CC - Item 4K - Memorandum of Agreement for the Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Program and Watershed Management Plan for the Upper Los Angeles River Watershed Management Area for Fiscal Years 2024-2026ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: BEN KIM, CITY MANAGER
DATE: JUNE 27, 2023
SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR THE COORDINATED
INTEGRATED MONITORING PROGRAM AND WATERSHED
MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UPPER LOS ANGELES RIVER
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT AREA FOR FISCAL YEARS 2024-2026
SUMMARY
On August 5, 2015, the Regional Board approved the Upper Los Angeles River (ULAR)
Watershed Management Plan (WMP) and Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Plan (CIMP).
During the Regional Board approval process the ULAR WMP group had developed a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to administer and establish a cost share for the
implementation of the CIMP. On October 20, 2015, the Council approved an MOA to administer
and establish a cost share for implementation of the CIMP that would be effective through June
30, 2018. On May 8, 2018, the Council approved an MOA to continue the administration and
establish a cost share for CIMP monitoring and reporting services for an additional five-year period
beginning July 1, 2018, through June 30, 2023. Staff is requesting that the City Council authorize
a new three-year agreement to continue the monitoring and reporting services for the CIMP and
WMP group. Rosemead's cost to participate would be $17,135 for FY 23-24, $16,588 for FY 24-
25, and $19,799 for FY 25-26 totaling $53,522 for all three years of the agreement.
BACKGROUND
On July 27, 2013, the City of Rosemead opted to join the City of Los Angeles and 17 other agencies
to form the Upper Los Angeles River (ULAR) group. The ULAR was required to develop and
implement the CIMP and WMP to comply with the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer (MS4)
Permit. The group jointly prepared both plans, which were submitted to the Regional Board for
approval. After review by many parties, and revisions required by the Regional Board, the CIMP
was approved in 2015 and the WMP was approved one year later in 2016. A revised WMP was
submitted to the Regional Board on June 28, 2021, as required by the MS4 Permit. Each
jurisdiction's cost share is based on the percentage of land area that discharges into the ULAR
Watershed Management Area.
The scope of work for the CIMP includes installation, maintenance, and monitoring of sampling
sites to determine levels of contamination of storm water discharges into the watershed area. The
AGENDA ITEM 4.K
City Council Meeting
June 27, 2023
Page 2 of 3
scope of work for the WMP includes reporting and compliance planning to meet requirements of
the MS4 Permit. The cost for the city to undertake the monitoring and reporting efforts alone would
be much higher than the joint effort with other jurisdictions.
CWE is contracted to assist the City with its MS4 permit compliance, including its current
participation in the WMP and CIMP. CWE has assisted the city throughout the MOA process and
will continue to represent Rosemead at ULAR group meetings and activities.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed work involves data collection and water quality monitoring; therefore, the project is
Categorically Exempt pursuant to Sections 15262, 15306, 15307, and 15308 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute the Memorandum of Agreement for the Upper
Los Angeles River Watershed Management Area for Fiscal Years 2024-2026; and
2. Find the activities of the action are categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to
Sections 15262, 15306, 15307, and 15308 of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Guidelines.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The City of Rosemead's cost share to participate in the proposed MOA is $17,135 for FY 23-24,
$16,588 for FY 24-25, and $19,799 for FY 25-26 totaling $53,522 for all three years of the
agreement. Funding for the cost of participation has been included in the proposed FY 23-24
budget.
STRATEGIC PLAN IMPACT
The project is consistent with the Strategic Plan's guiding principal for fiduciary responsibility of
providing for transparency in financial management of City's finances and providing quality of
life enhancement.
City Council Meeting
June 27, 2023
Page 3 of 3
PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS
This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process.
Prepared by:
DO Ile Garcia
Public Works Fiscal and Project Manager
Submitted by:
Ben Kim
City Manager
Attachment A: ULAR MOA FY 2023-2026
Attachment A
ULAR MOA FY 2023-2026
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES, THE CITY OF ALHAMBRA, THE CITY OF
BURBANK, THE CITY OF CALABASAS, THE CITY OF GLENDALE, THE CITY
OF HIDDEN HILLS, THE CITY OF LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE, THE CITY OF
MONTEBELLO, THE CITY OF MONTEREY PARK, THE CITY OF PASADENA, THE
CITY OF ROSEMEAD, THE CITY OF SAN FERNANDO, THE CITY OF SAN
GABRIEL, THE CITY OF SAN MARINO, THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE, THE
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA, THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY, LOS ANGELES
COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT, THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, THE
SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
REGARDING THE ADMINISTRATION AND COST SHARING FOR IMPLEMENTING
THE COORDINATED INTEGRATED MONITORING PROGRAM (CIMP) AND
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (WMP) FOR THE UPPER LOS
ANGELES RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT AREA
This Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), including its attachments, exhibits and
schedules, is made and entered into as of July 1st, 2023 by and between The SAN
GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (SGVCOG), a California Joint
Powers Authority, THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES (CITY), a municipal corporation, THE
CITY OF ALHAMBRA, a municipal corporation, THE CITY OF BURBANK, a municipal
corporation, THE CITY OF CALABASAS, a municipal corporation, THE CITY OF
GLENDALE, a municipal corporation, THE CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS, a municipal
corporation, THE CITY OF LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE, a municipal corporation, THE
CITY OF MONTEBELLO, a municipal corporation, THE CITY OF MONTEREY PARK, a
municipal corporation, THE CITY OF PASADENA, a municipal corporation, THE CITY
OF ROSEMEAD, a municipal corporation, THE CITY OF SAN FERNANDO, a municipal
corporation, THE CITY OF SAN GABRIEL, a municipal corporation, THE CITY OF SAN
MARINO, a municipal corporation, THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE, a municipal
corporation, THE CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA, a municipal corporation, THE CITY OF
TEMPLE CITY, a municipal corporation, LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
DISTRICT (LACFCD), a body corporate and politic, and the COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
(COUNTY), a political subdivision of the State of California. Collectively, these entities
shall be known herein as PARTIES or individually as PARTY.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (Regional Board)
have classified the Greater Los Angeles County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
Page 1 of 47
(MS4) as a large MS4 pursuant to 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) section
122.26(b)(4) and a major facility pursuant to 40 CFR section 122.2; and
WHEREAS, the Regional Board adopted the 2012 National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System MS4 Permit No. R4-2012-0175 on November 8, 2012, which was re-
adopted in the 2021 Regional Phase I MS4 Permit Order No. R4-2021-0105; and
WHEREAS, the 2012 MS4 Permit became effective on December 28, 2012, and
required that the LACFCD, the COUNTY, and 84 of the 88 cities within the County comply
with its prescribed elements; and
WHEREAS the 2021 MS4 Permit became effective on September 11, 2021,
superseding the 2012 MS4 Permit, and requires the COUNTY, LACFCD, 85 cities within
the coastal watersheds of Los Angeles County, the Ventura County Watershed Protection
District, the County of Ventura, and 10 cities within Ventura County to comply with its
prescribed elements; and
WHEREAS, the MS4 Permit identifies the PARTIES as MS4 permittees
responsible for compliance with the Permit's requirements pertaining to the PARTIES'
collective jurisdictional area in the Upper Los Angeles River Watershed Management
Area as identified in Exhibit D of this MOA; and
WHEREAS, the CITY and the cities of Alhambra, Burbank, Calabasas, Glendale,
Hidden Hills, La Canada Flintridge, Montebello, Monterey Park, Pasadena, Rosemead,
San Fernando, San Gabriel, San Marino, South EI Monte, South Pasadena, and Temple
City and LACFCD and the COUNTY formed the Upper Los Angeles River Watershed
Management Group (ULAR WMG) to collaborate on the Watershed Management
Program (WMP) and the Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Program (CIMP) in
accordance with the MS4 Permit, with the CITY serving as the ULAR WMG Lead Agency;
and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES desired to collaborate on the development of a WMP
and a CIMP in accordance with the MS4 Permit for a portion of the Upper Los Angeles
River Watershed Management Area as identified in Exhibit D of this MOA to comply with
all applicable monitoring requirements of the MS4 Permit; and
WHEREAS, the first WMP was submitted to the Regional Board by the PARTIES
on June 25, 2015 and was approved by the Regional Board on April 20, 2016; and
WHEREAS, a revised WMP was submitted to the Regional Board on June 28,
2021 and is pending approval; and
Page 2 of 47
WHEREAS, the first CIMP was submitted to the Regional Board by the PARTIES
on April 30, 2015 and was approved by the Regional Board on August 5, 2015; and
WHEREAS, a revised CIMP was submitted to the Regional Board on March 13,
2023 and is pending approval; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES have agreed to cooperatively share and fully fund the
estimated costs of the implementation of the CIMP and WMP; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES agree that each shall assume full and independent
responsibility for ensuring its own compliance with the MS4 Permit notwithstanding this
MOA; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES desire to have the SGVCOG: (a) invoice and collect
funds from each of the PARTIES to cover the costs of MONITORING SERVICES and
WMP-RELATED TASKS and pay the CITY; (b) perform tasks identified in CONTRACT
ADMINISTRATION in Exhibit A of this MOA;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived by the
PARTIES, and of the promises contained in this MOA, the PARTIES agree as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and fully incorporated
into this MOA.
Section 2. Purpose. The purpose of this MOA is to cooperatively fund the MONITORING
SERVICES and WMP-RELATED TASKS, as set forth in Exhibit A of this MOA.
Section 3. Cooperation. The PARTIES shall fully cooperate with one another to attain the
purposes of this MOA.
Section 4. Voluntarv. The PARTIES have voluntarily entered into this MOA for the
implementation of the MONITORING SERVICES and WMP-RELATED TASKS, and to
authorize the SGVCOG to administer the cost-sharing.
Section 5. Term. This MOA shall become effective on July 1, 2023 and shall remain in
effect for three (3) years up to and including June 30, 2026. The MOA may be extended,
through mutual agreement of the PARTIES.
Section 6. Commitment. Once effective, the PARTIES agree to uphold the promises
contained in this MOA for the duration of the agreed upon term. The Parties agree that
costs, expenses, fees, liabilities, and obligations incurred by the CITY in performing
MONITORING SERVICES in accordance with Tables 2-2C(i) of Exhibit B and WMP-
Page 3 of 47
RELATED TASKS in accordance with Table 3-313 of Exhibit B prior to the execution date
of this MOA but after July 1, 2023, shall be cost -shared under this Agreement according
to the amounts specified in Exhibit B and shall be included in the first invoice.
Section 7. THE PARTIES AGREE:
a. Monitoring Services. The CITY will perform the MONITORING SERVICES as
defined in Exhibit A.
b. WMP-Related tasks. The CITY and the SGVCOG will perform the WMP-RELATED
TASKS, as defined in Exhibit A.
c. Reporting. Each PARTY hereto authorizes the CITY to prepare and submit reports
to the Regional Board as required by the MS4 Permit. In addition, the CITY will
submit to the PARTIES the data used to prepare the reports. This data will be
transmitted electronically to all PARTIES and as requested by the Regional Board.
The CITY will provide sufficient time to the PARTIES to review the prepared
reports. The CITY shall consider incorporating such comments received and
answering a PARTY's questions to the best of its abilities prior to its submittal to
the Regional Board.
d. Contract Administration. The SGVCOG will be responsible for CONTRACT
ADMINISTRATION, as defined in Exhibit A.
e. Communication. To the extent the PARTIES have communications related to
CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION as defined in Exhibit A, such communications
shall be directed to the SGVCOG. Communications concerning MONITORING
SERVICES and WMP-RELATED TASKS under this Agreement shall be directed
to the ULAR WMG lead agency. Written notice will be provided to the PARTIES
should contact information from the SGVCOG and/or the ULAR WMG lead agency
change.
f. Contracting. The PARTIES contemplate that other individual NPDES permit
holders may wish to participate in the MONITORING SERVICES without being a
party to this MOA. In the event that another NPDES permittee wants to participate
in the MONITORING SERVICES, the SGVCOG may enter into an individual
separate agreement with such individual NPDES permittee. The individual NPDES
permittee will not become a party to this MOA but will be responsible for its
proportionate share of the costs for those MONITORING SERVICES. If other
individual NPDES permit holders' participation modifies the PARTIES'
proportionate cost share, each PARTIES' proportional payment obligation shall be
modified administratively in Exhibit B.
Page 4 of 47
Section 8. Invoicing and Payment.
a. Invoicing. The SGVCOG will invoice all PARTIES, except the CITY, annually in
amounts not exceeding the invoice amounts shown in Table 1 of Exhibit B. The
annual invoices will be issued by the SGVCOG to the PARTIES in July of each
calendar year for their proportional share of the estimated cost for MONITORING
SERVICES and WMP-RELATED TASKS, including SGVCOG's Contact
Management Fee, for the fiscal year, as shown in Exhibit B. The first invoice will
be issued in July 2023 or upon the execution of this Agreement, whichever is later.
The PARTIES hereby acknowledge and ratify services performed on or after the
earlier of July 1st, 2023 or the date of the last signature of the PARTIES that are
performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the MOA. Such services
shall be included in the first invoice and reimbursable pursuant to this MOA. The
CITY will invoice the SGVCOG for tasks performed, deducting the CITY's cost
portion for such tasks and the CITY's cost portion for the SGVCOG's program
management fee. The CITY shall provide SGVCOG an accounting of the
MONITORING SERVICES, and any WMP-RELATED TASKS completed during
each annual payment term consistent with the format as shown in Exhibit E.
b. Annual Payment. Each PARTY, excluding the CITY, shall pay the SGVCOG for
their invoice within sixty (60) days of receipt of the invoice from the SGVCOG.
c. Late Payment Penalty. Any payment that is not received within sixty (60) days
following receipt of the invoice from SGVCOG shall be subject to a late payment
of 10%. Interest on any late payments shall accrue at the rate of 1 % per month for
each month a payment is past due.
d. Delinquent Payments. A payment not made within three hundred and sixty-five
(365) days after receipt of the invoice from the SGVCOG shall result in the
SGVCOG notifying the Regional Board and the PARTIES that the delinquent
PARTY is no longer a participating member of the CIMP or WMP. The PARTY
shall be deemed to have withdrawn from this MOA and the remaining PARTIES'
cost share allocation shall be adjusted in accordance with the cost allocation
formula in Table 1 of Exhibit B. Withdrawal shall not relieve a PARTY's obligation
to pay its proportionate share of costs that were due at the time of the deemed
withdrawal.
e. Contingency. Each PARTY's annual invoice will include a contingency of fifteen
percent (15%) for MONITORING SERVICES and fifteen percent (15%) for WMP-
RELATED TASKS, as shown in Exhibit B. Contingency funds will be held by
SGVCOG until such time as they are needed. Contingency funds that are used will
be applied to each PARTY based on its proportional share. No PARTY will be
Page 5 of 47
obligated to pay for additional expenditures which exceed its contingency amounts
without an amendment to this MOA.
Monitoring Services Contingencv. The CITY shall have access to the
MONITORING SERVICES Contingency, for paying for or otherwise
implementing the MONITORING SERVICES defined in Exhibit A of this
MOA. The CITY shall notify the PARTIES before use of the MONITORING
SERVICES Contingency is appropriate or required as soon as practicable
but any failure to notify any PARTY or the PARTIES shall not alter,
eliminate, or affect the CITY's right to payment. The CITY will indicate the
amount of MONITORING SERVICES Contingency used in its applicable
invoice(s) to the SGVCOG for implementation of the MONITORING
SERVICES. Should the CITY determine in its reasonable discretion that the
MONITORING SERVICES Contingency not be necessary for
MONITORING SERVICES, the PARTIES may administratively shift these
funds to be used for WMP-RELATED TASKS and do so using the process
defined in Section 9(c).
ii. WMP-Related Tasks Contingency. The PARTIES may utilize WMP-
RELATED TASKS Contingency to complete projects consistent with the
WMP-RELATED TASKS defined in Exhibit A. To utilize WMP-RELATED
TASKS Contingency, the ULAR WMG shall discuss the proposed activity
and the ULAR WMG will come to a majority consensus, using the process
defined in Section 9(c), as to whether to move forward with the use of WMP-
RELATED TASKS Contingency and the process for implementation. The
SGVCOG shall utilize the WMP-RELATED TASKS Contingency to
reimburse the entity responsible for administering the approved WMP-
RELATED TASK funded by the WMP-RELATED TASKS Contingency.
Should the WMP-RELATED TASKS Contingency not be necessary for
WMP-RELATED TASKS, the PARTIES may administratively shift these
funds to be used for MONITORING SERVICES, using the process defined
in Section 9(c).
f. Shifting of Funds. The PARTIES may shift funds collected under this MOA between
MONITORING SERVICES and WMP-RELATED TASKS administratively, without
an amendment to this MOA, provided that the overall amount does not exceed the
total not -to -exceed amount of this MOA or a PARTY'S annual proportional cost, as
set forth in Table 1 of Exhibit B, and if approved by a majority consensus, using
the process defined in Section 9(c). Should the CITY require a shift in funds
between MONITORING SERVICES and WMP-RELATED TASKS in order to
implement the MONITORING SERVICES and WMP-RELATED TASKS, it shall
notify the SGVCOG before shifting these funds.
Page 6 of 47
g. Contract Manaqement Fee. The SGVCOG will receive a Contract Management
Fee of $100,000 per year for administration of this MOA by the SGVCOG. Each
PARTY will be assessed its proportionate share of the annual Contract
Management Fee as shown in Table 4 of Exhibit B.
h. Reconciliation of this MOA. At the end of the MOA, the SGVCOG will provide the
PARTIES with an accounting of actual expenditures, consistent with the format as
shown in Exhibit E, within ninety (90) days. Any unexpended funds held by
SGVCOG at the termination of this MOA will be rolled -over to cover expenses in
any subsequent MOA. PARTIES may request in writing a refund or credit of any
unexpended funds by the SGVCOG, in accordance with the distributed cost
formula set forth in Table 1 of Exhibit B.
Section 9. THE PARTIES FURTHER AGREE:
a. Documentation. The PARTIES agree to promptly provide at no cost to the CITY all
requested information and documentation in their possession that the CITY, in its
discretion, deems to be necessary or helpful for the performance of the
MONITORING SERVICES and WMP-RELATED TASKS.
b. Access. During the term of this MOA on an as -needed basis, each PARTY shall
allow the CITY or its contractor reasonable access and entry to land, facilities and
structures owned, operated, or controlled by the PARTY, which access and entry
are necessary or helpful for the CITY or its contractor to perform MONITORING
SERVICES and WMP-RELATED TASKS (FACILITIES). The FACILITIES shall
include but not be limited to the PARTY's storm drains, channels, catch basins,
and similar, provided, however, that prior to entering any of the PARTIES
FACILITIES, the CITY or its contractor, as applicable, shall provide seventy-two
(72) hours advance written notice of entry to the applicable PARTY, or in the cases
where seventy-two (72) hours' advance written notice is not possible, such as in
cases of unforeseen wet weather, the CITY or its contractor shall provide written
notice to the applicable PARTY as early as reasonably possible. Any PARTY,
including LACFCD, agrees to provide the CITY or its contractor a "no -fee" Access
Permit to its FACILITIES. This Access Permit does not cover any fees that may be
required for Construction Permits for the installation of permanent monitoring
equipment. The CITY shall secure any required necessary permits prior to entry.
c. Consensus. The PARTIES agree that consensus in the ULAR WMG will be
determined by a two-thirds supermajority (66.66°/x) voting of the ULAR WMG
members based on each PARTY's percentage land area of the Watershed as
shown in Exhibit D. Consensus shall be reached using an email vote of ULAR
WMG members. Any PARTY that does not respond to a vote within five business
days, shall be considered to support the majority consensus.
Page 7 of 47
d. Participation. Each PARTY shall designate an individual to provide representation
at the ULAR WMG that is authorized to provide official input on behalf of the
PARTY. Each PARTY shall ensure that a representative attends the ULAR WMG
meetings and, if necessary, responds to email communication.
e. Additional Activities. The PARTIES agree that additional activities may arise in the
course of implementing this MOA, and there may be interest in utilizing funds
collected through this MOA or pursuing additional funds, including but not limited
to the Safe Clean Water Program, to complete those projects. The ULAR WMG,
led by the ULAR WMG Lead Agency, shall discuss and determine additional
activities to be completed and the implementation approach to completing those
projects. The ULAR WMG will determine which activities to pursue in accordance
with the consensus process defined in Section 9(c). Any other PARTY that does
not desire to participate in an additional activity can submit a written request to the
SGVCOG that they do not desire to be part of the activity. The non -participating
PARTY will not be responsible for its proportionate share of funds to complete the
additional project, and the cost will be recalculated amongst the remaining
PARTIES.
Section 10. Indemnification. Each PARTY shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless
each other PARTY, on a pro rata basis, including its special districts, their member
agencies, elected and appointed officers, employees, agents, attorneys, and designated
volunteers from and against any and all liability, including, but not limited to, demands,
claims, actions, fees, costs, and expenses (including reasonable attorneys and expert
witness fees), arising from or connected with this MOA; provided, however, that no
PARTY shall indemnify another PARTY for that PARTY's own negligence or willful
misconduct.
Section 11. Termination
a. Noticing. Any PARTY may withdraw from this MOA for any reason, in whole or
part, by giving the SGVCOG and the Regional Board thirty (30) days written notice
thereof. Withdrawing PARTIES shall remain wholly responsible for their
proportional share of the costs of MONITORING SERVICES and WMP-RELATED
TASKS for any fiscal year for which the PARTY has not withdrawn. Withdrawing
PARTIES shall not be entitled to any refunds. Each PARTY shall also be
responsible for the payment of its own fines, penalties or costs incurred as a result
of the non-performance of the CIMP and/or WMP. Upon withdrawal by the
SGVCOG, the PARTIES shall meet and confer to designate an alternate
organization to accept the SGVCOG's responsibilities under this MOA.
Page 8 of 47
b. Default. If a PARTY fails to comply with any of the terms or conditions of this MOA,
that PARTY shall forfeit its rights to the work completed through this MOA, but no
such forfeiture shall occur unless and until the defaulting PARTY has first been
given notice of its default and a reasonable opportunity to cure the alleged default
c. Equipment Ownership. Devices such as automatic sampling stations - inclusive of
a cabinet, sampling equipment, ancillary devices, power supplies (EQUIPMENT)
may be installed to implement the CIMP. Any PARTY voluntarily terminating
membership will not be entitled to a refund for the portion of the share paid to
acquire and to operate the EQUIPMENT nor for the remaining value of the
EQUIPMENT, if any. The operational life of such EQUIPMENT is approximately
seven years, and after which it may be obsolete or may require major remodel or
replacement of electrical and mechanical components costing equivalent to a
purchase of a new EQUIPMENT. The remaining PARTIES agree to own, operate
and maintain and or replace the EQUIPMENT.
Section 12. General Provisions
a. Notices. Any notices, bills, invoices, or reports relating to this MOA, and any
request, demand, statement, or other communication required or permitted
hereunder shall be in writing and shall be delivered to the representatives of the
PARTIES at the addresses set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference. PARTIES shall promptly notify each other of any change of
contact information, including personnel changes, provided in Exhibit C. Written
notice shall include notice delivered via e-mail or fax. A notice shall be deemed to
have been received on (a) the date of delivery, if delivered by hand during regular
business hours, or by confirmed facsimile or by e-mail; or (b) on the third (3rd)
business day following mailing by registered or certified mail (return receipt
requested) to the addresses set forth in Exhibit C.
b. Administration. For the purposes of this MOA, the PARTIES and SGVCOG hereby
designate as their respective representatives the persons named in Exhibit C. The
designated representatives, or their respective designees, shall administer the
terms and conditions of this MOA on behalf of their respective entities. Each of the
persons signing below on behalf of a PARTY or the SGVCOG represents and
warrants that he or she is authorized to sign this MOA on behalf of such entity.
c. Relationship of the Parties. The PARTIES to this MOA are, and shall at all times
remain as to each other, wholly independent entities. No PARTY shall have power
to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of any other PARTY unless
expressly provided to the contrary by this MOA. No employee, agent, or officer of
a PARTY shall be deemed for any purpose whatsoever to be an agent, employee,
or officer of another PARTY.
Page 9 of 47
d. Amendment. The terms and provisions of this MOA may not be amended,
modified, or waived, except by an instrument in writing signed by all non -delinquent
PARTIES and the SGVCOG. Such amendments may be executed by those
individuals listed in Exhibit C or by a person authorized to execute such
amendment on behalf of each PARTY.
e. Law to Govern. This MOA is governed by, interpreted under, and construed and
enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. In the event of
litigation related to this MOA, venue in the State Superior Court or Federal District
Court shall lie exclusively in the County of Los Angeles.
f. No Presumption in Drafting. The PARTIES to this MOA agree that the general rule
that an MOA is to be interpreted against the PARTY drafting it, or causing it to be
prepared shall not apply.
g. Severability. If any provision of this MOA shall be determined by any court to be
invalid, illegal, or unenforceable to any extent, then the remainder of this MOA shall
not be affected, and this MOA shall be construed as if the invalid, illegal, or
unenforceable provision had never been contained in this MOA.
h. Entire Agreement. This MOA constitutes the entire agreement of the PARTIES to
this MOA with respect to the subject matter hereof.
Waiver. Waiver by any PARTY to this MOA of any term, condition, or covenant of
this MOA shall not constitute a waiver of any other term, condition, or covenant.
Waiver by any PARTY to this MOA of any breach of the provisions of this MOA
shall not constitute a waiver of any other provision, nor a waiver of any subsequent
breach or violation of any provision of this MOA.
j. Counterparts. This MOA may be executed in any number of counterparts, which
execution may be by electronic means as defined in Civil Code section 1633.2 and
each of which shall be an original, but all of which taken together shall constitute
but one and the same instrument, provided, however, that such counterparts shall
have been delivered to all PARTIES to this MOA.
k. All PARTIES to this MOA have been represented by counsel in the preparation
and negotiation of this MOA. Accordingly, this MOA shall be construed according
to its fair language.
Page 10 of 47
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this MOA to be executed by
their duly authorized representatives and affixed as of the date of signature of the
PARTIES:
Page 11 of 47
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
a
Mark Pestrella, Director of Public Works Dated
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Dawyn R. Harrison
County Counsel
m
Deputy
Page 12 of 47
Dated
LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT
Mark Pestrella, Chief Engineer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Dawyn R. Harrison
County Counsel
QI
Deputy
Page 13 of 47
Dated
Dated
CITY OF ALHAMBRA
By
Adele Andrade -Stadler, Mayor Dated
ATTEST:
By
Lauren Myles
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By
Joseph M. Montes, Esq.
City Attorney
Page 14 of 47
CITY OF LOS ANGELES
Dated:
ATTEST:
Holly Wolcott
Interim City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
:,
Hydee Feldstein Soto
City Attorney
Adena M. Hopenstand
Deputy City Attorney
0
Aura Garcia, President
Board of Public Works
Page 15 of 47
CITY OF BURBANK
Dated:
Konstantine Anthony, Mayor
ATTEST:
Justin Hess, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Joseph H. McDougall, City Attorney
Page 16 of 47
CITY OF CALABASAS
Dated:
2
ATTEST:
Maricela Hernandez, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Matthew T. Summers, City Attorney
David J. Shapiro, Mayor
Page 17 of 47
THE CITY OF GLENDALE
Dated:
ATTEST:
Roubik Golanian, P.E., City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Michael Garcia, City Attorney
0
Ardy Kassakhian, Mayor
Page 18 of 47
CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS
Dated:
ATTEST:
Deana L. Gonzalez, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Roxanne M. Diaz, City Attorney
Page 19 of 47
m
Steve Freedland, Mayor
CITY OF LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE
Dated:
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Adrian R. Guerra, City Attorney
m
Page 20 of 47
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Dated:
LIM
ATTEST:
Christopher Jimenez, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Torres, Mayor
Arnold Alva rez-Glasman, City Attorney
Page 21 of 47
CITY OF MONTEREY PARK
Dated: By:
ATTEST:
Maychelle Yee, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
-31
Karl H. Berger, City Attorney
Page 22 of 47
Ron Bow, City Manager
CITY OF PASADENA
Dated:
m
FAY
1r:61M
Mark Jomsky, City Clerk
r_1aa0i1T/4I7_Fg[i77i1V&I
Debra Wordham, Assistant City Attorney
Miguel Marquez, City Manager
Page 23 of 47
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
Dated:
ATTEST:
Ericka Hernandez, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Rachel H. Richman, City Attorney
M
Ben Kim, City Manager
Page 24 of 47
CITY OF SAN FERNANDO
Dated:
/_llg1��
Julia Fritz, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Richard Padilla, City Attorney
m
Celeste T. Rodriguez, Mayor
Page 25 of 47
CITY OF SAN GABRIEL
Dated:
ATTEST:
Sharon Clark, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Keith Lemieux, City Attorney
M
Page 26 of 47
Mark Lazzaretto, City Manager
CITY OF SAN MARINO
Dated:
ATTEST:
Mario Rueda, Acting City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Joseph Montes, City Attorney
Page 27 of 47
Steve Talt, Mayor
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Dated:
ATTEST:
Donna G. Shwartz, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Anthony R. Taylor, City Attorney
m
Rene Salas, City Manager
Page 28 of 47
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Dated:
ATTEST:
Mark Perez, Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Andrew L. Jared, City Attorney
Armine Chaparyan, City Manager
Page 29 of 47
CITY OF THE TEMPLE CITY
Dated:
ATTEST:
Peggy Kuo, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Greg Murphy, City Attorney
m
Page 30 of 47
Cynthia Sternquist, Mayor
SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
Dated:
ATTEST:
0
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
0
David DeBerry
Counsel for the SGVCOG
Page 31 of 47
Marisa Creter, Executive Director
EXHIBIT A
MOA Scope of Work
The purpose of this MOA is to facilitate compliance by the ULAR WMG with the MS4 Permit. The
tasks below outline the broadly -expected work anticipated to comply with the Permit.
MONITORING SERVICES
This includes any and all tasks required to comply with the monitoring requirements established
in the MS4 Permit and associated documents. This includes but is not limited to implementation
of the ULAR CIMP (Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Program), which includes but is not limited
to the following activities:
• Receiving Water Monitoring
• Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
• Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
• Urban Lakes Monitoring
• Data Management
• Capital, Operation, and Maintenance Activities
• Purchasing, maintaining, and replacing equipment (capital costs) necessary for monitoring
activities
• Development of the monitoring sections to be included in the Annual Report (e.g. trends
analysis, Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) attainment, summary of monitoring
activities)
• Annual Reconciliation of the MONITORING SERVICES under the MOA.
• This work may include additional activities and requirements based upon the March 2023
CIMP revisions, any other future CIMP revision, and subsequent requirements for the
Regional Board.
The City is responsible for completing the MONITORING SERVICES in this MOA, including by
utilizing consultant support services.
WMP-RELATED TASKS
This includes any and all tasks required to comply with the MS4 Permit, as well as other work that
is determined to advance the cities' efforts in complying with the MS4 Permit. The ULAR WMG is
required to complete the following activities as part of the ULAR Watershed Management
Program (WMP). This includes but is not limited to the sub -tasks defined below:
• Annual Reporting (including the WMP Progress Report)
• Report of Waste Discharge (ROWD)
• Adaptive Management
• Trash Monitoring and Reporting Plan (TMRP)
• WMP Revisions
• Website management (lastormh2o.org)
• California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA) Membership
Page 32 of 47
Contracts regarding WMP-RELATED TASKS will be administered by the SGVCOG utilizing a
consultant(s) selected in coordination with the ULAR WMG, unless otherwise determined by the
ULAR WMG. The lead agency of the ULAR WMG will provide subject -matter expertise and project
management support to the SGVCOG and its consultants for the purposes of completing this
task.
CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
This includes any and all tasks associated with administering this MOA, including but not limited
to the following:
• Facilitate the development of agreements and subsequent amendments for the ULAR
WMG.
• Manage procurements, contracting, and contract administration for consultants and
contractors, with the lead agency of the ULAR WMG providing subject -matter expertise
and project management support. This could include establishing and managing a bench
of technical consultants that could be utilized by any PARTY.
• Distribute invoices and collect payment from PARTIES.
• Pay invoices from the City, upon receipt of invoice, as established in Section 8(a) of the
MOA.
• Manage the MOA budget in coordination with the lead agency of the ULAR WMG.
• Facilitate the preparation of ULAR WMG administrative procedures by ULAR WMG and
ensure compliance with these procedures.
• Annual Reconciliation of WMP-RELATED TASKS under the MOA.
The CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION tasks will be completed by the SGVCOG.
Additional tasks may be identified in the process of complying with the Permit, at which point the
ULAR WMG would determine the optimal approach to ensuring that the ULAR WMG remains in
compliance with any and all aspects of the MS4 Permit and its associated documents.
Page 33 of 47
EXHIBIT B
MOA Cost Estimates
Table 1. Distribution of Combined Annual Implementation Costs
(CIMP/WMP/CASQA/SGVCOG fee)....................................................................... 35
Table 2. Distribution of Cost for Implementing Total ULAR CIMP Monitoring
Services.................................................................................................................. 36
Table 2A. Costs for General CIMP Monitoring Services .......................... 37
Table 2A(i). Distribution of Costs for General CIMP Monitoring Services ..... 37
Table 2B. Costs for Arroyo Seco NSWO Monitoring ................................ 38
Table 213(i). Distribution of Costs for Arroyo Seco NSWO Monitoring ........... 38
Table 2C. Costs for Legg Lake Monitoring ............................................... 39
Table 2C(i). Distribution of Costs for Legg Lake Monitoring .......................... 39
Table 3. Distribution of Costs for Implementing WMP-Related Tasks (including
CASQAfees)........................................................................................................... 39
Table 3A. Costs for Implementing General WMP-Related Tasks............ 40
Table 3B. Distribution of Costs for CASQA Membership Fees ............... 41
Table 4. SGVCOG Annual Contract Management Fees ...................................... 41
Page 34 of 47
Table 1. Distribution of Combined Annual Implementation Costs (CIMP/WMP/CASQA/SGVCOG fee)
Agency
Fiscal Year
23-24
Fiscal Year
24-25
Fiscal Year
25-26
Total (3 years)
LACFCD
$ 83,732
$ 79,353
$ 95,016
$ 258,101
City of Los Angeles
$ 943,982
$ 908,306
$ 1,084,118
$ 2,936,406
County of Los Angeles
$ 232,381
$ 217,554
$ 257,621
$ 707,556
City of Alhambra
$ 25,278
$ 24,472
$ 29,209
$ 78,958
City of Burbank
$ 57,421
$ 55,590
$ 66,350
$ 179,361
City of Calabasas
$ 20,731
$ 20,070
$ 23,954
$ 64,755
City of Glendale
$ 101,385
$ 98,139
$ 117,135
$ 316,659
City of Hidden Hills
$ 4,974
$ 4,815
$ 5,747
$ 15,536
City of La Canada Flintridge
$ 34,193
$ 27,729
$ 33,097
$ 95,018
City of Montebello
$ 27,721
$ 26,837
$ 32,032
$ 86,590
City of Monterey Park
$ 25,626
$ 24,809
$ 29,610
$ 80,045
City of Pasadena
$ 81,872
$ 74,179
$ 88,537
$ 244,588
City of Rosemead
$ 17,135
$ 16,588
$19,7991
$ 53,522
City of San Fernando
$ 7,854
$ 7,604
$ 9,076
$ 24,534
City of San Gabriel
$ 13,688
$ 13,252
$ 15,817
$ 42,756
City of San Marino
$ 12,471
$ 12,073
$ 14,410
$ 38,953
City of South EI Monte
$ 21,094
$ 17,250
$ 18,998
$ 57,341
City of South Pasadena
$ 12,064
$ 10,954
$ 13,074
$ 36,091
City of Temple City
$ 13,334
$ 12,909
$ 15,408
$ 41,651
Total
$ 1,736,9331
$ 1,652,482
$ 1,969,007
$ 5,358,422
Page 35 of 47
Table 2. Distribution of Cost for Implementing Total ULAR CIMP Monitoring Services
Agency
Fiscal Year
23-24
Fiscal Year
24-25
Fiscal Year
25-26
Total (3 years)
LACFCD
$ 66,082
$ 61,483
$ 62,518
$ 190,083
City of Los Angeles
$ 711,254
$ 671,309
$ 682,542
$ 2,065,105
County of Los Angeles
$ 179,686
$ 163,892
$ 166,695
$ 510,272
City of Alhambra
$ 19,008
$ 18,087
$ 18,389
$ 55,483
City of Burbank
$ 43,178
$ 41,085
$ 41,773
$ 126,036
City of Calabasas
$ 15,588
$ 14,833
$ 15,081
$ 45,503
City of Glendale
$ 76,240
$ 72,532
$73,7461
$ 222,518
City of Hidden Hills
$ 3,740
$ 3,559
$ 3,618
$ 10,917
City of La Canada Flintridge
$ 27,088
$ 20,494
$ 20,837
$ 68,419
City of Montebello
$ 20,845
$ 19,835
$ 20,167
$ 60,846
City of Monterey Park
$ 19,269
$ 18,335
$ 18,642
$ 56,247
City of Pasadena
$ 62,866
$ 54,824
$ 55,741
$ 173,431
City of Rosemead
$ 12,884
$ 12,260
$ 12,465
$ 37,610
City of San Fernando
$ 5,906
$ 5,620
$ 5,714
$ 17,240
City of San Gabriel
$ 10,293
$ 9,794
$ 9,958
$ 30,044
City of San Marino
$ 9,377
$ 8,923
$9,0721
$ 27,372
City of South EI Monte
$ 19,047
$ 15,166
$ 15,466
$ 49,679
City of South Pasadena
$ 9,258
$ 8,095
$ 8,231
$ 25,584
City of Temple City
1 $ 10,027
$ 9,541
$ 9,700
$ 29,268
Total Estimated Cost of CIMP
$ 1,321,633
$ 1,229,667
$ 1,250,357
$ 3,801,657
Note:
1. Total Monitoring Services cost = General CIMP + NSWO + Legg Lake
Page 36 of 47
Table 2A. Costs for General CIMP Monitoring Services
ULAR CIMP General Monitoring Component
Fiscal Year 23-
24
Fiscal Year
24-25
Fiscal Year 25-
26
Labor (Receiving Water and Storm Water Outfall)
$ 253,000
$ 230,000
$ 230,000
Laboratory Analysis (Receiving Water and Storm
Water Outfall)
$ 263,051
$ 237,879
$ 240,157
Laboratory Data Handling Fee (15%)
$ 39,458
$ 35,682
$ 36,024
Laboratory Analysis (TIE)
$ 40,000
$ 40,000
$ 40,000
Contract Services
$ 319,000
$ 305,000
$ 305,000
Equipment
$ 136,325
$ 130,081
$ 122,601
Administrative Fee (5%)
$ 52,542
$ 48,932
$ 48,689
Sub -Total
$ 1,103,375
$ 1,027,574
$ 1,022,471
Contingency (15%)
$ 165,506
$ 154,136
$ 153,371
Annual Escalation (2.5%)
$ -
$ 25,689
$ 51,763
Total
$ 1,268,881
$ 1,207,400
$ 1,227,604
Table 2A(i). Distribution of Costs for General CIMP Monitoring Services
Agency
Land Area
(acres)
% of Area
Fiscal Year
23-24
Fiscal Year
24-25
Fiscal Year
25-26
Total (3
years)
LACFCD (5%)
--
$ 63,444
$ 60,370
$ 61,380
$ 185,194
City of Los Angeles
181,288.00
58.53%
$ 705,492
$ 671,309
$ 682,542
$ 2,059,343
County of Los Angeles
41,048.07
13.25%
$ 159,741
$ 152,001
$ 154,544
$ 466,286
City of Alhambra
4,884.31
1.58%
$ 19,008
$18,0871
$ 18,389
$ 55,483
City of Burbank
11,095.20
3.58%
$ 43,178
$41,0851
$ 41,773
$ 126,036
City of Calabasas
4,005.681
1.29%
$ 15,588
$14,8331
$ 15,081
$ 45,503
City of Glendale
19,587.50
6.32%
$ 76,226
$72,5321
$ 73,746
$ 222,504
City of Hidden Hills
961.03
0.31%
$ 3,740
$3,5591
$ 3,618
$ 10,917
City of La Canada
Flintridge
5,534.46
1.79%
$ 21,538
$ 20,494
$ 20,837
$ 62,869
City of Montebello
5,356.38
1.73%
$ 20,845
$19,8351
$ 20,167
$ 60,846
City of Monterey Park
4,951.51
1.60%
$ 19,269
$ 18,335
$ 18,642
$ 56,247
City of Pasadena
14,805.30
4.78%
$ 57,616
$ 54,824
$ 55,741
$ 168,181
City of Rosemead
3,310.87
1.07%
$ 12,884
$ 12,260
$ 12,465
$ 37,610
City of San Fernando
1,517.64
0.49%
$ 5,906
$ 5,620
$ 5,714
$ 17,240
City of San Gabriel
2,644.87
0.85%
$ 10,293
$ 9,794
$ 9,958
$ 30,044
City of San Marino
2,409.64
0.78%
$ 9,377
$ 8,923
$ 9,072
$ 27,372
City of South EI Monte
1 1,594.161
0.51%
$6,2041
$5,9031
$ 6,002
$ 18,109
City of South Pasadena
1 2,186.201
0.71%
$8,5081
$8,0951
$ 8,231
$ 24,834
Page 37 of 47
City of Temple City
1 2,576.50
0.83%
1 $10,0271
$9,5411
$9,7001
$ 29,268
Total
309,757.32
100.00%
1 $ 1,268,881
$ 1,207,400
$ 1,227,604
$ 3,703,886
Note:
1. LACFCD is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost, which is subtracted before distributing the cost among the other
agencies.
Table 2B. Costs for Arroyo Seco NSWO Monitoring
CIMP Component
Fiscal Year
23-24
Fiscal Year
24-25
Fiscal Year
25-26
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
Fiscal
Total (3
Arroyo Seco (3 Screening Events)
$ 16,470
23-24
Year 24-25
Laboratory Data Handling Fee (15%)
years)
Agency
(acres)
Flat Rate: 15% of Total Monitoring costs
$ 2,470
Administrative Fee (5%)
LACFCD (5%)
Flat Rate: 5% of Total NSWO Monitoring
Cost
$ 947
$ -
$ 1,094
Monitoring Cost Sub -Total
$ 19,887
27.73%
$ 5,762
Additional Costs
$ -
$ 5,762
County of Los
Contingency (15%)
$ 1,989
Annual Escalation (2.5%)
$ -
Angeles
2361.13
Arroyo Seco (Total)
$ 21,876
$ -
$
Table 2B(i). Distribution of Costs for Arroyo Seco NSWO Monitoring
Note:
1. LACFCD is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost, which is subtracted before distributing the cost among the other
agencies.
Page 38 of 47
Land
Fiscal Year
Fiscal
Fiscal
Total (3
Area
% of Area
23-24
Year 24-25
Year 25-26
years)
Agency
(acres)
LACFCD (5%)
$ 1,094
$ -
$ -
$ 1,094
City of Los Angeles
3936.66
27.73%
$ 5,762
$ -
$ -
$ 5,762
County of Los
16.63%
Angeles
2361.13
$ 3,456
$ -
$
$ 3,456
City of Glendale
9.39
0.07%
$ 14
$ -
$ -
$ 14
City of La Canada
26.71 %
Flintridge
3791.77
$ 5,550
$ -
$ -
$ 5,550
City of Pasadena
3586.72
25.26%
$ 5,250
$ -
$ -
$ 5,250
City of South
3.61
Pasadena
512.25
$ 750
$ -
$
$ 750
Arroyo Seco (Total)
14,197.93
100.00%1
$21,8761
$ 21,876
Note:
1. LACFCD is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost, which is subtracted before distributing the cost among the other
agencies.
Page 38 of 47
Table 2C. Costs for Legg Lake Monitoring
CIMP Component
Fiscal Year
23-24
Fiscal Year
24-25
Fiscal Year
25-26
Legg lake
$ 22,235
$ 15,694
$ 15,694
Laboratory Data Handling Fee (15%)
$ 3,335
$ 2,354
$ 2,354
Administrative Fee (5%)
$ 1,279
$ 902
$ 902
Monitoring Cost Sub -Total
$ 26,849
$ 18,950
$ 18,950
Additional Costs
LACFCD (5%)
$ 159,517
City of Alhambra
Contingency (15%)
$ 4,027
$ 2,843
$ 2,843
Annual Escalation (2.5%)
$ -
$ 474
$ 959
Legg Lake (Total)
$ 30,876
$ 22,267
$ 22,752
Table 2Q). Distribution of Costs for Legg Lake Monitoring
Note:
1. Legg Lake now has a fish tissue monitoring requirement at a frequency of once every three years.
2. LACFCD is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost, which is subtracted before distributing the cost among the other
agencies.
Table 3. Distribution of Costs for Implementing WMP-Related Tasks (including CASCIA fees)
ULAR WMP Cost Distribution + CASQA
Land Area
% of
Fiscal
Fiscal
Fiscal
Total (3
Total (3
years)
(acres)
Area
Yea2r423
Year 24-25
Year 25-26
years)
A enc
9 Y
$ 181,398
$ 345,977
$ 704,503
County of Los Angeles
$ 40,106
$ 41,073
LACFCD (5%)
$ 159,517
City of Alhambra
$ 1,544
$ 1,113
$ 1,138
$ 3,795
County of Los Angeles
2,044.68
56.21%
$ 16,489
$ 11,891
$ 12,150
$ 40,530
South EI Monte
1,592.68
43.79%
$ 12,844
$ 9,262
$ 9,464
$ 31,570
Legg Lake (Total)
3,637.35
100.00%
$ 30,876
$22,2671
$ 22,752
$ 75,895
Note:
1. Legg Lake now has a fish tissue monitoring requirement at a frequency of once every three years.
2. LACFCD is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost, which is subtracted before distributing the cost among the other
agencies.
Table 3. Distribution of Costs for Implementing WMP-Related Tasks (including CASCIA fees)
ULAR WMP Cost Distribution + CASQA
Agency
Fiscal Year
23-24
Fiscal Year
24-25
Fiscal Year
25-26
Total (3
years)
LACFCD
$ 12,650
$ 12,870
$ 27,498
$ 53,018
City of Los Angeles
$ 177,128
$ 181,398
$ 345,977
$ 704,503
County of Los Angeles
$ 40,106
$ 41,073
$ 78,338
$ 159,517
City of Alhambra
$ 4,772
$ 4,887
$ 9,321
$ 18,981
City of Burbank
$ 10,841
$ 11,102
$ 21,174
$ 43,117
City of Calabasas
$ 3,914
$ 4,008
$ 7,645
$ 15,566
City of Glendale
$ 19,138
$ 19,599
$ 37,382
$ 76,119
City of Hidden Hills
$ 939
$ 962
$ 1,834
$ 3,735
City of La Canada Flintridge
$ 5,407
$ 5,538
$ 10,562
$ 21,507
City of Montebello
$ 5,233
$ 5,360
$ 10,222
$ 20,815
City of Monterey Park
$4,8381
$4,9551
$ 9,450
$ 19,242
Page 39 of 47
City of Pasadena
$ 14,466
$ 14,814
$ 28,255
$ 57,535
City of Rosemead
$ 3,235
$ 3,313
$ 6,319
$ 12,866
City of San Fernando
$ 1,483
$ 1,519
$ 2,896
$ 5,898
City of San Gabriel
$ 2,584
$ 2,646
$ 5,048
$ 10,278
City of San Marino
$ 2,354
$ 2,411
$ 4,599
$ 9,364
City of South EI Monte
$ 1,558
$ 1,595
$ 3,042
$ 6,195
City of South Pasadena
$2,1361
$ 2,188
$ 4,172
$ 8,496
City of Temple City
$2,5171
$ 2,578
$ 4,917
$ 10,013
Total Estimated Cost of WMP
1 $315,3001
$322,8151
$ 618,651
$ 1,256,766
Note:
1. Total cost = General WMP + CASQA Fees.
Table 3A. Costs for Implementing General WMP-Related Tasks
WMP Component
Fiscal Year
23-24
Fiscal Year
24-25
Fiscal Year
25-26
Total (3
years)
Semi -Annual Progress Report (June)
$ 50,000
$ 50,000
$ 50,000
$ 150,000
Annual Reporting Package
(December)
$ 100,000
$ 100,000
$ 100,000
$ 300,000
WMP Revisions/RAA/Adaptive
Management
$ -
$ -
$ 200,000
$ 200,000
Report of Waste Discharge (ROWD)
$ -
$ -
$ 20,000
$ 20,000
Trash Monitoring and Reporting Plan
(TMRP)
$ 50,000
$ 50,000
$ 50,000
$ 150,000
Program Management (10%)
$ 20,000
$ 20,000
$ 42,000
$ 82,000
Sub -Total
$ 220,000
$ 220,000
$ 462,000
$ 902,000
Contingency (15%)
$ 33,000
$ 33,000
$ 69,300
$ 135,300
Annual Escalation (2% per year)
$ -
$ 4,400.00
$ 18,664.80
$ 23,065
WMP Program Management Cost
(Total)
$ 253,000
$ 257,400
$ 549,965
$ 1,060,365
Note:
1. Annual Report package includes semiannual progress report.
Page 40 of 47
Table 3B. Distribution of Costs for CASQA Membership Fees
Agency
Land Area
(acres)
% of
Area
Fiscal
Year
23-24
Fiscal
Year
24-25
Fiscal
Year
25-26
Total (3
years)
City of Los Angeles
181,288.00
58.53%
$ 36,462
$ 38,285
$ 40,199
$ 114,945
County of Los Angeles
41,048.07
13.25%
$ 8,256
$ 8,669
$ 9,102
$ 26,026
City of Alhambra
4,884.31
1.58%
$ 982
$ 1,031
$ 1,083
$ 3,097
City of Burbank
11,095.20
3.58%
$ 2,232
$ 2,343
$ 2,460
$ 7,035
City of Calabasas
4,005.68
1.29%
$ 806
$ 846
$ 888
$ 2,540
City of Glendale
19,587.50
6.32%
$ 3,940
$ 4,137
$ 4,343
$ 12,419
City of Hidden Hills
961.03
0.31%
$ 193
$ 203
$ 213
$ 609
City of La Canada Flintridge
5,534.46
1.79%
$ 1,113
$ 1,169
$ 1,227
$ 3,509
City of Montebello
5,356.38
1.73%
$ 1,077
$ 1,131
$ 1,188
$ 3,396
City of Monterey Park
4,951.51
1.60%
$ 996
$ 1,046
$ 1,098
$ 3,139
City of Pasadena
14,805.30
4.78%
$ 2,978
$ 3,127
$ 3,283
$ 9,387
City of Rosemead
3,310.87
1.07%
$ 666
$ 699
$ 734
$ 2,099
City of San Fernando
1,517.64
0.49%
$ 305
$ 320
$ 337
$ 962
City of San Gabriel
2,644.87
0.85%
$ 532
$ 559
$ 586
$ 1,677
City of San Marino
2,409.64
0.78%
$ 485
$ 509
$ 534
$ 1,528
City of South EI Monte
1,594.16
0.51%
$ 321
$ 337
$ 353
$ 1,011
City of South Pasadena
2,186.201
0.71%
$ 440
$ 462
$ 485
$ 1,386
City of Temple City
2,576.50
0.83%
$ 518
$ 544
$ 571
$ 1,634
Total
1 309,757.321
100.00%1
$62,3001
$ 65,415
$ 68,686
$ 196,401
Note:
1. LACFCD will retain its own CASQA membership.
2. Assumes 5% escalation per year for CASQA fees.
Table 4. SGVCOG Annual Contract Management Fees
Page 41 of 47
Land Area
(acres)
% of Area
Fiscal Year
23-24
Fiscal
Year
24-25
Fiscal
Year
25-26
Total (3
years)
LACFCD (5%)
--
--
$ 5,000
$ 5,000
$ 5,000
$ 15,000
City of Los Angeles
181,288.00
58.53%
$ 55,600
$ 55,600
$ 55,600
$ 166,799
County of Los Angeles
41,048.07
13.25%
$ 12,589
$ 12,589
$ 12,589
$ 37,767
City of Alhambra
4,884.31
1.58%
$ 1,498
$1,4981
$ 1,498
$ 4,494
City of Burbank
11,095.201
3.58%
$ 3,403
$ 3,403
$ 3,403
$ 10,208
City of Calabasas
4,005.68
1.29%
$ 1,229
$ 1,229
$ 1,229
$ 3,686
City of Glendale
19,587.50
6.32%
$ 6,007
$ 6,007
$ 6,007
$ 18,022
City of Hidden Hills
961.03
0.31%
$ 295
$ 295
$ 295
$ 884
City of La Canada
Flintridge
5,534.46
1.79%
$ 1,697
$ 1,697
$ 1,697
$ 5,092
Page 41 of 47
City of Montebello
5,356.381
1.73%
$ 1,643
$1,6431
$ 1,643
$ 4,928
City of Monterey Park
4,951.51
1.60%
$ 1,519
$ 1,519
$ 1,519
$ 4,556
City of Pasadena
14,805.30
4.78%
$ 4,541
$ 4,541
$ 4,541
$ 13,622
City of Rosemead
3,310.87
1.07%
$ 1,015
$ 1,015
$ 1,015
$ 3,046
City of San Fernando
1,517.64
0.49%
$ 465
$ 465
$ 465
$ 1,396
City of San Gabriel
2,644.87
0.85%
$ 811
$ 811
$ 811
$ 2,433
City of San Marino
2,409.64
0.78%
$ 739
$ 739
$ 739
$ 2,217
City of South EI Monte
1,594.16
0.51%
$ 489
$ 489
$ 489
$ 1,467
City of South Pasadena
2,186.20
0.71%
$ 670
$ 670
$ 670
$ 2,011
City of Temple City
2,576.50
0.83%
$ 790
$ 790
$ 790
$ 2,371
Total
309,757.32
100.00%
$ 100,000
$ 100,000
$ 100,000
$ 300,000
Note:
1. SGVCOG fee is $100,000 per year and covers both Monitoring Services and WMP-related tasks.
2. LACFCD is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost, which is subtracted before distributing the cost among the other
agencies.
Page 42 of 47
EXHIBIT C
Upper Los Angeles River Watershed Management Area CIMP Responsible
Agencies Representatives
Agency Address
Agency Contact
City of Los Angeles
Alfredo Magallanes
Department of Public Works
E-mail: alfredo.magallanes@lacity.org
Bureau of Sanitation, Watershed Protection Division
Phone: (213) 485-3958
1149 S. Broadway
Los Angeles, CA 90015
County of Los Angeles
Mark Lombos
Department of Public Works
E-mail: mlombos@dpw.lacounty.gov
Stormwater Quality Division, Building A-9 East, 151 Floor
Phone: (626) 300-4665
1000 South Fremont Avenue
Alhambra, CA 91803
Los Angeles County Flood Control District
Jalaine Verdiner
Department of Public Works
E-mail: jquintr@dpw.lacounty.gov
Stormwater Quality Division, Building A-9 East, 1$' Floor
Phone: (626) 300-4666
1000 South Fremont Avenue
Alhambra, CA 91803
City of Alhambra
David Dolphin
111 South First Street
E-mail: DDOLPHIN@cityofalhambra.org
Alhambra, CA 91801-3796
Phone: (626) 300-1571
City of Burbank
Stephen Walker
P.O. Box 6459
E-mail: SWalker@burbankca.gov
Burbank, CA 91510
Phone: (818) 238-3804
City of Calabasas
Tatiana Holden
100 Civic Center Way
E-mail: tholden@cityofcalabasas.com
Calabasas, CA 91302-3172
Phone: (818) 224-1600
City of Glendale
Maurice Oillataguerre
Engineering Section, 633 East Broadway, Room 209
E-mail: moillataguerre@glendaleca.gov
Glendale, CA 91206-4308
Phone: (818) 550-4511
City of Hidden Hills
Joe Bellomo
165 Spring Valley Road
E-mail: jbellomo@willdan.com
Hidden Hills, CA 91302
Phone: (805) 279-6856
City of La Canada Flintridge 1327
Patrick DeChellis
Foothill Blvd.
E-mail: pdechellisi@lcf.ca.gov
La Canada Flintridge, CA 91011-2137
Phone: (818) 790-8882
Page 43 of 47
EXHIBIT C
Upper Los Angeles River Watershed Management Group
Responsible Agencies Representatives
City of Montebello
James A. Enriquez
1600 W Beverly Blvd
E-mail: jenriquez@cityofmontebello.com
Montebello, CA 90640
Phone: 323-887-1200
Rita Montalvo
E-mail: rmontalvo@cityofmontebello.com
Phone: 323-887-1200 Ext 469
City of Monterey Park
Xochitl Tipan
320 West Newmark Avenue
E-mail: xtipan@montereypark.ca.gov
Monterey Park, CA 91754-2896
Phone: (626) 307-1383
City of Pasadena
Dawn Petschauer
100 N Garfield Ave
E-mail: dpetschauer@cityofpasadena.net
3rd Floor, N306
Phone: (626) 744-3929
Pasadena, CA 91101-1726
City of Rosemead
Danielle Garcia
8838 East Valley Blvd.
E-mail: daarcia(ftitvofrosemead.orc
Rosemead, CA 91770-1787
Phone: (626) 569-2127
Ben Kim
E-mail: bkimCdcitvofrosemead.orc
Phone: (626) 569-2169
City of San Fernando
Kenneth Jones
117 Macneil Street
Email: kions@sfcity.org
San Fernando, CA 91340
Phone: (818) 898-1240
City of San Gabriel
Greg De Vinck
425 South Mission Avenue
E-mail: gdevinck@sgch.org
San Gabriel, CA 91775
Phone: (626) 308 - 2825
Capucine Hernandez
E-mail: chernandez@sgch.org
Phone: (626) 308-2825
City of San Marino
Amber Shah
2200 Huntington Drive
E-mail: ashah@cityofsanmadno.org
San Marino, CA 91108-2691
Phone: (626) 300 - 0787
City of South EI Monte
Rene Salas
1415 Santa Anita Ave.
E-mail: rsalas@soelmonte.org
South EI Monte, CA 91733
Phone: (626) 579-6540
Fax: (626)579-2409
City of South Pasadena
Ted Gerber
1414 Mission Street
E-mail: tgerber@southpasadenaca.gov
South Pasadena, CA 91020-3298
Phone: (626) 403-7240
Page 44 of 47
City of Temple City
Andrew Coyne
9701 Las Tunas Drive
E-mail: acoyne@templecity.us
Temple City, CA 9178
Phone: (626) 285-2171 Ext. 4344
San Gabriel Valley Council of
Marisa Creter
Governments
Email: mcreter(g)sgvcog.org
1333 Mayflower Avenue, Suite 360
Phone: (626) 457-1800
Monrovia, CA 91016
Page 45 of 47
EXHIBIT D
Upper Los Angeles River Watershed
.
`s
31M
San rernanap 1,517.60 049%
San Gabriel 2,64.87 des%
LEGEND
mammalian Los Angeles River
r.._..
Upper Los Angeles
4—••-2 watershed Boundary
Flood Control
District Territory
Upper LAWatershed Group
Participatnginths EWMP
Upper LA Watershed Agencies not
ParacipBbng in this EWMP
San Marina 2,409.60 0.26%
S9uah 6l Monte 1,594.16 0.51%
SouN Pasadena 2.18610 0.71%
Temples 2,576.50 OAA%
I FCD -
Group Tolal —309,757331041%
Upper Los Angeles River Watershed
I...
moEWMP Agencies
BUREAU OF BRNITATION
EHPoOVECULOIV.eP
rnREcioa 4N40G¢A4 l
aTE CREATED: Te n•o nwnwhamaev rmm•,w pv.nra.n
MANN BY' CREC BY
VWEI„Paan 6161] P.•w •namvrbam•d.m.o nWe.mW ns weq•t0�_
wi¢nensm : •rme. m^"e,m ore. p.uiwwm.wm, cTym,u.wxw
PROTECTION
Page 46 of 47
EXHIBIT E
Reconciliation Template
[the line items shown in this Exhibit are placeholders and are subject to change]
CIMP COMPONENT RECONCILIATION
CIMP Component - General Monitorin
FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 Total
General MMO onRmin
FY 19-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 Total
B
j
Actual
s
Total Remainin
9
LIMP Component - Non-Stormwater Monitoring
Non-Stormwa Monnonn FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 Total
Butl et IMO N S
Actual s
Total Remaining$
CIMP Component - Total
Bu et WON8
FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 Total
Actual
8
Total Remainin
$
WMP COMPONENT RECONCILATION
WMP MOA Table ttem
Budget (MOA) Actual (To Date) AES p2MdA o Balance
Annual Report
8
Adaptive Management
s
os ge ea apo o ae a qac arge
8
U LR3 Fun I
8
UDR Trash onitonn—g Reporting
Plan
s
Special Studies
$
ULAK 2017 eporto sate iac e
(ROWD)
8
Total
8
Page 47 of 47