Agenda packet — Arroyo Grande City Council, February 13, 2024 (part 1 of 2)

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

AGENDA SUMMARY

Tuesday, February 13, 2024, 6:00 p.m.

In person at:

Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers
215 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
AND via Zoom at:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86752345420
Please click the link above to join the Zoom Meeting:

Webinar ID: 867 5234 5420
Or by Telephone: 1-669-900-6833; 1-346-248-7799
This City Council meeting is being conducted in a hybrid in-person/virtual format. Members of the public may participate and provide public comment on agenda items during the meeting in person at the location identified above, by joining the Zoom meeting, or by submitting written public comments to the Clerk of the Council at [email protected]. Meetings will be broadcast live on Channel 20 and streamed on the City’s website and www.slo-span.org.

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. MOMENT OF REFLECTION

4. FLAG SALUTE

ARROYO GRANDE VALLEY KIWANIS CLUB

5. AGENDA REVIEW

5.a Closed Session Announcements
None.

5.b Ordinances read in title only
Recommended Action:

Move that all ordinances presented at the meeting shall be read by title only and all further readings be waived.

6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS

6.a Honorary Proclamation Recognizing February 2024 as Teen Dating Violence Action and Prevention Month

6.b Honorary Proclamation Recognizing Fire Chief Stephen Lieberman Upon His Retirement from Public Service

6.c City Manager Communications
(DOWNING)
Recommended Action:

Receive correspondence/comments as presented by the City Manager and Provide direction, as necessary.

6.c.1 Recent Storm Conditions and Updates

7. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
None.

Reports are made during the Second Council Meeting each month.

8. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
This public comment period is an invitation to members of the community to present issues, thoughts, or suggestions on matters not scheduled on this agenda. Comments should be limited to those matters that are within the jurisdiction of the City Council. Members of the public may provide public comment in-person or remotely by joining the Zoom meeting utilizing one of the methods provided below. Please use the “raise hand” feature to indicate your desire to provide public comment.

Click the link below to join the webinar: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86752345420; Webinar ID: 867 5234 5420
•
Or by Telephone: 1-669-900-6833; 1-346-248-7799
Press * 9 to “raise hand” for public comment
•
The Brown Act restricts the Council from taking formal action on matters not published on the agenda. In response to your comments, the Mayor or presiding Council Member may:
• Direct City staff to assist or coordinate with you.
• A Council Member may state a desire to meet with you. • It may be the desire of the Council to place your issue or matter on a future Council agenda.

Please adhere to the following procedures when addressing the Council:
• Comments should be limited to 3 minutes or less.
• Your comments should be directed to the Council as a whole and not directed to individual Council members.
• Slanderous, profane or personal remarks against any Council Member or member of the audience shall not be permitted.

9. CONSENT AGENDA
The following routine items listed below are scheduled for consideration as a group. The recommendations for each item are noted. Any member of the public who wishes to comment on any Consent Agenda item may do so at this time. Any Council Member may request that any item be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda to permit discussion or change the recommended course of action. The City Council may approve the remainder of the Consent Agenda on one motion.

9.a Consideration of Cash Disbursement Ratification
(VALENTINE)
Recommended Action:
1) Ratify the attached listing of cash disbursements for the period of January 1 through

Page 2 of 442 ends

January 15, 2024;
2) Determine that ratifying the cash disbursements is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.)

9.b Consideration of Statement of Investment Deposits
(VALENTINE)
Recommended Action:
1) Receive and file the attached report listing investment deposits of the City of Arroyo Grande as of December 31, 2023, as required by Government Code Section 53646(b); and 2) Determine that receiving the report of investment deposits is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.)

9.c Approval of Minutes
(MATSON)
Recommended Action:

Approve the minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of January 23, 2024, as submitted.

9.d Consideration of Appointment to the Downtown Parking Advisory Board (MATSON)
Recommended Action:

Approve the recommendation of Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie to appoint Kevin Delaney to the Downtown Parking Advisory Board.

9.e Consideration of Approval of Amendment 1 to the Regional Surface Transportation (RSTP) Exchange/Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) Cooperative Agreement AG – FAST – 01 with the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
(ROBESON)
Recommended Action:
1) Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute SLOCOG RSTP Exchange/STBG Cooperative Agreement Amendment 1 to AG-FAST-01;
2) Direct the City Clerk to submit the RSTP Exchange/STBG Cooperative Agreement Amendment 1 to No. AG-FAST-01 and the Resolution to the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments; and
3) Find that approving this agreement is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378).

9.f Consideration of Final Approval of Community Development Block Grant Projects for Year 2024 and Finding the Action Exempt Under the California Environmental Quality Act, State Guidelines Section 15061

Page 3 of 442 ends

(PEDROTTI)
Recommended Action:
1) Approve the proposed projects to be funded with the City’s allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for the Year 2024, as shown in Table 1 below; and 2) Find that the preliminary approval of projects is exempt from CEQA, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 subd. (b)(3).

9.g Consideration of Rejection of All Bids for the Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) Apparatus Door Replacement Project, PW 2023-11
(ROBESON)
Recommended Action:

Reject all Bids for the FCFA Apparatus Door Replacement Project and direct staff to competitively rebid this project.

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS

10.a Hold Public Hearings, Consider Adopting a Resolution Updating the Development Impact Fee Schedule & Consider the 2024 Development Impact Fee Nexus Study, & Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 3.36 of the AGMC, Development Impact Fees (VALENTINE)
Recommended Action:
1) Hold a Public Hearing and Adopt the Resolution updating Development Impact fees set forth in Attachment 1 Exhibit A;
2)Receive and file the 2024 Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update; 3) Hold a Public Hearing and Introduce the Ordinance amending Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 3.36.030 Regarding Development Impact Fees; and 4) Make findings that adopting the Resolution updating Development Impact fees and introducing the proposed Ordinance are not projects subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because they have no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.).

10.b Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Section 16.04.070 of Chapter 4 of Title 16 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Regarding the Definition of Formula Business and Finding That This Action is Exempt from Review Under the CEQA
(PEDROTTI)
Recommended Action:

Introduce, read by title only, and waive further reading of an Ordinance amending Section

16.04.070 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code regarding the definition of a Formula Business and finding the Ordinance exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because the Ordinance has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378)

11. OLD BUSINESS
None.

Page 4 of 442 ends

12. NEW BUSINESS

12.a Consideration of a Resolution Approving Arroyo Grande Community Service Grant Program Allocations for Fiscal Year 2023-24 and Finding This Action Is Not a Project Under the CEQA, State Guidelines Section 15378
(PEDROTTI)
Recommended Action:
1) Adopt a Resolution approving the Arroyo Grande Community Service Grant Program funding allocations identified in Attachment 1; and
2) Determine that adopting the Resolution is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.)

13. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Any Council Member may ask a question for clarification, make an announcement, or report briefly on his or her activities. In addition, subject to Council policies and procedures, Council Members may request staff to report back to the Council at a subsequent meeting concerning any matter or request that staff place a matter of business on a future agenda. Any request to place a matter of business for original consideration on a future agenda requires the concurrence of at least one other Council Member.

14. CLOSED SESSION
The City Council will recess to a closed session for the following:
a) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8:

Property: 214 East Branch Street
Agency Negotiators: Matthew Downing, City Manager; Bill Robeson, Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director

15. ADJOURNMENT
All staff reports or other written documentation, including any supplemental material distributed to a majority of the City Council within 72 hours of a regular meeting, relating to each item of business on the agenda are available for public inspection during regular business hours in the City Clerk’s office, 300 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande. If requested, the agenda shall be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act. To make a request for disability-related modification or accommodation, contact the Legislative and Information Services Department at 805-473-5400 as soon as possible and at least 48 hours prior to the meeting date.

This agenda was prepared and posted pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2 Agenda reports can be accessed and downloaded from the City’s website at www.arroyogrande.org If you would like to subscribe to receive email or text message notifications when agendas are posted, you can sign up online through the “Notify Me” feature.

Page 5 of 442 ends

City Council Meetings are cablecast live and videotaped for replay on Arroyo Grande’s Government Access Channel 20. The rebroadcast schedule is published at www.slo-span.org.

Page 6 of 442 ends

Item 6.a.

Page 7 of 442 ends

Item 6.b.

Page 8 of 442 ends

Item 9.a.

MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Nicole Valentine, Administrative Services Director BY: Lynda Horejsi, Accounting Manager
SUBJECT: Consideration of Cash Disbursement Ratification DATE: February 13, 2024
SUMMARY OF ACTION:

Review and ratify cash disbursements for the period of January 1 through January 15, 2024.

IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:

There is a $2,319,124.08 fiscal impact for the period of January 1 through January 15, 2024, that includes the following items:
 Accounts Payable Checks $ 1,850,660.42
 Payroll & Benefit Checks $ 468,463.66
RECOMMENDATION:
1) Ratify the attached listing of cash disbursements for the period of January 1 through January 15, 2024;
2) Determine that ratifying the cash disbursements is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.) BACKGROUND:

Cash disbursements are made weekly based on the submission of all required documents supporting the invoices submitted for payment. Prior to payment, Administrative Services staff reviews all disbursement documents to ensure that they meet the approval requirements adopted in the Municipal Code and the City’s Purchasing Policies and Procedures Manual.

Page 9 of 442 ends

Item 9.a.

City Council
Consideration of Cash Disbursement Ratification
February 13, 2024

Page 2 ends

ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:

The attached listing represents the cash disbursements required of normal and usual operations during the period. The disbursements are accounted for in the FY 2023-24 budget.

ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:

1. Approve staff’s recommendation;

2. Do not approve staff’s recommendation; or

3. Provide other direction to staff.

ADVANTAGES:
 The Administrative Services Department monitors payments of invoices for accountability, accuracy, and completeness using standards approved by the City Council.
 Invoices are paid in a timely manner to establish goodwill with merchants.  Discounts are taken where applicable.

DISADVANTAGES:

There are no disadvantages identified in this recommendation.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

Ratifying the cash disbursements is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.)
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:

The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2.

Attachments:

1. January 1 through January 15, 2024 – Accounts Payable Check Register

2. January 12, 2024 – Payroll & Benefit Check Register

Page 10 of 442 ends

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE

CHECK LISTING
JANUARY 1 - JANUARY 15, 2024
ATTACHMENT 1
Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name1 01/05/2024 299832 $ 777.00 10/23 CODE ENFORCEMENT SVCS 010.4101.5303 ADAMSKI MOROSKI MADDEN2 01/05/2024 299832 592.00 11/23 CODE ENFORCEMENT SVCS 010.4101.5303 ADAMSKI MOROSKI MADDEN 3 01/05/2024 299833 46.73 OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY CLERK 010.4002.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES4 01/05/2024 299833 (86.19) CREDIT- CM SUPPLIES 010.4101.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES5 01/05/2024 299833 70.59 PRINTER INK 010.4130.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES6 01/05/2024 299833 215.02 OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4201.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES7 01/05/2024 299833 154.07 BLDG MAINT-LIGHTS 010.4201.5604 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES8 01/05/2024 299833 4,101.52 COMM ENGAGEMENT-SANTA COP SUPPLIES 010.0000.2025 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES9 01/05/2024 299834 3,394.55 OTS GRANT EQUIPMENT 010.4209.5255 ANDAX INDUSTRIES LLC10 01/05/2024 299835 29,553.00 Q2 FY23/24 ANIMAL SVCS CONTRACT 010.4201.5321 ANIMAL SERVICES11 01/05/2024 299836 5,005.29 PURCHASE WATER METERS & REPLACEMENT PARTS 640.4712.5207 AQUA-METRIC SALES CO(DBA)12 01/05/2024 299836 879.20 PURCHASE WATER METERS & REPLACEMENT PARTS 640.4712.5207 AQUA-METRIC SALES CO(DBA)13 01/05/2024 299837 134.39 01/24 TOWER LEASE 010.4201.5303 ATC SEQUOIA LLC14 01/05/2024 299838 17,720.62 11/23 CITY ATTORNEY-GENERAL 010.4003.5304 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP15 01/05/2024 299838 2,193.50 11/23 CITY ATTY-COMM DEV 010.4003.5327 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP16 01/05/2024 299838 4,449.50 11/23 CITY ATTY-CITY COUNCIL 010.4003.5327 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP17 01/05/2024 299838 615.00 11/23 CITY ATTY-FIRE 010.4003.5327 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP18 01/05/2024 299838 1,640.00 11/23 CITY ATTY-PW 010.4003.5327 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP19 01/05/2024 299838 715.00 11/23 CITY ATTY-400 W BRANCH 010.4003.5327 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP20 01/05/2024 299838 1,787.50 11/23 CITY ATTY-COMMUNICATIONS 010.4003.5327 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP21 01/05/2024 299838 4,452.50 11/23 CITY ATTY-EMPLYMNT/LABOR 010.4003.5327 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP22 01/05/2024 299838 227.50 11/23 CITY ATTY-CALPERS 010.4003.5327 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP23 01/05/2024 299838 4,959.00 11/23 CITY ATTY-PRA/ARC 010.4003.5327 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP24 01/05/2024 299839 (360.00) DRUM CREDIT 640.4712.5274 BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC25 01/05/2024 299839 913.50 200LBS CALCIUM HYPOCHLORITE 640.4712.5274 BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC26 01/05/2024 299840 11.73 FAST SET CONCRETE 220.4303.5613 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER YARD27 01/05/2024 299840 129.27 PW-71 FIRST AID KIT, BROOM, TIEDOWNS 612.4610.5255 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER YARD28 01/05/2024 299840 64.64 PW-63 FLASHLIGHT 640.4712.5255 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER YARD29 01/05/2024 299841 558.00 LIVESCAN/FINGERPRINT-IN/OUT 010.4204.5329 CA ST DEPT OF JUSTICE30 01/05/2024 299841 32.00 LIVESCAN/FINGERPRINT-NEW EMPLOYEE 010.4002.5316 CA ST DEPT OF JUSTICE31 01/05/2024 299842 1,002.00 ACCT#CSA1047 01/24-06/24 ALARM 010.4201.5303 CAME SECURITY ALARMS32 01/05/2024 299842 546.00 ACCT#CSA1029 01/24-06/24 ALARM 010.4213.5303 CAME SECURITY ALARMS33 01/05/2024 299842 240.00 ACCT#CSA245 01/24-06/24 ALARM 010.4213.5303 CAME SECURITY ALARMS34 01/05/2024 299842 420.00 ACCT#CSA2015 01/24-06/24 ALARM 010.4213.5303 CAME SECURITY ALARMS35 01/05/2024 299842 444.00 ACCT#CSA1063 01/24-06/24 ALARM 010.4213.5303 CAME SECURITY ALARMS36 01/05/2024 299842 294.00 ACCT#CSA140 01/24-06/24 ALARM 010.4213.5303 CAME SECURITY ALARMS37 01/05/2024 299842 204.00 ACCT#CSA288 01/24-06/24 ALARM 010.4213.5303 CAME SECURITY ALARMS

Page 11 of 442 ends

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE

CHECK LISTING
JANUARY 1 - JANUARY 15, 2024
ATTACHMENT 1
Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name38 01/05/2024 299843 $ 17.40 ELECTRIC GATE BELTS 010.4201.5605 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS39 01/05/2024 299843 12.85 AIR FRESHENERS 010.4305.5601 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS40 01/05/2024 299843 11.12 GOPHER MACHINE PARTS 010.4420.5603 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS41 01/05/2024 299843 2.45 GOPHER MACHINE PARTS 010.4420.5603 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS42 01/05/2024 299844 65.00 12/23 REIMBURSE JIUJITSU 010.4203.5501 JASON CASTILLO43 01/05/2024 299845 2,734.00 NOI APP FEE-LIFT STN#3 FORCE MAIN STORM DAMAGE 612.5853.7001 CENTRAL COAST REGIONAL WATER QC BOARD44 01/05/2024 299846 199.98 ACCT#170562001 PD INTERNET 010.4201.5403 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS45 01/05/2024 299847 6,835.66 JUNIPER MODULE(4) & TRANSCEIVER 010.4140.5303 CIO SOLUTIONS LP46 01/05/2024 299847 4,768.00 12/23 CIO SOLUTIONS IT SUPPORT 010.4140.5303 CIO SOLUTIONS LP47 01/05/2024 299847 1,530.00 12/23 CROWDSTRIKE ADV DEFEND 010.4140.5303 CIO SOLUTIONS LP48 01/05/2024 299847 922.50 SWITCH UPGRADES 010.4140.5303 CIO SOLUTIONS LP49 01/05/2024 299847 6,042.00 MICROSOFT 365, PROJECT PLAN 3 010.4140.5607 CIO SOLUTIONS LP50 01/05/2024 299848 1,375.00 GIS GRAPHICS FOR SALES TAX ALL 218.4101.5303 CK CONSULTING51 01/05/2024 299849 7,500.00 12/23 PROF SVCS 23/24 REV MEASURE 010.4101.5303 CLIFFORD MOSS LLC52 01/05/2024 299849 381.59 VIDEO SHOOT EXPENSES-REV MEASURE 010.4101.5303 CLIFFORD MOSS LLC53 01/05/2024 299849 27,850.00 PROF SVCS-TRUE NORTH POLLING-REVENUE MEASURE 010.4101.5303 CLIFFORD MOSS LLC 54 01/05/2024 299850 479.75 GARBAGE, APPLIANCES, GREEN WAS 220.4303.5307 COLD CANYON LANDFILL, INC55 01/05/2024 299851 7,298.53 DESIGN & ENV SVCS FOR TRAFFIC WY BRIDGE 350.5679.7501 CONSOR NORTH AMERICA INC56 01/05/2024 299852 2,730.25 COMM ENGAGEMENT-SANTA COP SUPPLIES 010.0000.2025 CREATIVE CASTING57 01/05/2024 299853 400.00 12/23 NETBILL MAINT. 640.4710.5303 DATAPROSE LLC58 01/05/2024 299853 516.88 12/23 NETBILL CC TRANS 640.4710.5555 DATAPROSE LLC59 01/05/2024 299853 1,485.69 12/23 UTILITY BILL MAILING 640.4710.5208 DATAPROSE LLC60 01/05/2024 299853 129.22 12/23 NETBILL CC TRANS 612.4610.5555 DATAPROSE LLC61 01/05/2024 299854 324.00 REIMBURSE-REGISTRATION & EXAM 010.4203.5501 STEPHEN DOHERTY62 01/05/2024 299855 6,600.00 SOTO TURF RENOVATION-SEEDING 214.4550.5606 DORMAN HYDRO-SEEDING63 01/05/2024 299855 8,800.00 SOTO TURF RENOVATION-SEEDING 214.4550.5606 DORMAN HYDRO-SEEDING64 01/05/2024 299856 309.22 SOTO FIELD LIGHT REPAIR 10/26 010.4430.5303 ELECTRICRAFT INC65 01/05/2024 299856 2,604.67 LIFT STN#1, TEST & REPLACE PUMP 612.4610.5610 ELECTRICRAFT INC66 01/05/2024 299857 1,366.82 SOTO TURF RENOVATION- 42 BAGS 214.4550.5606 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS INC 67 01/05/2024 299858 (825.83) CREDIT FOR VALVES 640.4712.5610 FAMCON PIPE AND SUPPLY INC68 01/05/2024 299858 1,531.53 CLA-VAL REPAIR KITS 640.4712.5610 FAMCON PIPE AND SUPPLY INC69 01/05/2024 299858 825.83 3/4" CUSTOMER VALVES 640.4712.5610 FAMCON PIPE AND SUPPLY INC70 01/05/2024 299859 10.73 BAIT FOR TRAP AT REC 010.4213.5604 FARM SUPPLY CO71 01/05/2024 299860 966.00 TRI COLOR SHAWL-NEEDLE ARTS CLASS 010.4424.5351 ELIZABETH FRYER72 01/05/2024 299861 7,791.57 GIS SERVICES 010.4301.5303 GHD INC73 01/05/2024 299862 46.21 REFUND-DUPLICATE TOT PYMT 07/23 761.0000.2007 LORI GILLESPIE74 01/05/2024 299862 308.07 REFUND-DUPLICATE TOT PYMT 07/23 010.0000.4010 LORI GILLESPIE

Page 12 of 442 ends

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE

CHECK LISTING
JANUARY 1 - JANUARY 15, 2024
ATTACHMENT 1
Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name75 01/05/2024 299862 $ 61.61 REFUND-DUPLICATE TOT PYMT 07/23 240.0000.4016 LORI GILLESPIE76 01/05/2024 299863 1,550.00 ANNUAL CATHODE PROTECTION SVC-RES#2 - 6 640.4712.5609 GMC ELECTRICAL, INC77 01/05/2024 299864 49.41 01/24 AETNA RESOURCES- EAP FCFA 010.0000.1111 HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCE CTR78 01/05/2024 299864 197.64 01/24 AETNA RESOURCES EAP 010.4145.5147 HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCE CTR79 01/05/2024 299865 422.03 TOOLS-METER LID REMOVER, PROBES, STOP WRENCH 640.4712.5273 ICONIX WATERWORKS (US) INC 80 01/05/2024 299866 1,488.03 ABC GRANT SUPPLIES 010.4203.5255 INTOXIMETERS, INC81 01/05/2024 299867 55.26 FUEL 010.4203.5608 JB DEWAR, INC82 01/05/2024 299867 148.41 FUEL 010.4203.5608 JB DEWAR, INC83 01/05/2024 299868 596,036.96 2022 CONCRETE REPAIRS PROJECT 350.5638.7001 JJ FISHER CONSTRUCTION, INC.84 01/05/2024 299869 2,688.00 PICKLEBALL POWER-FALL SESSION 010.4424.5351 TROY E JOHNSTON85 01/05/2024 299870 3,818.75 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 350.5695.7701 KTUA86 01/05/2024 299871 1,608.33 PATROL EQUIPMENT 010.4203.5272 LASER TECHNOLOGY, INC87 01/05/2024 299872 50.00 12/23 PICKLEBALL POTLUCK PRIZE 010.4424.5351 MAUREEN LEWIS88 01/05/2024 299873 420.00 11/23 OCC FACILITY RENTAL-ZUMB 010.4424.5251 LUCIA MAR UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST89 01/05/2024 299873 255.84 11/12/23 TURKEY TROT CUSTODIAL 010.4424.5252 LUCIA MAR UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST90 01/05/2024 299873 832.50 11/23 OCC FACILITY USE-BASKETB 010.4424.5257 LUCIA MAR UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST91 01/05/2024 299874 43,600.00 LIFT STATION 3 STORM DAMAGE CONSTRUCTION 612.5853.7001 MAIN LINE ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION 92 01/05/2024 299875 50.00 2024 DUES-RON SIMPSON 220.4303.5503 MAINTENANCE SUPERINTENDENTS93 01/05/2024 299876 156.24 .5 CY COBBLE ROCK 010.4420.5605 MIER BROS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS94 01/05/2024 299876 312.48 1 CY COBBLE ROCKS 010.4420.5605 MIER BROS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS95 01/05/2024 299876 31.79 .5 CY DG 010.4420.5605 MIER BROS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS96 01/05/2024 299876 5,172.00 SOTO TURF RENOVATION-100CY TEE MIX 214.4550.5606 MIER BROS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS97 01/05/2024 299876 5,172.00 SOTO TURF RENOVATION-100CY TEE MIX 214.4550.5606 MIER BROS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS98 01/05/2024 299876 3,103.20 SOTO TURF RENOVATION-60CY TEE MIX 214.4550.5606 MIER BROS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS99 01/05/2024 299877 31.48 SANDING SPONGE, SPRAYPAINT, FASTENERS 010.4213.5604 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC 100 01/05/2024 299877 31.65 SCRAPER, PUTTY KNIFE, SPRAYPAINT 010.4213.5604 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC101 01/05/2024 299877 21.53 WHITE MARKING PAINT 010.4420.5605 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC102 01/05/2024 299877 8.69 ELBOW 010.4420.5605 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC103 01/05/2024 299877 258.56 (4) AQUAPHALT ASPHALT PATCH 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC104 01/05/2024 299877 193.92 (3) AQUAPHALT ASPHALT PATCH 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC105 01/05/2024 299877 130.48 (2) AQUAPHALT ASPHALT PATCH 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC106 01/05/2024 299877 260.96 (4) AQUAPHALT ASPHALT PATCH 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC107 01/05/2024 299877 129.28 (2) AQUAPHALT ASPHALT PATCH 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC108 01/05/2024 299877 260.96 (4) AQUAPHALT ASPHALT PATCH 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC109 01/05/2024 299878 7,950.00 EXECUTIVE SEARCH SVCS-CM 3RD INSTALLMENT 010.4101.5303 MOSAIC PUBLIC PARTNERS LLC110 01/05/2024 299879 950.00 2024 SOTO LIGHT MONITORING SERVICE FEE 010.4430.5303 MUSCO SPORTS LIGHTING LLC111 01/05/2024 299880 282.09 BLOWER 010.4420.5603 NOBLE SAW, INC

Page 13 of 442 ends

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE

CHECK LISTING
JANUARY 1 - JANUARY 15, 2024
ATTACHMENT 1
Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name112 01/05/2024 299880 $ 30.00 KEVLAR GLOVES 010.4420.5605 NOBLE SAW, INC113 01/05/2024 299880 508.93 (2) BLOWERS 220.4303.5273 NOBLE SAW, INC114 01/05/2024 299880 831.92 (2) CHAINSAWS 220.4303.5273 NOBLE SAW, INC115 01/05/2024 299881 900.00 WELL#7 & 8-INSTALL NEW CI2 PUMP 640.4711.5603 NVIRO116 01/05/2024 299882 54.48 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4120.5201 ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LLC117 01/05/2024 299882 155.13 COPY PAPER 010.4102.5201 ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LLC118 01/05/2024 299883 396.66 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL 010.4201.5315 PACIFIC CENTRAL COAST HEALTH119 01/05/2024 299884 36.00 UNIFORM CLEANING- PD ADMIN 010.4201.5303 PARAMOUNT CLEANERS120 01/05/2024 299884 410.00 UNIFORM CLEANING-PD PATROL SVCS 010.4203.5303 PARAMOUNT CLEANERS121 01/05/2024 299884 66.00 UNIFORM CLEANING-PD SUPPORT SVCS 010.4204.5303 PARAMOUNT CLEANERS 122 01/05/2024 299885 1,533.39 DOGGIE WASTE BAGS 010.4420.5605 PET PICK-UPS123 01/05/2024 299886 5.38 COUNCIL CHAMBERS WATER 010.4213.5303 READYREFRESH BY NESTLE124 01/05/2024 299886 5.38 COUNCIL CHAMBERS WATER 010.4213.5303 READYREFRESH BY NESTLE125 01/05/2024 299887 30,000.00 RATING EVAL FOR WIFIA LOAN FOR CCB 640.4710.5804 S&P GLOBAL RATINGS126 01/05/2024 299888 17.92 GAS SERVICES-1500 W BRANCH 010.4145.5401 SOCALGAS127 01/05/2024 299888 49.23 GAS SERVICES-215 E BRANCH 010.4145.5401 SOCALGAS128 01/05/2024 299888 35.89 GAS SERVICES-211 VERNON ST 010.4145.5401 SOCALGAS129 01/05/2024 299888 118.82 GAS SERVICES-111 S MASON 010.4145.5401 SOCALGAS130 01/05/2024 299889 1,855.00 WATER WALL RENTAL-HOLIDAY PARADE 010.4424.5353 STATEWIDE SAFETY & SIGNS INC 131 01/05/2024 299890 309.08 FAUCET-STROTHER PARK 010.4213.5604 STREATOR PIPE & SUPPLY132 01/05/2024 299890 65.74 (2) TOILET SEAT 010.4213.5604 STREATOR PIPE & SUPPLY133 01/05/2024 299891 2,509.00 ANNUAL PERMIT FEES-BSB REHAB/MITIGATION 350.5614.7301 SWRCB134 01/05/2024 299892 2,509.00 ANNUAL PERMIT FEES FOR SWINGING BRIDGE CIP 350.5620.7301 SWRCB135 01/05/2024 299893 92.66 SUBSCRIPTION-PENAL CODE BOOKS 010.4201.5503 THOMSON REUTERS WEST136 01/05/2024 299893 72.19 SUBSCRIPTION-EVIDENCE CODE BOOKS 010.4201.5503 THOMSON REUTERS WEST137 01/05/2024 299894 1,038.21 PD-4609 REPAIR 010.4203.5601 TOM'S AUTO SERVICE138 01/05/2024 299895 1,162.63 (5) SQUARE POSTS, (4) AQUAPHALT, (4) ANCHORS 220.4303.5613 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PRODUCTS139 01/05/2024 299896 16,000.00 ENTERPRISE ERP FINANCIAL MGMT 350.5453.7301 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC140 01/05/2024 299897 1,107.16 PAYROLL FOR W/E 12/10 PW MAINT WORKER 010.4120.5303 UNITED STAFFING ASSOC.141 01/05/2024 299897 1,032.98 PAYROLL FOR:W/E 12/17 OFFICE ASSISTANT 010.4120.5303 UNITED STAFFING ASSOC.142 01/05/2024 299897 802.09 PAYROLL FOR:W/E 12/24 OFFICE ASSISTANT 010.4120.5303 UNITED STAFFING ASSOC.143 01/05/2024 299897 1,046.44 PAYROLL FOR:W/E 12/24 PW MAINT WORKER 010.4420.5303 UNITED STAFFING ASSOC.144 01/05/2024 299897 930.37 PAYROLL FOR W/E 12/10 OFFICE ASSISTANT 010.4420.5303 UNITED STAFFING ASSOC.145 01/05/2024 299897 1,111.91 PAYROLL FOR:W/E 12/17 PW MAINT WORKER 010.4420.5303 UNITED STAFFING ASSOC.146 01/05/2024 299898 1,209.30 ACCT#208620661-00002 PD CELL PHONES 010.4201.5403 VERIZON WIRELESS147 01/05/2024 299899 614.05 COPY MACHINE LEASE PYMT 010.4201.5803 WELLS FARGO VENDOR FINANCIAL148 01/05/2024 299900 2,773.13 PORTABLE GENERATOR 640.4712.6201 WHITE CAP CONST. SUPPLY

Page 14 of 442 ends

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE

CHECK LISTING
JANUARY 1 - JANUARY 15, 2024
ATTACHMENT 1
Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name149 01/05/2024 299901 $ 7,010.00 FEE STUDY SVCS-USER, DEVLMT IMPACT & CAP 010.4120.5303 WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES150 01/05/2024 299902 1,440.00 10/23 SIGNAL MAINT-12 INTERSECTIONS 010.4307.5303 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC151 01/05/2024 299902 60.00 OAK PARK & JAMES WAY 010.4307.5303 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC152 01/05/2024 299902 60.00 OAK PARK & ECR 010.4307.5303 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC153 01/05/2024 299902 75.00 OAK PARK & W BRANCH 010.4307.5303 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC154 01/05/2024 299902 1,496.86 (2) CONFLICT MONITOR CARDS 010.4307.5303 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC155 01/05/2024 299902 1,440.00 11/23 SIGNAL MAINT 12 INTERSECTIONS 010.4307.5303 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC156 01/05/2024 299902 60.00 OAK PARK & JAMES WAY 010.4307.5303 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC157 01/05/2024 299902 60.00 OAK PARK & ECR 010.4307.5303 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC158 01/05/2024 299902 75.00 OAK PARK & W BRANCH 010.4307.5303 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC159 01/05/2024 299903 86.02 UB Refund Cst #00025370 640.0000.2301 MICHAEL & KELSIE RODRIGUEZ160 01/05/2024 299904 202.38 UB Refund Cst #00028840 640.0000.2301 KELLY ANN SMALLWOOD161 01/05/2024 299905 151.56 UB Refund Cst #00028935 640.0000.2301 LANCE VALENZUELA162 01/05/2024 299906 8,107.13 DENTAL INSURANCE 011.0000.2110 DELTA DENTAL163 01/05/2024 299906 2,440.01 DENTAL INSURANCE: RETIREES 010.4099.5132 DELTA DENTAL164 01/05/2024 299907 4,742.00 PORAC MED INSURANCE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED165 01/05/2024 299907 1,738.28 HMO BLUESHIELD - SEIU 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED166 01/05/2024 299907 13,110.80 PPO PERS GOLD - MANAGEMENT 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED167 01/05/2024 299907 11,192.14 PPO PERS GOLD - POLICE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED168 01/05/2024 299907 18,387.10 PPO PERS GOLD - SEIU 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED169 01/05/2024 299907 2,916.86 BLUE SHIELD TRIO HMO - MGMT 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED170 01/05/2024 299907 11,667.44 BLUE SHIELD TRIO HMO - POLICE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED171 01/05/2024 299907 19,438.90 HMO-UNITED HEALTHCARE-MGMT 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED172 01/05/2024 299907 8,546.40 HMO UNITED HEALTHCARE-POLICE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED173 01/05/2024 299907 21,114.66 HMO UNITED HEALTHCARE-SEIU 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED174 01/05/2024 299907 2,106.62 BLUE SHIELD TRIO HMO - SEIU 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED175 01/05/2024 299907 4,157.08 PERS GOLD - FIRE MANAGEMENT 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED176 01/05/2024 299907 2,303.00 PPO PERS PLATINUM - FIRE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED177 01/05/2024 299907 16,468.44 PPO PERS GOLD - FIRE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED178 01/05/2024 299907 1,620.48 BLUE SHIELD TRIO HMO - FIRE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED179 01/05/2024 299907 8,211.26 HMO UNITED HEALTHCARE-FIRE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED180 01/05/2024 299907 4,357.00 HMO-UNITED HEALTH FIRE-MGMT 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED181 01/05/2024 299907 3,347.03 MISC ADJUSTMENTS 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED182 01/05/2024 299907 7,499.84 RETIREE HEALTH INSURANCE 010.4099.5136 PERS - ACTIVE MED183 01/05/2024 299907 635.24 RETIREE HEALTH INSURANCE 220.4303.5136 PERS - ACTIVE MED184 01/05/2024 299907 800.48 RETIREE HEALTH INSURANCE-FCFA 010.0000.1111 PERS - ACTIVE MED185 01/05/2024 299907 110.68 ACTIVE FIRE HEALTH ADMIN FEE 010.0000.1111 PERS - ACTIVE MED

Page 15 of 442 ends

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE

CHECK LISTING
JANUARY 1 - JANUARY 15, 2024
ATTACHMENT 1
Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name186 01/05/2024 299907 $ 386.70 ACTIVE HEALTH ADMIN FEE 010.4145.5131 PERS - ACTIVE MED187 01/05/2024 299908 2,178.49 ACTIVE HEALTH INS-PT NONPERS 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED188 01/05/2024 299908 6.97 ACTIVE HEALTH INS-PT NONPERS ADMIN FEE 010.4145.5131 PERS - ACTIVE MED189 01/05/2024 299909 988.44 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 011.0000.2113 STANDARD INSURANCE CO190 01/05/2024 299909 484.84 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 011.0000.2113 STANDARD INSURANCE CO191 01/05/2024 299909 1,560.30 STANDARD LTD/STD INSURANCE 011.0000.2113 STANDARD INSURANCE CO192 01/05/2024 299909 68.02 MISC ADJUSTMENTS 011.0000.2113 STANDARD INSURANCE CO193 01/05/2024 299910 2,170.96 VISION CARE INSURANCE 011.0000.2119 VISION SERVICE PLAN194 01/05/2024 299910 635.35 01/24 VISION INS-RETIREES 010.4099.5133 VISION SERVICE PLAN195 01/11/2024 299911 2,244.27 UB Refund Cst #00020071 640.0000.2301 DOREE HILLIER196 01/11/2024 299912 126.06 UB Refund Cst #00028444 640.0000.2301 MARILLA JEFFERS197 01/11/2024 299913 82.43 UB Refund Cst #00029247 640.0000.2301 HEATHER WHITE198 01/12/2024 299914 864.00 STORMWATER SAMPLING 010.4301.5303 ABALONE COAST ANALYTICAL INC199 01/12/2024 299915 750.00 11/23 WEBSITE STREAMING & ARCH 010.4002.5303 AGP VIDEO, INC200 01/12/2024 299915 2,965.00 11/23 CABLECASTING 010.4002.5330 AGP VIDEO, INC201 01/12/2024 299916 271.80 PAPER TOWELS 010.4213.5604 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES202 01/12/2024 299916 29.00 (2) TP DISPENSERS 010.4213.5604 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES203 01/12/2024 299916 244.92 GLASS CLEANER 010.4213.5604 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES204 01/12/2024 299916 122.05 TOILET SEAT COVERS 010.4213.5604 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES205 01/12/2024 299916 121.86 FOAMING HAND SOAP 010.4213.5604 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES206 01/12/2024 299916 183.22 RAIN JACKETS & PANTS 010.4420.5605 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES207 01/12/2024 299916 27.63 SOCKET SCREW CAPS 010.4420.5605 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES208 01/12/2024 299916 31.08 GERM X CLEANER 010.4420.5605 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES209 01/12/2024 299916 53.76 SHEET PROTECTORS 220.4303.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES210 01/12/2024 299916 (6.98) REFUND-RETURN DESK CALENDAR 220.4303.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES211 01/12/2024 299916 53.97 OFFICE SUPPLIES 220.4303.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES212 01/12/2024 299916 96.96 (2) POWER BANKS 220.4303.5255 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES213 01/12/2024 299916 148.70 NITRIL GLOVES 220.4303.5613 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES214 01/12/2024 299916 53.97 OFFICE SUPPLIES 612.4610.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES215 01/12/2024 299916 53.97 OFFICE SUPPLIES 640.4710.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES216 01/12/2024 299916 53.97 OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4307.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES217 01/12/2024 299917 471,435.03 2022 SLURRY SEAL PROJECT CONSTRUCTION 350.5638.7001 AMERICAN ASPHALT SOUTH INC218 01/12/2024 299918 27.70 BAN#9391033180 805-473-0386 CITY HALL 010.4145.5403 AT&T219 01/12/2024 299918 27.70 BAN#9391033186 C C MACHINE 010.4145.5403 AT&T220 01/12/2024 299919 577.50 CO #1 - PURCHASING POLICY UPDATE 010.4120.5303 BAKER TILLY US LLP221 01/12/2024 299920 348.00 DOGGIE CLASSES NOV, DEC 010.4424.5351 IRINA BEATTY222 01/12/2024 299921 2,425.00 NEW HIRE POLYGRAPH, BACKGROUND 010.4201.5315 BELLA VISTA INVESTIGATIVE SVCS

Page 16 of 442 ends

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE

CHECK LISTING
JANUARY 1 - JANUARY 15, 2024
ATTACHMENT 1
Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name223 01/12/2024 299922 $ 2,892.54 12/23 CITY ATTY- COMM DEVELOPMENT 010.4003.5304 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP224 01/12/2024 299922 1,549.78 12/23 CITY ATTY-CITY COUNCIL 010.4003.5304 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP225 01/12/2024 299922 20.50 12/23 CITTY ATTY- CITY MGR 010.4003.5304 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP226 01/12/2024 299922 225.50 12/23 CITY ATTY-ADMIN SVCS 010.4003.5304 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP227 01/12/2024 299922 102.50 CITY ATTY-FIRE 010.4003.5304 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP228 01/12/2024 299922 1,086.50 12/23 CITY ATTY-PW 010.4003.5304 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP229 01/12/2024 299922 97.50 12/23 CITY ATTY- 400 W BRANCH 010.4003.5304 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP230 01/12/2024 299922 1,105.00 12/23 CITY ATTY-TELECOMMUNICATIONS 010.4003.5304 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP231 01/12/2024 299922 585.00 12/23 CITY ATTY-EMPLYMT/LABOR 010.4003.5304 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP232 01/12/2024 299922 8,455.00 12/23 CITY ATTY-PRA/ARC 010.4003.5304 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP233 01/12/2024 299922 15,051.74 12/23 CITY ATTY-GENERAL 010.4003.5304 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP234 01/12/2024 299923 1,176.00 ARTS & CRAFTS-WINTER SESSION 2 010.4424.5351 KENDRA BOWLING235 01/12/2024 299924 500.00 12/23 PD JANITORIAL 010.4201.5615 BRENDLER JANITORIAL SERVICE236 01/12/2024 299924 125.00 12/23 PD JANITORIAL 010.4213.5615 BRENDLER JANITORIAL SERVICE237 01/12/2024 299924 725.00 12/23 REC JANITORIAL SVC 010.4213.5615 BRENDLER JANITORIAL SERVICE238 01/12/2024 299924 285.00 12/23 WOMENS CLUB JANITORIAL SVC 010.4213.5615 BRENDLER JANITORIAL SERVICE239 01/12/2024 299924 300.00 12/23 WOMENS CLUB EXTRA CLEANING 010.4213.5615 BRENDLER JANITORIAL SERVICE240 01/12/2024 299925 204.71 JUMP STARTER 010.4305.5255 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS241 01/12/2024 299925 33.59 WIPER BLADES, DEODORIZER 010.4305.5601 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS242 01/12/2024 299925 178.85 FLUID EVACUATOR-PW FUEL ISLAND 010.4305.5603 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS243 01/12/2024 299926 80.00 12/23 CLOGGING CLASS 010.4424.5351 KATHLEEN J CINOWALT244 01/12/2024 299927 812.38 2024 EOC SATELLITE PHONE SVC 010.4201.5303 COMMUNICATIONS PROFESSIONALS245 01/12/2024 299928 5,547.90 SWINGING BRIDGE EVALUATION & REHABILITATION 350.5620.7501 CONSOR NORTH AMERICA INC246 01/12/2024 299929 14.26 PLAN SET-TRAFFIC SIMULATION 010.4301.5255 CRISP IMAGING247 01/12/2024 299930 472.50 BUILDING DEPARTMENT SERVICES 010.4212.5303 CSG CONSULTANTS INC248 01/12/2024 299931 156.80 12/23 SR FITNESS 010.4424.5351 GAYLE CUDDY249 01/12/2024 299932 250.25 PUMP REPAIR KIT 640.4711.5603 D AND H WATER SYSTEMS INC250 01/12/2024 299932 3,591.30 (1) NEW GAMMA/XL PUMP 640.4711.5603 D AND H WATER SYSTEMS INC251 01/12/2024 299933 63.35 12/23 LINE DANCING 010.4424.5351 ZOE DASCALOS252 01/12/2024 299934 1,862.00 12/23 BRIDGE GAMES & CLASSES 010.4424.5351 FIVE CITIES DUPLICATE BRIDGE253 01/12/2024 299935 89.00 REFUND-BASKETBALL 010.0000.4605 VONIE GRIMM254 01/12/2024 299936 125.00 REFUND-DOGGIE CLASS 010.0000.4605 DIEDRE HAA255 01/12/2024 299937 18,224.67 TRAFFIC WAY BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 350.5679.7303 HAMNER-JEWELL ASSOCIATES256 01/12/2024 299938 106.08 PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL 11/17-12/14 220.4303.5552 HARVEY'S HONEY HUTS257 01/12/2024 299939 845.39 CONTRACT SVCS-2ND QTR 010.4120.5303 HINDERLITER, DE LLAMAS & ASSOC258 01/12/2024 299939 78.26 AUDIT SVCS-SALES TAX -QTR 2 20 010.4120.5303 HINDERLITER, DE LLAMAS & ASSOC259 01/12/2024 299939 416.38 CONTRACT SVCS-2ND QTR 218.4101.5303 HINDERLITER, DE LLAMAS & ASSOC

Page 17 of 442 ends

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE

CHECK LISTING
JANUARY 1 - JANUARY 15, 2024
ATTACHMENT 1
Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name260 01/12/2024 299940 $ 63.35 12/23 LINE DANCING 010.4424.5351 KAYLYN KELLER261 01/12/2024 299941 449.83 PROF SVCS- 400 W BRANCH 010.0000.2563 KOSMONT & ASSOCIATES INC262 01/12/2024 299942 845.00 90 DAY INSPECTIONS PW50, PW27, PW 41, PW30 220.4303.5601 L. DIESEL MOBILE SERVICE(DBA)263 01/12/2024 299942 837.60 PW-50 REPAIR 220.4303.5601 L. DIESEL MOBILE SERVICE(DBA)264 01/12/2024 299942 220.00 90 DAY INPSECTION-PW51 612.4610.5601 L. DIESEL MOBILE SERVICE(DBA)265 01/12/2024 299943 8,480.11 TRUSPEED S SPEED GUN 271.4202.6201 LASER TECHNOLOGY, INC266 01/12/2024 299944 32,822.68 2023 FAIR OAKS WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT 640.5973.7001 MAIN LINE ENGINEERING CONSTRTN267 01/12/2024 299945 1,122.10 12/23 ZUMBA & BARRE 010.4424.5351 HEIDY MANGIARDI268 01/12/2024 299946 50.00 PARK DEPOSIT REFUND-STROTHER 010.0000.2206 MELISSA MANN269 01/12/2024 299947 500.00 WARRANT BUILDER PRO 010.4204.5607 MAVERICK DATA SYSTEMS270 01/12/2024 299948 8.61 REFLECTIVE TAPE 010.4301.5255 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC271 01/12/2024 299948 14.80 FASTENERS 010.4420.5605 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC272 01/12/2024 299948 15.06 DRILL BITS 010.4420.5605 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC273 01/12/2024 299948 10.21 FASTENERS 010.4420.5605 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC274 01/12/2024 299948 73.45 SOTO-WRENCH, CABLE TIES, UTILITY KNIFE 010.4430.5273 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC275 01/12/2024 299948 195.72 (3) AQUAPHALT ASPHALT PATCH 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC276 01/12/2024 299948 129.28 (2) AQUAPHALT ASPHALT PATCH 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC277 01/12/2024 299948 17.23 PW-44 CABLETIES 612.4610.5255 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC278 01/12/2024 299948 57.09 PW-71 SMALL TOOLS 612.4610.5273 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC279 01/12/2024 299949 2,650.00 EXECUTIVE SEARCH SVCS- CM FINAL PAYMENT 010.4101.5303 MOSAIC PUBLIC PARTNERS LLC280 01/12/2024 299950 1,817.56 FCFA PLUMBING REPAIRS 010.4213.5303 MR ROOTER PLUMBING281 01/12/2024 299951 136.00 12/23 YOGA IN THE PARK 010.4424.5351 NICCOLA NELSON282 01/12/2024 299952 89,183.75 2022 STREET REPAIRS CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION & 350.5638.7301 PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INC283 01/12/2024 299953 0.50 BLD23-000692 REFUND 1650 BEE CYN 010.0000.2208 PIPEDREAMS VENTURES HOLDINGS284 01/12/2024 299953 186.00 BLD23-000692 REFUND 1650 BEE CYN 010.0000.4182 PIPEDREAMS VENTURES HOLDINGS285 01/12/2024 299953 1.00 BLD23-000692 REFUND 1650 BEE CYN 010.0000.2223 PIPEDREAMS VENTURES HOLDINGS286 01/12/2024 299954 24.49 BLDG MAINT UNIFORMS 010.4213.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY287 01/12/2024 299954 24.49 BLDG MAINT UNIFORMS 010.4213.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY288 01/12/2024 299954 23.54 BLDG MAINT UNIFORMS 010.4213.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY289 01/12/2024 299954 25.03 CITY HALL MATS 010.4213.5303 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY290 01/12/2024 299954 48.02 WOMENS CLUB MATS, MOPS 010.4213.5303 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY291 01/12/2024 299954 27.63 PD MATS 010.4213.5303 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY292 01/12/2024 299954 31.17 REC DEPT MATS, MOPS 010.4213.5303 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY293 01/12/2024 299954 36.68 AUTO SHOP UNIFORMS 010.4305.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY294 01/12/2024 299954 16.38 AUTO SHOP UNIFORMS 010.4305.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY295 01/12/2024 299954 15.95 AUTO SHOP UNIFORMS 010.4305.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY296 01/12/2024 299954 57.31 PARKS DEPT UNIFORMS 010.4420.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY

Page 18 of 442 ends

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE

CHECK LISTING
JANUARY 1 - JANUARY 15, 2024
ATTACHMENT 1
Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name297 01/12/2024 299954 $ 34.76 PARKS DEPT UNIFORMS 010.4420.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY298 01/12/2024 299954 36.47 PARKS DEPT UNIFORMS 010.4420.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY299 01/12/2024 299954 23.08 SOTO SPORTS COMPLEX UNIFORMS 010.4430.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 300 01/12/2024 299954 23.08 SOTO SPORTS COMPLEX UNIFORMS 010.4430.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY301 01/12/2024 299954 22.22 SOTO SPORTS COMPLEX UNIFORMS 010.4430.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY302 01/12/2024 299954 33.18 STREETS DEPT UNIFORMS 220.4303.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY303 01/12/2024 299954 31.68 STREETS DEPT UNIFORMS 220.4303.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY304 01/12/2024 299954 33.18 STREETS DEPT UNIFORMS 220.4303.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY305 01/12/2024 299954 23.08 SEWER DEPT UNIFORMS 612.4610.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY306 01/12/2024 299954 23.08 SEWER DEPT UNIFORMS 612.4610.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY307 01/12/2024 299954 22.22 SEWER DEPT UNIFORMS 612.4610.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY308 01/12/2024 299954 46.72 WATER DEPT UNIFORMS 640.4712.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY309 01/12/2024 299954 44.35 WATER DEPT UNIFORMS 640.4712.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY310 01/12/2024 299954 46.72 WATER DEPT UNIFORMS 640.4712.5143 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY311 01/12/2024 299955 484.37 01/24 GRACE LN LANDSCAPE MAINT 216.4460.5304 RAINSCAPE312 01/12/2024 299955 1,201.41 01/24 PARKSIDE LANDSCAPE MAINT 219.4460.5304 RAINSCAPE313 01/12/2024 299956 89.15 REIMBURSE-VOL BANQUET SUPPLIES 010.4424.5252 KELLY REYNOLDS314 01/12/2024 299957 450.00 REFUND PPR16-000025 010.0000.4510 JOHN RUDA315 01/12/2024 299958 7,200.00 JULY 2023 THRU DEC 2023 MONTHLY STREET SWEEPING 220.4303.5303 SCA316 01/12/2024 299958 2,700.00 JULY 2023 THRU DEC 2023 MONTHLY STREET SWEEPING 010.4307.5303 SCA317 01/12/2024 299959 5.22 COMM GARDEN GREEN WASTE 010.4213.5303 SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC318 01/12/2024 299959 208.46 DUMPSTERS -RANCHO GRANDE PARK 010.4213.5303 SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC319 01/12/2024 299959 320.19 DUMPSTERS -FCFA 010.4213.5303 SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC 320 01/12/2024 299959 208.46 DUMPSTERS -STROTHER PARK 010.4213.5303 SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC321 01/12/2024 299959 163.87 DUMPSTERS -PD 010.4213.5303 SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC322 01/12/2024 299959 104.23 DUMPSTERS -PW RECYCLE 010.4213.5303 SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC323 01/12/2024 299959 90.25 CITY HALL TRASH & RECYCLE 010.4213.5303 SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC324 01/12/2024 299960 0.50 BLD23-000736 REFUND 1100 HASBROUK 010.0000.2208 TEKTON ELECTRIC INC325 01/12/2024 299960 0.50 BLD23-000753 REFUND 165 CENTURY 010.0000.2208 TEKTON ELECTRIC INC326 01/12/2024 299960 257.00 BLD23-000753 REFUND 165 CENTURY 010.0000.4183 TEKTON ELECTRIC INC327 01/12/2024 299960 327.00 BLD23-000736 REFUND 1100 HASBROUK 010.0000.4183 TEKTON ELECTRIC INC328 01/12/2024 299960 1.00 BLD23-000736 REFUND 1100 HASBROUK 010.0000.2223 TEKTON ELECTRIC INC329 01/12/2024 299960 1.00 BLD23-000753 REFUND 165 CENTURY 010.0000.2223 TEKTON ELECTRIC INC330 01/12/2024 299961 214.00 CC PH USER FEE STUDY 11/3, 11/9 010.4002.5301 THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY LLC331 01/12/2024 299961 107.10 CC PH DCA RE: IRRIGATED TURF 010.4002.5301 THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY LLC332 01/12/2024 299961 44.20 ORD SUMMARY- IRRIGATED TURF RESTRICTIONS 010.4002.5301 THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY LLC333 01/12/2024 299961 109.65 PC PH DCA RE: ADU 010.4130.5301 THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY LLC

Page 19 of 442 ends

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE

CHECK LISTING
JANUARY 1 - JANUARY 15, 2024
ATTACHMENT 1
Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name334 01/12/2024 299961 $ 102.00 PC PH APPEAL -TWO SPACE PARKLETS 010.4130.5301 THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY LLC335 01/12/2024 299961 850.00 NOTICE TO BIDDERS-SWINGING BRIDGE 11/8, 11/13 010.4301.5301 THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY LLC336 01/12/2024 299962 101.89 (10) ALUMINUM SIGNS 220.4303.5613 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PRODUCTS337 01/12/2024 299963 119.69 12/23 COPY MACH METER READ 010.4102.5602 ULTREX BUSINESS PRODUCTS (DBA)338 01/12/2024 299964 829.78 PAYROLL FOR W/E 12/31 OFFICE ASSISTANT 010.4120.5303 UNITED STAFFING ASSOC.339 01/12/2024 299964 1,046.48 PAYROLL FOR W/E 12/31 PW PT WORKER 010.4420.5303 UNITED STAFFING ASSOC.340 01/12/2024 299965 1,997.96 SALES TAX ALLOCATION MAILER 218.4101.5208 US POSTMASTER341 01/12/2024 299966 128.34 PH TESTER 640.4712.5610 USA BLUE BOOK342 01/12/2024 299967 83.20 12/23 ART FOR KIDS 010.4424.5351 PEGGY VALKO343 01/12/2024 299968 65.00 REFUND-12/09 ART IN THE PARK 010.0000.4607 TAMI VAN CLEF344 01/12/2024 299969 370.00 11/23 PROF LEGAL SVCS-SM WATER 640.4710.5575 WHITE BRENNER LLP345 01/12/2024 299970 654.15 BASKETBALL-FALL SESSION 3 010.4424.5351 YOUTH EVOLUTION BASKETBALL346 01/12/2024 299970 436.10 SOCCER-FALL SESSION 3 010.4424.5351 YOUTH EVOLUTION BASKETBALL347 01/12/2024 299971 1,134.00 WINTER BREAK GAMING & CODING CAMPS 010.4424.5351 YOUTH TECH INC. $ 1,850,660.42

Page 20 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
.

General Fund 411,252.39 5101 Salaries Full time 165,362.34 Streets Fund 21,174.66 5101 Volunteer Employee Retirement - Sewer Fund 11,549.32 5102 Salaries Part-Time - PPT 7,176.56 Water Fund 24,487.29 5103 Salaries Part-Time - TPT 1,766.67 468,463.66 5105 Salaries OverTime 16,139.80
5106 Salaries Strike Team OT -
5107 Salaries Standby 2,419.40
5108 Holiday Pay 94,342.96
5109 Sick Pay 8,698.81
Administrative Services 5110 - Annual Leave Buyback -
Information Services 5111 Vacation Bu - yback -
Community Development 5112 Sick Leave Buyback -
Police 15,199.58 5113 Vacation Pay 21,827.50
Public Works - Maintenance 163.36 5114 Comp Pay 1,697.65 Public Works - Enterprise 776.86 5115 Annual Leave Pay 15,238.49 Recreation - Administration 5116 Salaries - Police FTO - - Recreation - Special Events - 5121 PERS Retirement 40,771.56 Children In Motion 5122 Social Securit - y 24,696.07
5123 PARS Retirement 138.49 16,139.80
5126 State Disability Ins. 3,615.87
5127 Deferred Compensation 725.00
5131 Health Insurance 56,584.75
5132 Dental Insurance 3,109.42
5133 Vision Insurance 825.81
5134 Life Insurance 387.64
5135 Long Term Disability 692.62
5137 Leave Payouts -
5142 Unemployment Insurance -
5143 Uniform Allowance -
5144 Car Allowance 637.50
5146 Council Expense -
5147 Employee Assistance -
5148 Boot Allowance -
5149 Motor Pay 203.75
5150 Bi-Lingual Pay 150.00
5151 Cell Phone Allowance 1,255.00
468,463.66
OVERTIME BY DEPARTMENT:

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE

DEPARTMENTAL LABOR DISTRIBUTION

PAY PERIOD
12/22/2023 - 01/04/2024
1/12/2024

BY FUND BY ACCOUNT

Page 21 of 442 ends

Item 9.b.

MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Nicole Valentine, Administrative Services Director BY: Lynda Horejsi, Accounting Manager
SUBJECT: Consideration of Statement of Investment Deposits DATE: February 13, 2024
SUMMARY OF ACTION:

Presentation of the City’s investment deposits as of December 31, 2023.

IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:

There is no funding impact to the City related to these reports. However, the City does receive interest revenue based on the interest rate of the investments. Little to no future staff time is projected.

RECOMMENDATION:
1) Receive and file the attached report listing investment deposits of the City of Arroyo Grande as of December 31, 2023, as required by Government Code Section 53646(b); and 2) Determine that receiving the report of investment deposits is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.) BACKGROUND:

The Administrative Services Department has historically submitted to the City Council a monthly report, providing the following information:

1. Type of investment.

2. Financial institution (bank, savings and loan, broker, etc.).

3. Date of maturity.

4. Principal amount.

5. Rate of interest.

6. Current market value for all securities having a maturity of more than 12 months.

7. Relationship of the monthly report to the annual statement of investment policy.

Page 22 of 442 ends

City Council
Consideration of Statement of Investment Deposits
February 13, 2024

Page 2 ends

Item 9.b.

ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:

This report represents the City’s investments as of December 31, 2023, and includes all investments managed by the City. As of December 31, 2023, the investment portfolio was in compliance with all State laws and the City’s investment policy.

ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:

1. Approve staff’s recommendation to receive and file the attached report listing the investment deposits;

2. Do not approve staff’s recommendation; or

3. Provide other direction to staff.

ADVANTAGES:

Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the City. Investments are undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio.

DISADVANTAGES:

Some level of risk is present in any investment transaction. Losses could be incurred due to market price changes, technical cash flow complications such as the need to withdraw a non-negotiable Time Certificate of Deposit early, or even the default of an issuer. To minimize such risks, diversifications of the investment portfolio by institution and by investment instruments are being used as much as is practical and prudent.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

The Statement of Investment Deposits is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.)”
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:

The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2.

Attachments:

1. Portfolio Summary: December 31, 2023

Page 23 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
300 E. Branch St.

Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
Phone: (805) 473-5400

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Portfolio Summary
December 31, 2023
Investments Principal Value Current Market Value Interest Rate Date of Purchase Term Maturity Date % of Portfolio Local Agency Investment Fund $ 15,629,748.45 15,629,748.45 $ 3.843% 49.942% Certificates of Deposit
Pacific Premier Bank 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.100% February 21, 2023 12 mos February 21, 2024 0.796% BMW Bank North America 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.500% July 16, 2021 36 mos July 16, 2024 0.796% Mountain America Federal Credit Union 249,000.00 249,000.00 4.750% October 14, 2022 24 mos October 15, 2024 0.796% Enerbank USA 247,000.00 247,000.00 1.850% October 25, 2019 60 mos October 25, 2024 0.789% Wells Fargo Bank 249,000.00 249,000.00 4.600% October 28, 2022 24 mos October 28, 2024 0.796% Beal Bk Plano TX 247,000.00 247,000.00 1.350% March 26, 2022 36 mos March 26, 2025 0.789% Beal Bk Las Vegas NV 247,000.00 247,000.00 1.250% March 26, 2022 36 mos March 26, 2025 0.789% First Technology Federal 248,000.00 248,000.00 5.000% April 14, 2023 24 mos April 14, 2025 0.792% Flagstar Bank 245,000.00 245,000.00 0.850% May 15, 2020 60 mos May 15, 2025 0.783% American Express National Bank 246,000.00 246,000.00 3.100% May 25, 2022 36 mos May 25, 2025 0.786% New York Community Bank 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.550% July 1, 2021 48 mos July 1, 2025 0.796% Chief Financial Federal Credit Union 249,000.00 249,000.00 4.600% October 12, 2022 36 mos October 14, 2025 0.796% Live Oak Bank 249,000.00 249,000.00 3.150% May 25, 2022 48 mos May 26, 2026 0.796% UBS Bank USA 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.900% July 21, 2021 60 mos July 21, 2026 0.796% Toyota Financial Savings Bank 248,000.00 248,000.00 0.950% July 22, 2021 60 mos July 22, 2026 0.792% California Credit Union Glendale 243,000.00 243,000.00 5.450% October 26, 2023 36 mos October 26, 2026 0.776% Bank United NA 249,000.00 249,000.00 1.350% December 8, 2021 60 mos December 8, 2026 0.796% Capital One Bank USA 248,000.00 248,000.00 1.250% December 8, 2021 60 mos December 8, 2026 0.792% Discover Bank 246,000.00 246,000.00 3.200% May 18, 2022 60 mos May 19, 2027 0.786% United Teletech Financial Credit Union 248,000.00 248,000.00 3.500% November 8, 2023 53 mos April 1, 2028 0.792% Morgan Stanley Bank 244,000.00 244,000.00 4.650% April 6, 2023 60 mos April 6, 2028 0.780% Maine Savings Federal Credit Union 249,000.00 249,000.00 4.800% July 21, 2023 60 mos July 21, 2028 0.796% Morgan Stanley Bank 248,000.00 248,000.00 5.250% July 28, 2023 60 mos July 28, 2028 0.792% Alliant Credit Union 248,000.00 248,000.00 5.500% November 15, 2023 36 mos November 16, 2026 0.792% Total Certificates of Deposit 5,943,000.00 5,943,000.00 18.990% Agency Bonds
Federal Farm Credit Bank 1,999,314.00 1,962,137.74 0.350% December 4, 2020 42 mos May 16, 2024 6.388% Federal Home Loan Bank 499,252.43 505,816.65 1.000% July 19, 2022 29 mos December 20, 2024 1.595% Federal Farm Credit Bank 998,431.00 952,305.30 0.430% March 17, 2021 48 mos March 3, 2025 3.190% Federal Natl Mortgage Assn 1,000,000.00 931,614.04 0.500% October 20, 2020 60 mos October 20, 2025 3.195% Federal Home Loan Bank 999,500.00 926,812.18 0.800% March 17, 2021 60 mos March 10, 2026 3.194% Federal Home Loan Bank 994,396.00 944,060.74 2.400% March 17, 2021 72 mos March 29, 2027 3.177% Federal Home Loan Bank 500,000.00 483,561.57 3.375% May 17, 2022 60 mos May 17, 2027 1.598% Total Agency Bonds 6,706,308.22 6,990,893.43 22.337%

Page 24 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
300 E. Branch St.

Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
Phone: (805) 473-5400

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Portfolio Summary
December 31, 2023
Investments Principal Value Current Market Value Interest Rate Date of Purchase Term Maturity Date % of Portfolio Municipal Bonds
California State GO Various Purp Bond 491,810.00 $ 479,815.00 $ 3.100% May 12, 2022 47 mos April 1, 2026 1.571% California State Taxable GO Unlimited 1,256,116.00 1,298,272.40 3.500% November 1, 2023 53 mos April 1, 2028 4.014% Total Municipal Bonds 1,778,087.40 1,747,926.00 5.585%
Treasury Obligations
U.S. Treasury Z-2026 Series 984,728.00 922,187.50 1.100% December 6, 2021 53 mos May 31, 2026 3.146% Total Treasury Obligations 922,187.50 984,728.00 3.146% TOTAL INVESTMENTS $ 30,979,331.57 31,296,295.88 $ 100.000%

Page 25 of 442 ends

1 Item 9.c.

ACTION MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
January 23, 2024, 6:00 p.m.

Hybrid City Council Chamber/Virtual Zoom Meeting
215 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande
Council Members Present: Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie, Council Member Barneich, Council Member Secrest
Council Members Absent: Mayor Ray Russom, Council Member George Staff Present: City Clerk Jessica Matson, City Attorney Isaac Rosen, City Manager Matthew Downing,
Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director
Bill Robeson, Administrative Services Director
Nicole Valentine, City Engineer Shannon
Sweeney, Deputy City Clerk Julie Hawkins
This meeting was conducted in a hybrid in-person/virtual format. _____________________________________________________________________

1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie called the Regular City Council Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Matson took roll call. Council Member George and Mayor Ray Russom were absent.

3. MOMENT OF REFLECTION

4. FLAG SALUTE
Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie led the flag salute.

5. AGENDA REVIEW

5.a Closed Session Announcements
None.

5.b Ordinances read in title only
None.

6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS

6.a Honorary Proclamation Recognizing February 2024 as Black History Month

Page 26 of 442 ends

2 Item 9.c.

Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie read the Honorary Proclamation Declaring the month of February 2024 as Black History Month. Cheryl Vines and Roxanne Perez, SLO NAACP, accepted the proclamation.

Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie invited public comment. No public comments were received.

No action was taken on this item.

6.b City Manager Communications
City Manager Downing provided information regarding Mason Street traffic light signal timing; the formula business Ordinance and the ADU Ordinance; commented on the recent retirement gathering for Chief Lieberman; current recruitment for a new Fire Chief; and the Annual Employee Recognition Event. City Manager Downing and Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director Robeson responded to questions from Council.

Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie invited public comment. No public comments were received.

No action was taken on this item.

7. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
The City Council provided brief reports from the following committee, commission, board, or other subcommittee meetings that they attended as the City’s appointed representative.

7.a MAYOR RAY RUSSOM:

1. California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA)

2. Central Coast Blue Regional Recycled Water Authority Board

3. Five Cities Fire Authority

4. San Luis Obispo County Mayor's Meeting

5. South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD)

6. Other

7.b MAYOR PRO TEM GUTHRIE:

1. Central Coast Community Energy Policy Board (CCCE)

2. County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC)

3. Council of Governments/Regional Transit Authority/ South County Transit (SLOCOG/SLORTA/SCT)

4. Integrated Waste Management Authority Board (IWMA)

5. REACH Economic Development Roundtable

6. Other

Page 27 of 442 ends

3 Item 9.c.

7.c COUNCIL MEMBER BARNEICH:

1. Audit Committee

2. Homeless Services Oversight Council (HSOC)

3. Zone 3 Water Advisory Board

4. Other

7.d COUNCIL MEMBER GEORGE:

1. Five Cities Fire Authority

2. Visit SLO CAL Advisory Board

3. Other

7.e COUNCIL MEMBER SECREST:

1. Air Pollution Control District (APCD)

2. South County Chambers of Commerce Governmental Affairs Committee

3. Other

8. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie invited public comment. Speaking from the public was Candice Renner. No further public comments were received.

Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director Robeson responded to comments from the public.

9. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie asked the Council if there were any questions or any items to be pulled from the consent agenda for further discussion.

Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie invited public comment. No public comments were received.

Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie congratulated staff on another perfect audit.

Moved by Council Member Barneich
Seconded by Council Member Secrest
Approve Consent Agenda Items 9.a. through 9.f., with the recommended courses of action.

AYES (3): Council Member Barneich, Council Member Secrest, and Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie ABSENT (2): Mayor Ray Russom, and Council Member George Passed (3 to 0)

Page 28 of 442 ends

4 Item 9.c.

9.a Consideration of Cash Disbursement Ratification
1) Ratified the listing of cash disbursements for the period of December 16 through December 31, 2023; and 2) Determined that ratifying the cash disbursements is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.)

9.b Acceptance of the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report, Single Audit, and Audit Report for the Transportation Development Act Transportation Fund Reports 1) Received and filed the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR), Single Audit, and Audit Report for the Transportation Development Act Transportation Fund for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023; and 2) Determined that receiving and filing the ACFR, Single Audit and Audit Report for the Transportation Development Act Transportation Fund is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.)

9.c Consider Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Annual Adjustment of Sewer Connection Fees
1) Adopted a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

ARROYO GRANDE ADJUSTING SEWER CONNECTION FEES BY THE CHANGE IN THE

ENGINEERING NEWS RECORD CONSTRUCTION COST INDEX AND FINDING THE ACTION EXEMPT FROM CEQA"; and 2) Determined that adopting this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.)

9.d Consider Adoption of a Resolution to Update City Manager Name for Authorized Personnel for Financial Institutions
1) Adopted a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

ARROYO GRANDE AUTHORIZING THE DEPOSIT OF CITY FUNDS IN VARIOUS FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS"; and 2) Determined that adopting a resolution authorizing the deposit of City funds in various financial institutions and updating the names of designated employees in certain positions who are authorized to make deposits of City funds and enter into banking or investment arrangements is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.)

9.e Approval of Minutes
Approved the minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of January 9, 2024, as submitted.

9.f Calendar Year 2023 Water Supply and Demand Update
Received and filed the Calendar Year 2023 Water Supply and Demand Update.

Page 29 of 442 ends

5 Item 9.c.

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.

11. OLD BUSINESS
None.

12. NEW BUSINESS

12.a Consideration of the 2024 Pavement Priority Project List and Finding the Project is Not Subject to Environmental Review Under the California Environmental Quality Act, State Guidelines Section 15301
City Engineer Sweeney presented the report and provided a presentation on the 2024 Pavement Management Program. City Engineer Sweeney responded to questions from Council.

Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie invited public comment. Speaking from the public was Alexandria. No further public comments were received. City Engineer Sweeney responded to questions from the public and provided more information regarding funding for the project.

Council discussion ensued regarding support for the Program.

Moved by Council Member Barneich
Seconded by Council Member Secrest
1) Reviewed and approved a priority list of streets for the 2024 Pavement Management Program; 2) Authorized the City Manager or designee to choose the remaining projects on the list to maximize the project size and cost efficiency of more funds become available, along with other minor work associated with pavement maintenance, such as striping, concrete work, and pedestrian improvements; and 3) Found this project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the Class 2 exemption, which applies to the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15301.) AYES (3): Council Member Barneich, Council Member Secrest, and Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie ABSENT (2): Mayor Ray Russom, and Council Member George Passed (3 to 0)

13. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Council Member Barneich commented on the completion of construction work in the village and the links provided in the staff reports.

Council Member Secrest concurred regarding the helpfulness of links within staff reports.

14. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Ray Russom adjourned the meeting at 7:08 p.m.

Page 30 of 442 ends

6 Item 9.c.
_________________________
Caren Ray Russom, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Jessica Matson, City Clerk

Page 31 of 442 ends

Item 9.d.

MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Jessica Matson, Legislative & Info Services Director/City Clerk BY: Julie Hawkins, Deputy City Clerk/Communications Coordinator SUBJECT: Consideration of Appointment to the Downtown Parking Advisory Board
DATE: February 13, 2024
SUMMARY OF ACTION:

Appointment of Kevin Delaney to the Downtown Parking Advisory Board to fill a vacancy.

IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:

There is no financial or staffing impact from the recommended action.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the recommendation of Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie to appoint Kevin Delaney to the Downtown Parking Advisory Board.

BACKGROUND:

City Council policy sets forth appointment procedures for the City’s Commissions, Boards and Committees. Section 5.2 of the City Council Handbook states that “the Mayor and each member of the Council shall appoint one representative to each respective Commission/Board/Committee…, subject to approval by a majority of the Council.” A vacancy on the Downtown Parking Advisory Board occurred in February 2023 when former Board members’ terms ended. Due to the qualifications to serve on this advisory body, it has been difficult to fill the vacancies.

ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:

The Downtown Parking Advisory Board is responsible for advising the City Council and making recommendations as to how the agency funds assessments from Village merchants for the maintenance of Village parking shall be used. There is a current, unscheduled vacancy on the Board with a term expiration date of January 31, 2027. Kevin Delaney has applied and is recommended for appointment by Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie.

Page 32 of 442 ends

Item 9.d.

City Council
Consideration of Appointment to the Downtown Parking Advisory Board February 13, 2024

Page 2 ends

ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:

1. Approve Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie’s recommended appointment of Kevin Delaney to the Downtown Parking Advisory Board;

2. Do not approve the recommended appointment; or

3. Provide other direction to staff.

ADVANTAGES:

Approving the recommended appointment will fill one of the two vacancies on the Board.

DISADVANTAGES:

No disadvantages have been identified.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

No environmental review is required for this item.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:

The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2.

Attachments:

1. Application – K. Delaney

Page 33 of 442 ends

Attachment 1

Page 34 of 442 ends

Page 35 of 442 ends

Item 9.e.

MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Bill Robeson, Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director BY: Shannon Sweeney, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Consideration of Approval of Amendment 1 to the Regional Surface Transportation (RSTP) Exchange/Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) Cooperative Agreement AG – FAST – 01 with the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
DATE: February 13, 2024
SUMMARY OF ACTION:

Adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) approving the execution of amendment 1 to funding agreement No. AG-FAST-01 (Attachment 2) for project development responsibilities between the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) and the City of Arroyo Grande (City).

IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:

The City of Arroyo Grande secured $846,000 through the initial cooperative agreement with SLOCOG, AG – Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) – 01. See Table 1 for the breakdown and status of those funds. All funds have been previously reimbursed or are currently in process except for $390,000 that was programmed for Phase 2 of the East Branch Streetscape Project. City staff has reconvened a working group to discuss options for proceeding with that project.

With the execution of this amendment to cooperative agreement AG – FAST – 01, $413,000 of Urban State Highway Account (USHA) will be available for street paving, and $749,000 will be available for construction of the Halcyon Road Complete Streets Project.

Specific actions related to this funding will be presented for consideration to the Council in the future with each project.

RECOMMENDATION:
1) Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute SLOCOG RSTP exchange/STBG Cooperative Agreement Amendment 1 to AG-FAST-01; 2) Direct the City Clerk to submit the RSTP Exchange/STBG Cooperative Agreement Amendment 1 to No. AG-FAST-01 and the Resolution to the San Luis Obispo Council of

Page 36 of 442 ends

Item 9.e.

City Council
Consideration of Approval of Amendment 1 to the Regional Surface Transportation (RSTP) Exchange/Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) Cooperative Agreement AG – FAST – 01 with the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
February 13, 2024

Page 2 ends

Governments; and
3) Find that approving this agreement is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378).

BACKGROUND:

The Cooperative Agreement is a general agreement between SLOCOG and the City regarding the responsibilities of each agency. The specific projects are referenced and attached to allow for future actions such as the transfer of funds between the various projects or the addition of replacement projects. A Resolution (Attachment 1) is included and authorizes the Mayor to execute Amendment 1 to the RSTP Exchange/STBG Cooperative Agreement. This amendment provides new programmed funding, as shown in Table 2. Before the City can begin invoicing for reimbursement of the work performed, this amendment to the Cooperative Agreement must be executed between SLOCOG and the City.

Cooperative Agreement AG – FAST – 01, was approved by City Council on November 13, 2018. Of the funding associated with AG – FAST – 01, all has been reimbursed or in the process of being reimbursed except for $390,000 associated with the East Branch Streetscape project.

ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:

Table 1 shows the status of funding programmed through AG – FAST – 01.

Table 1: AG – FAST – 01 Programmed Funding
SLOCOG # Project Name Programmed $ Paid $ Balance
SMAPAG01U USHA - Arroyo Grande FY 17/18-20/21 $271,000 $271,000 $- SMAPAG01R East Branch Streetscape (Phase II) $390,000 $- $390,000 SMAPAG02R SRTS Capital Program (Cycle 1 + Cycle 2) - Harloe Elementary Pedestrian Access Enhancements $150,000 $150,000 $- SMAPCG13R ATPP-Grant Support $10,000 $10,000 $-
SMAPAG03R Systemic Safety Analysis $25,000 $15,000 $10,000* STLAG01R Brisco-Halcyon Road Interchange Modifications
Project $- $- $-
* Reimbursement in process
As stated previously, funding associated with AG – FAST – 01 has been expended, with the exception of the East Branch Streetscape project. Staff have recently reconvened a working group to discuss options for proceeding with this project.

Page 37 of 442 ends

Item 9.e.

Page 3 ends

Amendment 1 to AG – FAST – 01 includes $413,400 for streets paving, and $749,000 for design and right-of-way acquisition for the Halcyon Road Complete Streets project.

Table 2 shows a summary of funding programmed through Amendment 1 of AG – FAST – 01.

Table 2: Amendment 1 Programmed Funding
SLOCOG# Project Name RSHA USHA Balance
SMAPAG01U Urban Area Apportionment FY 21/22-
26/27; Local Choice Funds $ 413,400 $ 413,400
SMAPAG04R Halcyon Road Safe Routes to School
Improvements $ 749,000 $ -
$ 749,000
Total $ 1,162,400
One of the benefits of approving this agreement is that SLOCOG intends to exchange its apportionment of Federal Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) funds for Regional Surface Transportation Exchange (RSTP Exchange) funds for the projects within the City, therefore eliminating the non- federal match and compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:

1. Approve staff’s recommendations, which will enable the City to receive the funding shown in Table 2;

2. Modify as appropriate and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement;

3. Do not approve staff’s recommendations, which means the City will not receive the funding listed in Table 2); or

4. Provide direction to staff.

ADVANTAGES:

Approving the Cooperative Agreement will allow the City to receive funding for transportation projects that are consistent with the City Council Goal to support City infrastructure, without the need to complete extensive federal environmental review.

DISADVANTAGES:

None identified.

Page 38 of 442 ends

Item 9.e.

Page 4 ends

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

Approving this agreement is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378).

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:

The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2.

Attachments:

1. Proposed Resolution

2. Cooperative Agreement amendment 1 to No. AG-FAST-01

Page 39 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

ARROYO GRANDE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
AMENDMENT 1 TO SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL OF

GOVERNMENTS REGIONAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION

EXCHANGE / SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BLOCK GRANT
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. AG-FAST-01
WHEREAS, the City and the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) are authorized, pursuant to requirements of Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act § 1109(a), to enter into a Cooperative Agreement for any transportation purpose within the City; and,
WHEREAS, the SLOCOG Board approved allocation of urban and regional Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBGP) funds for projects within the City of Arroyo Grande; and,
WHEREAS, SLOCOG intends to exchange its apportionment of Federal Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) funds for Regional Surface Transportation Exchange (RSTP Exchange) funds for the projects within the City, therefore eliminating the nonfederal match and compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande does hereby:

1. Approve Exhibit 1 attached, entitled “San Luis Obispo Council of Governments RSTP Exchange/STBG Cooperative Agreement Amendment 1 to Agreement AGFAST-01”; and

2. Appoint the Mayor as the official representative authorized to sign San Luis Obispo Council of Governments RSTP Exchange/STBG Cooperative Agreement Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. AG-FAST-01.

3. CEQA ACTION. Approving this agreement is not a project subject to CEQA because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378).

On motion of Council Member seconded by Council Member and by the following roll call vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

The foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 13 th day of February 2024.

Page 40 of 442 ends

RESOLUTION NO.

PAGE 2

CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR
ATTEST:

JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:

MATTHEW DOWNING, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

ISAAC ROSEN, CITY ATTORNEY

Page 41 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
SLOCOG RSTP Exchange/STBG General Cooperative Agreement page 1 San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
Agreement No. AG-FAST-02

RSTP EXHANGE/STBG COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, ENTERED INTO ON THE DATE BELOW STATED is between the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, referred to herein as "SLOCOG", and the

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
a municipal corporation and
political subdivision of the
State of California, referred
to herein as the "CITY".

RECITALS
WHEREAS, SLOCOG and the CITY are authorized, pursuant to requirements of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST Act), FAST Act § 1109(a), to enter into a Cooperative Agreement for any transportation purpose within the CITY; and
WHEREAS, The FAST Act’s Surface Transportation Block Grant Program acknowledging that this program has the most flexible eligibilities among all Federal-aid highway programs and aligning the program’s name with how FHWA has historically administered it; and WHEREAS, the SLOCOG Board approved allocation of regional Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBGP) funds for the projects identified on the attached Table 1 (summary table and project summary sheets) and STBGP Program continues all prior STP eligibilities (see in particular 23 U.S.C. 133(b)(15), as amended, each of the individual project is herein referred to as “PROJECT”; and WHEREAS, SLOCOG intends to exchange its apportionment of Federal Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBGP) funds for Regional Surface Transportation Exchange (RSTP Exchange) funds for the PROJECTs, therefore eliminating the non-federal match and compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); and
WHEREAS, all applicable laws, regulations, and policies relating to the use of Regional Surface Transportation Program Exchange (RSTP Exchange) funds for the PROJECTs, shall apply notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, all obligations of the CITY under the terms of this Agreement are subject to funding appropriation by the Legislature, and the receipt and allocation of funding by SLOCOG; and NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above noted findings and considerations, the parties agree as follows:
1) The CITY agrees to administer each PROJECT and conduct the applicable environmental process required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for each PROJECT. 2) The CITY agrees to advertise, open and review bids, and to award the contract for each applicable PROJECT (or combination of projects) as needed, in accordance with State laws. 3) The CITY agrees that all phases of each PROJECT will be developed in accordance with policies, procedures, practices, standards, regulations, and laws that apply to the CITY, Caltrans (where appropriate), and SLOCOG General Programming Requirements, the 2016 Annual Exchange Agreement and subsequent STBGP annual exchange agreements between SLOCOG and the State of California (Department of Transportation). If in the judgment of SLOCOG a project may impact a street, road or highway owned or controlled by a jurisdiction other than CITY (including without limitation the County, another city, or the State of California), SLOCOG may require the CITY to establish a project development team (PDT) composed of representatives of such jurisdictions, as well as SLOCOG.

Page 42 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
SLOCOG RSTP Exchange/STBG General Cooperative Agreement page 2 4) The CITY agrees to construct each PROJECT in accordance with the plans and specifications of the CITY (and Caltrans when PROJECT involves state highway facilities), and in accordance with the conditions of funding adopted by SLOCOG.
5) The CITY agrees to maintain the facilities constructed, improved, or otherwise modified. 6) The CITY agrees to utilize, for each PROJECT, an amount of Regional or Urban RSTP Exchange funds equal to or less than that adopted by SLOCOG, and that SLOCOG’s total obligation shall not exceed the amounts shown in Table 1 unless a greater amount has been authorized in advance in writing by SLOCOG.
7) The CITY agrees to account for all costs for the PROJECTS to be paid by SLOCOG pursuant to this Agreement and agrees to perform all the reimbursable work for each project according to the billing period identified in the project summary sheets.
8) After the opening of bids on applicable PROJECTS, the CITY shall notify SLOCOG of any cost overruns or underruns to the original cost estimate. The following will be assumed and reflected in SLOCOG's RSTP Exchange accounting spreadsheets:
a) If less funding than what was programmed is required for a PROJECT, the cost savings will be made available for reprogramming into another CITY project as approved by SLOCOG. b) If more funding than what was programmed is required for a PROJECT, the CITY will be solely responsible for providing the additional funding, which can be comprised of various non-regional funding sources, including cost savings from other CITY RSTP Exchange projects. 9) The CITY may submit an invoice for reimbursement of funds expended for each PROJECT no more than once a month, using the attached Reimbursement Request Form (Exhibit A). All Payments will be prorated between CITY and SLOCOG based on the agreed percentages of funding, as adopted by SLOCOG and listed on each project summary sheet. All invoices must contain the following:
a. RSTP Exchange PROJECT number and name
b. A brief description of work accomplished during the billing period. c. A copy of the consultant’s bill to the CITY (if applicable). d. Amount expended by the CITY during the billing period, with evidence of funds expended (e.g. a copy of a CITY check to consultant or accounting documentation, etc.) e. Amount requested for reimbursement for the billing period 10) SLOCOG agrees to reimburse the CITY within 30 days of receipt of a completed reimbursement request form (Exhibit A) with all applicable attachments and signatures or as funds become available on a “1st come, 1st served” basis, an amount expended by the CITY during the invoices' billing period less the aforesaid proration. If a PROJECT receives both Regional and Urban Regional Surface Transportation Exchange funding (referred to in Exhibits hereto as “Regional” and “Urban” respectively), reimbursements shall be made on a pro rata basis from each source for SLOCOG’s share. SLOCOG's total obligation for each PROJECT cost shall not exceed the amount shown in Table 1,” unless SLOCOG has in writing authorized a greater amount per adopted SLOCOG policy. 11) Within two months of either the execution of this agreement or each PROJECT’s completion and all work incidental thereto, whichever comes later, the CITY must provide SLOCOG certification in the form provided in Exhibit B hereto, of completion in accordance with the provisions in this Agreement, and a final invoice containing those items listed above. In the event that final project costs are less than those listed on Table 1, hereto, the funds shall be reallocated in accordance with SLOCOG RSTP Exchange policy Exhibit C.
12) If this project has been paid for either entirely, or in part with Regional RSTP Exchange funds, and CITY, or any of its officials, chooses to publicly memorialize participation in said project, then CITY shall also memorialize SLOCOG’s financial participation in said project in a manner agreeable to SLOCOG.

This paragraph shall apply to, but is not limited to, signage during construction, representation at dedications and placement of plaques or other objects of memorialization, whether at or near the project site or not.

Page 43 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
SLOCOG RSTP Exchange/STBG General Cooperative Agreement page 3 13) The CITY grants to the State of California and/or SLOCOG access to the CITY's books and records for the purpose of verifying that RSTP Exchange funds paid are properly accounted for and the proceeds are expended in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. All documents shall be available for inspection by authorized Caltrans and/or SLOCOG agents at any time during the PROJECT development and for a four-year period from the date of completion, or for one year after the audit is completed or waived by Caltrans and/or SLOCOG, whichever is later. 14) Upon completion of all work under this Agreement, ownership and title to all materials will automatically be vested in the CITY and no further agreement will be necessary to transfer ownership to the CITY. 15) If existing public and/or private utilities conflict with the PROJECT construction or violate the CITY’s encroachment policy (as applicable), the CITY shall make all necessary arrangements with the owners of such utilities for their protection, relocation or removal. The CITY shall review the plans for protection, relocation or removal. If there are costs of such protection, relocation, or removal which the CITY must legally pay, the CITY shall pay the cost of said protection, relocation or removal, plus cost of engineering, overhead and inspection. If any protection, relocation or removal of utilities is required, such work shall be performed in accordance with CITY policies and procedures. 16) The CITY shall defend, indemnify and save harmless SLOCOG, its officers and employees from all and any claims, demands, damages, costs, expenses, judgments, attorneys’ fees or any liability arising out of this Cooperative Agreement to the performance or attempted performance of the provisions hereof, or any project referred to in the Exhibits hereto. Nothing contained in the foregoing indemnity provision shall be construed to require CITY to indemnify SLOCOG against any responsibility of liability in contravention of Civil Code section 2782.
17) If the CITY transfers its risk connected with design or construction of this project to independent contractors, CITY agrees to use its best efforts to obtain the independent contractor’s inclusion of SLOCOG as an indemnitee and in any insurance procured by such independent contractor(s) for the project, to name SLOCOG as an additional insured.
18) Both the CITY and SLOCOG shall designate a Project Coordinator who shall represent the respective agencies and through whom all communications between the parties to this agreement shall occur. 19) Both parties agree that if, in the course of carrying out the PROJECT, there is a disagreement among the Project Coordinators over the direction of the project, the matter will be forwarded through a three step conflict resolution process. First, resolution will be attempted between the CITY Manager and SLOCOG Executive Director. If a dispute continues, a determination shall be made by the SLOCOG Executive Committee, and, if required, final determination by the full SLOCOG Board. 20) Nothing in the provisions of this Agreement is intended to create duties, obligations, or rights for third parties not signatories to this Agreement or affect the legal liability of either party of the Agreement by imposing any standard of care with respect to the maintenance of local roads different from the standard of care imposed by law.
21) No alteration or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties thereto, and no oral understanding or agreement not incorporated herein or in the attached Table 1 shall be binding on any of the parties thereto. 22) This Agreement may be terminated or provisions contained therein may be altered, changed, or amended by mutual consent, in writing, of the parties hereto. 23) Prior to award of a contract for any PROJECT, SLOCOG may terminate the applicable PROJECT in the Cooperative Agreement by written notice, provided SLOCOG pays the CITY for all PROJECTrelated costs reasonably incurred by the CITY prior to termination. Also, prior to award of a contract for any PROJECT, the CITY may terminate the applicable PROJECT in the Cooperative Agreement by written notice, provided the CITY pays SLOCOG for all costs reasonably incurred by SLOCOG prior to termination.

SIGNATURES:

Page 44 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
SLOCOG RSTP Exchange/STBG General Cooperative Agreement page 4

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE SAN LUIS OBISPO

COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
By: ________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Caren Ray Russom, Mayor Peter Rodgers, Executive Director Date: _______________ Date: _______________
ATTEST:

By: ____________________________________
Jessica Matson, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL EFFECT:

By: ____________________________________ By:___________________________________ Isaac Rosen, City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere, SLOCOG Counsel Date: _______________ Date: _______________

Page 45 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
SLOCOG RSTP Exchange/STBG General Cooperative Agreement page 5 TABLE 1

CITY PROJECTS
for
Agreement No. AG-FAST-02
SLOCOG# Project Name RSHA USHA Balance
SMAPAG01U
Urban Area
Apportionment FY
21/22-26/27; Local
Choice Funds
$
-
$ 413,400 $ 413,400
SMAPAG04R
Halcyon Road Safe
Routes to School
Improvements
$
749,000 $ - $ 749,000

Page 46 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
SLOCOG RSTP Exchange/STBG General Cooperative Agreement page 6

EXHIBIT A
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
Regional Surface Transportation Program Exchange (RSTP Exchange)

REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST FORM
Agency Name: Date:

Contact Person:

Project Number(s): Regional: Urban:

Project Title:

This Invoice Covers Work Completed from: / / to: / /
Project Budget Information: (complete box below - refer to cooperative agreement “Table 1” for budget information)
Total SPENT This invoice $ - When using electronic format: fill in unshaded areas only Regional Urban
Other Sources
Non Regional
TOTAL
(must equal 100%)
Reimbursement Rate by Fund
Source (must be consistent with Exhibit
A Project Sheet)
0%
Pro-rata Reimbursement by
Funding Source
(Regional/Urban)
$ - $ - $ - $ -
Please send a check for $
Total RSTP Exchange share due this invoice (total of heavier shaded boxes above)
Attachments: 1) A brief description of work completed; and 2) Consultant invoices
3) Proof of payment (e.g. copy of CITY check to consultant).

Signed:
(Agency Rep.)
Shaded boxes below for SLOCOG Use
Regional Planner Approval Accounting Initials

Page 47 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
SLOCOG RSTP Exchange/STBG General Cooperative Agreement page 7

EXHIBIT B

PROJECT COMPLETION FORM
for
RSTP Exchange Projects
This form notifies SLOCOG of project completion in accordance with the provisions in the Cooperative Agreement noted below. Our records indicate that the project listed below, funded all or in part with RSTP Exchange funds, has been completed:

Project Name:

Project Number(s):

Cooperative Agreement Date (Recipient Agency):

Approved RSTP amount:

I certify, on behalf of the CITY/County
name of authorized official
of , that the project named above was completed
name of jurisdiction
on_____________________ in accordance with the provisions set forth in the cooperative approximate date of completion
agreement dated ___________________________. It is my understanding that all savings date jurisdiction representative signed
from a cost underrun will be returned to for
CITY/county or SLOCOG
reprogramming in accordance with the cooperative agreement.

Signed: Date:
signature of authorized official date signed
Return completed and signed Project Completion Forms within 2 months of the completion of each project to:

SLOCOG
1114 Marsh Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Attn: Stephen Hanamaikai

Page 48 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
SLOCOG RSTP Exchange/STBG General Cooperative Agreement page 8

EXHIBIT C
Project Eligibility by Fund Program - Project eligibility requirements by funding program are summarized below.

I. Regional Surface Transportation Program. The Surface Transportation Program (STP) provides flexible funding that may be used by States and localities for projects to preserve and improve the conditions and performance on any Federal-aid highway, bridge and tunnel projects on any public road, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and transit capital projects, including intercity bus terminals. SLOCOG’s 2014 RTP will provide guidance on priority routes for regional funding consideration.

The STP program supports national performance goals as defined in FAST-Act, but there are no measures tied specifically to this program. Eligible costs for funds under these programs include pre-project initiation documents (Pre-PID), project study reports (PSR), preliminary engineering (PE), right-of-way acquisition (RW), capital costs, and construction costs associated with an eligible activity.

Eligible Project Activities:
 Construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, resurfacing, restoration, preservation, or operational improvements for highways, streets, and roads; bikeways and other surface transportation improvements.
 Replacement, rehabilitation, and preservation of bridges on any public road, including construction or reconstruction necessary to accommodate other modes.  Construction of new bridges on a Federal-aid highway.  Capital costs for transit projects eligible for assistance under chapter 53 of title 49, including vehicles and facilities used to provide intercity passenger bus service.  Carpool projects, fringe and corridor parking facilities and programs, including electric and natural gas vehicle charging infrastructure, bicycle transportation and pedestrian walkways, and ADA sidewalk modification.
 Highway and transit safety infrastructure improvements and programs, installation of safety barriers and nets on bridges, hazard eliminations, mitigation of hazards caused by wildlife, railway-highway grade crossings.
 Highway and transit plans research and development.
 Capital and operating costs for traffic monitoring, management and control facilities and programs, including advanced truck stop electrification.  Surface transportation planning.
 Transportation Alternatives; newly defined, includes most transportation enhancement eligibilities with the exception of landscaping.
 Transportation control measures (e.g. as defined by region’s APCD Clean Air Plan)  Development and establishment of transportation management systems.  Environmental mitigation efforts
 Modifications to intersections with high accident rates or levels of congestion.  Infrastructure-based ITS capital improvements consistent with the Central Coast ITS Implementation Plan.
 Environmental restoration and pollution abatement.

Page 49 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
SLOCOG RSTP Exchange/STBG General Cooperative Agreement page 9  Control of noxious weeds and establishment of native species.  Congestion pricing projects and strategies, including electric toll collection and travel demand management strategies and programs.
 Recreational trails projects.
 Construction of marine terminals.
 Truck parking facilities.
 Surface transportation infrastructure modifications within port terminal boundaries, only if necessary to facilitate direct intermodal interchange, transfer, and access into and out of the port.
 Construction and operational improvements for a minor collector in the same corridor and in proximity to an NHS route if the improvement is more cost-effective (as determined by a benefit-cost analysis) than an NHS improvement and will enhance NHS level of service and regional traffic flow.

Available Funding
 Direct urban and rural apportionment up to minimum required equal to 110%, plus 15%, of the FY 1990/91 allocation of Federal Aid Secondary (FAS) based upon 2010 census data (initiated in 2015). Final apportionment tables will be developed for the August 2017 Board meeting.
 Regional discretionary funds of $5.0M through FY 2021.

Page 50 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
SLOCOG RSTP Exchange/STBG General Cooperative Agreement page 10

EXHIBIT D
General Programming Policies - All Fund Programs
SLOCOG’s 2014 Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy identifies an overall goal to develop a multi-modal transportation system which is balanced, coordinated, safe, cost effective, environmentally sound, economically supportive, meeting all the financially reasonable transportation needs of all citizens in San Luis Obispo County. General programming policies affecting the decision making and project selection of the surface transportation system are summarized as follows:

1. SLOCOG will strive to be fair and equitable in the allocation of funding between the various subregions in the county and among member jurisdictions.

2. SLOCOG will adhere to the federal and state statutes, policies, regulations and guidelines applicable to each fund being allocated, and require recipients of grants to do the same.

3. SLOCOG will recommend projects for funding that are:
 Deliverable
 Consistent with the goals, policies, and programs of the 2014 Regional Transportation Plan
 Regionally Significant
 Responsive to immediate funding and project needs
 Consistent with specific criteria of a particular funding program  High likelihood of leveraging other funding (state, federal and/or local)

4. SLOCOG will seek to implement all programs in a timely and efficient manner.

5. SLOCOG will seek to maximize the use of the funds for general public benefit, and will marshal other funds when possible to complete funded projects by prioritizing joint-funded projects.

6. SLOCOG will integrate social equity factors in to the decision making process by applying the findings generated from the Disadvantaged Communities Assessment that is now amended in to the 2014 RTP/SCS.

7. SLOCOG will, to the extent feasible, assure the integration of all projects with jurisdiction, region and statewide transportation plans, providing a comprehensive, systematic approach to resolving transportation problems in the region.

8. SLOCOG will retain maximum flexibility of federal programs under FAST ACT, where feasible, and will also seek to exchange Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBGP) (federal) funds for Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) Exchange (state) funds, for reasons of cost efficiency and simplicity in administration. Through the RSTP Exchange funds ultimately become (local) funds.

9. SLOCOG will retain a continuing commitment to emphasize quality and promote excellence in the development of competitive proposals, seeking to fund the best possible projects in terms of cost effectiveness, public benefit and regional and local significance.

10. SLOCOG will reserve discretionary funds for advance development work to ensure regionally significant projects are well scoped, alternatives assessed, accurate estimates prepared, and a finance plan for implementation is developed.

Page 51 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
SLOCOG RSTP Exchange/STBG General Cooperative Agreement page 11

11. SLOCOG will reserve off-the-top funding for programs identified in the 2014 RTP/SCS, including Transportation Demand Management (i.e. Rideshare), Active Transportation Partnership Program, Highway Safety Improvement Program and Safe Routes to School.

12. SLOCOG will maintain funding commitments for existing programmed projects as long as those projects have achieved the project delivery milestones set out at the time of programming. Unavoidable delays to the project delivery milestones will be considered on a case by case basis.

13. SLOCOG will commit a portion of discretionary funding to match and leverage other competitive state-wide grant programs (e.g. new SB1 programs, State of CA Active Transportation Program, Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) for projects of regional significance.)

14. SLOCOG may consider using the above referenced fund sources to address surface transportation needs as identified in the June 7th 2017 SLCOOG Board Staff Report item B-3 2018 RTIP Fund Assumptions Programming Approach - Table 2 Sections 1, 2, and 3, and defer the programming of funds on needs identified in Section 4 (Other Multi-Modal Needs, including bicycle, pedestrian, and public transit related needs).

Page 52 of 442 ends

Item 9.f.

MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Brian Pedrotti, Community Development Director
BY: Andrew Perez, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Consideration of Final Approval of Community Development Block Grant Projects for Year 2024 and Finding the Action Exempt Under the California Environmental Quality Act, State Guidelines Section 15061 DATE: February 13, 2024
SUMMARY OF ACTION:

Consider the final funding recommendations to the County Board of Supervisors for the City’s allocation of 2024 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, which will assist the County of San Luis Obispo (the “County") with its 2024 Action Plan process.

The recommended project funding allocations (see Table 1 below for more detail) are:
 Five Cities Homeless Coalition: $12,283
 Curb Ramp and Sidewalk Improvement Project: $58,960
 County Administration: $10,646
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:

The County has estimated that $81,889 in CDBG funds will be available to the City in the Fall of 2024. This represents a decrease of $5,416 below last year’s allocation. The County will help administer the CDBG program for the City, which will reduce City staff time involved. County staff will be paid for these administrative services through the CDBG program funds allocated to the City. Pursuant to the Cooperation Agreement between the County and the City approved by the City Council on June 13, 2023, for the term beginning on July 1, 2024, and ending on June 30, 2027, 65% of the total available administration funds, or $10,646, will be deducted by the County to meet its obligations under the terms of the agreement for administrative costs.

RECOMMENDATION:
1) Approve the proposed projects to be funded with the City’s allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for the Year 2024, as shown in Table 1 below; and

Page 53 of 442 ends

Item 9.f.

City Council
Consideration of Final Approval of Community Development Block Grant Projects for Year 2024 and Finding the Action Exempt Under the California Environmental Quality Act, State Guidelines Section 15061
February 13, 2024

Page 2 ends

2) Find that the preliminary approval of projects is exempt from CEQA, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 subd. (b)(3).

Table 1: Recommended 2024 CDBG Allocations
Project and Category
2023
Allocation
2024
Requested
Proposed
2024
Allocation
Public Services (15% Cap - $12,283)
5 Cities Homeless Coalition $13,095 $12,283 $12,283
Subtotal $13,095 $12,283 $12,283
Public Facilities (No Cap)
Curb Ramp and Sidewalk Improvement Project $56,749 $0 $58,960 HASLO – Arroyo Terrace Apartments $0 $58,960 $0
Subtotal $56,749 $58,960 $58,960
Economic Development (No Cap)
Subtotal $0 $0 $0
Area Benefit (30% Cap - $24,567)
Subtotal $0 $0 $0
Housing Rehabilitation (No Cap)
$0 $0 $0
Administration (20% Cap - $16,378)
City Administration $6,111 $0 $0
County Administration $11,350 $10,646 $10,646
Subtotal $17,461 $10,646 $10,646
Total $81,889
BACKGROUND:

City Council approved a Cooperation Agreement with the County on June 13, 2023 for the joint participation in the CDBG Program for Fiscal Years 2024-25 through 2026-27 (Attachment 2). The City, as a participant in the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) designated Urban County program, receives an annual formula-based allocation of CDBG funds. These funds are available for a variety of Community Development activities as long as the activities meet at least one of three national objectives. The objectives are:

1. Benefit low- and moderate-income persons;

Page 54 of 442 ends

Item 9.f.

Page 3 ends

2. Aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight; or

3. Address urgent community development needs that pose a serious or immediate threat to public health or welfare.

The County released a Notice of Funding Availability on October 6, 2023, and notified the public that the County and participating cities would accept applications for funding until November 5, 2023. At the December 12, 2023, City Council meeting, staff presented its preliminary funding recommendations for consideration. The City Council was largely supportive of staff’s recommendations but directed staff to reallocate funding from City Administration category to the Public Facilities category to increase funding for the Curb Ramp and Sidewalk Improvement project. That change is reflected in Table 1 and the proposed Resolution (Attachment 1).

ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:

The Cooperation Agreement between the County and the City provides the City with discretion regarding the allocation of funds. Unless the City’s recommendation to the County for funding is in conflict with CDBG regulations, the County will approve the recommendation. The County Board of Supervisors will make its final decision for funding priority in April 2024.

Public Services
The 5 Cities Homeless Coalition submitted the lone application requesting funding from the Public Service category. 5CHC’s application requests the entire fifteen percent (15%), or $12,283, to bolster its San Luis Obispo County Rapid Re-Housing/Homeless Prevention Program. This program provides financial assistance to low-income households and individuals facing homelessness to quickly identify and resolve barriers to gaining or maintaining housing. Financial assistance includes rental assistance, deposit assistance, and case management. The goal of the program is to assist participants to secure long-term, stable housing that they can afford to retain. The project aligns with the San Luis Obispo Countywide Plan to Address Homelessness. Staff recommends allocating $12,283 as requested to this program. This recommendation aligns with prior City Council direction regarding the support of programs and organizations that provide support for individuals and households facing homelessness and the recommendation from the December 12, 2023, City Council meeting.

Public Facilities
When the City Council considered the preliminary recommendations, the City had not received any applications seeking funding from the Public Facilities category. However, prior to the November 5, 2023, deadline, the Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo (HASLO) had submitted an application requesting all of the City’s Public Facilities funding to support its Arroyo Terrace project, but the application was withheld from the City for consideration by the County due to eligibility concerns. Those concerns have since been

Page 55 of 442 ends

Item 9.f.

Page 4 ends

resolved by clarifying the financial responsibilities of HASLO and the San Luis Obispo Nonprofit Housing Corporation. A letter was submitted by HASLO confirming that the application’s issues were resolved and confirmed by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The application and the letter confirming its eligibility are included as Attachments 4 and 5, respectively. The Arroyo Terrace project, consisting of 62 affordable housing units and one manager’s unit located at 700 Oak Park Blvd, was approved by the Planning Commission on May 18, 2021. HASLO’s application states that sixteen (16) of the apartments will now provide housing for households experiencing homelessness and the remaining forty-two (42) will be affordable to tenants with extremely low, very low, and low-income levels.

Staff reviewed the application and does not recommend supporting this funding request because the City has already taken steps to provide substantial financial assistance for this project. On July 25, 2023, the City Council approved Resolution 5310 which authorized the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney and Community Development Direction, to execute a regulatory agreement by which $448,370.37 would be allocated to the project from the City’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund for purposes of covering all building permit costs for this project (Attachment 6).

Staff recommends allocating the remaining available funding from CDBG allocation to the Public Facilities category for the Curb Ramp and Sidewalk Improvement project. The total funding recommendation is $58,960, which is the remaining funding available after fulfilling the request from 5CHC and the County Administration required by the Cooperative Agreement. The project will improve curb ramps to ADA standards adjacent to streets being paved. The replacement of existing curb ramps will be done in conjunction with scheduled pavement improvements, which are anticipated to occur in 2024. The use of CDBG funding furthers the objectives of the federal program, eliminating blight and addressing urgent community needs, while also allowing for the most efficient use of City’s Pavement Management Program budget. Use of the funds for the Curb Ramp and Sidewalk Improvement project is consistent with the direction from the City Council at the December 12, 2023, City Council meeting.

Administration/Planning and Capacity Building
Planning and capacity building funds are limited to a 20% cap of the total CDBG funding available. Pursuant to the Cooperation Agreement between the County and the City, 65% of the available funds for planning and capacity building/administration, or $10,646, will be deducted by the County to meet its obligations under the terms of the agreement for administrative costs. The remaining 35% of the total available funds from this category is available to cover costs incurred by the City for administration of CDBG project. However, as directed by the City Council during the preliminary recommendation hearing, the $5,732 is now recommended to be allocated to the Curb Ramp and Sidewalk and Improvement project.

Page 56 of 442 ends

Item 9.f.

Page 5 ends

No requests were received for housing rehabilitation projects, economic development projects, nor area benefit projects.

ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:

1. Adopt a Resolution approving final funding recommendations for the CDBG projects for the Year 2024, as proposed in Table 1 on page 2 of this staff report;

2. Modify, and adopt the Resolution approving final funding recommendations for the CDBG programs for the Year 2024; or

3. Provide other direction to staff.

ADVANTAGES:

The recommended 2024 CDBG allocations fund important City priorities and are consistent with the Cooperation Agreement between the County and City. The City’s Community Service Grant Program provides an additional funding opportunity, separate from CDBG, for local public service programs that address unmet needs in the community.

DISADVANTAGES:

The recommendation does not support funding a request from HASLO for its affordable housing project. However, the City has already pledged financial support for the project via the City’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

The Resolution approving final funding recommendations for the CDBG projects for the Year 2024 is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060, 15378 as it does not constitute a “project” under CEQA.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:

The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2.

Attachments:

1. Proposed Resolution

2. Cooperation Agreement

3. 5CHC Application

4. HASLO Application

5. HASLO Letter

6. City Council Resolution 5310

Page 57 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING TO THE COUNTY

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVAL OF COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROJECTS FOR
YEAR 2024
WHEREAS, via a Cooperative Agreement with the County of San Luis Obispo (hereinafter referred to as “County”) executed by the City of Arroyo Grande (“City”) on June 16, 2023, the City agreed to become a participant for a period of three years (2024- 2026) with the County and other cities therein as an “Urban County” under the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (hereinafter referred to as “HUD”) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program; and
WHEREAS, the City receives CDBG funds through the County; and WHEREAS, the County administers the CDBG program, including preparation, adoption, and annual updates to a Consolidated Plan that are approved by HUD following adoption by the County; and
WHEREAS, under the Cooperative Agreement, the City retains the authority to determine which projects are to be funded with its allotment of CDBG funds; and WHEREAS, the City expects to receive $81,889 in CDBG funds in 2024; and WHEREAS, on October 6, 2023, the County released a “Notice of Funding Availability” for projects to be funded by the 2024 CDBG programs, which provided that proposals were to be submitted by November 5, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviews applications and recommends to the County Board of Supervisors applications to be included as CDBG projects for funding; and WHEREAS, at its meeting on December 12, 2023, the City Council considered preliminarily funding recommendations for CDBG projects for the Program Year 2024; and
WHEREAS, on February 13, 2024, the City Council considered the City’s 2024 CDBG projects for final approval.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby recommends that the Board of Supervisors for the County of San Luis Obispo adopt the 2024 Action Plan, including the programs listed in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, to be funded with the City’s allocation of 2024 CDBG funds.

Page 58 of 442 ends

RESOLUTION NO.

PAGE 2
On motion of Council Member ______________, seconded by Council Member ___________, and on the following roll call vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 13 th day of February, 2024.

Page 59 of 442 ends

RESOLUTION NO.

PAGE 3

CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR
ATTEST:

JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
_____________________________________

MATTHEW DOWNING, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

ISAAC ROSEN, CITY ATTORNEY

Page 60 of 442 ends

RESOLUTION NO.

PAGE 4
EXHIBIT “A”
ALLOCATION OF PROGRAM YEAR 2024 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK

GRANT (CDBG) FUNDS
Project and Category
2023
Allocation
2024
Requested
Proposed
2024
Allocation
Public Services (15% Cap - $12,283)
5 Cities Homeless Coalition $13,095 $12,283 $12,283
Subtotal $13,095 $12,283 $12,283
Public Facilities (No Cap)
Curb Ramp and Sidewalk Improvement Project $56,749 $0 $58,960 HASLO – Arroyo Terrace Apartments $0 $58,960 $0
Subtotal $56,749 $58,960 $58,960
Economic Development (No Cap)
Subtotal $0 $0 $0
Area Benefit (30% Cap - $24,567)
Subtotal $0 $0 $0
Housing Rehabilitation (No Cap)
$0 $0 $0
Administration (20% Cap - $16,378)
City Administration $6,111 $0 $0
County Administration $11,350 $10,646 $10,646
Subtotal $17,461 $10,646 $10,646
Total $81,889

Page 61 of 442 ends

,,._g

A COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS

OBISPO AND THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE FOR JOINT PARTICIPATION

IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM, THE

HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM, AND THE EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2024 THROUGH 2026 THIS COOPERATION AGREEMENT is made and entered into on the date and year last written below, by and between the County of San Luis Obispo, a political subdivision of the State of California, hereinafter called "County," and the City of Arroyo Grande, a municipal corporation of the State of California, located in the County of San Luis Obispo, hereinafter called "City;" jointly referred to as "Parties".

WITNESS ETH
WHEREAS, in 1974, the U.S. Congress enacted, and the President signed a law entitled, The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, herein called the "Act." The Act is omnibus legislation relating to federal involvement in a wide range of housing and community development activities and contains eight separate titles; and
WHEREAS, Title I of the Act is entitled "Community Development" and governs programs for housing and community development within metropolitan cities and urban counties or communities by providing financial assistance annually for area-wide plans and for housing, public services, and public works programs; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Block Grant Program
(hereinafter referred to as "CDBG"), the HOME Investment Partnerships Act Program (hereinafter referred to as "HOME"), and the Emergency Solutions Grant Program (hereinafter referred to as "ESG") are consolidated under Title I of the Act; and
WHEREAS, the County has requested of the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, hereinafter referred to as "HUD," designate the County as an "urban county;" and
WHEREAS, the County needs to requalify as an urban county and will be eligible to receive CDBG funds provided that the County's entitled cities 1 of 15
ATTACHMENT 2

Page 62 of 442 ends

Page 63 of 442 ends

Page 64 of 442 ends

Page 65 of 442 ends

Page 66 of 442 ends

Page 67 of 442 ends

Page 68 of 442 ends

Page 69 of 442 ends

Page 70 of 442 ends

Page 71 of 442 ends

Page 72 of 442 ends

Page 73 of 442 ends

Page 74 of 442 ends

Page 75 of 442 ends

Page 76 of 442 ends

COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

HOMELESS SERVICES DIVISION
2024 NOFA – Public Services Application
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 1 OF 12 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected] Please submit Application by email to [email protected]. All submissions must be made electronically, no paper applications will be accepted. Application must be received no later than Sunday, November 5, 2023, at 9 pm.

I. PRIMARY APPLICANT INFORMATION (LEAD AGENCY)
Organization Name
Type of Organization Non-Profit For Profit Gov’t/Public Other:

UEI Number
Contact Person/Title
Finance Contact (if different)
Phone Number
Email
Address
City, State, Zip
Date of Incorporation
Is the organization faithbased? Yes No
Annual Operating Budget
Number of Paid Staff
Number of Volunteers
II. FUNDING DETAILS
Please identify all funding
sources being requested:

Select all that apply; you will be
required to fill out additional
details for each source requested.

Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)
Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG)
Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA)
HOME Investment Partnership Program (TBRA ONLY)
County General Funds Support (GFS)
Total Funding Requested $______________________
ATTACHMENT 3
5CITIES HOMELESS COALITION KR8JGGKBKEP9 Janna Nichols, Executive Director 805-574-1638 [email protected] P.O. Box 558 (100 S. 4th St) Grover Beach, CA 93483 March 3, 2009 ■ $6,406,867 35150407,358

Page 77 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Public Services Application
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 2 OF 12 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected] III. APPLICANT CAPACITY

1. Describe the applicant’s history of receiving and managing grants from County/State/Federal sources.

2. Briefly describe your organization’s auditing requirements, including those for the proposed project. (As outlined in 2 CFR § 200.500)

3. Describe how the organization participates in HMIS, Coordinated Entry, and the San Luis Obispo County Continuum of Care.

Currently 5CHC is contracted through 36 local, federal and state grants to provide more than $6 million in services. Through multiple grant monitoring activities to review 5CHC program and expenditure compliance for all local, state and federal grants, 5CHC has consistently received high praise for program quality and outcomes; reporting; compliance; and timeliness; and has never received a significant finding in an audit. Through CARES Act CV funds, 5CHC expended more than $5 Million in services and facility development since 2021, including subcontracting with multiple other providers and ensuring their compliance.
5CHC is timely in providing required reports and its billing process, meeting all required expenditure deadlines. 5CHC's outcomes consistently exceed agreed upon program metrics. Please note the various attachments we have included under section 10: policies, procedures, intake forms, file check lists, outcomes and program reports.

The rules governing ESG require that 5CHC, as a subrecipient, comply with all applicable federal laws, statutes, and regulations (which include but are not limited to the ESG Program Interim Rule (24 CFR Part 576) and the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (2 CFR Part 200). 5CHC annually engages and independent audit, and beginning in 2021-22 (due to increased federally sourced income) underwent a more rigorous Single Audit (attached). 5CHC's Single Audit for 2022-23 currently in process, and expected to be completed by Dec. 31, 2023. 5CHC has participated in HMIS since 2014 and has dedicated staff to this fulfill this activity in addition to program staff. In the past year more than 5 5CHC staff members have worked with the County to assess and invest in a new HMIS system, including the current implementation task force. The agency’s Executive Director is currently serves on HSOC, and its committees and served on the steering committee for the County's Homeless Services Strategic Plan and the County's HMIS Restructuring Steering Committee .

Beginning in 2019 5CHC joined with CAPSLO to participate in Coordinated Entry as a key intake partner.

Annually 5CHC has far exceeded the number of CE's completed per contract requirements. To date for the current fiscal year (first 5 months), 5CHC has completed more than 200 CE intakes. 5CHC has also invested in the development of a secure document sharing system, ShareFile, to enable inter-agency service coordination and referral to 5CHC's housing support programs.

Page 78 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Public Services Application
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 3 OF 12 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

4. Briefly describe your agency’s record keeping system with relevance to the proposed project.

5. Describe the organization’s experience delivering related programs/projects.

6. Identify all budgeted funds for homelessness-related services and housing opportunities.

Include leveraged funding in the budget attachment to exhibit financial sustainability of the project beyond the grant term if awarded.

Does your organization comply
with the Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles?
Yes No
IV. PROPOSED PROJECT and PROJECT DETAILS
Name of proposed
project
Project/Program
address(es)
5CHC employs a dedicated HMIS Data Manager to ensure quality compliance and track client outcomes.

This position is supported with three finance employees, including one charged with Grants Management for accountability of expenses and fulfillment of grant commitments. The agency's Associate Director is responsible for authorizing all funding requests and reporting on program outcomes. With each program activity case managers report to a Program Manager for supervision and oversight; including client eligibility and case file review . The agency's Executive Director is directly engaged in initial program development, and efforts to provide services on a regional basis. 5Cities Homeless Coalition has successfully provided rapid re-housing and homeless prevention programs since 2015. Through CARES Act CV funds, 5CHC will invested more than $900,000 last fiscal year in RRH and HP activities. Currently 5CHC is under contract or has been awarded 13 local, state and federal grants to provide RRH and HP services.
• Funds Requested (Amount and Source): ESG $151,945; HOME $81,531; GFS $81,549; CDBG – AG $13,095, Atas $4,667, MB $3,500, PR, $16,333, PB $5,238, SLO $20,333, County $29,167 • Leveraged funds: 5CHC Match $151,945; $20,382.75; Additional Local Grants & Contributions $200,000 San Luis Obispo County Rapid Re-Housing/Homeless Prevention 100 S. 4th Street, Grover Beach, CA 93433 Page 79 of 442 2024 NOFA – Public Services Application
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 4 OF 12 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected] Areas served City of Arroyo Grande City of Atascadero
City of Pismo Beach City of Paso Robles
City of Morro Bay City of Grover Beach
City of San Luis Obispo Countywide
Unincorporated communities of

7. Provide a brief narrative of the proposed project including projected outcomes. How would you describe your project to the public in one paragraph?

8. Is this effort new, continuing, or expanding? Please describe.

9. Describe how the project will align with the Lines of Effort to support the San Luis Obispo Countywide Plan to Address Homelessness (2022-2027). List and describe as many that are applicable.

Check any specific
population(s)
expected to be
served through this
project:

Adults with children
Adults without children
Elderly/Senior
Parenting Youth
Chronically Homeless
Veterans
Domestic Violence Survivors
Persons with Disabilities
Unaccompanied Youth (under 25 years of age)
Individuals with Co-occurring Disorders (Substance Use and Mental Health) 5CHC's Housing Program braids available funding sources and with multiple sources of funds, 5CHC is able to target funds with differing eligibility criteria in order to maximize their use to serve those with the highest needs and greatest number possible. 5CHC’s housing and stabilization services including landlord cultivation,case management support, and subsistence payments for rent, application fees and deposits to individuals, following a coordinated entry assessment and progressive engagement model. With these activities we will work to quickly identify and resolve barriers to gaining or maintaining housing.

This is a continuing effort. 5CHC has been successfully administering Rapid Re-housing and Homeless Prevention programs since 2015. 5CHC is currently under contract or has been awarded more than 10 local, state, and federal grants to provide RRH and HP services.

The proposed project directly supports the following Lines of Effort:

Line of Effort 2: Focus efforts to reduce or eliminate the barriers to housing stability for those experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness, including prevention, diversion, supportive services, and housing navigation efforts.

Line of Effort 3: Improve and expand data management efforts through HMIS and coordinated entry system to strengthen data-driven operational guidance and strategic oversight. 5CHC actively participates in HMIS and Coordinated Entry and seeks to support efforts through accurate and timely data collection to inform data-drive operation guidance and determine program success.

Page 80 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Public Services Application
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 5 OF 12 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

10. How does your program/service complement and collaborate with existing efforts in the County? Describe how the program/project will increase capacity of services/housing for persons experiencing homelessness and at-risk persons in the County.

11. Describe any consultation with local jurisdictions to gain support for the project. Describe any support you have from local jurisdictions.

12. Name partner agencies as applicable and describe how they will be participating in the delivery of the proposed activity.
5CHC Homeless Services program is integrated in the local Continuum of Care, focusing on collaboration and strategic action. 5CHC is a key participant in the Coordinated Entry System receiving referrals community partners throughout the compendium of services. Additionally, 5CHC staff participate in HSOC at all levels and regularly participate in evidence-based trainings (Mental Health First Aid, etc.) 5CHC also has a program of providing staff trainings monthly with other service professionals and partner agencies. 5CHC seeks to streamline services through collaborative work with service providers throughout the County. By coordinating efforts and providing consistent services throughout the County, 5CHC ensures the ability to maximize resources and prevent duplication of services and benefits.

While 5CHC did not secure letters of support for this application, each City in the County (with the exception of Atascadero) has supported 5CHC RRH and HP activities through its CDBG allocation. In addition the Cities in South County ()A.G., GB, and PB) each contribute through other grant or GF support. 5CHC engages with a broad spectrum of community partners to assist those needing housing assistance. In particular 5CHC, ECHO and CAPSLO, as part of the coordinated entry system. However, with the influx of COVID funding the last two years, 5CHC has built an even more extensive referral network consisting over more than 10 partner agencies, including CAPSLO, ECHO, Transition Mental Health Association, the Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo, Lumina Alliance, San Luis Obispo Legal Assistance Foundation, and Family Resource Centers throughout the County. 5CHC has become the hub for Rapid Re-housing and Homeless Prevention services, serving clients from San Miguel to Cambria to Nipomo with the help of our partners. Agencies refer prospective clients to be screened for eligibility for for RRH/HP assistance through 5CHC; this referral network has allowed us to maximize our resources, coordinate efforts, and avoid duplication of services and benefits.

Page 81 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Public Services Application
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 6 OF 12 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

13. Describe how you will ensure that the proposed project is accessible to communities of color which are disproportionately impacted by homelessness, particularly Black, Latinx, Asian, Pacific Islander, and Native and Indigenous communities. If you have previously received a grant to serve any of the affected communities, please provide a brief description of those grant activities and the outcomes you achieved.

Indicate the predicted performance outcomes listed below.

If not applicable, mark N/A or zero.

Number of unsheltered persons to become sheltered:

Number of people experiencing homelessness to be entering permanent housing:

Number of people experiencing Chronic Homelessness served:

Number of persons At-Risk of Homelessness served:

Number of Unaccompanied Youth served:

Number of Youth At-Risk of Homelessness served:

Number of persons in families with children served:

Total:

Number of persons to be served by facility or program during the program year:

V. CDBG – if requesting CDBG funds
Amount of CDBG Funds
Requested $______________________
Please indicate the amount
you are requesting for each
jurisdiction
Arroyo Grande $________________
Atascadero $________________
Morro Bay $________________
Paso Robles $________________
Pismo Beach $________________
San Luis Obispo $________________
County $________________
5CHC has a policy of promoting inclusiveness and diversity to enrich its programmatic effectiveness. 5CHC's has a strong record of collaborating across systems to identify and serve those most in need by partnering with diverse community groups. 5CHC is a member of the Diversity Coalition San Luis Obispo County. 5CHC is currently participating with the Central Coast Regional Equity Initiative, under the leadership of the Community Foundation and the UCSB Blum Center. As an example, 5CHC partnered in the 2020 Census, was a member of the County's COVID Task Force, and currently partners with UndocuSupport fund - in each case joining a robust network of public and private agencies to reach these same hard-to-reach populations. ).

N/A 40 HH 22 HH 62 HH
N/A 92,333 13,095 4,667 3,500 16,333 5,238 20,333 29,167

Page 82 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Public Services Application
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 7 OF 12 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected] Estimated number of
unduplicated persons or
households to benefit from
CDBG funds
Persons: ________
Households: __________
Please select the national
objective that best applies to
the proposed project.

Low/Moderate Income
Urgent Need (e.g., after a natural disaster)

LOW/MODERATE INCOME
Select which criteria the
proposed project intends
to qualify under to meet the
Low/Moderate Income objective
Area Benefit
Low/Moderate Income Clientele
Limited Clientele
Housing
Jobs/Micro-Enterprises
N/A – Low Moderate Income NOT Selected
Identify all eligible activities
that apply to the proposed
project.

Public Services (General)
Operating Costs of Homeless/AIDS Patients Programs
Senior Services
Handicapped Services
Legal Services
Youth Services
Transportation Services
Substance Abuse Services
Services for Battered and Abused Spouses
Crime Awareness or Neighborhood Cleanups
Fair Housing Activities
Tenant/Landlord/Housing Counseling
Child Care Services
Health Services
Services for Abused and Neglected Children
Mental Health Services
Subsistence Payments, Homeless Assistance, Rental Housing Subsidies or Security Deposits
Job Training and Job Placement Services
Assistance to microenterprises (technical assistance, business support services, and other similar services to owners of microenterprises or persons developing microenterprises)

14. Explain how the proposed project meets the selected National Objective. 37 16
Assistance will be provided to benefit a clientele who are generally presumed by HUD to be principally L/M income persons - those who are homeless. This population is among those who are currently presumed by HUD to be made up principally of L/M income persons: Reference: §570.208(a)(2)(i)(A) Additionally, as some assistance will be provided to those of imminent threat of homelessness, 5CHC's program additionally requires information on family size and income so that it is evident that at least 51% of the clientele are persons whose family income does not exceed the L/M income limit. Reference:
§570.208(a)(2)(i)(B) and (C)

Page 83 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Public Services Application
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 8 OF 12 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

15. Will the services offered by your organization increase or expand as a result of CDBG assistance? If yes, explain.

16. If your project serves any of the presumed benefit populations under the Low/Moderate Income national objective, please describe how the project will directly benefit the populations identified.

VI. ESG – if requesting ESG funds
Amount of ESG Funds
Requested $______________________
Identify all eligible activities and their amounts that apply to the proposed project Emergency Shelter $________________ Approximate Persons Served: _____________ Street Outreach $________________ Approximate Persons Served: _____________ Rapid Re-Housing $________________ Approximate Persons Served: _____________ Homeless Prevention $________________ Approximate Persons Served: _____________ HMIS $________________
Based on our request of $92,333 compared to a current grant of $41,871; we anticipate serving not less than 10 additional households. Our current contract calls for serving 6 households with $41,871. With the $50,000 increase requested, we seek to provide assistance to not less than 16 households. That said, our track record to maximize use of these funds has traditionally resulted in actual outcomes more than 30% above goal. With these funds, we would seek to do the same, while ensuring that families housing is stabilized and they have the resources to maintain their housing.

Through the Coordinated Entry assessment, clients are asked whether they are homeless, length of time homeless, etc.
151,945 69,487 26 68,557 14 13,901

Page 84 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Public Services Application
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 9 OF 12 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

17. ESG Matching Funds (1:1 match required)
Sources:
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Total $
VII. PLHA – if requesting PLHA funds
Amount of PLHA Funds
Requested $______________________
Estimated number of
unduplicated persons or
households to benefit from
PLHA funds
Persons: ________
Households: __________
Identify all eligible activities
that apply to the proposed
project.

Rapid Re-housing
Rental Assistance
Supportive/Case Management
Operating and Capital Costs for Navigation Centers
Operating and Capital Costs for Emergency Shelters
Operating and Capital Costs for New Construction, Rehabilitation, and Preservation of Permanent and Transitional Housing
PRIVATE CASH DONATIONS 151,945

Page 85 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Public Services Application
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 10 OF 12 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

18. Describe all eligible activities that apply to the proposed project.

Must provide rapid rehousing, rental assistance, navigation centers, emergency shelter, and transitional housing activities in a manner consistent with the Housing First practices described in 25 CCR, Section 8409, subdivision (b)(1)-(6) and in compliance with WIC Section 8255(b)(8). An applicant allocated funds for the new construction, rehabilitation, and preservation of permanent supportive housing shall incorporate the core components of Housing First, as provided in WIC Section 8255, subdivision (b).

VIII. HOME – if requesting HOME funds (TBRA ONLY)
Amount of HOME Funds
Requested $______________________
Estimated number of
unduplicated persons or
households to benefit from
HOME funds
Persons: ________
Households: __________
Provide proposed funding amounts and approximate number of households to be served:

Rental Subsidy $________________ Approximate Persons Served: _____________ Utility Subsidy $________________ Approximate Persons Served: _____________ Security and Utility Deposits $________________ Approximate Persons Served: _____________

19. Please describe your organization’s client application, intake, and preliminary assessment process.

Please provide a sample of client intake documents, as applicable, in the attachments section. $81,531 32 14 40,526 16 41,005 16
5CHC is a member of the Coordinated Entry collaborative, a system utilized by Homeless Service Providers throughout the County that provides a standardized intake assessment and referrals to ensure a more consistent and streamlined experience for those seeking services. During this initial intake, clients complete a comprehensive needs assessment, identify barriers to employment or housing, and develop an immediate action plan. Additionally, this assessment provides an opportunity to identify what services or resources a client is already connected to in an effort to reduce duplication of services. Clients are screened for homeless status (homeless certification forms) and income eligibility.

Page 86 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Public Services Application
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 11 OF 12 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

20. Describe your organizational collaboration with other local organizations to assist TBRA income eligible households.

HOME Matching Funds (25% match required)
Sources:
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Total $
IX. GFS – if requesting GFS funds
Amount of GFS Funds
Requested $______________________
Estimated number of
unduplicated persons or
households to benefit from
GFS funds
Persons: ________
Households: __________
Identify all eligible activities
that apply to the proposed
project.

Emergency Shelters
Warming Centers
Safe Parking
Street Outreach
Essential Services for Persons Experiencing Homelessness Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA)
5CHC engages with a broad spectrum of community partners to provide housing assistance. In particular 5CHC, ECHO and CAPSLO, as part of the coordinated entry system. Additionally, 5CHC has built an even more extensive referral network consisting over more than 10 partner agencies, including CAPSLO, ECHO, Transition Mental Health Association, the Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo, Lumina Alliance, San Luis Obispo Legal Assistance Foundation, and Family Resource Centers throughout the County. 5CHC has become the hub for Rapid Re-housing and Homeless Prevention services, serving clients from San Miguel to Cambria to Nipomo with the help of our partners. Agencies refer prospective clients to be screened for eligibility for for RRH/HP assistance through 5CHC; this referral network has allowed us to maximize our resources, coordinate efforts, and prevent duplication of services and benefits. Private Cash Donations 20,382.75 81,549 32 14

Page 87 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Public Services Application
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 12 OF 12 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

21. Describe all eligible activities that apply to the proposed project.

X. Attachments
Attachment A – Budget, Leveraged-Funds, and Budget Narrative (Required) Please attach a Budget and Budget Narrative for the project for which you are applying. The budget narrative should include FTEs to be provided. Please include the value of any matching funding.

Attachment B – Timeline (Required)
Attach a timeline for key steps of project implementation.

Attachment C - Most Recent Audit (Required)
Attachment D - Proof of Active SAM.gov Registration (Required) Attachment E – Incorporation Documents (Required)
Attachment F – CDBG Acknowledgements (Required if Applicable) Attachment G – Organization Mission Statement (Required) Attachment H – Match Certification Letter (if applicable) 1:1 match required for ESG; 25% match required for HOME TBRA Attachment I – Client Intake Forms (if applicable)
Attachment J – Letters of Support (Optional)
Please attach any letters of support or commitment from local governments or community partners.

Attachment K – Supplemental Answers to Questions (Optional) If you need more room to answer any of the application questions, please attach additional information here.

Include the question number for each question being answered.

For other additional or optional attachments, please label them clearly (e.g. Attachment L – “Title”).

XI. APPLICATION SUBMISSION:

Applications and accompanying documents are due to Homeless Services Division, Department of Social Services by 9:00 pm on November 5, 2023.

Electronic Copy – email to [email protected] Subject line: 2024 NOFA Public Services Application – (Applicant Name) 5CHC seeks to administer TBRA funds to eligible residents throughout SLO County. 5CHC has administered homeless prevention programs, including subsistence payments and rental subsidies for many years.

However, in recent years, rising rental costs have impacted local residents that are median wage earners. 5CHC is no longer just seeing extremely low income households seeking assistance and served through ESG HP, but rather low-moderate wage earners are seeking our assistance daily. It is vital we are able to provide quick and early intervention to these households; the majority are able to stabilize within 3 months of TBRA assistance.

Page 88 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 4

Page 89 of 442 ends

COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

HOMELESS SERVICES DIVISION
2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 1 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected] Please submit Application by email to [email protected]. All submissions must be made electronically, no paper applications will be accepted. Application must be received no later than Sunday, November 5, 2023, at 9 pm.

I. PRIMARY APPLICANT INFORMATION (LEAD AGENCY)
Organization Name
Type of Organization Non-Profit For Profit Gov’t/Public Other:

Select all that apply; you will be
required to fill out additional
details for each source requested.
*For tenant-based rental
assistance (TBRA), see Public
Services application.

HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME)*
HOME Investment Partnerships Program – American Rescue Plan (HOME-ARP)
Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)
Title 29
Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA)
Total Funding Requested $______________________
HASLO & SLONP HASLO - # UKM9S21EZ2F1 & SLONP - # DKJWAFNQ2JN4 Litzinger, Director of Finance and CFO Same 805 - 594 - 5304 [email protected] 487 Leff Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 HASLO - SLONP 10/15/1991 ■ HASLO $45,298,493 & SLONP $11,795,048 788
1,886,000

Page 90 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 2 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected] III. APPLICANT CAPACITY

1. Describe the organization’s history of receiving and managing grants from County/State/Federal sources.

2. Briefly list any recent development projects your organization has proposed, is currently working on, and has completed. (Regardless of funding source)

3. Briefly describe your organization’s auditing requirements, including those for the proposed project. (As outlined in 2 CFR § 200.500 and 24 CFR § 5.801) Since 1968 and 1990 respectively, HASLO and SLONP have been receiving and managing grants. There have been a variety of grants received and managed including but not limited to; HOME, CDBG, T-29, Project Homekey, AFH, RDA, CARES, ROSS, Decarbonization, and HTF. HASLO and SLONP have established systems to track and manage regulation compliance and reporting to the respective grantor. As the County knows, some of these grants may be set up as soft loans.

There are about fifteen (15) projects in the pipeline at various stages. Currently, the Paso Homekey project is being leased up. There are five (5) under construction, including the Anderson Hotel, Apartments at Toscano, and Shell Beach Senior to name a few. Three (3) projects are closing in the next few months, which include Orcutt Road, Bridge Street, and Cleaver and Clark Commons. And finally at the pre-development stage there are six (6) projects, which, two (2) will be requesting funding in this round.

HASLO administers Federal, State, and Local grants, and has strong systems and controls in place. HASLO provides the record keeping services for the project. Both HASLO and SLONP undergo annual audits by an independent CPA firm, including assessments of internal controls.

Page 91 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 3 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

4. Describe project staffs’ experience with Section 3. (As outlined in 24 CFR Part 75)

5. How will you document and maintain income status or presumed benefit status of each beneficiary in compliance with regulations?

6. Briefly describe your agency’s record keeping system with relevance to the proposed project.

Our staff has worked with County staff closely over the years to satisfy Section 3 as outlined in 24 CFR Part

75. The Director of Construction ensures that Section 3 language is included in the relevant construction documents and requests for proposals for contractors. Our team also provides the annual reports per the County’s request.

HASLO will perform all income certifications. HASLO has certified compliance specialists on staff with years of experience. At the housing application/intake stage income and asset information will be collected from each client, with back up documentation. Files will be maintained and available for county inspection.

HASLO currently performs income and compliance certifications for over 3,000 clients annually.

SLONP owns and operates hundreds of deed restricted housing units in San Luis Obispo County. It is accustomed to keeping detailed records regarding income eligibility for all programs. Additionally, HASLO will be the management agent for this housing. HASLO has many years of experience in maintaining record keeping and accounting in conformity with HUD and State regulations. Staff are certified in low-income housing compliance. Projects are audited annually and reports are provided to all funding sources. Detailed accounting records are maintained for all project costs and audited by third party auditing firms.

Page 92 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 4 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

7. Do you have any funds remaining from prior Fiscal Year allocations? If so, please list the project you received funding for, the fiscal year(s) you received the funding, and the remaining amount(s) for each fiscal year(s).

8. How do you plan to fund the operation and maintenance costs (if any) associated with this project? Are these funds available now? If not, when will they be available? Does your organization comply
with the Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles? (As
outlined in 2 CFR § 200)
Yes No
IV. PROPOSED PROJECT and PROJECT DETAILS
Name of proposed project
Project/Program address(es)
and/or Accessor’s Parcel
Number(s)
Please attach any maps, pictures, plans, or drawings under the attachments section at the end of the application.

Yes, there are funds remaining on the following projects however, all the funds are on schedule with commitment and expenditure deadlines:

Under construction - Anderson Hotel: $2M of ARPA from 2022. 100% drawn Under construction - Toscano: $813,738 of CDBG from 2021 and $142,396 of T-29. Remaining retainer is $48,370.40
Under construction - Shell Beach: $249,000 of HOME, $345,000 HOME ARP, $250,987 in T-29 from 2022.

Tony Navarro didn’t want us to draw the entire available amount, so there is $8,927.10 left to draw as well as retainer of $41,628.40
Under construction - Morro Bay: $81,755 of CDBG and $7,216 of T29 from 2021 retainer of $4,449.00 Closing soon - Orcutt Road: $936,986 of CDBG from 2023
Our submitted project pro forma identifies the expenses (including operation, maintenance costs, etc.) and the revenues (from rent, subsidies, etc.). The major project sponsors require that the project cash flows after debt service is paid. Once the project is built and leased up, the rent and subsidies will cover operations and maintenance. In addition, the lender requires that reserves are set aside on a monthly basis for capital projects over the life of the project.

Arroyo Terrace Project Address: 700 N. Oak Park Blvd, Arroyo Grande, CA APN(s) 077-011-010, 077-011-011, 077-011-012, 077-011-013 Page 93 of 442 2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 5 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected] Areas served City of Arroyo Grande City of Atascadero
City of Pismo Beach City of Paso Robles
City of Morro Bay City of Grover Beach
City of San Luis Obispo
Unincorporated community of
Number of proposed units
created or rehabilitated
For ACQUISITIONS, please
answer the following questions.

What is the proposed purchase
amount?
What is the anticipated escrow
closing date?
Will residential or commercial
occupants be displaced by the
project?
If yes, will it be temporary or
permanent? How long if
temporary?

9. Provide a brief narrative of the proposed project including projected outcomes. How would you describe your project to the public in one paragraph?

10. Describe site and neighborhood standards including proximity to services, transportation, and employment.
63 Created 3.1M 12/30/2024
No.

The mixed-use project consists of 63 100% affordable multi-family residential units, including a manager’ s unit, and 1,178 square feet of commercial space. As proposed, 16 of the units will be designated for those experiencing homelessness or at risk for homelessness as defined by HCD. The 63 dwelling units are proposed in three (3) separate, three-story buildings, that contain 30 one-bedroom, 17 two-bedroom, and 16 three-bedroom units. The project includes outdoor recreational space with a barbeque area and children’s playground near the preserved oak tree grove near the eastern portion of the project site for the residents of the development.

The site slopes downward from south to north with an approximate elevation difference across the site of 20 to 30 feet. The site had historically been used as a storage yard for an earthwork and underground utility contractor from the 1970's until recently. The project is surrounded by Highway 101 to the east, low-density residential to the west, commercial to the north and a mix of commercial and low-density residential to the south. Two (2) of the buildings would be located along the El Camino Real frontage and one (1) along the Chilton Street frontage. Parking is contained within the center of the site. The layout and design of the buildings utilizes the slope to blend the structures heights in with the neighboring residential. The project’s location is within walking proximity to basic amenities and services including grocery store, pharmacy, parks, school, and library. Bus stop and other commercial job centers are in proximity as well.

Page 94 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 6 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

11. What is the current zoning of the project site? Is the project site zoned correctly for the proposed activity?

12. If the project is NOT zoned correctly for the proposed activity, provide an explanation of efforts and a timetable to change the zoning or obtain a variance.

13. State whether or not the necessary permits have been issued. If a permit has not yet been issued, indicate when the permit(s) will be applied for or issued.

The site is zoned Office Mixed Use. The project has approved entitlements from the Planning Commission resulted in a lot merger of four (4) parcels and the construction of a mixed-use development including 63 affordable housing units and 1,178 square feet of commercial space.

N/A
The project has received its land use permits. Currently, the City of Arroyo Grande is reviewing the building plans. The building permit has not been issued but would be ready by est. Spring 2024.

Page 95 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 7 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

14. Describe how the project will align with a (or multiple) Line(s) of Effort to support the San Luis Obispo Countywide Plan to Address Homelessness (2022-2027).

Check any specific
population(s)
expected to be
served through this
project:

Multifamily
Age Restricted (including seniors)
Persons Experiencing Homelessness
Persons with Disabilities
Chronically Homeless
Veterans
Domestic Violence Survivors
Unaccompanied Youth (under 25 years of age)

15. Does the proposed project complement and collaborate with existing efforts in the county? If so, please name partner agencies and how they will participate.

16. If the proposed project will serve households experiencing homelessness, describe how the project will coordinate with other homeless service providers to connect individuals experiencing homelessness and families to resources.

See Attachment O for response.

The proposed project will complement the county’s efforts by providing permanent housing to those that meet the definition of experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness. The agencies that we collaborate with are a part of the HSOC and include but are not limited to 5CHC, CAPSLO, and ECHO.

The proposed project will coordinate with the county’s homeless services agencies to obtain referrals for clients in need of housing that meet the definition of those experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness. The agencies include but are not limited to 5CHC, CAPSLO, and ECHO.

Page 96 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 8 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

17. Will the project use a project specific waitlist or coordinated entry? Please describe.

18. Describe any consultation with local jurisdictions to gain support for the project. Describe any support you have from local jurisdictions.

19. Describe how you will ensure that the proposed project is accessible to communities of color which are disproportionately impacted by homelessness, particularly Black, Latinx, Asian, Pacific Islander, and Native and Indigenous communities. If you have previously received a grant to serve any of the affected communities, please provide a brief description of those grant activities and the outcomes you achieved.

HASLO will use its waiting lists for the majority of the large family low-income units. The units set aside for homeless or those at risk of homelessness will be referred through the Coordinated Entry System (CES).

San Luis Obispo (SLO) County's CES is developing their Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) Waiting list protocol, identifying PSH units that are available, along with the required tenant selection criteria. They perform a match against their list of applicants who meet the criteria and make referrals to the Housing Provider. The Coordinated Entry System Partner making the referral certifies that the applicant meets the selected criteria of being a person with a disability and that they meet the homeless requirements. If CES is unable to make referrals then referrals will be obtained directly from emergency shelter services providers, including CAPSLO (Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo/central county), 5Cities Homeless Coalition (south county), El Camino Homeless Organization (North County), Salvation Army (countywide) and SLO County Department of Social Services. After a referral is made, the Housing Provider will verify the income, using third party documentation acceptable to State HCD, CTCAC, and the County.

The City of Arroyo Grande fully supports the project and is actively working to find ways to provide additional funding support. One of the ways includes the City pursuing the creation of a deferred impact fee program for affordable housing projects.

HASLO does not discriminate its tenants or potential tenants based on their personal characteristics and protected classes. Our outreach is to all groups. And waiting lists are utilized in numerical order.

Page 97 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 9 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected] Has an environmental review
been completed (CEQA and/or
NEPA)?
Yes – CEQA review complete
No – CEQA review not complete
Yes – NEPA review complete
No – NEPA review not complete
Has a Phase I or Phase II archeological/historical survey been conducted at the project site? Yes No
Has a Phase I or Phase II environmental assessment been conducted for the property?
Yes No N/A

20. List and describe any known hazards (e.g., asbestos, lead-based paint, storage tanks – aboveground, underground). List “N/A” if not applicable.

Is the project on a property designated or been
determined to be potentially eligible for designation as a local, state, or national historical site?
Yes No N/A
Are the building(s)/structure(s) located on a historic site or within a local historic district? Yes No N/A
Is the project located within a 100-year flood plain? Yes No N/A If YES to the question above, does your organization have flood insurance? Yes No N/A
Will demolition be required? Yes No
Are there any existing buildings on the project property that were constructed prior to 1978?
Yes No
If YES to above, please answer the following questions:

Has an asbestos risk assessment report(s) been
prepared for the building(s)? Yes No
Has the building(s) been abated for asbestos? Yes No
Has a lead hazard risk assessment report(s) been
prepared for the building(s)? Yes No
Has the building(s) been abated for lead paint? Yes No
Will children occupy the building(s)? Yes No
IF CHILDREN WILL OCCUPY THE BUILDING, indicate
the age range of the children. If no children will
occupy the building, select N/A.

Age Range: _______________
N/A
If the project includes temporary or permanent
relocation of occupants, it is subject to the Uniform
Relocation Act (URA). Please indicate whether the URA is applicable to your project.

Yes, I have read and understand this
requirement.

No, this requirement is not
applicable.

Based on the data gathered and reviewed during this Phase I ESA, Haro Environmental did not identify recognized environmental conditions or concerns that have impacted, or pose a significant environmental threat to subsurface soil, soil vapor, or groundwater beneath the Site. ■
■
■
■
NEPA Start date Feb 2024

Page 98 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 10 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

21. Describe how the project will meet ADA and Section 504 standards for accessibility by the disabled. Describe the methods, funding, and timetable to be utilized to address the problems.

Section 504 (24 CFR Part 8) applies to new construction of multifamily housing with five or more units, or substantial rehabilitation of multifamily housing projects that have 15 or more units.

22. Identify whether or not the site is owned or leased by the applicant. If optioned or owned by another entity, provide their name and contact information.

V. HOME – if requesting HOME funds
Amount of HOME Funds Requested $______________________
Estimated number of HOME assisted units Units: __________ Identify all eligible activities that apply to
the proposed project.

Acquisition
Rehabilitation
Relocation
Demolition
Site Preparation (In anticipation of a HOME funded
project)
New Construction
Multi-Family
Single Family
This new construction project will be designed and constructed to adhere to all Section 504 and ADA requirements. In addition, we will adhere to the provisions of California Building Code Chapter 11(B) regarding accessibility to privately owned housing made available for public use by providing a minimum of 10% of the units with mobility features, and a minimum of 4% of the units with communications features. The site is owned by the Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo. 879,000 All available 8

Page 99 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 11 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected] Please indicate the number and type of units CREATED
30% AMI HOME
Assisted Units
31% to 50%

AMI HOME
Assisted Units
51% to 80%

AMI HOME
Assisted Units
Unrestricted
Resident
Manager
Total
Zero-Bedroom
(Studio)
One-Bedroom
Two-Bedroom
Three-Bedroom
Total
For rehabilitation projects, please fill out both tables below. If your project does not include rehabilitation, please skip.

Please indicate below the number and type of EXISTING units:
30% AMI HOME
Assisted Units
31% to 50%

AMI HOME
Assisted Units
51% to 80%

AMI HOME
Assisted Units
Unrestricted
Resident
Manager
Total
Zero-Bedroom
(Studio)
One-Bedroom
Two-Bedroom
Three-Bedroom
Total
Please indicate below the proposed number and type of units AFTER rehabilitation:
30% AMI HOME
Assisted Units
31% to 50%

AMI HOME
Assisted Units
51% to 80%

AMI HOME
Assisted Units
Unrestricted
Resident
Manager
Total
Zero-Bedroom
(Studio)
One-Bedroom
Two-Bedroom
Three-Bedroom
Total
3 27 30 2 14 1 17 2 14 16 7 55 1 63

Page 100 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 12 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected] HOME Matching Funds (25% match required)
Sources:
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Total $
VI. HOME-ARP – if requesting HOME ARP funds
Amount of HOME-ARP Funds Requested $______________________ Estimated number of HOME-ARP assisted
units Units: __________
Identify all eligible activities that apply to
the proposed project.

Acquisition
Rehabilitation
New Construction
Multi-Family
Single Family
Continue to the next page.

HASLO Public Funds Loan - up to 1,330,170 City of Arroyo Grande - Affordable Housing Fund 448,370.37 1,778,540.37 274,484 3

Page 101 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 13 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected] Please indicate the number and type of units CREATED
30% AMI

HOME-ARP
Assisted Units
31% to 50%

AMI HOME-ARP
Assisted Units
51% to 80%

AMI HOME-ARP
Assisted Units
Unrestricted
Resident
Manager
Total
Zero-Bedroom
(Studio)
One-Bedroom
Two-Bedroom
Three-Bedroom
Total
For rehabilitation projects, please fill out both tables below. If your project does not include rehabilitation, please skip.

Please indicate below the number and type of EXISTING units:
30% AMI

HOME-ARP
Assisted Units
31% to 50%

AMI HOME-ARP
Assisted Units
51% to 80%

AMI HOME-ARP
Assisted Units
Unrestricted
Resident
Manager
Total
Zero-Bedroom
(Studio)
One-Bedroom
Two-Bedroom
Three-Bedroom
Total
Please indicate below the proposed number and type of units AFTER rehabilitation:
30% AMI

HOME-ARP
Assisted Units
31% to 50%

AMI HOME-ARP
Assisted Units
51% to 80%

AMI HOME-ARP
Assisted Units
Unrestricted
Resident
Manager
Total
Zero-Bedroom
(Studio)
One-Bedroom
Two-Bedroom
Three-Bedroom
Total
3 27 30 2 14 1 17 2 14 1663

Page 102 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 14 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected] VII. CDBG – if requesting CDBG funds
Amount of CDBG Funds
Requested $______________________
Estimated number of
unduplicated persons or
households to benefit from
CDBG funds
Persons: ________
Households: __________
Please select the national
objective that best applies to
the proposed project.

Please refer to "Basically CDBG" or
the "CDBG Guide to National
Objectives and Eligible Activities" in
the Library for more information
regarding CDBG national
objectives.

Low/Moderate Income
Slums or Blight
Urgent Need (e.g., after a natural disaster)

LOW/MODERATE INCOME
Select which criteria the
proposed project intends
to qualify under to meet the
Low/Moderate Income objective
Area Benefit
Limited Clientele
Housing
Jobs
N/A – Low Moderate Income NOT Selected

SLUM OR BLIGHT
Select which criteria the
proposed project intends to
qualify under to meet the Slums
or Blight objective
Area Basis
Spot Basis
N/A – Slum or Blight NOT Selected
Identify all eligible activities
that apply to the proposed
project.

Acquisition
Rehabilitation
Demolition
Site Preparation (In anticipation of a HOME funded project)

23. Explain how the proposed project meets the selected National Objective. 563,000 All Co & AG 63
The project meets the National Objective by benefiting low/moderate income households and persons through supporting the creation of affordable housing.

Page 103 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 15 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected] VIII. PLHA – if requesting PLHA funds
Amount of PLHA Funds
Requested $______________________
Estimated number of
unduplicated persons or
households to benefit from
PLHA funds
Persons: ________
Households: __________
Identify all eligible activities
that apply to the proposed
project.

Affordable Rental and Ownership
Housing
Predevelopment
Development
Acquisition
Rehabilitation
Preservation

24. Describe all eligible activities that apply to the proposed project.

Must meet the needs of a growing workforce earning up to 60 percent of AMI. ADUs shall be available for occupancy for a term of no less than 30 days.

IX. Title 29 – if requesting Title 29 funds
Total Amount of Title 29 Funds
Requested $______________________
Amount of Title 29 Funds
Requested by Jurisdiction North County: $______________________ Central County: $______________________
South County: $______________________
North Coast: $______________________
Open to All: $______________________
Estimated number of
unduplicated persons or
households to benefit from
Title 29 funds
Persons: ________
Households: __________
Which of the activities applies
to your proposed project?
Homebuyer Assistance
Rental Housing
454,195 All available 63
The proposed project will provide all affordable units at under 60% AMI. The funds will be used to pay for predevelopment accrued costs, acquiring the property, and construction development.
199,884 156,290 43,594 63

Page 104 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 16 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected]

25. If awarded, how will the funds be used to produce affordable housing? X. Attachments
Attachment A – Sources and Uses (Required)
Please attach the Sources and Uses for your proposed project. This should include a summary of where the capital used to fund a development will come from (the sources) and what this capital will be used for (the uses).

Attachment B – Timeline (Required)
Attach a timeline for key steps of project implementation.

Attachment C – Any Maps, Photos, Drawings, Plans (Required) Attachment D - Most Recent Audit (Required)
Attachment E - Proof of Active SAM.gov Registration (Required) Attachment F – Organizational Chart (Required)
Attachment G – Incorporation Documents (Required)
Attachment H – General Liability Insurance (Required)
Attachment I – CDBG Acknowledgements (Required if Applicable) Attachment J – Phase I or Phase II Environmental Review (Required if Applicable) Attachment K – Pro Forma (Required for Rental Housing)
Attachment L – Appraisal of Property (Required if Applicable) Attachment M – Relocation Plan (Required if Applicable) Attachment N – Commitment letters for funds (if applicable) Attachment O – Supplemental Answers to Questions (Optional) The funds will be used to cover the new construction hard costs and acquisition.

However, because of the large size of the project, additional public funds are needed to make the project competitive for a tax credit award. The project has also applied to HCD for Multifamily Housing Program (MHP) funding. HCD should announce awards in December 2023.

Page 105 of 442 ends

2024 NOFA – Housing Application
Rev. 10/13/2023
DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES - P.O. BOX 8119 | SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 | PAGE 17 OF 17 www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Social-Services/Homeless-Services.aspx | [email protected] If you need more room to answer any of the application questions, please attach additional information here.

Include the question number for each question being answered.

Attachment P – Letters of Support (Optional)
Please attach any letters of support or commitment from local governments or community partners.

For other additional or optional attachments, please label them clearly (e.g. Attachment Q – “Title”).

X. APPLICATION SUBMISSION:

Applications and accompanying documents are due to Homeless Services Division, Department of Social Services by 9:00 pm on November 5, 2023.

Electronic Copy – email to [email protected] Subject line: 2024 NOFA Housing Application – (Applicant Name)

Page 106 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 5

Page 107 of 442 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 5310

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

ARROYO GRANDE AUTHORIZING A BUDGET

ADJUSTMENT FROM THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING

TRUST FUND AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER

TO EXECUTE A REGULATORY AGREEMENT WITH THE

HOUSING AUTHORITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande approved application Lot Merger 21- 001 and Conditional Use Permit 21- 001 to merge four parcels and construct sixty- three ( 63) multi-family residential units that will be affordable for low income households;
WHEREAS, Planning Commission Resolution 21- 2345 contains a condition of approval requiring the developer to record a regulatory agreement against the property ensuring that the units will remain affordable for at least 55 years from the date of occupancy; and WHEREAS, the Affordable Housing Trust Fund is administered under the general supervision of the Community Development Director and pursuant to the regulations established by City Council, as established by Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section

16. 80. 080; and
WHEREAS, on July 18, 2023, the developer submitted a letter requesting a contribution from the City' s Affordable Housing Trust Fund to aid in the costs in constructing the project; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council authorizes a budget adjustment in a not-to-exceed amount of$ 448,370. 37 from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund and authorizing the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney and Community Development Director, to execute a regulatory agreement with grant conditions between the City and the Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo ( HASLO) establishing the terms of the contribution from the City' s Affordable Housing Trust Fund to HASLO' s affordable housing project located at 700 Oak Park Blvd in that not-to-exceed amount of$ 448,370. 37.

On motion of Council Member Barneich, seconded by Council Member George, and by the following roll call vote, to wit:

AYES: Council Members Barneich, George, Guthrie, Secrest, and Mayor Ray Russom NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 25th day of July, 2023.

ATTACHMENT 6

Page 108 of 442 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 52 t
PAGE 2
so
A
ye
CAREN RAY ' USS o M, MAYOR
ATTEST:

L52, 41/ AtiM .tr-c>ie
JESSICA 1ON,DeITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:

V
it gr i , 0
WH TNEY M, a ONALD, ITY MANAGER
APPROV- D AS T FORM:
411/

ISAAC ROSEN, CITY ATTORNEY

Page 109 of 442 ends

OFFICIAL CERTIFICATION
I, SARAH LANSBURGH, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the attached Resolution No. 5310 was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande on the 25th day of July, 2023.

WITNESS my hand and the Seal of the City of Arroyo Grande affixed this 28th day of July, 2023.

SARAH LANSB RGH, DLE UTY CITY CLERK

Page 110 of 442 ends

Item 9.g.

MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Bill Robeson, Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director BY: Shannon Sweeney, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Consideration of Rejection of All Bids for the Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) Apparatus Door Replacement Project, PW 2023-11
DATE: February 13, 2024
SUMMARY OF ACTION:

Reject all Bids for the Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) Apparatus Door Replacement Project (Project) and direct staff to competitively rebid this project.

IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
$115,000 in FY 2023-24 sales tax funding is allocated to this project. Inadequate funding is available to proceed with the low bid of $189,767.

Staff time will be impacted with the administration and coordination of the process of rebidding this project. Maintenance staff will continue to be impacted by the ongoing maintenance required by the existing doors during the time required to rebid the project.

RECOMMENDATION:

Reject all Bids for the FCFA Apparatus Door Replacement Project and direct staff to competitively rebid this project.

BACKGROUND:

The current Apparatus Bay doors at Fire Station 1 are obsolete with replacement parts no longer available. The door for Bay 6 has been purposely removed from service to salvage replacement parts to maintain operation of the remaining doors. These doors allow for the response, secure storage, and maintenance of emergency response vehicles serving the community.

Replacement of Fire Station 1 apparatus doors was included in the FY 2023/24 – 2027/28 Capital Improvement Program, which was adopted by City Council on June 27, 2023.

Staff developed a bid package including minimum specifications for the project. Staff advertised the project on January 3, 2024, by posting it on the City’s website and emailing

Page 111 of 442 ends

CITY COUNCIL
Consideration of Rejection of All Bids for the Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) Apparatus Door Replacement Project, PW 2023-11

Page 2 ends

Item 9.g.
a link to the bid documents to six potential bidders. One bid was received prior to the bid opening deadline of January 31, 2024. This bid from National Garage Door Company is $189,767. This bid has been reviewed as is responsive (meets all the bid requirements.) ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:

After receiving only one bid at the bid opening, staff reached out to potential bidders who did not submit a bid. Multiple bidders indicated that they were unfamiliar with the bidding process, as they are ordinarily subcontractors and not prime contractors on construction jobs.

Because of their unfamiliarity with the process, they did not allocate sufficient time to obtain a bid bond to accompany their bid and therefore missed the deadline. If the existing bid is rejected, staff will rebid the project and include clearer language of the bid bond requirement in the Notice inviting Bids.

The Notice inviting Bids contains the following language:
“City shall award the contract for the Project to the lowest responsive, responsible Bidder as determined by the City from the base bid. City reserves the right to reject any or all bids or to waive any irregularities or informalities in any bids or in the bidding process.” Staff recommends that Council exercise the right established in the statement above due to bid received exceeding funding allocated for the project.

The original estimated construction completion date for this project was August 19, 2024.

Rebidding the project will add approximately two months to the schedule, for an estimated completion date of October 15, 2024.

ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:

1. Reject all Bids for the FCFA Apparatus Door Replacement Project and direct staff to competitively rebid this project;

2. Do not reject bids and proceed with awarding the contract to the lowest bidder.

Authorize a budget amendment of $93,743.70 from sales tax fund balance ($189,767-$115,000 plus $18,976.70 contingency); or

3. Provide other direction to staff.

ADVANTAGES:

Rejecting all bids allows the City to competitively rebid the project with language that more clearly outlines the steps required to submit a complete bid. Adding this language is expected to expand the number of potential bidders, creating a more competitive environment.

Page 112 of 442 ends

CITY COUNCIL
Consideration of Rejection of All Bids for the Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) Apparatus Door Replacement Project, PW 2023-11

Page 3 ends

Item 9.g.

DISADVANTAGES:

Competitively rebidding this project will take additional time. Existing doors have maintenance issues that will continue to require staff time to address until the doors are replaced. Rebidding this project will add approximately two months to the project schedule. Staff believes that rebidding the project will result in more competitive pricing, with potential savings beyond the ongoing cost of maintaining the existing doors for an additional two months.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

Rejecting bids is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.)
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:

The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2.

Attachments

1. Bid Opening Log Sheet

Page 113 of 442 ends

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 114 of 442 ends

Item 10.a.

MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Nicole Valentine, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Hold Public Hearings, Consider Adopting a Resolution Updating the Development Impact Fee Schedule & Consider the 2024 Development Impact Fee Nexus Study, & Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 3.36 of the AGMC, Development Impact Fees
DATE: February 13, 2024
SUMMARY OF ACTION:

Hold a public hearing and adopt a Resolution updating City Development Impact fees as set forth in Attachment 1 Exhibit A, and receive and file the 2024 Development Impact Fee Nexus Study. Hold a public hearing and conduct the first reading, by title only, of an Ordinance titled: “An Ordinance of the City Council of Arroyo Grande Amending Section

3.36.030 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Regarding Development Impact Fees and Finding the Ordinance Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act.” Adoption of this Ordinance will be at a future City Council meeting.

IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:

The Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update (“DIF Study”) was included in the FY 2022-23 budget and the City spent approximately $45,850 on consultant services to prepare the DIF Study. Development Impact Fees (DIFs) reflect and mitigate impacts of new development. They do not represent profit making by the City.

RECOMMENDATION:
1) Hold a Public Hearing and Adopt the Resolution updating Development Impact fees set forth in Attachment 1 Exhibit A;
2)Receive and file the 2024 Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update; 3) Hold a Public Hearing and Introduce the Ordinance amending Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 3.36.030 Regarding Development Impact Fees; and 4) Make findings that adopting the Resolution updating Development Impact fees and introducing the proposed Ordinance are not projects subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because they have no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.).

Page 115 of 442 ends

Item 10.a.

City Council
Hold Public Hearings, Consider Adopting a Resolution Updating the Development Impact Fee Schedule and Consider the 2024 Development Impact Fee Nexus Study, and Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 3.36 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, Development Impact Fees
February 13, 2024

Page 2 ends

BACKGROUND:

In Arroyo Grande, DIFs are collected at the time a building permit is issued. Fees are used to finance the acquisition, construction and improvement of public facilities needed as a result of this new development. A separate fund is maintained to account for the receipt and expense of each category of DIF funds.

The City engaged with Willdan Financial Services to conduct the DIF Study; included as Attachment 1, Exhibit “B.” Willdan Financial Services worked closely with the Administrative Services Department, Community Development Department, Public Works Department, and the City Attorney to update the DIF Study to reflect best practices and changes in state and federal law that have occurred since the last update.

ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:

DIFs are one-time fees paid by new development to fund the cost of providing municipal facilities to serve that development. This authorization exists through the enactment of California Government Code sections 66000 through 66025 (also known as the “Mitigation Fee Act” and sometimes referred to as “AB1600”). The Mitigation Fee Act is premised on the concept that new development pays its own way, or, put another way, new development has to mitigate its own impacts on the City’s public facilities. This process includes making a determination that there is a reasonable relationship between the purpose of the fee, the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed. In order for DIF to be legally enforceable, local governments must conduct an analysis that identifies anticipated growth that is related to infrastructure costs and apportion those costs to projected development. This is distributed by type of development, square foot, dwelling unit, or per trip basis - with the intent that this impact fee type of distribution equitably mitigates the impact of development on City resources, amenities and infrastructure.

The primary policy objective of a DIF program is to ensure that new development pays the capital costs associated with growth. Although growth also imposes operating costs, there is not a similar system to generate revenue from new development for services. The primary purpose of the DIF Study is to calculate and present fees that will enable the City to expand its inventory of public facilities, as new development creates increased demands on those public facilities.

The City programs DIF-funded capital projects through its Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Using a CIP allows the City to identify and direct its fee revenue to public facilities projects that will accommodate future growth. By programming fee revenues to specific capital projects, the City can help ensure a reasonable relationship between new development and the use of fee revenues as required by the Mitigation Fee Act.

Page 116 of 442 ends

Item 10.a.

Page 3 ends

Impact fee revenue must be spent on new facilities or expansion of current facilities to serve new development. Impact fee revenue can be spent on capital facilities to serve new development, including but not limited to land acquisition, construction of buildings, construction of infrastructure, the acquisition of vehicles or equipment, information technology, software licenses and equipment. The proposed DIF unit measurement is based on Square Foot or Meter Size depending on the type of DIF.

DIF is calculated to fund the cost of facilities required to accommodate growth. The six steps followed in this DIF Study include:

1. Estimate existing development and future growth;

2. Identify facility standards;

3. Determine facilities required to serve new development;

4. Determine the cost of facilities required to serve new development;

5. Calculate fee schedule; and

6. Identify alternative funding requirements.

In accordance with the provisions of Section 66000 of the Government Code, there must be a nexus between the fees imposed, the use of the fees and the development projects on which the fees are imposed. Furthermore, there must be a relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the improvements.

The DIF Study summarizes an analysis of development impact fees needed to support future development in the City through 2050. It is the City’s intent that the costs representing future development’s share of public facilities and capital improvements be imposed on that development in the form of a DIF. During the DIF Study review we identified which public facilities would provide the right categories for the City through 2050. The proposed Ordinance will be adopted following the successful public hearing and adoption of the Resolution. The proposed Ordinance includes the following updated DIF categories to ensure the City’s municipal code contains the current DIF information.

The public facilities and improvements included in this analysis are divided into the following fee categories, which are described in detail in the DIF Study, Attachment 1, Exhibit “B”:
 Fire Protection Facilities
 Police Facilities
 Park Facilities
 Recreation Facilities
 Water Facilities
 Transportation Facilities
 Storm Drain Facilities
 Wastewater Facilities

Page 117 of 442 ends

Item 10.a.

Page 4 ends

Growth projects are used as indicators of demand to determine facility needs and allocate those needs between existing and new development. The growth projections included in the DIF Study are based on a 2023 base year and a planning horizon of 2050. These growth estimates are used to allocate facility costs to the projected new development.

Table 1 shows the estimated number of residents, dwelling units, employees, and nonresidential building square footage in Arroyo Grande, both in 2023 and projected for 2050.

The base year estimates of household residents and dwelling units comes from the California Department Of Finance (DOF). The 2050 projection of residents was identified in the "Medium" growth scenario from the SLOCOG 2050 Regional Growth Forecast. The regional growth forecast projected 8,460 households in 2050. Accounting for 7% vacancy (which is the current vacancy rate reported by the DOF), the projection totals an increase of 1,016 housing units. It assumes that the same ratio of single family to multifamily will be maintained as development occurs.

Base year employees were estimated based on the latest data from the US Census' OnTheMap application and exclude 187 local government (public administration) employees. Total projected workers in 2050 are identified in the regional growth forecast.

The proportion of workers by land use is held consistent with current estimates.

Table 1 – Existing and New Development
The DIF Study details the legal framework that allows the imposition of the DIF, the required findings, the reasonable relationship requirements, and the methodology used in the DIF Study.

The DIF Study does not create the DIF rates but rather recommends DIF rates that would recover the estimated full costs of providing public facilities to mitigate the demands of new development. The City Council must vote to adopt the DIF rates. Collecting the full costs needed to provide these future facilities today positions the City to have resources available when those facilities are needed. For this reason, staff recommends that the attached proposed Resolution be adopted, to fully recover future development related costs. 2023 Increase 2050
Residents 17,740 2,709 20,449
Dwelling Units 8,086 1,016 9,102
Employment 5,338 2,575 7,913
Sources: CA DOF; OnTheMap; SLOCOG 2050 Regional

Page 118 of 442 ends

Item 10.a.

Page 5 ends

Next Steps:

The City Council may approve the DIF via the attached Resolution with the attached Ordinance being subsequently adopted to ensure the proposed DIF categories match the City’s Municipal Code. In compliance with State law, the updated DIF rate will become effective 60 days after adoption of the Resolution. An effective date of April 15, 2024, would result in two and a half months of collecting the new fees during the remainder of the fiscal year. Finally, a second reading and adoption of the Ordinance is scheduled for February 27, 2024.

The amount of the DIF shall be modified annually to account for inflation each January 1 based on the change in the Engineering News Record, California Construction Cost Index each year. Such inflationary increases shall not constitute an increase within the meaning of the Mitigation Fee Act and may be implemented each year without the requirement to obtain approval of the City Council.

ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:

1. Adopt the Resolution updating Development Impact fees set forth in Exhibit “A” and introduce the Ordinance amending Section 3.36.030 of the AGMC; or

2. Modify and adopt the Resolution updating Development Impact fees set forth in “Exhibit “A” and continue the public hearing to introduce the Ordinance amending Section 3.36.030 of the AGMC pending legal counsel review of any modifications applied to the Resolution; or

3. Provide other direction to staff.

ADVANTAGES:

By approving the recommended DIF, the City will be able to recover the estimated cost of providing infrastructure to offset the impact caused by new development.

DISADVANTAGES:

Implementing the recommended DIF will result in an increased cost to new development.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

Adopting the Resolution updating Development Impact fees set forth in the Exhibit “A” and the Ordinance are not projects subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because they have no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.)

Page 119 of 442 ends

Item 10.a.

Page 6 ends

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:

The Agenda was posted at City Hall, on the City’s website, and published in the newspaper in accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act and Government Code Section 54954.2.

Attachments:

1. Proposed Resolution, including the following exhibits i. Exhibit A – the DIF Schedule
ii. Exhibit B – the DIF Study

2. Proposed Ordinance: “An Ordinance of the City Council of Arroyo Grande Amending Section 3.36.030 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Regarding Development Impact Fees and Finding the Ordinance Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act.”

Page 120 of 442 ends

65501.00008\41993952.1
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. _______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING DEVELOPMENT

IMPACT FEES FOR ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN

THE CITY AND TAKING OTHER ACTIONS THERETO
WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande (the “City”), County of San Luis Obispo, State of California is duly authorized pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act (the “Act”), commencing with California Government Code, section 66000 et seq., to impose development impact fees (“DIF”) for purposes defraying all or a portion of the costs of public facilities related to new development occurring within the City; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with requirements of the Act, the City Council has directed staff to conduct a comprehensive review of the City's DIF to determine whether those fees are adequate to defray the cost of public facilities related to new development projects; and
WHEREAS, the City contracted with Willdan Financial Services to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the City's existing DIF; and WHEREAS, Willdan Financial Services prepared a report, entitled 2024 Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update (the “Study”), dated January 30, 2024, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit “B,” and incorporated herein by this reference, which establishes amounts of the City's DIF and explains the nexus between the imposition of the fee and the estimated reasonable cost of constructing certain facilities for which the DIF is charged; and
WHEREAS, the Study and related documents have been made available for public review and comment as required by the Act; and
WHEREAS, the Study substantiates the need for DIF amongst eight different categories of facilities provided by the City; and
WHEREAS, the City provided notice of the public hearing and provided written notice to any interested parties that have requested such notice pursuant to the notice requirements of the Act; and
WHEREAS, in compliance with the Act, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed DIF on February 13, 2024 to hear all oral and written presentations from the public regarding the proposed DIF; and WHEREAS, following the adoption of this Resolution, the City Council will adopt Ordinance No. ___, amending Arroyo Grande Municipal Code section 3.36.030 to reflect minor changes to the newly adopted DIF categories; and

Page 121 of 442 ends

65501.00008\41993952.1
RESOLUTION NO.

PAGE 2
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to adopt the proposed DIF, in accordance with the nexus calculations and recommendations in the Study.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby finds as follows:

SECTION 1. Incorporation. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. Findings. The City Council finds and determines that the Study, complies with the Act by establishing the basis for the imposition of fees on new development.

This finding is based on the fact that the Study:
(a) Identifies the purpose of the fee;
(b) Identifies the use to which the fee will be put;
(c) Shows a reasonable relationship between the use of the fee and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed; (d) Demonstrates a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities and the type of development projects on which the fee is imposed; and
(e) Demonstrates a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facilities or portion of the public facilities attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.

SECTION 3. Fees for Uses Consistent with the Study. The City Council hereby determines that the fees collected pursuant to this Resolution shall be used to finance the public facilities described or identified in the Study or other such facility plans as may be proposed, modified, or amended from time to time by the City Council.

SECTION 4. Approval of Items in Development Impact Fee Study. The City Council has considered the specific project descriptions and cost estimates identified in the Study and hereby approves such project descriptions and cost estimates and finds them reasonable as the basis for calculating and imposing certain DIF.

SECTION 5. Differentiation Among Fees. The City Council finds that the fees recommended in the Study are separate and different from other fees the City may impose through the implementation of a specific plan or as a condition of final map approval, building permit issuance or tentative or parcel map approval pursuant to its authority under the Subdivision Map Act, the Quimby Act, and the City's implementing resolutions and ordinances, as may be amended from time to time.

In addition, this Resolution shall not be deemed to affect the imposition or collection of other fees the City is legally authorized to impose and collect.

Page 122 of 442 ends

65501.00008\41993952.1
RESOLUTION NO.

PAGE 3
SECTION 6. CEQA Finding. The City Council finds that this Resolution is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because this Resolution does not qualify as a “project” under CEQA and because this Resolution will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines section 15060, subd. (c)(2), (3).) Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines defines a project as the whole of an action, which could potentially result in either a direct physical change, or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change, in the environment. Here, this Resolution will not result in any construction or development, and it will not have any other effect that would physically change the environment. This Resolution therefore does not qualify as a project subject to CEQA.

SECTION 7. Adoption of Report. The Study is hereby adopted.

SECTION 8. Amount of Fee. The City Council hereby approves and adopts the DIF as set forth in Exhibit “A” to this Resolution, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Exhibit “A” sets forth the aggregate amount imposed as a DIF for development projects and also sets forth the breakdown of each DIF by category type.

The DIF set forth in Exhibit “A” are consistent with the Study. The amount of the DIF shall be modified annually to account for inflation each January 1 based on the change in the Engineering News Record, California Construction Cost Index each year. Such inflationary increases shall not constitute an increase within the meaning of the Act and may be implemented each year without the requirement to obtain approval of the City Council.

SECTION 9. Prior Resolutions Superseded. The DIF approved by this Resolution supersede previously adopted resolutions that set the amounts of DIF.

SECTION 10. Severability. If any action, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Resolution or the imposition of the DIF for any project described in the Study or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution or other DIF levied by this Resolution that can be given effect without the invalid provisions or application of the DIF.

SECTION 11. Effective Date. Consistent with the Act, the DIF as identified in attached Exhibit "A" adopted by this Resolution shall take effect on April 15, 2024, a period longer than the required sixty (60) days following the adoption of this Resolution by the City Council.

SECTION 12. Records. The documents and materials associated with this Resolution that constitute the record of proceedings on which the City Council’s findings and determinations are based are located at 300 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, CA 93420. The City Clerk is the custodian of the record of proceedings.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande this 13th day of February 2024 by the following vote:

Page 123 of 442 ends

65501.00008\41993952.1
RESOLUTION NO.

PAGE 4
On motion of Council Member __________________ seconded by Council Member __________________ and on the following roll call vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

The foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 13th day of February, 2024.

Page 124 of 442 ends

65501.00008\41993952.1
RESOLUTION NO.

PAGE 5
_____________________________________

CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR
ATTEST:

JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
_____________________________________

MATTHEW DOWNING, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________

ISAAC ROSEN, CITY ATTORNEY

Page 125 of 442 ends

65501.00008\41993952.1
RESOLUTION NO.

PAGE 6
EXHIBIT “A”
2024 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE

Page 126 of 442 ends

65501.00008\41993952.1
RESOLUTION NO.

PAGE 7
EXHIBIT “B”
2024 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY

Page 127 of 442 ends

CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY
UPDATE
FINAL
JANUARY 29, 2024
Oakland Office Corporate Office Other Regional Offices
66 Franklin Street 27368 Via Industria Aurora, CO
Suite 300 Suite 200 Orlando, FL
Oakland, CA 94607 Temecula, CA 92590 Phoenix, AZ
Tel: (510) 832-0899 Tel: (800) 755-6864 Plano, TX
Fax: (888) 326-6864 Seattle, WA
Washington, DC
www.willdan.com
Exhibit B

Page 128 of 442 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 129 of 442 ends

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................... 1 Background and Study Objectives 1
Facility Standards and Costs 1
Use of Fee Revenues 2
Development Impact Fee Schedule Summary 2
Other Funding Needed 4

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 6 Public Facilities Financing in California 6
Study Objectives 6
Fee Program Maintenance 7
Study Methodology 7
Types of Facility Standards 7
New Development Facility Needs and Costs 8
Organization of the Report 9

2. GROWTH FORECASTS ............................................................... 10 Land Use Types 10
Impact Fees for Accessory Dwelling Units 10
Existing and Future Development 11
Occupant Densities 12

3. FIRE PROTECTION FACILITIES .................................................... 14 Service Population 14
Existing Facility Inventory 15
Planned Facilities 15
Cost Allocation 15
Fee Revenue Projection 16
Fee Schedule 16

4. POLICE FACILITIES.................................................................... 18 Service Population 18
Existing Facility Inventory 18
Planned Facilities 19
Cost Allocation 19
Fee Revenue Projection 20
Fee Schedule 20

5. PARK FACILITIES....................................................................... 22 Service Population 22
Existing Park Facilities Inventory 22
Parkland and Park Facilities Unit Costs 23
Park Facility Standards 24

Page 130 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update ii
Quimby Act Standard 24
City of Arroyo Grande Park Facilities Standards 25
Facilities Needed to Accommodate New Development 25
Parks and Recreation Facilities Cost per Capita 26
Use of Fee Revenue 27
Fee Schedule 27

6. RECREATION FACILITIES............................................................ 29 Service Population 29
Existing Facilities Inventory 29
Planned Facilities 30
Cost Allocation 30
Fee Revenue Projection 31
Fee Schedule 31

7. WATER FACILITIES.................................................................... 33 Water Demand 33
EDU Generation by New Development 33
Facility Needs and Costs 34
Cost per EDU 35
Fee Schedule 35

8. TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES..................................................... 37 Trip Demand 37
Trip Demand Growth 38
Planned Facilities 39
Fee per Trip Demand Unit 41
Fee Schedule 41

9. STORM DRAIN FACILITIES .......................................................... 43 Storm Drain Demand 43
EDU Generation by New Development 43
Planned Facilities 44
Cost per Equivalent Dwelling Unit 44
Fee Schedule 45

10. WASTEWATER FACILITIES .......................................................... 46 Wastewater Demand 46
EDU Generation by New Development 46
Facility Needs and Costs 47
Cost per EDU 47
Fee Schedule 48

11. AB 602 REQUIREMENTS............................................................ 49 Compliance with AB 602 49
66016.5. (a) (2) - Level of Service 49
66016.5. (a) (4) – Review of Original Fee Assumptions 49

Page 131 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update iii
66016.5. (a) (5) – Residential Fees per Square Foot 52
66016.5. (a) (6) – Capital Improvement Plan 52

12. IMPLEMENTATION...................................................................... 53 Impact Fee Program Adoption Process 53
Inflation Adjustment 53
Reporting Requirements 53
Programming Revenues and Projects with the CIP 56

13. MITIGATION FEE ACT FINDINGS.................................................. 57 Purpose of Fee 57
Use of Fee Revenues 57
Benefit Relationship 57
Burden Relationship 58
Proportionality 58
APPENDIX ......................................................................................... 59

Page 132 of 442 ends

1 Executive Summary
This report summarizes an analysis of development impact fees needed to support future development in the City of Arroyo Grande through 2050. It is the City’s intent that the costs representing future development’s share of public facilities and capital improvements be imposed on that development in the form of a development impact fee, also known as a public facilities fee. The public facilities and improvements included in this analysis are divided into the fee categories listed below:
▪ Fire Protection Facilities
▪ Police Facilities
▪ Park Facilities
▪ Recreation Facilities
▪ Water Facilities
▪ Transportation Facilities
▪ Storm Drain Facilities
▪ Wastewater Facilities
Background and Study Objectives
The primary policy objective of a development impact fee program is to ensure that new development pays the capital costs associated with growth. Although growth also imposes operating costs, there is not a similar system to generate revenue from new development for services. The primary purpose of this report is to calculate and present fees that will enable the City to expand its inventory of public facilities, as new development creates increases in service demands.

The City collects public facilities fees under authority granted by the Mitigation Fee Act (the Act), contained in California Government Code Sections 66000 et seq. This report provides the necessary findings required by the Act for adoption of the fees presented in the fee schedules contained herein.

The City programs development impact fee-funded capital projects through its Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Using a CIP allows the City to identify and direct its fee revenue to public facilities projects that will accommodate future growth. By programming fee revenues to specific capital projects, the City can help ensure a reasonable relationship between new development and the use of fee revenues as required by the Mitigation Fee Act.

Facility Standards and Costs
There are three approaches used to calculate facilities standards and allocate the costs of planned facilities to accommodate growth in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act requirements in this study.

The existing inventory approach is based on a facility standard derived from the City’s existing level of facilities and existing demand for services. This approach results in no facility deficiencies attributable to existing development. This approach is often used when a long-range plan for new facilities is not available. Future facilities to serve growth will be identified through the City’s annual CIP and budget process and/or completion of a new facility master plan. This approach is used to calculate the fire protection, police, parks and recreation facility fees in this report.

The planned facilities approach allocates costs based on the ratio of planned facilities that serve new development to the increase in demand associated with new development. This approach is appropriate when specific planned facilities that only benefit new development can be identified, or when the specific share of facilities benefiting new development can be identified. Examples include street improvements to avoid deficient levels of service or a sewer trunk line extension to a previously undeveloped area. This approach is used for the water, transportation, storm drain and wastewater facilities fees in this report.

Page 133 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 2 The system plan approach is based on a master facility plan in situations where specific needed facilities serve both existing and new development. This approach allocates existing and planned facilities across existing and new development to determine new development’s fair share of facility needs. This approach is used when it is not possible to differentiate the benefits of new facilities between new and existing development. This approach is not used in this report.

Use of Fee Revenues
Impact fee revenue must be spent on new facilities or expansion of current facilities to serve new development. Facilities can be generally defined as capital acquisition items with a useful life greater than five years. Impact fee revenue can be spent on capital facilities to serve new development, including but not limited to land acquisition, construction of buildings, construction of infrastructure, the acquisition of vehicles or equipment, information technology, software licenses and equipment.

In that the City cannot predict with certainty how and when development within the City will occur during the planning horizon assumed in this study, the City may need to update and revise the project lists funded by the fees documented in this study. Any substitute projects should be funded within the same facility category, and the substitute projects must still benefit and have a relationship to new development. The City could identify any changes to the projects funded by the impact fees when it updates the CIP. The impact fees could also be updated if significant changes to the projects funded by the fees are anticipated.

Development Impact Fee Schedule Summary
Table E.1 summarizes the development impact fees that meet the City’s identified needs and comply with the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act. Table E.2 displays the maximum justified water facilities impact fee schedule.

Page 134 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 3 E.1: Maximum Justified Development Impact Fee Schedule Land Use
Fire
Protection Police Parks1 Recreation Water2 Transportation Storm
Drain Wastewater Total
Residential - per Sq. Ft. $ 0.24 $ 0.17 $ 3.22 $ 0.17 $ - $ 1.37 $ 0.03 $ 0.59 $ 5.79 Nonresidential - per Sq. Ft.

Commercial $ 0.21 $ 0.15 $ - $ - $ - $ 6.94 $ 0.01 $ 0.26 $ 7.57 Office 0.32 0.23 - - - 7.27 0.01 0.29 8.12
2 Fee schedule based on w ater meter size. See Table E.2 for w ater facilities fee schedule.

Sources: Tables 3.5, 4.6, 5.7, 6.6, 7.5, 8.5, 9.5 and 10.5. 1 Mitigation Fee Act fee for infill development show n. Development occurring in subdivisions subject to Quimby Act fee in-lieu of dedication at $2.77 per square foot.

Refer to Table 5.7 for more information.

Page 135 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 4 Meter Size
Impact Fee per
Meter
5/8 inch $ 2,588
3/4 inch 3,881
1 inch 6,469
1-1/2 inch 12,938
2 inch 20,701
3 inch 38,814
4 inch 64,690
6 inch 129,380
1 Includes administrative charge of 2.0 percent for (1) legal, accounting, and other administrative support and (2) impact fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting, mandated public reporting, and fee justification analyses.

Source: Table 7.5.

Table E.2: Maximum Justified Water Impact
Fee Schedule
Other Funding Needed
Impact fees may only fund the share of public facilities related to new development in Arroyo Grande. They may not be used to fund the share of facility needs generated by existing development or by development outside of the City. As shown in Table E.3, approximately $4 million in additional funding will be needed to complete the facility projects the City currently plans to develop if fees are adopted at the maximum justified fee level. The “Additional Funding Required” column shows non-impact fee funding required to fund a share of the improvements partially funded by impact fees. Non-fee funding is needed because these facilities are needed partially to remedy existing deficiencies and partly to accommodate new development. To the extent that the City adopts fees that are lower than the maximum justified amount, the non-fee funding requirements may increase, depending on the fee category and methodology.

The City will need to develop alternative funding sources to fund existing development’s share of the planned facilities. Potential sources of revenue include but are not limited to existing or new general fund revenues, existing or new taxes, special assessments, and grants.

Page 136 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Update Study 5 Table E.3: Non-Impact Fee Funding Required
Fee Category
Total Project
Cost
Other
Identified
Revenue
Development
Fee Revenue
Additional
Funding
Required
Fire Protection $ 1,076,649 $ - $ 1,076,649 $ -
Police 673,344 - 673,344 -
Parks 10,628,000 - 10,628,000 -
Recreation 574,308 - 574,308 -
Water 9,995,398 - 7,179,581 2,815,817
Transportation 22,554,000 11,014,000 11,540,000 -
Storm Drain 784,000 - 96,432 -
Wastewater 3,266,458 - 2,038,454 1,228,003
Total $ 49,552,156 $ 11,014,000 $ 33,806,768 $ 4,043,821 Sources: Tables 3.5, 4.5, 5.5, 6.5, 7.3, 7.4, 8.3, 9.3 and 10.3.

Page 137 of 442 ends

6 1. Introduction
This report presents an analysis of the need for public facilities to accommodate new development in the City of Arroyo Grande. This chapter provides background for the study and explains the study approach under the following sections:
▪ Public Facilities Financing in California;
▪ Study Objectives;
▪ Fee Program Maintenance;
▪ Study Methodology; and
▪ Organization of the Report.

Public Facilities Financing in California
The changing fiscal landscape in California during the past 45 years has steadily undercut the financial capacity of local governments to fund infrastructure. Three dominant trends stand out:
▪ The passage of a string of tax limitation measures, starting with Proposition 13 in 1978 and continuing through the passage of Proposition 218 in 1996; ▪ Declining popular support for bond measures to finance infrastructure for the next generation of residents and businesses; and
▪ Steep reductions in federal and state assistance.

Faced with these trends, many cities and counties have had to adopt a policy of “growth pays its own way.” This policy shifts the burden of funding infrastructure expansion from existing ratepayers and taxpayers onto new development. This funding shift has been accomplished primarily through the imposition of assessments, special taxes, and development impact fees also known as public facilities fees. Assessments and special taxes require the approval of property owners and are appropriate when the funded facilities are directly related to the developing property. Development impact fees, on the other hand, are an appropriate funding source for facilities that benefit all development jurisdiction-wide. Development impact fees need only a majority vote of the legislative body for adoption.

Study Objectives
The primary policy objective of a public facilities fee program is to ensure that new development pays the capital costs associated with growth. The primary purpose of this report is to update the City’s existing impact fees based on the most current available facility plans and growth projections. The maximum justified fees will enable the City to expand its inventory of public facilities as new development leads to increases in service demands.

Arroyo Grande is forecast to see significant growth through this study’s planning horizon of 2050.

This growth will create an increase in demand for public services and the facilities required to deliver them. Given the revenue challenges described above, Arroyo Grande has decided to continue to use a development impact fee program to ensure that new development funds its share of facility costs associated with growth. This report makes use of the most current available

Page 138 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 7 growth forecasts and facility plans to update the City’s existing fee program to ensure that the fee program accurately represents the facility needs resulting from new development.

Fee Program Maintenance
Once a fee program has been adopted it must be properly maintained to ensure that the revenue collected adequately funds the facilities needed by new development. To avoid collecting inadequate revenue, the inventories of existing facilities and costs for planned facilities must be updated periodically for inflation, and the fees recalculated to reflect the higher costs. The use of established indices for each facility included in the inventories (land, buildings, and equipment), such as the California Construction Cost Index, is necessary to accurately adjust the impact fees.

For a list of recommended indices, see Chapter 12.

While fee updates using inflation indices are appropriate for annual or periodic updates to ensure that fee revenues keep up with increases in the costs of public facilities, it is recommended to conduct more extensive updates of the fee documentation and calculation (such as this study) when significant new data on growth forecasts and/or facility plans become available. For further detail on fee program implementation, see Chapter 12.

Study Methodology
Development impact fees are calculated to fund the cost of facilities required to accommodate growth. The six steps followed in this development impact fee study include:

1. Estimate existing development and future growth: Identify a base year for existing development and a growth forecast that reflects increased demand for public facilities;

2. Identify facility standards: Determine the facility standards used to plan for new and expanded facilities;

3. Determine facilities required to serve new development: Estimate the total amount of planned facilities, and identify the share required to accommodate new development;

4. Determine the cost of facilities required to serve new development: Estimate the total amount and the share of the cost of planned facilities required to accommodate new development;

5. Calculate fee schedule: Allocate facilities costs per unit of new development to calculate the development impact fee schedule; and

6. Identify alternative funding requirements: Determine if any non-fee funding is required to complete projects.

The key public policy issue in development impact fee studies is the identification of facility standards (step #2, above). Facility standards document a reasonable relationship between new development and the need for new facilities. Standards ensure that new development does not fund deficiencies associated with existing development.

Types of Facility Standards
There are three separate components of facility standards:
▪ Demand standards determine the amount of facilities required to accommodate growth, for example, park acres per thousand residents, square feet of library space per capita, or gallons of water per day. Demand standards may also reflect a level of service such as the vehicle volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio used in traffic planning.

Page 139 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 8 ▪ Design standards determine how a facility should be designed to meet expected demand, for example, park improvement requirements and technology infrastructure for City office space. Design standards are typically not explicitly evaluated as part of an impact fee analysis but can have a significant impact on the cost of facilities. Our approach incorporates the cost of planned facilities built to satisfy the City’s facility design standards.
▪ Cost standards are an alternate method for determining the amount of facilities required to accommodate growth based on facility costs per unit of demand. Cost standards are useful when demand standards were not explicitly developed for the facility planning process. Cost standards also enable different types of facilities to be analyzed based on a single measure (cost or value) and are useful when different facilities are funded by a single fee program. Examples include facility costs per capita, cost per vehicle trip, or cost per gallon of water per day.

New Development Facility Needs and Costs
A number of approaches are used to identify facility needs and costs to serve new development.

This is often a two-step process: (1) identify total facility needs, and (2) allocate to new development its fair share of those needs.

There are three common methods for determining new development’s fair share of planned facilities costs in this study: the existing inventory method, the planned facilities method, and the system plan method. Often the method selected depends on the degree to which the community has engaged in comprehensive facility master planning to identify facility needs.

The formula used by each approach and the advantages and disadvantages of each method is summarized below:

Existing Inventory Method
The existing inventory method allocates costs based on the ratio of existing facilities to demand from existing development as follows:

Current Value of Existing Facilities
Existing Development Demand
Under this method new development will fund the expansion of facilities at the same standard currently serving existing development. The existing inventory method results in no facility deficiencies attributable to existing development. This method is often used when a long-range plan for new facilities is not available. Future facilities to serve growth are identified through an annual CIP and budget process, possibly after completion of a new facility master plan. This approach is used to calculate the fire protection, police, parks, and recreation facility fees in this report.

Planned Facilities Method
The planned facilities method allocates costs based on the ratio of planned facility costs to demand from new development as follows:

Cost of Planned Facilities
New Development Demand
This method is appropriate when planned facilities will entirely serve new development, or when a fair share allocation of planned facilities to new development can be estimated. An example of the former is a Wastewater trunk line extension to a previously undeveloped area. An example of the latter is expansion of an existing library building and book collection, which will be needed only if new development occurs, but which, if built, will in part benefit existing development, as well.

Under this method new development will fund the expansion of facilities at the standards used in = cost per unit of demand
= cost per unit of demand

Page 140 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 9 the applicable planning documents. This approach is used for the water, transportation, storm drain and wastewater facilities fees in this report.

System Plan Method
This method calculates the fee based on the value of existing facilities plus the cost of planned facilities, divided by demand from existing plus new development:

Value of Existing Facilities + Cost of Planned Facilities Existing + New Development Demand
This method is useful when planned facilities need to be analyzed as part of a system that benefits both existing and new development. It is difficult, for example, to allocate a new fire station solely to new development when that station will operate as part of an integrated system of fire stations that together achieve the desired level of service.

The system plan method ensures that new development does not pay for existing deficiencies.

Often facility standards based on policies such as those found in Comprehensive Plans are higher than the existing facility standards. This method enables the calculation of the existing deficiency required to bring existing development up to the policy-based standard. The local agency must secure non-fee funding for that portion of planned facilities required to correct the deficiency to ensure that new development receives the level of service funded by the impact fee.

This approach is not used in this report.

Organization of the Report
The determination of a public facilities fee begins with the selection of a planning horizon and development of growth projections for population and employment. These projections are used throughout the analysis of different facility categories and are summarized in Chapter 2.

Chapters 3 through 10 identify facility standards and planned facilities, allocate the cost of planned facilities between new development and other development, and identify the appropriate development impact fee for each of the following facility categories:
▪ Fire Protection Facilities
▪ Police Facilities
▪ Park Facilities
▪ Recreation Facilities
▪ Water Facilities
▪ Transportation Facilities
▪ Storm Drain Facilities
▪ Wastewater Facilities
Chapter 11 describes how this nexus study complies with the requirements of AB 602.

Chapter 12 details the procedures that the City must follow when implementing a development impact fee program. Impact fee program adoption procedures are found in California Government Code Sections 66016 through 66018.

The five statutory findings required for adoption of the maximum justified public facilities fees in accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act are documented in Chapter 13. = cost per unit of demand

Page 141 of 442 ends

10 2. Growth Forecasts
Growth projections are used as indicators of demand to determine facility needs and allocate those needs between existing and new development. This chapter explains the source for the growth projections used in this study based on a 2023 base year and a planning horizon of 2050.

Estimates of existing development and projections of future growth are critical assumptions used throughout this report. These estimates are used as follows:
▪ The estimate of existing development in 2023 is used as an indicator of existing facility demand and to determine existing facility standards. ▪ The estimate of total development at the 2050 planning horizon is used as an indicator of future demand to determine total facilities needed to accommodate growth and remedy existing facility deficiencies, if any. ▪ Estimates of growth from 2023 through 2050 are used to (1) allocate facility costs between new development and existing development, and (2) estimate total fee revenues.

The demand for public facilities is based on the service population, dwelling units or nonresidential development creating the need for the facilities.

Land Use Types
To ensure a reasonable relationship between each fee and the type of development paying the fee, growth projections distinguish between different land use types. The land use types for which impact fees have been calculated for are defined below. ▪ Residential Dwelling Units: All residential dwelling units, including detached and attached one-unit dwellings and all multifamily dwellings including apartments, duplexes and condominiums.
▪ Commercial: All commercial, retail, educational, and service development. ▪ Office: All general, professional, and medical office development.

Some developments may include more than one land use type, such as a mixed-use development with both multifamily and commercial uses. In those cases, the facilities fee would be calculated separately for each land use type.

The City has the discretion to determine which land use type best reflects a development project’s characteristics for purposes of imposing an impact fee and may adjust fees for special or unique uses to reflect the impact characteristics of the use. If a project results in the intensification of use, at its discretion, the City can charge the project the difference in fees between the existing low intensity use and the future high intensity use.

Impact Fees for Accessory Dwelling Units
The California State Legislature recently amended requirements on local agencies for the imposition of development impact fees on accessory dwelling units (ADU) with Assembly Bill AB 68 in 2021. The amendment to California Government Code §65852.2(f)(2) stipulates that local agencies may not impose any impact fees on ADU less than 750 square feet. ADU greater than 750 square feet can be charged impact fees in proportion to the size of the primary dwelling unit.

Calculating Impact Fees for Accessory Dwelling Units
For ADUs greater than 750 square feet, impact fees can be charged as a percentage of the single family impact fee. The formula is:

Page 142 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 11 𝐴𝐷𝑈 𝑆𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝐹𝑒𝑒𝑡
𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑅𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑆𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝐹𝑒𝑒𝑡
× 𝑆𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒 𝐹𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑦 𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝐹𝑒𝑒 = 𝐴𝐷𝑈 𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝐹𝑒𝑒
In the case of an 800 square foot ADU and a 1,600 square foot primary residence, the impact fees would be 50 percent (800 square feet / 1,600 square feet = 50%) of the single family dwelling unit fee.

Existing and Future Development
Table 2.1 shows the estimated number of residents, dwelling units, employees, and building square feet in Arroyo Grande, both in 2023 and in 2050. The base year estimates of household residents and dwelling units comes from the California Department of Finance (DOF). The 2050 projection of residents was identified in the “Meduim” growth scenario from the SLOCOG 2050 Regional Growth Forecast. The regional growth forecast projected 8,460 households in 2050.

Accounting for 7% vacancy (which is the current vacancy rate reported by the DOF), the projection totals an increase of 1,016 housing units. It assumes that the same ratio of single family to multifamily will be maintained as development occurs.

Base year employees were estimated based on the latest data from the US Census’ OnTheMap application and exclude 187 local government (public administration) employees. Total projected workers in 2050 are identified the regional growth forecast. The proportion of workers by land use is held consistent with current estimates. The estimates of nonresidential building square feet were estimated by dividing employee counts by the occupancy density factors presented in the following table.

Page 143 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 12 Table 2.1: Existing and New Development
2023 Increase 2050
Residents 1 17,740 2,709 20,449
Dwelling Units 2
Single Family 6,233 783 7,016
Multifamily 1,853 233 2,086
Total 8,086 1,016 9,102

Employment 3
Commercial 3,696 1,783 5,479
Office 1,642 792 2,434
Total 5,338 2,575 7,913
Building Square Feet (000s) 4
Commercial 1,743 841 2,584
Office 504 243 747
Total 2,247 1,084 3,331
1 Current household population from California Department of Finance.

Projection based on SLOCOG 2050 Regional Grow th Forecast, Medium Scenario.
2 Current values from California Department of Finance. Projection of 9,102 housing units for 2050 from SLOCOG Regional Grow th Forecast. Assumes

7.0% vacancy and a total of 8,460 households. Assumes same ratio of single family to multifamily w ill be maintained as development occurs. 4 Estimated building square feet calculated based on increase of employees and density factors in Table 2.2.
3 Current estimates of primary jobs from the US Census' OnTheMap.

Projection based on SLOCOG 2050 Regional Grow th Forecast. Assumes current ratio among land uses w ill be maintained.

Sources: California Department of Finance, Table E-5, SLOCOG 2050 Regional Grow th Forecast; OnTheMap Application,
http://onthemap.ces.census.gov; Table 2.2, Willdan Financial Services.

Occupant Densities
All fees in this report are calculated based on dwelling units or building square feet. Occupant density assumptions ensure a reasonable relationship between the size of a development project, the increase in service population associated with the project, and the amount of the fee.

Occupant densities (residents per dwelling unit or workers per building square foot) are the most appropriate characteristics to use for most impact fees. The fee imposed should be based on the land use type that most closely represents the probable occupant density of the development.

The occupancy factors are shown in Table 2.2. The residential density factors are based on data for Arroyo Grande from the 2021 U.S. Census’ American Community Survey, the most recent data available. The nonresidential occupancy factors are derived from data from the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition.

Page 144 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 13 Table 2.2: Occupant Density Assumptions
Residential - All Units 2.27 Residents per dwelling unit Nonresidential
Commercial 2.12 Employees per 1,000 square feet
Office 3.26 Employees per 1,000 square feet
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables B25024 and B25033; ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition; Willdan Financial Services.

Page 145 of 442 ends

14 3. Fire Protection Facilities
The purpose of this fee is to ensure that new development funds its fair share of fire protection facilities. A fee schedule is presented based on the existing facilities standard of fire protection facilities in the City of Arroyo Grande to ensure that new development provides adequate funding to meet its needs.

Service Population
Fire protection facilities serve both residents and businesses. Therefore, demand for services and associated facilities are based on the City’s service population including residents and workers.

Table 3.1 shows the existing and future projected service population for fire protection facilities.

While specific data is not available to estimate the actual ratio of demand per resident to demand by businesses (per worker) for this service, it is reasonable to assume that demand for these services is less for one employee compared to one resident, because nonresidential buildings are typically occupied less intensively than dwelling units. The 0.31-weighting factor for workers is based on a 40-hour workweek divided by the total number of non-work hours in a week (128) and reflects the degree to which nonresidential development yields a lesser demand for police facilities.

Table 3.1: Fire Protection Facilities Service Population A B A x B = C
Persons
Weighting
Factor
Service
Population
Residents
Existing (2023) 17,740 1.00 17,740
New Development 2,709 1.00 2,709
Total (2050) 20,449 20,449
Workers
Existing (2023) 5,338 0.31 1,655
New Development 2,575 0.31 798
Total (2050) 7,913 2,453
Combined Residents and Weighted Workers
Existing (2023) 19,395
New Development 3,507
Total (2050) 22,902
Sources: Table 2.1; Willdan Financial Services.
1 Workers are w eighted at 0.31 of residents based on a 40 hour w ork w eek out of a possible 128 non-w ork hours in a w eek (40/128 = 0.31)

Page 146 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 15 Existing Facility Inventory
The City owns a single fire station. The replacement cost of the station and canopy are listed in the City’s insured property schedule. The land that the station is sited on is valued at $566,400 per acre, based on an analysis of land sales comparisons in Arroyo Grande since 2018, as reported by CoStar. In total, the City owns approximately $6 million worth of fire facilities, which are summarized in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2: Existing Facility Inventory
Quantity Units Unit Cost
Replacement
Cost
Fire Station - 140 Traffic Way
Land 1.05 acres $ 566,400 $ 594,720
Fire Station 12,698 sq. ft. 420 5,332,554
Canopy 880 sq. ft. 29 25,397
Total Value - Existing Facilities $ 5,952,671
Sources: City of Arroyo Grande; CJPIA Property Schedule, March 7, 2023; Willdan Financial Services.

Planned Facilities
The City is planning to spend future fire facilities fee revenue on an expansion and reconfiguration of the sleeping quarters at the fire station. This will allow the Five Cities Fire Authority to increase staffing and service capacity as the City grows.

Cost Allocation
Table 3.3 expresses the City’s current fire facilities level of service in terms of an existing cost per capita, by dividing the replacement cost of the City’s existing facilities by the existing service population. The resulting cost per capita drives the fee calculation. The cost per capita is multiplied by the worker weighting factor to determine the cost per worker.

Table 3.3: Fire Protection Facilities Existing
Standard
Value of Existing Facilities $ 5,952,671
Existing Service Population 19,395
Cost per Capita $ 307
Facility Standard per Resident $ 307
Facility Standard per Worker1 95
1 Based on a w eighing factor of 0.31.

Sources: Tables 3.1 and 3.2.

Page 147 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 16 Fee Revenue Projection
The City plans to use fire protection facilities fee revenue to construct improvements and acquire capital facilities and equipment to add to the system of fire facilities to serve new development.

Table 3.4 details a projection of fee revenue, based on the service population growth increment identified in Table 3.1.

Table 3.4: Revenue Projection - Existing Standard
Cost per Capita $ 307
Growth in Service Population (2023 to 2050) 3,507
Fee Revenue $ 1,076,649
Sources: Tables 3.1 and 3.4.

Fee Schedule
Table 3.5 shows the maximum justified fire protection facilities fee schedule. The City can adopt any fee up to this amount. The cost per capita is converted to a fee per unit of new development based on dwelling unit and employment densities (persons per dwelling unit or employees per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential building space). The fee per dwelling unit is converted into a fee per square foot by dividing the fee per dwelling unit by the assumed average square footage of a dwelling unit.

The total fee includes a two percent (2.0%) administrative charge to fund costs that include: a standard overhead charge applied to City programs for legal, accounting, and other departmental and administrative support, and fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting and mandated public reporting.

In Willdan’s experience with impact fee programs, two percent of the base fee adequately covers the cost of fee program administration. The administrative charge should be reviewed and adjusted during comprehensive impact fee updates to ensure that revenue generated from the charge sufficiently covers, but does not exceed, the administrative costs associated with the fee program.

Page 148 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 17 Table 3.5: Maximum Justified Fire Protection Facilities Fee Schedule A B C = A x B D = C x 0.02 E = C + D F = E / Average
Cost Per Admin Fee per
Land Use Capita Density Base Fee1 Charge1, 2 Total Fee1 Sq. Ft.3 Residential Dwelling Unit $ 307 2.27 $ 697 $ 14 $ 711 $ 0.24 Nonresidential - per 1,000 Sq. Ft.

Commercial $ 95 2.12 $ 201 $ 4 $ 205 $ 0.21
Office 95 3.26 310 6 316 0.32
Sources: Tables 2.2 and 3.3.
2 Administrative charge of 2.0 percent for (1) legal, accounting, and other administrative support and (2) impact fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting, mandated public reporting, and fee justification analyses.
1 Fee per average sized dw elling unit or per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential building space. 3 Assumes an average of 2,974 square feet per dw elling unit in Arroyo Grande, based on an analysis of recent building permits.

Page 149 of 442 ends

18 4. Police Facilities
The purpose of this fee is to ensure that new development funds its fair share of police facilities.

A fee schedule is presented based on the existing standard of police facilities in the City of Arroyo Grande to ensure that new development provides adequate funding to meet its needs.

Service Population
Police facilities serve both residents and businesses. Therefore, demand for services and associated facilities are based on the City’s service population including residents and workers.

Table 4.1 shows the existing and future projected service population for police facilities. While specific data is not available to estimate the actual ratio of demand per resident to demand by businesses (per worker) for this service, it is reasonable to assume that demand for these services is less for one employee compared to one resident, because nonresidential buildings are typically occupied less intensively than dwelling units. The 0.31-weighting factor for workers is based on a 40-hour workweek divided by the total number of non-work hours in a week (128) and reflects the degree to which nonresidential development yields a lesser demand for police facilities.

Table 4.1: Police Facilities Service Population
A B A x B = C
Persons
Weighting
Factor
Service
Population
Residents
Existing (2023) 17,740 1.00 17,740
New Development 2,709 1.00 2,709
Total (2050) 20,449 20,449
Workers
Existing (2023) 5,338 0.31 1,655
New Development 2,575 0.31 798
Total (2050) 7,913 2,453
Combined Residents and Weighted Workers
Existing (2023) 19,395
New Development 3,507
Total (2050) 22,902
Sources: Table 2.1; Willdan Financial Services.
1 Workers are w eighted at 0.31 of residents based on a 40 hour w ork w eek out of a possible 128 non-w ork hours in a w eek (40/128 = 0.31) Existing Facility Inventory
The City’s police facilities inventory is comprised of a police station, garage and police vehicles.

The replacement cost of the buildings of these facilities was identified in the City’s insurance

Page 150 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 19 property schedule. The land that the station is sited on is valued at $566,400 per acre, based on an analysis of land sales comparisons in Arroyo Grande since 2018, as reported by CoStar. In total, the City owns $4.2 million worth of police facilities. Table 4.2 displays the City’s existing inventory of police facilities.

Table 4.2: Existing Police Facilities Inventory
Quantity Units Unit Cost
Replacement
Cost
Police Station - 200 North Halycon Road
Land 0.69 acres $566,400 $ 390,816
Station 7,528 sq. ft. 357 2,686,425
Garage 1,000 sq. ft. 91 90,864
Subtotal $ 3,168,105
Vehicles $ 1,056,204
Total Value - Existing Facilities $ 4,224,309
Sources: City of Arroyo Grande; CJPIA Property Schedule, March 7, 2023; Appendix Table A.1; Willdan Financial Services.

Planned Facilities
Table 4.3 displays the planned police facilities, including upgrades to its records management system, upgrades to property and evidence storage, and new community safety cameras. In total, the City has identified $175,000 of planned police facilities.

Table 4.3: Planned Police Facilities
Cost
Report Management System (RMS) Upgrade at PD $ 150,000
Property and Evidence Storage System Upgrade 25,000
Total Cost of Planned Facilities $ 175,000
Source: City of Arroyo Grande FY 2023-25 Biennial Budget.

Cost Allocation
Table 4.4 expresses the City’s current police facilities level of service in terms of an existing cost per capita, by dividing the replacement cost of the City’s existing facilities by the existing service population. The resulting cost per capita drives the fee calculation. The cost per capita is multiplied by the worker weighting factor to determine the cost per worker.

Page 151 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 20 Table 4.4: Police Facilities Existing Standard
Value of Existing Facilities $4,224,309
Existing Service Population 19,395
Cost per Capita $ 218
Facility Standard per Resident $ 218
Facility Standard per Worker1 68
1 Based on a w eighing factor of 0.31.

Sources: Tables 4.1 and 4.2.

Fee Revenue Projection
The City plans to use police facilities fee revenue to construct improvements and acquire capital facilities and equipment to add to the system of police facilities to serve new development. Table

4.5 details a projection of fee revenue, based on the service population growth increment identified in Table 4.1. When setting fees to maintain the existing level of service, the resulting fee revenue will fully fund the identified planned facilities, and the City will need to identify additional facilities to maintain the level of service as new development adds demand for police services and facilities through the planning horizon.

Table 4.5: Revenue Projection - Existing Standard
Cost per Capita $ 218
Growth in Service Population (2023 to 2050) 3,507
Fee Revenue $ 764,526
Sources: Tables 4.1 and 4.4.

Fee Schedule
Table 4.6 shows the maximum justified police facilities fee schedule. The City can adopt any fee up to this amount. The cost per capita is converted to a fee per unit of new development based on dwelling unit and employment densities (persons per dwelling unit or employees per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential building space). The fee per dwelling unit is converted into a fee per square foot by dividing the fee per dwelling unit by the assumed average square footage of a dwelling unit.

Page 152 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 21 In Willdan’s experience with impact fee programs, two percent of the base fee adequately covers the cost of fee program administration. The administrative charge should be reviewed and adjusted during comprehensive impact fee updates to ensure that revenue generated from the charge sufficiently covers, but does not exceed, the administrative costs associated with the fee program.

Table 4.6: Maximum Justified Police Facilities Fee Schedule A B C = A x B D = C x 0.02 E = C + D F = E / Average
Cost Per Admin Fee per
Land Use Capita Density Base Fee1 Charge1, 2 Total Fee1 Sq. Ft.3 Residential Dwelling Unit $ 218 2.27 $ 495 $ 10 $ 505 $ 0.17 Nonresidential - per 1,000 Sq. Ft.

Commercial $ 68 2.12 $ 144 $ 3 $ 147 $ 0.15
Office 68 3.26 222 4 226 0.23
Sources: Tables 2.2 and 4.4.
1 Fee per average sized dw elling unit or per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential building space. 2 Administrative charge of 2.0 percent for (1) legal, accounting, and other administrative support and (2) impact fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting, mandated public reporting, and fee justification analyses.
3 Assumes an average of 2,974 square feet per dw elling unit in Arroyo Grande, based on an analysis of recent building permits.

Page 153 of 442 ends

22 5. Park Facilities
The purpose of the park facilities impact fee is to fund the park facilities needed to serve new development. The maximum justified impact fee is presented based on the existing standard of park facilities per capita.

Service Population
Park facilities in Arroyo Grande primarily serve residents. Therefore, demand for services and associated facilities is based on the City’s residential population. Table 5.1 shows the existing and future projected service population for park and recreation facilities.

Table 5.1: Park Facilities Service
Population
Residents
Existing (2023) 17,740
New Development 2,709
Total (2050) 20,449
Source: Table 2.1.

Existing Park Facilities Inventory
The City of Arroyo Grande owns and maintains several parks throughout the city. Table 5.2 summarizes the City’s existing parkland inventory in 2023. All facilities are located within the City limits. In total, the inventory includes a total of 43.9 acres of improved parkland.

Page 154 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 23 Table 5.2: Parkland Inventory
Name
Developed
Acres
Unimproved
Open Space Total
Neighborhood and Community Parks
Soto Sports Complex 18.00 - 18.00
Rancho Grande Park 8.00 - 8.00
Strother Park 8.14 - 8.14
Terra De Oro Park 3.94 - 3.94
Elm Street Park 5.00 - 5.00
Heritage Square Park 2.12 - 2.12
Health Fitness Park 0.51 - 0.51
Kingo Park 0.80 - 0.80
Kiwanis Park 3.30 - 3.30
Parque Pequeno 0.58 - 0.58
Hoosegow Park 0.31 - 0.31
Hart-Collett Firefighters Memorial Park 0.36 - 0.36
Village Gazebo 0.25 - 0.25
Dower Way Side Park 0.10 - 0.10
Tiger Tail Park 1.22 - 1.22
Total 52.63 - 52.63
Open Space
James Way Oak Habitat & Wildlife Preserve - 75.02 75.02 Total 52.63 75.02 127.65
Source: City of Arroyo Grande.

Parkland and Park Facilities Unit Costs
Table 5.3 displays the unit costs necessary to develop parkland in Arroyo Grande. The land cost assumption was based on an analysis of recent land sales within the City of Arroyo Grande using data from CoStar. An estimate of $750,000 per acre for standard parkland improvements is based on Willdan’s recent experience with other clients in California. Parkland acquisition is valued at $566,400 per acre, based on an analysis of land sales comparisons in Arroyo Grande since 2018, as reported by CoStar. In total, it is assumed to cost approximately $1.3 million to acquire and improve an acre of parkland in Arroyo Grande. Also shown in the table is an estimate for open space acquisition. This assumption is based on land sales comparisons of agricultural land, also reported by CoStar.

Page 155 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 24 Table 5.3: Park Facilities Unit Costs
Cost
Per Acre
Share of
Total Costs
Standard Park Improvements $ 750,000
Vehicles (See Appendix Table A.2) 3,757
Total Park Improvements $ 753,757 57%
Land Acquisition 566,400 43%
Total Cost per Acre $1,320,157 100%
Open Space Acquisition $ 52,800
Sources: City of Arroyo Grande; CoStar; Willdan Financial Services.

Park Facility Standards
Park facility standards establish a reasonable relationship between new development and the need for expanded park facilities. Information regarding the City’s existing inventory of existing parks facilities was obtained from City staff.

The most common measure in calculating new development’s demand for parks is the ratio of park acres per resident. In general, facility standards may be based on a jurisdiction’s existing inventory of park facilities, or an adopted policy standard contained in a master facility plan or general plan. Facility standards may also be based on a land dedication standard established by the Quimby Act.
1 Quimby Act Standard
The Quimby Act specifies that the dedication requirement must be a minimum of 3.0 acres and a maximum of 5.0 acres per 1,000 residents. A jurisdiction can require residential developers to dedicate above the three-acre minimum if the jurisdiction’s existing park standard at the time it adopted its Quimby Act ordinance justifies the higher level (up to five acres per 1,000 residents).

The standard used must also conform to the jurisdiction’s adopted general or specific plan standards.

The Quimby Act only applies to land subdivisions. The Quimby Act would not apply to residential development on future approved projects on single parcels, such as apartment complexes and other multifamily development.

The Quimby Act allows payment of a fee in lieu of land dedication. The fee is calculated to fund acquisition of the same amount of land that would have been dedicated.

The Quimby Act allows use of in-lieu fee revenue for any park or recreation facility purpose.

Allowable uses of this revenue include land acquisition, park improvements including recreation facilities, and rehabilitation of existing park and recreation facilities. The Quimby Act generally requires that fees be used for neighborhood and community park acreage to serve the subdivision, except in limited circumstances.
1 California Government Code §66477.

Page 156 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 25 City of Arroyo Grande Park Facilities Standards
Table 5.4 shows the existing standard for improved park acreage per 1,000 residents based on the type of parkland. In total the City has an existing parkland standard of 2.97 acres per 1,000 residents, which is less than the minimum Quimby standard of 3.0 acres per 1,000 residents..

The impact fee analysis in this report will be based on maintaining the City’s 2.97 acre per 1,000 resident standard as new development adds demand for parks in Arroyo Grande. Fees in-lieu of land dedication for subdivisions are calculated at the minimum Quimby standard of 3.0 acres of developed parkland per 1,000 residents.

Table 5.4 also shows the City’s existing open space standard. This is calculated separately from the parkland standard. The current open space standard is 4.23 acres per 1,000 residents.

Table 5.4: Parkland Standards
Developed Park Acreage 52.63
Existing Service Population (2023) 17,740
Existing Standard (Acres per 1,000 Residents) 2.97
Quimby Act Standard (Acres per 1,000 Residents) 3.00
Open Space Acreage 75.02
Existing Service Population (2023) 17,740
Existing Standard (Acres per 1,000 Residents) 4.23
Sources: Tables 5.1 and 5.2.

Facilities Needed to Accommodate New Development
Table 5.5 shows the park facilities needed to accommodate new development at the existing standard. To achieve the standard by the planning horizon, depending on the amount of development subject to the Quimby Act, new development must fund the purchase and improvement of between 8.05 and 8.13 parkland acres.

The facility standards and resulting fees under the Quimby Act are higher because development will be charged to provide 3.0 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, and 2.97 acres of improvements, whereas development not subject to the Quimby Act will be charged to provide only 2.97 acres of parkland and improvements per 1,000 residents. Since the exact amount of development that will be subject to the Quimby fees is unknown at this time, Table 5.5 presents the range of total facility costs that may be incurred depending on the amount of development subject to the Quimby Act.

Table 5.5 also displays the cost necessary to maintain the City’s existing open space standard.

The City would need to acquire 11.46 acres of open space to maintain this standard.

Page 157 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 26 Table 5.5: Park Facilities to Accommodate New Development Calculation Parkland Improvements Total Range1
Parkland (Quimby Act), Improvements (Mitigation Fee Act) 2 Facility Standard (acres/1,000 capita) A 3.00 2.97
Growth in Service Population (2023 to 2050) B 2,709 2,709 Facility Needs (acres) C = A x B/1000 8.13 8.05
Average Unit Cost (per acre) D $ 566,400 $ 753,757
Total Cost of Facilities E = C x D $4,605,000 $ 6,068,000 $10,673,000 Parkland and Improvements - Mitigation Fee Act 3
Facility Standard (acres/1,000 capita) A 2.97 2.97
Growth in Service Population (2023 to 2050) B 2,709 2,709 Facility Needs (acres) C = A x B/1000 8.05 8.05
Average Unit Cost (per acre) D $ 566,400 $ 753,757
Total Cost of Facilities E = C x D $4,560,000 $ 6,068,000 $10,628,000 Open Space
Facility Standard (acres/1,000 capita) A 4.23 -
Growth in Service Population (2023 to 2050) B 2,709 -
Facility Needs (acres) C = A x B/1000 11.46 -
Average Unit Cost (per acre) D $ 52,800 -
Total Cost of Facilities E = C x D $ 605,000 $ - $ 605,000 Note: Totals have been rounded to the thousands.
1 Values in this column show the range of the cost of parkland acquisition and development should all development be either subject to the Quimby Act, or to the Mitigation Fee Act, respectively. 2 Cost of parkland to serve new development show n if all development is subject to the Quimby Act (Subdivisions of 50 units or more). Parkland charged at 3.0 acres per 1,000 residents; improvements charged at the existing standard. 3 Cost of parkland to serve new development show n if all development is subject to the Mitigation Fee Act. Parkland and improvements are charged at the existing standard.

Sources: Tables 5.1, 5.3, and 5.4.

Parks and Recreation Facilities Cost per Capita
Table 5.6 shows the cost per capita of providing new park facilities at the Quimby standard, and the existing facility standard. The cost per capita is shown separately for land and improvements.

The costs per capita in this table will serve as the basis of four fees:
• A Quimby Act Fee in-lieu of parkland dedication. This fee is payable by residential development occurring in subdivisions.
• A Mitigation Fee Act Fee for parkland acquisition. This fee is payable by residential development not occurring in subdivisions.
• A Mitigation Fee Act Fee for parkland improvements. This fee is payable by all residential development.
• A Mitigation Fee Act Fee for open space acquisition. This fee is payable by all residential development.

Page 158 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 27 A development project pays either the Quimby Act Fee in-lieu of land dedication, or the Mitigation Fee Act Fee for land acquisition, not both. All development projects pay the Mitigation Fee Act Fees for park improvements and open space.

Table 5.6: Park Facilities Investment per Capita
Improvements Open Space
Calculation Quimby Fee OR Impact Fee AND Impact Fee AND Impact Fee Parkland Investment (per acre) A $ 566,400 $ 566,400 $ 753,757 $ 52,800 Existing Standard (acres per 1,000 capita) B 3.00 2.97 2.97 4.23 Total Cost per 1,000 capita C = A x B $ 1,699,200 $1,682,200 $ 2,238,700 $ 223,300 Cost per Resident D = C / 1,000 $ 1,699 $ 1,682 $ 2,239 $ 223 Sources: Tables 5.3 and 5.4.

Land
Use of Fee Revenue
The City plans to use park and recreation facilities fee revenue to purchase parkland and open space and construct improvements to add to the system of park facilities that serves new development. The City may only use impact fee revenue to provide facilities and intensify usage of existing facilities needed to serve new development. The City should program fee revenue to capacity expanding projects annually through its CIP and budget process.

Fee Schedule
To calculate fees by land use type, the investment in park facilities is determined on a per resident basis for parkland acquisition, open space acquisition and parkland improvements.

These investment factors (shown in Table 5.6) are based on the unit cost estimates and the City’s existing facility standards.

Table 5.7 shows the maximum justified park and recreation facilities fee based on the existing standard per capita under the Quimby Act and under the existing park standard under the Mitigation Fee Act, respectively. The cost per resident is converted to a fee per dwelling unit using the occupancy density factor from Table 2.2. The fee per dwelling unit is converted into a fee per square foot by dividing the fee per dwelling unit by the assumed average square footage of a dwelling unit.

Page 159 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 28 Table 5.7: Maximum Justified Park and Recreation Facilities Fee Schedule A B C = A x B D = C x 0.02 E = C + D F = E / Average
Cost Per Base Admin Fee per
Land Use Capita Density Fee1 Charge1, 2 Total Fee Sq. Ft.3 Quimby Act - Subdivisions
Parkland $ 1,699 2.27 $ 3,857 $ 77 $ 3,934 $ 1.32
Improvements 2,239 2.27 5,083 102 5,185 1.74
Open Space 223 2.27 506 10 516 0.17
Total $ 4,161 $ 9,446 $ 189 $ 9,635 $ 3.23
Mitigation Fee Act - Infill
Parkland $ 1,682 2.27 $ 3,818 $ 76 $ 3,894 $ 1.31
Improvements 2,239 2.27 5,083 102 5,185 1.74
Open Space 223 2.27 506 10 516 0.17
Total $ 4,144 $ 9,407 $ 188 $ 9,595 $ 3.22
Sources: Tables 2.2 and 5.6.
2 Administrative charge of 2.0 percent for (1) legal, accounting, and other administrative support and (2) impact fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting, mandated public reporting, and fee justification analyses.
1 Fee per average sized dw elling unit or per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential building space. 3 Assumes an average of 2,974 square feet per dw elling unit in Arroyo Grande, based on an analysis of recent building permits.

Page 160 of 442 ends

29 6. Recreation Facilities
The purpose of this fee is to ensure that new development funds its fair share of recreation facilities. A fee schedule is presented based on the existing facilities standard of recreation facilities in the City of Arroyo Grande to ensure that new development provides adequate funding to meet its needs.

Service Population
Park facilities in Arroyo Grande primarily serve residents. Therefore, demand for services and associated facilities is based on the City’s residential population. Table 6.1 shows the existing and future projected service population for recreation facilities.

Table 6.1: Recreation Facilities
Service Population
Residents
Existing (2023) 17,740
New Development 2,709
Total (2050) 20,449
Sources: Table 2.1; Willdan Financial Services.

Existing Facilities Inventory
The City’s recreation facilities inventory is comprised of the Community Center/Woman’s Club, Historical Society Complex, and Mark M. Millis Community Center. The replacement cost of the buildings was identified in the City’s insured property schedule. The assumed land costs is valued at $566,400 per acre, based on an analysis of land sales comparisons in Arroyo Grande since 2018, as reported by CoStar. In total the City owns $3.8 million worth of recreation facilities. The recreation facilities inventory is displayed in Table 6.2.

Page 161 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 30 Table 6.2: Existing Recreation Facilities Inventory
Quantity Units Unit Cost
Replacement
Cost
Land (acres)
Community Center/Womans Club 2.05 acres $566,400 $ 1,161,120 Historical Society Complex 1.21 acres 566,400 685,344
Subtotal - Land 3.26 $ 1,846,464
Buildings (square feet)
Community Center/Womans Club 4,477 sq. ft. $ 251 $ 1,125,815 Mark M. Millis Community Center1 5,600 sq. ft. - -
Historical Society Complex - House, Single Family 1,371 sq. ft. 201 275,528 Historical Society Complex - Museum 864 sq. ft. 195 168,748 Historical Society Complex - Barn 2,400 sq. ft. 81 194,145 Historical Society Complex - House, Single Family 780 sq. ft. 187 146,173 Historical Society Complex - 100% Garage 160 sq. ft. 49 7,901 Subtotal - Buildings 15,652 $ 1,918,310
Total Value - Existing Facilities $ 3,764,774
1 No value is show n for this facility because it w ill be replaced by the planned facility.

Sources: City of Arroyo Grande; CJPIA Property Schedule, March 7, 2023; CoStar; Willdan Financial Services.

Planned Facilities
The City plans to construct a new community center to replace the Millis Community Center. The total cost of the planned facility is $6.2 million. This planned facility cost does not drive the fee calculation, rather, the fees are set to maintain the existing level of service.

Table 6.3: Planned Facilities
Cost
Recreation Services / Community Center Building $ 6,150,000 Total $ 6,150,000
Source: City of Arroyo Grande FY 2023-25 Biennial Budget.

Cost Allocation
Table 6.4 expresses the City’s current recreation facilities level of service in terms of an existing cost per capita, by dividing the replacement cost of the City’s existing facilities by the existing service population. The resulting cost per capita drives the fee calculation.

Page 162 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 31 Table 6.4: Existing Standard
Value of Existing Facilities $ 3,764,774
Existing Service Population 17,740
Cost per Resident $ 212
Sources: Tables 6.1 and 6.3.

Fee Revenue Projection
The City plans to use recreation facilities fee revenue to construct improvements and acquire capital facilities and equipment to add to the system of recreation facilities to serve new development. While the City plans to construct the facilities in Table 6.3 the costs in that table do not drive the fee calculation. Table 6.5 details a projection of fee revenue, based on the service population growth increment identified in Table 6.1 and the existing facility standard identified in Table 6.4. The City will have spent the fee revenue appropriately so long as the fee revenue is spent on new or expanded recreation facilities that benefit new development.

Table 6.5: Revenue Projection - Existing Standard
Cost per Capita $ 212
Growth in Service Population (2023 to 2050) 2,709
Projected Fee Revenue $ 574,308
Sources: Tables 6.1 and 6.4.

Fee Schedule
Table 6.6 shows the maximum justified recreation facilities fee schedule. The cost per capita is converted to a fee per unit of new development based on dwelling unit densities (persons per dwelling unit). The fee per dwelling unit is converted into a fee per square foot by dividing the fee per dwelling unit by the assumed average square footage of a dwelling unit.

Page 163 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 32 Table 6.6: Maximum Justified Recreation Facilities Fee Schedule A B C = A x B D = C x 0.02 E = C + D F = E / Average
Cost Per Admin Fee per
Land Use Capita Density Base Fee1 Charge1, 2 Total Fee1 Sq. Ft.3 Residential Dwelling Unit $ 212 2.27 $ 481 $ 10 $ 491 $ 0.17 Sources: Tables 2.2 and 6.4.
1 Fee per average sized dw elling unit.
2 Administrative charge of 2.0 percent for (1) legal, accounting, and other administrative support and (2) impact fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting, mandated public reporting, and fee justification analyses.
3 Assumes an average of 2,974 square feet per dw elling unit in Arroyo Grande, based on an analysis of recent building permits.

Page 164 of 442 ends

33 7. Water Facilities
This chapter details an analysis of the need for water facilities to accommodate growth within the City of Arroyo Grande. The projects and associated costs in this chapter were identified in the City’s Water System Master Plan. This chapter documents a reasonable relationship between new development and a water facilities impact fee to fund facilities that serve new development.

Water Demand
Estimates of new development and its consequent increased water demand provide the basis for calculating the water facilities fee. The need for water facilities improvements is based on the water demand placed on the system by development. A typical measure of demand is a flow generation rate, expressed as the number of gallons per day generated by a specific type of land use. Flow generation rates are a reasonable measure of demand for the City’s system of water improvements because they represent the average rate of demand that will be placed on the system per land use designation.

Table 7.1 shows the calculation of equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) demand factors based on flow generation by land use category. The residential flow generation estimates are based on 2023 actual usage data from the City. The nonresidential flow generation factors per acre are based on data from the City’s Water System Master Plan. EDU factors express water flow from each land use in terms of the flow generated by a single family dwelling unit.

Table 7.1: Water Demand by Land Use
Land Use Type
Flow
Generation1 Density2
Average Flow
Generation per
DU or 1,000 Sq.

Ft.3
Equivalent
Dwelling Unit
(EDU)
Residential Dwelling Unit
Single Family 178 1.00
Multifamily 148 0.83
Nonresidential - per 1,000 Sq. Ft.

Commercial 1,102 43.56 25.30 0.14
Office 1,243 43.56 28.54 0.16
Sources: Table 3-2, City of Arroyo Grande Water System Master Plan; Willdan Financial Services. 1 Gallons per acre per day.
2 1,000 square feet per acre for nonresidential. Nonresidential densities are based on typical densities for each land use from the City's zoning code. Nonresidential densities are based on floor-area-ratios of 1.0 for commercial and 1.0 for office.
3 Residential flow generation by unit type provided by the City for use in this analysis. Nonresidential flow generation calculated using flow generation per acre and density assumptions show n in this table.

EDU Generation by New Development
Table 7.2 shows the estimated EDU generation from new development through 2050. The EDU factors from Table 7.1 are multiplied by the land use assumptions from Table 2.1 to estimate total EDUs in the base year, at the planning horizon and for new development. New development will

Page 165 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 34 generate approximately 1,132 new EDUs through 2050, comprising 12.3% of water demand in the City at that time.

Table 7.2: Water Facilities Equivalent Dwelling Units
Land Use
EDU
Factor
Units /
1,000 SF EDUs
Units /
1,000 SF EDUs
Units /
1,000 SF EDUs
Residential - per Dwelling Unit
Single Family 1.00 6,233 6,233 783 783 7,016 7,016
Multifamily

0.83 1,853 1,538 233 193 2,086 1,731
Subtotal 8,086 7,771 1,016 976 9,102 8,747
Nonresidential - per 1,000 Sq. Ft.

Commercial 0.14 1,743 244 841 118 2,584 362
Office 0.16 504 81 243 38 747 119
Subtotal 2,247 325 1,084 156 3,331 481
Total 8,096 1,132 9,228

87.7% 12.3% 100%
Sources: Tables 2.1 and 7.1.
2023 Growth 2023 to 2050 Total - 2050
Facility Needs and Costs
Table 7.3 identifies the planned water facilities to be funded by the fee. Project costs from the 2012 Water System Master Plan have been adjusted for inflation into 2023 dollars, using the Engineering News Record’s Construction Cost Index (CCI). Those projects that have already been completed, or that do not benefit new development have been excluded from the table.

Projects that are needed to serve both existing and new development are allocated to the impact fee based on the increase in capacity associated with each improvement. For project C-3, the impact fee is allocated a portion of the costs based on new development’s share of EDUs in 2050 (12.3%), identified in Table 7.2. Projects that are needed solely to serve new development are allocated 100% to new development through this impact fee.

Table 7.3: Water Facilities Costs to Serve New Development No. Description Size
Total Cost
(2012)
Total Cost
(2023)
Allocation to
New
Development
Cost Allocated
to New
Development
B‐4 Highway 101 Crossing Upgrade – El Camino Real to West Brach St.1 415‐LF $ 454,600 $ 659,852 57.3% $ 377,864 B‐5 Highway 101 Crossing Upgrade – West Cherry Avenue1 280‐LF 358,600 520,508 57.3% 298,069 B‐6 Phased Mains Replacement1 3,865‐LF 1,018,050 1,477,700 57.3% 846,205 B‐10 Lierly Lane to Coach Road Upgrade2 3,245‐LF 288,800 419,193 75.0% 314,395 C‐1 New Well 800‐gpm 1,134,900 1,647,308 100.0% 1,647,308 C‐2 Miller Way Booster Zone Upgrade 75‐gpm 136,600 198,275 50.0% 99,138 C‐3 Security Upgrades N/A 47,100 68,366 12.3% 8,409
C‐4 Coach Road and Greenwood Drive Upgrades 1,385‐LF 267,600 388,422 100.0% 388,422 C‐7 4‐inch Mains Upgrades2 11,600‐LF 2,162,000 3,138,145 75.0% 2,353,609 C‐8 Phased Mains Replacement13,865‐LF 1,018,000 1,477,628 57.3% 846,163 Total $ 6,886,250 $ 9,995,398 $ 7,179,581
1 Upgrading 8" cast iron mains to 8" PVC mains w ill increase capacity by 234%. 2 Larger mains represent 400% increase in capacity.

Sources: City of Arroyo Grande Water System Master Plan, 2012; Engineering New s Record's Construction Cost Index (CCI); Table 7.2, Willdan Financial Services.

Page 166 of 442 ends

City of Arroyo Grande Development Impact Fee Nexus Study Update 35 Cost per EDU
Table 7.4 calculates a cost per EDU associated by dividing the total cost of projects allocated to new development identified in Table 7.3 by the growth in EDUs identified in Table 7.2.

Table 7.4: Cost per EDU
Cost Allocated to New Development $ 7,179,581
Growth in EDUs (2023 to 2050) 1,132
Cost per EDU $ 6,342
2% Fee Program Administration 127
Total Fee per EDU $ 6,469
Sources: Tables 7.2 and 7.3.

Fee Schedule
The maximum justified fee for water facilities is shown in Table 7.5. The cost per EDU is converted to a fee per unit of new development based on capacity of a 1” meter relative to the capacity of other meter sizes. Using water meter size to drive the fee schedule is reasonable and directly proportional to the amount of water that can be accommodated by a connection.

Page 167 of 442 ends

Arroyo Grande City CouncilFebruary 13, 2024

Arroyo Grande City Council
February 13, 2024