City of Hesperia

HESPERIA CITY COUNCIL

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY

HOUSING AUTHORITY

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

WATER DISTRICT

AGENDA

Regular Joint Meetings 1st and 3rd Tuesday Date: June 18, 2013 REGULAR MEETING

Time: 5:00 P.M. (Closed Session)

6:30 P.M. (Regular Meeting)

CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS

Bill Holland, Mayor

Thurston “Smitty” Smith, Mayor Pro Tem

Russ Blewett, Council Member

Mike Leonard, Council Member

Eric Schmidt, Council Member

- - - - - - -

Mike Podegracz, City Manager

Eric L. Dunn, City Attorney

City of Hesperia Council Chambers

9700 Seventh Avenue Hesperia, CA 92345

City Clerk’s Office: (760) 947-1007

Agendas and Staff Reports are available on the City Website

www.cityofhesperia.us

Documents produced by the City and distributed less than 72 hours prior to the

meeting, regarding items on the agendas, will be made available in the City Clerk’s Office located at

9700 Seventh Avenue during normal business hours.

http://www.cityofhesperia.us/

NOTE: In compliance with the Americans with Disability Act, if you need

special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City

Clerk’s Office at (760) 947-1007 or (760) 947-1056. Notification 48 hours

prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements

to ensure accessibility.

June 18, 2013City Council Meeting Agenda

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

HESPERIA CITY COUNCIL


HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY

HESPERIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

HESPERIA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

HESPERIA WATER DISTRICT

As a courtesy, please silence your cell phones, pagers, and other electronic devices while the meeting is

in session. Thank you.

Prior to action of the Council, any member of the audience will have the opportunity to address the legislative

body on any item listed on the agenda, including those on the Consent Calendar. Comments are limited to three

(3) minutes for Public Comments, Consent Calendar and New Business and five (5) minutes for Public Hearings.

PLEASE SUBMIT A COMMENT CARD TO THE CITY CLERK WITH THE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER NOTED.

CLOSED SESSION - 5:00 PM

Roll Call

Mayor Bill Holland

Mayor Pro Tem Thurston "Smitty" Smith

Council Member Russell Blewett

Council Member Mike Leonard

Council Member Eric Schmidt

Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation:

Government Code Section 54956.9(d)2

13-286

1. Two (2) Cases

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation


13-287

1. Hesperia Housing, LP

Conference with Labor Negotiator

Government Code Section 54957.6

13-500

Negotiations between the City of Hesperia and the San Bernardino Public Employees

Association (SBPEA) and non-represented employees.

CALL TO ORDER - 6:30 PM

A. Invocation by Ron Wilson New Life Chapel Church

B. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag

Page 2 City of Hesperia Printed on 6/13/2013


C. Roll Call

Mayor Bill Holland





D. Agenda Revisions and Announcements by City Clerk

E. Closed Session Reports by City Attorney

ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS

13-055

1. Presentation of Employee of the Month of May to Keith Cheong,

Accountant by George Pirsko, Sr. Management Analyst.

2. Presentation of Employee of the Month of June to Dena Elmerakeb,

Customer Service Representative by Jill Wyman, Customer Service

Supervisor.

3. Presentation on Mormon Helping Hands Program by Council Member

Schmidt.

4. Community Events Calendar by Melinda Sayre-Castro.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Please complete a “Comment Card” and give it to the City Clerk. Comments are limited to three (3) minutes per

individual. State your name for the record before making your presentation. Disclosure of your address is

optional, but very helpful for the follow-up process.

Under the provisions of the Brown Act, the Council is prohibited from taking action on oral requests. However,

Council/Agency/Authority/Commission/Board Members may respond briefly or refer the communication to staff.

The Council/Agency/Authority/Commission/Board may also request the City Clerk to calendar an item related to

your communication at a future meeting.

1) City Council

2) Fire District

3) Water District

JOINT CONSENT CALENDAR


http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?m=l&id=/matter.aspx?key=1322


1. 13-313

Consideration of the Draft Minutes from the Regular Meeting held Tuesday,

June 4, 2013 and the Special Budget Workshop held Tuesday, June 11, 2013.

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council approve the Draft Minutes from the

Regular Meeting held Tuesday, June 4, 2013 and the Special Budget

Workshop held Tuesday, June 11, 2013.

Staff Person: Assistant City Clerk Melinda Sayre-Castro

Draft Meeting Minutes 6-4-2013

Min SBW 2013-06-11

Attachments:

2. 13-295

Warrant Run Report (City - Successor Agency - Housing Authority -

Community Development Commission - Fire - Water)

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Council/Board ratify the warrant run and payroll

report for the City, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community

Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development

Commission, Fire District, and Water District.

Staff Person: Assistant City Manager/Management Services Brian Johnson

SR Warrant Run Report 6-18-2013

Attachment 1 - Warrant Run

Attachments:

3. 13-033

Treasurer's Cash Report for the period ended April 30, 2013

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Council/Board accept the Treasurer's Cash Report

for the City, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment

Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission,

Fire District, and Water District.


SR Treasurer's Report 6-18-2013

Attachment 1 - Investment Report

Attachments:



http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=f3d5ebad-ccec-48a3-bbdb-fe070310b3af.pdf

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=dba2847e-2898-4e1d-aec2-20444c394c7b.docx


http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=bd1f831b-08d0-44e4-a97f-46f294b6b208.dot

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=56d59c01-1721-46db-b124-32d05606ef1b.xlsx


http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=5949b70b-b254-46c0-8724-c95b315b4c1c.docx

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=4dd7cf15-2cd4-4dd0-b915-2fde6406dfb7.pdf

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 1

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 13

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 15


4. 13-283

Amend and Increase Contract 2009-10-092 with Goodspeed Auto Fueling

Systems

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council, Chair and Board Members of the

Hesperia Water District, and the Successor Agency to Hesperia Community

Redevelopment Agency authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment

to contract number 2009-10-092 with Goodspeed Auto Fueling Systems,

thereby extending the contract for an additional year and increasing the

contract authority an additional $400,000 with a new not-to-exceed amount of

$1,750,000.

Staff Person: Public Works Manager Dale Burke

SR Goodspeed 6-18-2013

Attachment 1 - Goodspeed Extension Letter

Attachments:

5. 13-288

Amend and Increase Contract 2008-09-017 with Wes Mobile

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Council, Chairman and Board Members of the

Hesperia Water District, and the Successor Agency to Hesperia Community

Redevelopment Agency authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment

to contract number 2008-09-017 with Wes Mobile Wash, thereby extending the

contract for an additional year and increasing the contract authority an

additional $9,200 for Fiscal Year 2013-14 with a new not-to-exceed amount of

$57,000.


SR Wes Mobile Car Wash 6-18-2013Attachments:



http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=e39999ea-9b62-4009-94e5-9ee92535ad5b.docx

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=f06af01a-aacc-4d5d-b852-ccb9b34a7f0b.pdf


http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=0409cdb1-2a9d-4405-ab71-cfd3f9c9971c.docx

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 25

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 29


6. 13-289

Fleet Maintenance Services for Fiscal Year 2013-14

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Council, Chairman and Board Members, Hesperia

Water District and the Successor Agency to Hesperia Community

Redevelopment Agency authorize the City Manager to execute a Purchase

Requisition, with the Hesperia Unified School District, in the amount of

$406,000 which includes a contingency of 10% (for possible further

maintenance increases) for the provision of providing vehicle /equipment

maintenance on City, District and Agency vehicles, for Fiscal Year 2013-14.

Staff Person: Director of Development Services Scott Priester

SR Fleet Maintenance 6-18-2013

Attachment 1 - Fleet Maintenance Services

Attachments:

7. 13-290

Paving Material Demands for Fiscal Year 2013-14

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute

an open purchase order with Vulcan Materials Company and Blue Diamond

Materials of Oro Grande, California, for asphalt materials necessary to repair

the City streets in the not-to-exceed amount of $100,000.


SR Paving Materials 6-18-2013Attachments:

8. 13-291Security Services Contract, Mojave Corporate Yard and Civic Center

Recommended Action:

It is recommend that the City Council and the Board of the Hesperia Water

District authorize the City Manager to execute a new three (3) year

Professional Services Agreement with True Liberty Protection Services in the

not-to-exceed amount of $434,500.00 for the three years.


SR Security Services 6-18-2013

Attachment 1 - Security Services Contract

Attachments:



http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=f0c5cb93-ea13-4c76-8f05-b233ce26cdfc.docx

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=b57d637b-8daa-4a79-bdd7-4ff7d2b59c5b.pdf


http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=7f58daf3-7871-4143-a7c5-fb920b4073af.docx


http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=f7bdbbf6-1a4d-41e1-be5e-513a0d9e4cf6.docx

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=57305a54-1aa4-4349-9c45-883a47f65fb7.docx

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 31

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 37

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 43

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text


9. 13-303

FY 2012-13 Fourth Quarter Budget Amendments

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the following Resolutions be adopted amending the

respective Fiscal Year 2012-13 Budgets for the City of Hesperia, and Hesperia

Water District:

1. City of Hesperia Resolution No. 2013-031

2. Hesperia Water District Resolution HWD 2013-06


SR FY 23-13 4th Qtr Amendments 6-18-2013

Resolution 2013-031

Resolution 2013- 06

Attachments:

10. 13-305

2013 Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG)

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Council adopt Resolution No. 2013-30, accepting

the appropriation of $21,455.00 from the US Department of Justice, for the

purpose of partially funding operational overtime, training and equipment.

Staff Person: Captain Nils Bentsen

SR JAG Grant 6-18-203

Attachment 1 - MOU

Resolution 2013-30

Attachments:

11. 13-285

Amend and Increase Contract 2009-10-026 for Road Striping Services with J &

S Striping Inc.

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council authorize the City Manager

to execute an amendment to Contract 2009-10-026 with J & S Striping Inc.,

thereby extending the contract for an additional year, and increasing the

contract authority and purchase order for an additional $115,000 with a new

not-to-exceed amount of $457,312.


SR Striping 6-18-2013Attachments:



http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=16173aaf-f270-4ec2-9901-166aeee82d31.docx

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=66d088e1-6d66-41b4-887e-8b4da6dbbf22.doc

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=b24776e8-f998-4b59-91c3-886d35b134d7.docx


http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=21c4a945-0121-4162-a093-2b3bc0ddaa7a.doc

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=cd9916e1-ca51-41cd-a0d9-a399673ff04c.doc

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=92e8f71b-ca83-42df-87a8-16d1d095bbbb.doc


http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=45186f7c-ab5c-449a-b668-5c4e52a71990.docx

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 47

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 51

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 57


12. 13-293

New World Systems Approvals

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to approve

a five year contract with New World Systems for $535,401, for a Standard

Software Maintenance Agreement; an upgrade to the Human Resources

module; six additional licenses and a 5% contingency.

Staff Person: Management Analyst Holly Effiom

SR New World Systems 06-18-13Attachments:

CONSENT ORDINANCES

WAIVE READING OF ORDINANCES

Approve the reading by title of all ordinances and declare that said titles which appear on the public agenda shall

be determined to have been read by title and further reading waived.

13. 13-300

Ordinance regarding Internet Sweepstakes Cafés

Recommended Action:

Place on second reading and adopt by title waiving the text of Ordinance No .

2013-06, an amendment to the Hesperia Municipal Code to establish

regulations for Internet Sweepstakes Cafés.

Staff Person: Principal Planner Dave Reno

SR Internet Sweepstakes Cafes 6/4/2013

Attachment 1 - Law Enforcement Advisory

Ordinance 2013-06

Attachments:

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Please complete a “Comment Card” and give it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Comments are limited to

five (5) minutes per individual. State your name for the record before making your presentation. Disclosure of

your address is optional, but very helpful for the follow-up process.

WAIVE READING OF ORDINANCES

Approve the reading by title of all ordinances and declare that said titles which appear on the public agenda shall

be determined to have been read by title and further reading waived.



http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=5185a254-bf5b-4a6a-a3e2-727a76401898.docx


http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=f195d8a8-e3f0-41be-87d4-b671d7ce9a3f.doc

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=797e795c-fcb8-49bb-acb9-cbf87a65a9d4.pdf

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=92fb20b3-0501-4c60-9706-a1f0dbc52b00.doc

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 59

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 63


14. 13-294

Environmental Impact Report for the Ranchero Road Corridor Widening

Project (C.O. # 7094)

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Council adopt Resolution No. 2013-028, certifying

the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) as complete and adopting the

Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP) and the Findings of Fact and

Statement of Overriding Considerations (FFSOC) for the Ranchero Corridor

Road Widening Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act

(CEQA).


SR EIR C.O. 7094 6-18-2013

Attachment 1 - EIR Ranchero Road Corridor

Attachment 2 - EIR Ranchero Road Corridor

Resolution 2013-028

Attachments:

NEW BUSINESS



http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=ae91597d-7618-4921-ab1b-ace1ede0d98a.docx

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=07d59217-c409-45e0-b741-a0253ec991f7.pdf

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=5ab03a0a-59ab-4b81-8dfe-800b1cbc6493.pdf

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=b8b4d5d0-5366-4dbe-ad2b-7627e4e1fa56.docx

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 69


15. 13-306

Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget Adoption

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council/Agency/Board/Commissions adopt the

following Resolutions approving the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget for the City of

Hesperia, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission,

Hesperia Fire Protection District, and Hesperia Water District:

1. City of Hesperia Resolution No. 2013-26 adopting the Fiscal Year 2013-

14 Budget.

2. City of Hesperia Resolution No. 2013-27 adopting the GANN

Appropriations Limit.

3. Hesperia Housing Authority Resolution HHA 2013-03

4. Hesperia Community Development Commission Resolution CDC 2013-

04

5. Hesperia Fire Protection District Resolution HFPD 2013-06 adopting

the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget

6. Hesperia Fire Protection District Resolution HFPD 2013-07 adopting

the GANN Appropriations Limit

7. Hesperia Water District Resolution HWD 2013-05 adopting the Fiscal

Year 2013-14 Budget


SR Budget Adoption 6-18-2013

Resolution 2013-26

Attachments:

COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND COMMENTS

The Council may report on their activities as appointed representatives of the City on various Boards and

Committees and/or may make comments of general interest or report on their activities as a representative of the

City.

CITY MANAGER/CITY ATTORNEY/STAFF REPORTS

The City Manager, City Attorney or staff may make announcements or reports concerning items of interest to the

Council and the public.

ADJOURNMENT



http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=2661523e-730c-4599-b7a9-04479f09a255.doc

http://hesperia.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=2cc0ed8f-1922-4baa-8e3f-cc56f2c0fd3b.doc

shernandez

Typewritten Text

Page 141

THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK

City Council Chambers

9700 Seventh Ave.

Hesperia CA, 92345

www.cityofhesperia.us

City of Hesperia

Meeting Minutes - Draft

City CouncilJOINT AGENDA OF CITY COUNCIL & SUCCESSOR AGENCY

TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, HOUSING AUTHORITY,

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, FIRE

PROTECTION DISTRICT AND WATER DISTRICT.

6:30 PMTuesday, June 4, 2013

CLOSED SESSION - 5:30 PM

Roll Call

Presnt:

Mayor Bill Holland




Absent:


Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation:


1. One Case

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation


1. Desert Gem/Younesco Properties, CIVVS1103899

2. Alternative Pain, Jose Moran, Earth Group, &

Dwayne Thompson v. City of Hesperia, CIVVS1202742

3. Dwayne Thompson v. City of Hesperia, CIVVS1205329

4. Jose Moran v. City of Hesperia, CIVVS1301337

5. Alternative Pain v. City of Hesperia, CIVVS1301338

6. Earth Group v. City of Hesperia, CIVVS1301339


8. Dwane Thompson v. City of Hesperia, CIVVS1301621


10. Victor Valley Medical Care v. City of Hesperia, CIVVS1301041

11. City of Hesperia v. Alternative Pain, et. Al., CIVDS1304653

12. Higher Healing v. City of Hesperia, CIVVS1301789

CALL TO ORDER - 6:30 PM

Page 1City of Hesperia

June 4, 2013City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft

Invocation by Richard Spring of First Baptist Church in HesperiaA.

Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag led by Council Member LeonardB.

Roll Call

Present:

Mayor Bill Holland




Absent:


C.

Agenda Revisions and Announcements by City Clerk- NoneD.

Closed Session Reports by City Attorney- No reportable action taken.E.

ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS

Community Events Calendar, Melinda Sayre-Castro, Assistant City Clerk

1) City's 25th Anniversary celebration 6/29 from 8:00 a.m. at Ranchero Road

Underpass.

2) Animal Control Shelter Open House event 7/13 from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Myrna Bidler & Majorie Janson, commented on a dog attack at Mrs. Janson's

residence.

Pastor David Penn, commented on the proposed Internet Cafe ordinance.

Daniel Krist- commented on fireworks, loud parties, Fire Station 301 & water quality.

Larry Mall, commented on the Hesperia Police Department and the Citizen's on

Patrol program.

Charles Blackwell, commented on the Hesperia Police Department and the Citizen's

on Patrol program.

JOINT CONSENT CALENDAR

A motion was made by Council Member Blewett, seconded by Council Member

Leonard, that the consent calendar be approved. The motion carried by the

following vote:

Aye: Mayor Holland, Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Council Member Blewett and

Council Member Leonard

4 -

Absent: Council Member Schmidt1 -



1.

Draft Minutes from the Regular Meeting held Tuesday, May 7, 2013

Recommended Action:

Approve the Draft Minutes from the Regular Meeting held Tuesday, May 7,

2013.

Sponsors: Assistant City Clerk Melinda Sayre-Castro

2.

Treasurer's Cash Report for the period ended March 31, 2013

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Council/Board accept the Treasurer's Cash

Report for the City, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community

Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community

Development Commission, Fire District, and Water District.

Sponsors: Assistant City Manager/Management Services Brian Johnson

3.

Warrant Run Report (City - Successor Agency - Housing Authority -

Community Development Commission - Fire - Water)

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Council/Board ratify the warrant run and payroll

report for the City, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community

Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community

Development Commission, Fire District, and Water District.

Sponsors: Assistant City Manager/Management Services Brian Johnson

4.

Consideration of Final Tract Map 18240

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2013-24

approving Final Tract Map No. 18240 to re-configure 7 residential lots and a

remainder Lot B, on 4.12 gross acres, located on Modesto Court.

Sponsors: Director of Development Services Scott Priester



5.

Badger Meter, Inc. Contract for Fiscal Year 2013-14

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District

authorize the City Manager to execute a contract for Fiscal Year 2013-14

with Badger Meter Inc. in the not-to-exceed amount of $250,000 for the

purchase of water meters and related water meter parts.


6.

Consideration of of Resolution No. 2013-25 in support of House Resolution

(H.R.) 1676 creating the Johnson Valley National Off-highway Vehicle

Recreation Area

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Council adopt Resolution No. 2013-25 in support

of House Resolution (H.R.) 1676 introduced by Congressman Paul Cook

(R-Yucca Valley), which would create the Johnson Valley National

Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Recreation Area.

Sponsors: Management Analyst Georgia Graham

7.Increase Contract with Infinity National Services

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Mayor and Council Members and Chair and

Board Members of the Hesperia Water District authorize the City Manager to

execute an increase to the current 2010-11-70 contract with Infinity National

Services to cover Fiscal Year 2012-13 in the not-to-exceed amount of

$255,350.




8.

Datamatic Fire Fly Purchase Order

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Chair and Board Members of the Hesperia Water

District authorize the City Manager to execute a Purchase Order for the

purchase of 2,000 Datamatic Mosaic Fire Fly units from Datamatic, Ltd. in

the not-to-exceed amount of $248,000.


9.Extend Contract 2009-10-066 Well Maintenance and Repair with Best

Drilling and Pump, Inc.

Recommended Action:


District authorize the City Manager to execute an extension to Contract

2009-10-066 with Best Drilling and Pump, Inc., for an additional year with a

new not-to-exceed amount of $54,000.


10.Extend Contract to Superior Electric Motor Repair

Recommended Action:


District authorize the City Manager to execute an extension to contract with

Superior Electric Motor Service for an additional year in the not-to-exceed

amount of $20,000.




11.Extend Contract with Clinical Laboratory of San Bernardino for Water

Analysis

Recommended Action:


District authorize the City Manager execute an extension to the contract with

Clinical Laboratory of San Bernardino Inc. for an additional year in the

not-to-exceed amount of $75,000 for Fiscal Year 2013-14.


12.

Five Year Agreement for Charter Data Services

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to

approve a five year Agreement for Charter Data Services in the amount of

$178,500.

Sponsors: Network Administrator Rolando Quinonez

13.

Execute Contract for Warehouse Commodity: Brass, Piping, Hydrant

Material

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Hesperia Water District Board of Directors

authorize the City Manager to execute a one-year commodity contract to

Inland Water Works for Brass, Piping and Hydrant Materials for water

operations and the Pipeline division replacement program in the

not-to-exceed amount of $420,000.




14.

Award Contract - Fire Station 303 Site Improvements

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council award a contract for Fire Station 303

Site Improvements (Account No. 200-55-521-0000-8400) to the lowest

responsive and responsible bidder, M.C. Alyea Construction, in the amount

of $38,123.50 and approve an additional 10% contingency in the amount of

$3,800.00, for a total not to exceed amount of $41,923.50; approve the

design of the project represented by the plans and specifications; and

authorize the City Manager to execute the contract.


PUBLIC HEARING - City Council

15.

Ordinance regarding Internet Sweepstakes Cafés

Recommended Action:

The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council introduce and

place on first reading Ordinance No. 2013-06, an amendment to the

Hesperia Municipal Code to establish regulations for Internet Sweepstakes

Cafés.

Sponsors: Principal Planner Dave Reno

Mayor Holland opened the public hearing. There being no publc testimony, the public

hearing was closed.

A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Smith to introduce and and place on

first reading Ordinance 2013-06, seconded by Council Member Leonard, that

this item be approved. The motion carried by the following vote:



4 -


NEW BUSINESS



16.

Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for State Legislative Advocacy Services

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council provide direction regarding the

timeline for the Request for Qualifications process for State Legislative

Advocacy Services and appoint two Council Members to serve on the

Selection Committee with staff.

Sponsors: Management Analyst Georgia Graham

Direction given to appoint Council Member Blewett & Mayor Holland.

17.

Public Safety Joint Powers Authority Feasibility Study

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council and the Board Members of the

Hesperia Fire Protection District (District) approve a Professional Services

Agreement (PSA) for professional services to conduct a Public Safety Joint

Powers Authority (JPA) feasibility study to Citygate Associates, LLC in an

amount of $199,888 and authorize a contingency of 5%, or $10,000 for a

total authorized contract amount of $209,888.

It is also recommended that the City Council approve a Memorandum of

Understanding with the City of Adelanto, Town of Apple Valley, and City of

Victorville which details the responsibility of each agency during preparation

of the JPA feasibility study.

Sponsors: City Manager Mike Podegracz

A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Smith, seconded by Council Member

Leonard, that this item be approved. The motion carried by the following vote:



4 -




COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND COMMENTS

Mayor Holland – Commented on the Public Safety Joint Powers study to be

conducted, high school graduations, the Police Activities League boxing event.

Council Member Schmidt – Absent.

Mayor Pro-Tem Smith – Commented on the Dog Walk event, the SB County Fair,

high school graduations, and the upcoming Ranchero Undercrossing opening.

Council Member Leonard – Commented on Public Safety study, and the upcoming

Fire Pancake breakfast.

Council Member Blewett – Commented on the Dog Walk, the Public Safety study,

fireworks in the City, and the Ranchero Undercrossing event.

CITY MANAGER/CITY ATTORNEY/STAFF REPORTS

Reminded the Council of the Budget Workshop next Tuesday @ 3 pm, and provided

an update on the SAFER grant implementation.

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 7:39 p.m. in honor of the four fire fighters that lost their

lives.



Page 10

SPECIAL MEETING JOINT CITY COUNCIL

HESPERIA COMMUNITY DEVEOPMENT COMMISSION HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY

FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT WATER DISTRICT

REGULAR MEETING June 11, 2013

DRAFT MINUTES The Special Meeting was called to order at 3:00 p.m. by Mayor Holland in the Council Chamber, 9700 Seventh Avenue, Hesperia, California and Old Key West Resort, 1510 N. Cove Rd, Lake Buena Vista, FL 32830. CALL TO ORDER 3:00 p.m. Present: Council Member Blewett Council Member Schmidt via teleconference. Council Member Leonard Mayor Holland Mayor Pro Tem Smith Absent: None

JOINT PUBLIC COMMENTS - None NEW BUSINESS 1. Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget Workshop. (Staff person: Mike Podegracz, City Manager) Presentation given by Brian Johnson, Assistant City Manager/Management Services and Scott Priester, Director of Development Services. ADJOURNMENT 5:15 p.m.

________________________________ By: Melinda Sayre-Castro, Assistant City Clerk

Page 11


Page 12

City of Hesper ia STAFF REPORT

DATE: June 18, 2013

TO: Mayor and Council Members City Council, as Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency Chair and Commissioners, Hesperia Housing Authority Chair and Commissioners, Community Development Commission Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Fire Protection District Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District

FROM: Mike Podegracz, City Manager

BY: Brian D. Johnson, Assistant City Manager/Management Services

SUBJECT: Warrant Run Report (City – Successor Agency – Housing Authority – Community Development Commission – Fire – Water)

RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the Council/Board ratify the warrant run and payroll report for the City, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission, Fire District, and Water District. BACKGROUND The Warrant Run totals represented below are for the period May 18, 2013 through May 31, 2013.

Agency/District Accounts Payable Payroll Wires TotalsCity of Hesperia 2,205,445.60 222,504.78 4,240.16 2,432,190.54Successor Agency 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Housing Authority 843.14 2,460.23 0.00 3,303.37Community Development Commission 14,963.67 2,207.31 0.00 17,170.98Fire 144.31 0.00 0.00 144.31Water 1,045,479.76 85,980.31 0.00 1,131,460.07

Totals $3,266,876.48 $313,152.63 $4,240.16 $3,584,269.27 The wire amounts for the City of Hesperia are as follows:

$2,502.80 to Union Bank, N.A. for Hesperia 2005 Civic Plaza Interest Payment. $1,737.36 to Union Bank, N.A. for Hesperia Measure I 2004 Interest Payment.

Page 13

YEAR-TO PRIOR YTDW/E W/E WARRANT DATE DATE

FUND # FUND NAME 5/24/2013 5/31/2013 TOTALS Wires TOTALS * TOTALS

Accounts Payable

100 GENERAL 158,349.77$ 1,020,507.66$ 1,178,857.43$ -$ 20,277,103.63$ 14,087,479.58$ 150 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ADMIN -$ -$ -$ -$ 15,887.78$ 170,976.39$ 201 MEASURE I - ARTERIAL -$ -$ -$ -$ 137,750.00$ 158,215.80$ 202 MEASURE I - LOCAL -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 203 MEASURE I - TRANSIT -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 204 MEASURE I - RENEWAL -$ -$ -$ -$ 429,633.34$ 68,839.96$ 205 GAS TAX -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 8,000.00$ 207 ARTICLE 8 (LOCAL TRANSPORT-SB 325) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 250 TRAFFIC CONGESTION RELIEF -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 251 CDBG 977.74$ 5,000.00$ 5,977.74$ -$ 1,014,874.39$ 304,204.49$ 252 CDBG CAPITAL PROJECT -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 253 CDBG - RLF -$ -$ -$ -$ 3,547.01$ 1,284.91$ 254 AB2766 - TRANSIT -$ -$ -$ -$ 80,000.00$ 50,000.00$ 255 AB3229 SUPPLEMENTAL LAW -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 256 ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS GRANT 35.85$ -$ 35.85$ -$ 18,640.44$ 42,079.19$ 257 NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PROG 4,050.19$ 431.35$ 4,481.54$ -$ 361,802.39$ 292,859.39$ 259 REIMBURSABLE GRANTS FUND -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 260 DISASTER PREPARED GRANT 2,116.27$ -$ 2,116.27$ -$ 20,050.11$ 16,231.47$ 263 STREETS MAINTENANCE 13,624.03$ 25,744.47$ 39,368.50$ -$ 851,806.88$ 833,874.71$ 300 DEV. IMPACT FEES - STREET -$ 67,337.83$ 67,337.83$ -$ 5,125,878.13$ 600,023.00$ 301 DEV. IMPACT FEES - STORM DRAIN -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 7,007.45$ 302 DEV. IMPACT FEES - FIRE -$ -$ -$ -$ 123,387.27$ 90,945.53$ 303 DEV. IMPACT FEES - POLICE -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,814.43$ 304 DEV. IMPACT FEES - PUBLIC WKS. -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 396 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 399 FEMA-1203-DR (DISASTER) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 400 MEASURE I DEBT SER 1993A 10.89$ -$ 10.89$ 1,737.36$ 728,250.95$ 642,540.42$ 401 CITY DEBT SERVICES 5,470.89$ -$ 5,470.89$ 2,502.80$ 759,817.47$ 829,763.03$ 402 WATER RIGHTS ACQUISITION -$ -$ -$ -$ 266,954.38$ -$ 502 FIRE STATION BUILDING -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 503 COUNTY-HIGH DESERT GOV'T CENTER -$ 704,715.99$ 704,715.99$ -$ 8,921,767.10$ 1,512,973.10$ 504 CITY WIDE STREETS - CIP -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,813,002.28$ 1,147,692.86$ 506 INDUSTRIAL PARK LEAD TRACK -$ -$ -$ -$ 5,210.73$ 4,310,643.29$ 507 TOWNSHIP -$ -$ -$ -$ 29,119.57$ 258,879.37$ 508 RANCHERO RD UNDERCROSSING-LOCAL -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,654,803.16$ 598 BIKE PATH PROJECT -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 600 RANCHERO RD UNDERCROSSING -$ -$ -$ -$ 8,146,473.13$ 9,114,084.27$ 602 RANCHERO RD/I-15 INTERCHANGE -$ -$ -$ -$ 56,437.54$ 7,708,657.33$ 800 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 18,950.96$ 162,988.86$ 181,939.82$ -$ 6,061,523.92$ 6,428,071.06$ 801 TRUST/AGENCY 2,780.32$ 12,352.53$ 15,132.85$ -$ 139,186.82$ 213,190.47$ 802 AD 91-1 AGENCY -$ -$ -$ -$ 3,757,681.54$ 1,877,224.81$ 803 TRUST RANCHO L.F./BOYLE -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 804 TRUST-INTEREST BEARING -$ -$ -$ -$ 515.24$ 1,943.24$ 806 SUMMIT VALLEY -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 807 CFD 2005-1 -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,382,252.31$ 1,367,334.38$

CITY 206,366.91$ 1,999,078.69$ 2,205,445.60$ 4,240.16$ 60,528,554.35$ 53,801,637.09$

200 FIRE 39.27$ 105.04$ 144.31$ -$ 7,107,631.30$ 8,267,592.91$

385 LOW & MOD HOUSING -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 4,635,173.97$ 389 R D A -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 278,186.76$ 486 RDA PROJECT AREA #1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 11,588,315.74$ 487 RDA PROJECT AREA #2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 991,506.73$ 586 RDA PROJECT AREA 1-C/P -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 970,516.02$ 587 RDA PROJECT AREA 2-C/P -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 116,347.00$ 588 RDA-V V E D A -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

RDA -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 18,580,046.22$

160 REDEVELOP OBLIG RETIREMENT - PA1 -$ -$ -$ -$ 12,396,376.44$ 2,975,557.94$ 161 REDEVELOP OBLIG RETIREMENT - PA2 -$ -$ -$ -$ 845,140.59$ 230,829.97$ 162 REDEVELOP OBLIG RETIREMENT-HOUSING -$ -$ -$ -$ 3,391,167.41$ 1,108,134.39$ 173 SUCCESSOR AGENCY ADMINISTRATION -$ -$ -$ -$ 42,875.00$ -$

SUCCESSOR AGENCY -$ -$ -$ -$ 16,675,559.44$ 4,314,522.30$

370 HOUSING AUTHORITY 836.84$ 6.30$ 843.14$ -$ 152,368.05$ 12,565.20$ HOUSING AUTHORITY 836.84$ 6.30$ 843.14$ -$ 152,368.05$ 12,565.20$

170 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 13,021.12$ 1,942.55$ 14,963.67$ -$ 335,580.02$ 60.00$ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 13,021.12$ 1,942.55$ 14,963.67$ -$ 335,580.02$ 60.00$

700 WATER OPERATING 829,333.20$ 52,832.25$ 882,165.45$ -$ 7,730,164.59$ 6,971,874.77$ 701 WATER CAPITAL -$ -$ -$ -$ 8,510.59$ -$ 710 SEWER OPERATING 159,670.51$ 3,643.80$ 163,314.31$ -$ 2,196,000.64$ 2,114,926.32$ 711 SEWER CAPITAL -$ -$ -$ -$ 14,160.45$ -$

WATER 989,003.71$ 56,476.05$ 1,045,479.76$ -$ 9,948,836.27$ 9,086,801.09$

ACCOUNTS PAYABLE TOTAL 1,209,267.85$ 2,057,608.63$ 3,266,876.48$ 4,240.16$ 94,748,529.43$ 94,063,224.81$

REG. PAYROLL City 222,504.78$ -$ 222,504.78$ -$ 5,074,203.39$ 5,450,032.57$ RDA -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 320,061.18$ Successor Agency -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Housing Authority 2,460.23$ -$ 2,460.23$ -$ 61,370.51$ 32,917.35$ Community Development Commission 2,207.31$ -$ 2,207.31$ -$ 56,160.29$ -$ Fire -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Water 85,980.31$ -$ 85,980.31$ -$ 2,450,954.86$ 2,224,212.65$

PAYROLL TOTAL 313,152.63$ -$ 313,152.63$ -$ 7,642,689.05$ 8,027,223.75$

City of HesperiaWARRANT RUNS

05/18/13 - 05/31/2013

* The year to date totals for this Warrant Report are for the 2012-13 fiscal year starting July 1; no checks were issued on June 30, 2012.Page 14


DATE: June 18, 2013

TO: Mayor and Council Members City Council, as Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency Chair and Commissioners, Hesperia Housing Authority Chair and Commissioners, Community Development Commission Chairman and Board Members, Hesperia Fire Protection District Chairman and Board Members, Hesperia Water District


BY: Brian D. Johnson, Assistant City Manager/Management Services

SUBJECT: Treasurer’s Cash Report for the period ended April 30, 2013

RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the Council/Board accept the Treasurer’s Cash Report for the City, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission, Fire District, and Water District. BACKGROUND This report is presented to the City Council pursuant to Government Code Section 53646 (b) setting forth the City’s investment portfolio. ISSUES/ANALYSIS The Treasurer’s Cash Reports are presented on the following pages for each agency. FISCAL IMPACT These reports reflect cash balances as of April 30, 2013. ALTERNATIVE(S) Provide alternative direction to staff. ATTACHMENT(S) 1. City of Hesperia Investment Report 2. Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency Investment Report 3. Hesperia Housing Authority Investment Report 4. Community Development Commission Investment Report 5. Hesperia Fire Protection District Investment Report 6. Hesperia Water District Investment Report

Page 15

FUND VALUE

General Fund (100 & 800) 10,700,190.19$ Redevelopment Agency Admin (150) (167,130.43)AB27666 - Transit (254) 179,281.52AB3229 Supplemental Law (255) 99,269.25AD No. 91-1 (802) 637,425.90Beverage Recycling Grant (256) 27,552.06CFD 2005-1 (807) 2,058,184.92City Debt Service (401) 1,076,380.61City Wide-Capital Projects (504) (266,514.23)Community Dev Block Grant (251, 252, & 253) 902,621.91County-High Desert Gov't Center (503) 631,656.23Development Impact Fund (300-304 & 396-397) 7,068,460.04Disaster (260) 3,816.28Fire Station Building (502) 4,240,994.30Gas Tax Fund (205) 186,831.59Gas Tax Swap (206) 10,022.00Industrial Park Lead Track (506) 60.62Local Transportation SB325 (207) 539,682.44Measure I - Arterial (201) 3,915.45Measure I - Renewal (204) 2,625,821.54Measure I Bond Issue (400, 596, & 597) 1,147,781.00Neighborhood Stabilization Prog (257) 456,749.58Public Works Street Maint (263) 547,952.59Ranchero (600) (3,408,620.98)Ranchero Rd/I-15 Interchange (602) 0.00Ranchero Rd Undercrossing-Local (508) 0.00Township (507) 92,185.21Trust Fund (801 & 803-806) 1,211,058.362012 Water Rights Acquisition (402) (266,954.38)

TOTAL CITY FUNDS 30,338,673.57$

CITY OF HESPERIA

FUND VALUE

Successor Agency Administration (173) 53,953.61$ Redevelop Oblig Retirement - PA1 (160) 2,192,719.26 Redevelop Oblig Retirement - PA2 (161) 241,942.60 Redevel Oblig Retirement-Housing (162) 41,046.07

TOTAL SUCCESSOR AGENCY FUNDS 2,529,661.54$


Page 16

FUND VALUE Hesperia Housing Authority Fund (370) 13,538,161.99$ VVEDA Housing Authority (371) 1,554,376.26

TOTAL HOUSING AUTHORITY FUNDS 15,092,538.25$

HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY

FUND VALUE Community Development Commission Fund (170) 10,708.24$

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

FUND VALUE Fire District Fund (200) 2,004,278.38$

FIRE

VALUE

Water Operating (700) 6,890,963.61$

Water Capital (701) (12,453,461.09)

Sewer Operating (710) 7,283,808.17

Sewer Capital (711) 3,637,647.35

TOTAL WATER FUNDS 5,358,958.04$ 1

WATER

FUND

Page 17


Page 24


DATE: June 18, 2013

TO: Mayor and Council Members Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District Successor Agency to Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency


BY: Scott Priester, Director of Development Services Dale Burke, Public Works Manager Mark Faherty, Public Works Supervisor/Streets

SUBJECT: Amend and Increase Contract 2009-10-092 with Goodspeed Auto Fueling Systems

RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the City Council, Chair and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District, and the Successor Agency to Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to contract number 2009-10-092 with Goodspeed Auto Fueling Systems, thereby extending the contract for an additional year and increasing the contract authority an additional $400,000 with a new not-to-exceed amount of $1,750,000. BACKGROUND Over the past three (3) years, Goodspeed Auto Fueling Systems has provided fuel services to the City of Hesperia and the Hesperia Water District. Goodspeed continues to offer fueling at multiple local stations and various western state locations. The contract with Goodspeed is scheduled to end on June 30, 2013. Goodspeed has agreed to a one-year extension of the current contract, maintaining the costs identified within the 2009-10 fee schedule. ISSUES/ANALYSIS Goodspeed has agreed to a one-year extension to the existing contract, beginning July 1, 2013, and ending June 30, 2014. Goodspeed has been providing 24-hour fueling services to the City of Hesperia for a number of years, and during this period of time there have been no interruptions to service due to supply demands. The estimated fuel costs for Fiscal Year 2013-14 is $400,000 for all City and Water District vehicles. FISCAL IMPACT Funding for fuel services has been included in the adopted Fiscal Year 2013-14 City and Water District’s budgets under Fund No. 100 (General); 263 (Streets); 385 (Successor Agency to Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency); 700 (Water); and 710 (Sewer).

Page 25

ALTERNATIVE(S) 1. Provide alternative direction to staff. ATTACHMENT(S) 1. Goodspeed Extension Letter

Page 26


Page 28


DATE: June 18, 2013

TO: Mayor and Council Members Chairman and Board Members, Hesperia Water District Successor Agency to Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency



SUBJECT: Amend and Increase Contract 2008-09-017 with Wes Mobile Wash

RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the City Council, Chairman and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District, and the Successor Agency to Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to contract number 2008-09-017 with Wes Mobile Wash, thereby extending the contract for an additional year and increasing the contract authority an additional $9,200 for Fiscal Year 2013-14 with a new not-to-exceed amount of $57,000. BACKGROUND Over the past several years, Wes Mobile Wash has provided mobile washing services to the City of Hesperia and the Hesperia Water District. Wes Mobile Wash continues to provide mobile washing services to many of the Departments within the City. The contract with Wes Mobile Wash is scheduled to end on June 30, 2013. Wes Mobile Wash has agreed to a one-year extension of the current contract, maintaining the costs identified within the 2008-09-017 fee schedule. ISSUES/ANALYSIS Wes Mobile Wash has agreed to a one-year extension with no cost increase to the existing contract beginning July 1, 2013, and ending June 30, 2014. Wes Mobile Wash has been providing vehicle washing services to the City of Hesperia for a number of years, and the City is satisfied with the service being provided. The washing service has been more cost effective by providing mobile vehicle washing on-site and eliminating the need for employees to transport vehicles for cleaning. FISCAL IMPACT Funding for fuel services for Fiscal Year 2013-14 include City and Water District’s budgets: 100 (General); 263 (Streets); 385 (Successor Agency to Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency); 700 (Water); and 710 (Sewer).

Page 29

ALTERNATIVE(S) 1. Provide alternative direction to staff. ATTACHMENT(S) None

Page 30


DATE: June 18, 2013

TO: Mayor and Council Members Chairman and Board Members, Hesperia Water District Successor Agency to Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency



SUBJECT: Fleet Maintenance Services for Fiscal Year 2013-14

RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the City Council, Chairman and Board Members, of the Hesperia Water District and the Successor Agency to Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency authorize the City Manager to execute a Purchase Requisition, with the Hesperia Unified School District, in the amount of $406,000 which includes a contingency of 10% (for possible further maintenance increases) for the provision of vehicle/equipment maintenance on City, District and Agency vehicles, for Fiscal Year 2013-14. BACKGROUND The Hesperia Unified School District currently provides preventative and corrective maintenance for the City, Successor Agency and Hesperia Water District fleets. At the February 4, 2004, Council meeting the City Council and Water Board approved a multi-year contract with the Hesperia Unified School District for the purpose of providing fleet services. ISSUES/ANALYSIS Staff continues to monitor the Hesperia Unified School District service levels and is currently satisfied with the service being provided. The Hesperia Unified School District typically provides 24-hour service, and in many cases, vehicles that are dropped off for service at the end of a workday have the maintenance performed and ready for use by the beginning of the following day. The new Purchase Requisition, in the amount of $406,000, will cover the cost of vehicle and equipment maintenance for Fiscal Year 2013-14. FISCAL IMPACT Funding for fleet maintenance/fuel services for Fiscal Year 2013-14 include City and Water District’s budgets: 100 (General); 263 (Streets); 385 (Successor Agency to Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency); 700 (Water); and 710 (Sewer). ALTERNATIVE(S) 1. Provide alternative direction to staff.

Page 31

ATTACHMENT(S) Vehicle Maintenance Agreement.

Page 32


Page 36


DATE: June 18, 2013

TO: Mayor and Council Members


BY: Scott Priester,Director of Develpoment Services Dale Burke, Public Works Manager Mark Faherty, Public Works Supervisor

SUBJECT: Paving Material Demands for Fiscal Year 2013-14

RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute an open purchase order with Vulcan Materials Company and Blue Diamond Materials of Oro Grande, California, for asphalt materials necessary to repair the City streets in the not-to-exceed amount of $100,000. BACKGROUND Each year the City purchases asphalt materials for maintenance of the City’s streets. Two types are purchased, “hot mix” for permanent patching and “cold mix” for temporary patching and certain pothole repairs. The material purchased is used for the miscellaneous repair of City streets, such as filling potholes, small paving projects, and minor drainage improvements. ISSUES/ANALYSIS Staff has budgeted $289,000 for all street maintenance materials in Fiscal Year 2013-14, which includes signage, graffiti supplies, crack seal materials, striping and legends, and other miscellaneous materials. Of this budgeted amount, staff is requesting that the Council approve open Purchase Orders in the not-to-exceed amount of $100,000 for paving materials. This is based on last year’s expenditures for paving materials totaling approximately $100,000 and the request for $100,000 this year reflects the amount needed to fund the paving program. Two local vendors are available to provide these materials, Vulcan Materials and Blue Diamond Materials and they both provide hot mix. Vulcan Materials is the only local firm that provides hot mix daily on an as-needed basis; however, the high demand for “hot mix” asphalt in the Victor Valley makes it necessary to have as many sources as possible. Consequently, staff is also recommending authorization to purchase with both local vendors if necessary. This request to purchase a commodity without bidding is allowable under the single vendor provisions of the Purchasing System established under the Hesperia Municipal Code Section 3.08.070, which states in part,

Page 37

“A commodity shall be considered obtainable only from one vendor when only one vendor offers it for sale, lease or rental, or when only one vendor is able to do so within the time frame and/or under the terms and conditions which reasonably meet the needs of the using agency, or when there is a sole distributor or manufacturer of a product or service such that there is no acceptable substitute within a specific geographical area”.

Staff received material price quotes from both local vendors. Based on these, approval of these purchase order requests will place Vulcan Materials as the primary vendor for both hot and cold mixes, and Blue Diamond would be used as a back-up for hot mix in order to ensure City activities are not delayed.

FISCAL IMPACT Funding for this project is identified in the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget in Fund 263. Budget Amount $289,000.00 Pavement Material 100,000.00 Balance Remaining $189,000.00 ALTERNATIVE(S) 1. Provide alternative direction to staff. ATTACHMENT(S) 1. Blue Diamond / Sully Miller Asphalt Materials. 2. Vulcan Materials Company

Page 38


Page 42


DATE: June 18, 2013

TO: Mayor and Council Members and Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District


BY: Scott Priester, Director of Development Services Dale Burke, Public Works Manager Scott Saude, Facility Supervisor

SUBJECT: Security Services Contract, Mojave Corporate Yard and Civic Center

RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommend that the City Council and the Board of the Hesperia Water District authorize the City Manager to execute a new three (3) year Professional Services Agreement with True Liberty Protection Services in the not-to-exceed amount of $434,500.00 for the three years. BACKGROUND Within the proposed Fiscal Year 2013-14 budget, City Council allocated funds for the purpose of contracting unarmed security services for multiple years. In previous years Mojave Corporate Yard and the Civic Center has experienced minor theft and vandalism prompting the continuing need to contract for unarmed security services. Over the past several years, unarmed security guards have reduced and prevented theft and vandalism that previously occurred at both locations. It has also provided for a safe and secure facility for our employees after normal working hours. ISSUES/ANALYSIS Facility Maintenance has recommended that unarmed security services continue at the Mojave Corporate Yard and the Hesperia Civic Center to prevent future theft and vandalism as well as providing a safe environment for those employees utilizing the facility after normal working hours. The purchasing department solicited nine security contractors to provide bids to perform security services at the Mojave Yard and Civic Center locations combined. The lowest responsible bidder was True Liberty Protection Services. A summary of the bid results is attached. The new contract will begin on July 01, 2013, and will continue through June 30, 2016. FISCAL IMPACT Funding for the new three (3) year contract is identified under the proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2013-14 in account 700-29-400-4070-7500 and 100-29-310-3110-7500. ALTERNATIVE(S) 1. Provide alternative direction to staff.

Page 43

ATTACHMENT(S) 1. Bid comparison

Page 44

shernandez

Typewritten Text


Page 46


DATE: June 18, 2013

TO: Mayor and Council Members Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District


BY: Brian D. Johnson, Assistant City Manager-Management Services Anne Duke, Deputy Finance Director Casey Brooksher, Senior Accountant

SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2012-13 Fourth Quarter Budget Amendments

RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the City Council and Water District Board adopt the following Resolutions amending the respective Fiscal Year 2012-13 Budgets for the City of Hesperia and the Hesperia Water District:

1) City of Hesperia Resolution No. 2013-031

2) Hesperia Water District Resolution HWD 2013-06

BACKGROUND

In compliance with the City Council’s policy direction, staff has reviewed anticipated expenditures through the end of Fiscal Year 2012-13 for the City of Hesperia and Hesperia Water District to determine if year-end adjustments are needed. ISSUES/ANALYSIS The analysis of anticipated expenditures through the end of Fiscal Year 2012-13 indicates the following budget amendment requests should be considered.

Replacement of the Well Motor Located at the Hesperia Golf Course (100-220) – $50,000 The well motor located at the Hesperia Golf Course failed and requires replacement. The General Fund will be utilized for replacing the well motor, since the City owns the water rights associated with the Golf Course.

Blade Server Purchase (100-215) – $65,000 On May 7, 2013, the City Council approved the implementation of the blade server system to allow for the use of a Virtual Desktop Infrastructure. This budget amendment would provide the funding for the implementation. In the staff report, it was identified that the cost of $65,000 would be included as a fourth quarter amendment.

Purchase of Rancho Las Flores Water Rights with Bond Proceeds (100-220) – $26,847,377 The amendment will record the issuance of the Hesperia Joint Finance Authority – 2012 Lease Revenue Bonds for the purchase of the Rancho Las Flores water rights. Of the

Page 47

$26,847,377 amendment, $25,000,000 represents the actual purchase of the water rights; the $5,000,000 down payment was approved at first quarter for total purchase price of $30,000,000. The remaining $1,847,377 will establish the transfer out of the General Fund to the debt service fund (Fund 402). This amount is comprised of the required bond reserves, cost of issuance, and bond discounts. Due to the annual audit process and the closing of the fiscal year, additional appropriation authority may be required. Should this occur, staff will present a final year-end budget request to the Council after the close of the fiscal year.

Debt Service Payment for the Rancho Las Flores Bond Issue (402) – $676,693 Of the $676,693 budget amendment, $281,448 is needed for the interest payment pertaining to bond issue for the Rancho Las Flores water rights purchase. The remaining $395,245 will record the expenses pertaining to the cost of issuance and bond discounts.

Purchase of a Hybrid Vehicle (256) – $14,156 The FY 2012-13 Budget included funds of $22,000 to purchase a vehicle to support the environmental programs. During the year, a grant of $14,156 was awarded by the Air Quality Management District (AQMD) to replace an existing fleet vehicle with an energy efficient vehicle. Utilizing the grant and existing budget funds, a hybrid Chevrolet Silverado can be purchased for $38,000. The grant of $14,156 will be combined with the $22,000 identified in the FY 2012-13 Budget and $1,844 is budget savings.

The AQMD grant of $14,156 is a reimbursable grant, where funds must be spent prior to receiving the award. The City anticipates receiving the reimbursement during FY 2013-14. A budget amendment is needed for the AQMD grant award, as the funding of the $23,844 is included in the FY 2012-13 Budget.

Upgrade the Utility Billing Call Center (700) – $70,000 During the May 7, 2013 City Council meeting, Council approved purchase of equipment and software to upgrade of the Utility Billing Call Center. By upgrading the call center software, Utility Billing staff will be able to better serve the citizens. In the staff report, it was identified that the cost of $70,000 would be included as a fourth quarter amendment.

Increase of Victor Valley Waste Water Reclamation Authority (VVWRA) Fees (710) – $264,000 During FY 2012-13, VVWRA increased the wastewater treatment fees by fifteen percent (15%), which has caused the actual costs to exceed the adopted budget.

FISCAL IMPACT

With exception of the amendments pertaining to the 2012 Lease Revenue Bonds (Rancho Las Flores water rights) and the purchase of the hybrid vehicle, the proposed Fiscal Year 2012-13 Fourth Quarter Budget were included in the Fiscal Year 2012-13 Revised estimates during the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget process, and their fiscal impact is reflected in the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget reserve calculations. The remaining budget amendments were not included in the FY 2012-13 Revised; however, these amendments will be included during the fiscal year end close process.

ALTERNATIVES Provide alternative direction to staff.

ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 2013-031 2. Resolution HWD 2013-06

Page 48

RESOLUTION NO. 2013-031

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2012-13 CITY OF HESPERIA BUDGET TO FUND CERTAIN RELATED EXPENDITURES

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hesperia adopted the Fiscal Year 2012-13 Budget on June 19, 2012; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hesperia has authorized various amendments to the Fiscal Year 2012-13 Budget throughout the year; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hesperia has reviewed the proposed Fiscal Year 2012-13 fourth quarter budget amendments information and analysis and has found it acceptable. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF HESPERIA CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. That the recitals above are true and correct and adopted as findings. Section 2. That the City Council of the City of Hesperia approves the Fiscal Year 2012-13 fourth quarter budget amendments. Section 3. That the City Council of the City of Hesperia approves the budget amendments with the following expenditure appropriations from the following funds and departments:

• Replacement of the Well Motor Located at the Hesperia Golf Course (100) – $50,000 • Purchase of Water Rights with Bond Proceeds (100) – $26,847,377 • Blade Server Purchase (100) – $65,000 • Debt Service Payment for the Rancho Las Flores Bond Issue (402) – $676,693 • Purchase of a Hybrid Vehicle (256) – $14,156

Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of June 2013. ___________________________________ Bill Holland, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Melinda Sayre-Castro, Assistant City Clerk

Page 49

RESOLUTION NO. HWD 2013-06

A RESOLUTION OF THE HESPERIA WATER DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2012-13 HESPERIA WATER DISTRICT BUDGET TO FUND CERTAIN RELATED EXPENDITURES

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District adopted the Fiscal Year 2012-13 Budget on June 19, 2012; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District has authorized various amendments to the Fiscal Year 2012-13 Budget throughout the year; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District has reviewed the proposed Fiscal Year 2012-13 fourth quarter budget amendment information and analysis and has found it acceptable. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE HESPERIA WATER DISTRICT AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the recitals above are true and correct and adopted as findings. Section 2. That the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District approves the Fiscal Year 2012-13 Year-End Budget Amendments. Section 3. That the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District approves the budget amendments with the following expenditure appropriations from the following funds:

• Upgrade the Utility Billing Call Center (700) $70,000 • Increase of Victor Valley Waste Water Reclamation Authority Fees (710) $264,000

Section 4. The Secretary of the Board of Directors shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of June 2013. ___________________________________ Bill Holland, Chair ATTEST: _______________________________ Melinda Sayre-Castro, Secretary

Page 50

DATE: June 18, 2013



BY: Nils Bentsen, Chief of Police

SUBJECT: 2013 Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG)

RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the Council adopt Resolution No. 2013-30, accepting the appropriation of $21,455.00 from the US Department of Justice, for the purpose of partially funding operational overtime, training and equipment. BACKGROUND The Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program (JAG, formerly LLEBG) was authorized by the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1997, Public Law 104-208 for the purpose of providing units of local government with funds to underwrite projects to reduce crime and improve public safety. The Bureau of Justice Assistance makes direct awards to local government when amounts are over $10,000, provided that they are used consistently within the statutory program purpose areas. These program areas have been identified as hiring, overtime, equipment, and support personnel. ISSUES/ANALYSIS The City of Hesperia has chosen to distribute its Edward Byrne Justice Assistant Grant funds for the following purpose: Operational overtime, training and equipment. FISCAL IMPACT The funds from this grant will supplement the existing police budget; and this will have no fiscal impact on the general budget. ALTERNATIVE(S) 1. Provide alternative direction to staff. ATTACHMENT(S) 1. Resolution No. 2013-30 2. MOU concerning distribution of the Edward Byrne JAG program award

Page 51

INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF APPLE VALLEY, THE CITIES OF ADELANTO, BARSTOW, CHINO,

COLTON, FONTANA, HESPERIA, HIGHLAND, MONTCLAIR, ONTARIO, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, REDLANDS, RIALTO, SAN BERNARDINO, UPLAND, VICTORVILLE,

AND THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CA

CONCERNING DISTRIBUTION OF THE 2013 JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT AWARD

This Agreement is made and entered into this _____ day of ___________, 2013, by and between THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, acting by and through its governing body, the Board of Supervisors (hereinafter referred to as “COUNTY”), and the aforementioned TOWN (hereinafter referred to as “TOWN”) and named CITIES (hereinafter referred to as “CITIES”), acting by and through their respective governing bodies, the Town Council and City Councils, all of whom are situated within the County of San Bernardino, State of California, as follows: WHEREAS, each governing body, in performing governmental functions or in paying for the performance of governmental functions hereunder, shall make that performance or those payments from current revenues legally available to that party; and WHEREAS, each governing body finds that the performance of this Agreement is in the best interests of all parties, that the undertaking will benefit the public, and that the division of costs fairly compensates the performing party for the services or functions under this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY agrees to release to TOWN and CITIES their respective grant allocation from the JAG Award within sixty (60) days upon receipt of funds, less five percent (5%) for administrative fees, as reflected on Appendix 1 here attached and hereby incorporated by reference as part of this agreement; and COUNTY agrees to use the five percent (5%) of JAG award funds received from TOWN and CITIES under this agreement for administrative fees toward the administration of TOWN’s and CITIES’ programs during the entire permissible duration of said programs; and TOWN and CITIES agree to deposit their JAG award funds into a separate trust account in accordance with JAG guidelines; and TOWN and CITIES each agree to the five percent (5%) reduction of their respective grant allocation from the JAG award, as reflected on Appendix 1 for administrative fees toward the administration of this program; and additionally the TOWN and CITIES each agree that it is their responsibility to ensure these funds are expended in accordance with JAG guidelines, and that the interest generated from such funds shall be solely applied and expended in accordance with these same JAG guidelines; and WHEREAS, the TOWN, CITIES and COUNTY believe it to be in their best interests to reallocate the JAG funds, NOW THEREFORE, the COUNTY and TOWN and CITIES agree as follows: Section 1. COUNTY agrees to release to TOWN and CITIES their respective grant allocation from the JAG Award within sixty (60) days upon receipt of funds, less five percent (5%) for administrative fees, as reflected in Appendix 1 here attached and hereby incorporated by reference as part of this Agreement, and; COUNTY agrees to use the five percent (5%) of JAG award funds received from TOWN and CITIES under this agreement for administrative fees toward the administration of the TOWN’s and CITIES’ programs during the entire permissible duration of said programs.

Page 52

Section 2. TOWN and CITIES agree to deposit their JAG award funds into a separate trust account in accordance with the JAG guidelines; and TOWN and CITIES agree to the five percent (5%) reduction of their respective grant allocation from the JAG award, as reflected in Appendix 1, for administrative fees toward the administration of this program, and; TOWN and CITIES each agree that it is their responsibility to ensure these funds are expended in accordance with JAG guidelines and that all interest generated from such funds shall be solely applied and expended in accordance with these same JAG guidelines. Section 3. TOWN and CITIES agree to enter into a sub-award grant agreement with the COUNTY in order to acknowledge receipt of the federal award information and applicable compliance requirements, including special conditions for each sub-award, before receiving grant funds. Section 4. TOWN and CITIES agree to provide COUNTY with sufficient timely information as necessary within five business days after receiving written request from COUNTY to meet JAG requirements for quarterly and annual financial and performance reports. Section 5. Nothing arising from this Agreement shall impose any liability for claims or actions against COUNTY other than what is authorized by law. Section 6. Nothing arising from this Agreement shall impose any liability for claims or actions against TOWN and/or CITIES other than what is authorized by law. Section 7. Each party to this Agreement will be responsible for its own actions in providing services under this Agreement and shall not be liable to any other party to this Agreement for any claim or action arising from the services provided under this Agreement. Section 8. The parties to this Agreement do not intend for any third party to obtain a right by virtue of this Agreement. Section 9. By entering into this Agreement, the parties do not intend to create any obligations, either express or implied, other than those set out herein; further, this Agreement shall not create any rights in any party not a signatory hereto.

Page 53

CITY OF HESPERIA, CA ______________________________ City Manager ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________ City Attorney

/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /

Page 54

2013 Justice Assistance Grant APPENDIX 1

Jurisdiction Formula-based

Allocation 5% Admin

FeeAward

AmountSan Bernardino County 84,728$ (4,238)$ 80,490$ Adelanto 17,205$ (860)$ 16,345$ Apple Valley 15,504$ (775)$ 14,729$ Barstow 15,809$ (790)$ 15,019$ Chino 17,255$ (863)$ 16,392$ Colton 14,743$ (737)$ 14,006$ Fontana 59,328$ (2,966)$ 56,362$ Hesperia 22,584$ (1,129)$ 21,455$ Highland 18,727$ (936)$ 17,791$ Montclair 14,413$ (721)$ 13,692$ Ontario 47,071$ (2,354)$ 44,717$ Rancho Cucamonga 24,741$ (1,237)$ 23,504$ Redlands 17,078$ (853)$ 16,225$ Rialto 38,545$ (1,927)$ 36,618$ San Bernardino 136,850$ (6,843)$ 130,007$ Upland 11,622$ (581)$ 11,041$ Victorville 54,557$ (2,728)$ 51,829$ Total 610,760$ (30,538)$ 580,222$

Page 55


A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, SPECIFYING THE INTENDED PURPOSE FOR THE 2013 ALLOCATION FROM THE EDWARD BYRNE JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG)

WHEREAS, the Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) provides for supplemental funding to reduce crime and improve public safety; and WHEREAS, the funding is administered by the Bureau of Justice; and WHEREAS, the revenues received from this grant are allocated to qualifying agencies for specific purposes. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. All facts set forth in this resolution are true and correct. Section 2. That the City Council approves the appropriation of $21,485 for the City of

Hesperia from the Bureau of Justice, Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant, for the purpose of partially funding operational overtime, training and equipment.

Section 3. The Director of Management Services shall establish a mechanism to provide for

the receipt and expenditure of all allocated monies under the Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG).

Section 4. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution

and enter it into the book of original resolutions. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of June, 2013. ______________________________ Bill Holland, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Melinda Sayre-Castro Assistant City Clerk

Page 56


DATE: June 18, 2013



BY: Scott Priester, Director of Development Services Dale Burke, Public Works Manager Scott Smith, Maintenance Crew Supervisor/Streets

SUBJECT: Amend and Increase Contract 2009-10-026 for Road Striping Services with J & S Striping Inc.

RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to Contract 2009-10-026 with J & S Striping Inc., thereby extending the contract for an additional year, and increasing the contract authority and purchase order for an additional $115,000 with a new not-to-exceed amount of $457,312. BACKGROUND Over the past four (4) years, J & S Striping Inc. has provided road striping maintenance services for the City of Hesperia. The current $342,213 contract with J & S Striping Inc. is scheduled to end on June 30, 2013. J & S Striping Inc. has requested a one-year extension of the current contract, maintaining the unit costs identified within the 2011-12 fee schedule. This will bring the total contract to $457,312 over five (5) years. ISSUES/ANALYSIS J & S Striping Inc. has requested a one-year extension to the existing contract; beginning July 1, 2013, and ending June 30, 2014. Due to the increase in fuel costs, employee benefits, and material costs, J & S Striping Inc. is unable to reduce their current rates; however, they will honor the rates identified in the 2011-12 fee schedule. FISCAL IMPACT Funding for road striping maintenance is identified within the proposed Fiscal Year 2013-14 budget under account 263-29-310-3150-7610 (115,000). ALTERNATIVE(S) 1. Provide alternative direction to staff. ATTACHMENT(S) None

Page 57


Page 58


DATE: June 18, 2013



BY: Kim Summers, Deputy City Manager Holly Effiom, Management Analyst

SUBJECT: New World Systems Approvals

RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to approve a five year contract with New World Systems (NWS) for $535,401, for a Standard Software Maintenance Agreement; an upgrade to the Human Resources module; six additional licenses and a 5% contingency. BACKGROUND On September 22, 2004, the City approved a three year contract with NWS for a Standard Software Maintenance Agreement. NWS has been the vendor for the City’s Financial Management System, and all other major management systems that the City acquires are configured to interface with this financial system. This agreement was amended in 2008 and 2009 for extension purposes. In August 2009, the City approved a contract for the maintenance of NWS’ Financial Management, Utility Billing, Payroll & Human Resources, and Community Development modules. This agreement is due to expire June 30, 2013. In addition, the existing Human Resources software will no longer be supported by NWS after December 31, 2014; requiring an upgrade; and the City requires additional licenses for Police and City use. ISSUES/ANALYSIS The City has negotiated with NWS for a new 5-Year, Standard Software Maintenance Agreement (SSMA) that will cover the Licensed Standard Software for: telephone support, software upgrades and new releases, temporary fixes, licensed documentation revision, and user group participation. Currently, the Police Department employs a cashiering process that involves manual receipting and reconciliation, which has resulted in the City receiving an audit finding for cash receipting. To remediate this finding, the City will provide the Police Department access to NWS through the purchase of six additional software licenses for $6,000. This will allow Police staff to perform cashiering functions within the automated system, which contains the proper protocols to correct the audit finding for this area. Police staff will utilize four licenses and the remaining two licenses will be used by City staff. Nearly all available NWS licenses are currently in use. Additionally, NWS is phasing out support on the existing Human Resources software after December 31, 2014, and is offering the City an upgrade called “NextGen” which will provide

Page 59

new functionality to automate and streamline human resources operations. The cost of this upgrade is estimated at $30,000 for software implementation and training, and any additional configuration, if needed. Finally, a 5% contingency is being requested for inclusion in this action to cover the cost of unanticipated configurations required over the 5-year period. The recommended action covered by this staff report is as follows:

1. The 5-year Standard Software Maintenance Agreement (SSMA) with New World Systems (NWS) for maintenance of the Financial Management System, including the Utility Billing, Payroll & Human Resources, and the Community Development modules which will expire June 30, 2018;

2. A 5% contigency for additional related system configuration; 3. Purchase of 6 additional licenses ($6,000) for use by the Police Department and City staff;

and, 4. Upgrade of the Human Resources software at a cost of approximately $30,000.

FISCAL IMPACT The SSMA includes a built in 5% maximum increase in each subsequent fiscal year during the five year contract. The breakdown as shown in the contract is as follows:

Fiscal year

Annual Maintenance Contingency

2013/14 $86,080.00 $4,304.00 2014/15 $90,380.00 $4,519.00 2015/16 $94,900.00 $4,745.00 2016/17 $99,640.00 $4,982.00 2017/18 $104,620.00 $5,231.00

Total $475,620.00 $23,781.00 The five-year maximum cost of the SSMA contract (which includes contingency) would be $499,401.00. Funding for the SSMA would be budgeted over the next five fiscal years jointly between City Manager/Information Technology (proposed FY 2013-14 Budget $60,000) and Water Billing (proposed FY 2013/14 Budget $27,000). The cost of NextGen is approximately $30,000, and the cost of the 6 additional licenses for the Police Department and City use is $6,000. Total cost of the contract plus contingencies is $535,401. ALTERNATIVE(S)

1. Provide alternate direction to staff. ATTACHMENT(S)

Page 60

None.

Page 61


Page 62

DATE: June 4, 2013

TO: Mayor and City Council Members


BY: Scott Priester, Development Services Director Dave Reno, Principal Planner

SUBJECT: Ordinance regarding Internet Sweepstakes Cafés (Applicant: City of Hesperia)

RECOMMENDED ACTION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council introduce and place on first reading Ordinance No. 2013-06, an amendment to the Hesperia Municipal Code to establish regulations for Internet Sweepstakes Cafés. BACKGROUND The City is proposing to extend a Municipal Code amendment to address the proliferation of internet sweepstakes cafés. The sweepstakes aspect allows customers to play gambling themed games on computers to win cash prizes. The Bureau of Gambling Control considers internet cafés that offer these types of sweepstakes to be illegal gambling operations. (Attachment 1) On April 2, 2013, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance 2013-04, prohibiting the establishment of these uses for 45 days. On April 16, 2013, the Council extended this Urgency Ordinance until April 2, 2015. ISSUES/ANALYSIS The City’s code currently does not define these uses. Two definitions will be added. The first will define a “computerized sweepstakes device.” This provides that any device, whether a computer or any other machine used for gambling, will be covered under the ordinance. The second will define internet sweepstakes cafés as any place where computerized sweepstakes devices are located for the use of the public. Finally, the ordinance will prohibit establishment of an internet sweepstakes café anywhere in the City. The primary issue is that at least five of these cafés have been established in the City, under the premise that they offer business support services. Subsequent investigation revealed that no such services are offered. The only activity is gambling as defined by the state. On March 20, 2013, the Sheriff’s Department and code enforcement staff closed these establishments within the City of Hesperia. As mentioned above, an Urgency Ordinance was adopted and is effective until April 2, 2015. The Planning Commission held a hearing on a permanent ordinance on April 11, 2013. The Commission unanimously voted to recommend adoption of the permanent ordinance.

Page 63

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

2nd Reading

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

shernandez

Typewritten Text

FISCAL IMPACT This action will have impacts on code enforcement and the Sheriff’s Department, if enforcement becomes a priority. Penal Code section 335a states, “Any and all money seized in or in connection with such machine or device shall immediately, after such a machine or device has been so destroyed, be paid into the treasury of the city or county.” Therefore, it is possible that the City may receive revenue from the prosecution of these businesses and the subsequent destruction of gaming devices. ALTERNATIVES 1. Decline to adopt the permanent ordinance. As this wouild be inconsistent with Council’s

previous actions to regulate Internet Sweepstakkes Cafés, this alternative is not recommended.

2. Provide alternative direction to staff. ATTACHMENTS 1. Law Enforcement Advisory, Bureau of Gambling Control 2. Ordinance No. 2013-06

Page 64

BUREAU OF

GaUBLTNGGoNTRoL

Knmnu D. HnnnrsAttorney General

Wey¡¡e J. Qurrur Jn.Bureau Chief

NUMBER 1I LAW ENFORCEMENT ADVISORY DEcEMBER 5,2A12

Internet Cafés

With increasing frequency, so-called "lnternet cafés" that sell Internet time or phone cards in conjunctionwith a "promotional sweepstakes," are operating throughout California. The "sweepstakes aspect" of theInternet cafes permits cnstomers to play gambling{hemed games on computers to win cash prizes. The

Bureau of Gambling Control (Bureau) considers Intemet cafés that offer these types of sweepstakes to be

illegal gambling operations.

Method of Operation:

In general, Internet cafés are located in storefront strip malls, though they can also be standaloneestablishments, Numerous computer terminals or stations are located inside each Internet café.

Customers generally purchase Internet time or phone time using a magnetic striped card provided by theInternet café. After making a purchase of Internet time or phone time, customers swipe the magnetic cardthrough a card reader at a computer terminal or station inside the Internet café to play gambling-themedgames. Along with the Internet time or phone time, customers receive sweepstakes "entries" or "credits"based upon the amount spent (e.g., 100 sweepstakes entries for $1.00 of Internet tirne purchased). Thesweepstakes entries are displayed on the computer screens as "credits." The customer then has the optionto select one of several gambling-themed games and makes bets with the credits. Customers who winprizes can cash in any winnings, or use the winnings to purchase additional internet time and sweepstakesentries. Cash prizes ranging from $1.00 to as much as $4,000 are paid out daily. Customers n-ray be ableto receive and play 100 credits per 24-hour period for free, but must purchase Internet time or phone cardtime to obtain additional sweepstakes credits to play the games once they have played the free credits.

In addition to the onsite computers, a server running the sweepstakes software will typically be present,

although a remote location server might also be used. The software operates and controls the garne playand pay outs at the computer terminals and maintains customer inforrnation. The software is most oftenprovided by out-of-state companies and is designed with tl-re intent of circumventing state gambling laws.It can reasonably be anticipated that this software will be continuously rnodified to avoid detection andanalysis in an attempt to prevent prosecution.

Page 65

Existins Law:

Computers that offer the sweepstakes generally described above are illegal "slot machine[s] or device[s]"prohibited by Penal Code section 330b, subdivision (d). (See also People ex rel. Loclryer t,, PacificGaming Technologies (2000) 82 Cal,App .4fh 699 [a vencling machine dispensing pre-paid telephonecards with "a sweepstakes feature" ancl prizes deterrnined by a pre-set computer program is an unlawfulgarnbling device under Penal Cocle section 330b].) Penal Code section 330a, subdivision (a), describes asprohibited "any slot or card machine, contrivance, appliance or mechanical device" on "whicll money orother valuable thing is staked or hazarded." (See also Pen. Code, $ 330.1.) Business and ProfessionsCode sections 17200, et seq., and 17500, et seq., provide for civil penalties ancl other remedies againstthese Internet café operations for unlawful business practices and false advertising. Penal Code section335a states, "Any and all money seized in or in connection with such machine or device shall,immediately after such a machine or device has been so destroyed, be paid into the treasury of the city orcounty," The operator may sue for recovery of the devices within 30 days after issuance of the notice ofintended destruction under Penal Code section 335a.

Assistance:

The Bureau will assist California law enforcement agencies working toward prosecution or pursuing civilor admir-ristrative actions in connection with Internet café gambling operations. Assistance mayencompass advice, Bureau personnel and equipment, search and arrest warrant examples, ancl otherexperienced assistance with enforcement operations. The local law enforcement agency will retain thelead role and be responsible for evidence retention, seizure of funds, and prosecution, oi civil oradministrative action against the establishment.

This advisory is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be legal ad¡¡ice.

For more informaïion regarding this adilisory, contact the Calif'ornia DeparÍntent of Justice, But.emt ofGambling Control at (916)227-3584

Page 66

ORDINANCE NO. 2013-06

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, ADDING SECTIONS TO TITLE 16 OF THE HESPERIA MUNICIAL CODE REGARDING INTERNET SWEEPSTAKES CAFÉS (DCA13-00003)

WHEREAS, On January 5, 1998, the City Council of the City of Hesperia adopted its Ordinance No. 250, thereby adopting the Hesperia Municipal Code; WHEREAS, Chapter 16.08 of the Hesperia Development Code establishes definitions of various land uses and activities and Chapter 16.16 lists land uses allowed in each zone district. No definition or regulation currently exists for internet sweepstakes cafés; WHEREAS, The Bureau of Gambling Control has found that such establishments harbor activities illegal in the state and the City desires to curtail the negative secondary impacts of crime, including prostitution, illegal drug distribution and theft; WHEREAS, The proposed Development Code amendment is exempt from the provisions of CEQA under Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, as there is no possibility that the proposed Development Code revisions regarding internet sweepstakes cafés can have significant adverse effects on the environment; WHEREAS, On April 11, 2013, the Planning Commission of the City of Hesperia conducted a duly noticed public hearing pertaining to internet sweepstakes cafés and concluded said hearing on that date, and recommended adoption of said ordinance; WHEREAS, On June 4, 2013, the City Council of the City of Hesperia conducted a duly noticed public hearing pertaining to internet sweepstakes cafés and concluded said hearing on that date. WHEREAS, All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE HESPERIA CITY COUNCIL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. All of the facts set forth in this Ordinance are true, correct and are adopted as findings. Section 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to the Council, including written and oral staff reports, the Commission specifically finds that the proposed Ordinance is consistent with the goals and objectives of the adopted General Plan.

Page 67

Section 3. The Hesperia Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: Section 16.08.142 is added to read as follows:

“Computerized sweepstakes device” shall mean any computer, machine, game or apparatus which, upon insertion of a coin, token, access number, magnetic card or similar object, or upon payment of anything of value, may be operated by the public generally for use in a contest of skill, entertainment, amusement or chance whether or not registering a score, and which provides the user with a chance to win anything of value or any cash payout or anything that could be redeemed, directly or indirectly, for any cash payout and which is not otherwise permitted as gambling, a lottery or as a gaming device under state law.

Section 16.08.347 is added to read as follows:

“Internet sweepstakes café” shall mean any premises upon which a computerized sweepstakes device is located for the use or entertainment of the public, whether or not such premises has other business purposes of any nature whatsoever.

Section 16.16.073 is hereby added to read as follows:

An internet sweepstakes café, as defined in Section 16.08.347, is prohibited within the City of Hesperia.

Section 4. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days from the date of adoption. Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of the Ordinance and shall

cause the same to be posted in three (3) public places within the City of Hesperia pursuant to the provisions of Resolution 93-78.

ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of June 2013. ___________________________ Bill Holland, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Melinda Sayre-Castro, Assistant City Clerk

Page 68

City of Hesper ia

STAFF REPORT

DATE: June 18, 2013



BY: Scott Priester, Director of Development Services Tina Souza, Management Analyst

SUBJECT: Environmental Impact Report for the Ranchero Road Corridor Widening Project (C.O. # 7094)

RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2013-028, certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) as complete and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP) and the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (FFSOC) for the Ranchero Corridor Road Widening Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). BACKGROUND The Ranchero Road Corridor Widening project consists of widening approximately five miles of Ranchero Road between the Ranchero Road Underpass and the Ranchero Road/Interstate 15 Interchange. In February of 2008, the City contracted with Parsons to perform the engineering design and necessary environmental studies as well as prepare any necessary environmental documents that evaluate potential effects the project may have in accordance with CEQA requirements. Approximately 50% of the subject five mile stretch of Ranchero Road is located in the unincorporated area of County of San Bernardino. In June of 2011, the City and County entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the design and environmental work to be performed on the project. City staff and Parsons have been working with the County to complete all the required environmental documentation. The City, acting as the Lead Agency, prepared the Final EIR in compliance with CEQA and the City’s General Plan. The project is subject to review and approval by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) for a 1602 Streambed Alteration Permit, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) – Lahontan Region for 401 Water Quality Certification and National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit (CGP) for non-stormwater discharges associated with construction activities which also includes a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) for a 404 Permit. ISSUES/ANALYSIS An Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the project in June 2010. The results of the analysis indicated that potential significant noise impacts existed that could not be fully mitigated. Consequently, in order to carry out the project, CEQA requires

Page 69

of 2 Major and Council Members Environmental Impact Report for the Ranchero Road Corridor Widening Project (C.O. # 7094) June 18, 2013

the preparation of an EIR. In compliance with CEQA, the Notice of Preparation, Notice of Availability, Notice of Completion, Draft EIR, Technical Studies, and the Final EIR containing the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program were completed and collectively make up the EIR. The Draft EIR was circulated to 30 agencies as well as the State Clearinghouse. The public review period for the draft was from December 18, 2012 to February 2, 2013. Comments were received by ACOE, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD), Department of Water Resources (DWR), RWQCB, and CDFW. Many of the comments did not warrant revisions to the Draft EIR; however, revisions were made to the Draft EIR as a result of comments from three of the agencies. Additionally, notices were sent to residents in the immediate vicinity of Ranchero Road and the City held a Public Open House on January 10, 2013 for citizens and other agencies to discuss the project. There were 17 persons in attendance at the Open House and four comments were received by the public. In general, comments received from citizens were with regards to issues of noise, traffic, and Right-of-Way (ROW) acquisition. In accordance with CEQA requirements, the Final EIR must be certified and the MMRP and FFSOC adopted prior to any further action on the project such as ROW acquisition. At this time, there is no funding identified by the City to move forward with ROW acquisition or construction; therefore, a projected schedule has not been determined. Any funding allocation requests will be presented to the Council should said funding become available. Certification of the Final EIR and adoption of the MMRP and FFSOC by the City Council as Lead Agency allows for the County to subsequently adopt the same and carry out portions of the project within their jurisdiction. Currently, the County has some funding for certain segments of the project. Because funding for remaining segments of the project have not been identified by the County, a completion schedule is undetermined. Following certification of the Final EIR, Parsons will file a Notice of Determination with the County of San Bernardino Clerk’s Office in compliance with CEQA. FISCAL IMPACT Certifications associated with this phase of the project were included in the City’s 2012-13 Capital Improvement Program under Fund 504 in account number 504-29-700-7094-7500. ALTERNATIVE(S) 1. Provide alternative direction to staff. ATTACHMENT(S) 1. Resolution 2013-028 2. Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 3. Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program

Page 70

Ranchero Road Widening Project

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT

OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS

Prepared for:

City of Hesperia

Development Services 9700 Seventh Avenue

Hesperia, CA 92345

Contact: Scott Priester

Director of Development Services

(760) 947-1473

and

County of San Bernardino Department of Public Works

825 E. Third Street, Room 127

San Bernardino, CA 92415

Lead Agency City of Hesperia Development Services

9700 Seventh Avenue

Hesperia, CA 92345

Findings By

City of Hesperia City Council

Prepared by:

3200 E. Guasti Road, Suite 200

Ontario, CA 91764

Contact: Andy Cheah (909) 218-3535

June 2013

Page 71

1

I. INTRODUCTION

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code [PRC] §21080) and

the CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] §15063) state that if it has been

determined that a Project may or will have significant impacts on the environment, then an

Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared. Accordingly, an EIR has been prepared

by the City of Hesperia (City) to evaluate potential environmental effects that may result from

the proposed Ranchero Road Widening Project. The EIR has been prepared in accordance with

the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (PRC § 21000 et seq.), and

implementing State CEQA Guidelines (CCR Title 14, § 15000 et seq.).

In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15090, the City, as Lead Agency for the Project,

certifies that:

(a) The Final EIR for the Project has been completed and processed in compliance with

the requirements of CEQA;

(b) The Final EIR was presented to the City of Hesperia City Council, as the decision-

making body for the City, who reviewed and considered the information contained in

the Final EIR prior to approving the Project; and

(c) The Final EIR reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis. The City has

exercised independent judgment in accordance with PRC Section 21082.1(c) in

retaining its own environmental consultant, directing the consultant in preparation of

the EIR, as well as reviewing, analyzing, and revising material prepared by the

consultant.

These Findings of Fact (Findings) and Statement of Overriding Considerations have been

prepared in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. The purpose of these Findings is

to satisfy the requirements of PRC Section 21081 and Sections 15090, 15091, 15092, 15093, and

15097 of the CEQA Guidelines in connection with approval of the Ranchero Road Widening

Project. Before Project approval, an EIR must be certified pursuant to Section 15090 of the

CEQA Guidelines. Prior to approving a Project for which an EIR has been certified, and for

which the EIR identifies one or more significant environmental impacts, the approving agency

must make one or more of the following findings, accompanied by a brief explanation of the

rationale, pursuant to PRC Section 21081 and Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines, for each

identified significant impact:

(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which

avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the

final EIR.

(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another

public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted

by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.

(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including

provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the

mitigation measures or Project alternatives identified in the final EIR.

Page 72

2

The City has made one or more of the specific written findings regarding each significant impact

associated with the Project. Those findings are presented here, along with a presentation of facts

in support of the findings. Concurrent with the adoption of these findings, the City Council

adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as presented in Appendix H of the

Final EIR and Section VIII of these Findings.

Section 15092 of the CEQA Guidelines states that after consideration of an EIR, and in

conjunction with the Section 15091 findings identified above, the lead agency may decide

whether or how to approve or carry out the Project. The lead agency may approve a Project with

unavoidable adverse environmental effects only when it finds that specific economic legal,

social, technological, or other benefits of the proposed Project outweigh those effects. Section

15093 requires the lead agency to document and substantiate any such determination in a

“statement of overriding considerations” as a part of the record. The City’s Statement of

Overriding Considerations is presented in Section VI of these Findings.

As required by CEQA, the City expressly finds that the Final EIR for the Ranchero Road

Widening Project reflects the City’s independent review and judgment. In accordance with the

provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the County adopts these Findings and Statement

of Overriding Considerations as part of its certification of the Final EIR. A brief explanation of

the rationale for each finding is provided in Section V.

The City Council of the City of Hesperia, in approving the Ranchero Road Widening Project,

makes the Findings described below and adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations

presented at the end of the Findings. The EIR was prepared by the City acting as lead agency

pursuant to CEQA. Hereafter, the Notice of Preparation, Notice of Availability, Notice of

Completion, Draft EIR (circulated from December 18, 2012 to February 2, 2013), Technical

Studies, Final EIR, containing Responses to Comments and textual revisions to the Draft EIR,

and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program will be referred to collectively herein as the

“EIR”. These Findings are based on the entire record before this City Council, including the EIR.

This City Council adopts the facts and analyses in the EIR, which are summarized below for

convenience. The omission of some detail or aspect of the EIR does not mean that it has been

rejected by this City Council.

II. PROJECT SUMMARY

A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1. Site Location

The Project area for the Ranchero Road Widening Project consists of a 5-mile segment of the

east-west roadway generally located in the southern limits of the City of Hesperia and

unincorporated San Bernardino County. The Project site is located from approximately 2,200

feet east of Mariposa Road on the west to Seventh Avenue on the east. The Project area

encompasses the existing road right-of-way (ROW) as well as portions of numerous adjacent

parcels which are situated along the north and south sides of Ranchero Road. The Project is

located along the section line separating Sections 1, 2, 3, and 4, T3N R5W from Sections 33, 34,

35, and 36 of T4N R5W, and along the section line separating Sections 5 and 6 of T3N R4W

from Sections 31 and 32 of T4N R4W, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, within the Baldy

Mesa and Hesperia, California, US Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5’ quadrangles.

Page 73

3

The Project area consists of undeveloped and developed property throughout the Ranchero Road

Widening Project footprint. Within the City's jurisdiction, land uses in the Project area are

predominantly rural residential, with pockets of medium-density single-family housing,

agriculture, and small-scale isolated commercial located along the Project alignment. The Project

area within the County is currently zoned for various rural residential uses. The western half of

the Project area has a larger percentage of undeveloped land and rural residential homes

compared to the mostly developed eastern half of the Project area, which consists of low- to

high-density residential housing. Most of the improved land on both sides of the roadway within

the corridor reflects these zoning and land use designations.

2. Project Description

The Project proposes to widen Ranchero Road from approximately 2,200 feet east of Mariposa

Road on the west to Seventh Avenue on the east. The proposed Project would involve widening

Ranchero Road from its current two-lane configuration to a four-lane facility within the City and

County jurisdictions. The proposed Project will not widen the Ranchero Road Aqueduct Bridge

as part of this Project or construct any improvements on the bridge deck, which will be evaluated

as a separate Project. The proposed Project supports the ultimate planned development of the

Project corridor into a six-lane roadway, which is to be constructed as needed to accommodate

projected future traffic demand. The proposed Project involves securing ROW throughout the

Project corridor to construct the two additional lanes along Ranchero Road.

The proposed Project would be constructed in two phases. Phase 1 consists of widening

Ranchero Road within the County limits from 2,200 feet east of Mariposa Avenue to Topaz

Avenue for a total of approximately 3 miles. It is anticipated that Phase 1 would be constructed

by 2014. Phase 2 consists of widening Ranchero Road from Topaz Avenue to Seventh Avenue

for a total of 2 miles. Phase 2 would be constructed by 2016.

3. Actions Covered by the EIR

The EIR will support the following discretionary approvals:

•••• Approval of a City Encroachment Permit

•••• Approval of a Tree or Plant Removal Permit

•••• Approval of a County Encroachment Permit

B. PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the proposed Ranchero Road Widening Project is as follows:

1. Improve east-west accessibility within Hesperia and the City’s Sphere of Influence

(SOI);

2. Improve traffic circulation in Hesperia by reducing traffic congestion; and

3. Support the mission of the City’s Street Improvement Program by providing residents

with improved residential streets and infrastructure.

Page 74

4

III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The City conducted an extensive review of this Project, which included a Draft EIR and a Final

EIR, including technical reports, along with a public review and comment period. The following

is a summary of the City’s environmental review and public participation efforts conducted for

this Project:

•••• Scoping Period: On June 15, 2012, the City submitted a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to the

State Clearinghouse, responsible agencies, and other interested parties announcing

commencement of the EIR process for the proposed Project. The NOP was mailed to a list of

40 recipients, including elected officials, government agencies, and interested parties. After

receiving the NOP, the State Clearinghouse identified the Project as SCH 2012061058 and

distributed it to state agencies with a potential interest in the proposed Project for a review

period that began on June 15, 2012, and ended 30 calendar days later on July 16, 2012. The

NOP was also sent out for posting at the San Bernardino County Clerk of the Board and

advertised in the Daily Press on Friday, June 15, 2012.

− Issues of concern were identified by the Lead Agency, through responses to the NOP, and

other communications addressing the Project and Project EIR. Ten comment letters were

received during the scoping period. Among the common areas of concern identified

through the NOP process were issues pertaining to noise/vibration, ROW acquisition, air

quality, and the aqueduct bridge.

•••• Draft EIR Circulation and Public Comment Period: Upon completion of the

environmental document, copies of the Draft EIR were sent to the State Clearinghouse for

circulation to resource agencies. The Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day public review,

beginning December 18, 2012 and ending in February 2, 2013. A Notice of Completion was

issued, and copies were distributed to a list of responsible and trustee agencies, as well as

parties known to have an interest in the Project. The Draft EIR was available for public

review at the City of Hesperia, Hesperia Branch Library, and County of San Bernardino.

− To inform the public of the availability of the Draft EIR, a Notice of Availability and

Announcement of a Public Meeting for the Draft EIR was published in the Daily Press

and posted in the San Bernardino County Clerk of the Board's office on December 18,

2012. Direct mail distributions were also sent to residents living adjacent to the Project

area. The Public Information/Open House for the Draft EIR was held on January 10,

2013, at the Hesperia Branch Library between 6:00 p.m. and 7:30 p.m. During the open

house, 17 persons attended and 4 comments were submitted by the public. The comment

period ended February 2, 2013, and 11 comments from 6 resource agencies and 5 from

the general public were received.

IV. INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT FINDING

The City solicited proposals from independent consultants to prepare the EIR for the Project.

Subsequently, the City selected and retained Parsons, to prepare the EIR. Parsons prepared the

EIR under the supervision and direction of the City of Hesperia planning staff.

Finding:

The EIR for the Project reflects the City’s independent judgment. The City has exercised

independent judgment in accordance with PRC Section 21082.1(c)(3) in retaining its own

Page 75

5

environmental consultant and directing the consultant in the preparation of the EIR. The City has

independently reviewed and analyzed the EIR and accompanying studies and finds that the

report reflects the independent judgment of the City.

At a meeting assembled on June 18, 2013, the City Council of the City of Hesperia determined

that, based upon all of the evidence presented, including, but not limited to, the Final EIR,

written and oral testimony given at the meetings and hearings, and submission of testimony from

the public, organizations, and regulatory agencies, the following impacts associated with the

Project are: (1) less than significant and do not require mitigation; or (2) potentially significant

and each of these impacts will be avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance through the

identified mitigation measures and/or implementation of an environmentally superior alternative

to the Project; or (3) significant and cannot be fully mitigated to a level of less than significant

but will be substantially lessened to the extent feasible by the identified mitigation measures.

A. GENERAL FINDING ON MITIGATION MEASURES

City staff will incorporate mitigation measures recommended in the EIR as applicable to the

Project. These mitigation measures are summarized in Appendix H of the Final EIR.

Finding:

Unless specifically stated to the contrary in these findings, it is this City Council’s intent to adopt

all mitigation measures recommended by the EIR that are applicable to the Project. If a measure

has, through error, been omitted from these Findings, and that measure is not specifically

reflected in these Findings, that measure shall be deemed to be adopted pursuant to this

paragraph. In addition, unless specifically stated to the contrary in these Findings, all repeating

or rewording mitigation measures recommended in the EIR are found to be equally effective in

avoiding or lessening the identified environmental impact.

V. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND FINDINGS

City staff reports, the EIR, written at public meetings or hearings, these facts, Findings and

Statement of Overriding Considerations, and other information in the administrative record,

serve as the basis for the City’s environmental determination.

The detailed analysis of potentially significant environmental impacts and proposed mitigation

measures for the Project is presented in Section 2.0 of the Draft EIR and the Final EIR.

Responses to comments from the public and from other government agencies on the Draft EIR

are provided in Appendix M of the Final EIR.

The EIR evaluated 18 major environmental categories for potential impacts, including

Aesthetics; Agriculture; Air Quality; Biological Resources; Cultural Resources; Geology and

Soils; Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Hazards and Hazardous Materials; Hydrology and Water

Quality; Land Use and Planning; Mineral Resources; Noise; Population and Housing;

Acquisitions; Recreation; Transportation and Traffic; Utilities and Service Systems; and Energy.

Both Project-specific and cumulative impacts were evaluated. Of these major environmental

categories, this City Council concurs with the conclusions in the EIR that the environmental

issues and subissues discussed in Subsections A and B below are anticipated to have no effects,

less than significant without mitigation or can be mitigated below a level of significance. For the

Page 76

6

remaining potential environmental impacts that cannot feasibly be mitigated below a level of

significance discussed in Subsection C, the City Council must evaluate the overriding

considerations and Project benefits and balance them against the significant impacts of the

Project.

A. IMPACTS IDENTIFIED AS LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT REQUIRING NO

MITIGATION

The following environmental issues were found in the EIR as having no potential to cause

significant impacts and therefore require no Project-specific mitigation. These environmental

resources include: Aesthetics, Agriculture, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse

Gas, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Land use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Population

and Housing, Utilities and Service Systems, Recreation, and Transportation and Traffic. In the

following section, each of the aforementioned resource issues is identified, and the potential for

significant adverse environmental effects is discussed.

1. Aesthetics

Potential Significant Impact:

Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: have a substantial adverse effect on a

scenic vista or resource; substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site

and its surroundings; or create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely

affect day or nighttime views in the area.

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on aesthetics are discussed in detail in Section 2.1 of the Final

EIR. Based on the entire record before us, this City Council finds less than significant impacts

related to aesthetic resources.

Facts in Support of the Finding:

Construction Impacts:

The construction phase of the Project could potentially result in temporary visual impacts.

During construction of the proposed Project, the presence of construction vehicles and

equipment could temporarily degrade the visual quality of the Project site; however, the presence

of construction vehicles would be temporary and would cease once construction is complete. In

summary, the visual character and quality of the Project corridor would be temporarily affected

by removal of vegetation, heavy equipment use and storage, excavation, and the presence of

other visible general construction activity. This would result in a less than significant impact.

Permanent Impacts:

The proposed Project is not located on or near a state scenic highway. Based on a site

reconnaissance, neither rock outcroppings nor historic buildings exist along the Project corridor.

Additionally, no notable scenic vistas or scenic resources, including those views from adjacent

homes, would be significantly altered by the proposed Project. Finally, while roadway

construction would be required along the entire alignment, this work is not anticipated to affect

any scenic vista.

Page 77

7

The Project would produce minor changes in the existing visual character along Ranchero Road

through widening the existing pavement from a two-lane roadway to a four-lane facility;

however, this minor change would only occur in areas that have not already been widened to

four lanes, because certain segments of Ranchero Road have already been paved to

accommodate the proposed four-lane configuration. Furthermore, the Project would not involve

any overcrossing structures and would be constructed at-grade, which would maintain the

existing views of the desert landscape. While the Project would entail vegetation removal along

both sides of the roadway in some areas, existing residential and commercial structures would

not be affected. The proposed Project improvements could be perceived by some as beneficial

along segments of the roadway that currently have a degraded appearance. Given the above

considerations, and with incorporation of minimization measures as detailed in the

environmental document, the Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual

character or quality of the Project area.

2. Agriculture


Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: convert protected farmland to

nonagricultural use; conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act

contract; or involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or

nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest

land to non-forest use.

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on agriculture are discussed in detail in Section 2.2 of the Final

EIR. Based on the entire record before us, this City Council finds no significant impact related to

agriculture.



Less than significant impacts to farmland would be associated with the Project during

construction. Temporary road closures and detours might occur as part of Project construction,

which might impact access to and from existing agricultural uses along the east end of the

corridor. Project construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be employed to

minimize dust and noise, and to manage stormwater runoff. Construction staging would not

occur on agricultural land, and adjacent agricultural parcels would not be otherwise significantly

impacted during Project construction. Construction-related impacts to agricultural resources

would be less than significant.

Permanent Impacts:

Permanent impacts, including acquisition and conversion, of parcels zoned for agriculture are not

expected. The Project would have a less than significant impact on agricultural resources.

Page 78

8

3. Cultural Resources


Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: cause a substantial adverse change in

the significance of a historical or archaeological resource; directly or indirectly destroy a unique

paleontological resource or unique geologic feature; or disturb human remains including those

interred outside of formal cemeteries.

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on cultural resources are discussed in detail in Section 2.5 of the

Final EIR. Based on the entire record before us, this City Council finds no significant impact

related to cultural resources.



Construction activities, including associated staging areas, are not anticipated to produce impacts

to cultural resources. The California Aqueduct and bridge structure were recently identified as

being eligible for listing as a historic resource on the National Register of Historic Places by

Caltrans and the California Department of Parks and Recreation. However, construction of the

proposed Project would avoid construction-related activities within the California Aqueduct,

including construction on the Ranchero Road Bridge spanning over the California Aqueduct. The

transport of construction equipment across the Ranchero Road Bridge will not exceed the 66.2

metric ton operating load capacity of the existing bridge structure as determined by the Caltrans

Division of Maintenance; therefore, no impacts to the bridge structure are anticipated as a result

of constructing the Build Alternative.

Though the record search and archaeological survey failed to indicate the presence of known

buried archaeological and cultural resources, construction monitoring would minimize potential

effects to buried cultural resources in the unlikely event they are encountered during construction

activities. During excavation activities, undocumented and unknown cultural materials might be

uncovered. In this event, minimization measures would be implemented to ensure impacts to

cultural resources are minimized.

Permanent Impacts:

No impacts are expected during operation of the proposed Project on historical, archaeological,

or paleontological resources. The California Aqueduct is the only eligible historic property/

historical resource located within the Project corridor; however, construction of the proposed

Project and its operation would not affect this resource. Ranchero Road, along the aqueduct

bridge, would remain a two-lane facility; however, the proposed Project would widen Ranchero

Road at each end of the bridge to four lanes. It is anticipated that traffic congestion along the

bridge would worsen compared to the widened portion of Ranchero Road because of the reduced

traffic-carrying capacity. Nevertheless, at opening year condition of the proposed Project,

roadway capacity along the California Aqueduct Bridge would still operate at Level of Service

(LOS) D, which is considered acceptable by standards contained in the City’s adopted General

Plan; therefore, no significant traffic-related impacts are anticipated on the historically eligible

California Aqueduct Bridge at opening year conditions.

Page 79

9

No other historical resources were identified, and the Project would have no impact on historical

resources.

4. Geology and Soils


Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: expose people or structures to potential

substantial adverse effects of earthquakes, seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, or landslides;

result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of top-soil; or be located on expansive or unstable

soils.

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on geology and soils are discussed in detail in Section 2.6 of the

Final EIR. Based on the entire record before us, this City Council finds no significant impact

related to geology and soils.



Significant impacts resulting from liquefaction, settlement, and expansion are not expected to

result from Project construction because the proposed Project involves widening and realignment

of an existing roadway and does not include construction of any structures or substantial

excavation or trenching. Furthermore, as described in the geotechnical report, the potential for

fault rupture, liquefaction, and landslides is considered low within the study area. The proposed

Project would involve clearing and grubbing and grading, which might have minor temporary

impacts. Construction activities could result in increased wind and soil erosion; however, in

accordance with the statewide General Permit for Storm Water Discharges associated with

Construction, the Project would incorporate all applicable construction site BMPs to minimize

potential loss of top-soil and/or soil erosion.

Implementation of construction BMPs overseen by a State-licensed professional, in compliance

with City and County standards, would reduce potential soil erosion impacts to a less than

significant level and is not expected to increase risk or result in hazards associated with slope

instability.

5. Greenhouse Gas Emissions


Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: generate direct or indirect greenhouse

gas (GHG) emissions that would have a significant effect on the environment; or conflict with an

applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of

GHGs.

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on GHG emissions are discussed in detail in Section 2.7 of the

Final EIR. Based on the entire record before us, this City Council finds no significant impacts

related to GHG emissions.

Page 80

10



Construction GHG emissions include emissions produced as a result of emissions generated by

onsite construction equipment, emissions arising from traffic delays that may result from

construction, and through vehicle trips generated from construction workers traveling to and

from the Project site. These emissions are produced at different levels throughout the

construction phase. The frequency and occurrence of the temporary impacts for the Project

would be reduced through best practices to be incorporated into the plans and specifications, and

by implementing better traffic management during construction. In addition, with innovations

such as longer pavement lives and improved traffic management plans, the GHG emissions

produced during construction of the proposed Project would be mitigated to some degree by

longer intervals between maintenance and rehabilitation events. Based on these considerations,

the construction phase of the Project would result in less than significant impacts based on

proposed avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures.

Permanent Impacts:

Operational GHG emissions are associated with vehicle traffic along the roadway within the

Project corridor. The proposed Project is a transportation facility; therefore, GHG emissions

would include the direct GHG emissions from vehicle traffic along the proposed Project corridor.

One of the main strategies in the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) to reduce GHG emissions is

to make Hesperia’s transportation and land use systems more efficient. GHGs created by

transportation are by far the greatest opportunity for emissions reductions.

The highest levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) from mobile sources, such as automobiles, occur at

stop-and-go speeds (zero to 25 mph) and speeds over 55 mph; the most severe emissions occur

from zero to 25 mph. To the extent that a Project relieves congestion by enhancing operations

and improving travel times in high-congestion travel corridors, GHG emissions, particularly

CO2, may be reduced.

The proposed Project is designed to reduce congestion and vehicle time delays along Ranchero

Road. A stated Project objective is to reduce congestion and improve traffic operations, which is

consistent with the objectives of the City’s CAP. The Project is expected to relieve congestion

and improve travel times by decreasing vehicles idling at intersections along Ranchero Road.

These improvements to traffic and circulation would translate to reduced overall and regional

GHG emissions.

6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials


Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: create a significant hazard through the

routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; create a significant hazard through

reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions; emit hazardous emissions or handle

hazardous materials within 0.25-mile of a school; be located on a hazardous materials site that

would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment; impair implementation of an

adopted emergency response or evacuation plan; or expose people or structures to a significant

risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildlands fires.

Page 81

11

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on hazards and hazardous materials are discussed in detail in

Section 2.8 of the Final EIR. Based on the entire record before us, this City Council finds no

significant impact related to hazards and hazardous materials.



During construction, there is a potential for encountering hazardous materials or waste at the

Project’s ground-disturbance locations. Aerially deposited lead may also be present along the

shoulders of the Project alignment. In addition, pesticide and herbicide residue may also exist

along the Project corridor in trace concentrations. This potential pesticide and herbicide residue

is not expected to result in significant impacts. Impacts would be less than significant.

Asbestos-containing materials (ACM) are suspected to be present in bridge joint compound

materials along the Project alignment. In addition, concrete and asphalt debris piles are located

adjacent to the Project alignment and may contain hazardous components. Contamination in the

concrete and asphalt is expected to be present, but in relatively low concentrations. Standard

construction practices would reduce impacts from ACMs and other trace contamination in

concrete and asphalt debris to less than significant.

Construction activities themselves may also involve the use of hazardous materials. Schools are

located within 0.25-mile of the proposed Project alignment. As a result, the public, environment,

and school attendees may be exposed to hazardous materials if an upset condition were to occur

during construction. The use, storage, and transport of hazardous materials would be controlled

through standard construction practices to reduce the risk of upset conditions. Impacts would be

less than significant based on the low level of existing contamination, minimal disruption caused

by construction activities, and avoidance and minimization measures that would be employed

during construction.

Permanent Impacts:

During permanent operation, the Project would not increase the generation of hazardous

materials within the Project area, nor would it increase risks of exposure. Trucks hauling

hazardous materials would continue to be operated in compliance with local, state, and federal

regulations regarding hazardous substance transport. The Project would not create a hazard to the

public or environment or otherwise increase the risk of releasing hazardous material into the

environment.

The nearest school is Oak Hills Christian Preschool located less than 0.01-mile north of the

Project area at 13032 Ranchero Road. In addition, Oak Hills High School is located 0.04-mile

from the Project area at 7625 Cataba Road. Despite the proximity of schools to the Project

corridor, the Project is not likely to result in increased exposure of school properties or sensitive

receptors to hazardous emissions or materials.

Construction and operations of the proposed Project would be consistent with the City’s

Emergency Response Plan.

Page 82

12

In addition, the Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk involving

wildland fires.

Less than significant permanent impacts are expected to result from the Project as proposed. The

widening of Ranchero Road would result in an improved, safer setting to transport hazardous

waste materials, enhancing activities already existing within Hesperia. Furthermore, the Project

would not promote or otherwise encourage the increase of generation of such materials in the

vicinity. Finally, the Project would conform to the City’s Emergency Operations Plan to avoid

impacts to emergency responders, evacuation plans, and wildland fire regulations.

7. Land Use and Planning


Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: physically divide an established

community; conflict with applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations; or conflict with

applicable habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans.

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on land use and planning are discussed in detail in Section 2.10

of the Final EIR. Based on the entire record before us, this City Council finds no significant

impact related to impacts to existing and planned land uses within the Project area.



No adverse land use impacts would be associated with the Project during construction. The

Project would not convert land uses in the Project area, nor would it conflict with any land use

plans, policies, or regulations. Construction activities would be temporary in nature and would

not introduce land uses that are incompatible with existing uses, require changes to existing land

use designations, or change local or regional planning document goals or policies. In addition,

construction would not include activities that would be unacceptable or intrusive to adjacent land

uses such that those current land uses could not remain. Moreover, BMPs for construction traffic

management, noise abatement, and control of air quality and water quality impacts would be

implemented during Project construction to address construction-related impacts to local land

uses.

Permanent Impacts:

The Project would be compatible with existing land uses identified in the City's adopted General

Plan. Ranchero Road is an existing roadway already established as a transportation corridor

through the existing community. Surrounding land uses already utilize the road and are

presumably accustomed to the general effects of such a facility.

Property acquisitions along the Project alignment needed to accommodate the realigned and

widened roadway are discussed in Section 2.13 of the Final EIR, which focuses on acquisitions.

The proposed property acquisitions would accommodate widening and realignment of an

existing transportation corridor and would not change land uses because they only involve small

Page 83

13

portions of each subject property. The use of these acquired property as a roadway facility is

compatible with the uses identified in the City's General Plan.

8. Mineral Resources


Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: result in the loss of availability of a

known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and residents of the state; or result

in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a

local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan.

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on mineral resources are discussed in detail in Section 2.11 of

the Final EIR. Based on the entire record before us, this City Council finds no significant impact

related to impacts to mineral resources.


Construction and Permanent Impacts:

There are no known mineral resources within the Project area; therefore, no impacts to mineral

resources are anticipated with the Project during construction or operation of the proposed

Project. No loss of availability of locally important mineral resources or recovery sites is

anticipated.

9. Population and Housing


Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: directly or indirectly induce substantial

population growth; displace substantial numbers of existing housing; or displace substantial

numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on population and housing are discussed in detail in Section 2.13

of the Final EIR. Acquisitions are discussed in Section 2.14. Based on the entire record before

us, this City Council finds no significant impact related to population and housing in the Project

area, including acquisitions.



During construction, local circulation would likely be impacted by potential construction

detours, temporarily altered driveway access, and movement of construction equipment/vehicles

within the Project area. Local streets would be maintained open for vehicle traffic, and driveway

access to adjacent properties would be maintained at all times during the construction period.

Page 84

14

The existing labor supply to construct the proposed Project is adequate, and population growth

inducement and population displacement are not anticipated. Temporary construction-related

impacts would not impact lifestyles or neighborhood character and stability.

The proposed Project is being implemented to accommodate planned future growth as

documented in the adopted 2007 San Bernardino County General Plan, 2010 City of Hesperia

General Plan, and their component Area and Specific Plans. The proposed Project would be

compatible with existing and planned land uses. The Project would facilitate the flow of east-

west traffic across Hesperia and adjacent unincorporated land. This Project would be beneficial

for the community because it would facilitate economic growth, enhance public services,

improve emergency response times, and ultimately accommodate future increases in traffic.

Improvements to Ranchero Road are not anticipated to impact community character, cohesion,

population, or housing. In addition, the Project is not anticipated to adversely impact public

services or facilities.

Permanent Impacts:

A total of 25 partial acquisitions of residential parcels would be required to accommodate the

Project; however, no full acquisitions are expected. These partial acquisitions will consist of

small amounts of property fronting the roadway that would be acquired as part of the Project

ROW. No business or residential displacements are anticipated at this time. These acquisitions

would be obtained “in fee” through the payment of fair market value for the property that is

acquired if within City jurisdiction, or as easements if within County jurisdiction. As project

design is finalized, additional ROW needs may be identified.

At this time, all construction activities are expected to occur within the proposed ROW, which

includes the partial acquisitions discussed above. No additional temporary construction

easements would be required, and no temporary ROW impacts would occur. Based on these

findings and current design, no acquisition-related impacts are anticipated during construction.

10. Utilities and Service Systems


Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: exceed wastewater treatment

requirements; require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities

or expansion of existing facilities; require or result in the construction of new stormwater

drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities; have sufficient water supplies available to

serve the Project from existing entitlements and resources, or new or expanded entitlements are

needed; not be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the

Project’s solid waste disposal needs; or result in adverse impacts to service ratios, response

times, or other performance objectives for fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, or

other public facilities.

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on utilities and service systems are discussed in detail in Section

2.17 of the Final EIR. Based on the entire record before us, this City Council finds no significant

impact to utilities or service systems.

Page 85

15



Project construction would result in minor temporary impacts to utilities, involving the relocation

of some utilities to accommodate post-Project conditions.

The proposed roadway widening and realignment would require the relocation of some utility

facilities. The utility owners of gas, power poles, and phone lines would be responsible for

relocation of their respective facility prior to Project construction. The Project also includes

extensions of four existing corrugated metal pipe (CMP) drainage culverts under Ranchero Road.

The diameter of CMP ranges from 48 to 96 inches. The proposed pavement width is generally

70 feet and varies as needed to avoid existing utilities. Asphalt Concrete (AC) dikes would be

constructed on both sides of roadway pavement to convey stormwater runoff.

The process of utility relocation is expected to occur over approximately 9 months. Existing

utilities that would interfere with construction of the corridor improvements would be removed

and relocated for continuing service. In addition, utilities crossing the alignment may need to be

removed and relocated to either temporary or permanent locations at the outset.

This work would be conducted in accordance with contract specifications, including the

following requirements: obtain authorization from owner before initiating work; contact

Underground Service Alert in advance of excavation work to mark-out underground utilities;

conduct investigations, including exploratory borings, to confirm the location and type of

underground utilities and service connections; prepare a support plan for each utility crossing

detailing the intended support method; take appropriate precautions for the protection of

unforeseen utility lines; and restore or replace each utility as close as possible to its former

location and as good or better condition than found prior to removal.

The Project may result in some temporary disruption to emergency services due to detours and

closures from Project construction. To ensure that emergency response times are not disrupted,

all affected public and private emergency responders would be informed of the Project

construction schedule, lane closures (if any), and detour plans (if any) well in advance of any

detour plan or lane closure being implemented throughout the construction period. Furthermore,

to avoid conflicts during construction, emergency and other essential service providers, as well

as other public services, would be notified prior to construction. Finally, a TMP would be

prepared for the Project prior to construction. The TMP would include plans and requirements

for the Project area that must be implemented during Project construction to ensure traffic safety

and maintain access for emergency access vehicles at all times.

Permanent Impacts:

Once the proposed Project is complete, most impacts related to utilities would be complete.

Operation of the proposed Project would not result in an increase in demand on any utilities or

result in disruptions to utilities; therefore, no significant impacts to utilities are expected.

Furthermore, the enhanced east-west connectivity provided by the Build Alternative may

actually improve the response times for emergency services in Hesperia.

Page 86

16

11. Recreation


Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: increase the use of existing

neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities; or require the construction or

expansion of recreational facilities.

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on recreation are discussed in detail in Section 2.15 of the Final


recreational resources.



Because no existing parks are located near the proposed Project, there would be no impact on

existing parks and/or recreational facilities.

Permanent Impacts:

In the long-term, the proposed Project would not affect the use of existing neighborhood or

regional parks or other recreational facilities because the nearest existing park is 0.3-mile away

and is considered distant from the proposed Project area. In addition, the Project would not

involve construction or expansion of any recreational facilities or increased recreational demand;

therefore, the Project would not result in significant impacts to recreational resources.

12. Transportation and Traffic


Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: conflict with applicable plans,

ordinances, or policies establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the

circulation system; conflict with an applicable CMP; result in a change in air traffic patterns,

including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial

safety risks; substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses; result in

inadequate emergency access; or conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding

public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decreases the performance or safety

of such facilities.

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on transportation and traffic are discussed in detail in Section

2.16 of the Final EIR. Based on the entire record before us, this City Council finds no significant

impact related to transportation and traffic.



The proposed Project would likely cause temporary traffic delays and inconveniences during

construction. Potential impacts during construction would be temporary, intermittent, and

Page 87

17

relatively brief. Two lanes would be kept open so that traffic flow and emergency vehicle access

can be maintained during construction of the proposed Project. Temporary traffic delays during

construction could affect the response times of emergency personnel and equipment. These

impacts can be addressed through implementation of traffic management procedures during

construction.

A Transportation Management Plan (TMP) would be developed for all work performed within

the public ROW. The purpose of the TMP would be to identify measures to be taken to reduce

construction-related delays to the public and provide safe and efficient movement of motorists,

pedestrians, bicyclists, construction equipment, workers, and emergency and law enforcement

personnel and equipment.

In addition to the TMP, the proposed Project would also develop a Traffic Control Plan (TCP)

during the design phase. The TCP prepared for the proposed Project shall follow the California

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (January 2012 or the latest edition) and local agency

guidelines. Data to be included in the TMP would vary depending upon the complexity of the

work being performed, the volume of traffic affected, and the roadway geometrics at the specific

location where the construction would be performed. The TCP would depict the sequence of

construction operations, construction to be performed, traveled way that would be utilized by

movements of traffic during each phase of construction, hours of operation, and the estimated

time required for construction completion. Multiple phases of construction would require a

separate TCP component for each different construction phase or operation. The proposed

Project would not adversely impact response times of emergency personnel and equipment with

the development of a TCP.

Access to residential and commercial driveways would also be maintained during construction of

the proposed Project. In addition, the Project is not expected to require any detours or prolonged

local street/lane closures. With the preparation and implementation of a TMP and TCP, potential

temporary impacts during construction would be minimized to less than significant.

Permanent Impacts:

No permanent significant impacts to traffic and transportation facilities would occur as part of

the proposed Project. The Project is designed to improve traffic operations and provide increased

capacity, thereby improving mobility for local and regional users. The proposed Project is

considered to have a less than significant impact on traffic and transportation conditions.

The City's General Plan has identified increases in traffic congestion due to the anticipated

growth in the future. In conjunction with other transportation projects (i.e., I-15/Ranchero Road

Interchange and Burlington Northern Santa Fe [BNSF] Underpass projects) and planned future

developments in this area of Hesperia, the average daily traffic (ADT) is expected to increase

substantially in the future compared to existing traffic conditions. The City and the County have

identified the widening of Ranchero Road in their respective General Plans to address future

traffic congestion; hence, the proposed Project is consistent with currently adopted City and

County plans because construction of two additional lanes would be within the General Plan

designation for Ranchero Road.

One of the City's policies identified in the Circulation Element is to improve the public roadway

system to meet existing and future demands. The projected ADT for the opening year (2016)

Page 88

18

without Project condition is 12,084 vehicles per day (vpd), compared to the existing traffic

volume of 7,781 vpd. Compared to opening year future traffic volumes with a four-lane facility,

ADTs are anticipated to be higher at 12,674 with the Project.

Compared to opening year future traffic volumes for a four-lane facility, ADTs are anticipated to

be higher at 12,674; however, the projected volume to capacity (V/C) ratio is significantly lower

at 0.41, resulting in better traffic operations compared to the No Build Alternative. Because the

proposed Project would not widen the bridge spanning over the California Aqueduct, it is

anticipated that traffic volumes of 12,674 vpd would utilize the two-lane bridge with a V/C ratio

of 0.87, which is slightly higher than the No Build Alternative. The reduction of the number of

through lanes from four lanes to two lanes at either end of the bridge would act as a choke point

for vehicles traveling along Ranchero Road. Due to this condition, congestion is anticipated to be

heavier within the general area of the California Aqueduct Bridge compared to the proposed

four-lane segments of the widened facility. Nevertheless, at opening year conditions of the

proposed Project, roadway capacity along the California Aqueduct Bridge would still operate at

LOS D, which is considered acceptable by standards contained in the City’s adopted General

Plan; therefore, no significant traffic impacts are anticipated on the California Aqueduct Bridge

at opening year conditions.

The City realizes that the California Aqueduct Bridge needs to be widened within the same time

frame of implementing Phase 2 of the proposed Project. The City and County have been actively

coordinating with the Department of Water Resources (DWR) for the past 4 years regarding the

widening of Ranchero Road and will continue coordination through Project construction. The

City anticipates that the California Aqueduct Bridge would be widened concurrently with Phase

2 of the proposed Project. Because the proposed Project and the California Aqueduct Bridge

would be widened concurrently, future traffic conditions are anticipated to operate better

compared to the No Build Alternative conditions.

At City buildout conditions when Ranchero Road is widened to its ultimate six-lane

configuration, the adopted City General Plan indicates traffic volumes along Ranchero Road on

the California Aqueduct Bridge will increase to 41,400 vpd. The City’s adopted General Plan has

identified that Ranchero Road and the California Aqueduct Bridge will ultimately be widened to

six lanes; hence, the traffic analysis considered in this document defers to the findings and results

of the City of Hesperia’s General Plan Transportation Technical Report (2009). The City

assumes that the California Aqueduct Bridge would be widened to its ultimate configuration with

six lanes between opening year (2016) of the proposed Project and General Plan buildout

conditions. Traffic conditions along Ranchero Road within the California Aqueduct Bridge

segment at City buildout conditions (with six lanes) are anticipated to generally operate at a V/C

ratio of 0.90, which is generally considered as operating at an acceptable LOS D.

As indicated in the General Plan, the City realizes the need to widen the California Aqueduct

Bridge to accommodate future planned growth and has prioritized widening of the bridge in its

Capital Improvement Program. Continued coordination with DWR regarding widening of the

California Aqueduct Bridge is ongoing.

The widening of Ranchero Road would be consistent with the City's policy to improve roadways

to meet future demands with construction of the two additional lanes. The traffic operation along

Ranchero Road is expected to further improve with construction of the road to its ultimate

Page 89

19

configuration as a six-lane roadway facility (an additional one lane in each direction beyond the

proposed Project); however, potential benefits and impacts of widening Ranchero Road to six

lanes would require a separate environmental document and analysis.

The City adopted its latest TCP in 2010. One of the goals of the plan is to strive to achieve and

maintain LOS D on all roadways and LOS D at all intersections. Currently, Ranchero Road

within the proposed Project area is operating at LOS D or better. Under future without Project

traffic conditions, an increase in ADT of 12,084 is expected, resulting in a V/C ratio of 0.83;

therefore, Ranchero Road is expected to operate at an acceptable LOS D without the proposed

Project. With the proposed Project, the capacity of Ranchero Road would be increased, which

would result in improved traffic conditions compared to opening year without Project conditions.

Construction of the Project would not significantly impact the LOS in the Project area.

B. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT CAN BE MITIGATED

BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES

PRC Section 21081 states that no public agency shall approve or carry out a Project for which an

EIR has been completed which identifies one or more significant effects unless the public agency

makes one or more of the following findings:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which

mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.

2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another

public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.

3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make

infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR, and overriding

economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the Project outweigh the

significant effects on the environment.

The following issues from three of the environmental categories analyzed in the EIR, including

Air Quality, Biological Resources, and Hydrology and Water Quality, were found to be

potentially significant, but can be mitigated to a less than significant level with the imposition of

mitigation measures. This City Council hereby finds pursuant to PRC Section 21081 that all

potentially significant impacts listed below can and will be mitigated to below a level of

significance by imposition of the mitigation measures in the EIR and that these mitigation

measures are included as Conditions of Approval and set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and

Reporting Program adopted by this City Council. Specific findings of this City Council for each

category of such impacts are set forth in detail below.

1. Air Quality


Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: conflict with or obstruct implementation

of the applicable air quality plan; violate air quality standards or contribute substantially to an

existing or projected air quality violation; result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of

any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or

state ambient air quality standard, including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative

Page 90

20

thresholds for ozone precursors; expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant

concentrations; or create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on air quality are discussed in detail in Section 2.3 of the Final


short-term and long-term air quality.



Construction-related impacts to air quality are short-term in duration and are not anticipated to

result in adverse or long-term conditions. Implementation of appropriate minimization measures

will reduce any air quality impacts from construction activities.

Temporary construction-related airborne dust and vehicle emissions would occur during site

preparation and Project construction. Compliance with Mojave Desert Air Quality Management

District (MDAQMD) and Caltrans BMPs would sufficiently reduce the construction-related air

pollutant emissions to less than significant levels. Emissions from construction equipment are

also expected and would include carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOX), volatile organic

compounds (VOCs), directly emitted particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), and toxic air

contaminants (TACs) such as diesel exhaust (DE) particulate matter. Ozone (O3) is a regional

pollutant that is derived from NOX and VOCs in the presence of sunlight and heat. These

construction emissions are not predicted to exceed MDAQMD thresholds. With the

implementation of minimization measures, no adverse construction air quality impacts are

anticipated.

Permanent Impacts:

The Project is not expected to have a substantial regional emissions impact. The primary source

of air pollutant emissions associated with the proposed Project would be motor vehicle traffic.

The proposed Project is included in the adopted 2012 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and

the 2010-2011 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) Annual Listing of

Obligated Projects. The Project’s influence on mobile source air pollutant emissions was already

incorporated into the air quality modeling used in MDAQMD’s conformity determinations for

the 2012 RTP and 2008 RTIP and its 2012-2035 RTP Transportation Conformity Report. The

Project’s inclusion in a conforming RTP/RTIP is one indicator that operation of the Build

Alternative would not produce a substantial regional impact on air pollutant emissions.

Another indicator that the proposed Project would not have a substantial regional emissions

impact is the net influence of the Project on motor vehicle traffic emissions in the Project

vicinity, relative to the baseline emissions under no-action conditions. For the proposed Project,

AM and PM period average travel speeds for automobiles and trucks within the corridor are

expected to increase after construction, thereby decreasing the estimated emissions. These

reductions in estimated emissions are primarily attributable to the predicted increases in average

travel speeds.

Page 91

21

Based on the inclusion of the Project in a conforming RTP/RTIP and an anticipated reduction in

overall emissions, no adverse regional air quality impacts would result from operation of the

Project as proposed.

Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures:

During the operational phase, the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts to air

quality; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Although operational emissions from the Project are anticipated to be less than significant, site

preparation and roadway construction would involve clearing, cut-and-fill activities, grading,

removing or improving existing roadways, and paving roadway surfaces, which may affect

nearby sensitive receptors. To ensure that potential construction-related air quality impacts are

minimized, the following measures would apply to the proposed Project to mitigate impacts to

less than significant:

•••• AQ-1: Periodic watering for short-term stabilization of disturbed surface areas to minimize

visible fugitive dust emissions (for purposes of this Rule, use of a water truck to maintain

most disturbed surfaces and actively spread water during visible dusting episodes shall be

considered sufficient to maintain compliance).

•••• AQ-2: Take actions sufficient to prevent Project-related track-out onto paved surfaces.

•••• AQ-3: Cover loaded haul vehicles while operating on publicly maintained paved surfaces.

•••• AQ-4: Stabilize graded site surfaces upon completion of grading when subsequent

development is delayed or expected to be delayed more than 30 days, except when such a

delay is due to precipitation that dampens the disturbed surface sufficiently to eliminate

visible fugitive dust emissions.

•••• AQ-5: Reduce nonessential earth-moving activity under high wind conditions (for purposes

of this Rule, a reduction in earth-moving activity when visible dusting occurs from moist and

dry surfaces due to wind erosion shall be considered sufficient to maintain compliance).

•••• AQ-6: Water exposed surfaces at least twice per day; activities will be scheduled to allow for

early paving of road surfaces; reduced travel speeds (15 mph) on unpaved surfaces shall be

enforced; simultaneous disturbance areas will be limited to the smallest area as practical; and

all stockpiles will be covered with tarps.

•••• AQ-7: Measures contained in the MDAQMD Rule 403 would be followed, as applicable,

during Project construction. The City of Hesperia would be responsible for selecting

appropriate applicable Rule 403 measures to be followed during Project construction and for

overseeing compliance with the measures by the construction contractors. The construction

contractors would be required to obtain construction permits from the City and County, and

the permits would state the required Rule 403 measures that must be followed by the

contractors.

2. Biological Resources


Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: have a substantial direct or indirect

adverse effect on species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special-status species; have a

Page 92

22

substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities; have a

substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands; substantially with the movement of

native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or

migratory wildlife corridors; conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological

resources; or conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural

Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation

plan.

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on biological resources are discussed in detail in Section 2.4 of

the Final EIR. Based on the entire record before us, this City Council finds no significant impact

related to biological resources.



Limited temporary impacts to biological resources would be associated with the proposed

Project’s construction phase. Areas immediately adjacent to Ranchero Road (and within a

30-foot-wide buffer on either side of the road) will likely be temporarily impacted by

construction activities, including vehicle and equipment staging areas, access roads, and other

construction-related activities. Once the roadway construction is complete, these impacted areas

will be revegetated and restored to pre-Project conditions in accordance with Project avoidance,

minimization, and/or mitigation measures as discussed in measure BIO-8.

The Project contains many occurrences of Joshua tree and California juniper, which are pursuant

to Section 16.24.150 of Hesperia’s Protected Plant Ordinance, and Section 88.01.060 of the

County’s Plant Protection and Management Code. This provision states that listed desert plants

in the municipal code are to be regulated and, in some instances, protected. The removal of such

plant species would require a removal permit granted by the City. The Project team will adhere

to the conditions of this development code and related permits as needed.

Implementation of BMPs, preconstruction surveys, construction monitoring, and prescribed

mitigation would reduce all potential impacts to sensitive species. Although there will be short-

term impacts associated with construction of the Project, these impacts would not adversely

impact the greater population of plant and wildlife species, or associated habitats onsite due to

the abbreviated duration and minimization techniques employed.

Vegetation

Permanent Impacts:

Construction of the proposed Project is likely to result in permanent impacts to existing natural

communities, including Mojave Desert Scrub, California Juniper Woodland, and Atriplex Scrub;

however, in recent years, the proposed Project area has been disturbed by continued surrounding

development. Most of the permanent impacts are focused in areas that are directly adjacent to

existing roadways and are heavily disturbed; however, the proposed Project will minimize

permanent impacts to natural communities by implementing the minimization measures

identified in Section 2.4-6 of the environmental document.

Page 93

23

Permanent impacts to wetlands and riparian habitat are considered less than significant with

incorporated mitigation, as described in Section 2.4.6 of the Final EIR.

As described in the Project’s Biological Resources Survey, wildlife likely cross Ranchero Road

at many different locations along its length, with no preference being clear. The Project occurs

along an existing roadway; therefore, it is not expected to interfere with existing wildlife

movement and would have a less than significant impact on this resource.

Permanent impacts of the proposed Project on existing natural communities include permanent

impacts to Mojave Desert Scrub, California Juniper Woodland, and Atriplex Scrub; however, in

recent years, vegetation communities near the proposed Project area have been disturbed and

encroached upon by continued surrounding development. Most permanent impacts to vegetation

will occur in areas that are directly adjacent to existing roadways and are heavily disturbed;

however, the proposed Project will minimize permanent impacts to natural communities by

implementing the minimization measures identified in Section 2.4-6 of the environmental

document.

The property contains California juniper and Joshua trees, which are protected under the City of

Hesperia Municipal Code. Title 16 Development Code, Chapter 16.24 Protected Plants requires

that: “land use applications, building permits, and all other development permits (e.g., grading,

mobile home set downs), shall consider and include a review of any proposed native tree or plant

removal” (City of Hesperia, 1997). Trees that must be inventoried include any desert native trees

and/or plants with stems 2 inches or greater in diameter or a height of 6 feet or greater, including

the aforementioned species. All plants protected by the State Desert Native Plants Act and all

riparian vegetation (within 200 feet of a stream) must also be inventoried (City of Hesperia,

2007). The proposed Project will also conform to the County of San Bernardino’s goals as

identified in the County’s General Plan (2007) under Desert Region Goals and Policies of the

Conservation Element.

Only one special-status species was observed in the Project area during the Project’s focused rare

plant survey; however, there is suitable habitat for seven sensitive plant species. Through

implementation of avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures, less than significant

permanent impacts are expected for the following species: Booth’s evening primrose, Pygmy

poppy, Sagebrush loeflingia, and Short-joint beavertail cactus.

Sagebrush loeflingia (Loeflingia squarrosa var. artemisiarum) has suitable habitat in the Project

area and was observed in three separate locations along the Project corridor during focused rare

plant surveys. This species has a moderate potential to occur, with a record occurrence 6.3 miles

north of the Project’s western terminus (CNDDB, 2009).

Sagebrush loeflingia was observed during the field survey in three separate locations along the

Project corridor; however, it is not classified as rare, threatened, or endangered by state law

according to the most recent State and Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants

of California list (CDFW, 2013). Therefore, based on these studies, the City and County do not

anticipate impacts to any plant species that would require further analysis, permitting, or

mitigation.

Page 94

24

Of the 21 sensitive animal species documented by the California Natural Diversity Database

(CNDDB), suitable habitat is present for only 9 species. Each of these is briefly discussed below.

Desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) habitat in the Project area is relatively small and marginal,

with several disturbances, including urban developments, foot traffic, trash dumping, and vehicle

traffic. Even though there is natural habitat present within the Project area, the surrounding area

is developed with residential and commercial properties with little remaining undisturbed desert

vegetation. The Project area is effectively within an island of habitat that has very tenuous

connectivity to any large open space areas with high-quality habitat. No desert tortoises or desert

tortoise sign were observed during the habitat assessment, and the species is presumed to be

extirpated from the Project area. No records of desert tortoise were found in Hesperia in the

CNDDB, and the nearest record was in northern Adelanto, more than 13 miles northwest of the

Project area. For these reasons, no impacts to Desert tortoises are anticipated as a result of the

proposed Project.

San Diego coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma coronatum blainvillei) has suitable habitat within

the Project area, with the closest known record located 3.5 miles southwest of the western

terminus of the Project area (CNDDB, 2009). This species has a high potential to occur. Less

than significant impacts are expected as a result of the proposed Project.

Coastal western whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri) has suitable habitat within the Project

area, with the closest known record located 8 miles southwest of the western terminus of the

Project area (CNDDB, 2009). This species has a moderate potential to occur. Less than

significant impacts are expected as a result of the proposed Project.

Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii) has no suitable nesting habitat within the Project area, and

the closest known record is located 2 miles north of the Project area (CNDDB, 2009). This

species may hunt for prey within habitats found within the Project area; however, this species has

a low potential to occur. No impact to this species is anticipated as a result of the proposed

Project.

Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) has suitable open scrub habitats and grassland within the

Project area. No burrowing owls or burrowing owl burrows were observed during the habitat

suitability assessment; however, there are multiple occurrences of burrowing owl within 10 miles

of the Project area, and several locations within 5 miles of the Project area. The nearest recorded

concentrations of owls are located 6 to 7 miles northwest of the Project area (CNDDB, 2009).

Although no burrowing owls seem to be currently present within the Project area, the area

supports suitable habitat and potential burrow locations for this species; therefore, the burrowing

owl has a high potential to occur.

However, although the site does support suitable habitat for burrowing owl, its isolation and high

level of disturbance lead to the conclusion that this species is not likely to occur within the

Project area. The impact areas are within existing City/County ROW and private property.

Because the impact area is adjacent to an urban arterial roadway, much of the proposed Project

area is currently being utilized as a shoulder by vehicles and commercial trucks. For these

reasons, it is unlikely that any listed species, including burrowing owl, occupy vegetation within

the Project impact area. This species is not expected to be present within the Project area;

Page 95

25

however, preconstruction surveys will be conducted to confirm absence of burrowing owl as

detailed below.

As identified in measure BIO-6, a preconstruction survey for burrowing owl will be conducted

by a qualified biologist no more than thirty (30) days prior to ground-disturbing activities to

determine the presence or absence of burrowing owls on the site. If there are resident owls found

during the preconstruction survey, then the City of Hesperia will develop a Burrowing Owl

Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (BOMMP) and work with the California Department of Fish and

Wildlife (CDFW) to determine and implement measures to minimize impacts.

Should occupied burrowing owl burrows be directly impacted, less than significant impacts are

anticipated as a result of the proposed Project through implementation of avoidance and

minimization measures.

Le Conte’s thrasher (Toxostoma lecontei) has suitable habitat within the Project area. The closest

known record is located 3.25 miles northeast of the eastern terminus of the Project area

(CNDDB, 2009); therefore, this species has a high potential to occur. Through implementation of

measure BIO-4, less than significant impacts to this species are anticipated as a result of the

proposed Project.

Gray vireo (Vireo vicinior) has suitable habitat within the Project area. The closest known record

is located 1.25 miles east of the eastern terminus of the Project area (CNDDB, 2009); therefore,

this species has a high potential to occur. Through implementation of measure BIO-4, less than

significant impacts to this species are anticipated as a result of the proposed Project.

Mohave ground squirrel (Spermophilus mohavensis) has only marginal habitat present within the

Project area, with very limited connectivity to other fragmented habitat within urban portions of

Hesperia and Apple Valley. Nearly all of the historic sightings of Mohave ground squirrel date

back more than 30 years. The one most recent sighting is separated from the Project area by large

tracts of developed residential properties. Although the site does support natural desert habitat,

its isolation, lack of constituent habitat elements for the Mohave ground squirrel, and lack of

nearby recent sightings lead to the conclusion that the squirrel would not occur within the Project

area. No impact to this species is anticipated as a result of the proposed Project.

American badger (Taxidea taxus) has suitable habitat within the Project area, but no observations

of this species have been documented in the nearby vicinity. Additionally, the surrounding

region is fragmented into smaller pieces that are not suitable to the badger’s needs; therefore, this

species has a low potential to occur. No impacts to this species are anticipated as a result of the

proposed Project.


The proposed Project contains jurisdictional waters that would be impacted by the Project. In

addition, construction of the Project would require the removal of native desert vegetation that

may provide habitat for certain sensitive species. The following measures would apply to the

proposed Project to mitigate impacts to less than significant:

•••• BIO-1: Necessary permits from United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), CDFW,

and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) will be obtained prior to construction

Page 96

26

within jurisdictional areas. Potential impacts to listed species will be mitigated through

conservation of core populations in conservation areas.

•••• BIO-2: The following measures will be incorporated into a Stormwater Pollution Prevention

Plan (SWPPP) to be prepared for the proposed Project in accordance with the General

Construction Stormwater Permit:

− Areas proposed to be used for equipment access (e.g., temporary construction roads)

within streambed habitats will be protected from soil compaction and erosion to the

extent feasible through the use of BMPs such as geomats or rubber-tired equipment.

− To eliminate the release of pollutants within sensitive habitats, the Project will locate

staging areas outside of streambeds and other jurisdictional features.

− Equipment used in and around waters of the U.S. should be in good working order and

free of dripping or leaking engine fluids.

− All vehicle maintenance, staging, and materials storage will occur at least 300 feet from

all waters of the U.S.

− Any necessary equipment washing will occur where the water cannot flow into the

stream channel.

•••• BIO-3: Orange construction fencing and/or brightly colored staking will be used where

recommended by the biologist and to delineate environmentally sensitive areas.

•••• BIO-4: A biological monitor will be present during work in the vicinity of environmentally

sensitive areas to ensure that direct or indirect impacts to these areas are avoided during

construction.

•••• BIO-5: Construction activities, such as clearing and grubbing, will occur outside the bird

breeding season (approximately September to February) to minimize impacts to nesting

birds. If construction is required to occur during the bird nesting season (March 1 to August

31), then a preclearance nesting bird survey will be conducted by a qualified biologist, and

buffer zones around active nests will be established as appropriate. If the preconstruction

survey identifies occupation of nesting birds within the Project area, then a 250-foot buffer

around the nest shall be maintained until a qualified biologist has determined that the nest is

no longer occupied.

•••• BIO-6: A preconstruction survey for burrowing owl shall be conducted by a qualified

biologist no more than thirty (30) days prior to ground-disturbing activities to determine the

presence or absence of burrowing owls on the site. If there are resident owls found during the

preconstruction survey, then the City of Hesperia will develop a Burrowing Owl Mitigation

and Monitoring Plan (BOMMP) and work with CDFW to determine and implement

measures to minimize impacts.

•••• BIO-7: To the extent feasible, impacted desert trees (i.e., Joshua trees) or plants more than 6

feet in height or with stems more than 2 inches in diameter would be transplanted or

stockpiled for future transplanting within the area directly impacted by Project construction

and site clearance.

•••• BIO-8: Provide replacement landscaping or vegetation to disturbed areas consistent with the

natural surroundings, and in accordance with City Code Section 16.24.150 and County Codes

88.01.050 (Tree or Plant Removal Permits) and 88.01.060 (Desert Native Plant Protection).

Page 97

27

3. Hydrology and Water Quality


Whether implementation of the proposed Project would: violate water quality standards of waste

discharge requirements; substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interferes substantially

with groundwater recharge; substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area;

create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned

stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff;

otherwise substantially degrade water quality; place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area;

expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding,

including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam; or increase risk of loss by seiche,

tsunami, or mudflow.

Finding:

Potential impacts of the Project on hydrology and water quality are discussed in detail in Section

2.9 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record before us, this City Council finds no significant

impact related to hydrology and water quality.



The greatest potential for water quality impacts from the proposed Project would be during

construction. The total disturbed soil area (DSA) anticipated for this Project is 9.25 acres.

Construction of the proposed Project may require the use of temporary drainage conveyance

systems to decrease the potential for erosion. Additionally, the increase in impervious surface

would increase onsite runoff, and it is anticipated that existing storm drain facilities would need

to be modified and additional overside drains may have to be added. Because these facilities

would be modified to accommodate additional flows, the capacity of the existing storm drain

systems would not be exceeded. The effects to the existing storm drain system as a result of the

proposed Project would be less than significant.

Proposed construction activities would involve stockpiling, grading, excavation, dredging,

paving, and other earth-disturbing activities resulting in the alteration of existing drainage

patterns. These types of activities would constitute a temporary alteration of drainage patterns.

The Project-specific SWPPP would include BMPs designed to minimize stormwater and

erosional impacts during construction by implementing BMPs such as temporary silt fence,

temporary fiber rolls, hydroseeding, street sweeping, and temporary cover. Compliance with the

Construction General Permit (CGP) would minimize the potential for construction activities to

alter natural drainages via deposition of sediments; therefore, compliance with the CGP would

reduce the risk of short-term erosion resulting from drainage alterations during construction to a

less than significant impact.

Erosion and siltation in the Project area would be increased during construction of the proposed

Project due to activities such as clearing, grubbing, and excavation. Detailed construction plans

for the proposed improvements have not been completed; therefore, the exact amounts of

increased erosion and siltation cannot be estimated. However, permanent erosion control BMPs,

such as channel lining, riprap energy dissipation, and landscaping, will also help minimize the

potential for erosion and siltation from this Project.

Page 98

28

Because the proposed Project would disturb more than 1-acre during construction, the General

Construction Permit CAS000002 would require preparation of a SWPPP prior to construction.

The SWPPP would identify which appropriate construction BMPs would be implemented to

avoid adverse water quality impacts during construction. The Project would have to comply with

the requirements of any other related permits from the RWQCB and the provisions of the

General Construction Permit CASD000002 issued for construction Projects. The amount of

sediment entering the Mojave watershed in the Project area is expected to be minimal with

implementation of a SWPPP. Permanent erosion control BMPs, such as channel lining, riprap

energy dissipation, and landscaping, will also help minimize the amount of sediment from this

Project.

Several engineering features of the Project have the potential to degrade water quality. Examples

of these features include paving of existing and new roadbed, adjusting the vertical alignment

based on design speed criteria, adjusting cross-street features to conform to new improvements,

extending drainage facilities, and relocating utilities. Because the proposed Project would result in

the disturbance of more than 1-acre of soil during construction, the Project will need to comply

with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) CGP, which will require the

preparation and implementation of a SWPPP that identifies Construction Site BMPs. These

BMPs would be implemented to avoid adverse water quality impacts during construction. The

Project would have to comply with the requirements of any other related permits from the

RWQCB and the provisions of the CGP.

The amount of sediment entering the Mojave watershed in the Project area is expected to be

minimal with implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP will identify a combination of soil

stabilization BMPs, sediment control BMPS, tracking control BMPs, and wind erosion control

BMPs to be implemented. Examples of Construction Site BMPs that are anticipated to be

implemented on this Project are temporary silt fence, temporary fiber rolls, hydroseeding, street

sweeping, and temporary cover. A final determination of the Construction Site BMP strategy

will be determined at a subsequent Project phase. With the preparation and implementation of a

SWPPP, no water quality standards or waste discharge requirements (WDRs) would be violated;

therefore, construction of the Build Alternative is not expected to substantially degrade water

quality within the Mojave Watershed.

The construction and proposed culvert extensions associated with this Project may require

dewatering. Dewatering may be required after a storm event if runoff becomes pooled in any

depressions at the construction site or if groundwater is encountered during excavation activities.

Groundwater dewatering discharge could adversely affect surface water quality if effluent that is

rich in sediment or contaminated with chemicals is not managed properly. Extracted

groundwater may contain pollutants that may be a result of the decomposition of organic

materials (e.g., hydrogen sulfide), leaking underground storage tanks (LUSTs), surface spills,

sewage, other passed land uses, or the potential presence of nutrients (i.e., phosphorous and

nitrogen compounds). Results from soil boring samples will determine if dewatering is required

for areas within the proposed Project limits.

Currently, discharges of groundwater from construction and Project dewatering to surface waters

within the Project limits must comply with WDRs issued by the Lahontan RWQCB for limited

threat discharges to surface waters (Order No. R6T-2008-0003, NPDES NO. CAG996001).

Discharges covered by this permit include, but are not limited to, diverted stream flows,

Page 99

29

construction dewatering, and dredge spoils dewatering, as well as several other activities.

Because all dewatering operations that may be necessary as a result of implementing the Build

Alternative would need to comply with Order No. Order No. R6T-2008-0003 (NPDES NO.

CAG996001), no impacts to surface water quality resulting from dewatering activities are

expected. Furthermore, because the Build Alternative for the proposed project would not utilize

groundwater for any purposes, and no runoff would be infiltrated into groundwater basins, no

impacts to groundwater quality are expected.

Permanent Impacts:

The proposed Project would increase the existing impervious surface area within the Project site

by 9.3 acres. Because the Upper Mojave Watershed Area is approximately 549,333 acres, the

addition of 9.3 acres of impervious surface would not substantially affect the overall amount of

runoff or the amount of discharge into natural surface drainages. Additionally, because runoff

would be collected and conveyed into a designed drainage network, the proposed Project would

not significantly alter the existing pattern of natural surface drainage in the Project vicinity. With

the implementation of Permanent BMPs, the proposed Project would not significantly impact

water quality because it would not substantially contribute to the exceedance of any adopted

water quality standard or conflict with objectives, plans, goals, policies, or implementation of the

Lahontan RWQCB’s Basin Plan.

The Upper Mojave Watershed Area is approximately 549,333 acres. The proposed additional

impervious area (9.3 acres) within the watershed makes up a small percentage of this area. This

is expected to create a minor localized increase in urban runoff within the Project vicinity. With

the minor increase in impervious surface, an increase in peak flow in the overall flow regime for

the Project area is anticipated; however, this increase would be addressed by the construction of

AC dikes along the outer edges of the proposed roadway to convey stormwater to the overside

drain and ultimately convey it to the proposed extended culverts. The currently proposed storm

drainage system design includes extension of existing CMP drainage culverts under Ranchero

Road and overside drains on both sides of the roadway pavement. Such a design would entail

largely maintaining the existing drainage pattern across the subject roadway corridor. Most of the

surface water from the Project would be diverted to proposed permanent BMPs or designed

collection drainage areas along the roadway. Because runoff from the proposed Project would be

conveyed to stabilized drainage facilities, and the use of Permanent BMPs would be

implemented, impacts to surface water would be less than significant.

The final plans that will be prepared during the plans, specifications, and estimate (PS&E) phase

will determine the final amount of impervious paved surface areas. Given these considerations,

the proposed Project would not have a significant impact on local water resources and quality

under CEQA.

Streams crossing Ranchero Road within the Project area are not 303(d) listed; hence, these

drainages are not subject to any total maximum daily load (TMDL) discharge restrictions.

Considering the increasing residential and commercial development in the surrounding

community, traffic volume is expected to grow substantially in the future. Consequently, the

amount of motor vehicle-related pollutants discharged into the watershed and drainage channels

from impervious surfaces would increase with or without implementation of the proposed

Project. By incorporating temporary and permanent avoidance, minimization, and mitigation

measures into the Project plans, the increase in motor vehicle-related pollutants from the

Page 100

30

proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on surface water quality under

CEQA. In fact, because the Project would reduce traffic congestion, pollutants from traffic

congestion during peak periods could also decrease. Finally, because the increased area of

impervious surface is small compared to the local watershed, the proposed Project would not

significantly impact local water resources and quality under CEQA,

As mentioned above, groundwater in the Project area is at considerable depth, likely on the order

of 200 feet below ground surface. While water would be used as a dust palliative and for other

purposes during construction, these uses would not adversely affect groundwater supply. Based

on the depth to groundwater within the study area and the relatively shallow excavation depths

associated with the Project, the proposed Project would not impact the groundwater aquifer.

An online search for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Flood Insurance

Rate Maps (FIRMs) determined that there are no maps for the subject area; hence, no flood

hazard zones have been designated for the Project area. In summary, the proposed Project would

not be located in a designated flood zone. Once constructed, the proposed roadway

improvements would not impede or redirect flood flows. There are no levees or dams near the

Project that would be subject to failure and expose people or structures associated with the

Project to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding.

The proposed Project would have less than significant impacts to water resources because it

would not substantially affect the overall amount of runoff, the amount of discharge into natural

surface drainages, or the existing pattern of natural surface drainage in the Project vicinity.

Furthermore, the proposed Project would not significantly impact water quality because it would

not substantially contribute to the exceedance of any adopted water quality standard or conflict

with objectives, plans, goals, policies, or implementation of the Lahontan RWQCB’s Basin Plan.


Implementation of the mitigation measures described below will reduce all impacts to less than

significant. Mitigation measures in the drainages will be developed in conjunction with those

developed for jurisdictional wetland impacts. Any discharges of sediment or other wastes,

including wastewater, to waters of the United States or waters of the State must be avoided to the

maximum extent practicable. Final design of the Project will limit disturbance to natural water

bodies and drainage systems, including ephemeral drainage systems, and provide adequate

buffers of native vegetation along drainage systems to lessen erosion and protect water quality.

Lining runoff channels with impermeable surfaces, such as concrete or grouted riprap, will be

discouraged.

•••• HWQ-1: Concentrated flow conveyance systems (e.g., drainage ditches, dikes, berms) will

be designed to ensure that flows to drainage channels will not result in increased erosion,

sedimentation, or any contaminant conveyance to the extent feasible. Slope/surface

protection systems that utilize hard surfaces, such as concrete or equivalent materials, will be

designed to minimize erosion to the extent feasible.

•••• HWQ-2: During construction, waste management BMPs will be implemented. These BMPs

consist of procedural and structural BMPs for handling, storing, and disposing of wastes

generated by a construction Project.

Page 101

31

•••• HWQ-3: During construction, soil stabilization BMPs will be incorporated. These BMPs

consist of preparing the soil surface and applying soil stabilizing media, such as straw mulch,

soil binders, and geotextile mats.

•••• HWQ-4: During construction, non-stormwater BMPs, such as vehicle and equipment

maintenance, will be implemented to limit the potential for pollutants to impact surface

waters.

•••• HWQ-5: In an effort to uphold water quality standards, the proposed Project will require

Section 404, 401, and 1602 permits. Construction will not commence within jurisdictional

areas until these permits are issued by the respective resource agencies. The conditions of

these permits will be incorporated into the Project.

•••• HWQ-6: A SWPPP shall be prepared by the Contractor and reviewed by the City for

approval prior to commencement of any soil-disturbing activities. The SWPPP shall address

all State and federal stormwater control requirements and regulations. The SWPPP shall

address all construction-related activities, equipment, and materials that have the potential to

impact water quality. The SWPPP shall include BMPs to control pollutants, sediment from

erosion, stormwater runoff, and other construction-related impacts.

•••• HWQ-7: The City shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State Water Resources Control

Board (SWRCB) at least thirty (30) days prior to any soil-disturbing activities.

•••• HWQ-8: All work will conform to NPDES requirements as described in NPDES Permit for

General Construction Activities (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002).

These include, but are not limited to, temporary sediment control, temporary soil

stabilization, scheduling, waste management, materials handling, and other non-stormwater

BMPs.

•••• HWQ-9: Construction activities will give special attention to stormwater pollution control

during the rainy season, defined as August 1 through October 1, and from November 1

through May 1. No work should be conducted whenever rain is predicted. Water Pollution

Control BMPs will be used to minimize impacts to receiving waters. Measures will be

incorporated to contain all vehicle loads and avoid any tracking of materials.

•••• HWQ-10: As described by the Mojave Watershed Storm Water Management Plan, the

Lahontan RWQCB requires implementation of soil stabilization and sediment control BMPs

to protect the Mojave River and its tributaries during thunder and flash flood storms during

the rainy season. Soil stabilization and sediment controls will be implemented to protect the

Mojave River and, if applicable, all equipment will be removed from waterways prior to

flash floods.

•••• HWQ-11: Post-construction maintenance BMPs, including routine maintenance work to keep

the Project site free of debris, such as litter pickup, toxics control, street sweeping, drainage, and

channel cleaning, will be incorporated into the Project. Permanent soil stabilization BMPs

will be incorporated into Project design, such as preservation of existing vegetation,

concentrated flow conveyance systems (e.g., drainage ditches, dikes, berms, swales), and

slope/surface protection systems that use vegetation. Appropriate BMPs will be selected

during final design.

•••• HWQ-12: The proposed Project would be designed to prevent the flooding of Ranchero

Road, cross streets, and adjacent lands.

Page 102

32

•••• HWQ-13: The Ranchero Road drainage facilities would be designed to accommodate a 10-

year return frequency storm per local guidelines.

•••• HWQ-14: The City shall continue enforcing the City’s Municipal Code provisions for flood

hazard reduction (Title 8: Safety, Chapter 8.28: Flood Hazard Protection and Regulations).

This code, which applies to new construction and existing projects undergoing substantial

improvements, provides construction standards that address the major causes of flood

damage, and includes provisions for anchoring, placement of utilities, raising floor

elevations, using flood-resistant construction materials, and other methods to reduce flood

damage.

4. Noise and Vibration

Construction Noise and Vibration Impacts:


The EIR evaluated and concluded that the construction activities could result in temporary or

periodic increase in ambient noise levels and vibration in the Project vicinity resulting in

exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the

City’s General Plan or Noise Ordinance.

Finding:

Based on the entire record before us, this City Council finds that this impact is potentially

significant but will be mitigated to a level of less than significant with the implementation of

mitigation measures NOI-1 through NOI-7. The City Council finds that mitigation measures

NOI-1 through NOI-7 are incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

for the Project, which will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing the potentially

significant construction noise impacts.


While the mitigation measures discussed below will reduce construction noise and vibration to

the extent feasible, it is anticipated that operational noise generated by the Project may

periodically exceed the City of Hesperia's General Plan Noise Element Noise Standard; however,

Section 16.20.125 of the Hesperia Municipal Code exempts: “Temporary construction, repair, or

demolition activities between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. except Sundays and federal holidays.” In

addition to the City's noise ordinance, HMC Section 16.20.130 states that: “No vibration shall be

allowed which can be felt without the aid of instruments at or beyond the lot line; nor will any

vibration be permitted which produces a particle velocity greater than or equal to 0.2-inch per

second measured at or beyond the lot line.” The same construction activity exemption applied to

noise impacts is also applied to vibration impacts.

Accordingly, as a CEQA threshold, it will be applied any time, not just outside periods when

construction is exempt under the Municipal Code. For construction noise impacts, noise

standards from the Municipal Code and County Code are applied as appropriate. A significant

construction-related noise impact will be deemed to occur if sensitive land uses would be

exposed to construction-generated noise exceeding Municipal Code standards outside of

exempted hours. A significant construction-related vibration impact will be deemed to occur if

sensitive land uses would be exposed to detectable vibration levels posing a risk of building

Page 103

33

damage standards at any time. These vibration thresholds are based on Municipal and County

code provisions; however, with implementation of mitigation measures NOI-1 through NOI-7,

enumerated and discussed above, this potentially significant impact will be reduced to a less than

significant level. Accordingly, with implementation of mitigation measures, the Project’s

operational noise will not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise

levels and vibration in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Noise

impacts from construction of the proposed Project will be mitigated to the greatest extent

possible through construction scheduling and implementation of BMPs and minimization

measures as indicated in the environmental commitments record in the EIR.


The following mitigation measures will mitigate construction source noise impacts to the extent

feasible:

•••• NOI-1: Use newer equipment with improved noise muffling and ensure that all equipment

items have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement measures, such as mufflers,

engine enclosures, and engine vibration isolators, intact and operational. Newer equipment

will generally be quieter in operation than older equipment. All construction equipment

should be inspected at periodic intervals to ensure proper maintenance and presence of noise

control devices (e.g., mufflers and shrouding).

•••• NOI-2: To the extent feasible, the Contractor will turn off construction idling equipment.

The Contractor will strive to keep noise levels from construction equipment relatively

uniform and avoid impulsive noises.

•••• NOI-3: Between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. on all days and between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.

on Sundays and federal holidays, any construction activities occurring within 700 feet of

noise-sensitive areas must be accompanied by noise monitoring to assure compliance with

the applicable noise thresholds and must immediately be modified to achieve compliance if

necessary or ceased when/if compliance cannot be achieved. Between the hours of 10:00

p.m. and 7:00 a.m., the same provision applies when construction occurs within 1,150 feet of

noise-sensitive areas.

•••• NOI-4: Where vibratory rollers are used within 30 feet of existing building structures during

exempted hours, rollers shall be selected based on compaction force to assure that the 0.2-

inch per second PPV threshold is not exceeded at the structure. Whenever vibratory rollers

are used within 30 feet of such building structures, continuous vibration monitoring shall be

performed and a plan shall be in place to allow immediate modification or cessation of any

vibratory roller activity that generates vibrations exceeding the applicable threshold. Outside

of exempted hours, activity constraints will need to be applied for perceptibility thresholds so

that the corresponding distance will be more than 200 feet. As a practical matter, this will

prevent the use of vibratory rollers on the Project outside of the exempted hours. When other

vibration-generating construction equipment is used outside of exempted hours, it shall only

be done when compliance with the perceptibility threshold can be verified through

conservative vibration propagation modeling and/or continuous onsite vibration monitoring.

•••• NOI-5: To ensure that the surrounding community is aware of potential noise impacts during

construction, the City and County will provide adequate public notification in advance of

proposed construction activities.

Page 104

34

•••• NOI-6: When possible, the use of construction equipment that creates high vibration levels

will be limited, such as vibratory rollers and hammers operating in the proximity of

residential structures or other sensitive land uses.

•••• NOI-7: The hours of vibration-intensive equipment use, such as vibratory rollers, will be

restricted to daytime hours so that impacts to residents are minimal.

C. IMPACTS ANALYZED IN THE EIR AND DETERMINED TO BE

SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE

With the implementation of all available and feasible mitigation measures recommended in the

EIR, the following adverse impacts of the Project stated below are considered to be significant

and unavoidable, based upon information in the EIR and in the administrative record. These

impacts are considered significant and unavoidable despite the imposed mitigation measures

which will reduce impacts to the extent feasible.

1. Noise and Vibration

Permanent Noise Impact:

Significant Unavoidable Impact:

The EIR evaluated and concluded that Project implementation is anticipated to result either

individually or cumulatively with other planned projects an increase in operational traffic noise,

which would exceed the City's and/or County's established exterior noise standards. Significant

unavoidable noise impacts are anticipated to occur to adjacent residential homes along the

Ranchero Road corridor.

Finding:

Based on the entire record before us, this City Council finds that this impact is potentially

significant and unavoidable. Noise impacts are discussed in detail in Section 2.12 of the EIR.

The City Council finds that mitigation measure NOI-8 is incorporated into the Mitigation

Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, which will be implemented as specified

therein, thereby reducing the potentially significant operational noise impacts to certain

residents. However, the City Council finds that the proposed mitigation measures would not

completely mitigate the Project’s operational noise impacts, which would remain significant and

unavoidable.


Operational noise generated by the Project may exceed the City of Hesperia's General Plan Noise

Element Noise Standard. Specifically, a significant Project operational noise impact would occur

if predicted outdoor noise levels at noise-sensitive receivers under future build conditions are

higher than predicted noise levels under future no-build conditions and equal or exceed a

Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) of 65 A-weighted decibel (dBA). Under both future

scenarios, area-wide traffic demand is predicted to be substantially higher than existing levels,

and the Project would increase roadway capacity by widening the roadway from two to four

lanes along Ranchero Road, resulting in increased traffic volumes and traffic noise levels along

the Project corridor relative to the future no-build condition.

Page 105

35

Operation of the proposed Project is anticipated to produce potentially significant noise impacts

to private properties along the Ranchero Road corridor. Despite reasonable efforts to mitigate the

impacts, including analyzing the use of soundwalls to abate noise impacts, the configuration of

private property access points, topography, significant impacts to the community through

property acquisition, and cost to implement make it infeasible to construct permanent soundwalls

that can effectively abate potentially significant noise impacts. The use of rubberized asphalt

pavement was also considered as a potential noise abatement measure, but it was determined to

be infeasible due to many reasons described below.

Soundwalls were initially considered as a possible mitigation measure to abate potentially

significant impacts; however, the implementation of soundwalls at certain locations will not

adequately abate noise impacts due to the gaps between the soundwalls to accommodate property

access driveways for residential homes directly located adjacent to Ranchero Road. For

soundwalls to abate traffic noise, a continuous soundwall is needed, but the gap for access

driveways will allow traffic noise to propagate, rendering the soundwalls an ineffective noise

abatement measure. The topography of some of the residential properties is below the elevation

of Ranchero Road and will require additional property acquisition to properly grade the area to

construct the noise barrier. Property acquisition may displace several residents, which could

result in significant impacts to the community. Because the proposed Project is an interim

improvement, construction of the soundwalls will result in a significant throw-away cost when

the ultimate six-lane configuration of Ranchero Road is constructed, requiring the soundwalls to

be demolished to accommodate construction of the additional lanes. It is anticipated that the

ultimate six-lane configuration of Ranchero Road will include soundwalls (if necessary).

The use of rubberized asphalt pavement was also considered as a potential noise abatement

measure; however, because the area is not built-out, the use of rubberized asphalt will be difficult

to repair when potholes need to be filled, or other street and utility improvements are required.

Combining repairs of the rubberized asphalt with other materials, such as using common hot-mix

asphalt, will not adhere to the properties of rubberized asphalt. Repairing the roadway with the

same rubberized asphalt is anticipated to not result in proper adhesion or repair.

Additionally, utilizing rubberized asphalt would require continual repair of cracks and potholes

to maintain the effectiveness of rubberized asphalt as an effective noise abatement measure. The

cost of the material is approximately 20 percent greater compared to hot-mix asphalt; continual

repairs of this type of pavement will equate this type of noise abatement unreasonable in terms of

cost. As mentioned previously, the adhesion properties of the rubberized asphalt with other

materials, including repairs to rubberized asphalt with the same material, is poor, resulting in

continual repairs.

The infeasibility of implementing the abovementioned noise abatement measures will result in

significant unavoidable noise impacts to those properties. In certain residential homes, assistance

will be provided to select residents to install double-pane windows to aid in reducing traffic-

related noise based on the criterion identified in NOI-8.

Double-pane windows are anticipated to abate operational traffic noise for certain properties

along the Ranchero Road corridor. It is anticipated that double-pane windows, as described in

mitigation measure NOI-8, would only provide noise abatement to seven residences identified as

APNs: 409-214-12, 409-222-48, 409-222-44, 409-222-38, 409-222-58, 405-241-03, and

Page 106

36

405-241-04. Of these seven residences, only one property (APN 409-214-12) does not currently

have double-pane windows installed. The Project will confirm this finding prior to completion of

the final design of the Project. The City will coordinate with the property owner(s) who qualifies

for the implementation of this noise abatement measure.


The following mitigation measures will mitigate operational noise impacts to the extent feasible:

•••• NOI-8: Provide double pane-windows to affected residential homes adjacent to Ranchero

Road within the Project area. Double-pane windows would only be provided at specific areas

of the residential home where they would provide a reduction in traffic noise. The backyard

or other areas of the property that would not provide traffic noise reduction would not be

eligible for double-pane windows. Residential homes qualified for this mitigation measure

must meet all of the following criterion:

− Residential property must be identified as an noise impacted dwelling. Noise impact is

defined as: Design Year with Project CNEL equals or exceeds 65 dBA or Project increase

of 5 decibel (dB) or more resulting in CNEL of 60 dBA or more.

− Residential property driveway access is located and directly provides access to Ranchero

Road.

− Residential property currently does not have double-pane windows installed.

VI. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS

The City Council of the City of Hesperia hereby declares that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines

Section 15093, the City Council has balanced the benefits of the proposed Project against any

significant and unavoidable environmental impacts in determining whether to approve the

proposed Project. If the benefits of the proposed Project outweigh the unavoidable adverse

environmental impacts, those impacts are considered “acceptable.”

The City Council of the City of Hesperia hereby declares that the EIR has identified and

discussed significant effects that may occur as a result of the Project. With the implementation of

the mitigation measures discussed in the EIR, these impacts can be mitigated to a level of less

than significant except for the unavoidable and significant impacts discussed in Section V(C)

herein.

The City Council hereby declares that it has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate

or substantially mitigate the potential impacts resulting from the Project.

The City Council hereby declares that to the extent any mitigation measures recommended to the

City are not incorporated, such mitigation measures are infeasible because they would impose

restrictions on the Project that would prohibit the realization of specific economic, social, and

other benefits that this City Council finds outweigh the unmitigated impacts.

The City Council finds that except for the Project, the other alternatives set forth in the EIR are

infeasible because they would prohibit the realization of the Project objectives and/or specific

Page 107

37

economic, social, or other benefits that this City Council finds outweigh any environmental

benefits of the alternatives.

The City Council hereby declares that, having reduced the adverse significant environmental

effects of the Project, to the extent feasible by adopting the proposed mitigation measures,

having considered the entire administrative record on the Project, and having weighed the

benefits of the Project against its unavoidable significant impact after mitigation, the City

Council has determined that the social, economic, and environmental benefits of the Project

outweigh the potential unavoidable significant impacts and render those potential significant

impacts acceptable based upon the following considerations:

1. The Ranchero Road Widening Project provides additional roadway capacity along

Ranchero Road to alleviate future traffic congestion.

The Project is anticipated to provide additional roadway capacity to facilitate planned growth in

the future. According to the City's General Plan, approximately 41,400 to 47,800 vehicles per

day would utilize Ranchero Road in the future, which would exceed its intended two-lane

operating capacity of 14,500 vehicles per day. Without the proposed interim widening of the

roadway, significant traffic congestion and delays would likely occur along Ranchero Road and

could prompt motorists to take alternative routes resulting in increased traffic along other local

streets.

2. The Ranchero Road Widening Project enhances traffic flow and operations along the

corridor

The Project would provide an additional lane in each direction along Ranchero Road. The

additional lane would provide a passing lane for slow-moving vehicles such as heavy trucks and

vehicles turning to abutting driveways, which will enhance the flow of traffic along Ranchero

Road. An additional lane would also provide a benefit to emergency service providers by

allowing emergency vehicles to better maneuver and weave through traffic along the corridor,

which is anticipated to result in better emergency response times.

3. Roadway Improvements are anticipated to facilitate planned growth as described in the

City of Hesperia's General Plan.

The proposed Project would facilitate planned growth in the City as discussed in the City of

Hesperia General Plan (2010). Construction of the I-15/Ranchero Road Interchange Project and

the Ranchero Road Underpass would necessitate the improvement along Ranchero Road. These

current roadway projects require the widening of Ranchero Road to facilitate the planned growth

within the area.

Each of the reasons for approval cited above is a separate and independent basis that justifies

approval of the roadway widening Project. Thus, even if a court were to set aside any individual

reason or reasons, the City of Hesperia hereby finds that it would stand by its determination that

each reason, or any combination of reasons, is a sufficient basis for approving the Project

irrespective of the significant and unavoidable impacts that may occur.

As the CEQA Lead Agency for the proposed action, the City of Hesperia has reviewed the

Project description and the alternative presented in the EIR, and fully understands the Project and

Project alternative proposed for development. Furthermore, the City Council finds that all

Page 108

38

potential adverse environmental impacts and all feasible mitigation measures to reduce the

impacts from the Project have been identified in the Draft EIR, the Final EIR, and public

testimony. This City Council also finds that a reasonable range of alternatives was considered in

the EIR and this document and finds that approval of the Project is appropriate.

This City Council has identified economic and social benefits and important policy objectives,

above, which result from implementing the Project. The City Council has balanced these

substantial social and economic benefits against the unavoidable significant adverse effects of

the Project. Given the substantial social and economic benefits that will accrue from the Project,

this City Council finds that the benefits identified herein override the unavoidable environmental

effects.

PRC Section 21002 provides: “In the event specific economic, social and other conditions make

infeasible such Project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual Projects can be

approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof.” Section 21002.1(c) provides: “In

the event that economic, social, or other conditions make it infeasible to mitigate one or more

significant effects of a Project on the environment, the Project may nonetheless be approved or

carried out at the discretion of a public agency…” Finally, CCR, Title 4, 15093 (a) states: “If the

benefits of a proposed Project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the

adverse environmental effects may be considered ‘acceptable’.”

The Findings required under CEQA (PRC Section 21000 and following) and the CEQA

Guidelines (CCR, Title 14, Section 15000 and following), and in particular CEQA Guidelines

§15091, made by the City, find that approval of the Ranchero Road Widening Project could

result in significant environmental impacts that cannot be substantially lessened or avoided with

the implementation of mitigation measures. Despite these significant and unavoidable impacts,

the City chooses to approve the proposed Project on the basis that specific economic, legal,

social, technological, or other benefits of the road widening Project outweigh and override these

significant and unavoidable impacts.

The City Council hereby declares that the foregoing benefits provided to the public through

approval and implementation of the Project outweighs the identified significant adverse

environmental impacts of the Project that cannot be mitigated. The City Council finds that each

of the Project benefits outweighs the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified in

the Final EIR and, therefore, finds those impacts to be acceptable.

VII. CERTIFICATION OF EIR

CERTIFICATION

In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15090, the City of Hesperia, as Lead Agency for

the Project, certifies that:

a. The Final EIR for the Project has been completed and processed in compliance with

the requirements of CEQA;

b. The Final EIR was presented to the City of Hesperia City Council, as the decision-

making body for the City of Hesperia, who reviewed and considered the information

contained in the Final EIR prior to approving the Project; and

Page 109

39

c. The Final EIR reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis.

The City has exercised independent judgment in accordance with PRC Section 21082.1(c) in

retaining its own environmental consultant, directing the consultant in preparation of the EIR, as

well as reviewing, analyzing, and revising material prepared by the consultant.

The City Council finds that it has reviewed and considered the Final EIR evaluating the proposed

Project; that the Final EIR is an accurate and objective statement that fully complies with CEQA

and the State CEQA Guidelines; and that the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the

City of Hesperia City Council.

The City Council declares that no new significant information as defined by the State CEQA

Guidelines Section 15088.5 has been received by the City Council after circulation of the Draft

EIR that would require recirculation.

The City Council certifies the EIR based on the following findings and conclusions:

Findings:

The Project would have the potential for creating significant adverse impacts. These significant

adverse environmental impacts have been identified in the EIR and will require mitigation as set

forth in the Findings. Significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated to a level of

insignificance after mitigation include noise, as discussed in the Findings of Fact.

Conclusions:

Except as to those impacts stated above relating to traffic and circulation, air quality, and noise,

all other significant environmental impacts from implementation of the proposed Project have

been identified in the EIR and, with implementation of the mitigation measures identified, will

be mitigated to a level of insignificance.

Alternatives to the proposed Project, which could potentially achieve the basic objectives of the

proposed Project, have been considered and rejected in favor of the proposed Project.

Environmental, economic, social, and other considerations and benefits derived from

development of the proposed Project override and make infeasible any alternatives to the

proposed Project or further mitigation measures beyond those incorporated into the proposed

Project.

VIII. RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING

PROGRAM

Pursuant to PRC Section 21081.6, the City Council hereby adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and

Reporting Program attached hereto as Exhibit A. In the event of inconsistencies between the

mitigation measures set forth herein and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program shall control.

Page 110

40

IX. RESOLUTION REGARDING CUSTODIAN OF RECORD

The documents and material that constitute the final record of proceedings on which these

Findings have been based are located at the City of Hesperia. The custodian for these records is

the City Clerk of the City of Hesperia. This information is provided in compliance with PRC

Section 21081.6.

X. RESOLUTION REGARDING STAFF DIRECTION

A Notice of Determination shall be filed with the County of San Bernardino within five (5)

working days of final Project approval.

XI. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.

ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18

th day of June 2013.

______________________________________

Bill Holland, Mayor

ATTEST:

___________________________________

Melinda Sayre-Castro, Assistant City Clerk

Page 111

Parsons H-1 June 2013

Appendix H Mitigation Monitoring

Reporting Program

Page 112

Appendix H Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program

June 2013 H-2 Parsons

No. Description Responsible

Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase

Task Completed (Sign and

Date)

Source Comments

ACQUISITIONS

ACQ-1 Provisions of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Act will be followed to provide compensation for partial acquisitions.

City of Hesperia/

County of San

Bernardino

Design Uniform Relocation and Assistance & Real Property

Act/EIR

AESTHETICS

VIS-1 Design the project to be consistent with the City’s visual enhancement goals.

City of Hesperia

Design EIR

VIS-2 Consistent with the City’s 2010 General Plan policy (CN-1.1), use drought-resistant landscaping to minimize the contrast between the project and surrounding areas. Plan landscaping to complement existing natural and man-made features, including the dominant landscaping of surrounding areas.

City of Hesperia

Design EIR

VIS-3 Incorporate design measures to reduce potential glare and night-lighting impacts during facility construction. Where appropriate, this should include provisions for shielding, specifying light intensity (e.g., number of lights, lumens, and wavelengths) in accordance with the City’s lighting ordinance.

City of Hesperia

Design EIR

Page 113




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

AGRICULTURE

AG-1 Project construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be employed to minimize dust and noise, and to manage stormwater runoff.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia

Construction EIR

AG-2 Construction staging would not occur on agricultural land, and adjacent agricultural parcels would not be otherwise significantly impacted during project construction.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia

Construction EIR

AIR QUALITY

AQ-1 Periodic watering for short-term stabilization of disturbed surface areas to minimize visible fugitive dust emissions (for purposes of this Rule, use of a water truck to maintain most disturbed surfaces and actively spread water during visible dusting episodes shall be considered sufficient to maintain compliance).

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia

Construction Rule 403.2 of the MDAQMD

AQ-2 Take actions sufficient to prevent project-related track-out onto paved surfaces.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia


AQ-3 Cover loaded haul vehicles while operating on publicly maintained paved surfaces.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia


AQ-4 Stabilize graded site surfaces upon completion of grading when subsequent development is delayed or expected to be delayed more than 30 days, except when such a delay

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia


Page 114




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

is due to precipitation that dampens the disturbed surface sufficiently to eliminate visible fugitive dust emissions.

AQ-5 Reduce nonessential earth-moving activity under high wind conditions (for purposes of this Rule, a reduction in earth-moving activity when visible dusting occurs from moist and dry surfaces due to wind erosion shall be considered sufficient to maintain compliance).

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia


AQ-6 The Contractor shall water exposed surfaces at least twice per day; activities will be scheduled to allow for early paving of road surfaces; reduced travel speeds (15 miles per hour [mph]) on unpaved surfaces shall be enforced; simultaneous disturbance areas will be limited to the smallest area as practical; and all stockpiles will be covered with tarps.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia


AQ-7 Measures contained in MDAQMD Rule 403 would be followed, as applicable, during project construction. The City would be responsible for selecting appropriate applicable Rule 403 measures to be followed during project construction and for overseeing compliance with the measures by the construction contractors. The construction contractors would be required to obtain construction permits from the

City of Hesperia

Design / Construction

Rule 403 of the MDAQMD

Page 115




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

City, and the permits would state the required Rule 403 measures that must be followed by the contractors.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

BIO-1 Necessary permits from USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB will be obtained prior to construction within jurisdictional areas. Potential impacts to listed species will be mitigated through conservation of core populations in conservation areas.

City of Hesperia/ County of

San Bernardino

Design Section 404 USACE, 401 RWQCB and CDFW 1602

BIO-2 The following measures will be incorporated into a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be prepared for the proposed project in accordance with the General Construction Stormwater Permit:

• Areas proposed to be used for equipment access (e.g., temporary construction roads) within streambed habitats, will be protected from soil compaction and erosion to the extent feasible through the use of BMPs such as geomats or rubber-tired equipment.

• To eliminate the release of pollutants within sensitive habitats, the project will locate staging areas outside of streambeds and other jurisdictional features.

• Equipment used in and around

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia

Preconstruction/ Construction

CWA 404, 401 NPDES 1602

SAA

Page 116




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

waters of the U.S. should be in good working order and free of dripping or leaking engine fluids.

• All vehicle maintenance, staging, and materials storage will occur at least 300 feet (ft) from all waters of the U.S.

• Any necessary equipment washing will occur where the water cannot flow into the stream channel.

BIO-3 Orange construction fencing and/or brightly colored staking will be used where recommended by the biologist and to delineate environmentally sensitive areas.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia

Preconstruction EIR; NPDES 1602 SAA

BIO-4 A biological monitor will be present during work in the vicinity of environmentally sensitive areas to ensure that direct or indirect impacts to these areas are avoided during construction.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia

Construction CDFW; EIR

BIO-5 Construction activities, such as clearing and grubbing, will occur outside the bird breeding season (approximately September to February) to minimize impacts to nesting birds. If construction is required to occur during the bird nesting season (March 1 to August 31), then a preclearance nesting bird survey will be conducted by a qualified biologist, and buffer zones around active nests will be established as appropriate. If the

City of Hesperia


CDFW; EIR

Page 117




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

preconstruction survey identifies occupation of nesting birds within the project area, then a 250-foot buffer around the nest shall be maintained until a qualified biologist has determined that the nest is no longer occupied.

BIO-6 A preconstruction survey for burrowing owl shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than thirty (30) days prior to ground-disturbing activities to determine the presence or absence of burrowing owls on the site. If there are resident owls found during the preconstruction survey, then the City of Hesperia will develop a Burrowing Owl Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (BOMMP) and work with CDFW to determine and implement measures to minimize impacts.

City of Hesperia


CDFW; EIR

BIO-7 To the extent feasible, impacted desert trees (i.e. Joshua trees) or plants more than 6 ft in height or with stems more than 2 inches in diameter would be transplanted or stockpiled for future transplanting within the area directly impacted by project construction and site clearance.

City of Hesperia

During/After Construction

CDFW; EIR

Page 118




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

BIO-8 Provide replacement landscaping or vegetation to disturbed areas consistent with the natural surroundings, and in accordance with City Code Section 16.24.150 and County Codes 88.01.050 (Tree or Plant Removal Permits) and 88.01.060 (Desert Native Plant Protection).

City of Hesperia

During/After Construction

EIR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

CR-1 If any archaeological materials are encountered during ground-disturbing construction activities, all activities must be suspended in the vicinity of the find until the deposits or features are recorded and evaluated by a qualified archaeologist. If determined eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) by the City (based on the evaluation by the archaeologist), ground-disturbing construction activities cannot recommence until mitigation measures have been implemented.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia

Construction CEQA Guidelines

Section 15064.5

Page 119




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

CR-2 If human remains of any kind are found during construction, the requirements of Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code (PRC), and Assembly Bill (AB) 2641 shall be followed. According to these requirements, all construction activities must cease immediately, and the San Bernardino County Coroner and a qualified archaeologist must be notified. The Coroner will examine the remains and determine the next appropriate action based on his/her findings. If the Coroner determines the remains to be of Native American origin, he/she will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC will then identify the most likely descendants (MLD) to be consulted regarding treatment and/or reburial of the remains. If an MLD cannot be identified, or the MLD fails to make a recommendation regarding the treatment of the remains within 48 hours after gaining access to the remains, the project proponent shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia

Construction Public Resources

Code Section 5097.94,

5097.98 and 5097.99

Page 120




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES

PALEO-1 Prior to the start of any project-related construction, the City shall ensure that a designated paleontological resource specialist is available for field activities and prepared to implement the mitigation monitoring and reporting plan (MMRP) conditions. The designated paleontological resource specialist will be responsible for implementing all paleontological mitigation and for using qualified personnel to assist in this work.

City of Hesperia

Preconstruction EIR

PALEO-2 Prior to the start of construction, a Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan drafted by the designated paleontological resource specialist will be submitted to the City for approval. The plan will identify general and specific measures to minimize potential impacts to sensitive paleontological resources. The project paleontological resource specialist will implement the Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan as needed. The Paleontological Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan will include, but not be limited to, the following components:

• A discussion of the sequence of project-related tasks, such as any preconstruction surveys, fieldwork, flagging or staking,

City of Hesperia

Preconstruction EIR

Page 121




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

construction monitoring, mapping and data recovery, fossil preparation and recovery, identification and inventory, preparation of final report, and transmittal for curation.

• Identification of the person(s) expected to assist with each of the tasks identified within this condition, and a discussion of the mitigation team leadership and organizational structure, and the interrelationship of tasks and responsibilities.

• Where monitoring of project construction activities is deemed necessary, the extent of the areas where monitoring is to occur and a schedule for the monitoring.

• An explanation that the designated paleontological resource specialist shall have the authority to halt or redirect construction in the immediate vicinity of a vertebrate fossil find until the significance of the find can be determined.

• A discussion of the equipment and supplies necessary for the recovery of fossil materials and any specialized equipment needed to prepare, remove, load, transport, and analyze large-sized fossils or extensive fossil

Page 122




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

deposits.

• Inventory, preparation, and delivery for curation into a retrievable storage collection in a public repository or museum that meets the Society for Vertebrate Paleontology standards and requirements for the curation of paleontological resources;

• Identification of the institution (expected to be the San Bernardino County Museum) that has agreed to receive any data and fossil materials recovered during project-related monitoring and mitigation work, discussion of any requirements of specifications for materials delivered for curation and how they will be met, and the name and phone number of the contact person at the institution.

PALEO-3 Prior to the start of construction, the designated paleontological resource specialist will prepare a staff training program for review and approval by the City and County. The paleontological resource specialist will conduct a training session for the project owner, project managers, construction supervisors, equipment operators, and all new employees as appropriate. The training program will address the potential to encounter paleontological resources

City of Hesperia

Preconstruction EIR

Page 123




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

in the field, the sensitivity and importance of these resources, and the legal obligations to preserve and protect such resources.

PALEO-4 During construction, the designated paleontological resource specialist or paleontological monitor will be present at all times he/she deems appropriate to monitor construction-related grading, excavation, trenching, and/or augering in areas with a high potential for paleontological resources to occur. Paleontological monitoring will include inspection of exposed rock units and microscopic examination of matrix to determine if fossils are present. Upon the advice of the paleontological monitor, the Construction Manager has the authority to temporarily divert excavations or drilling away from exposed fossils to efficiently and professionally recover the fossil specimens and collect associated data.

City of Hesperia

Preconstruction EIR

PALEO-5 The City and/or County, through the designated paleontological resource specialist, will ensure recovery, preparation for analysis, analysis, identification and inventory, preparation for curation, and the delivery for curation of all significant paleontological resource materials collected during the monitoring, data recovery, mapping, and mitigation activities related to the project.

City of Hesperia


EIR

Page 124




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

PALEO-6 The City will ensure preparation of a Paleontological Resources Report by the designated paleontological resource specialist following the analysis of the recovered fossil materials and related information. The Paleontological Resources Report will be submitted to the City for approval. The report will include a description and inventory list of recovered fossil materials, a (confidential) map showing the location of paleontological resources found in the field, determinations of sensitivity and significance, and a statement by the paleontological resource specialist that project impacts to paleontological resources have been mitigated.

City of Hesperia

Construction EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

GEO-1 In accordance with the statewide General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction, the project would incorporate all applicable construction site BMPs to minimize potential loss of top-soil and/or soil erosion.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia


EIR

GEO-2 Implementation of construction BMPs overseen by a State-licensed professional, in compliance with aforementioned County standards, would reduce potential soil erosion impacts to a less than significant level.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia


EIR

Page 125




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS WASTE MATERIALS

HAZ-1 The construction contractor will be required to prepare and implement a Worker Health and Safety Plan to be approved by the City and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) before the onset of construction activities.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia

Preconstruction EIR

HAZ-2 Any soils with aerially deposited lead (ADL) contamination shall be managed properly and disposed. During project construction, soil in the project limits may be reused within the right-of-way (ROW). Soil export will be minimized, and excess soil generated during project construction, if any, will be disposed of at a hazardous waste disposal facility.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia


EIR

HAZ-3 Paint used for lane striping shall be tested for lead-based paint (LBP) prior to demolition/removal to determine proper handling and disposal requirements.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia


EIR

HAZ-4 Conduct asbestos-containing materials(ACM) and LBP surveys, if appropriate, before demolition of any structures constructed before 1979 to determine the level of risk posed to construction workers and the public and to identify appropriate protection measures.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia


EIR

Page 126




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

HYDROLOGY/ WATER QUALITY

HWQ-1 Concentrated flow conveyance systems (e.g., drainage ditches, dikes, berms) will be designed to ensure that flows to drainage channels will not result in increased erosion, sedimentation, or any contaminant conveyance to the extent feasible. Slope/surface protection systems that utilize hard surfaces, such as concrete or equivalent materials, will be designed to minimize erosion to the extent feasible.

City of Hesperia

Design EIR

HWQ-2 During construction, waste management BMPs will be implemented. These BMPs consist of procedural and structural BMPs for handling, storing, and disposing of wastes generated by a construction project.

City of Hesperia/ Contractor

Construction EIR

HWQ-3 During construction, soil stabilization BMPs will be incorporated. These BMPs consist of preparing the soil surface and applying soil stabilizing media, such as straw mulch, soil binders, and geotextile mats.


Construction EIR

HWQ-4 During construction, non-stormwater BMPs, such as vehicle and equipment maintenance, will be implemented to limit the potential for pollutants to impact surface waters.


Construction EIR

Page 127




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

HWQ-5 In an effort to uphold water quality standards, the proposed project will require Section 404, 401, and 1602 permits. Construction will not commence within jurisdictional areas until these permits are issued by the respective resource agencies. The conditions of these permits will be incorporated into the project.


Design Section 404, 401 and 1602

HWQ-6 A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared by the Contractor and reviewed by the City for approval prior to commencement of any soil-disturbing activities. The SWPPP shall address all State and federal stormwater control requirements and regulations. The SWPPP shall address all construction-related activities, equipment, and materials that have the potential to impact water quality. The SWPPP shall include BMPs to control pollutants, sediment from erosion, stormwater runoff, and other construction-related impacts.


Design EIR

HWQ-7 The City shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) at least thirty (30) days prior to any soil-disturbing activities.


Prior to Construction

EIR

Page 128




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

HWQ-8 All work will conform to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements as described in NPDES Permit for General Construction Activities (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002). These include, but are not limited to, temporary sediment control, temporary soil stabilization, scheduling, waste management, materials handling, and other non-stormwater BMPs.


Construction NPDES

HWQ-9 Construction activities will give special attention to stormwater pollution control during the rainy season, defined as August 1 through October 1, and from November 1 through May 1. No work should be conducted whenever rain is predicted. Water Pollution Control BMPs will be used to minimize impacts to receiving waters. Measures will be incorporated to contain all vehicle loads and avoid any tracking of materials.


Construction EIR

HWQ-10 As described by the Mojave Watershed Storm Water Management Plan, the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) requires implementation of soil stabilization and sediment control BMPs to protect the Mojave River and its tributaries during thunder and flash flood storms during the rainy season. Soil stabilization and


Construction RWQCB

Page 129




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

sediment controls will be implemented to protect the Mojave River and, if applicable, all equipment will be removed from waterways prior to flash floods.

HWQ-11 Post-construction maintenance BMPs, including routine maintenance work to keep the project site free of debris, such as litter pickup, toxics control, street sweeping, drainage, and channel cleaning, will be incorporated into the project. Permanent soil stabilization BMPs will be incorporated into project design, such as preservation of existing vegetation, concentrated flow conveyance systems (e.g., drainage ditches, dikes, berms, swales), and slope/surface protection systems that use vegetation. Appropriate BMPs will be selected during final design.


Construction EIR

HWQ-12 The proposed project would be designed to prevent the flooding of Ranchero Road, cross streets, and adjacent lands.


Design EIR

HWQ-13 The Ranchero Road drainage facilities would be designed to accommodate a 10-year return frequency storm per local guidelines.


Design City/ County Guidelines

Page 130




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

HWQ-14 The City shall continue enforcing the City’s Municipal Code provisions for flood hazard reduction (Title 8: Safety, Chapter 8.28: Flood Hazard Protection and Regulations). This code, which applies to new construction and existing projects undergoing substantial improvements, provides construction standards that address the major causes of flood damage, and includes provisions for anchoring, placement of utilities, raising floor elevations, using flood-resistant construction materials, and other methods to reduce flood damage.

City of Hesperia

Design/ Construction

Hesperia General Plan

Implementation Policy SF 2.1

NOISE

NOI-1 Use newer equipment with improved noise muffling and ensure that all equipment items have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement measures, such as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine vibration isolators, intact and operational. Newer equipment will generally be quieter in operation than older equipment. All construction equipment should be inspected at periodic intervals to ensure proper maintenance and presence of noise control devices (e.g., mufflers and shrouding).

Contractor Construction Federal Transportation Administration/

City of Hesperia Noise

Ordinance

Page 131




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

NOI-2 To the extent feasible, the Contractor will turn off construction idling equipment. The Contractor will strive to keep noise levels from construction equipment relatively uniform and avoid impulsive noises.



Ordinance

NOI-3 Between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. on all days and between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Sundays and federal holidays, any construction activities occurring within 700 ft of noise-sensitive areas must be accompanied by noise monitoring to assure compliance with the applicable noise thresholds and must immediately be modified to achieve compliance if necessary or ceased when/if compliance cannot be achieved. Between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., the same provision applies when construction occurs within 1,150 ft of noise-sensitive areas.

Contractor Construction City of Hesperia Noise

Ordinance

NOI-4 Where vibratory rollers are used within 30 ft of existing building structures during exempted hours, rollers shall be selected based on compaction force to assure that the 0.2-inch per second peak particle velocity (PPV) threshold is not exceeded at the structure. Whenever vibratory rollers are used within 30 ft of such building structures, continuous vibration monitoring shall be performed and a plan shall be in

Contractor Construction City of Hesperia Noise

Ordinance

Page 132




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

place to allow immediate modification or cessation of any vibratory roller activity that generates vibrations exceeding the applicable threshold. Outside of exempted hours, activity constraints will need to be applied for perceptibility thresholds, so that the corresponding distance will be more than 200 ft. As a practical matter, this will prevent the use of vibratory rollers on the project outside of the exempted hours.

When other vibration-generating construction equipment is used outside of exempted hours, it shall only be done when compliance with the perceptibility threshold can be verified through conservative vibration propagation modeling and/or continuous onsite vibration monitoring.

NOI-5 To ensure that the surrounding community is aware of potential noise impacts during construction, the City and County will provide adequate public notification of the proposed construction.

City of Hesperia

Preconstruction EIR

NOI-6 When possible, the use of construction equipment that creates high vibration levels will be limited, such as vibratory rollers and hammers operating in the proximity of residential structures or other sensitive land uses.



Ordinance

Page 133




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

NOI-7 The hours of vibration-intensive equipment use, such as vibratory rollers, will be restricted to daytime hours so that impacts to residents are minimal.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia

Construction City of Hesperia Noise Ordinance; EIR

NOI-8 Provide double-pane windows to affected residential homes adjacent to Ranchero Road within the project area. Double-pane windows would only be provided at specific areas of the residential home where they would provide a reduction in traffic noise. The backyard or other areas of the property that would not provide traffic noise reduction would not be eligible for double-pane windows. Residential homes qualified for this mitigation measure must meet all of the following criterion: • Residential property must be

identified as a noise-impacted dwelling. Noise impact is defined as: Design Year with Project CNEL equals or exceeds 65 dBA or Project Increase of 5 dB or more resulting in CNEL of 60 dBA or more.

• Residential property driveway access is located and directly provides access to Ranchero Road.

• Residential property currently does not have double-pane windows installed.

Residences qualifying for double

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia

Design; implement

during construction

EIR

Page 134




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

pane windows are those residential homes that are located adjacent to and directly accessing Ranchero Road. These homes are identified as:

• 0409-214-12 • 0409-222-48

• 0409-222-44

• 0409-222-38 • 0409-222-58

• 0405-241-03

• 0405-241-04 Of the seven residential homes identified above, only one residence currently does not have double-pane windows. This residential home, identified as APN 409-214-12, would be provided with double-pane windows by the City, if double-pane windows are not already installed. The City will contact the property owner during final design of the proposed project regarding the option to provide the resident with double-pane windows for the property; installation of these windows would only include areas that are facing Ranchero Road and, if the home is located adjacent to a minor cross-street, then double-pane windows would be installed at the residential home facing the minor street.

Page 135




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC

TRANS-1 The City will prepare and implement a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) to minimize the inconveniences during construction. Included among the provisions, the City and its contractor will coordinate with local police, fire, and emergency medical service providers regarding construction scheduling and any other practical measures to maintain adequate access to properties and response times. Two-way traffic through the construction zone will be maintained throughout the construction period.

Contractor/ City of

Hesperia

Design; implement

during construction

EIR

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

UTIL-1 The City will develop and implement a Construction Management Plan and coordinate with utility providers before and during construction. Interruptions of service, if any, would be done in consultation with individual providers, and follow guidelines and schedules set in place by the City and San Bernardino County, including notification to impacted residences and businesses.

City of Hesperia

Design EIR

Page 136




Party/ Monitor

Timing/ Phase


Date)

Source Comments

UTIL-2 A professional waste hauler will be utilized to remove waste from construction activities from the site. The hauler will comply with all local, State, and federal requirements for waste diversion, including the provisions of AB 939.detour plans.

City of Hesperia/ County of

San Bernardino

During Construction

EIR

Page 137


A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH# 2012061058 FOR THE RANCHERO CORRIDOR WIDENING PROJECT AS COMPLETE; AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM AND FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS.

WHEREAS, the Ranchero Corridor Widening Project consists of widening approximately five miles of Ranchero Road between the Ranchero Underpass and the Ranchero Road/Interstate 15 Interchange; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Res. Code § 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR § 15000 et seq.), the City Council of the City of Hesperia (Council) is the lead agency for the project as the public agency with general governmental powers; and WHEREAS, an Initial Study/ Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) prepared in June 2010, indicated the potential for significant impacts that could not be fully mitigated. Consequently, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was generated; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was distributed to numerous state, federal, and local agencies, elected officials, and interested parties for a scoping period of 30 days from June 15, 2012 to July 16, 2012. Relevant comments received in response to the NOP were incorporated into the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was circulated for public review period of 45 days from December 18, 2012 to February 2, 2013. A total of 11 comments were received from six resource agencies and five from the general public during the comment period. The responses to the comments received are included in the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed Public Open House regarding the project was held on January 10, 2013 and four comments were received. The responses to the comments received are included in the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA guidelines and the City’s Local CEQA Guidelines have been satisfied in the EIR. Significant environmental effects of the project have been adequately evaluated and are sufficiently detailed in the Final EIR and Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (FFSOC); and WHEREAS, environmental impacts which the City finds are less than significant and do not require mitigation are described in the Final EIR and FFSOC; and WHEREAS, environmental impacts which are identified as significant, but the City finds can be mitigated to a level of less than significant through feasible mitigation measures are described in the Final EIR and FFSOC; and

Page 138

WHEREAS, environmental impacts which are identified as significant, but the City finds cannot be fully mitigated to a level of less than significant despite the implementation of feasible mitigation measures, are described in the Final EIR and FFSOC; and WHEREAS, the findings and conclusions made by the City pursuant to this Resolution are based upon the oral and written evidence presented as a whole and not based solely on the information provided in this Resolution; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF HESERIA CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the

Recitals, Part A of this Resolution, are true and correct. Section 2. The City Council hereby declares that pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section

15093, the City Council has considered the benefits of proposed Project against any significant and unavoidable environmental impacts in determining whether to approve the proposed project. The benefits of the proposed Project outweigh the unavoidable significant environmental impacts and those impacts are considered acceptable.

Section 3. The Council finds that it has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate

or substantially mitigate potential impacts resulting from the Project. Section 4. Based on conclusions set forth above, this Council hereby certifies the Final EIR-

SCH# 2012061058 as complete and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program and the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

Section 4. That City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and

enter it into the book of original resolutions. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of June 2013. ______________________________ Bill Holland, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Melinda Sayre-Castro Assistant City Clerk

Page 139


Page 140

of 2 - 1 -1Page 1 of 2 - 1 -1

C I TY O F H E SP E R I A

S TA F F R E P OR T

RECOMMENDED ACTION

It is recommended that the City Council/Agency/Board/Commissions adopt the following Resolutions approving the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget for the City of Hesperia, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission, Hesperia Fire Protection District, and Hesperia Water District:

1) City of Hesperia Resolution No. 2013-26 adopting the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget.

2) City of Hesperia Resolution No. 2013-27 adopting the GANN Appropriations Limit.

3) Hesperia Housing Authority Resolution HHA 2013-03

4) Hesperia Community Development Commission Resolution CDC 2013-04

5) Hesperia Fire Protection District Resolution HFPD 2013-06 adopting the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget

6) Hesperia Fire Protection District Resolution HFPD 2013-07 adopting the GANN Appropriations Limit

7) Hesperia Water District Resolution HWD 2013-05 adopting the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget

BACKGROUND

In compliance with the City Council’s policy direction, staff has prepared the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget for the City of Hesperia, the Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission, the Hesperia Water District, and the Hesperia Fire Protection District Board’s consideration and action. A comprehensive review of the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Proposed Budget took place during a Public Workshop on June 11, 2013.

DATE: June 18, 2013

TO: Mayor and Council Members Chair and Commission, Hesperia Housing Authority Chair and Commission, Community Development Commission Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Fire Protection District Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District


BY: Brian D. Johnson, Assistant City Manager-Management Services

SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget Adoption

Page 141

Staff Report Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget Adoption June 18, 2013

ISSUES/ANALYSIS

The City Council/Agency/Board/Commission’s expenditure plan and related resources to fund the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget have been presented and staff is available to answer questions that the legislative bodies may have. Staff requests authority to make technical corrections, minor edits, etc. to the FY 2013-14 Proposed Budget document to be incorporated into the final FY 2013-14 Budget as approved by the City Council. FISCAL IMPACT:

See Fiscal Year 2013-14 Proposed Budget. ALTERNATIVE

Provide alternate direction to staff. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 2013-026 2. Resolution No. 2013-027 3. Resolution HHA 2013-03 4. Resolution CDC 2013-04 5. Resolution HFPD 2013-06 6. Resolution HFPD 2013-07 7. Resolution HWD 2013-05

Page 142


A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE ANNUAL FISCAL YEAR 2013-14 BUDGET

WHEREAS, the City Manager has prepared the proposed operating and capital budget for Fiscal Year 2013-14 for the City of Hesperia; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received the Fiscal Year 2013-14 proposed budget and held a public workshop concerning its adoption; and WHEREAS, the final budget document will be the City’s official Program of Services for the City of Hesperia for Fiscal Year 2013-14. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. In all respects, the facts as set forth in this Resolution are true and correct.

Section 2. To accept, approve, and adopt the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget as proposed and presented by staff and as adjusted by Council direction, as the official budget document and Program of Services for the City of Hesperia for Fiscal Year 2013-14, which includes:

Section 2a. City General Fund expenditures of $23,827,402 with total resources (revenue, budgeted reserves, and transfers) of $23,983,765.

Section 2b. Other City funds expenditures of $22,729,914 are from the following funds, exclusive of transfers:

Fund No. Fund Name Expenditure 204 Measure I – 2010 Renewal $ 4,301,813 251 CDBG Administration 1,507,415 253 CDBG Revolving Loans 554,020 254 AB2766 AQMD 80,000 256 Environmental Programs Grant Fund 82,326 257 Neighborhood Stabilization Program 642,325

260 Disaster Preparedness Fund 19,425

263 Street Maintenance Fund 3,287,043 300 Streets Development Impact Fee 1,569,871

302 Fire Development Impact Fee 840,615

400 Measure I Debt Service Fund 763,860

401 City Debt Service Fund 793,500

402 Water Rights Acquisition 1,345,475

502 Fire Building Fund 2,521,385

504 City Streets Projects Fund 3,704,112

600 Ranchero Road Undercrossing 716,729

Total $22,729,914

Page 143

Resolution No. 2013-26 Page 2

Section 3. That the City Council approves the following position classification changes included in the 2013-14 Budget as follows:

Section 3a. That the City Council approves the reclassification of the Deputy City Manager position classification with additional duties and the salary range is increased from Range 45 to Range 47, which is an Unclassified/At-Will, Senior Management, non-represented position classification with an Employment Agreement and Auto Allowance of $400 per month.

Section 3b. That the City Council approves the reclassification of the Community Relations and Media Coordinator position classification with additional duties and the salary range is increased from Range 34 to Range 37, which is a Management, non-represented position classification.

Section 3c. That the City Council approves the new position classification title of Financial Analyst, which is a Professional/Supervisory, non-represented position classification with the salary range of 35.

Section 3d. That the City Council approves the new position classification title Senior Financial Analyst, which is a Management, non-represented position classification with the salary range of 40.

Section 3e. That the City Council approves the retitling of the Senior Management Analyst, assigned to the Management Services Department, position to the new title of Senior Financial Analyst, which will continue to be a Management, non-represented position classification with the same salary range of 40.

Section 3f. That the City Council approves the reclassification of the Payroll Analyst position (Range 32) to an Accounting Technician position (Range 31) which is a General, non-represented position classification.

Section 3g. That the City Council approves the new position classification title of Human Resources Specialist, which is a Professional/Supervisory, non-represented position classification with the salary range of 35.

Section 3h. That the City Council approves the new position classification title Senior Human Resources Analyst, which is a Management, non-represented position classification with the salary range of 40.

Section 3i. That the City Council approves the reclassification of the Community Development Supervisor position (Range 38) classification with additional duties to a Building and Safety Manager position (Range 40) which is a Management, non-represented position classification.

Section 3j. That the City Council approves the reclassification of the Public Works Manager position (Range 44) classification with additional duties to a Public Works Director (Range 46) which is a Senior Management, non-represented position classification.

Section 4. That the City Manager and department head staff shall have the authority to transfer funds as incorporated in the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget and consistent with the policy adopted by the City Council.

Section 5. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

Page 144

Resolution No. 2013-26 Page 3

ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of June 2013.

ATTEST: Bill Holland, Mayor Melinda Sayre-Castro, Assistant City Clerk

Page 145


A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2013-14 ARTICLE XIIIB LIMIT (GANN APPROPRIATIONS LIMITATION)

WHEREAS, Article XIIIB of the California Constitution (Proposition 4) was passed by voters in 1979; and

WHEREAS, Article XIIIB sets a limit on the annual spending or appropriations levels of the state, local governments, and schools according to changes in inflation and population, the base year levels being set in Fiscal Year 1978-79; and

WHEREAS, said limit is known as the Gann Appropriations Limitation and must be adopted annually by the governing body of each jurisdiction; and

WHEREAS, said annual limitation is established by multiplying either the increase of the jurisdictional change in per capita income or assessed valuation, whichever is greater, by the change in population; and multiplying the resulting figure by the previous fiscal year’s limitation; and

WHEREAS, upon incorporation, the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) set the base Gann Appropriations Limitation for the City of Hesperia at $12,000,000; and

WHEREAS, said limitation has been properly adjusted for the City of Hesperia each fiscal year, including Fiscal Year 2013-14, by the Management Services Department according to the State’s formula as shown in Attachment 1; and

WHEREAS, it is required that each jurisdiction’s governing body adopt their adjusted Gann Appropriations Limitation on an annual fiscal year basis.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. In all respects, the facts as set forth in this resolution are true and correct.

Section 2. Approves the annual Fiscal Year 2013-14 Article XIIIB Limit (Gann Appropriations Limitation) of $72,860,526 for the City of Hesperia.

Section 3. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of June 2013.

Bill Holland, Mayor ATTEST:

Melinda Sayre-Castro, Assistant City Clerk

Page 146

CITY OF HESPERIA AND HESPERIA FIRE DISTRICT

SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS (GANN LIMITS)

FISCAL YEARS 1989/90 through 2013/14

Change In

Factor 1 Factor 2 Fire Fire

Fiscal Per Capita Calculation City City Gann District District Total

Year Population Income of Factor Balance Limit Balance Gann Limit Gann

1988/90 - incorporation - LAFCO base amount $12,000,000

1989/90 0.0000 0.0498 1.0498 $12,000,000 12,597,600 $2,937,542 $15,535,142

1990/91 1.0550 1.0421 1.099416 12,597,600 13,850,003 $2,937,542 3,229,581 17,079,584

1991/92 1.0829 1.080477 1.170049 13,850,003 16,205,182 3,229,581 3,778,768 19,983,950

1992/93 1.0525 1.079359 1.136025 16,205,182 18,409,492 3,778,768 4,292,775 22,702,267

1993/94 1.0392 1.150802 1.195913 18,409,492 22,016,151 4,292,775 5,133,785 27,149,936

1994/95 1.0177 1.124327 1.144228 22,016,151 25,191,496 5,133,785 5,874,221 31,065,717

1995/96 1.0120 1.0071 1.019185 25,191,496 25,674,795 5,874,221 5,986,918 31,661,713

1996/97 1.0132 1.0467 1.060516 25,674,795 27,228,531 5,986,918 6,349,222 33,577,753

1997/98 1.0042 1.0467 1.051096 27,228,531 28,619,800 6,349,222 6,673,642 35,293,442

1998/99 1.0181 1.0415 1.060351 28,619,800 30,347,034 6,673,642 7,076,403 37,423,437

1999/00 1.0138 1.0453 1.059725 30,347,034 32,159,511 7,076,403 7,499,041 39,658,552

2000/01 1.0209 1.0491 1.071026 32,159,511 34,443,672 7,499,041 8,031,668 42,475,340

2001/02 1.0189 1.0782 1.098578 34,443,672 37,839,060 8,031,668 8,823,414 46,662,474

2002/03 1.0286 0.9873 1.015537 37,839,060 38,426,965 8,823,414 8,960,503 47,387,468

2003/04 1.0362 1.0231 1.060136 38,426,965 40,737,809 8,960,503 9,499,352 50,237,161

2004/05 1.0309 1.0328 1.064714 40,737,809 43,374,116 9,499,352 10,114,093 53,488,209

2005/06 1.0759 1.0526 1.132492 43,374,116 49,120,839 10,114,093 11,454,129 60,574,968

2006/07 1.0520 1.0396 1.093659 49,120,839 53,721,448 11,454,129 12,526,911 66,248,359

2007/08 1.0705 1.0442 1.117816 53,721,448 60,050,694 12,526,911 14,002,782 74,053,476

2008/09 1.0246 1.0429 1.068555 60,050,694 64,167,469 14,002,782 14,962,743 79,130,212

2009/10 1.0106 1.0062 1.016866 64,167,469 65,249,718 14,962,743 15,215,105 80,464,823

2010/11 1.0050 0.9746 0.979473 65,249,718 63,910,337 15,215,105 14,902,785 78,813,122

2011/12 1.0065 1.0251 1.031763 63,910,337 65,940,321 14,902,785 15,376,142 81,316,463

2012/13 1.0068 1.0377 1.044756 65,940,321 68,891,546 15,376,142 16,064,317 84,955,863

2013/14 1.0061 1.0512 1.057612 68,891,546 72,860,526 16,064,317 16,989,814 89,850,340

Page 147

RESOLUTION HHA 2013-03

A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMISSIONERS OF THE HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY, CITY OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE ANNUAL FISCAL YEAR 2013-14 BUDGET

WHEREAS, the Executive Director of the Hesperia Housing Authority has prepared the proposed operating budget for Fiscal Year 2013-14; and WHEREAS, the Hesperia Housing Authority Commission has received the Fiscal Year 2013-14 proposed budget and held a public workshop concerning its adoption; and WHEREAS, the final budget document will be the Commission’s official Program of Services for the Housing Authority for Fiscal Year 2013-14. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. In all respects, the facts as set forth in this resolution are true and correct. Section 2. To accept, approve, and adopt the Fiscal Year 2013-14 budget as proposed

and presented by staff and as adjusted by Commission direction, as the official budget document and Program of Services for the Housing Authority for Fiscal Year 2013-14, which includes: budget expenditures totaling $761,203, with revenue of $155,710, budgeted reserves of $221,274 for VVEDA Housing Authority Fund 371, and transfers of $1,200,000 for total resources of $1,355,710.

Section 3. That the Commission and department head staff shall have the authority to

transfer funds as incorporated in the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget and consistent with the policy adopted by the Commissioners. Section 4. That the Secretary of the Commission shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of June 2013.

Bill Holland, Chairman ATTEST:

Melinda Sayre-Castro, Secretary

Page 148

RESOLUTION CDC 2013-04

A RESOLUTION OF THE HESPERIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE ANNUAL FISCAL YEAR 2013-14 BUDGET

WHEREAS, the Executive Director of the Hesperia Community Development Commission has prepared the proposed operating budget for Fiscal Year 2013-14; and WHEREAS, the Hesperia Community Development Commission has received the Fiscal Year 2013-14 proposed budget and held a public workshop concerning its adoption; and WHEREAS, the final budget document will be the Commission’s official Program of Services for the Hesperia Community Development Commission for Fiscal Year 2013-14. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HESPERIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. In all respects, the facts as set forth in this resolution are true and correct. Section 2. To accept, approve, and adopt the Fiscal Year 2013-14 budget as proposed

and presented by staff and as adjusted by Commission direction, as the official budget document and Program of Services for the Hesperia Community Development Commission for Fiscal Year 2013-14, which includes: budget expenditures totaling $378,894, with revenue of $100,800 and budgeted reserves and transfers of $278,094, for total resources of $378,894.

Section 3. That the Commission and department head staff shall have the authority to

transfer funds as incorporated in the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget and consistent with the policy adopted by the Commissioners. Section 4. That the Secretary of the Commission shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of June 2013.

Bill Holland, Chairman ATTEST:


Page 149

RESOLUTION HFPD 2013-06

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE HESPERIA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, CITY OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE ANNUAL FISCAL YEAR 2013-14 BUDGET

WHEREAS, the Executive Director has prepared the proposed operating budget for Fiscal Year 2013-14 for the Hesperia Fire Protection District; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has received the Fiscal Year 2013-14 proposed budget and held a public workshop concerning its adoption; and WHEREAS, the final budget document will be the District’s official Program of Services for the Hesperia Fire Protection District for Fiscal Year 2013-14. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE HESPERIA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. In all respects, the facts as set forth in this resolution are true and correct. Section 2. To accept, approve and adopt the Fiscal Year 2013-14 budget as proposed

and presented by staff and as adjusted by Board direction, as the official budget document and Program of Services for the Hesperia Fire Protection District for Fiscal Year 2013-14 which includes: appropriated expenditures totaling $10,194,864 and estimated revenue of $10,024,673 and budgeted reserves and transfers of $170,191, for total resources of $10,194,864.

Section 3. That the Executive Director and department head staff shall have the

authority to transfer funds as incorporated in the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget and consistent with the policy adopted by the District’s Board of Directors. Section 4. That the Secretary of the Board of Directors shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of June 2013.

Bill Holland, Chair ATTEST: Melinda Sayre-Castro, Secretary

Page 150

RESOLUTION HFPD 2013-07

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE HESPERIA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2013-14 ARTICLE XIIIB LIMIT (GANN APPROPRIATIONS LIMITATION)

WHEREAS, Article XIIIB of the California Constitution (Proposition 4) was passed by voters in 1979; and

WHEREAS, Article XIIIB sets a limit on the annual spending or appropriations levels of the state, local governments, and schools according to changes in inflation and population, the base year levels being set in Fiscal Year 1978-79; and

WHEREAS, said limit is known as the Gann Appropriations Limitation and must be adopted annually by the governing body of each jurisdiction; and

WHEREAS, said annual limitation is established by multiplying either the increase of the jurisdictional change in per capita income or assessed valuation, whichever is greater, by the change in population; and multiplying the resulting figure by the previous fiscal year’s limitation; and

WHEREAS, said limitation has been properly adjusted for the Hesperia Fire Protection District fiscal year, including Fiscal Year 2013-14, by the Management Services Department according to the State’s formula as shown in Attachment 1; and

WHEREAS, it is required that each jurisdiction’s governing body adopt their adjusted Gann Appropriations Limitation on an annual fiscal year basis.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF HESPERIA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AS FOLLOWS:


Section 2. Approves the annual Fiscal Year 2013-14 Article XIIIB Limit (Gann Appropriations Limitation) of $16,989,814 for the Hesperia Fire Protection District.

Section 3. That the Board Secretary shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of June 2013. Bill Holland, Chair ATTEST: Melinda Sayre-Castro, Secretary

Page 151

CITY OF HESPERIA AND HESPERIA FIRE DISTRICT

SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS (GANN LIMITS)

FISCAL YEARS 1989/90 through 2013/14

Change In

Factor 1 Factor 2 Fire Fire

Fiscal Per Capita Calculation City City Gann District District Total

Year Population Income of Factor Balance Limit Balance Gann Limit Gann

1988/90 - incorporation - LAFCO base amount $12,000,000

1989/90 0.0000 0.0498 1.0498 $12,000,000 12,597,600 $2,937,542 $15,535,142

1990/91 1.0550 1.0421 1.099416 12,597,600 13,850,003 $2,937,542 3,229,581 17,079,584

1991/92 1.0829 1.080477 1.170049 13,850,003 16,205,182 3,229,581 3,778,768 19,983,950

1992/93 1.0525 1.079359 1.136025 16,205,182 18,409,492 3,778,768 4,292,775 22,702,267

1993/94 1.0392 1.150802 1.195913 18,409,492 22,016,151 4,292,775 5,133,785 27,149,936

1994/95 1.0177 1.124327 1.144228 22,016,151 25,191,496 5,133,785 5,874,221 31,065,717

1995/96 1.0120 1.0071 1.019185 25,191,496 25,674,795 5,874,221 5,986,918 31,661,713

1996/97 1.0132 1.0467 1.060516 25,674,795 27,228,531 5,986,918 6,349,222 33,577,753

1997/98 1.0042 1.0467 1.051096 27,228,531 28,619,800 6,349,222 6,673,642 35,293,442

1998/99 1.0181 1.0415 1.060351 28,619,800 30,347,034 6,673,642 7,076,403 37,423,437

1999/00 1.0138 1.0453 1.059725 30,347,034 32,159,511 7,076,403 7,499,041 39,658,552

2000/01 1.0209 1.0491 1.071026 32,159,511 34,443,672 7,499,041 8,031,668 42,475,340

2001/02 1.0189 1.0782 1.098578 34,443,672 37,839,060 8,031,668 8,823,414 46,662,474

2002/03 1.0286 0.9873 1.015537 37,839,060 38,426,965 8,823,414 8,960,503 47,387,468

2003/04 1.0362 1.0231 1.060136 38,426,965 40,737,809 8,960,503 9,499,352 50,237,161

2004/05 1.0309 1.0328 1.064714 40,737,809 43,374,116 9,499,352 10,114,093 53,488,209

2005/06 1.0759 1.0526 1.132492 43,374,116 49,120,839 10,114,093 11,454,129 60,574,968

2006/07 1.0520 1.0396 1.093659 49,120,839 53,721,448 11,454,129 12,526,911 66,248,359

2007/08 1.0705 1.0442 1.117816 53,721,448 60,050,694 12,526,911 14,002,782 74,053,476

2008/09 1.0246 1.0429 1.068555 60,050,694 64,167,469 14,002,782 14,962,743 79,130,212

2009/10 1.0106 1.0062 1.016866 64,167,469 65,249,718 14,962,743 15,215,105 80,464,823

2010/11 1.0050 0.9746 0.979473 65,249,718 63,910,337 15,215,105 14,902,785 78,813,122

2011/12 1.0065 1.0251 1.031763 63,910,337 65,940,321 14,902,785 15,376,142 81,316,463

2012/13 1.0068 1.0377 1.044756 65,940,321 68,891,546 15,376,142 16,064,317 84,955,863

2013/14 1.0061 1.0512 1.057612 68,891,546 72,860,526 16,064,317 16,989,814 89,850,340

Page 152

RESOLUTION HWD 2013-05

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE HESPERIA WATER DISTRICT, CITY OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE ANNUAL FISCAL YEAR 2013-14 BUDGET

WHEREAS, the General Manager has prepared the proposed operating and capital budget for Fiscal Year 2013-14 for the Hesperia Water District; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has received the Fiscal Year 2013-14 proposed budget and held a public workshop concerning its adoption; and WHEREAS, the final budget document will be the District’s official Program of Services for the Hesperia Water District for Fiscal Year 2013-14.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE HESPERIA WATER DISTRICT AS FOLLOWS:


Section 2. To accept, approve, and adopt the Fiscal Year 2013-14 budget as proposed and presented by staff and as adjusted by Board direction, as the official budget document and Program of Services for the Hesperia Water District for Fiscal Year 2013-14 which includes: water expenditures of $18,089,874, and water revenues and budgeted reserves or total resources totaling $17,714,437, and also sewer expenditures of $2,902,548, and sewer revenue and budged reserves or total resources totaling $3,676,142, for combined estimated District resources of $21,390,579 and appropriated expenditures of $20,992,422.

Section 3. That the General Manager and department head staff shall have the authority to transfer funds as incorporated in the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget and consistent with the policy adopted by the District’s Board of Directors.

Section 4. That the Secretary of the Board of Directors shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of June 2013.

Bill Holland, Chair ATTEST:


Page 153

City of Hesperia

Documents

Transcript of City of Hesperia