Meeting Date: 1 December, 2009
Prepared by: Mike Branson
City Council
Agenda Item Summary
Name: Consideration of a Resolution accepting an $8,500 grant from the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District (MPRPD) for dune habitat restoration and protection, and ADA access improvements in the Del Mar and North Dunes area of Carmel Beach and authorizing a transfer from the Capital Projects Reserve for project expenditures until receipt of grant proceeds.
Description: The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea applied for an MPRPD grant in October 2009 to restore and protect the dune habitat, improve the ADA access, and install interpretive signs in the Del Mar and North Dunes areas of Carmel Beach. The MPRPD awarded an $8,500 grant to the City for these projects, except for the interpretive signs.
Overall Cost:
City Funds: N/A
Grant Funds: $8,500
Staff Recommendation: Accept the $8,500 grant award from the MPRPD for dune habitat restoration and protection and ADA improvements in the Del Mar and North Dunes areas of Carmel Beach.
Important Considerations: The grant agreement between the City and the MPRPD and the grant guidelines are attached. The MPRPD grant is supported on a reimbursement level. A transfer from the Capital Projects Reserve Account to a General Fund Account will allow the proper designation of project expenditures to support reimbursement requests. The work proposed is included in the Del Mar Master Plan.
Decision Record: The MPRPD grant application was authorized by the City Council on October 6, 2009. The MPRPD has awarded the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea grants of $10,000 (2007) and $8,500 (2006) for projects in Mission Trail Nature Preserve and Forest Hill Park.
Reviewed by:
______________________________ _________________
Rich Guillen, City Administrator Date
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 2009-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA ACCEPTING A GRANT FROM THE MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,500 FOR DUNE HABITAT RESTORATION AND PROTECTION, AND IMPROVE ADA ACCESS IN THE DEL MAR AND NORTH DUNES AREA OF CARMEL BEACH, AND AUTHORIZING A TRANSFER FROM THE CAPITAL PROJECTS RESERVE OF $8,500 FOR PROJECT EXPENDITURES UNTIL GRANT PROCEEDS ARE RECIEVED
__________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District is awarding grants for parks, open space, and coastal preservation projects within its boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea applied for a grant to restore and protect dune habitat, improve ADA access, and install interpretive signs in the Del Mar and North Dunes areas of Carmel Beach; and
WHEREAS, the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District has awarded a grant to the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea in the amount of $8,500 to restore and protect dune habitat restoration and improve ADA access in the Del Mar and North Dunes areas of Carmel Beach; and
WHEREAS, the grant is paid on a reimbursement basis and a transfer of $8,500 from the Capital Projects Reserve to a project account will allow proper designation of expenses to support reimbursement requests.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA DOES:
1. Accept the grant of $8,500 from the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District for restoration and protection of the dune habitat and ADA access improvements in the Del Mar and North Dunes areas of Carmel Beach.
2. Authorize the City Administrator to enter a grant agreement between the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District.
3. Authorize a transfer of $8,500 from the Capital Projects Reserve Account to General Fund Account 01-87602 designated for the grant project.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA this 1st day of December 2009, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
SIGNED,
___________________________
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR
ATTEST:
________________________________
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
Saturday, December 5, 2009
CITY COUNCIL: Resolution Approving Application for Grant Funds from State to Complete Del Mar Master Plan
Meeting Date: December 1, 2009
Prepared by: Rich Guillen
City Council
Agenda Item Summary
Name: Consideration of a Resolution approving the application for $234,915 in grant funds from the State of California Recreational Trails Program to complete the Del Mar Master Plan.
Description: The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea applied for $234,915 in grant funds from the State of California’s Recreational Trails Program on October 1, 2009, to fund projects to complete the Del Mar Master Plan. Projects included in this grant application are: final planning and construction of segments of the California Coastal Trail; improved beach access; an ADA-compliant boardwalk and viewing platform; parking lot improvements and dunes restoration. Segments include an ADA-compliant pedestrian boardwalk (the San Antonio Pathway) a 600- foot sand trail and wooden staircase (4th Avenue beach access), and a 200-foot boardwalk and viewing platform at the Del Mar Dunes. The project also includes parking lot improvements and the protection and restoration of the North Dunes.
Overall Cost: City Funds: Amount of matching funds dependent on grant awarded
Grant Funds: $234,915 requested
Staff Recommendation: Approve the Resolution.
Important Considerations: The grant application between the City and the State of California Recreational Trails Program is attached. The projects proposed in this grant application are included in the Del Mar Master Plan.
Decision Record: None
Reviewed by:
______________________________ _________________
Rich Guillen, City Administrator Date
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 2009-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR $234,915 IN GRANT FUNDS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECREATIONAL TRAILS PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the “Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users” provides funds to the State of California for Grants to federal, state, local and nonprofit organizations to acquire, develop and/or maintain motorized and non-motorized trail Projects; and
WHEREAS, the State Department of Parks and Recreation has been delegated the responsibility for the administration of the program within the State, setting up necessary procedures governing Project Application under the program; and
WHEREAS, said procedures established by the State Department of Parks and
Recreation require the Applicant to certify by resolution the approval of Application(s) before submission of said Application(s) to the State; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant will enter into a Contract with the State of California to complete the Project(s);
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea hereby:
1. Approves the filing of an Application for the Recreational Trails Program; and
2. Certifies that the Project is consistent with the Applicant’s general plan or the equivalent planning document; and
3. Certifies that said Applicant has or will have available prior to commencement of any work on the Project(s) included in this Application, sufficient funds to operate and maintain the Project(s); and
4. Certifies that the Applicant has reviewed, understands, and agrees to the General Provisions contained in the Contract shown in the Procedural Guide; and
5. Appoints the City Administrator as agent to conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all documents, including, but not limited to Applications, agreements, amendments, payment requests and so on, which may be necessary for the completion of the Project.
6. Agrees to comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and guidelines.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA this 1st day of December 2009 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
SIGNED,
______________________________
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
Prepared by: Rich Guillen
City Council
Agenda Item Summary
Name: Consideration of a Resolution approving the application for $234,915 in grant funds from the State of California Recreational Trails Program to complete the Del Mar Master Plan.
Description: The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea applied for $234,915 in grant funds from the State of California’s Recreational Trails Program on October 1, 2009, to fund projects to complete the Del Mar Master Plan. Projects included in this grant application are: final planning and construction of segments of the California Coastal Trail; improved beach access; an ADA-compliant boardwalk and viewing platform; parking lot improvements and dunes restoration. Segments include an ADA-compliant pedestrian boardwalk (the San Antonio Pathway) a 600- foot sand trail and wooden staircase (4th Avenue beach access), and a 200-foot boardwalk and viewing platform at the Del Mar Dunes. The project also includes parking lot improvements and the protection and restoration of the North Dunes.
Overall Cost: City Funds: Amount of matching funds dependent on grant awarded
Grant Funds: $234,915 requested
Staff Recommendation: Approve the Resolution.
Important Considerations: The grant application between the City and the State of California Recreational Trails Program is attached. The projects proposed in this grant application are included in the Del Mar Master Plan.
Decision Record: None
Reviewed by:
______________________________ _________________
Rich Guillen, City Administrator Date
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 2009-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR $234,915 IN GRANT FUNDS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECREATIONAL TRAILS PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the “Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users” provides funds to the State of California for Grants to federal, state, local and nonprofit organizations to acquire, develop and/or maintain motorized and non-motorized trail Projects; and
WHEREAS, the State Department of Parks and Recreation has been delegated the responsibility for the administration of the program within the State, setting up necessary procedures governing Project Application under the program; and
WHEREAS, said procedures established by the State Department of Parks and
Recreation require the Applicant to certify by resolution the approval of Application(s) before submission of said Application(s) to the State; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant will enter into a Contract with the State of California to complete the Project(s);
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea hereby:
1. Approves the filing of an Application for the Recreational Trails Program; and
2. Certifies that the Project is consistent with the Applicant’s general plan or the equivalent planning document; and
3. Certifies that said Applicant has or will have available prior to commencement of any work on the Project(s) included in this Application, sufficient funds to operate and maintain the Project(s); and
4. Certifies that the Applicant has reviewed, understands, and agrees to the General Provisions contained in the Contract shown in the Procedural Guide; and
5. Appoints the City Administrator as agent to conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all documents, including, but not limited to Applications, agreements, amendments, payment requests and so on, which may be necessary for the completion of the Project.
6. Agrees to comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and guidelines.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA this 1st day of December 2009 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
SIGNED,
______________________________
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL: Resolution Adopting Regulations for Candidate Statements of Qualifications for Municipal Election 2010
Meeting Date: December 1, 2009
Prepared by: Heidi Burch, City Clerk
City Council
Agenda Item Summary
Name: Consideration of a Resolution adopting regulations for candidate statements of qualifications for the Municipal Election to be held in the City on April 13, 2010.
Description: A Resolution adopting the regulations, guidelines, and fees for candidates who choose to file an optional candidate statement of qualifications for the April 13, 2010 Municipal Election.
Overall Cost:
City Funds: N/A
Grant Funds: N/A
Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.
Important Considerations:
The City is required to provide information to potential candidates for office about filing a Statement of Qualifications, including the filing deadline, fees, and other guidelines. This resolution fulfills this disclosure of information for the April 13, 2010 election and subsequent municipal elections.
Decision Record:
None. In the past, the information contained in this Resolution was provided to candidates in their Election Handbook.
Reviewed by:
_____________________________ ______________
Rich Guillen, City Administrator Date
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 2009-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATE STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN THE CITY ON APRIL 13, 2010
WHEREAS, pursuant to §12000, et seq., Elections Code, the City Council of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea has called an election to be held on April 13, 2010 for the purpose of electing successors to the terms of office which expire in April 2010; and
WHEREAS, §13307 of the Elections Code of the State of California provides that the governing body of any local agency adopt regulations pertaining to materials prepared by any candidate for a municipal election, including costs of the candidate’s statement; and
WHEREAS, the Candidate’s Statement of Qualifications is an optional Statement that appears on the ballot distributed to all voters that must include the title of the office sought (i.e., Mayor or Council Member), name of the local agency (City of Carmel-by-the-Sea), and the date the election is to be held (April 13, 2010); and
WHEREAS, should a candidate for office choose not to file a Statement, he or she must indicate such on the Nomination Paper provided by the City Clerk. The Candidate’s Statement of Qualifications may be withdrawn, but not changed, during the period for filing Nomination Papers and until 5:00 p.m. of the next working day after the close of the nomination period; and
WHEREAS, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea charges a fee to print the Candidate Statement of Qualifications on the ballot that must be paid upon filing of the Nomination Papers; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk shall estimate the total cost of printing, handling, translating, and mailing the candidate’s statements filed pursuant to this section, including costs incurred as a result of complying with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (as amended), and require each candidate filing a statement to pay in advance to the local agency his or her estimated pro rata share as a condition of having his or her statement included in the voter’s pamphlet. In the event the estimated payment is required, the estimate is just an approximation of the actual cost that varies from one election to another election and may be significantly more or less than the estimate, depending on the actual number of candidates filing statements. Accordingly, the clerk is not bound by the estimate and may, on a pro rata basis, bill the candidate for additional actual expense or refund any excess paid depending on the final actual cost. In the event of underpayment, the clerk may require the candidate to pay the balance of the cost incurred. In the event of overpayment, the clerk shall prorate the excess amount among the candidates and refund the excess amount paid within 30 days of the election; and
WHEREAS, the Statement may include name, age, occupation of the candidate and a brief description of no more than 200 words of the candidate’s education and qualifications expressed by the candidate himself or herself. If a candidate chooses to file the Statement, the Statement shall not include party affiliation of the candidate, nor membership or activity in partisan political organizations; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk shall provide each candidate or the candidate’s representative a copy of this Resolution at the time nominating petitions are issued.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA DOES:
1. Adopt this resolution for the April 13, 2010 Municipal Election and next ensuing municipal election and at each municipal election after that time.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA this 1st day of December 2009, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
SIGNED:
_______________________
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_____________________
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
Prepared by: Heidi Burch, City Clerk
City Council
Agenda Item Summary
Name: Consideration of a Resolution adopting regulations for candidate statements of qualifications for the Municipal Election to be held in the City on April 13, 2010.
Description: A Resolution adopting the regulations, guidelines, and fees for candidates who choose to file an optional candidate statement of qualifications for the April 13, 2010 Municipal Election.
Overall Cost:
City Funds: N/A
Grant Funds: N/A
Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.
Important Considerations:
The City is required to provide information to potential candidates for office about filing a Statement of Qualifications, including the filing deadline, fees, and other guidelines. This resolution fulfills this disclosure of information for the April 13, 2010 election and subsequent municipal elections.
Decision Record:
None. In the past, the information contained in this Resolution was provided to candidates in their Election Handbook.
Reviewed by:
_____________________________ ______________
Rich Guillen, City Administrator Date
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 2009-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATE STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN THE CITY ON APRIL 13, 2010
WHEREAS, pursuant to §12000, et seq., Elections Code, the City Council of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea has called an election to be held on April 13, 2010 for the purpose of electing successors to the terms of office which expire in April 2010; and
WHEREAS, §13307 of the Elections Code of the State of California provides that the governing body of any local agency adopt regulations pertaining to materials prepared by any candidate for a municipal election, including costs of the candidate’s statement; and
WHEREAS, the Candidate’s Statement of Qualifications is an optional Statement that appears on the ballot distributed to all voters that must include the title of the office sought (i.e., Mayor or Council Member), name of the local agency (City of Carmel-by-the-Sea), and the date the election is to be held (April 13, 2010); and
WHEREAS, should a candidate for office choose not to file a Statement, he or she must indicate such on the Nomination Paper provided by the City Clerk. The Candidate’s Statement of Qualifications may be withdrawn, but not changed, during the period for filing Nomination Papers and until 5:00 p.m. of the next working day after the close of the nomination period; and
WHEREAS, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea charges a fee to print the Candidate Statement of Qualifications on the ballot that must be paid upon filing of the Nomination Papers; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk shall estimate the total cost of printing, handling, translating, and mailing the candidate’s statements filed pursuant to this section, including costs incurred as a result of complying with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (as amended), and require each candidate filing a statement to pay in advance to the local agency his or her estimated pro rata share as a condition of having his or her statement included in the voter’s pamphlet. In the event the estimated payment is required, the estimate is just an approximation of the actual cost that varies from one election to another election and may be significantly more or less than the estimate, depending on the actual number of candidates filing statements. Accordingly, the clerk is not bound by the estimate and may, on a pro rata basis, bill the candidate for additional actual expense or refund any excess paid depending on the final actual cost. In the event of underpayment, the clerk may require the candidate to pay the balance of the cost incurred. In the event of overpayment, the clerk shall prorate the excess amount among the candidates and refund the excess amount paid within 30 days of the election; and
WHEREAS, the Statement may include name, age, occupation of the candidate and a brief description of no more than 200 words of the candidate’s education and qualifications expressed by the candidate himself or herself. If a candidate chooses to file the Statement, the Statement shall not include party affiliation of the candidate, nor membership or activity in partisan political organizations; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk shall provide each candidate or the candidate’s representative a copy of this Resolution at the time nominating petitions are issued.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA DOES:
1. Adopt this resolution for the April 13, 2010 Municipal Election and next ensuing municipal election and at each municipal election after that time.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA this 1st day of December 2009, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
SIGNED:
_______________________
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_____________________
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL: Resolution Authorizing City Administrator to Apply for Energy Efficiency & Conservation Block Grant (EECBG)
CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
December 1, 2009
TO: The Honorable Mayor McCloud & Council Members
FROM: Heidi Burch, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Agenda Item VII-L
The material for:
A. Item VII-L – Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the City Administrator to apply for Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) funding through the California Energy Commission for local energy efficiency projects will be provided under separate cover.
Thank you,
Heidi Burch
City Clerk
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
December 1, 2009
TO: The Honorable Mayor McCloud & Council Members
FROM: Heidi Burch, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Agenda Item VII-L
The material for:
A. Item VII-L – Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the City Administrator to apply for Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) funding through the California Energy Commission for local energy efficiency projects will be provided under separate cover.
Thank you,
Heidi Burch
City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL: Ordinance Amending Green Building Ordinance 2009-8 to move Mandatory Date of Compliance
Meeting Date: December 1, 2009
Prepared by: Sean Conroy, Plng & Bldg Services Manager
City Council
Agenda Item Summary
Name: Consideration of an Ordinance amending Green Building Ordinance 2009-8 to move the mandatory date of compliance from January 1, 2010 to August 1, 2010. (Second reading)
Description: The Green Building Ordinance 2009-8, was adopted by the City Council on August 4, 2009, establishing the criteria new construction projects must have in order to receive a building permit. The ordinance specified that these requirements would become mandatory on January 1, 2010. Staff proposes to extend the mandatory date by seven months to August 1, 2010.
Overall Cost:
City Funds: N/A
Grant Funds: N/A
Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Ordinance (Second reading).
Important Considerations: The original purpose of delaying mandatory compliance with the Green Building Ordinance until January 2010 was to give the public a trial period to become familiar with the program and for staff to determine the reasonableness of the standards. Since then, the significant slowdown in construction activity has caused staff to recommend extending the trial period even further.
Decision Record: At its October 14, 2009 meeting, Planning Commission voted to recommend to City Council to extend the trial period of the ordinance until August 1, 2010. The Council held a first reading of this ordinance on November 3, 2009.
Reviewed by:
__________________________ _____________________
Rich Guillen, City Administrator Date
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY PLANNING AND BUILDING
STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR MCCLOUD AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
THROUGH: RICH GUILLEN, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: SEAN CONROY, PLNG & BLDG SERVICES MANAGER
DATE: 1 DECEMBER 2009
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND GREEN BUILDING ORDINANCE 2009-8 MOVING THE MANDATORY COMPLIANCE DATE FROM JANUARY 1, 2010 TO AUGUST 1, 2010
INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND
Green Building Ordinance 2009-8 was adopted by the City Council on August 4, 2009. It established criteria for new construction projects to meet in order to receive a building permit. The ordinance states that the requirements will become mandatory on January 1, 2010. The original intent of the trial period was to allow the public to become familiar with the program and for staff to determine the reasonableness of the standards.
Since passage of the ordinance, construction activity and building permit
submittals have significantly decreased. Staff now recommends further extending the trial period until August 1, 2010, giving the public even more time to become familiar with the program and staff more time to evaluate the standards. During the trial period, applicants will still be required to fill out the appropriate Green Building Checklist, but will not be required to obtain a specific number of points in order to receive a building permit.
The Planning Commission recommended extending the trial period to the City Council on 14 October 2009. The Council held its first reading of this ordinance on November 3, 2009.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Ordinance (Second reading).
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE 2009-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA AMENDING GREEN BUILDING ORDINANCE 2009-8 TO MOVE THE MANDATORY DATE OF COMPLIANCE FROM JANUARY 1,2010 TO AUGUST 1,2010
WHEREAS, The City of Camel-by-the-Sea is a unique community that prides itself on its village character and environmental resources; and
WHEREAS, the City has adopted a General Plan and Municipal Code that strive to protect the village character through clear policies and regulations that guide property owners in the protection this character; and
WHEREAS, the City adopted green building requirements as section 15.54 of the Camel Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the goal of the ordinance it to guide development in a sustainable manner, promote energy efficiency, improve air quality, preserve natural resources and encourage architectural design that is consistent with the City's design traditions; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will extend the trial period of the ordinance from January 1,2010 to August 1,2010.
WHEREAS, the ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as it will have no negative impact on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Camel-by-the-Sea does hereby adopt the following amendments to CMC Section 15.54:
15.54.050 - Ordinance Phasing
Phase 1 : Prior to 1 August 2010 this ordinance shall not be mandatory. Unless exempt, all applicants shall submit the appropriate checklist properly filled out, but are not required to achieve a specific point total in order to obtain building permit approval.
Phase 2: Beginning on 1 -Auwst 2010, all building permit applications that are not exempt, or that are not associated with planning permit applications that have been approved or determined to be "complete" by the Planning Department prior to 1 3kmxw-y Auwst 201 0, shall comply with the requirements of this ordinance.
SEVERABILITY
If any part of this ordinance, even as small as a word or phrase, is found to be unenforceable such finding shall not affect the enforceability of any other part.
EFFECTIVE TIME PERIOD
This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after final passage and adoption last.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA this 1 st day of December 2009 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBER:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBER:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBER:
SIGNED:
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
Prepared by: Sean Conroy, Plng & Bldg Services Manager
City Council
Agenda Item Summary
Name: Consideration of an Ordinance amending Green Building Ordinance 2009-8 to move the mandatory date of compliance from January 1, 2010 to August 1, 2010. (Second reading)
Description: The Green Building Ordinance 2009-8, was adopted by the City Council on August 4, 2009, establishing the criteria new construction projects must have in order to receive a building permit. The ordinance specified that these requirements would become mandatory on January 1, 2010. Staff proposes to extend the mandatory date by seven months to August 1, 2010.
Overall Cost:
City Funds: N/A
Grant Funds: N/A
Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Ordinance (Second reading).
Important Considerations: The original purpose of delaying mandatory compliance with the Green Building Ordinance until January 2010 was to give the public a trial period to become familiar with the program and for staff to determine the reasonableness of the standards. Since then, the significant slowdown in construction activity has caused staff to recommend extending the trial period even further.
Decision Record: At its October 14, 2009 meeting, Planning Commission voted to recommend to City Council to extend the trial period of the ordinance until August 1, 2010. The Council held a first reading of this ordinance on November 3, 2009.
Reviewed by:
__________________________ _____________________
Rich Guillen, City Administrator Date
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY PLANNING AND BUILDING
STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR MCCLOUD AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
THROUGH: RICH GUILLEN, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: SEAN CONROY, PLNG & BLDG SERVICES MANAGER
DATE: 1 DECEMBER 2009
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND GREEN BUILDING ORDINANCE 2009-8 MOVING THE MANDATORY COMPLIANCE DATE FROM JANUARY 1, 2010 TO AUGUST 1, 2010
INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND
Green Building Ordinance 2009-8 was adopted by the City Council on August 4, 2009. It established criteria for new construction projects to meet in order to receive a building permit. The ordinance states that the requirements will become mandatory on January 1, 2010. The original intent of the trial period was to allow the public to become familiar with the program and for staff to determine the reasonableness of the standards.
Since passage of the ordinance, construction activity and building permit
submittals have significantly decreased. Staff now recommends further extending the trial period until August 1, 2010, giving the public even more time to become familiar with the program and staff more time to evaluate the standards. During the trial period, applicants will still be required to fill out the appropriate Green Building Checklist, but will not be required to obtain a specific number of points in order to receive a building permit.
The Planning Commission recommended extending the trial period to the City Council on 14 October 2009. The Council held its first reading of this ordinance on November 3, 2009.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Ordinance (Second reading).
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE 2009-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA AMENDING GREEN BUILDING ORDINANCE 2009-8 TO MOVE THE MANDATORY DATE OF COMPLIANCE FROM JANUARY 1,2010 TO AUGUST 1,2010
WHEREAS, The City of Camel-by-the-Sea is a unique community that prides itself on its village character and environmental resources; and
WHEREAS, the City has adopted a General Plan and Municipal Code that strive to protect the village character through clear policies and regulations that guide property owners in the protection this character; and
WHEREAS, the City adopted green building requirements as section 15.54 of the Camel Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the goal of the ordinance it to guide development in a sustainable manner, promote energy efficiency, improve air quality, preserve natural resources and encourage architectural design that is consistent with the City's design traditions; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will extend the trial period of the ordinance from January 1,2010 to August 1,2010.
WHEREAS, the ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as it will have no negative impact on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Camel-by-the-Sea does hereby adopt the following amendments to CMC Section 15.54:
15.54.050 - Ordinance Phasing
Phase 1 : Prior to 1 August 2010 this ordinance shall not be mandatory. Unless exempt, all applicants shall submit the appropriate checklist properly filled out, but are not required to achieve a specific point total in order to obtain building permit approval.
Phase 2: Beginning on 1 -Auwst 2010, all building permit applications that are not exempt, or that are not associated with planning permit applications that have been approved or determined to be "complete" by the Planning Department prior to 1 3kmxw-y Auwst 201 0, shall comply with the requirements of this ordinance.
SEVERABILITY
If any part of this ordinance, even as small as a word or phrase, is found to be unenforceable such finding shall not affect the enforceability of any other part.
EFFECTIVE TIME PERIOD
This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after final passage and adoption last.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA this 1 st day of December 2009 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBER:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBER:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBER:
SIGNED:
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL: Resolution Authorizing Participation in Initial Exploration & Analysis of Joint Fire Service Options
City Council
Agenda Item Summary
Name: Consideration of a Resolution authorizing participation in an Initial Exploration and Analysis of Joint Fire Service Options.
Description: At a November meeting, Mayors, City Managers and Fire Department Managers discussed the concept of joint fire services. The main discussion of the meeting was to review the current opportunities given the shrinking financial resources available to public agencies. The discussion centered on the potential of achieving organizational and operational efficiencies through some joint fire service options. The general consensus of the group was to participate in further discussions and analysis of achieving joint fire services.
Overall Cost:
City Funds: $0 with this action/unknown as to any future expense.
Grant Funds: N/A
Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.
Important Considerations: Joint fire services should only be considered if improvements occur through a joint management oversight and improvements to operational efficiencies.
Decision Record: Several discussions have occurred over the past three to four years regarding fire shared services. To date, no action has been taken by the Council to expand beyond the current fire administration contract with the City of Monterey.
Reviewed:
Rich Guillen, City Administrator Date
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR McCLOUD AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: RICH GUILLEN, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: NOVEMBER 24,2009
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN AN INITIAL EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS OF JOINT FIRE SERVICE OPTIONS
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
BACKGROUND
The concept of shared fire protection services has been studied and implemented to varying degrees in Monterey County for several decades. A 1981 Monterey County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) study concluded that significant opportunities existed for both cost avoidance and actual cost savings through a variety of approaches which would more closely integrate City of Monterey and Monterey Peninsula Airport fire services. The study recommended merging the Monterey Airport Fire Department into the City of Monterey Fire Department with the Monterey
Airport contracting with the City department for fire services. An additional study recommendation, improving joint training and operations among all Monterey Peninsula fire agencies, has been accomplished to a large degree through common performance standards, joint and multi-agency training, common equipment standards, automatic and mutual aid agreements, shared command and administrative services, and functional and actual consolidations and mergers.
In 1982, Monterey County Service Area #42 was reorganized into the Pebble Beach Community Services District. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) provided contractual fire services to PBCSD and the adjacent Monterey County Service Areas #39 and #43. These two County Service Areas were later reorganized into the Cypress Fire Protection District in 1993 with CDF continuing to provide contractual fire protection services to both agencies. Through shared personnel and other resources, this represents an effective and continuing example of a functional consolidation.
In 2000, the Carmel Valley Fire Protection District was reorganized to include the Mid Carmel Valley Fire Protection District and the Santa Lucia Preserve Community Services District. In 2005, the Naval Postgraduate School Fire Department was disbanded in lieu of concurrent jurisdiction fire protection from the City of Monterey.
The cities of Seaside and Marina also completed a fire service consolidation study in 2005 which concluded both jurisdictions could realize cost benefits by sharing a fire station in the Fort Ord reuse area and merging fire management functions, with an eventual benefit to full consolidation. Both City Councils endorsed moving forward with the recommendations; however the proposed consolidation failed to achieve final approval in 2007.
A 2007 fire service consolidation study by the cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Camel-by-the-Sea concluded that consolidatiori of fire services aniolig the thee cities would provide both fiscal savings and enhanced operational and service-level efficiencies and effectiveness. The study recommended a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) as the best governance model, and further recommended merging the existing fire management staffs of the three cities to provide the capacity to conduct the longer range detailed analysis and planning necessary to achieve full consolidation. Monterey
subsequently began providing contractual duty chief services to both Pacific Grove and Camel in early 2008, and the Monterey and Pacific Grove fire departments were fully consolidated in December 2008 with Pacific Grove contracting with Monterey for fire protection services.
In October 2008, the Camel Valley Fire District hosted a meeting of all Monterey County fire agency policy and executive-level leaders to discuss opportunities for fire service partnerships. This meeting highlighted the current state and local economic crisis as a window of opportunity to identify common interests and explore common sense alternatives to reduce costs and maintain vital public safety services to our respective communities.
It should be noted that Monterey currently provides fire service to Sand City while Seaside provides for Del Rey Oaks.
This summary illustrates the numerous studies and efforts to date to improve the organizational, operational, and fiscal effectiveness and efficiencies of Monterey Peninsula fire services through joint operations and shared services.
STAFF REVIEW
An October 2009 Seaside Fire Department management and staffing study
recommended that Seaside conthe and expand their efforts with thk city of Monterey to include discussions regarding the feasibility of forming a sub-regional partnership to provide fire protection and EMS services. This became the nexus for a meeting of policy and executive leaders representing the cities of Monterey, Seaside, Pacific Grove, Marina, Camel-by-the-Sea, Del Rey Oaks, the Presidio of Monterey, Monterey Peninsula Airport District, and Salinas Rural and Camel Valley Fire Districts in November 2009 to further discuss the concept of joint fire services. This
meeting highlighted the current window of opportunity to achieve fiscal and operational efficiencies by improving organizational efficiencies in the multiple small fire agencies within the greater Monterey Peninsula region. This discussion resulted in general consensus that the concept of a joint fire agency has sufficient merit to warrant further discussion and analysis.
The objectives of the proposed analysis include working cooperatively and
transparently with key stakeholders to:
Identify and frame the key issues and goals;
Define the scope and scale of a joint fire services agency;
Identify and explore shared governance options and associated costs; and
Develop guiding principles.
The anticipated outcome of this initial analysis is a preferred shared fire services governance alternative for Council's consideration and policy direction regarding further detailed planning. Staff anticipates completion of the initial analysis in early 2010.
Staff recommends that Council authorize staff to participate in an initial study and analysis of joint fire service options. The requested Council action does not commit the City to any proposed outcome, but rather provides the authority to participate in the analysis necessary to determine whether any of the potential joint service options could benefit Camel-by-the-Sea.
FISCAL IMPACT
Staff anticipates limited fiscal implications consisting primarily of staff time and resources within current budget allocations to complete the requested initial analysis.
The long-term fiscal implications of joint fire services are yet to be determined and will be presented to Council in a future report.
SUMMARY
The Council could choose not to pursue an analysis of joint fire services at this time.
The requested action, however, is consistent with the Council's goal of working to improve our residents' quality of life and explore agreements or consolidations with other local fire departments that would produce a higher level of service to the entire region by reducing duplicate overhead and better utilizing existing resources.
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 2009-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN INITIAL EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS OF JOINT FIRE SERVICE OPTIONS
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey has provided contractual fire protection and emergency medical response services to the City of Sand City since 1993; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey has provided contractual fire protection and emergency medical response services to the City of Pacific Grove since December 2008; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey has been providing interim contractual fire
administration and support services to the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea since December 2008, and is actively engaged in efforts to secure a long-term agreement for fire protection and first responder emergency medical response services; and
WHEREAS, the City of Seaside recently completed a fire department management and staffing study which recommended that Seaside continue and expand their efforts with the City of Monterey to include discussions regarding the feasibility of forming a sub-regional partnership to provide fire protection and EMS services; and
WHEREAS, that said study concluded that consolidation of the three city fire departments is both operationally and fiscally feasible, and is a cost effective solution to improve the coordination, command, and control of fire services, with significant operational and servicelevel benefits; and
WHEREAS, other Monterey Peninsula jurisdictions have indicated a potential interest in a joint fire service partnerships; and
WHEREAS, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea desires to fully explore the benefits and costs associated with various joint fire service options.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA DOES:
1. Authorize participation in an initial exploration and analysis of joint fire service options with the following goals:
a. Reduce or maintain response time for each community
b. Lower ISO rating for each community
c. Lower operating cost for each community
d. Increase the number of people and equipment available for response
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA this 1st day of December 2009, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
SIGNED:
_______________________
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
Agenda Item Summary
Name: Consideration of a Resolution authorizing participation in an Initial Exploration and Analysis of Joint Fire Service Options.
Description: At a November meeting, Mayors, City Managers and Fire Department Managers discussed the concept of joint fire services. The main discussion of the meeting was to review the current opportunities given the shrinking financial resources available to public agencies. The discussion centered on the potential of achieving organizational and operational efficiencies through some joint fire service options. The general consensus of the group was to participate in further discussions and analysis of achieving joint fire services.
Overall Cost:
City Funds: $0 with this action/unknown as to any future expense.
Grant Funds: N/A
Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.
Important Considerations: Joint fire services should only be considered if improvements occur through a joint management oversight and improvements to operational efficiencies.
Decision Record: Several discussions have occurred over the past three to four years regarding fire shared services. To date, no action has been taken by the Council to expand beyond the current fire administration contract with the City of Monterey.
Reviewed:
Rich Guillen, City Administrator Date
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR McCLOUD AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: RICH GUILLEN, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: NOVEMBER 24,2009
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN AN INITIAL EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS OF JOINT FIRE SERVICE OPTIONS
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
BACKGROUND
The concept of shared fire protection services has been studied and implemented to varying degrees in Monterey County for several decades. A 1981 Monterey County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) study concluded that significant opportunities existed for both cost avoidance and actual cost savings through a variety of approaches which would more closely integrate City of Monterey and Monterey Peninsula Airport fire services. The study recommended merging the Monterey Airport Fire Department into the City of Monterey Fire Department with the Monterey
Airport contracting with the City department for fire services. An additional study recommendation, improving joint training and operations among all Monterey Peninsula fire agencies, has been accomplished to a large degree through common performance standards, joint and multi-agency training, common equipment standards, automatic and mutual aid agreements, shared command and administrative services, and functional and actual consolidations and mergers.
In 1982, Monterey County Service Area #42 was reorganized into the Pebble Beach Community Services District. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) provided contractual fire services to PBCSD and the adjacent Monterey County Service Areas #39 and #43. These two County Service Areas were later reorganized into the Cypress Fire Protection District in 1993 with CDF continuing to provide contractual fire protection services to both agencies. Through shared personnel and other resources, this represents an effective and continuing example of a functional consolidation.
In 2000, the Carmel Valley Fire Protection District was reorganized to include the Mid Carmel Valley Fire Protection District and the Santa Lucia Preserve Community Services District. In 2005, the Naval Postgraduate School Fire Department was disbanded in lieu of concurrent jurisdiction fire protection from the City of Monterey.
The cities of Seaside and Marina also completed a fire service consolidation study in 2005 which concluded both jurisdictions could realize cost benefits by sharing a fire station in the Fort Ord reuse area and merging fire management functions, with an eventual benefit to full consolidation. Both City Councils endorsed moving forward with the recommendations; however the proposed consolidation failed to achieve final approval in 2007.
A 2007 fire service consolidation study by the cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Camel-by-the-Sea concluded that consolidatiori of fire services aniolig the thee cities would provide both fiscal savings and enhanced operational and service-level efficiencies and effectiveness. The study recommended a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) as the best governance model, and further recommended merging the existing fire management staffs of the three cities to provide the capacity to conduct the longer range detailed analysis and planning necessary to achieve full consolidation. Monterey
subsequently began providing contractual duty chief services to both Pacific Grove and Camel in early 2008, and the Monterey and Pacific Grove fire departments were fully consolidated in December 2008 with Pacific Grove contracting with Monterey for fire protection services.
In October 2008, the Camel Valley Fire District hosted a meeting of all Monterey County fire agency policy and executive-level leaders to discuss opportunities for fire service partnerships. This meeting highlighted the current state and local economic crisis as a window of opportunity to identify common interests and explore common sense alternatives to reduce costs and maintain vital public safety services to our respective communities.
It should be noted that Monterey currently provides fire service to Sand City while Seaside provides for Del Rey Oaks.
This summary illustrates the numerous studies and efforts to date to improve the organizational, operational, and fiscal effectiveness and efficiencies of Monterey Peninsula fire services through joint operations and shared services.
STAFF REVIEW
An October 2009 Seaside Fire Department management and staffing study
recommended that Seaside conthe and expand their efforts with thk city of Monterey to include discussions regarding the feasibility of forming a sub-regional partnership to provide fire protection and EMS services. This became the nexus for a meeting of policy and executive leaders representing the cities of Monterey, Seaside, Pacific Grove, Marina, Camel-by-the-Sea, Del Rey Oaks, the Presidio of Monterey, Monterey Peninsula Airport District, and Salinas Rural and Camel Valley Fire Districts in November 2009 to further discuss the concept of joint fire services. This
meeting highlighted the current window of opportunity to achieve fiscal and operational efficiencies by improving organizational efficiencies in the multiple small fire agencies within the greater Monterey Peninsula region. This discussion resulted in general consensus that the concept of a joint fire agency has sufficient merit to warrant further discussion and analysis.
The objectives of the proposed analysis include working cooperatively and
transparently with key stakeholders to:
Identify and frame the key issues and goals;
Define the scope and scale of a joint fire services agency;
Identify and explore shared governance options and associated costs; and
Develop guiding principles.
The anticipated outcome of this initial analysis is a preferred shared fire services governance alternative for Council's consideration and policy direction regarding further detailed planning. Staff anticipates completion of the initial analysis in early 2010.
Staff recommends that Council authorize staff to participate in an initial study and analysis of joint fire service options. The requested Council action does not commit the City to any proposed outcome, but rather provides the authority to participate in the analysis necessary to determine whether any of the potential joint service options could benefit Camel-by-the-Sea.
FISCAL IMPACT
Staff anticipates limited fiscal implications consisting primarily of staff time and resources within current budget allocations to complete the requested initial analysis.
The long-term fiscal implications of joint fire services are yet to be determined and will be presented to Council in a future report.
SUMMARY
The Council could choose not to pursue an analysis of joint fire services at this time.
The requested action, however, is consistent with the Council's goal of working to improve our residents' quality of life and explore agreements or consolidations with other local fire departments that would produce a higher level of service to the entire region by reducing duplicate overhead and better utilizing existing resources.
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 2009-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN INITIAL EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS OF JOINT FIRE SERVICE OPTIONS
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey has provided contractual fire protection and emergency medical response services to the City of Sand City since 1993; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey has provided contractual fire protection and emergency medical response services to the City of Pacific Grove since December 2008; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey has been providing interim contractual fire
administration and support services to the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea since December 2008, and is actively engaged in efforts to secure a long-term agreement for fire protection and first responder emergency medical response services; and
WHEREAS, the City of Seaside recently completed a fire department management and staffing study which recommended that Seaside continue and expand their efforts with the City of Monterey to include discussions regarding the feasibility of forming a sub-regional partnership to provide fire protection and EMS services; and
WHEREAS, that said study concluded that consolidation of the three city fire departments is both operationally and fiscally feasible, and is a cost effective solution to improve the coordination, command, and control of fire services, with significant operational and servicelevel benefits; and
WHEREAS, other Monterey Peninsula jurisdictions have indicated a potential interest in a joint fire service partnerships; and
WHEREAS, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea desires to fully explore the benefits and costs associated with various joint fire service options.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA DOES:
1. Authorize participation in an initial exploration and analysis of joint fire service options with the following goals:
a. Reduce or maintain response time for each community
b. Lower ISO rating for each community
c. Lower operating cost for each community
d. Increase the number of people and equipment available for response
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA this 1st day of December 2009, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
SIGNED:
_______________________
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL: Resolution for Participation in a Monterey Peninsula Regional Police Special Response Unit (SRU)
City Council
Agenda Item Summary
Name: Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea to participate in a Monterey Peninsula regional police special response unit (SRU).
Description: The police chiefs from six Peninsula cities and CSU-Monterey Bay worked together to develop a coordinated, well-staffed local tactical special response unit (SRU), for rapid deployment in emergency situations. This might include situations such as an active shooter, armed and barricaded persons, high-risk search warrant service, or a hostage situation. This effort will support other tactical teams in Monterey County. The team was created under a memorandum of understanding agreement among the participating cities.
In August 2009, the city attorneys and risk managers representing the
Peninsula cities approved the agreement. The team has received grant funding from the Monterey County Homeland Security Grant Approval
Authority (GAA) in its 2007, 2008, and 2009 grants cycles ($407,000) to fully train and supply the team with a transport vehicle, uniforms, personal protection, and communication equipment. Staff requests that the Council adopt a Resolution to support Carmel’s future commitment. The Memorandum of Agreement was reviewed by the City Attorney.
Overall Cost:
City Funds: $2,245.00 and $4,491.00 annually (Account 01-74011).
Grant Funds: $407,000 for the entire team through 2009
Staff Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign a multiyear agency agreement confirming the City’s participation, and financial obligation costs.
Important Considerations: The formation of a local special response unit (SRU) for rapid deployment is a critical component for public safety and for patrol officers on the perimeter of a critical incident. The City’s participation will ensure a well-trained team can respond to any crisis situation.
Decision Record: None
Reviewed by:
______________________________ _________________
Rich Guillen, City Administrator Date
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
RESOLUTION 2009-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA TO PARTICIPATE IN A MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL POLICE SPECIAL RESPONSE UNIT (SRU)
WHEREAS, the Peninsula is a unique area in Monterey County comprised of seven smaller cities containing military installations such as the Naval Postgraduate School and Defense Language Institute, and two regional airports, California State University at Monterey Bay, Monterey Peninsula College, and significant tourist destinations such as the Monterey Bay Aquarium that are potential terrorism targets; and
WHEREAS, violent crime is a constant issue, so the demand for a highly prepared and trained special weapons and tactics team that can respond rapidly has existed for many years and continues to grow; and
WHEREAS, while the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office maintains a fully trained and capable SWAT team, the distance of the Sheriff’s Office to the Monterey Peninsula and the physical size of Monterey County result in an unreasonable time delay for emergency response to the Peninsula; and
WHEREAS, the formation of a Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit would allow for the rapid deployment of a combined tactical, crisis negotiation team for critical incidents such as an active shooter, armed and barricaded persons, high risk search warrant service, or a hostage situation; and
WHEREAS, the high risk of injury to the public and team members, the escalation of active shooter incidents and the greater potential for terrorist acts, such as the use of weapons of mass destruction, make it vital to include a tactical medical component to the team; and
WHEREAS, the police chiefs of the Peninsula communities recognize that a regional approach to providing a well staffed, trained and equipped local tactical team is the most practical and realistic strategy to guarantee such a team is available for rapid deployment and can act as support to other tactical teams in Monterey County; and
WHEREAS, the team has received grant funding from the Monterey County Homeland Security Grant Approval Authority in its 2007, 2008 and 2009 grants cycles ($407,000 total) to fully train and supply the team with a transport vehicle, uniforms, personal protection and communications equipment; and
WHEREAS, the total cost of services for FY 2009-10 will be between $2,245.00 and $4,491.00 annually, comprising of overtime compensation for training and deployment for one Carmel officer assigned to the tactical and crisis negotiation teams; and
WHEREAS, funding will be charged to the General Fund Police Overtime Budget Account No. 01-74011.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARMEL-BY-THE SEA DOES:
1. Approve the Agreement with the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the cities of Marina, Seaside, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand City, and California State University at Monterey Bay to implement and deploy a Regional Police Special Response Unit (SRU) consisting of special weapons and tactics, tactical medicine and crisis negotiation team components, and;
2. Authorize the City Manager and Public Safety Director to execute the Agreement and all related documents on behalf of the City and subject to final review and approval by the City Attorney.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
on this 1st day of December 2009 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
SIGNED:
_________________________
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITIES OF SEASIDE, MARINA, MONTEREY, PACIFIC GROVE, SAND CITY, CARMEL, AND CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY AT MONTEREY BAY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION AND DEPLOYMENT OF A REGIONAL POLICE SPECIAL RESPONSE UNIT (SRU) CONSISTING OF SPECIAL WEAPONS & TACTICS, TACTICAL MEDICINE AND CRISIS NEGOTIATION TEAM COMPONENTS
This agreement (“Agreement”) is made by and between the Cities of SEASIDE, MARINA, MONTEREY, PACIFIC GROVE, SAND CITY, CARMEL, AND CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY AT MONTEREY BAY (hereinafter collectively as the “Parties” or “Police Agencies” or in their individual capacities as “Police Agency” or “Party”).
The Parties share not only common boundaries and/or geographic proximity on the Monterey Peninsula, but also mutual demands for police response. It is to the mutual advantage and benefit of the Parties to render supplemental police services to each other in the event of dangerous and unusual critical incidents, high-risk planned tactical operations, the execution of search warrants, or other situation that are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of the Police Agency having jurisdiction of the area in which the incident occurs.
The Parties recognize that mutual aid and cooperation in response to critical incidents can be enhanced and made more flexible and effective by combining police and other personnel for such situations.
The Parties desire to formally establish by this Agreement a regional effort to work in conjunction with each other to effectively meet such demands for police response and to clarify the legal relationships of the Parties.
In consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, it is agreed as follows:
1. Personnel and Selection.
a. The Regional Special Response Unit (“Regional SRU”) shall consist of a Special Weapons and Tactics (“SWAT”) Team of tactical officers, a Tactical Emergency Medic Team (“TEM’s”), and a Crisis Negotiations Team (“CNT”). The Regional SRU configuration may be comprised of as many sub-teams or reserve teams as needed for a particular incident.
b. A Regional SRU Board (“Board”) shall be established to provide oversight of the Regional SRU to include, but not be limited to, the adoption of policies and procedures, the selection of command staff and team members, Agreement compliance, and budget management. The Board shall consist of the Parties' police chiefs, and one city Party’s fire chief selected by the Board.
c. The Parties shall assign and maintain officers, supervisors, and employees for the Regional SRU sufficient to provide appropriate joint coverage for critical incidents as determined by the Board.
d. The Board shall establish minimum qualifications and selection process for team members, including, but not limited to, physical agility and tactical firearms qualifications. The Board shall mutually agree upon the selection of candidate(s) for the Regional SRU and each member of the Board will have final approval or rejection of any candidate, regardless of which Party employs the candidate.
2. Supervision and Command.
a. The incident commander of the Police Agency in whose jurisdiction a critical incident is located may request a response from the Regional SRU. The Regional SRU commander, in his or her sole discretion, shall decide whether the Regional SRU should respond to the incident. If the Regional SRU commander decides a Regional SRU response is appropriate, then each Police Agency should respond to the request for Regional SRU services as promptly and fully as possible.
b. All employees of the Parties participating in any response under this Agreement, or any training involving a Regional SRU exercise or event, shall be subject to the exclusive chain of command of the Regional SRU.
c. The Police Agency requesting Regional SRU assistance shall identify the incident commander. The incident commander must approve any tactical plan. The Police Agency incident commander shall work collaboratively with the Regional SRU commander to facilitate the Regional SRU response. The Regional SRU commander will take charge of the operational function of the Regional SRU and will present a tactical action plan to the Police
Agency incident commander for approval as soon as possible. The Police Agency incident commander must approve the Regional SRU commander’s tactical plan before its implementation.
d. In the event of the death of or serious injury to any person(s) when the circumstances of the death or injury involves a peace officer, the Regional SRU shall request that the Monterey County District Attorney's Office conduct an independent investigation pursuant to the Monterey County District Attorney’s Protocol For Officer-Involved Shootings (OIS) and In-Custody Death (ICD) protocol, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, or any version subsequently adopted.
e. In its sole discretion and pursuant to its own policy, each Police Agency is responsible for conducting its own internal affairs investigation pertaining to its own officers. In cases that involve officers from different Police Agencies, the investigation may be conducted by an independent law enforcement agency or consultant selected by the Board and with approval from the Police Agencies whose officers are subjects of the investigation. The cost of any joint investigation will be shared equally by the Police Agencies involved in the investigation.
3. Costs and Expenses.
a. No Police Agency furnishing aid pursuant to this Agreement shall be entitled to compensation for services rendered to a requesting Police Agency. Each Party (i) will be responsible for all personnel costs and obligations associated with any staff member it assigns to the Regional SRU, including, but not limited to, base salary and benefits, overtime salary and benefits, Worker’s Compensation benefits, death benefits, disability benefits, and safety officer industrial disability retirement benefits; and (ii) agrees to waive any and all subrogation rights against Parties that may accrue from payment of such benefits.
b. Each Party will also be responsible for the costs of all necessary individual tactical equipment and weapon(s) issued to the team member employed by the Party.
c. The Board will manage any grants received by the Regional SRU.
4. Policies and Procedures.
a. The Board shall establish and agree upon Standard Operating Procedures (“SOP”) for the operation of the Regional SRU.
b. The SOP will be consistent with the California Commission of P.O.S.T. (Peace Officers Standards and Training) “S.W.A.T. Operational Guidelines and Standardized Training Recommendations” report from July 2005, or as it may be amended or revised in the future.
c. The SOP shall include, but not be limited to, executive oversight of the Regional SRU, chain of command control over the critical incident responses, and procedures for activation of the Regional SRU in response to critical incidents. In cases of conflicting Police Agency policy regarding enforcement activities, including, but not limited to, shooting policy, approved weapons, pursuit policy) the policies of the officer's employing Police Agency in effect at the time of the enforcement activity shall apply.
5. Liability
a. In assigning personnel to the Regional SRU, or while performing under this Agreement, or while participating in Regional SRU training, each Party shall consider any such assignment, deployment, or training an act of “mutual aid” in assistance of a law enforcement agency pursuant to California Government Code sections 55632 and 55634.
b. The city or public entity whose Police Agency requests Regional SRU assistance shall indemnify, hold harmless, and defend all other agencies and public entities that are signatories to this agreement from any claims or liabilities that may arise out of the implementation of a Regional SRU tactical plan as described herein if (1) the request for Regional SRU response was authorized by the requesting agency incident commander, and
(2) the Regional SRU
commander approved response by the Regional SRU, and (3) a tactical plan was communicated to the requesting Police Agency incident commander by the Regional SRU commander, and (4) the requesting Police Agency incident commander approved the tactical plan, and (5) the conduct of the Regional SRU members was in compliance with the approved tactical plan.
c. In any and all other circumstances apart from the implementation of the Regional SRU tactical plan as set forth in Paragraph 5(b) above, each Party shall be responsible for the acts, errors, or omissions of its own assigned officers, agents, or employees and shall incur any liabilities arising out of the services and activities of those officers, agents, or employees while participating in the Regional SRU. Personnel assigned to perform services for the Regional SRU shall be deemed to be continuing under the employment of their respective employers, and shall continue to have the same powers, duties, privileges, responsibilities, and immunities
as are conferred upon them as peace officers or other employees in their own jurisdictions.
d. Except as set forth in Paragraph 5(b) above, each Party shall hold harmless, defend, and indemnify each and every other Party, its officers, agents, and employees from and against any liabilities, claims, actions, costs, damages or losses of any kind, including, but not limited to, death or injury to any person, and/or damage to property, arising out of the acts, errors, or omissions of its officers, agents, and employees under this Agreement.
e. Except as set forth in Paragraph 5(b) above, no Party shall be responsible for the acts, errors, or omissions of another Party's officers, agents, or employees, nor incur any liabilities arising out of the services and activities of another Party's officers, agents, or employees.
f. In the event of a civil claim (the “Underlying Claim”) by a third party (which could include an employee of one Party who is filing a civil claim) against any one or more Parties based on the Regional SRU’s activities, all Parties agree to defer any claims against another participating
agency, its officer(s) or employees until the Underlying Claim is settled or otherwise determined.
Thereafter, any claims between or among Parties shall be resolved in accordance with law.
h. Nothing in this Agreement shall be read as waiving or limiting any defense to claims of liability otherwise available to law enforcement officers, fire personnel, and/or public employees, such as the defense of qualified immunity. Nothing in this Agreement shall be read as intending
to create or creating a higher duty of care on the part of any Party or its officers than would otherwise exist under existing law and the involved Party’s own policies, practices, and procedures.
Personnel assigned to perform services for the SRU shall be deemed to be continuing under the employment of their respective employers, and shall continue to have the same powers, duties, privileges, responsibilities, and immunities as are conferred upon them as peace officers or fire
personnel or other employees in their own jurisdictions.
6. Implementation Guidelines.
The Police Chiefs of all the Parties shall jointly promulgate written guidelines for the implementation of this Agreement. Said guidelines shall be in writing and approved by a majority vote of the Board. Such guidelines may be changed as necessary from time to time.
7. Termination of Agreement.
Each Party may withdraw from participation in this Agreement at any time, without the consent of any other Party, upon giving all Parties 90 days written notice thereof.
8. Third Parties
This Agreement shall not be construed as, or deemed to be an Agreement for the benefit of any third party or parties, and no third party or parties shall have a right of action hereunder for any cause whatsoever.
9. Modification
This Agreement is the entire contract between the parties. This Agreement shall supercede any previous agreements, oral or written, implied or express, between the parties, with respect to implementation and deployment of the Regional SRU. No waiver or modification of this Agreement shall be valid unless it is in writing and executed by the Parties.
10. Independent Advice
Each Police Agency hereby represents and warrants that in executing this Agreement, it does so with full knowledge of the rights and duties it may have with respect to the other. Each Police Agency also represents and warrants that it has received independent legal advice from its attorney with respect to the matters set forth in this Agreement, and the rights and duties arising out of this Agreement.
11. Notices
All notices which are required or allowed under this Agreement shall be given to a Police Agency’s representative on the Board, or that Board Member’s designee. All notices shall be deemed given or sent when deposited, as certified mail or for overnight delivery, postage and fees prepaid, in the United States mails; when delivered to Federal Express, United Parcel Service, DHL WorldWide Express, or Airborne Express, for overnight delivery, charges prepaid or charged to the sender's account; when personally delivered to the recipient; when transmitted by electronic means, and such transmission is electronically confirmed as having been
successfully transmitted; or when delivered to the home or office of a recipient in the care of a person whom the sender has reason to believe will promptly communicate the notice to the recipient.
12. Dispute Resolution
If any dispute arises between the Parties as to proper interpretation or application of this Agreement, the Parties shall first meet and confer in a good faith attempt to resolve the matter between themselves. If the dispute is not resolved by meeting and conferring, the matter shall
be submitted for formal mediation to a mediator selected mutually by the parties. The expenses of such mediation shall be shared equally between the Parties.
13. Termination
This Agreement shall be for an indefinite term unless the Parties implement a joint exercise of powers agreement pursuant to Government Code section 6500, et. seq. (“JPA”) at which time this Agreement shall automatically terminate. Any Party may terminate its participation by
delivering a resolution of termination to the Regional SRU Board thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of such termination. The Parties shall work cooperatively toward the formation of a JPA with the goal being to have the necessary documents taken to each Party’s City Council
or other governing body for consideration by January 1, 2011. The City of Seaside will begin immediately to facilitate the formation of the joint powers authority.
14. Signatures.
This Agreement shall become effective once the Parties' City Council's or other governing body have approved its execution. Attached to this Agreement collectively as Exhibit “B” are the resolutions authorizing each Party to enter into this Agreement. Each Signatory to this Agreement certifies that he or she has the lawful authority to execute this Agreement for and on behalf of the Party named herein.
_______________________________ ______________________________
City of Seaside City of Marina
______________________________ ______________________________
City of Sand City City of Carmel
______________________________ ______________________________
City of Monterey
______________________________ ______________________________
City of Pacific Grove California State University at
Monterey Bay
Exhibit A
Monterey County District Attorney’s Protocol For Officer-Involved Shootings (OIS) and In-Custody Death (ICD) protocol
Exhibit B
Resolutions
Agenda Item Summary
Name: Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea to participate in a Monterey Peninsula regional police special response unit (SRU).
Description: The police chiefs from six Peninsula cities and CSU-Monterey Bay worked together to develop a coordinated, well-staffed local tactical special response unit (SRU), for rapid deployment in emergency situations. This might include situations such as an active shooter, armed and barricaded persons, high-risk search warrant service, or a hostage situation. This effort will support other tactical teams in Monterey County. The team was created under a memorandum of understanding agreement among the participating cities.
In August 2009, the city attorneys and risk managers representing the
Peninsula cities approved the agreement. The team has received grant funding from the Monterey County Homeland Security Grant Approval
Authority (GAA) in its 2007, 2008, and 2009 grants cycles ($407,000) to fully train and supply the team with a transport vehicle, uniforms, personal protection, and communication equipment. Staff requests that the Council adopt a Resolution to support Carmel’s future commitment. The Memorandum of Agreement was reviewed by the City Attorney.
Overall Cost:
City Funds: $2,245.00 and $4,491.00 annually (Account 01-74011).
Grant Funds: $407,000 for the entire team through 2009
Staff Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign a multiyear agency agreement confirming the City’s participation, and financial obligation costs.
Important Considerations: The formation of a local special response unit (SRU) for rapid deployment is a critical component for public safety and for patrol officers on the perimeter of a critical incident. The City’s participation will ensure a well-trained team can respond to any crisis situation.
Decision Record: None
Reviewed by:
______________________________ _________________
Rich Guillen, City Administrator Date
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
RESOLUTION 2009-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA TO PARTICIPATE IN A MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL POLICE SPECIAL RESPONSE UNIT (SRU)
WHEREAS, the Peninsula is a unique area in Monterey County comprised of seven smaller cities containing military installations such as the Naval Postgraduate School and Defense Language Institute, and two regional airports, California State University at Monterey Bay, Monterey Peninsula College, and significant tourist destinations such as the Monterey Bay Aquarium that are potential terrorism targets; and
WHEREAS, violent crime is a constant issue, so the demand for a highly prepared and trained special weapons and tactics team that can respond rapidly has existed for many years and continues to grow; and
WHEREAS, while the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office maintains a fully trained and capable SWAT team, the distance of the Sheriff’s Office to the Monterey Peninsula and the physical size of Monterey County result in an unreasonable time delay for emergency response to the Peninsula; and
WHEREAS, the formation of a Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit would allow for the rapid deployment of a combined tactical, crisis negotiation team for critical incidents such as an active shooter, armed and barricaded persons, high risk search warrant service, or a hostage situation; and
WHEREAS, the high risk of injury to the public and team members, the escalation of active shooter incidents and the greater potential for terrorist acts, such as the use of weapons of mass destruction, make it vital to include a tactical medical component to the team; and
WHEREAS, the police chiefs of the Peninsula communities recognize that a regional approach to providing a well staffed, trained and equipped local tactical team is the most practical and realistic strategy to guarantee such a team is available for rapid deployment and can act as support to other tactical teams in Monterey County; and
WHEREAS, the team has received grant funding from the Monterey County Homeland Security Grant Approval Authority in its 2007, 2008 and 2009 grants cycles ($407,000 total) to fully train and supply the team with a transport vehicle, uniforms, personal protection and communications equipment; and
WHEREAS, the total cost of services for FY 2009-10 will be between $2,245.00 and $4,491.00 annually, comprising of overtime compensation for training and deployment for one Carmel officer assigned to the tactical and crisis negotiation teams; and
WHEREAS, funding will be charged to the General Fund Police Overtime Budget Account No. 01-74011.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARMEL-BY-THE SEA DOES:
1. Approve the Agreement with the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the cities of Marina, Seaside, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand City, and California State University at Monterey Bay to implement and deploy a Regional Police Special Response Unit (SRU) consisting of special weapons and tactics, tactical medicine and crisis negotiation team components, and;
2. Authorize the City Manager and Public Safety Director to execute the Agreement and all related documents on behalf of the City and subject to final review and approval by the City Attorney.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
on this 1st day of December 2009 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
SIGNED:
_________________________
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________
Heidi Burch, City Clerk
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITIES OF SEASIDE, MARINA, MONTEREY, PACIFIC GROVE, SAND CITY, CARMEL, AND CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY AT MONTEREY BAY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION AND DEPLOYMENT OF A REGIONAL POLICE SPECIAL RESPONSE UNIT (SRU) CONSISTING OF SPECIAL WEAPONS & TACTICS, TACTICAL MEDICINE AND CRISIS NEGOTIATION TEAM COMPONENTS
This agreement (“Agreement”) is made by and between the Cities of SEASIDE, MARINA, MONTEREY, PACIFIC GROVE, SAND CITY, CARMEL, AND CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY AT MONTEREY BAY (hereinafter collectively as the “Parties” or “Police Agencies” or in their individual capacities as “Police Agency” or “Party”).
The Parties share not only common boundaries and/or geographic proximity on the Monterey Peninsula, but also mutual demands for police response. It is to the mutual advantage and benefit of the Parties to render supplemental police services to each other in the event of dangerous and unusual critical incidents, high-risk planned tactical operations, the execution of search warrants, or other situation that are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of the Police Agency having jurisdiction of the area in which the incident occurs.
The Parties recognize that mutual aid and cooperation in response to critical incidents can be enhanced and made more flexible and effective by combining police and other personnel for such situations.
The Parties desire to formally establish by this Agreement a regional effort to work in conjunction with each other to effectively meet such demands for police response and to clarify the legal relationships of the Parties.
In consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, it is agreed as follows:
1. Personnel and Selection.
a. The Regional Special Response Unit (“Regional SRU”) shall consist of a Special Weapons and Tactics (“SWAT”) Team of tactical officers, a Tactical Emergency Medic Team (“TEM’s”), and a Crisis Negotiations Team (“CNT”). The Regional SRU configuration may be comprised of as many sub-teams or reserve teams as needed for a particular incident.
b. A Regional SRU Board (“Board”) shall be established to provide oversight of the Regional SRU to include, but not be limited to, the adoption of policies and procedures, the selection of command staff and team members, Agreement compliance, and budget management. The Board shall consist of the Parties' police chiefs, and one city Party’s fire chief selected by the Board.
c. The Parties shall assign and maintain officers, supervisors, and employees for the Regional SRU sufficient to provide appropriate joint coverage for critical incidents as determined by the Board.
d. The Board shall establish minimum qualifications and selection process for team members, including, but not limited to, physical agility and tactical firearms qualifications. The Board shall mutually agree upon the selection of candidate(s) for the Regional SRU and each member of the Board will have final approval or rejection of any candidate, regardless of which Party employs the candidate.
2. Supervision and Command.
a. The incident commander of the Police Agency in whose jurisdiction a critical incident is located may request a response from the Regional SRU. The Regional SRU commander, in his or her sole discretion, shall decide whether the Regional SRU should respond to the incident. If the Regional SRU commander decides a Regional SRU response is appropriate, then each Police Agency should respond to the request for Regional SRU services as promptly and fully as possible.
b. All employees of the Parties participating in any response under this Agreement, or any training involving a Regional SRU exercise or event, shall be subject to the exclusive chain of command of the Regional SRU.
c. The Police Agency requesting Regional SRU assistance shall identify the incident commander. The incident commander must approve any tactical plan. The Police Agency incident commander shall work collaboratively with the Regional SRU commander to facilitate the Regional SRU response. The Regional SRU commander will take charge of the operational function of the Regional SRU and will present a tactical action plan to the Police
Agency incident commander for approval as soon as possible. The Police Agency incident commander must approve the Regional SRU commander’s tactical plan before its implementation.
d. In the event of the death of or serious injury to any person(s) when the circumstances of the death or injury involves a peace officer, the Regional SRU shall request that the Monterey County District Attorney's Office conduct an independent investigation pursuant to the Monterey County District Attorney’s Protocol For Officer-Involved Shootings (OIS) and In-Custody Death (ICD) protocol, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, or any version subsequently adopted.
e. In its sole discretion and pursuant to its own policy, each Police Agency is responsible for conducting its own internal affairs investigation pertaining to its own officers. In cases that involve officers from different Police Agencies, the investigation may be conducted by an independent law enforcement agency or consultant selected by the Board and with approval from the Police Agencies whose officers are subjects of the investigation. The cost of any joint investigation will be shared equally by the Police Agencies involved in the investigation.
3. Costs and Expenses.
a. No Police Agency furnishing aid pursuant to this Agreement shall be entitled to compensation for services rendered to a requesting Police Agency. Each Party (i) will be responsible for all personnel costs and obligations associated with any staff member it assigns to the Regional SRU, including, but not limited to, base salary and benefits, overtime salary and benefits, Worker’s Compensation benefits, death benefits, disability benefits, and safety officer industrial disability retirement benefits; and (ii) agrees to waive any and all subrogation rights against Parties that may accrue from payment of such benefits.
b. Each Party will also be responsible for the costs of all necessary individual tactical equipment and weapon(s) issued to the team member employed by the Party.
c. The Board will manage any grants received by the Regional SRU.
4. Policies and Procedures.
a. The Board shall establish and agree upon Standard Operating Procedures (“SOP”) for the operation of the Regional SRU.
b. The SOP will be consistent with the California Commission of P.O.S.T. (Peace Officers Standards and Training) “S.W.A.T. Operational Guidelines and Standardized Training Recommendations” report from July 2005, or as it may be amended or revised in the future.
c. The SOP shall include, but not be limited to, executive oversight of the Regional SRU, chain of command control over the critical incident responses, and procedures for activation of the Regional SRU in response to critical incidents. In cases of conflicting Police Agency policy regarding enforcement activities, including, but not limited to, shooting policy, approved weapons, pursuit policy) the policies of the officer's employing Police Agency in effect at the time of the enforcement activity shall apply.
5. Liability
a. In assigning personnel to the Regional SRU, or while performing under this Agreement, or while participating in Regional SRU training, each Party shall consider any such assignment, deployment, or training an act of “mutual aid” in assistance of a law enforcement agency pursuant to California Government Code sections 55632 and 55634.
b. The city or public entity whose Police Agency requests Regional SRU assistance shall indemnify, hold harmless, and defend all other agencies and public entities that are signatories to this agreement from any claims or liabilities that may arise out of the implementation of a Regional SRU tactical plan as described herein if (1) the request for Regional SRU response was authorized by the requesting agency incident commander, and
(2) the Regional SRU
commander approved response by the Regional SRU, and (3) a tactical plan was communicated to the requesting Police Agency incident commander by the Regional SRU commander, and (4) the requesting Police Agency incident commander approved the tactical plan, and (5) the conduct of the Regional SRU members was in compliance with the approved tactical plan.
c. In any and all other circumstances apart from the implementation of the Regional SRU tactical plan as set forth in Paragraph 5(b) above, each Party shall be responsible for the acts, errors, or omissions of its own assigned officers, agents, or employees and shall incur any liabilities arising out of the services and activities of those officers, agents, or employees while participating in the Regional SRU. Personnel assigned to perform services for the Regional SRU shall be deemed to be continuing under the employment of their respective employers, and shall continue to have the same powers, duties, privileges, responsibilities, and immunities
as are conferred upon them as peace officers or other employees in their own jurisdictions.
d. Except as set forth in Paragraph 5(b) above, each Party shall hold harmless, defend, and indemnify each and every other Party, its officers, agents, and employees from and against any liabilities, claims, actions, costs, damages or losses of any kind, including, but not limited to, death or injury to any person, and/or damage to property, arising out of the acts, errors, or omissions of its officers, agents, and employees under this Agreement.
e. Except as set forth in Paragraph 5(b) above, no Party shall be responsible for the acts, errors, or omissions of another Party's officers, agents, or employees, nor incur any liabilities arising out of the services and activities of another Party's officers, agents, or employees.
f. In the event of a civil claim (the “Underlying Claim”) by a third party (which could include an employee of one Party who is filing a civil claim) against any one or more Parties based on the Regional SRU’s activities, all Parties agree to defer any claims against another participating
agency, its officer(s) or employees until the Underlying Claim is settled or otherwise determined.
Thereafter, any claims between or among Parties shall be resolved in accordance with law.
h. Nothing in this Agreement shall be read as waiving or limiting any defense to claims of liability otherwise available to law enforcement officers, fire personnel, and/or public employees, such as the defense of qualified immunity. Nothing in this Agreement shall be read as intending
to create or creating a higher duty of care on the part of any Party or its officers than would otherwise exist under existing law and the involved Party’s own policies, practices, and procedures.
Personnel assigned to perform services for the SRU shall be deemed to be continuing under the employment of their respective employers, and shall continue to have the same powers, duties, privileges, responsibilities, and immunities as are conferred upon them as peace officers or fire
personnel or other employees in their own jurisdictions.
6. Implementation Guidelines.
The Police Chiefs of all the Parties shall jointly promulgate written guidelines for the implementation of this Agreement. Said guidelines shall be in writing and approved by a majority vote of the Board. Such guidelines may be changed as necessary from time to time.
7. Termination of Agreement.
Each Party may withdraw from participation in this Agreement at any time, without the consent of any other Party, upon giving all Parties 90 days written notice thereof.
8. Third Parties
This Agreement shall not be construed as, or deemed to be an Agreement for the benefit of any third party or parties, and no third party or parties shall have a right of action hereunder for any cause whatsoever.
9. Modification
This Agreement is the entire contract between the parties. This Agreement shall supercede any previous agreements, oral or written, implied or express, between the parties, with respect to implementation and deployment of the Regional SRU. No waiver or modification of this Agreement shall be valid unless it is in writing and executed by the Parties.
10. Independent Advice
Each Police Agency hereby represents and warrants that in executing this Agreement, it does so with full knowledge of the rights and duties it may have with respect to the other. Each Police Agency also represents and warrants that it has received independent legal advice from its attorney with respect to the matters set forth in this Agreement, and the rights and duties arising out of this Agreement.
11. Notices
All notices which are required or allowed under this Agreement shall be given to a Police Agency’s representative on the Board, or that Board Member’s designee. All notices shall be deemed given or sent when deposited, as certified mail or for overnight delivery, postage and fees prepaid, in the United States mails; when delivered to Federal Express, United Parcel Service, DHL WorldWide Express, or Airborne Express, for overnight delivery, charges prepaid or charged to the sender's account; when personally delivered to the recipient; when transmitted by electronic means, and such transmission is electronically confirmed as having been
successfully transmitted; or when delivered to the home or office of a recipient in the care of a person whom the sender has reason to believe will promptly communicate the notice to the recipient.
12. Dispute Resolution
If any dispute arises between the Parties as to proper interpretation or application of this Agreement, the Parties shall first meet and confer in a good faith attempt to resolve the matter between themselves. If the dispute is not resolved by meeting and conferring, the matter shall
be submitted for formal mediation to a mediator selected mutually by the parties. The expenses of such mediation shall be shared equally between the Parties.
13. Termination
This Agreement shall be for an indefinite term unless the Parties implement a joint exercise of powers agreement pursuant to Government Code section 6500, et. seq. (“JPA”) at which time this Agreement shall automatically terminate. Any Party may terminate its participation by
delivering a resolution of termination to the Regional SRU Board thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of such termination. The Parties shall work cooperatively toward the formation of a JPA with the goal being to have the necessary documents taken to each Party’s City Council
or other governing body for consideration by January 1, 2011. The City of Seaside will begin immediately to facilitate the formation of the joint powers authority.
14. Signatures.
This Agreement shall become effective once the Parties' City Council's or other governing body have approved its execution. Attached to this Agreement collectively as Exhibit “B” are the resolutions authorizing each Party to enter into this Agreement. Each Signatory to this Agreement certifies that he or she has the lawful authority to execute this Agreement for and on behalf of the Party named herein.
_______________________________ ______________________________
City of Seaside City of Marina
______________________________ ______________________________
City of Sand City City of Carmel
______________________________ ______________________________
City of Monterey
______________________________ ______________________________
City of Pacific Grove California State University at
Monterey Bay
Exhibit A
Monterey County District Attorney’s Protocol For Officer-Involved Shootings (OIS) and In-Custody Death (ICD) protocol
Exhibit B
Resolutions
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)