HomeMy Public PortalAboutAgreement_2018-04-17_ Los Angeles County_Upper Los Angeles River Watershed Management Area_Admin and Cost Share_SGVCOGMEMORANDUM 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, AND
THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
REGARDING THE ADMINISTRATION AND COST SHARING FOR IMPLEMENTING
THE COORDINATED INTEGRATED MONITORING PROGRAM (CIMP) AND
ENHANCED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN (EWMP) FOR THE UPPER
LOS ANGELES RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT AREA
This Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), made and entered into as of the date of the
last signature set forth below 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.
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, for the purpose of this MOA, the term PARTIES shall mean the
Cities of Los Angeles, 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, Temple City, Los Angeles
Page 1 of 57
County Flood Control Districts (LACFCD), and the County of Los Angeles (COUNTY)
and the term CITY shall mean only the City of Los Angeles; and the term SGVCOG
shall mean the San Gabriel Valley Council of Government; and
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
(MS4) as a large MS4 pursuant to 40 CFR section 122.26(b)(4) and a major facility
pursuant to 40 CFR section 122.2; and
WHEREAS, the Regional Board has adopted National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System MS4 Permit Order No. R4-2012-0175 (MS4 Permit); and
WHEREAS, the MS4 Permit became effective on December 28, 2012, and requires
that the LACFCD, the COUNTY, and 84 of the 88 cities (excluding Avalon, Long Beach,
Palmdale, and Lancaster) within the County comply with the prescribed elements of the
MS4 Permit; and
WHEREAS, the MS4 Permit identified the PARTIES as MS4 permittees responsible
for compliance with the MS4 Permit requirements pertaining to the PARTIES' collective
jurisdictional area in the Upper Los Angeles Watershed Management Area as identified
in Exhibit E of this MOA; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES elected voluntarily to collaborate on the development of
an Enhanced Watershed Management Program (EWMP) and a Coordinated Integrated
Monitoring Program (CIMP) in accordance with the MS4 Permit for a portion of the
Upper Los Angeles Watershed Management Area as identified in Exhibit E of this MOA
to comply with all applicable monitoring requirements of the MS4 Permit; and
WHEREAS, the EWMP 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, the CIMP was submitted to the Regional Board by the PARTIES on
June 26, 2014 and was approved by the Regional Board on November 18, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES have agreed for the CITY to perform and coordinate the
MONITORING SERVICES of the CIMP and the EWMP-RELATED TASKS on the
PARTIES' behalf, and the PARTIES have agreed to pay the CITY for their services as
indicated in Tables 1-4 of Exhibit A and Tables 1-10 of Exhibit B, respectively, of this
MOA; and
Page 2 of 57
WHEREAS, the CITY retains the right to outsource some or all of the
elements of the MONITORING SERVICES and EWMP-RELATED TASKS, at a cost
not to exceed those shown in Tables 1-4 of Exhibit A and Tables 1-10 of Exhibit B;
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 EWMP-RELATED TASKS and pay the CITY; (b) administer this
MOA; and (c) negotiate, enter into agreements with, and collect funds from individual
NPDES permit holders for cost-sharing of MONITORING SERVICES; and (d)
negotiate, enter into agreements with consultant(s) to execute services to uphold the
SERVICES and TASKS of this MOA; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES have agreed that the total cost for this MOA shall
not exceed $6,758,892 as shown in Table 1 of Exhibit C; and.
WHEREAS, the PARTIES have agreed to cooperatively share and fully fund
the estimated costs of the implementation of the CIMP and EWMP based on the
Distributed Cost contained in Tables 1-4 of Exhibit A and Tables 1-10 of Exhibit B,
respectively, of this MOA; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES agree that each shall assume full and independent
responsibility for ensuring its own compliance with the MS4 Permit despite the
collaborative approach of the MOA; and
WHEREAS, individual NPDES permit holders that are not PARTIES may wish
to participate in the MONITORING SERVICES for individual permit compliance; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES contemplate allowing such individual NPDES
permit holders to participate in the MONITORING SERVICES without being a party
to this MOA, in order to minimize the costs of preparing and implementing the CIMP
to each of the PARTIES; and
WHEREAS, the SGVCOG agrees to enter into individual separate
agreements with such individual NPDES permit holders (which shall not become
parties to this MOA) for MONITORING SERVICES cost-sharing purposes only; and
WHEREAS, if other individual NPDES permit holders participate in the cost
sharing relating to the MONITORING SERVICES, the PARTIES contemplate that
the invoicing table in Exhibit C will be modified as appropriate and each PARTY's
proportional payment obligation reduced accordingly to reflect other individual
NPDES permit holders' payments.
Page 3 of 57
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived by the
PARTIES, and of the promises contained in this MOA, the PARTIES, and SGVCOG
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 TASKS of the Upper Los Angeles River Watershed
Management Area Group CIMP and EWMP and to authorize the SGVCOG to
administer the cost sharing.
Section 3. Cooperation. The PARTIES and the SGVCOG shall fully cooperate with
one another to attain the purposes of this MOA.
Section 4. Voluntary. The PARTIES have voluntarily entered into this MOA for the
implementation of the MONITORING SERVICES and EWMP-RELATED TASKS and
authorize the SGVCOG to administer the cost-sharing.
Section 5. Term. This MOA shall become effective on the date the last PARTY
executes this MOA and shall remain in effect for five (5) years from the effective date or
until June 30th, 2023, or whichever is later. The MOA may be extended, through an
executed amendment, for an additional three (3) years.
Section 6. Commitment. Once effective, all cooperating PARTIES and the SGVCOG
agree to uphold the promises contained in this MOA for the duration of the agreed upon
term.
Section 7. THE PARTIES AND SGVCOG AGREE:
a. Monitoring Services. The CITY will perform the MONITORING SERVICES to
support the PARTIES' submittal of the MS4 Permit Annual Report. The CITY
reserves the right to modify this MOA, through a written amendment to be
approved by all PARTIES, when conditions, such as, but not limited to,
expansion of CIMP requirements, additional EWMP-RELATED TASKS impact
annual costs.
b. Reporting. The PARTIES authorize the CITY to prepare and submit semi-annual
and annual analytical monitoring reports to the Regional Board as described in
the CIMP as well as electronic files if requested by the Regional Board. The CITY
shall distribute the semi-annual and annual reports to the PARTIES fifteen (15)
businesses days prior to submittal to the Regional Board. The PARTIES may
Page 4 of 57
review the monitoring report and submit comments to the CITY prior to its
submittal to the Regional Board.
c. Invoicing. The SGVCOG will invoice all PARTIES, except the CITY, in annual
amounts not exceeding the invoice amounts shown in Table 1 of Exhibit C.
SGVCOG will pay the CITY, the difference between the funds collected and the
sum of administrative costs; the CITY's portion of shared costs for MONITORING
SERVICES and EWMP-RELATED TASKS. The annual invoices will be issued in
May of each calendar year in anticipation of the expected monitoring cost for the
next fiscal year. The CITY shall provide SGVCOG an accounting of the
MONITORING SERVICES and EWMP-RELATED TASKS completed during
each annual payment term by October 31st of the following year. Contingency
and other funds shall be retained by SGVCOG to be used at the discretion of the
PARTIES. The PARTIES will form a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
subcommittee to verify the accounting, monitoring and other work completed and
the amount of the invoices before the SGVCOG remits payment back to the
CITY.
Additional Studies. The PARTIES agree that preparing grant applications, and/or
conducting watershed -wide special studies, monitoring with other watershed
groups, conducting other collaborative activities for the purpose of complying with
the MS4 Permit may be funded by the Parties subject to the terms of this MOA,
provided that there are available excess contract funds or contingency funds
available to fund these activities. Prior to the performance of any such activities,
all PARTIES must provide written approval of the activities and revise Tables 1-4
of Exhibit A and Tables 1-10 of Exhibit B showing which PARTIES will be funding
the activities and in what amounts.
a. Contracting. The PARTIES contemplate allowing other individual NPDES permit
holders to participate in the MONITORING SERVICES without being a party to
this MOA, in order to minimize the costs of preparing and implementing the CIMP
to each of the PARTIES. In the event that another NPDES permit holder wants to
participate in the MONITORING SERVICES, the SGVCOG may enter into an
individual separate agreement with such individual NPDES permit holder (which
shall not become a party to this MOA) for MONITORING SERVICES cost sharing
purposes. If other individual NPDES permit holders participate in the cost sharing
relating to the MONITORING SERVICES, the invoicing tables in Exhibit C shall
be modified as appropriate and each PARTIES' proportional payment obligation
reduced accordingly to reflect other individual NPDES permit holders' payments.
Section 8. Payment.
a. Annual Payment. Each PARTY shall pay the SGVCOG for its proportional share
of the estimated cost for MONITORING SERVICES and EWMP-RELATED
Page 5 of 57
TASKS including SGVCOG's fees as shown in Table 4 of Exhibit A and Table 3
of Exhibit B, within sixty (60) days of receipt of the invoice from the SGVCOG.
The SGVCOG will remit payment to the CITY within sixty (60) days of receipt of
payments from the other PARTIES, noting any delinquent payments that remain
due after deducting the SGVCOG's administrative fixed fee as set forth in Table 4
of Exhibit A and Table 3 of Exhibit B and twelve hundred and thirty dollars
($1,230) per individual permittee agreement. The invoicing amounts presented in
Exhibit C have been agreed upon by the PARTIES and are subject to change,
through a written amendment, to address unforeseen challenges.
b. Program Management Fee. The costs of MONITORING SERVICES in Exhibit A
and EWMP-RELATED TASKS in Exhibit B include a Program Management Fee
for facilitation of this MOA by the SGVCOG in the combined amount of $100,000
per year as shown in Table 4 of Exhibit A and Table 3 of Exhibit B.
c. Contingency. The CITY and the SGVCOG will notify the PARTIES if actual
expenditures for MONITORING SERVICES and/or EWMP-RELATED TASKS are
anticipated to exceed the cost estimates contained in Exhibit A and B. Inasmuch,
the MONITORING SERVICES may be adaptable to sampling events during an
event that may preclude the CITY from notifying the PARTIES, and the CITY may
incur cost greater than the contract estimates contained in Exhibit A. The
PARTIES agree to pay the CITY (through SGVCOG) for their proportional share
of these additional expenditures at an amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) of
their proportional annual cost as shown in Table 1 of Exhibit C. Any costs which
exceed this ten percent (10%) contingency will require an amendment to this
MOA. These funds will be held by SGVCOG until such time as they are needed.
d. Reconciliation of this MOA. Any unexpended funds held by SGVCOG at the
termination of this MOA will be refunded or credited to the PARTIES by the
SGVCOG, as requested in writing by each PARTY and in accordance with the
distributed cost formula set forth in Tables 1 of Exhibit C or PARTIES may elect
to roll-over unexpended funds to cover monitoring expenses in the subsequent
MOA. At the end of the MOA, the SGVCOG will provide the PARTIES with an
accounting of actual expenditures within ninety (90) days.
e. Late Payment Penalty. Any payment that is not received within sixty (60) days
following receipt of the invoice from SGVCOG shall be subject to interest on the
original amount from the date that the payment first became due. The interest
rate shall be equal to the Prime Rate in effect when the payment first became
due plus one percent (1%) for any payment that is made within one (1) to thirty
(30) days after the due date. The Prime Rate in effect when the payment first
became due plus five percent (5%) shall apply to any payment that is made
within thirty one (31) to sixty (60) days after the due date. The Prime Rate in
Page 6 of 57
effect when the payment first became due plus ten percent (10%) shall apply to
any payment that is made more than sixty (60) days past the due date. The
rates, shall nevertheless, not exceed the maximum allowed by law.
f. Delinquent Payments. A payment is considered to be delinquent one hundred
and eighty (180) days after receipt of the invoice from the SGVCOG. The
following procedure may be implemented to attain payments from the delinquent
PARTY or PARTIES: 1) verbally contact/meet with the manager(s) from the
delinquent PARTY or PARTIES; 2) submit a formal letter to the delinquent
PARTY or PARTIES from SGVCOG counsel; and 3) notify the Regional Board
that the delinquent PARTY or PARTIES are no longer a participating member of
the CIMP or EWMP. If the PARTY or PARTIES remain delinquent after the
above procedures, then that PARTY's participation in this MOA will be deemed
terminated, and the remaining PARTIES' cost share allocation shall be adjusted
in accordance with the cost allocation formula in Exhibit C.
Section 9. THE PARTIES FURTHER AGREE:
a. Documentation. The PARTIES agree to provide at no cost to the City all
requested information and documentation in their possession that is deemed
necessary by the PARTIES to perform the MONITORING SERVICES and
EWMP-RELATED TASKS.
b. Access. Each PARTY shall allow the City or its contractor reasonable access
and entry to—on an as- needed basis during the term of this MOA—certain
facilities and structures owned, operated, or controlled by the PARTY, which
access and entry are necessary for the CITY or its contractor to perform
MONITORING SERVICES and EWMP-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 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, CITY or its contractor shall provide written notice to
the applicable PARTY as early as reasonably possible. LACFCD, being a
member of this MOA, 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. Each PARTY agrees that due to certain monitoring activities, such as toxicity
testing, the total cost of this MOA is not inclusive of those activities that may be
required to successfully complete the analyses. Thus, the PARTIES agree to
Page 7 of 57
fund the required additional work when the CITY notifies them that the activity
has taken place. The PARTIES agree to pay the CITY (through the SGVCOG)
for their proportional share of these additional expenditures at an amount not to
exceed their proportional annual cost plus the ten percent (10%) contingency as
shown in Exhibit A. No PARTY will be obligated to pay for additional
expenditures which exceed this amount absent an amendment to this MOA.
d. Reporting. The CITY shall distribute the semi-annual and annual reports to the
PARTIES fifteen (15) business days prior to its intended date of submittal to the
Regional Board. The PARTIES may review the reports and submitted
comments to the CITY prior to its submittal to the Regional Board. The CITY
has control of the submittal but shall discuss the PARTIES' comments as they
apply to the report.
Section 10. Indemnification
a. Each PARTY and the SGVCOG shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless each
other PARTY, including its special districts, 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 attorney's and expert witness fees), arising
from or connected with the respective acts of each PARTY arising from or related
to this MOA; provided, however, that no PARTY shall indemnify another PARTY
for that PARTY'S own negligence or willful misconduct.
b. In light of the provisions of Section 895.2 of the Government Code of the State of
California imposing certain tort liability jointly upon public entities solely by reason
of such entities being parties to an agreement (as defined in Section 895 of said
Code), each of the PARTIES hereto, pursuant to the authorization contained in
Section 895.4 and 895.6 of said Code, shall assume the full liability imposed
upon it or any of its officers, agents, or employees, by law for injury caused by
any act or omission occurring in the performance of this MOA to the same extent
such liability would be imposed in the absence of Section 895.2 of said Code. To
achieve the above stated purpose, each PARTY indemnifies, defends, and holds
harmless each other PARTY for any liability, cost, or expense that may be
imposed upon such other PARTY solely by virtue of said Section 895.2. The
provisions of Section 2778 of the California Civil Code are made a part hereof as
if incorporated herein.
Section 11. Termination
a. Any PARTY including the SGVCOG may withdraw from this MOA for any reason,
in whole or part, by giving the other PARTIES and the Regional Board thirty (30)
days written notice thereof. Withdrawing PARTIES shall remain wholly
Page 8 of 57
responsible for their share of the costs of MONITORING SERVICES and EWMP-
RELATED TASKS for the extent of the effective term of this MOA. 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 EWMP. 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.
b. The SGVCOG shall notify in writing all PARTIES within fourteen (14) days of
receiving written notice from any PARTY that intends to terminate this MOA.
c. 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.
d. 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 and/or SGVCOG at the addresses set forth in Exhibit D attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference. PARTIES and SBCCOG shall
promptly notify each other of any change of contact information, including
personnel changes, provided in Exhibit D. 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 D.
Page 9 of 57
b. Administration. For the purposes of this MOA, the PARTIES and SGVCOG
hereby designate as their respective representatives the persons named in
Exhibit D. 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 to this MOA 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.
d. Binding Effect. This MOA shall be binding upon, and shall be to the benefit of the
respective successors, heirs, and assigns of each party to this MOA; provided,
however, no party may assign its respective rights or obligations under this MOA
without the prior written consent of the other parties.
e. 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 D or by a responsible individual as determined
by each PARTY.
f. 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 trial courts shall lie exclusively in
the County of Los Angeles.
g. 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.
h. 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.
I. Entire Agreement. This MOA constitutes the entire agreement of the parties to
this MOA with respect to the subject matter hereof.
Page 10 of 57
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.
k. Counterparts. This MOA may be executed in any number of counterparts, 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.
I. 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. Any ambiguities shall be resolved in a collaborative manner by
the PARTIES and SGVCOG and shall be rectified by amending this MOA as
described in Section 12(e).
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES and SBCCOG hereto 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 57
CITY OF THE TEMPLE CITY
Date: - 1- 20 f S CITY OF TEMPLE CITY
ATTEST:
9-0&)a I�-�w
Peggy Kuo, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Eric S. Va , City Attorney
gy
Bn IA —
William Man, Mayor
Page 30 of 57
EXHIBIT A
Upper Los Angeles River Enhanced Watershed Management Area CIMP Implementation Costs
Table 1. Exhibit A Distribution of Total Estimated Cost for Implementing the ULAR CIMP
Agency
Fiscal Year
18-19
Fiscal Year
19-20
Fiscal Year
20.21
Fiscal Year
21-22
Fiscal Year
22-23
Total
LACFCD
$41,269
$57,360
$34,536
$34,556
$51,127
$218,848
City of Los Angeles
$448,136
$637,212
$373,145
$373,145
$580,367
$2,412,005
County of Los Angeles
$110,198
$132,588
$94,952
$95,161
$116,540
$549,439
City of Alhambra
$11,184
$10,053
$10,053
$10,053
510,053
$51,398
City of Burbank
$25,406
$42,837
$22,837
$22,837
$54,168
$168,086
City of Calabasas
$23,640
$70,648
$8,245
$8,245
$8,245
$119,023
City of Glendale
$44,852
$71,702
$40,317
$40,317
$88,532
$285,720
City of Hidden Hills
$5,496
$15,915
$1,978
$1,978
$1,978
$27,345
City of La Canada Flintridge
$12,673
$14,057
$11,392
$11,392
$15,314
$64,827
City of Montebello
$12,265
$11,025
$11,025
$11,025
$11,025
$56,365
City of Monterey Park
$11,338
$10,192
$10,192
$10,192
$10,192
$52,105
City of Pasadena
$33,902
$30,693
$30,474
$30,474
$30,857
$156,399
City of Rosemead
$7,581
$6,815
$6,815
$6,815
$6,815
$34,840
City of San Fernando
$3,475
$4,623
$3,124
$3,124
$5,359
$19,705
City of San Gabriel
$6,056
$5,444
$5,444
$5,444
$5,444
$27,832
City of San Marino
$5,518
$4,960
$4,960
$4,960
$4,960
$25,357
City of South EI Monte
$11,484
$11,271
$11,431
$11,594
$11,760
$57,541
City of South Pasadena
$5,006
$4,500
$4,500
$4,500
$4,500
$23,005
City of Temple City
$5,900
$5,303
$5,303
$5,303
$5,303
$27,113
Page 32 of 57
Total Estimated Cost of CIMP
$825,379 $1,147,199 $690,722 $691,114 $1,022,538 $4,376,952
1' The Total Estimated Cost for each agency is the sum of General Monitoring Costs (refer to Table 2, Exhibit A) plus the costs for Nan-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring (refer to Table 3a -
j, Exhibit A), Legg Lake Receiving Water Monitoring, and SGVCOG annual fee.
Table 2. Exhibit A Distribution of General Monitoring Costs.
Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Total
LIMP Component 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23
Receiving Water Monitoring
$273,744
$273,744
$273,744
$273,744
$273,744
$1,368,720
Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
$80,009
$80,009
$80,009
$80,009
$80,009
$400,044
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
$31,056
(NSWO costs
are distributed according to sub -watershed)
City of Los Angeles
Data Management (15%)
$53,063
$53,063
$53,063
$53,063
$53,063
$265,315
Cap -nal Expenses
$96,906
$21,000
$21,000
$21,000
$21,000
$180,906
Operation & Maintenance Expenses
$9,414
$9,414
$9,414
$9,414
$9,414
$47,072
Contracted Services: Annual aeporLDMToois,on-callsupport
$90,000
$90,000
$90,000
$90,000
590,000
$450,000
Program Management (5%)
$30,157
$26,362
$26,362
$26,362
$26,362
$135,603
General Monitoring Costs (Sub -Total)
$633,293
$553,592
$553,592
$553,592
$553,592
$2,847,659
Contingency (10%)
$63,329
$55,359
555,359
$55,359
$55,359
$284,766
Annual Escalation (0%, 2%,2%,2%,2%)
$0
$12,179
$12,179
$12,179
$12,179
$48,716
General Monitoring Costs (Total)
$696,622
$621,130
$621,130
$621,130
$621,130
$3,181,141
Agency
Land Area
(acres)
% of Area
Fiscal Year
18-19
Fiscal Year
19.20
Fiscal Year
20-21
Fiscal Year
21-22
Fiscal Year
22-23
Total
LACFCD (5%)
-
-
$34,831
531,056
$31,056
$31,056
$31,056
$159,057
City of Los Angeles
181,288.00
58.53%
$387,319
$345,345
$345,345
$345,345
$345,345
$1,768,699
County of Los Angeles
41,048.07
13.25%
$87,698
$78,195
$78,195
$78,195
$78,195
$400,477
City of Alhambra
4,884.31
1.58%
$10,435
$9,304
$9,304
$9,304
$9,304
$47,653
City of Burbank
11,095.20
3.58%
$23,705
$21,136
$21,136
$21,136
$21,136
$108,248
City of Calabasas
4,005.68
1.29%
$8,558
$7,631
$7,631
$7,631
$7,631
$39,081
City of Glendale
19,587.50
6.32%
$41,848
$37,313
$37,313
$37,313
$37,313
$191,101
City of Hidden Hills
961.03
0.31%
$2,053
$1,831
$1,831
$1,831
$1,831
$9,376
City of La Canada Flintridge
5,534.46
1.79%
$11,824
S10,S43
$10,543
$10,543
$10,543
$53,996
Page 33 of 57
City of Montebello
5,356.38
1.73%
$11,444
$10,204
$10,204
$10,204
$10,204
$52,258
City of Monterey Park
4,951.51
1.60%
$10,579
$9,432
$9,432
$9,432
$9,432
$48,308
City of Pasadena
14,805.30
4.78%
$31,631
$28,203
$28,203
$28,203
$28,203
$144,445
City of Rosemead
3,310.87
1.07%
$7,074
$6,307
$6,307
$6,307
$6,307
$32,302
City of San Fernando
1,517.64
0.49%
$3,242
$2,891
$2,891
$2,891
$2,891
$14,807
City of San Gabriel
2,644.87
0.85%
$5,651
$5,038
$5,038
$5,038
$5,038
$25,804
City of San Marino
2,409.64
0.78%
$5,148
$4,590
$4,590
$4,590
$4,590
$23,509
City of south EI Monte
1,594.16
0.51%
$3,406
$3,037
$3,037
$3,037
$3,037
$15,553
City of South Pasadena
2,186.20
0.71%
$4,671
$4,165
$4,165
$4,165
$4,165
$21,329
City of Temple City
2,576.50
0.83%
$5,505
$4,908
$4,908
$4,908
$4,908
$25,137
Total
309,757.32
100%
$696,622
$621,130
$621,130
$621,130
$621,130
$3,181,141
Note:
1. General Monitoring Costs include all required monitonng elements in the CIMP, except for Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring and Receiving water monitoring in Echo Park Lake, Lake
Calabasas, and Legg Lake.
2. The areas owned by Caltrans, State Parks, and U.S. Government have been excluded from the total area of the Upper Los Angeles River watershed.
3. Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) is responsible for 5% of the General Monitoring Costs, which is subtracted before the costs are distributed among the other
Parties.
4. Area (acres) determined by GIS analysis as shown in Exhibit C.
S. Agency Percent Area = (Agency Area / Total Area) x 100%
6. Distributed Cost to each Parry = [(Total of General Monitoring Costs - LACFD 5%) x Agency Percent Area] 1100%.
Table 3A Exhibit A Distribution of Costs for NonStorrnwater Outfall Monitoring in Aliso Canyon Wash
Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Total
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring (ACW) 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23
Inventory and 6 screening Events
$13,784
$0
$0
$0
$0
$13,784
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
$0
$58,132
$0
$0
$0
$58,132
Data management (15%)
$2,068
$8,720
$0
$0
$0
$10,788
Program Management (5%)
$793
$3,343
$0
$0
$0
$4,135
Monitoring Cost Sub Total
$16,645
$70,195
$0
$0
$0
$86,839
Contingency (10%)
$1,664
$7,019
$0
$0
$0
$8,684
Annual Escalation (0%, 2%,2%)
$0
$1,544
$0
$0
$0
$1,544
Aliso Canyon Wash (Total)
$18,309
$78,759
$0
$0
$0
$97,068
Page 34 of 57
Land Area
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Total
% of Area
Agency (acres)
18-19
19-20
20-21
21-22
22-23
$0
LACFCD(5%) - -
$915
$3,938
$0
$0
$0
$4,853
City of Los Angeles 11,604.43 86.31%
$15,013
$64,581
$0
50
$0
$79,594
County of Los Angeles 1,839.94 13.69%
$2,380
$10,240
$0
$0
$0
$12,620
ACW (Total) 13,444.37 100%
$18,309
$78,759
$0
$0
$0
$97,068
Note'
t. Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost,
which is subtracted
before the cost is distributed
among the other Parties.
27.39%
2. Distributed Cost to each Party within a given Segment or Tributary = [(Total of Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring Costs - LACFD 5%) x Agency Percent
Area] 1 100%
$0
Table 3B Exhibit A (McCoy Canyon)
$0
$16,476
McCoy Canyon (Total)
3,056.09
100%
$11,916
$51,397
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Total
Non-5[ormwa[er Outfall Monitoring (McCoy Canyon)
18-19
19-20
20-21
21-22
22-23
Inventory and 6 screening Events
$8,971
$0
$0
$0
$0
$8,971
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
5o
$37,937
$0
$0
$0
$37,937
Data Management (15%)
$1,346
$5,691
$0
$0
$o
$7,036
Program Management (5%)
$516
$2,181
$0
$0
$0
$2,697
Monitoring Cost Sub -Total
$10,833
$45,809
$0
$0
$0
$56,642
Contingency (10%)
$1,083
$4,581
$0
$0
$0
$5,664
Annual Escalation 10%, 2%, 2%)
$o
$1,008
SO
$0
$0
$1,008
McCoy Canyon (Total)
$11,916
$51,397
$0
$63,314
A
Agency
Land Area % of Area
(acres)
Fiscal Year
18-19
Fiscal Year
19-20
Fiscal Year
20-21
Fiscal Year
21-22
Fiscal Year
22-23
Total
LACFCD(5%)
-
-
$596
$2,570
$0
$0
$0
$3,166
City of Los Angeles
161.26
5.28%
$597
$2,576
50
$0
$0
$3,174
County of Los Angeles
237.07
7.76%
$878
$3,788
$0
$0
$0
$4,666
City of Calabasas
1,820.64
59.57%
$6,744
$29,089
$0
$0
$0
$35,833
City of Hidden Hills
837.12
27.39%
$3,101
$13,375
$0
$0
$0
$16,476
McCoy Canyon (Total)
3,056.09
100%
$11,916
$51,397
$0
$0
$0
$63,314
Note
Page
35 of
57
1. Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost, which is subtracted before the cost Is distrbuted among the other Parties.
2. Distributed Cost to each Parry within a given Segment or Tributary = [(Total of Non-Stonnwater Outfall Monitoring Costs- LACFD 5%) x Agency Percent Areal / 100%
Table 3C Exhibit A (Dry Canyon)
Non-stormwater Outfall Monitoring (Dry Canyon) Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Total
18-19 19-20 20.21 21-22 22-23
Inventory and 6 screening Events
$8,971
$0
$0
$0
$0
$8,971
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
$0
$37,937
$0
$0
$0
$37,937
Data Management (15%)
$1,346
$5,691
$0
$0
$0
$7,036
Program Management (5%)
$516
$2,181
$0
$0
$0
$2,697
Monitoring Cost Sub -Total
$10,833
$45,809
$0
$0
$0
$56,642
Contingency (10%)
$1,083
$4,581
$0
$0
$0
$5,664
Annual Escalation (0%, 2%,2%)
$0
$1,008
$0
$0
$0
$1,008
Dry Canyon (Total)
$11,916
$51,397
$0
$0
$0
$63,314
Land Area Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Total
Agency
% of Area
(acres) 16-19
19-20
20-21
21-22
22-23
LACFCD (5%)
- - $596
$2,570
$0
$0
$0
$3,166
City of Los Angeles
746.31 25.07% $2,838
$12,241
$0
$0
$0
$15,079
County of Los Angeles
199.50 6.70% $759
$3,272
$0
$0
$0
$4,031
City of Calabasas
2,031.13 68.23% $7,724
$33,314
$0
$0
$0
$41,038
My Canyatt (TMO
2,976.94 IOD% $11,916
$51,397
$0
$0
$0
$63,314
Note'
1. Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost which is subtracted before the cost is distributed among the other Parties.
2. Distributed Cost to each Party within
a given Segment or Tributary = [(Total of NonStormwater outfall Monitoring Costs - LACFD 5%) x Agency Percent Areal 1100%
Table 313 Exhibit A (Bell Creek)
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Total
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring (Bell Creek)
18-19
19-20
20-21
21-22
22-23
Page 36 of 57
Inventory and 6 screening Events
$13,389
$0
$0
$0
$0
$13,389
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
$0
$37,937
$0
$0
$0
$37,937
Data Management (15%)
$2,008
$5,691
$0
$0
$0
$7,699
Program Management (5%)
$770
$2,181
$0
$0
$0
$2,951
Monitoring Cost Sub -Total
$16,167
$45,809
$0
$0
$0
$61,976
Contingency (10%)
$1,617
$4,581
$0
SO
$0
$6,198
Annual Escalation(0%,2%,2%)
$0
$1,008
$0
$0
$0
$1,008
Bell Creek (Total)
$17,784
$51,397
$0
$o
$0
$69,181
Land Area
$0
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Total
Agency (acres)
% of Area
18-19
19-20
20-21
21-22
22-23
$0
LACFCD(5%) -
-
$889
$2,570
$0
$0
$0
$3,459
City of Los Angeles 9,281.64
86.24%
$14,569
$42,107
$0
$0
$0
$56,676
County of Los Angeles 1,357.60
12.61%
$2,131
$6,159
$0
$0
$0
$8,290
City of Hidden Hills 123.92
1.15%
$195
$562
$0
$0
$0
$757
Bell Geek (Total) 10,763.16
100%
$17,784
$51,397
$0
$0
$0
$69,181
Note:
1, Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost. which is subtracted
before the cost is distributed among the other Parbes.
2. Distributed Cost to each Party within a given Segment or
Tributary = [(Total of Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring Costs - LACFD 5%) x Agency Percent Area] 1100%
Table 3E Exhibit A (Segment C)
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Total
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring (Segment C)
18-19
19-20
20-21
21-22
22-23
Inventory and 6 screening Events
$0
$28,360
50
$0
$0
$28,360
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
$0
$0
$0
$0
$49,024
$0
Data Management (15%)
$0
$4,254
$0
$0
$7,354
$4,254
Program Management (5%)
$0
$1,631
$0
$0
$2,819
$1,631
Monitoring Cost Sub Total
$0
$34,244
$0
$0
$59,197
$34,244
Contingency (10%)
$0
$3,424
$0
$0
$5,920
$3,424
Annual Escalation (0%, 2%,2%)
$0
$o
$0
$0
$1,302
$0
Segment C (Total)
$0
$37,669
$0
$0
$66,419
$104,087
Page 37 of 57
Agency
Land Area
(acres)
% of Area
Fiscal Year
18-19
Fiscal Year
19-20
Fiscal Year
20-21
Fiscal Year
21-22
Fiscal Year
22-23
Total
LACFCD (5%)
-
-
$0
$1,883
$0
$0
$3,321
$5,204
City of Los Angeles
23,633.48
69.45%
$0
$24,853
$0
$0
$43,821
$68,674
County of Los Angeles
300.53
0.88%
$0
$316
$0
$0
$557
$873
City of Burbank
3,401.83
10.00%
$0
$3,577
$0
$0
$6,308
$9,885
City of Glendale
6,496.20
19.09%
$0
$6,831
$0
$0
$12,045
$18,877
City of Pasadena
197.70
0.58%
$0
$208
$0
$0
$367
$574
Segment C (Total)
34,029.74
100%
$0
$37,669
$0
$0
$66,419
$104,087
Note:
1. Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost, which is subtracted before the cost ,s distributed among the other Parties.
2. Distributed Cost to each Parry within a given Segment or Tributary =[(Total of Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring Costs - tACFD 5%) x Agency Percent Area] 1100%
Table 3F Exhibit A (Verdugo Wash)
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring (Verdugo Wash) Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Total
18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23
Inventory and 6 screening Events
$0
$28,360
$0
50
$0
$28,360
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
$0
$0
$0
$0
$40,916
$0
Data Management (15%)
$0
$4,254
$0
$0
$6,137
$4,254
Program Management (5%)
$0
$1,631
$0
$0
$2,353
$1,631
Monitoring Cost Sub -Total
$0
$34,244
$0
$0
$49,406
$34,244
Contingency (10%)
$0
$3,424
$0
$0
$4,941
$3,424
Annual Escalation (0%, 2%, 2%)
$0
$0
$0
$0
$1,087
$0
Verdugo Wash(Total)
$0
$37,669
$0
$0
$55,434
$93,102
Page 38 of 57
Land Area
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Total
AgencyYo
(acres)
of Area 18-19
19-20
20-21 21-22
22-23
LACFCD (5%)
-
- $o
$1,883
$0 $o
$2,772
$4,655
City of Los Angeles
1,276.17
6.68% $o
$2,389
$0 $0
$3,515
$5,904
Page 38 of 57
County of Los Angeles
3,671.20
19.20%
$0
$6,872
$0
$0
$10,113
$16,985
City of La Canada Flintridge
1,424.01
7.45%
$0
$2,665
$0
$0
$3,923
$6,588
City of Glendale
12,740.31
66.64%
$0
$23,848
$0
$0
$35,095
$58,942
City of Pasadena
6.08
0.03%
$0
$11
$0
$0
$17
$28
Verdugo Wash (Total)
19,117.77
100%
$0
$37,669
$0
$0 _
$55,434
$93,102
Note',
I . Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LAC FCD) is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost, which is subtracted before the cost is distributed among the other Parties
2, Distributed Cost to each Party within a given Segment or Tributary = [(Total of Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring Costs - LACFD 5%) x Agency Percent Area] / 100%
Table 3G Exhibit A (Burbank Western Channel)
Agency%
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Total
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring (BWC)
18-19
19-20
20-21
21-22
22-23
$4,753
Inventory and 6 screening Events
$0
$28,360
$0
$0
$0
$28,360
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
$0
$0
$0
$0
$42,363
$0
Data Management (15%)
$0
$4,254
$0
$0
$6,355
$4,254
Program Management (5%)
$0
$1,631
$0
$0
$2,436
$1,631
Monitoring Cost Sub -Total
$0
$34,244
$0
$0
$51,154
$34,244
Contingency (10%)
s0
$3,424
$0
$0
$5,115
$3,424
Annual Escalation (0%, 2°%, 2%)
$0
$0
$o
$0
$1,125
$0
Burbank Western Channel (Total)
$0
$37,669
$0
$0
$57,395
$95,063
Agency%
Land Area
of Area (acres)
Fiscal Year
18-19
Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
19-20 20-21
Fiscal Year
21-22
Fiscal Year
22-23
Total
LACFCD (5%)
- -
$0
$1,883 $0
$0
$2,870
$4,753
City of Los Angeles
8,749.20 52.19%
$0
$18,676 $0
$0
$28,457
$47,133
City of Burbank
7,693.45 45.89%
$0
$16,423 $0
$0
$25,023
$41,445
City of Glendale
321.42 1.92%
$0
$686 $0
$0
$1,045
$1,732
Burbank Western Channel (Total)
16,764.07 100%
$0
$37,669 $0
$0
$57,395
$95,063
Note
1. Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost,
which is subtracted before the costs distributed among the other Parties.
2, Distributed Cost to each Party within a
given Segment or Tributary = [(Total of Non-Stonnwaler Outfall Monitoring Costs - LACFD 5%) x Agency Percent
Area] / 100%
Page 39 of 57
Table 3H Exhibit A (Tujunga Wash)
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Total
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring (Tujunga Wash)
18-19
19-20
20-21
21-22
22-23
Inventory and 6 screening Events
$0
$28,360
$0
$0
$0
$28,360
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
$0
$0
$0
$0
$41,435
$0
Data Management (15%)
$0
$4,254
$0
$0
$6,215
$4,254
Program Management (5%)
$0
$1,631
$0
$0
$2,382
$1,631
Monitoring Cost Sub -Total
$0
$34,244
$0
$0
$50,032
$34,244
Contingency (10%)
$0
$3,424
$0
$0
$5,003
$3,424
Annual Escalation (0%, 2%,2%)
$0
$0
$0
$0
$1,101
$0
Total
$o
$37,669
$0
SO
$56,136
$93,805
Land Area Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Total
Agency
% of Area
(acres) 18-19
19-20
20-21
21-22
22-23
LACFCD (5%)
- - $0
$1,883
$0
$0
$2,807
$4,690
City of Los Angeles
32,491.56 89.72% $0
$32,108
$0
$0
$47,849
$79,957
County of Los Angeles
2,183.42 6.03% $0
$2,158
$0
$0
$3,215
$5,373
City of Glendale
20.25 0.06% $0
$20
$0
$0
$30
$50
City of San Femando
1,517.65 4.19% $0
$1500
$0
$0
$2,235
$3,735
Tujunga Wash (Total)
36,212.88 100% $0
$37,669
$0
$0
$56,136
$93,805
Note:
1. Los Angeles County Flood Control District (L4CFCO) is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost, which is subtracted before the cost is distributed among the other Parties.
2. Distributed Cost to each Parry within
a given Segment or Tributary = ((Total of Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring Costs - IACFD 5%) x Agency Percent Areal / 100%
Table 31 Exhibit A (Segment D)
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
fiscal Year
Total
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
(Segment D)
18-19
19-20
20.21
21-22
22-23
Inventory and 6 screening Events
$0
$28,360
$0
$0
$0
$28,360
Page 40 of 57
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
$0
$0
$0
$0
$32,657
$0
Data Management (15%)
$0
$4,254
$0
$0
$4,899
$4,254
Program Management (5%)
$0
$1,631
$0
$0
$1,878
$1,631
Monitoring Cost Sub -Total
$0
$34,244
$o
$o
$39,433
$34,244
Contingency (10%)
$0
$3,424
$0
$0
$3,943
$3,424
Annual Escalation (0%, 2%, 2%)
$0
$0
$0
$0
$868
$0
Total
$0
$37,669
$0
$0
$44,244
$81,913
Note:
1. Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost, which is subtracted before the cost is distributed among the other Parties
2, Distributed Cost to each Party within a given Segment or Tributary = ((Total of Non-Slormwater Outfall Monitoring Costs - LACFD 5%) x Agency Percent Areal t 100%
Table 3J Exhibit A (Bull Creek)
Land Area
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Total
Agency
(acres)
% of Area
18-19
19-20
20-21
21-22
22-23
$0
LACFCD(5%)
-
- $0
$1,883
$0
$0
$2,212
$4,096
City of Los Angeles
23,079.17
100.00% $0
$35,785
$0
$0
$42,032
$77,817
Segment D (Total)
23,079.17
100% $0
$37,669
$0
$0
$44,244
$81,913
Note:
1. Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost, which is subtracted before the cost is distributed among the other Parties
2, Distributed Cost to each Party within a given Segment or Tributary = ((Total of Non-Slormwater Outfall Monitoring Costs - LACFD 5%) x Agency Percent Areal t 100%
Table 3J Exhibit A (Bull Creek)
Land Area Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Total
Agency ( %of Area acres) 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23
Page 41 of 57
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
Total
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring (Bull Creek)
18-19
19-20
20-21
21-22
22-23
Inventory and 6 screening Events
$0
$26,778
$0
$0
$0
$26,778
Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring
$0
$0
$0
$0
$37,937
$0
Data Management (15%)
$0
$4,017
$0
$0
$5,691
$4,017
Program Management (5%)
$0
$1,540
$0
$0
$2,181
$1,540
Monitoring Cost Sub -Total
$0
$32,334
$0
$0
$45,809
$32,334
Contingency (10%)
$0
$3,233
$0
$0
$4,581
$3,233
Annual Escalation (0%, 2%, 2%)
$0
$0
$0
$0
$1,008
$0
Total
$0
$35,568
$0
$0
$51,397
$86,965
Land Area Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Total
Agency ( %of Area acres) 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23
Page 41 of 57
LACFCD (S%)
- - $0
$1,778
$0
$0
$2,570
$4,348
City of Los Angeles
10,822.34 85.09% $0
$28,752
$0
$0
$41,548
$70,299
County of Los Angeles
1,896.24 1491% $0
$5,038
$0
$o
$7,280
$12,318
Bull Creek (Total)
12,718.58 100% $0
$35,568
$0
$0
$51,397
$86,965
Note:
1. Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost which is subtracted before the cost is distributed among the other Parties.
2. Distributed Cost to each Party within a given Segment or Tributary = [(Total of Non-Stormwater Outfall Monitoring Costs - LACFD 5%) x Agency Percent Area] 1100%
Table 3K Exhibit A (Legg Lake)
Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Total
Legg Lake Receiving Water Monitoring 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23
Receiving Water Monitoring
$14,178
$14,178
$14,178
$14,178
$14,178
$42,533
Data Management (15%)
$2,127
$2,127
$2,127
$2,127
$2,127
$6,380
Program Management (5%)
$815
$815
$815
$815
$815
$2,446
Monitoring Cost Sub -Total
$17,120
$17,120
$17,120
$17,120
$17,120
$51,359
Contingency (10%)
$1,712
$1,712
$1,712
$1,712
$1,712
$5,136
Annual Escalation (0%, 2%, 2%, 2%, 2%)
$0
$377
$384
$392
$400
$761
Legg Lake (Total)
$18,831
$19,208
$19,592
$19,984
$20,384
$98,000
Agency
Land Area
(acres)
%of Area
Fiscal Year
18-19
Fiscal Year
19-20
Fiscal Year
20-21
Fiscal Year
21-22
Fiscal Year
22-23
Total
LACFCD(5%)
-
-
$942
$960
$980
$999
$1,019
$2,882
County of Los Angeles
2,044.68
56.21%
$10,056
$10,258
$10,463
$10,672
$10,885
$30,777
Scarth EI Monte
1592.68
43.79%
$7,833
$7,990
$8,150
$8,313
$8,479
$23,973
Legg Lake (Total)
3,637.35
100%
$18,831
$19,208
$19,592
$19,984
$20,384
$98,000
Note:
1. Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost, which is subtracted before the cost is distributed among the other Parties
2. Distributed Cost to each Party within Lake = [(Total of Lake Monitoring Costs - LACFD 5%) x Agency Percent Area] i 100%
Page 42 of 57
Table 4. San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments Fee
Land Area %of Area Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Total
Agency (acres) 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23
LACFCD (5%)
-
5.00%
$2,500
$2,500
$2,500
$2,500
$2,500
$12,500
City of Los Angeles
181,288.00
58.53%
$27,800
$27,800
$27,800
$27,800
$27,800
$138,999
County of Los Angeles
41,048.07
13.25%
$6,295
$6,295
$6,295
$6,295
$6,295
$31,473
City of Alhambra
4,884.31
1.58%
$749
$749
$749
$749
$749
$3,745
City of Burbank
11,095.20
3.58%
$1,701
$1,701
$1,701
$1,701
$1,701
$8,507
City of Calabasas
4,005.68
1.29%
$614
$614
$614
$614
$614
$3,071
City of Glendale
19,587.50
6.32%
$3,004
$3,004
$3,004
$3,004
$3,004
$15,018
City of Hidden Hills
961.03
0.31%
$147
$147
$147
$147
$147
$737
City of La Canada Flintridge
5,534.46
1.79%
$849
$849
$849
$849
$849
$4,243
City of Montebello
5,356.38
1.73%
$821
$821
$821
$821
$821
$4,107
City of Monterey Park
4,951.51
1.60%
$759
$759
$759
$759
$759
$3,796
City of Pasadena
14,805.30
4.78%
$2,270
$2,270
$2,270
$2,270
$2,270
$11,352
City of Rosemead
3,310.87
1.07%
$508
$508
$508
$508
$508
$2,539
City of San Fernando
1,517.64
0.49%
$233
$233
$233
$233
$233
$1,164
City of San Gabriel
2,644.87
0.85%
$406
$406
$406
$406
$406
$2,028
City of San Marino
2,409.64
0.78%
$370
$370
$370
$370
$370
$1,848
City of South EI Monte
1,594.16
0.51%
$244
$244
$244
$244
$244
$1.222
City of South Pasadena
2,186.20
0.71%
$335
$335
$335
$335
$335
$1,676
City of Temple City
2,57650
0.83%
$395
$395
$395
$395
$395
$1,975
Total
309,757.32
1.00
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$250,000
Note:
1. Total cost of 5GVCOG Fees is $50,000 per year.
2. Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) is responsible for 5% of the Total Cost, which is subtracted before the cost is distributed among the other Parties
Page 43 of 57
EXHIBIT B
Upper Los Angeles River Enhanced Watershed Management Area EWMP Implementation Costs
Tablet. Distribution of Total Cost for Implementing LILAR EWMP Associated Tasks
CITY
% Drainage Area
FY 18-19
FY 19-20
FY 20-21
FY 21-22
FY 22-23
5YR Total
City of Los Angeles
58.53%
$219,177
$166,120
$312,775
$416,958
$221,723
$1,336,752
Alhambra
1.58%
$5,916
$4,484
$6,735
$4,867
$5,985
$27,987
Burbank
3.58%
$13,409
$10,163
$15,265
$33,182
$13,564
$85,583
Calabasas
1.29°/
$5,254
S3.662
545.435
53,975
54,887
$63.213
Glendale
6.32%
$23,627
$17,943
$26,949
$98,628
$23,947
$191,139
Hidden Hills
0.31%
$4,303
$882
$10,237
5957
$1,176
$17,555
La Canada Flintridge
1.79%
$6,704
$5,082
$7,632
$5,516
$6,782
$31,717
Montebello
1.73%
$6,478
$4,910
$7,375
$5,329
$6,553
530,646
Monterey Park
1.60%
$5,994
$4,544
$6,824
$4,932
$6,064
$28,357
Pasadena
4.78%
$17,897
$13,564
S20, 375
$14,758
$18.105
S84.698
Rosemead
1.07%
$5,034
$3,034
54,559
$3,294
$4,051
$19.971
San Fernando
0.49%
$4,474
$1,390
$2,088
$5,510
51.855
$15.317
San Gabriel
0.85%
$4,828
$2,414
$3,625
$3,917
$3,221
$18,005
San Marino
0.78%
$4,753
$2,212
$3,324
$2,401
$2,953
$15,642
South EI Monte
0.51%
$1,602
$3,052
$2,177
$1,573
$1,934
$10,338
South Pasadena
0.71%
$4,680
$2,010
$3.022
$2,182
$2,685
514.579
Temple City
0.83%
$4,804
$2,354
$3.537
$2,555
$3,143
$16.393
LACFCD
-
$10,250
$6.500
$34,050
527,300
511,500
589.600
LA County
13.25%
$49,616
$37,605
$69,313
$77,719
$50,192
$284,445
Total
100.00%
$398,845
$290,923
$585,296
$715,552
$390,321
$2,381,938
Notes:
1. Total Cost= SGVCOG
Admin Fee+Annual Report Costs +Adaptive
Management Costs +
ROWD Costs LRS
Costs +TMRP
Costs + Special Studies Costs +2017 Report of Waste Discharge
(ROWD).
Page 44 of 57
Table 2 : Upper Los Angeles CIMP Contingency (Deficiency) Funds FY15/16 To FY 17/18
CITY % Drainage Area
City of Los Angeles
58.53%
Alhambra
1.58%
Burbank
3.58%
Calabasas
1.29%
Glendale
6.32%
Hidden Hills
0.31%
La Canada Flintridge
1.79%
Montebello
173%
Monterey Park
1.60%
Pasadena
4.78%
Rosemead
1 07%
San Fernando
0.49%
San Gabriel
0.85%
San Marino
0.78%
South EI Monte
0.51%
South Pasadena
0.71%
Temple City
0.83%
LACFCD
_
LA County
1$.25%
Total
100.00%
FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 17-18 Contingency
Contingency Total collected Used Leftover
FY15-18
$81.543
S66.726
$60,867
$209,136
$50,699.77
$158,436.67
$2,201
$1,801
$1,643
$5,646
$5,258.20
$387.38
$4,988
$4,081
$3,723
$12,792
56,858.12
$5,933.76
$1,797
$1,471
$1,342
$4,609
$5,031.86
($422.50)
$8.805
$7,205
$6,572
S22.582
$9,045.74
513.536.56
$432
$353
$322
$1,108
$4,247.56
($3,139.88)
$2,494
$2,041
$1,861
$6,396
$5,425.68
5970.26
$2,410
$1,972
$1,799
$6,182
$5,379.80
$801.75
$2,229
$1,824
$1,664
$5,717
$5.275.51
$441.53
$6,659
$5,449
$4,971
$17,080
$7,813.84
$9,265.81
$1,491
51.220
S1.113
$3,823
54,852.88
($1,029.61)
$683
$559
$510
$1,751
$4,390.94
($2,640.10)
$1,184
$959
$884
$3,037
$4,681.32
(51,644.14)
$1,087
$889
$811
$2,787
$4,620.72
($1,833.66)
$711
$581
$530
$1,822
$4,410.66
($2,588.35)
$989
$809
$738
S2,537
$4,563.16
($2,026.22)
$1,156
$946
$863
$2,966
$4.66371
($1.698.00)
$7,333
$6,000
$5,473
$18,806
$ -
$18,806.05
$18,460
$15,106
$13,779
$47,344
$ 14,573.98
$32,770.25
$146,650
$120,004
$109,467
$376,121
$151,793.45
$224,327.55
Nates:
1 . Table represents excess contingency funds from FY 15-16 per Agency. As agreed, costs for the implementation of the TMRP (34,000/Agency) was subtracted from each Agency s contingency
surplus. Agency's showing Deficiency have remaining implementation costs factored into Year 1 of the TMRP annual costs (refer to Table 8)
Page 45 of 57
Table 3: Upper Los Angeles SGVCOG Management Funds FY18119 To FY 22123
CITY % Drainage Area FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23
City of Los Angeles
58.53%
$ 27,802
S27,802
$ 27,802
$ 27,802
$ 27,802
Alhambra
1.58%
S
751
$ 751
S 751
S 751
S 751
Burbank
3.58%
$
1,701
$ 1,701
$ 1,701
$ 1,701
$ 1,701
Calabasas
1.29%
S
613
$ 613
$ 613
$ 613
$ 613
Glendale
6.32%
$
3,002
$ 3,002
$ 3,002
$ 3,002
$ 3.002
Hidden Hills
0.31%
S
147
S 147
$ 147
$ 147
S 147
La Canada Flintridge
1.79%
S
850
$ 850
$ 850
$ 850
S 850
Montebello
1.73%
S
822
$ 822
S 822
$ 822
S 822
Monterey Park
1.60%
$
760
$ 760
$ 760
$ 760
S 760
Pasadena
4.78%
S
2,271
$ 2,271
$ 2,271
$ 2,271
$ 2,271
Rosemead
1.07%
$
508
$ 508
$ 508
S 508
S508
San Fernando
0.49%
S
233
S 233
S 233
S 233
S 233
San Gabriel
0.85%
$
404
$ 4G4
S 404
$ 404
$ 404
San Marino
0.78%
$
371
S 371
S 371
$ 371
S 371
South EI Monte
0.51%
$
242
$ 242
$ 242
$ 242
$ 242
South Pasadena
0.71%
$
337
3 337
$ 337
S 337
$ 337
Temple City
0.83%
$
394
$ 394
$ 394
$ 394
$ 394
LACFCD
_
S
2.500
$ 2.500
S 2.500
S 2,500
$ 2.500
LA County
13.25%
$
6,294
$ 6,294
$ 6,294
$ 6,294
$ 6,294
Total
100.00%
$
50,000
$ 50,000
$ 50,000
$ 50,000
$ 50,000
Page 46 of 57
Table 4: Upper Los Angeles Annual Report Funds FYI 8119 To FY 22/23
CITY
FY 18-19
FY 19-20
FY 20-21
FY 21-22
FY 22-23
Drainage Area
City of Los Angeles
58.53%
$
58,530
$
58.530
S
58,530
$
58,530
$
58,530
Alhambra
1.58%
S
1,580
$
1,580
S
1,580
$
1,580
$
1,580
Burbank
3.58%
$
3,580
$
3,580
$
3,580
$
3,580
$
3,580
Calabasas
129%
$
1,290
$
1,290
S
1,290
$
1,290
S
1,290
Glendale
6.32%
$
6,320
$
6,320
$
6,320
$
6,320
$
6,320
Hidden Hills
0.31%
S
310
S
310
$
310
S
310
S
310
La Canada Flintridge
1.79%
S
1,790
$
1,790
$
1,790
S
1,790
$
1,790
Montebello
1,73%
S
1,730
$
1.730
$
1,730
$
1,730
S
1,730
Monterey Park
1.60%
$
1,600
$
1,600
$
1,600
$
1,600
$
1,600
Pasadena
4.78%
S
4,780
$
4,780
$
4,780
S
4,780
$
4,780
Rosemead
1.07%
S
1.070
$
1,070
$
1,070
$
1,070
$
1,070
San Fernando
0.49%
S
490
S
490
S
490
S
490
S
490
San Gabriel
0.85%
$
850
$
850
$
850
$
850
$
850
San Marino
0.78%
$
780
$
780
$
780
$
780
S
780
South EI Monte
0.51%
$
510
$
510
$
510
$
510
$
510
South Pasadena
0.71%
$
710
$
710
$
710
S
710
$
710
Temple City
0.83%
$
830
$
830
$
830
S
830
$
830
LACFCD
_
S
0
$
0
S
0
S
0
S
0
LA County
13.25%
$
13,250
$
13,250
$
13,250
$
13,250
$
13,250
Total
100.00%
$
100,000
$
100,000
$
100,000
$
100,000
$
100,000
Notes:
1. LACFCD is compiling their
own Annual Report and not conlnbuting
to the Watershed effort.
Page 47 of 57
Table 5: Upper Los Angeles Adaptive Management Funds FYI 8119 To FY 22123
CITY
Drainage Area
FY 18-19
FY 19-20
FY 20-21
FY 21-22
FY 22-23
City of Los Angeles
58.53°h
$41,703
E -
$
83,405
$ -
$
55,604
Alhambra
1.58%
$ 1,126
$ -
$
2,252
$ -
S
1,501
Burbank
3.58%
$ 2,551
$ -
$
5,102
$ -
$
3,401
Calabasas
1.29%
S 919
S -
S
1,838
$ -
S
1,226
Glendale
6.32%
S 4,503
$ -
S
9,006
$ -
$
6,004
Hidden Hills
031%
S 221
$ -
S
442
S -
S
295
La Canada
1.79%
$ 1,275
$ -
S
2,551
$ -
$
1,701
Flintridge
Montebello
1.73%
S 1.233
$ -
$
2,465
$ -
S
1,644
Monterey Park
1.60%
$ 1,140
$ -
S
2,280
$ -
$
1,520
Pasadena
4.78%
S 3,406
$ -
S
6.812
S -
S
4,541
Rosemead
1.07%
$ 762
$ -
$
1,525
$ -
$
1,017
San Fernando
0.49%
S 349
$ -
S
698
S -
S
466
San Gabriel
0.85%
$ 606
$ -
$
1,211
$ -
$
BOB
San Marino
0.78%
$ 556
$ -
S
1,112
S -
$
741
South EI Monte
0.51%
$ 363
$ -
$
727
$ -
S
485
South Pasadena
0.71%
S 506
$ -
S
1,012
$ -
$
675
Temple City
0.83%
S 591
$ -
$
1,183
$ -
$
789
LACFCD
_
S 3.750
$ -
$
7,500
$ -
$
5,000
LA County
13.25%
$ 9,441
$ -
$
18,881
$ -
$
12,588
Total
100.00%
$ 75,000
$
150,000
$ -
$
100,000
Notes:
1, Year 3 includes costs
for a Reasonable Assurance Analysis
(RAA)
Page 48 of 57
Table 6: Upper Los Angeles Report Of Waste Discharge (ROWD) FY18/19 To FY 22/23
CITY
% Drainage Area
FY 18-19
FY 19-20
FY 20-21
FY 21-22
FY 22-23
City of Los Angeles
58.53%
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ 14,194
$ -
Alhambra
1.58°/
$ -
5 -
$ -
$ 383
$ -
Burbank
3.58%
$ -
$ -
$ -
S 868
S -
Calabasas
1.29%
S -
S -
S -
S 313
S -
Glendale
6.32%
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ 1,533
$ -
Hidden Hills
0.31%
S -
$ -
$ -
$ 75
-
La Canada Flintridge
1.79%
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ 434
S -
Montebello
1.73%
S -
S -
S -
$ 420
S -
Monterey Park
1.60%
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ 388
$ -
Pasadena
4.78%
S -
$ -
S -
$ 1.159
5 -
Rosemead
1.07%
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ 259
$ -
San Fernando
0.49%
S -
S -
S -
5 119
$ -
San Gabriel
0.85%
$ -
S -
$ -
$ 206
$ -
San Marino
0.78%
S -
S -
S -
S 189
$ -
South EI Monte
0.51%
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ 124
$ -
South Pasadena
0.71%
S -
$ -
S -
5 172
$ -
Temple City
0.83%
S -
$ -
$ -
S 201
S -
LACFCD
—
S
5 -
S -
S 750
5 -
LA County
13.25%
$ -
$ -
$ -
S 3,213
S -
Total
100.00%
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ 25,000
$ -
Table -7: Upper Los Angeles Load Reduction Strategy (LRS )Funds FYI 8/19 To FY 22/23
CITY % Drainage Area FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23
City of Los Angeles
58.53%
S
- 5 -
$ 63,200
$
236,644
$ -
Alhambra
1.58°/
S
- 5
- 5 -
$
-
$ -
Burbank
3.58%
S
- S
- $ -
$
22,150
S -
Calabasas
1,29%
5
- S
- S 39,935
$
-
S -
Glendale
6.32%
S
- $
- $ -
$
79,152
S -
Page 49 of 57
Hidden Hills
0.31%
$
- $ -
$
8,913
$
-
$ -
La Canada FNrAddp
1.79%
$
$
$
-
S
2.583
$
Montebello
1.73%
$
- $ -
$
-
$
-
$ '
Me it, 8) Park
1.60%
$
$ -
S
-
$
-
$
Pasadena
4.78%
$
$ -
$
-
$
35
$ -
Ftosomm d
1.07%
$
- $ -
$
-
$
-
$ -
San Fernando
0.49%
$
- $ -
$
-
$
3,483
$ -
Swteabfim
0.89%
S
- $ -
$
-
$
-
$ -
San Marino
0.78%
$
- $ -
$
-
$
La Canada Flintridge
$ '
Som B Nor"
0.51%
$
- $
$
-
$
1,081
$
South Pasadena
0.71%
$
- $
$
-
$
-
$ '
Tetapls CRY
0.83%
$
- $
$
-
$
-
$
LACFCD
_
$
- $
- $
6,575
$
20,050
$ -
LA County
13.25%
$
- $
- $
12,827
$
36,902
$ -
Total
100.00%
$
- $ -
$
131,600
$
50,000
$ -
Notes:
1. Includes costs to perform non-stom water investigations (510K/Trib or Reach), Facts Sheets for Priority Outfalls ($3K/ea assumed 4 POs/Tdb or Reach), and LRS Reports for Segment E Tributaries
(FY 20-21), Segment C and its Tributaries, and Segment D and its Tributaries (FY 21-22)
Table 8: Upper Los Angeles Trash Monitoring And Reporting Plan (TMRP) Implementation FY18119 To FY 22/23
CITY
% Drainage Area
FY 18-19
FY 19-20
FY 20-21
FY 21-22
FY 22-23
City of Los Angeles
46.7%
$
35,305
$
35,305
$
35,305
$
35,305
$
35,305
Alhambra
1.26%
$
953
$
953
$
953
$
953
$
953
Burbank
2.86%
$
2,162
$
2,162
$
2,162
$
2,162
$
2,162
Calabasas
1.03%
$
1,201
$
779
$
779
$
779
$
779
Glendale
5.05%
$
3,818
$
3,818
$
3,818
$
3,818
$
3,818
Hidden Hills
0.25%
$
3,329
$
189
$
189
$
189
$
189
La Canada Flintridge
1.43%
$
1,081
$
1,081
$
1,081
$
1,081
$
1,081
Montebello
1.38%
$
1,043
$
1,043
$
1,043
$
1,043
$
1,043
Page 50 of 57
Monterey Park
1.28%
$
968
S
968
$
968
S
968
S
968
Pasadena
3.81%
S
2,880
$
2,880
S
2.880
S
2,880
S
2,880
Rosemead
0.85%
$
1,672
$
643
$
643
$
643
$
643
San Fernando
0.39%
$
2,935
$
295
$
295
S
295
S
295
San Gabriel
0.68%
$
2,158
$
514
$
514
$
514
S
514
San Marino
0.62%
S
2.302
$
469
$
469
S
469
$
469
South EI Monte
0.41%
$
2,898
$
310
$
310
$
310
$
310
South Pasadena
C.56%
$
2.450
$
423
$
423
S
423
$
423
Temple City
0.66%
$
2.197
S
499
$
499
$
499
S
499
LACFCD
_
S
0
S
0
$
0
S
0
S
0
LA County
10.57%
$
7,991
$
7,991
$
7,991
$
7,991
$
7,991
Total
79.79%
$
77,344
$
60,321
$
60,321
$
6D,321
$
60,321
Notes:
1 . Total Drainage Area (100%) includes the Ballon Creek Participating Agencies (not shown here).
2. LACFCD is imolementng their own TMRP independently, and is not contributing to this Watershed effort.
Table 9: Upper Los Angeles Special Studies Funds FY18119 To FY 22/23
CITY
% Drainage Area
FY 18-19
FY
19-20
FY
20-21
FY 21-22
FY
22-23
City of Los Angeles
58.53%
$ 44,483
$ 44,483
$ 44,483
$ 44,483
$ 44,483
Alhambra
1.58%
$ 1,2D1
S
1,201
S
1,201
$
1,201
$
1,201
Burbank
3.58%
$ 2,721
$
2,721
$
2,721
$
2,721
$
2,721
Calabasas
1.29%
$ 980
S
980
S
980
S
980
$
980
Glendale
6.32%
$ 4,803
$
4,803
$
4,803
$
4,803
S
4,803
Hidden Hills
0.31%
$ 236
S
236
$
236
S
236
$
236
La Canada Flintridge
1.79%
$ 1,360
$
1,360
$
1,360
$
1,360
$
1,360
Montebello
1.73%
$ 1,315
S
1,315
$
1,315
$
1,315
$
1.315
Monterey Park
1.60%
S 1,216
S
1,216
$
1,216
$
1,216
$
1,216
Pasadena
4.78%
$ 3,633
S
3.633
$
3,633
$
3,633
5
3.633
Rosemead
1.07%
$ 813
$
813
$
813
$
813
$
813
San Fernando
0.49%
$ 372
$
372
$
372
$
372
$
372
San Gabriel
0.85%
S 646
$
646
$
646
$
646
S
646
Page 51
of 57
San Marino
0.78%
$
593
$
593
$
593
S
593
$
593
South EI Monte
0.51%
$
388
$
388
$
388
$
388
$
388
South Pasadena
0.71%
$
540
S
540
S
540
$
540
S
540
Temple City
0.83%
$
631
$
631
$
631
S
631
$
631
LACFCD
—
S
4,000
S
4.000
S
4,000
S
4,000
S
4,000
LA County
13.25%
$
10,070
$
10,070
$
10,070
$
10,070
$
10,070
Total
100.00%
$
80,000
$
80,000
$
80,000
$
80,000
$
80,000
1. Special studies at a cost of $200,000 each spread out over 5 years.
Table 10: Upper Los Angeles 2017 Report Of Waste Discharge (ROWD) Cost
CITY % Drainage Area FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23
City of Los Angeles
58.53%
$ 11.355
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
Alhambra
1.58%
$ 307
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
Burbank
3.58%
$ 695
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
Calabasas
1.29°/
S 250
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
Glendale
6.32%
S 1,226
$ -
$ -
$ -
$
Hidden Hills
0.31%
S 60
S
-
La Canada Flintridge
1.79%
S 347
$ -
S -
5 -
$ -
Montebello
1.73%
S 336
S -
$ -
5 -
S -
Monterey Park
1.60%
$ 310
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
Pasadena
4.78%
S 927
S -
$ -
S -
$ -
Rosemead
1.07%
$ 208
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
San Fernando
0.49%
S 95
S -
$ -
S -
S -
San Gabriel
0.85%
$ 165
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
San Marino
0.78%
S 151
$ -
$ -
S -
S -
South EI Monte
0.51%
$ 99
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
South Pasadena
0.71%
$ 138
$ -
$ -
$ -
S -
Temple City
0.83%
S 161
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
LACFCD
—
—
$ -
5 -
$ -
S -
LA County
13.25%
5 2.571
$ -
S -
$ -
$ -
Total
100.00%
$ 19,400
$ -
5 -
$ -
S -
Page 52 of 57
EXHIBIT C
Upper Los Angeles River Enhanced Watershed Management Area
CIMP and EWMP Invoicing Schedule
Table 1. CIMP/EWMP Implementation Annual Implementation Costs
CITY
% Drainage Area
July 2018
July 2019
July 2020
July 2021
July 2022
City of Los Angeles
58.53%
$ 667,313
$ 803,332
$ 685,920
$ 790,103
$ 802,090
Alhambra
1.58%
S
17,100
S 14.537
S
16,788
$ 14,920
$ 16.038
Burbank
3.58%
$
38,815
$ 53,000
5
38,102
$ 56,019
$ 67,732
Calabasas
1.29%
$
28.894
S 74.310
S
53.680
$ 12,220
S 13,132
Glendale
6.32%
$
68,524
$ 89,645
5
67,266
$ 138,945
$ 112,479
Hidden Hills
0.31%
S
9,799
S 16,797
S
12,215
$ 2,935
$ 3.154
La Canada Flintridge
1.79%
$
19,377
$ 19,139
$
19,024
$ 16,908
$ 22,096
Montebello
1.73%
S
18,743
5 15.935
5
18,400
S 16,345
$ 17,578
Monterey Park
1.60%
$
17,332
S 14,736
$
17,016
$ 15,124
$ 16.256
Pasadena
4.78%
S
51,799
S 44,257
S
50,849
$ 45.232
$ 48.962
Rosemead
1.07%
$
12,615
$ 9,649
$
11,374
$ 10,109
$ 10,866
San Fernando
049%
S
7,949
$ 6,013
$
5,212
$ 8,634
$ 7,214
San Gabriel
0.85%
$
10,884
$ 7,858
$
9,069
$ 9,361
$ 8,665
San Marino
0.78°/
S
10.271
$ 7,172
$
8,284
S 7,361
$ 7,913
South EI Monte
0.51%
S
13,086
S 14,323
$
13,608
S 13.167
S 13.694
South Pasadena
0.71%
S
9.686
$ 6,510
$
7.522
S 6,682
$ 7,185
Temple City
0.83%
$
10,704
$ 7,657
$
8,840
$ 7,858
$ 8,446
LACFCD
-
S
51,519
$ 63,860
$
68,586
$ 61,856
$ 62,627
LA County
13.25%
$
159,814
$ 170,193
$
164,265
$ 172,880
$ 166,732
Total
100.00%
$ 1,224,224
$ 1,439,121
$ 1,276,019
$ 1,406,667
$ 1,412,860
Page 53 of 57
EXHIBIT D
Upper Los Angeles River EWMP/CIMP Responsible Agencies
Representatives
Agency Address
Agency Contact
City of Los Angeles
Shahram Kharaghani
Department of Public Works
E-mail: Shahram.Kharaghani@Lacily.org
Bureau of Sanitation, Watershed Protection Division
Phone: (213) 485-0587
1149 S. Broadway
Fax: (213) 485-3939
Los Angeles, CA 90015
County of Los Angeles
Paul Alva
Department of Public Works
E-mail: PALVA@dpw.lacounty.gov
Stormwater Quality Division, 11Th Floor
Phone: (626) 458-4325
900 South Fremont Avenue
Fax: (626) 457-1526
Alhambra, CA 91603-1331
Los Angeles County Flood Control District
Paul Alva
Department of Public Works
E-mail: PALVA@dpw.lacounty.gov
Stormwater Quality Division, 11m Floor
Phone: (626) 458-4325
900 South Fremont Avenue
Fax: (626) 457-1526
Alhambra, CA 91803-1331
City of Alhambra
David Dolphin
11 South First Street
E-mail: DDOLPHIN@cityofalhambra.org
Alhambra, XA 91801-3796
Phone: (626) 300-1571 Fax:
City of Burbank
Alvin Cruz
P.O. Box 6459
E-mail:ACruz@burbankca.gov
Burbank, CA 91510
Phone: (818) 238-3941 Fax:
City of Calabasas
Alex Farassati
100 Civic Center Way
E-mail: afarassati@cityofcalabasas.com
Calabasas, CA 91302-3172
Phone: (818) 224-1600
Fax: (818) 225-7338
City of Glendale
Chris Chew
Engineering Section, 633 East Broadway, Room 205
E-mail: cchew@ glendaleca.gov
Glendale, CA 91206-4308
Phone: (818) 548-3945
Fax:
City of Hidden Hills
Joe Bellomo
6165 Spring Valley Road
jbellomo@willdan.com Phone:
Hidden Hills, CA 91302
(805) 279-6856
City of La Canada Flintridge 1327
Hoon Hahn
Foothill Blvd.
E-mail: hhahn@Icf.ca.gov
La Canada Flintridge, CA 91011-2137
Phone: 818-790-8882
Fax:818-70.8897
Page 54 of 57
EXHIBIT D
Upper Los Angeles River EWMP/CIMP Responsible Agencies
Representatives
City of Montebello
Norma Salinas
1600 W Beverly Blvd
E-mail: Nsalinas@cityofmontebello.com
Montebello, CA 90640
Phone: 323-887-1365
Fax: 323- 887-1410
Eric Woosley
E-mail: ewoosley@infrastructure-engineers.com
Phone: 714-940-0100 Ext 5226
City of Monterey Park
Bonnie Tam
320 West Newmark Avenue
E-mail: btam@montereypark.ca.gov
Monterey Park, CA 91754-2896
Phone: (626) 307-1383
City of Pasadena
Sean Singletary
P.O. Box 7115
E-mail: ssingletary@cityofpasadena.net
Pasadena, CA 91109-7215
Phone: (626) 744-4273
Fax:
City of Rosemead,
Rafael Fajardo
8838 East Valley Blvd.
E-mail: rfajardo@cityofrosemead.org
Rosemead, CA 91770-1787
Phone: (626) 569-2107
Curtis Cannon
E-mail: ocannon@cityofrosemead.org
Phone: (626) 569-2107
City of San Fernando
Joe Bellomo
117 Macneil Street
Email: jbellomo@willdan.com
San Fernando, CA 91340
Phone: (805) 279-6856
City of San Gabriel
Daren Grilley
425 South Mission Avenue
E-mail: darlllev0sach.ora
San Gabriel, CA 91775
Phone:
Fax:
Patty Pena
ppena sach.oro
Phone: (626) 308-2825
City of San Marino
Kevin Sales
2200 Huntington Drive
E-mail: kjserv@aol.com
San Marino, CA 91108-2691
Phone:
Fax:
City of South EI Monte
Manuel Mancha
1415 Santa Anita Ave.
E-mail: mmancha@soelmonte.org
South El Monte, CA 91733
Phone: (626) 579-6540
Fax: (626) 579-2409
City of South Pasadena
Paul Toor
1414 Mission Street
E-mail: ptoor(@southpasadenaca gov
South Pasadena, CA 91020-3298
Phone: (626) 403-7246
Page 55 of 57
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 Governments
Marisa Crater
1000 S. Fremont Ave. Unit 42
E-mail: mcreter@sgvcog.org
Bldg A10 -N, Suite 10210
Phone: (626) 457-1800
Ihambra, CA 9180
Fax: (626) 457-1285
Page 56 of 57
EXHIBIT E
Upper Los Angeles River Enhanced Watershed Management Area
rM w
auwuoPaAxrtAno% _
swSswAla xNMlnDllua
Pxooawu luwwia _
n. x.Prn.n.xer.m.e. perm s ••v P•x
xxM.naWxr brleV4b xrr MY M xWr
.rs.a•�x.m.lns rxe.xnx.w oxracw uia.x•
MAWI K: 0116AIlO BY:
ulAaw,EMA1PMxx1•%
Page 57 of 57
�•
2I
UCAREASNOT
�•,
1
1IB6.20
USEIrNn GICUTATIpV
0.83%
Tobl
309,73).33
100%
k
•ti
ti
l Iia
(t(,�1
WaMJ
r
s
uo..
i
j
� W
!
los An eln WOMahM u ors tkrp MtAh fWAB
Agency
Area lanes)
Perc[nt Aro
_ _
"\
Athamb--------------
4 8133
1.58%
swwopo
Burbank
11 95.2D
3.58%
Calabash
0005.68
139%
A
CII o/LosM Na
181 88.00
5863%
i
I
Glendale
19 8L50
6.33%
tt
Mlddln Hills
961.03
031%
f
V Cards ilinhl
5 531.16
1.79%
%j
losM Nes faun
A 048.07
13.25%
it
MonlebNlo
5 36.38
133%
Monterey Park
4931.51
1.60%
Pasadena
30,805.30
4.78%
lalm--siPx
raPx
Rosemh0
3,310.87
1.07%
�. +.
San Fernando
151].61
0.19%
San GabrlN
x 01.87
O,Bs%
LEGEND
sen Marino
2109.6E
0.78%
Los Angeles River
I Upper Los Angeles
Upper LA Watershed Group
l_.._f Watershed Boundary
Participating in this EWMP
VIIW7�nW
Flood Control
Upper LA Watershed Agencies not
Dislnct Territory
Participating in this EWMP
Upper Los Angeles River Watershed
e
rM w
auwuoPaAxrtAno% _
swSswAla xNMlnDllua
Pxooawu luwwia _
n. x.Prn.n.xer.m.e. perm s ••v P•x
xxM.naWxr brleV4b xrr MY M xWr
.rs.a•�x.m.lns rxe.xnx.w oxracw uia.x•
MAWI K: 0116AIlO BY:
ulAaw,EMA1PMxx1•%
Page 57 of 57
1594.16SI
1IB6.20
0.]I%157650
0.83%
Tobl
309,73).33
100%
rM w
auwuoPaAxrtAno% _
swSswAla xNMlnDllua
Pxooawu luwwia _
n. x.Prn.n.xer.m.e. perm s ••v P•x
xxM.naWxr brleV4b xrr MY M xWr
.rs.a•�x.m.lns rxe.xnx.w oxracw uia.x•
MAWI K: 0116AIlO BY:
ulAaw,EMA1PMxx1•%
Page 57 of 57