallbrook Community Plan (APN 124-340-48). |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |N/A |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER: |
| |Dismiss the appeal, remand TPM 20610RPL1 to the Department of Planning and Land Use (DPLU) for continued processing, and direct the |
| |applicant to submit a replacement Tentative Parcel Map. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Horn, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors closed the Hearing and took action as recommended. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|2. |SUBJECT: |NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING: |
| | |4S RANCH PLANNING AREA 40; ZONE RECLASSIFICATION R04-005, SAN DIEGUITO COMMUNITY PLAN AREA (DISTRICT: 5) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |This is a request for a Zone Reclassification to change the Height Designator from “G” (35 feet, 2 stories) to “H” (35 feet, 3 stories). |
| |The Rezone is for a one-lot condominium subdivision map with 206 condominium units in Neighborhood 3, Area 3.2 of the 4S Ranch Specific |
| |Plan. The subject property is 11.84 acres and located on the northeast side with the intersection of future Camino San Thomas and 4S Ranch|
| |Parkway, approximately 650 feet north of Rancho Bernardo Road. The site is subject to the RV18, Variable Residential Use Regulations. The|
| |RV18 Use Regulations allow a variety of residential uses with a density of 18 dwelling units per acre. The parcel is in the Current Urban |
| |Development Area of the General Plan, (21) Specific Plan Area Land Use Designation and is located in the San Dieguito Community Plan Area. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |None. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |PLANNING COMMISSION: |
| |It is hereby found that the proposed project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as specified under Section |
| |15182 of the State CEQA Guidelines for the reasons detailed in the Notice of Exemption Form dated November 8, 2004 on file with DPLU as |
| |Environmental Review Number 95-08-001ii; |
| |It is hereby found that the Board of Supervisors has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final Environmental Impact |
| |Report (EIR) dated November 4, 1998 on file with DPLU as Environmental Review Number 95-08-001 prior to making its decision on the project;|
| |The “Environmental Review Update Checklist Form for Projects with a Previously Approved Environmental Document“ dated November 8, 2004 on |
| |file with DPLU as Environmental Review Number 95-08-001ii including CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, 15163, and 15164 Findings for |
| |Determining the Appropriate Environmental Documentation to be completed when there is a previously certified EIR is hereby adopted; |
| |Adopt the attached Form of Ordinance (Attachment B): |
| |“AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY (R04-005)” |
| |DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND LAND USE: |
| |The Department concurs with the Planning Commission recommendations. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Horn, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors closed the Hearing and took action as recommended, |
| |adopting Ordinance No. 9706 (N.S.) entitled: AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY IN 4S RANCH PLANNING AREA|
| |40 (R04-005). |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
|3. |SUBJECT: |SET HEARING FOR 3/23/05 |
| | |VALLEY CENTER - ACQUISITION OF 154.64 ACRES (BROWN) FOR INCLUSION IN THE HELLHOLE CANYON OPEN SPACE PRESERVE |
| | |(DISTRICT: 5) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |On April 9, 2003 (11), the Board of Supervisors accepted a $100,000 grant from the Habitat Conservation Fund for land acquisition for the |
| |Hellhole Canyon Open Space Preserve in Valley Center. In November 2003, the Friends of Hellhole Canyon, a non-profit corporation, was |
| |awarded an Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program Grant of $191,500 to supplement the acquisition of a 154.64-acre parcel, which |
| |is surrounded on three sides by the County’s Hellhole Canyon Open Space Preserve. On December 10, 2003 (7), the Board adopted a resolution|
| |authorizing the Department of Parks and Recreation to enter into an agreement with the State of California to accept the Environmental |
| |Enhancement and Mitigation Program Grant funds from the Friends of Hellhole Canyon. With the funding now in place, the County is ready to |
| |proceed with the acquisition. |
| |The Board is requested to take the necessary actions to purchase the 154.64-acre property, identified as Assessor Parcel Number 189-080-02 |
| |from Mary Anne Peters Brown for $413,025 (Thomas Guide, Page 1091-F2, G2). If acquired, this property will become part of the Hellhole |
| |Canyon Open Space Preserve. In addition, the requested action includes the appropriation of $11,756 in additional Environmental |
| |Enhancement and Mitigation Program grant funds in the Capital Outlay Fund to supplement the project. These funds represent an additional |
| |award from the grant that was received by the Friends group in 2004 for this project. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |Should the Board approve the purchase of the property for $413,025 on March 23, 2005, funds for the purchase will be provided, in part, by |
| |existing budgeted funds available in Capital Project 1000021 – North County Open Space Acquisitions. In addition, grant funds of $11,756 |
| |are being appropriated in this action, and the Friends of Hellhole Canyon are contributing $18,600 to the purchase, which will be credited |
| |to the County in escrow. The funding sources are Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program grant funds of $203,256 ($191,500 |
| |existing budgeted grant and $11,756 being appropriated in this action); Habitat Conservation Fund grant funds of $100,000; County Multiple |
| |Species Conservation Plan/Open Space Acquisition General Funds of $100,000, which will provide the 100 percent (100%) match required by the|
| |Habitat Conservation Fund grant; and the $18,600 being contributed in escrow by the Friends group, which totals $421,856 for the purchase. |
| |If approved, there will be a current year cost of $413,025 for the acquisition, no annual cost, and the proposal will require no additional|
| |staff years. The remaining funds in Capital Project 1000021 will be used for staff costs related to the acquisition, and title and escrow |
| |fees. Management of the acquired land will be funded with existing budgeted resources in the Department of Parks and Recreation. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Direct the Clerk of the Board to publish the required Notice of Intention to Purchase in accordance with Government Code sections 25350 and|
| |6063. |
| |Establish appropriations of $11,756 in the Capital Outlay Fund for Capital Project 1000021 – North County Open Space Acquisitions, based on|
| |awarded Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program grant funds. (4 VOTES) |
| |Set this matter for March 23, 2005, at which time the Board of Supervisors may approve the purchase of Assessor Parcel Number 189-080-02 |
| |from Mary Anne Peters Brown for $413,025. |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| |At the March 23, 2005 Public Hearing: |
| |Find, in accordance with Section 15325 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, that the purchase of Assessor Parcel |
| |Number 189-080-02 is categorically exempt from the provisions of the guidelines as it involves the transfer of ownership of land to |
| |preserve open space and natural habitat. |
| |Approve the Real Property Contract for the purchase of Assessor Parcel Number 189-080-02 from Mary Ann Peters Brown for $413,025, and |
| |direct the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors to execute two originals of the contract. |
| |Approve the Supplemental Closing Instructions and direct the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors to execute two originals of this contract. |
| |Authorize the Director of the Department of General Services, or designee, to execute all escrow and related documents necessary to |
| |complete the purchase. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent, setting |
| |Hearing for March 23, 2005 at 9:00 a.m. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
|4. |SUBJECT: |ESTABLISHMENT OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO FALLBROOK COMMUNITY CENTER PARK AND RAINBOW PARK, FALLBROOK |
| | |(DISTRICT: 5) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |On December 3, 2003 (11), the Board of Supervisors approved the advertisement to bid and award a construction contract for the junior |
| |playground and park improvements project at Fallbrook Community Center Park. This project is nearing completion, and is the second phase |
| |of the playground equipment replacement that began in 2002 with the replacement of the tot lot equipment adjacent to the facility’s Day |
| |Care Center. |
| |On November 18, 2004, the Fallbrook County Service Area 81 Advisory Board recommended $35,000 in Park Land Dedication Ordinance funds for |
| |the removal and replacement of an existing, deteriorated driveway that is located adjacent to the junior playground. The driveway was in |
| |disrepair, and the Advisory Board deemed it appropriate to include this improvement as a complement to the playground projects. |
| |On October 31, 2001 (8), the Board approved the advertisement to bid and award a construction contract for development of a 5-acre parcel |
| |in the community of Rainbow, also in the Fallbrook Local Park Planning Area. The project was completed in June 2003 and is used |
| |extensively by the community. On November 18, 2004, the Fallbrook County Service Area 81 Advisory Board recommended $25,000 of Park Land |
| |Dedication Ordinance funds to modify and increase the capacity of the holding tanks for the restroom building at Rainbow Park and to pay |
| |for converting a portion of the masonry trash enclosure at the park into a storage shed. The expansion of the restroom holding tanks will |
| |reduce the current number of service calls and related costs to empty the tanks because of their limited holding capacity. The storage |
| |shed conversion is intended to provide storage for equipment and materials for use at the park. |
| |The requested actions will approve the appropriation of Fallbrook area Park Land Dedication Ordinance funds of $35,000 to fund the driveway|
| |project at Fallbrook Community Center Park and $25,000 to fund the restroom and storage shed projects at Rainbow Park. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |Funds for this request are not budgeted. The funding source is Fallbrook area Park Land Dedication Ordinance funds. If approved, this |
| |request will result in $60,000 current year cost, no annual costs, and will require the addition of no staff years. Maintenance of the |
| |newly constructed facilities will be the responsibility of Fallbrook County Service Area 81. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Find in accordance with section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines that the Fallbrook Community Center |
| |Park driveway project and the Rainbow Park restroom and storage shed projects are categorically exempt from CEQA. |
| |Establish appropriations of $60,000 in the Fallbrook area Park Land Dedication Ordinance (PLDO), Operating Transfer Out, for the Fallbrook |
| |Community Center Park Driveway project ($35,000), and the Rainbow Park Restroom and Storage Shed projects ($25,000), based on Fund Balance |
| |available in the Fallbrook Area PLDO fund. (4 VOTES) |
| |Establish appropriations of $60,000 in the Capital Outlay Fund for Capital Project 1000003 – Fallbrook Community Center Park Improvements |
| |($35,000), and Capital Project 1000195 – Rainbow Park Improvements ($25,000), based on an Operating Transfer from the Fallbrook area PLDO |
| |fund. (4 VOTES) |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|5. |SUBJECT: |ADVERTISE AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF MISSION ROAD, PHASE II, IMPROVEMENTS IN FALLBROOK (DISTRICT: 5)|
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |The proposed project consists of widening Mission Road between Pepper Tree Lane and Main Avenue in Fallbrook (Thomas Guide page 1027, F |
| |4-5) to provide four traffic lanes, a center two-way left turn lane, curb, gutter, sidewalk, reconstruction of existing pavement, utility |
| |undergrounding, drainage improvements and parking lane on east side. Design plans have been completed and the project is ready for |
| |construction. Construction is scheduled to commence May 2005 and will take about one year to complete. |
| |The project requires acquisition of 16 permanent road easements from 14 property owners. To date, nine easements have been obtained, and |
| |negotiations for the remaining easements continue with the property owners. On March 24, 2004 (7), the Board adopted a Resolution of |
| |Necessity authorizing condemnation for the remaining easements. Eminent domain suits, which include an order of possession, have been filed|
| |with the Court. No appeals of the Orders of Possession were received from the property owners during the appeal period. The Real Estate |
| |Services Division is conducting negotiations with the remaining property owners in an attempt to reach agreements prior to court |
| |intervention. |
| |On December 15, 2004 (5), the Board amended the TransNet Local Streets and Road Program to provide additional $3,098,000 for the Mission |
| |Road Project of which $1,354,291 was for right of way acquisition. |
| |This is a request to 1) appropriate unanticipated revenue from TransNet and utility fair share reimbursements; 2) approve advertisement and|
| |subsequent award, to the lowest responsible bidder, of a contract to construct Mission Road, Phase II, Improvements; and 3) approve |
| |execution, upon receipt, of Utility Undergrounding Agreements. Upon Board approval, the Department of Purchasing and Contracting will |
| |advertise the project and award a contract for construction of the project. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |Funds for this project are budgeted in the Department of Public Works FY 2004-5 Detailed Work Program in the amount of $2,715,240 for |
| |construction. This project is identified as part of County’s Regional Transportation Improvement Program. Funding source is TransNet. |
| |Funding sources of additional appropriations are unanticipated revenue from TransNet ($1,354,291), San Diego Gas and Electric ($1,042,542),|
| |SBC Pacific Bell Telephone Company ($46,964), and Adelphia Communications ($39,535). Establishment of appropriations based on these sources|
| |of unanticipated revenue are required and included as part of this request. If approved, this request will result in current year cost of |
| |$5,198,572, no annual costs, and no additional staff years required. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Find that there are no changes in the project or in circumstances under which it is undertaken which involve significant new environmental |
| |impacts, which were not considered in the Negative Declaration previously adopted on March 24, 2004 (7), and that no new information of |
| |substantial importance has become available since the Negative Declaration was prepared. |
| |Establish additional appropriations of $1,354,291 in the Department of Public Works Detailed Work Program, for the Mission Road, Phase II, |
| |Improvements Project, based on unanticipated revenue from TransNet funds. (4 VOTES) |
| |Establish appropriations of $1,129,041 in the Department of Public Works Detailed Work Program, for the Mission Road, Phase II, |
| |Improvements Project, based on unanticipated revenue from San Diego Gas and Electric ($1,042,542), SBC Pacific Bell Telephone Company |
| |($46,964) and Adelphia Communications ($39,535). (4 VOTES) |
| |Authorize the Director, Department of Purchasing and Contracting, to take any action authorized by Section 401, et seq. of the |
| |Administrative Code with respect to contracting for subject public works project. |
| | |
| |Designate the Director, Department of Public Works, as the County Officer responsible for administering the construction contract, in |
| |accordance with Board Policy F-41, Public Works Construction Contracts. |
| |Approve and authorize the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors to execute, upon receipt, Utility Undergrounding Agreements between the County |
| |of San Diego and each of the following utility companies: San Diego Gas and Electric/Sempra Energy, three originals; SBC Pacific Bell |
| |Telephone Company, one original; and Adelphia Communications, one original. |
| |Approve and authorize the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors to execute, upon receipt, Utility Cost Agreements between the County of San |
| |Diego and each of the following utilities: Fallbrook Public Utility District and Pacific Bell Telephone Company. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|6. |SUBJECT: |ADVERTISE AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF KENWOOD DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS IN SPRING VALLEY (DISTRICT: 2) |
| | |(CARRYOVER FROM 1/5/05, AGENDA NO. 4) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |On January 5, 2005 (4) the Board of Supervisors continued this item to February 9, 2005. |
| |This project involves construction of sidewalk and drainage improvements along Kenwood Drive in Spring Valley, from Bancroft Drive to Helix|
| |Street (Thomas Guide: Page 1271-B5). It also includes improvements to the existing traffic signal at the intersection of Kenwood Drive |
| |and Bancroft Drive. The project will improve pedestrian access and safety, and will improve traffic circulation. |
| |This is a request to approve advertisement and subsequent award, to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, of a contract to |
| |construct Kenwood Drive Improvements in Spring Valley. Upon Board approval, Department of Purchasing and Contracting will advertise and |
| |subsequently award a contract for construction, scheduled to commence in Spring 2005. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |This project is included in the Department of Public Works Fiscal Year 2004-05 Detailed Work Program. The amount budgeted is $60,000. The |
| |funding source is Gas Tax. This request adds $780,000 in appropriations from fund balance available in the Road Fund, and transfers Gas Tax|
| |appropriations of $229,000 from the Gird Road Bridge project budget. This project will result in current year cost of $1,069,000, no |
| |subsequent year cost, and will require no additional staff years. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Find that the proposed project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as specified under Section 15301 of the State|
| |CEQA Guidelines. |
| |Establish appropriations of $780,000 in the Department of Public Works Detailed Work Program for Kenwood Drive Improvements project based |
| |on fund balance available in the Road Fund. (4 VOTES) |
| |Transfer appropriations of $229,000 within the Department of Public Works Detailed Work Program from Gird Road Bridge project to Kenwood |
| |Drive Improvements project. |
| |Authorize the Director, Department of Purchasing and Contracting, to take any action authorized by Section 401, et seq. of the |
| |Administrative Code with respect to contracting for subject public works project. |
| |Designate the Director, Department of Public Works, as the County Officer responsible for administering the construction contract, in |
| |accordance with Board Policy F-41, Public Works Construction Contracts. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors withdrew this item at the request of the Chief |
| |Administrative Officer. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|7. |SUBJECT: |NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING: |
| | |FORMATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT FOR PARKSIDE STREET IN LAKESIDE (DISTRICT: 2) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |The purpose of the Underground Utility District program is to underground overhead utilities to benefit communities. Board Policy J-17, |
| |Undergrounding of Existing Overhead Utility Facilities, establishes a policy and procedure for district formation and program |
| |administration. |
| |Establishing an Underground Utility District is a two-step process. The first step is to adopt a resolution of intention to set a date for|
| |a public hearing to form a new district. The Board took this action on January 12, 2005 (6). The proposed action today, the second step |
| |in the process, will adopt an ordinance forming a district at the close of the public hearing. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |Utility companies underground their overhead lines at their own expense. The local agency forms and administers the underground utility |
| |district. Funds for formation and administration of the proposed utility district are budgeted in Department of Public Works General Fund.|
| |If approved, this request will result in a $2,000 current year cost, and $1,000 subsequent year cost. No additional staff years will be |
| |required. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Find that the proposed project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as specified under Section 15301 of the State|
| |CEQA Guidelines because it consists of undergrounding existing public utilities. |
| |At the close of the public hearing, adopt the following Ordinance: |
| |AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 89.300 TO THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY CODE OF REGULATORY ORDINANCES TO FORM AN UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT FOR |
| |PARKSIDE STREET, UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 99. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors closed the Hearing and took action as recommended, on|
| |Consent, adopting Ordinance No. 9707 (N.S.) entitled: AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 89.300 TO THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY CODE OF REGULATORY |
| |ORDINANCES TO FORM AN UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT ON PARKSIDE STREET UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 99. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|8. |SUBJECT: |AUTHORIZATION AND RATIFICATION OF GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, WEIGHTS & MEASURES |
| | |(DISTRICT: ALL) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |This is a request to ratify the submission and to authorize the acceptance of a $16,400 grant funded by the Fish and Wildlife Advisory |
| |Commission. The grant will provide funding for the County’s Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory and will be used to detect West Nile Virus|
| |and other diseases in animals in San Diego County. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |Funds for this request are not budgeted. The funding source is the Fish and Wildlife Advisory Commission. If approved, this request will |
| |result in $16,400 current year costs and revenue and will require the addition of no staff years. There is no local match for this grant. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Waive Board Policy B-29, which requires that Board approval be given in advance of application for funds. |
| |Ratify the previously submitted application for a Fish and Wildlife Advisory Commission grant and authorize acceptance of the $16,400 grant|
| |awarded by the Fish and Wildlife Commission. |
| | |
| |Authorize the Department of Agriculture, Weights and Measures to apply for new grant funding in the amount of $25,000.00 from the Fish and |
| |Wildlife Advisory Commission in Fiscal Year 2005-06 for equipment and technology to enhance the capabilities of the Animal Disease and |
| |Diagnostic Laboratory to detect West Nile Virus and other dangerous diseases in animals. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|9. |SUBJECT: |TRAFFIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS (DISTRICT: 2 & 5) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |The Traffic Advisory Committee (TAC) meets every six weeks to review proposed changes or additions to regulatory traffic controls. |
| |Fourteen items were on the Committee's December 3, 2004, meeting agenda. The Committee recommends your action on all fourteen items. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |Funds for this proposal are budgeted in the Department of Public Works Road Fund. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |TRAFFIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE |
| |Consider and file report including the following recommendations: |
| |District 2 |
| |2-A. Saint George Street and Gillispie Drive, SPRING VALLEY-Do not establish an all-way stop control. |
| |2-B. Leland Street and Saint George Street, SPRING VALLEY-Do not establish any regulatory controls. |
| |2-C. Proctor Valley Road from SR-94 easterly to a point 1600 feet north of Calle Bueno Ganar, JAMUL-Direct the existing 40 MPH speed limit |
| |posting be recertified for the continued use of radar for speed enforcement. |
| |2-D. Jamul Drive from Steele Canyon Road easterly to Lyons Valley Road, JAMUL-Direct the existing 45 MPH speed limit posting be recertified|
| |for the continued use of radar for speed enforcement. |
| |2-E. Winter Gardens Boulevard and Sapota Drive, LAKESIDE-Do not place this intersection on the County’s Traffic Signal Priority List. |
| |2-F1. Olde Highway 80, north side, from a point 80 feet west of the west line of Oak Creek Road westerly 140 feet, FLINN SPRINGS-Establish|
| |a parking prohibition from 7 PM to 7 AM. |
| | |
| |2-F2. San Vicente Road from the south line of Eleventh Street southerly to the north line of Hanson Lane, RAMONA-Direct the existing 50 MPH|
| |speed limit posting be recertified for the continued use of radar for speed enforcement. |
| |2-F3. Rios Canyon Road, west side, from the south line of Kelli Lane southerly 40 feet, FLINN SPRINGS-Establish a parking prohibition. |
| |2-F4. State Route 94, west side, from the north line of Maxfield Road northerly 200 feet, JAMUL-Establish a no parking tow-away zone. |
| |2-F5. State Route 94, west side, from the north line of Singer Lane northerly 800 feet, RANCHO SAN DIEGO-Establish a parking prohibition. |
| |2-F6. Kempton Street, east side, from a point 140 feet north of the north line of Lakeview Avenue northerly 40 feet, SPRING |
| |VALLEY-Establish a parking prohibition. |
| |District 5 |
| |5-A. Burma Road and Olive Hill Road, FALLBROOK-Retain the existing yield control for northbound traffic on Olive Hill Road approaching |
| |Burma Road. |
| |5-B1. Lawrence Welk Drive, both sides, from a point 1,320 feet west of the west line of Champagne Boulevard easterly to a point 1,320 feet |
| |east of the east line of Champagne Boulevard (a distance of 2,700 feet), ESCONDIDO-Establish a parking prohibition from 11 PM to 6 AM. |
| |5-B2. El Camino del Norte, north side, from the west line of Via Roswitha westerly 330 feet, RANCHO SANTA FE-Extend an existing parking |
| |prohibition an additional 140 feet. |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Find that the proposed project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as specified under Section 15301 of the State|
| |CEQA Guidelines. |
| |Concur with Traffic Advisory Committee's recommendations. |
| |Adopt, amend and/or delete the following Resolutions. |
| |No. 301 (Items 2-F1, 2-F3, 2-F5, 2F6, 5-B1and 5-B2) |
| |No. 667 (Item 2-F4) |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent, adopting the |
| |following Resolutions: |
| |Resolution No. 05-14 entitled: TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 2942: RESOLUTION AMENDING TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 301 RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT |
| |OF NO STANDING OR PARKING ZONES IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. |
| |Resolution No. 05-15 entitled: TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 2943: RESOLUTION AMENDING TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 301 RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT |
| |OF NO STANDING OR PARKING ZONES IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. |
| | |
| |Resolution No. 05-16 entitled: TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 2944: RESOLUTION AMENDING TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 301 RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT |
| |OF NO STANDING OR PARKING ZONES IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. |
| |Resolution No. 05-17 entitled: TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 2945: RESOLUTION AMENDING TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 301 RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT |
| |OF NO STANDING OR PARKING ZONES IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. |
| |Resolution No. 05-18 entitled: TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 2946: RESOLUTION AMENDING TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 301 RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT |
| |OF NO STANDING OR PARKING ZONES IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. |
| |Resolution No. 05-19 entitled: TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 2947: RESOLUTION AMENDING TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 301 RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT |
| |OF NO STANDING OR PARKING ZONES IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. |
| |Resolution No. 05-20 entitled: TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 2948: RESOLUTION AMENDING TRAFFIC RESOLUTION NO. 301 RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT |
| |OF NO STANDING OR PARKING ZONES IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|10. |SUBJECT: |APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES INC. TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN OF THREE |
| | |ROUNDABOUTS IN RANCHO SANTA FE (DISTRICT: 5) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |On September 18, 2002 (26), the Board of Supervisors directed Staff to begin discussions with Rancho Santa Fe Association and concerned |
| |stakeholders to explore options available for traffic control and intersection improvements at five intersections in Rancho Santa Fe and |
| |Fairbanks Ranch areas. |
| |On October 26, 2004 (13), the Board of Supervisors authorized funding for the design of three roundabouts in Rancho Santa Fe area (Thomas |
| |Guide page 1168: E-3, F-1, F-2). Roundabout projects are unique, and require design consultants with extensive expertise and experience. |
| |Public Agencies in California must use a Qualifications Based Selection method to contract for consultant services. This method requires |
| |that such services be engaged based on demonstrated competence and qualifications for types of services to be performed at a fair and |
| |reasonable cost. Board Policy F-40, Procuring Architectural, Engineering and Related Professional Services, describes the County’s method |
| |for Qualifications Based Selection. In accordance with the policy, qualified consultants from the City/County/Port of San Diego Consultant|
| |Rotation List were invited to interview for the required engineering services. Following review of qualifications and interviews, David |
| |Evans & Associates, Inc. from Ontario, California was selected as the most qualified. |
| |This is a request for approval of an agreement with David Evans & Associates, Inc. to provide design engineering services for three |
| |roundabouts on the Paseo Delicias corridor between El Camino del Norte (east) and La Granada (west), for compensation not to exceed |
| |$190,000. The contract will terminate February 28, 2007, or when consultant services are no longer needed, whichever comes first. |
| |Agreement authorizes the Director, Department of Public Works to extend the termination date if necessary to complete project services and |
| |to adjust allowable billing rates on an annual basis to mutually agreed upon fair and reasonable rates. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |Funds for this action are budgeted in the Fiscal Year 2004-05 Department of Public Works General Fund. Funding sources are funding from |
| |the Rancho Santa Fe Association ($125,000) and District 5, Community Projects Budget ($65,000). If approved, this request will result in|
| |a current year cost of $190,000, no annual costs and will require no additional staff years. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Find that the proposed action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as specified under Section 15060(c)(3) of the |
| |State CEQA Guidelines because it is not a project as defined by Section 15378 of the Guidelines. |
| |Find that the services can be provided more economically and efficiently by the proposed independent contractor than by persons employed in|
| |the Classified Service. |
| |Approve and authorize the Director, Department of Public Works, to execute an agreement with David Evans & Associates, Inc. to provide |
| |engineering services for the design of three roundabouts in Rancho Santa Fe for compensation not to exceed $190,000, terminating on |
| |February 28, 2007. |
| |Designate the Director, Department of Public Works, as County Officer responsible for administering the contract. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|11. |SUBJECT: |APPROVAL OF CONSULTANT AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE BURNSITE AND LANDFILL ENGINEERING SERVICES ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS |
| | |(DISTRICT: ALL) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |The County is responsible for monitoring its inactive landfills and burnsites. The County has an immediate need for a consultant to prepare|
| |landfill closure and post-closure maintenance plans; and to prepare construction plans, specifications, and cost estimates for landfill |
| |maintenance projects. Services needed include periodic waste characterization studies to determine the presence of materials such as lead |
| |and other metals of concern that could pose a health risk under various exposure conditions. Waste characterization studies require |
| |development of investigation strategies, site reconnaissance of surface conditions and test sampling to determine composition of surface |
| |soils. At burnsites, the subsurface extent and composition of the site must also be studied. Consultants with technical expertise in this |
| |type of testing and evaluation are needed to perform these services. |
| |Public agencies in California must use a qualifications based selection method to contract for consultant services. This method requires |
| |such services be engaged based on demonstrated competence and qualifications for types of services to be performed at a fair and reasonable|
| |cost. Board Policy F-40, Procuring Architectural, Engineering and Related Professional Services, describes the County’s method for |
| |qualifications based selection. In accordance with provisions of the policy, countywide solicitations were conducted. Following review of |
| |statements of qualifications from respondent firms, and interviews with those firms, San Diego-based GeoSyntec Consultants, Inc. |
| |(GeoSyntec) was selected as most qualified to perform required services for this project. |
| |This is a request for approval of an agreement with GeoSyntec to provide Burnsite and Landfill Engineering Services on an as-needed basis |
| |for compensation not to exceed $500,000. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |Funds for this request are in the Fiscal Year 2004-05 Department of Public Works Landfill Management Program budget. Funding source is the |
| |Solid Waste Environmental Trust Fund. If approved, this request will result in $500,000 current year costs, no annual cost and will require|
| |no additional staff years. There will be no impact to the General Fund. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Find proposed action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as specified under Section 15060(c)(3) of the State |
| |CEQA Guidelines because it is not a project as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15378. |
| |Find that services can be provided more economically and efficiently by the proposed independent contractor than by persons employed in the|
| |Classified Service. |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| |Approve and authorize the Director, Department of Public Works to execute three originals of an agreement with GeoSyntec to provide |
| |Burnsite and Landfill Engineering Services on an as-needed basis for compensation not to exceed $500,000. Agreement will terminate February|
| |9, 2009, or when funds are exhausted or services are no longer required, whichever occurs first, with option to extend termination date by |
| |written mutual agreement if original funding remains available. |
| |Designate the Director, Department of Public Works as County Officer responsible for administering the contract. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|12. |SUBJECT: |AGREEMENTS WITH THREE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING FIRMS TO PROVIDE SERVICES ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS (DISTRICT: ALL) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |The Department of Public Works has a need for consultant services on an immediate and temporary basis for environmental studies. These |
| |consultants may also be used for environmental studies for other County departments. Use of these consultants will enhance the Department’s|
| |ability to complete environmental reviews and mitigation requirements in a timely manner. |
| |Three consultant firms, RECON Environmental, Inc.; Jones & Stokes Associates; and Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. were selected in |
| |accordance with provisions of Board Policy F-40, Procuring Architectural, Engineering and Related Professional Services. Public agencies |
| |in California must use a Qualifications Based Selection method to contract for architectural, engineering, environmental and other |
| |professional services. This method requires such services be engaged on basis of demonstrated competence and qualifications for the types |
| |of services to be performed at a fair and reasonable cost. Board Policy F-40 describes the County’s method for Qualifications Based |
| |Selection. In accordance with provisions of the policy, the selection committee interviewed consultant firms from the Joint |
| |County/City/Port of San Diego consultant list for Environmental Services. The firms selected were ranked highest among firms interviewed |
| |for this project. |
| |This is a request to approve three separate agreements with individual firms to provide environmental services for fees not to exceed |
| |$250,000 each, with these agreements ending January 31, 2008, or when funds are exhausted or services are no longer required, whichever |
| |shall occur first. The agreements authorize the Director, Department of Public Works, to extend the termination date and to adjust billing|
| |rates on an annual basis to mutually agreed upon fair and reasonable rates. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |Funds for this request are included in the Fiscal Year 2004-05 Department of Public Works Detailed Work Program. Funding source is |
| |TransNet. All non-TransNet projects undertaken under these agreements will be reimbursed from appropriate funding sources. If approved, |
| |this request will result in Fiscal Year 2004-05 cost of approximately $250,000 and approximately $250,000 annually over the next two years.|
| |It will require no additional staff years. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Find that the proposed action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as specified under Section 15060(c) (3) of the|
| |State CEQA Guidelines because it is not a project as defined by Section 15378 of the Guidelines. |
| |Find that the services can be provided more economically and efficiently by the proposed independent contractors than by persons employed |
| |in the Classified Service. |
| |Approve and authorize the Director, Department of Public Works to execute following agreements: |
| |An Agreement with RECON Environmental, Inc. to provide environmental services for compensation not to exceed $250,000. Agreement to |
| |terminate January 31, 2008, or when funds are exhausted or services are no longer required, whichever shall occur first, with option to |
| |extend termination date by written mutual agreement if original funding remains available. |
| |An Agreement with Jones & Stokes Associates to provide environmental services for compensation not to exceed $250,000. Agreement to |
| |terminate January 31, 2008, or when funds are exhausted or services are no longer required, whichever shall occur first, with option to |
| |extend termination date by written mutual agreement if original funding remains available. |
| |An Agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to provide environmental services for compensation not to exceed $250,000. Agreement to|
| |terminate January 31, 2008, or when funds are exhausted or services are no longer required, whichever shall occur first, with option to |
| |extend termination date by written mutual agreement if original funding remains available. |
| |Designate the Director, Department of Public Works, as County Officer responsible for administering the agreements. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|13. |SUBJECT: |ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: |
| | |COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TRACT NO. 4995-1: EXTEND LIEN CONTRACT AND APPROVE FIRST AMENDMENT FOR IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED IN|
| | |MOUNTAIN EMPIRE SUBREGIONAL PLAN AREA (DISTRICT: 2) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |Tract No. 4995-1 is a subdivision consisting of 83 single-family residential lots, and a total of 756.79 acres. It is located in the |
| |Mountain Empire Subregional Plan area, on the south side of Old Highway 80 between Miller Valley Road and Crestwood Road (Thomas Guide, |
| |Page 1298/1299, B-1, 2005 Edition). |
| |Owner of this recorded subdivision does not wish to construct the project at this time. A two-year extension will ensure responsibility for|
| |constructing needed infrastructure, such as streets, drainage and water facilities, will remain with the owner and allow him to retain |
| |development rights on the project. |
| |Amendment of lien contract requires owner provide updated groundwater analysis, prior to substituting security in place of the lien |
| |contract and commencing construction of required improvements. |
| |This is a request to amend lien contract and extend, for a period of two years, the performance completion date of improvements for County |
| |of San Diego Tract No. 4995-1, Final Map 13673. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |If approved, this request will have no fiscal or staffing impact. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER: |
| |Approve and authorize Clerk of the Board to execute the First Amendment to Lien Contract (Attachment B). |
| |Grant an extension of time to November 1, 2006, for the performance completion date of lien contract improvement agreement for County of |
| |San Diego Tract No. 4995-1. |
| |ACTION: |
| |Adding the following recommendations: |
| |Include the stipulations noted in the October 7, 2004 letter written by the County’s Hydrogeologist as part of the Groundwater study and |
| |other issues staff determines appropriate; |
| |Request that John Peterson, Michael Thometz, and Donna Tisdale work together to make sure that the Groundwater study is agreeable to all |
| |when it comes back to the Board; |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Jacob, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|14. |SUBJECT: |ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: |
| | |COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TRACT NO. 5229-2: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP AND SECURED AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE |
| | |IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED IN SAN DIEGUITO COMMUNITY PLAN AREA (DISTRICT: 5) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |This project is a subdivision consisting of 264 lots, 257 are single-family residential lots, 1 common area lot, a school site, 2 open |
| |space lots and 3 private street (alley) lots. It is located in the 4S Ranch area with a total of 248.19 acres. It is located north of |
| |Rancho Bernardo Road and west of Alva Road (Thomas Guide, Page 1169, F-2, 2004 Edition). |
| |The project is being brought before the Board for approval of final map and secured agreement for public and private improvements. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |N/A |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Acting as the Board of Supervisors: |
| |Approve this map and accept on behalf of the Public, subject to improvements, 4S Ranch Parkway, Silver Pine Road, Silver Crest Drive, |
| |Ralphs Ranch Road, Albert Avenue, Eagle Canyon Place, Monterey Ridge Drive, Glen Aspen Drive, Glen Aspen Court, Eagle Canyon Way, Albert |
| |Place, Monterey Ridge Way, Monterey Ridge Court and Alva Road for use as streets all as dedicated on said map. |
| |Approve and authorize Clerk of the Board to execute Agreement to Improve Major Subdivision, which includes the street improvements, |
| |drainage improvements, sewer and water facilities, and setting of final monuments (Attachment B). |
| |Accept the open space easement as granted on said map. |
| |Accept drainage easements as dedicated on said map. |
| |Accept clear space easements and noise protection easements as granted on said map. |
| |Authorize Clerk of the Board to notify the Director, Planning and Land Use, to delete the provisional zoning classification per Ordinance |
| |8972 affixed to the official zoning encompassed by this subdivision. |
| |Relates to Flood control District Agenda Item No. 1. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|15. |SUBJECT: |ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: |
| | |COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TRACT NO. 5108-4: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP AND JOINT AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE |
| | |IMPROVEMENTS IN LAKESIDE COMMUNITY PLAN AREA (DISTRICT: 2) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |This project is a subdivision, consisting of 28 single-family residential lots and a total of 81.38 acres. It is located in the Lakeside |
| |area along Creek Hills Road, on the north side of Quail Canyon Road (Thomas Guide, Page 1213, B-7, 2005 Edition). |
| |This project is being brought before the Board for approval of final map and joint agreement for public and private improvements. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |N/A |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Approve this map and accept on behalf of the public, subject to improvements, Creek Hills Road for use as a street as dedicated on said |
| |map. |
| |Accept easements for pedestrian and equestrian trail purposes and drainage easements, as dedicated on said map. |
| |Accept the visual impact mitigation easement over Lots 73, 76, 77, 79 and 82 through 85 as granted on said map. |
| |Approve and authorize Clerk of the Board to execute the Joint Agreement to Improve Major Subdivision, which includes street and drainage |
| |improvements, water facilities and setting of final monuments (Attachment B). |
| |Adopt a Resolution entitled Resolution Accepting Previously Rejected Offer to Dedicate Subdivision Street, accepting a previously rejected |
| |offer of dedication of Broad Oaks Road (SC 1930), all as offered and rejected on Map No. 14184 (Attachment E). |
| |Direct Clerk of the Board to record adopted Resolution Accepting Previously Rejected Offer to Dedicate Subdivision Street with the County |
| |Recorder. |
| |Authorize Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors to execute Joint Use Agreement on Sheet 1 of final map, and Clerk of the Board to |
| |acknowledge said signature on the map. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent, adopting |
| |Resolution No. 05-21 entitled: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PREVIOUSLY REJECTED OFFER TO DEDICATE SUBDIVISION STREET. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
|16. |SUBJECT: |ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: |
| | |COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TRACT NO. 5154-1: APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO JOINT AGREEMENT (SUBSTITUTION OF PARTIES, EXTENSION|
| | |OF TIME) LOCATED IN JAMUL-DULZURA (DISTRICT: 2) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |This project is a recorded subdivision consisting of 5 single-family residential lots and a total of 11.2 acres. It is located in the |
| |Jamul area at the eastern end of Las Palmas Road (Thomas Guide, Page 1292, J-3, 2005 Edition). |
| |This is a request to approve an Amendment to Joint Agreement (Substitution of Parties and Extension of Time) and to extend, for a period of|
| |two years, the performance completion date for County of San Diego Tract No. 5154-1, Final Map 14821. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |N/A |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Approve and authorize Clerk of the Board to execute First Amendment to Joint Agreement to Improve Major Subdivision (Substitution of |
| |Parties and Extension of Time) for Tract No. 5154-1 (Attachment B). |
| |Authorize Clerk of the Board to release the original Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit (Reference No. SB99-9218), issued by California |
| |Bank and Trust to guarantee construction of improvements to Tract No. 5154-1. |
| |Grant an extension of time for a period of two years, ending March 16, 2007, for the performance completion date for County of San Diego |
| |Tract No. 5154-1. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|17. |SUBJECT: |ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: |
| | |COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TRACT NO. 5334-1: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP AND SECURED AGREEMENTS FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE |
| | |IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED IN SAN DIEGUITO COMMUNITY PLAN AREA (DISTRICT: 5) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |This project is a subdivision consisting of one future condominium lot, and a total of 7.08 acres. It is located in the San Dieguito area,|
| |at the northeast corner of 4S Ranch Parkway and Rancho Bernardo Road (Thomas Guide, Page 1169, F-3, 2004 Edition). |
| |This project is being brought before the Board for approval of final map and secured agreements for public and private improvements. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |N/A |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Approve this map. |
| |Accept access rights from Lot 1 in and to 4S Ranch Parkway, Lot 1 in and to Town Square Parkway except at access opening No. 1 and Lot 1 in|
| |and to Camino San Thomas except at emergency access opening, all as relinquished and waived on said map. |
| |Approve and authorize Clerk of the Board to execute Agreement to Improve Major Subdivision TM 5334-1 (Onsite), which includes street and |
| |drainage improvements, sewer and water facilities, and setting of final monuments (Attachment B). |
| |Approve and authorize Clerk of the Board to execute Agreement to Improve Major Subdivision TM 5334-1 (Offsite), which includes street and |
| |drainage improvements, and sewer and water facilities (Attachment E). |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|18. |SUBJECT: |ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM: |
| | |COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TRACT NO. 5291-1: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP AND SECURED AGREEMENTS FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE |
| | |IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED IN SAN DIEGUITO COMMUNITY PLAN AREA (DISTRICT: 5) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |This project is a subdivision consisting of 5 commercial lots and a total of 16.62 acres. It is located in the San Dieguito Community Plan|
| |area, at the southeast corner of Rancho Bernardo Road and Dove Canyon Road (Thomas Guide, Page 1169, F3, 2004 Edition). |
| |The project is being brought before the Board for approval of final map and secured agreements for public and private improvements. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |N/A |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Approve this map. |
| |Accept on behalf of the County, all access rights from Lots 1 and 3 in and to Camino Del Norte (SA 680) and accept the access rights from |
| |Lots 1, 2 and 4 in and to Dove Canyon Road except at access opening Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 6; and accept the access rights from Lots 4 and 5 in |
| |and to Rancho Bernardo Road except at access opening Nos. 1 and 2, all as relinquished and waived on said map. |
| |Approve and authorize Clerk of the Board to execute Agreement to Improve Major Subdivision for setting of final monuments (TM 5291-1, |
| |Onsite), (Attachment B). |
| |Approve and authorize Clerk of the Board to execute Amendment to Agreement to Improve Major Subdivision, which includes street |
| |improvements, drainage facilities and engineering (TM 5229-1, Offsite CG 4550), (Attachment E). |
| |Approve and authorize Clerk of the Board to execute Agreement to Improve Major Subdivision, which includes street improvements, drainage |
| |facilities and engineering (TM 5291-1,Offsite CG 4550), (Attachment F). |
| |Approve and authorize Clerk of the Board to execute Amendment to Agreement to Improve Major Subdivision, which includes street |
| |improvements, drainage facilities and engineering (TM 5229-1, Offsite CG 4551), (Attachment I). |
| |Approve and authorize Clerk of the Board to execute Agreement to Improve Major Subdivision, which includes street improvements, drainage |
| |facilities, and engineering (TM 5291-1, Offsite CG 4551), (Attachment J). |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Roberts, Horn |
| |
| |
|19. |SUBJECT: |VENDOR SELECTION AND FINANCING OF INTEGRATED PROPERTY TAX SYSTEM (DISTRICT: ALL) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |On February 8, 2005 (16) the Board of Supervisors, at the request of the Chief Administrative Officer, continued the item to February 9, |
| |2005 at the regular meeting of Board of Supervisors for Department of Planning and Land Use matters. |
| |On February 24, 2004 (20), the Board of Supervisors authorized a series of actions to replace an aging property tax system with a state of |
| |the art Integrated Property Tax System (IPTS), necessary for maintaining the highest standards of fiscal stability and service to the |
| |public. The County Technology Office has endeavored, with the support of the Assessor/Recorder/County Clerk, the Treasurer-Tax Collector |
| |and the Chief Financial Officer, to obtain an IPTS. The Department of Purchasing and Contracting has issued a Request for Proposals, and |
| |negotiated with qualified companies to finalize a contract for the design, development, and implementation of an IPTS. The Board of |
| |Supervisors has also authorized the Chief Financial Officer to seek financing of this new tax system through the capital-financing program |
| |sponsored by the San Diego County Capital Asset Leasing Corporation (SANCAL). The Chief Financial Officer was further authorized to select |
| |the property to be subject to the financing lease as collateral. |
| |Negotiations were completed in the fall of 2004. However, the award of a contract has been delayed due to the filing of a protest in |
| |accordance with Board Policy A-97. Board approval is now sought both to award the contract to Bearing Point Corporation and to complete |
| |the financing for the IPTS. |
| |Subsequent to the Board authorizing debt financing for this project through SANCAL, an opportunity has arisen to use one-time funds to |
| |finance the project. These one-time funds would come from securitizing the repayment by the State of the Vehicle License Fee (VLF) Gap |
| |Loan (the “VLF Receivable”) which is owed to the County by August 15, 2006. In a separate item on today’s agenda, the Board is requested to|
| |approve securitizing the VLF Receivable of approximately $60 million and using approximately $33 million of the proceeds to pay for the |
| |IPTS. The Board is further requested to approve the use of available fund balance as the basis for establishing appropriations for the |
| |project until such time as the proceeds from the securitization are received. Should the Board not approve the VLF Securitization |
| |proposal or should the minimum sales price of the VLF Receivable not be achieved, staff will return in May with the documents necessary for|
| |issuing certificates of participation (COPs) as originally planned. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |The total project cost for the IPTS is approximately $37 million. Approximately $33 million of the project will be financed through the |
| |sale of the VLF Receivable. This amount includes approximately $32 million to be paid to the vendor as well as an estimated amount for |
| |independent verification and validation of the system upon completion. The remaining $4 million cannot be covered by the proceeds of |
| |tax-exempt financing and includes a contingency set aside and project team support costs. These latter costs will be funded from management|
| |reserves in the Finance and General Government Group. Interim funding until the proceeds of the sale are realized will be available general|
| |fund balance. This proposal does not require additional County staff. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |ASSESSOR / RECORDER / COUNTY CLERK, TREASURER / TAX COLLECTOR, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER |
| |In accordance with Section 401 of the County Administrative Code, authorize the Director, Department of Purchasing and Contracting to award|
| |a contract to Bearing Point Corporation for the design, development, and implementation of an Integrated Property Tax System and to amend |
| |the contract as needed to reflect changes to system requirements and funding, subject to the approval of the Chief Information Officer. |
| |Cancel the Property Tax fund balance designation of $10.4 million. |
| |Establish appropriations of $33.2 million in the Finance and General Government Group Executive Office for the Integrated Property Tax |
| |System based on available fund balance in the General Fund. (4 VOTES) |
| |Authorize the Auditor and Controller to substitute revenue from the proceeds of the sale of the VLF Receivable or the COPs once received |
| |for the fund balance used as the interim funding source for the project. |
| |Adopt the resolution “PROVIDING FOR THE DECLARATION OF OFFICIAL INTENT OF THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES FROM |
| |PROCEEDS OF INDEBTEDNESS”. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent, adopting |
| |Resolution No. 05-22 entitled: RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO PROVIDING FOR THE DECLARATION OF OFFICIAL|
| |INTENT OF THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES FROM PROCEEDS OF INDEBTEDNESS. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Horn, Roberts |
| |
| |
|20. |SUBJECT: |TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES CONTRACT RE-COMPETITION (DISTRICT: ALL) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |On February 8, 2005 (17) the Board of Supervisors, at the request of the Chief Administrative Officer, continued the item to February 9, |
| |2005 at the regular meeting of Board of Supervisors for Department of Planning and Land Use matters. |
| |The County of San Diego has become highly regarded nation-wide for innovation in service delivery, program effectiveness, concern for |
| |customer satisfaction, cost-conscious management, and fiscal discipline exhibited throughout the organization. A key enabler of this |
| |success was the outsourcing of Telecommunications and Information Technology Services in December 1999. Since then, the County of San Diego|
| |has been able to significantly improve service delivery across the County. Our goal remains to provide our customers and the employees that|
| |serve them with a reliable, integrated network, standardized desktop hardware, modern business software, and Information Technology |
| |resources designed to achieve communication and business efficiency. |
| |The term of the County’s current contract with Computer Sciences Corporation and the Pennant Alliance expires on December 31, 2006, and |
| |provides provisions to extend the contract through 2009. However pricing for these three option years has not been established. The |
| |proposed recommendation to issue a Request for Proposals, if approved, will solicit input from the entire technology industry, with the |
| |goal of enhancing our public/private partnership in the delivery of Telecommunications and Information Technology Services in a cost |
| |effective manner. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |Appropriations are available for this project in the Fiscal Year 2004/2005 budget and no additional costs are anticipated at this time. |
| |BUSINESS IMPACT IMPACT: |
| |The proposed action will have a positive impact on the business community by continuing to make contract opportunities available to the |
| |private sector. The issuance of an RFI will allow adequate time for the business community to participate in the process early and |
| |encourage maximum interaction with County personnel during the process. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |In accordance with Section 401 et seq, of the County Administrative Code, authorize the Director, Purchasing & Contracting, to issue |
| |competitive solicitations by (a) soliciting and responding to industry’s comments on the project through a Request for Information (RFI), |
| |then (b) identifying qualified vendors through a Request for Statements of Qualification (RFSQ) process, and thereafter (c) issuing a |
| |Request for Proposals (RFP) to those potential prime contractors found qualified. Upon successful negotiations and determination of a fair|
| |and reasonable price, the Chief Administrative Officer will return to the Board of Supervisors with recommendations on award of contract(s)|
| |for the provision of Information Technology and Telecommunications Services. |
| |In accordance with Board Policy A-87, Competitive Procurement, authorize the Director of Purchasing and Contracting to extend the |
| |termination date of the County’s existing contract with the Gartner Group from June 30, 2005 through the award of the new IT outsourcing |
| |contract and completion of initial transition activities, a period of approximately one year. |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Roberts, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, on Consent. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Horn, Roberts |
| |
| |
|21. |SUBJECT: |VEHICLE LICENSE FEE (VLF) GAP LOAN FINANCING PROGRAM (DISTRICT: ALL) |
| |OVERVIEW: |
| |On February 8, 2005 (18) the Board of Supervisors, at the request of the Chief Administrative Officer continued the item to February 9, |
| |2005 at the regular meeting of Board of Supervisors for Department of Planning and Land Use matters. |
| |During Fiscal Year 2003-04, the County experienced a loss of Vehicle License Fee (VLF) revenue for a three-month period due to the State’s |
| |action of rescinding payments from their general fund. As part of the agreement that was reached between the State and local governments |
| |and codified in SB 1096, this VLF revenue loss became an involuntary loan (“the VLF Gap Loan”) from local governments to be paid back by |
| |the State. Under Section 10754.11 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code (the “VLF Law”), the State Controller is required to make a |
| |one-time payment on or before August 15, 2006 (Fiscal Year 2006-07) to local governments to compensate for the suspension of VLF payments |
| |during Fiscal Year 2003-04 (the “VLF Receivable”). The amount to be repaid to the County as a result of that suspension is approximately |
| |$60 million. Payment by the State Controller to the County of this amount depends on various factors and no assurance is made that the |
| |State Controller will transfer all or a portion of the amounts required under the VLF Law by the scheduled date. |
| |An additional feature of SB 1096 was that it granted local governments the authority to securitize the VLF Receivable. Through a program |
| |sponsored by the California State Association of Counties (CSAC) and the League of California Cities, the County has the opportunity to |
| |sell its VLF Receivable to the California Statewide Communities Development Authority (CSCDA) and receive an upfront payment. CSCDA will |
| |issue bonds to purchase VLF Receivables from local governments, and the bonds will be repaid by the State directly to bondholders. The |
| |County’s sale of its VLF Receivable would be irrevocable, and bondholders would have no recourse to the County if the State does not make |
| |the VLF Gap Loan repayment. The actual purchase price of the VLF Receivable will depend on the total amount of VLF Receivables that local|
| |governments sell to CSCDA and on bond market conditions at the time the VLF bonds are priced. The anticipated proceeds will include the |
| |County’s VLF Receivable, less any capitalized interest costs, credit enhancement fees and bond issuance costs. The County has until |
| |February 18, 2005 to commit to participation in the first round of the securitization program. |
| |There are two significant benefits to participating in this program. The first relates to the uncertainty as to whether the State will pay|
| |the VLF Receivable when it becomes due. By securitizing the VLF Receivable now, the County transfers the risk of collection to the |
| |bondholders. The second relates to the opportunity it creates on an immediate basis to extinguish existing debt or to finance projects on |
| |a cash basis rather than by incurring additional debt. |
| |The Debt Advisory Committee (The “Committee”) has reviewed the proposal to securitize the VLF Receivable as well as several options for use|
| |of the proceeds from the sale. The Committee recommends proceeding with the securitization and using a portion of the proceeds to pay for |
| |the development of the Integrated Property Tax System (IPTS) rather than to finance it through the issuance of Certificates of |
| |Participation, as previously planned. The Committee further recommends that the remainder of the proceeds be used to pay down the Unfunded |
| |Actuarial Accrued Liability (UAAL) of the San Diego County Employees Retirement Association (SDCERA) to increase its funded ratio and |
| |reduce the County’s future contributions. In today’s market, such an approach would yield tax-exempt proceeds of approximately $33 million |
| |to finance the IPTS and taxable proceeds of approximately $24 million to pay down the UAAL. This recommendation is contingent upon the |
| |Board’s approval to proceed with the IPTS project and award the contract, a separate item which is on today’s agenda. Should the Board |
| |decide not to proceed with the IPTS project and award the contract, the Committee recommends receiving all of the VLF Receivable proceeds |
| |on a taxable basis and remitting the entire amount to the San Diego County Employees Retirement Association to be applied toward reducing |
| |the UAAL. |
| |The risk of participating in this program relates to the costs for securitizing the VLF Receivable. Specifically, these costs represent |
| |how much the market will discount the VLF Receivable of $60 million. The County would mitigate this risk by requiring a minimum sales price|
| |of at least $56.6 million, which is approximately 93.1% of the VLF Receivable. Should the minimum sales price fail to meet this threshold,|
| |the County would not proceed with the sale. Staff believes this threshold is reasonable based upon the uncertainty of timely payment by |
| |the State and current and future savings that would be achieved through use of the proceeds from the sale. |
| |It is anticipated that the proceeds received from the sale of the VLF Receivable would be received in March 2005. |
| |FISCAL IMPACT: |
| |If Option 3 is approved as recommended by the Debt Advisory Committee, the proceeds of approximately $57 million from the sale of the VLF |
| |Receivable would result in approximately $33 million being used to cash finance rather than debt finance the development of a new |
| |Integrated Property Tax System for the County and approximately $24 million being used to pay down a portion of the UAAL of the SDCERA. |
| |Cash financing the IPTS would result in the avoidance of $2.6 million in annual debt service payments over 20 years and will free up $13 |
| |million in resources previously set aside for this project ($10.4 million in designated fund balance and $2.6 million in current year |
| |appropriations). Contributions to SDCERA over and above the required amounts, in itself, would result in a reduction of the UAAL, a higher |
| |funded ratio for the retirement fund, and lower contributions by the County. Should the Board decide not to proceed with the IPTS project |
| |and award the contract, the Debt Advisory Committee recommends Option 2. If this Option is approved, the proceeds of approximately $56 |
| |million from the sale of the VLF Receivable would all be contributed to SDCERA, which would result in a greater positive impact than the |
| |contribution of the $24 million proposed in Option 3. In connection with the required tax analysis on the tax-exempt portion of the sale, |
| |the County is required to pay an up-front, non-refundable application fee of $5,000 to cover the additional tax analysis required by Bond |
| |Counsel. This will be paid through existing appropriations in the general fund. |
| |RECOMMENDATION: |
| |CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER |
| |Authorize the Chief Financial Officer to sell the County’s VLF Receivable to CSCDA for a minimum sale price of $56.6 million. |
| |Approve Option 3 for the use of the VLF Receivable proceeds, as described herein. Should the Board decide not to proceed with the IPTS |
| |project and award the contract, approve Option 2 for the use of the VLF Receivable proceeds as described herein. |
| |Adopt the resolution approving the form and authorizing the execution and delivery of a Purchase and Sale Agreement and related documents |
| |with respect to the sale of the County’s VLF Receivable. |
| |Authorize and direct the Chief Financial Officer to send, or to cause to be sent, an irrevocable written instruction required by statute to|
| |the State Controller notifying the State of the sale of the VLF Receivable and instructing the disbursement of the VLF Receivable to the |
| |VLF Bond Trustee. |
| |Establish appropriations of up to $25.0 million in the General County Expense budget unit for contributions to the San Diego County |
| |Employees Retirement Association, or if Option 2 is approved, establish appropriations of up to $57.0 million in the General County Expense|
| |budget unit for contributions to the San Diego County Employees Retirement Association (4 VOTES). |
| |ACTION: |
| |ON MOTION of Supervisor Cox, seconded by Supervisor Jacob, the Board of Supervisors took action as recommended, adopting Resolution No. |
| |05-23 entitled: A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FORM OF AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND RELATED|
| |DOCUMENTS WITH RESPECT TO THE SALE OF THE SELLER’S VEHICLE LICENSE FEE RECEIVABLE FROM THE STATE; AND DIRECTING AND AUTHORIZING CERTAIN |
| |OTHER ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. |
| |AYES: Cox, Jacob, Slater-Price, Horn, Roberts |
| |
| |
|22. |SUBJECT: |CLOSED SESSION |
| |A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION |
| |(Subdivision (a) of Government Code section 54956.9) |
| |County of San Diego v. Earl McDougal, et al.; San Diego County Superior Court No. GIN 039330-1 |
| |B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION |
| |(Subdivision (a) of Government Code section 54956.9) |
| |County of San Diego v. Tony Shin, et al.; San Diego County Superior Court No. GIN 039332-1 |
| |C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION |
| |(Subdivision (a) of Government Code section 54956.9) |
| |County of San Diego v. Michael Parker, et al.; San Diego County Superior Court No. GIN 041729-1 |
| |D. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION |
| |Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Government Code section 54956.9: (Number of Cases – 1). |
| |ACTION: |
| |County Counsel reported that by vote of all four members of the Board of Supervisors present and voting aye with District Four absent, the |
| |Board of Supervisors authorized the following actions: |
| |County of San Diego V. Earl McDougal, Superior Court No. GIN 039330-1; authorize settlement of an eminent domain action in the sum of |
| |$417,500.00. |
| |County of San Diego V. Tony Shin, Superior Court No. GIN 039332; Authorize settlement of the county’s eminent domain action by payment of |
| |the sum of $390,000 and acquisition of adjacent property for a remnant parcel and transfer of title to that remnant as part of the |
| |compensation. |
There being no further business, the Board adjourned at 10:02 a.m. in memory of Vernon Shears, Martin Altbaum, and George Owen Bjornstad.
THOMAS J. PASTUSZKA
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
County of San Diego, State of California
Consent: Francia/Tosh
Discussion: Hall
NOTE: This Statement of Proceedings sets forth all actions taken by the County of San Diego Board of Supervisors on the matters stated, but not necessarily the chronological sequence in which the matters were taken up.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- san diego gs pay scale
- uchs san diego bell schedule
- san diego writer s conference 2020
- university high school san diego ca
- city of new haven board of education
- san diego city high school
- san diego high schools
- san diego county high schools
- san diego writers conference
- preliminary change of ownership san diego ca
- san diego county retirement association
- 2019 san diego county fair