Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07.F- City Manager RESOLUTION(ID# 1918) DOC ID: 1918 B CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO—REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Agreement/Contract From: Andrea Travis-Miller M/CC Meeting Date: 07/02/2012 Prepared by: Heidi Aten, (909) 384-5122 Dept: City Manager Ward(s): All Subject: Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino Authorizing the Execution of a Professional Services Agreement by and Between the City of San Bernardino and Graves &King LLP for Hearing Officer And/Or Administrative Law Officer Services. Financial Impact: For FY 2012-2013, approximately$125,000 is projected for hearing officer services. The Firm's rate for service is$185 per hour. This rate includes a 5 percent compensation reduction. ACP and Administrative Citation hearings are held twice a month. The actual cost to the City each year depends upon the actual number of hearing officer hours. Account No. 001-090-0053-5502 Account Description: General Government Fund Please note this balance does not indicate available funding. It does not include non-encumbered reoccurring expenses or expenses incurred,but not yet processed. Motion: Adopt Resolution. Synopsis of Previous Council Action: April 23, 2009-Council Adopts Resolution 2009-82 authorizing the execution of a Professional Services Agreement with the Law Offices of Jones and Mayer, and retaining Gregory P. Palmer for Hearing Officer and/or Administrative Law Officer services. I, December 19, 2007-Council Adopts Resolution 2007-475 authorizing the execution of a ! Professional Services Agreement with William Holt for Hearing Officer and/or Administrative Law Officer services. September 6, 2006- Council Adopts Resolution 2006-304 authorizing the execution of a Professional Services Agreement with Mandel E. Himelstein for Hearing Officer and/or Updated:6/28/2012 by Sabdi Sanchez B 1918 Administrative Law Officer services. November 7, 2005- Council Adopts Resolution 2005-365 authorizing the execution of a Professional Services Agreement with William Holt to provide Hearing Officer services. Background: The City maintains a rotation of two independent hearing officers qualified to hear Administrative Citation cases and Administrative Civil Penalties (ACP) to address violations of the Municipal Code. To be in compliance with the San Bernardino Municipal Code (SBMC) 9.93.090 and the 2002 California Supreme Court decision (Haas v. County of San Bernardino, 27 Cal. 4" 1017), at this time it is necessary for the City to retain a new hearing officer to allow for the required rotation of hearing officers. The California Supreme Court decision required the establishment of a rotation of at least two hearing officers for administrative citation hearings; and Section 9.93.090 of the SBMC states the term of an Administrative Hearing Officer shall be three years. Hearing Officer Gregory P. Palmer has heard Administrative Citation cases for the last three years. Mr. Palmer's contract expired April 30, 2012. At this time it is necessary to retain the services of a new hearing officer. Upon the execution of this Agreement, a new hearing officer will join the rotation. The Administrative Hearing Officer Services RFP was advertised on the City website, in the San Bernardino County Sun, and through the San Bernardino Chamber of Commerce. The Business Registration Division generated a list of attorneys registered in the City and notice was sent to 85 local attorneys. The City received four proposals from professional law firms. The proposals were evaluated by a selection committee comprised of City staff representing the City Clerk's and City Manager's offices and the Finance Department. Proposals went through a selection process which consisted of two phases. The first phase included a review of the all written proposals. The proposals were given scores in the four following categories: fee for service, hearing officer experience, legal experience, and quality of writing samples. Proposals with the highest ranking scores were invited to participate in the second phase of the process, the oral interviews. Three of the companies were invited to meet with the selection committee for further consideration. Updated:6/28/2012 by Sabdi Sanchez B Packet Pg. 1069 1918 The selection committee recommends that the City enter into a professional services agreement with Graves & King LLP, retaining Harvey W. Wimer III, to serve as hearing officer for the City. Located in Riverside, Graves &King LLP received the second highest ranking score based on their price,hearing officer and legal expertise. The proposed agreement is for a period of three years, from July, 2012, through June, 2015. The Firm's rate for service is $185 per hour and includes a 5 percent compensation reduction. ACP and Administrative Citation hearings are held twice a month. The ACP hearings are scheduled by the City Attorney's Office and the Administrative Citations hearings are scheduled by the Code Enforcement Division. City Attorney Review: Supportina Documents: Hearing Officer Resolution Graves and King(DOCX) Exhibit A-Graves and King Hearing Officer Professional Services Agreement (DOCX) Graves and King Proposal (PDF) Updated:628/2012 by Sabdi Sanchez B Packet Pg. 1070 ME �^ RESOLUTION NO. 1L„ 1 2 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A PROFESSIONAL 3 SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO $ AND GRAVES & KING LLP FOR HEARING OFFICER AND/OR it 4 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW OFFICER SERVICES. w d 5 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON 6 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: m 7 SECTION 1. The Mayor of the City of San Bernardino is hereby authorized and = d 8 -' directed to execute on behalf of said City, a Professional Services Agreement between 9 Graves & King LLP and the City of San Bernardino, for hearing officer services and E 10 a 11 administrative law officer services under the City's Municipal Code, a copy of which is m 12 attached hereto marked Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference as fully as though 13 set forth at length. 'w 14 SECTION 2. The authorization to execute the above-referenced agreement is z 15 c rescinded if the parties to the agreement fail to execute it within sixty (60) days of the 4 16 17 passage of this resolution. d 18 /// `o 19 0 20 21 22 m 23 3 d 24 c 25 /// E 26 © 28 /// i i 1 2 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A PROFESSIONAL a 3 SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND GRAVES & KING LLP FOR HEARING OFFICER AND/OR 4 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW OFFICER SERVICES. y `m 5 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor `o 6 and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a meeting 5 7 M 8 thereof,held on the day of 2012,by the following vote,to wit: 9 Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT lO E MARQUEZ 11 JENKINS m 13 VALDIVIA o N 14 SHORETT > 15 KELLEY _ c Y 16 JOHNSON m 17 MCCAMMACK > m 18 C 19 20 Georgeann Hanna,City Clerk 0 m a! 21 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this day of 2012. 22 m c 23 Patrick J. Morris,Mayor 24 City of San Bernardino c m 25 Approved as to form: E 26 JAMES F. PENMAN, City Attorney a (� 27 fir+ 28 By. Packet Pg. 1072 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND GRAVES & KING LLP FOR HEARING OFFICER AND/OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW OFFICER SERVICES. d u 0 1 This Agreement, is entered into this day of , by and between c d 2 Graves & King LLP ("CONSULTANT") and the City of San Bernardino ("CITY" or San d 3 Bernardino.) ` W 4 E 5 WITNESSETH: v 6 WHEREAS, the Mayor and Common Council have determined that it is 7 advantageous and in the best interest of the City of San Bernardino to engage in a professional c 8 services agreement CONSULTANT to act as an independent Hearing Officer and/or m 9 Administrative Law Officer; and 10 d WHEREAS, CONSULTANT possesses the professional skills and ability to provide m j 11 m 12 said services for the CITY; and q m u 13 NOW,THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: Z N 14 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. c 0 15 For the remuneration stipulated, the City of San Bernardino hereby engages the services d 16 ° 17 of CONSULTANT to designate Harvey W. Wimer III or other qualified attorney from the u m 18 law firm to provide Hearing Officer services and/or Administrative Law Officer services as 0 19 set forth by San Bernardino Municipal Code Chapters 8.30, 9.92 and 9.93. No other d x m person unless agreed upon shall provide these services pursuant to this agreement. 5 Y 21 22 2. COMPENSATION AND EXPENSES. R 23 a. For the service delineated above, CITY shall pay the CONSULTANT a rate of$185 a 24 per hour for preparation, conduct of hearings, and signing of orders. The hourly rate of a xx 25 $185 includes a 5% compensation reduction and will be reflected on the invoices. The w 26 E 27 t x 28 a Packet Pg. 1073 ME PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND GRAVES & KING LLP FOR HEARING OFFICER AND/OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW OFFICER SERVICES. m c hourly rate includes overhead expenses such as telephone, photocopy, postage, mileage and � 1 2 related costs. m x m 3 b. No other expenditures made by CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed by CITY. '- 2 4 c. Bills shall be submitted by hearing, monthly, or quarterly to the City Manager's E E v 5 Office, 300 N D Street, San Bernardino, CA 92418. 6 _ d. Support staff for hearings shall be provided by the City of San Bernardino. All 7 8 hearings shall be held in the City at City Hall. g 2 9 3. TERM; TERMINATION. 10 a. The term of the Agreement is for a fixed period of three (3)years, commencing July 2, 11 2012, and expiring June 30, 2015. At the conclusion of the agreement, the Hearing Officer a 12 13 will not be eligible to be retained or employed in any capacity by the City for a period of 2 d 14 twelve(12)months. w m c 15 b. CONSULTANT agrees to be available to hold hearings at least two (2) days per m 16 month at City Hall. The hearings shall be held on days that City Hall is open to the public a `m 17 and at times specified by the CITY, unless changed by mutual agreement of the parties. 18 ° CONSULTANT will be available for a full day of hearings on days scheduled for hearing. c 19 d 20 c. CITY may terminate this Agreement only upon CONSULTANT'S inability or refusal c rn 21 to conduct hearings and render decisions or his failure to maintain his good standing and v e m 22 active status with the State Bar of California. CITY shall have no other right to terminate m 23 this Agreement. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement at any time by thirty (30) a 24 a days written notice. r 25 Ul 26 4. INDEMNITY. m (� 27 E �.r L 28 a PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND GRAVES & KING LLP FOR HEARING OFFICER AND/OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW OFFICER SERVICES. CONSULTANT agrees to and shall indemnify and hold the CITY, its elected O W 1 =_ 2 officials, employees, agents or representatives, free and harmless from all claims, actions, d 3 damages and liabilities of any kind and nature arising from bodily injury, including death, '- 4 or property damage, based or asserted upon any actual or alleged act or omission of Z E a 5 CONSULTANT, its employees, agents, or subcontractors, relating to or in any way a 6 connected with the accomplishment of the work or performance of services under this 7 8 Agreement, unless the bodily injury or property damage was actually caused by the sole o Y 9 negligence of the CITY, its elected officials, employees, agents or representatives. As part 10 of the foregoing indemnity, CONSULTANT agrees to protect and defend at its own m E 11 m expense, including attorney's fees, the CITY, its elected officials, employees, agents or 12 13 representatives from any and all legal actions based upon such actual or alleged acts or 14 omissions. CONSULTANT hereby waives any and all rights to any types of express or m c 0 15 implied indemnity against the CITY, its elected officials, employees, agents or H d 16 0 representatives, with respect to third party claims against the CONSULTANT relating to or a i 17 j in any way connected with the accomplishment of the work or performance of services C 18 � 19 under this Agreement. i = 20 5. INSURANCE. j Y 21 While not restricting or limiting the foregoing, during the term of this Agreement, 22 CONSULTANT shall maintain in effect policies of comprehensive public, general and m 23 automobile liability insurance, in the amount of $1,000,000.00 combined single limit, and a 24 :2 25 statutory workers' compensation coverage, and shall file copies of said policies with the w 26 CITY's Risk Manager prior to undertaking any work under this Agreement. CITY shall be E 27 set forth as an additional named insured in each policy of insurance provided hereunder. z 28 a 8. 1075 7.F.b PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND GRAVES & KING LLP FOR HEARING OFFICER AND/OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW OFFICER SERVICES. m u The Certificate of Insurance furnished to the CITY shall require the insurer to notify CITY 1 ° 2 at least thirty (30) days prior to any change in or termination of the policy d 3 6. NON-DISCRIMINATION. 4 In the performance of this Agreement and in the hiring and recruitment of 5 E 9 5 employees, CONSULTANT shall not engage in, nor permit its officers, employees or R 6 agents to engage in, discrimination in employment of persons because of their race, religion, 7 8 color, national origin, ancestry, age, mental or physical disability, medical condition, g A 9 marital status, sexual gender or sexual orientation, or any other status protected by law. 10 7_ INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. E 11 m The Parties intend that the relationship between them created under the Agreement is 12 d 13 that of an independent contractor only. The CONSULTANT shall perform each element of Z © 14 the work set forth in the Scope of Services as an independent contractor and shall not be c 0 15 considered an employee of the CITY. This Agreement is by and between the ��" w 16 ° CONSULTANT and the CITY, and is not intended, and shall not be construed, to create the a` 17 relationship of agent, servant, employee, partnership, joint venture, or association, between o 18 0 19 the CITY and the CONSULTANT. The CITY is interested only in the results obtained A d x 20 under the Agreement; unless otherwise indicated and under unusual circumstances, the Y 21 manner and means of performing the services are subject to the CONSULTANT'S sole 22 control. The CONSULTANT shall have no right or authority to find or commit the CITY, m 23 �? 24 unless specifically authorized in writing by the City Manager in each specific instance. The a 25 CONSULTANT shall not be entitled to any benefits, including, without limitation, workers' w 26 compensation, disability insurance, vacation or sick pay. The CONSULTANT shall be 27 28 a Packet Pg. 1076 TF:b PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND GRAVES & KING LLP FOR HEARING OFFICER AND/OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW OFFICER SERVICES. `ro u ' responsible for providing at its expense, and in its name, disability, workers' compensation W 1 2 or other insurance. d 3 The CONSULTANT assumes full and sole responsibility for, and shall therefore '- 4 pay, any and all federal and state income taxes, Social Security, estimated taxes, E E M 5 unemployment taxes, and any other taxes incurred as result of the compensation set forth a 6 herein. The CONSULTANT agrees further to provide the CITY with proof of payment 7 8 upon reasonable demand. The CONSULTANT holds the CITY harmless from and against o` N 9 any and all claims, demands, losses, costs, fees, liabilities, taxes, penalties, damages or 10 injuries suffered by the CITY (including, but not limited to, attorney fees and court costs, 11 whether or not litigation is commenced) arising out of the failure of the CONSULTANT to a 12 d 13 comply with this provision. Further, this right indemnification shall apply to any and all Z 14 claims, demands, losses, costs, fees, liabilities, taxes, penalties, damages and injuries c 0 15 suffered by the CITY as a result of the classification of the CONSULTANT as independent m 16 ° contractor under this Agreement. a 17 8. BUSINESS REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS. E 18 m 19 CONSULTANT warrants that it possesses or shall obtain, and will maintain, a c s 20 business registration certificate pursuant to Chapter 5 of the Municipal Code, and any other c Y 21 license, permits, qualifications, insurance and approval of whatever nature which are legally m 22 required of CONSULTANT to practice its profession. 23 9. NOTICES. a 24 a 25 Any notice to be given pursuant to this Agreement shall be deposited with the w 26 United States Postal Service, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: E 27 28 a Packet Pg. 7077 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND GRAVES & KING LLP FOR HEARING OFFICER AND/OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW OFFICER SERVICES. m 0 ... TO THE CITY: City of San Bernardino O1 1 300 North"D" Street, 0 Floor 2 San Bernardino, CA 92418 Telephone: (909) 384-5140 0 3 Attention: City Manager's Office m m 4 2 TO THE CONSULTANT: Harvey W. Wimer III E 5 Graves&King LLP 6 P.O. Box 1548 3610 Fourteenth Street, Second Floor 7 Riverside,CA 92501 .- 8 Phone: (951) 680-0100 `o N 9 10. ATTORNEYS' FEES. 10 In the event that litigation is brought by any party in connection with this agreement, 11 2 the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the opposing party all costs and a 12 a expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by the prevailing party in the v 13 14 exercise of any of its rights or remedies hereunder or the enforcement of any of the terms, C 0 15 conditions or provisions hereof. The costs, salary and expenses of the City Attorney and N d w 16 members of his office in enforcing this Agreement on behalf of the CITY shall be n 17 considered as "attorneys' fees" for the purposes of this paragraph. O 18 w 11. ASSIGNMENT. 19 d 20 CONSULTANT shall not voluntarily or by operation of law assign, transfer, sublet or c Y 21 encumber all or any part of the CONSULTANT's interest in this Agreement without CITY's m 22 prior written consent. Any attempted assignment, transfer, subletting or encumbrance shall be 23 void and shall constitute a breach of this Agreement and cause for the termination of this a 24 a 25 Agreement. Regardless of CITY's consent, no subletting or assignment shall release w 26 CONSULTANT of CONSULTANT's obligation to perform all other obligations to be E 27 performed by CONSULTANT hereunder for the term of this agreement. x 28 a 'Packet Pg. 1078 ME PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND GRAVES & KING LLP FOR HEARING OFFICER AND/OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW OFFICER SERVICES. `m 12. VENUE. 0 1 2 The parties hereto agree that all actions or proceedings arising in connection with this d 3 Agreement shall be tried and litigated either in the State courts located in the County of San '- 4 Bernardino, State of California or the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, c v 5 Riverside Division. The aforementioned choice of venue is intended by the parties to be the 6 mandatory and not permissive in nature. 7 8 0 R 9 13. GOVERNING LAW. 10 This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. E 0 11 14. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. 2 a 12 a .. 13 This Agreement shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the parties to this 14 Agreement and their respective heirs, representatives, successors, and assigns. to c 0 15 15. HEADINGS. N a w 16 ° The subject headings of the sections of this Agreement are included for the purposes a` d 17 of convenience only and shall not affect the construction or the interpretation of any of its o 18 19 provisions. - x 20 16. SEVERABHdTY. te 21 If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent m 22 jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason, such determination shall not affect 23 c? the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions hereof or of the a 24 a 25 offending provision in any other circumstance, and the remaining provisions of this w 26 Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. E L 27 17. REMEDIES; WAIVER. 28 Packet Pg. 1079 ;.7F.b PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND GRAVES & KING LLP FOR HEARING OFFICER AND/OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW OFFICER SERVICES. All remedies available to either party for one or more breaches by the other parry rn 2 are and shall be deemed cumulative and may be exercised separately or concurrently without d 3 waiver of any other remedies. The failure of either party to act in the event of a breach of Z N 4 this Agreement by the other shall not be deemed a waiver of such breach or a waiver of S E v 5 future breaches, unless such waiver shall be in writing and signed by the party against Q 6 0 whom enforcement is sought. — 7 8 .T 9 18. ENTIRE AGREEMENT; MODIFICATION. c 10 This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement and the understanding between the E E 11 �' parties, and supersedes any prior agreements and understandings relating to the subject Q 12 manner of this Agreement. This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a written O 13 d 14 instrument executed by all parties to this Agreement. R 0 15 `o 16 d 17 o 18 19 20 Y 21 R N 22 N 23 `? 24 a 25 w 26 E r 27 Q 28 7.F;b PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND GRAVES & KING LLP FOR HEARING OFFICER AND/OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW OFFICER SERVICES. 0 O 1 = 2 m 3 N 4 E 5 ro 6 7 8 0 .y 9 IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and 10 date set forth below. E d 11 m a 12 Dated: 2012 CONSULTANT m u 13 d By: U) 14 Harvey W. Winner III Graves & King LLP w 15 y d 16 a d 17 0 18 19 Dated 2012 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO x01 20 By: Y 21 Andrea Travis-Miller, Acting City Manager 22 23 9 Approved as to Form: 4 24 JAMES F. PENMAN, a L 25 City Attorney w c 26 By: £ s 27 a 28 }o- 7.F.b. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND GRAVES & KING LLP FOR HEARING OFFICER AND/OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW OFFICER SERVICES. 0 0 rn 1 � m 2 x d 3 Vl 4 E v 5 a 6 7 V 8 0 .N m 9 10 £ 11 m a 12 U 13 d N 14 C O_ 15 " v `o 16 a d 17 0 18 19 x 20 Y 21 m " 22 ; l0 23 a 24 a L x 25 w c 26 £ u 27 x Q 28 Packet Pg1 ig82? PROPOSAL SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO RFP F-12-17 - ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER SERVICES N d U f' d N m U_ O C d d 7 m N C �E v Q m m Vl O O. O o` rn c Y v c m N d 7 N C d E t u m Q Submitted By: Graves &King LLP P.O. Box 1548 Riverside, CA 91752 (951) 680-0100 Pack�tfg.,108� PROPOSAL SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO RFP F-12-17 - ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER SERVICES TABLE OF CONTENTS N d U Cover Letter ................................................ Pages 1 thru 4 N d Resumes........................................................... Page 5 0 s Documents (certification from State Bar of CA)........... Page 6 R d s Background Statement ......................................... Page 7 ; m Writing Samples................................................. Page 8 E M References ....................................................... Page 9 Q Fee for Service ................................................. Page 10 Appendix B ..................................................... Page 23 0 a` 90 Day Minimum Proposal Verification of Addenda Received .......................... Page 25 and Page 26 Y v d Contractor Exception Statement ............................. Page 27 c� Insurance Certificates ......................................... C d t U d Q Submitted By: Graves & King LLP P.O. Box 1548 Riverside, CA 91752 (951) 680-0100 � . May 10, 2012 Writer's Direct E-mail Address: hwim&@gra ere dking.com 3610 Fourteenth Saeet Sewed Floor Riverside,California 92501 City of San Bernardino Direct eJ!mai!to: City Manager's Office- Sixth Floor Post Office Box 1548 g00 North D Street Riverside,California 92502 San Bernardino, CA 92418 TelepbD.(951)680-0100 W Facsimile: (951)680-0700 Attention: Heidi Aten z m in William J.IGng 11947-] S) Re: RFP F-12-17-Administrative Hearing Officer Services Pamsk L.Gnv<s' Harvey W.Wi-111• 0 Mlchad G.M.om• Rohen C.Mau C Michwl D.Svrgms To Whom It May Concern: 2 Of The law firm of Graves & King LLP is pleased to provide the City of San ; - — Bernardino with the following proposal submitted as a response to RFP F-12- RoMt D.Rids to Dennis J.Mahone. 17 - Administrative Hearing Officer Services. C_ Yn Roxanne Crocks Szu Pe.Lu Tang Nkdro e G h a M oA.g Mn d ndn address and This proposal osal is submitted b Graves&Kin g . a earn=a R E„iaoaa number for the firm's headquarters is: (`r Melieso R.Ran Ace kern Yekrangl Offs AdmLtirtram. Graves &King LLP Viaoa R.Joh-n. P.O. Tex 1540 O 0 C fl O •A lrvleulwll.�w Gmx°^� 3610 Fourteenth Street, Second Floor o Riverside, CA 92501 a Los N.B,AWd B.I .M (951) 680-0100 S S.h 1 Bend Boulevard snh=laso Y GleMale,('(SIRISS 91112 TJ reieohnne:jEISJSsl-0425 Graves & Kin LLP is a California limited liability partnership that was m Faaimile: 181gI331-0425 g founded in 1993. A, LIMITED LIABILITY The principal contact person for the Firm is Harvey W. Wimer III,the Firm's managing partner. Mr. Wimer's contact information is as follows: C d PARTNERSHIP E r Harvey W. Winner III Managing Partner a Graves &King LLP P.O. Box 1548 3610 Fourteenth Street, Second Floor Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 680-0100 hwimerCOgravesandking com PacketPg. 1085 Heidi Aten City of San Bernardino Re: RFP F-12-17-Administrative Hearing Officer Services May 10, 2012 Page 2 Since being founded in 1993, Graves & King LLP has provided the highest quality legal counsel to public entities throughout the Inland Empire, including the County of San Bernardino, the San Bernardino Flood Control District, the Eastern Municipal Water District,the City of Rancho Cucamonga,the City of Victorville, the City of Banning, the City of Penis,the City of Murrieta, as well as other public agencies and special districts. n The Firm is fully capable of assessing the scope of the applicable Municipal Code sections, conducting administrative hearings and rendering sound decisions while acting as the City's contract Administrative Hearing Officer. The Firm has assisted its public entity o clients in drafting, revising, enforcing and litigating the scope of various municipal code m provisions. In addition, the Firm's experience in conducting and participating in v arbitrations and mediation spans nearly twenty years and hundreds of cases. With this = depth of experience, the Firm is fully capable of overseeing and handling disputes involving various Municipal Code violations. ` N C The Firm proposes that the Administrative Hearing Officer services be conducted by either Harvey W. Wilmer III or I.E.Holmes Ill. Both Mr. Wilmer and Mr.Holmes are attorneys a licensed to practice law by the California State Bar and both are in good standing. The Firm envisions that Mr.Wiener and Mr. Holmes, collectively, can handle the City's needs for Administrative Hearing Officer services. 0 The firm's managing Partner, Harvey W. Wilmer III, has practiced law with Graves & o King LLP in the Inland Empire since 1994. Mr. Wiener's practice is primarily centered rn on providing legal services to local public agencies at both the trial court and appellate Y court levels(including the California Supreme Court.) In addition, Mr. Wimer has acted as the contract Administrative Hearing Officer for the City of Rancho Cucamonga since 2009. As the Administrative Hearing Officer for Rancho Cucamonga, Mr. Wilmer has heard and rendered decisions in nearly 250 cases. The cases Mr. Wilmer has handled include: C 0 a) Code Enforcement: Mr. Wilmer has decided cases involving nuisance abatement issues, unlicensed business operations, land use, non-conforming z commercial signs, political signs, lack of required landscaping, etc. a b) Animal Control: Mr. Winter has decided cases involving barking noise violations, lack of required licenses, lack of required vaccination, leash law violations, etc. 7.F.c Heidi Aten City of San Bernardino Re: RFP F-12-17-A&WnistrativeHearing Officer Services May 10, 2012 Page 3 c) Fire and Building Code: Mr. Wimer has decided cases involving weed abatement assessments, fire code violations, commercial sprinkler systems certifications,etc. m u Attorney J. E. Holmes HI has been practicing law in the Inland Empire since 1975. N During his distinguished career, Mr. Holmes has received judicial training both through d the U.S. Army's Judge Advocate General's School and the County of Riverside's superior o court. Mr. Holmes was appointed a Judge Pro-Tem in the Riverside County Superior o Court in 2006 and has acted as a judge pro tern since that time. As a Judge Pro-Tem, Mr. Holmes has primarily handled a criminal caseload. Mr. Holmes acted as Administrative v Law Judge for die United States Army from 1990 to 1994. As an Administrative Law = Judge,Mr.Holmes heard cases involving alleged violations of military administrative law, listened to testimony, received documentary evidence and rendered written decisions in N each case. E a In addition, Mr. Wimer and Mr. Holmes are each court-appointed arbitrators and a mediators with both the Riverside and San Bernardino County Superior Courts. As arbitrators, they have handled cases involving varied topics including property disputes, contract disputes, personal injuries claims, etc. 0 a The Firm recognizes that in many situations, a cited party or aggrieved citizen may not o completely understand and/or appreciate the applicable Municipal Code provisions or the m reasons for the City's action. It is the firm's experience that in some circumstances, the r misunderstanding or lack of appreciation may be an impediment to the City's ultimate goal of achieving compliance. In addition to rendering a decision, the Firm views H administrative hearings as an opportunity to explain the City's position and to foster dialog between the parties about possible resolutions. In many situations, these efforts will increase the likelihood of achieving the City's goal of gaining compliance and reduce the likelihood of future violations. £ s U Both Mr. Wimer and Mr. Holmes are fully capable of conducting fair and impartial a Administrative Hearings, to hear testimony and receive documentary evidence, to issue final orders, and to impose civil penalties and assess administrative costs consistent with the violation. Graves&King LLP has read and understands the RFP in its entirety, including the scope and nature of the work, all appendices, attachments, exhibits, schedules and addendum, as applicable. The Firm has no objections or exceptions to the contents of the RFP or to the contents of the sample Professional Services Agreement. QBi. Heidi Aten City of San Bernardino Re: RFP F-12-17-Administrative Hearing Officer Services May 10, 2012 Page 4 This letter is signed by the individual authorized to negotiate and execute an agreement with the City on behalf of the Firm. y Thank you for providing Graves & King LLP with the opportunity to submit a proposal 2 to the City of San Bernardino. We look forward to your response. W it m _U Very truly yours, 0 rn G VES & KING LLP m x Alto s at � R N C *REY"W. WIMER III E Q �o J\W P_FILES�PLGJEAMNw AQty of San BennardiWGIty of SS RFP Response wpd r R 0 O O O a` m c Y 9 C A N d W L t7 C d E r u as Q ; C GRAVES KINGA Limited Liability Partnership 3610 Fourteenth Street, Second Floor ? Riverside,California 92501 - { Telephone:(951)680-0100 Facsimile: (951)680-0700 w u u r > 1 y I N Partner of the Firm { d i _2 Harvey W.Winter III I hwimer@gravesandking.com ! 5 m Education = • Juris Doctor,University of La Verne College of law 1993 > o Student of Distinction,graduating class of 1993 12 o Law Review,Editor-in-Chief 1992-1993 o Law Review,Staff Writer 1991-1992 'E • Bachelor of Arts,Communications,California State University,Fullerton CA 1989 C Bar Membership • Supreme Court of the State of California �- • Supreme Court of the United States w • United States District Court,Central District of California 0 0 Professional Affiliations a m • State Bar of California E • Riverside County Bar Association • San Bernardino County Barristers Association,Founding Director a • Association of Southern California Defense Counsel d 2002-Present,Court appointed arbitrator/mediator,Riverside Superior Court m' • 2002-Present,Court appointed arbitrator/mediator,San Bernardino Superior Court C Professional Experience E • 1999-Present,Partner,Graves&King LLP • 19941999,Associate Attorney,Graves&King LLP 2009-Present,Administrative Hearing Judge,City of Rancho Cucamonga • 2009-Present,Commissioner,City of Redlands,Public Works and Municipal Utility Commission Packet Pg. 1089 7.F.c RA,�jT(f'�`VES KING - A Limited Liability Partnership 3610 Fourteenth Street,Second Floor i Riverside,California 92501 Telephone:(951)680-0100 Facsimile: (951)680-0700 d u d rn Of Counsel J.E.Holmes III a iholmes®eravesandking.com E d Education = • Juris Doctor,University of California,San Francisco o Hastings College of law 1964 • Claremont Men's College,Claremont,CA c • Bachelor of Science,Business Economics 1964 'E • Distinguished Military Graduate a¢ • U.S.Army ROTC m Special Education — • 2009,Riverside Superior Court-Judge Pro Tem,Riverside,CA m • 2009,Pepperdine University,Straus Institute for Riverside,CA Dispute Resolution n. "Mediating the Litigated Case"42 Hour Settlement Mediation Course 0 • 2003,Riverside Superior Court-judge Pro Team,Riverside,CA rn • 1993,The Twenty Second Interservice Military Judges Seminar,The Air Force Judge S Advocate General's School a • 1992,The Twenty First interservice Military Judges Seminar,The Air Force Judge m Advocate General's School m • 1978,The U.S.Army Judge Advocate General's Schools,Officer Advance Course (Non- Resident) • 1973,The U.S.Army Judge Advocate General's School,4th Litigation Course,VA • 1970,The U.S.Army Judge Advocate General's School,8th Military Judge Course E • 1968,The US.Army Judge Advocate General's School,Basic Course,VA Q Bar Membership • 1992,United States District Court,Eastern District of California • 1992,United States Court of Military Review • 1979,Supreme Court of the United States of America • 1974,United States Court of Appeal-Ninth District • 1973,United States District Court Northern District of Califomia • 1970,United States Tax Court • 1970,United States Court of Claims • 1968,Supreme Court of the State of California and subordinate Courts 'w • 1968,United States Court of Military Appeals • 1968,United States District Court-Central District of California > 0 U) Professional Affiliations • 1968-present,State Bar of California Q • 1980-present,American Board of Trial Advocates rn • Served Director,National Board of Directors(1990-2002) c • Served Director,State Board of Directors(1988-1989) d • Served President,San Bernardino/Riverside Chapter(1983) m • 1980-2008,Association of Southern California Defense Counsel - o Served Director,Board of Director,(1999-2003) m • 1975-present Riverside County Bar Association 'c • Served on the Judicial Nomination Recommendation Committee -Fo • Chairperson,Emergency Preparedness/Disaster Relief Committee(2001-2007) American Bar Association w �- • Federal Bar Association m Professional Experience a • 2010-present Of Counsel,Graves&King LLP °oa • Thompson&Colegate LLP Riverside,CA a` 0 2004-2009,Of Counsel o 1981-2004,Partner y o 19751981,Associate • 2009-present,Settlement Mediator-Riverside Superior Court-Civil Settlement Mediation w Services,Riverside CA m • 2006-present,Judge Pro Tem-Riverside Superior Court Riverside CA • 2001-present,Settlement Mediator-Riverside County Bar Association-Dispute Resolution Service,Riverside CA m • 1995-present,Arbitrator-Riverside Superior Court,Riverside County Bar Association E Dispute Resolution Service&Private Arrangement Arbitration,Riverside CA m • 1992-present,Settlement Mediator-Court of Appeals,Fourth District Appellate Q • 1974-1975,Associate Attorney,Surr&Hellyer,LLP,San Bernardino,CA U.S.Army Judge Advocate General Corps Service o 1968-1974,Jude Advocate General Corps Officer(Active Duty) • U.S. Army Reserve Judge Advocate Generals Corps Service o 1974-1996,Active Reserve:Judge Advocate Generals Corps& • Special Operations:Civil Affairs o 1964-1968,(U.S.Army Inactive Reserve) PacketPg. 1091 Professional Activities • The Society of White House Military Aides 1985-present • White House Military Aide 1968-1970 Redlands Symphony Association Board of Directors-3 three year terms • Kimberly Shirk Historical Home Foundation Board of Directors<1 three year terms • Redlands Sunrise Rotary(Paul Harris Fellow) • First Congregational Church,Chairman of Board of Directors-4 three year terms Redlands Conservancy Member Redlands Historical Foundation Member m • 3-2-1 Wine Tasting President v • Orange Empire Military Officers Association Board of Directors a • Air Force Village West Board of Directors,previously served 2 three year berms m • Phi Alpha Delta Legal Fraternity Alumni Member • Phi Delta Theta Fraternity Alumni Member 0 rn General • Peer Rating:AV by Martindale Hubbell(1968-1970) d • The Society of White House Military Aides = m m c E v a m N O O. O a` m c Y v c m N d A C E E L U N Q Packet Pg. 1092 Graves&King LLP Proposal:RFP F-12-17Administrative Hearing Officer Services Documents Attached please find a copy of the current California State Bar membership card for both Mr. Wimer and Mr. Holmes. Also enclosed please find confirmation from the California State Bar confirming that both Mr. Wimer and Mr. Holmes' bar membership are current, active and in good standing. d ur d U_ 0 C d S d N E 'O a R m 0 n 0 IL` rn c Y v c m N N A C d L U A Q 6 "R�ticek�?g:7093 t - THE ST.^yEt 6F ClUJIA ul HARVEY W.WIMER III m` 2 166326 MCLE GROUP 3 O PRESERVE AND IMPROVE OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM C IN ORDER TO ASSURE A FREE AND JUST SOCIETY UNDER LAW, v Only alive members are mlNm le precMCelm'. I ACTIVE N C m m O O O a m THE STAEF CAIFORNIA - 'O J.E. HOLMES III 42267 MCLE GROUP 2 C9 IN ORDER TO IMPROVE OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM I C IN ORDER TO ASSUREA FREE AND JUST SOGEfY UNDER LAW E ONYeclie members ere enlPoea to praNUlaw n E ACTIVE laa i Q Packet Pg. 1094 State Bar of CA:: Harvey William Wimer III Page 1 - .- Tuesday,May 8,2012 ATTORNEY SEARCH Harvey William Wimer III -#166326 Current Status: Active N This member is active and may practice law in California. v See below for more details. `w y Profile Information The following information is from the official records of The State Bar of California. 0 Bar Number: 166326 ,E 0 Address: Graves&IGng LLP Phone Number. (951)680.0100 x 3610 14th St 2FL Riverside,CA 92501 Fax Number. (951)680-0700 n Map it a-mail: hwimer@gravesandking.com ` a County: Riverside Undergraduate School: California St Univ Fullerton;CA E E District: District 4 Q QSections: None Law School: Univ of LeVeme COL; Ontario CA Status History Effective Data Status Change y 0 Present Active a 0 12/1/1993 Admitted to The State Bar of California a Explanation of member status Y Actions Affecting Eligibility to Practice Law N Disciplinary and Related Actions � R Overview of the attorney discipline system, t j This member has no public record of discipline. w E L Administrative Actions 0 A This member has no public record of administrative actions. G Start New Search . cwAWUs I MMV I PMwft"I WY I G1PyI1PM J A WNNN I FAQ ON1ITU CUb BnoIQNbMs http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fhVMember/Detail/166326 Packet Pg.1095 State Bar of CA ::J. E. Holmes III Page 1 1011301, _.... ._ Tuesday, May 8, 2012 lie ` Ii . . ATTORNEY SEARCH J. E. Holmes Ill -#42267 Current Status: Active N This member Is active and may practice law in California. v See below for more details. rn Profile Information 0 The following information is from the official records of The State Bar of California. Q, c Bar 42267 Number: _ Address: Graves&King Phone Number: (951)660-0100 > 361014th St 2nd Fl is PO Box 1548-1546 Fax Number: (951)660.0700 in Riverside,CA c 92502 a-mail: Not Available E v Map it Q County: Riverside Undergraduate Claremont McKenna Coll;Claremont School: CA °r District: District 4 m Sections: None Law School: UC Hastings COL;San Francisco CA o __ _.. .. __. ........,. _.. .__.. o Status History o. m Effective Date Status Change Y Present Active -o c 611911988 Admitted to The State Bar of California � w Explanation of member status m Actions Affecting Eligibility to Practice Law Disciplinary and Related Actions E Overview of the attorney discipline system. m This member has no public record of discipline. Q Administrative Actions This member has no public record of administrative actions. Start New Search x hUp://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Member/Detail/42267 Packet Pg. to96 i _ Graves & King LLP Proposal:RFP F-12-17A&ninistrative Hearing Officer Services Background Statement Services: Graves & King LLP is not currently under contract with the City of San Bernardino for any other services. The Firm has not previously performed any services for the City of m San Bernardino in the last ten(10)years. In 2011, Mr. Wimer acted as a court-appointed z arbitrator in one case involving the City of San Bernardino as defendant. n d Litigation: `o m Mr. Holmes: m Mr. Holmes is not involved in any litigation to which the City is a party. _ Mr. Wimer: N Mr. Wimer currently represents the County of San Bernardino and the San a �. Bernardino County Flood Control District in a case entitled Mora, et al. v. City of Hi and et al.(San Bernardino County Superior Court Case No.CIVDS 1114384) The City of San Bernardino and the County and Flood Control District are merely co-defendants in this action. The City has not filed a cross-complaint against the N County/District and the County/District have not filed a cross-complaint against the a City. The Firm does not believe there is any conflict in this regard. a' m If the City would prefer, Mr. Wimer will not perform any administrative hearing x officer services until the Mora case is resolved(in approximately twelve months). d d E L U A Q V 7 Packet Pg. 1097 3.F.c Graves & King LLP Proposal: RFP F-12-17Administrative Hearing Officer Services Writing Samples Writing samples for Mr. Wimer and Mr. Holmes are included. Please note: The names of the private parties have been redacted for privacy issues. In addition, Mr. Holmes has no writings reflecting his involvement as a Judge Pro Tem in the Riverside Superior Court as those records remain with the criminal court system. y Writing samples reflecting Mr. Holmes writing in representative civil cases are included for reference. 0 0 rn c M m x d m m E E v a N 0 a 0 a m c Y v t m N d R C N E L U N a 8 7.Rc CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER Building and Safety Department Code Enforcement Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 (909)477-2710 Citation No: C01084 Violation Address: Citation Date: 9/25/2010 Res onsible Pa : m Violation Date: 9/251/2010 Res onsible Parties Mailinq Address Occupant If different): w Hearin held on: December 21 2010 y Present: Officer Oral testimony presented by: 0 Officer c Documentary evidence presented by: Officer = d Upon consideration of all the oral testimony and documentary evidence presented,the decision is: .> .m Tha clf flnn la HAninrl ` N The reasons for this decision are as follows: E See attached findings. a m m h O Q O a` m c As to the fine: Y a $200.00 to be returned to Mr.110dolift m m m r; { E Z PURSUANT TO RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 1.12, SECTION 1.12.300,THIS DECISION IS FINAL, ANY PERSON AGGREIVEO BY THIS DECISION MAY OBTAIN REVIEW OF IT BY FILING A PETITION FOR REVIEW WITH THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TIME LINES AND PROVISIONS SET FORTH IN CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 53069.4. Packet Pg. 1099 Marc Steinorth Citation Nos. C01027, C01077, C01080, C01081. C01084 Findings of Administrative Hearing Officer d U Mr. Steinorth was issued five citations for violations of R.C.M.C. 14.25.020A i v regarding the placement of more than.one temporary sign on a parcel. In separate citations were apparently for violations in various parts of the City. There was no documentation presented at the hearing establishing thalMr;IM-110Wwas provided with a Complianq Order pursuant to R.C.M.CY 12.260 and 1.12.270. `- Officer GNM confirmed the C t} did not issue a Compliance Order prior to the issuance of the Administrative Citations on September 21, 2010, September 24, ; 2010 and September 25,2010. N C The Administrative Hearing Officerconcludes that R.C.M.C. section 1.12.260 E requires the City to issue a Compliance Order prior to the issuance of the a Administrative Citation: Whenever the citing official determines that there exists a continuing y violation of this code related to building,plumbing, electrical mechanical $ or similar structural or zoning issues, that does not create an immediate a` danger to health or safety, the citing official shall issue or cause to be { issued a written compliance order to any responsible person, and such order shall be served by the citing ofcial as provided in this chapter. N Mr.'�yas provided a packet of information by the City at the inception of his political campaign. It is undisputed the information provided by the City contained information about how and when political signs could be placed in the E City. Upon review of the information provided by the City to Mr. AM(and presumably other candidates as well), the Administrative Hearing Officer a concludes the information provided did not satisfy the specific requirements of R.C..M.C. 1.12.270. Thus, the citations issued without a Compliance Order are invalid. Based upon the foregoing, the Administrative Hearing Officer finds in favor of Mr. Steinorth. Pacitef P�k;'IiOU"[ 1 2 3 4 5 6 d v 7 v y 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 9 0 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 10 11 %MW1 NOW Case No.il � x � 12 plaintiff, 13 ARBITRATOR'S FINDINGS E vs. v a 14 15 16 defendant. m 0 a 0 17 a` m 18 Y D 19 The following is a statement of the arbitrator's decision following the non-binding N 20 arbitration conducted on November 16, 2011. 21 PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT cs c 22 The complaint by plaintiffs W{contains a single cause of action against the t U 23 City alleging his property damages were caused by a dangerous condition of public property. In a 24 his complaint, the plaintiff alleges the( 400#0000ketorm drain system [which the arbitrator 25 understands is the system commonly referred to as the "Town Creek" storm drain] was defectively 26 designed and inadequately maintained by the City. As a result, the storm drain failed to during a 27 28 1 ARBITRATOR'S FINDINGS PcknYPg.'1707 `. I heavy downpour on March 7, 2010, causing storm flows to collect on his property resulting in 2 property damages and loss of use. The plaintiffs cause of action is based upon Government Code 3 § 835. 4 EVIDENCE PRESENTED AT ARBITRATION 5 The plaintiff has owned the subject property since 2000. He did not receive the standard 6 real estate disclosures from the seller when he purchased the property and was unaware of any 7 prior flooding on the property, and also unaware of the existence of a 24 inch drainage structure it 8 located in the yard area of the property. Apparently the drain was covered by several inches of "u 9 dirt up until the time of the subject flood. At the hearing, the plaintiff presented evidence c 10 regarding the flooding that occurred on his property located al WW*A OPAM in San x 11 Bernardino. The flooded premises consists of a below grade residential apartment and a utility ; Z 12 1 closet. Mr,o~testified that during the subject flooding,more than six feet of water ponded 13 in the yard area adjacent the structure. He also provided photos depicting the water line on the v a 14 outside and on the inside of the structure supporting his contention the water rose to a maximum `m 15 depth of six feet. -- 16 The Town Creek storm drain flows beneath the plaintiffs property. It has existed in that o 0 17 location for at least 70 years. The section of the storm drain that passes underneath the plaintiff's e m 18 property is a six foot closed channel located approximately six feet beneath the surface. The 24 x v 19 inch drain on the plaintiff's property was intended to drain into the Town Creek system below. a V d 20 The plaintiff s expert, Mr. Bassam Bahhour, a civil engineer, testified that he believes the 0 21 source of the water that flooding the plaintiff's property was storm flows that backed up out of the d 22 Town Creek storm drain. According to Mr. Bahhour, sometime in the 1980s, the City constructed E U ni 23 a drainage improvement beneath Fifth Street. The new system was comprised of a 54 inch pipe a 24 which tied into the existing 6 foot box structure. The City constructed a wall in the six foot 25 structure creating an approximate 90 degree angle for the flows. Mr. Bahhour testified the 90 26 degree transition from the Eft box into the 54 inch pipe created a 74 percent reduction in flow 27 capacity, and did not meet reasonable design parameters. He also testified that the unreasonable 28 design would have contributed to the collection of debris at that Located and could have resulted in 2 ARBITRATOR'S FINDINGS 14 ecket Pg�;1102; 7:F.c I the system becoming blocked. Mr. Bahhour also testified that based upon his review of rain 2 gauges in the area, the subject storm was not a unusually large storm. 3 It was Mr. Bahhour's opinion that during the subject storm the Town Creek storm drain 4 became blocked at the transition location, causing flows to back up in the system. The flows then 5 traveled up the six foot riser beneath the 24 inch storm drain and out of the 24 inch storm drain, 6 flooding the plaintiff's property. Mr. Bahhour pointed to photographs depicting the dislodged u 7 storm drain grate as evidence the flows came up out of the system onto the plaintiff's property. v N 8 The plaintiff seeks cost of repairs and loss of use of the property in the amount of .2 9 $39,631.00. rn 10 At the arbitration, the City presented the testimony of Mr. John Van Havermaat, the City's x 11 supervisor for the maintenance of its storm drain system. Mr. Van Havermant testified that be has > 12 been involved with the maintenance of the City's storm drain system for 27 years. He testified N 13 that the Town Creek system is a "closed" system and that any debris entering into the system v 14 would have to pass through the debris grates affixed to the box culverts that pass flows into the a 15 system. He also testified that during his 27 years with the City, he could not recall any prior m 16 flooding or drainage problems at that location. He further testified that his maintenance crews o a 17 inspected the Town Creek storm drain within a few months of the subject incident and found no 0 a m 18 evidence of debris accumulation in the system. x 19 The City next presented the testimony of Mr. Robert Eisenbeisz, the City Engineer. Mr. m 20 Eisenbeisz testified that the Town Creek storm drain has been in place for many years and that 21 development in the watershed upstream of the plaintiffs property has redirected flows into other c 22 drainage systems, resulting in a decrease in flows to the area of the plaintiffs property. He t u 23 testified that there was no evidence the flows in the subject storm exceeded the capacity of the six a 24 foot box or of the 54 inch pipe. 25 The City next presented the expert testimony of Mr. Wayne Chang, a civil engineer. Mr. 26 Chang testified that based upon his review of the rainfall data obtained from a number of rain 27 gauges, some closer to the plaintiffs property and others farther away, he believes the subject 28 storm event closest to the plaintiffs property had a return frequency in excess of 100 years for a 3 ARBITRATOR'S FINDINGS Packet Pg. 1103 1 10 minute duration. He also believes that the gauges farther away from the plaintiff's property 2 depicted a much lower return frequency. According to Mr. Chang, this information established 3 that the subject storm was very intense but very localized and that it would not have been expected 4 to exceed the capacity of the 6 foot box or 54 inch pipe because the storm upstream of the 5 plaintiff's property was not of an unusual size. Mr. Chang also testified that he did not consider 6 the "as built" configuration of the transition structure to be unreasonable and that it was very U 7 common for transition structures to redirect flows in a 90 degree angle. z 8 CONCLUSIONS OF ARBITRATOR 9 It is the plaintiffs burden to establish that the City's storm drain system failed during the a 10 subject storm. According to the plaintiffs expert, the flooding could have been caused by (a) d 11 rainfall on plaintiffs property and other adjacent property accumulating on the plaintiff's property 12 or, alternatively, (b)by the Town Creek system becoming plugged causing flows to back up onto 13 the plaintiffs property. Plaintiffs expert testified that it was his conclusion the damages were £ v 14 caused by the system becoming plugged during the subject storm event. a 15 In the arbitrator's view, the defect in the plaintiffs position is that there was no evidence 16 presented that debris could get into the closed system or that any blockage did, in fact, occur o a 17 during the subject event. There was no evidence of debris accumulation being a problem at the a` m 18 transition location in the past, despite the fact the structure has been in existence nearly 30 years. iY 19 There was no evidence of any debris accumulation in the system after the subject event. In the �, N 20 absence of such evidence, the arbitrator is left to speculate as to the actual cause of the flooding. m 21 Moreover, evidence that the plaintiff was unaware of the existence of the drain on his property and 22 that the drain was covered by six inches of dirt suggests, at the very least, an equally plausible t U 23 explanation for the flooding on the plaintiffs property. a 24 / / / 25 26 1 ( / 27 28 4 ARBITRATOR'S FINDINGS Packet Pg. 1104 r 1 For these reasons, the arbitrator fords in favor of defendant 2 Because the arbitrator concludes the plaintiff has not met his burden, the arbitrator will not address 3 the merits of the City's design immunity defense. 4 5 Dated: November 2011 GRAVES & KING Lie Attorneys at Law y 6 7 By. g RARVEY W. WIMER III o ARBITRATOR o 9 rn J MP_FILES\PLG-TEAMIhw I.WORKS DIRWRBU RATIONS-MEDIATIONMIeiman Arbitrators findings woo � 10 m 2 v 11 > 12 .0 13 v a 14 15 m 16 "o a 0 17 a m c 18 Y v c 19 y d 20 r? 21 c d 22 U A 23 a 24 25 26 27 28 5 ARBITRATOR'S FINDINGS Packef Pg. 7105.. 7.F.c I Harvey W.W imer m State Bar No.: 166326 J.E. Holmes Ell State Bar No.:42267 2 GRAVES & KING LLP Attorneys at low 3 3610 Fourteenth Street,Second Floor Riverside,California 92501 4 DIRECT ALL MAD,TO: Post Office Box 1548 5 Riverside.California 92502 (951)680-0100;F=imae(951)680-0700 6 Attornevs for Defendant TECTRANS. INC: m DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION, LLC; z 7 and ERNESTO SALGADO rn 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA o 9 m COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CENTRAL DISTRICT 10 d 11 Case No: BC453803 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION m 12 FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF 13 VS. ISSUE OF DUTY; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES a 14 TECTRANS, INC.; DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION, LLC; CITY OF °D 15 MAYWOOD; ERNESTO SALGADO and DOES 1-50, inclusive, 16 Date: August 31, 2011 Defendants Time: 8:30 a.m. $ 17 Dept: 15 0 0. Complaint Filed: January 26, 2011 a 18 AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS. Assigned to: Hon. Richard Fruin x Trial Date: None set v 19 N m 20 'ta 21 TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS:: c 22 NOTICE is hereby given that on August 31, 2011, at 8:30 o'clock a.m., or so soon thereafter E E 23 as the matter may be heard in department 15 of this Court, located at 111 North Hill Street, Los s a 24 Angeles, the defendants TECTRANS, INC., and DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION, LLC, will 25 move the Court, and do hereby move, for summary adjudication in their favor of an issue of duty. 26 The authority for this motion is Code of Civil Procedure §437c(f). The grounds of the motion 27 are that there is no dispute concerning the material facts and on the basis of the undisputed material facts 29 the defendants are entitled to adjudication of the issue of duty as a matter of law. MOTION FOR SUMMARY 1 ADJUDICATION 01,ISSUES Packet Pg. 1106 7.Flc_ I The issue to be adjudicated is: that these moving defendants were not subject to the duties of 2 a common carrier. 3 The motion is based upon this notice, the attached memorandum of points and authorities, the 4 separate statement of undisputed material facts served and filed concurrently herewith, the declarations 5 an exhibits served and filed concurrently herewith, the pleadings and papers in the Court's file, matters 6 of which the Court may take judicial notice, and such argument as may be made at the hearing of the .2 7 motion. v N m 8 _U 9 Dated: GRAVES &KING LLP ° Attorneys at Law E 10 d 11 By: 12 A I y J. . HOLMES III _ 13 Attorneys for Defendants, E TECTRANS, INC., DIVERSIFIED a 14 TRANSPORTATION, LLC, and ERNESTO SALGADO 15 m U 16 a 0 17 a m c_ 18 Y v c 19 N m 20 m 21 c 5 E 22 u m 23 a 24 25 26 27 28 2 ----MOTION FOR SUMMARY SIONOFISSUES Pabke#Fg I OF T.F.c 1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 2 1 3 INTRODUCTION 4 On October 12, 2010,plaintiff and her caretaker, were being transported on a bus owned by the 5 CITY OF MAYWOOD (CITY), operated by DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION, LLC, 6 (DIVERSIFIED) and driven by ERNESTO SALGADO. The bus was used to transport elderly and u 7 disabled residents of the CITY to and from medical appointments, and it was equipped for that purpose. N 8 The plaintiff alleges that she was injured when the wheelchair ramp malfunctioned and suddenly dropped .2 9 over three feet while the plaintiff and her wheelchair were on the ramp. rn C 10 The plaintiff alleges that at the time and place of the accident, DIVERSIFIED, and its parent, x 11 TECTRANS,INC.,were common carriers within the meaning of Civil Code§2168,and were therefore 0 q 12 subject to a special duty of care. These defendants,however, were operating the bus as private carriers ; .E 13 pursuant to their contract with the CITY; therefore, the special duty of care is inapplicable. v a 14 II rn 15 AUTHORITY R 16 Code of Civil Procedure §437c(f) provides that "A party may move for summary adjudication o 0 17 as to . . . one or more issues of duty, if that party contends that . . . one or more defendants either owed a m 18 or did not owe a duty to the plaintiff." It has been held that a "ruling which `completely disposes' of E a 19 an issue of duty as required by the last sentence of the section, but which has no dispositive impact on N d 20 other issues would appear to be fully in conformance with legislative intent and the straightforward, 21 unambiguous language of the section." Linden Partners v. Wilshire Linden Associates (1998) 62 d 22 Cal.AppAth 508, 520. It is a "settled principle that the existence and scope of a duty is a question of t U A 23 law for the court." Id., p. 518. a 24 "Motions for summary adjudication are procedurally identical to motions for summary 25 judgment . . . The motion shall be granted`if all the papers submitted show that there is no triable issue 26 as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.'" Dunn 27 v. County of Santa Barbara (2006) 135 Cal.AppAth 1281, 1290. 28 3 T FZSSII $PSf 1 M0170N FOR SO 2 THE ISSUE OF DUTY FRAMED BY THE PLEADINGS 3 The complaint alleges that the plaintiff "required the utmost care and vigilance of a common 4 carrier to provide safe transportation to her destination." (115, p. 3, lines 18-19.) It further alleges 5 that these defendants failed "to conform their conduct to the standard required of a common carrier." 6 (118, p. 4, lines 22-23.) These allegations are incorporated into each of the three causes of action 7 asserted against these moving defendants. (See 128, p. 6, lines 20-21; 136, p. 8, lines 13-14; 143, p. n 8 9, lines 27-28.) The complaint also alleges that these moving defendants "had a legal duty to conform 9 their conduct to the standard of the highest care and vigilance of a very cautious person in the same 0 rn 10 circumstances," an allegation that is apparently intended to specify the duty owed by a common carrier. x 11 (129, p. 6, lines 23-24.) m 12 IV 'c 13 THE UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS v a �--� 14 The CITY OF MAYWOOD has created a municipal Medical Transportation Program to assist 15 elderly and disabled residents. (Declaration of Carlos Fernandez, 12.) Under the program, 16 transportation is provided to qualified residents of the CITY between their homes and medical facilities o a 0 17 (including their doctors' offices). (Id., 13; declaration of Nancy Perez, 113-4.) In order to qualify for a 0 18 the program, residents must either be at least 62 years of age or else suffering from a medically Y c v 19 documented disability. (Declaration of Fernandez 13; declaration of Perez, 13.) In order to avail H d 20 themselves of transportation under the program, qualified residents must apply for and be issued a ,>, 21 special identification card. (Declaration of Perez, 13.) Transportation to medical appointments is d 22 provided at no personal expense to the persons transported, as the program is funded by the CITY. r U A 23 (Declaration of Fernandez, 15; declaration of Perez, 15) a 24 The CITY contracted with DIVERSIFIED to operate the shuttle bus used for its Medical 25 Transportation Program. (Declaration of Fernandez, 16; declaration of Perez, 12.) DIVERSIFIED is 26 compensated by the CITY at a fixed hourly rate. (Declaration of Fernandez, 16.) Neither these moving 27 defendants nor their employees are compensated directly by the passengers. (Declaration of Perez, 15.) 28 / 4 PaaKet pg.1�t19 A TSSUi:3 _ n 3 I Qualified Maywood residents with city-issued identification cards must schedule medical 2 transportation at least two weeks in advance. (Declaration of Perez, 16.) Qualified residents may be 3 transported to a doctor's office or medical facility within a ten-mile radius of Maywood City Hall. (Id., 4 14.) Members of the general public are not transported under this program. (Id., 111.) 5 On the date of the incident giving rise to this action, the plaintiff was transported by the 6 Maywood Medical Transportation Program. (Deposition of Ernesto Salgado, p.87, line 7-p. 89, 7 line 25.) y g V u 9 THE ISSUE OF DUTY SHOULD BE ADJUDICATED 0 W to IN FAVOR OF THE DEFENDANTS AS A MATTER OF LAW x 11 "Every one who offers to the public to carry persons, property, or messages, excepting only 12 telegraphic messages, is a common carrier of whatever he thus offers to carry." Civil Code §2168. a 13 A common carrier under section 2168 is one who offers to the general public to carry E a 14 goods or persons, and is bound to accept anyone who tenders the price of carriage. 15 (Citation.) A private carrier, on the other hand, is bound only to accept carriage 16 pursuant to special agreement. "All persons who undertake for hire . . . belong to one o CL 0 17 or the other of these classes. ... Private carriers are such as carry for hire and do not a rn 18 come within the definition of a common carrier." x v 19 Webster v. Ebright (1992) 3 Cal.App.4th 784, 787, citing and quoting Samuelson v. Public Utilities N 20 Com. (1951)36 Cal.2d 722,729. "Unlike common carriers,private carriers are not bound to carry any 21 person for any reason unless they enter into an agreement to do so." Saenz v. Whitewater[voyages, Inc. d 22 (1990) 226 Cal.App.3d 758, 764, citing Samuelson, supra, p. 730. The statutory definition of a r v 23 common carrier has been interpreted "to include only those who are `bound to accept anyone who a 24 tenders the price of carriage.'" Chubb Group of Ins. Companies v. H.A. Transp. Systems, Inc. 25 (C.D.Cal. 2002) 243 F.Supp.2d 1064, 1073, citing Webster, supra, p. 787 and Samuelson, supra, 26 p. 729. "In order for the common carrier obligations to apply, a person or entity must first have been 27 acting as a common carrier within the meaning of the Civil Code." Simon v. Walt Disney World Co. �r 28 (2004) 114 Cal.AppAth 1162, 1170. 5 5 —Tyt MMAR DJUD TIONOFTSSUES 9• I It is undisputed that the plaintiff was being transported as a participant in the Maywood Medical 2 Transportation Program. It is undisputed that that program was operated by the moving defendants 3 under an agreement with the CITY and that the program's vehicles transported only certain qualified 4 program participants (and their caregivers or attendants) and only to certain types of appointments. It 5 is undisputed that these moving defendants were not compensated directly by the passengers, but were 6 paid by the CITY to transport qualified persons. Therefore, the defendants were, in respect to the m u 7 plaintiff and the program in which she participated, a private carrier and not a common carrier. t rn 8 The duty owed to passengers by a private carrier is not the same as that owed by a common 9 carrier. "It is settled that being a carrier for reward does not itself impose the `utmost care' standard 0 m c 10 of common carriers." Samuelson,supra,p. 787. The "standard of care for a private carrier for reward x 11 is ordinary negligence." Webster,supra,p. 793. A transportation company "acting as a private carrier 12 . . . certainly was required to exercise no more than ordinary care and prudence." Ibid., quoting y 'c 13 Carpena v. County of Los Angeles (1960) 183 Cal.App.2d 541, 543-544. v a 14 It may appear that Civil Code §2100 imposes the heightened duty of care upon common carriers m 15 and private carriers alike; but this is to misread the statute. Section 2100 merely codifies the common 16 law as it existed at the time the section was enacted. See Kline v. Santa Barbara Consol. Ry. Co. (1907) c a 0 17 150 Cal. 741. "The common law imposes the more stringent standard on common carriers alone. a m 18 Private carriers need exercise only ordinary care." 6 W[rxtN,SUMMARY(10th ed. 2005), Torts §925; Y 0 19 see Car pena v. Los Angeles (1960) 183 C.A.2d 541; cf. Gornstein v. Priver(1923) 64 Cal.App. 249. N 20 Lopez v. Southern Calif. Rapid Transit Dist. (1985) 40 Cal.3d 780, 785, is not contrary, because the 21 distinction made there by the Supreme Court was not between common carriers and private carriers, m 22 as those terms are used at common law, but between publicly owned common carriers and privately t U r 23 owned common carriers. See WITHIN, supra, loc.cit.; see also Webster, supra, 3 Ca1.App.4th at a 24 p. 791. The Supreme Court has recognized the distinction, but declined to elaborate on it. Gomez u 25 Superior Court(2005)35 CalAth 1125, 1130 n. 3. The Webster opinion is consistent with longstanding 26 California case law, which has held, for example, that a taxicab company under contract to a school 27 district for the purpose of transporting disabled pupils was a private carrier subject to a duty of ordinary 28 care. Hopkins v. Yellow Cab Co. (1952) 114 Cal.App.2d 394, 398. 6 Pac MOTION F T115bUE5 ket Pg iti I Therefore, the references in the complaint to the duties of a common carrier are inapplicable to 2 the circumstances of this case. Because these moving defendants are a private carrier,they were subject 3 to the duty that is applicable to private carriers, and not that of common carriers. 4 VI 5 CONCLUSION 6 Based upon the foregoing, the defendants respectfully request that the Court adjudicate in their m U 7 favor the issue of duty, viz., that they were not subject to the duties of a common carrier. N d g u 9 Dated: GRAVES &KING LLP rn Attorneys at Law c_ 10 w x 11 2 By: VE W. ft 12 R III ` J.E. HOLMES III c 13 Attorneys for Defendants, E TECTRANS, INC., DIVERSIFIED a 14 TRANSPORTATION, LLC, and ERNESTO SALGADO 15 m 16 " 0 M 0 17 a m c 18 Y v C 19 m N d 20 l7 21 E 22 u A 23 a 24 25 26 27 28 7 ,..:. . MOTION FOR D TION OF ISSUES 7.F.c Graves &King LLP Proposal:RFP F-12-17Administrative Hearing Officer Services References Kurt Keating Cade Enforcement Supervisor City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 477-2712 Kurt.Keating @cityofrc.us n The Firm has provided Administrative Law Judge services to the City since 2009. - 0 m Duane Burk ` Director of Public Works City of Banning 99 E. Ramsey Street Banning, CA 92220 N (951) 922-3105 dburk@ci.banning.ca.us a The Firm has provided legal counsel to the City of Banning since 2005. Chuck Buquet Risk Manager City of Victorville o 14343 Civic Drive a Victorville, CA 92392 m (760) 955-5031 Y cbuquet@ci.victorville.ca.us The Firm has provided legal counsel to the City of Victorville since v 1999. 'm Michael Markel Principal Assistant County Counsel E Office of County Counsel - San Bernardino U 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue, 3rd Floor c San Bernardino, CA 92415-0140 (909) 387-4069 mmarkel@cc.sbcounty.gov The Firm has provided legal counsel to the County of San Bernardino and the San Bernardino County Flood Control District since 1993. 9 Packet Pg. 1113 Graves & King LLP Proposal:RFP F-12-17 Administrative Hearing Officer Services Fee for Services The Firm proposes to perform the services set forth in RFP F-12-17 as follows: Attorney services: N d $185 per hour for time spent preparing, attending hearings, researching and analyzing applicable law/codes, preparation of written decisions, and other tasks y related to the provision of Administrative Hearing Officer Services. (Please note-the rate includes overhead such as telephone, photocopy, postage, mileage, etc.) m c Travel Expenses: d x d No charge A m City will be billed monthly. a A 0 O O O a` rn c Y v c m N d A C d E L O R a 10 Appendix B Affidavit of Non-Collusion To be Executed by the Submitter of this RFP N IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATION, I CERTIFY THAT OUR BUSINESS: d y 1. Does not and will not have a financial interest in any business, property or source of v ' income, which could be financially affected or otherwise conflict in any manner with the o performance of services under this Request for Proposal (RFP); - i 2. Has not directly or indirectly, entered into any agreement, participated in any collusion, or w otherwise taken any action in restraint of free, competitive bidding in connection with this = RFP; and > 3. Is not currently suspended or debarred from doing business with any government entity. E I affirm that the above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge under penalty of perjury a r under the laws of the State of California. t a y ai uClB�Z a` t ignat re of Authorized Representative Date cg Y . 9 V_8 WINI6YL 'MANA64uG tPive Name aY d ft( CRfly�s cF K!�/� L�l° R v Business Name m t� P 9:dwx 15q At 9250 1 l/WIMCYC @ �29LCS �W©KUiG. Cpl E Mailing Address Email Address t U A Q 23 �r t. n, I', RFP F-12-17 Administrative Hearing Officer Services Are there any other additional or incidental costs that will be required by ur firm in order to meet the requirements of the Proposal Specifications? Yes / o (circle one). If you answered "Yes', please provide detail of said additional costs: w U U > Please indicate any elements of the Proposal Specifications that cannot be met by your m firm. NONE d U_ 0 rn Have you included in your proposal all informational items and forms as requested Yes / No . (circle one). If you answered "No", please explain: _ v N_ C_ E This offer shall remain firm for 90 days from RFP close date. a Terms and conditions as set forth in this RFP apply to this proposal. o Cash discount allowable 5 % 3Q days; unless otherwise stated, payment terms are: Net thirty (30) days. 0 aP In signing this proposal, Offeror(s) warrants that all certifications and documents requested herein are attached and properly completed and signed. Y a c From time to time, the City may issue one or more addenda to this RFP. Below, please y indicate all Addenda to this RFP received by your firm, and the date said Addenda was/were received. c� Verification of Addenda Received E L Addenda No: Received on: Addenda No: Received on: Addenda No: Received on: FIRM NAME: GRA S34 V I)JG ADDRESS: P•O- box ISY3 �)��ts�oEC4 9aso� 25 Packet Pg. 1116 RFP F-12.17 q Administrative Hearing Offic=Services Phone: /S'- Ego' 0/00 Email: 6,RALE34yPKty6,01-ki Fax: 90 - 0700 U! Authorized Signature: v 2 Print Name: _ �/- IA))/M 6k J= N `m U Title: /UTAa/gtrWls PM9N6YL_ o c IF SUBMITTING A "NO PROPOSAL", PLEASE STATE REASON (S) BELOW: m .m N G E a a o; 0 0 0 0 a` m c Y a c m N U N C d E L u m Q 26 PacketPg. 1117 7:F.c RFP F-12-17 Administrative Hearing Officer Services SUBCONTRACTOR'S LIST As required by California State Law, the General Contractor bidding will hereinafter state the subcontractor who will be the subcontractor on the job for each particular trade or subdivision of the work in an amount in excess of one-half of one percent of the General Contractor's total bid and will state the firm name and principal location of the mill, shop, or office of each. If a General Contractor fails to specify a subcontractor, or if he specifies more than one subcontractor for the same portion of work to be performed y under the contract in excess of one-half of one percent, he agrees that he is fully qualified to perform that portion himself and that he shall perform that portion himself. > d co v U DIVISION OF NAME OF FIRM OR LOCATION WORKOR CONTRACTOR CITY is TRADE x m N C E 9 Q W A N I�avr,Y Wim�12 o Print Name ig ature of Bidder a m �+ Y Company Name: (0'MVFr d-/�(A4 LLP M Address: P• 60 15,T8 R��/r*Nr/A6 72sp/ d E REJECTION OF BIDS The undersigned agrees that the City of San Bernardino reserves the right to reject any a or all bids, and reserves the right to waive informalities in a bid or bids not affected by law, if to do seems to best serve the public interest. 27 Packet Pg. 1118 7.F.c A OC RbP CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE °ii/DBfzD,iY� THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER,AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADD17TONAL INSURED,the policy(ies)must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED,subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endprsement(s). PRODUCER Randall S. Prout cr Tamie Wj&m 440 W Baseline Rd P"M"o wr,909-62 FAX Mn 1-60 I Claremont, CA 91711 ADU Mss,tarnie uLnet INSURERt3f AFFDRONG COVERAGE NIIICA INSURER A:State Farm General Insurance Company 2911111 Ixfuam GRAVES&KING LLP msuRER 8:State Farm Fire and Casualty Ccm am �J m P DBOX 1548 imuseRc:State Farm Mutual Automobile kaurame Conan O RIVERSIDE,CA 92502 1"431x8"°' d INSNRERE: to INSV F: d COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISIDN NUMBER: a THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD p INDICATE. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT,TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT MATH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS DI CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE-POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE-TERMS, C EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES.LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. wyy AIM MR P lcfE POuCYE%P m LTR TYPEOF II&IRAROE Pd.ILYNUMMR lMems = A CAI.uA"81iY Y Y 924343-6596-4 1013112011 10/312012 EACHOCCURRENCE $ 2,000,000 N X COMMERCIAL GENERIL IJAMLIiY PREMISES Eeomaram i D M CNIMSNAOE F-1ocom NO EXP(AM Ore 1 S 6.000 PERSORAL&A U` URY f 0 VJ C GENERAL AGGREGATE S MD 000 GEMLAGGREGATEDMITAPPLIERPER PRODUCTS-CAMPaIP AGG f 4,000,WO Q X POLICY PRO- LOC Budding Conterds f 290.900 - AUTOMMINEUAIMLnY -+y: "9929249431-75C 1 8 4 112 911' 1pIN0121.. peril" f. 1000.000 Eo ARYAUrO e00ILY INJIXiY IPerpersm) a OI .. ALLDVAIEO........ swE0 U8)-..... NJFOS AUTOS 'X' HIRED AUTOS -X A� eracde f q s a a A X umBRELLALWe X fJCp1R 92-BG-6594.1 G 10/3112011 1001/2012 �`OI OtWRREWCE s 5,000,000 O` IL EXCESS UAS LIAIMS.MADE AGGREGATE a 5.W0,000 to DED I X 1 RETENTN]NS 10.000 f C \YORKERS CONDENSATION NOSrATLL X 0TH- Y B AND EMPLOYERS'UAHkfTlr YIN 924B7-R273-7F 10!312011 t0I3112012 a u ns AN/PROPRETIX AmNERE%ECUTNE EL EACH ACCIDGJT a 540DO C OFFICENEWER EXCWDED? Y� MIA w 0,MMtMic NHI EL DISEASE-EA EMPLOYERa 600,Om H ffm dr—antler ELDIGSA -POUCYLIMIT 1 f MR.= K C pFSCRFi1DN OF OPEMTION431 LOGnONSI VEM0.ES(ANaN ACORD 101,AtldYiwW RUnvna 43cneAWe,I more epacelsrequnetl) m E L Additional Insured: 0 THE COUNITYIDISTRICTS OF SAN BERNARDINO AND ITS OFFICERS,EMPLOYEES,AGENTS AND VOLUNTEERS WITH RESPECT TO LIABILITIES ARISING OUT OF THE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES HEREUNDER Q CERTIFICATE HOLDER I -- CANCELLATION County f San Bernardino and its.officers,employees, SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE mY THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE W91 HE DELIVERED IN agents and volunteers, CIO Eblx SPO ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.. PO Box 257,Ref#87-GravesK888 Portland,MI 44875.0257 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATNE ©1988-2010 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. ACORD 25(2010105) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD 1001488 1329426 JA-15-2010 PacketPg. 1119 7.F.c OP ID:YC DATE(MMMDNYYYI A`° Q R CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE ,,,gy„ THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER,AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED,the Pollcy(ies)must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WANED,subject to the terms and conditions of the policy,certain policies my require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder In lieu of such endomemen 3. PRODUCER 626-943-2200 NRMTACT Narver Insurance 641 W.Las Tunas Drive 828-299-1010 PH FAX e: PO Box 1509 pppltE55: San Gabriel,CA 91776 PRDDucm D .GRAVE•1 Diane Wood NeVas 3 MFDRMNG Covel a NNC0 INsuREO Graves&King,LLP INSURERA I Navi atop Insurance 42307 P.G.Box 1$49 INSURER B: t Riverside,CA 92502 INSUREAC: W INSURERD: d INSURFRE: INSURER O COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD C INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT,TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, m EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES.LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. m S ILTR TmEWINNJRANCE POUCYNUMaEA MMO DIT(Yn (MMIDDIWYO UNITS > OENEMLIrABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE E @ CdAMERCHLGENE BIUTY PREMISES a S In CLAIMS ADE OCCUR MED E%P(PlYr ell-pMam) i C PERSONALAAUVODURY i .E GENER&AGGREOATE $ Q GENLAGGREGMEUMRAPPUESPER: McLcTS-COMPAP AM E POLICY P LOC S OD AUTOYOBILELUINLIIY C NEDVWLEUMR $ C (Ea-mane ANYAllTO BODILYINAIRYl E R ALL0IMIEDAUIDS BODILY INIURV(PaecabnD i C SCHEWLEDAUTOS _ PROPERTY WNAfiE E O HIREDAUTOS NON-ONNEDAUTOO E ll E Do C UMeRP1AUAB EACHOCCURRENCE E Y EXCESSLUa Clfiu DE AGGREGATE E c DEDUCTIBLE a re N RETENTION E a N yIOn�RSCOMPENSXWN WOBTATl4 OTl4 AND EMMMEM5 LIABILITY AIA•P110FRIEIOWPARTNBUEXECUTIVEYIN E.L EACH ACCIDENT i (7 (Mendav'I.NN)F%CLUDEO'! NIA .. E.L.gSE46E-EA EMPLOYE f N -.de- gwds DESCRPTIMOFOP TIONSEeiw EL dSEA3E P0UCY LIMB F N A Professional Pmleannouuv i1Nif11 11!01/12 PER CLaad 2,UW, t Liability AGGREGATE 0.000, m DaacRIPMMOOPERATIONNSILOCATIONSIVEHCES(Hach ACORDo Adalllonal Rem*$U duM,amd s- ftM." � 7Lggipt ag (CO 09-259). DUCBE: 0 00PER CLAIM ND AG G TE. r a PRIOR ACTS-RETROACTIVE DATE:01/01/1993 e10 day notice of cancellation in the event of non payment of premium. CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION CITYOFR SHOULD ANY EXPIRATION THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES WILL CANCELLED BEFORE THE ACCORDANCE DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN City of Rancho Cucamonga ACCORDANCE WRH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. Attn: Tiffany I.Cooper 10500 Civic Center Dr.Box 807 AUTH)RDED RIDNiEBBITATNE Rancho Cucamonga,CA$1730 /J 01988.2009 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. ACORD 25(2009/09) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD Packet Pg. 1120