Agenda packet, first session — American Canyon City Council, May 2, 2023

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
City Hall - Council Chambers
4381 Broadway St., Suite 201, American Canyon
May 2, 2023
6:30 PM
City Council and other public meengs will be conducted in person at City Hall, 4381 Broadway, Suite 201, and also via Zoom Teleconferencing to promote local, state, and federal guidelines and social distancing recommendaons for the containment of the coronavirus. Members of the public are invited to a'end the meeng either in person or via teleconference. This meeng will be broadcast live to residents on Napa Valley TV, on our websitehere and on YouTube here.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Oral comments, during the mee(ng: Oral comments can be made in person during Open and Closed Session. A Zoom Webinar has been established for public comments made via zoom, during Open Session only. To give your public comment via zoom, connect via the below Zoom link and use the “raise your hand” tool, or call into the zoom mee-ng at 408-638-0968 and press *9 to “raise your hand” when the item is called. To avoid confusion, all hands raised outside of Public Comment periods will be lowered.

Written comments, via eComments: Please submit wri2en comments through the eComments link, located on the Mee-ngs & Agendas page of our websitehere. Comments will be available to council members in real -me. To allow for review of comments, eComments will close at 3:00 pm on the day of the mee-ng. All comments received will be posted online and become part of the mee-ng record.

Zoom Meeting Link: Click here.

Webinar ID: 852 5117 7763; Passcode: 123456
The above-iden-fied measures exceed all legal requirements for par-cipa-on in public comment, including those imposed by the Ralph M. Brown Act. For more informa-on, please call the Office of the City Clerk at (707) 647-4369 or email [email protected].

AGENDA MATERIALS: City Council agenda materials are published 72 hours prior to the mee-ng and are available to the public via the City’s website at www.cityofamericancanyon.org.

AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT: The City Council will provide materials in appropriate alterna-ve formats to comply with the Americans with Disabili-es Act. Please send a wri2en request to City Clerk at 4381 Broadway, Suite 201, American Canyon, CA 94503 or by email to [email protected]. Include your name, address, phone number and brief descrip-on of the requested materials, as well as your preferred alterna-ve format or auxiliary aid, at least three calendar days before the meeting.

Mayor: Leon Garcia
Vice Mayor: Pierre Washington
Councilmembers: Mariam Aboudamous, Mark Joseph, David Oro CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MAY 2, 2023
1 PUBLIC ADDRESS – CLOSED SESSION 5:30 P.M.

The Mayor will call the meeng to order and conduct role call. Council will immediately convene into Closed Session a+er hearing any public comment on Closed Session items. At 6:30 p.m. the Council will reconvene into Open Session and then resume Closed Session at the end of the meeting to address outstanding items, if necessary. 5:30 P.M. CLOSED SESSION

1. Matters Relating to Public Employment Public Employee Performance Evaluation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.

Position: Jason Holley, City Manager

2. Conference with Legal Counsel – An(cipated Li(ga(on Authorized pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(2).

One Matter.

3. Conference with Legal Counsel - Exis(ng Li(ga(on. Pursuant to Government Code Sec(on 54956.9(d)(1):
a. American Canyon I , LLC vs. Napa Unified School District(Napa Superior Court Case No. 22CV001145).
b. City of American Canyon v. City of Vallejo, et al. (Sacramento Superior Court Case No. 34-2022-00327471).
c. City of American Canyon v. Leon Dale Schmidt , Napa County Superior Court Case No. 22CV001041.
d. Center for Biological Diversity v. City of American Canyon et al., Napa County Superior Court Case No. 23CV000511.
e. Golden State Environmental Jus&ce Alliance v. City of American Canyon et al., Napa Superior Court Case No. 23cv000510.
f. City of Vallejo v. City of American Canyon et al., Napa County Superior Court Case No. 23CV000517.

CALL TO ORDER - CLOSED SESSION

ROLL CALL - CLOSED SESSION

PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
This me is reserved for members of the public to address the City Council on Closed Session Items only. Comments must be made in person and are limited to 3 minutes. Comments for items on the Open Session agenda will be taken when the item is called in Open Session. Comments for Items not on the Closed Session or Open Session agenda will be heard during the Open Session Public Comment period.

MEETING RECESS - COUNCIL TO CONVENE IN CLOSED SESSION
6:30 P.M. OPEN SESSION - REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MAY 2, 2023
2 CALL TO ORDER

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION/CONFIRMATION OF REPORTABLE ACTION

PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

4. Proclamation - Older Americans Month May 2023

5. Proclamation - Historic Preservation Month

6. Proclamation - Mental Health Matters Month

7. Proclama(on - May 2023 Asian American and Na(ve Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Heritage Month

8. Proclamation - 54th Annual Professional Municipal Clerks Week

PUBLIC COMMENTS - ITEMS NOT ON CLOSED SESSION OR OPEN SESSION AGENDA This me is reserved for members of the public to address the City Council on items that are not on the Closed Session or Open Session agenda and are within the subject ma'er jurisdicon of the City Council. Comments are limited to 3 minutes. Comments for items on the Open Session agenda will be taken when the item is called in Open Session.The City Council is prohibited by law from taking any acon on ma'ers discussed that are not on the agenda, and no adverse conclusions should be drawn if the City Council does not respond to public comment at this time.

AGENDA CHANGES
The Mayor and Council may change the order of the Agenda or request discussion of a Consent Item. A member of the Public may request discussion of a Consent Item by making that request during Public Comment.

CONSENT CALENDAR

9. City Council Minutes of April 18, 2023
Recommendation: Approve the minutes of the Regular City Council mee-ng of April 18, 2023.

10. Contract Amendment #8 Brightview Landscape
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolu-on authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment 8 to Agreement 2017-111 with BrightView Landscape Services in the amount of$21,012 for a total contract amount not to exceed $2,605,011 for ongoing landscape maintenance for the new Devlin Road Extension.

11. Title 10 – Vehicles and Traffic, Chapter 10.56 Speed Limits Code Update Recommendation: Waive second reading, read by -tle only, and adopt an Ordinance amending Title 10 – Vehicles and Traffic, Chapter 10.56 Speed Limits of the American Canyon Municipal Code.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MAY 2, 2023
3 12. Interwest Consul(ng Group Building and Safety Services contract augment and one-year extension
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolu-on of the City Council of the City of American Canyon approving Amendment 16 to Agreement 2011-A105 with the Interwest Consul-ng Group to extend the contract for Building and Safety Services to the end of Fiscal Year 2023/24, and increase the total contract amount by $642,000 not to exceed $3,784,500.

13. Lance Soll and Lunghard LLP contract amendment and extension Recommendation: Adopt a Resolu-on of the City Council of the City of American Canyon approving Amendment 2 to Agreement 2022-A101 with Lance Soll and Lunghard LLP (Exhibit A) to increase the total contract amount by $110,000 to an amount not to exceed $159,900, extend the contract term to June 30, 2024, and amend the Fiscal Year 2022/23 budget to account for the additional contract cost during the current fiscal year.

14. Quarterly Investment Report for City and Fire District for Fiscal Year 2022-23 Quarter 3 Recommendation: Receive and file the City and Fire District’s Treasurer’s Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2023.

15. HdL Companies Cannabis Permit Management services 2-year contract extension Recommendation: Adopt a Resolu-on of the City Council of the City of American Canyon approving Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 2018-177 with HdL Companies for a 2-year contract extension for Commercial Cannabis Permit Management Services from July 1, 2023 to June 30, 2025.

16. Report Upon Return from Closed Session - April 18, 2023

PUBLIC HEARINGS

17. Smoke Free Multi-Unit Housing Ordinance
Recommendation: Waive first reading, read by -tle only, and adopt an Ordinance by the City Council of the City of American Canyon amending the American Canyon Municipal Code Chapter 9.04 “Neighborhood Preserva-on” to prohibit smoking in any unit of a mul--unit residence and any common area of a multi-unit residence in the City of American Canyon.

BUSINESS

18. Kids Commerce Business License Fee Waiver
Recommendation: Adopt a Minute Order waiving Business License Fees for youth participants in the American Canyon Chamber of Commerce's "Kid's Commerce" program.

19. Pooled Insurance Program
Recommendation: Receive and file presenta-on regarding PLAN Joint Powers Authority's pooled insurance programs.

MANAGEMENT AND STAFF ORAL REPORTS
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MAY 2, 2023
4 MAYOR/COUNCIL COMMENTS, COMMITTEE REPORTS, AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS The Mayor and Council may comment on ma'ers of public concern and announce ma'ers of public interest; no collective council action will be taken.

20. City Council Committee Report - Councilmember Joseph

21. City Council Committee Report - Councilmember Oro

22. Future Agenda Items of Note:

May 16, 2023 Council Meeting
Memorial Day
Public Works Week
Rotary of Napa and NCOE Presentation on Spirit Horse
Safe Gambling Student Presentation
Safe Gun Storage Ordinance
LLAD Draft Engineers Report
Proposed FY 23/24 Budget
June 6, 2023 Council Meeting
Juneteenth
LGBTQ Pride Month
Philippine Cultural Month
Final FY 23/24 Budget
LLAD Annual Budget
June 20, 2023 Council Meeting
Fair Housing Napa Valley Annual Report
Napa Housing Authority Annual Report
June 20, 2023 Special Meeting with Open Space, Ac(ve Transporta(on and Sustainability Commission (7:30p)
FY 23/24 Annual Work Plan
June 20, 2023 Special Meeting with Parks and Community Services Commission (8:30p) FY 23/24 Annual Work Plan
July 4, 2023 Council Meeting Cancelled Due to Fourth of July Holiday

ADJOURNMENT

CERTIFICATION
I, Taresa Geilfuss, CMC, City Clerk for the City of American Canyon, do hereby declare that the foregoing agenda of the City Council was posted in compliance with the Brown Act prior to the meeting date. ______________________________________
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MAY 2, 2023
5 Taresa Geilfuss, CMC, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MAY 2, 2023
6 CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON

PROCLAMATION

IN RECOGNITION OF OLDER AMERICANS MONTH
MAY 2023
WHEREAS, President John F. Kennedy established Senior Citizen Month (since renamed Older American Month) in 1963; and
WHEREAS, since then the population of adults over 65 has increased from 17 million to over 50 million people in 2023, representing approximately 16.5% of the US population; and WHEREAS, it is important to acknowledge the contributions older individuals have made in our community and in the workplace to the economic well-being of our nation through civic leadership and mentoring; and
WHEREAS, our expanding elder population profoundly impacts every facet of our lives, redefining our ideas of work, retirement and leisure, altering our housing and living arrangements, challenging our healthcare systems, reshaping our economy, and altering social and public policy; and WHEREAS, the opportunity and challenges that await us require our continued commitment to the goal of ensuring that our senior citizens enjoy active, productive and healthy lives, and do so independently, safely and with dignity; and
WHEREAS, the City of American Canyon joins the national tradition of designating the month of May as a time to celebrate the contributions of older Americans and rededicate our efforts to better serve their needs; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City American Canyon wishes to express its appreciation for past and continuing contributions of its older residents to the community and our nation, and recognize that older adults are a vital and growing part of our City; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that I, Leon Garcia, Mayor of the City of American Canyon, on behalf of the American Canyon City Council, do hereby proclaim May 2023, to be Older Americans Month. I urge every resident to recognize the contributions of our older citizens, help to create an inclusive society, and join efforts to support older Americans’ choices about how they age in their communities.

Dated: May 2, 2023 ______________________________
Leon Garcia, Mayor
7 CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON

PROCLAMATION
Historic Preservation Month
WHEREAS, the National Park Service’s Register of Historic Places is authorized by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. The National Register program supports public and private efforts to identify, evaluate, protect, and adapt for re-use, America's historic, cultural, and archeological resources; and WHEREAS, in 1973, May was designated “Preservation Month” to raise awareness of historic preservation and the continuity it builds between past, present, and future to instill national and community pride, promote heritage tourism and show the social, economic, and environmental benefits of historic preservation; and WHEREAS, Napa County has irreplaceable historic resources including stone bridges, 19th Century wineries, Victorian commercial buildings, our WPA-era Post Offices as well as architect-designed residences; and WHEREAS, Napa County Landmarks (NCL), founded in 1974 by John Whitridge, is a non-profit organization that fosters appreciation and preservation of historic buildings, sites and districts through education programs, public policy, research, and technical assistance; and
WHEREAS, NCL creates community discussion and preservation of our historic resources to protect and re-use them, create jobs, stabilize property values and preserve existing housing stock; and WHEREAS, NCL creates community discussion and preservation of our historic resources to protect and re-use them, for example, the American Canyon cement silos, once threatened, will now be reused by the current developer, create jobs, stabilize property values and preserve existing housing stock; and WHEREAS, Throughout the year, NCL creates awareness of historic preservation through the Holiday Candlelight Tour, Annual Preservation Awards, walking and biking tours of historic areas as well as the creation of the Ten Threatened Treasures list of endangered historic places facing potential demolition: and WHEREAS, NCL provides high school scholarships to seniors to promote interest in Napa County history in our local youth as well as distributes A Napa Coloring Book free to all third graders in Napa County; and Whereas, NCL recognizes Napa County preservation through the Preservationist of the Year award and Awards of Merit to honor those who restore, rehabilitate or adapt an historic resource for continued use; and NOW, THEREFORE I, Leon Garcia, Mayor of the City of American Canyon, on behalf of the American Canyon City Council, do herby proclaim, May, as Historic Preservation Month and call on our citizens to support preservation and Napa County Landmarks efforts to preserve the rich history of Napa County.

Dated: May 2, 2023
__________________________
Leon Garcia, Mayor
8 CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON

PROCLAMATION
Mental Health Matters Month
May 2023
WHEREAS, half of the population will experience some type of mental health challenge over the course of a lifetime; and
WHEREAS, 64% of individuals who screened as “at risk” for mental health concerns had never received treatment or support before and data highlighted how profoundly mental health concerns impacted individuals based on their racial and ethnic groups; and WHEREAS, the Mental Health Division seeks to reduce barriers to access, improve community engagement that ensures culturally and linguistically competent care to divers Napa County communities through culturally competent services and policies; and WHEREAS, the Mental Health Plan works to eliminate disparities in services and increase education about mental illness, Napa County service providers are to be commended for their community collaborative approach when working with individuals in need; and
WHEREAS, a holistic approach to services which includes prevention, early intervention and wrap around services is an effective way to meet the needs of individuals at risk of developing mental health issues, individuals who are experiencing early onset of the symptoms of mental illness, or individuals with serious mental illness or severe emotional disturbance; and
WHEREAS, creating a community where everyone feels comfortable reaching out for the support they deserve is crucial to ending the stigma around mental health; and treating individuals with mental illness with respect is of immense importance.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that I, Mayor Leon Garcia, on behalf of the entire City Council, do hereby proclaim the Month of May as Mental Health Matters Month.

Date: May 2, 2023 ____________________________
Leon Garcia, Mayor
9 CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON

PROCLAMATION
Asian American and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
Heritage Month
May 2023
WHEREAS, this May, during Asian American and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Heritage Month, we recognize the history and achievements of Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders (AANHPIs) across our Nation. We reflect on the tradition of leadership, resilience, and courage shown by AANHPI communities, and recommit to the struggle for AANHPI equity; and WHEREAS, our city is a diverse one - with Asian American/Pacific Islanders comprising 34.9% of American Canyon’s total population, Latinx comprising 30.7%, Caucasian at 20.5% and Black/other 13.5%; and WHEREAS, Asian Americans, and Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders make our Nation more vibrant through diversity of cultures, languages, and religions. There is no single story of the AANHPI experience, but rather a diversity of contributions that enrich America’s culture and society and strengthen the United States’ role as a global leader. The American story as we know it would be impossible without the strength, contributions, and legacies of AANHPIs who have helped build and unite this country in each successive generation; and
WHEREAS, despite the strength shown and successes achieved, AANHPI communities face systemic barriers to economic justice, health equity, educational attainment, and personal safety. We recognize the heightened fear felt by many Asian American communities in the wake of increasing rates of antiAsian harassment and violence. We will continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with AANHPI citizens of our community in condemning, denouncing, and preventing these acts of violence. We will continue to look for opportunities to heal together and fight against all racism; and WHEREAS, we affirm that Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders make our community stronger. We urge our friends, neighbors and people in our community to join us this month in celebrating AANHPI history, people, and cultures; and
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Mayor Leon Garcia, on behalf of the City of American Canyon, do hereby proclaim May 2023 as Asian American and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Heritage Month. I call upon the people of American Canyon to learn more about the history of Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders, and to observe this month with appropriate programs and activities.

Dated: May 2, 2023
__________________________
Leon Garcia, Mayor
10 CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON

PROCLAMATION
54th ANNUAL PROFESSIONAL MUNICIPAL CLERKS WEEK
April 30 - May 6, 2023
Whereas, The Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk, a time honored and vital part of local government exists throughout the world, and
Whereas, The Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk is the oldest among public servants, and Whereas, The Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk provides the professional link between the citizens, the local governing bodies and agencies of government at other levels, and Whereas, Professional Municipal Clerks have pledged to be ever mindful of their neutrality and impartiality, rendering equal service to all.

Whereas, The Professional Municipal Clerk serves as the information center on functions of local government and community.

Whereas, Professional Municipal Clerks continually strive to improve the administration of the affairs of the Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk through participation in education programs, seminars, workshops and the annual meetings of their state, provincial, county and international professional organizations.

Whereas, It is most appropriate that we recognize the accomplishments of the Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk.

Now, Therefore, I, Leon Garcia, Mayor of the City of American Canyon, on behalf of the American Canyon City Council, do recognize the week of April 30 through May 6, 2023, as Professional Municipal Clerks Week, and further extend appreciation to our Professional Municipal Clerks, City Clerk Taresa Geilfuss and Deputy City Clerk Cherri Walton and to all Professional Municipal Clerks for the vital services they perform and their exemplary dedication to the communities they represent.

Dated: May 2, 2023 __________________________
Leon Garcia, Mayor
11 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
MAY 2, 2023

STAFF REPORT

CONSENT
ITEM NUMBER: 9.

TITLE
City Council Minutes of April 18, 2023

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the minutes of the Regular City Council meeting of April 18, 2023.

ATTACHMENTS:

Minutes of April 18, 2023.pdf
12 CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING

ACTION MINUTES
April 18, 2023
5:30 P.M. – CLOSED SESSION

CALL TO ORDER - CLOSED SESSION
The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER - CLOSED SESSION

ROLL CALL - CLOSED SESSION

Present: Councilmember Mariam Aboudamous, Councilmember Mark Joseph, Councilmember David Oro, Vice Mayor Pierre Washington, Mayor Leon Garcia

Absent: None
Excused: None

PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
Mayor Garcia opened the public comments for closed session items. Written comments: none. Oral comments: none. The public comments period was closed.

MEETING RECESS - COUNCIL TO CONVENE IN CLOSED SESSION
The open session was recessed to reconvene in closed session at 5:31 p.m. 5:30 P.M. CLOSED SESSION ITEMS

1. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation Authorized pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(2). Two Matters.

2. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1):

American Canyon I, LLC vs. Napa Unified School District (Napa Superior Court Case No. 22CV001145).

City of American Canyon v. City of Vallejo, et al. (Sacramento Superior Court Case No. 34-2022- 00327471).

City of American Canyon v. Leon Dale Schmidt, Napa County Superior Court Case No. 22CV001041 13 3. Threat to Public Services of Facilities - Pursuant to Government Code 54957(a) Consultation with: Jason B. Holley, City Manager/Director of Emergency Services & William D.

Ross, City Attorney
6:30 P.M. OPEN SESSION - REGULAR MEETING

CALL TO ORDER - COUNCIL TO RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION
The Council reconvened in open session with a called to order at 6:32 p.m.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.

ROLL CALL - OPEN SESSION

Present: Councilmember Mariam Aboudamous, Councilmember Mark Joseph, Councilmember David Oro, Vice Mayor Pierre Washington, Mayor Leon Garcia

Absent: None
Excused: None

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION/CONFIRMATION OF REPORTABLE ACTION City Attorney William Ross provided an oral report upon return from closed session. Closed session commenced at 5:32 p.m. Closed session adjourned at 6:15 p.m. A written report will be provided.

PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

4. Proclamation - National Building Safety Month
Mayor Garcia announced the proclamation. It was received by Community Development Director Brent Cooper with Permit Technician Laura Welch and Administrative Technician Nicolle Hall.

5. Proclamation - National Volunteers Week April 16th-22nd, 2023 Mayor Garcia announced the proclamation. It was received by Adrian Peet and Cheryl JacksonPeet.

6. Proclamation - Nation Earth Day, April 22, 2023
Mayor Garcia announced the proclamation. It was received by Janelle Sellick with other members of the American Canyon Arts Foundation.
14 PUBLIC COMMENTS - ITEMS NOT ON CLOSED SESSION OR OPEN SESSION AGENDA Mayor Garcia called for public comments. Written comments: none. Oral comments: Hassan Khattak was called to speak; Sindy Biederman was called to speak; Karina Servente was called to speak. The public comments period was closed.

AGENDA CHANGES
There were no changes to the agenda.

CONSENT CALENDAR
Action: Motion to adopt CONSENT CALENDAR made by Councilmember Mark Joseph, seconded by Vice Mayor Pierre Washington, and CARRIED by roll call vote.

Ayes: Councilmember Mariam Aboudamous, Councilmember Mark Joseph, Councilmember David Oro, Vice Mayor Pierre Washington, Mayor Leon Garcia Nays: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Excused: None

7. Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of April 4, 2023 Action: Approved the minutes of the City Council Meeting of April 4, 2023.

8. Report Upon Return from Closed Session
Action: Approved the Report Upon Return from Closed Session from the Regular City Council Meeting of April 4, 2023.

9. 6th Cycle Housing Element Municipal Code Implementation Action: Waived second reading, read by title only, and adopted Ordinance 2023--03 by the City Council of the City of American Canyon amending the American Canyon Municipal Code Chapter

19.38 "Emergency Shelters"; and Chapter 19.39 "Accessory Dwelling Units" consistent with current State Law.

10. Circle K Gas Station Off-Site Public Improvements
Action: Adopted Resolution 2023-26 of the City Council of the City of American Canyon accepting the Off-Site Public Improvements associated with the Circle K Gas Station Project (Agreement 2023-11-R).

11. BPR Consulting Group Permit Technician Contract Amendment and Extension Action: Adopted Resolution 2023-27 of the City Council of the City of American Canyon approving Amendment 1 (Agreement 2023-37) to Agreement 2022-A136 with BPR Consulting Group Permit Technician services to increase the total contract amount by $157,500 to an amount not to exceed $207,500, extend the contract term to June 30, 2024, and amend the Fiscal Year 2022/23 budget to account for the additional contract cost during the current fiscal year. 15 12. Annual 2022 General Plan Annual Progress Report
Action: Received and filed the 2022 General Plan Annual Progress Report.

13. Credit Card Processing Fees
Action: Approve changes to the City's credit card processing practices (Minute Order 2023-10) so that fees will no longer be absorbed by the city and instead passed through to end users.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

14. Summary Vacation of Easement
Council received a staff report from Public Works Director Erica Ahman Smithies. Mayor Garcia called for public comments. Written comments: none. Oral comments: none. The public comments period was closed.

Action: Motion to adopt Resolution 2023-28 of the City Council of the City of American Canyon, authorizing the City Manager to summarily vacate the 25-foot-wide water easement (Agreement 2023-12-R), containing 61,924 square feet described in Exhibit A, Parcel B, in Resolution 2009-08 made by Councilmember David Oro, seconded by Councilmember Mark Joseph, and CARRIED by roll call vote.

Ayes: Councilmember Mariam Aboudamous, Councilmember Mark Joseph, Councilmember David Oro, Vice Mayor Pierre Washington, Mayor Leon Garcia Nays: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Excused: None
Councilmember Mariam Aboudamous left the meeting at 7:10 p.m.

15. Speed Survey Update
Council received a staff report from Public Works Director Erica Ahman Smithies with consultant Ashlee Takushi available for questions. Mayor Garcia opened the public hearing and called for public comments. Written comments: Carlotta Sainato. Oral comments: Sindy Biederman was called to speak. Public comments and the public hearing were closed.

Action: Motion to adopt Resolution 2023-29 approving the 2022 Engineering and Traffic Surveys and the Speed Limit recommendations therein and directing the City Clerk to file the Report with the Napa County Traffic Court made by Councilmember David Oro, seconded by Vice Mayor Pierre Washington, and CARRIED by roll call vote.

Ayes: Councilmember Mark Joseph, Councilmember David Oro, Vice Mayor Pierre Washington, Mayor Leon Garcia
Nays: None
Abstain: None
16 Absent: Councilmember Mariam Aboudamous
Excused: None
Action: Motion to waive first reading, read by title only, and introduce an Ordinance amending Title 10 - Vehicles and Traffic, Chapter 10.56 Speed Limits of the American Canyon Municipal Code made by Councilmember David Oro, seconded by Councilmember Mark Joseph, and CARRIED by roll call vote.

Ayes: Councilmember Mark Joseph, Councilmember David Oro, Vice Mayor Pierre Washington, Mayor Leon Garcia
Nays: None
Abstain: None

Absent: Councilmember Mariam Aboudamous
Excused: None

BUSINESS

16. Parks and Recreation Department User Fee Schedule
Council received a staff report from Parks & Recreation Director Alexandra Ikeda. Mayor Garcia called for public comments. Written comments: Cathy Margolati. Oral comments: Fran Lemos was called to speak. The public comments period was closed.

Action: Motion to adopt Resolution 2023-30 to amend the Parks and Recreation User Fee Schedule to update and establish new user fees for the performance of various Parks and Recreation Department services made by Vice Mayor Pierre Washington, seconded by Councilmember David Oro, and CARRIED by roll call vote.

Ayes: Councilmember Mark Joseph, Councilmember David Oro, Vice Mayor Pierre Washington, Mayor Leon Garcia
Nays: None
Abstain: None

Absent: Councilmember Mariam Aboudamous
Excused: None

17. Annual Communications Report
Council received a staff report from Communications Manager Jen Kansanback. Mayor Garcia called for public comments. Written comments: none. Oral comments: Beth Marcus was called to speak. The public comments period was closed.
17 MANAGEMENT AND STAFF ORAL REPORTS

18. Maintenance and Utilities Department, Water Operations Update Council received a staff report and presentation from Water Systems Manager Dominic Patrick.

Parks & Recreation Director Alexandra Ikeda provided updates.

MAYOR/COUNCIL COMMENTS, COMMITTEE REPORTS, AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

19. Future Agenda Items of Note:

May 2, 2023
Municipal Clerk Week
Earth Day
Older Americans Month
Mental Health Month
Bike Month
Secondhand Smoke Prohibition
Kids Commerce Business License Fee Waiver
Facility Rental Insurance
May 16, 2023
Memorial Day
Public Works Week
National Building Safety Month
Safe Gun Storage Ordinance
LLAD Draft Engineers Report
Proposed FY 23/24 Budget
June 6, 2023
Juneteenth
LGBTQ Pride Month
Philippine Cultural Month
Final FY 23/24 Budget
LLAD Annual Budget

20. Council Committee Report - Councilmember Mark Joseph Councilmembers discussed future agenda items.
18 ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:28 p.m.

CERTIFICATION
Respectfully Submitted,
_____________________________________
Taresa Geilfuss, CMC, City Clerk
19 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
MAY 2, 2023

STAFF REPORT

CONSENT
ITEM NUMBER: 10.

TITLE
Contract Amendment #8 Brightview Landscape

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolu,on authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment 8 to Agreement 2017-111 with BrightView Landscape Services in the amount of$21,012 for a total contract amount not to exceed $2,605,011 for ongoing landscape maintenance for the new Devlin Road Extension.

CONTACT
Felix Hernandez, III, Maintenance and Utilities Director Brian Materne, Maintenance and Utilities Superintendent

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS
On July 1, 2017, the city hired Coast Landscape Management (now known as BrightView Landscape Services) to provide contracted landscape maintenance services (Agreement 2017-111, Resolu,on 2017-53). Subsequently, seven (7) additional amendments have added additional scope of work.

On July 2, 2019, the council approved Amendment 4 (Resolu,on 2019-57) which extended the contract term through June 30, 2020. On July 21, 2020, the council approved Amendment 6 (Resolu,on 2020-70) which extended the contract an addi,onal four (4) years through June 30, 2024.

In response to request from the property owners, BrightView propose to increase the frequency of weed and liBer control to (3) ,mes per week for LLAD Zone Three (Napa Junc,on). Amendment 7 (ABachment 2) increases the level of service for ongoing maintenance for LLAD Zone 3 (Napa Junc,on Mixed-Use) for Fiscal Years 2021/22 through 2023/24 congruent with Amendment 6 to include an infla,on adjustment of 2% minimum to 4% maximum for subsequent Fiscal Years for a total contract amount not to exceed $2,583,999.

The city has extended Devlin Road to the north crea,ng new areas within our city limits that need landscaping services. On November 18, 2022, Public Works did a "No,ce of Comple,on" for the Devlin Road and Vine Trail Extension Project (#TR14-0100) Resolu,on 2022-93. Landscaping 20 Services was transferred in March 2023 to the Parks Maintenance Division of the Maintenance and Utilities Department. BrightView Landscaping Service was the lowest estimate for monthly services.

Amendment #8 is for ongoing maintenance for the Devlin Road for the last 4 months of FY 2022/23 through FY 2023/24 congruent with Amendment #6 to include an infla,on adjustment of 2% minimum to 4% maximum for subsequent Fiscal Years. FY 2022/23 cost $5,100 and FY 2023/24 cost is $15,912 for a total increase of $21,012 bringing the total contract amount not to exceed $2,605,011.

COUNCIL PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
Outdoors and Recrea,on: "Expand opportuni,es for use of outdoor recrea,on and an ac,ve and healthy lifestyle."

FISCAL IMPACT
Sufficient funds exist in the FY 2022/23 Budget, Fund 281 account 281-85-460-42190 in the amount of $16,000.00, and Fund 100 account 100-40-540-42310 in the amount of $5,012.00.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
15301 - The Project is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") under the Class 1 exemp,on of exis,ng facili,es of Sec,on 15301 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regula,ons and said exemp,on is not negated by any excep,on under Sec,on 15300.2 of said Regulations.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution BrightView

2. Amendment 8 Brightview
21 RESOLUTION NO. 2023-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT 8 TO AGREEMENT 2007-A111 WITH BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPING SERVICE IN THE AMOUNT OF $21,012.00 AND A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $2,605,011,

FOR ANNUAL ONGOING LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES
WHEREAS, utilizing contract landscape maintenance firms is a cost-effective way to maintain parks and landscaped areas in Landscaping and Lighting Assessment Districts and other citywide locations; and WHEREAS, in 2017 the City re-bid and awarded the Landscape Maintenance Services Contract (Agreement 2017-A111) to Coast Landscape (now known as BrightView Landscape Services) as the lowest responsive bidder; and
WHEREAS, on July 21, 2020, the council approved Amendment 4 (Resolution 2020-70) which extended the contract term through June 30, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the City has extended Devlin Road to the north creating new areas within our city limits that need landscaping services; and
WHEREAS, BrightView Landscaping Service was the lowest estimate for monthly services; and WHEREAS, sufficient funds exist in FY 2022/23 and FY 2023/24 in Fund 281 account 281-85-460-42190 in the amount of $16,000.00, the remaining balance would be taken from Parks Division (Repairs and Maintenance) 100-40-540-42310.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of American Canyon hereby authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment 8 to Agreement 2017-A111 with BrightView Landscaping in the amount of $21,012.00 for a total contract amount not to exceed $2,605,011.00.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council of the City of American Canyon held on the 2nd day of May, 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
____________________________
Leon Garcia, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVE AS TO FORM:

____________________________ _____________________________ Taresa Geilfuss, CMC, City Clerk William D. Ross, City Attorney 22 CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON AGREEMENT NO. 2023-_____
AMENDMENT #8 TO AGREEMENT NO. 2021-A111 TO THE

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON STANDARD AGREEMENT FOR INDEPENDENT

CONTRACTOR SERVICES WITH BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPING SERVICES

RECITALS

1. The City of American Canyon (“CITY”) and Brightview Landscape (“CONTRACTOR”) have entered into an Agreement dated July 1, 2017.

2. The Agreement provides for amendments to perform specific tasks under a specific scope of services that may arise during the term of the agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, CITY and CONTRACTOR agree as follows:

1.00 SERVICES AND COMPENSATION
CONTRACTOR agrees to provide services as listed in Attachment “A” to increase the contract amount for FY 2022/2023 in the amount of $5,100.00 and FY 2023/2024 in the amount of $15,912.00 for a total increase of $21,012.00 for Devlin Road landscape services for a total not to exceed contract amount of $2,605,011.00.

2.00 REMAINING PROVISIONS
All other terms of the August 9, 2021 Agreement remain in full force and effect.

Executed on _________, 2023 at American Canyon, California.

CITY: CONTRACTOR:

By: ____________________________ By: __________________________ Jason B. Holley Fairlight Beard
City Manager General Manager

23 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
MAY 2, 2023

STAFF REPORT

CONSENT
ITEM NUMBER: 11.

TITLE
Title 10 – Vehicles and Traffic, Chapter 10.56 Speed Limits Code Update

RECOMMENDATION
Waive second reading, read by 1tle only, and adopt an Ordinance amending Title 10 – Vehicles and Traffic, Chapter 10.56 Speed Limits of the American Canyon Municipal Code.

CONTACT
Erica Ahmann Smithies, P.E., Public Works Director

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS
Maintaining vehicle speed enforcement is a key component in ensuring our neighborhood streets remain safe. The posted Speed Limits are not enforceable without a valid (i.e. current) Engineering and Traffic Safety Report.

Most streets in American Canyon are classified as local streets because they typically have low vehicle volumes and speeds. These roads have an automa1c (or prima facie) Speed Limit of 25 mph, regardless of whether or not a Speed Limit sign is posted. Special areas around sensi1ve popula1ons (such as schools) also have a prima facie speed limit of 25 mph.

Larger, high-volume City streets (such as collectors and arterials) have a prima facie Speed Limit of 55 mph. However, California Vehicle Code (CVC) also prohibits driving a vehicle on these streets “… at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property”.

Because the reasonable and prudent standard is subjec1ve, the State Legislature requires an Engineering and Traffic Survey (ETS) be conducted to substan1ate a lower speed limit. A Survey is required to guard against ci1es tendency to create speed traps in order to generate revenue from unsuspecting motorists.

Specifically, CVC §40802 et seq. requires an ETS to be conducted every five to ten years to determine the prevailing speed (or 85th percen1le speed). The prevailing speed is that which 85% of motorists are measured when driving safely (i.e. reasonable and prudent). It can vary over 1me 24 depending upon site condi1ons. Most oEen, the measured prevailing speed becomes the posted Speed Limit. However, the prevailing speed may be adjusted downward to a lower Speed Limit.

The maximum Speed Limit reduc1on is 5 mph (below the prevailing speed). This reduc1on can only be based upon engineering judgement of “condi1ons not readily apparent to the driver” (e.g. presence of pedestrians and collision rates). Said differently, the City cannot arbitrarily pick a lower Speed Limit; rather, it measures the speeds of the (mostly) safe vehicles, and then it can enforce those limits on all drivers. Further explana1on of this ra1onale is shown in AIachment 3 and a summary of recommended Speed Limits is shown in the table below:

ID Roadway Segment
Current Speed
Limit (mph)
Recommended
Speed Limit (mph)
1 Green Island Road Mezzetta Court to
SR 29
40 40
2 Eucalyptus Drive
Wetlands Edge
Road to Donaldson
Way
35 30
3 Benton Way
Wetlands Edge
Road to Donaldson
Way
25 25
4 Donaldson Way
West
Donaldson Way to
SR 29
25 25
5 Donaldson Way
East
SR 29 to Newell
Drive
25 25
6 West American
Canyon Road
Wetlands Edge
Road to James
Road
40 35
7 Kimberly Drive
Meadow Bay Drive
to SR 29
25 25
8 Wetlands Edge
Road
Eucalyptus Drive to
Kensington Drive
25 25
9 Hummingbird Way
Benton Way to
West American
Canyon Road
25 25
10 Donaldson Way
Eucalyptus Drive to
Benton Way
25 25
11 Elliot Drive
Benton Way to
West American
Canyon Road
30 25
12 Elliot Drive
West American
Canyon Road and
Marla Drive
25 25
25 13 James Road
Wilson Way to
West American
Canyon Road
25 25
14 Danrose Drive
West American
Canyon Road to
Mini Drive
25 25
15 Broadway Street
American Canyon
Road to Mini Drive
30 30
16 Newell Drive
Northern Newell
Open Space
Extents to
American Canyon
Road
35 30
17 Flosden Road
American Canyon
Road to Southern
City Limits
45 40
18 American Canyon
Road East
Broadway Street to
Eastern City Limits
45 40
In October 2022, the City ini1ated the new ETS for City streets (loca1ons 1-18 above) to help law enforcement’s ability to enforce posted Speed Limits. The ETS was completed under the direc1on of a Professional Traffic Engineer (Fehr and Peers) and the Public Works Director. It includes speed survey data, traffic volume counts, and accident history for the selected streets. This data was considered along with roadway characteris1cs, adjacent land uses, side street traffic, and sight distances in recommending appropriate posted speeds.

Based on the analysis in the ETS report, the recommenda1ons were to maintain the exis1ng speed limits for all roadway segments except for Segment 2, Segment 3, Segment 6, Segment 11, Segment 12, Segment 16, Segment 17 and Segment 18 outlined in the above table where a speed limit reduc1on of 5 mph is recommended. Addi1onal details including a comparison of the 2016/2017 ETS report are also provided in the 2022 ETS report.

On April 18, 2023, City Council approved the 2022 Engineering and Traffic Surveys report and the recommended Speed Limits therein and directed the City Clerk to file the report with the Napa County Traffic Court.

COUNCIL PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
Public Safety: "Ensure American Canyon remains a safe community."

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct financial impact to the City in approving the report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
26 The approval of the 2022 ETS is a Class 21 Categorical Exemp1on under CEQA Guidelines Sec1on 15321 (b), Enforcement Actions by Regulatory Agencies.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Ordinance - Chapter 10.56 Speed Limits

2. Speed Survey Report April 2023
27 ORDINANCE NO. 2023‐____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON AMENDING CHAPTER

10.56 SPEED LIMITS, TITLE 10 – VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC OF THE AMERICAN CANYON MUNICIPAL CODE WHEREAS, State law establishes prima facie speeds limits of 25 mph and 55 mph on certain City streets but allows the City to set lower prima facie speed limits based upon recommendations from an Engineering and Traffic Survey; and upon adoption by ordinance of the City and posting of such limits on the street thereon; and; and
WHEREAS, Engineering and Traffic Surveys are valid up to ten years depending upon site conditions and law enforcement personnel training and any recommendations for a lower prima facie speed limit must be adopted by ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City commissioned the 2022 Engineering and Traffic Surveys Report prepared by Fehr and Peers on April 2023; and
WHEREAS, the 2022 Engineering and Traffic Surveys Report was prepared under the direction of a Professional Traffic Engineer based upon speed survey data, traffic volume counts, accident reports, roadway characteristics, adjacent land uses, side street traffic and sight distance for the selected streets and include recommendations for Speed Limits; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Director, the Fire Chief, and the Police Chief agree with the recommendations in the 2022 Engineering and Traffic Surveys Report.

NOW, THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: Chapter 10.56 Speed Limits, Title 10 vehicles and Traffic of the American Canyon Municipal Code is superseded and replaced with:

The Ordinance shall take effect 30 days from adoption.

The foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of American Canyon, State of California, held on the 18th day of April, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

The foregoing Ordinance was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of American Canyon, State of California, held on the 2nd day of May, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT: _____________________________
Leon Garcia, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________ ___________________________ Taresa Geilfuss, CMC, City Clerk William D. Ross, City Attorney 29 City of American Canyon –
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
Prepared for:

City of American Canyon
April 2023
WC22-3928
30 Table of Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... i

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1

2. Existing Roadway Network .................................................................................................................... 3 Roadway Network................................................................................................................................................. 3

3. Average Daily Traffic Volumes .............................................................................................................. 8

4. Speed Survey Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 10 Data Collection ................................................................................................................................................... 10 California Vehicle Code ...................................................................................................................................... 10 Prima Facie Speed limits ............................................................................................................................ 11 Engineering and Traffic Survey................................................................................................................... 11 AB-43 and AB-1938 .................................................................................................................................... 13 Collision Data............................................................................................................................................... 14 Segments Summaries........................................................................................................................................ 20

5. Comparison of 2022 Speeds to 2016/2017 Surveys ..................................................................... 29

6. Summary and Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 33 Appendices
Appendix A: Data Sheets for Study Segments
Appendix B: CVC Section 627
31 List of Figures
Figure 1: Study Roadway Segments........................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: Posted Speed Limits .................................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 3: Institutions, Community Centers, and Priority Locations........................................................................... 7 Figure 4: Average Daily Traffic Volumes (Bi-Directional) ........................................................................................... 9 Figure 5: Observed 85th Percentile Speeds ............................................................................................................17 Figure 6: Summary of Observed 85th Percentile Speeds .......................................................................................18 Figure 7: Location of Collisions Related to Speed...................................................................................................19 Figure 8: Change in 85th Percentile Speeds Between 2016/2017 and 2022.....................................................32 List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Speed Survey Results ............................................................................................................14 Table 2: Speed Survey Comparison between 2016/2017 and 2022 Results......................................................29 32 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
i
Executive Summary
This report presents the results of an engineering and traffic survey analysis completed in the City of American Canyon, California. This study analyzes the appropriateness of posted speed limits on 18 roadway segments within the American Canyon City limits. Speed limits for the roadway segments were evaluated and compared to the 85th percentile speed to make recommendations on whether the speed limit is appropriate and can be radar enforced per California law. Locations where the 85th percentile speed deviates from the posted speed limit by at least 2.5 miles per hour were analyzed in more detail. Additionally, in October 2021, Assembly Bill 43 (AB 43) was signed by the Governor and in September 2022, Assembly Bill 1938 (AB 1938) became law. Both Assembly Bills authorize local authorities to consider the safety of vulnerable users such as pedestrians, bicyclists, and those who roll (wheelchair users, scooters, etc.) when setting speed limits. With these Assembly Bills in place, local authorities have additional justification to lower speed limits in combination with other improvements to manage speeds. These redundancies in implementation on our roadway system to reduce fatal and severe injuries are in line with the national and state level adoption of the Safe System Approach.

The Safe System Approach is based on the premise that death and severe injury due to collisions is unacceptable on our roadways, and we have a shared responsibility to prevent these tragic events from occurring. The adoption of the lower speed limit settings from AB 43 and AB 1938 promotes the reduction in speeds in areas where there is potential for more multimodal activity. Lowering speeds of vehicles helps to reduce the kinetic energy between vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists when a crash does occur, reducing the outcome of a fatal or severe injury.

Overall, the observed 85th percentile speeds have slightly increased as compared to the data from the 2016/2017 Speed Surveys. Speeds have increased in one or both directions on 8 of the 16 roadway segments (50%) and decreased or stayed the same on 8 roadway segments. One new segment (Kimberly Drive) was added to this speed survey and has no recorded 2016/2017 speed data. The following road segments have 85th percentile speeds that are 10 mph or more above the current posted speed limit:
• Kimberly Drive from Meadow Bay Drive to SR 29 (Segment 7) • Elliot Drive from West American Canyon Road to Marla Drive (Segment 12) • Broadway Street from American Canyon Road East to Mini Drive (Segment 15) The California Vehicle Code (CVC) and Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) allow consideration of other factors besides the 85th percentile speed when setting posted speed limits. These factors include existing roadway conditions (e.g., pavement width), on-street residential density, pedestrian and bicycle safety, and speed-related collision data. Further, the adoption of AB 43 and AB 1938 allows local 33 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
ii
jurisdictions to also consider surrounding land use contexts such as schools, senior zones, and business activity districts. Incorporating these factors into the speed survey evaluation, we recommend the existing speed limits be maintained on all but five study roadway segments in the City of American Canyon.

We recommend the City reduce the posted speed limit on the following roadway segment from 45 mph to 40 mph:
• Flosden Road from American Canyon Road East to the Southern City Limits (Segment 17) • American Canyon Road East from Broadway Street to the Eastern City Limits (Segment 18) We recommend the City reduce the posted speed limit on the following roadway segment from 40 mph to 35 mph:
• West American Canyon Road from Wetlands Edge Road to James Road (Segment 6) We recommend the City reduce the posted speed limit on the following two roadway segments from 35 mph to 30 mph:
• Eucalyptus Drive from Wetlands Edge Road to Donaldson Way (Segment 2) • Newell Drive from the Northern Newell Open Space Extents to American Canyon Road East (Segment 16)
The recommendation for these segments comes from the need for reducing speeds around school zones.

We recommend the City implement a 25 miles per hour speed limit within 500 to 1,000 feet of a school zone. Outside of this zone, the segments are recommended to be 30 mph.

We recommend the City reduce the posted speed limit on the following roadway segment from 30 mph to 25 mph:
• Elliot Drive from Benton Way to West American Canyon Road (Segment 11) We recommend the City reduce the posted speed limit on the following roadway segment from 25 mph to 15 mph:
• Benton Way from Wetlands Edge Road to Donaldson Way (Segment 3) The recommendation for this segment comes from the need for reducing speeds around school zones and community amenities such as the American Canyon Community Center, Phillip West Aquatic Center, the Boys and Girls Club, and the Community Park 2. AB 321, adopted in 2008, allows local government to lower the speed limit at schools to a 15 mile per hour speed limit within 500 to 1,000 feet of a school zone. Outside of the school zone, the segment is recommended to remain at 25 mph. 34 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
iii
The City should continue to monitor speeds on the following eight roadway segments and implement traffic calming measures to reduce the 85th percentile speeds. These roadways have been prioritized into Three Tiers in which the City should consider installing traffic calming improvements, with Tier I being the highest priority:

Tier I
• Kimberly Drive from Meadow Bay Drive to SR 29 (Segment 7) • Elliot Drive from West American Canyon Road to Marla Drive (Segment 12) Tier II
• Broadway Street from American Canyon Road East to Southern City Limits (Segment 15) Tier III
• West American Canyon Road from Wetlands Edge Road to James Road (Segment 6) • Flosden Road from American Canyon Road East to the Southern City Limits (Segment 17) • American Canyon Road East from Broadway Street to the Eastern City Limits (Segment 18) 35 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
1 1. Introduction
This report presents the speed survey analysis completed in the City of American Canyon, California. This study analyzes the appropriateness of posted speed limits on various roadway segments within City limits based on the laws and regulations defined in the California Vehicle Code Division 11, Chapter 7. Speed limits for the roadway segments were evaluated and compared to the 85th percentile speed to make recommendations on whether the speed limit is appropriate. Locations where the 85th percentile speed deviates from the posted speed limit by at least 2.5 miles per hour were analyzed in more detail. The analysis evaluated the operations of the following 18 roadway segments, which are shown on Figure 1:

1. Green Island Road from Mezzetta Court to SR 29

2. Eucalyptus Drive from Wetlands Edge Road to Donaldson Way

3. Benton Way from Wetlands Edge Road and Donaldson Way

4. Donaldson Way West from Donaldson Way to SR 29

5. Donaldson Way East from SR 29 to Newell Drive

6. West American Canyon Road from Wetlands Edge Road to James Road

7. Kimberly Drive from Meadow Bay Drive to SR 29

8. Wetlands Edge Road from Eucalyptus Drive to Kensington Way

9. Hummingbird Way from Benton Way to West American Canyon Road

10. Donaldson Way from Eucalyptus Drive to Benton Way

11. Elliot Drive from Benton Way to West American Canyon Road

12. Elliot Drive from West American Canyon Road to Marla Drive

13. James Road from Wilson Way to West American Canyon Road

14. Danrose Drive from West American Canyon Road to Mini Drive

15. Broadway Street from American Canyon Road East to Mini Drive

16. Newell Drive from the Northern Newell Open Space Extents to American Canyon Road East

17. Flosden Road from American Canyon Road East to the Southern City Limits

18. American Canyon Road East from Broadway Street to the Eastern City Limits The remainder of this report is divided into the following five chapters. • Chapter 2: Existing Roadway Network describes existing speed limits, lane configurations, and collision data for the roadway segments analyzed.
• Chapter 3: Average Daily Traffic Volumes presents the average daily traffic volumes for the study roadway segments.
• Chapter 4: Speed Survey Analysis describes the methodology used for the speed survey and the data analysis.
• Chapter 5: Comparison of 2022 Speeds to 2016/2017 Survey compares the results of the 2022 speed survey to the results of the 2016 and 2017 speed surveys. • Chapter 6: Summary and Conclusion
36 Napa County
Solano County
Napa County
Solano County
American
Canyon/Fish
and Game
Lynch Canyon
Fagan
Marsh ER
Napa County
Airport
Napa-Sonoma
Marshes
Wildlife Area
Newell OSP

AMERICAN
CANYON

AMERICAN
CANYON
NAPA

1. Green Island Road from Mezzetta Court to SR 29

2. Eucalyptus Drive from Wetlands Edge Road to Donaldson Way

3. Benton Way from Wetlands Edge Road and Donaldson Way

4. Donaldson Way West from Donaldson Way to SR 29

5. Donaldson Way East from SR 29 to Newell Drive

6. West American Canyon Road from Wetlands Edge Road to James Road

7. Kimberly Drive from Meadow Bay Drive to SR 29

8. Wetlands Edge Road from Eucalyptus Drive to Kensington Way

9. Hummingbird Way from Benton Way to West American Canyon Road

10. Donaldson Way from Eucalyptus Drive to Benton Way

11. Donaldson Way from Benton Way to West American Canyon Road

12. Elliot Drive from West American Canyon Road to Marla Drive

13. James Road from Wilson Way to West American Canyon Road

14. Danrose Drive from West American Canyon Road to Mini Drive

15. Broadway Street from American Canyon Road East to Mini Drive

16. Newell Drive from the Northern Newell Open Space Extents to American Canyon Road East

17. Flosden Road from American Canyon Road East to the southern city limits

18. American Canyon Road East from Broadway Street to eastern city limits 37 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
3 2. Existing Roadway Network
This section describes the existing roadway facilities as noted in the City’s Circulation Element and posted speed limits for the study segments.

Roadway Network
The City of American Canyon and study roadway network are presented on Figure 1. West American Canyon Road, Newell Drive, and Flosden Road are major arterial roadways in the City serving the highest traffic volumes and have higher travel speeds. Local and collector streets in the survey include Green Island Road, Eucalyptus Drive, Benton Way, Donaldson Way, Kimberly Drive, Wetlands Edge Road, Hummingbird Way, Elliot Drive, James Road, Danrose Drive, and Broadway Street. All of these roadways are described in detail below. Figure 2 presents the posted speed limits on the study roadway network. Figure 3 presents the City’s schools and Safety Priority Locations identified in the LRSP.

Green Island Road is a two-lane, east-west collector that terminates in the west and extends to SR 29 in the east. The posted speed limit on Green Island Road is 40 miles per hour east of Mezzetta Court and 25 miles per hour west of Mezzetta Court. Parking is prohibited on both sides of the street west of Mezzetta Court and on the south side of the street east of Mezzetta Court. The segment between Mezzetta Court and SR 29 has discontinuous sidewalks on the north side of the street and no bicycle facilities.

Eucalyptus Drive is a two-lane, east-west collector that terminates in the west and extends to Rio Del Mar in the east. The posted speed limit on Eucalyptus Drive is 35 miles per hour. The Class I path along the Napa Junction Elementary School frontage serves both pedestrians and bicyclists. The south side of the roadway has sidewalk from Wetlands Edge Road to Theresa Avenue.

Benton Way is a two-lane, east-west collector that terminates at Wetlands Edge Road in the west and Donaldson Way/Elliot Drive in the east. The posted speed limit on Benton Way is 25 miles per hour. This roadway has sidewalks and Class II bike lanes on both sides of the street. Between Wetlands Edge Road and Donaldson Way, Benton Way serves American Canyon Middle School, the Boys and Girls Club, American Canyon Co-Op Preschool, and the American Canyon Community Services.

Donaldson Way West is a two-lane, east-west collector that terminates at Donaldson Way/Elliot Drive in the west and SR 29 in the east. The posted speed limit on Donaldson Way is 25 miles per hour. Parking is prohibited on the south side of the street for 150 feet east of SR 29. This roadway has discontinuous sidewalks on both sides of the street. Donaldson Way West has Class II bike lanes on both sides west of Carolyn Drive and a Class III bike boulevard east of Carolyn Drive. 38 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
4 Donaldson Way East is a two-lane, east-west arterial that terminates at SR 29 in the west and Newell Drive in the east. The posted speed limit on Donaldson Way is 25 miles per hour between SR 29 and Tuscan Oak Trail and 30 miles per hour between Tuscan Oak Trail and Newell Drive. Parking is prohibited on the north side of the street west of Crestwood Lane and the south side between Tuscan Oak Trail and the American Canyon Police Department. This roadway has discontinuous sidewalks on both sides of the street and no bicycle facilities.

West American Canyon Road is a four-lane, east-west arterial that terminates at Wetlands Edge Road in the west and SR 29 in the east. The posted speed limit on West American Canyon Road is 40 miles per hour.

Parking is prohibited along various segments on the south side of the road between Chaucer Lane and James Road. The segment between Wetlands Edge Road and James Road has continuous sidewalk along the south side of the street, but there is a 1,000-foot gap in the north side sidewalk west of James Road.

Class II bike lanes are provided along both sides of West American Canyon Road.

Kimberly Drive is a two-lane, east-west collector that terminates at Meadow Bay Drive in the west and SR 29 in the east. The posted speed limit on Kimberly Drive is 25 miles per hour. This roadway has sidewalks on both sides of the street and discontinuous Class II bike lanes provided only between Elliot Drive and SR

29. Wetlands Edge Road is a two-lane, north-south collector that terminates at Eucalyptus Drive in the north and Kensington Way in the south. The posted speed limit on Wetlands Edge Road is 25 miles per hour.

Parking is prohibited on the west side of the road where parking is not designated. This roadway has a Class I path of the west side of the street, and sidewalks on the east side of the street.

Hummingbird Way is a two-lane, north-south local road that terminates at Benton Way in the north and West American Canyon Road in the south. The posted speed limit on Hummingbird Way is 25 miles per hour. This roadway has sidewalks on both sides of the street and no bicycle facilities.

Donaldson Way is a two-lane, north-south collector that terminates at Eucalyptus Drive in the north and Benton Way/Donaldson Way West in the south. The posted speed limit on Donaldson Way is 25 miles per hour. This roadway has sidewalks on both sides of the street and no bicycle facilities.

Elliot Drive is a two-lane, north-south collector that terminates at Benton Way/Donaldson Way West in the north and the City limits in the south. The posted speed limit on Elliot Drive is 30 miles per hour north of West American Canyon Road and 25 miles per hour south of West American Canyon Road. The segment between Benton Way and West American Canyon Road has sidewalks and Class II bike lanes on both sides of the street. The segment between West American Canyon Road and the City limits has sidewalks on both sides of the street and Class II bike lanes that terminate at the walking path near Linwood Park. Elliot Drive also serves the American Canyon Adult Activity Center.
39 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
5 James Road is a two-lane, north-south collector that terminates at Wilson Way in the north and West American Canyon Road in the south. The posted speed limit on James Road is 25 miles per hour. This roadway has sidewalks, with minor sidewalk gaps, on the east side of the street and no bicycle facilities.

Danrose Drive is a two-lane, north-south collector that terminates at West American Canyon Road in the north and Mini Drive in the south. The posted speed limit on Danrose Drive is 25 miles per hour. This roadway has sidewalks on both sides of the street and no bicycle facilities.

Broadway Street is a two-lane, north-south collector that terminates at American Canyon Road East in the north and Southern City Limits in the south. The posted speed limit on Broadway Street is 30 miles per hour north of Mini Drive. Parking is prohibited on both sides of the roadway along most of Broadway Street aside from near the Veterans Memorial Park and the American Canyon Dog Park. Sidewalks are provided along the west side of the roadway with portions of sidewalk being a Class I path. There are gaps in the sidewalk along the east side of the road. There is a discontinuous Class II bike lane on the east side of the street.

Newell Drive is a four-lane, north-south arterial that terminates at the northern Newell Open Space extents and American Canyon Road East in the south. The posted speed limit on Newell Drive is 35 miles per hour.

Parking is prohibited on both sides of the roadway between American Canyon Road East and just north of Silver Oak Trail, near American Canyon High School. There are Class I paths along the west side of the street, and Class I paths along the east side of the street between the Silver Oak Trail in the north and American Canyon Road East in the south. No sidewalk is present on the east side of the street between the northern Newell Open Space extents and Silver Oak Trail.

Flosden Road is a four-lane, north-south arterial that terminates at American Canyon Road East in the north and Southern City Limits in the south. The posted speed limit on Flosden Road is 45 miles per hour. Parking is prohibited along various segment on both sides of the road. This roadway has sidewalks on both sides of the street and no bicycle facilities.

American Canyon Road East is a four-lane, east-west arterial west of Flosden Road and a two-lane road east of Flosden Road from SR 29 in the west to the city limits. The posted speed limit on American Canyon Road East is 45 miles per hour within the city limits. Parking is prohibited on the south side of the road between Broadway Street and Flosden Road. American Canyon Road East has continuous sidewalks along the south side west of Via Firenze and no bicycle facilities. 40 Napa County
Solano County
Napa County
Solano County
American
Canyon/Fish
and Game
Lynch Canyon
Fagan
Marsh ER
Napa County
Airport
Napa-Sonoma
Marshes
Wildlife Area
Newell OSP

AMERICAN
CANYON

AMERICAN
CANYON
NAPA

AMERICAN
CANYON

AMERICAN
CANYON
NAPA

AMERICAN
CANYON
WetlandsEdge Rd
Elliott Dr
DonaldsonWay
BentonWay
Hummingbird Way

SEE INSET
INSET
WC22-3928_3_POI
Institutions, Community Centers, and Safety Priority Locations Figure 3
American Canyon City Limit
School Community Center Senior Center
Safety Priority Segment Study Segment
42 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
8 3. Average Daily Traffic Volumes
This section of the report presents the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes for the roadway segments analyzed for this report. Segment counts were taken in early October 2022. Figure 4 graphically presents the ADT for the 18 study roadway segments analyzed.

All but two of the roadway segments analyzed in this report serve fewer than 10,000 ADT. Flosden Road between American Canyon Road East and the Southern City Limits serves an average of 17,600 vehicles per day. Flosden Road is another major arterial and connects to American Canyon Road East and the City of Vallejo; therefore, the higher volumes on this roadway are expected. American Canyon Road East between Broadway Street and the Eastern City Limits serves an average of 19,800 vehicles per day. American Canyon Road East is a major arterial in the City of American Canyon and connects to SR 29 and Flosden Road, so the higher volumes on this roadway are expected.
43 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
9 Figure 4: Average Daily Traffic Volumes (Bi-Directional) 0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
Daily Traffic Volume
Roadway Segments
44 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
10 4. Speed Survey Analysis
This section represents the results of a speed survey conducted in September 2022. The data from the survey is presented first, followed by the analysis of each segment. The key measure for analysis is the 85th percentile or critical speed of a roadway segment. The 85th percentile speed is that speed at which 85 percent of free-flowing vehicles are traveling at or below the posted speed limit. Special attention is paid to those roadway segments where the 85th percentile speed exceeds the posted speed limit by 2.5 miles per hour (mph) or greater.

Appendix A contains individual data sheets for all 18 roadway segments analyzed for the 2022 American Canyon Speed Survey.

Data Collection
Speed surveys were conducted at 18 locations within the City of American Canyon. Some study roadways have multiple study segments to reflect the changes in posted speeds, traffic volumes, streets width or other significant factors that vary on a roadway. Automated machine equipment was used to capture existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes. Per guidelines from the MUTCD, speeds for high-volume locations were collected with radar equipment. For those roadway segments that have lower roadway volumes that do not allow for effective radar observations, automated machine equipment that continually collects traffic data was used to capture observed travel speeds. The approximate locations of the volume data collection points are indicated in Figure 1 and correspond with the location number indicator for each roadway segment.

Figure 5 and Figure 6 visually show the 85th percentile speeds for the 18 study roadway segments analyzed.

Based on the speed survey analysis, the posted speed limit at each location was evaluated and recommendations made on whether the speed limit is appropriate. Specifically, the 85th percentile speed was used as a baseline comparison to the posted speed limit.

California Vehicle Code
Division 11, Chapter 7, of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) defines the California Speed Laws (also known as Sections 22348-22413). Relevant sections of the CVC are used to determine speed limits in local jurisdictions are discussed below.
45 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
11 Prima Facie Speed limits
Prima facie speed limits are the innate speed limits on the roadway and shall be applicable unless changed as authorized in the CVC. Section 22352 of the CVC indicates the following prima facie speed limits. • 15 mph: at railway crossings, when traversing any intersection with site restrictions, or on any alley.
• 25 mph: in any business or residence district as defined by Division 1 of the CVC, when approaching or passing a school building or grounds, or when passing a senior center or other facility primarily used by senior citizens.

These prima facie speed limits are set by the CVC and the prima facie speed limit of 25 mph can only be changed based on an Engineering and Traffic Survey.

Engineering and Traffic Survey
In order for the court systems and the public to accept and respect the posting and enforcement, by radar, of posted speed limits, an Engineering and Traffic Survey must incorporate sound, repeatable methods conforming to the CVC and engineering principles.

Section 22357(a) stipulates that local authorities may set speed limits greater than 25 mph if an Engineering and Traffic Survey, such as this, determines that speeds greater than 25 mph would facilitate the orderly movement of vehicular traffic and would be reasonable and safe upon any street excluding those subject to a prima facie limit of 25 miles per hour. Based on the Engineering and Traffic Survey, the local authority may, by ordinance, determine and declare a speed limit of 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, or 60 miles per hour or a maximum speed limit of 65 miles per hour, whichever is found most appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic, and is reasonable and safe.

An Engineering and Traffic Study shall include the consideration of all the following as defined in Section 627 of the CVC:
• Prevailing speeds as determined by the traffic engineering measurements, • Collision records, and
• Highway, traffic, and roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver.

In addition to the metrics identified above, local authorities may consider the following:
• Residential density, if any of the following conditions exist on a portion of highway, other than a business district:
46 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
12 ◦ Upon one side of the highway, within one-quarter mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 13 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures, ◦ Upon both sides of the highway, collectively, within one-quarter of a mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 16 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures, or
◦ The portion of highway is longer than one-quarter of a mile but has the ratio of separate dwelling houses or business structures to the length of the highway described in the earlier two points above; and
• Pedestrian and bicycle safety.

The declared speed limits become effective when appropriate speed limit signs are erected on the street.

This does not apply to any 25-mph prima facie limit as it relates to passing a school building, senior center, or other facility primarily used by senior citizens.

Methodology for Modifying Prima Facie Speed Limits
When conducting an Engineering and Traffic Survey to establish speed limits, Section 21400 of the CVC, and Section 2B.13 of the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), requires that local authorities round the 85th percentile free flow speed to the nearest 5 mph increment to set the appropriate speed limit, except:

1. The posted speed limit may be reduced by five mph from the nearest five mph increment of the 85th percentile speed, based on guidelines from CVC Section 627 and 22358.5, or

2. In cases where the 85th percentile speed would be rounded up the nearest five miles per hour increment, local authority may decide to instead round down and set the speed limit to the lower five miles per hour increment. If the speed limit is set at the lower five mph increment the local authority shall not reduce the speed limit any further for any reason, including those set forth in CVC Section 627 and 22358.5.

In addition, the speed limit shall be established at the same level in both directions at a given point on a roadway for uniformity purposes. Thus, the lower of the two critical speeds may be used to determine the overall segment speed limit.

In addition to the CVC Section 627 description above, Appendix B contains the text of CVC Section 627 and describes in detail what factors should be taken into consideration when establishing speed limits. A speed limit can be lowered by five mph to account for these special factors. Establishment of a speed limit of more than five mph below the 85th percentile speed should only be done after careful consideration. 47 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
13 Roadway Reconfigurations
West American Canyon Road is a major arterial in the City serving the highest traffic volumes and have higher travel speeds. However, we recommend (Chapter 4, Segment Summaries) that this roadway be converted to a two-lane roadway. Since this segment serves less than 25,000 vehicles, a two-lane roadway with enhanced pedestrian and bicycle facilities is more suited for the surrounding land uses.

AB-43 and AB-1938
California Assembly Bills No. 43 and No. 1938 were passed to update Vehicle Code relating to traffic safety in 2021 and 2022, respectively. AB-43 and AB-1938 outline the following amendments to current prima facie speed limit laws:
• The prima facie limits are twenty-five miles per hour:
o On any highway, in any business or residence district unless a different speed is determined by local authority or the Department of Transportation under procedures set forth in this code.
o When approaching or passing a school building or the grounds thereof, contiguous to a highway and posted with a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign, while children are going to or leaving the school either during school hours or during the noon recess period. o When passing a senior center or other facility primarily used by senior citizens, contiguous to a street other than a state highway and posted with a standard “SENIOR” warning sign. • The Department of Transportation shall, in the next scheduled revision, revise and thereafter maintain the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices to require the Department of Transportation or a local authority to round speed limits to the nearest five miles per hour of the 85th percentile of the free-flowing traffic. However, in cases in which the speed limit needs to be rounded up to the nearest five miles per hour increment of the 85th-percentile speed, the Department of Transportation or a local authority may decide to instead round down the speed limit to the lower five miles per hour increment.
• If a local authority, after completing an engineering and traffic survey, finds that the speed limit is still more than is reasonable or safe, the local authority may, by ordinance, determine and declare a prima facie speed limit that has been reduced an additional five miles per hour for either of the following reasons:
o The portion of highway has been designated as a safety corridor. A local authority shall not deem more than one-fifth of their streets as safety corridors. o The portion of highway is adjacent to any land or facility that generates high concentrations of bicyclists or pedestrians, especially those from vulnerable groups such as children, seniors, persons with disabilities, and the unhoused.
48 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
14 • If a local authority, after completing an engineering and traffic survey, finds that the speed limit is still more than is reasonable or safe, the local authority may, by ordinance, retain the current speed limit or restore the immediately prior speed limit if that speed limit was established with an engineering and traffic survey and if a registered engineer has evaluated the section of highway and determined that no additional general purpose lanes have been added to the roadway since completion of the traffic survey that established the prior speed limit. • Notwithstanding any other law, a local authority may, by ordinance, determine and declare a 25 or 20 miles per hour prima facie speed limit on a highway contiguous to a business activity district when posted with a sign that indicates a speed limit of 25 or 20 miles per hour. These prima facie limits apply only to roads that meet all of the following conditions:
o A maximum of four traffic lanes.
o A maximum posted 30 miles per hour prima facie speed limit immediately prior to and after the business activity district, if establishing a 25 miles per hour speed limit. o A maximum posted 25 miles per hour prima facie speed limit immediately prior to and after the business activity district, if establishing a 20 miles per hour speed limit. • The bill prohibits the total reduction in the speed limit from exceeding 12.4 miles per hour from the 85th percentile speeds.

Collision Data
Collision data was obtained from the Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) for the five-year window between January 2016 and December 2020. Specifically, collision data where the primary collision factor was related to speed were used to augment the analysis in this report. Table 1 shows the collisions by segment and Figure 7 shows the location of speed-related collisions for the five-year window analyzed.

Table 1: Summary of Speed Survey Results
Roadway Segment
Posted
Speed
limit
85th Percentile
Speed
Difference from
Posted Speed limit Collisions
SpeedRelated
Collisions3
Average
Statewide
Collision
Rate4
Segment
Collision
Rate NB/EB1 SB/WB2 NB/EB1 SB/WB2

1. Green Island Road from
Mezzetta Court to SR 29 40 38 39 -2 -1 3 3 1.12 0.47

2. Eucalyptus Drive from
Wetlands Edge Road to
Donaldson Way
35 37 38 2 3 0 0 1.12 0.0

3. Benton Way from
Wetlands Edge Road and
Donaldson Way
25 31 30 6 5 1 0 1.12 0.51
49 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
15 Table 1: Summary of Speed Survey Results
Roadway Segment
Posted
Speed
limit
85th Percentile
Speed
Difference from
Posted Speed limit Collisions
SpeedRelated
Collisions3
Average
Statewide
Collision
Rate4
Segment
Collision
Rate NB/EB1 SB/WB2 NB/EB1 SB/WB2

4. Donaldson Way West
from Donaldson Way to SR
29 25 31 32 6 7 0 0 1.12 0.0

5. Donaldson Way East from
SR 29 to Newell Drive 25 32 32 7 7 3 2 1.12 0.64

6. West American Canyon
Road from Wetlands Edge
Road to James Road
40 40 41 0 1 4 1 1.15 0.62

7. Kimberly Drive from
Meadow Bay Drive to SR 29 25 40 37 15 12 4 1 1.12 1.70

8. Wetlands Edge Road
from Eucalyptus Drive to
Kensington Way
25 33 32 8 7 1 0 1.12 0.60

9. Hummingbird Way from
Benton Way to West
American Canyon Road
25 29 25 4 0 1 1 1.12 1.83

10. Donaldson Way from
Eucalyptus Drive to Benton
Way
25 28 30 3 5 3 1 1.12 0.90

11. Elliot Drive from Benton
Way to West American
Canyon Road
30 35 35 5 5 0 0 1.12 0.0

12. Elliot Drive from West
American Canyon Road to
Marla Drive
25 35 37 10 12 3 0 1.12 0.73

13. James Road from Wilson
Way to West American
Canyon Road
25 32 35 7 10 2 0 1.12 0.51

14. Danrose Drive from
West American Canyon
Road to Mini Drive
25 30 30 5 5 4 1 1.12 0.78

15. Broadway Street from
American Canyon Road East
to Mini Drive
30 40 41 10 11 1 0 1.12 0.21

16. Newell Drive from the
Northern Newell Open
Space Extents to American
Canyon Road East
35 39 39 4 4 5 3 1.15 0.70
50 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
16 Table 1: Summary of Speed Survey Results
Roadway Segment
Posted
Speed
limit
85th Percentile
Speed
Difference from
Posted Speed limit Collisions
SpeedRelated
Collisions3
Average
Statewide
Collision
Rate4
Segment
Collision
Rate NB/EB1 SB/WB2 NB/EB1 SB/WB2

17. Flosden Road from
American Canyon Road East
to the Southern City Limits
45 51 50 6 5 6 2 1.15 0.35

18. American Canyon Road
East from Broadway Street
to Eastern City Limits
45 48 52 3 7 7 4 1.15 0.36
Notes:

1. NB = Northbound, EB = Eastbound

2. SB= Southbound, WB = Westbound

3. Speed-related collisions are collisions in which drivers are assessed to be driving above the posted speed limit.

4. Average statewide collision rate (accident/million-miles) is based on accident data for the years 2017 through 2019. Accident rates of existing road segments are used to predict the average rates on new roads, or to compare rates on other roads of the same type.

This rate is based on all collision types, not just speed-related collisions.

5. The bold texts indicates segments where the collision rate is higher than the statewide collision rate of similar roadway type.

Source: 2020 Collision Data on California State Highways (road miles, travel, collisions, collision rates), Caltrans 51 WC22-3928_1_StudySegments
Study Roadway Segments
Figure 1
American Canyon City Limit
Napa County
Solano County
Napa County
Solano County
American
Canyon/Fish
and Game
Lynch Canyon
Fagan
Marsh ER
Napa County
Airport
Napa-Sonoma
Marshes
Wildlife Area
Newell OSP

AMERICAN
CANYON

AMERICAN
CANYON
NAPA

0.0 10.0

20.0 30.0

40.0 50.0
Speed (mph)
Roadway Segments
NB/EB 85th Percentile Speed SB/WB 85th Percentile Speed Posted Speed Limit 53 WC22-3928_1_StudySegments
Study Roadway Segments
Figure 1
American Canyon City Limit
Napa County
Solano County
Napa County
Solano County
American
Canyon/Fish
and Game
Lynch Canyon
Fagan
Marsh ER
Napa County
Airport
Napa-Sonoma
Marshes
Wildlife Area
Newell OSP

AMERICAN
CANYON

AMERICAN
CANYON
NAPA

VALLEJO
Devlin Rd
Kimberly Dr
Elliott Dr
Wetlands Edge Rd
Newell Dr
Broadway
American Canyon Rd
Airport Blvd
Meadows Dr
Borges Ln
Fairgrounds Dr
Main St Broadway
Mini Dr
Silver Oak Trl
Flosden Rd
S Kelly Rd
Eucalyptus Dr
Green Island Rd
Green Island Rd
Napa Junction Rd
DonaldsonWay
Riodel M ar Benton Way Hummingbird
Way
James Rd Danrose Dr
D o naldson WayE
·29
·37
·12
!"80
\\Fpwc03.fpainc.local\wc-data\PROJECTS\_WC22\WC22-3928.00_American_Canyon_Speed_Survey\Analysis\CollisionAnalysis\CollisionAnalysis.aprx Collisions
Collision Count
1 - 2
3 - 5
6 - 10
11 - 16
American Canyon City Limit
WC22-3928_6_Collisions
Figure 7
54 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
20 Segments Summaries
This section of the report analyzes all roadway segments and provides an explanation for necessary speed adjustments. Where the 85th percentile speed exceeds the posted speed limit by 2.5 mph or greater, additional information is provided to determine the adequacy of the posted speed limit. Other factors such as collision records, roadside conditions, and residential density along the roadway, as well as pedestrian and bicyclist safety are also used in determining the adequacy of the posted speed limits.

Segment 1. Green Island Road from Mezzetta Court to SR 29 The posted speed limit on Green Island Road from Mezzetta Court to SR 29 is 40 mph. In the eastbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 2 mph under the posted limit, while in the westbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 1 mph under the current posted speed limit.

The 85th percentile speeds in both eastbound and westbound directions indicate an initial speed limit of 40 mph which is equal to the current posted speed limit. Therefore, we recommend the City maintain the existing speed limit of 40 mph.

Segment 2. Eucalyptus Drive from Wetlands Edge Road to Donaldson Way The posted speed limit on Eucalyptus Drive from Wetlands Edge Road to Donaldson Way is 35 mph. In the eastbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 2.0 mph over the posted limit, while in the westbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 3.0 mph over the posted speed limit.

Eucalyptus Drive has a discontinuous Class I path for pedestrians and bikes on the North side of the street.

Napa Junction Magnet Elementary School is also located at the west end of this segment. The school generates pedestrian and bicycle traffic along the roadway.

According to AB 43, speeds may be lowered on roadways with high pedestrian and bicycle traffic to improve safety. Therefore, we recommend the City reduce the speed limit to 25 mph 500-1,000 feet around Napa Junction Magnet Elementary School and 30 mph outside of the school zone.

Segment 3. Benton Way from Wetlands Edge Road to Donaldson Way The posted speed limit on Benton Way from Wetlands Edge Road and Donaldson Way is 25 mph. The observed 85th percentile speeds were 6 mph and 5 mph greater than the posted speed limit in the eastbound and westbound directions, respectively, which would initially indicate a posted speed limit of 30 mph.

This segment of Benton Way has sidewalks and bike lanes in both directions. However, American Canyon Middle School, Boys and Girls Club, American Canyon Co-Op Preschool, and American Canyon Community 55 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
21 Services are located along this roadway segment and attract a substantial level of pedestrian and bicycle activity throughout the day. No speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of Benton Way for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

Based on the segment properties explained above and in accordance with CVC Section 627, the City has the authority to establish the speed limit at five miles per hour below the limit established by the observed 85th percentile speeds. Additionally, AB 321 allows cities to lower speed limits to 15 mph around schools that are located in a residential district on a two-lane road with an existing speed limit of 30 mph or less.

Due to Benton Way’s proximity to schools and other institutions that produce high pedestrian and bicycle traffic, we recommend that the City reduce the speed limit to 15 mph within the school zone and implement traffic calming measures outlined in the American Canyon Complete Streets Safety Assessment (2022). Traffic calming measures at the intersection of Chaucer Lane include adding highvisibility crosswalks along the west and south leg, installing curb extensions on the west leg, and making the curb red to increase the visibility of pedestrians crossing. Benton Way is recommended to remain at 25 mph outside of the school zone.

Segment 4. Donaldson Way West from Donaldson Way to SR 29 The posted speed limit on Donaldson Way West from Donaldson Way to SR 29 is 25 mph. The observed 85th percentile speeds were 6 mph and 7 mph greater than the posted speed limit in the eastbound and westbound directions, respectively, which would initially indicate a posted speed limit of 30 mph.

More than 16 separate dwelling units exist on both sides of the roadway within a quarter mile along this roadway segment. Additionally, Donaldson Way West has discontinuous sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides of the street. In accordance with CVC Section 627, the City has the authority to establish the speed limit at five miles per hour below the limit established by the 85th percentile speed. No speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of Donaldson Way West for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

Segment 5. Donaldson Way East from SR 29 to Newell Drive The posted speed limit on Donaldson Way East from SR 29 to Newell Drive is 25 mph. The 85th percentile speeds were observed to be 7 mph greater than the posted speed limit in both directions, which would initially indicate a posted speed limit of 30 mph.
56 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
22 Donaldson Way East has discontinuous sidewalks on the north side of the street and no bicycle facilities on either side of the roadway. Additionally, a railway crosses this segment of Donaldson Way East just west of Tuscan Oak Trail. Two speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of Donaldson Way East for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

Segment 6. West American Canyon Road from Wetlands Edge Road to James Road The posted speed limit of West American Canyon Road from Wetlands Edge Road to James Road is 40 mph.

In the eastbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured equal to the posted limit, while in the westbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 1 mph over the current posted speed limit.

West American Canyon Road has a continuous sidewalk on the south side of the street and a discontinuous sidewalk on the north side of the street. This segment has discontinuous unprotected Class II bike lanes on both sides of the street.

The 85th percentile speeds in both eastbound and westbound directions indicate an initial speed limit of 40 mph which is equal to the current posted speed limit. West American Canyon Road’s average daily traffic is less than 25,000 vehicles. According to AB 43, speeds may be lowered by five miles per hour where there are high pedestrian and bicycle traffic to improve safety. Therefore, to improve the pedestrian and bicycle environment, we recommend that the City reduce the speed limit to 35 mph. Due to West American Canyon Road’s low daily traffic volumes1, we also recommend that the City convert the two outside travel lanes to Class I paths or protected Class IV bike lanes (see Chapter 4, Roadway Reconfigurations).

Segment 7. Kimberly Drive from Meadow Bay Drive to SR 29 The posted speed limit of Kimberly Drive from Meadow Bay Drive to SR 29 is 25 mph. In the eastbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 15 mph over the posted limit, while in the westbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 12 mph over the posted speed limit, which would initially indicate a posted speed limit of 35 mph.

More than 16 separate dwelling units exist on both sides of the roadway within a quarter mile along this roadway segment. Kimberly Drive has sidewalks on both sides of the street and discontinuous bike lanes 1 https://highways.dot.gov/safety/proven-safety-countermeasures/road-diets-roadway-configuration 57 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
23 on both sides. One speed-related collision has been reported on this section of Kimberly Drive for the fiveyear period analyzed for this report. Additionally, the roadway segment collision rate is measured at 1.70 acc/mil.miles which is greater than the average statewide collision rate of similar roadway types (1.12 acc/mil.miles).

Based on the segment properties explained above and in accordance with CVC Section 627, the City has the authority to establish the speed limit at five miles per hour below the limit established by the observed 85th percentile speed, which would be 30 mph. However, due to the segment properties identified above such as the residential nature of Kimberly Drive and lack of bicycle facilities, we recommend that the City maintain the current speed limit of 25 mph. The City should monitor this segment as a Tier I priority for possible traffic calming measures to reduce the 85th percentile speeds.

Segment 8. Wetlands Edge Road from Eucalyptus Drive to Kensington Way The posted speed limit of Wetlands Edge Road from Eucalyptus Drive to Kensington Way is 25 mph. In the northbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 8 mph over the posted speed limit, while in the southbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 7 mph over the posted speed limit.

The 85th percentile speeds would initially indicate raising the speed limit to 30 mph.

More than 13 separate dwelling units exist on the east side of the roadway within a quarter mile along this roadway segment. Wetlands Edge Road has a Class I path on the west side of the street, and sidewalks on the east side of the street. Additionally, there are five marked uncontrolled crosswalks that connect to the San Francisco Bay Trail. This segment has no on-street bicycle facilities, but bicyclists are able to use the Class I path along the west side of the street. One speed-related collision has been reported on this section of Wetlands Edge Road for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

Segment 9. Hummingbird Way from Benton Way to West American Canyon Road The posted speed limit of Hummingbird Way from Benton Way to West American Canyon Road is 25 mph.

In the northbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 4 mph over the posted limit, while in the southbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured equal to the posted speed limit.

Since the lower of the two 85th percentile speeds can be used to set the speed limit, the 85th percentile speeds in the southbound direction indicate an initial speed limit of 25 mph which is equal to the current posted speed limit. Therefore, we recommend the City maintain the existing speed limit of 25 mph. 58 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
24 Segment 10. Donaldson Way from Eucalyptus Drive to Benton Way The posted speed limit of Donaldson Way from Eucalyptus Drive to Benton Way is 25 mph. In the northbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 3 mph over the posted limit, while in the southbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 5 mph over the posted speed limit.

Since the lower of the two 85th percentile speeds can be used to set the speed limit, the 85th percentile speeds in the northbound direction indicate an initial speed limit of 30 mph.

According to the California MUTCD 2014 Edition, Revision 3, for cases in which the nearest five miles per hour increment of the 85th percentile speed would require rounding up, then the speed limit may be rounded down to the nearest five miles per hour increment below the 85th percentile speed, if no further reduction is used. The 85th percentile speeds in the northbound direction were rounded up to indicate an initial speed limit of 30 mph, which can be rounded down to 25 mph. Therefore, we recommend the City maintain the existing speed limit of 25 mph.

Segment 11. Elliot Drive from Benton Way to West American Canyon Road The posted speed limit of Elliot Drive from Benton Way to West American Canyon Road is 30 mph. In both northbound and southbound directions, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 5 mph over the posted limit. The 85th percentile speeds would initially indicate raising the speed limit to 35 mph.

More than 16 separate dwelling units exist on both sides of the roadway within a quarter mile along this roadway segment. Elliot Drive has sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides of the roadway. This segment’s connection to two major roadways, West American Canyon Road and Benton Way, generates pedestrian and bicycle traffic. No speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of Elliot Drive for the fiveyear period analyzed for this report.

Based on the segment properties explained above and in accordance with CVC Section 627, the City has the authority to establish the speed limit at five miles per hour below the limit established by the observed 85th percentile speeds. According to AB 43, speeds may be lowered on roadways with high pedestrian and bicycle traffic to improve safety. Therefore, to improve the pedestrian and bicycle environment, we recommend that the City reduce the current speed limit to 25 mph.

Segment 12. Elliot Drive from West American Canyon Road to Marla Drive The posted speed limit of Elliot Drive from West American Canyon Road to Marla Drive is 25 mph. In the northbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 10 mph over the posted limit, while in the southbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 12 mph over the posted speed limit, which would initially indicate a posted speed limit of 35 mph. 59 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
25 More than 16 separate dwelling units exist on both sides of the roadway within a quarter mile along this roadway segment. The American Canyon Adult Activity Center is also located along Elliot Drive. Elliot Drive has sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides of the street, although there are areas where the sidewalk narrows to approximately three feet along the segment. In 2023, crosswalk enhancements were added to the crosswalk for a walking trail south of Knightsbridge Way that included high-visibility striping and a pedestrian activated rectangular rapid flashing beacon (RRFB). No speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of Elliot Drive for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

California Assembly Bill No. 43 sets a prima facie speed limit of 25 mph when passing a senior center.

According to AB 43, speeds may be lowered near senior centers and where the pedestrian and bicycle environment poses a risk to safety. Due to the proximity to a senior center and the segment properties identified above such as the residential nature of Elliot Drive and lack of pedestrian and bicycle facilities, we recommend that the City maintain the current speed limit of 25 mph. The City should monitor this segment of Elliot Drive as a Tier I priority for possible traffic calming measures to reduce the 85th percentile speeds.

Segment 13. James Road from Wilson Way to West American Canyon Road The posted speed limit of James Road from Wilson Way to West American Canyon Road is 25 mph. In the northbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 7 mph over the posted limit, while in the southbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 10 mph over the posted speed limit. Since the lower of the two 85th percentile speeds can be used to set the speed limit, the 85th percentile northbound speed would initially indicate raising the speed limit to 30 mph.

More than 16 separate dwelling units exist on both sides of the roadway within a quarter mile along this roadway segment. James Road has sidewalks on the east side of the street, however there are two sidewalk gaps – one at Wilson Way and the other at Donaldson Way. The City will close these sidewalk gaps in late 2023. James Road does not have bicycle facilities. No speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of James Road for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

More than 16 separate dwelling units exist on both sides of the roadway within a quarter mile along this roadway segment. Danrose Drive has sidewalks on both sides of the street, but it does not have bicycle facilities. One speed-related collision has been reported on this section of Danrose Drive for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

Segment 15. Broadway Street from American Canyon Road East to Southern City Limits The posted speed limit of Broadway Street from American Canyon Road East to the Southern City Limits is 30 mph. In the northbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 10 mph over the posted limit, while in the southbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 11 mph over the posted speed limit. The 85th percentile speeds would initially indicate raising the speed limit to 40 mph.

Broadway Street has sidewalks on one or both sides of the street and discontinuous bike lanes. Veterans Memorial Park, American Canyon Dog Park, and a playground are located along this roadway segment and attract a substantial level of pedestrian and bicycle activity throughout the day. No speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of Broadway Street for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

Based on the segment properties explained above and in accordance with CVC Section 627, the City has the authority to establish the speed limit at five miles per hour below the limit established by the observed 85th percentile speed, which would be 35 mph. However, due to the segment properties identified above such as the roadway conditions and lack of continuous pedestrian and bicycle facilities, we recommend that the City maintain the current speed limit of 30 mph. The City should monitor this segment of Broadway Street for possible traffic calming measures to reduce the 85th percentile speeds.

Segment 16. Newell Drive from the Northern Newell Open Space Extents to American Canyon Road East
The posted speed limit on Newell Drive from the Northern Newell Open Space Extents to American Canyon Road East is 35 mph. In both northbound and southbound directions, the 85th percentile speed was 61 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
27 measured at 4 mph over the posted limit. The 85th percentile speeds would initially indicate raising the speed limit to 40 mph.

Newell Drive has a Class I path along the west side of the road, and a Class I path on the east side of the road between Silver Oak Trail and American Canyon Road East. There is no sidewalk present on the east side of the street between the northern Newell Open Space extents and Silver Oak Trail. American Canyon High School is also located at the south end of this segment. The school generates pedestrian and bicycle traffic along the roadway.

According to AB 43, speeds may be lowered on roadways with high pedestrian and bicycle traffic to improve safety. Therefore, we recommend the City reduce the speed limit to 25 mph 500-1,000 feet around American Canyon High School and 30 mph outside of the school zone.

Segment 17. Flosden Road from American Canyon Road East to the Southern City Limits The posted speed limit on Flosden Road from American Canyon Road East to the Southern City Limits is 45 mph. The observed 85th percentile speeds were 6 mph and 5 mph greater than the posted speed limit in the northbound and southbound directions, respectively, which would initially require a posted speed limit of 50 mph.

Flosden Road is a major arterial and has high traffic volumes serving an average of over 17,000 vehicles daily. This segment has sidewalks on both sides of the road, but it does not have bicycle facilities. Two speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of Flosden Road for the five-year period analyzed for this report. The American Canyon Local Road Safety Plan identified this segment as a high severity roadway due the severity of its collisions from 2017 to 2021.

Based on the segment properties explained above and in accordance with CVC Section 627, the City has the authority to establish the speed limit at five miles per hour below the limit established by the observed 85th percentile speeds. According to AB 43, speeds may be lowered by five miles per hour where the speed limit is deemed more than reasonable or safe. Therefore, due to the segment properties identified above, such as high traffic volumes and lack of adequate bicycle facilities, and the City-identified safety risk, we recommend that the City reduce the speed limit to 40 mph.

Segment 18. American Canyon Road East from Broadway Street to the Eastern City Limits
The posted speed limit on American Canyon Road East from Broadway Street to the Eastern City Limits is 45 mph. The observed 85th percentile speeds were 3 mph and 7 mph greater than the posted speed limit in the eastbound and westbound directions, respectively, which would initially require a posted speed limit of 50 mph.
62 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
28 American Canyon Road East is a major arterial and has high traffic volumes serving an average of nearly 20,000 vehicles daily. This segment has sidewalks on the south side of the road, but it does not have bicycle facilities. Four speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of American Canyon Road East for the five-year period analyzed for this report. The American Canyon Local Road Safety Plan identified both the segments of American Canyon Road East between Silver Oak Trail and Newell and between Newell and the Eastern City Limits as high severity roadways due the severity of their collisions from 2017 to 2021.

Based on the segment properties explained above and in accordance with CVC Section 627, the City has the authority to establish the speed limit at five miles per hour below the limit established by the observed 85th percentile speeds. According to AB 43, speeds may be lowered by five miles per hour where the speed limit is deemed more than reasonable or safe. Therefore, due to the segment properties identified above, such as high traffic volumes and lack of adequate bicycle facilities, and the City-identified safety risk, we recommend that the City reduce the speed limit to 40 mph. 63 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
29 5. Comparison of 2022 Speeds to
2016/2017 Surveys
This section of the report compares the observed 85th percentile speeds collected for this report, to those observed in the 2016/2017 speed surveys. Specifically, this section presents a comparison of the trends in observed speeds in the City. Table 2 compares the 85th percentile speeds for the 2016/2017 and 2022 speed data and Figure 8 shows the difference in the observed 85th percentile speeds between year 2016/2017 and year 2022 data (2022 minus 2016/2017).

As shown in Table 2, half of the 85th percentile speeds have increased as compared to data from 2016/2017.

On the following 8 roadway segments the 85th percentile speeds increased in one or both directions from 2016/2017 to 2022.

4. Donaldson Way West from Donaldson Way to SR 29

8. Wetlands Edge Road from Eucalyptus Drive to Kensington Way

10. Donaldson Way from Eucalyptus Drive to Benton Way

12. Elliot Drive from West American Canyon Road to Marla Drive

13. James Road from Wilson Way to West American Canyon Road

14. Danrose Drive from West American Canyon Road to Mini Drive

15. Broadway Street from American Canyon Road East to Mini Drive

16. Newell Drive from the Northern Newell Open Space Extents to American Canyon Road East Table 2: Speed Survey Comparison between 2016/2017 and 2022 Results Roadway Segments
Posted
Speed
limit
85th Percentile Speed Change between 2016
and 2022 Speed
Survey NB/EB 2
1 SB/WB1
2016/
2017 2022
2016/
2017 2022 NB/ EB1 SB/ WB1

1. Green Island Road from Mezzetta Court to SR
29 40 41 38 42 39 -3 -3

2. Eucalyptus Drive from Wetlands Edge Road to
Donaldson Way 35 41 37 42 38 -4 -4

3. Benton Way from Wetlands Edge Road and
Donaldson Way 25 32 31 30 30 -1 0

4. Donaldson Way West from Donaldson Way to
SR 29 25 32 31 30 32 -1 2

5. Donaldson Way East from SR 29 to Newell
Drive 25 34 32 35 32 -2 -3
64 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
30 Table 2: Speed Survey Comparison between 2016/2017 and 2022 Results Roadway Segments
Posted
Speed
limit
85th Percentile Speed Change between 2016
and 2022 Speed
Survey NB/EB 2
1 SB/WB1
2016/
2017 2022
2016/
2017 2022 NB/ EB1 SB/ WB1

6. West American Canyon Road from Wetlands
Edge Road to James Road 40 43 40 42 41 -3 -1

7. Kimberly Drive from Meadow Bay Drive to SR
29 25 N/A 40 N/A 37 N/A N/A

8. Wetlands Edge Road from Eucalyptus Drive to
Kensington Way 25 32 33 35 32 1 -3

9. Hummingbird Way from Benton Way to West
American Canyon Road 25 30 29 31 25 -1 -6

10. Donaldson Way from Eucalyptus Drive to
Benton Way 25 32 28 29 30 -4 1

11. Elliot Drive from Benton Way to West
American Canyon Road 30 35 35 35 35 0 0

12. Elliot Drive from West American Canyon
Road to Marla Drive 25 34 35 33 37 1 4

13. James Road from Wilson Way to West
American Canyon Road 25 31 32 32 35 1 3

14. Danrose Drive from West American Canyon
Road to Mini Drive 25 29 30 29 30 1 1

15. Broadway Street from American Canyon East
Road to Mini Drive 30 38 40 37 41 2 4

16. Newell Drive from the Northern Newell Open
Space Extents to American Canyon Road East 35 36 39 36 39 3 3

17. Flosden Road from American Canyon Road
East to the Southern City Limits 45 52 51 50 50 -1 0

18. American Canyon Road East from Broadway
Street to Eastern City Limits 45 N/A 48 N/A 52 N/A N/A
Notes:

1. NB = Northbound, EB = Eastbound, SB= Southbound, WB = Westbound

2. Change between 2022 and 2016 speed survey = 2022 85th percentile speed minus 2016 85th percentile speed. Yellow highlight denotes speed increase and green highlight indicates a speed decrease or no change.

3. N/A indicates that no recorded speed data for year 2016 is available to compare against 2022 speed data.

Source: Fehr & Peers, November 2022.

On the remaining 8 roadway segments the 85th percentile speeds either decreased or were unchanged compared to the 2016/2017 data.
65 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
31 The greatest increase in the 85th percentile speed between 2016/2017 and 2022 occurred on Elliot Drive from West American Canyon Road to Marla Drive (Segment 12) and Broadway Street from American Canyon Road East to Mini Drive (Segment 15) with a four miles per hour increase in the southbound direction. The speeds on Elliot Drive and Broadway Street however, only increased by one mile per hour and two miles per hour in the northbound direction, respectively. The largest decrease in speed occurred on Hummingbird Way from Benton Way to West American Canyon Road (Segment 9), which decreased by six miles per hour in the southbound direction. The speeds on Hummingbird Way however, only decreased by one mile per hour in the northbound direction.

For those segments where the 85th percentile speeds increase compared to 2016/2017 data, the average increase was approximately 2.1 mph. Conversely, the 85th percentile speeds decreased on average by about

2.7 mph for those segments where the speeds decreased as compared to 2016/2017. 66 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
32 Figure 8: Change in 85th Percentile Speeds Between 2016/2017 and 2022 Note: Segment 7 (Kimberly Drive) and Segment 18 (American Canyon Road East) are not included in this chart as no history of speed data is available. -6.0
-5.0
-4.0
-3.0
-2.0
-1.0

0.0 1.0

2.0 3.0

4.0 Change in 85th Percentile Speed (mph)
Roadway Segments
NB/EB 85th Percentile Difference SB/WB 85th Percentile Difference 67 City of American Canyon
2022 Engineering and Traffic Survey
33 6. Summary and Conclusion
Based on the analysis in this report, we recommend the City of American Canyon maintain the existing speed limits for all roadway segments except for Segment 2, Segment 3, Segment 6, Segment 11, Segment 12, Segment 16, and Segment 17. We recommend the following reductions in speed limits:
• 35 mph to 25 mph around the school zone and 30 mph outside the school zone on Eucalyptus Drive from Wetlands Edge Road to Donaldson Way (Segment 2) • 30 mph to 15 mph around the school zone and 25 mph outside the school zone on Benton Way from Wetlands Edge Road and Donaldson Way (Segment 3)
• 40 mph to 35 mph on West American Canyon Road from Wetlands Edge Road to James Road (Segment 6)
• 30 mph to 25 mph Elliot Drive from Benton Way to West American Canyon Road (Segment 11) • 35 mph to 25 mph around the school zone and 30 mph outside the school zone on Newell Drive from the Northern Newell Open Space Extents to American Canyon Road East (Segment 16) • 45 mph to 40 mph on Flosden Road from American Canyon Road East to the Southern City Limits (Segment 17)
• 45 mph to 40 mph on American Canyon Road East from Broadway Street to the Eastern City Limits (Segment 18)
In addition, we recommend the City implement traffic calming measures to reduce the 85th percentile speeds and improve the pedestrian and bicycle environment on roadway segments by tier, with Tier I being top priority.

Data Sheets for Study Segments
69 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 1 Segment Limits:
2 Date:
35 feet Traffic Volumes:
40 mph
EB WB
38 39
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.47 1.12
Speed Related 0.47 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

However, Section 627 of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) stipulates that other factors besides the 85th percentile speed such as accident records, roadside conditions, residential density along the roadway, as well as pedestrian and bicyclist safety can be considered when determining speed limits.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Green Island Rd from Between Mezzetta Court and SR 29.

Green Island Rd Between Mezzetta Court and SR 29
Number of Lanes October 13, 2022
Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey 100 Average Daily Traffic (vehicles) 6,522
Two-way EB|WB
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

Railroad Crossing, Parking prohibited on both sides
of the street west of Mezzetta Court and on the
south side of the street east of Mezzetta Court
50th Percentile (Two-way) 33
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace (Two-way) 27-36 mph
Percent in Pace (Two-way) 63%
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Discontinuous sidewalks on the north side of the
street, No bicycle facilities
Industrial Uses
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit on Green Island Road from Mezzetta Court to SR 29 is 40 mph. In the eastbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 2 mph under the posted limit, while in the westbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 1 mph under the current posted speed limit.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
N/A Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20
Recommended Speed Limit: 40 mph
Summary and Justification:
3 3
Data Summary 1
70 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 2 Segment Limits:
2 Date:
35-50 feet Traffic Volumes:
35 mph
EB WB
37 38
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.00 1.12
Speed Related 0.00 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Eucalyptus Dr from Between Wetlands Edge Road and Donaldson Way.

Eucalyptus Dr Between Wetlands Edge Road and
Donaldson Way
Number of Lanes October 11, 2022
Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey 100 Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Two-way EB|WB
1,933
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

N/A 50th Percentile (Two-way) 33
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace (Two-way) 29-38 mph
Percent in Pace (Two-way) 85%
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Class I path along Napa Junction Elementary
School, discontinuous sidewalk on the south side of
the street
Residential Neighborhood
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
Napa Junction Magnet Elementary School, Napa
Junction Family Resource Center
Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20
Recommended Speed Limit: 25 mph in school zone, 30 mph outside school zone Summary and Justification:

The posted speed limit on Eucalyptus Drive from Wetlands Edge Road to Donaldson Way is 35 mph. In the eastbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 2.0 mph over the posted limit, while in the westbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 3.0 mph over the posted speed limit.

Eucalyptus Drive has a discontinuous Class I path for pedestrians and bikes on the north side of the street and a discontinuous sidewalk on the south side of the street.

Napa Junction Magnet Elementary School is also located at the west end of this segment. The school generates pedestrian and bicycle traffic along the roadway.

According to AB 43, there is a prima facie speed limit of 25 mph near schools, and speeds may be lowered on roadways with high pedestrian and bicycle traffic to improve safety. Therefore, we recommend the City reduce the speed limit to 25 mph 500-1,000 feet around Napa Junction Magent Elementary School and 30 mph outside of the school zone.
0 0
Data Summary 2
71 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 3 Segment Limits:
2 Date:
45 feet Traffic Volumes:
25 mph
EB WB
31 30
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.51 1.12
Speed Related 0.00 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Benton Way from Between Wetlands Edge Road and Donaldson Way.

Benton Way Between Wetlands Edge Road and
Donaldson Way
Number of Lanes October 11, 2022
Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey 100 Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Two-way EB|WB
1,995
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

N/A 50th Percentile (Two-way) 26
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace (Two-way) 23-32 mph
Percent in Pace (Two-way) 77%
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Sidewalks and Class II bike lanes on both sides of
the street
Residential Neighborhood
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit on Benton Way from Wetlands Edge Road and Donaldson Way is 25 mph. The observed 85th percentile speeds were 6 mph and 5 mph greater than the posted speed limit in the eastbound and westbound directions, respectively, which would initially indicate a posted speed limit of 30 mph.

This segment of Benton Way has sidewalks and bike lanes in both directions. However, American Canyon Middle School, Boys and Girls Club, American Canyon Co-Op Preschool, and American Canyon Community Services are located along this roadway segment and attract a substantial level of pedestrian and bicycle activity throughout the day. No speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of Benton Way for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
American Canyon Middle School, Boys and Girls
Club, American Canyon Community Services
Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20
Recommended Speed Limit: 15 mph in school zone, 25 mph outside school zone Summary and Justification:
1 0
Data Summary 3
72 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 4 Segment Limits:
2 Date:
35-45 feet Traffic Volumes:
25 mph
EB WB
31 32
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.00 1.12
Speed Related 0.00 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
26 23-32 mph
81%
Two-way EB|WB
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Donaldson Way West from Between Donaldson Way and SR 29.

Donaldson Way West Between Donaldson Way and SR 29
Number of Lanes October 4, 2022
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

Prohibited parking on the south side of the street for
150 feet east of SR 29
50th Percentile
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace
Percent in Pace
100
3,574
Discontinuous sidewalks on both sides of the street,
Class II bike lanes on both sides west of Carolyn
Drive, Class III bike boulevard west of Carolyn Drive
Residential Neighborhood
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit on Donaldson Way West from Donaldson Way to SR 29 is 25 mph. The observed 85th percentile speeds were 6 mph and 7 mph greater than the posted speed limit in the eastbound and westbound directions, respectively, which would initially indicate a posted speed limit of 30 mph.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
N/A Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20
Recommended Speed Limit: 25 mph
Summary and Justification:
0 0
Data Summary 4
73 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 5 Segment Limits:
2 Date:
40 feet Traffic Volumes:
25 mph
EB WB
32 32
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.64 1.12
Speed Related 0.42 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
4,784
29 24-33 mph
90%
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Donaldson Way East from Between SR 29 and Newell Drive.

Donaldson Way East Between SR 29 and Newell Drive
Number of Lanes October 4, 2022
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

Railroad Crossing, Prohibited parking on the north
side of the street west of Crestwood Lane and the
south side between Tuscan Oak Trail and the
American Canyon Police Department
50th Percentile
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace
Percent in Pace
Two-way EB|WB
100
Discontinuous sidewalks on both sides of the street,
no bicycle facilities
Residential Neighborhood
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
American Canyon Police Department, Shenandoah
Park
Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20
Recommended Speed Limit: 25 mph
Summary and Justification:

The posted speed limit on Donaldson Way East from SR 29 to Newell Drive is 25 mph. The 85th percentile speeds were observed to be 7 mph greater than the posted speed limit in both directions, which would initially indicate a posted speed limit of 30 mph.

Donaldson Way East has discontinuous sidewalks on the north side of the street and no bicycle facilities on either side of the roadway. Additionally, a railway crosses this segment of Donaldson Way East just west of Tuscan Oak Trail. Two speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of Donaldson Way East for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

Based on the segment properties explained above and in accordance with CVC Section 627, the City has the authority to establish the speed limit at five miles per hour below the limit established by the observed 85th percentile speeds. Therefore, due to the residential nature of Donaldson Way East and lack of continuous pedestrian and bicycle facilities, we recommend that the City maintain the current speed limit of 25 mph. 3 2
Data Summary 5
74 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 6 Segment Limits:
4 Date:
65-85 feet Traffic Volumes:
40 mph
EB WB
40 41
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.62 1.15
Speed Related 0.15 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
6,565
36 32-41 mph
69%
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along West American Canyon Rd from Between Wetlands Edge Road and James Road.

West American Canyon
Rd
Between Wetlands Edge Road and James
Road
Number of Lanes October 11, 2022
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

Two-twenty foot median, Prohibited parking along
various segments on the south side of the street
between Chaucer Lane and James Road
50th Percentile
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace
Percent in Pace
Two-way EB|WB
100
Discontinuous sidewalk on the north side of the street, Continuous sidewalk on the south side of the street,
Class II bike lanes on both sides of the street
Residential Neighborhood/Commercial Space
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit of West American Canyon Road from Wetlands Edge Road to James Road is 40 mph. In the eastbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured equal to the posted limit, while in the westbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 1 mph over the current posted speed limit.

The 85th percentile speeds in both eastbound and westbound directions indicate an initial speed limit of 40 mph which is equal to the current posted speed limit. West American Canyon Road’s average daily traffic is less than 25,000 vehicles. According to AB 43, speeds may be lowered by five miles per hour where there is high pedestrian and bicycle traffic to improve safety. Therefore, to improve the pedestrian and bicycle environment, we recommend that the City reduce the speed limit to 35 mph. Due to West American Canyon Road’s low daily traffic volumes, we also recommend that the City convert the two outside travel lanes to Class I paths or protected Class IV bike lanes.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
Northampton Park, Retail (Safeway) Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20 Recommended Speed Limit: 35 mph
Summary and Justification:
4 1
Data Summary 6
75 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 7 Segment Limits:
2 Date:
35-60 feet Traffic Volumes:
25 mph
EB WB
40 37
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 1.70 1.12
Speed Related 0.42 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
2,391
34 28-37 mph
78%
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Kimberly Drive from Between Meadow Bay Drive and SR 29.

Kimberly Drive Between Meadow Bay Drive and SR 29
Number of Lanes October 4, 2022
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

N/A 50th Percentile
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace
Percent in Pace
Two-way EB|WB
100
Sidewalks on both sides of the street, Discontinuous
Class II bike lanes between Elliot Drive and SR 29
Residential Neighborhood
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit of Kimberly Drive from Meadow Bay Drive to SR 29 is 25 mph. In the eastbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 15 mph over the posted limit, while in the westbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 12 mph over the posted speed limit, which would initially indicate a posted speed limit of 35 mph.

More than 16 separate dwelling units exist on both sides of the roadway within a quarter mile along this roadway segment. Kimberly Drive has sidewalks on both sides of the street and discontinuous bike lanes on both sides. One speed-related collision has been reported on this section of Kimberly Drive for the five-year period analyzed for this report. Additionally, the roadway segment collision rate is measured at 1.70 acc/mil.miles which is greater than the average statewide collision rate of similar roadway types (1.12 acc/mil.miles).

Based on the segment properties explained above and in accordance with CVC Section 627, the City has the authority to establish the speed limit at five miles per hour below the limit established by the observed 85th percentile speed, which would be 30 mph. However, due to the segment properties identified above such as the residential nature of Kimberly Drive and lack of bicycle facilities, we recommend that the City maintain the current speed limit of 25 mph. The City should monitor this segment as a Tier I priority for possible traffic calming measures to reduce the 85th percentile speeds.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
Kimberly Park Athletic Field Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20 Recommended Speed Limit: 25 mph
Summary and Justification:
4 1
Data Summary 7
76 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 8 Segment Limits:
2 Date:
30 feet Traffic Volumes:
25 mph
NB SB
33 32
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.60 1.12
Speed Related 0.00 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
1,685
28 23-32 mph
75%
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Wetlands Edge Rd from Between Eucalyptus Drive and Kensington Way.

Wetlands Edge Rd Between Eucalyptus Drive and Kensington Way
Number of Lanes October 13, 2022
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

San Francisco Bay Trail on West side of the street,
Prohibited parking on the west side of the street
where parking is not designated
50th Percentile
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace
Percent in Pace
Two-way NB|SB
100
Sidewalks on both sides of the street, No bicycle
facilities
Residential Neighborhood
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit of Wetlands Edge Road from Eucalyptus Drive to Kensington Way is 25 mph. In the northbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 8 mph over the posted speed limit, while in the southbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 7 mph over the posted speed limit. The 85th percentile speeds would initially indicate raising the speed limit to 30 mph.

More than 13 separate dwelling units exist on the east side of the roadway within a quarter mile along this roadway segment. Wetlands Edge Road has sidewalks on both sides of the street. However, there are five marked uncontrolled crosswalks that connect to San Francisco Bay Trail. This segment has no bicycle facilities. One speedrelated collision has been reported on this section of Donaldson Way East for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
N/A Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20
Recommended Speed Limit: 25 mph
Summary and Justification:
1 0
Data Summary 8
77 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 9 Segment Limits:
2 Date:
35 feet Traffic Volumes:
25 mph
NB SB
29 25
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 1.83 1.12
Speed Related 1.83 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
554
23 18-27 mph
76%
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Hummingbird Way from Between Benton Way and West American Canyon Road.

Hummingbird Way Between Benton Way and West American
Canyon Road
Number of Lanes October 13, 2022
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

N/A 50th Percentile
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace
Percent in Pace
Two-way NB|SB
100
Sidewalks on both sides of the street, No bicycle
facilities
Residential Neighborhood
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit of Hummingbird Way from Benton Way to West American Canyon Road is 25 mph. In the northbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 4 mph over the posted limit, while in the southbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured equal to the posted speed limit.

Since the lower of the two 85th percentile speeds can be used to set the speed limit, the 85th percentile speeds in the southbound direction indicates an initial speed limit of 25 mph which is equal to the current posted speed limit. Therefore, we recommend the City maintain the existing speed limit of 25 mph.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
N/A Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20
Recommended Speed Limit: 25 mph
Summary and Justification:
1 1
Data Summary 9
78 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 10 Segment Limits:
2 Date:
40 feet Traffic Volumes:
25 mph
NB SB
28 30
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.90 1.12
Speed Related 0.30 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
3,370
25 21-30 mph
79%
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Donaldson Way from Between Eucalyptus Drive and Benton Way.

Donaldson Way Between Eucalyptus Drive and Benton
Way
Number of Lanes October 11, 2022
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

N/A 50th Percentile
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace
Percent in Pace
Two-way NB|SB
100
Sidewalks on both sides of the street, No bicycle
facilities
Residential Neighborhood
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit of Donaldson Way from Eucalyptus Drive to Benton Way is 25 mph. In the northbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 3 mph over the posted limit, while in the southbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 5 mph over the posted speed limit, which would initially indicate a posted speed limit of 30 mph.

Since the lower of the two 85th percentile speeds can be used to set the speed limit, the 85th percentile speeds in the northbound direction indicates an initial speed limit of 30 mph.

According to the California MUTCD 2014 Edition, Revision 3, for cases in which the nearest five miles per hour increment of the 85th percentile speed would require rounding up, then the speed limit may be rounded down to the nearest five miles per hour increment below the 85th percentile speed, if no further reduction is used. The 85th percentile speeds in the northbound direction was rounded up to indicate an initial speed limit of 30 mph, which can be rounded down to 25 mph. Therefore, we recommend the City maintain the existing speed limit of 25 mph.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
N/A Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20
Recommended Speed Limit: 25 mph
Summary and Justification:
3 1
Data Summary 10
79 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 11 Segment Limits:
2 Date:
45 feet Traffic Volumes:
30 mph
NB SB
35 35
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.00 1.12
Speed Related 0.00 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
3,793
30 26-35 mph
74%
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Elliot Dr from Between Benton Way and West American Canyon Road.

Elliot Dr Between Benton Way and West American
Canyon Road
Number of Lanes October 11, 2022
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

N/A 50th Percentile
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace
Percent in Pace
Two-way NB|SB
100
Sidewalks and Class II bike lanes on both sides Residential Neighborhood Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit of Elliot Drive from Benton Way to West American Canyon Road is 30 mph. In both northbound and southbound directions, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 5 mph over the posted limit. The 85th percentile speeds would initially indicate raising the speed limit to 35 mph.

Based on the segment properties explained above and in accordance with CVC Section 627, the City has the authority to establish the speed limit at five miles per hour below the limit established by the observed 85th percentile speeds. According to AB 43, speeds may be lowered on roadways with high pedestrian and bicycle traffic to improve safety. Therefore, to improve the pedestrian and bicycle environment, we recommend that the City reduce the current speed limit to 25 mph.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
N/A Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20
Recommended Speed Limit: 25 mph
Summary and Justification:
0 0
Data Summary 11
80 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 12 Segment Limits:
2 Date:
40-45 feet Traffic Volumes:
25 mph
NB SB
35 37
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.73 1.12
Speed Related 0.00 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
4,166
31 28-37 mph
80%
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Elliott Dr from Between West American Canyon Road and Marla Drive.

Elliott Dr Between West American Canyon Road
and Marla Drive
Number of Lanes October 4, 2022
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

Walking path crossing near Linwood Park and bridge
over creek North of Folland Drive
50th Percentile
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace
Percent in Pace
Two-way NB|SB
100
Sidewalks on both sides, Class II bike lanes on both
sides north of the walking path near Linwood Park
Residential Neighborhood
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit of Elliot Drive from West American Canyon Road to Marla Drive is 25 mph. In the northbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 10 mph over the posted limit, while in the southbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 12 mph over the posted speed limit, which would initially indicate a posted speed limit of 35 mph.

More than 16 separate dwelling units exist on both sides of the roadway within a quarter mile along this roadway segment. The American Canyon Senior Center is also located along Elliot Drive. Elliot Drive has discontinuous sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides of the street. Additionally, there is a marked, uncontrolled crosswalk for a walking trail south of Knightsbridge Way. No speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of Elliot Drive for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

California Assembly Bill No. 43 sets a prima facie speed limit of 25 mph when passing a senior center. According to AB 43, speeds may be lowered near senior centers and where the pedestrian and bicycle environment poses a risk to safety. Due to the proximity to a senior center and the segment properties identified above such as the residential nature of Elliot Drive and lack of pedestrian and bicycle facilities, we recommend that the City maintain the current speed limit of 25 mph. The City should monitor this segment of Elliot Drive as a Tier I priority for possible traffic calming measures to reduce the 85th percentile speeds.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
American Canyon Senior Center, Elliot Park, City of
American Canyon Community Garden
Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20
Recommended Speed Limit: 25 mph
Summary and Justification:
3 0
Data Summary 12
81 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 13 Segment Limits:
2 Date:
40 feet Traffic Volumes:
25 mph
NB SB
32 35
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.51 1.12
Speed Related 0.00 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
3,985
29 22-31 mph
73%
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along James Rd from Between Wilson Way and West American Canyon Road.

James Rd Between Wilson Way and West American
Canyon Road
Number of Lanes October 11, 2022
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

N/A 50th Percentile
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace
Percent in Pace
Two-way NB|SB
100
Sidewalks on the east side of the street, No bicycle
facilities
Residential Neighborhood
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit of James Road from Wilson Way to West American Canyon Road is 25 mph. In the northbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 7 mph over the posted limit, while in the southbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 10 mph over the posted speed limit. Since the lower of the two 85th percentile speeds can be used to set the speed limit, the 85th percentile northbound speed would initially indicate raising the speed limit to 30 mph.

More than 16 separate dwelling units exist on both sides of the roadway within a quarter mile along this roadway segment. Elliot Drive has sidewalks on the east side of the street, but it does not have bicycle facilities. No speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of Elliot Drive for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
American Canyon Library, American Canyon Fire
District
Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20
Recommended Speed Limit: 25 mph
Summary and Justification:
2 0
Data Summary 13
82 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 14 Segment Limits:
2 Date:
40 feet Traffic Volumes:
25 mph
NB SB
30 30
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.78 1.12
Speed Related 0.19 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
5,213
26 21-30 mph
86%
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Danrose Dr from Between West American Canyon Road and Mini Drive.

Danrose Dr Between West American Canyon Road
and Mini Drive
Number of Lanes October 11, 2022
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

N/A 50th Percentile
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace
Percent in Pace
Two-way NB|SB
100
Sidewalks on both sides of the street, No bicycle
facilities
Residential Neighborhood
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit of Danrose Drive from West American Canyon Road to Mini Drive is 25 mph. In both northbound and southbound directions, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 5 mph over the posted limit. The 85th percentile speeds would initially indicate raising the speed limit to 30 mph.

More than 16 separate dwelling units exist on both sides of the roadway within a quarter mile along this roadway segment. Danrose Drive has sidewalks on both sides of the street, but it does not have bicycle facilities. One speed-related collision has been reported on this section of Elliot Drive for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
N/A Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20
Recommended Speed Limit: 25 mph
Summary and Justification:
4 1
Data Summary 14
83 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 15 Segment Limits:
2 Date:
30 feet Traffic Volumes:
30 mph
NB SB
40 41
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.21 1.12
Speed Related 0.00 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
4,941
35 32-41 mph
74%
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Broadway Street from Between American Canyon Road East and Mini Drive.

Broadway Street Between American Canyon Road East and
Mini Drive
Number of Lanes October 4, 2022
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

Prohibited parking on both sides of the roadway along
most of Broadway aside from near the Veterans
Memorial Park and the American Canyon Dog Park.
50th Percentile
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace
Percent in Pace
Two-way NB|SB
100
Continuous sidewalk with portions of a Class I path on
the west side of the street, Discontinuous sidewalk on
the east side of the street, Discontinuous Class II bike lane on the east side of the street
Residential Neighborhood, Green Space
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit of Broadway Street from American Canyon Road East to the Southern City Limits is 30 mph. In the northbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 10 mph over the posted limit, while in the southbound direction, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 11 mph over the posted speed limit. The 85th percentile speeds would initially indicate raising the speed limit to 40 mph.

Broadway Street has sidewalks on one or both sides of the street and discontinuous bike lanes. Veterans Memorial Park, American Canyon Dog Park, and a playground are located along this roadway segment and attract a substantial level of pedestrian and bicycle activity throughout the day. No speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of Elliot Drive for the five-year period analyzed for this report.

Based on the segment properties explained above and in accordance with CVC Section 627, the City has the authority to establish the speed limit at five miles per hour below the limit established by the observed 85th percentile speed, which would be 35 mph. However, due to the segment properties identified above such as the roadway conditions and lack of continuous pedestrian and bicycle facilities, we recommend that the City maintain the current speed limit of 30 mph. The City should monitor this segment of Broadway Street for possible traffic calming measures to reduce the 85th percentile speeds.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
Veterans Memorial Park, American Canyon Dog Park Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20 Recommended Speed Limit: 30 mph
Summary and Justification:
1 0
Data Summary 15
84 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 16 Segment Limits:
4 Date:
60 feet Traffic Volumes:
35 mph
NB SB
39 39
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.70 1.15
Speed Related 0.42 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
7,293
35 30-39 mph
76%
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Newell Drive from Between the Northern Newell Open Space Extents and American Canyon Road East.

Newell Drive Between the Northern Newell Open Space
Extents and American Canyon Road East
Number of Lanes October 4, 2022
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

Two-ten foot median, Prohibited parking on both sides
of the roadway between American Canyon Road and
just north of Silver Oak Trail, near American Canyon
High School
50th Percentile
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace
Percent in Pace
Two-way NB|SB
100
Discontinuous sidewalks on both sides of the street,
No bike facilities
Residential Neighborhood, Undeveloped Open Space
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit on Newell Drive from the Northern Newell Open Space Extents to American Canyon Road East is 35 mph. In both northbound and southbound directions, the 85th percentile speed was measured at 4 mph over the posted limit. The 85th percentile speeds would initially indicate raising the speed limit to 40 mph.

Newell Drive has discontinuous sidewalks on both sides of the street and does not have bicycle facilities. American Canyon High School is also located at the south end of this segment. The school generates pedestrian and bicycle traffic along the roadway.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
American Canyon High School Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20 Recommended Speed Limit: 25 mph in school zone, 30 mph outside school zone Summary and Justification:
5 3
Data Summary 16
85 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 17 Segment Limits:
4 Date:
60 feet Traffic Volumes:
45 mph
NB SB
51 50
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.35 1.15
Speed Related 0.12 N/A
January 12, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
17,584
45 41-50 mph
65%
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along Flosden Rd from Between American Canyon Road East and the Southern City Limits.

Flosden Rd Between American Canyon Road East and
the Southern City Limits
Number of Lanes October 11, 2022
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Roadway Width
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey Average Daily Traffic (vehicles)
Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

Two-ten foot median, Prohibited parking along various
segments on both sides of the road
50th Percentile
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace
Percent in Pace
Two-way NB|SB
100
Sidewalks on both sides of the street, No bike
facilities
Residential Neighborhood
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) The posted speed limit on Flosden Road from American Canyon Road East to the Southern City Limits is 45 mph. The observed 85th percentile speeds were 6 mph and 5 mph greater than the posted speed limit in the northbound and southbound directions, respectively, which would initially require a posted speed limit of 50 mph.

Based on the segment properties explained above and in accordance with CVC Section 627, the City has the authority to establish the speed limit at five miles per hour below the limit established by the observed 85th percentile speeds. According to AB 43, speeds may be lowered by five miles per hour where the speed limit is deemed more than reasonable or safe. Therefore, due to the segment properties identified above, such as high traffic volumes and lack of adequate bicycle facilities, and the Cityidentified safety risk, we recommend that the City reduce the speed limit to 40 mph.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
N/A Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20
Recommended Speed Limit: 40 mph
Summary and Justification:
6 2
Data Summary 17
86 City of American Canyon
2022 Speed Survey Analysis
Roadway Name: Segment #: 18 Segment Limits:
2-4 Date:
30-65 feet Traffic Volumes:
45 mph
EB WB
48 52
Segment State Wide Average
Total Crashes 0.36 1.15
Speed Related 0.21 N/A
April 10, 2023
Signature Date
Bob Grandy, TE1422
Average Daily Traffic (vehicles) 19,777
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 40802 requires speed limits be justified by an Engineering and Traffic Survey conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. Speed limits are legally required to be established at the nearest five (5) mph increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is defined as that speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. This means that a segment with an 85th percentile speed of 27.4 miles per hour can be posted for 25 mph, while a segment with a critical speed of 27.5 mph must be posted at 30 mph.

Below are the results for the speed survey analysis conducted along American Canyon Road East from Between Broadway Street and the Eastern City Limits.

American Canyon Road
East
Between Broadway Street and the Eastern
City Limits
Number of Lanes April 6, 2023
Roadway Width Two-way EB|WB
Posted Speed Total Vehicles Observed during speed survey 100 Conditions Not Readily Apparent: Current Speed Data:

Two-seventeen foot median, Prohibited parking on
the south side of the road between Broadway and
Flosden Road
50th Percentile 43
85th Percentile
10 mph Pace 37-46 mph
Percent in Pace 61%
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Description of Surrounding Area:

Sidewalks on the south side of the street, no bicycle
faciltiies
Residential Neighborhood/Commercial Space
Community Facilities: Crash History: Number Rate (acc/mil vehicle miles) N/A Crash Data Collected from 01/01/16 to 12/31/20
7 4
Recommended Speed Limit: 45 mph
Summary and Justification:

The posted speed limit on American Canyon Road East from Broadway to the Eastern City Limits is 45 mph. The observed 85th percentile speeds were 3 mph and 7 mph greater than the posted speed limit in the eastbound and westbound directions, respectively, which would initially require a posted speed limit of 50 mph.

American Canyon Road East is a major arterial and has high traffic volumes serving an average of nearly 20,000 vehicles daily. This segment has sidewalks on the south side of the road, but it does not have bicycle facilities. Four speed-related collisions have been reported on this section of American Canyon Road East for the five-year period analyzed for this report. The American Canyon Local Road Safety Plan identified both the segments of American Canyon Road East between Silver Oak Trail and Newell and between Newell and the Eastern City Limits as high severity roadways due the severity of their collisions from 2017 to 2021.

Based on the segment properties explained above and in accordance with CVC Section 627, the City has the authority to establish the speed limit at five miles per hour below the limit established by the observed 85th percentile speeds. According to AB 43, speeds may be lowered by five miles per hour where the speed limit is deemed more than reasonable or safe. Therefore, due to the segment properties identified above, such as high traffic volumes and lack of adequate bicycle facilities, and the Cityidentified safety risk, we recommend that the City reduce the speed limit to 40 mph.

Notes:

Is licensed by the Board for Professional
Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists
Data Summary 18
87 Appendix B:

CVC Section 627
88 VEHICLE CODE - VEH
DIVISION 1. WORDS AND PHRASES DEFINED [100 - 681]
( Division 1 enacted by Stats. 1959, Ch. 3. )
627.
(a) “Engineering and traffic survey,” as used in this code, means a survey of highway and traffic conditions in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation for use by state and local authorities.
(b) An engineering and traffic survey shall include, among other requirements deemed necessary by the department, consideration of all of the following:
(1) Prevailing speeds as determined by traffic engineering measurements. (2) Accident records.
(3) Highway, traffic, and roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver. (c) When conducting an engineering and traffic survey, local authorities, in addition to the factors set forth in paragraphs (1) to (3), inclusive, of subdivision (b) may consider all of the following:
(1) Residential density, if any of the following conditions exist on the particular portion of highway and the property contiguous thereto, other than a business district:
(A) Upon one side of the highway, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 13 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures.
(B) Upon both sides of the highway, collectively, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 16 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures.
(C) The portion of highway is longer than one-quarter of a mile but has the ratio of separate dwelling houses or business structures to the length of the highway described in either subparagraph (A) or (B).
(2) Pedestrian and bicyclist safety.
(Amended by Stats. 2000, Ch. 45, Sec. 1. Effective January 1, 2001.) 89 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
MAY 2, 2023

STAFF REPORT

CONSENT
ITEM NUMBER: 12.

TITLE
Interwest Consulting Group Building and Safety Services contract augment and one-year extension

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolu-on of the City Council of the City of American Canyon approving Amendment 16 to Agreement 2011-A105 with the Interwest Consul-ng Group to extend the contract for Building and Safety Services to the end of Fiscal Year 2023/24, and increase the total contract amount by $642,000 not to exceed $3,784,500.

CONTACT
Brent Cooper, AICP, Community Development Director

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS
Since 2011, Interwest Consul-ng Group provides contract Building and Safety Services that includes a part--me Building Official, Plan Check services, and on-call Building Inspec-on Services. The contract is funded from 45% of the building permit fees plus an hourly charge for Inspec-on Services.

For Fiscal Year 2023/24, staff an-cipates that the Interwest Building and Safety services will cost $642,000 which is offset from building plan check and inspection revenue.

Interwest provides excellent staff that maintain a high level of service for the City. For this reason, staff recommends extending the contract for one additional fiscal year.

COUNCIL PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
Organizational Effectiveness: "Deliver exemplary government services."

FISCAL IMPACT
The Interwest services cost of $642,000 and associated revenues are included in the upcoming Fiscal Year 2023/24 budget.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
N/A
90 ATTACHMENTS:

1. Interwest Contract Resolution 16th Amendment

2. Exhibit A 16th Amendment
91 RESOLUTION NO. 2023-______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON APPROVING AMENDMENT 16 TO AGREEMENT 2011-A105 WITH THE INTERWEST CONSULTING

GROUP TO EXTEND THE CONTRACT FOR BUILDING AND SAFETY SERVICES TO THE END OF FISCAL YEAR 2023/24 AND INCREASE THE TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT BY $642,000 TO AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $3,784,500
WHEREAS, the City has a longstanding practice of providing Building & Safety Services through a combination of in-house and contract staff; and
WHEREAS, because of the volatility of development, contracting specialized Building and Safety staff helps the City remain flexible with resources in response to market conditions and demands; and WHEREAS, City lacks the qualified personnel to provide the specified work product; and WHEREAS, consistent with the “A/B/C Test” stipulated by the Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. Superior Court (Case No. S222732), the Interwest Consulting Group is an independent contractor free from the control and direction of the City in connection with the performance of the work, who performs work that is outside the usual course of the City’s business and is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed for the City; and WHEREAS, the Interwest Consulting Group contract cost is fixed at 45% of the building permit and plan check fee revenue which ensures the services are provided at no net cost to the General Fund and provides part-time Building Inspection services for an hourly charge that is offset with salary savings from a vacant Building Official position.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of American Canyon hereby determines that the Interwest Consulting Group is free from the control and direction of the City in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of such work and in fact.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of American Canyon hereby determines that the Interwest Consulting Group performs work that is outside the usual course of the City’s business.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of American Canyon hereby determines that the Interwest Consulting Group is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed for the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of American hereby approves Amendment 16 to Agreement 2011-A105 with the Interwest Consulting Group increasing the total contract amount by $642,000 to an amount not to exceed $3,784,500 for building and safety inspection, building official, and plan check services and extends the contract term to June 30, 2024 as incorporated by reference as Exhibit A to this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council of the City of American Canyon held on the 2
nd day of May, 2023, by the following vote:
92 AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
____________________________
Leon Garcia, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________ _________________________________ Taresa Geilfuss, CMC, City Clerk William D. Ross, City Attorney Exhibit A – 16
th Amendment to Agreement 2011-A105
93 EXHIBIT A
CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON AGREEMENT NO. ____________
AMENDMENT #16 TO AGREEMENT NO. 2011-A105 TO THE CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON

STANDARD AGREEMENT FOR BUILDING AND SAFETY, BUILDING OFFICIAL PLAN CHECK,

AND BUILDING INSPECTION SERVICES WITH INTERWEST CONSULTING GROUP

RECITALS

1. The City of American Canyon (“CITY”) and Interwest Consulting Group (“CONSULTANT”) have entered into an Agreement dated November 2, 2011, with a First Amendment on January 15, 2013, a Second Amendment on May 22, 2014, a Third Amendment on December 19, 2014, a Fourth Amendment on July 7, 2015, a Fifth Amendment on March 17, 2016, a Sixth Amendment on November 15, 2016, a Seventh Amendment on April 4, 2017, an Eighth Amendment on October 5, 2017, a Ninth Amendment on January 8, 2018, a Tenth Amendment on March 6, 2018, an Eleventh Amendment on June 5, 2018, a Twelfth Amendment on June 18, 2019, a Thirteenth Amendment on March 3, 2020, a Fourteenth Amendment on October 5, 2021, and a Fifteenth Amendment on June 21, 2022.

2. The Agreement provides for amendments to perform specific tasks under a specific scope of services that may arise during the term of the agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, CITY and CONSULTANT agree as follows:

1.00 SERVICES AND COMPENSATION
CONSULTANT agrees to provide services as listed in Attachment “A” to increase the contract amount for additional services in the amount of $642,000 not to exceed $3,784,500.

2.00 TIME OF PERFORMANCE
The services covered by this Amendment shall be performed or provided by June 30, 2024.

3.00 REMAINING PROVISIONS
All other terms of the November 2, 2011 Agreement remain in full force and effect.

Executed on __________________, 2023, at American Canyon, California. 94 CITY: CONSULTANT/CONTRACTOR:

By: ____________________________ By: __________________________ Jason B. Holley Name
City Manager Title
95 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
MAY 2, 2023

STAFF REPORT

CONSENT
ITEM NUMBER: 13.

TITLE
Lance Soll and Lunghard LLP contract amendment and extension

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolu(on of the City Council of the City of American Canyon approving Amendment 2 to Agreement 2022-A101 with Lance Soll and Lunghard LLP (Exhibit A) to increase the total contract amount by $110,000 to an amount not to exceed $159,900, extend the contract term to June 30, 2024, and amend the Fiscal Year 2022/23 budget to account for the addi(onal contract cost during the current fiscal year.

CONTACT
Juan Gomez, Finance Director

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS
During the last couple of years, the finance department has had numerous re(rements and departures resul(ng in a loss of years of ins(tu(onal knowledge in addi(on to challenges recrui(ng for key posi(ons in a (ght labor market. In 2022, finance contracted with Lance Soll and Lunghard (LSL) LLP to assist with accoun(ng and audit support services including monthly, quarterly and yearly reconcilia(ons, CIP monitoring and capital assets accoun(ng. This augmenta(on to staff has allowed city staff to focus on ACFR prepara(on, budget prepara(on, suppor(ng city departments with purchasing, analysis and process improvements.

City staff has been very pleased with the services rendered by Lance Soll Lunghard LLP. In the last three months they have assisted the finance department with bank reconcilia(ons, capital assets reconcilia(ons and have provided staff with best prac(ce recommenda(ons. The original $49,900 contract amount has been expended and to ensure the finance department con(nues to meet financial repor(ng deadlines and support with accoun(ng tasks, staff requests a contract amendment in the amount of $110,000. This amount would provide con(nued services for this current and next fiscal year.

COUNCIL PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
Organizational Effectiveness: "Deliver exemplary government services." 96 FISCAL IMPACT
Total contract amendment cost is $110,000. The FY 2022-23 budget will be amended by $30,000 to cover the addi(onal services. FY 2023-24 contract budget of $80,000 will be included in the ensuing budget.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
15378(b) - The ac(on is not a "Project" subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because it does not qualify as a "Project" under Public Resources Code Sec(ons 21065 and 21080 and in Section 15378(b) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution - Lance Soll and Lunghard LLP

2. Exhibit A - Amendment 2 - Lance Soll and Lunghard LLP 97 RESOLUTION NO. 2023‐

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON, AUTHRORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AMENDEMENT # 2 WITH LANCE SOLL AND

LUNGHARD LLP FOR ACCOUNTING AND AUDIT SUPPORT SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $110,000 FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $159,990, EXTEND THE CONTRACT TERM TO JUNE 30, 2024 AND AMEND THE FISCAL YEAR 2022/23 BUDGET TO

ACCOUNT FOR THE ADDITIONAL CONTRACT COST FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR WHEREAS, the City finance department has experienced vacancies in key positions and is looking to augment department staff; and
WHEREAS, Lance Soll and Lunghard LLP currently provides the City of American Canyon with Accounting and Audit Support Services; and
WHEREAS, Lance Soll and Lunghard LLP has the technical and relevant governmental accounting expertise; and
WHEREAS, the City issatisfied with accounting and auditsupportservices provided by Lance Soll and Lunghard LLP; and
WHEREAS, the Fiscal Year 2022/23 budget shall be amended to increase Professional Services by $30,000; and
WHEREAS, Lance Soll and Lunghard LLP contract shall be increased to reflect the additional work accomplished during Fiscal Year 2022/23 and anticipated work for Fiscal Year 2023/24, equaling $110,000 for a total contract amount not to exceed $159,990

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of American Canyon authorizes the City Manager to sign Amendment #2 with Lance Soll and Lunghard LLP for accounting and audit support services through June 30, 2024.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council of the City of American Canyon held on the 2nd day of May, 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
__________________________
Leon Garcia, Mayor

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________ ___________________________ Taresa Geilfuss, CMC, City Clerk William D. Ross, City Attorney 98 CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON AGREEMENT NO. ____________
AMENDMENT #2 TO AGREEMENT NO. 2022-A101 THE CITY OF AMERICAN

CANYON STANDARD AGREEMENT FOR INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR

SERVICES WITH LANCE SOLL AND LUNGHARD LLP

RECITALS

1. The City of American Canyon (CITY) and Lance Soll and Lunghard LLP (CONSULTANT) have entered into an Agreement dated June 13, 2022 that has been previously amended by Amendment 1 (Agreement No. 2020- A179).

2. The Agreement provides for amendments to perform specific tasks under a specific scope of services that may arise during the term of the agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, CITY and CONSULTANT agree as follows:

1.00 SERVICES AND COMPENSATION
CONSULTANT agrees to provide services as listed in Attachment “A” to increase the contract amount for additional services in the amount of $110,000 for a total not to exceed contract amount of $159,900.

2.00 TIME OF PERFORMANCE
The services covered by this Amendment shall be performed or provided by June 30, 2024.

3.00 REMAINING PROVISIONS
All other terms of the June 13, 2022 Agreement remain in full force and effect.

Executed on April 10, 2023, at American Canyon, California.

CITY: CONSULTANT:

By: ____________________________ By: __________________________ Jason B. Holley Kelly Telford CPA
City Manager Partner Government Services
99 Docu$ ign Envelope ID 1A24A6CA F7BA- 4D5F A744 B64FC3A' 7146E LSLi::

PREPARED BY
Lance Soli & Lunghard LLP
Certified Public Accountants
License Number 2584
Proposal Presented to the
City of American Canyon
Accounting Consulting Services

CONTACT PERSON
Kelly Telford CPA Partner
Kelly Telford@Islcpas com
714) 672 0022
November 26 2022
Focused
on YOU
Attachment A
100
DocuSign Envelope ID 1A24A6CA F7BA- 41215F A744 B64FC3A7146E LSL'::

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

PROFILE OF THE PROPOSER
License to Practice in California
Size of Firm
Desk Reviews/ Disciplinary Action
Peer Review

PEER REVIEW LETTER
1 2
5 5
5 5
5 6
SUMMARY OF PROPOSER' S QUALIFICATIONS 8
Continuing Education 8
Quality of Staff Assurance 8
Recent Experience 8
Client References 8

APPENDICES
Appendix A Benefits of Working with LSL
Appendix B Engagement Team Resumes
10 101
LocuSign Envelope ID 1A24A6CA I7BA- 4D5F A744 B64FC3A7146E LSL':: `

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
November 26 2022
City of American Canyon
Maria Ojeda Assistant City Manager
4381 Broadway Street Suite 201
American Canyon CA 94503
Ms Ojeda
LANCE SOLL & LUNGHARD LLP (" LSL CPAs , " LSL ) is pleased to present our scope of work proposal for accounting and consulting services We value the opportunity to present our professional qualifications to the City of American Canyon and demonstrate why our services are second to none Our proposal highlights our firm s strength and stability along with our demonstrated experience knowledge passion and creative problem solving capabilities as a leader in the field of governmental accounting and auditing Our dynamic team is comprised of top talent within the industry and with our comprehensive government experience we believe you will find that LSL CPAs is one of the best qualified accounting firms to provide these services for the City

SPECIFIC APPROACH TO SCOPE OF SERVICES
LSL has a structured well tested approach to annual accounting services Our goal isn t to replace your team but become a part of it Our team is willing and ready to provide assistance in strategic areas that allow your team to focus on the day to day After a thorough review of your annual financial statements we believe the most effective approach would be to assist with the following
Monthly reconciliation of the bank and investment accounts including interest allocation Monthly reconciliation of accounts receivable accounts payable and deposits payable Monthly reconciliation of interfund activity ( due to/ from transfers in/ out) Monthly reconciliation of taxes and verification that scheduled payments were received Monthly review of miscellaneous income to determine appropriateness of classification Monthly monitoring of capital improvement project accounting and budget compliance Monthly review of financial data to assist in identifying mispostings Preparing monthly quarterly and annual reports as needed Assistance with year end close accounting procedures in preparation for the annual audit At the end of each month LSL will provide you with all of the documents for your records along with an executive summary regarding the procedures performed during the month any unusual items that need further research and any recommendations for the month
As the City is just now wrapping up the annual audit for FY 2021 22 we would be happy to assist with these services going back to July 2022 to encompass all of FY 2022-3 During the first months review we will conduct a thorough review of the general ledger to identify any additional accounts or transactions that should be researched in an attempt to ensure the opening balances have been reconciled From there we would conduct monthly reviews as listed above This would result in a larger number of hours at the beginning of the engagement but would reduce once these preliminary tasks are completed
102
LocuSign Envelope ID 1A24A6CA F7BA- 4D5F A744 B64FC3A7146E LSL':: '
LSL can provide all of the above services or we can tailor our services to meet your needs All services will be previously agreed to at the specified rates below
If selected these duties would be transitioned to LSL in phases to ensure the City does not experience an interruption in day to -day activities LSL CPAs is a full service accounting firm providing accounting and consulting services for organizations across the country We are happy to assist the City in any other areas that need attention beyond those detailed in the proposal

QUALIFICATIONS/ PERSONNEL
Kelly Telford CPA Partner with LSL would be responsible for overseeing this engagement She has previous experience as an Audit Partner as well as holding the role of Finance Director for the City of Seal Beach Costa Mesa and the Los Angeles County Community Development Agency within the last 7 years She will hand select a team that meets the needs of the City to ensure a seamless transition and continuation of daily activities All of our team members have worked in and with government agencies the majority of their careers and are experts in their fields

DOLLAR COST PROPOSAL
Our quoted hourly rates based on level of experience for the services requested are as follows LSL 2023 Hourly Rates
Title Rates
Partner
Senior Manager
Manager
JSupennsor
Senior
IExpenenced Staff
f Staff _ __
IClerical
340
260
220
195 _
r $ 170
145
125
90 Progress payments will be made on the basis of hours of work completed during the course of the engagement and out of -pocket expenses incurred in accordance with the firm s proposal

ADAPTING TO A REMOTE WORKING RELATIONSHIP
LSL is fully equipped with software and communication tools to support a remote process We leverage both Zoom and Microsoft Teams to easily connect over a video call in a face to face setting giving us the ability to share screens and information in real time Additionally having the customizable LSL CaseWare Cloud Portal makes the exchange of secure information easy and painless
103
DocuSign Envelope ID 1A24A6CA F7BA- 405F A744 B64FC3A7146E LSL":: •'

CONCLUSION
Our collective experience in local government accounting backed by our comprehensive understanding of all federal and state grant programs awarded to municipalities has refined our development of efficient procedures and streamlined work plan approach which we believe makes LSL one of the best qualified teams to perform this engagement for the City of American Canyon
Our proposal is a firm and irrevocable offer for 90 days following the closing date for the receipt of proposals For this proposal Kelly Telford CPA Partner is authorized to make representations for our firm She can be reached by phone at ( 714) 458 5292 or by email at Kelly TelfordelsIcpas com Very truly yours
4, _fee 54424, r0V,
City of American Canvon
Signature
Date
104
DocuSign Envelope ID 1A24A6CA F7BA- 4D5F A744 B64FC3A7146E LSL::

PROFILE OF THE PROPOSER
LSL is a full service accounting firm with company headquarters in Brea California and additional offices located in Laguna Hills Santa Ana and Sacramento California as well as in The Woodlands Texas LSL CPAs was established in 1929 and has grown as a leader in the governmental accounting and auditing industry Our team of industry experts holds extensive experience in providing auditing accounting and consulting services to govemment entities including cities counties water and electric utilities and special purpose govemment agencies Our clients have grown to understand that an audit from LSL provides them with a wealth of knowledge confidence and value added services LSL has consistently been named one of the Top Accounting Firms in Orange County by the Orange County Business Journal

LICENSE TO PRACTICE IN CALIFORNIA
LSL CPAs is a limited liability partnership and is not a wholly owned subsidiary of a parent company LSL is a public accounting firm licensed by the State of California Department of Consumer Affairs as a Public Accounting Partnership As a firm we are members of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and the California Society of Certified Public Accountants All key staff to be assigned to this engagement are or will be licensed by the State of California to practice as Certified Public Accountants

SIZE OF FIRM
Our firm is compnsed of approximately 145 employees including 15 partners who are dedicated to solving your toughest challenges Our governmental team consists of 4 partners 2 senior4managers 4 managers 4 supervisors 4 seniors and 8 professional staff All staff assigned to YCPARMIA will be employed by LSL on a full- time basis LSL has the full resources to complete this project and will not use sub contractors Our focused effort is to obtain and retain quality staff in order to provide staff consistency and quality accounting services with minimal disruptions further enabling us to provide high quality services to our clients

DESK REVIEWS/ DISCIPLINARY ACTION
There have been no disciplinary actions against our organization since its inception There have been no litigations against our firm in the past three years Our Single Audit reports are desk reviewed either by the federal cognizant agency or the State Controller' s Office acting as the Oversight Agency We have never had a report rejected by any
of these agencies which demonstrates our thorough understanding of federal grant programs LSL is highly regarded and recognized by the staff of the State Controller s Office for top quality reports

PEER REVIEW
Our firm has participated in the Peer Review Program since its inception All our peer reviews have covered governmental engagements and have received pass ratings Our most recent peer review was conducted by Mark F Wille A Professional Accountancy Corporation A copy is provided on the following pages 105
DocuSign Envelope ID 1A24A6CA F7BA- 4135F A744 B64FC3A7146E LSL:: •°
Peer Review Letter

MARK F WILLE
Certified Public Acctiuntaet
A morEW) NX... iEV -Nry2 UA' FWAIViv1
Report on the Farm' sS} stern of ()kinky Control
January 17 2020
To the Partners
Lance Soll & Lunghard, LLP
and the peer Review Committee oldie California Society of CPAs We have reviewed the system of quality control for the warning and aaiditing practice of Lances Soli & 1 unghard, LLP (the firm) in effect for the year ended May 31 2019 Our peer tevieww as conducted in accordance with the Standards for Performing and Reporting on I'i err Reviews established by the Peer Review Board of The American htstitute of Certified Public tr. couiitants
A summer} of the nature, objectives,, scope limitations of and tht, procedures performed in a System Review as described m the standards may be found at wwwaicpa org srsumman The Summary also includes an explanation of how engagements identified as not performed or repotted in conformity with appheable professional standards, if any are evaluated by a peel reviewer to determine q peer resew r=uing
Firm' sResponsibility
The firm is responsible for designing a systems of quality control and complying WW1 9t to provide the firm with reasonable assurance of performing and r+ portin in +.o nfarmtt} with applicable professional standards to all material respws The thin is also responsible for evaluating actions to promptly rernediate engagements deemed at not performed or reported in conformity math professional standards. when appropriate and for t mediating weaknesses in its systenm ofquality control Zany
Peer Re lewer' sResponsibility
Engagements selected for review included engagements performed under Gov rnment Audazng Stemdmds including compliance audits under the Single Audit Act and audits of employee benefit plans
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the design of the syeern of quilit4 uantml and the finn s compliance therewith based on our review
Required Selections and Considerations
As a part ofour re nt & we considt' red reviews by regulator} entities as L intnunucated by the firm ifapplicable in determining the nattio and cxtont of our procedures Zia
DA
1451 Qi, a6 Stree4 N2 107 1iewpers ice. Ca1Nonw 92660
449 6524040 Fax 949 6521045 otiwepu. comn
106
DocuSign Envelope ID 1A24A6CA F7BA- 4D5F A744 B64FC3A7146E LSLH:: •'
Qpm» n
In our opinion, the system ofquality control for the accounting and auditing practice ofLance, 011 & Lnnighard LLP in effect for tht. veal ended May 31 2019 has been suitably designed and oomphed with to provide he firm with treasonable assurance of performing and reporting in conformity with applicable prof ssionat standards in all material respects Firms can ' tease a rating ofpass, pass with deicw ncy( tes) orfrii( Lance, Soli & 1 unghard LLP has mewed a peer review rating of pass
Mark F
06,,, c7, 4/A(2- 0
Wdle
A Professional Accountancy Corporation
107
DocuSign Envelope ID 1A24A6tA F7BA- 4135F A744 B64FC3A7146E LSL•'::

SUMMARY OF PROPOSER' SQUALIFICATIONS

CONTINUING EDUCATION
As a firm policy all professional government staff meet the requirement of 40 hours of continuing education every year with at least 24 hours in governmental accounting and auditing in a two year penod Our educational programs include training from CaICPA AICPA Government Audit Quality Center and GFOA

QUALITY OF STAFF ASSURANCE
LSL ensures the quality of staffing overthe term of the engagement through firm policies that provide for maintaining continuity of engagement teams except in instances where an employee has left the firm or has been promoted All other changes in staffing at the supervisor level and above will first have the YCPARMIA s expressed written permission

RECENT EXPERIENCE
As a firm we have extensive experience with municipalities including cities counties water and electric utilities special districts joint powers authorities and compliance with OMB Uniform Guidance We are familiar with all federal and state grant programs typically awarded to municipalities Generally our government sector services break down into the following major classifications attestation compliance consulting outsourced accounting and reporting year end close assistance interim staffing strategic planning and tax services We also provide accounting services that include outsourced accounting services year end close assistance audit preparation bank reconciliation training ERP implementation and GASB implementation services Our collective experience in local government accounting backed by our comprehensive understanding of all federal and state grant programs awarded to municipalities has refined our development of efficient procedures and streamlined work plan approach which we believe makes LSL one of the best qualified teams to perform these services

CLIENT REFERENCES
Below is a showcase of our experience in providing accounting and consulting services with other governmental organizations
City of Moses Lake, WA
Contact Name Madeline Prentice Director of Finance
Contact Telephone Number
Contact E mail Address
509) 764 3732
mprenticec citvofml com
The LSL team was responsible for assisting with their new ERP implementation performing year- end closing procedures along with city staff including year end analysis and journal entries for all general ledger accounts preparing the government -wide conversion journal entries preparing the 2020 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report and managing and training department staff
Scope of Work
108
DocuSign Envelope ID 1A24A6CA F7BA- 405F A744 B64FC3A7146E LSL•
City of Manteca, CA
Contact Name Jared Hanson Deputy Finance Director
209) 456- 8782
1hansenna. cimanteca ca us
The City requested LSL to provide full year end close services and to include analysis and workpapers for all accounts and preparation of all journal entries necessary to ensure a complete and accurate general ledger LSL has a team of eight staff including one Senior Manager Manager and Supervisor who are working diligently to close their books Contact Telephone Number
Contact E- mail Address
Scope of Work
The completed deliverable will be all documents necessary for the 2022 audit and all journal entnes necessary to close the accounting records Contact Name
Georgetown Divide Public Utilities District, CA
Jessica Buckle Office/ Finance Manager
530) 330- 456 x103
lbuckle@gd- pud org
The City provide monthly accounting services and full year end close services which includes analysis and workpapers for all accounts and preparation of all journal entnes necessary to ensure a complete and accurate general ledger
Contact Telephone Number
Contact E mail Address
Scope of Work
Appendices on the following pages]
109
DocuSign Envelope ID 1A24A6CA F7BA- 4D5F A744 B64FC3A7146E LSL':: °

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A BENEFITS OF WORKING WITH LSL
Keeping up with the numerous accounting and regulatory changes can seem unmanageable Now more than ever finance departments are facing more complexity risk and changes and with fewer resources As the industry continues to evolve a strategic relationship with LSL can help you better manage these changes and better understand the industry' sbest management practices
1) Annual Governmental Accounting Update Annually we hold a half day seminar providing an update to new accounting and regulatory standards impacting local governments The goal is to provide useful relevant information that impacts your organization
2) Annual Onsite Client Specific Training Tailored training for your organization on topics that are most relevant and needed for you and your team Topics may include fraud risk management internal controls accounting pronouncements governmental accounting and ACFR preparation 3) Focused Topic Specific Webinars and Ongoing News & Alerts Important topics affecting local governments and govemment entities sometimes need more attention and explanation In addition to our annual update our webinars and newsletters offer a short focused approach to these critical areas 4) Meetings with Governing Boards We believe communication is the key to a successful relationship and offer two annual meetings with your Board or Committees Meetings promote dialogue between LSL and the Authority on an ongoing basis

APPENDIX B ENGAGEMENT TEAM RESUMES
Resumes for each member of the proposed engagement team are included on the following pages 110
DocuSign Envelope ID 1A24A6CA F7BA- 4D5F A744 B64FC3A7146E LSL•':'•

LICENSE
Certified Public Accountant —
California 2014
Texas — pending

ENGAGEMENTS
City of Moses Lake WA
City of Manteca CA
City of Winters CA
City of Monrovia CA
City of Marfa TX
City of Shafter CA
Georgetown Divide Public Utilities
District CA
County of Hidalgo TX
Orange County Sanitation District
Orange County Water District
Orange County Fire Authonty
Kelly A Telford, CPA

ENGAGEMENT PARTNER

ACHIEVEMENTS
Kelly has served as Director of Finance/ City Treasurer for the County of Los Angeles the City of Costa Mesa and the City of Seal Beach and developed her expertise in accounting and auditing financial forecasting budget development public utilities investment management grant management human resources and information technology

CONTINUING EDUCATION
130 total hours over the last three years 104 of which were in governmental accounting and auditing subjects Kelly meets the requirements of governmental CPE Government Auditing Standards

EXPERIENCE
Kelly has over 19 years of experience working both in and with government agencies including large and small Cities redevelopment agencies/ successor agencies, Special Districts and Native American Tribes and Tribal Casinos She has been an auditor and consultant for 13 years specializing in the audits of government agencies As an auditor her experience as a Director of Finance/ City Treasurer has helped her better appreciate the demands of government agency finance departments and she strives to have a collaborative relationship yearround not just during the audit Her work has entailed
The preparation of the ACFR for entities involved in CSMFO and GFOA in the U S and Canada
Audit review and technical assistance throughout the year to deliver the most up to -date information with current GASB pronouncements Presentations to City Councils Board of Supervisors Boards of Directors and Audit Committees

MEMBERSHIPS
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants ( AICPA) California Society of Certified Public Accountants ( CalCPA) California Society of Municipal Finance Officers ( CSMFO) Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA)

EDUCATION
Bachelor of Arts Degree in Accounting — California State University Fullerton 2003
111

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
MAY 2, 2023

STAFF REPORT

CONSENT
ITEM NUMBER: 14.

TITLE
Quarterly Investment Report for City and Fire District for Fiscal Year 2022-23 Quarter 3

RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file the City and Fire District’s Treasurer’s Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2023.

CONTACT
Juan Gomez, Finance Director

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS
The City’s Investment Policy requires; the Treasurer to submit a quarterly investment report to the City Council. The report (A4achment 1) for the quarter ended March 31, 2023, includes investment transac6ons for both the City and Fire District. The report shows the City’s cash and investment book balance, including debt reserves and unspent proceeds, was $77,359,756. The Fire District’s book balance was $5,560,493.

The City’s diversified porAolio includes $48.2 million invested in the California State Treasurer’s Office Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) and $24.14 million managed by Chandler Asset Management. The funds managed by Chandler are invested in U.S. Treasury Notes, Federal Agency Securities, Asset Backed Securities, U.S. Corporate Notes, Supranational Securi6es, and FDIC insured Corporate Notes. The lower market value to book value is due to the rising interest rate environment. That is an unrealized number, since the City normally holds investments to maturity. The increasing rate environment also offers an opportunity to invest to achieve higher returns.

The Fire District maintains cash and investment accounts separately from the City. The book value of the District’s total porAolio is $5.56 million. All cash not needed to meet the current opera6onal requirements of the Fire District is invested with Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF).

COUNCIL PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
Organizational Effectiveness: "Deliver exemplary government services." 112

FISCAL IMPACT
The recommended action will have no impact on the city’s budget.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Not Applicable
ATTACHMENTS:

Investment Report Mar 31, 2023.pdf
113
Investment Report
For the Quarter Ended
March 31, 2023
ATTACHMENT 1
City of American Canyon
Operating and Capital Funds Book Value Market Value Book Yield (1) % of Portfolio Cash - Petty $ 2,300 $ 2,300 0.00%
Cash - Westamerica Bank 912,669 912,669 0.30% 1.25%
Local Agency Investment Fund 48,198,928 47,548,740 2.83% 65.79% Asset Backed Securities 2,510,529 2,452,550 2.41% 3.43% Federal Agency Securities 4,868,598 4,639,756 1.63% 6.65% Collaterial Mortgage Obligations 155,274 146,245 0.72% 0.21% Corporate Notes 6,232,434 5,893,982 2.19% 8.51%
Money Market Fund 207,876 207,876 4.32% 0.28%
Supranational 974,420 918,852 1.03% 1.33%
U.S. Treasury Notes 9,195,800 8,742,058 1.76% 12.55%
TOTAL OPERATING CASH 73,258,828 71,465,028 2.49% 100.00% Debt Reserves and Proceeds
Debt Service Reserves
602 - American Canyon Road 345,621 345,621
603 - CFD 3,138,619 3,138,619
Capital Reserve
601 - 2004 Reassessment 320,366 320,366
360 - AmCyn Road East 296,322 296,322
TOTAL DEBT & CAPITAL RESERVES 4,100,929 4,100,929
TOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENTS - CITY $ 77,359,756 $ 75,565,956 (1) The weighted average yield as operating and capital funds for the month ended 3/31/2023 was 2.49%. 114
Investment Report
For the Quarter Ended
March 31, 2023
ATTACHMENT 1
American Canyon Fire Protection District
Description Book Value Market Value Book Yield (2) % of Portfolio Cash - Westamerica Bank $ 391,132 391,132 0.30% 7.03%
Local Agency Investment Fund 5,169,361 5,099,628 2.83% 92.97% TOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENTS - FIRE DISTRICT $ 5,560,493 $ 5,490,760 2.65% 100.00% (2) The weighted average yield for the month ended 3/31/2023 was 2.65%.

The investments, as shown above, are in conformance with the Investment Policy or bond agreements There are sufficient funds to meet the City's budgeted financial obligations for the next six months.

Respectfully submitted,
Juan Gomez
Finance Director/Treasurer
115

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
MAY 2, 2023

STAFF REPORT

CONSENT
ITEM NUMBER: 15.

TITLE
HdL Companies Cannabis Permit Management services 2-year contract extension

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolu,on of the City Council of the City of American Canyon approving Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 2018-177 with HdL Companies for a 2-year contract extension for Commercial Cannabis Permit Management Services from July 1, 2023 to June 30, 2025.

CONTACT
Brent Cooper, AICP, Community Development Director

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS
In July 2018, the City contracted with HdL Companies for their exper,se in developing and administering Commercial Cannabis ordinances and subsequently administering Commercial Cannabis permits. Since that ,me, HdL has provided specialized exper,se to assist in processing three commercial cannabis applications.

The contract does not obligate the City to any ongoing costs. If there is any further service needed on the exis,ng applica,ons, HdL’s contract would provide exper,se to evaluate any proposed change. The City Council further evaluates commercial cannabis applica,ons on an annual basis each January. Should the City Council provide direc,on to reopen an applica,on period, HdL would be available through an existing contract to provide technical assistance.

COUNCIL PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
Economic Development and Vitality: "A>ract and expand diverse business and employment opportunities."

FISCAL IMPACT
The Recommended Ac,on will have no fiscal impact because the cost for consultant services are offset due to the City Council’s adoption of Commercial Cannabis permit fees and deposits. 116

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Recommended Action is not a “project” and exempt from review under CEQA.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. HdL Contract Resolution

2. HdL Cannabis Agreement Amendment 4
117
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO AGREEMENT NO. 2018-A177 WITH HDL COMPANIES FOR A 2-YEAR

CONTRACT EXTENSION FOR COMMERCIAL CANNABIS PERMIT MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO JUNE 30, 2025
WHEREAS, on July 18, 2018, the Parties entered to Agreement No. 2018-177 with HdL Companies (“Contractor”) for Cannabis Ordinance consulting services; and WHEREAS, due to the specialized nature of Commercial Cannabis permit implementation, the City lacks the qualified personnel to provide the specified work product; and WHEREAS, the Parties seeks to extend the “Term” of Agreement No. 2018-177 for two years to from July 1, 2023 to June 30, 2025 for the purpose of Commercial Cannabis Permit Management Services as described in the scope of services identified in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, consistent with the “A/B/C Test” standard of the Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. Superior Court (230 Cal. 4th 718 (2018)), the Contractor is a contractor free from the control and direction of the City in connection with the performance of the work sought, who performs work that is outside the usual course of the City’s business and is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed for the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of American Canyon hereby determines that the Contractor is free from the control and direction of the City in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of such work and in fact.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of American Canyon hereby determines that the Contractor performs work that is outside the usual course of the City’s business.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of American Canyon hereby determines that the Contractor is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed for the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of American Canyon hereby authorizes the City Manager to approve Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 2018-A117 with HdL Companies attached hereto as Exhibit A to extend the contract for two years from June 30, 2023 to June 30, 2025.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council of the City of American Canyon held on the 2
nd day of May, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
118
____________________________
Leon Garcia, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________ _________________________________ Taresa Geilfuss, CMC, City Clerk William D. Ross, City Attorney Exhibit A – 4
th Amendment to Agreement 2018-177
119
CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON AGREEMENT NO. 2023-
AMENDMENT #4 TO AGREEMENT NO. 2018-A177 TO THE CITY OF AMERICAN

CANYON STANDARD AGREEMENT

FOR INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR SERVICES WITH HDL COMPANIES FOR

COMMERCIAL CANNABIS PERMIT SERVICES

RECITALS

1. The City of American Canyon (“CITY”) and HDL Companies (“CONSULTANT”) have entered into an Agreement dated original agreement date July 18, 2018.

2. The Agreement provides for amendments to perform specific tasks under a specific scope of services that may arise during the term of the agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, CITY and HDL COMPANIES agree as follows:

1.00 TIME OF PERFORMANCE
Original agreement amended to extend term to June 30, 2025.

2.00 REMAINING PROVISIONS
All other terms of the July 18, 2018 Agreement remain in full force and effect.

Executed on , , 2023, at American Canyon, California.

CITY: CONTRACTOR:

By: ____________________________ By: __________________________ Jason B. Holley Andy Nickerson
City Manager President, HdL Companies
120
William D. Ross
David Schwarz
Kypros G. Hostetter
Law Offices of
William D. Ross
400 Lambert Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94306
Telephone: (650) 843-8080
Facsimile: (650) 843-8093
www.lawross.com
Los Angeles Office:
11420 Santa Monica Blvd
#25532
Los Angeles, CA 90025
File No: 199/6
April 27, 2023

VIA E-MAIL
The Honorable Leon Garcia, Mayor
and Members of the City Council
City of American Canyon
4381 Broadway, Suite 201
American Canyon, CA 94503
Re: Report Upon Return from Closed Session; Virtual Regular City Council Closed Session Meeting of the American Canyon City Council; April 18, 2023 Dear Mayor Garcia and Members of the City Council:

This communication sets forth reportable action, if any, of the City Council (“Council”) of the City of American Canyon (“City”), consistent with provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Opening Meeting Act (Government Code Section 54950, et seq.) resulting from the Closed Session of the Virtual Regular City Council Closed Session Meeting of April 18, 2023, consistent with Government Code Section 54957.1.

Mayor Leon Garcia called the meeting to order in Open Session at 5:31 p.m. with all Council Members present and after determining that there were no public comments on Closed Session matters, then adjourned to Closed Session at 5:32 p.m.

There were three matters agendized for City Closed Session consideration.

1. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Authorized pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2) Two Matters

2. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1):
a. American Canyon I, LLC v. Napa Valley Unified School District (Napa County Superior Court Case No
22CV001145).
121
The Honorable Leon Garcia, Mayor
and Members of the City Council
April 27, 2023

Page 2 ends

b. City of American Canyon v. City of Vallejo, et al.
(Sacramento Superior Court Case No. 34-2022-00327471).
c. City of American Canyon v. Leon Dale Schmidt, (Napa
County Superior Court Case No. 22CV001041).

3. Threat to Public Services of Facilities – Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(a)
Consultation with: Jason B. Holley, City Manager/Director of Emergency Services & William D. Ross, City Attorney
With respect to the first matter considered under Closed Session Agenda Item No. 1., there was confirmation of the Settlement Authority granted to the City Attorney for prospective resolution. Except as indicated, there was no other reportable action under the common law attorney-client privilege and that provided by Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2).

With respect to the second matter considered under Closed Session Agenda Item No. 1., there was no reportable action under the common law attorney-client privilege and that provided by Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1).

With respect to Closed Session Agenda Item No. 2.a. there was reportable action in terms of status of the litigation and the indication that a possible Global Settlement could be pursued with the Napa Valley Unified School District and other parties involved in the Watson Ranch Specific Plan. Except as indicated, there was no other reportable action under the common law attorney-client privilege and that provided by Government Code Section 54956(d)(1).

With respect to Closed Session Agenda Item No. 2.b., it was indicated that there was no change in status from the previous Report Upon Return from Closed Session for the April 4, 2023 Council Meeting.

With respect to Closed Session Agenda Item No. 2.c., the status of the pending Application for Entry of Default Judgment was confirmed. With the exception of the current litigation status, there was no other reportable action under the common law attorney-client privilege or that provided by Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1).

With respect to Closed Session Agenda Item No. 3.,there was no reportable action under the provisions of Government Code Section 54957(a).

Your Council concluded the Closed Session at 6:15 p.m.

At the conclusion of the Closed Session, the City Council Members acting concurrently as Board Members of the American Canyon Fire Protection District (“District”) conferred, as they 122
The Honorable Leon Garcia, Mayor
and Members of the City Council
April 27, 2023

Page 3 ends

are allowed under the Brown Act, to schedule a prospective Closed Session Item with respect to the performance review of the City Attorney, City Manager, the District (“District”) Chief and Counsel for May 2, 2023.

In Open Session, it was indicated that a written report upon return from Closed Session consistent with Government Code Section 54957.1, would be prepared concerning the matters agendized for Closed Session.

This communication should be reviewed under the Consent portion of the Agenda of your next Regular or Special City Council Meeting.

Should you have questions concerning this Report, it may be taken off the Consent calendar when agendized in the future, or our office may be contacted in the interim.

Very truly yours,
William D. Ross
City Attorney
WDR:jf
cc: Jason B. Holley, City Manager
Maria Ojeda, Assistant City Manager
Taresa Geilfuss, City Clerk
Cherri Walton, Deputy City Clerk
123

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
MAY 2, 2023

STAFF REPORT

PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM NUMBER: 17.

TITLE
Smoke Free Multi-Unit Housing Ordinance

RECOMMENDATION
Waive first reading, read by .tle only, and adopt an Ordinance by the City Council of the City of American Canyon amending the American Canyon Municipal Code Chapter 9.04 “Neighborhood Preserva.on” to prohibit smoking in any unit of a mul.-unit residence and any common area of a multi-unit residence in the City of American Canyon.

CONTACT
Brent Cooper, AICP, Community Development Director

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS
Numerous studies have found that tobacco smoke is a major contributor to indoor air pollu.on, and that breathing secondhand smoke is a cause of disease, including lung cancer, in nonsmokers. At special risk are elderly people, individuals with cardiovascular disease, and individuals with impaired respiratory func.on, including asthma.cs and those with obstruc.ve airway disease. In the United States alone, more than 440,000 people die in the United States from tobacco-related diseases every year, making it the na.on’s leading cause of preventable death. A report on the impacts of secondhand smoke is included as Attachment 2.

The City Council has been a strong advocate for smoking-cessa.on policies. For example, in 2016, the City Council approved an ordinance that prohibits smoke shops and hookah lounges in American Canyon (Ordinance 2016-03).

On December 7, 2021, the City Council received a presenta.on regarding health dangers of secondhand smoke (SHS) in mul.family (MFR) se@ngs. In response to the presenta.on, the Council expressed an interest in learning more about the issue - including a poten.al smoking prohibi.on of both tobacco and cannabis in MFR settings.

On November 15, 2022, the City Manager provided an update to the City Council. The update informed that staff met with the Napa Youth Council and Napa County Health and Human Services Agency representa.ves. Staff also reached out and met with mul.-family complex owners and mobile home park owners. These mee.ngs revealed that private, an.-smoking rules are already in 124
place. A matrix of multifamily housing neighborhoods is included as Attachment 3.

The Napa Youth Council representa.ves presented an argument in favor of a City smoke-free mul.unit ordinance which was supported by the City Council. In response to Council direc.on, staff prepared an ordinance that addresses a prohibi.on of smoking of all varie.es (i.e.: tobacco, cannabis, vaping) within multiunit housing and the common areas.

To address non-smoking requirements in mul.unit housing, staff amended the Neighborhood Preserva.on Ordinance to add smoke free requirements to a wide variety of "Nuisance" abatement procedures.
"Nuisance", in the context of the Neighborhood Preserva.on Ordinance, refers to the legal defini.on in California Penal Code Sec.on 360 and Municipal Code Sec.on 9.04.020. These defini.ons define "Nuisance" as: “any building or property operated or maintained in a way that harms health or interferes with comfortable enjoyment of life or property by an en.re community or neighborhood, or by any considerable number of persons.” Any property that contains a “Nuisance” is subject to Code Enforcement through the Neighborhood Preserva.on Ordinance. The incidence of smoking in a mul.unit residence meets the defini.on of a “Nuisance” in the legal term because secondhand smoke can harm the health and interfere with one or more neighbors’ comfortable enjoyment on their property.

Staff reviewed the draF ordinance with the Napa Youth Council and the Napa County Health and Human Services Agency on April 17, 2023. In addi.on to proposed amendments to the ordinance, the Napa Youth Council discussed the prac.cal issue that smoking addic.on will make it difficult for occupants to stop smoking at their home. We agreed it would be helpful to prepare a handout with informa.on and resources to assist with smoking cessa.on. The Napa Youth Council and Napa County Public Health agreed to partner with city staff to prepare a useful smoking cessa.on resource handout.

On April 20, 2023, staff received feedback from the Napa Youth Council based on the California Smoke Free Mul.unit model ordinance. Among the suggested revisions, the Napa Youth Council pointed out that the smoking prohibi.on should not include the use of tradi.onal, sacred tobacco as part of an Indigenous prac.ce or a lawfully recognized religious, spiritual, or cultural ceremony or prac.ce. In addi.on, the smoking prohibi.on should not include hotels, motels, dormitories, campgrounds, rented single family housing, and manufactured housing parks.

Staff revised the draF ordinance consistent with this input. A copy of the Neighborhood Preserva.on Ordinance with the addi.on of smoke-free mul.unit standards is included in AIachment 1 in redline/strikeout format along with a jus.fica.on to explain the reason for each amendment.
125
Also, in accordance with our outreach strategy, on April 21, 2023, the draF Smoke-Free Mul.unit ordinance was emailed to the American Canyon Apartment Manager contact list and all individuals that have signed up for informa.on related to development projects in the Community Development Department.

COUNCIL PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
Public Safety: "Ensure American Canyon remains a safe community."

FISCAL IMPACT
Enforcement ac.ons associated with the proposed Smoke Free Mul.-Unit Ordinance will become a part of the Code Enforcement service and is included in the current and future fiscal year budgets.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Environmental review is not required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sec.ons 15060(c)(2) (the ac.vity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the ac.vity is not a project as defined in Sec.on 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regula.ons, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no poten.al for resul.ng in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly and it prevents changes in the environment pending the comple.on of the contemplated municipal code review.

ATTACHMENTS:
1 CC Ordinance Smoke Free Multi Unit
2 Understanding Second Hand Smoke

3. Multi_Family_Smoking_Matrix
126
ORDINANCE NO. 2023-XX

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON AMENDING AMERICAN CANYON MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 9.04 “NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION” TO

PROHIBIT SMOKING IN ANY UNIT OF A MULTI-UNIT RESIDENCE AND ANY COMMON AREA OF A

MULTI-UNIT RESIDENCE IN THE CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON
WHEREAS, numerous studies have found that tobacco smoke is a major contributor to indoor air pollution, and that breathing secondhand smoke is a cause of disease, including lung cancer, in nonsmokers. At special risk are elderly people, individuals with cardiovascular disease, and individuals with impaired respiratory function, including asthmatics and those with obstructive airway disease); and WHEREAS, health hazards induced by breathing secondhand smoke include lung cancer, heart disease, respiratory infection, decreased respiratory function, broncho-constriction, and broncho-spasm; and WHEREAS, more than 440,000 people die in the United States from tobacco-related diseases every year, making it the nation’s leading cause of preventable death; and WHEREAS, the United States Environmental Protection Agency has found secondhand smoke to be a risk to public health and has classified secondhand smoke as a Group “A” carcinogen, the most dangerous class of carcinogen; and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Surgeon General has concluded that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke; and
WHEREAS, just 30 minutes of exposure to secondhand smoke is sufficient to damage blood vessels in a healthy nonsmoker; and
WHEREAS, the California Air Resources Board has put secondhand smoke in the same category as the most toxic automotive and industrial air pollutants by categorizing it as a toxic air contaminant for which there is no safe level of exposure; and
WHEREAS, secondhand smoke exposure adversely affects fetal growth with elevated risk of low birth weight and increased risk of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome in infants of mothers who smoke; and WHEREAS, in the United States, secondhand smoke is thought to cause about 46,000 heart disease deaths each year; and
WHEREAS, secondhand smoke can seep under doorways and through wall cracks; and WHEREAS, the only way to fully protect nonsmokers from secondhand smoke is to completely eliminate smoking in indoor spaces. Separating smokers from nonsmokers, cleaning the air, and ventilating buildings cannot completely eliminate exposure to secondhand smoke; and WHEREAS, cigarette butts pose a health threat to children. Small children who had ingested cigarette butts exhibited symptoms of illness such as spontaneous vomiting, nausea, lethargy, and gagging; and 127
WHEREAS, cigarette butts are a major and persistent source of litter. In the last 25 years of coastal cleanups, cigarette and cigarette filters ranked as the number one source of waste comprising nearly 32% of all collected litter items; and
WHEREAS, electronic smoking devices and other unapproved nicotine delivery products have a high appeal to youth due to their high tech design and availability in child-friendly flavors like cotton candy, bubble gum, chocolate chip cookie dough and cookies and cream milkshake; and WHEREAS, a CDC study showed that in 2011 4.7% of all high school students had tried e-cigarettes and that in 2012 that percentage more than doubled to 10.0% of all high school students; and WHEREAS, nonsmokers who live in multiunit dwellings can be exposed to neighbors’ secondhand smoke, as evidenced by the following:
• Residents of multiunit housing have higher levels of cotinine (a biomarker for nicotine) in their blood and saliva than those living in detached houses;i • Among children who live in homes in which no one smokes indoors, those who live in multiunit housing have 45% higher cotinine levels than children who live in detached houses;ii
• Twelve studies have found between 26% and 64% of residents of multiunit housing report secondhand smoke drifting into their home;i
• Surveys have found that 65% to 90% of multiunit housing residents who experience secondhand smoke in their home are bothered by it,36 and a 2019–2020 survey documented variations in secondhand smoke source among multiunit housing residents in Los Angeles County, who reported secondhand smoke exposure from tobacco (39%), marijuana (36%), and e-cigarettes (9%);iii
• Between 44.0% and 46.2% of Californians living in multiunit housing with personal smokefree home policies are exposed to secondhand smoke in their home;iv and WHEREAS, harmful residues from tobacco smoke can be absorbed by and cling to virtually all indoor surfaces long after smoking has stopped and then be emitted back into the air, making this “thirdhand smoke” a potential health hazard, as evidenced by the following:
• Thirdhand smoke contains carcinogenic materials that accumulate over time, presenting a health hazard long after the initial smoke is gone;v
• Studies consistently find that thirdhand smoke remains months after nonsmokers have moved into units where smokers previously lived,vi and a recent study documents that it can remain in units for years;vii
• Human exposure to these thirdhand smoke carcinogens can occur through inhalation, ingestion, or skin absorption through contact with carpeting, furnishings, or clothing;viii • Thirdhand smoke potentially poses the greatest danger to infants and toddlers, who crawl on rugs and furnishings and place household items in their mouths;viii • Nonsmoking people who are exposed to thirdhand smoke have significantly higher nicotine and cotinine levels than those who have not been exposed to thirdhand smoke;vi • Research has shown that thirdhand smoke damages human cellular DNA45,ixand is carcinogenic at exposure levels relevant to residents of multiunit housing;x and 128
WHEREAS, secondhand smoke in multiunit housing is a significant threat to the health and safety of California children, as evidenced by the following:
• About a quarter of those who live in multiunit housing (25.2%) are under the age of 18;iv • The home is the primary source of secondhand smoke exposure for children; • A national survey found that 56.4% of U.S. youth living in apartment units in which no one smokes have elevated blood cotinine levels above 0.05 ng/mL, indicating they have been exposed to potentially dangerous levels of secondhand smoke;ii • The same survey also found that children who live in homes in which no one smokes indoors have 45% higher cotinine levels if they live in apartments compared with detached homes;ii and
WHEREAS, research demonstrates that a majority of adults supports smoke-free policies in multiunit residences, as evidenced by the following:
• 73.7% of U.S. adults surveyed favor smoke-free public housing;xi • 63.5% of Californians surveyed favor restricting smoking inside apartment units;xii and WHEREAS, there are significant savings from adopting a smoke-free multiunit housing policy, as evidenced by the following:
• Prior to implementation, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s smokefree public housing policy was conservatively estimated to produce an annual savings of 4 to 8 million dollars a year for U.S. public housing authorities in renovation-related costs,xiii and 30 to 109 million dollars per year in health care costs in California alone;xiv • Implementing statewide smoke-free policies in multiunit housing property would save property owners in California an estimated $18.1 million in renovation expenses each year; xv and
WHEREAS, smoke-free multiunit hosing policies have been shown to have a meaningful impact on public health, as evidence by the following:
• An estimated 268% of Californians (or 10.17.3 million people) live in multiunit housing;xvi • The U.S. Surgeon General has concluded that eliminating smoking in indoor spaces is the only way to fully protect nonsmokers from secondhand smoke exposure; and that separating smokers from nonsmokers, cleaning the air, and ventilating buildings cannot completely prevent secondhand smoke exposure;xvii
• Smoke-free housing policies resulted in a 24% reduction in self-reported exposure to secondhand smoke exposure among racially and ethnically diverse seniors living in lowincome multiunit housing properties;xviii and WHEREAS, a duly-noticed public hearing was held by the City of American Canyon City Council on May 2, 2023 on the subject ordinance, at which time all those in attendance were given the opportunity to speak on this proposal and to submit comments.

NOW, THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
129
SECTION 1: That smoking in all its forms in multiunit living environments is a nuisance.

SECTION 2: The purpose of this ordinance is to: (1) protect the public health and welfare by prohibiting smoking in any unit of a multi-unit residence and any common area of a multi-unit residence because there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke, and (2) guarantee the right of nonsmokers to breathe smoke-free air at their place of residence.

SECTION 3: Amend American Canyon Municipal Code Chapter 9.04 “Neighborhood Preservation” as follows:

Chapter 9.04 NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION
(All Content Displayed)
• 9.04.010 Findings and determination.
• 9.04.020 Declaration of public nuisances.
• 9.04.030 Chapter not exclusive.
• 9.04.040 Classification of nuisances.
• 9.04.050 Inspection.
• 9.04.060 Summary abatement of immediate dangers.
• 9.04.070 Notice to abate public nuisance.
• 9.04.080 Request for hearing.
• 9.04.090 Hearing by the city council.
• 9.04.100 Decision of the city council.
• 9.04.110 Limitation on filing judicial action.
• 9.04.120 Abatement by property owner.
• 9.04.130 Abatement by the city.
• 9.04.140 Record of cost of abatement notice and hearing to confirm. • 9.04.150 Assessment lien.
• 9.04.160 Nuisance abatement lien.
• 9.04.170 Alternative actions available.
130
• 9.04.180 Violations—Penalties.

9.04.010 Findings and determination.

The city council finds and determines that the restrictions in this chapter are necessary to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the public; to protect the integrity and character of residential neighborhoods and districts; to protect the appearance of the Highway 29 corridor; to prevent the devaluation of property values; and, to enhance and protect the livability, social and economic conditions of the city. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.020 Declaration of public nuisances.

A. Any property, building or other improvements found to be maintained in violation of any one or more of the provisions of Section 9.04.040 of this chapter is declared to constitute a public nuisance and shall be abated by rehabilitation, repair, removal or demolition pursuant to the procedures set forth in this chapter.

B. Any property, building, or other improvement found to be maintained in such condition as to constitute a public nuisance as defined anywhere in this code, the statutes of the state of California or in the common law is declared to constitute a public nuisance subject to abatement under the procedures in this chapter. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.030 Chapter not exclusive.

A. This chapter does not exclusively regulate the conditions and use of property within the city. This chapter shall supplement and be in addition to other provisions of this code and to other statutes, ordinances or regulations existing or subsequently enacted by the city, the state or any other legal entity or agency having jurisdiction.

B. The procedures for abatement set forth in this chapter are not exclusive and are in addition to any other provisions provided in this code or by state law for the abatement of public nuisances. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.040 Classification of nuisances.

It is unlawful for any person owning, leasing, occupying, or having charge or possession of any property in the city to maintain or permit such property to be maintained in such a manner that any of the following conditions are found to exist thereon and to be of such magnitude as to be injurious or potentially injurious to the public health, safety and welfare or to have a tendency to degrade the appearance and property values of surrounding property or to cause damage to public rights-of-way:

A. Property Conditions.

1. Overgrown, diseased, dead or decayed trees, weeds or other vegetation which:
131
a. Constitute a fire hazard or a condition considered dangerous to the public health, safety and general welfare due to a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, impairment of vehicular traffic or obstruction of vehicular line of site or the ability to clearly observe safety signs and signals, b. Are likely to harbor rats, vermin or other pests. This provision identifies conditions which may be deemed to constitute a nuisance within portions of the city that are partially or fully developed because of the potential to adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare and to degrade the appearance and property values of surrounding property. Due to the diminished potential for such adverse effects, such condition would not constitute a nuisance when existing on grazing lands or large undeveloped parcels except when such conditions exist on properties immediately adjacent to developed property.

American Canyon fire protection district standards for weed abatement continue to apply to property city-wide;

2. Accumulations of debris, rubbish and trash in the front or side yard areas visible from the public right-of-way or which constitute a health or fire hazard;

3. Storage, as to be visible at ground level from a public street or adjoining property for unreasonable periods or as a part of a continuing practice, any of the following:
a. Abandoned, inoperative, wrecked or dismantled motor vehicles of any kind, and abandoned, inoperative, wrecked or dismantled trailers, campers or boats, b. Broken or discarded household furnishings and fixtures, appliances, boxes and cartons, play equipment, toys and similar materials,
c. Discarded, wrecked or inoperable machinery and tools, d. Salvage materials, scrap metal or building and construction materials, including, but not limited to, dirt, sand, gravel, concrete, tile, rocks, bricks, and similar materials except when associated with agricultural uses or ongoing landscape projects;

4. Garbage or trash cans which cause offensive odors to neighbors or containers stored in front or side yards, which are visible from public streets unless all of the following conditions exist: a) The garbage/trash container(s) are stored within a defined area that is maintained in a neat and orderly condition, b) all trash is stored completely within a designated container, the container is covered, and no trash has spilled over or has fallen on the ground in the immediately surrounding area, and c) the trash cans/containers are stored behind the front wall plane of the dwelling;

5. Conditions which, due to their accessibility to the public, may prove hazardous or dangerous, including, but not limited to:
a. Unused and/or broken equipment such as ice boxes and refrigerators, b. Abandoned wells, shafts or basements,
c. Hazardous or unprotected pools, pits, ponds or excavations, 132
d. Machinery which is inadequately secured or protected, e. Accumulations of lumber, refuse and waste matter, or discarded materials, including, but not limited to, building and construction materials;

6. Parking or storing construction equipment or machinery except during excavation, construction or demolition operations conducted pursuant to a building or grading permit or when associated with ongoing agricultural/noncommercial landscaping activities;

7. Parking of any motor vehicle, including a recreational vehicle, trailer, camper or boat on lawns or other landscaped areas within portions of the property visible from a public street where such areas are not paved or otherwise surfaced to allow parking. Allowable surface materials may include gravel, brick, grasscrete, concrete pavers, or similar materials that define the parking area and minimize erosion potential;

8. Parking of any motor vehicle, including a recreational vehicle, trailer, camper or boat on property adjacent to Highway 29 for the purpose of offering the same for sale to the general public where a “for sale” or similar sign is displayed on or in the vehicle, trailer, camper or boat which is visible to traffic on Highway 29 and constitutes or tends to constitute a traffic safety hazard or an unsightly appearance;

9. Smoking in any dwelling unit of a multi-unit residence and any common area of a multi-unit residence.
i. "Smoke" or "smoking" “Smoking” means inhaling, exhaling, burning, or carrying any lighted or heated cigar, cigarette, pipe, or any other lighted or heated product containing, made, or derived from nicotine, tobacco, marijuana, or other plant, whether natural or synthetic, that is intended for inhalation. Smoking includes carrying or using an activated electronic delivery device. Smoking does not include the use of traditional, sacred tobacco as part of an Indigenous practice or a lawfully recognized religious, spiritual, or cultural ceremony or practice.
ii. "Common area of multi-unit residence" means any enclosed area or unenclosed area that may be used by more than the residents of a single unit or room, including but not limited to shared lobbies, courtyards, lounges, hallways, elevators, stairs, community rooms, playgrounds, gym facilities, swimming pools, parking garages, parking lots, living and dining areas, kitchens, bathrooms, laundry rooms, lobbies, waiting rooms, and television rooms.
iii. "Dwelling Unit" means one or more rooms designed for residential use by a single household that contain cooking, living, sanitary, and sleeping facilities and that are physically separated from any other rooms or dwelling units that may be in the same structure. “Dwelling Unit” for purposes of smoking prohibition does not encompass hotels, motels, dormitories, campgrounds, rented single family housing, and manufactured housing parks.
iv. “Multiunit Residence” means a building or portion thereof designed or used for residential occupancy by two or more households in separate dwelling units. 133
JUSTIFICATION: addresses all types of smoking, residential living units, and common living areas where secondhand smoke may impact nonsmokers’ rights to breathe smoke-free air at their place of residence.

B. Structural Conditions. Structures or buildings, both permanent and temporary, or other improvements, including, but not limited to walls and fences, which are subject to any of the following conditions:

1. Are structurally unsafe, either entirely or in part;

2. Constitute a fire hazard;

3. Have a faulty weather protection, including but not limited to crumbling, cracked, missing broken or loose exterior plaster or other siding, roofs, foundations or floors (including lack of paint or other protective finish), broken or missing windows or doors;

4. Have dry rot or warped materials, or are infested with termites;

5. Are abandoned, partially destroyed or left unreasonably in a state of partial construction. State of partial construction means building and structures which are partially constructed when the building permit for such construction has expired;

6. Are unoccupied and have been left unlocked or otherwise open or unsecured from intrusion by persons, animals or the elements;

7. Have exterior walls, fences, driveways or sidewalks which are in hazardous condition, hinder free access to public sidewalks or are in a state of disrepair as to be unsightly. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.050 Inspection.

A. Authorized Representatives. The city manager and the community development director or their designated representatives are authorized to make inspections and take such actions as may be required by this chapter to abate public nuisances.

B. Inspection of Premises. Whenever there is a reasonable cause to believe that a condition, activity or use of property exists which constitutes a public nuisance, the city manager or community development director or a designated representative may seek to enter the premises at a reasonable time for the purpose of inspection. If the premises are occupied, entry shall be requested and proper credentials shall be presented. If the premises are unoccupied, a reasonable effort shall be made to locate the property owner. If entry is refused or if the property cannot be located, a twenty-four written notice of intent to inspect shall be left at the premises. The notice shall state that the property owner or occupant of the property has the right to refuse entry and if such entry is refused, the city may seek assistance from a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain entry to inspect the premises. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.060 Summary abatement of immediate dangers.
134
Whenever any condition on or use of property causes or constitutes or reasonably appears to cause or constitute an imminent or immediate danger to the health or safety of the public or a significant portion thereof, the city manager or his or her designee may order, without notice or judicial action, the immediate abatement of the public nuisance. The expense of such abatement shall be collectible as provided in this chapter. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.070 Notice to abate public nuisance.

A. Contents of Notice. Whenever the city manager or the community development director or his or her designee finds that a nuisance, as declared in Section 9.04.030, exists on any property located within the city, he or she shall give written notice to the owner and to any tenant or occupant or other person having charge or possession of the property shall receive a written notice. The notice shall:

JUSTIFICATION: revise language to a contemporary standard.

1. Describe the property sufficient to identify the location of the public nuisance;

2. Identify the nuisance and reference the section(s) of this code that have been violated;

3. Direct abatement of the nuisance by a specified date;

4. State the available methods of abatement;

5. Contain a statement of the hearing rights of the owner or occupant of the property on which any public nuisance is located; and

6. Indicate that if no request for hearing is made or that if after a hearing an order of abatement is issued, and the nuisance is not properly abated, then the city may abate the nuisance and charge the expenses as a personal obligation and/or a special assessment or lien against the property.

The amount of time allowed to abate a nuisance shall be determined by considering the severity of nuisance and its effect on the health, safety, welfare and aesthetics of the community.

B. Service of Notice. A notice to abate shall be mailed, by registered or certified mail, to the owner and occupant of property, or shall be served upon the owner or occupant in person. The notification shall be sent to the owner at the address appearing on the latest tax assessment roll and if there is no such address, then in care of the property address. In addition to personal service or service by registered or certified mail, notice to abate shall be posted on two conspicuous places on the affected property attested to by affidavit of city official Service shall be deemed complete at the time the notice is personally served or deposited in the mail with the correct amount of postage affixed and is posted on the affected property as described. The failure of any owner or other person to receive such notice shall not affect in any manner the validity of any proceedings taken pursuant to this chapter.

C. Property Owner Definition. The term “property owner” or “owner” as used in this chapter, shall mean the owner or owners of record of real property as shown on the last Napa County equalized assessment roll or supplemental roll, whichever is more current. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994) 135

9.04.080 Request for hearing.

The city council shall hold a public hearing to determine that a public nuisance exists upon the written request of the owner or occupant of the property for which a notice to abate has been issued. The request shall be made to the city clerk within ten days from the date of personal service or within fifteen days from the date of mailing of the notice to abate. The request for hearing shall state the grounds upon which the hearing is requested. The matter shall be scheduled for hearing and the city clerk shall notify the owner or occupant requesting the hearing of the same, not less than five days prior to such hearing, unless such notice is waived in writing by the person requesting the hearing. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.090 Hearing by the city council.

At the time and place stated in the notice of public hearing, the city council shall hear and consider all relevant evidence, objections or protests, and shall receive testimony from owners, occupants, witnesses, city personnel and interested persons relative to the alleged public nuisance and to the proposed abatement measures. The hearing may be continued from time to time. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.100 Decision of the city council.

A. Following the public hearing, the city council shall consider all evidence and determine whether the property, or any part of the property, constitutes a public nuisance as alleged. If the city council finds that a public nuisance does exist and that there is sufficient cause to abate the nuisance, the city council shall prepare a statement of findings and an order, which shall specify the nature of the nuisance, and order the owner or other person having charge or control of the premises to abate the nuisance, the method of abatement and the time within which the work shall be commenced and completed.

B. A copy of the statement of findings and order shall be served on the property owner and any occupant in the manner provided in Section 9.04.110. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.110 Limitation on filing judicial action.

Action to review the city council statement of findings and order shall be commenced within thirty days of the date of service of the statement of findings and order and the same shall contain the statement advising of this time limit on seeking court review. After the expiration of thirty days from the date of service of the statement of findings and order, all objections to the decision shall be deemed waived. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.120 Abatement by property owner.

The property owner, or person having charge or control of the property, may at his or her their own expense abate the nuisance as prescribed by the notice to abate or the order of the city council, if any, prior to the expiration of the abatement period set forth in the notice or the order. If and when an owner or occupant undertakes to abate any such nuisance, the community development director or his 136
or her designated representative may impose such conditions as are necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare. Any necessary permits and/or approvals shall be obtained by the owner or occupant. After the property has been inspected by the community development director or his or her designated representative, and the nuisance has been fully abated in accordance with the notice to abate or order, the proceedings shall terminate. The city manager or the community development director or his or her designated representative may extend the abatement period specified in the notice to abate or any order to abate upon a showing of good cause. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994) JUSTIFICATION: revise language to a contemporary standard.

9.04.130 Abatement by the city.

A. Failure to Abate. If a declared nuisance is not completely abated by the owner or person having charge or control of the property within the time prescribed in the notice to abate or after a public hearing, in the city council order, if any, the city manager or his or her designee shall cause the same to be abated by city employees or private contract. The city manager or his or her designated representative is expressly authorized to enter upon the property for the purpose of abating the nuisance.

JUSTIFICATION: revise language to a contemporary standard.

B. Abatement of Motor Vehicles. Abatement of any motor vehicle registered or subject to registration with the Department of Motor Vehicles shall be carried out in conformance with the provisions of the Vehicle Code and Ordinance No. 92-19 of the city establishing the American Canyon traffic code and any amendments thereto.

C. Cost of Abatement Constitute Civil Debt. Upon the abatement of the public nuisance, or any portion thereof, by the city, all the costs, including incidental expenses shall be a civil debt owing to the city jointly and severally by the persons who have been given notice as provided in this chapter, except for any persons which the city council concludes pursuant to proof at the hearing to confirm the costs of abatement are not persons properly charged with responsibility of abatement. The costs shall be billed to the owner or occupant and shall be collectible in the same manner as any other civil debt owing the city. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.140 Record of cost of abatement notice and hearing to confirm.

A. The city manager or his or her designee shall keep an account of the costs, including incidental expenses, of abating such public nuisance on each separate lot or parcel of land where the work is done by the city and shall render an itemized report in writing to the city council showing the cost of abatement, including the rehabilitation, demolition or repair of said property, including any salvage value relating thereto; provided that before said report is submitted to the city council, a copy of the same together with a notice of the time when said report shall be heard by the city council for confirmation, shall be served upon the owner of the property in accordance with the provisions of Section 9.04.070 of this chapter at least ten days prior to submitting the same to the city council. Proof of said service shall be made by affidavit filed with the city clerk. 137
JUSTIFICATION: revise language to a contemporary standard.

B. At the time fixed for hearing, the city council shall consider the correctness or reasonableness of the costs included in the accounting together with any protests or objections as may be offered against it, and shall correct, modify or amend the same, after which, by motion, the accounting as submitted, corrected, modified or amended shall be confirmed. The hearing may be continued from time to time.

C. The term “incidental expenses” means and includes, but is not limited to, the personnel costs, both direct and indirect, including attorneys’ fees, costs incurred in documenting the nuisance, the actual expenses and costs of the city in the preparation of notices, specifications and contracts, and in inspecting the work, and the costs of printing and mailing required hereunder. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.150 Assessment lien.

A. The total cost for abating such nuisance, as confirmed, by the city council, shall constitute a special assessment against the respective lot or parcel of land to which it relates, and upon recordation in the office of the county recorder of a notice of lien, as so made and confirmed, shall constitute a lien on said property for the amount of such assessment.

B. After such confirmation and recordation, a certified copy of the city council’s decision confirming the abatement costs shall be filed with the Napa County auditor-controller on or before August 1st each year, whereupon, it shall be the duty of the county auditor-controller to add the amounts of the respective assessments to the next regular tax bill levied against said respective lots and parcels of land for municipal purposes and thereafter said amounts shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary taxes are collected, and shall be subject to the same penalties and the same procedure and sale in case of delinquency as provided for ordinary municipal taxes. All laws applicable to the levy, collection and enforcement of municipal taxes shall be applicable to such special assessments.

C. In the alternative, after such recordation, such lien may be foreclosed by judicial or other sale in the manner and means provided by law. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.160 Nuisance abatement lien.

As an alternative to the assessment lien procedure contained in Section 9.04.150 the total cost for abating such nuisance, as confirmed by the city council, may be collected pursuant to the procedures set forth in Government Code Section 38773.1 as a nuisance abatement lien.

A. Prior to the recordation of any nuisance abatement lien, the city shall provide notice of the same to the owner of record of the parcel or lot on which the nuisance is maintained as shown on the last equalized assessment roll or the supplemental roll, whichever is more current.

B. The notice shall be served in the same manner as a summons in a civil action in accordance with Article 3 (commencing with Section 415.10) of Chapter 4 of Title 5 of Part 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. If the owner of record, after diligent search cannot be found, the notice may be served by posting a copy thereof in a conspicuous place upon the property for a period of ten days and publication 138
thereof in a newspaper of general circulation published in the county of Napa pursuant to Government Code Section 6062.

C. The notice of nuisance abatement lien shall specify the amount of the lien, that the city is the agency on whose behalf the lien is imposed, the date the notice to abate was served or the date on which the city council issued its order to abate, if any, the street address, legal description and assessor’s parcel number of the parcel on which the lien is imposed, and the name and address of the record owner of the parcel.

D. After recordation of the nuisance abatement lien, the city may foreclose the lien by an action brought by the city for a money judgment. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.170 Alternative actions available.

A. Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed to prevent the city council or the city manager from ordering the city attorney to commence a civil or criminal proceeding to abate a public nuisance under applicable civil or penal code provisions as an alternative to the proceedings as set forth in this chapter.

B. Pursuant to Government Code Section 38773.7, upon the entry of a second or subsequent civil or criminal judgment within a two-year period finding that property owner is responsible for a public nuisance subject to abatement pursuant to this chapter, the city shall be entitled to an order of the court requiring the owner to pay treble the costs of the abatement. (Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)

9.04.180 Violations—Penalties.

A. The owner or other person having charge or control of any property, building or structure who maintains any condition described as a public nuisance in Section 9.04.040 or who fails to abate a nuisance within the time periods specified in a notice to abate or any city council order to abate is guilty of an infraction pursuant to Section 1.24.010 of this code.

B. Any occupant or person in possession of any such building or structure who fails to vacate such building or structure in accordance with an order given pursuant to this chapter is guilty of an infraction pursuant to Section 1.24.010 of this code.

C. Any person who obstructs, impedes or interferes with any authorized representative or agent of the city or with any person who owns or holds any estate or interest in a building which has been ordered to be vacated, repaired, rehabilitated or demolished, or with any person to whom such building has been lawfully sold pursuant to the provision of this code whenever any such person is engaged in proceedings involving the abatement of a nuisance is guilty of an infraction pursuant to Section 1.24.010 of this code.

D. Section 1.24.010 provides that each day of violation constitutes a separate offense and may be separately punished and that fourth and subsequent violations may be prosecuted as a misdemeanor.

E. Section 9.12.030 provides the penalty for any violation of any provision of this chapter. (Ord. 2017-01 § 2, 2017; Ord. 94-07 § 1, 1994)
139
SECTION 4. CEQA FINDINGS. The City Council finds the municipal code amendment is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2) because the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment; and Section 15060(c)(3) because the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3 because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. In addition, the municipal code amendment is not a project under CEQA Regulation Section 15061(b)(3) because it has no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.

SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall become effective effect 30 days after its final passage pursuant to Government Code section 36937.

SECTION 6. SEVERABILITY. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and adopted this Ordinance and each section, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 7. CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this Ordinance is based are located at the City Clerk’s office located at 4831 Broadway, Suite 201, American Canyon, CA 94503. The custodian of these records is the City Clerk.

The foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of American Canyon, State of California, held on the 2
nd day of May, 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

The foregoing Ordinance was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of American Canyon, State of California, held on the _________ day of ____________, ______, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
_____________________________
Leon Garcia, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
140
_______________________________ ___________________________ Taresa Geilfuss, CMC, City Clerk William D. Ross, City Attorney 141
Footnotes:
i
Snyder K, Vick JH, King BA. Smoke-free multiunit housing: a review of the scientific literature. Tob Control. 2016;25:9-20. doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2014-051849.
ii Wilson KM, Klein JD, Blumkin AK, Gottlieb M, Winickoff JP. Tobacco smoke exposure in children who live in multiunit housing. Pediatrics. 2011;127(1):85-92. doi: 10.1542/peds.2010-2046. iii Toy P, Yount C, Meng YY, et al. Health at Risk: Policies Are Needed to End Cigarette, Marijuana, and ECigarette Secondhand Smoke in Multi-Unit Housing in Los Angeles. Los Angeles, Calif.: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research. 2020. Available at:
http://healthpolicy.ucla.edu/publications/Documents/PDF/2020/Health-at-Risk-policybriefmay2020.pdf iv King BA, Babb SD, Tynan MA, Gerzoff RB. National and state estimates of secondhand smoke infiltration among U.S. multiunit housing residents. Nicotine Tob Res. 2013; 15(7):1316–1321. doi:10.1093/ntr/nts254.
v Kuschner WG, Reddy S, Mehrotra N, Paintal HS. Electronic cigarettes and thirdhand tobacco smoke: two emerging health care challenges for the primary care provider. Int J Gen Med. 2011; 4:115–20. doi:10.2147/IJGM.S16908.
vi Matt GE, Quintana PJE, Zakarian JM, et al. When smokers move out and non-smokers move in:
residential thirdhand smoke pollution and exposure. Tob Control. 2011;20(1):e1. doi:10.1136/tc.2010.037382.
vii Matt GE, Quintana PJE, Hoh E, et al. Persistent Tobacco Smoke Residue in Multiunit Housing: Legacy of Permissive Indoor Smoking Policies and Challenges in the Implementation of Smoking Bans. Prev Med Rep. 2020;18:101088. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2020.101088.
viii Sleiman M, Gundel LA, Pankow JF, Jacob P, Singer BC, Destaillats H. Formation of carcinogens indoors by surface-me- diated reactions of nicotine with nitrous acid, leading to potential thirdhand smoke hazards. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107(15):6576–81. doi:10.1073/pnas.0912820107. ix Hang B, Sarker AH, Havel C, et al. Thirdhand smoke causes DNA damage in human cells. Mutagenesis. 2013;28(4):381– 91. doi:10.1093/mutage/get013.
x Hang B, Wang P, Zhao Y, et al. Thirdhand Smoke: Genotoxicity and Carcinogenic Potential. Chronic Dis Transl Med. 2019;6(1):27-34. doi: 10.1016/j.cdtm.2019.08.002. xi Wang TW, Lemos PR, McNabb S, King BA. Attitudes toward Smoke-Free Public Housing among US Adults, 2016. Am J Prev Med. 2018 Jan;54(1):113–118. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2017.08.026. xii American Lung Association of California. California Voter and Rural Voter Attitudes About Secondhand Smoke in Multi-Unit Housing: Public Opinion Survey. 2018. 142
xiii McFarlane A, Djoko Y, Woodward A. Instituting Smoke-Free Public Housing: An Economic Analysis.

Cityscape. 2017;19(3):435-448. Available at:
https://www.huduser.gov/portal/periodicals/cityscpe/vol19num3/ch24.pdf. xiv King BA, Peck RM, Babb SD. National and State Cost Savings Associated with Prohibiting Smoking in Subsidized and Public Housing in the United States. Prev Chronic Dis. 2014;11:E171. doi:

10.5888/pcd11.140222.
xv Ong MK, Diamant AL, Zhou Q, Park HY, Kaplan RM. Estimates of smoking-related property costs in California multiunit housing. Am J Public Health. 2012; 102(3):490–493. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2011.300170. xvi Chambers C, Sung H, Max W. Home Exposure to Secondhand Smoke among People Living in Multiunit Housing and Single Family Housing: A Study of California Adults, 2003–2012. J Urban Heal. 2015;92(2):279-

90. doi:10.1007/s11524- 014-9919-y.
xvii U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke. A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health. 2006. Available at:
www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/sgr/2006/index.htm. xviii Hollar TL, Cook N, Quinn D, Phillips T, DeLucca M. Smoke-free multiunit housing policies show promise in reducing secondhand smoke exposure among racially and ethnically diverse, low-income seniors. J Immigr Minor Health. 2017;19(6):1281–1289. doi.org/10.1007/s10903-016-0430-2. 143
Understanding
Tobacco and Marijuana
Secondhand Smoke (SHS)
• Tobacco SHS can cause lung cancer, heart
disease, serious respiratory illnesses such as
bronchitis and asthma, low birth weight, and
sudden infant death syndrome.[1]
• Despite differences in the chemicals found in
tobacco and marijuana secondhand smoke,
they share similarities. [2]
Tobacco SHS Marijuana SHS
Tobacco SHS contains
more than 7,000 chemicals,
including 70 that are known
to cause cancer.[1]
Marijuana SHS contains
thousands of chemicals
including 33 that are known
to cause cancer.[3]
Tobacco SHS contains
chemicals including tar,
hydrogen cyanide, cadmium,
lead, ammonia, and carbon
monoxide.[1]
Marijuana SHS contains
2 times as much tar and
ammonia and 8 times as
much hydrogen cyanide as
tobacco smoke.[3]
How does California law restrict marijuana use and possession? California law[5] prohibits[1]:
• Smoking marijuana in any location where smoking tobacco is prohibited. • Smoking, vaping or consuming marijuana (includes all parts of the plant) or using marijuana products (this includes concentrates, edibles and topicals) in a public place. • Smoking marijuana within 1,000 feet of a school, day care center, or youth center when children are present. • Possessing or using marijuana or marijuana products on the grounds of a school, day care center, or youth center while children are present.
• Smoking or consuming marijuana or possessing an open container of marijuana while driving or riding as a passenger in a motor vehicle, boat, aircraft, or other vehicle used for transportation. • Smoking, vaping or consuming marijuana in personal vehicles when a minor under 18 years of age is present in the vehicle whether in motion or at rest [6] • Smoking or vaping marijuana on certain residential properties, including rental homes, if a property owner or landlord has prohibited smoking on the property.[7] Tobacco and
Marijuana
Secondhand Smoke
What’s the Concern?
1 Some exemptions apply. See California Health and Safety Code Section 11362.3 (a) and Business and Professions Code Section 26200 for local authority for the full policy.

How is “smoking”
defined in California
smokefree laws?
California law defines “smoking”
as inhaling, exhaling, burning or
carrying any lighted or heated
tobacco or plant product intended
for inhalation, whether natural or
synthetic, in any manner or in any
form. This includes the use of an
electronic smoking device. [4]
ATTACHMENT 2
144
California allows local governments the legal authority to pass zoning and licensing ordinances that prevent marijuana retailers and dispensaries from operating in their communities. It also gives local governments the authority to control whether or not they will allow temporary events in their jurisdictions. [17] Public Locations Where Smoking Tobacco and Marijuana
are Prohibited by California Law
Indoor Workspaces
Smoking is prohibited in most
enclosed places of employment [8]
including:
• Public and private offices and office
buildings
• Government buildings, inside and within
20 feet of an entrance, exit, or window
• Restaurants, bars, gaming clubs, bingo
halls, and pool halls
• Malls, movie theaters, and gyms
• Hotel and motel lobbies, common
areas, employee-only areas, meeting
or banquet rooms, and at least 80%
of guest rooms within a hotel must be
smokefree
• Social organizations such as Elks
Lodges or Veteran’s Clubs
• Covered parking lots, public
transportation systems, state-owned
vehicles, taxi cabs, and cabs of motor
trucks and tractor trailers if nonsmokers
are present
• Owner-operated businesses with no
other employees
Outdoor Spaces
Smoking is prohibited in many
outdoor spaces, including:
• Certified farmers’ markets [9]
• Within state parks and state coastal
beaches [10]
• Within 25 feet of playgrounds, tot
lots, or recreational areas specifically
designated for use by children [11]
Youth-Sensitive Areas
Smoking is prohibited in
youth-sensitive areas such as:
• Licensed day care centers, including
private residences licensed as family
day care homes[12]
• K-12 public schools (including charter
schools) and school vehicles [13, 14]
• Licensed children’s residential
facilities, foster family homes, or
resource family homes [15]
• Youth buses [16]
• Within 250 feet of youth
sporting events [11]
145
Figure 1. Percentage of adults aged 18-64 exposed to tobacco SHS or marijuana SHS by location of most recent exposure (among those individuals who report recent exposure).

Data: 2019 Online California Adult Tobacco Survey, Wave 1 and 2.

Tobacco Marijuana Tobacco Marijuana Tobacco Marijuana Tobacco Marijuana Tobacco Marijuana Sidewalks
Percent
At Home Shopping Areas Parks/Outdoor
Recreation Areas
Workplaces

SHS SHS SHS SHS SHS SHS SHS SHS SHS SHS
0 10
20 30
40 50

42.0 30.8

13.4 27.5

11.4 6.8

11.6 18.8

8.4 1.6
Tobacco and Marijuana
Secondhand Smoke Exposure
in California
• 60% of California adults report being
exposed to tobacco SHS in the past two
weeks. [18]
• 50% of California adults report being
exposed to marijuana SHS in the past two
weeks. [18]
SHS Exposure by Location
The most common location of recent
exposure to marijuana SHS is on sidewalks,
[18] followed by in the home, [18] and at
parks and outdoor recreation areas [18] (Fig.
1). More people report recent exposure to
marijuana SHS than tobacco SHS in the
home, [18] at parks, [18] and other outdoor or
recreation areas [18].

The U.S. Surgeon General continues to warn the public that there is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. Comprehensive smokefree ordinances can protect the public’s health and provide everyone the right to breathe smokefree air.
146
References

1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Center for Disease Control and Prevention,, , Editor. 2006, Coordinating Center for Helath Promotion, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health: Atlanta, GA.

2. Moir, D., Rickert, W. S., Levasseur, G., Larose, Y., Maertens, R., White, P., & Desjardins, S., A Comparison of Mainstream and Sidestream Marijuana and Tobacco Cigarette Smoke Produced Under Two Machine Smoking Conditions. Chemical Research in Toxicology, 2008. 21(2): p. 494-502.

3. Reproductive and Cancer Hazard and Assessment Branch, Evidence on the Carcinogenicity of Marijuana Smoke, C.E.P.A.

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Editor. 2009.

4. Section 22950.5(c), in California Business and Professions Code.

5. California Health and Safety Code Section 11362.3 (a).

6. Cummings, K.M., et al., Marketing to America's youth: evidence from corporate documents. Tobacco Control, 2002. 11(suppl 1): p. i5-i17.

7. Boonn, A., State Cigarette Excise Tax Rates & Rankings. 2016, Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids: Washington, D.C.

8. Leatherdale, S.T. and J.M. Strath, Tobacco retailer density surrounding schools and cigarette access behaviors among underage smoking students. Annals of Behavioral Medicine. 33(1): p. 105-111.

9. McCarthy, W.J., et al., Density of Tobacco Retailers Near Schools: Effects on Tobacco Use Among Students. American Journal of Public Health, 2009. 99(11): p. 2006-2013.

10. Public Resources Code Section 5008.10.

11. Moreland-Russell, S., et al., Disparities and Menthol Marketing: Additional Evidence in Support of Point of Sale Policies.

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2013. 10(10): p. 4571-4583.

12. Balbach, E.D., R.J. Gasior, and E.M. Barbeau, R.J. Reynolds’ Targeting of African Americans: 1988–2000. American Journal of Public Health, 2003. 93(5): p. 822-827.

13. Chuang, Y.-C., et al., Effects of neighbourhood socioeconomic status and convenience store concentration on individual level smoking. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 2005. 59(7): p. 568-573.

14. Peterson, N.A., et al., Tobacco outlet density and demographics at the tract level of analysis in New Jersey: A statewide analysis. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 2011. 18(1): p. 47-52.

15. Henriksen, L., et al., Reaching youth at the point of sale: cigarette marketing is more prevalent in stores where adolescents shop frequently. Tobacco Control, 2004. 13(3): p. 315-318.

16. Henriksen, L., et al., Is adolescent smoking related to the density and proximity of tobacco outlets and retail cigarette advertising near schools? Preventive Medicine, 2008. 47(2): p. 210-214.

17. Business and Professions Codes Section 26200.

18. California Department of Public Health, California Tobacco Control Program. Online California Adult Tobacco Survey 2019 (Wave 1 and 2). Sacramento, CA: California Department of Public Health; 2020. 147
www.publichealthlawcenter.org
May 2021 SMOKE-FREE

HOUSING
Exposure to secondhand
smoke is not just a discomfort
and an annoyance, but a serious
health hazard.1
For tenants and owners of multi-unit housing,
such as apartments and common interest
communities, commercial tobacco smoke from a
neighboring unit that infiltrates their homes can
pose a daily problem.2 As a result, many local
governments, housing authorities, and property
owners of multi-unit housing are taking proactive
steps to prevent or eliminate secondhand smoke
from infiltrating living space and to provide
housing that is 100 percent smoke-free. This
guide provides basic guidelines to communities
about policies that address secondhand smoke
infiltration in multi-unit housing.3
The Public Health Law Center has created this series of legal technical assistance guides to serve as a starting point for organizations interested in implementing certain tobacco control measures. We encourage you to consult with local legal counsel before attempting to implement these measures.4 For more details about these policy considerations, please contact the Center.

REGULATING SMOKING

IN MULTI-UNIT HOUSING
148
www.publichealthlawcenter.org Regulating Smoking in Multi-Unit Housing 2 Policy Benefits
A smoke-free policy for a multi-unit housing complex, such as an apartment building or common interest community, can benefit all parties concerned — residents, as well as landlords and property owners.
{ Protection from Secondhand Smoke: Secondhand smoke travels through lighting fixtures, cracks in walls, around plumbing, under doors, and in shared heating/ventilation.

Drifting smoke outdoors can travel into nearby windows, doors, and ventilation systems.

Tobacco smoke exposes users and bystanders to serious health risks, such as lung cancer, cardiovascular disease, asthma attacks, respiratory infections, sudden infant death syndrome, and other conditions.5 Air quality experts have concluded that “the only means of avoiding health effects and eliminating indoor [environmental tobacco smoke] exposure is to ban all smoking activity inside and near buildings.”6 The most important benefit of a smoke-free housing policy is that it enables residents, employees, and other visitors to breathe air free of hazardous secondhand smoke.
{ Market Advantage: Surveys show that a growing number of residents and owners are seeking smoke-free housing and are willing to pay more to ensure their home environments are smoke-free.7 Apartments, and units in common interest communities that smell of smoke are harder to rent and sell.
{ Reduced Costs: Smoke-free housing policies can save landlords and property owners excess building maintenance costs, because cleaning and replacement expenses are significantly higher in units with residents who smoke. Depending on the length of residency and amount of smoking in a unit, turnover costs can be hundreds of dollars higher for units in which smoking has occurred. All of the following can add to these costs:
cleaning or repainting walls; cleaning or replacing carpets, drapes, appliances and fixtures exposed to smoke; or replacing floors and countertops burned by cigarettes.8 { Reduced Fire Risk: The use of cigarettes and other combustible tobacco products is a leading cause of residential building fires and a cause of almost a quarter (23 percent) of annual home fire deaths.9 A smoke-free policy reduces the risk of fire and provides increased safeguards to tenants and their property.
{ Positive Modeling: Multi-unit housing developments are often highly visible within a community. Thus, when a development adopts a smoke-free policy, the public, local government and organizations learn of the benefits of such a policy and may be encouraged to adopt similar measures in other settings. Moreover, since children and youth May 2021
149
www.publichealthlawcenter.org Regulating Smoking in Multi-Unit Housing 3 often reside in multi-unit housing developments, a smoke-free policy can help reduce youth initiation through positive modeling behavior.
{ Legal Liability: The rise of smoke-free housing policies has spurred an increased awareness of the legal liability of landlords, management companies, condominium associations, co-op owners and residents who smoke to prevent secondhand smoke exposure.10 Lawsuits related to secondhand smoke exposure in housing include claims based on legal theories such as nuisance, warranty of habitability, and quiet enjoyment.11 In addition, residents with pre-existing physical conditions aggravated by secondhand smoke may file complaints under disability laws, such as the Fair Housing Act.12
Policy Elements
An effective smoke-free housing policy typically includes the following elements:
{ An introduction that explains the policy’s purpose.
{ Clear, consistent definitions of important terms, such as “smoking,” “smoke,” “premises,” and “common area,” to help ensure that the policy is interpreted, implemented, and enforced in ways that effectively protect the entire community within a building or complex. ] A comprehensive definition of smoking would include the use of electronic cigarettes and lighted or heated tobacco, nicotine, or other plant products, including hookah and marijuana.
{ Description of who must comply, such as tenants, guests, employees, and business visitors. { Disclaimers that the landlord, management company, or homeowners association is not acting as a guarantor of the policy. This provision helps protect landlords, management companies, or homeowners associations of smoke-free buildings from claims brought by tenants injured as a result of unknown policy violations. { A provision allowing one tenant to bring a claim directly against another tenant based on secondhand smoke intrusion. The non-smoking tenant could get a court order requiring the tenant who smokes to take action to stop the smoke infiltration. { Graduated enforcement provisions that provide warnings, cessation information and opportunities for residents to remedy violations before more punitive measures are taken, such as fines or eviction.13
May 2021
150
www.publichealthlawcenter.org Regulating Smoking in Multi-Unit Housing 4 { Clear guidelines related to enforcement, including the following:
] Where the policy will be enforced (e.g., in common areas, units, balconies, patios, outdoor areas, and/or setbacks from entrances)
] How it will be enforced (e.g., through verbal warnings, warning letters, fines, and/or eviction) ] The responsibilities of property managers, including requirements to post warning signs and consistently enforce the policy
] The responsibilities of tenants, including an obligation to notify guests and visitors of the policy and to report violations)
] A requirement that smoke-free leases and agreements be signed by both parties (e.g., the tenant and the landlord)
Other Policy Considerations
Some jurisdictions encourage or require landlords, management companies, or homeowners associations to adopt smoke-free policies in multi-unit dwellings. Before adopting a smoke-free policy, landlords, management companies, or homeowners associations should review the local laws to ensure that the property’s smoke-free policy will complement any existing requirements.

Smoke-free Affordable Housing. The trend toward smoke-free affordable housing is accelerating. In recent years, multiple federal agencies and the Surgeon General have encouraged the development of smoke-free affordable housing.14 Significantly, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) now prohibits smoking in all public housing, meaning that individuals may no longer smoke in individual units, common areas, or within 25 feet of residential and administrative public housing buildings.15 Some public housing authorities are also requiring mixed-finance properties and project-based housing voucher properties to be smoke-free, and some are making their smoke-free policies stricter than HUD requires (by, for example, prohibiting e-cigarette use).16 Landlords that accept individual Housing Choice Vouchers may adopt smoke-free policies of their own.17 For more information about this rule, visit the HUD website or read HUD’s Smoke-free Public Housing Rule: An Overview.

Low Income Housing Tax Credit. The Low Income Housing Tax Credit program provides federal tax credits to states and local government units to stimulate the development of affordable housing.18 Local governments can develop criteria for the type of housing they want in their communities. States such as California,19 Maine,20 Minnesota,21 and New Hampshire,22 as well as cities such as Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota,23 have included the adoption of smokeMay 2021 151
www.publichealthlawcenter.org Regulating Smoking in Multi-Unit Housing 5 free policies for proposed building projects as mandatory prerequisites or as optional criteria for consideration in the awarding of tax credits.

Requiring Smoke-free Multi-Unit Housing. Some jurisdictions prohibit smoking in multi-unit housing. In Belmont, California, for example, smoking is not allowed in common areas, individual units of multi-unit housing, or outdoors within 20 feet of windows or doors.24 As of March 2021, the only such policies are city or county policies in California. A list of jurisdictions with these policies in place is available from the American Nonsmokers’ Rights Foundation. 25 Disclosing Smoking Policies for Multi-Unit Buildings. A growing number of communities are requiring that multi-unit rental apartment buildings and common interest communities disclose their smoking policies to prospective tenants and buyers. For example, Oakland, California,26 and the State of Oregon27 have passed laws that require the owners of rental apartment buildings to disclose the smoking policies for their buildings, whether the policies are smoking permitted, smoking restricted, or smoke-free. The laws do not mandate that units be smokefree; they simply require that prospective tenants be notified of the smoking policies and location of smoking and non-smoking units. The Oakland ordinance also requires that sellers of condominiums disclose the smoking policy for the unit and the complex.28 When a smokefree or smoking permitted disclosure statement is included in a standard lease for multi-unit dwellings, tenants are alerted to living environments that may be hazardous to their health.

May 2021
152
www.publichealthlawcenter.org Regulating Smoking in Multi-Unit Housing 6 Disclosure policies are not as effective in protecting public health as policies that prohibit smoking, but they can serve a role in alerting policymakers to the dangers of secondhand smoke in residential settings and provide prospective tenants or buyers with helpful information.

Examples of Select Policies
Below are examples of smoke-free policies in select multi-unit housing locations. If you consider adapting any language from these policies, take care to ensure the provision in question is practical and legal in your jurisdiction. Please note that the Public Health Law Center does not endorse or recommend any of the following policies. These examples are included simply to illustrate how different multi-unit housing developments have approached the smoke-free issue.

Name Location Sample Policy
California Apartment Association California Sample Smoke-free Lease Addendum Breathe Easy Maine Maine Model Smoke-free Policies and Other Documents Smoke-Free Apartments Maryland Rental Model Smoke-free Lease Addendum for Multi-Unit Dwellings
Common Interest Community Model Smoke-free
Lease Addendum for Multi-Unit Dwellings
Live Smoke Free Minnesota Model Smoke-free Policies and Other Documents Utah Department of Health Utah Model Smoke Free Policies and Related Documents Other Helpful Resources
The Public Health Law Center has a web page containing several publications and resources on smoke-free policies in apartments, condominiums, affordable housing, and other multiunit dwellings, and best practices for smoke-free policies. In addition, the site includes a Minnesota-specific Model Smoke-Free Lease Addendum (2020); Model Smoke-Free Condo Policy (2020); and information on Smoke-Free Tribal Housing Policies (2020); Smoke-free MultiUnit Housing: Equitable Enforcement Strategies (2020); and Marijuana in Multi-Unit Residential Settings (2019). Other organizations, such as Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, have web pages containing the latest news and resources on smoke-free housing initiatives.

May 2021
153
www.publichealthlawcenter.org Regulating Smoking in Multi-Unit Housing 7 Contact Us
Please feel free to contact the Public Health Law Center at publichealthlaw@mitchellhamline. edu with any questions about the information included in this guide or to discuss local concerns you may have about implementing such a policy.

This publication was prepared by the Public Health Law Center at Mitchell Hamline School of Law, Saint Paul, Minnesota. The Center provides information and technical assistance on law and policy issues related to public health. The Center does not provide legal advice or enter into attorney-client relationships, and this document should not be considered legal advice. This publication was made possible by funding from Clean Air for All: The Smoke-Free Public Housing Project and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of Clean Air for All or the Foundation.

Endnotes
1 U.S. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., The Health Consequences of Smoking — 50 Years of Progress: A Report of the Surgeon General (2014), https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/consequences-smoking-exec-summary.pdf. 2 The Public Health Law Center recognizes that traditional and commercial tobacco are different in the ways they are planted, grown, harvested, and used. Traditional tobacco is and has been used in sacred ways by Indigenous communities and tribes for centuries. Comparatively, commercial tobacco is manufactured with chemical additives for recreational use and profit resulting in disease and death. For more information visit: http://www.keepitsacred.itcmi.org.

When the word “tobacco” is used throughout this document, a commercial context is implied and intended. 3 This publication contains general guidelines on smoke-free housing that could apply to all multi-unit housing types, including common interest communities and rental properties, including condominium associations, as well as tenants and property managers.
4 The information contained in this document is not intended to constitute or replace legal advice. 5 U.S. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., supra note 1, at 2-4. 6 Am. Soc’y of Heating, Refrigerating & Air-Conditioning Eng’rs, ASHRAE Position Document on Environmental Tobacco Smoke 5 (2020), https://www.ashrae.org/File%20Library/About/Position%20Documents/pd_environmental-tobacco-smoke-2020-07-1.pdf. 7 Smokefree Housing Project, A Landlord’s Guide to No-Smoking Policies 5, https://www.co.lincoln.or.us/sites/default/files/fileattachments/health_amp_human_services/page/4327/landlordguide.pdf. 8 Rachel E. Wilbur et al., 12 Smoke-Free Multiunit Housing Policy: Caretakers’ Perspectives on Economic and Personal Impacts, Int’l J. Env’t Rsch. Pub. Health 8092, 8093 (2015), https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4515710/pdf/ ijerph-12-08092.pdf (“Few studies … have attempted to document the actual cost savings achieved at properties with a smoke-free MUH policy. Ong et al. found that properties with a comprehensive smoke-free policy experienced fewer smoking-related costs than properties with a partial or non-existent smoke-free policy, with properties experiencing average smoking-related costs of $282 per unit. Further, in a study of affordable housing properties in North Carolina, property managers reported that turnover costs are on average $348 higher in units where tenants have smoked.”). 9 Marty Ahrens, Nat’l Fire Prot. Ass’n, Home Fires Started by Smoking 1 (2019), https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/ News-and-Research/Fire-statistics-and-reports/US-Fire-Problem/Fire-causes/ossmoking.ashx.

May 2021
154
www.publichealthlawcenter.org Regulating Smoking in Multi-Unit Housing 8 10 Susan Schoenmarklin, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium, Infiltration of Secondhand Smoke into Condominiums, Apartments and Other Multi-Unit Dwellings: 2009 (2009), https://publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/ tclc-syn-condos-2009.pdf.
11 Id. at 4-10.
12 Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601–3631. The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities, including those with severe breathing problems. It applies to owners and operators of most housing, including apartments and project-based housing vouchers and other HUD-assisted housing. 13 Public Health Law Center, Smoke-free Multi-unit Housing: Equitable Enforcement Strategies (2020), https://www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/SF-MUH-Equitable-Enforcement-Strategies.pdf. 14 Fed. Healthy Homes Work Grp., Advancing Healthy Housing: A Strategy for Action (2013), https://www.hud.gov/ sites/documents/STRATPLAN_FINAL_11_13.PDF; U.S. Dep’t of Housing & Urban Dev., Leading our Nation to Healthier Homes: The Healthy Homes Strategic Plan (2009), https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/HH/documents/hh_strategic_plan. web_posting.pdf; Unnumbered Letter from Tammye Treviño, Administrator, Housing and Community Facilities Program, to State Directors Rural Development, November 21, 2012, http://www.carh.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/MC_RDSmokeFreePolicy.pdf. 15 U.S. Dep’t of Housing & Urban Dev., Smoke-Free Policy Recommended Checklist, https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/2_SMOKEF_POLICYCHECKLIST.PDF. 16 Id.; Smokefree Public Housing — One Year Later, Am. Nonsmokers’ Rights Found. (July 11, 2019), https://no-smoke.org/ smokefree-public-housing-one-year-later.
17 See Smokefree Public Housing — One Year Later, supra note 16. 18 Low-income Housing Tax Credits, U.S. Dep’t of Housing & Urban Dev., https://www.huduser.gov/PORTAL/datasets/lihtc. html (last updated June 5, 2020).
19 Cal. Code Regs. tit. 4, § 10325(c)(8)(C) (2019).
20 99-346 Me. St. Hous. Auth. § 5(L) (2020).
21 Live Smoke Free, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits in Minnesota 1 (2020), https://mnsmokefreehousing.org/wp-content/uploads/Low-Income-Housing-Tax-Credits-in-MN.pdf. 22 N.H. Hous. Fin. Auth. 109.06(I) (2020).
23 Live Smoke Free, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits in Minnesota 1 (2020), https://mnsmokefreehousing.org/wp-content/uploads/Low-Income-Housing-Tax-Credits-in-MN.pdf. 24 Belmont, Cal., Municipal Code § 20.5-3(a)(3)-(4) (2021). 25 Am. Nonsmokers’ Rights Found., U.S. Laws for 100% Smokefree Multi-Unit Housing (2021), https://no-smoke.org/ wp-content/uploads/pdf/smokefreemuh.pdf.
26 Oakland, Cal., Municipal Code § 8.30.050 (2021)..
27 Or. Rev. Stat. § 90.220(4) (2021).
28 Oakland, Cal., Municipal Code § 8.30.050 (2021).

May 2021
155
1 Matrix of Smokefree Multi-Unit Housing Policies in California March 2022
California municipalities are at the forefront of expanding smokefree air protections by adopting policies that regulate smoking in multi-unit housing in order to create healthier living environments for residents by reducing exposure to drifting secondhand smoke.

This matrix provides an overview of key policy provisions in the 90 California municipalities that have enacted ordinances that at minimum regulate smoking in private units of multi-unit housing. Overall, 185 California municipalities regulate smoking in multi-unit housing to some extent. The municipalities not included on this matrix have enacted policies that regulate smoking in multi-unit housing to a lesser extent than in private units (i.e. indoor common areas, outdoor common areas, and/or outdoor private use areas like balconies and patios) or limit the regulation of smoking to publically owned/affordable multi-unit housing.

Note: This matrix includes both policies that are on the PETS website, which is current through March 31, 2021, and more recently enacted and analyzed policies that are not yet in the PETS database. Jurisdictions with new or updated policy provisions on this matrix, but not yet on PETS, are denoted by ~. The matrix does not include policies that have not yet been analyzed by ANRF staff. See note on last page for further info.
90 California municipalities have enacted ordinances that regulate smoking in private units of multi-unit housing (MUH):*  38 municipalities require all MUH properties with 2 or more units to be 100% smokefree indoors—both rental units and condominium/owner-occupied units—and including e-cigarette use and marijuana smoking/vaping.** The names of municipalities with these strongest policies are in bold.
 52 municipalities require all MUH properties with 2 or more units to be 100% smokefree indoors for tobacco—both rental units and condominium/owner-occupied units—but may not fully include e-cigarette use and/or marijuana smoking/vaping in the policy.  10 municipalities require all rental MUH properties with 2 or more units to be 100% smokefree indoors but exempt some or all condominium/owner-occupied units.
 19 municipalities have partial policies that require some, but not all, units or buildings to be smokefree, or contain other exemptions such as allowing existing residents to continue smoking in their unit. These weaker, partial policies are in blue text. 156
2 * The 90 municipalities that regulate smoking in private units of multi-unit housing to some extent cover 5,112,610 Californians, or 13% of the state population.
** The 38 municipalities with the strongest multi-unit housing laws cover 1,988,512 Californians, or 5.1% of the state population.

See Definitions and Explanatory Notes starting on page 9.

Policy Provisions
Municipality County
Key

Enactment
Date
Effective Date
(Phase-in Time) Population Minimum # of Units
% of Units
Smokefree
Exempts
Existing
Residents
Includes
Condos
Includes
E-Cigarette
Use
Includes
Smoking/
Vaping
Marijuana

1. Alameda Alameda 11/15/2011 1/1/2013
(13.5 months) 78,522 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

2. Albany Alameda 2/21/2017 3/24/2018
(13 months) 19,804 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

3. Baldwin
Park Los Angeles 11/2/2011
6/21/12 new,
12/2/14 existing
(3 years)
75,892 2
100% new/
80% existing No Yes Yes Smoking Prohibited

4. Bell Gardens Los Angeles 10/14/2019 6/1/2021
(20 months) 42,421 3 100% No Yes Yes Yes

5. Belmont San Mateo 10/9/2007 1/8/2009
(15 months) 27,097 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

6. Belvedere Marin 10/10/2016 11/9/2017
(13 months) 2,134 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

7. Benicia Solano 12/3/2019 9/2/2020
(9 months) 28,192 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

8. Berkeley~ Alameda 12/17/2013,
10/27/2020
5/1/2014
(4.5 months) 121,485 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

9. Beverley
Hills Los Angeles 10/3/2017 1/1/2019(15 months) 34,186 2 100% No Yes Yes Vaping Prohibited

10. Brisbane San Mateo 11/3/2016 6/3/2017
(6.5 months) 4,697 2 100% No Yes Yes Medical Use Exempt

11. Burbank Los Angeles 10/5/2010 5/1/2011
(7 months) 103,703 2 N/S1 No Yes No (Not Addressed) Yes 157
3 Policy Provisions
Municipality County
Key

Enactment
Date
Effective Date
(Phase-in Time) Population Minimum # of Units
% of Units
Smokefree
Exempts
Existing
Residents
Includes
Condos
Includes
E-Cigarette
Use
Includes
Smoking/
Vaping
Marijuana

12. Burlingame San Mateo 8/17/2015 2/13/2016
(6 months) 30,576 2 100% No No No (Not Addressed)
Medical Use
Exempt

13. Calabasas Los Angeles 1/16/2008 1/1/2012
(4 years) 23,988 2 80% Yes No Yes Yes

14. Clayton Contra Costa 5/1/2018 5/1/2019
(12 months) 12,083 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

15. Compton Los Angeles 10/25/2011 1/1/2013
(14 months) 96,803 3 100% No Yes Yes Yes

16. Concord Contra Costa 1/7/2020 1/1/2021
(12 months) 129,183 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

17. Contra Costa
County^
Contra Costa 3/13/2018 7/1/2019
(15.5 months) 177,494 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

18. Corte
Madera~
Marin 5/6/2014,
5/4/2021
12/2/14 new,
6/5/15 existing
(13 months)
9,838 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

19. Cotati Sonoma 10/13/2015 1/1/2017
(14.5 months) 7,454 2 100% No Yes Yes Medical Use Exempt

20. Crescent
City Del Norte 11/16/2020
1/1/21 new,
1/1/22 existing
(14 months)
6,676 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

21. Culver City Los Angeles 10/27/2014 5/26/2016
(19 months) 39,169 2 100% No Yes Specifically Exempt
Smoking
Prohibited

22. Cupertino~ Santa Clara 6/16/2021 10/1/2021
(3.5 months) 60,257 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

23. Daly City San Mateo 10/22/2012 1/21/2014
(15 months) 106,677 2 100% No No Yes Yes

24. Danville Contra Costa 11/17/2015 5/1/2016
(5.5 months) 44,605 3 100% No Yes Yes Yes

25. Dublin Alameda 7/19/2011 1/1/2013
(17.5 months) 61,240 16 75% No No Yes Yes
158
4 Policy Provisions
Municipality County
Key

Enactment
Date
Effective Date
(Phase-in Time) Population Minimum # of Units
% of Units
Smokefree
Exempts
Existing
Residents
Includes
Condos
Includes
E-Cigarette
Use
Includes
Smoking/
Vaping
Marijuana

26. El Cerrito Contra Costa 10/7/2014 10/1/2015
(12 months) 25,398 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

27. El Monte Los Angeles 1/19/2016 8/19/2017
(19 months) 115,517 3 100% No Yes Yes Medical Use Exempt

28. Emeryville Alameda 9/17/2018 7/1/2019
(9.5 months) 11,899 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

29. Fairfax Marin 6/1/2011 9/1/2012
(15 months) 7,578 4 75% No No Yes Yes

30. Firebaugh Fresno 5/20/2019 7/1/2019
(1.5 months) 8,300 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

31. Foster City San Mateo 11/17/2014 11/5/2015
(11.5 months) 33,997 N/S 100% No Yes Yes Yes

32. Fremont Alameda 12/6/2016 2/1/2017
(2 months) 235,740 2
100% new/
0% existing No Yes Yes Yes

33. Glendale Los Angeles 5/28/2013 6/27/2013
(1 month) 200,232 2
100% new/
0% existing No Yes No (Not Addressed) Yes

34. Half Moon
Bay San Mateo 10/16/2018 1/15/2020(15 months) 12,834 2 100% No Yes Yes Medical
Vaping
Exempt

35. Healdsburg Sonoma 5/6/2019 5/6/2020
(12 months) 11,845 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

36. Hercules Contra Costa 5/14/2019 7/1/2020
(14 months) 25,616 10 100% No Yes Yes Yes

37. Huntington
Park Los Angeles 3/5/2012 7/1/2013(16 months) 58,353 2
100% rental/
80% condos
Yes,
condos 80% Yes Yes

38. Jurupa
Valley~
Riverside 2/4/2021
3/6/21 new,
8/3/21
designated units
(6 months)
105,653 3
100% new/
designated
existing units
Yes No Yes Yes
159
5 Policy Provisions
Municipality County
Key

Enactment
Date
Effective Date
(Phase-in Time) Population Minimum # of Units
% of Units
Smokefree
Exempts
Existing
Residents
Includes
Condos
Includes
E-Cigarette
Use
Includes
Smoking/
Vaping
Marijuana

39. Lafayette Contra Costa 11/12/2013 2/10/2014
(3 months) 26,305 3
100% new/
0% existing Yes Yes Specifically Exempt
No (Not
Addressed)

40. Larkspur Marin 4/20/2011
5/20/11 new,
11/17/11
existing
(7 months)
12,319 2
100% new/
80% existing Yes Yes No (Not Addressed) Yes

41. Loma Linda San
Bernardino 6/24/2008 1/1/2012 (3.5 years) 24,184 2 70% Yes No No (Not Addressed) Smoking
Prohibited

42. Los Gatos Santa Clara 5/26/2016 6/25/2017
(13 months) 30,729 2 100% No No Yes Yes

43. Manhattan
Beach Los Angeles 10/20/2015 5/5/2017(18.5 months) 35,500 3 100% No Yes Yes Yes

44. Marin
County^ Marin 5/22/2012
2/16/13 new,
8/20/13 existing
(15 months)
68,252 2
100% new/
80% existing No Yes Specifically Exempt
Medical Use
Exempt

45. Mill Valley Marin 10/19/2015 11/18/2016
(13 months) 14,330 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

46. Millbrae San Mateo 7/23/2019 1/1/2020
(5 months) 22,625 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

47. Milpitas~ Santa Clara 6/15/2021 1/1/2022
(6.5 months) 79,517 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

48. Moorpark Ventura 12/20/2017 2/1/2019
(13.5 months) 36,372 2 100% No No Yes Yes

49. Morro Bay San Luis
Obispo 4/28/2020 8/1/2020(3 months) 10,578 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

50. Mountain
View~
Santa Clara 6/8/2021 1/1/2022
(6.5 months) 81,656 3 100% No Yes Yes Yes

51. Novato Marin 1/24/2017 1/1/2018
(11 months) 55,642 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes
160
6 Policy Provisions
Municipality County
Key

Enactment
Date
Effective Date
(Phase-in Time) Population Minimum # of Units
% of Units
Smokefree
Exempts
Existing
Residents
Includes
Condos
Includes
E-Cigarette
Use
Includes
Smoking/
Vaping
Marijuana

52. Oakley Contra Costa 2/11/2014 4/1/2014
(1.5 months) 41,324 2
100% new/
0% existing No Yes No (Not Addressed)
Vaping
Exempt

53. Pacific
Grove Monterey 12/18/2019 10/1/2021(21.5 months) 15,522 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

54. Pacifica San Mateo 9/9/2019 10/9/2020
(13 months) 38,984 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

55. Palo Alto~ Santa Clara 1/9/2017 1/1/2018
(12 months) 66,573 2 100% No Yes Yes Smoking Prohibited

56. Pasadena Los Angeles 7/11/2011 1/1/2013
(18 months) 141,258 2 100% No Yes No (Not Addressed) Yes

57. Petaluma Sonoma 1/28/2013 1/1/2014
(11 months) 60,767 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

58. Pinole Contra Costa 9/17/2019 10/18/2019
(1 month) 19,279 2 100% No Yes Yes No (Not Addressed)

59. Pleasant Hill Contra Costa 4/5/2010
4/5/10 new,
1/1/16 existing
(5 years)
34,840 4
100% new/
50% existing No No Yes Vaping Prohibited

60. Pleasanton Alameda 9/5/2017 10/4/2018
(13 months) 81,717 2 100% No No Yes
Medical Use
Exempt in
Outdoor
area

61. Rancho
Cordova Sacramento 10/5/2020 10/5/2021(12 months) 73,147 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

62. Redwood
City San Mateo 11/13/2017 1/1/2019(13.5 months) 85,784 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

63. Richmond Contra Costa 7/21/2009 1/1/2011
(17.5 months) 109,884 2 100% No Yes Yes
Medical
Smoking
Exempt

64. Rohnert
Park Sonoma 1/23/2018 4/23/2018(3 months) 42,902 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes 161
7 Policy Provisions
Municipality County
Key

Enactment
Date
Effective Date
(Phase-in Time) Population Minimum # of Units
% of Units
Smokefree
Exempts
Existing
Residents
Includes
Condos
Includes
E-Cigarette
Use
Includes
Smoking/
Vaping
Marijuana

65. Ross Marin 1/11/2019 2/9/2020
(13 months) 2,290 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

66. San
Anselmo Marin 12/9/2014 1/8/2016(13 months) 12,525 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

67. San Bruno San Mateo 11/22/2016 2/22/2018
(15 months) 43,083 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

68. San Carlos San Mateo 4/8/2019 7/8/2020
(15 months) 30,154 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

69. San Mateo San Mateo 7/17/2017 8/16/2017
(1 month) 104,333 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

70. San Mateo
County^
San Mateo 11/4/2014 2/4/2016
(15 months) 65,392 2 100% No Yes Yes Specifically Exempt

71. San Pablo Contra Costa 2/18/2020 7/1/2021
(16.5 months) 30,967 2 100% No No Yes Yes

72. San Rafael Marin 10/15/2012 11/14/2013
(13 months) 58,775 3 100% No Yes Specifically Exempt
No (Not
Addressed)

73. Santa Clara Santa Clara 2/5/2019 8/1/2019
(6 months) 127,721 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

74. Santa Clara
County^
Santa Clara 11/9/2010 2/9/2012
(15 months) 83,699 2 100% No Yes Yes No (Not Addressed)

75. Santa
Monica Los Angeles 10/23/2012 11/22/2012 (1 month) 91,577 N/S 100% new/
Designated
existing units
Yes Yes Yes Yes

76. Santa Rosa Sonoma 7/7/2015 8/7/2016
(13 months) 179,701 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

77. Saratoga Santa Clara 8/17/2016 9/16/2016
(1 month) 30,697 4 100% No No Yes Yes

78. Sausalito Marin 7/31/2012
2/27/13 new,
8/30/13 existing
(13 months)
7,116 2
100% new/
80% existing No Yes Yes
Medical
Smoking
Exempt
162
8 Policy Provisions
Municipality County
Key

Enactment
Date
Effective Date
(Phase-in Time) Population Minimum # of Units
% of Units
Smokefree
Exempts
Existing
Residents
Includes
Condos
Includes
E-Cigarette
Use
Includes
Smoking/
Vaping
Marijuana

79. Sebastopol Sonoma 8/3/2010 11/2/2011
(15 months) 7,760 2 100% No Yes Yes Medical Use Exempt

80. Sonoma Sonoma 11/8/2016 12/12/2016
(1 month)
11,075 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

81. Sonoma
County^
Sonoma 9/13/2011 1/12/2013
(16 months) 142,067 2 100% No Yes No (Not Addressed)
No (Not
Addressed)

82. South
Pasadena Los Angeles 8/4/2010
3/3/11 new,
9/4/13 existing
(3 years)
25,661 2
100% new/
80% existing No Yes Yes Yes

83. South San
Francisco San Mateo 11/9/2016 11/9/2017(12 months) 67,408 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

84. Sunnyvale Santa Clara 2/23/2016 9/23/2016
(7 months) 152,770 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes

85. Temecula Riverside 5/8/2007
11/8/07 new,
6/7/12 existing
(5 years)
113,381 10 25% Yes N/S No (Not
Addressed)
Medical Use
Exempt

86. Tiburon Marin 7/18/2018
10/18/2018
(3 months)
9,144 3 100% No Yes Yes Yes

87. Union City Alameda 11/23/2010 2/23/2012
(15 months) 74,722 2 100% No No Yes Yes

88. Walnut
Creek Contra Costa 10/1/2013 1/30/2014(4 months) 69,567 2 100% No Yes Yes Medical
Vaping
Exempt

89. West
Hollywood~
Los Angeles 4/19/2021 5/19/2021
(1 month)
36,450 3
100% new/
0% existing No Yes Specifically Exempt
Smoking
and Vaping
Exempt

90. Windsor Sonoma 5/17/2017 8/15/2017
(3 months) 27,447 2 100% No Yes Yes Yes
163
9 Explanatory Notes:

Policies that require all rental and condominium/owner-occupied properties with 2 or more units to be 100% smokefree—and include ecigarette use and marijuana smoking/vaping—are in bold.

Policies that require all rental and condominium/owner-occupied properties with 2 or more units to be 100% smokefree—whether or not the policy addresses e-cigarette use and marijuana smoking/vaping—have a blue background.

Policies that require MUH units to be 100% smokefree but apply to buildings with 3 or more units, or do not fully include e-cigarette use and/or marijuana smoking/vaping in the policy—are not bolded.

Partial policies that require less than 100% of rental units to be smokefree are listed in blue text. ^ = Policy applies only to unincorporated areas of the county. Population listed is for unincorporated areas of the county. ~ = Jurisdiction has new or updated policy provisions not yet available on the PETS website.

N/S = Not Specified: The law does not provide details on this policy provision. 1 = Smoking prohibited in multi-unit buildings when units share heating or cooling systems.

Note: ANRF is aware of additional smokefree housing policies enacted in jurisdictions—including Alameda County, Fresno, and Marin County—which will be added to the matrix once the policies have undergone PETS analysis.

Definitions:

Key Enactment Dates: The date of the jurisdiction’s primary policy addressing smoking in units of MUH, as well as the dates of any significant amendments to the policy. Jurisdictions may have enacted multiple policies regulating smoking in MUH. Effective Date: The final date when the primary policy is in full effect. Policies often have an initial effective date for when common areas and newly occupied units must be smokefree, and a final effective date when the policy is in effect for residents living in the building at the time the policy is enacted.

Phase-in Time: The length of time between the policy’s enactment date and when it went into full effect. The phase-in time does not reflect the unknown date in the future when buildings will be 100% smokefree for policies that exempt existing residents indefinitely.

Minimum # of Units: The minimum number of units in MUH buildings that are necessary for the policy to apply. The best practice is for policies to apply to MUH buildings with 2 or more units. 164
10 % of Units Smokefree: The percent of units in MUH buildings that are required to be smokefree when the law is fully in effect. The best practice is for policies to require 100% of units in all MUH buildings to be smokefree. If a policy has different requirements for new units versus existing units, the percentages are specified as “X% new, Y% existing.” Existing Residents Exempt: Indicates if the policy allows residents living in MUH buildings at the time the law is adopted to continue smoking in their unit indefinitely. This exemption is often referred to as a grandfathering provision.

Includes Condos: Indicates if the policy covers condominiums, townhomes, and other types of owner-occupied MUH buildings.

Includes E-Cigarettes: Indicates if policy regulates the use of electronic smoking devices, like e-cigarettes and other vaping products, in the same manner as it regulates smoking tobacco. As of 2016, the California Business and Professions Code Section 22950.5(c) defines smoking to include the use of an electronic smoking device. This matrix reflects the language included in each municipal policy, some of which do not address the use of these products or include exemptions that may not be consistent with current state definitions.

Includes Marijuana: Indicates if policy regulates smoking and vaping marijuana/cannabis in the same manner as it regulates smoking tobacco. Since 2017, California Health and Safety Code Section 11362.1(2) prohibits smoking marijuana/cannabis in almost all locations where smoking tobacco is prohibited, including residential areas. This matrix reflects the language included in each municipal policy, some of which do not address marijuana/cannabis or include exemptions that may not be consistent with current state definitions.

ANR Foundation is actively collecting policies for the PETS Database. If you know of local laws that you think should be included in this matrix, or want to inquire about additional information on particular laws, please contact the ANR Foundation at [email protected]. © 2022, California Department of Public Health. This material may not be reproduced or disseminated without prior written permission from the California Department of Public Health. 165
Location # Of
Units
Estimated
# of
Residents
Allows Indoor
Smoking –
Rented Unit
Allows
Indoor Smoking –
Privately Owned Unit
Allows
Outdoor
Smoking
Canyon Ridge at Napa Junction
800 Reliant Way
148 300 NO NO NO
The Lodge at Napa Junction
5500 Eucalytpus Drive
216 300 NO NO NO
Village at Vintage Ranch Apartment
Townhomes
100 Toscana Drive
159 350 NO NO NO
Canyon Manor Apartments
941 Danrose Drive
48 96 NO NO NO
Vineyard Crossings
202 Tapestry Lane
146 300 NO NO NO
Valley View Senior Homes
1 Natalie Lane
70 72 NO NO NO
World Marine Estates
2555 Flosden Road
126 325 N/A*** YES** NO
Fairgrounds Mobile Estates
2525 Flosden Road
231 1000 NO YES** NO
Las Casitas Napa Mobile Home Park
3000 Broadway
96 150 N/A*** YES** YES*
Olympia Mobilodge of Napa
244 American Canyon Road
201 600 NO YES** YES*
American Canyon Mobile Home Park
260 American Canyon Road
191 750 N/A*** YES** NO
American Canyon Apartments
300 American Canyon Road
34 90 NO NO NO
*Designated areas only away from building entry.
**Existing park rules prohibit smoke emanating from inside a privately-owned unit from interfering with another unit. ***There are no rented units at these parks.

ATTACHMENT 3
166

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
MAY 2, 2023

STAFF REPORT

BUSINESS
ITEM NUMBER: 18.

TITLE
Kids Commerce Business License Fee Waiver

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Minute Order waiving Business License Fees for youth par-cipants in the American Canyon Chamber of Commerce's "Kid's Commerce" program.

CONTACT
Jason Holley, City Manager
Valerie Zizak-Morais, Executive Director and CEO, American Canyon Chamber of Commerce

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS
The American Canyon Chamber of Commerce's "Kid's Commerce Program" teaches students everything they need to know to start a business. The program is free to Napa County youth, because of partnership with local businesses. Program graduates will also be given a free booth to sell their goods or services at this year’s Meet Me in the Street events, which occurs the second Wednesday in June, July and August.

Before a business can operate in American Canyon, they must first obtain a business license. The applica-on fee is $25 and the cost of the license depends upon the amount of gross receipts. Staff recommends the Council exercise its authority under ACMC 5.04.435 to waive the applica-on fee and any license fees (if applicable).

COUNCIL PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
Economic Development and Vitality: "ADract and expand diverse business and employment opportunities."

FISCAL IMPACT
The Recommended Ac-on to waive business license applica-on fees and license fees will forgo General Fund revenue by approximately $500.
167

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
15378(b) - The ac-on is not a "Project" subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because it does not qualify as a "Project" under Public Resources Code Sec-ons 21065 and 21080 and in Section 15378(b) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.

ATTACHMENTS:

None
168

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
MAY 2, 2023

STAFF REPORT

BUSINESS
ITEM NUMBER: 19.

TITLE
Pooled Insurance Program

RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file presentation regarding PLAN Joint Powers Authority's pooled insurance programs.

CONTACT
Maria Ojeda, Assistant City Manager

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS
Pooled Liability Assurance Network (PLAN), a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) is a provider of insurance for municipal en44es. American Canyon - along with 27 other municipali4es - are JPA members and risk-share to purchase a more cost-effec4ve insurance coverage program for assets, property and liability insurance.

In addi4on to insurance, PLAN JPA provides an array of services not limited to li4ga4on management for claims and legal ac4ons taken against the City, third party administrator (TPA) services that adjust claims with the intent to bring claims to a 4mely closure; and, loss control services that provide access to specialists that provide assistance to city's staff in evalua4on, mitigation and other assessment tools to prevent and treat losses.

Among the services provided by PLAN JPA - the 'Special Event Program,' is provided by Alliant Insurance Services. Through this Program, companies, organiza4ons and/or individual may obtain liability coverage. This Program is not limited to 'special events' but also applies to the private rental of City facili4es (ie. picnic shelters, etc.) Typical homeowner insurance policy's may not provide the appropriate coverage, and o;en if available could be at higher cost. In addi4on, the use of personal insurance would require significant staff 4me devoted to learning, reviewing, processing insurance cer4ficates and speaking directly with individual insurance companies. The Special Event Insurance op4on assures coverage limits and other cri4cal details are in place to protect the City and the private party using the facility. The premium amount depends upon a variety of risk factors - including whether alcohol is present - and the full cost is passed through to the applicant. 169

COUNCIL PRIORITY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
Organizational Effectiveness: "Deliver exemplary government services."

FISCAL IMPACT
The cost of the premiums for the Special Event Liability Program offered by Alliant are passed through to the applicants and there no financial impact to the City. The costs for assets, property and liability insurance are budgeted annually through the regular budget process.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
15378(b) - The ac4on is not a "Project" subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because it does not qualify as a "Project" under Public Resources Code Sec4ons 21065 and 21080 and in Section 15378(b) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Plan JPA - American Canyon City Council Presentation 170
May 2, 2022

PLAN JPA
171
What is PLAN JPA?
172
173
Programs & Services
174
Liability Program
175
PLAN JPA General Liability Program Structure
176
Property Program
177
Additional Coverages
178
PLAN JPA Contractual Risk
Transfer Management
179
Contractual Risk Transfer:
180
Contractual Risk Transfer:
181
Special Event Liability Program
182
Limits
183
Coverage
184
Tenant/User Program Hazard Schedule I
185
Excluded Events- Including but not limited to:
186
Special Events Program
Available Online
187
• Provided by Alliant Insurance Services
• Companies, organizations and/or individual may obtain liability coverage.
• This Program applies to the private rental of City facilities (ie. picnic shelters, etc.)
• Homeowner insurance policies may provide the appropriate coverage, and could be at a higher rate. Providing this option requires specialized staff to coordinate and review private insurance certificates.
• Special Events Insurance Program assures appropriate coverage limits are met.

The premium amount depends upon a variety of risk factors: e.g. the presence of alcohol. All fees are passed through to the applicant. 18 Special Events Program
188
Event Information
189
20 Thank you for your time,
Questions?
190
City Council Committee Report
Submitted
by: * Councilmember Mark Joseph
Council
Meeting
Date:
05/02/2023
Event
Date: 2023-04-19
Event Type Committee Report
Event Title:* Napa Valley Transportation Authority (NVTA) Event Report: We received our quarterly project update and an update on transit services. The links to both presentations are included.

We also approved a modification to the new Maintenance Facility that would allow the site to maintain hydrogen-fueled busses. This is a proactive move on NVTA's part, since hydrogen appears to be more advantageous in the long run, and there may be a supply nearby (the multi-fuel center on Devlin is considering adding hydrogen to its list of fuel types).

File/Photo Upload Max file size for all uploads is 10 MB Event
Date: 2023-04-24
Event Type Committee Report
Event Title:* North Bay Recycled Water Authority (NBRWA) board meeting Event Report: We met via zoom and re-appointed the current chair and selected someone other than me as Vice-Chair! We also reviewed the status of Phase 1 (finishing the closeout process) and Phase 2 (which we are part of, and is just getting started). We also talked about current regional efforts at addressing Sea Level Rise (NBRWA is working with Marin and Sonoma on this effort, but there may be some applicability to our situation, along the Wetlands Edge). We also received updates on what other agencies are doing and our own efforts, particularly relating to drought contingency planning. Apparently, the last election triggered a number of changing board members, which explains why things seem a little disjointed.

File/Photo Upload Max file size for all uploads is 10 MB Event
Date:

Event Type Other
Event Title:* Climate-related activities
Event Report: Earth Day: This event went well--we had about 10 informational booths (Napa Valley College, ACCPF, City, Recology, RCD, etc.) each with a variety of giveaways (from free compost to health screenings!). The mini-compost pail was a big hit! The weather was great, Napa Junction provided spillover parking and NVTA had one of their all-electric busses onsite.

League of Women Voters Climate Program: I attended this session at the Napa Main Library. There were presentations on several local initiatives, including ACHS' Climate Challenge app, Calistoga's reusable/compostable foodware ordinance and St. Helena's Million Tree Initiative.

One-on-One with David Graves: Meet with the former Napa County Planning Commissioner (and Board of Supervisor candidate) to talk about climate action issues. He is very knowledgeable and it was a good chance to talk about a variety of current issues.

Upcoming Climate Action Committee: Although the monthly meeting will be addressed in my next report, I did review some of last month's presentations.

File/Photo Upload Max file size for all uploads is 10 MB 191
Event
Date:

Event Type Community Event
Event Title:* Various Community Events and Activities
Event Report: Spring Salute: This is the annual Central Labor Council fund raiser, and this year it was at the Ruins. This site is getting better every year (and the program itself drew a wide audience of elected officials from Napa and Sonoma).

It also served as an opportunity to recognize Jon Riley's years of service to the local labor movement--he received the lifetime achievement award.

Democrats of Napa Valley meeting: We heard from two candidates vying for Party Secretary.

Workforce Summit: This was organized by the Workforce Alliance of the North Bay, and had speakers discussing the latest workforce trends and ways in which Napa Valley College and others can help anticipate and train the next generation of workers.

Clinic Ole Ribbon-cutting: I was there to welcome Clinic Ole into our community. They are in the Canyon Plaza center. Related to this is the fact that North Bay Urgent Care is slowing opening as well--they are located on the north end of town.

Leadership Napa Valley Reunion/Jill Techel's Retirement: The Mayor and I were there to honor Jill Techel who is retiring from 20 years as the Program Director of this program (and we are also alumni!) A good chance to run into some of the other graduates.

One-on-One with Ryan Klobas: Meet with the Farm Bureau's Executive Director and discussed local issues, including the Bureau's potential position on future City Annexations.

Napa Community Benefits Coalition meeting: Attended this monthly meeting. They are beginning to focus on tracking the Federal funding that is available for infrastructure and climate action. We need to monitor this effort, since it will help us identify funding opportunities and likely receive supportive letters and partnerships, when we do apply. For example, the Safe Streets For All program could be a great funding source for our SR29 Corridor Study and bikelanes.

ACHS Activities: Went to the campus on the 26th to check out their Wellness Event (Chamber, Fire, PD and others were there as well). Also got a chance to see the unveiling of a new student-painted mural in one of the buildings.

See the photo below. Very exciting--this could become a tradition! Kiwanis: Attended the monthly General Membership Meeting. I was elected President-elect! Yay for me--this means I will become President and then, most importantly, Immediate Past President!! File/Photo Upload
ACHS mural 2023.jpg 2.52MB
Max file size for all uploads is 10 MB
192
City Council Committee Report
Submitted
by: * Councilmember David Oro
Council
Meeting
Date:
05/02/2023
Event
Date: 2023-05-02
Event Type Community Event
Event Title:* Various events
Event Report: Earth Day at Wetlands Edge Park - April 22, 2023 Great event, though I heard several local schools also had an Earth Day event at the same time. The crowd seemed lighter than in years past. I also prefer it along the gravel road, I know not ideal, but i think we get more foot traffic from hikers there.

Considering that we have several events going on at the same time, the City might want to partner with ACCPF and the local schools to have one uber event Wetlands Edge.

Ole Health American Canyon Grand Opening - April 24, 2023 Finally got to tour the facility and learn about the Ole Health mission and services. It's a great edition to community and long overdue.

File/Photo Upload Max file size for all uploads is 10 MB Event
Date: 2023-04-12
Event Type Committee Report
Event Title:* Eco Center 2x2 Committee Term Sheet and Non-Mission Alignment Event Report: Vice Mayor Washington and I had a short meeting with members of ACCPF to discuss slight changes and clarifications in the term sheet, namely about rentals to no-missioned aligned organizations. Staff has the details which will come back to the committee and then council
File/Photo Upload Max file size for all uploads is 10 MB 193
City Council Committee Report
Submitted
by: * Councilmember David Oro
Council
Meeting
Date:
05/02/2023
Event
Date: 2023-04-20
Event Type Committee Report
Event Title:* Napa Valley Tourism Board Meeting
Event Report: Received an update on the long range Strategic Plan which included input from the entire NVTC and Visit Napa Valley board as well as community members from April 19th. This is a process to update their 2019 strategic plan by revisiting their prepandemic strategies, testing assumptions, and devising a new 3-year plan with updated strategic goals, actionable initiatives, and new targets. The number one goal: Ensure the renewal of TID in 2024. It's something that I brought up in earlier reports and the City of American Canyon hotel members will be soon approached about participation.

Additional details from the meeting are in the attachment, which removes a irrelevant slides to meet the size limit of submitting this report.

File/Photo Upload Max file size for all uploads is 10 MB 194
April 2023 NVTC Board of Directors Meeting April 20, 2023 195 Agenda

NVTC BOARD MEETING
Call to Order, Introductions & Antitrust
Reminder
Public Comment
Review and Approval of December 15, 2022,
Minutes
Long Range Plan Draft Update
Department Reports
- CEO Report
- Community & Industry
- Marketing & Communications
- Sales & Business Development
- Partnership & Guest Experience
Finance
- Review & Approval of NVTC Financials
- Review & Approval of NVTC Draft FY24 Budget
- Review FY23 Jan & Feb Financials & FY24 Draft
Budget
Local TID Reports
Adjourn
2 196
FY24-26 Long Range Plan DRAFT
197
Visit Napa Valley
UPDATE on the Strategic Plan
April 19, 2023
198
In 2022, the Visit Napa Valley team embarked on a process to update their 2019 strategic plan by revisiting their prepandemic strategies, testing assumptions, and devising a new 3-year plan with updated strategic goals, actionable initiatives, and new targets.

MMGY NextFactor engaged many of the Napa Valley CVB
executive leaders, board members of Visit Napa Valley and Napa Valley Tourism Corporation, plus local government
leaders and key stakeholders to ensure a broad range of input to develop the plan.

The project included:
• A DestinationNEXT assessment of the Napa Valley
• One-on-one interviews of key industry and community
leaders
• Board and management work sessions with information
about key trends and with discussion of the Ideal Future • Additional work by the team and consultants
Community Engagement:

One-on-One Interviews - 12 interviews with local
stakeholders throughout the community.

Board and Management Sessions - Multiple
sessions with the DBACVB management team and
board of directors
DestinationNEXT Assessment
105 Participants
• 50.5% Visit Napa Valley Industry Partners
• 16.2% Board Members
• 13.3% Community Leaders
• 8.6% Visit Napa Valley Team
• 7.6% Government Leaders
• 3.8% Customers
Introduction
199
Destination Opportunities
• Focusing on mid-week
meeting/conference business
• Increasing collaboration between
wineries/lodging
• Highlighting responsible/sustainable
agriculture and developing more
experiences
• Building on momentum created due to
intimate, outdoor spaces discovered
during Covid
• Protecting agricultural land in a balanced
manner
• Encouraging responsible development and
the sustainability of the destination
• Diversification of product offerings
• Shifting values; understanding new ones
complement (not replace) the old ones
• Attracting day visitors – who can still enjoy a
visit for a moderate price
• Strike a balance between what we have and
protecting quality of life
High Frequency Responses Other Responses
200
Destination Challenges
• Workforce shortage/affordable housing
• High traffic volume, congestion, lack of
public transportation
• Regulations/permitting process restricting
development
• Lack of resident support/understanding of
visitor economy
• High cost can hurt diversity of community
and visitors
• Climate change and water shortages
High Frequency Responses Other Responses
• Managing less volume in favor of visitors
who align with our values
• Political shifts that are underway
• Keeping our high standards with workforce
vacancies
• Friction arising between wineries and
lodging, each attributing the destination’s
rising costs to the other
• The population of our residents is aging and
stagnant in growth
201
VNV Should Focus on
• Expanding outreach/education/advocacy with
residents & elected officials to create a better
understanding of the work VNV does to
balance community impact + maximize
economic impact
• Increasing and sharing data analytics to evolve
marketing
• Developing a coalition of locals who
understand the positive impact of the visitor
economy to offset the vocal minority who are
opposed.
• Board diversity
• Showcasing stories of the farmers and
agriculture
• Explaining the “why” behind the focus on
luxury travelers
• Creating what’s needed, not just promoting
what’s here
High Frequency Responses Other Responses
202
DestinationNEXT Assessment
203
Ideal Future Ranking (from the Board Visioning Session) During the planning workshop, Visit Napa Valley board members ranked the following items in terms of importance to determine the ideal future for Napa Valley’s visitor economy in the next three years. The rankings are listed in order of the aggregated results.

Ranking Accomplishment Score
1 Ensure renewal of TID in 2024 9.9
2 Own the brand as a premiere sustainable wine and lifestyle destination 8.6 3 Create ongoing plan for community involvement in goals of VNV 8.4 4 Engage all stakeholders to develop a DMP (master plan) 8.0 5 Explore transportation solutions to access destination 7.9 6 Encourage reliable public transportation throughout the county 7.7 7 Revisit messaging for appropriateness and authenticity 7.7 8 Advocate for protecting natural resources in NV 7.7
9 Build on the momentum of outdoor experiences 7.7
204
Ideal Future Ranking (continued)
Ranking Accomplishment Score
10 Target next generation of visitors 7.6
11 Improve repeat visitation 7.6
12 Consolidate destination resources 7.6
13 Communicate unique attributes of different destinations in the valley 7.5 14 Grow diversity of experiences in Napa Valley 7.3
15 Engage with other local organizations in their strategic planning 7.2 16 Be a conduit to coalesce stakeholders around community values 7.1 17 Create a coalition (lodging/transp.) to achieve group biz beyond 1 hotel 6.7 18 Partner to develop and deploy economic diversity with dev. sectors (arts?) 6.6 19 Celebrate diversity of artisanal beverages/experiences 6.5 20 Investigate strategies to overcome DEI misperceptions to attract more visitors and workforce 6.4
205
Strategic Pillars
Marketing
& Sales
Destination
Management
Organizational
Excellence
Community
Engagement
206
Strategic Initiatives
Marketing & Sales
• Refine messaging to differentiate Napa Valley from other wine regions. • Convey Napa Valley experiences that deliver on diverse interests. • Leverage the ownable attributes of Napa Valley - people, land, history, experience.

Own the Napa Valley brand as the
authentic wine and lifestyle
destination.
• Hone messaging and media strategy to inspire today’s leisure traveler (luxury, aspirational, and next generation).
• Communicate the unique attributes of the Napa Valley experience to motivate group business.
• Continue to inspire and motivate resident sentiment and workforce development.

Drive destination demand with identified
market segments – leisure traveler (domestic
and international); group and travel trade
(meetings/incentive planners and luxury
travel advisors); and local/residents and
workforce.
• Drive refined messaging and outreach to educate group/travel trade on the benefits of mid-week and off-peak bookings.
• Motivate leisure traveler to consider mid-week and off-season (need period), multi-day bookings.
• Champion messaging that inspires local/resident engagement.

Inspire need period travel.

DRAFT
207
Strategic Initiatives
Destination Management
• Benchmark other destinations for best practices.
• Incorporate tourism into County/City general plan development and facilitate jurisdictional buy-in process.
• Encourage the diversification of tourism product in Napa Valley in conjunction with the wine and hospitality sector; government agencies; and residents/constituents
Explore the feasibility of
developing a Destination
Master Plan.
•Identify and lend a point of view to organizations addressing workforce solutions (e.g., solutions for affordable workforce housing, workforce development, and diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives). •Offer insight on overall infrastructure needs to deliver a quality experience to visitors and, thereby, also residents.
•Advocate for transportation solutions to improve access to and within the destination for visitors and residents alike.

Ensure a seat at the table during
discussions related to common
community and hospitality industry
challenges (e.g., challenges in
workforce, housing, transportation).
• Collaborate with industry partners – Napa Valley Vintners, Napa Green, Napa Farm Bureau, Napa Valley Vine Trail, etc. – and communicate the sustainability messaging to outward audiences (e.g., visitors, residents, media, etc.).

Advocate for destination
stewardship and protecting the
natural resources in Napa Valley.

DRAFT
208
Strategic Initiatives
Proactive Partnership & Community Engagement
• Inform and engage with stakeholders to secure buy-in for TID funding for the next 10 years.
• Produce and distribute annual business plans that advance the full objectives of the DMO for the visitor sector.

Ensure renewal of the Napa Valley
Tourism Improvement District by
2024.
•Develop an advocacy plan that informs, advocates, and educates creating synergy and alignment with government, ancillary organizations, and residents. •Develop a public affairs strategy, aligning support, bandwidth, and resource allocation.

Expand government advocacy efforts
(local, state, national) to promote the
health of the tourism industry.
• Refine community relations program that informs, advocates, and educates on the Tourism Industry’s impact in our local community.

Communicate the importance of
tourism with residents informed by data
that supports the positive economic
impact of tourism.
• Continue evolving, streamlining, and optimizing the Visit Napa Valley partnership program to best serve the visitor-facing businesses of Napa Valley.
• Deliver tools and resources, as an industry thought leader and subject matter expert, that will inform partner decisions with their respective strategic initiatives (e.g.: provide access to data, industry experts, annual business plans, bi-annual partner events, hospitality workforce programs, etc.). • Elevate the visibility for community and partner events and activities that coalesce around community values (e.g., Napa Valley Restaurant Week; Mustard Season; Lighted Art Festival; and other such communityorchestrated events).

Sustain strong and positive
relationships with industry
partners.

DRAFT
209
Strategic Initiatives
Organizational Excellence
• Align staff responsibilities and roles with strategic priorities and initiatives.
• Create and communicate a clear, delineated organizational development plan for employees.
• Develop and foster a positive culture and curate employee engagement.

Foster an environment that attracts
and retains high-level talent.
•Invest in relevant data, research, and studies and address industry trends. •Provide insights to support, affect, and motivate tourism and hospitality goals. •Identify, adopt, and disseminate robust business intelligence (data, studies, reporting tools) to support and inform DMO marketing & sales decisions and to support the industry.

Deliver tourism and hospitality
industry thought leadership.
• Write and communicate an annual activity report and plan in accordance with Management District Plan guidelines.
• Deliver best-in-class audits with results reported to stakeholders - e.g., Boards of Directors; city/county governments, etc.

Maintain transparency of business
activity and governance.

DRAFT
210
Community Values
(Verbatim responses from visioning)
Quality of
Experience
Authenticity
Environmental
Stewardship
Collaboration –
Neighbors Helping
Neighbors
Safety/Quality of
Life
Family
Craftsman
Excellence
Innovation/
Pioneering/
Visionary
Suggested Way to Present These
What We Believe:

Environmental stewardship matters
We desire balance
We are accountable
We are authentic
Part of our DNA:

Authenticity
Delivering a quality experience
Pride
Locally owned
Working hard
Demonstrating generosity and philanthropy
Coming together in crisis
Neighbors helping neighbors
What we do:

Collaborate
Lead
Solve problems
Innovate
Balance
Problem Solvers
Engaged
Coming Together in Crisis
Hard-working/ work ethic
Generous/
Philanthropic/
Charitable
Global Presence
Evolutionary
Made in USA/Local
Ownership
Independent
DRAFT
211
Next
Steps
212
• Board feedback on strategic
initiatives and strategies - April 20
• Consultants and VNV team continue
to work on targets to measure results,
timeline, and vision.
• Final draft completed - June 9
• Board(s) review the final plan June 15
Next Steps
213
Visit Napa Valley CEO Report
214
District Parameters
History: Formed in 2010 for 5-year
term; renewed in 2015
Term: 10 years:

June 16, 2015- June 15, 2025
Boundaries: The NVTID includes
all hotels within the boundaries of
the cities of American Canyon,
Calistoga, Napa, and St. Helena, the
town of Yountville, and the
unincorporated area of the County
of Napa
215
Tourism Improvement District Renewal
The Napa Valley Tourism Improvement
District ("NVTID") scheduled to sunset June
15, 2025.
12-month process allowing additional time
ahead of renewal deadline.
• March: Steering Committee Formed
• Summer: Alignment with Stakeholders
27 216
TID Generated Revenue Since Inception
The Revenue Which Funds Visit Napa Valley Operating & Marketing Budget 217
TOT Details by Jurisdiction
Economic Impact of Tourism
Jurisdiction Population
# of Rooms
As of June
2022
FY22 TOT
Collected
By Jurisdiction
TOT Collected
Per Resident
TOT Collected
Per Room
TOT as a % of
General Fund
TOT Growth
Since 2011
Rounded to the
Nearest ,000 FY22 Actual Based on FY23
Budgets, not Actual
American Canyon 20,000 313 $1.6M $79 $5,062 6% +119%
Napa 80,000 3,076 $27M $340 $8,834 25% +176%
Yountville 3,000 450 $9.8M $3,276 $21,839 59% +145%
St. Helena 6,000 295 $4M $659 $13,395 20% +174%
Calistoga 5,000 837 $11.8M $2,357 $14,082 60% +243%
Unincorporated County 27,000 762 $13.8M $511 $18,099 6% +69% Total Napa Valley 141,000 5,733 $68,115,994 $483 $11,881 +147% The Tourism Industry Provides Significant Positive Impact to the Local Jurisdictions Throughout Napa County. 29 218
March Trends
Smith Travel Research
30 March Occupancy ADR RevPAR Revenue Supply Demand
2023 56.9 $ 377.96 $ 215.21 $35,279,054 163,928 93,341
2022 65.7 $ 386.67 $ 254.14 $40,526,898 159,464 104,809 2019 66.9 $ 275.96 $ 184.68 $28,900,573 156,488 104,727 YOY % change/2022 -13.4% -2.3% -15.3% -12.9% 2.8% -10.9% YOY % change/2019 -14.9% 37.0% 16.5% 22.1% 4.8% -10.9%
Year to Date Occupancy ADR RevPAR Revenue Supply Demand 2023 50.2 $ 346.63 $ 174.06 $82,836,279 475,920 238,976 2022 53.2 $ 359.57 $ 191.12 $88,471,941 462,901 246,047 2019 61.9 $ 254.41 $ 157.56 $71,629,681 454,630 281,551 YOY % change/2022 -5.5% -3.6% -8.9% -6.4% 2.8% -2.9%
YOY % change/2019 -18.9% 36.2% 10.5% 15.6% 4.7% -15.1%
Smith Travel Research
Smith Travel Research
219
YTD March Trends
Smith Travel Research
31 Calendar YTD
March 2023
Hotel Rooms
(Approximate) Occupancy YOY % ADR YOY % RevPAR YOY %
Comp Set Napa County 5,700 50.2 -5.5% $ 346.63 -3.6% $ 174.06 -8.9% Sonoma County 7,500 51.5 -4.7% $ 186.89 -1.9% $ 96.32 -6.5% Monterey County 12,500 56.8 -2.2% $ 215.16 -1.8% $ 122.24 -4.0% San Luis Obispo County 10,670 55.6 -6.8% $ 151.78 -2.3% $ 84.37 -9.0% Santa Barbara County 10,720 57.6 -7.2% $ 206.08 -4.1% $ 118.69 -11.1% San Francisco County 30,000 57.3 25.6% $ 274.61 45.6% $ 157.35 82.8% Jurisdictions American Canyon 315 72.2 0.1% $ 128.65 0.2% $ 92.94 0.3% Napa (City of) 3000 50.2 -8.1% $ 292.18 9.5% $ 146.74 0.7% Yountville 450 43.4 3.2% $ 623.24 -14.0% $ 270.69 -11.2% Calistoga 870 51.3 -6.2% $ 496.45 -7.8% $ 254.93 -13.6% Unincorporated Co. 760 43.8 -3.0% $ 425.30 -18.9% $ 186.16 -21.3% Service Type Luxury 39.1 -9.7% $ 845.73 -18.6% $ 330.48 -26.5% Group 54.5 1.4% $ 269.89 -0.7% $ 146.98 0.6%
Limited Service 57.8 -13.2% $ 160.33 -1.4% $ 92.68 -14.4% Smith Travel Research
220
Annual Average Occupancy 2019-2022 Comparison
Smith Travel Research
72% 74% 72%
41%
53%
47%
60%
64% 64% 64% 62%
67%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Napa County Sonoma County Monterey County
2019 2020 2021 2022
32 221
Annual Average Daily Room Rate Comparison 2019-2022
Smith Travel Research
$337
$181
$229
$267
$140
$180
$404
$200
$259
$470
$226
$290
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
$400
$450
$500
Napa County Sonoma County Monterey County
2019 2020 2021 2022
33 222
Source: STR. © 2023 CoStar
Group
34 53%
11% 7%
Napa
Valley
California Total US
More Luxury
Non-Luxury Luxury
Napa Valley has a unique market composition
56%
32% 28%
Napa
Valley
California Total US
More NonBranded
Branded Independent
65 84 88
Napa
Valley
California Total US
Smaller
Average Size
223
Source: STR. © 2023 CoStar
Group
35 26% 27% 27% 29%
32%
36%
41% 42%
$-
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
$400
$450
$500
Sonoma Cape Cod San Luis
Obispo
South
Lake
Tahoe
Monterey CO Ski
Area
Santa
Barbara
Napa
Valley
TTM Feb 2023 ADR TTM Feb 2019 ADR 2019 vs 2023 % Ch
All areas have seen significant ADR growth
Submarket ADR and growth.
224
36 Recovery Summary
Jan’22-Dec’22
Metro Area 2022 vs 2019
CA - San Diego 5%
CA - Los Angeles -18%
CA - San Francisco -26%
CA - Orange County -4%
CA - San Jose / Silicon Valley -33%
CA - Napa / Sonoma / Wine Country 17%
CA - Palm Springs 18%
CA - Santa Barbara 25%
CA - Monterey Bay 1%
CA - Sacramento -33%
Month 2022 vs 2019 2023 vs 2019
January 99.48% 106.28%
February 156.43% 155.00%
March 177.30%
April 120.69%
May 106.77%
June 128.95%
July 97.69%
August 101.89%
September 103.91%
October 96.04%
November 112.93%
December 125.81%
Group Travel Trends
Source: CVENT
225
37 Top Overlapping & Lost Business Competitors
Jan’22-Dec’22
Top 10 Overlapping Metro Areas
CA – Sonoma County
CA – San Diego
CA – San Francisco
CA – Half Moon Bay
AZ – Scottsdale
CA – Dana Point
CA – Monterey
CA – Newport Beach
CA – Santa Barbara
CA - Sausalito
Top 5 Lost Business
Metro Areas
CA – Sonoma County
CA – San Francisco
CA – San Diego
CA – Monterey
AZ - Scottsdale
Group Travel Trends
Source: CVENT
37 226
Experience Is Key In Attracting Today’s Consumer
38 31%
12% 10%
25% 26%
15% 15% 13%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
California Washington Oregon Other States
Visited in Past Plan to Visit in Next 1-2 Years
Base: U.S. wine drinkers, n=1,772
Source: WMC – U.S. Wine Consumer Segmentation Survey, October-November 2021 Wine Market Council
227
Consumers Planning to Visit by Segment
39 30%
20% 20%
14%
20%
9% 10% 11%
21%
11% 11%
13%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
California Washington Oregon Other States
Core Marginal Non-Adopter
Base: U.S. wine drinkers, n=1,772
Source: WMC – U.S. Wine Consumer Segmentation Survey, October-November 2021 Wine Market Council
228
40 Base: U.S. Wine drinkers, n=1,772.

Source: WMC – U.S. Wine Consumer Segmentation Survey, October-November 2021 Plan to visit wineries in next 1-2 years in...

Consumer Type California Oregon WA Other States
Gen Z 46% 18% 39% 20%
Millennial 34% 25% 26% 13%
Gen X 27% 16% 13% 14%
Boomer 15% 7% 6% 12%
May not add to 100% due to rounding
*Non-Adopter = drink beer, spirits or other alcohol but not or rarely wine Intent to Visit Wine Country –
Wine Drinkers By Age & Segment
Wine Market Council
229
Community & Industry
230
Industry Ecosystem Meetings
Visit Napa Valley Connects with Industry
Tourism
Advocacy Day
May 16-17, 2023
Sacramento, CA
Outlook Forum
All Industry Meeting &
Education
Opportunity
Marketing
Meeting
Update from SF
Travel on New
Campaign
231
Destination Stewardship & Community Engagement
Advocating for our Community
Workforce
Development
“Crush that Career” Paid
Marketing Campaign
Career Resources
Napa Valley 101 Educational
Module
1% TOT for Affordable
Housing
Supporting
the Vine Trail
Napa Valley Vintners &
Napa Valley’s hospitality
industry has pledged $5M
total to complete the Vine
Trail.

Sustainability
Napa Green is partnering
with Visit Napa Valley to
expand its certification
umbrella beyond wineries
and vineyards into
hospitality, beginning with
Napa Green Lodging for
hotel properties.

Trends &
Insights
Creating Educated Advocates
for the Napa Valley
Hospitality Industry
232
Napa Green Next Steps

SUSTAINABLE TRAVEL
Napa Green Lodging
 Held Kick Off with Pilot Lodging Partners in
November
 Next:
 1-on-1 Meeting to Review Draft
Standards
 2 Phases of Resource Audits
 Pilot Learnings
 Roll Out More Broadly
233
Napa Green Pilot Participants

SUSTAINABLE TRAVEL
Property Rooms Location
DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel & Spa Napa Valley - American Canyon 132 American Canyon Archer Hotel Napa 183 City of Napa
River Terrace Inn 114 City of Napa
The McClelland House 6 City of Napa
R INN Napa 10 City of Napa
Napa Valley Lodge 55 Yountville
Brannan Cottage Inn 6 Calistoga
Carneros Resort & Spa 100 Unincorporated
234

NAPA VALLEY
Interactive course that digs
into what makes Napa
Valley a premier travel
destination
Designed for tourism
professionals who regularly
communicate about the
Napa Valley in visitor-facing
settings
101
235
Napa Valley Vine Trail
Continuing to Fulfill Pledge
$2.5M/10-year pledge
from the Napa Valley hospitality
community
“It is estimated that, when all 47-miles of the Vine Trail are completed, it will benefit the local economy by
over $165 million annually.” - Congressman Mike Thompson 236
Marketing & Communications
237
Visit Napa Valley’s Reach
Cultivating the Napa Valley Brand

2.7 Million
Annual Website Visits
50,000
Email Subscribers
42Million
Paid Media Impressions
900+Million
Earned Media Impressions
925,000+
Partner Website Referrals
337,000
Social Media Followers
110,000
Guests at Napa Valley
Welcome Center
18Million
Social Media Impressions
238
Target Audiences
Luxury
Traveler
Aspirational
Traveler
Group Trade
Travel Trade
Tourism &
Hospitality
Workforce
Local
Community
239
Target Markets
California Texas
(Dallas)
New York
(NYC)
Illinois
(Chicago)
Florida
(Miami/Tampa)
50% 50%
California Presents the Greatest Opportunity and Impact in Advertising Efforts Allocation of Advertising Budget
58 240
Paid Media
241
Key Paid Advertising Initiatives
Cheers,
The Good
Life
Always On & Seasonal

CONSUMERS
Approachable
Luxury
Pulsed

CONSUMERS
Crush
That Meeting
Pulsed

GROUP TRADE
Cheers
Tourism
Matters
Pulsed

RESIDENTS
Crush
That Career
Pulsed

WORKFORCE
242
Cheers Seasonal – Hulu

P A I D M E D I A

1.5M
VIEWS

EACH MONTH
50/50

ASPIRATIONAL
& LUXURY

AUDIENCES
243
Cheers Always On – Digital & Social

P A I D M E D I A

3.6M

VIDEO VIEWS
TRACKING 96% TO GOAL

1.01%
CTR

0.90% GOAL
1:18

AVERAGE TOS
0:44 GOAL
244
Cheers Seasonal – AFAR

P A I D M E D I A
• 4 – 6 editorial articles guiding
travelers to enriching experiences in
the Napa Valley.
• Organic email and social promotion
of content on AFAR channels.
• First-ever Napa Valley “Small
Business Guide” on @afarmedia
(Instagram) featuring 6 – 8 local
business to be spotlighted on
Instagram’s latest “Guides” feature.
• The Napa Valley dedicated guide will
include a destination introduction
and an AFAR-curated string of posts
from Visit Napa Valley-approved IG
accounts. 245
Crush That Career – Digital & OOH

1.01%
CTR
579% TO GOAL

5.9M

IMPRESSIONS

LAUNCHED IN

FEBRUARY

IMPRESSIONS
Workforce Development – Staffing
4 minutes
on site
246
Approachable Luxury – Digital & Social

P A I D M E D I A

PROMOTING
DINING | LODGING | WINERIES
DINING
1:07

AVERAGE TIM E O N SITE
0:30 GOAL

LODGING

1.4%

STAN DOUT

CLICKTHROUGH RATE

0.90% GOAL

WINERIES
1:23

AVERAGE TIM E O N SITE
0:30 GOAL
247
Cheers Tourism Matters – Digital & Print

1.2M

IM P RESSIO N S
950K GOAL
7,000

SESSIO N S
3,000 GOAL
0:28

AVERAGE TO S
0:20 GOAL

P A I D M E D I A
248
Crush That Meeting – Digital & Print

1.36%
CTR

0.75% GOAL
322K

IMPRESSIONS
TRACKING 85% TO GOAL
2:14

AVERAGE TOS
0:43 GOAL

P A I D M E D I A
249
April 25 – 27, 2023
560 Million
Impressions
Nationwide Radio Promotion
Valued at $7M+/year
National Promo Spot
Local Activation on The Vine
250
Owned Media
251

2.7Million
Annual Website Visits
925,000+
Partner Website
Referrals
252
Top Visited Webpages
OWNED
January – March
• 745K Overall Sessions • 564K Total Users • 36% above prepandemic 2019 levels • “Cheers” landing page is always among the Top 5
on site – our paid media
ads pay off!
• “Wineries” landing page
always among the Top 5
on site – a function of
organic search!
253
Consumer Newsletter
Organically weaving in partner
news and information to share a
compelling and relevant
Napa Valley story.
50,000
Subscribers
6%
Click-Through Rate
(January – March) 254
Website - Blog
OWNED
Most Visited Blogs

VIEWS OF BLOG PAGES
(January – March)
235,000
AVG. TIME SPENT

PER BLOG PAGE
2m:13s
255
Social Media
337,000
Social Media Followers
18Million
Social Media Impressions
OWNED
• 2 Reels with 11Million+ Views
Each… Viral!
• 2.2 Million New Accounts
Reached (up 936%)
• 79,000 Engagements • 3,800+ New Followers Gained256
Radio Interstitials
Partnership
“What’s Good,
Napa Valley!”
135,000
Monthly Audience Reach
257
Earned Media
258
Media Relations
Recent Media Coverage
259
Media Relations
Positive Press Mentions Resulting from Proactive Media Engagement 900M+ Positive Press Impressions in 2022
260
Partnership & Guest Experience
261
Napa Valley Welcome Center
80 Helping Visitors Discover the Napa Valley
Visitor Traffic
• January – March 2023: 18,006
• YOY change: -10.3% (relates to March)
• Traffic counter data includes outside influences
Origin of Guest in March
• Captured data from 28% of total guests
• USA Domestic = 43%
• CA Drive Market = 25%
• International = 21%
• Napa County = 11%
Current Hours – “Cabernet Season”
• Daily: 9:30 a.m. to 6 p.m.

Peak Season Hours – Beginning May 25, 2023
• Daily: 9:30 a.m. to 7 p.m.

March 2023 March 2022
6,287 guests 8,416 guests
16 rain days 7 rain days
262
Napa Valley Welcome Center
81 Guest and Partner Amenities
Merchandise
• $60,562 gross revenue Jan – Mar 2023
Partner Pop-ups
• Wed – Thurs beginning May 2023
• Six partners per time slot, 2x day
• Enthusiastic participation and peer to peer
networking
QR Code Scans
• Window Posters
• 468 scans from 367 unique people
• Top Performers
• $50 and Under Wine Tastings
• Michelin rated Restaurants
• Winery Map
• QR Landing Page
• Mustard Season 263
Visit Napa Valley Partnership
Partnership Statistics
2023 Partnership Term
• Premium Partner = 187
• Standard Partner = 273
• Standard Plus = 9
• Associate Partner = 13
• TID Lodging = 48
• TOTAL PARTNERS = 531
Recruitment Strategy
• Presentation and Education
• Review attrition and re-capture former
partners; likely attributed staff turnover
• VNV Leadership outreach to personal
connections
• Attend and discover networking
organizations as an outlet to capture an
interested audience.
• Recruit for Standard and Standard +
Lodging, 24%
Restaurant , 20%
Winery, 30%
Other, 26%

PARTNERS BY TYPE
264
Visit Napa Valley Partnership
Partnership Benefits
Direct Touchpoints
Welcome Center Referrals: Jan – Mar 2023
• January: 1,193
• February: 2,171
• March: 2,483
Visit Napa Valley Website: Jan – Mar 2023
• Partner Listing Views: 87,241
• Reservation Click-thrus: 11,824
Ambassador Days
A cross-departmental selection of Visit Napa Valley staff tour partner businesses on field trip-style outings. Focusing on one Napa Valley town at a time, our staff receives hands-on learning for better, more thoughtful and purposeful referrals. Visit Napa Valley outreach benefits all; our partners showcase their unique attributes, our Communications team discover a compelling angle for a new media lead, and our Sales team find that perfect new meeting space. See above at Kerr Cellars. 265

ADJOURNMENT
266

American Canyon City CouncilMay 2, 2023

American Canyon City Council
May 2, 2023