Agenda packet — Artesia City Council, June 9, 2025 (part 4 of 5)

0.070 ppm
(137 µg/m3)
Respirable
Particulate
Matter (PM10)9
24 Hour 50 µg/m3
Gravimetric or
Beta Attenuation
150 µg/m3
= Primary
Standard
Inertial Separation and
AAM Gravimetric Analysis 15 20 µg/m3 —
Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)9
24 Hour No Separate State Standard 35 µg/m3 = Primary
Standard
Inertial Separation and
Gravimetric Analysis
AMM15 12 µg/m3 Gravimetric or
Beta Attenuation 9 µg/m3 15 µg/m3
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
1 Hour 20 ppm
(23 mg/m3) Non-Dispersive
Infrared Photometry
(NDIR)
35 ppm
(40 mg/m3) — Non-Dispersive Infrared
Photometry
(NDIR)
8 Hour 9.0 ppm
(10 mg/m3)
9 ppm
(10 mg/m3)
8 Hour
(Lake Tahoe)
6 ppm
(7 mg/m3) — —
Nitrogen
Dioxide
(NO2)10
1 Hour 0.18 ppm
(339 µg/m3) Gas Phase
Chemiluminescence

0.10 ppm
(188 µg/m3) —
Gas Phase Chemiluminescence
AAM15 0.030 ppm
(57 µg/m3)

0.053 ppm
(100 µg/m3)
= Primary
Standard
Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2)11
1 Hour 0.25 ppm
(655 µg/m3)
Ultraviolet
Fluorescence
.075 ppm
(196 µg/m3) —
Ultraviolet Fluorescence;
Spectrophotometry
(Pararosaniline Method)
3 Hour — — 0.5 ppm
(1300 µg/m3)
24 Hour 0.04 ppm
(105 µg/m3)

0.14 ppm
(for certain areas)11 —
AAM15 — 0.030 ppm
(for certain areas)11 —
Lead12,13
30 Day Average 1.5 µg/m3
Atomic Absorption
— —
High Volume Sampler and
Atomic Absorption
Calendar
Quarter — 1.5 µg/m3 (for certain areas)12 = Primary
Rolling Standard
3-Month Avg.13 — 0.15 µg/m3
 SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.3-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Pollutant Averaging
Time
California Standards1 Federal Standards 2
Concentration3 Method4 Primary3,5 Secondary 3,6 Method7 Visibility
Reducing
Particles14
8 Hour See footnote 14
Beta Attenuation &
Transmittance through
Filter Tape No
National
Standards
Sulfates 24 Hour 25 µg/m3 Ion Chromatography
Hydrogen
Sulfide 1 Hour 0.03 ppm(42 µg/m3)
Ultraviolet
Fluorescence
Vinyl Chloride12 24 Hour 0.01 ppm
(26 µg/m3)
Gas
Chromatography
Notes:
1 California standards for ozone, carbon monoxide (except 8-hour Lake Tahoe), sulfur dioxide (1 and 24 hour), nitrogen dioxide, suspended particulate matter–-PM10, PM2.5, and visibility reduction particles, are values that are not to be exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded. California ambient air quality standards are listed in the Table of Standards in Section 70200 of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations. 2 National standards (other than ozone, particulate matter, and those based on annual averages or annual arithmetic mean) are not to be exceeded more than once a year. The ozone standard is attained when the fourth highest 8-hour concentration in a year, averaged over 3 years, is equal to or less than the standard. For PM10, the 24-hour standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 µg/m3 is equal to or less than one. For PM2.5, the 24-hour standard is attained when 98 percent of the daily concentrations, averaged over 3 years, are equal to or less than the standard. 3 Concentration expressed first in units in which it was promulgated. Equivalent units given in parentheses are based upon a reference temperature of 25oC and a reference pressure of 760 torr. Most measurements of air quality are to be corrected to a reference temperature of 25oC and a reference pressure of 760 torr; ppm in this table refers to ppm by volume, or micromoles of pollutant per mole of gas.
4 Any equivalent procedure which can be shown to the satisfaction of the ARB to give equivalent results at or near the level of the air quality standard may be used 5 National Primary Standards: The levels of air quality are necessary, with an adequate margin of safety to protect the public health. 6 National Secondary Standards: The levels of air quality are necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant. 7 Reference method as described by the EPA. An “equivalent method” of measurement may be used but must have a “consistent relationship to the reference method” and must be approved by EPA. 8 On October 1, 2015, the national 8-hour ozone primary and secondary standards were lowered from 0.075 to 0.070 ppm. 9 As of February 7, 2024, the annual primary PM2.5 standard changed from 12 µg/m3 to 9 µg/m3. The existing national 24-hour PM2.5 standards (primary and secondary) were retained at 35 μg/m3, as was the annual secondary standard of 15 μg/m3. The existing 24-hour PM10 standards (primary and secondary) of 150 μg/m3 also were retained. The form of the annual primary and secondary standards is the annual mean, averaged over 3 years. 10 To attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 98th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each site must not exceed 100 ppb. Note that the national 1-hour standard is in units of parts per billion (ppb). California standards are in units of parts per million (ppm). To directly. compare the national 1-hour standard to the California standards the units can be converted from ppb to ppm. In this case, the national standard of 100 ppb is identical to 0.100 ppm. 11 On June 2, 2010, a new 1-hour SO2 standard was established, and the existing 24-hour and annual primary standards were revoked. To attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations at each site must not exceed 75 ppb. The 1971 SO2 national standards (24-hour and annual) remain in effect until one year after an area is designated for the 2010 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment for the 1971 standards remain in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2010 standards are approved. *Note that the 1-hour national standard is in units of parts per billion (ppb). California standards are in units of parts per million (ppm). To directly compare the 1-hour national standard to the California standard the units can be converted to ppm. In this case, the national standard of 75 ppb is identical to 0.075 ppm. 12 The ARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as 'toxic air contaminants' with no threshold level of exposure for adverse health effects determined. These actions allow for the implementation of control measures at levels below the ambient concentrations specified for these pollutants. 13 The national standard for lead was revised on October 15, 2008, to a rolling 3-month average. The 1978 lead standard (1.5 μg/m3 as a quarterly average) remains in effect until one year after an area is designated for the 2008 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment for the 1978 standard, the 1978 standard remains in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2008 standard are approved. 14 In 1989, the ARB converted both the general statewide 10-mile visibility standard and the Lake Tahoe 30-mile visibility standard to instrumental equivalents, which are "extinction of

0.23 per kilometer" and "extinction of 0.07 per kilometer" for the statewide and Lake Tahoe Air Basin standards, respectively. 15 AAM = Annual Arithmetic Mean
 SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.3-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 The proposed project is in the Los Angeles County portion of the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), in which the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is substantially responsible for air pollution control. Table 4.3-2 shows the attainment status of the SCAB for each criteria pollutant for both the NAAQS and the CAAQS. Presented below are descriptions of the air pollutants of concern and their known health effects.

Table 4.3-2

FEDERAL AND STATE ATTAINMENT STATUS
Pollutants Federal Classification State Classification
Ozone (O3) Nonattainment (Extreme) Nonattainment
Particulate Matter (PM10) Maintenance (Serious) Nonattainment Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Nonattainment (Serious) Nonattainment Carbon Monoxide (CO) Maintenance (Serious) Attainment
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Maintenance (Primary) Attainment Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Unclassified/Attainment Attainment Sulfates
No Federal Standards
Attainment
Lead (Pb) Attainment
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) Unclassified
Visibility Reducing Particles Unclassified
Sources: ARB, 2022a; USEPA, 2024a.

Nitrogen oxides (NOX) serve as integral participants in the process of photochemical smog production and are precursors for certain particulate compounds that are formed in the atmosphere and for ozone. A precursor is a directly emitted air contaminant that, when released into the atmosphere, forms, causes to be formed, or contributes to the formation of a secondary air contaminant for which an ambient air quality standard (AAQS) has been adopted, or for which presence in the atmosphere will contribute to the violation of one or more AAQSs. When NOX and reactive organic gases (ROG) are released into the atmosphere, they can chemically react with one another in the presence of sunlight to form ozone. The two major forms of NOX are nitric oxide (NO) and NO2. NO is a colorless, odorless gas formed from atmospheric nitrogen and oxygen when combustion takes place under high temperature and/or high pressure. NO2 is a reddish-brown pungent gas formed by the combination of NO and oxygen. NO2 acts as an acute respiratory irritant and eye irritant and increases susceptibility to respiratory pathogens (USEPA, 2011).

Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless non-reactive pollutant produced by incomplete combustion of fossil fuels. CO is emitted almost exclusively from motor vehicles, power plants, refineries, industrial boilers, ships, aircraft, and trains. In urban areas, such as the project location, automobile exhaust accounts for most CO emissions. CO is a non-reactive air pollutant that dissipates relatively quickly; therefore, ambient CO concentrations generally follow the spatial and temporal distributions of vehicular traffic. CO concentrations are influenced by local meteorological conditions, primarily wind speed, topography, and atmospheric stability. CO from motor vehicle exhaust can become locally concentrated when surface-based temperature inversions are combined with calm atmospheric conditions, a typical situation at dusk in urban areas between November and February. The highest levels of CO typically occur during the colder months of the year when inversion conditions are more frequent. CO competes with oxygen, often replacing it in the blood, thus reducing the blood’s ability to transport oxygen to vital organs. The results of excess CO exposure can be dizziness, fatigue, and impairment of central nervous system functions. High concentrations are lethal (USEPA, 2023).
 SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.3-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Particulate matter (PM) consists of finely divided solids or liquids, such as soot, dust, aerosols, fumes and mists. Primary PM is emitted directly into the atmosphere from activities such as agricultural operations, industrial processes, construction and demolition activities, and entrainment of road dust into the air. Secondary PM is formed in the atmosphere from predominantly gaseous combustion by-product precursors, such as sulfur oxides, NOX, and ROGs.

Particle size is a critical characteristic of PM that primarily determines the location of PM deposition along the respiratory system (and associated health effects) as well as the degradation of visibility through light scattering. In the United States, federal and state agencies have focused on two types of PM. PM10 corresponds to the fraction of PM no greater than 10 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter and is commonly called respirable particulate matter, while PM2.5 refers to the subset of PM10 of aerodynamic diameter smaller than 2.5 micrometers, which is commonly called fine particulate matter.

PM10 and PM2.5 deposition in the lungs results in irritation that triggers a range of inflammation responses, such as mucus secretion and bronchoconstriction, and exacerbates pulmonary dysfunctions, such as asthma, emphysema, and chronic bronchitis. Sufficiently small particles may penetrate the bloodstream and impact functions such as blood coagulation, cardiac autonomic control, and mobilization of inflammatory cells from the bone marrow. Individuals susceptible to higher health risks from exposure to PM10 airborne pollution include children, the elderly, smokers, and people of all ages with low pulmonary/cardiovascular function. For these individuals, adverse health effects of PM10 pollution include coughing, wheezing, shortness of breath, phlegm, bronchitis, and aggravation of lung or heart disease, leading, for example, to increased risks of hospitalization and mortality from asthma attacks and heart attacks (USEPA, 2024b).

Reactive organic gases (ROG) are defined as any compound of carbon, excluding CO, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate, which participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions. It should be noted that there are no state or national ambient air quality standards for ROG because ROGs are not classified as criteria pollutants. They are regulated, however, because a reduction in ROG emissions reduces certain chemical reactions that contribute to the formation of ozone. ROGs are also transformed into organic aerosols in the atmosphere, which contribute to higher PM10 and lower visibility. The term “ROG” is used by the ARB for this air quality analysis and is defined the same as the federal term “volatile organic compound” (VOC).

Ozone is a secondary pollutant produced through a series of photochemical reactions involving ROG and NOX. Ozone creation requires ROG and NOX to be available for approximately three hours in a stable atmosphere with strong sunlight. Because of the long reaction time, peak ozone concentrations frequently occur downwind of the sites where the precursor pollutants are emitted. Thus, ozone is considered a regional, rather than a local, pollutant. The health effects of ozone include eye and respiratory irritation, reduction of resistance to lung infection and possible aggravation of pulmonary conditions in persons with lung disease. Ozone is also damaging to vegetation and untreated rubber (USEPA, 2020).

4.3.2 Climate/Meteorology
Air quality is affected by both the rate and location of pollutant emissions, and by meteorological conditions that influence movement and dispersal of pollutants. Atmospheric conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, and air temperature gradients, along with local topography, provide the link between air pollutant emissions and air quality.
 SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.3-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 The project site is located wholly within the SCAB, which includes all of Orange County and the nondesert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. The distinctive climate of the SCAB is determined by its terrain and geographical location. The SCAB is in a coastal plain connecting broad valleys and low hills, bounded by the Pacific Ocean in the southwest quadrant with high mountains forming the remainder of the perimeter. The general region lies in the semi-permanent high-pressure zone of the eastern Pacific. Thus, the climate is mild, tempered by cool sea breezes.

This usually mild climatological pattern is interrupted infrequently by periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, or Santa Ana winds (SCAQMD, 1993).

The average high and low temperatures as recorded at the Signature Aviation LGB - Long Beach Daugherty Field Airport (COOP ID: 045085; 33°48'48.9"N 118°09'12.3"W)(WRCC, 2022), which is approximately 5.8 miles southwest of the project site and has a period of record 1949-2016, are 74.2 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) and 54.8°F, respectively. Average high and low winter (December, January, and February) temperatures are approximately 67.1°F and 46.07°F, respectively, and average summer (June, July, and August) high and low temperatures are approximately 81.0°F and 62.97°F, respectively. The annual average of total precipitation is approximately 12.01 inches, which occurs mostly during the winter and relatively infrequently during the summer. Monthly precipitation averages approximately 2.4 inches during the winter (December, January, and February), approximately 0.91 inch during the spring (March, April, and May), approximately 0.61 inch during the fall (September, October, and November), and approximately 0.05 inch during the summer (June, July, and August).

4.3.3 Local Air Quality
The SCAQMD has divided the SCAB into source receptor areas (SRAs), based on similar meteorological and topographical features. The project site is in SCAQMD’s South Los Angeles County Coastal air monitoring area (SRA 4). The air monitoring station, Long Beach-Signal Hill, at 1710 East 20th Street, Signal Hill CA 90755, 7.3 miles southwest of the project site, monitors ozone, PM10, and SO2. .The air monitoring station at Long Beach-Route 710 Near Road monitoring station, at 5895 Long Beach Boulevard, Long Beach, CA 90805, 6.8 miles west of the project site, monitors PM2.5 and NO2.

The air monitoring station in Compton is located at 700 N Bullis Road, Compton, CA 90221, 7.4 miles east of the project. It monitors CO and lead. The ambient air quality data in the project vicinity as recorded from 2021 through 2023 and applicable standards are shown in Table 4.3-3.  SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.3-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Table 4.3-3

AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA

4.3.4 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP)
The SCAQMD is required to produce plans to show how air quality would be improved in the region.

The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) requires that these plans be updated triennially to incorporate the most recent available technical information.7 A multi-level partnership of governmental agencies at the federal, state, regional, and local levels implement the programs contained in these plans.

Agencies involved include the EPA, ARB, local governments, Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and SCAQMD. The SCAQMD and the SCAG are responsible for formulating and implementing the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the SCAB. The SCAQMD updates its AQMP every three years.

The 2022 AQMP (SCAQMD, 2022) was adopted by the SCAQMD Board on December 2, 2022. It focuses on reducing ozone by limiting the emissions of NOx, which is a key reactant in ozone formation. The NOx reductions are through extensive use of zero-emission technologies across all stationary and mobile source categories. The majority of NOx emissions are from heavy-duty trucks, ships, and other state and federally regulated mobile sources that are mostly beyond the SCAQMD’s control. The SCAQMD’s primary authority is over stationary sources, which account for approximately 20 percent of the SCAB’s NOx emissions.
7 CCAA of 1988.

Air Pollutant Standard/Exceedance 2021 2022 2023
Ozone – Long Beach- Signal Hill
Max. 1-hour Concentration (ppm)
Max. 8-hour Concentration (ppm)
# Days > Federal 8-hour Std. of 0.070 ppm
# Days > California 1-hour Std. of 0.09 ppm
# Days > California 8-hour Std. of 0.070 ppm

0.086

0.064
0 0
16 0.108

0.077
1 1
0 0.089

0.065
0 0
0 PM10 – Long Beach- Signal Hill
Max. Federal 24-hour Concentration (µg/m3)
Est. # Days > Fed. 24-hour Std. of 150 µg/m3
State Annual Average (20 µg/m3)
ND
ND
ND

57.9 0
ND

81.2 0
ND
PM2.5 - Long Beach-Route 710
Max. State 24-hour Concentration (µg/m3)
# Days > Fed. 24-hour Std. of 35 µg/m3
State Annual Average (12 µg/m3)
103.2
7 12.9

41.7 1

11.9 58.5
1 14.3
NO2 – Long Beach-Route 710
Max. 1-hour Concentration (ppm)
State Annual Average (0.030 ppm)
# Days > California 1-hour Std. of 0.18 ppm

0.091

0.025
0 0.095

0.025
0 0.071

0.021
0 CO - Compton
Max CO 1-hour 1971 (ppm)
Max CO 8-hour 1971 (ppm)
# Days > Federal 1-hour Std. of 35 ppm
# Days > Federal 8-hour Std. of 9 ppm

4.3 3.7
0 0

3.4 3
0 0

3.2 2.6
0 0
SO2 - Signal Hill
Max SO2 1-hour 2010 (ppm)
Max SO2 3-hour 1971 (ppm)
# Days > Federal 1-hour Std. of 35 ppm
# Days > Federal 8-hour Std. of 9 ppm

0.059

0.037

0.061

0.038

0.023

0.014
Lead - Compton Max Lead 3-Month 2009 (µg/m3)
# Days > Federal Std. of 0.15 µg/m3 0.014 0.013 0.017
Source: ARB,2022. CO, SO2, and Lead Data are from USEPA, 2024c.

ND - There was insufficient (or no) data available to determine the value.  SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.3-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 The AQMP incorporates updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories and incorporates the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) prepared by SCAG (2020). The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS was determined to conform to the federally mandated State Implementation Plan for the attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. county and City general plans.

4.3.5 Sensitive Receptors
Some people, such as individuals with respiratory illnesses or impaired lung function because of other illnesses, persons over 65 years of age, and children under 14, are particularly sensitive to certain pollutants. Facilities and structures where these sensitive people live or spend considerable amounts of time are known as sensitive receptors. For the purposes of a CEQA analysis, the SCAQMD considers a sensitive receptor to be a receptor such as a residence, hospital, or convalescent facility where it is possible that an individual could remain for 24 hours (Chico and Koizumi, 2008, p. 3-2).

Commercial and industrial facilities are not included in the definition of sensitive receptor, because employees typically are present for shorter periods of time, such as eight hours. Therefore, applying a 24-hour standard for PM10 is appropriate not only because the averaging period for the state standard is 24 hours, but because the sensitive receptor would be present at the location for the full 24 hours.

The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are a single-family residence, approximately 95 feet south of the project site, and a hotel (Days Inn & Suites by Wyndham Artesia) located 55 feet north of the project site.
 SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.3-9
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.3-1

SURROUNDING SENSITIVE RECEPTORS
 SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.3-10
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.3.6 Applicable South Coast Air Quality Management District Rules Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust Rule)
During construction, the project would be subject to SCAQMD Rule 403 (fugitive dust). SCAQMD Rule 403 does not require a permit for construction activities, per se; rather, it sets forth general and specific requirements for all construction sites (as well as other fugitive dust sources) in the SCAB.

The general requirement prohibits a person from causing or allowing emissions of fugitive dust from construction (or other fugitive dust sources) such that the presence of such dust remains visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emissions source. SCAQMD Rule 403 also prohibits construction activity from causing an incremental PM10 concentration impact, as the difference between upwind and downwind samples, at the property line of more than 50 micrograms per cubic meter as determined through PM10 high-volume sampling. The concentration standard and associated PM10 sampling do not apply if specific measures identified in the rules are implemented and appropriately documented.

Other requirements of Rule 403 include not causing or allowing emissions of fugitive dust that would remain visible beyond the property line; no track-out extending 25 feet or more in cumulative length and all track-out to be removed at conclusion of each workday; and using the applicable best available control measures included in Table 1 of Rule 403.

Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings)
Construction of this project will include the application of architectural coatings and be subject to SCAQMD Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). Among other applicable provisions, Rule 1113 requires those who apply, store at a worksite, or solicit the application of architectural coatings to use coatings that contain VOC less than or equal to the VOC limits specified in Table 1 of the rule. According to Table 1, the VOC content limit for Roof and Floor Coating is 50 grams per liter (g/L), and for Parking Coating, it is 100 g/L.

4.3.7 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Less than Significant Impact
The South Coast 2022 AQMP, discussed above, incorporates land use assumptions from local general plans and regional growth projections developed by SCAG to estimate stationary and mobile air emissions associated with projected population and planned land uses. If the proposed land use is consistent with the local general plan, then the impact of the project is presumed to have been accounted for in the AQMP. This is because the land use and transportation control sections of the AQMP are based on the SCAG regional growth forecasts, which incorporate projections from local general plans. The General Plan Land Use designation for the project site is City Center Mixed-Use with a zoning designation of Artesia Live Specific Plan (City of Artesia, 2010a, p. LU-8) (City of Artesia, 2016a, p. 5). The purpose of the Artesia Live Specific Plan is to facilitate development, especially mixed-use development in the City Center area (City of Artesia, 2016, p. 3). The proposed project incorporates residential, commercial and public aspects for a cohesive mixed-use concept. The land use and zoning would continue to be consistent with the local plans and the impacts of the project are still accounted for in the AQMP.
 SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.3-11
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Another measurement tool in evaluating consistency with the AQMP is to determine whether a project would generate population and employment growth and, if so, whether that growth would exceed the growth rates forecasted in the AQMP and how the project would accommodate the expected increase in population or employment. Artesia Pioneer Place Mixed-Use Project would create minimal increase in population and overall VMT, which would be included in the growth rates forecasted in the AQMP.

Additionally, to assist the implementation of the AQMP, projects must not create regionally significant emissions of regulated pollutants from either short-term construction or long-term operations. The SCAQMD has developed criteria in the form of emissions thresholds for determining whether emissions from a project are regionally significant (SCAQMD, 2019) which are useful for estimating whether a project is likely to result in a violation of the NAAQS and/or whether the project is in conformity with plans to achieve attainment. SCAQMD’s significance thresholds for criteria pollutant emissions during construction activities and project operation are summarized in Table 4.3-4. A project is considered to have a regional air quality impact if emissions from its construction and/or operational activities exceed the corresponding SCAQMD significance thresholds.

Table 4.3-4

SCAQMD THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Pollutant Construction Thresholds
(lbs/day)
Operational Thresholds
(lbs/day)
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 75 55
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) 100 55
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 550
Sulfur Oxides (SOx) 150 150
Particulate Matter (PM10) 150 150
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 55 55
Note: lbs = pounds.

Source: SCAQMD, 2019.

Regional Construction Emissions
Construction activities for the project is anticipated to begin in July 2026 and end in September 2028, and would have five construction phases:
• Site Preparation • Paving
• Grading • Architectural Coating
• Building Construction
Table 4.3-5 shows the project schedule used for the air quality, GHG emissions, and noise analyses.

Table 4.3-5

CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
Construction Phase Start End
Site Preparation July 1, 2026 July 14, 2026
Grading July 15, 2026 August 11, 2026
Building Construction August 12, 2026 August 12, 2028
Paving August 13, 2028 August 25, 2028
Architectural Coating August 26, 2028 September 15, 2028  SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.3-12
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 These construction activities would temporarily create emissions of dust, fumes, equipment exhaust, and other air contaminants. Mobile sources (such as diesel-fueled equipment onsite and traveling to and from the project site) would primarily generate NOX emissions. The amount of emissions generated daily would vary depending on the amount and types of construction activities occurring at the same time.

Estimated criteria pollutant emissions from the Artesia Pioneer Place Project’s onsite and offsite project construction activities were calculated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2022.1.1.29 (CAPCOA, 2021). CalEEMod is a planning tool for estimating emissions related to land use projects. Model-predicted emissions from the proposed project are compared with applicable thresholds to assess regional air quality impacts. CalEEMod defaults were used for offroad construction equipment and onroad construction trips and direct and indirect operational emissions.

As shown in Table 4.3-6, construction emissions would not exceed SCAQMD regional thresholds.

Therefore, the Proposed Project’s short-term regional air quality impacts would be less than significant. Refer to Appendix B of this document for air quality calculations.

Table 4.3-6

MAXIMUM DAILY REGIONAL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Construction Activity Maximum Emissions (pounds/day)
ROG NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Emissions, 2026 0.85 9.25 9.4 1.35 0.52
Maximum Emissions, 2027 0.76 6.38 9.22 0.75 0.32
Maximum Emissions, 2028 35.55 6.08 9.1 0.73 0.3
SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 75 100 550 150 55
Significant? (Yes or No) No No No No No
Source: Calculated by UltraSystems with CalEEMod (Version 2022.1.1.29) (CAPCOA, 2021) Regional Operational Emissions
Operational emissions would be generated from mobile and area sources. Vehicle exhaust emissions generated from project-induced vehicle trips are known as “mobile source emissions.” “Area source emissions” would be generated from structural maintenance and landscaping activities, and use of consumer products. Since the project will be an all-electric development, the project’s energy use will not contribute to criteria pollutant emissions. CalEEMod was also used to estimate operational emissions.

As seen in Table 4.3-8, for each criteria pollutant, operational emissions would be below the pollutant’s SCAQMD significance threshold. Therefore, operational criteria pollutant emissions would be less than significant.
 SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.3-13
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Table 4.3-7

MAXIMUM DAILY PROJECT OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Emission Source Pollutant (pounds/day)
ROG NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Mobile Source Emissions 1.79 1.38 15.0 3.56 0.92
Area Source Emissions 24.42 1.79 49.4 5.93 5.82
Energy Source Emissions 0 0 0 0 0
Total Operational Emissions 26.21 3.17 64.4 9.49 6.74
SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 55 55 550 150 55
Significant? (Yes or No) No No No No No
Source: Calculated by UltraSystems with CalEEMod (Version 2022.1.1.29) (CAPCOA, 2021). b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Less Than Significant Impact
Since the SCAB is currently in nonattainment for ozone and PM2.5, related projects may exceed an air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality exceedance. The SCAQMD neither recommends quantified analyses of construction and/or operational emissions from multiple development projects nor provides methodologies or thresholds of significance to be used to assess the cumulative emissions generated by multiple cumulative projects. Instead, the District recommends that a project’s potential contribution to cumulative impacts be assessed by utilizing the same significance criteria as those for project-specific impacts. Furthermore, the SCAQMD states that if an individual development project generates less-than-significant construction or operational emissions impacts, then the development project would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment.

As discussed above, the mass daily construction and operational emissions generated by the project would not exceed any of the SCAQMD’s significance thresholds. Also, as discussed below, localized emissions generated by the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD’s Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs). Therefore, the project would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for the pollutants which the SCAB is in nonattainment. Thus, cumulative air quality impacts associated with the project would be less than significant. c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less than Significant Impact
Construction of the project would generate short-term and intermittent emissions. Pollutants emitted during the construction phase include diesel particulate matter emissions from construction equipment, but these would be of short duration compared to the 70-year lifetime exposure for cancer risk that is assumed by the ARB’s health risk assessment methods (ARB, 2024). The project will not require demolition of any buildings so there is limited risk of asbestos exposure. Operation of the proposed project is not expected to be a source of air toxics.

Following the SCAQMD’s Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (Chico and Koizumi, 2008), only onsite construction emissions were considered in the localized significance analysis. The  SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.3-14
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are a single-family residence, approximately 95 feet (29 meters) south of the project site and a hotel (Days Inn & Suites by Wyndham Artesia) located 55 feet (17 meters) north of the project site. LSTs for projects in Source Receptor Area 4 (South Los Angeles County Coastal) were obtained from tables in Appendix C of the aforementioned methodology. It is recommended to use one-acre site LST table listings for projects smaller than one acre (Wang, 2024). Table 4.3-8 shows the results of the localized significance analysis for the project.

Localized short-term air quality impacts from construction of the project would be less than significant.

Table 4.3-8

RESULTS OF LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE ANALYSIS
Nearest Sensitive Receptor
Maximum Onsite Emissions
(pounds/day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Maximum daily emissions 5.87 7.16 0.23 0.21
SCAQMD LST for 1 acre @ 25 meters (hotel) 57 585 4 3
SCAQMD LST for 1 acre @ 29 meters (single family residence) 57.2 617.6 5.4 3.2 Significant (Yes or No) No No No No
d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less than Significant Impact
A project-related significant adverse effect could occur if construction or operation of the proposed project would result in generation of odors that would be perceptible in adjacent sensitive areas.

According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook (SCAQMD, 1993), land uses and industrial operations that are associated with odor complaints include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include equipment exhaust. Odors from these sources would be localized and generally confined to the immediate area surrounding the project. The project would use typical construction techniques, and the odors would be typical of most construction sites and temporary in nature. The project would not create substantial objectionable odors, and this impact would be less than significant.  SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.4-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.4 Biological Resources
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state
or federally protected wetlands (including,
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
X

4.4.1 Methodology
UltraSystems researched readily available information, including relevant literature, databases, agency web sites, various previously completed reports and management plans, GIS data, maps, aerial imagery from public domain sources, and in-house records to identify the following:
1) habitats, special-status plant and wildlife species, jurisdictional waters, critical habitats, and wildlife corridors that may occur in and near the project site; and 2) local or regional plans, policies, and regulations that may apply to the project.

The following data sources were accessed by UltraSystems for synthesis of data within this report. • United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-Minute Topographic Maps for the Los Alamitos  SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.4-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Quadrangle and the Whittier Quadrangle (USGS, 2023, 2021) and current aerial imagery (Google Earth Pro, 2024).
• The Web Soil Survey, provided by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (Soil Survey Staff, 2024). • California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), provided by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW; CNDDB, 2024a).
• California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) Life History Accounts and Range Maps provided by the CDFW (CDFW, 2024a).
• BIOS Habitat Connectivity Viewer, provided by the CDFW (CDFW, 2024b). • Information, Planning and Conservation (IPaC), provided by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS, 2024a).
• Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS). Critical Habitat Mapper, provided by the USFWS (USFWS, 2024b).
• National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), provided by the USFWS (USFWS, 2022c). • Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v9.5) provided by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS, 2024a).
• California Native Plant Society’s A Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition (CNPS, 2024b).
• EPA Waters GeoViewer, provided by USEPA (USEPA, 2024b). • Information on California plants for education, research and conservation, provided by Calflora (Calflora, 2024)
Plant and wildlife species protected by federal agencies, state agencies, and nonprofit resource organizations, such as the California Native Plant Society (CNPS), are collectively referred to as “special-status species.”8 Some of these plant and wildlife species are afforded special legal or management protection because they are limited in population size and typically have a limited geographic range and/or habitat.

Aerial imagery from the abovementioned sources was overlaid with geospatial data by utilizing Geographic Information System (GIS) software (ArcGIS 10.1) to identify documented observations of the following biological or environmental components within the project vicinity: 1) previously recorded observations within the project vicinity of special-status species; 2) special-status vegetation communities; 3) protected management lands; 4) proposed and final critical habitats; 5) wetlands, waters of the State (WOS) and waters of the United States (WOUS); and, 5) wildlife corridors.

A Biological Study Area (BSA) was defined for the project and includes the project site and a 500-foot buffer zone around the perimeter of the project boundary (see Figure 4.4-1). UltraSystems biologist Matthew Sutton conducted a field evaluation for existing biological resources of the BSA on July 30, 2024. In this survey, he documented habitat types, wildlife corridors, potential waters of the U.S. and State (including wetlands), potential threats to ecosystem health, and plant and wildlife species in the BSA. Based on the results of the literature review and field survey results, an analysis was conducted to plan either (1) the avoidance of or (2) to minimize project impacts to any of the protected biological resources that were determined to have a potential to occur or were observed during the field survey. 8 Avian species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) are not considered “special-status species.”  SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.4-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.4.2 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated In its current state, the project site primarily consists of undeveloped land, covering over 99 percent of the lot, with a small section of a sidewalk in the northwest corner of the project site covering less than one percent of the lot. The undeveloped land is vegetated by non-native grasses and other nonnative weedy plant species, which are periodically mowed. The entire project site, except for the sidewalk area, is enclosed by fencing.

The dominant plant life forms on the project site and a portion of the lot south of the project site are non-native annual grasses and forbs; there is also low cover of non-native shrubs, mainly along the southern and eastern borders of the project site. Offsite areas within the BSA consist primarily of commercial and residential developments with landscaped areas, as well as paved areas, including roads, parking lots and sidewalks.

Based on the project site’s location within a highly urbanized setting in which developed and landscaped areas make up more than 95 percent of the BSA, there is limited habitat for special-status plant or wildlife species. The project site is surrounded by commercial buildings and residential homes, apartment complexes, churches and education facilities. The majority of the land cover of the project site, and of the lot south of the project site, contains vegetated areas which may provide foraging material for wildlife species that can access the site (birds, bats). However, due to the lack of native plant and wildlife species diversity, native soils, natural hydrology, and other factors to support a healthily functioning ecosystem within the BSA, it is not anticipated that special-status plant and wildlife species would establish within the BSA.  SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.4-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.4-1

BIOLOGICAL STUDY AREA
 SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.4-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Plants
Upon completing a habitat assessment survey on July 30, 2024, Mr. Sutton concluded that non-native grasses and forbs cover the majority of the project site, and non-native, ornamental species occur in landscaped areas around roads, parking lots, and structures throughout the remainder of the BSA.

Special-Status Plant Species
Based on a literature review and query from publicly available databases for reported occurrences (CNDDB, 2024a, CNPS, 2024a), within a 10-mile radius of the BSA, 42 special-status plant species have been recorded in the area. None of the 42 special-status plant species are expected to occur within the BSA due to one or more of the following factors: (1) the BSA lacks suitable habitat for the establishment of those species; (2) most of the surfaces consist primarily of impermeable, paved surfaces, and those areas with exposed soils, such as portions of the project site, have very compacted soils; (3) vegetated areas are dominated by non-native weedy or ornamental plant species that may outcompete or otherwise inhibit the establishment of native plant species; (4) the BSA doesn’t occur within the species’ reported distribution or elevation range (CalFlora, 2024; CNDDB, 2024a; CNPS, 2024a,b; Jepson eFlora Project, 2024).

Due to the aforementioned physical and biological factors within the BSA, it was determined that none of the special-status plant species identified in the 10-mile radius database query are expected to occur within the BSA. Refer to Appendix C Special-Status Species Occurrence Potential Determination for a list of all species evaluated in the species inventory and for all federal, state and other agencies special-status species designations.

Wildlife
The results of the literature review and site habitat assessment conducted by UltraSystems biologists determined that the BSA does not support habitat that is suitable for a diverse community of wildlife species. Thus, very few special-status wildlife species have the potential to occur within the BSA.

During the biological field survey, the following common urban-adapted bird species were observed within the BSA: American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), Eurasian collared-dove (Streptopelia decaocto), western gull (Larus occidentalis), and American goldfinch (Spinus tristis). Gopher mounds of Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae) were observed at one location within the project site. A carpenter bee (Xylocopa sp.) was observed foraging in the forbs in the disturbed lot immediately south of the project site.

Special-Status Wildlife Species
Based on a literature review and query from publicly available databases for reported occurrences within a ten-mile radius of the project site, 18 listed and 23 sensitive wildlife species were reported as recent occurrences (≤ 20 years) or are recognized as occurring based on previous surveys or knowledge of the area.

Of those 41 total species, two special-status species were determined to have a low potential to occur within the project BSA. One listed (candidate for state listing) species was determined to have a low potential to occur in the BSA. Due to several biological and physical factors within the BSA, it was determined that there is a lack of suitable habitat conditions to support 38 of the 41 special-status wildlife species identified in the 10-mile radius database query. Thirty-eight wildlife species were determined to not be expected to occur within the BSA due to one or more of the following factors: (1) the BSA lacks suitable habitat for foraging, nesting or breeding habitat; (2) the BSA does not occur within the species reported distribution or elevation range; (3) there are no recent (<20 years) occurrences within a 10-mile radius of the project (CNDDB, 2024a); or, (4) the BSA undergoes significant disturbances and the species may not be adaptive to such disturbances associated with urbanized settings (CDFW, 2024a; CDFW, 2024b; CNDDB, 2024a, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, 2024; Google Earth Pro, 2024; Soil Survey Staff, 2024; USEPA, 2024b; USFWS, 2024a; USFWS,  SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.4-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 2024b; USFWS, 2024c). Refer to Appendix C Special-Status Species Occurrence Potential Determination for more information including applicable status ranking definitions. Refer to Figure 4.4-2for a representation of CNDDB Known Occurrences within two miles of the BSA.

No special-status bird species, including Cooper’s hawk and other birds in the wildlife inventory, were observed during the biological field survey. The three special-status wildlife species determined to have a low potential to occur within the BSA and their respective status ranks are provided below:

Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii) WL: Cooper’s hawks are medium-sized hawks of the woodlands (CNDDB, 2024b). These raptors are commonly sighted in parks, neighborhoods, over fields, and even along busy streets if there are large trees nearby for perching and adequate prey species such as other birds and small mammals. They prefer to breed in more densely wooded areas than occur in the BSA, such as woodland openings and edges of riparian and oak habitat (CDFW, 2014; Cornell Lab or Ornithology, 2024). Cooper’s hawks build nests in pines, oaks, Douglas-firs, beeches, spruces, and other trees (Cornell Lab of Ornithology, 2024).

Due to the highly urbanized nature of the project site and surrounding vicinity, this species was determined to have only a low potential to occur within the BSA. Cooper’s hawks prefer more densely wooded areas, such as woodland openings and edges of riparian and oak habitats, than occur within the BSA (Cornell Lab of Ornithology, 2024). Furthermore, they prefer to nest where there is a grove of six or more contiguous trees providing dense canopy cover, and no such grove occurs in the BSA. The project site does not contain any trees and thus lacks nesting habitat for this raptor; however, there are several trees within 200 feet of the project site which are of suitable size for this species to use for nesting.

Although the trees within the BSA do not provide optimal nesting habitat for this raptor, they do provide some suitable nesting habitat. Noise and dust generated from project activities could potentially cause Cooper’s hawk to abandon its nest. Thus, project development would potentially have a significant impact on the nesting and breeding behavior of this raptor.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure (MM) BIO-1 (see page 4.4-9 below), which requires preconstruction nesting bird surveys if any project activities would occur during the nesting season, would reduce impacts to Cooper’s hawk to a less than significant level.

Crotch’s bumble bee (Bombus crotchii) SCE: The majority of Crotch’s bumble bee observations occur in southern California in arid grassland and scrub habitats (NatureServe, 2019). This species often nests in inactive mammal burrows. Plant families identified as being utilized for foraging by Crotch’s bumble bee include Fabaceae, Apocynaceae, Asteraceae, Lamiaceae, and Boraginaceae (Richardson, 2019). The preferred plant genera for foraging include Antirrhinum, Phacelia, Clarkia, Dendromecon, Eschscholzia, and Eriogonum (Koch, 2012), as well as Asclepias, Chaenactis, Lupinus, Medicago, Phacelia, and Salvia (The Xerces Society, 2018).

Four species within the plant family Asteraceaae, weak leaved burweed, flax-leaved horseweed, and Canada horseweed were observed on the project site. Since plant species within the family Asteraceae are known to be used for foraging by this species, the project site contains suitable foraging habitat for Crotch’s bumble bee. Although none of this species preferred genera of foraging species mentioned above were observed within the project site, one species within the Medicago genus, California burclover (Medicago polymorpha), is typical of ruderal fields such as what occurs on the project site. Additionally, one pocket gopher mound was observed on the project site, but no tunnels or burrows in which this species could nest were observed within the project site. Based onthe availability of foraging plant species within the project site, it was determined Crotch’s bumble bee has a low potential to forage within the BSA. Project development would remove foraging habitat of Crotch’s bumble bee. However, since there is abundant foraging habitat of Crotch’s bumble bee within the project vicinity, it is not anticipated that project development would have a significant impact to this species.  SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.4-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.4-2

CNDDB KNOWN OCCURRENCES WILDLIFE SPECIES
 SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.4-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 American bumble bee (Bombus pensylvanicus): American bumble bee are a very social species of bee that form annual colonies which include a solitary queen, female workers, and males (USDANRCS, 2021). The annual life cycle of this species initiates in late spring when the queen emerges from its overwintering site and begins laying eggs to produce the colony. Workers are produced throughout the summer. The life cycle ends with the production of males and new queens in late summer to early autumn.

American bumble bee occupy habitats such as grassland, farmland, and other open areas. There are three main habitat requirements of this species: (1) nectar and pollen from a diversity of plant species that are used as foraging species, (2) undisturbed nesting sites which occur in stands of grass, near good foraging sites, and (3) decaying wood in which hibernating queens can overwinter. This species is a generalist forager that will forage upon a diversity of plant species near its nest.

Many pollen and nectar producing plant species were observed on the project site during the biological survey. Although one pocket gopher mound was observed on the project site during the survey, no tunnel or burrow in which this species could nest was observed. Additionally, no decaying wood in which a queen of this species could overwinter was observed. Since only one of the three habitat requirements was observed during the survey, it is not anticipated that this species would establish a nesting colony within the project site. Development of the project may reduce foraging habitat of American bumble bee but because there is abundant foraging habitat within the project vicinity, and project development would have a less than significant impact to this species.

Bird Species Protected by the Migratory Birds Treaty Act Four bird species observed during the field survey are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the California Fish and Game Code, which render it unlawful to take native breeding birds, and their nests, eggs, and young. Indirect impacts to breeding birds could occur from increased noise, vibration, and dust during construction. The foregoing indirect impacts could adversely affect the breeding behavior of some birds, and lead to the loss (take) of eggs and chicks, or nest abandonment. Migratory avian species that may use portions of the project site for nesting during the breeding season are protected under the MBTA. Construction-related activities that may include, but are not necessarily limited to, building demolition and/or relocation, grading, materials laydown, access and infrastructure improvements, and building construction, could result in the take of nesting migratory species covered under the MBTA.

The project site contains vegetation such as shrubs, grasses and forbs that could potentially provide cover and nesting habitat for bird species protected by the MBTA that were observed during the field survey, such as the mourning dove and American goldfinch (Cornell Lab of Ornithology, 2024; CDFW, 2024b; CDFW, 2014). Native bird species such as mourning dove, American goldfinch, American crow, and others are protected by the MBTA (USFWS, 2020) and the California Fish and Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513), which render it unlawful to take native breeding birds, their nests, eggs, and young. Direct impacts to native bird species that nest on the ground or in shrubs, such as mourning dove and American goldfinch, would result from the project’s vegetation removal and excavation and grading of the soils. Indirect impacts to breeding birds could occur from increased noise, vibration and dust during construction, which could adversely affect the breeding behavior of some birds, and lead to the loss (take) of eggs and chicks, or nest abandonment. Therefore, the project has the potential to have significant direct and indirect impacts on migratory non‐game breeding birds and their nests, young and eggs. With the implementation of mitigation measure MM BIO-1, the project would have less than significant impacts to native bird species protected under the MBTA and the California Fish and Game Code.
 SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.4-9
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Mitigation Measure
MM BIO-1 Pre-Construction Breeding Bird Survey. To maintain compliance with the MBTA and Fish and Game Code, and to avoid impacts to or take of migratory non-game breeding birds, their nests, young, and eggs, the following measures will be implemented:
a. Project activities that will remove or trim vegetation or otherwise disturb potential breeding and nesting sites will be scheduled outside the breeding bird season to avoid direct impacts to migratory non-game breeding birds protected by the MBTA and Fish and Game Code. The breeding bird nesting season is typically from February 15 through September 15, but can vary slightly from year to year, usually depending on weather conditions.
b. If project activities cannot be avoided during February 15 through September 15, a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction breeding bird survey for breeding birds and active nests or potential nesting sites within the limits of project disturbance. The survey will begin no later than seven days before the onset of scheduled activities, such as mobilization and staging, or other grounddisturbing activities such as vegetation and substrate removal and/or disturbance. The surveys will end no later than three days before onset of the aforementioned activities.
c. If more than three days pass between the date of preconstruction breeding bird survey completion and the onset of construction activities mentioned in BIO1(b), another preconstruction breeding bird survey must be conducted as described in BIO-1(b).
d. If a breeding bird territory or an active bird nest is located during the preconstruction survey and will potentially be impacted, the site will be mapped on engineering drawings and a no activity buffer zone will be marked (fencing, stakes, flagging, orange snow fencing, etc.) a minimum of 100 feet in all directions for most migratory bird species or 500 feet in all directions for listed bird species and all raptors. The biologist will determine the appropriate buffer size based on the type of activities planned near the nest and the type of bird that created the nest. This no-activity buffer zone will not be disturbed until a qualified biologist has determined that the nest is inactive, the young have fledged, the young are no longer being fed by the parents, the young have left the area, or the young will no longer be impacted by project activities. The biologist will conduct weekly monitoring to determine when nesting is complete. Based on their professional judgement, the biologist will adjust the buffer size and monitoring frequency depending on whether project impacts on nesting behavior are significant due to the individual species’ tolerance of work activities and/or proximity of nest to noise levels, vibration levels, or other project-related disturbances. Once the nesting cycle has finished, the qualified biologist will allow project activities to begin within the buffer zone.
e. If listed bird species are observed within the project site during the preconstruction surveys or monitoring, the biologist will immediately stop nearby construction work, map the area and notify the appropriate resource agency to determine suitable protection measures and/or mitigation measures and to  SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.4-10
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 determine if additional surveys or focused protocol surveys are necessary.

Project activities may begin within the area only when concurrence is received from the appropriate resource agency.
f. Birds or their active nests will not be disturbed, captured, handled or moved.

Active nests cannot be removed or disturbed; however, nests can be removed or disturbed if determined inactive by a qualified biologist. g. If no breeding birds or active nests are observed during the pre-construction survey or they are observed and will not be impacted, project activities may begin, and no further mitigation will be required.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
With implementation of mitigation measure MM BIO-1, impacts to nesting birds due to project development would be reduced to a less than significant level. b) Would the project have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact
Neither the literature review nor results of the reconnaissance-level field survey indicate that riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities occur within the BSA. All land cover within the BSA is either developed or is occupied by ornamental or weedy non-native plant species and contains no riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities as described below (see also Figure 4.4-3).

Therefore, project development would have no direct or indirect impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities.

Additionally, no USFWS critical habitat occurs within the BSA. The nearest critical habitat is for California coastal gnatcatcher, approximately 5.9 miles northeast of the BSA (USFWS, 2024b).

Therefore, project development would have no impact on USFWS critical habitat.

Land Cover Types
Disturbed
Disturbed lands consist of exposed soils subjected to disturbances including vehicle traffic, mowing, disking, excavation or other type of alteration of the soil surface. These disturbances often result in compaction of the substrates. Disturbed areas are often dominated by weedy, non-native vegetation, lacking shrubs or trees. The disturbed land cover within the BSA occurs in an undeveloped lot immediately south of the project site. There is one residence in the southwestern corner of this lot.

The rest of the lot is covered with compacted soils, with about 20 percent cover of bare ground in front of the residence and 80 percent cover of non-native grass thatch, which had been recently mowed to approximately four inches in height, and several weedy forb species.

The grass species within the thatch were foxtail barley (Hordeum murinum) and ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus). Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon) was also observed in other areas of the project site. Forb cover within the project site was approximately 30 percent and consisted of the  SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.4-11
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 following species: flax-leaved horseweed (Erigeron bonariensis), prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), weak leaved burweed (Ambrosia confertiflora), Canada horseweed (Erigeron canadensis), cheeseweed (Malva parviflora), nettle leaf goosefoot (Chenopodium murale), and prostrate knotweed (Polygonum aviculare). Approximately five percent of the lot was covered with tree of heaven (Ailanthus altisima) saplings.

Disturbed areas do not fit any classification described in A Manual of California Vegetation Second Edition (Sawyer et al., 2009; CNPS, 2024b) or Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Communities of California (Holland, 1986). Disturbed habitats are not considered a sensitive plant community (CDFW, 2024c). Approximately 0.6 acre of this land cover was mapped within the BSA, and none within the project site.

Urban/Developed
Urban/developed land cover within the BSA is represented by areas occupied by physical structures and other impermeable surfaces as well as landscaped yards, medians, and other areas bordering streets and buildings. The developed features within the BSA include man-made structures such as commercial, religious, educational and residential buildings, paved roadways, parking lots and sidewalks, and other impermeable surfaces that cannot support vegetation. The urban/developed land cover provides limited habitat for wildlife species. However, birds and small mammals could use vegetation in undeveloped and landscaped areas for foraging, shelter and nesting. Landscaping (ornamental trees, shrubs, turf, etc.) associated with the urban/developed land cover is also included within this category. Urban/developed land cover does not fit any classification described in A Manual of California Vegetation Second Edition (Sawyer et al., 2009; CNPS, 2024b) or Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Communities of California (Holland, 1986). Approximately 26.8 acres of this land cover were mapped within the BSA, and less than 0.01 acre was mapped within the project site.

Ornamental tree species that were observed within this land cover include Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia porifera) lining the roadway medians, and jacaranda (Jacaranda mimosifolia), Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.), queen palm (Syagrus romanzoffiana), and several other urban-adapted street tree species. Other ornamental plant species such as bird of paradise (Strelitzia reginae) were observed within landscaping in the BSA.

Wild Oats and Annual Brome Grasslands (Avena spp. - Bromus spp. Herbaceous Semi-Natural Alliance)
Wild oats and annual brome grasslands (Avena spp. - Bromus spp. Herbaceous Semi-Natural Alliance) occupy 0.8 acre of the project site and do not occur anywhere else within the BSA. The wild oats and annual brome grasslands land cover that occurs onsite covers the majority of the property and is dominated by non-native annual grasses and ruderal forbs with sporadic occurrences of saplings of one tree species, tree of heaven, along the western, southern and eastern project borders. survey, non-native grass thatch covered approximately 50 percent of the project site and had been recently mowed to approximately four inches in height. The dominant grass species within the thatch were foxtail barley and ripgut brome. Another 10 percent of the project site was covered with Bermuda grass. Forb cover within the project site was approximately 40 percent. The dominant forb species were flax-leaved horseweed, prickly lettuce and Russian thistle. Approximately five percent of the project site was covered with tree of heaven. House finch and American goldfinch were observed foraging within the onsite vegetation. This community is not considered sensitive (CDFW, 2024c).  SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.4-12
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.4-3

LAND COVER TYPES
 SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.4-13
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? No Impact
Based on the absence of wetlands and/or wetland conditions observed during the site visit by a staff biologist and the results of a literature query showing a lack of recorded historic wetlands, no wetlands occur within the BSA. Therefore, development of the project would have no direct or indirect impacts to state or federally-protected wetlands. d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Less Than Significant Impact
The project site and surrounding areas do not support resident or migratory fish species or wildlife nursery sites. The areas surrounding the project site are currently developed, and therefore the project would not result in any new fragmentation of available habitat. Although none were observed during the field survey, it is likely that urban-adapted mammals such as opossum (Didelphis virginiana), raccoons (Procyon lotor), skunks (Mephitis mephitis), and coyote (Canis latrans), occasionally move through the BSA in search of shelter or foraging source. However, development of the project would not have significant impacts to the movement of any urban-adapted mammals. No established resident or migratory wildlife corridors occur within the BSA or in the surrounding areas (CDFW, 2024b). Although there are many small natural landscape blocks, such as school grounds and parks within the vicinity of the project site, these areas do not form a contiguous wildlife corridor. The nearest large natural landscape block, Puente Hills, is approximately 7.7 miles northeast of the BSA.

As a result, the project would not interfere substantially with or impede: (1) the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species; (2) established resident or migratory wildlife corridors; or (3) the use of wildlife nursery sites. Therefore, the project would have less than significant impact on native wildlife movement, native wildlife corridors, and native wildlife nursery sites. e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact
The City of Artesia’s Tree Protection Ordinance, in § 7-4 of the City’s municipal ordinance, protects street trees and heritage trees (i.e., trees that provide significant habitat value, are native to California, have historical or cultural significance, or is integral to City parks or planning). The City requires mitigation for the removal of street trees or heritage trees within the City’s rights-of-way or on private property. As there are no street trees or heritage trees within the project site or that would be impacted by project development, this project does not conflict with a tree preservation policy or ordinance. f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Communities Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact
The project site is not located in a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other approved HCP area. For this reason, the project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved local, regional, or state HCP.

Therefore, the project would have no impact in this regard.  SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.5-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.5 Cultural Resources
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource
pursuant to § 15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
X
Information from the Cultural Resources Inventory Report dated July 31, 2024 (see Appendix D), prepared by UltraSystems for the Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project in the City of Artesia, has been included within this section.

4.5.1 Methodology
A cultural resources inventory was conducted for the Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project site (Figure 4.5-1) that included a California Historic Resources Inventory System (CHRIS) records and literature search at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) located at California State University, Fullerton. Additionally, a request was made to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to conduct a search of their Sacred Lands File (SLF) for potential traditional cultural properties as well as to provide a list of local Native American tribes and tribal representatives to contact. Finally, a pedestrian survey of the project site was completed. The SCCIC records search was conducted on June 26, 2024. The NAHC request was made on June 14, 2024, and a reply was received on July 2, 2024; letters were sent to the listed tribes on July 3, 2024, and follow-up telephone calls were conducted following conclusion of the response period on July 23, 2024. The pedestrian field survey was conducted on July 5, 2024.

4.5.2 Existing Conditions
Based on the cultural resources records search, it was determined that no cultural resources have been previously recorded within the project site boundary. Within the 0.5-mile buffer zone around the project site, one historic resource was identified by the SCCIC, ten historic-era resources were identified in the Built Environmental Resource Directory, and no pre-historic resources were identified. Table 4.1-1 in Appendix D of this document summarizes these resources.

The primary historic feature in the vicinity of the project site is a one-story single-family home, built in 1958, which is located approximately 0.32 mile to the northwest of the project boundary (see Sections 2.2.3.5 and 4.1.1 in Appendix D).

This one-story single-family home was located at 17501 Roseton Avenue, in the City of Artesia (P19-192291). The Ranch-style residence consisted of a home and attached garage. The residence was linear in plan, with a gable on hipped roof clad in asphalt shingles. The walls are covered in flagstone and vertical wood siding. Replacement of original fenestration and alteration to the façade have  SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.5-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.5-1

TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
 SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.5-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 resulted in a loss of historic integrity to the residence. The property is not eligible for listing in the National or California registers, nor is it a contributor to a National or California Register-eligible historic district. The building was a post-war example of a very common type, the plan house. The property no longer exists, and its location is now cleared and undeveloped.

4.5.3 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
No Impact
A historical resource is defined in § 15064.5(a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines as any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript determined to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California. Historical resources are further defined as being associated with significant events, important persons, or distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction; representing the work of an important creative individual; or possessing high artistic values. Resources listed in or determined eligible for the California Register, included in a local register, or identified as significant in a historic resource survey are also considered as historical resources under CEQA.

Similarly, the National Register criteria (contained in 36 CFR 60.4) are used to evaluate resources when complying with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Specifically, the National Register criteria state that eligible resources comprise districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and that (a) are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or (b) that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or (c) that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or (d) that have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important to history or prehistory.

A substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, as a result of a project or development, is considered a significant impact on the environment. Substantial adverse change is defined as physical demolition, relocation, or alteration of a resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of the historical resource would be materially impaired. Direct impacts are those that cause substantial adverse physical change to a historic property. Indirect impacts are those that cause substantial adverse change to the immediate surroundings of a historic property, such that the significance of a historical resource would be materially impaired.

The cultural resources records search conducted at the SCCIC determined that one historic resource has been recorded within the 0.5-mile radius buffer zone of the area of potential effect (APE) of the project boundary (Table 4.1-2 in Appendix D), but none have been recorded within the APE. The site was a single-family home, as described above.

The project site would be built on land that was developed with multiple structures and a singlefamily home in the 1950s, and a large commercial structure constructed circa 1988. As late as 1991, the property was occupied by commercial structures according to aerial photos and topographic map analysis (see Section 2.2.3.3 in Appendix D).
 SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.5-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 A search of the Built Environmental Resource Directory (BERD) provided by the Office of Historic Preservation (2022) was conducted for this project. It was determined that the project boundary does not have any resources present that have been evaluated under the National Register of Historic Places. The 0.5-mile radius has 10 resources noted in the BERD, nine of which have been determined ineligible for National Register by consensus through the Section 106 process but not been evaluated for the California Register or local listing (6Y), and one was not evaluated for the National or California Register but was submitted to the Office of Historic Preservation; however, the submission is indicated as either withdrawn or inactive (7W). The list of resources can be found on Table 4.1 1 in Appendix D. Proposed project development would not adversely impact historical resources. b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated An archaeological resource is defined in § 15064.5(c) of the CEQA Guidelines as a site, area or place determined to be historically significant as defined in § 15064(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, or as a unique archaeological resource defined in § 21083.2 of the Public Resources Code as an artifact, object, or site that contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions of public interest or that has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest or best example of its type, or that is directly associated with a scientifically-recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person. The past residencia and commercial use on the project site suggests that ground here has been highly disturbed, with little native surface soil remaining. It is unlikely that undisturbed unique archeological resources exist on the project site as determined by the cultural resources investigation conducted by UltraSystems, which included a CHRIS records search of the project site and buffer zone, a search of the SLF by the NAHC, and pedestrian field survey.

The cultural resources records search conducted at the SCCIC determined that there are no prehistoric cultural resource sites or isolates recorded within the project boundary or within the

0.5-mile radius buffer area around the project footprint and areas of direct and indirect impacts. The result of the pedestrian survey was negative for both prehistoric and historic sites and isolates on the project site.

According to records at the SCCIC, there are no previous cultural resource surveys that included a portion of the project boundary. Four surveys have been completed within or intersecting the 0.5- mile radius project buffer but not within the project footprint and areas of direct and indirect impacts (refer to Table 4.5-2 in Appendix D). As noted above, the recording of the one-story single-family home located at 17501 Roseton Avenue (P-19-192291) was described in a Historic Building Assessment.

There were no other prehistoric or historic cultural resources recorded within the project boundary or the 0.5-mile project buffer.

On June 14, 2024, Stephen O’Neil, UltraSystems Cultural Resources Manager and Principal Investigator, contacted the NAHC via email requesting a search of their SLF and a list of local tribal organizations and individuals to contact for project outreach. The results of the search request were received July 2, 2024, from Mr. Andrew Green, Cultural Resources Analyst. The NAHC letter stated that “A record search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) was completed for the information you have submitted for the above referenced project. The results were negative [emphasis in the original].” (See Section 4.2 and Attachment C in Appendix D).  SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.5-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Eighteen representatives of ten Native American tribes were contacted requesting a reply if they have knowledge of cultural resources in the area that they wished to share and asking if they had any questions or concerns regarding the project. These tribes included:
• Cahuilla Band of Indians
• Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh
Nation
• Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of
Mission Indians
• Gabrieleno/Tongva Nation
• Gabrielino/Tongva Indians of California
Tribal Council
• Gabrielino Tongva Tribe
• Juaneño Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen
Nation 84A
• Juaneño Band of Mission Indians – Acjachemen
Nation (Belardes)
• Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians
• Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians
UEI sent letters and emails on July 3, 2024, to each of the 18 tribal contacts representing ten tribal entities describing the project and including a map showing the project's location, requesting a reply if they have knowledge of cultural resources in the area, and asking if they had any questions or concerns regarding the project (see Section 4.2 and Attachment C in Appendix D).

There have been three direct responses to the letters and emails to date. An email response was received on July 3, 2024, from BobbyRay Esparza, Cultural Director for the Cahuilla Band of Indians (on behalf of Anthony Madrigal, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer and Erica Schenk, Chairperson) indicating that the tribe has reviewed the project and requests all cultural materials associated with the project for review. Mr. O’Neil responded on the same day noting that the Lead Agency, the City of Artesia’s Planning Department, can provide a copy of the report if requested during the AB 52 consultation.

An email response was received on July 15, 2024, from Chloe Soto, Admin Specialist of the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians –Kizh Nation (on behalf of Andrew Salas, Chairperson and Christina Swindall Martinez, Secretary) requesting the lead agency’s contact information. Mr. O’Neil responded on the same day that the project proponent has yet to file the project with the Lead Agency, but that once that has been done the Lead Agency will contact local tribes.

An email response was received on July 3, 2024, from Christina Conley, Cultural Resources Administrator for the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council (on behalf of Robert Dorame, Chairperson) asking if a cultural report was completed and to provide a copy of the report as the project boundaries are in close proximity to the village of Jaisobit. Mr. O’Neil responded on July 8, 2024, indicating that the tribe may request a copy of the report during AB 52 consultation with the Lead Agency. Mr. O’Neil also indicated that we are aware of the village of Jaisobit from ethnohistoric reports using the San Gabriel mission sacramental registers, but not from ethnographic or historic accounts, and do not have a clear sense of its location. Any information the tribe may provide would be appreciated. No further response has been received.

Following up on the initial letter and email contacts, telephone calls were conducted by Megan Doukakis, Assistant Project Archeologist, on July 23, 2024, to all the eleven tribal contacts who had not already responded to UltraSystems’ mailing and email. Three telephone calls were placed with no direct answer and so messages were left describing the project and requesting a response. These were to Ms. Sandonne Goad, Chairperson of the Gabrielino / Tongva Nation; Sam Dunlap, Cultural Resource Director with the Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe; and Joyce Perry, Cultural Resource Director of the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation – Belardes; there has been no response to  SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.5-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 date from these calls. In the call to Charles Alvarez with the Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe and to Heidi Lucero, Chairperson and THPO for the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation – 84A, the phone lines were found to be disconnected and so no message could be left. The call to Anthony Morales, Chairperson of the Gabrielino /Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians was not answered, and the call dropped; therefore, there was no ability to leave a voice message.

The call to Vanessa Minott, Tribal Administrator and Steven Estrada, Tribal Chairman of the Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians was answered by the tribal office receptionist who stated that Ms.

Minott and Mr. Estrada were not in the office and took a message for them. There has been no response to date.

On the call to Mr. Joseph Ontiveros with the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians’ Cultural Resources Department, he stated that the tribe would defer to Anthony Morales with the Gabrielino/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians. Mr. Ontiveros’s response represented Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson and Jessica Valdez, Cultural Resource Specialist for the tribe. (See Section 4.2 and Attachment C in Appendix D).

An intensive pedestrian survey of the project site was conducted on July 5, 2024, by Mr. O’Neil. The survey consisted of walking over, visually inspecting, and photographing the exposed ground surface of the project site using standard archaeological procedures and techniques. The project boundary was surrounded by a chain-link fence on three sides and wooden panels on the west boundary and was entirely vacant with no structures. The ground visibility was poor, at five to ten percent, with the entire surface covered in both dried and living grasses (predominantly Bermuda grass [Poaceae species]), weeds (including tumble weed [Salsola tragus]) and gravel. An approximately four foot high mound of soil with small piles of broken concrete surrounding it was visible in the southeast corner of the lot. The result of the pedestrian survey was negative for both prehistoric and historic sites and isolates on the project site. Based on the results of the records search and the onsite field survey, it was determined that it is unlikely that cultural resources or tribal resources would be adversely affected by construction of the project. Outreach to local Native American tribes did result in information in a potential traditional cultural property in the project area, but not specifically located at the project site.

The cultural resource study findings suggest that there is a low potential for finding resources during the construction work. There will be subsurface grading for the new structure foundations up to 11 feet for the bottom of the first floor, elevator pits and utility vaults. This would reach into previously undisturbed native soil. Therefore, it is recommended that an archaeological monitor and Native American monitor observe this subsurface disturbance work. If during ground disturbance work prehistoric and/or historic items are observed during subsurface activities, work should be stopped in that area and the qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor should be called to assess the findings and retrieve the material.

Grading activities associated with development of the project would cause new subsurface disturbance and may result in the unanticipated discovery of unique historic and/or prehistoric archeological resources. In the event of an unanticipated discovery, implementation of mitigation measures MM CUL-1 and MM-CUL-2 described below would ensure that impacts on archeological resources would be less than significant.
 SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.5-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Mitigation Measure
MM CUL-1 In the event of an unexpected discovery of a cultural resource as defined by CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5, during any project-related earth-disturbing activities, all earth-disturbing activities within 60 feet of the find shall be halted and the City of Artesia shall be notified. The project applicant shall retain an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology to assess the significance of the find. Impacts on any significant resources shall be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through data recovery or other methods determined adequate by the archaeologist and that are consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archaeological Documentation. Any identified cultural resources shall be recorded on the appropriate DPR 523 (A-L) form and filed with the SCCIC. Construction activities may continue on other parts of the project site while evaluation and treatment of prehistoric archaeological resources takes place.

Construction activities may continue on other parts of the project site while evaluation and treatment of prehistoric archaeological resources takes place.

CUL-MM-2 Prior to the commencement of grading or excavation, workers conducting construction activities, and their foremen will receive Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training from a qualified archaeologist regarding the potential for sensitive archaeological and paleontological resources to be unearthed during grading activities.

The workers will be directed to report any unusual specimens of bone, stone, ceramics or other archaeological objects, artifacts or features observed and paleontological specimens of bone or features observed during grading and/or other construction activities to their foremen and to cease grading activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery until a qualified archaeologist or Native American cultural monitor is notified of the discovery by the Superintendent of the project site and can assess their significance. The WEAP shall be implemented to educate all construction personnel about the area’s environmental conditions and the environmental protection measures that must be adhered to by all workers throughout the duration of project construction.

Training materials shall be language-appropriate for all construction personnel. Upon completion of the WEAP, workers shall sign a form stating that they attended the program, understand all protection measures, and shall abide by all the rules of the WEAP. A record of all trained personnel shall be kept with the construction foreman at the project field construction office and shall be made available to any resource agency personnel. If new construction personnel are added to the project later, the construction foreman shall ensure that new personnel receive training before they start working. The archaeologist shall provide hard copies of the WEAP presentation to the construction foreman.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
With implementation of mitigation measures MM CUL-1 and MM-CUL-2 above, the proposed project’s impacts on potential cultural resources would be less than significant.  SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.5-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated As previously discussed in (Section 4.5.b) above, the project would be built on relatively disturbed land that has been previously graded and is in an urban area. No human remains have been previously identified or recorded onsite. The project proposes subsurface grading for the new structure foundations up to 11 feet for the bottom of the first floor, elevator pits and utility vaults.

Grading activities associated with development of the project would cause new subsurface disturbance and could result in the unanticipated discovery of unknown human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. In the unlikely event of an unexpected discovery, implementation of mitigation measure MM CUL-3 would ensure that impacts related to the accidental discovery of human remains would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure
MM CUL-3 If human remains are encountered during excavations associated with this project, all work will stop within a 30-foot radius of the discovery and the Los Angeles County Coroner will be notified (§ 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code). The Coroner will determine whether the remains are recent human origin or older Native American ancestry. If the coroner, with the aid of the supervising archaeologist, determines that the remains are prehistoric, they will contact the NAHC. The NAHC will be responsible for designating the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD (either an individual or sometimes a committee) will be responsible for the ultimate disposition of the remains, as required by § 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code. The MLD will make recommendations within 24 hours of their notification by the NAHC. These recommendations may include scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials (§ 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code).

Level of Significance After Mitigation
With implementation of mitigation measure CUL-3 above, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts to human remains.
 SECTION 4.6 – ENERGY
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.6-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.6 Energy
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency? X
a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
Less than Significant Impact
Construction Impact Analysis
The following forms of energy are anticipated to be expended during project construction:
• Diesel fuel for offroad equipment (expressed in gallons). • Electricity to deliver water for use in dust control (expressed in kilowatt-hours [kWh]). • Motor vehicle fuel for worker commuting, materials delivery and waste disposal (expressed in gallons).

Transportation Energy
Project construction would consume energy in the form of petroleum-based fuels associated with the use of offroad construction vehicles and equipment on the project site, construction workers' travel to and from the project site, and delivery and haul truck trips hauling solid waste from and delivering building materials to the project site.

During project construction, trucks and construction equipment would be required to comply with the California Air Resources Board’s (ARB's) anti-idling regulations. ARB's In-Use Off-Road Diesel Fueled Fleets regulation would also apply (ARB, 2016). Vehicles driven to or from the project site (delivery trucks, construction employee vehicles, etc.) are subject to fuel efficiency standards established by the federal government. Therefore, project construction activities regarding fuel use would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy.

Electricity
The proposed project is located in a developed area, and infrastructure for providing electric power to the area is well established by the Southern California Edison Company (SCE). During project construction, energy would be consumed in the form of electricity associated with the conveyance and treatment of water used for dust control and, on a limited basis, powering lights, electronic equipment, or other construction activities necessitating electrical power. Due to the fact that electricity usage associated with lighting and construction equipment that utilizes electricity is not easily quantifiable or readily available, the estimated electricity usage during project construction is speculative.  SECTION 4.6 – ENERGY
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.6-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Lighting used during project construction would comply with California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 standards/requirements, such as wattage limitations.This compliance would ensure that electricity use during project construction would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy. Lighting would be used in compliance with applicable City of Artesia Municipal Code requirements to create enough light for safety.

Natural Gas
Natural gas is supplied to the project site by Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas). SoCalGas is the primary distributor of retail and wholesale natural gas across Southern California, including the City of Artesia. Use, if any, of natural gas during construction would be negligible.

Operation
The project will be an all-electric development, and no natural gas will be used during project operations.

The following forms of energy would be expended during project operation:
• Electricity for the proposed residential and commercial uses, street lighting, space and water heating, and conveyance and treatment of water.
• Gasoline for onroad motor vehicles.

Estimated project operational energy usage, which was estimated by CalEEMod as part of the air quality and greenhouse gas emissions analyses,9 is shown in Table 4.6-1. The proposed mixed-used project is estimated to have on average up to three residents per unit, 28 restaurant guests, six restaurant employees, and fewer than five building employees (Zhang, 2024; Humphrey & Partners, 2025). For a worst-case scenario, per capita values are based on a count of 249 residents, 28 restaurant guests, six restaurant employees, and three building employees for an estimated population of 286. Since the current site is undeveloped, existing use was assumed to be zero.

The commitment of resources required for the construction and operation of the project would limit the availability of such resources for future generations or for other uses during the life of the project. However, the use of such resources would be reduced when compared to what they would be in the absence of complying with the CALGreen Code. Therefore, energy consumption would not result in a substantial increase in energy production for energy providers and the energy demand associated with the project would be less than significant.

Table 4.6-1

ESTIMATED PROJECT OPERATIONAL ENERGY USE
Energy Type Units Value Per-Capita Energy Usea
Onroad Motor Vehicle Travel
(Fuel)b
Gallons gasoline/year 55,262 193.2
Gallons diesel/year 5,175 18.1
Natural Gas Usec 1,000 BTU per year 0 0
Electricity Use Kilowatt-hours per year 567,000 1,982.5 a Based upon estimated building population of 286 (Zhang, 2024; Humphrey & Partners, 2025). bOnroad Motor Vehicle Fuel Consumption calculated by UltraSystems using EMFAC2021(v1.0.2) emissions inventory web platform tool (ARB, 2022) and CalEEMod (2022.1.1.29) (CAPCOA, 2022); see Appendix B1. cAs a project design feature, no natural gas will be consumed during the operational phase.

Electricity use calculated by UltraSystems with CalEEMod (2022.1.1.29). 9 See Section 4.3 (Air Quality), Section 4.8 (Greenhouse Gas Emissions), and Appendix B2.  SECTION 4.6 – ENERGY
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.6-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Less than Significant Impact
Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards
The Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations) were established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods.

Compliance with Title 24 will result in a decrease in GHG emissions.

The Title 24 standards are updated on a three-year schedule, with the most current 2022 standards adopted on August 11, 2021. In December 2021, the 2022 standards were approved by the California Building Standards Commission for inclusion into the California Building Standards Code. The Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Energy Code) apply to newly constructed buildings, additions, and alterations. They are a vital pillar of California’s climate action plan. The 2022 Energy Code will produce benefits to support the state’s public health, climate, and clean energy goals. The 2022 Energy Code encourages efficient electric heat pumps, establishes electric-ready requirements for new homes, expands solar photovoltaic and battery storage standards, strengthens ventilation standards, and more. Buildings with permit applications applied for on or after January 1, 2023, must comply with the 2022 Energy Code. Public Resources Code §§ 25402 subdivisions (a)-(b) and § 25402.1 emphasize the importance of building design and construction flexibility by requiring the California Energy Commission (CEC) to establish performance standards, in the form of an “energy budget” in terms of the energy consumption per square foot of floor space (CEC, 2022b).

The provisions of Title 24, Part 6 apply to all buildings for which an application for a building permit or renewal of an existing permit is required by law. They regulate design and construction of the building envelope, space-conditioning and water-heating systems, indoor and outdoor lighting systems of buildings, and signs located either indoors or outdoors. Title 24, Part 6 specifies mandatory, prescriptive and performance measures, all designed to optimize energy use in buildings and decrease overall consumption of energy to construct and operate residential and nonresidential buildings. Mandatory measures establish requirements for manufacturing, construction, and installation of certain systems, equipment, and building components that are installed in buildings.

Title 24 California Green Building Standards Code
The California Green Building Standards Code (Title 24, Part 11) commonly referred to as the CALGreen Code, is a statewide mandatory construction code developed and adopted by the California Building Standards Commission and the Department of Housing and Community Development. The CALGreen standards require new residential and commercial buildings to comply with mandatory measures under the topics of planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency/conservation, material conservation and resource efficiency, and environmental quality. CALGreen also provides voluntary tiers and measures that local governments may adopt that encourage or require additional measures in the five green building topics.

To comply with the 2022 CALGreen Code, the proposed project will incorporate renewable energy sources that meet the minimum requirements of the code. The roof plan includes a solar panel area that meets the CALGreen requirement for new multi-family residential buildings.  SECTION 4.6 – ENERGY
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.6-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 City of Artesia
The City of Artesia General Plan 2030, adopted in 2010, addresses energy efficiency and conservation within several elements of the plan such as the Housing Sub-Element, Air Quality and Climate Change Sub-Element, and the Sustainability Element (City of Artesia, 2010a). The Housing Sub-Element highlights SCE’s incentives for builders to incorporate energy-efficient appliances into new development, including $275 per multi-family unit that are 15 to 20 percent more energy efficient than what is required by the County or State. Obtaining LEED Certification by demonstrating energy and water savings, lower maintenance costs, and improved resident satisfaction is another way the City encourages energy conservation. Section 4.8.2.3 lists policies related to GHG reduction. Energy conservation policies stated in the General Plan include (City of Artesia, 2010a):
• Policy HE 1.5: Encourage energy conservation in new residential development and rehabilitation or remodeling of existing housing units. o Action HE 1.5aGreen Building Practices and Energy Conservation: The City will review existing standards, current trends, and educate about and incentivize green building practices. • Community Policy SUS 1.2: Promote community use of energy efficient practices and technologies. o Policy Action SUS 1.2.1: Support the adoption of standards to require energy efficient technology and conservation measures for major renovations and new construction. o Policy Action SUS 1.2.2: Support the adoption of standards requiring retrofits of existing homes with energy efficient measures at time of sale, such as increased insulation, weatherstripping, improved lighting and water efficiency. o Policy Action SUS 1.2.3: Prioritize outreach and education to promote energy efficient practices by residents and businesses.
• Community Policy SUS 1.3: Encourage the use of renewable energy technology citywide. o Policy Action SUS 1.3.1: Coordinate with utility companies to publicize rebates and incentive programs for renewable energy generation.
o Policy Action SUS 1.3.2: Prioritize development of an outreach and education program to promote renewable energy installations by residents and businesses. sustainable planning efforts and projects that aim to reduce GHG emissions.

The City has also adopted ordinances that promote energy efficiency. The City of Artesia adopted the 2022 Green Building Standards Code into the Artesia Municipal Code on January 1, 2023; it can be cited as the Green Building Standards Code of the City of Artesia (ecode360, 2024). The Artesia Municipal Code also includes “Green Building Certification Incentives” which encourage green building practices within the design, construction, and maintenance of buildings to:
• Reduce greenhouse gas emissions. • Increase energy efficiency. • Conserve natural resources. • Reduce building operating and maintenance costs. • Encourage higher building standards. • Promote a healthier indoor environment. • Reduce City waste. • Promote alternative energy sources such as solar, wind, and natural gas.

Sustainability and green building are of great importance to the City of Artesia. In addition to state mandates on energy efficiency, the City is focused on achieving greater energy efficiency in buildings, as well as reducing consumption of energy resources and generation of solid waste.

The proposed project will be designed in compliance with the applicable City of Artesia goals and policies, federal and state requirements for energy efficiency, including Title 24. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.  SECTION 4.7 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.7-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.7 Geology and Soils
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.

X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil? X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in
on or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1 B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative waste
water disposal systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste water?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?
X
The following section is based in part on findings and conclusions of the Updated Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed Mixed-Use Development Tract No. 73667, dated August 9, 2024, prepared by GEOTEK, Inc., (Appendix E) and the Paleontological Resources Records Search prepared by the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLA) dated June 23, 2024 (Appendix D2). a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
 SECTION 4.7 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.7-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Less Than Significant
The Alquist-Priolo Zones Special Studies Act defines active faults as those that have experienced surface displacement or movement during the last 11,000 years (CGS, 2019). The project site is not located within a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (GEOTEK, 2024b, p. 8). As shown in Figure 4.7-1, the nearest Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone is along the Northeast Flank Fault, located 6.4 miles southwest of the project site. No active faults are known to project through the site.

Additionally, as shown in Figure 4.7-2, the nearest active fault is approximately 6.5 miles southwest of the project site. Thus, project development would not expose people or structures to substantial risks from rupture of a known earthquake fault, and impacts would be less than significant. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact
The site is near several active faults; therefore, during the life of the proposed structure, the property will probably experience moderate to occasionally high ground shaking, Design and construction in accordance with the current California Building Code (CBC) requirements are anticipated to adequately address hazards from potential ground shaking. The CBC contains provisions for earthquake safety based on factors including occupancy type, the types of soil and rock onsite, and the strength of ground motion with specified probability of occurring at the site. The geotechnical investigation report includes seismic design parameters for use in design and construction of the proposed project (GEOTEK, 2024, pp. 8-9b pp. 8-9).

The project would be constructed in accordance with the applicable CBC standards (CBC, 2022). In addition, the CBC is included in the City’s Municipal Code (City of Artesia Municipal Code, Chapter 8-1, 2024) and provides minimum standards to protect property and public welfare by regulating the design and construction of excavations, foundations, building frames, retaining walls, and other building elements to mitigate the effects of earthquakes and adverse soil conditions.

Therefore, impacts from strong ground shaking would be less than significant. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Significant Impact
General types of ground failures that might occur due to severe ground shaking typically include landslides, ground subsidence, ground lurching and shallow ground rupture. The probability of occurrence of each type of ground failure depends on the severity of the earthquake, distance from the faults, topography, subsoils and relatively shallow groundwater tables (approximately 50 feet or less below ground surface), in addition to other factors. The project site is in a zone of required investigation for liquefaction mapped by the California Geological Survey, as shown below on Figure 4.7-3.

Liquefaction typically occurs when saturated or partially saturated soils behave like a liquid, as a result of losses in strength and stiffness in response to an applied stress such as that caused by an earthquake.

The geotechnical engineering report states that evidence of previous shallow groundwater, in the form of mottles, was found in the borings as shallow as five feet below ground surface. The liquefaction analysis done as part of the geotechnical engineering investigation determined that site soils are liquefiable, with maximum seismic settlement of 4.5 inches; and maximum differential settlement of

2.25 inches over a horizontal distance of 40 feet (GEOTEK, 2024b, p. 10). The geotechnical engineering report sets forth recommendations for reducing liquefaction hazard including excavating under the building footprint to a depth of 9 feet below ground surface; and use of a mat foundation (GEOTEK, 2024b, p. 18).10 Impacts arising from liquefaction would be less than significant after implementation of recommendations in the geotechnical engineering report. 10 The recommended over excavation depth is 5 feet below the bottom of the foundation.  SECTION 4.7 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.7-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.7-1

ALQUIST-PRIOLO EARTHQUAKE FAULT ZONES
 SECTION 4.7 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.7-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.7-2

REGIONALLY ACTIVE FAULTS
 SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.7-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 iv) Landslides?
No Impact
Topography within the project site is relatively flat. As shown in Figure 4.7-3, the project site is not located within or adjacent to a zone of required investigation for earthquake-induced landslides.

Additionally, the project site is located in a flat, developed urban area that does not contain steep slopes or hills. Therefore, project development would not exacerbate landslide hazards, and no impact would occur.
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact
The project proponent would be required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity Construction General Permit Order 2022- 0057-DWQ (Construction General Permit). Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling or excavation but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore the original line, grade, or capacity of the facility. Dischargers whose projects disturb one or more acre of soil are required to obtain coverage under this permit through the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB); in addition, the Construction General Permit requires the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP; SWRCB, 2020)). The SWPPP would mandate site-specific construction best management practices (BMPs) that would minimize or avoid soil erosion through stormwater or wind. These BMPs would be implemented prior to ground-disturbing activities and would remain in place until construction is complete. Construction BMPs are grouped into six categories: erosion control, sediment control, wind erosion control, tracking control, non-stormwater management controls, and waste management and controls. As detailed in the grading plan, the proposed project would disturb approximately 0.83 acres of land.

At project completion the entire site would be developed with the proposed building and minor amounts of landscaping and walkways around the building perimeter, thus reducing the potential for post-construction soil erosion. Thus, the project would have less than significant impacts related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil.
 SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.7-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.7-3

LANDSLIDES AND LIQUEFACTION
 SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.7-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Less than Significant Impact
Impacts related to liquefaction and landslides are discussed above in Section 4.7.a above. The site is underlain by soils that are susceptible to liquefaction. Implementation of recommendations in the geotechnical engineering report would reduce impacts arising from liquefaction to less than significant.

Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading is the downslope movement of surface sediment due to liquefaction in a subsurface layer. The downslope movement is due to gravity and earthquake shaking combined. Lateral spreading of the ground surface during a seismic activity usually occurs along the weak shear zones within a liquefiable soil layer and has been observed to generally take place toward a free face (i.e., retaining wall, slope, or channel) and to lesser extent on ground surfaces with a very gentle slope.

The geotechnical report for the project states that the potential for lateral spreading is negligible, because the area is flat and no free face is present near the site (GEOTEK, 2024b, p. 9).

Subsidence
The major cause of ground subsidence is the excessive withdrawal of groundwater. Soils with high silt or clay content are particularly susceptible to subsidence. The project site is in an area of ground subsidence mapped by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS, 2024). The project site is over the Central Subbasin of the Coastal Plain of Los Angeles Groundwater Basin; the Central Subbasin spans about 270 square miles comprising the northeast half of the Los Angeles Basin (CBMWD, 2021). The Water Replenishment District (WRD) ensures that a reliable supply of high-quality groundwater is available—in the service areas of the Central Basin Municipal Water district and West Basin Municipal Water District—through replenishment with recycled water and stormwater capture. In 2013 and 2014, WRD was appointed by the Court as the Watermaster Administrative Body for the Central and West Coast Basins. In this role, WRD is responsible for administering the terms of the legal judgments controlling pumping, water right sales and leases, storage, and carry-over conversions (WRD, 2024). Considering management of groundwater levels in the Central Subbasin by the WRD, project development is not expected to cause substantial ground subsidence, and impacts would be less than significant.

Collapsible Soils
Collapsible soils shrink upon being wetted and/or being subject to a load. The geotechnical engineering report states that upper site soils consist of disturbed soils/artificial fill and to be nonuniform, loose and of low relative compaction; and recommends excavation of the site to a depth of 9 feet bgs (for construction of a semisubterranean parking structure to a depth of 4 feet bgs), and a mat foundation (GEOTEK, 2024b, pp. 11, 18). The geotechnical engineering report also recommends that precise grading plans, wall/fence plans, and foundation plans for the site be reviewed by GEOTEK prior to construction to check for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical engineering report. Impacts related to collapsible soils would be less than significant after implementation of recommendations in the geotechnical engineering report.  SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.7-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1 B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less than Significant Impact
Expansive soils shrink and swells with changes in soil moisture. Soil moisture may change from landscape irrigation, rainfall, and utility leakage. Expansive soils are not a design consideration for the proposed project, as site soils are typically granular and non-expansive (GEOTEK, 2024b, p. 11).

Impacts related to expansive soils would be less than significant. e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
No Impact
The project includes construction of sewer laterals connecting to existing sewer main next to the project site. Therefore, the project would not use septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems, and no impacts would occur.
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation
The project site boundary encompasses a single sediment type, identified as “Young axial channel deposits” (Qya2) of alluvium dating to the Holocene (11,000 years ago to the present) and late Pleistocene (less than 129,000 years ago) (Saucedo, et al. 2016).

Los Angeles County Natural History Museum (LACM) records indicate that there are no fossil localities within the project site, but there are fossil localities nearby from the same sedimentary deposits that occur in the proposed project area, either at the surface or at depth. LACM records identified four fossil localities in the region, two in southeast Los Angeles County and two in northwest Orange County (Bell 2024:1). These resources are presented in Table 4.7-1 below.

Grading and excavation activities associated with development of the project would cause new subsurface disturbance and could damage fossils. This impact would be potentially significant without mitigation. Mitigation measure MM GEO-1 is required to ensure the project would have a less than significant impact regarding paleontological resources.

Mitigation Measure
MM GEO-1: Before the beginning of project ground disturbing activities, the project proponent shall provide the City of Artesia Planning Manager evidence that the proponent has retained a qualified paleontologist to be on call during ground disturbing activities. If paleontological resources are uncovered during construction activities, the contractor shall halt construction activities within 50 feet of the find and notify the City of Artesia Planning Manager. The on-call paleontologist shall be notified and afforded the necessary time and funds to recover, analyze, and curate the find(s). The fossils must be donated to a permanent accredited repository. Subsequently, the monitor shall remain onsite for the duration of the ground disturbance to ensure the protection of any other resources that may be in the area.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
With implementation of Mitigation Measure MM GEO-1, potential impacts to paleontological resources would be reduced to a less than significant level.  SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.7-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Table 4.7-1

FOSSIL LOCALITIES IN THE PROJECT REGION
Locality Location Formation Taxa Depth

LACM IP
4560
East of Hwy. 39; north from
Rosecrans Ave., Orange County
Unknown
(Pliocene)
Pecten caurinus Gould Creek bed

LACM VP
4185-
4201
Coyote Creek, adjacent to Ralph
B Clark Regional Park in West
Coyote Hills, Orange County
La Habra
(Pleistocene;
sandy silt
shot through
with caliche)
Bison (Bison), camel (Camelops), horse
(Equus), mammoth (Mammuthus),
mastodon (Mammut1), elephant clade
(Proboscidea), dire wolf (Aenocyon
dirus2), Coyote (C. latrans), deer
(Odocoileus), dwarf pronghorn
(Capromeryx), unidentified artiodactyl;
sea duck (Chendytes)
Creek bed

LACM VP
3660
Cover St & Pixie Ave;
Lakewood
Unknown
(Pleistocene)
Mammoth (Mammuthus) 19 ft bgs

LACM VP
7493
30 yards south of Pacific Coast
Highway & 10 yards west of
Grand Ave; Long Beach
Lakewood
[Upper
Pleistocene]
Camel family (Camelidae) 8.5 ft bgs

LACM VP
12853
Artesia, CA Not specified
(Pleistocene)
Horse (Equus sp. (small)) Not
specified
21164 Cerritos, CA San Pedro
Series
(Pleistocene)
Bent-nosed clam (Macoma nasuta),
Pacific Littleneck clam (Leukoma
laciniata5), Purple clam (Sanguinolaria
nuttalli), California fat-tellin
(Leporimetis obesa6), Clipped Semele
(Semele decisa), Clam sp. Petricola
denticulata, Smooth Western Nassa
(Nassa cerritensis)
Not
specified
Source: Bell, 2024;
Notes: 1. Spelling updated from Mamut to the correct spelling of Mammut. 2. taxa updated from Canis dirus to the present usage of Aenocyon dirus. 3. This record was not provided by the LACM but reported in Jefferson, 1991. 4. This record is from the UCMP repository. 5, Reported as Tapes lacineata on UCMP database. 6. Reported as Metis alta on UCMP database.  SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.8-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases?
X

4.8.1 Background Information on Greenhouse Gas Emissions Life on earth depends on energy coming from the sun. About half the light reaching Earth's atmosphere passes through the air and clouds to the surface, where it is absorbed and then radiated upward in the form of infrared heat. About 90 percent of this heat is then absorbed by carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) and radiated back toward the surface, which is warmed to a life-supporting average of 59 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) (NASA, 2024).

Human activities are changing the natural greenhouse. Over the last century, the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and oil has increased the concentration of atmospheric CO2. This happens because the coal or oil burning process combines carbon in the fuel with oxygen in the air to make CO2. To a lesser extent, the clearing of land for agriculture, industry, and other human activities has increased concentrations of GHGs (NASA, 2024).

GHGs are defined under the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 as CO2, methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) (AB 32, chapter 488). HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 would not be emitted in significant amounts by the new activities in the proposed project, so they will not be discussed further in this section.

Associated with each GHG species is a “global warming potential” (GWP), which is a value used to compare the abilities of different GHGs to trap heat in the atmosphere. GWPs are based on the heat-absorbing ability of each gas relative to that of CO2, as well as the decay rate of each gas (the amount removed from the atmosphere over a given number of years). The GWPs of CO2, CH4 and N2O are 1, 25 and 298, respectively (GMI, 2022). “Carbon dioxide equivalent” (CO2e) emissions are calculated by weighting each GHG compound’s emissions by its GWP and then summing the products.

Carbon Dioxide (CO2). Carbon dioxide is a colorless, odorless gas consisting of molecules made up of two oxygen atoms and one carbon atom. CO2 is produced when an organic carbon material (such as wood) or fossilized organic matter (such as coal, oil, or natural gas) is burned in the presence of oxygen. Since the industrial revolution began in the mid-1700s, industrial activities have increased in scale and distribution. Prior to the industrial revolution, CO2 concentrations were stable at a range of 275 to 285 ppm (IPCC, 2007). The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Earth System Research Laboratory indicates that the global concentration of CO2 was 419.3 parts per million (ppm) in 2023 (NOAA, 2024). These concentrations of CO2 exceed by far the natural range over the last 650,000 years (180 to 300 ppm) as determined from ice cores.  SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.8-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Methane (CH4). Methane is a colorless, odorless non-toxic gas consisting of molecules made up of four hydrogen atoms and one carbon atom. CH4 is combustible, and is the main constituent of natural gas, a fossil fuel. CH4 is released when organic matter decomposes in low oxygen environments.

Natural sources include wetlands, swamps and marshes, termites, and oceans. Anthropogenic sources include the mining of fossil fuels and transportation of natural gas, digestive processes in ruminant animals such as cattle, rice paddies, and the buried waste in landfills. Over the last 50 years, human activities such as growing rice, raising cattle, using natural gas, and mining coal have added to the atmospheric concentration of CH4. Other anthropogenic sources include fossil-fuel combustion and biomass burning.

Nitrous Oxide (N2O). Nitrous oxide is a colorless, non-flammable gas with a sweetish odor, commonly known as “laughing gas,” and sometimes used as an anesthetic. N2O is naturally produced in the oceans and in rainforests (USEPA, 2024a). Manmade sources of N2O include the use of fertilizers in agriculture, nylon and nitric acid production, cars with catalytic converters and the burning of organic matter. Concentrations of N2O also began to rise at the beginning of the industrial revolution.

4.8.2 Regulatory Setting
GHGs are regulated at the national, state, and air basin level; each agency has a different degree of control. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) regulates at the national level; the California Air Resources Board (ARB) regulates at the state level; and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regulates at the air basin level in the Artesia Pioneer Place project area.

4.8.2.1 Federal Regulations
The USEPA collects several types of GHG emissions data. These data help policy makers, businesses, and the USEPA track GHG emissions trends and identify opportunities for reducing emissions and increasing efficiency. The USEPA has been maintaining a national inventory of GHG emissions since 1990 and in 2009 established mandatory reporting of GHG emissions from large GHG emissions sources.

EPA is also getting GHG reductions through partnerships and initiatives, evaluating policy options, costs, and benefits, advancing the science, partnering internationally and with states, localities, and tribes, and helping communities adapt.

Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards
NHTSA's Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards regulate the distance vehicles must cover per gallon of fuel. The agency establishes CAFE standards for passenger cars and light trucks (referred to as light-duty vehicles), as well as separate guidelines for fuel consumption by mediumand heavy-duty trucks and engines. The latest CAFE standards were proposed by the NHTSA in July 2023 and finalized in June 2024 (NHTSA, 2024). Effective August 23, 2024, passenger cars and light trucks will see an increase of 2 percent annually for passenger cars in model years 2027–31. For light trucks, the increase will be 0 percent per year for model years 2027–28 and 2 percent per year for model years 2029–31. Additionally, NHTSA is setting final fuel efficiency standards for heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans (HDPUVs) with a 10 percent annual increase for model years 2030–32 and further increases for model years 2033–35.
 SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.8-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule
On March 31, 2020, the USEPA and the NHTSA published the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule Part One: One National Program, revoked California’s authority to set its own GHG emissions standards and set zero emission vehicle (ZEV) mandates in California. The loss of the ZEV sales requirements would likely result in additional gasoline-fueled vehicles being sold in the State and criteria emissions increasing. On April 30, 2020, USEPA and NHTSA issued the Final SAFE Rule (ARB, 2020), which relaxed the federal GHG emissions and CAFE standards and would probably have resulted in increased CO2 emissions. However, this regulation was repealed on December 21, 2021, by the Biden administration (NHTSA, 2021).

4.8.2.2 State Regulations
Executive Order S 3-05
On June 1, 2005, the governor issued EO S 3-05, which set the following GHG emission reduction targets:
• By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels.
• By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels.
• By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.

To meet these targets, the Climate Action Team (CAT)11 prepared a report to the Governor in 2006 that contained recommendations and strategies to help ensure that the targets in EO S-3-05 would be met.

Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32)
In 2006, the California State Legislature enacted the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, also known as AB 32. AB 32 focuses on reducing GHG emissions in California. GHGs, as defined under AB 32, include CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6. AB 32 required that GHGs emitted in California be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. The ARB is the state agency charged with monitoring and regulating sources of emissions of GHGs that cause global warming. AB 32 also required that by January 1, 2008, the ARB determine what the statewide GHG emissions level was in 1990, and that it had to approve a statewide GHG emissions limit, so it could be applied to the 2020 benchmark. The ARB approved a 1990 GHG emissions level of 427 million metric tons of CO2e (MMTCO2e), on December 6, 2007, in its Staff Report. Therefore, in 2020, emissions in California were required to be at or below 427 MMTCO2e.

Under the “business as usual or (BAU)12” scenario established in 2008, statewide emissions were increasing at a rate of approximately one percent per year, as noted below. It was estimated that the 2020 estimated BAU of 596 MMTCO2e would have required a 28 percent reduction to reach the 1990 level of 427 MMTCO2e.

As part of the 2014 update, the ARB revised the 2020 Statewide limit to 431 million MT of CO2e, an approximately one percent increase from the original estimate. The 2020 business as usual forecast in the update is 509 million MT of CO2e. The state would need to reduce those emissions by 15.3 11 The Climate Action Team (CAT) members are state agency secretaries and the heads of agencies, boards, and departments, led by the Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA). They coordinate statewide efforts to implement global warming emission reduction programs and the state's Climate Adaptation Strategy. 12 A business-as-usual (BAU) scenario assumes that none of the Scoping Plan measures are implemented (ARB, 2022).  SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.8-9
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 percent to meet the 431 million MT of CO2e 2020 limit.

Climate Change Scoping Plan
The first AB 32 Scoping Plan (ARB, 2008) contained the main strategies to achieve the 2020 emissions cap. The GHG reduction strategies contained in the AB 32 Scoping Plan included direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and non-monetary incentives, voluntary actions, and market-based mechanisms such as a cap-and-trade system. In August 2011, the Scoping Plan was reapproved by the Board and included the Final Supplement to the Scoping Plan Functional Equivalent Document (ARB, 2011). The 2011 Scoping Plan expanded the list of nine Early Action Measures into a list of 39 Recommended Actions contained in Appendices C and E of the Plan. In May 2014, ARB developed, in collaboration with the CAT, the First Update to California’s Climate Change Scoping Plan (Update) (ARB, 2014), which showed that California was on track to meet the near-term 2020 GHG limit and was well positioned to maintain and continue reductions beyond 2020 as required by AB 32.

In November 2017, ARB published the 2017 Scoping Plan (ARB, 2017) which was built upon the former Scoping Plan and Update by outlining priorities and recommendations for the state to achieve its target of a 40 percent reduction in GHGs by 2030, compared to 1990 levels.

In December 2022, the ARB approved its Final 2022 Scoping Plan Update (ARB, 2022), which adds carbon neutrality to the former Scoping Plan. The 2022 Plan identifies a technologically feasible, costeffective path to reduce GHG emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels and achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier. Through the lens of carbon neutrality, the 2022 Plan expands the scope to more meaningfully consider how our natural and working lands (NWL) contribute to our long-term climate goal through carbon capture. The 2022 Plan focuses on efforts to shift away from fossil fuels resulting in a 94 percent decrease in liquid petroleum demand, a 71 percent decrease in smog-related pollutants, a job increase of 4 million, and $200 billion of health cost savings for Californians (ARB, 2022).

Renewables Portfolio Standard (Scoping Action E-3)
The California Energy Commission estimates that in 2000 about 12 percent of California’s retail electric load was met with renewable resources. Renewable energy includes (but is not limited to) wind, solar, geothermal, small hydroelectric, biomass, anaerobic digestion, and landfill gas. California’s current Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) was intended to increase that share to 33 percent by 2020. It was reported that in 2021, over 37 percent of California’s retail electricity sales were provided by RPScertified renewables (CEC, 2021). Increased use of renewables will decrease California’s reliance on fossil fuels, thus reducing emissions of GHGs from the electricity sector. In October 2015, Governor Brown signed Senate Bill (SB) 350, which requires retail sellers and publicly owned utilities to procure 50 percent of their electricity from eligible renewable energy resources by 2030. Signed in 2018, SB 100 requires an increase in the RPS to 60 percent by 2030, along with a long-term goal of 100 percent of RPS and zero-carbon energy by 2045 (CEC, 2021).

Senate Bill 375 (SB 375)
Senate Bill (SB) 375 passed the Senate on August 30, 2008, and was signed by the Governor on September 30, 2008. Per SB 375, the transportation sector is the largest contributor of GHG emissions and contributes approximately 45 percent of the GHG emissions in California, with automobiles and light trucks alone contributing almost 30 percent. SB 375 indicates that GHGs from automobiles and light trucks can be reduced by new vehicle technology. However, significant reductions from changed land use patterns and improved transportation are also necessary. SB 375 states, “Without improved land use and transportation policy, California will not be able to achieve the goals of AB 32.” SB 375  SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.8-10
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 does the following: (1) requires metropolitan planning organizations to include sustainable community strategies in their regional transportation plans for reducing GHG emissions, (2) aligns planning for transportation and housing, and (3) creates specified incentives for the implementation of the strategies.

Executive Order B-30-15
On April 29, 2015, Governor Brown issued EO B-30-15, which added an interim target of GHG emissions reductions to help ensure the State meets its 80 percent reduction by 2050, as set in EO S3-05. The interim target is to reduce GHG emissions by 40 percent by 2030. It also directs State agencies to update the Scoping Plan, update the Adaptation Strategy every three years, and take climate change into account in their planning and investment strategies. Additionally, it requires the State’s Five-Year Infrastructure Plan will take current and future climate change impacts into account in all infrastructure projects.

Title 24
Although not originally intended to reduce GHGs, California Code of Regulations Title 24 Part 6:

California’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, was first adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption.

The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy-efficient technologies and methods. The California Energy Commission updates the standards every three years. The 2022 standard, effective January 1, 2023, encourages efficient electric heat pumps, establishes electric-ready requirements for new homes, expands solar photovoltaic and battery storage standards, strengthens ventilation standards, and more (CEC, 2024).

Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards
During the 2021 Triennial Code Adoption Cycle, California state agencies reviewed the most recent edition of national model codes and standards and made amendments and additions to most parts of the California Building Standards Code. The latest version of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (Title 24) was published on July 1, 2022, and became effective on January 1, 2023 (State of California, 2023a). Below are modified chapters in Part 6 Building Energy Efficiency Standards that are relevant to the proposed project and would reduce GHG emissions (State of California, 2023a).

Administrative Regulations:
• Lighting controls and mechanical systems Acceptance Test Technician Certification Providers (ATTCPs) must record related Certificates of Compliance, Installation, and Acceptance Testing in an electronic database. § 10-103.1(c)3H and § 10-103.2(c)3H. • Energy Commission-approved community shared solar or renewable system and energy storage system qualification requirements updated. §10-115.

Mandatory Requirements:
• Minimum HVAC efficiency requirements updated for various equipment types, and minimum efficiency requirements added for dedicated Outside Air System (DOAS), ACs serving computer rooms, and heat pump and heat recovery chiller packages. § 110.2. • Demand responsive lighting controls trigger changed to 4,000 watts or more, and requirements added for controlled receptacles. § 110.12 & § 160.5(b)4E.  SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.8-11
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 • All envelope insulation, vapor retarder, and fenestration requirements unified. § 160.1. • For dwelling units, installed heat recovery ventilation (HRV) and energy recovery ventilation (ERV) systems must have a Home Energy Rating System (HERS) verified maximum fan efficacy of 1.0 W/cfm. § 160.2(b)2Biii.
• Mechanical ventilation systems of enclosed parking garages must meet the requirements of § 120.6(c). § 160.2(d).
• Water heating piping must be insulated per Table 160.4-A. § 160.4(f). • New electric ready requirements for space heating, cooking, and clothes dryers serving individual dwelling units and common areas, when gas equipment is installed. Electrical infrastructure must be provided and reserved to the equipment location for the future installation of electrical appliances. § 160.9(a)-(c)
Title 24 Part 11, California Green Building Standards Code The California Green Building Standards Code (Title 24, Part 11 code) commonly referred to as the CALGreen Code, is a statewide mandatory construction code developed and adopted by the California Building Standards Commission and the Department of Housing and Community Development.

In the 2021 Triennial Code Adoption Cycle, California state agencies made amendments and additions to most parts of the California Building Standards Code, Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (Title 24) which became effective on January 1, 2023 (State of California, 2023a). Below are modified chapters in Part 11 California Green Building Standards Code that would reduce GHG emissions and are relevant to the proposed project.

Chapter 4 – Residential Mandatory Measures

4.106.4 and subsections. EV charging for new construction.

Expanded EV charging requirements to installation of EV charging receptacles and EV chargers (EVSE). • Modified Exception 1 to address situations in which there is no local utility power supply or when the local utility is unable to supply adequate power. • Repealed references to specific dollar amounts for exceptions due to variations in utility costs based upon locations.
• Included an exception related to adverse impact to construction cost of a project, similar to the provision for non-residential EV charging.

Chapter A4 – Residential Voluntary Measures
California Energy Commission
A4.2 Energy efficiency
The 2022 Energy Code encourages efficient electric heat pumps, establishes electric-ready requirements for new homes, expands solar photovoltaic and battery storage standards, strengthens ventilation standards, and more. CalCERTS, Inc. (CalCERTS) and ConSol Home Energy Efficiency  SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.8-12
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Rating Services, Inc. (CHEERS) have each applied to the California Energy Commission (CEC) to be certified as residential data registries for the 2022 Energy Code.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
In the process of fulfilling its mandate to reduce local air pollution, the SCAQMD has promoted a few programs to combat climate change, e.g., energy conservation, low-carbon fuel technologies, renewable energy, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reduction programs and market incentive programs.

Air Quality-Related Energy Policy
In 2011, the SCAQMD Board adopted an Air Quality-Related Energy Policy (SCAQMD, 2011) that integrates air quality, energy, and climate change issues in a coordinated and consolidated manner.

The Energy Policy presents policies to guide and coordinate SCAQMD efforts and actions to support the policies.

4.8.2.3 Local Regulations
The City of Artesia’s General Plan 2030 (City of Artesia, 2010a) addresses climate change in the Air Quality and Climate Change Sub-Element, which implements principles and policies to attain state and federal air quality standards. General Plan goals and policies related to climate change and GHG emissions reduction are (City of Artesia, 2010a):
• Community Policy AQ 1.1: Work with community and regional partners to reduce the number of unhealthy air quality days per year based on an established baseline. o Policy Action AQ 1.1.1: Promote and participate in cooperative efforts with agencies and communities in the South Coast Air Basin to achieve clean air. o Policy Action AQ 1.1.2: Continue to implement the provisions of the Transportation Demand Management Ordinance.
• Community Policy AQ 1.2: Increase awareness and participation throughout the community in efforts to reduce air pollution and enhance air quality. o Policy Action AQ 1.2.1: Promote and encourage ridesharing activities within the community.
o Policy Action AQ 1.2.2: Encourage, publicly recognize, and reward innovative approaches that improve air quality.
o Policy Action AQ 1.2.3: Allow or encourage programs for priority parking in City and private parking lots for alternative fuel vehicles, especially zero and super ultra low emission vehicles (ZEVs and SULEVs).
• Community Policy AQ 2.1: Encourage and, where feasible, mandate the implementation of best practices towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
o Policy Action AQ 2.1.1: Encourage alternate modes of transportation, including but not limited to light rail, vanpooling, carpooling, pedestrian walkways, and bicycling. o Policy Action AQ 2.1.2: Encourage alternative commute patterns. o Policy Action AQ 2.1.3: Consider alternative work schedules for City employees to reduce employee driving.
 SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.8-13
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 o Policy Action AQ 2.1.4: Coordinate with neighboring jurisdictions to create an integrated system of bike routes through such improvements as signage, additional bicycle lanes and paths, and additional bicycle racks.
o Policy Action AQ 2.1.5: Coordinate efforts to increase pedestrian activity through improvements that make walking more safe, convenient, and enjoyable, including sidewalks, accessibility ramps, benches, traffic-calming measures, landscaping, and convenient and safe transit stops.
o Policy Action AQ 2.1.6: Coordinate with regional agencies to provide convenient access to commuter-rail and other transit opportunities.
o Policy Action AQ 2.1.7: Continue preventative maintenance and repair of City vehicles and equipment and investigate the possibility of converting the vehicle fleet to clean fuel vehicles.
• Community Policy AQ 2.2: Promote a balance of residential, commercial, institutional and recreational uses with adjacencies that reduce vehicle miles traveled. o Policy Action AQ 2.2.1: Encourage mixed use developments that combine land uses such as residential, commercial, institutional and recreational uses, thereby improving convenience and reducing trip generation.
o Policy Action AQ 2.2.2: Encourage infill development projects that create or support job centers and transportation nodes.
o Policy Action AQ 2.2.3: Increase residential and commercial densities around transit facilities and major corridors.
• Community Policy AQ 2.3: Cooperate with the State, the Southern California Association of Governments, and the Gateway Cities Council of Governments to achieve mandates imposed by AB 32, which calls for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020; by Executive Order S-3-05, which calls for a reduction of GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050; and by SB 375, which promotes and prioritizes transit-oriented development. o Policy Action AQ 2.3.1: Coordinate with Gateway Cities COG and participate in development of their Sustainable Communities Strategy, including a regional inventory of current GHG emissions, in compliance with SB 375.
o Policy Action AQ 2.3.2: Consider pursuit of State or Federal funding available for sustainable planning efforts and projects that aim to reduce GHG emissions.

4.8.3 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact
California has enacted several pieces of legislation that relate to GHG emissions and climate change, several of which set aggressive goals for GHG reductions within the state. Per Senate Bill 97, the California Natural Resources Agency adopted amendments to the CEQA Guidelines, which address the specific obligations of public agencies when analyzing GHG emissions under CEQA to determine a project’s effects on the environment. However, neither a threshold of significance nor any specific mitigations are included or provided in these CEQA Guideline amendments.  SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.8-14
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 GHG Significance Threshold
Neither the City of Artesia, the SCAQMD, nor the State CEQA Guidelines Amendments have adopted quantitative thresholds of significance for addressing a project’s GHG emissions. Nonetheless, § 15064.4 of the CEQA Guidelines serves to assist lead agencies in determining the significance of the impacts of GHGs. As required in § 15064.4 of the CEQA Guidelines, this analysis includes an impact determination based on the following: (1) an estimate of the amount of GHG emissions resulting from the Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project; (2) a qualitative analysis or performance based standards; (3) a quantification of the extent to which the Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project increases GHG emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting; and (4) the extent to which the Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions.

SCAQMD’s guidance uses a tiered approach rather than a single numerical emissions threshold. If a project’s GHG emissions “fail” the non-significance of a given tier, then one goes to the next tier.

The threshold selected for this analysis is Tier 3, which establishes a screening significance threshold level to determine significance using a 90 percent emission capture rate. For Tier 3, the SCAQMD estimated that at a threshold of approximately 3,000 metric tons CO2e (MTCO2e) per year emissions would capture 90 percent of the GHG emissions from new residential or commercial projects. Thus, this analysis uses 3,000 MTCO2e per year as the significance threshold under the first impact criterion in Section 4.8.3.

Construction GHG Emissions
Construction is an episodic, temporary source of GHG emissions. Emissions are generally associated with the operation of construction equipment, import or export of soil, and the disposal of construction waste. To be consistent with the guidance from the SCAQMD for calculating criteria pollutants from construction activities, only GHG emissions from onsite construction activities and offsite hauling and construction worker commuting are considered as project-generated. As explained by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in its 2008 white paper (CAPCOA, 2008), the information needed to characterize GHG emissions from manufacture, transport, and end-of-life of construction materials would be speculative at the CEQA analysis level; CEQA does not require an evaluation of speculative impacts (CEQA Guidelines § 15145). Therefore, the construction analysis does not consider such GHG emissions, but does consider non-speculative onsite construction activities, and offsite hauling and construction worker trips. All GHG emissions are identified on an annual basis.

Estimated criteria pollutant emissions from the Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project’s onsite and offsite project construction activities were calculated using CalEEMod, Version 2022.1.1.29, which was described in Section 4.3.7. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 4.8-1. The total construction GHG emissions would be 600 metric tons of CO2e. Consistent with SCAQMD recommendations and to ensure that construction emissions are assessed in a quantitative sense, construction GHG emissions have been amortized over a 30-year period. The amortized value, 20 MTCO2e, has been added to the Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project’s annual operational GHG emissions. (See below.) Modeling results are in Appendix B. For each construction year, annual GHG emissions would be far below the threshold of 3,000 MT of CO2e per year and therefore would be less than significant.
 SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.8-15
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Table 4.8-1

PROJECT CONSTRUCTION-RELATED GHG EMISSIONS
Year Annual Emissions (MT)
CO2 CH4 N2O R CO2e
2026 154 0.01 0.01 0.09 157
2027 269 0.01 0.01 0.14 273
2028 168 0.01 0.01 0.08 170
Total 591 0.03 0.03 0.31 600
Operational GHG Emissions
The operational GHG emissions calculated by CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.29 are shown in Table 4.8-2. Total annual unmitigated emissions from the Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project, including the amortized construction emissions, would be 741.2 MTCO2e per year. Energy production and mobile sources account for about 88 percent of the emissions.13 Table 4.8-2

PROJECT OPERATIONAL GHG EMISSIONS
Emissions Source Estimated Project Generated CO2e Emissions (Metric Tons per Year)
Mobile (Motor Vehicles) 519
Area Sources 29
Energy Demand (Electricity) 137
Water Demand 11.3
Solid Waste Generation 24.4
Refrigerants 0.51
Construction Emissions a 20
Total 741.2 a Total construction GHG emissions were amortized over 30 years and added to those resulting from the operation of the project.

Therefore, under the first significance criterion, GHG emissions would be less than significant. b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHG?
Less than Significant Impact
The City of Artesia does not have a Climate Action Plan to specifically address GHG reductions. However, the project’s compliance with Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards would help reduce GHG emissions.

An approach to identifying potential conflict with GHG reduction plans, policies, or regulations is to examine General Plan provisions that prescribe or enable GHG emissions control. The Artesia General Plan 2030 lists policies that reduce GHG emissions. However, the policies prescribe actions to be taken by the City and not measures to be implemented by a project proponent. Nevertheless, the proposed project would not conflict with any of the GHG emission reduction policies. As was demonstrated in Section 4.11, the proposed project would have less than significant impacts in relation to consistency with local land use policies or regulations. Therefore, the project would not hinder the GHG emission reductions of the Artesia General Plan 2030. The proposed project would be designed and built in compliance with the California Green Building Standards (CAL Green) Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11). In conclusion, GHG impacts would be less than significant. 13 Calculations are provided in Appendix B.
 SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.9-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the release
of hazardous materials into the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant
to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard or excessive noise for people
residing or working in the project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?
X
The analysis in this section is based in part on the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I ESA) prepared by GeoTek Development, Inc., Inc. dated July 31, 2024 (GeoTek, 2024) (Appendix F).

Phase I ESA presents information obtained from site reconnaissance of the project area, historical development of the project site, and a comprehensive database search to determine whether the project site contains recognized environmental conditions (RECs). a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less than Significant Impact
The project site is located in an area characterized primarily by a mix of residential and commercial development. To the north, it is bordered by 176th Street, followed by a motel and a commercial building. To the east, it is bordered by the ABC Unified School District building and the transportation center. To the south, it is surrounded by empty land, and to the west, it is bordered by Pioneer Boulevard, followed by further commercial development. None of the adjacent properties seem to  SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.9-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 present any RECs or concerns for the site.

The project site is currently unoccupied land. Power lines run through the central area of the project in a north-south direction. Some debris has been observed on the site. However, this debris is considered of minimal significance. No visible evidence of hazardous substances or waste materials was found during the initial site assessment. There were also no signs of spills or leaks, and no strong or unpleasant odors were detected within the vicinity of the project site (GeoTek, 2024).

The site is listed in the environmental database report obtained for the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA). The listing is associated with proposed construction projects on the site. However, based on the Phase I ESA, it was determined that the listing does not indicate any RECs affecting the project (GeoTek, 2024).

Construction
Transportation of hazardous materials/waste is regulated by California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 26. The California Highway Patrol (CHP) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) enforce federal and state regulations and respond to hazardous materials transportation emergencies. Emergency responses are coordinated as necessary among federal, state, and local governmental authorities and private persons through a state-mandated Emergency Response Plan.

Construction of the proposed project would involve the transport, storage, and use of chemical agents, solvents, paints, and other hazardous materials commonly associated with construction activities. Chemical transport, storage and use would comply with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA); California hazardous waste control law (California Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5, Hazardous Waste Control); California Division of Safety and Health (DOSH); South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD); and the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) requirements.

The construction contractor would maintain equipment and supplies onsite for containing and cleaning up small spills of hazardous materials, and in the event of a release of hazardous materials of quantity and/or toxicity that onsite workers could not safely contain and clean up, they would notify LACFD immediately. LACFD is a Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) with jurisdiction over the project location. LACFD administers the following programs within the County of Los Angeles: the Hazardous Waste Generator Program, the Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Program, the California Accidental Release Prevention Program (Cal-ARP), the Aboveground Storage Tank Program, and the Underground Storage Tank Program (County of Los Angeles, 2024e).

Therefore, compliance with applicable laws and regulations during the construction of the project would reduce the potential for accidental release of hazardous materials, and the impacts of construction hazards would be less than significant.

Operation
The project operation would involve the transport, storage, use, and disposal of small amounts of hazardous materials for cleaning and landscaping purposes, such as commercial cleaning agents, paints, and lubricants for the maintenance of the proposed buildings and landscaping. These materials would be stored, handled, and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations.  SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.9-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 The proposed project would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of quantities of hazardous materials that may create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Therefore, the impact of hazardous materials from project operation would be less than significant. b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Less than Significant Impact
Construction
As mentioned above, the Phase I ESA report found no potential areas of concern/contamination on the project site (GeoTek, 2024). Additionally, the construction of the proposed project would adhere to applicable federal, state, and local regulations regarding the safe handling and transportation of hazardous materials during construction. The construction contractor would maintain equipment and supplies onsite for containing and cleaning up small spills of hazardous materials and would train construction workers on such containment and cleanup. In the event of a release of hazardous materials in quantity and/or toxicity that construction workers on the site could not contain and clean up safely, the project promoter would immediately notify LACFD. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant during construction.

Prior to the commencement of site preparation, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that includes Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be prepared and implemented during all construction activities. This includes good housekeeping of construction equipment, stockpiles, and active construction areas, ensures that spill and leak prevention procedures are established, and that clean-up kits and materials are readily available for use onsite during all construction activities.

Compliance with all existing federal, state, and local safety regulations governing the transportation, use, handling, storage, and disposal of potentially hazardous materials would ensure that the impacts due to temporary construction will be less than significant.

Operation
The project operation would involve the handling and storage of materials such as commercial cleaners, solvents, and other materials for janitorial use, paints; and landscape fertilizers/pesticides during project operations. However, these materials would be stored, handled, and disposed of according to applicable regulations and would not be stored in amounts that would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable problems and accidents. The project would have a less than significant impact in this regard. c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
No Impact
As noted in Section 4.15 of this Initial Study, the Ross Academy of Creative and Media Arts Middle School is the closest school to the project site, located approximately 0.4 miles southeast. There are no existing or proposed schools within 0.25-mile of the proposed project site. Therefore, there would be no impact in this regard.
 SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.9-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code § 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact
Government Code § 65962.5 requires the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) to compile and update, at least annually, lists of the following:
• Hazardous waste and substances sites from the DTSC EnviroStor database. • Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) sites by county and fiscal year in the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker database. • Solid waste disposal sites identified by SWRCB with waste constituents above hazardous waste level outside waste management units.
• SWRCB Cease and Desist Orders (CDOs), and Cleanup and Abatement Orders (CAOs). • Hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to § 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code, identified by DTSC.

These lists are collectively referred to as the “Cortese List.” The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment completed for the project did not reveal evidence of a recognized environmental condition in connection with the project site and did not recommend further investigation (GeoTek, 2024, p. 37).

As noted in the Phase I ESA and shown in Figure 4.19-1 below, there are 11 Cortese sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the project property. However, due to the lack of current violations, spills, and/or leaks, and the type of listing, it is the opinion of Phase I ESA that these facilities have not created a recognized environmental condition at the project site (GeoTek, 2024, p. 19). Therefore, there would be no impact in this regard.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact
The nearest airport is Long Beach Airport (LGB), located approximately five miles southwest of the project site. As shown in Figure 4.9-2, the project is not located within the airport notification area or impact zones. Therefore, given the distance of the project from the nearest active airports, the project would not expose people to safety hazards due to proximity to a public airport and no impacts would occur.
 SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.9-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.9-1

CORTESE ACT SITE
 SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.9-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.9-2

AIRPORTS
 SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.9-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Construction
The project would comply with applicable City regulations, such as the City's Fire Code, in regard to providing adequate emergency access. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the City would review project site plans, including the location of all buildings, fences, access driveways, and other features that may affect emergency access. Fire lanes would be provided for adequate emergency access. The design of the site for the proposed project includes access and fire lanes that would accommodate emergency ingress and exit by fire trucks, police units, and ambulance/paramedic vehicles. All onsite access and sight-distance requirements would be in accordance with City design requirements. The City's review process and compliance with applicable regulations and standards would ensure that adequate emergency access would be provided at the project site at all times.

During the construction phase, the project could temporarily impact the street traffic adjacent to the project due to construction activities on the right-of-way (ROW). The project construction could reduce the number of lanes or temporarily close a portion of Pioneer Boulevard and/or 176th Street. The public ROW near the project site is within the jurisdiction of the City of Artesia. Before the start of construction activities on the public ROW, the General Contractor shall submit a detailed Construction Management Plan (CMP) to be reviewed and approved by the City of Artesia Traffic Engineer. The typical CMP requires things such as the installation of K-Rail between the construction area and open traffic lanes, the use of flagmen and directional signs to direct traffic where only one travel lane is available or when equipment movement creates temporary hazards, and the installation of steel plates to cover trenches under construction. Emergency access must be maintained. Compliance with the City of Artesia requirements for traffic management during construction in the public ROW would ensure that the project would have a less than significant impact in this regard. The TRANS-1 mitigation measure is recommended to address the impacts of potential hazards during the construction phase.

Mitigation Measures
Refer to the mitigation measure TRANS-1 in Section 4.17.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
After implementation of the mitigation measure TRANS-1 above, the project would have less than significant impact from the construction phase on emergency access.

Operation
City of Artesia’s Local Hazard Mitigation Program
The City of Artesia is dedicated to enhancing community safety and preparedness through its Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP). Artesia recognizes the importance of proactive planning to create a more resilient environment for residents, businesses, and visitors. The LHMP serves as a roadmap for public safety officials, City personnel, elected representatives, and the public to understand the potential risks that could arise from natural and human-caused hazards. This plan outlines actionable recommendations to reduce these risks before a disaster strikes (City of Artesia, 2024e).

As mentioned above, the project design would undergo a review to ensure that there would be adequate emergency ingress and egress within the project site in accordance with City of Artesia Fire Code requirements. Project operation would not conflict with the City’s LHMP, and the project would have a less than significant impact in this regard.  SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.9-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 City of Artesia's Emergency Operations Plan
The City of Artesia's Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) addresses the City's planned response to emergency situations associated with natural or man-made disasters under an all-hazards approach.

This plan does not apply to normal day-to-day emergencies, or the established departmental procedures used to cope with such emergencies. Instead, this plan focuses on operational concepts that would be implemented in large-scale disasters, which can pose major threats to life, property, and the environment and require robust emergency responses (City of Artesia, 2024e).

Prior to the issuance of any construction permits, the City of Artesia will conduct a project plan review of all building locations, including the placement of walls, fences, entrances, driveways, and other elements which may impede emergency response access. The proposed site plan includes access and fire lanes adequate for fire department vehicles, law enforcement units, and emergency medical transportation. All onsite visibility requirements and access points will align with the construction standards defined by the City of Artesia and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

The City’s review process will evaluate the project for compliance with the City’s Fire Code, LHMP, EOP, and all applicable City regulations and standards ensuring adequate emergency access would be provided at the project site. Therefore, project operations would not conflict with impair. or interfere with the implementation of an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan and the project would have a less than significant impact.
g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? No Impact
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) developed Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) for State Responsibility Areas (SRA) and Local Responsibility Areas (LRA).

As defined by CAL FIRE, the designation of theVery High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) refers to either:
a. Wildland areas supporting high- to extreme fire behavior resulting from climax fuels typified by well-developed surface fuel profiles (e.g., mature chaparral) or forested systems where crown fire is likely. Additional site elements include steep and mixed topography and climate/fire weather patterns that include seasonal extreme weather conditions of strong winds and dry fuel moisture. The burn frequency is typically high and should be evidenced by numerous large historical fires in the area. Firebrands from both short (<200 yards) and long-range sources are often abundant.
b. Developed/urban areas typically with high vegetation density (greater than 70 percent cover) and associated high fuel continuity, allowing for frontal flame spread over much of the area with progress impeded by only isolated non-burnable fractions. Often, where tree cover is abundant, these areas look very similar to adjacent wildland areas. Developed areas may have less vegetation cover and still be in this class when in the immediate vicinity (0.25 mile) of wildland areas zoned as Very High (see above).

As discussed in Section 4.20, Wildfire, the project site is not located within an SRA FHSZ or a VHFHSZ in LRA for the County of Los Angles. The project site is in an urbanized developed area where no wildfire hazards are present. The development of the project would not expose people or structures to wildfire risks and no impact would occur.
 SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.10-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on or
offsite; X
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding on- or offsite;
X
iii) create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
X
iv) impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation? X
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
X
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? Less than Significant Impact
The project site is in the Coyote Creek-San Gabriel River Hydrologic Unit (HU; HU Code 180701060606), which drains an area of approximately 59.3 square miles (USEPA 2024; see Figure

4.10-1, USGS Watersheds). The project site is currently undeveloped, and measures approximately

0.83 acre. The project site contains ruderal vegetation and scattered piles of debris, including concrete debris. The project site is relatively flat; under existing conditions, stormwater and surface water onsite generally discharges to the existing gutter on Pioneer Boulevard as sheet flow or as then conveyed westerly to County storm drain BI 0533 and conveyed south to the Artesia-Norwalk Drain prior to discharging to Coyote Creek, San Gabriel River and ultimately, San Pedro Bay and the Pacific Ocean (Hunsaker and Associates 2024, p. 4).

Development of the project has the potential to result in two types of water quality impacts:
(1) short-term impacts due to construction-related discharges; and (2) long-term impacts from operation. Soil disturbance would temporarily occur during project construction, due to earth-moving activities such as excavation and trenching for the semi-subterranean parking garage  SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.10-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.10-1

USGS WATERSHEDS
 SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.10-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 and utilities, soil compaction and moving, cut and fill activities, and grading. Disturbed soils are susceptible to high rates of erosion from wind and rain, resulting in sediment transport via stormwater runoff from the project area. Erosion and sedimentation affect water quality through interference with photosynthesis, oxygen exchange and respiration, growth, and reproduction of aquatic species.

Runoff from construction sites may include sediments and contaminants such as oils, fuels, paints, solvents, suspended solids, sediments, nutrients, heavy metals, pathogens, and trash and debris.

Pollutants such as nutrients, trace metals, hydrocarbons, and bacteria can attach to sediment and be carried by stormwater into local storm drains which ultimately discharge into the Pacific Ocean.

Construction Pollutants Control
Temporary impacts to water quality, such as those described above, could occur during construction of the project. Project construction would require ground-disturbing activities, clearing of existing vegetation, paving and grading for construction of building foundations. Disturbed soils accelerate erosion and increase sediment in stormwater runoff to receiving waters, causing increased turbidity and sedimentation. Additionally, fuel, oil, and other fluids used in construction vehicles, equipment, and heavy machinery could leave the site, enter the storm drain system and create or add to contaminant loads in the San Gabriel River.

Dischargers whose projects disturb one or more acres of soil are required to obtain coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (General Permit; Order WQ 2022-0057-DWQ, NPDES NO. CAS000002). Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling, or excavation, but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore the original line, grade, or capacity of the facility (SWRCB 2022)14.

The General Permit requires the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) by a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD). The SWPPP would include site-specific construction stormwater BMPs which would be implemented as part of project design, and maintained or replaced, as necessary. These BMPs would minimize or avoid erosion through wind or stormwater and would also minimize or avoid sediment- or pollutant-laden stormwater from leaving the construction site and entering receiving waters (e.g., the San Gabriel River). For these reasons, potential violations of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during construction would be less than significant.

Operational Pollutant Controls
In 2022 the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) issued Order No. R4-2021- 0105/NPDES No CAS004004, Waste Discharge Requirements and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Discharges within the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties (MS4 permit); the City of Artesia is a signatory to this MS4. The MS4 regulates the discharge of pollutants in urban storm water runoff from anthropogenic (generated from human activities) sources and/or activities within the 14 Although the site is less than one acre, it is assumed that the project will obtain coverage under the General Permit.  SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.10-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 jurisdiction and control of the permittees own and operate storm drains, including flood control facilities.

The MS4 requires new development and significant redevelopment projects to develop a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) that incorporates post-construction low-impact development (LID) BMPs to reduce the quantity of rainfall runoff and improve the quality of water that leaves a site. LID is a leading stormwater management strategy that seeks to minimize the impacts of runoff and stormwater pollution as close to its source as possible. LID comprises a set of site design approaches and structural BMPs that are designed to address runoff and pollution at the source.

Structural LID BMPs can effectively remove nutrients, bacteria, and metals from stormwater while reducing the volume and intensity of stormwater flows.

The project would consist of one drainage management area (DMA-1), which will ultimately discharge at two points along 176th Street. The Final Low Impact Development Plan (LID Plan; Hunsaker and Associates, 2024; see Appendix G) is a WQMP and presents the LID BMPs proposed for the project site. These BMPs include storm drain messaging and signing; education of property owners, tenants, and occupants; designated and protected outdoor trash storage/waste handling areas; street sweeping of private streets; runoff-minimizing landscaping (planters) around the perimeter of the site; and a modular wetland along the southern perimeter. Overflow from the modular wetland unit will discharge to Pioneer Boulevard. The LID Plan is included herein as Appendix G.

Treatment flow requirements as required by the MS4 will be met through implementation of this modular wetland and infiltration tanks. These stormwater treatment methods provide superior pollutant (total suspended solids, nutrients, bacteria, hydrocarbons, and heavy metals) and removal capacity and would be able to effectively remove stormwater pollutants through physical, chemical, and biological filtration processes which are designed to mimic the processes performed by natural wetlands.

The Construction General Permit, MS4, and the associated LID PLAN would require the implementation of non-structural and structural BMPs to ensure that construction and postconstruction stormwater runoff is retained and/or treated prior to discharge into the municipal storm drain and receiving waters. Therefore, with adherence to existing water quality control requirements, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be necessary. b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Less than Significant Impact
Construction
Construction of the proposed project would use only a minimal amount of water, for purposes such as dust control, from readily available public sources. This water use would be temporary and would not require the substantial use of groundwater. Once construction is completed, the project would be connected to municipal water lines. Project construction would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
 SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.10-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Operation
The City’s main source of water supply is groundwater from the Central Basin East Service Area of the Golden State Water Company (GSWC). GSWC obtains water from a variety of sources, including the Coastal Plain of Los Angeles Groundwater Basin, Central Subbasin (Subbasin), which underlays the project site (DWR 2004). Water delivered to customers in the Artesia System is a blend of groundwater pumped from the Central Groundwater Basin (GSWC 2024).

The Subbasin is an adjudicated basin (Central and West Basin Water Replenishment District vs. Charles E. Adams, et al. [Superior Court, County of Los Angeles, Case No. 786656]), and the amount of groundwater that can be pumped annually is limited. GSWC Artesia has six active wells with a total maximum capacity of 7,050 gallons per minute (gpm). GSWC Artesia has direct access to GSWC’s Allowed Pumping Allocation (APA) of 16,439 acre-feet per year and captures a portion of GSWC’s APA, leased water, and stored water in its annual groundwater extractions. Additionally, GSWC Artesia also anticipates having continued access to the Central Basin supplies in the future as they may manifest from the APA.

GSWC uses additional groundwater supplies from the Central Basin to meet its annual uses in all of its service areas in the Central Basin. The additional groundwater supplies consist of leased groundwater from other users with surplus supply, carryover supplies from the previous year, dry year excess pumping allowed under current basin management scenarios and imported supplies from Central Basin Municipal Water District (GSWC et al., 2020, pp. 3-1 – 3-9).

As of 2020, the GSWC relied mostly on groundwater for its drinking water supply and anticipates being able to meet normal and dry year water demands through 2045 (GSWC et al, 2020, p. 5-3). As an adjudicated groundwater basin, GSWC is not allowed to decrease groundwater supplies in a way that would impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. Furthermore, the LID BMPs described in Section 4.10 (a) would retain most stormwater runoff generated onsite and allow it to percolate through the soil and add to the volume of the aquifer. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on or offsite; Less Than Significant Impact
Construction
Under existing conditions, the project site does not contain drainages, including streams or rivers, and stormwater runoff generated on the proposed project site that does not infiltrate onsite is discharged north to 176th Street, where it enters the municipal storm drain system. During project construction the drainage pattern of the site would be altered during grubbing and grading; however, due to the location and nature of the proposed project, this alteration would be temporary.

The project is expected to obtain coverage under the General Permit, which includes preparation and implementation of a SWPPP specifying construction stormwater BMPs to be implemented to control erosion and protect the quality of surface water runoff from the project site. The SWPPP must be  SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.10-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 prepared before the project owner receives a grading or building permit and must be implemented year‐round throughout construction. Project compliance with regulatory requirements would reduce potential erosion/siltation impacts during the construction phase. Construction of the project would not result in substantial erosion or siltation, and potential impacts would be less than significant.

Operation
The proposed LID BMPs described in Section 4.10 (a), including the modular wetland, would capture stormwater and filter sediment before the stormwater enters the municipal storm water system.

With implementation of site-specific stormwater BMPs described in the SWPPP and installation of LID BMPs as described in the LID Plan (see Appendix G), potential impacts resulting in substantial erosion or siltation on or offsite would be less than significant and mitigation is not required. ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
Less Than Significant Impact
Under existing conditions, 98 percent of the site is pervious (natural vegetation, soils) and two percent is impervious. Under proposed (operational) conditions, the site would be 90 percent impervious surfaces and 10 percent pervious surfaces (Hunsaker and Associates, 2024, p. i).

The project design would include a modular wetland biofiltration planter that would capture and retain stormwater generated on the project site; only precipitation events that exceed the 85th percentile, 24-hour storm event (calculated to be 1,984 cubic feet) would overflow the retention and infiltration systems and directly enter the municipal storm drain system. The modular wetland biofiltration planter has been selected to capture 2,976 cubic feet of stormwater (Hunsaker and Associates 2024, pp. 10-11).

Installation and maintenance of the structural LID BMPs described in the LID Plan would reduce the volume of stormwater runoff leaving the project site. Therefore, the potential for the proposed project to create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff is less than significant and mitigation is not required.
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
Less than Significant Impact
The project site is located in Zone X, Other Flood Areas, as shown in Figure 4.10-2. Zone X includes areas of 0.2 % annual chance [500-year] flood, areas of 1% annual chance [100-year] flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; and areas protected by levees from 1% annual chance flood. The 500-year flood Zone describes a flood event that has a 0.2  SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.10-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 percent chance of occurring in any year, and the 100-year flood Zone describes a flood event that has a one percent chance of occurring in any year.

The waterbody nearest to the project site is the San Gabriel River, approximately 1.4 miles west of the project site. The San Gabriel River is protected by a levy, which reduces the flood risk to sites located in Zone X. For this reason, the proposed project is not anticipated to significantly impede or redirect flood flows. The potential for the project to impede or redirect flood flows is less than significant and mitigation is not required.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Less than Significant Impact
Flood Hazard
As discussed above, the project site is in an area of reduced flood hazard and is not anticipated to become inundated due to flood. Impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required.

Tsunami
A tsunami is a sea wave (or series of waves) of local or distant origin that results from large-scale seafloor displacements associated with large earthquakes, major submarine slides, or exploding volcanic islands (California Seismic Safety Commission, 2022). The project is not located within a tsunami inundation zone (State of California, 2021). The project site is at least 8.6 miles from the Pacific Ocean and would not be affected by a tsunami. No impact would occur, and mitigation is not required.

Seiche Zones
A seiche is an oscillating wave caused by wind, tidal forces, earthquakes, landslides and other phenomena in a closed or partially closed water body such as a river, lake, reservoir, pond, and other large inland water body. The closest open bodies of water capable of producing a seiche would be the ponds at El Dorado Park in the City of Long Beach, approximately three miles south of the project site. No impact would occur, and mitigation is not required.  SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.10-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.10-2

FEMA FIRM
 SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.10-9
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less than Significant Impact
The California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne) defines water quality objectives as the “allowable limits or levels of water quality constituents or characteristics which are established for the reasonable protection of beneficial uses of water or the prevention of nuisance within a specific area.” Thus, water quality objectives are intended to protect the public health and welfare, and to maintain or enhance water quality in relation to the existing and/or potential beneficial uses of the water. Water quality objectives apply to both waters of the United States and waters of the State.

As required by Porter-Cologne, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) requires individual Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) to develop Water Quality Control Plans (Basin Plans), which are “designed to preserve and enhance water quality and protect the beneficial uses of all regional waters. Specifically, the Basin Plan (i) designates beneficial uses for surface and ground waters, (ii) sets narrative and numerical objectives that must be attained or maintained to protect the designated beneficial uses and conform to the state's antidegradation policy, and (iii) describes implementation programs to protect all waters in the Region[s]. In addition, the Basin Plan incorporates (by reference) all applicable State and Regional Board plans and policies and other pertinent water quality policies and regulations.

The proposed project is under the jurisdiction of the Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties (Basin Plan; RWQCB 2014, as amended). As discussed in Sections 4.10 a) and 4.10 b), the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the water quality control plans or sustainable groundwater management plans of the RWQCB. Impacts would be less than significant.
 SECTION 4.11 – LAND USE AND PLANNING
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.11-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.11 Land Use and Planning
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due
to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental effect?
X
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? No Impact
The surrounding area of the project site comprises several existing land uses. On the north, there is a commercial center and a hotel. Across Pioneer Boulevard, to the west, there is a commercial shopping center. To the south, there is the church and vacant land to the east there is the ABC Unified School District’s Business, Industrial and School Bus Yard.

The proposed mixed-use project site is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Pioneer Boulevard and 176th Street at 17610-17618 Pioneer Boulevard. The project seeks to develop a sixstory mixed-use building that incorporates a total of 83 residential units. These residential units, along with other components, will be located above a two-level parking garage. In addition to living spaces, the project will offer a variety of outdoor amenities, such as a courtyard serving as a common area intended for gatherings. In addition, an outdoor bar and dining area with kitchen service and restroom facilities will be provided.

The development would occur within the Artesia Live Specific Plan area, a rectangular site comprised of 35,772 square feet. The vacant site is relatively flat and has a surface elevation of approximately 57 feet. In addition, the site is located approximately 1.5 miles east of the San Gabriel River channel and one mile north of the future Artesia Light Rail Station.15 The development plans adhere to the guidelines outlined in the 2030 Artesia General Plan and the Artesia Live Specific Plan and the project would not physically divide the established community. The site is not used to travel between surrounding areas; therefore, there would be no impact. b) Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Less than Significant Impact
The General Plan Land Use designation for the project site is City Center Mixed-Use with a zoning designation of Artesia Live Specific Plan (City of Artesia, 2010a, p. LU-8) (City of Artesia, 2016a, p. 5).

The City Center Mixed-Use Designation encourages the development and redevelopment of a 15 The Metro Southeast Gateway Line is a planned light rail line between the City of Artesia and downtown Los Angeles, with opening planned for 2035 (Metro, 2024).
 SECTION 4.11 – LAND USE AND PLANNING
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.11-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 complementary mix of commercial retail, office and residential uses to expand economic vibrancy and livability in the City’s core commercial area. The City Center Mixed-Use designation is intended to serve as the City’s core. The City Center Mixed-Use designations encourage physical and functional integration of adjacent residential areas to ensure the protection and enhancement of adjacent residential neighborhoods (City of Artesia, 2010a, p. LU-10).

The purpose of the Artesia Live Specific Plan is to facilitate development, especially mixed-use development, in the City Center area (City of Artesia, 2016, p. 3).

The proposed project incorporates residential, commercial and public aspects for a cohesive mixeduse concept. This project's design involves vertical integration, positioning four stories of residential uses over a two-story parking garage with an outdoor bar and dining area with kitchen service and restroom facilities located on the sixth floor. This interlaces residential and commercial uses with public amenities creating a design that enhances the City’s core.

As a result, the impact of the project relating to the consistency with local land use plans, policies, or regulations would be less than significant.
 SECTION 4.12 – MINERAL RESOURCES 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.12-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.12 Mineral Resources
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be
of value to the region and the residents
of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
X
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
No Impact
As shown in Figure 4.12-1 below, the project site is located within Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ)-1, which is an area where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence (DOC, 1998).

This corresponds with 2014 data from the US Geological Survey (USGS) from the Artesia LIVE Specific Plan, which comprises the full extent of the project site, that the project area has no notable mineral deposits (City of Artesia, 2016).

Furthermore, according to the Department of Conservation Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal Resources Well Finder, there are no oil and gas wells within one mile of the project site. The nearest active well is approximately 4.6 miles northwest of the project site as shown in Figure 4.12-2. No oil or gas wells were identified on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site.

Therefore, the project would have no impact on the availability of known mineral resources of value to the region or state residents, or a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated in the City of Artesia General Plan, the Artesia LIVE Specific Plan, or other land use plan.  SECTION 4.12 – MINERAL RESOURCES 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.12-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.12-1

DESIGNATED MINERAL RESOURCE ZONES
 SECTION 4.12 – MINERAL RESOURCES 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.12-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.12-2

GAS & OIL WELLS AND FIELDS
 SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.13 Noise
Would the project result in:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration
or groundborne noise levels? X
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
X

4.13.1 Characteristics of Sound
Sound is a pressure wave transmitted through the air. It is described in terms of loudness or amplitude (measured in decibels), frequency or pitch (measured in hertz or cycles per second), and duration (measured in seconds or minutes). The decibel (dB) scale is a logarithmic scale that describes the physical intensity of the pressure vibrations that make up any sound. The pitch of the sound is related to the frequency of the pressure vibration. Because the human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies, a special frequency-dependent rating scale is used to relate noise to human sensitivity. The A-weighted decibel scale (dBA) provides this compensation by discriminating against upper and lower frequencies in a manner approximating the sensitivity of the human ear. The scale is based on a reference pressure level of 20 micropascals (zero dBA). The scale ranges from zero (for the average least perceptible sound) to about 130 (for the average human pain level).

4.13.2 Noise Measurement Scales
Several rating scales have been developed to analyze adverse effects of community noise on people.

Since environmental noise fluctuates over time, these scales consider that the effect of noise on people depends largely upon the total acoustical energy content of the noise, as well as the time of day when the noise occurs. Those that are applicable to this analysis are as follows:
• Leq, the equivalent noise level, is an average of sound level over a defined time period (such as 1 minute, 15 minutes, 1 hour or 24 hours). Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure.
• L90 is a noise level that is exceeded 90 percent of the time at a given location; it is often used as a measure of “background” noise.
 SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 • Lmax is the root mean square (RMS) maximum noise level during the measurement interval.

This measurement is calculated by taking the RMS of all peak noise levels within the sampling interval. Lmax is distinct from the peak noise level, which only includes the single highest measurement within a measurement interval.
• CNEL, the Community Noise Equivalent Level, is a 24-hour average Leq with a 4.77-dBA “penalty” added to noise during the hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., and a 10-dBA penalty added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime (Caltrans, 2013). The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60-dBA 24-hour Leq would result in a calculation of 66.7 dBA CNEL. • Ldn, the day-night average noise, is a 24-hour average Leq with an additional 10-dBA “penalty” added to noise that occurs between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. The Ldn metric yields values within 1 dBA of the CNEL metric. As a matter of practice, Ldn and CNEL values are considered to be equivalent and are treated as such in this assessment.

4.13.3 Existing Noise
The City of Artesia’s General Plan lists sensitive receptors as locations where human populations (especially children, senior citizens, and sick persons) are present, and where there is a reasonable expectation of continuous human exposure to noise. Land uses considered sensitive by the State of California include schools, playgrounds, athletic facilities, hospitals, rest homes, rehabilitation centers and long-term care and mental care facilities. Some jurisdictions also consider day care centers, single-family dwellings, mobile home parks, churches, and libraries to be sensitive to noise.

Moderately sensitive land uses typically include multi-family dwellings, hotels, motels, dormitories and outpatient clinics. Land uses less sensitive to noise are business, commercial and professional developments. Noise receptors categorized as being least sensitive to noise include industrial, manufacturing, utilities, agriculture, natural open space, undeveloped land, parking lots, motorcycle parks, rifle ranges, warehousing, liquid and solid waste facilities, salvage yards and transit terminals.

Some of these land uses generate high noise levels (City of Artesia, 2010a, p. N-5). Additionally, the City’s Municipal Code has noise controls that apply to the proposed project, which require residential acoustical designs to prevent significant noise exposure.

The nearest sensitive receptors to the project are a Days Inn & Suites north of the project site boundary, a single-family residence south of the site, and Cerritos Presbyterian Church southeast of the site. These and other sensitive receptors are shown in Figure 4.13-1. Table 4.13-1 summarizes information about sensitive receivers16 nearest the project site. 16 A sensitive receiver is a sensitive receptor that represents many similar receptors in a specified location, such as one house on a block of houses.
 SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.13-1

SENSITIVE NOISE RECEPTORS IN PROJECT GENERAL AREA
 SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Table 4.13-1

SENSITIVE RECEIVERS IN PROJECT AREA
Description Location
Distance
From Site
Boundary
(feet)a
Nearest
Ambient
Sampling
Pointb
Days Inn & Suites by Wyndham 17510 Pioneer Boulevard 60 1 Cerritos Presbyterian Church 11841 178th Street 74 2
CPC Preschool 11840 178th Street 456 2
Single-family Residence 11733 176th Street 420 3
Single-family Residence 17718 Pioneer Boulevard 126 2
Ross Academy of Creative & Media Arts Middle School 17707 Elaine Avenue 779 4 aThese distances were not used for the construction noise calculations. See Section 4.13.6. bSee Figure 4.13-2 for locations of ambient noise sampling points.

On July 10, 2024, UltraSystems made 15-minute ambient noise level measurements at four locations in the general area of the project in the City of Artesia. These are shown in Figure 4.13-2. (See Appendix G.) Measurements were made between 11:17 a.m. and 1:36 p.m. As shown in Table 4.13-2, average short-term ambient noise levels (Leq) ranged from 55.3 to 59.1 dBA Leq. The highest Lmax (73.3 dBA) was recorded along Elaine Avenue. All monitored noise levels were within the range considered typical for the nearby land uses for the City of Artesia.

Table 4.13-2

AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENT RESULTS
Point Data
Set
Sampling
Time Address Sound Level (dBA) Notes Leq Lmax L90
1 S013 1236 -
1251
17510 Pioneer
Boulevard 58.1 69.0 53.2 In front of Days Inn & Suites by Wyndham Artesia. 2 S012 1152 -
1207
11840 178th
Street 55.9 72.5 45.7
In front of Kindred Presbyterian
Church and CPC Preschool
southeast of project site.
3 S014 1311 -
1326
11733 176th
Street 55.3 71.1 47.1 In front of a single-family residence west of the project site. 4 S011 1117 -
1132
17707 Elaine
Avenue 59.1 73.3 44.5
In front of the Ross Academy of
Creative and Media Arts Middle
School east of the project site.
 SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.13-2

AMBIENT NOISE MONITORING LOCATIONS
 SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.13.4 Regulatory Setting
State of California
The California Department of Health Services (DHS) Office of Noise Control has studied the correlation of noise levels with effects on various land uses17. The most current guidelines prepared by the state noise officer are contained in the General Plan Guidelines issued by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research in 2003 and reissued in 2017 (Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, 2017). These guidelines establish four categories for judging the severity of noise intrusion on specified land uses:
• Normally Acceptable: Is generally acceptable, with no mitigation necessary. • Conditionally Acceptable: May require some mitigation, as established through a noise study.
• Normally Unacceptable: Requires substantial mitigation. • Clearly Unacceptable: Probably cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.

The types of land uses addressed by the state standards, and the acceptable noise categories for each, are presented in Table 4.13-3. There is some overlap between categories, which indicates that some judgment is required in determining the applicability of the numbers in a given situation.

Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations requires performing acoustical studies before constructing dwelling units in areas that exceed 60 dBA Ldn. In addition, the California Noise Insulation Standards identify an interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL for new multi-family residential units. Local governments frequently extend this requirement to single-family housing. 17 The Office of Noise Control no longer exists.
 SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Table 4.13-3

CALIFORNIA LAND USE COMPATIBILITY FOR COMMUNITY NOISE SOURCES Land Use Category Noise Exposure (dBA, CNEL)
55 60 65 70 75 80
Residential –
Low-Density
Single-Family, Duplex,
Mobile Homes
Residential – Multiple
Family
Transient Lodging –
Motel, Hotels
Schools, Libraries,
Churches, Hospitals,
Nursing Homes
Auditoriums, Concert
Halls, Amphitheaters
Sports Arena,
Outdoor Spectator
Sports
Playgrounds,
Neighborhood Parks
Golf Courses, Riding
Stables, Water
Recreation,
Cemeteries
Office Buildings,
Business Commercial
and Professional
Industrial,
Manufacturing,
Utilities, Agriculture
Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction without any special noise insulation requirements.

Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design.

Conventional construction, but with closed windows and a fresh air supply system or air conditioning will normally suffice.

Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.

Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.

Source: Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, 2017.  SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 City of Artesia
General Plan Noise Element
The Noise Element of the City of Artesia General Plan (City of Artesia, 2010a) identifies sources of noise in the City and provides objectives and policies that ensure that noise from various sources would not create an unacceptable noise environment. Table 4.13-4 and Table 4.13-5 show the City’s guidelines for interior and exterior noise exposure.

Table 4.13-4

CITY OF ARTESIA GENERAL PLAN INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR NOISE STANDARDS Time Period Permissible Noise Level (dBA)
Exterior Noise Limits
7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. 55
10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. 50
Interior Noise Limits
7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. 55
10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. 45
Source: City of Artesia, 2010a
Table 4.13-5

CITY OF ARTESIA GENERAL PLAN INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SHORT TERM PERMITTTED

INCREASES IN NOISE
Permitted Increases in Noise (dBA) Duration of Increase in Minutes Per Hour Exterior Noise Limits
5 15
10 5
15 1
20 Less than 1 minute
Interior Noise Limits
5 1
10 Less than 1 minute
Source: City of Artesia, 2010a
For a mixed-use development such as the proposed project, conservative exterior noise levels of 65 dBA CNEL or less are desirable. As mentioned in the General Plan, the City sets forth requirements for the insulation of multiple-family residential dwelling units, such as those in the project, from excessive and potentially harmful noise. Whenever multifamily residential dwelling units are proposed in areas with excessive noise exposure, the developer must incorporate construction features into the building’s design that reduce interior noise levels to 45 dBA CNEL or lower (City of Artesia 2010a, p. N-6).

The General Plan Noise Element has the following applicable goals, associated policies, and actions for addressing noise issues in the community (City of Artesia, 2010a, p. N-10-N-13):

Community Goal N 1: Land use planning decisions, including planning for new development, consider noise impacts.

Community Policy N 1.1
 SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-9
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Permit only those new development or redevelopment projects that have incorporated appropriate mitigation measures, so that standards contained in the Noise Sub-Element or adopted ordinances are met.

Policy Action N 1.1.1
Enforce noise standards, as contained in the City’s Noise Ordinance.

Policy Action N 1.1.2
Require a noise impact evaluation for projects, if determined necessary through the environmental review process. If noise abatement is found necessary, implementation mitigation measures based on a technical study prepared by a qualified acoustical professional.

Policy Action N 1.1.3
Implement noise mitigation by placing conditions of approval on development projects and require a clear description of mitigation on subdivision maps, site plans, and building plans for inspection purposes.

Community Policy N 1.2
Continue to enforce noise standards consistent with health and quality of life goals and employ effective techniques of noise abatement through such means as a noise ordinance, building codes, and subdivision and zoning regulations.

Policy Action N 1.2.1
Require that any proposed development near existing residential land uses demonstrate compliance with the City’s Noise Ordinance prior to the approval of the project.

Policy Action N 1.2.2
Review the Noise Ordinance to determine if additional or modified standards are necessary to address mixed use development.

Policy Action N 1.2.3
Require the design of mixed-use structures to incorporate techniques to prevent the transfer of noise and vibration from the non-residential to residential uses.

Policy Action N 1.2.4
Encourage commercial uses that are not noise intensive in mixed use developments.

Policy Action N 1.2.5
Orient residential uses away from major noise sources, particularly in mixed use areas.

Community Goal N 2: Noise impacts from transportation sources are minimized.

Community Policy N 2.1
Encourage outside agencies to minimize impacts of noise from regional transportation corridors.

Policy Action N 2.1.2
Coordinate sound attenuation projects with Caltrans to mitigate noise to keep interior residential levels below the State standard of 45 dBA CNEL.

Community Policy N 2.2
Reduce noise impacts from transportation corridors under the City’s jurisdiction.

Policy Action N 2.2.2
 SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-10
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Evaluate truck movements and routes in the City to provide effective separation from residential or other noise sensitive land uses.

Community Goal N 3: Noise impacts from non-transportation sources are minimized.

Community Policy N 3.1
Ensure non-transportation sources of noise have incorporated appropriate mitigation measures, so that standards contained in the Noise Sub-Element or adopted ordinances are met.

Policy Action N 3.1.1
Require that noise mitigation techniques be incorporated into all constructionrelated activities.

Policy Action N 3.1.2
Enforce the Noise Ordinance to ensure that stationary noise and noise emanating from construction activities, private development, and/or special events are minimized.

Community Goal N 4: Noise impacts to noise sensitive receptors are minimized, ensuring that City and State interior and exterior noise levels are not exceeded.

Community Policy N 4.1
Ensure Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL) for noise sensitive land uses meet normally acceptable levels, as defined by State standards.

Policy Action N 4.1.1
Require buffers or appropriate mitigation of potential noise sources on noise sensitive areas.

City of Artesia Municipal Code
The City of Artesia’s regulations with respect to noise are included in Municipal Code Title 5 Chapter 2 (Noise).18 They include limitations on noise levels within mixed-used places as shown below.

Title 5 Chapter 2 of the Municipal Code has the following project-related provisions:
§ 5-2.05 Prohibited Noises - General Standard.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, and in addition thereto, it is unlawful for any person to willfully make or continue, or cause to be made or continued, any loud, unnecessary, or unusual noise, sound or vibration which unreasonably disturbs the peace and quiet of any neighborhood or which causes discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable person of normal sensitiveness residing in the area.

The factors which shall be considered in determining whether such noise violates the provisions of this section shall include, but not be limited to, the following (Ord. 599, § 1):
(a) The volume of the noise;
(b) The intensity of the noise;
(c) Whether the nature of the noise is usual or unusual; (d) Whether the origin of the noise is natural or unnatural; (e) The volume and intensity of the background noise, if any; (f) The proximity of the noise to residential sleeping facilities; 18 https://ecode360.com/43217219#43217219.
 SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-11
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 (g) The nature and zoning of the area within which the noise emanates; (h) The density of the inhabitation of the area within which the noise emanates; (i) The time of the day or night the noise occurs;
(j) The duration of the noise;
(k) Whether the noise is recurrent, intermittent, or constant; and (l) Whether the noise is produced by a commercial or noncommercial activity. § 5-2.06 Prohibited Noises—Specific Violations.

Except as set forth in Section 5-2.07 of this chapter, the following acts and the causing or permitting thereof, are specifically declared to be a violation of this chapter (Ord. 599, § 1):
(a) Radios, Phonographs, Etc. The using, operating or permitting to be played, used or operated between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. of any radio, musical instrument, phonograph, television set, or instrument or device similar to those heretofore specifically mentioned (hereinafter "device") for the production or reproduction of sound in volume sufficiently loud as to be plainly audible at a distance of 50 feet or more from the property line of the property from which the noise, sound or vibration is emanating, and the using, operating or permitting to be played, used or operated between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. of any such device for the production or reproduction of sound in volume sufficiently loud as to be plainly audible at a distance of 200 feet or more from the property line of the property from which the noise, sound or vibration is emanating. (b) Band or Orchestral Rehearsals. The conducting of or carrying on, or allowing the conducting or carrying on of band or orchestral concerts or rehearsals or practice between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. sufficiently loud as to be plainly audible at a distance of 50 feet or more from the property line of the property where the concert, rehearsal or practice is occurring, and the conducting of or carrying on, or allowing the conducting or carrying on of band or orchestral concerts or rehearsals or practice between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. sufficiently loud as to be plainly audible at a distance of 200 feet or more from the property line of the property where the concert, rehearsal or practice is occurring. (c) Engines, Motors and Mechanical Devices Near Residential District. The sustained, continuous or repeated operation or use between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. of any motor or engine or the repair, modification, reconstruction, testing or operation of any automobile, motorcycle, machine, contrivance, or mechanical device or other contrivance or facility unless such motor, engine, automobile, motorcycle, machine or mechanical device is enclosed within a sound insulated structure so as to prevent noise and sound from being plainly audible at: (1) a distance of 50 feet or more from the property line of the property from which the noise, sound or vibration is emanating or (2) the exterior wall of any adjacent residence, whichever is less.
(e) Loading and Unloading. Loading, unloading, opening, closing or other handling of boxes, crates, containers, building materials, garbage cans or similar objects between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. in volume sufficiently loud as to be plainly audible at a distance of 50 feet or more from the property line of the property where the activity is occurring. (f) Construction. Operating or causing the operation of any tools, equipment, impact devices, derricks or hoists used on construction, drilling, repair, alteration, demolition or earthwork, between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays or at any time on Sunday or Federal holiday.
 SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-12
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.13.5 Significance Thresholds
This analysis incorporated is based upon the noise thresholds prescribed in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, as amended (AEP, 2024) and shown as checklist questions a) through c) at the beginning of this section. There are normally two criteria for judging noise impacts. First, noise levels generated by the proposed project must comply with all relevant federal, state and local standards and regulations. The second measure of impact used in this analysis is the significant increase in noise levels above existing ambient noise levels as a result of the introduction of a new noise source. An increase in noise level due to a new noise source has a potential to adversely impact people.

Based on the applicable noise regulations stated above, the proposed project would have a significant noise impact if it would:
• Conflict with applicable noise restrictions or standards imposed by regulatory agencies. • Result in short-term exposures exceeding 80 dBA (FTA, 2018). • Cause the permanent ambient noise level at the property line of an affected land use to increase by 5 dBA CNEL or more.
• Contribute to a significant cumulative noise impact.

4.13.6 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in generation of substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Less than Significant Impact
Noise impacts associated with mixed use projects include short-term and long-term impacts.

Construction activities, especially heavy equipment operation, would create noise effects on and adjacent to the construction site. Long-term noise impacts include project-generated onsite and offsite operational noise sources. Onsite (stationary) noise sources from the apartment homes would include operation of mechanical equipment such as air conditioners and building maintenance.

Offsite noise would be attributable to project-induced traffic, which would cause an incremental increase in noise levels within and near the project.

Short-Term Construction Noise
The construction of the proposed project may generate temporary increases in ambient noise levels that exceed the thresholds of significance for this analysis. Noise impacts from construction activities are a function of the noise generated by the operation of construction equipment and offroad delivery and worker commuter vehicles, the location of equipment, and the timing and duration of the noise-generating activities.

For the purpose of this analysis, it was estimated that the proposed project would be built in six phases, which are listed in Table 4.13-6. Construction is anticipated to run from early July 2026 to mid-September 2028.

The types and numbers of pieces of equipment to be deployed during each construction phase were determined as part of the air quality and greenhouse gas emissions analyses for this project (see Section 4.3 and Section 4.8). For each equipment type, the table shows an average noise emission level (in dB at 50 feet, unless otherwise specified) and a “usage factor,” which is an estimated fraction  SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-13
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 of operating time that the equipment would be producing noise at the stated level. Equipment characteristics for the six phases are shown in Table 4.13-6.

Using calculation methods published by the Federal Transportation Administration (FTA, 2018), UltraSystems estimated the average hourly exposures at four sensitive receiver locations, as seen in Figure 4.13-1: two churches, one school, one preschool, a Days Inn & Suites by Windham Artesia, and single-family houses. The distances used for the calculation were measured from the receivers to the approximate center of activity of each construction phase, since that would be the average location of construction equipment.

Several of the sensitive receivers analyzed would be shielded from the project noise sources by existing buildings in the surrounding area. The effects of the shielding from existing buildings were taken into account according to Caltrans guidance (Caltrans, 2009, p. 2-35). Shielding by partially constructed new buildings was not taken into account.

Table 4.13-6

CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE CHARACTERISTICS
Construction Phase Equipment Type Horsepower
No. of
Pieces
Usage
Factor
dBA @
50 Feet
Composite
dBA
1 – Site Preparation Tractor/Loader/Backhoes 84 1 0.37 85 80.68 2 – Grading Graders 187 1 0.41 85 82.61
Excavators 158 1 0.38 80
Off-Highway Trucks 376 1 0.38 75
3 – Building
Construction
Cranes 231 1 0.29 83 81.97
Forklifts 89 2 0.30 67
Generator Sets 84 1 0.5 73
Welders 46 1 0.45 74
Tractor/Loader/Backhoes 84 1 0.37 85
4- Paving Pavers 81 1 0.42 77 74.40
Rollers 36 1 0.38 74
5 – Architectural Coating Air Compressors 78 1 0.48 81 77.81 Sources: Equipment deployment determined by CalEEMod (2022.1.1.29) (CAPCOA, 2024). Noise emissions characteristics from Knauer et al. (2006).

Table 4.13-7 summarizes the maximum estimated construction-related short-term noise exposures at the nearest sensitive receiver for each construction phase. Grading is the activity producing the maximum exposures. Short-term noise exposures due to construction activities would be about 56.3 to 71.2 dBA Leq. Exposures above 70 dBA Leq are due mainly to a combination of proximity to the sources and lack of intervening structures to attenuate the noise.

Table 4.13-7

ESTIMATED MAXIMUM ONE-HOUR CONSTRUCTION NOISE EXPOSURES Receiver Phase Distance
(feet)
Ambient
(dBA Leq)
Construction
(dBA Leq)
New Total
(dBA Leq)b
1 - Days Inn & Suites by Wyndham Grading 325 58.1 66.4 67.0 2 - Cerritos Presbyterian School Grading 185 55.9 71.2 71.3 3 - Single-family house Grading 580 55.3 56.3a 58.8
4 - Ross Academy (Classroom) Grading 918 59.1 52.3a 59.9 5 - Ross Academy (Playing Field) Grading 1129 59.1 49.3a 59.5 6 - Single-family house Grading 205 55.9 70.3 70.5 a Blocking from intervening structures taken into account. b Total = ambient + contribution from construction,
 SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-14
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Construction activity in the City of Artesia is limited to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and is prohibited on Sundays and federal holidays.19 Noise exposure from construction of the proposed project would not exceed the FTA’s 80 dBA threshold. Impacts would be less than significant.

Operational Noise
Mobile Sources
According to the CalEEMod analysis prepared for this project, the project would generate a maximum of 557 new trips per day in the operational phase (Appendix J). The average daily traffic was obtained from data supplied by Kunzman Associates, Inc. in a traffic impact analysis. The average daily traffic on Pioneer Boulevard between 176th Street and 178th Street Avenue was 16,200 vehicles per day in 2015 (Kunzman Associates, Inc., 2015). Assuming a growth rate of two percent per year, the current year traffic in the same segment of Pioneer Boulevard would be 19,360 vehicles per day.

The increase due to the project would be about 2.9 percent. Given the logarithmic nature of the decibel, traffic volume needs to be doubled—that is, a 100 percent increase—in order for the noise level to increase by 3 dBA (ICF Jones & Stokes, 2009), the minimum level perceived by the average human ear. Because the maximum increase in traffic in any road segment would be far below 100 percent, the increase in roadway noise experienced at sensitive receivers would not be perceptible to the human ear. Therefore, roadway noise associated with project operation would not expose a land use to noise levels that are considered incompatible with or in excess of adopted standards, and impacts would be less than significant.

Onsite
Onsite noise sources from the proposed mixed-use project would include operation of mechanical equipment such as air conditioners and building maintenance equipment; and motor vehicles accessing, driving on, and exiting the parking lot and garbage trucks accessing the parking lot. Noise levels associated with operation of the project are expected to be comparable to those of nearby residential areas and activities.

Noise impacts from onsite sources would be less than significant. b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact
Vibration is sound radiated through the ground. Vibration can result from a source (e.g., subway operations, vehicles, machinery equipment, etc.) causing the adjacent ground to move, thereby creating vibration waves that propagate through the soil to the foundations of nearby buildings. This effect is referred to as groundborne vibration. The peak particle velocity (PPV) or the root mean square (RMS) velocity is usually used to describe vibration levels. PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous peak of the vibration level, while RMS is defined as the square root of the average of the squared amplitude of the level. PPV is typically used for evaluating potential building damage, while RMS velocity in dB is typically more suitable for evaluating human response.

The background vibration velocity level in residential areas is usually around 50 vibration decibels 19 Artesia Municipal Code § 5-2.06 (f).
 SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-15
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 (VdB). The vibration velocity level threshold of perception for humans is approximately 65 VdB. A vibration velocity level of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels for most people. Most perceptible indoor vibration is caused by sources within buildings such as operation of mechanical equipment, movement of people, or the slamming of doors. Typical outdoor sources of perceptible groundborne vibration are construction equipment, steel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. If a roadway is smooth, the groundborne vibration from traffic is rarely perceptible. The range of interest is from approximately 50 VdB to 100 VdB, which is the general threshold where minor damage can occur in fragile buildings.

Construction Vibration
Construction activities for the project have the potential to generate groundborne vibration. The operation of construction equipment generates vibrations that propagate though the ground and diminish in intensity with distance from the source. Vibration impacts can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibration at moderate levels, to slight damage of buildings at the highest levels. The construction activities associated with the project could have an adverse impact on both sensitive structures (i.e., building damage) and populations (i.e., annoyance).

The FTA (2018) has published standard vibration levels for construction equipment operations, at a distance of 25 feet. The construction-related vibration levels for the nearest sensitive receivers for major construction phases are shown in Table 4.13-8. These calculations were based on the distances from the onsite construction activity and onroad loaded trucks to the centers of the closest sensitive receivers.

Table 4.13-8

VIBRATION LEVELS OF TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
Equipment
PPV
@ 25 ft.
(in/sec)
Vibration
dB @ 25 ft.
(VdB)
PPV
@ 288 ft
(in/sec)a
Vibration
dB @ 288
ft. (VdB)a
PPV
@ 194 ft.
(in/sec)b
Vibration
dB @ 194
ft. (VdB)b
Loaded Trucks 0.076 86 0.008 59
Jackhammer 0.035 79 0.0024 47
Small bulldozer 0.003 58 0.00020 26
Large bulldozer 0.089 87 0.0061 55
Source: Calculated by UltraSystems.

Note: PPV = peak particle velocity, VdB = vibration decibels, in/sec = inches per second. aApplies to onsite construction activities to the nearest sensitive receiver (Cerritos Presbyterian Church). bApplies to onroad truck activities to the nearest sensitive receiver (Days Inn & Suites by Windham Artesia).

As shown in Table 4.13-7, the PPV of construction equipment at the nearest sensitive receiver (Days Inn & Suites by Windham Artesia) is at most 0.008 inch per second, which is less than the FTA damage threshold of 0.12 inch per second PPV for fragile historic buildings. The maximum VdB are 59 VdB, which is below the FTA threshold for human annoyance of 80 VdB. Unmitigated vibration impacts would therefore be less than significant.

Operational Vibration
The project involves the operation of residential-related and low-grade commercial-related equipment and would not involve the use of stationary equipment that would result in high vibration levels, which are more typical for large manufacturing and industrial projects. Groundborne vibrations at the project site and immediate vicinity currently result from heavy-duty vehicular travel  SECTION 4.13 - NOISE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.13-16
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 (e.g., refuse trucks and transit buses) on the nearby local roadways, and the project would not result in a substantive increase of these heavy-duty vehicles on the public roadways. Therefore, vibration impacts associated with operation of the project would be less than significant. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact
The nearest active public airport is the Long Beach Airport, located approximately 5.3 miles southwest of the project site. Fullerton Municipal Airport, the only municipal airport in Orange County, is located approximately 5.5 miles east of the project and the project is located outside of its 60 dBA CNEL noise contour. Further, the project is located outside of the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour for Long Beach Airport. Thus, project development would not expose residents onsite to excessive airport-related noise levels, and impacts would be less than significant.  SECTION 4.14 – POPULATION AND HOUSING
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.14-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.14 Population and Housing
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for example,
by proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
X
d) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and business) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Less than Significant Impact
The existing and projected demographic data for Artesia for 2019 and 2050 are shown in Table 4.14-

1. The population in the City is forecast to increase approximately 3.1 percent, the number of households is forecast to increase 8.7 percent, and employment is forecast to increase 4.4 percent during that period (SCAG, 2024). The estimated total number of housing units in the City as of April 2021 was 4,731, consisting of 3,382 (71.5 percent of total) single-family detached, 364 (7.7 percent) single-family attached, 949 (20.1 percent) multifamily and 36 (0.8 percent) mobile homes (SCAG, 2021, p. 10/18).

Table 4.14-1

CITY OF ARTESIA DEMOGRAPHIC AND GROWTH FORECAST
2019 2050 Difference
(2019 – 2050)
Percent Change
(2019 – 2050)
Population 16,400 16,900 500 3.1%
Households 4,600 5,000 400 8.7%
Employment 6,800 7,100 300 4.4%
Sources: SCAG, 2024
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) forecasts a net increase over the 30-year period of approximately 500 residents, or an increase of 3.1 percent.

Population Impacts
The project proposes the development of a total of 83 multi-family residential units. The average household size in the City of Artesia in 2024 is 3.32 persons (CDF, 2024). Thus, the project at full occupancy is estimated to house 276 persons, well within the estimated increase of 500 residents between 2019 and 2050.
 SECTION 4.14 – POPULATION AND HOUSING
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.14-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Housing Impacts
The project proposes a density of 100 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). The Artesia LIVE Specific Plan currently allows for up to 70 du/ac. The project includes an amendment to the Artesia Live Specific Plan increasing the allowed to allow a proposed 100 du/ac. With approval of this request, the project would remain consistent with the projected growth of the City laid out in the General Plan and Artesia LIVE Specific Plan. The proposed 83 housing units would be well within the forecast increase of 400 households (that is, occupied housing units) in the City and no adverse housing impact would occur.

Employment Impacts
Project operation is estimated to generate about 18 jobs: 15 in the restaurant and three building management (Zhang, 2024). Operational employment generation would be well within the employment forecast for the City of Artesia and would not have an adverse impact.

Project construction would generate a small number of temporary construction jobs. The unemployment rate in Los Angeles County in July 2024 was 6.5% (EDD, 2024). Thus, construction employment is expected to be absorbed from the regional labor force and is not expected to have an adverse impact regarding employment forecasts for the City of Artesia.

The implementation of the project is consistent with the overall intent of the City’s goals to provide adequate housing opportunities to meet its fair share of projected housing needs, while incorporating mixed-use development. Roads and other infrastructure are present abutting two sides of the project site. Therefore, no indirect impacts associated with the extension of roads and other infrastructure would occur.
e) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact
The project site is currently a 0.83-acre vacant lot in the City of Artesia. No housing or residents are currently located on site. Therefore, the project would not displace any housing or people, and the project would not require the construction of replacement housing. No impact would occur.  SECTION 4.15 – PUBLIC SERVICES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.15-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.15 Public Services
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection? X
b) Police protection? X
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Other public facilities? X
a) Fire protection?
Less than Significant Impact
The Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) provides fire services for the City of Artesia through a contract with the City (City of Artesia, 2024a). The LACFD has 168 fire stations that are divided into 22 battalions. The LACFD provides fire protection services to all unincorporated county land plus 59 contract cities, as well as the Angeles and Los Padres National Forests. Battalion 9 is primarily responsible for serving the City of Artesia (City of Artesia, 2016, p. 36). The nearest station to the project site is Station 30, the Headquarters of LACFD Battalion 9, approximately one mile south of the project site at 19030 Pioneer Boulevard in the City of Cerritos (Google Earth Pro, 2024).

The project proposes the development of a six-story mixed-use building on an approximately 0.83- acre vacant site. Implementing the project with 83 residential units could cause a small increase in the residential and employment population within the project limits. There are no fire facilities fees in effect for the City. Property tax and special tax revenue generated by the City funds Fire Department services in the City. These revenues would continue to fund the fire department services for future developments in the City. In the event additional resources are needed, the property tax growth within the City would meet the increased demand (City of Artesia, 2016).

Given the modest number of residential units and resultant minimal population growth, the proposed project would not require the construction or expansion of new fire department facilities, and the project should have a less than significant impact.
b) Police protection?
Less than Significant Impact
The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LACoSD) provides police protection to the City of Artesia through a contract with the City (City of Artesia, 2024a). The nearest station to the project site is the LACoSD Lakewood Sheriff’s Station, located approximately 3.25 miles southwest of the project site at 5130 Clark Avenue in the City of Lakewood (Google Earth Pro, 2024).  SECTION 4.15 – PUBLIC SERVICES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.15-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 The General Plan Program EIR concluded that existing police protection staffing levels were sufficient to meet the service demands associated with the projected population growth permitted under the General Plan and built according to the proposed General Plan Update, including mixed-use projects (City of Artesia, 2016). The Lakewood Station is primarily responsible for providing law enforcement services to the project area (City of Artesia, 2016, p. 36).

Therefore, the proposed project would not require the construction or expansion of new police stations or facilities, and the project would have a less than significant impact. c) Schools?
Less than Significant Impact
The project is located within the boundaries of the ABC Unified School District (ABCUSD), which provides public education to residents of Artesia. The district includes nineteen elementary schools, five junior high schools, three comprehensive high schools, a college preparatory grade 7-12 school, a continuation high school, infant/children centers, extended day care, and an adult school (City of Artesia, 2016).

The nearest public elementary school is Elliott Elementary School, located 1.2 miles southeast. Ross Academy of Creative and Media Arts Middle School is 0.4 miles southeast, and Cerritos High School is 1.6 miles southeast of the project site (Google Earth Pro, 2024).

The Residential and Commercial/Industrial Development School Fee Justification Study prepared for the School District (Cooperative Strategies, 2020) projects an increase in student enrollment attributable to new development. As a result, the school district has established that school fees are levied on new development projects consistent with the requirements of AB 2926, AB 1600, AB 181, and the provisions of § 66001 of the Government Code. According to § 65996 of the California Government Code § 65996 deems school development impact fees to be “full and complete school facilities mitigation” (Cooperative Strategies, 2020, p. 5).

ABCUSD has residual capacity for 2,705 students consisting of 1,871 students in elementary schools, 100 students in middle schools, and 734 students in high schools (Cooperative Strategies, 2020, p. 10).

As shown in Table 4.15-1 below, the proposed project would increase existing housing by 83 residential units, potentially increasing the student population of the school district by approximately 45 students. This nominal growth in the student population is not anticipated to require new or expanded facilities, since the district’s facilities are adequate and meet current and anticipated student demand.

Table 4.15-1

ESTIMATED PROJECT STUDENT GENERATION
School Level Student Generation Factor
Multi-Family Attached Units
Dwelling Units /
Multi-Family Attached
Total Student
Generation
Elementary (K-5) 0.2758 83 23
Middle (6-8) 0.0863 83 7
High (9-12) 0.1754 83 15
Total 0.5375 83 45
Source: Cooperative Strategies, 2020, p. 14
 SECTION 4.15 – PUBLIC SERVICES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.15-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 As discussed above, the School District imposes developer fees for new development for residential and commercial uses. The impact of the project on the facilities of the School District would be less than significant after paying the required developer fees for the schools. d) Parks?
Less than Significant Impact
The City of Artesia is largely built out with little vacant land available for the dedication of parkland.

Additionally, the proposed project does not include any areas which are currently parkland or have been designated for parkland. The City of Artesia has an estimated population of 15,597 people (US Census, 2024) and the increase in the number of residents is just 1.9 percent of the existing population. Demands for parks are generated by the population within the park service area, and the project’s 83 units would result in a minor increase in population. The City of Artesia does not have an established standard for City-provided parkland. The City General Plan references a target park acreage of 52.65 acres based on the target acreage of 3 acres per 1,000 population in the Quimby Act (California Government Code § 66477) (City of Artesia, 2010, p. OS-8). At the target park acreage of 3 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, project development would create demand for 0.678 acres of parkland20. The proposed project does not significantly increase the need for parkland beyond what was analyzed in the General Plan Program EIR. Additionally, under the provisions of the Quimby Act, the project would be required to dedicate parkland or pay an in-lieu fee as an alternative.

Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.
e) Other Public Facilities?
Less than Significant Impact
The Artesia Public Library is operated by Los Angeles County. The library is located at 18801 Elaine Avenue, about 1.1 miles southeast (Google Earth Pro, 2024) of the project site on the Artesia Park grounds (Library Artesia, 2024). As noted above, the increase in residents associated with the project would have a negligible effect on the demand for library services. Therefore, the impact of the proposed project on libraries would be less than significant. 20 Proposed increase of 226 residents = (1,000/226)/3 = 0.678 acres  SECTION 4.16 – RECREATION 
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.16-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.16 Recreation
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
X
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact
The City of Artesia Parks and Recreation Department operates 65.8 acres of open space (6.3 percent of the total City land area) for parks and recreational facilities. The nearest park to the project site is the regional Artesia Park located at 18750 Clarkdale Avenue approximately 4,200 feet to the southeast.

The City of Artesia is largely built out with minimal vacant land for park dedication. In addition, the project site does not contain any areas currently or previously dedicated as land for park use (City of Artesia, 2010a, p. OS-2).

The demand for parks is determined principally by the number of people residing in the service area of the park. The project involves the development of a mixed-use development that contains 83 residential dwelling units with various open space amenities. The project is estimated to house approximately 290 residents. based on the average number of residents per household in the City of Artesia in 2023, which is 3.49 according to the 2023 US Census QuickFacts (US Census, 2024). The City of Artesia does not have an established standard for City-provided parkland. The City General Plan references a target park acreage of 3 acres per 1,000 population in the Quimby Act (California Government Code Section 66477) (City of Artesia, 2010, p. OS-8). At the target park acreage, project development would create demand for 0.87 acres of parkland.

In addition to the various open space amenities proposed by the project, a dedication of parkland or payment of an in-lieu fee consistent with the Quimby Act shall be required upon approval. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.
 SECTION 4.17 – TRANSPORTATION 
7277Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.17-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.17 Transportation
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
X
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent
with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)??
X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X
The following analysis is based upon the Artesia Mixed-Use Project VMT Analysis dated August 21, 2024 for the proposed project (RK Engineering, 2024), included as Appendix J to this document. a) Would the project conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less than Significant Impact
Applicable Plans, Ordinances, and Policies
Connect SoCal 2024 (RTP/SCS)
Connect SoCal 2024, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), is a long-term plan for the Southern California region that details the investment in our transportation system and development in our communities to meet the needs of the region.

As demonstrated in Threshold b) below, the proposed project would not conflict with the Connect SoCal 2024 RTP/SCS. Therefore, it would have a less than significant impact.

City of Artesia General Plan— Traffic and Circulation Element The General Plan contains goals and policies that are applicable to the proposed project. Applicable goals and policies are summarized below:

Community Goal CIR 4: Reduced vehicle miles traveled.

Policy Action CIR 4.1.1: Encourage mixed use developments that combine residential and/or commercial or recreational uses, thereby improving convenience and reducing trip generation.  SECTION 4.17 – TRANSPORTATION 
7277Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.17-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 • Project Compliance: The proposed project would not conflict with Policy Action CIR 4.1.1 because the proposed project is a mixed-use development with both residential and commercial uses. Therefore, the project would comply with this policy.

Policy Action CIR 4.1.3: Increase residential and commercial density around bus transit facilities and major corridors.
• Project Compliance: The project proposes to increase the residential density up to 100 dwelling units per acre while including a commercial element to the project.

The proposed project would not conflict with City of Artesia General Plan— Traffic and Circulation Element and would have a less than significant impact.

City of Artesia Municipal Code
Parking
As discussed in Section 3.0 of this Initial Study, vehicular ingress and egress would be along two driveways along the northern portion of the project site along 176th Street that would lead to two levels of parking – one level of semi-subterranean parking and another level of above-ground parking; the project would have 163 total parking spaces comprised of 119 standard parking stalls, five ADA stalls, 12 tandem stalls, 20 compact tandem stalls for the residential use and seven parking stalls for the commercial use. The number of parking spaces would adhere to the required parking spaces required by Title 9 Chapter 2 Article 11 of the City’s Municipal Code.

Landscaping
As discussed in Section 3.0 of this Initial Study, all areas subject to landscaping as required by Title 9 Chapter 2 Article 15 of the City’s Municipal Code, the landscaping will be developed in accordance with its provisions. The landscape irrigation concept for the site will be designed to provide the most efficient and conserving means to distribute irrigation water and provide the property management company with the latest technology for water conservation.

The total building footprint is approximately 31,254 square feet. The project would be required to provide five percent of the building’s footprint, equal to 1,825 square feet of landscaping. The project would provide approximately 3,114 square feet of landscaping.

In conclusion, the project would not conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system. Impacts regarding conflict with a program plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system would be less than significant. b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Less than Significant Impact
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b) pertains to the use of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as a method of determining the significance of transportation impacts. The County’s guidelines provide screening and impact criteria to determine if the project would cause a significant transportation impact.  SECTION 4.17 – TRANSPORTATION 
7277Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.17-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 If the proposed project meets any of the following VMT screening criteria, the proposed project should be expected to have a less than significant impact without conducting a detailed project-level assessment:
• Non-Retail Project Trip Generation Screening Criteria: Project generates less than 110 Net Daily Trips.
• Retail Project Site Plan Screening Criteria: Project is a local serving retail land use with less than 50,000 Square Feet of Gross Floor Area.
• Proximity to Transit-Based Screening Criteria: Project is located near a major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor, AND the following is true:
o Project has an FAR Ratio is Greater than 0.75,
o Project does not provide more parking than required by the County Code, o Project is consistent with the SCAG RTP/SCS.
o Residential Land Use Based Screening Criteria: Project is 100% affordable housing.

As shown in Table 4.17-1, the retail component meets the retail project site plan screening criteria and would therefore screen out of further VMT analysis. However, the residential component does not meet any of the screening criteria identified above. Therefore, further VMT analysis for the Project’s residential component is required.

Table 4.17-1

PROJECT TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES
Land Use ITE
Code Qty. AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total ITE Trip Generation Rate
Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) 221 n/a 23% 77% 0.37 61% 39% 0.39 4.54 Strip Retail Plaza (<40k) 822 n/a 60% 40% 2.36 50% 50% 6.59 54.45 Project Trip Generation Forecast
Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) 221 83 D/U 7 24 31 20 12 32 377 Strip Retail Plaza (<40k) 822 1.25 TSF 2 1 3 4 4 8 68
Total Project Trip Generation 9 25 34 24 16 40 445
Source: RK Engineering, 2024, Table 2 1 Trip Generation, 11th Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers [ITE], 2024) The County of Los Angeles VMT Guidelines recommend the following impact criteria:
“A residential project would result in a potentially significant VMT impact if the project’s residential VMT per capita would not be 16.8% below the existing residential VMT per capita for the Baseline Area in which the project is located.”
The VMT analysis was conducted using the 2024 SCAG RTP travel demand model, with a base model year of 2019. The 2024 SCAG RTP travel demand model was used to calculate the City of Artesia’s VMT per capita and VMT Threshold of Significance. Table 4.17-2 shows the citywide average and the threshold. The Threshold of Significance has been calculated to be 22.9 homebased VMT per capita (RK Engineering, 2024, p. 6).

The Project’s socio-economic data was calculated based on the average household size of 3.35 per the California Department of Finance Population and Housing Estimate for Artesia for 2024. As such, the 83 multifamily dwelling units (DU) are anticipated to house approximately 278 residents (RK Engineering, 2024, p. 7).
 SECTION 4.17 – TRANSPORTATION 
7277Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.17-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Table 4.17-2

VMT THRESHOLD OF SIGNIFICANCE
Analysis Scenario Geographic
Area
Total Home-Based
VMT
Total
Residents
Total Home-Based
VMT Per Capita
SCAG Base 2019 City of Artesia 515,401.28 18,726 27.5

16.8% Reduction in Citywide Average Home-Based VMT per Capita -4.6 VMT Threshold of Significance 22.9
Source: 2024 RTP SCAG Travel Demand Model
The calculation for the home-based VMT for the project was determined by multiplying the average trip length of the Project's Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) for home-based trips by the average daily traffic (ADT) of the residential component, which is equal to 377 daily trips with a TAZ average trip length of approximately 8.43 miles (RK Engineering, 2024, p. 7). The proposed commercial use is considered an ancillary use and is not considered a direct trip generator; thus, it is omitted from the trip generation calculations. As shown in Table 4.17-3, the project VMT per capita is 11.4, a VMT per capita 11.5 below the threshold of significance of 22.9 VMT per capita. Therefore, the project impact is less than significant.

Table 4.17-3

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED SUMMARY
Traffic Analysis
Zone
Avg. Trip
Length1
Avg. Daily
Trips2
Project
VMT Residents3 VMT per capita
21824100 8.43 miles 377 3,178.1 278 11.4
City of Artesia Average VMT per Capita 22.9
Difference -11.5
Source: RK Engineering, 2024, p. 8.
c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Construction
During the construction phase, the project could temporarily impact street traffic on Pioneer Boulevard and/or 176th Street adjacent to the project site due to construction activities in the ROW.

Project construction could reduce the number of lanes or temporarily close a portion of Pioneer Boulevard or 176th Street. This impact would be significant without mitigation. Mitigation measure TRANS-1 is recommended to address potential hazard impacts during the construction phase.

Mitigation Measure
MM TRANS-1
Prior to the start of construction activities in the public right-of-way, the General Contractor shall submit a detailed Construction Management Plan to be reviewed and approved by the City of Artesia Traffic Engineer. The Construction Management Plan shall specify that the Construction Manager will schedule truck traffic and employee shifts to avoid creating trips during the peak traffic periods, as is feasible for construction operations. All measures including identified truck routes and designated employee parking areas shall be included in  SECTION 4.17 – TRANSPORTATION 
7277Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.17-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 the Construction Management Plan. The Plan shall include but is not limited to the following provisions:
a) Identification of permitted hours for construction related delivery and removal of heavy equipment and materials;
b) Identification of where construction workers would park their personal vehicles during project construction with a requirement that at no time shall construction worker vehicles block any driveways. If complaints are received by the project applicant or City of Artesia regarding issues with construction worker vehicle parking, the project applicant shall identify alternative parking options for construction workers so as not to interfere with adjacent parking availability;
c) Identification of how emergency access to and around the project site will be maintained during project construction;
d) Identification of haul routes for delivery or removal of heavy and/or oversized equipment or material loads. Where feasible, delivery or removal of oversized equipment or material loads shall be conducted during off-peak-hour traffic periods; e) Maintain pedestrian and bicycle connections around the project site and safe crossing locations shall be considered for all pedestrian and bicyclist detours; and f) Maintain the security of the project site by erecting temporary fencing during the construction phase of the project. Any onsite night lighting used during the construction phase of the project shall be in compliance with City of Artesia lighting requirements.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
After implementation of mitigation measure TRANS-1 above, the project would have less than significant construction-phase impacts regarding a substantial increase in hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses. d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Construction
Project construction could temporarily close sidewalks and street lane(s) along Pioneer Boulevard and/or 176th Street., which could temporarily impact emergency access. Mitigation Measure (MM) TRANS-1 is recommended to reduce potential project impacts regarding emergency access during the construction phase of the proposed project.

Mitigation Measure
Refer to MM TRANS-1 above.

Level of Significance after Mitigation
MM TRANS-1 would reduce potential impacts regarding emergency access to a less than significant level because this mitigation measure requires the identification of how emergency access to and around the project site would be maintained during project construction.  SECTION 4.17 – TRANSPORTATION 
7277Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.17-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Operation
The project would comply with applicable City regulations, such as the requirement to comply with the City’s fire code to provide adequate emergency access. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Los Angeles County Fire Department would review project site plans, including the location of all buildings, fences, access driveways, and other features that may affect emergency access. The site design includes access and fire lanes that would accommodate emergency ingress and egress by fire trucks, police units, and ambulance/paramedic vehicles. All onsite access and sight distance requirements would be in accordance with all applicable design requirements (City of Artesia Fire Code § 503 regarding fire access, and Caltrans Highway Design Manual § 201 regarding sight distances). The review process and compliance with applicable regulations and standards would ensure that adequate emergency access would be provided. Therefore, the project would not result in inadequate emergency access and there would be less than significant impacts.  SECTION 4.18 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.18-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource that is
listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code § 5020.1(k)?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource that is
determined to be a significant resource to a
California Native American tribe pursuant to
the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resource Code § 5024.1(c)?
X
Information from the Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report, dated July 31, 2024 (see Appendix D), prepared by UltraSystems for the Pioneer Place Mixed Use Projectin the City of Artesia, has been included in this section.
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code § 5020.1(k)?
No Impact
No resources as defined by Public Resources Code §21074 have been identified. Additionally, the project site has not been recommended for historic designation for prehistoric and Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs). No tribal cultural sites were documented in the Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File (SLF) search (refer to Section 4.2 and Attachment C: “Native American Heritage Commission Records Search and Native American Contacts” in Appendix D to this IS/MND). No specific tribal resources have been identified.

No prehistoric or historic archaeological resources were observed during the field survey conducted on July 5, 2024, by Stephen O’Neil, M.A., RPA as part of the cultural resources investigation (see Section 4.3, Appendix D). The results of the pedestrian assessment indicate that it is unlikely that prehistoric resources will be adversely affected by construction of the project given the disturbed condition of the ground surface. The cultural resource records search at the SCCIC (the local California Historic Resources Information System facility) on June 26, 2024, indicated there are no prehistoric or historic sites on the project parcel (Section 4.1 in Appendix D).

No tribal cultural resources onsite are listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code § 5020.1(k). Therefore, the project would have no impact in this regard.  SECTION 4.18 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.18-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is determined to be a significant resource to a California Native American tribe pursuant to the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code § 5024.1(c)?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) requires meaningful consultation with California Native American Tribes on potential impacts on tribal cultural resources (TCRs), as defined in Public Resources Code § 21074. TCRs are sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either eligible or listed in the California Register of Historical Resources or local register of historical resources (CNRA, 2007).

As part of the AB 52 process, Native American tribes must submit a written request to the lead agency to be notified of projects within their traditionally and culturally affiliated area. The lead agency must provide written, formal notification to those tribes within 14 days of deciding to undertake a project. The tribe must respond to the lead agency within 30 days of receiving this notification if they want to engage in consultation on the project, and the lead agency must begin the consultation process within 30 days of receiving the tribe’s request. Consultation concludes when either (1) the parties agree to mitigation measures to avoid a significant effect on a tribal cultural resource, or (2) one of the parties, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes mutual agreement cannot be reached.

Senate Bill 18 (SB 18) requires meaningful consultation with California Native American Tribes on potential impacts on tribal cultural resources (TCRs) that may result from zoning and master plan changes. The State of California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research developed these Tribal Consultation Guidelines in order to provide guidance to cities and counties on the process for consulting with Native American Indian tribes during the adoption or amendment of local general plans or specific plans (defined in Government Code § 65450 et seq.). SB 18 requires local agencies to consult with tribes prior to making certain planning decisions and to provide notice to tribes at certain key points in the planning process, thereby providing tribes an opportunity to participate in local land use decisions at an early planning stage.

The project has been filed with the City of Artesia which is the Lead Agency. Peter Kahn, Planning Manager, with the City of Artesia (the Lead Agency) was contacted on July 23, 2024, inquiring about when they will be initiating AB 52 and SB 18 consultation notice to local tribes for the project. October 21, 2024, Okina Dor, Community Development Director, stated that AB 52 consultation had not yet started (O. Dor to S. O’Neil, personal communication via email; October 21, 2024). On November 5, 2024, a set of 18 tribal consultation request letters were provided to Art Bashmakian and Okina Dor (City Planning Department) for mailing.

The Lead Agency has prepared and sent letters via certified mail and emails to the several tribes on the tribal list provided to UltraSystems from the NAHC, informing them of the project. The letters conveyed that the recipient has 30 days from the receipt of the letter to request AB 52 consultation regarding the project. Also, in accordance with SB 18, a tribe has 90 days in which to respond and request opening consultation, unless a shorter timeframe has been agreed to by the tribe. This section will be updated once the City has concluded the AB 52 consultation.  SECTION 4.18 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.18-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Mr. Dor initiated AB 52 and SB 18 consultation to local tribes for the Pioneer Place Project. Consultation invitations were sent to the participating tribes through email and certified mail informing them of the project on November 27, 2024. The tribes contacted included:
• Anthony Madrigal, THPO; Cahuilla Band of
Indians
• Erica Schenk, Chairperson; Cahuilla Band of
Indians
• BobbyRay Esparza, Cultural Director; Cahuilla
Band of Indians
• Andrew Salas, Chairperson; Gabrieleno Band
of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation
• Chistina Swindall Martinez, Secretary;
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh
Nation
• Anthony Moralez, Chairperson;
Gabrielino/Tongva San Gabriel Band of
Mission Indians
• Robert Dorame, Chairperson; Gabrielino
Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council
• Christina Conley, Cultural Resource
Administrator; Gabrielino Tongva Indians of
California Tribal Council
• Sandonne Goad, Chairperson;
Gabrielino/Tongva Nation
• Charles Alvarez, Chairperson; GabrielinoTongva Nation • Sam Dunlap, Cultural Resource Director;
Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe
• Joyce Perry, Cultural Resources Director;
Juaneño Band of Mission Indians,
Acjachemen Nation - Belardes
• Matias Belardes, Chairperson; Juaneño
Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen
Nation - Belardes
• Heidi Lucero, Chairperson & THPO;
Juaneño Band of Mission Indians,
Acjachemen Nation – 84-A
• Vanessa Minott, Tribal Administrator;
Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians
• Steven Estrada, Chairman; Santa Rosa
Band of Cahuilla Indians
• Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson; Soboba Band
of Luiseño
• Joseph Ontiveros, THPO; Soboba Band of
Luiseño
• Jessica Valdes, Cultural Resources
Specialist; Soboba Band of Luiseño
The Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation, responded by email to O. Dor on December 10, 2024, requesting consultation. A meeting was held between the tribe and Dor on January 21, 2025.

Following the meeting the Kizh Nation Administrator provided an email on January 23, 2025 describing their concerns for the project, stating that the project location is “within the Gabrieleno community of Naxaaw’nga whose land area is now known as the city of Artesia”; that all mainland villages overlapped each other to help facilitate the movement of cultural resources throughout the landscape with village use areas were usually shared between village areas and were commonly used by two or more adjoining villages, and therefore, human activity can be pronounced within the shared use areas due to the combined use by multiple villages and TCR’s may be present in the soil from the thousands of years of human activity within that landscape. They also note the presence of sacred water ways and traditional trade routes in the project area. The Kizh Nation provided three TCR mitigation measures which the City accepted. See below. On January 27, 2025, the City informed the Kizh Nation of accepting their suggested mitigation measureswhich the Band acknowledged and provided the Band with a soil study report of the project site as requested. (Art Bashmakian [Acting Planner Manager] to S. O’Neil, personal communication via telephone and email; January 2, 2025, and emails January 27, 2025). Mr. Bashmakian let Chairperson Salas know that the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council have requested to be included in Tribal monitoring and asked that they approve a revision to their mitigation measure TCR_1 through email on February 25, 2025, A formal response from Chairperson Salas indicating that the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation are the “…the designated tribal entity responsible for monitoring due to their direct lineal descent and ancestral ties to this land…” and that “a rotation would compromise the integrity of cultural  SECTION 4.18 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.18-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 preservation efforts” on February 26, 2025. Mr. Bashmakian provided modified mitigation measures that include both interested tribes for the tribe to review on March 11, 2025. A letter from the tribe’s attorney, Kara E. Grant, was received on the same day, indicated that they do not support the revision of these measures. Consultation with the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation is ongoing.

The City sent emails to all non-responding tribes to follow up the mailing on January 16, 2025. The Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians replied the same day, declining consultation and stating they defer to the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians. (A. Bashmakian to S. O’Neil, personal communication via telephone; January 27, 2025).

Telephone calls were conducted February 10, 2025, to the Cahuilla Band of Indians, and a message was left for Anthony Madrigal, Tribal Historic Officer. The Gabrielino/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, and a message was left for Anthony Morales, Chairperson. The Gabrielino/Tongva Nation, and a message was left for Sandonne Goad, Chairperson. The Gabrieleno-Tongva Tribe, and a message was left for Chairperson Charles Alvarez at two numbers provided by the NAHC. The Juaneño Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation – Belardes, a message was left for Joyce Perry, Cultural Resources Director. The Juaneño Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation – 84A, and a message was left for Heidi Lucero, Chairperson and THPO. There has been no reply from any of these seven tribes. On a call to the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians, Mr. Bashmakian spoke with Jessica Valdez, Cultural Resources Specialist who stated that the project was not within their tribal area and to contact the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council (Chairperson Robert Dorame and administrator Christine Conley). (A. Bashmakian to S. O’Neil, personal communication via email; February 11, 2025.) To date none of other tribes have responded to either request or decline consultation.

Christina Conley with the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council responded via email January 29, 2025, stating that the project “is near a cultural site” and asked if there had been ”cultural reporting.” Bashmakian and Conely had a telephone meeting February 10, 2025, following which Conley sent an email again noting “close proximity to a recorded tribal site and asked again if “any cultural reporting had been conducted.” Mr. Bashmakian provided the draft cultural resources inventory report on February 19, 2025. In an email on February 21, 2025, Ms. Conley indicated that the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council would like to be included in Tribal monitoring and that if “… there is more than one interested tribe with respect to monitoring, a rotation may be implemented for equity and respect.” No TCRs were documented in the Native American Heritage Commission’s SLF search. During outreach to the tribes in preparation of the Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory, the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council noted the presence in the region of a specific traditional cultural resource, the village of Jaisobet and recommended monitoring during subsurface construction activities.

No resources as defined by Public Resources Code § 21074 have been identified (refer to Section 4.2 and Attachment C: “Native American Heritage Commission Records Search and Native American Contacts” in Appendix D to this IS/MND). Additionally, the project site has not been recommended for historic designation for prehistoric and TCRs. No specific tribal resources have been identified.

No prehistoric or historic archaeological resources were observed during the field survey. The previous cultural resources surveys within the 0.5-mile buffer zone found no recorded archaeological sites or isolates. One historic structure, a one-story single-family home was located approximately

0.32 mile to the northwest within the half-mile buffer of the project boundary. The cultural resource study findings at the SCCIC indicate that there is a low potential for finding tribal resources.

Land at the project site is disturbed by past construction in the upper several feet of soil. The prior fully built environment of the project site with the commercial uses that had taken place here suggests that the ground has been significantly disturbed. The cultural resource study findings  SECTION 4.18 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.18-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 suggest that there is a low potential for finding resources during the residential construction work.

There will be subsurface grading for the new structure foundations up to 11 feet below ground surface for the bottom of the first floor, elevator pits and utility vaults. This would reach into previously undisturbed native soil.

However, given the local Native American tribal concerns for potential traditional cultural resources, mitigation measures provided by the Kizh Nation will be implemented to further reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Tribal monitoring of subsurface construction activities will be implemented with MM TCR-1. In the unlikely event of an unexpected discovery, implementation of mitigation measure MM TCR-2 dealing with associated funerary objects and MM TCR-3 dealing with human remains are recommended to ensure that impacts related to the accidental discovery of human remains would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures:

MM TCR-1: Tribal Cultural Resources and Archaeological Monitoring. The project archaeologist, in consultation with interested tribes, the developer, and the City of Artesia, shall develop an Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) to address the details, timing, and responsibility of archaeological and cultural activities that will occur on the project site. Details in the AMP shall include:

1. Monitoring of project-related ground disturbance (including, but not limited to, brush clearing, grading, trenching, etc.) coordinated with these construction-related activities;

2. The development of a simultaneous monitoring schedule in coordination with the developer and the project archeologist for the designated Native American Tribal Monitors from the two consulting tribes during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities on the site:
including the scheduling, safety requirements, duties, scope of work, and Native American Tribal Monitors’ authority to stop and redirect grading activities in coordination with the project archaeologist.;

3. The protocols and stipulations that the developer, City, Tribes, and project archaeologist will follow in the event of inadvertent TCR discoveries, including any newly discovered cultural resource deposits that shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation.

At least 30 days prior to application for a grading permit and before any brush clearance, grading, excavation, and/or ground disturbing activities on the site, the developer shall retain a tribal cultural monitor(s) to monitor all ground-disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown TCRs.

Pursuant to the AMP, a tribal monitor from the consulting tribe(s) shall be present during the initial grading activities. The tribal monitor(s) shall be present during all ground disturbing work, not only if something is found during initial grubbing.

MM TCR-2: Treatment and Disposition of Tribal Cultural Resources. In the event that Native American cultural resources are inadvertently discovered during the course of any ground-disturbing activities, including but not limited to brush clearance, grading, trenching, etc., for the proposed project, the following procedures will be carried out for treatment and disposition of the discoveries:

1. Temporary Curation and Storage: During the course of construction, all discovered resources shall be temporarily curated in a secure location on-site or at the offices of the project archaeologist. The removal of any artifacts from the project site will need to be thoroughly inventoried with tribal monitor oversight of the process;

2. Treatment and Final Disposition: The landowner(s) shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods, and all archaeological artifacts and nonhuman  SECTION 4.18 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.18-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 remains as part of the required mitigation for impacts to cultural resources. The applicant shall relinquish the artifacts through one or more of the following methods and provide the City of Artesia with evidence of same:
a. Accommodate the process for on-site reburial of the discovered items with the consulting Native American tribes or bands. This shall include measures and provisions to protect the future reburial area from any future impacts. Reburial shall not occur until all cataloging, basic analysis, other analyses as recommended by the project archaeologist and approved by consulting tribes, and basic recordation have been completed; all documentation should be at a level of standard professional practice to allow the writing of a report of professional quality; b. For purposes of conflict resolution, if more than one Native American tribe or band is involved with the project and cannot come to an agreement as to the disposition of cultural materials, materials shall be curated at the Fowler Museum at UCLA or the Natural History of Los Angeles County by default;
At the completion of grading, excavation, and ground-disturbing activities on the site, a Phase IV Monitoring Report shall be prepared by the project archaeologist and submitted to the City documenting monitoring activities conducted by the project archaeologist and Native Tribal Monitors within 60 days of completion of grading. This report shall document the impacts to the known resources on the property; describe how each mitigation measure was fulfilled; document the type of cultural resources recovered and the disposition of such resources; provide evidence of the required cultural sensitivity training for the construction staff held during the required pregrade meeting; and, in a confidential appendix, include the daily/weekly monitoring notes from the archaeologist and the tribal monitor(s). All reports produced will be submitted to the City, Fowler Museum at UCLA or the Natural History of Los Angeles County and consulting tribes.

MM TCR-3: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary or Ceremonial Objects A. Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.

B. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods are discovered or recognized on the project site, then Public Resource Code 5097.9 as well as Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 shall be followed.

C. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).

D. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods.

E. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
With implementation of MM TCR-1 and MM TCR-2 above, potential project impacts on TCRs would be less than significant. With implementation of MM TCR-3 above, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts to human remains and associated funerary objects.  SECTION 4.19 – UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.19-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction
of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment
or storm water drainage, electric power, natural
gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably foreseeable
future development during normal, dry and
multiple dry years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to serve
the project’s projected demand in addition to
the provider’s existing commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the
attainment of solid waste reduction goals??
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
X
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Less than Significant Impact
As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, the proposed project would require sewer, domestic water, fire water, stormwater drainage, and electrical connections to existing utility infrastructure in the City of Artesia.

Domestic Water – As detailed in Threshold 4.19 b) below the City would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and any future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Therefore, any impacts would be less than significant.

Wastewater Treatment – As detailed in Threshold 4.19 c) below, the current wastewater conveyance and treatment system servicing the project site would have the wastewater capacity to serve the proposed project. Therefore, any impact would be less than significant.

Stormwater – The City of Artesia is 99 percent built out and has an existing stormwater infrastructure provided through the County of Los Angeles. There is a 24-inch storm drain line that runs along Artesia Boulevard, extending from Roseton Avenue west approximately 500 feet and  SECTION 4.19 – UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.19-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 continuing 200 feet northwest to Caine Drive. Another storm drain line begins south of the Gridley Road intersection and 183rd Street and varies in diameter from 18-24 inches. Another drain line extending north-south in Fallon Avenue has a varying size of 63-inch diameter north and 75-inch diameter south of Artesia Boulevard (City of Artesia, 2016, p. 33).

Electric Power - Electric power for the City of Artesia is provided by Southern California Edison (SCE) (City of Artesia, 2010a, p. 5.12-37). The proposed project is located in a developed area and the infrastructure for providing electric power to the area is well established. SCE typically utilizes existing utility corridors to reduce environmental impacts and has energy efficiency programs to reduce energy usage and maintain reliable service throughout the year (SCE, 2018, p. 45). The SCE has existing facilities that would provide electricity to the Specific Plan area (City of Artesia, 2016, p. 35). Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.

Natural Gas -SoCalGas is the primary distributor of natural gas throughout Southern California, including the City of Artesia. However, the project does not include the use of natural gas.

Telecommunications Facilities - Cable services, including internet, phone, and television, are provided in the City of Artesia by DirecTV, Dish, Frontier, Spectrum, and Verizon (City of Artesia, 2024c). Project development would not interfere with the operation of telecommunications facilities and impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Less than Significant Impact
The City of Artesia receives its water from the Golden State Water Company (GSWC). Most of Artesia’s water supplies have been local groundwater resources. Specifically, Artesia’s water supply contains adjudicated groundwater from the Central Basin, purchased water through the water supply nexus between GWSC, Central Basin Municipal Water District (CBMWD), and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD). There is also water purchased from the City of Cerritos, emergency connections with the cities of Lakewood, Long Beach, Cerritos, the GSWC West Orange Service Area and the Norwalk Municipal Water System. Recycled water is purchased from CBMWD through the Central Basin Recycled Water Project (GSWC, 2020). The estimated project water demands are shown in Table

4.19-1. The State-mandated Water Use Objectives will mandate water budgets that include residential, indoor, and landscape usage, as well as nonresidential allowances. These unit demands include all current savings from building codes and water efficient requirements, including the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen)(GSWC, 2020, p. 4-5). As demonstrated in Table 4.19-2 and Table

4.19-3, there would be sufficient water supply available to meet the project demands and the City of Artesia during normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry years.

Table 4.19-1

PROJECTED WASTEWATER GENERATION AND WATER DEMANDS
Land Use Quantity Wastewater Generation
Rate Water Demand1 Annual Demand1
Multi-Family 83 du 156 gpd/du 15,279 gpd 17.1 afy
Restaurant 4,414 sq. ft. 125gpd/1,000 sq. ft. 706.5 gpd 0.79 afy Total Projected Demand 13,500 gpd 17.8 afy
Source: Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, 2021, p. 20 Note: 1Water consumption rates are assumed as 128 percent (nonresidential) and 118 percent (residential)of the wastewater generation rates.
 SECTION 4.19 – UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.19-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Table 4.19-2

NORMAL AND SINGLE DRY YEAR WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND (AFY) Normal Year 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Supply totals 5,109 5,152 5,196 5,240 5,284
Demand totals 5,109 5,152 5,196 5,240 5,284
Difference 0 0 0 0 0
Potential Impact 0.35% 0.35% 0.34% 0.33% 0.34%
Single Dry Year 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Supply totals 5,620 5,668 5,716 5,764 5,813
Demand totals 5,620 5,668 5,716 5,764 5,813
Difference 0 0 0 0 0
Potential Impact 0.32% 0.31% 0.31% 0.31% 0.31%
Source: GSWC, 2020, p. 5-3
Table 4.19-3

MULTIPLE DRY YEAR WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND (AFY)
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
First Year
Service Area Supply 5,620 5,668 5,716 5,764 5,813
Service Area Demand 5,620 5,668 5,716 5,764 5,813
Difference 0 0 0 0 0
Potential Impact 0.32% 0.31% 0.31% 0.31% 0.31%
Second Year
Service Area Supply 5,630 5,677 5,725 5,774 5,813
Service Area Demand 5,630 5,677 5,725 5,774 5,813
Difference 0 0 0 0 0
Potential Impact 0.32% 0.31% 0.31% 0.31% 0.31%
Third Year
Service Area Supply 5,639 5,687 5,735 5,784 5,813
Service Area Demand 5,639 5,687 5,735 5,784 5,813
Difference 0 0 0 0 0
Potential Impact 0.32% 0.32% 0.31% 0.31% 0.31%
Fourth Year
Service Area Supply 5,649 5,696 5,745 5,793 5,813
Service Area Demand 5,649 5,696 5,745 5,793 5,813
Difference 0 0 0 0 0
Potential Impact 0.31% 0.31% 0.31% 0.31% 0.31%
Fifth Year
Service Area Supply 5,658 5,706 5,754 5,803 5,813
Service Area Demand 5,658 5,706 5,754 5,803 5,813
Difference 0 0 0 0 0
Potential Impact 0.31% 0.31% 0.31% 0.31% 0.31%
Source: GSWC, 2020, p. 5-3
The project would require approximately 17.8 acre feet per year (afy) of water distributed by the water sources of the GSWC service area through 2045. The impact of the project on excess water supply in normal, single, and multiple dry years would have projected a demand of from a low of 0.31 percent  SECTION 4.19 – UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.19-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 during normal years to a high of 0.35 percent for a single normal, single-dry year, or multiple-dry year through 2045.

The project would not require or result in the construction of new water treatment facilities or the expansion of existing facilities and would have sufficient water supply available for the reasonably foreseeable future during normal, dry and multiple dry years. Additionally, the project applicant would be required to implement the applicable requirements of the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) that would further reduce water demand. The impact on water supply would be less than significant.
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? Less than Significant Impact
Wastewater in the Artesia system is transported to the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts’ (LACSD), Los Coyotes Water Reclamation Plant (LCWRP) in Cerritos and San Jose Creek WRP (SJCWRP) in Whittier for treatment (City of Artesia, 2012, p. 5.12-5). The LCWRP has capacity of 37.5 MGD; in 2023, average daily influent flows were 21.5 MGD, with residual capacity of about 16 MGD.

The SJCWRP has capacity of 100 MGD; in 2023 average daily influent flows were 62.4 MGD, with residual capacity of 37.6 MGD (LACSD, 2023).

The project operation is estimated to generate 13,500 gpd of wastewater, as shown in Table 4.19-1 above (County of Los Angeles, 2021). This is roughly 0.025 percent of the residual capacity of the two affected WTPs. In the region, there is sufficient wastewater treatment capacity for project-generated wastewater and project development would not require the construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities. Therefore, the impacts to wastewater treatment would be less than significant. d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Less than Significant Impact
Construction
The construction of the project would generate solid waste that would be disposed of in local landfills.

Materials generated during the construction of the project would include paper, cardboard, metal, plastics, glass, concrete, lumber scrap, and other materials. During construction, bulk solid waste, excess building materials, fill, and other construction waste would be disposed of in a manner consistent with the State of California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. Section 4.408 of the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen; California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11) requires that at least 65 percent of non-hazardous construction operations be recycled and/or salvaged for reuse. Project construction would include recycling and/or salvaging at least 65 percent of construction and demolition waste according to the 2022 CALGreen.  SECTION 4.19 – UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.19-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Operation
Waste Haulers - Since November 2015, CR&R Environmental Services has been the franchised waste hauler for the City of Artesia and has been responsible for providing recycling, refuse, and green waste services to residents (City of Artesia, 2024d). The waste stream generated by the City of Artesia is processed and sorted at the CR&R location in Santa Fe Springs at 12739 Lakeland Road (County of Los Angeles, 2024d).

Transfer Station - The Solid Waste Department manages the City's transfer station. The City of Artesia does not maintain an operational landfill. Transfer stations are facilities that move waste from small vehicles to larger transfer trailers or railway cars, which are then used to transport the waste to a remote landfill.

Landfills –In 2023 about 97 percent of the solid waste landfilled from the City of Artesia was disposed of at two facilities described below in Table 4.19-4: Azusa Land Reclamation in the City of Azusa, and the Sunshine Canyon Landfill in the Community of Sylmar in the City of Los Angeles. The remaining daily disposal capacity of the two landfills combined is over 11,000 tons.

Table 4.19-4

LANDFILLS SERVING THE CITY OF ARTESIA
Facility Name Remaining
Capacity
Permitted
Daily Disposal
Actual Daily
Disposal*
Residual Daily
Capacity
Est. Closing
Date
Sunshine
Canyon Landfill 77,900,000 12,100 7,862.83 4,237.17 10/31/2037 Azusa Land
Reclamation 51,512,201 8,000 1,058.73 6941.27 1/1/2045
Total 129,412,201 20,100 8,921.56 11,178.44
* Daily disposal calculated based on annual disposal tonnage assuming 300 operating days per year: that is, six days per week less certain holidays.

Sources: LADPW, 2024a; CalRecycle, 2024a/b/c.

As shown in Table 4.19-5, the estimated increase in solid waste from the project of 64.6 tons per year represents a miniscule fraction of the remaining estimated permitted capacity (0.0000005 percent). Since there is sufficient permitted landfill capacity to support the operation of the proposed project, no adverse impact would occur on the solid waste collection service or the landfill disposal system. Therefore, the impact of the project on existing solid waste disposal facilities would be less than significant.

Table 4.19-5

ESTIMATED PROJECT-GENERATED SOLID WASTE
Land Use Qty. Generation Rate Pounds per year (tons)
Multi-family Residential 83 du 4 lbs./du/day 121,180 lbs. per year (60.59 tons) Restaurant 4,414 sq. ft. 0.005 lbs./sq ft/day 8,056 lbs. per year (4 tons) Total 129,236 lbs. per year (64.6 tons)
Note: lbs./du/day = pounds per dwelling unit per day
Source: CalRecycle, 2024d
 SECTION 4.19 – UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.19-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less than Significant Impact
In 1989, the California Legislature enacted the California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939), to address solid waste problems and capacities comprehensively. The law required each city and county to divert 50 percent of its waste from landfills by the year 2000.

Assembly Bill 341 (AB341; Chapter 476, Statute of 2011) increases the statewide waste diversion goal to 75 percent by 2020 and mandates recycling for commercial and multi-family residential land uses.

Assembly Bill 1826 (AB 1826; California Public Resources Code §§ 42649.8 et seq.) requires the recycling of organic matter by businesses, and multifamily residences of five or more units, generating such waste in amounts over certain thresholds. Organic waste means food waste, green waste, landscape and pruning waste, non-hazardous wood waste, and paper waste spoiled with food mixed with food waste.

Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383; California Health and Safety Code §§ 39730.5 et seq.) set targets to achieve a 50 percent reduction in the level of statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2020 and a 75 percent reduction by 2025. The law is intended to reduce the emissions of methane, a shortlived climate pollutant, from the decomposition of organic waste in landfills, for the protection of people in at-risk communities, and to reduce GHG emissions.

Section 5.408 (Construction Waste Reduction, Disposal, and recycling) of the 2022 California Green Building Standard code (CALGreen; Title 24, California Code of regulations, part 11) requires that at least 65 percent of the nonhazardous construction and demolition waste from nonresidential construction operations be recycled and/or salvaged for reuse.

Section 6-2.109 of the Artesia Municipal Code requires owners of residential, commercial, and industrial properties in the City to have a service for soil waste and recyclable materials collection (City of Artesia, 2024b).

Ordinance 22-927 was adopted by the City of Artesia, eliminating the practice of stopping waste collection services due to nonpayment and instead placing solid waste charges on accounts that are delinquent for 60 days or more against the owner’s property (City of Artesia, 2024b).

The proposed project would comply with applicable local, state, and federal solid waste disposal standards; therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.  SECTION 4.20 – WILDFIRE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.20-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.20 Wildfire
If located in or near state responsibility areas
or lands classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? x
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby
expose project occupants to, pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines
or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk
or that may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact
The project site is not located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) as shown in Figure 4.20-1. An LRA is where cities or counties are responsible for the costs of wildfire prevention and suppression. The nearest VHFHSZ in an LRA is about 5.7 miles to the east of the project site.

The project site is not located in a VHFHSZ within a State Responsibility Area (SRA; where the State is responsible for the costs of wildfire prevention and suppression), as shown in Figure 4.20-2. . The nearest SRA to the project site is approximately 9.5 miles to the northeast.

Given the significant distance of the project site to any land classified as VHFHSZ, no impact would occur.
 SECTION 4.20 – WILDFIRE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.20-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.20-1

FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONE IN LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY AREA
 SECTION 4.20 – WILDFIRE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.20-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Figure 4.20-2

FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONE IN STATE RESPONSIBILITY AREA
 SECTION 4.20 – WILDFIRE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.20-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
No Impact
As discussed above, the project site is not located in or near a VHFHSZ. The project site is not located on or near a slope that could exacerbate the risks of wildfires. The Santa Ana winds can cause extreme winds to descend to the Pacific Coast around Los Angeles from inland desert regions. These winds can occur at any time of the year, but are most known for bringing hot, dry weather and low humidity, typically between October and March (NWS, 2024). Being situated in the southeast part of the County of Los Angeles, the project site would be no more susceptible to the Santa Ana winds than most of the County of Los Angeles. Therefore, the project would not expose the project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire and would have no impact in this regard.
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
No Impact
As discussed above, the project site is not located in or near an SRA, nor is the project site in or near a VHFHSZ. The project would not require the installation or maintenance of infrastructure that can exacerbate fire risk. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact. d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
No Impact
As discussed above, the project site is not located in or near an SRA or land classified as VHFHSZ. The project site is relatively flat; therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. No impact would occur.  SECTION 4.21 – MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.21-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Would the project have:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat
of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
X
b) Impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects,
and the effects of probable future projects)?
X
c) Environmental effects will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
X
a) Would the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Considering that the project is located in a highly urbanized area with developed and landscaped substrates, optimal habitat for special-status plant and wildlife species is lacking. Thus, with the implementation of mitigation measure BIO-1 (to protect nesting bird species from noise and dust disturbances), the proposed project would have less than significant impacts on species. As detailed in Section 4.5, grading activities associated with the development of the project would cause new subsurface disturbance and could result in the unanticipated discovery of unique paleontological and/or archeological resources. With the implementation of mitigation measures GEO-1, CUL-1 to CUL-3, and TCR-1 to TCR-3, potential project impacts on historic and prehistoric resources would be less than significant.
 SECTION 4.21 – MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 4.21-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 b) Would the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Less than Significant Impact
Regarding cumulative projects, the City of Artesia website does not list any current or upcoming projects within two miles of the proposed project site. Therefore, the proposed project would have no significant impacts, and the project would not be cumulatively considerable in connection with other projects being developed in the City.
c) Would the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated As discussed in Sections 4.1 through 4.20 of this document, after the implementation of mitigation measures, potential adverse environmental effects were found to be less than significant on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Therefore, less than significant impacts would occur with the implementation of mitigation measures.
 SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 5-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

5.0 REFERENCES
AEP, 2024. 2024 CEQA California Environmental Quality Act Statute & Guidelines. Association of Environmental Professionals. Accessed online at
https://www.califaep.org/docs/2024_CEQA_Statute_and_Guidelines_Handbook.pdf, on August 15, 2024.

ARB, 2008. Climate Change Scoping Plan: a framework for change. California Air Resources Board.

December 2008. Accessed online at
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/scopingplan/document/adopted_sco ping_plan.pdf, on July 26, 2024.

ARB, 2011. Final Supplement to the AB 32 Scoping Plan Functional Equivalent Document. California Air Resources Board. August 19, 2011.

ARB, 2014. First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, Building on the Framework. California Air Resources Board. May 2014. Accessed online at
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/scopingplan/2013_update/first_upd ate_climate_change_scoping_plan.pdf, on July 26, 2024.

ARB, 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. California Air Resources Board.

Accessed online at https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf, on July 26, 2024.

ARB, 2022. 2022 Scoping Plan. Accessed online at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/ab32-climate-change-scoping-plan/2022-scoping-plan-documents, on July 26, 2024.

ARB, 2022a. Maps of State and Federal Area Designations. Accessed online at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/maps-state-and-federal-area-designations , May 3, 2024.

ARB, 2022b. CARB approves unprecedented climate action plan to shift world’s 4th largest economy from fossil fuels to clean and renewable energy. Accessed Online at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/carb-approves-unprecedented-climate-action-plan-shiftworlds-4th-largest-economy-fossil-fuels, on May 7, 2024 ARB, 2023. iADAM Air Quality Data Statistics. California Air Resources Board. Accessed online at http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam, on May 3, 2024.

ARB, 2024. Health Risk Assessment. California Air Resources Board. Accessed online at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/health-risk-assessment, on October 23, 2024.

Bell, Alyssa. 2024. Paleontological resources for the Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project (7277). June 23, 2024. Research and Collections, Natural History Museum Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, California.

Calflora, 2024. Information on California plants for education, research and conservation.

Observation Search. Available at https://www.calflora.org/entry/observ.html. Accessed on August 15, 2024.
 SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 5-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 CalRecycle, 2024a. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details for Sunshine Canyon City/County Landfill.

Accessed online at
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/259?siteID=4702 on August 19, 2024.

CalRecycle, 2024b. CalRecycle, 2024a. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details for Azusa Land Reclamation Co. Landfill. Accessed online at
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/3532?siteID=1001 on August 19, 2024.

CalRecycle, 2024c. Landfill Tonnage Reports. Accessed online at https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LandfillTipFees/ on August 19, 2024.

CalRecycle, 2024d. Business Group Waste Stream by Material Type Calculator. Accessed online at https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/MaterialTypeStreams on July 12, 2024.

CAPCOA, 2008. CEQA & Climate Change. Evaluating and Addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Projects Subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, January.
https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/2008publications/CAPCOA-1000-2008-010/CAPCOA-1000- 2008-010.pdf. Accessed on May 7, 2024.

CAPCOA, 2022. California Emissions Estimator Model®, Version 2022.1.1.29. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. Accessed online at https://www.caleemod.com/model, on July 31, 2024.

CDF (California Department of Finance). 2024. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 2021- 2024. Accessed online at: https://dof.ca.gov/wpcontent/uploads/sites/352/Forecasting/Demographics/Documents/E5_2024_InternetVersion.xlsx, on August 16, 2024.

CEC, 2021. Clean Energy Serving California. Accessed online at https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/topics/renewable-energy/clean-energyserving-california, on July 26, 2024.

CEC, 2022. Electricity Consumption by County. Accessed online at https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx, on July 26, 2024.

CEC, 2024. 2010-2022 CEC-A15 Results and Analysis. Accessed online at https://www.energy.ca.gov/media/3874, on July 26, 2024.

CDFW. 2024a. CDFW California Wildlife Habitat Relationships Life History Accounts and Range Maps. Available at https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CWHR/Life-History-and-Range. Accessed on August 16, 2024.

CDFW, 2024b. BIOS Habitat Connectivity Viewer. Accessed at https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/BIOS.

Accessed on August 16, 2024.

CDFW, 2024c. California Natural Community List. Retrieved from  SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 5-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities. Accessed on August 16, 2024.

CGEU (California Gas and Electric Utilities) , 2022. 2020 California Gas Report. Accessed online at https://www.socalgas.com/sites/default/files/2020-
10/2020_California_Gas_Report_Joint_Utility_Biennial_Comprehensive_Filing.pdf on July 12, 2024.

Chico, T. and Koizumi, J., 2008. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, California. Accessed online at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significancethresholds/final-lst-methodology-document.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Accessed on July 31, 2024.

City of Artesia, 2010. City of Artesia General Plan 2030. Accessed online at https://www.cityofartesia.us/DocumentCenter/View/226/Artesia-General-Plan?bidId=, on June 15, 2024.

City of Artesia, 2010b. City of Artesia General Plan EIR. Accessed online at https://www.cityofartesia.us/258/General-Plan-Update, on June 21, 2024.

City of Artesia, 2024a. For Emergencies. Accessed online at https://www.cityofartesia.us/274/Public-Safety on July 8. 2024.

City of Artesia, 2024b. Solid Waste Collection Requirements. Accessed online at https://www.cityofartesia.us/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=421 on July 8. 2024.

City of Artesia, 2024c. Utility Providers, Accessed online at https://www.cityofartesia.us/190/Utility-Providers on July 8, 2024.

City of Artesia, 2024d. Solid Waste and Recycling. Accessed online at https://www.cityofartesia.us/318/Solid-Waste-Recycling on July 8, 2024.

City of Artesia, 2024e. Emergency Preparedness. Accessed online at https://www.cityofartesia.us/347/Emergency-Preparedness on July 8, 2024.

City of Los Angeles, 2012. Sewage Generation Factors Chart. Accessed online at https://engpermitmanual.lacity.org/sewer-s-permits/technical-procedures/sewagegeneration-factors-chart on July 10, 2024.

CNDDB (California Natural Diversity Database). 2024a. RareFind 5 (Internet). California Department of Fish and Wildlife (5.3.0).

CNDDB, 2024b. July 2024. Special Animals List . California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Sacramento, CA. Available at CNDDB - Plants and Animals (ca.gov). Accessed on August 16, 2024.

CNPS (California Native Plant Society), Rare Plant Program. 2024a. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v9.5). Available at http://www.rareplants.cnps.org. Accessed on August 15, 2024.  SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 5-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 CNPS, 2024b. A Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition. Sacramento, CA. Available at http://www.cnps.org/cnps/vegetation/. Accessed on August 15, 2024. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA.

Cornell Lab of Ornithology. 2024. All About Birds. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York.

Available at https://www.allaboutbirds.org Accessed on August 16, 2024.County of Los Angeles, 2010. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2010 Congestion Management Program. Accessed online at
https://planning.lacity.gov/eir/conventioncntr/DEIR/files/references/2010%20Congestio n%20Management%20Plan.pdf on July 2, 2024.

County of Los Angeles, 2024a. Department of Public Works Wastewater Plants. Accessed online at https://pw.lacounty.gov/SMD/services on July 11, 2024.

County of Los Angeles, 2024b. Sanitation District. Accessed online at https://www.lacsd.org/services/wastewater-sewage/facilities/wastewater-treatmentfacilities July 11, 2024.

County of Los Angeles, 2024c. Artesia Public Library. Accessed online at https://lacountylibrary.org/location/artesia-library/ on July 8, 2024.

County of Los Angeles, 2024d. Department of Public Works - Los Angeles County Sewer Maintenance Districts. Accessed online at https://pw.lacounty.gov/core-serviceareas/water-resources/sewer/ on July 11, 2024.

County of Los Angeles, 2024e. Fire Department CUPA. Accessed online at https://fire.lacounty.gov/cupa-programs on July 2, 2024.

County of Los Angeles, 2024f. Los Coyotes Water Reclamation Plant Water Capacity Accessed online at https://www.lacsd.org/services/wastewater-sewage/facilities/los-coyotes-waterreclamation-plant August 1, 2024.

DOC (Department of Conservation), 1998. Guidelines for Classification and Designation of Mineral Lands. Accessed online at
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/smgb/Guidelines/Documents/ClassDesig.pdf on July 10, 2024.

DOC (Department of Conservation), 2022. California Important Farmland Finder. Accessed online at https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/, on June 21, 2024.

DOC (Department of Conservation), 2024. Well Finder. Accessed online at http://www.conservation.ca.gov/calgem on June 28, 2024.

DWR (California Department of Water Resources). 2004. Bulletin 118, California’s Groundwater:

Basin Descriptions. Available at https://data.cnra.ca.gov/dataset/bulletin-118-update2003-basin-reports. Downloaded on July 30, 2024.

Ecode360, 2024. City of Artesia, CA. Code of Ordinances. Chapter 10 Green Building Standards Code.

Accessed online at https://ecode360.com/43219218 on July 23, 2024.  SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 5-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 GeoForward.com. 2024. Geology & Earth Science | Local Geology: Long Beach, California Geology & Hydrogeology. Accessed online at: https://www.geoforward.com/geology-long-beachcalifornia-hydrogeology/, on July 5, 2024.

GEOTEK, 2024a. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Tract No. 73667. Prepared for Atlas Development, Inc. Dated July 31, 2024.

GEOTEK, 2024b. Updated Geotechnical Engineering Report, Proposed 7-Story Mixed-Use Building, SEC Pioneer Blvd and 176th Street, Artesia, California, Development Tract No. 73667.

Prepared for Atlas Development, Inc. Dated August 9, 2024.

Google Earth Pro V 7.3.6.9796 (February 22, 2024). City of Artesia, Los Angeles County, California, U.S.A. 33.870671°, -118.081668°. Eye alt 2,378 feet. Imagery date December 4, 2023. © 2024 Google LLC., Accessed on August 16, 2024.

GSWV (Golden State Water Company), Tully and Young, Inc., and Zanzero. 2020. Artesia Service Area 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Adopted July 15, 2021. Prepared for Golden State Water Company. Available at
https://wuedata.water.ca.gov/uwmp_plans.asp?cmd=2020. Downloaded on July 30, 2024.

GSWC (Golden State Water Company. 2024. Central Basin East. Available at https://www.gswater.com/central-basin-east. Accessed on July 30, 2024.

GMI, 2022. What is a Global Warming Potential? And Which One Do I Use? GHG Management Institute. Accessed online at https://ghginstitute.org/2010/06/28/what-is-a-globalwarming-potential/, on July 26, 2024.

Humphrey and Partners, 2024. Site Design for the Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project.

Humphrey and Partners, 2025. Updated Site Design for the Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project.

Hunsaker and Associates. 2023. Conceptual Water Quality Exhibit, Artesia Live, Artesia, California.

Prepared on December 27, 2023.

Jefferson, G.T. 1991. A catalogue of Late Quaternary Vertebrates from California: Part Two, Mammals. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County Technical Reports No. 7.

Jepson Flora Project (eds.). 2024. Jepson eFlora, Available at http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/.

Accessed on August 16, 2024.

Koch, J., J. Strange, and P. Williams. 2012. Bumble Bees of the Western United States. USDA Forest Service Research Notes. Publication No. FS-972. Available at: Dr. Jonathan B. Koch : USDA ARS. Accessed on May 13, 2024.Kunzman Associates, Inc., 2015. Artesia LIVE Traffic Impact Analysis. Dated November 30, 2015.

Knauer, H. et al., 2006. FHWA Highway Construction Noise Handbook. U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology, Administration, Cambridge, Massachusetts, FHWA-HEP-06-015 (August 2006),
LACH (Los Angeles Community Hospital), 2024. About Los Angeles Community Hospital. Accessed  SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 5-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 online at https://www.lach-la.com/about-us/ on July 10, 2024.

LADPW (Los Angeles County Department of Public Works), 2024. Landfill Data for the City of Artesia - Solid Waste Activity Disposal Report. Accessed online at https://dpw.lacounty.gov/epd/swims/reports/pages/swims-rpt11.aspx on August 19, 2024.

Metro (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority). 2024. Southeast Gateway Line.

Accessed online at https://www.metro.net/projects/southeastgateway/#status, on July 29, 2024.

Miller, Russel V., 1994. Generalized Mineral Land Classification Map of Los Angeles County-South Half, Aggregate Resources Only. California Department of Conservation (DOC), Division of Mines and Geology (DMG), Open-File Report (OFR) 94-14, Plate 1B. Accessed online at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/mlc/ (Surface Mining and Reclamation Act [SMARA] CGS Information Warehouse: Mineral Land Classification), on June 11, 2024.

NatureServe. 2019. Comprehensive Report Species - Bombus crotchii. Available from:
http://explorer.natureserve.org/servlet/NatureServe?searchName=Bombus+crotchii Accessed on May 13, 2024.Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, J.M. Evens, 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society Press. Sacramento, CA.

NOAA Research, 2024. No sign of greenhouse gases increasing slowing in 2023. Accessed online at https://research.noaa.gov/2024/04/05/no-sign-of-greenhouse-gases-increases-slowingin-2023/ on July 16, 2024.

NHTSA, 2024. Corporate Average Fuel Economy. June 7, 2024: NHTSA Announces Final Rule for CAFE and HDPUV Standards. Accessed online at https://www.nhtsa.gov/lawsregulations/corporate-average-fuel-economy, on July 25, 2024.

NASA, 2024. The Causes of Climate Change. Four Major Gases That Contribute to the Greenhouse Effect. Accessed online at https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/causes/on July 26, 2024.

Richardson, L. L. 2019. Bumble Bees of North America: Data Contributors. Available from:
http://www.leifrichardson.org/bbna.html Accessed: Accessed: August 16, 2024.

RWQCB (Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board). 2014 (as amended). Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties. Available at https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/water_issues/programs/basin_plan/basin_pl an_documentation.html. Accessed on July 31, 2024.

Saucedo, G.J., H.G. Greene, M.P. Kennedy, and S.P. Bezore. 2016. Geologic map of the Long Beach 30' x 60' quadrangle, California (ver. 2.0). California Geological Survey. Accessed online at https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_109539.htm, on July 19, 2024.

Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, J.M. Evens, 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition.

California Native Plant Society Press. Sacramento, CA.
 SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 5-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments). 2021. Local Housing Data. Dated April 2021. Accessed online at https://scag.ca.gov/local-housing-data on July 11, 2024.

SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments). 2024a. Connect SoCal 2024. Dated April 4, 2024. Accessed online at https://scag.ca.gov/connect-socal on August 1, 2024.

SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments). 2024b. Connect SoCal 2024 Demographics and Growth Forecast. Accessed online at: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/fileattachments/03_scag_drtp24_citytier2taz_092523.xlsx?1695685277 on July 31, 2024.

SCAQMD, 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Diamond Bar, CA. Accessed online at http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/ceqaair-quality-handbook-(1993), on October 17, 2022.

SCAQMD, 2011. South Coast AQMD Air Quality-Related Energy Policy. Accessed online at https://www.aqmd.gov/nav/about/policies/aqmd-air-quality-related-energy-policy, on July 26, 2024.

SCAQMD, 2017. Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Accessed online at http://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/clean-air-plans/airquality-mgt-plan/final-2016-aqmp on October 21, 2022.

SCAQMD, 2019. SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Accessed online at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-significance-thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=2, on July 31, 2024.

SCAQMD, 2022. 2022 Air Quality Management Plan. Accessed online at https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-managementplans/2022-air-quality-management-plan/final-2022-aqmp/final-2022- aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=16, on May 3, 2024.

State of California, 2023a. 2022 Title 24 California Code Changes. Accessed online at The Xerxes Society, 2018. A Petition to the State of California Fish and Game Commission to List The Crotch bumble bee (Bombus crotchii), Franklin’s bumble bee (Bombus franklini), Suckley cuckoo bumble bee (Bombus suckleyi), and western bumble bee (Bombus occidentalis occidentalis) as Endangered under the California Endangered Species Act. Submitted by The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, Defenders of Wildlife, Center for Food Safety.

October 2018.

State of California, 2023b. California Energy Commission. Accessed online at https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/Lists/DocketLog.aspx?docketnumber=21-BSTD-04, on July 26, 2024.

UCMP (University of California Museum of Paleontology). University of California Berkeley.

Accessed online at https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/about-ucmp/ on October 22, 2024.

USDA-NRCS (United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service), 2021. American Bumble Bee (Bombus pensylvanicus) Field Guide. Accessed at American Bumble Bee Field Guide (fws.gov). Accessed on August 16, 2024.  SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 5-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). WATERSkmz version 2.1. Available at https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/viewing-waters-data-using-google-earth. Updated on June 25, 2024. Downloaded on July 11, 2024.

USEPA, 2024a. Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Control Regulations. Accessed online at https://www3.epa.gov/region1/airquality/nox.html, on July 26, 2024.

USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency), 2024b. EPA Waters GeoViewer. Available at https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/waters-geoviewer. Accessed on August 16, 2024.

USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency), 2024c. AirData Air Quality Monitors.

Accessed online at
https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=5f239fd3e72f424f98ef3 d5def547eb5&extent=-146.2334,13.1913,-46.3896,56.5319, on October 22, 2024.

USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service), 2020. List of Birds Protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Accessed online at: https://www.fws.gov/media/list-birds-protectedmigratory-bird-treaty-act-2020. Accessed on August 16, 2024.

USFWS, 2024a. Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC). Official Species List: Project Code:
2024-0113011. Carlsbad, California. July 9, 2024. Available at https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/.

Accessed on August 15, 2024.

USFWS, 2024b. Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS). Critical Habitat for Threatened & Endangered Species [USFWS] (arcgis.com). Available at https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html. Accessed on August 15, 2024.

USFWS, 2024c. National Wetlands Inventory. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Available at https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html.

Accessed on August 15, 2024.

USGS (U.S. Department of the Interior, United States Geological Survey), 1974. Los Alamitos Quadrangle, California, 7.5-Minute Series [map]. Scale 1:24,000. Prepared for U.S. Topo: The National Map. Available at https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/. Downloaded on August 15, 2024.

USGS, 2024. National Hydrography Dataset. Available at http://nhd.usgs.gov/. Accessed on August 16, 2024.W & W Land Design Consultants, Inc., 2015. Geotechnical Report for the Proposed 7-Story Mixed-Use Building.

WRCC, 2022. Western U.S. Climate Historical Summaries, Western Regional Climate Center.

Accessed online at https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca0192, on July 31, 2024.  SECTION 6.0 – LIST OF PREPARERS
7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 6-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

6.0 LIST OF PREPARERS

6.1 CEQA Lead Agency
Salvador Lopez, Interim Community Development Director
City of Artesia
Community Development Department
18747 Clarkdale Ave.

Artesia, CA 90701
Phone: (562) 865-6262

6.2 Project Applicant
Raymond Zhang
Atlas Development
1221 S. Hacienda Blvd.

Hacienda Heights, CA 91745
Phone: (626) 429-3218

6.3 UltraSystems Environmental, Inc.

6.3.1 Environmental Planning Team
Betsy Lindsay, MURP, ENV SP, Project Director
Robert Reicher, MBA, ENV SP, Senior Project Manager

6.3.2 Technical Team
Amir Ayati, B.S., Staff Scientist
Steve Borjeson, B.A., Senior Planner
Billye Breckenridge, B.A., ENV SP, Project Manager/GIS Manager Allison Carver, B.S., Senior Biologist
Megan Doukakis, M.A., Assistant Project Archaeologist
Patricia Haigh, B.S., B.A., Staff Scientist
Gulben Kaplan, M.S., GIS Analyst
Audrey McNamara, B.A., Staff Biologist
Michael Milroy, M.S., Senior Planner
Stephen O’Neil, M.A., RPA, Cultural Resources Manager
Michael Rogozen, D. Env, Senior Principal Engineer
Isha Shah, M.S., Staff Engineer/Scientist
Matthew Sutton, M.S., B.A., ISA, Staff Biologist

6.3.3 Subcontractor
Traffic Engineering
Justin Tucker, PE, TE., Associate Principal, RK Engineering  SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 7-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

7.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared in conformance with § 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code and § 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines, which requires all state and local agencies to establish monitoring or reporting programs whenever approval of a project relies upon an MND or an EIR. The MMRP ensures the implementation of the measures being imposed to mitigate or avoid the significant adverse environmental impacts identified through the use of monitoring and reporting. Monitoring is generally an ongoing or periodic process of project oversight; reporting generally consists of a written compliance review that is presented to the decision-making body or authorized staff person.

It is the intent of the MMRP to (1) provide a framework for document implementation of the required mitigation; (2) identify monitoring/reporting responsibility; (3) provide a record of the monitoring/reporting; and (4) ensure compliance with those MM that are within the responsibility of the City and/or Applicant to implement.

The following subjects require mitigation:

Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Geology and Soils
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Transportation
Tribal Cultural Resources
Table 7.0-1 lists impacts, mitigation measures adopted by the City of Artesia in connection with the approval of the proposed project, level of significance after mitigation, responsible and monitoring parties, and the project phase in which the measures are to be implemented. Only those environmental topics for which mitigation is required are listed in this Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
 SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 7277/Pioneer Place Mixed Use Project Page 7-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025 Table 7.0-1

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

TOPICAL AREA

IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE PARTY

MONITORING
ACTION

1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY

2. MONITORING
AGENCY

3. MONITORING
PHASE

4.4 Biological Resources
Threshold 4.4a)
Have a substantial
adverse effect, either
directly or through
habitat modifications,
on any species
identified as a
candidate, sensitive,
or special status
species in local or
regional plans,
policies, or
regulations, or by the
California
Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
MM BIO-1: Pre-Construction Breeding Bird Survey.

To maintain compliance with the MBTA and Fish and Game Code, and to avoid impacts to or take of migratory non-game breeding birds, their nests, young, and eggs, the following measures will be implemented:
a. Project activities that will remove or trim vegetation or otherwise disturb potential breeding and nesting sites will be scheduled outside the breeding bird season to avoid
direct impacts to migratory non-game breeding birds
protected by the MBTA and Fish and Game Code. The
breeding bird nesting season is typically from February 15 through September 15, but can vary slightly from year to year, usually depending on weather conditions.
b. If project activities cannot be avoided during February 15 through September 15, a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction breeding bird survey for breeding birds and active nests or potential nesting sites within the limits of project disturbance. The survey will begin no later than seven days before the onset of scheduled activities, such as mobilization and staging, or other ground-disturbing
activities such as vegetation and substrate removal and/or disturbance. The surveys will end no later than three days before onset of the aforementioned activities.

Project
Applicant
Field
Verification

1. City of Artesia

2. City of Artesia

3. During
construction
 SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 7277/Temple City Self Storage Facility Page 7-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

TOPICAL AREA

IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE PARTY

MONITORING
ACTION

1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY

2. MONITORING
AGENCY

3. MONITORING
PHASE
c. If more than three days pass between the date of
preconstruction breeding bird survey completion and the onset of construction activities mentioned in BIO-1(b), another preconstruction breeding bird survey must be
conducted as described in BIO-1(b).
d. If a breeding bird territory or an active bird nest is located during the pre-construction survey and will potentially be impacted, the site will be mapped on engineering drawings and a no activity buffer zone will be marked (fencing, stakes, flagging, orange snow fencing, etc.) a minimum of 100 feet in all directions for most migratory bird species or 500 feet in all directions for listed bird species and all raptors. The biologist will determine the appropriate buffer size based on the type of activities planned near the nest and the type of bird that created the nest. This no-activity buffer zone will not be disturbed until a qualified biologist has
determined that the nest is inactive, the young have fledged, the young are no longer being fed by the parents, the young have left the area, or the young will no longer be impacted by project activities. Periodic monitoring by a biologist will be performed to determine when nesting is complete. Once the nesting cycle has finished, the qualified biologist will allow project activities to begin within the buffer zone. e. If listed bird species are observed within the project site during the pre-construction surveys or monitoring, the
biologist will immediately stop nearby construction work, map the area and notify the appropriate resource agency to determine suitable protection measures and/or mitigation measures and to determine if additional surveys or focused protocol surveys are necessary. Project activities may begin  SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 7277/Temple City Self Storage Facility Page 7-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

TOPICAL AREA

IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE PARTY

MONITORING
ACTION

1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY

2. MONITORING
AGENCY

3. MONITORING
PHASE
within the area only when concurrence is received from the appropriate resource agency.
f. Birds or their active nests will not be disturbed, captured, handled or moved. Active nests cannot be removed or
disturbed; however, nests can be removed or disturbed if determined inactive by a qualified biologist.
g. If no breeding birds or active nests are observed during the pre-construction survey or they are observed and will not be impacted, project activities may begin, and no further mitigation will be required.

4.5 Cultural Resources
Threshold 4.5b)
Would the project
cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of an
archaeological
resource pursuant to
§ 15064.5?
MM CUL-1:

In the event of an unexpected discovery of a cultural resource as defined by CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5, during any project related earth disturbing activities, all earth disturbing activities within 60 feet of the find shall be halted and the City of Artesia shall be notified.

The project applicant shall retain an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology to assess the significance of the find. Impacts on any significant resources shall be mitigated to a less than significant level through data recovery or other methods determined adequate by the archaeologist and that are consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archaeological Documentation. Any identified cultural resources shall be recorded on the appropriate DPR 523 (A L) form and filed with the SCCIC. Construction activities Qualified
Archaeologist
Project
Contractor
Field
Verification

1. City of Artesia

2. City of Artesia

3. During
construction
 SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 7277/Temple City Self Storage Facility Page 7-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

TOPICAL AREA

IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE PARTY

MONITORING
ACTION

1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY

2. MONITORING
AGENCY

3. MONITORING
PHASE
may continue on other parts of the project site while evaluation and treatment of prehistoric archaeological resources takes place.

A Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist. The qualified archaeologist shall recommend the extent of archaeological monitoring necessary to ensure the protection of any other resources that may be in the area and afforded the necessary time and funds to recover, analyze, and curate the find(s). Construction activities may continue on other parts of the project site while evaluation and treatment of prehistoric archaeological resources takes place.

MM CUL-2:

Prior to the commencement of grading or excavation, workers conducting construction activities, and their foremen will receive Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training from a qualified archaeologist regarding the potential for sensitive archaeological and paleontological resources to be unearthed during grading activities. The workers will be directed to report any unusual specimens of bone, stone, ceramics or other archaeological artifacts or features and paleontological specimens of bone or features observed during grading and/or other construction activities to their foremen and to cease grading activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery until a qualified archaeologist or Native American cultural monitor is notified of the discovery by the Superintendent of the project site and can assess their significance.

The WEAP shall be implemented to educate all construction personnel about the area’s environmental conditions and the environmental protection measures that must be adhered to by all workers throughout the duration of project construction.

Qualified
Archaeologist
Field
Verification

1. City of Artesia

2. City of Artesia

3. Prior to
construction
 SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 7277/Temple City Self Storage Facility Page 7-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

TOPICAL AREA

IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE PARTY

MONITORING
ACTION

1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY

2. MONITORING
AGENCY

3. MONITORING
PHASE
Training materials shall be language-appropriate for all construction personnel. Upon completion of the WEAP, workers shall sign a form stating that they attended the program, understand all protection measures, and shall abide by all the rules of the WEAP.

A record of all trained personnel shall be kept with the construction foreman at the project field construction office and shall be made available to any resource agency personnel. If new construction personnel are added to the project later, the construction foreman shall ensure that new personnel receive training before they start working. The archaeologist shall provide hard copies of the WEAP presentation to the construction foreman.

Threshold 4.5c)
Would the project
disturb any human
remains, including
those interred
outside of formal
cemeteries?
MM CUL-3:

If human remains are encountered during excavations associated with this project, all work will stop within a 30-foot radius of the discovery and the Los Angeles County Coroner will be notified (§ 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code). The Coroner will determine whether the remains are recent human origin or older Native American ancestry. If the coroner, with the aid of the supervising archaeologist, determines that the remains are prehistoric, they will contact the NAHC. The NAHC will be responsible for designating the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD (either an individual or sometimes a committee) will be responsible for the ultimate disposition of the remains, as required by § 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code. The MLD will make recommendations within 24 hours of their notification by the NAHC. These recommendations may include scientific removal and
nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials (§ 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code).

County
Coroner
Qualified
Archaeologist
NAHC
Project
Contractor
Field
Verification

1. City of Artesia

2. City of Artesia

3. During
construction
 SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 7277/Temple City Self Storage Facility Page 7-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

TOPICAL AREA

IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE PARTY

MONITORING
ACTION

1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY

2. MONITORING
AGENCY

3. MONITORING
PHASE

4.7 Geology and Soils
Threshold 4.7f)
Directly or indirectly
destroy a unique
paleontological
resource or site or
unique geological
feature?
MM GEO-1:

Before the beginning of project ground disturbing activities, the project proponent shall provide the City of Artesia Planning Manager with evidence that the proponent has retained a qualified paleontologist to be on call during ground disturbing activities. If paleontological resources are uncovered during construction activities, the contractor shall halt construction activities within 50 feet of the find and notify the City of Artesia Planning Manager. The on-call paleontologist shall be notified and afforded the necessary time and funds to recover, analyze, and curate the find(s). The fossils must be donated to a permanent accredited repository.

Subsequently, the monitor shall remain onsite for the duration of the ground disturbance to ensure the protection of any other resources that may be in the area.

Project
Contractor
City of Artesia
Planning
Manager
On-Call
Paleontologist
Field
Verification

1. City of Artesia

2. City of Artesia

3. During
construction

4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Threshold 4.9f)
Would the project
impair
implementation of or
physically interfere
with an adopted
emergency response
plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
Refer to the mitigation measure TRANS-1 in Section 4.17.

After implementation of the mitigation measure TRANS-1 above, the project would have less than significant impact from the construction phase on emergency access.

Refer to
TRANS-1
Refer TRANS1 Refer TRANS-1
 SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 7277/Temple City Self Storage Facility Page 7-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

TOPICAL AREA

IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE PARTY

MONITORING
ACTION

1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY

2. MONITORING
AGENCY

3. MONITORING
PHASE

4.17 Transportation
Threshold 4.17c)
Substantially increase
hazards due to a
geometric design
feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous
intersections) or
incompatible uses
(e.g., farm
equipment)? levels,
threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal
community,
substantially reduce
the number or
restrict the range of a
rare or endangered
plant or animal or
eliminate important
examples of the
major periods of
California history or
prehistory?
and,
Threshold 4.17 d)
MM TRANS-1
Prior to the start of construction activity in the public right-of-way, the General Contractor shall submit a detailed Construction Management Plan to be reviewed and approved by the City of Artesia Traffic Engineer. The Construction Management Plan shall specify that the Construction Manager will schedule truck traffic and employee shifts to avoid creating trips during the peak traffic periods, as is feasible for construction operations. All measures including identified truck routes and designated employee parking areas shall be included in the Construction Management Plan. The Plan shall include but is not limited to the following provisions:
a) Identification of permitted hours for construction related deliveries and removal of heavy equipment and material; b) Identification of where construction workers would park their personal vehicles during project construction with a requirement that at no time shall construction worker
vehicles block any driveways. If complaints are received by the project applicant or City of Artesia regarding issues with construction worker vehicle parking, the project applicant shall identify alternative parking options for construction workers so as not to interfere with adjacent parking
availability;
c) Identification of how emergency access to and around the project site will be maintained during project construction; Project
Applicant
Field
Verification

1. City of Artesia

2. City of Artesia

3. Prior to the start
of construction
activity in the
public right-ofway
 SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 7277/Temple City Self Storage Facility Page 7-9
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

TOPICAL AREA

IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE PARTY

MONITORING
ACTION

1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY

2. MONITORING
AGENCY

3. MONITORING
PHASE
Result in inadequate
emergency access?
d) Identification of haul routes for delivery or removal of heavy and/or oversized equipment or material loads.

Where feasible, delivery or removal of oversized equipment or material loads shall be conducted during off-peak hour traffic periods;
e) Maintain pedestrian and bicycle connections around the project site and safe crossing locations shall be considered for all pedestrian and bicyclist detours; and
f) Maintain the security of the project site by erecting temporary fencing during the construction phase of the
project. Any onsite night lighting used during the
construction phase of the project shall be in compliance with City of Artesia lighting requirements.

4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Threshold 4.18b)
Cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of a tribal
cultural resource that
is determined to be a
significant resource
to a California Native
American tribe
pursuant to the
criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of
MM TCR-1:

Tribal Cultural Resources and Archaeological Monitoring. The project archaeologist, in consultation with interested tribes, the developer, and the City of Artesia, shall develop an Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) to address the details, timing, and responsibility of archaeological and cultural activities that will occur on the project site. Details in the AMP shall include:

1. Monitoring of project-related ground disturbance
(including, but not limited to, brush clearing, grading, trenching, etc.) coordinated with these construction-related activities;
Project
Applicant
Field
Verification

1. City of Artesia

2. City of Artesia

3. Prior to
commencement
of any “grounddisturbing
activity”
 SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 7277/Temple City Self Storage Facility Page 7-10
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

TOPICAL AREA

IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE PARTY

MONITORING
ACTION

1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY

2. MONITORING
AGENCY

3. MONITORING
PHASE
Public Resource Code
§ 5024.1(c)?

2. The development of a simultaneous monitoring schedule in coordination with the developer and the project
archeologist for the designated Native American Tribal
Monitors from the two consulting tribes during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities on the site:
including the scheduling, safety requirements, duties, scope of work, and Native American Tribal Monitors’ authority to stop and redirect grading activities in coordination with the project archaeologist.;

3. The protocols and stipulations that the developer, City, Tribes, and project archaeologist will follow in the event of inadvertent TCR discoveries, including any newly
discovered cultural resource deposits that shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation.

MM TCR-2:

Treatment and Disposition of Tribal Cultural Resources. In the event that Native American cultural resources are inadvertently discovered during the course of any ground-disturbing activities, including but not limited to brush clearance, grading, trenching, etc., Construction
Contractor
Qualified
Archeologist
Field
Verification

1. City of Artesia

2. City of Artesia
 SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 7277/Temple City Self Storage Facility Page 7-11
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

TOPICAL AREA

IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE PARTY

MONITORING
ACTION

1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY

2. MONITORING
AGENCY

3. MONITORING
PHASE
for the proposed project, the following procedures will be carried out for treatment and disposition of the discoveries:

2. Treatment and Final Disposition: The landowner(s) shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods, and all archaeological artifacts and nonhuman remains as part of the required mitigation for impacts to cultural resources. The applicant shall relinquish the artifacts through one or more of the following methods and provide the City of Artesia with evidence of same:
a. Accommodate the process for on-site reburial of the
discovered items with the consulting Native American tribes or bands. This shall include measures and provisions to protect the future reburial area from any future impacts.

Reburial shall not occur until all cataloging, basic analysis, other analyses as recommended by the project archaeologist and approved by consulting tribes, and basic recordation have been completed; all documentation should be at a level of standard professional practice to allow the writing of a report of professional quality;
b. For purposes of conflict resolution, if more than one Native American tribe or band is involved with the project and cannot come to an agreement as to the disposition of cultural

3. During
construction
 SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 7277/Temple City Self Storage Facility Page 7-12
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

TOPICAL AREA

IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE PARTY

MONITORING
ACTION

1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY

2. MONITORING
AGENCY

3. MONITORING
PHASE
materials, materials shall be curated at the Fowler Museum at UCLA or the Natural History of Los Angeles County by default; At the completion of grading, excavation, and ground-disturbing activities on the site, a Phase IV Monitoring Report shall be prepared by the project archaeologist and submitted to the City documenting monitoring activities conducted by the project archaeologist and Native Tribal Monitors within 60 days of completion of grading. This report shall document the impacts to the known resources on the property; describe how each mitigation measure was fulfilled; document the type of cultural resources recovered and the disposition of such resources; provide evidence of the required cultural sensitivity training for the construction staff held during the required pregrade meeting; and, in a confidential appendix, include the daily/weekly monitoring notes from the archaeologist and the tribal monitor(s). All reports produced will be submitted to the City, Fowler Museum at UCLA or the Natural History of Los Angeles County and consulting tribes.

MM TCR-3:

Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary or Ceremonial Objects
A. Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.

B. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods are discovered or recognized on the project site, then Public Construction
Contractor
Los Angeles
County
Coroner
Field
Verification

1. City of Artesia

2. City of Artesia

3. During
construction
 SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 7277/Temple City Self Storage Facility Page 7-13
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2025

TOPICAL AREA

IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE PARTY

MONITORING
ACTION

1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY

2. MONITORING
AGENCY

3. MONITORING
PHASE
Resource Code 5097.9 as well as Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5 shall be followed.

C. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code section
5097.98(d)(1) and (2).

D. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods.

E. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 9, 2025 ITEM NO: 11A.

TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) - Managers and Supervisors Unit Employees FROM: Ericka Jackson, HR Manager
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:

Melissa Burke, Deputy City Manager
Jamie Murguia, Finance Manager
HongDao Nguyen, City Attorney
Abel Avalos, City Manager
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council, by motion:

1. Adopt, Resolution No. 25-3039, adopting Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Artesia and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Local 1520 (AFSCME), Council 36 – Managers and Supervisors Unit; and

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the MOU on their behalf.

BACKGROUND:

The City last concluded negotiations with AFSCME Local 1520 – Managers and Supervisors Unit in 2022. As that agreement reached its expiration, new negotiations commenced in March 2025 to address workforce priorities and maintain competitiveness in compensation and benefits.

To inform this process, the City commissioned a Classification and Compensation Study by Transformance Consulting, finalized in March 2025. This comprehensive analysis provided key insights into market salary comparisons and equitable pay practices, forming a foundational component of the negotiation strategy.

Following collaborative and constructive bargaining, a tentative agreement was reached on May 13, 2025, and subsequently ratified by the union on June 4, 2025. The resulting MOU reflects shared priorities and the City's dedication to supporting its workforce.

ANALYSIS:

Negotiations between the City and AFSCME Managers and Supervisors Unit began in March 2025, with additional sessions in April and May 2025. The goal was to align the interests of unit employees with the City’s fiscal and operational strategies.

The main priorities addressed in the agreement include:

Base Salary Adjustments: Realignment of compensation levels to achieve 60% of the median market salary, based on findings from the March 2025 Transformance Consulting study.

Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA): Annual 3% increases effective in July 2026, July 2027, and July 2028 to ensure earnings reflect economic changes.

Benefit Enhancements: Improvements in health, education, and supplemental benefits to address employee needs and enhance overall satisfaction.

Key updates in the new MOU include:

Continuing to offer up to the Kaiser Los Angeles rate for health, dental and vision coverage amount.

A monthly Opt-Out provision for employees who decline the City’s health, dental, and vision coverage (and provide proof of other source of coverage).

An increase in annual Health Reimbursement Account (HRA) contributions.

Designation of a citywide holiday closure period between Christmas and New Year’s In addition to these updates, several procedural refinements have been made to enhance efficiency and promote employee development. This agreement exemplifies the City’s commitment to its personnel and to fostering a supportive and progressive work environment.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Implementation of the MOU includes the following financial implications:

Salary adjustments to meet 60% of median market levels
Annual 3% COLAs beginning in July 2026 and continuing through July 2028 Eligibility for bilingual pay where applicable. Upon successful completion of the examination process, employees receive $100 per month for verbal translation only and $125 for both verbal and written translation Increase in HRA contributions from $600 to $800 per year Monthly Opt Out Provision for Health, Dental and Vision Coverage in the amount of $400 per month Tiered monthly car allowance:

Tier I: City Clerk, Public Works Manager, Parks and Recreation Manager - $100 per month Tier II: Accounting Manager, Assistant Parks and Recreation Manager, Economic Development Manager, Planning Manager, Special Projects Manager - $75 per month Tier III: Management Analyst, Code Compliance Supervisor, Parks and Recreation Supervisor, Business License/Revenue Specialist - $50 per month
City-issued Cell Phones for the purposes of conducting City business Education Reimbursement in the amount of $3,500 per fiscal year Eligibility to participate in a deferred compensation - 457 (b) plan and 401 (a) plan with a matching contribution of the first 3% of the employee's base compensation that the employee contributed to the 457 (b) plan
Health benefits covered at the Region 3, CalPERS, Kaiser Tier level of benefits based on the eligible employee's designated level of coverage
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:

Staff recommends that the City Council, by motion:

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the MOU on their behalf.

Attachments
Resolution No. 25-3039 (Approval of Managers MOU).pdf
RESOLUTION NO. 25-3039

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF ARTESIA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (“MOU”)

BETWEEN THE CITY OF ARTESIA AND THE

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1520 (“AFSCME”)
COUNCIL 36 – MANAGERS AND SUPERVISORS UNIT
WHEREAS, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 1520 (“AFSCME”) was initially recognized as the exclusive bargaining representative of the managers and supervisors classifications at the City of Artesia (“CITY”) on October 27, 2021;
WHEREAS, in accordance with the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act governing labor-management relationships for California local governments, the City and the AFSCME met and conferred in good faith between March 2025 and May 2025 in an effort to reach a new agreement;
WHEREAS, AFSCME ratified the proposed agreement on June 4, 2025; and WHEREAS, the City and AFSCME have now reached agreement on an MOU. This MOU is attached as Exhibit “A.”

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARTESIA DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council of the City declares that the City and AFSCME, after negotiating in good faith, have reached agreement on a new MOU, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” to this Resolution and incorporated herein by reference.

SECTION 2. The City Council hereby approves the attached MOU. The MOU is effective July 1, 2025 and expires on June 30, 2029.

SECTION 3. The City Council of the City of Artesia intends each and every provision of the attached and approved MOU to have independent effect. If any one or more of the provisions contained therein shall be ruled illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity, legality, and enforceability of the remaining provisions contained therein shall not in any way be affected or impaired.

SECTION 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. 1 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of June, 2025. __________________________________

ALI SAJJAD TAJ, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________________

JENNIFER ALDERETE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________

BEST BEST & KRIEGER
2 3

DEFINITIONS
CLASSIFICATION: A position or group of positions sufficiently similar in respect to authority, duties and responsibilities that the same descriptive classification title is assigned.

DAY: When City Hall is open, unless an employee is assigned to an alternative work schedule.

DEPARTMENT: Any one of the departments of the City’s organizational structure managed by a Manager, Director, Deputy City Manager or the City Manager.

DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP: As defined in the California Family Code Section 297, two adults who have chosen to share one another's lives in an intimate and committed relationship of mutual caring and that meet the conditions and/or requirements of Section 297.

EMPLOYEE: An individual who has been selected, is compensated through the City payroll and appointed to a City classification.

FULL TIME: A period of forty (40) hours of work time per workweek in increments of eight (8), nine (9) or ten (10) hours per shift.

IMMEDIATE FAMILY: Immediate Family shall include the employee’s and the employee’s spouse’s or domestic partner’s parent, grandparent, foster-parent, sibling, step-sibling, spouse, domestic partner, child, stepchild, foster child or grandchild.

LEAVE: An absence from work related to Authorized time away from work granted to an employee in accordance with the policies and provisions outlined in this Memorandum of Understanding, applicable City policies, and state or federal laws. Leave may include, but is not limited to, vacation, sick leave, holiday leave, bereavement leave, jury duty, and other approved absences.

MANAGEMENT: An employee in any classification designated by the City Manager as managerial.

PAY PERIOD: A pay period consists of two (2) consecutive workweeks established to provide twenty-six (26) pay periods each calendar year. 4 POSITION: Authority, duties and responsibilities assigned by the City which constitute the services to be performed by a Unit member.

SENIORITY: A status acquired by an employee based upon the employee’s original date of hire into a classification, in the bargaining unit. Seniority does not accrue while an employee is in an unpaid status.

TIER I MANAGEMENT: City Clerk, Public Works Manager, Parks and Recreation Manager.

TIER II MANAGEMENT: Accounting Manager, Assistant Parks and Recreation Manager, Economic Development Manager, Planning Manager, Special Projects Manager.

TIER III MANAGEMENT: Business License Specialist/Revenue Officer, Management Analyst, Parks and Recreation Supervisor, Code Compliance Supervisor.

UNIT MEMBER: An individual compensated through the City payroll, appointed to a City classification and designated to be within this Bargaining unit for labor bargaining purposes.

UNION BUSINESS: Legitimate business activities involved in representing bargaining unit members such as attending union meetings, conferences, trainings and meetings with represented employees to discuss collective bargaining matters. It does not include any events or activities that are primarily social, athletic, fundraising or recreational in nature, which are not on city-time. The latter would require an employee to use personal leave.

WORKDAY: A workday is an individual 24-hour period within a seven consecutive day (168- hour) workweek.

WORKING OUT OF CLASS ASSIGNMENT: On a temporary basis, the performance by Unit members of the duties of a higher classification with a higher pay range than the pay range of their assigned permanent classification.

WORKWEEK: A workweek is a fixed and regularly recurring period of 168 hours—seven consecutive 24-hour periods (workdays).

WORK SCHEDULE: A full-time work schedule is a 40 hour per workweek schedule consisting of: 1) Eight (8) hours in a workday for five (5) consecutive workdays within a workweek; or 2) Ten (10) hours in a workday for four (4) consecutive workdays within a workweek. 3) Other work schedules necessary to better meet the needs or requirements of the position 5 or the Unit members shall be permitted at the discretion of the Director or Manager of the Unit members, Department. For example, nine (9) hours in a workday for four (4) consecutive workdays followed by a four (4) hour workday on the fifth consecutive workday shall be considered an acceptable workweek.
6 American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 1520, Council 36, Managers and Supervisors Unit
July 1, 2025
Local 1520 reserves the right to add, modify, or delete any proposal(s) during negotiations.

I. RECOGNITION
A. The City of Artesia (“City”) recognizes the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 1520, Managers and Supervisors Unit, Council 36, (thereafter “AFSCME” or “Union”) as the exclusive bargaining agent for all regular full-time employees employed by the City in the classifications referenced in Appendix “A” of this MOU subject to the applicable provisions of the law. The City shall meet and confer on the salary for all newly created represented classifications.

B. AFSCME, in turn, recognizes the City of Artesia as the duly elected representative of the people and agrees to negotiate exclusively with the agents of the City through the provisions of the Employer-Employee Relations Resolution.

C. Excluded from AFSCME are all other employees, all management and supervisory employees not listed in Appendix “A”, confidential employees, substitute, shortterm and limited-term employees.

D. The City and AFSCME agree that the unit described herein is the appropriate unit.

This includes all permanent positions listed in Appendix A as bargaining unit employees. Neither party will later contest the appropriateness of the unit by any means, including use of Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) procedures.

Nothing in the foregoing shall preclude the parties from negotiating any new classification created by the City or from changing the unit description by mutual agreement. However, the City and AFSCME reserve their rights to seek clarification or amendment pursuant to PERB regulations with respect to any new classifications created by the City that are not enumerated in the unit description.

II. TERMS OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
The term of this MOU shall be from 7/1/2025 – 6/30/2029. The benefits provided under this MOU shall not be retroactive from the date of execution unless explicitly provided as such.

III. NONDISCRIMINATION
The City and Union recognize the right of the employees to form, join or participate in lawful activities of employee organizations and the equal alternative right of 7 employees to refuse to form, join or participate in employee organization activities.

No employee shall be intimidated, coerced, restrained or discriminated against by the City or the Union in any manner which is unlawful pursuant to state or federal law. This article is not to be subject to the Grievance Procedure.

The City and the Union agree that no employee will be promoted, demoted, transferred, bypassed for promotion, disciplined, or discharged or in any way discriminated against because of race, color, sex, age, national origin, disability, political or religious opinions or affiliations, or any other classification protected by Federal or State law. The City and the Union shall reopen any provision of this Agreement for the purpose of complying with any final order of the federal or state agency or court of competent jurisdiction requiring a modification or change in any provision of this Agreement in compliance with State or Federal anti-discrimination laws. Equal employment opportunities will be extended to all persons in all aspects of the employer-employee relationship, including recruitment, hiring, upgrading, training, promotion, transfer, discipline, layoff, recall and termination.

IV. FULL UNDERSTANDING
This MOU contains all of the covenants, stipulations, and provisions agreed upon by the parties. Any prior existing understanding or agreements by the parties, whether formal or informal, regarding any such matters contained in the MOU are hereby superseded or terminated in their entirety.

For the life of this MOU, the Union and the City mutually agree that to reopen negotiations with respect to any subject or matter covered in this MOU requires mutual consent by both parties. Without such mutual consent, the parties shall not be required to meet and confer regarding the same.

V. MANAGEMENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
SECTION 1. The City reserves, retains, and is vested with, solely and exclusively, all rights of management as allowed by law, unless modified by this Memorandum of Understanding. The rights of the City include, but are not limited to, the exclusive right to:

A. To manage the City generally and to determine the issues of policy.

B. To determine the necessity and organization of any service or activity conducted by the City and expand or diminish service.

C. To determine the nature, manner, means, technology, and extent of services to be provided to the public.
8 D. Methods of financing.

E. Types of equipment or technology to be used.

F. To determine and/or change the facilities, methods, technology, means and size of the workforce by which City operations are to be conducted.

G. To determine and change the number of locations, relocations and types of operations, processes, and materials to be used in carrying out all City functions including, but not limited to, the right to contract for or subcontract any work or operation.

H. To determine the size and composition of the workforce.

I. To assign work to and schedule employees in accordance with requirements as determined by the City, and to establish hours of work and change work schedules and assignments.

J. To relieve employees from duties for lack of work or similar non-disciplinary reasons.

K. To establish and modify productivity and performance programs and standards.

L. To discharge, suspend, demote or otherwise discipline employees in accordance with the City Personnel Rules and Regulations.

M. To determine job classifications, assign positions to job classifications, to reclassify employees without competition as long as the employees are qualified and employment laws are followed, to create new classification positions, and/or salary ranges as needed, to under fill any allocated position.

N. To hire, transfer, promote and demote employees for non-disciplinary reasons in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding and City Personnel Rules and Regulations.

O. To determine policies, procedures and the standards for selection, training and promotion of employees.

P. To establish and manage employee performance standards including, but not limited to, quality and quantity standards; and to require compliance therewith.

Q. To maintain order and efficiency in its facilities and operations.

R. To establish and promulgate and/or modify rules and regulations to maintain order and safety in the City which are not in contravention with this Agreement. 9 S. To take any and all necessary action to carry out the mission of the City in emergencies.

SECTION 2. Where management makes any changes in working conditions because of Federal and State law requirements, the City shall not be required to negotiate the matter or manner of compliance with such law where the manner of compliance is specified by such law. Except in emergencies, or where the City is required to make changes in its operations because of the requirements of Law, whenever the contemplated exercise of management's rights shall impact a significant number of employees included in this unit, the City agrees to meet and confer with the Union on all matters relating to employment conditions and employer-employee relations including wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment of employees within this unit unless the matter of the exercise of such rights is provided for in this Memorandum of Understanding. Nothing in this Article is intended to modify the City's obligations under the Meyers-Milias Brown Act.

VI. NOTIFICATION OF JOB CLASSIFICATION CHANGES
All positions within the City shall be appropriately classified to reflect their assigned duties, responsibilities, and qualifications. Proper classification ensures fairness, transparency, and compliance with applicable laws and policies, including equal pay for equal work.

The City shall notify the Union or the affected employee(s) with a copy of any proposed changes in any job description for existing classifications represented by the Union no less than ten (10) working days prior to final approval.

At Will Status
Director-level Management Employees serve at the will of the City Manager and may be removed at any time with or without cause. Probationary periods are established only for the purpose of education reimbursement, vacation use, and other related benefits. Probationary periods do not in any way impact the At-Will nature of Director-level management positions.

VII. ACTING PAY

WORKING OUT OF CLASS AND PROVISIONAL ASSIGNMENTS
The City may assign employees to work out of class or grant provisional assignments based on operational needs. Employees assigned to perform duties of a higher-level classification may be eligible for a temporary pay increase after completing 15 calendar days in the higher-level role.
10 If the out-of-class assignment is assumed to last 15 calendar days or longer, the Human Resources Manager may authorize a pay adjustment effective the first day the higher-level duties are assigned.

All requests for working out of class or provisional assignments should be submitted in advance and require approval by the Human Resources Manager prior to the assignment beginning.

Audit Provision for Unapproved Assignments
If an employee is directed or permitted to assume the duties of a higher classification without prior Human Resources approval, the employee may request that Human Resources conduct an audit of the duties performed. If the audit confirms that the employee was assigned and performed duties of a higher classification for a period of 15 calendar days or more, the Human Resources Manager may authorize retroactive pay at the appropriate higher-level rate.

Compensation
Employees approved for working out of class or provisional assignments will receive a pay adjustment as follows:
• The employee’s salary shall be adjusted to Step A of the higher classification's salary range; or
• If the employee’s current salary exceeds Step A, they shall receive a minimum five percent (5%) increase, not to exceed the top step of the higher classification’s salary range.

VIII. CHANGE IN WORK SCHEDULE
Permanent changes to an employee’s work schedule will be made after a notice of ten work days to the employee.

IX. COMPENSATION
A. Step Advancement
Employees shall receive a step advancement on their anniversary date within their current position unless they receive an unsatisfactory evaluation.

B. Salary

1. Employees shall receive a salary as set forth in the Salary Schedule attached to this Resolution as Appendix “B” which is incorporated herein by reference. 11 2. The City shall apply Cost of Living Increases to the classifications assigned to this unit in the following manner:
i. 3% effective July 1, 2026
ii. 3% effective July 1, 2027
iii. 3% effective July 1, 2028
C. Vehicle Allowance
Tier I: Department Heads - $100.00
Tier II: Mid Managers - $75.00
Tier III: Entry Level Management - $50.00
D. Cell Phones
The City shall provide employees with a cell phone for the purpose of conducting City business. The classifications that will receive City-issued cell phone devices are determined by the City Manager.

E. Education Reimbursement
The City offers a discretionary Education Reimbursement Program to assist eligible employees in pursuing City-related courses, degree programs, or vocational training that enhance their skills and benefit the City’s operations.

Eligibility

1. Employee Eligibility:
○ This program is available exclusively to permanent, full-time, nonprobationary employees of the City. ○ Employees must be in good standing at the time of application and throughout the reimbursement process (they cannot be on an active performance improvement plan, and their most recent evaluation overall rating must be satisfactory or above).

2. Course Eligibility:
○ Courses, degree programs, or vocational training must be directly related to the employee’s current role, enhance their job performance, or align with the City’s operational needs.
○ Approval is required prior to the employee beginning the course or training. 12 3. Benefit Details
Maximum Reimbursement:
○ Employees may be reimbursed for eligible education expenses up to a maximum of $3,500.00 per fiscal year.
○ This maximum includes both education reimbursement and student loan repayment.

Discretionary Nature:
○ This benefit is discretionary and subject to available funds and approval by the City Manager and the Human Resources Manager.

Grade Requirements:
○ For courses where grades of A-F are assigned, a grade of C or better is required for reimbursement eligibility.

Documentation:
○ Employees must provide written evidence of successful course completion, such as transcripts, certificates, or other official documentation.

Reimbursement Exclusions:
○ If an employee is terminated for poor performance or misconduct or resigns prior to the reimbursement being processed, the City is not obligated to provide payment under this program.

4. Application Process
Pre-Approval Required:
○ Employees must submit an Education Reimbursement Request form to the Human Resources Department detailing the course, institution, costs, and relevance to their position.
○ Both the City Manager and the Human Resources Manager must approve the request in writing before the course begins.

5. Reimbursement Claims:
○ Upon successful completion of the course, employees must submit all required documentation, including proof of grade or completion and itemized receipts, to the Finance Manager for processing. ○ Approved reimbursements will be processed in accordance with the City’s payroll or accounts payable schedule.
13 6. General Provisions
o Participation in this program does not guarantee advancement, promotion, or any changes to the employee’s role or salary.
o Employees are responsible for any costs that exceed the $3,500.00 annual limit or are not covered by the program.

F. Bilingual Pay
Qualified employees who are requested/desired by the City to use bilingual skills during their scheduled work hours, may be entitled to bilingual pay, provided that such employee shall first demonstrate a language proficiency, in any language designated by their Manager as a high need area which requires bilingual skills.

1. Use of bilingual skills shall include substantial time spent translating, answering phone calls, speaking, or writing in a language other than English, during the course of work. The employee is entitled to receive bilingual pay on a recurring basis over their regular salary of $125 per month for providing both written and verbal bilingual communication and $100 if only verbal. Eligible employees must have passed a proficiency examination as determined by Human Resources. If the employee is unsuccessful in demonstrating proficiency, they may retest 90 days after their last proficiency exam.

2. The City may determine the number of employees designated to provide translation service per designated language. Upon an employee’s promotion, lateral transfer or demotion, the request to use bilingual skills will be reviewed by Human Resources per the operational needs of the City.

3. The Human Resources Manager shall review any requests made by Directors, Managers, Supervisors or employees that meet the customer service needs of the City. Consideration will be given to the employee worksite and how many other employees at the worksite have been assigned to provide bilingual services.

Consideration will only be given to languages such as Spanish, Tagalog and Khmer and other languages as assigned that are spoken regularly during the course of work. The Human Resources Division has the discretion to limit the number of employees that are assigned to perform this function.

4. The parties agree that to the extent permitted by law, the parties understand that bilingual pay is special compensation and shall be reported to CalPERS as such pursuant to Title 2 CCR Section 571 (a)(4) Special Assignment Pay as bilingual premium. The parties acknowledge that the City cannot guarantee that CalPERS 14 will continue to designate bilingual pay and that the parties are bound by CalPERS’ determination.

X. OTHER COMPENSATION
A. Deferred Compensation
The City has adopted a 457(b) Deferred Compensation Plan ("457(b) Plan") under which all City employees are eligible to participate. The City will not make any matching contributions to the 457(b) Plan. The City will also adopt a 401(a) Deferred Compensation Plan ("401(a) Plan"). The 401(a) Plan terms will provide for a City matching contribution to be made on behalf of each employee, on a dollar-for-dollar basis, for the first three percent (3%) of each employee's base compensation that the employee contributed to the 457(b) Plan. Annual contributions to the 457(b) Plan and the 401(a) Plan are subject to the limits set by the IRS. Employees who are aged 50 or order at the end of the calendar year can make annual catch-up contributions to the 457(b) Plan.

B. Health Reimbursement Account
The City will provide each benefit-eligible employee with $800 per calendar year in the form of a Health Reimbursement Account (HRA). This benefit will be administered in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations governing Health Reimbursement Accounts. Employees are encouraged to review these rules to understand the eligible
XI. RETIREMENT
A. CalPERS Contributions
Employees of the City of Artesia shall be fully responsible for paying 100% of the employee contribution toward their CalPERS retirement. The required contribution rate is determined based on the employee's membership date with CalPERS:

1. Classic Members (employees who became CalPERS members before January 1, 2013): The employee contribution rate is currently set at 7% of pensionable compensation as of the date this MOU was entered.

2. PEPRA Members (employees who became CalPERS members on or after January 1, 2013): The employee contribution rate is currently set at 7.75% of pensionable compensation as of the date this MOU was entered. *These rates are subject to change based on CalPERS regulations, and employees are responsible for ensuring timely payment of their contributions through payroll deductions. 15 B. Retirement Formula
Tier I — 2% at 60 — All "classic" employees covered under this provision of this MOU shall have their final percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service determined in accordance with Section 21354.3 of the Public Employees Retirement Law (2% at 60).

Tier Il — 2% at 62 - All employees covered under this provision of this MOU hired on or after January 1 , 2013 shall have their final percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service determined in accordance with Section 7522.20 of the Public Employees Retirement Law (2% at 62) based on Article 4. California Public Employee's Pension Reform Act of 2013.

C. Retiree Health

1. Employer Contributions for Retirees:

Employees who retire from the City during the term of this agreement shall receive a monthly employer contribution for medical and dental coverage equivalent to the employer contribution for then-current employees at the same level of coverage, as required by Government Code section 22892.

2. Adjustments for Tier Changes:
○ If a retiree removes a dependent from medical coverage resulting in a tier change (e.g., Family tier reduced to Employee + 1), the retiree's monthly employer contribution for medical and dental coverage will be reduced to match the employer contribution for then-current employees in the new tier. ○ A retiree will not receive an increase in the City's monthly contribution as a result of a change in dependents, except as required by Government Code section 22892, to ensure that the employer contribution is equal for both current employees and retirees in the same tier.
○ If a retiree's circumstances change and additional coverage is needed (e.g., Employee + 1 increased to Family tier), the retiree will continue to receive the employer contribution based on the tier they were in at retirement, subject to any adjustments required by Government Code section 22892. The retiree will not be entitled to receive the employer contribution for a higher tier.

C. Medicare and Dependent Coverage
○ Retirees must apply for Medicare upon reaching eligibility. ○ Dependent coverage will end based on policy age limits as outlined in the applicable medical and dental insurance plans.
○ Employees must work for the City for at least ten consecutive years and retire from the City in order for the employee to be eligible for retiree 16 medical benefits and shall receive the PEMHCA Minimum Employer Contribution pursuant to California Government Code section 22892. ○ All Benefits end once the employee is eligible for Medicare.

XII. ACTIVE EMPLOYEE HEALTH AND WELFARE BENEFITS
A. Health Benefits
The City will contribute an amount equal to the Region 3, CalPERS “Kaiser tier” level of benefits based on the eligible Bargaining Unit employee’s designated level of coverage (i.e., single, two-party, family). To the extent that said City contribution is in excess of the actual premium due for an employee, the employee may designate the excess to be used for payment of dental and/or vision premiums. Any excess amount cannot be cashed out or used for any other purpose.

B. If an employee needs to change their coverage due to a change in family status (e.g., single to single +1 or single +1 to family), appropriate documentation for the change must be received by the Human Resources Department. Following receipt and approval of the documentation, the City will contribute up to the next level in the employee’s current elected plan.

C. Opt-Out Compensation for Benefits
Employees who choose not to enroll in the City of Artesia’s medical, dental, and vision benefit plans shall receive $400 per month as compensation. Employees wishing to opt out must provide proof to Human Resources of alternate coverage that meets the minimum essential coverage requirements under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and complete any required opt-out documentation.

D. Disability
All active, full-time employees regularly working 30 or more hours per week are provided with non-participating group long-term and short-term disability insurance, effective the first day of the month following their hire date.

Long Term Disability: The coverage amount is 66 2/3% of the employee's basic monthly earnings, excluding overtime, up to a maximum monthly benefit of $6,000.

Short Term Disability: The coverage amount is 66 2/3% of the employee's basic weekly earnings, excluding overtime, up to a maximum weekly benefit of $1,385.

Benefit payments are subject to all provisions of the master policy. 17 E. Life Insurance
The City shall provide $100,000 of life insurance to employees. In addition, employees may use cafeteria benefits to purchase life insurance up to $50,000.

Employees may purchase additional life insurance in $10,000 increments at their own expense. Employees may purchase life insurance for their dependents at their own expense.

XIII. VACATION
A. All employees shall earn vacation time as follows:

Years of Eligible Service Accruals
0 2 weeks per year
1 2 weeks + 1 day per year
2 2 weeks + 2 days per year
3 2 weeks + 3 days per year
4 2 weeks + 4 days per year
5-15 3 weeks per year
16+ 4 weeks per year

1. Accrual and Eligibility:
○ Employees must accrue vacation time before becoming eligible to use it. ○ Vacation leave may only be taken with the approval of the department head.
○ Vacation leave must be requested and approved prior to the planned time off.

2. Vacation Leave Maximum Accrual: Employees may only accrue vacation leave up to a maximum leave balance of 320 hours in a fiscal year.

3. Accrual During Paid Status: Vacation leave accrues only when an employee is in a paid status.

4. Initial Usage Restrictions: Accrued vacation leave cannot be used until the employee has completed six (6) months of active service. 18 B. Vacation Eligibility
Employees are not able to take vacation time until accrued. Vacation may only be taken at times agreeable to the immediate supervisor. No vacation shall be taken for a period exceeding the maximum hours accumulated at any given time.

Vacation leave only accrues when an employee is in a paid status and not when an employee is on a Leave of Absence for more than 30 days. Accrued vacation leave may not be used before completion of the initial 6 months of active service with the City of Artesia.

C. Vacation Buyback
Each calendar year, eligible employees will have two opportunities to cash-out certain accrued vacation hours. Cash out periods will be calculated in six-month intervals and paid in the months of November or May of each calendar year.

Eligibility
To be eligible to participate, employees must meet the following criteria:
• Be a full-time employee who has passed probation.
• Cash out a minimum of 20 hours and a maximum of 160 hours in total in a calendar year.
• Maintain a minimum of 80 vacation leave hours after the cash out.

Accrual Periods/Pay dates
Two times a year, between October 1st and October 31st, and between April 1st and April 30th, employees can make an irrevocable election to cash-out vacation that they will earn in the following six-month period.

First Accrual Period
Between October 1st and October 31st of each calendar year, employees may elect in writing to cash-out vacation that they will accrue in the next six months (November 1st through April 30th) (“First Accrual Period”). Vacation cash-outs for the First Accrual Period will be paid on the first payroll date after the end of the First Accrual Period. For example, if an employee makes an election on October 10, 2025, to cash out 20 hours of vacation leave that will be accrued between November 1, 2025, and April 30, 2026, the 20 hours of vacation will be paid in the first payroll date of May 2026.

Second Accrual Period
Between April 1st and April 30th of each calendar year, employees may elect in writing to cash-out vacation hours that they will accrue in the next six months (May 1st through October 31st) (“Second Accrual Period”). Vacation cash-outs for the Second Accrual Period will be paid on the first payroll date after the end of the Second Accrual Period. For example, if an employee makes an election 19 on April 10, 2026, to cash out 20 hours of vacation leave that will be accrued between May 1, 2026, and October 31, 2026, the 20 hours of vacation will be paid in the first payroll date of November 2026.

Procedure
• Each October and/or April, eligible employees may complete and submit a request form during the applicable period to cash out vacation accruals. Forms should be submitted to Human Resources by the last business day in October or April.
• The election is final. While cash out requests are voluntary, once the form is submitted, the election cannot be changed.
• Vacation will be paid out at the standard rate of pay in effect at the time the vacation is paid.

D. Unforeseeable Emergency Vacation Cash Out
In the event that an employee experiences an event which they believe is an Unforeseeable Emergency, they may request a cash-out of their vacation which has been accrued as of the date the cash-out request is submitted to the City Manager, along with any supporting documentation. The City Manager (or their designee) will review each request and supporting documentation, and based on the facts and circumstances, shall determine whether an Unforeseeable Emergency exists.

The amount of vacation that can be cashed out is limited to the amount the City Manager (or their designee) determines, in their sole discretion, is necessary to resolve the Unforeseeable Emergency. The City Manager’s (or their designees’) decision shall be final.
“Unforeseeable Emergency” shall mean a financial emergency caused by an extraordinary and unforeseeable event beyond the employee’s control that will result in a severe financial hardship if a cash payment is not made, as determined in accordance with Internal Revenue Code Section 409A(a)(2)(B)(ii) and the underlying Treasury Regulations.

The following are examples of situations that may constitute an Unforeseeable Emergency:
(a) Medical expenses of an employee, spouse (defined as the person to whom the employee is legally married, and not including an individual legally separated from an employee under a decree of legal separation), or dependent (as defined by Internal Revenue Code Section 152, without regard to Code Section 152(b)(1), (b)(2), or (d)(1)(B)) resulting from an illness or accident. (b) An employee’s, spouse’s, or dependent’s funeral expenses. 20 (c) The need to rebuild an employee’s home following damage not otherwise covered by insurance.
(d) Imminent foreclosure or eviction from the employee’s primary residence.

In the event the Internal Revenue Service revises or changes its regulations pertaining to this policy, the City will meet and confer with the bargaining units to determine how to manage the impact thereof.

XIV. HOLIDAYS
A. The City shall observe the following holidays:

1. New Year’s Day

2. Martin Luther King Day

3. President’s Day

4. Cesar Chavez Day

5. Memorial Day

6. Juneteenth Day

7. Independence Day

8. Labor Day

9. Veteran’s Day

10. Thanksgiving Day

11. Friday after Thanksgiving Day

12. Christmas Day
*Any additional holidays declared by the Mayor
i. Designation of Holidays for Holiday Office Closure. Effective January 1, 2026, City of Artesia offices shall be closed for a designated period during the week between the Christmas and the New Year holidays, as determined by the annual holiday schedule attached as Exhibit “C” and incorporated herein. Employees will be paid three (3) days of holiday pay for the closure period.
ii. Essential Personnel: Employees whose roles are deemed essential and require their presence during the designated closure period shall be notified by their department head. Such employees will receive an equal amount of holidays for use at an alternative time, subject to prior approval (example: If employee is scheduled to work one day during the holiday closure, the employee would receive one holiday for use). Such time must be used within the six months following the holiday closure and not later than June 30th of the current fiscal year.
21 iii. Department heads and supervisors are responsible for ensuring compliance with this policy and coordinating any necessary staffing adjustments.

Questions regarding the holidays should be directed to the Human Resources Department.

B. Birthday Floating Holiday
Effective January 1, 2026 employees assigned to this unit will receive one (1) floating holiday each year, paid at 8 or 9 hours of straight time, depending on the employee's assigned schedule. This floating holiday must be used within the employee's birthday month and will be forfeited if not used by the last day of that month.

C. Holiday Pay

1. Full-Time Employees:
○ Employees working a "regular" 8-hour schedule will receive 8 hours of holiday pay.
○ Employees working a "9/80" schedule will receive 9 hours of holiday pay, except when the holiday falls on their scheduled 8-hour Friday, in which case they will receive 8 hours of holiday pay.
○ Temporary employees are not eligible to receive holiday pay.

D. Holiday Observance

1. When a holiday falls on a Saturday, the preceding workday will be observed as the holiday.

2. When a holiday falls on a Sunday, the following workday will be observed as the holiday.

XV. LEAVES
SECTION I: Sick Leave
A. Sick Leave Accrual
Employees shall accrue 8 hours of paid sick leave per month when in paid status.

Employees unable to report to work due to personal illness, injury, or the illness/injury of an immediate family member must notify their supervisor no later than 30 minutes prior to their scheduled start time, or as soon as possible in the event of an emergency. 22 Temporary Employees
Temporary employees will be provided with 5 days (40 hours) of paid sick leave each fiscal year.
○ Unused sick leave may carry over to the next fiscal year, with a maximum accrual cap of 48 hours.
○ Sick leave usage is limited to 40 hours in any fiscal year. ○ Sick leave is not payable upon separation from employment.

B. Permissible Uses of Sick Leave
Sick leave may be used for:

1. Personal illness, injury, or disability.

2. Medical or dental appointments.

3. Care for a sick child, parent, spouse, registered domestic partner, designated person, or other family member as defined by California Labor Code Section 233 (up to 50% of annual accrued sick leave may be used for this purpose).

4. Pregnancy-related complications, delivery, and recovery.

5. Other qualifying events authorized under state law.

C. Extended Illness or Injury

1. Employees anticipating an extended absence of five (5) days or more may be required to submit a physician’s statement detailing:
○ The estimated length of absence.
○ Any job restrictions or light-duty requirements.
○ The employee’s ability to safely return to work.

2. FMLA, CFRA leave, and sick leave will run concurrently where applicable.

D. Exhaustion of Sick Leave

1. Employees who exhaust their sick leave due to an extended illness or injury may use accrued vacation, compensatory time, or holiday leave as applicable.

Sick leave shall not be abused. The City reserves the right to require a satisfactory statement of a licensed physician in the event of suspected abuse when an employee misses work due to an illness, injury, or disability. The Human Resources Manager may require a written statement from the attending physician or dentist to establish that the employee is or was incapacitated and unable to perform their duties or that the employee is capable of and released to return to the performance of all of the duties of their position. The physician’s statement must verify that an injury or disability 23 existed, its beginning and ending dates and/or the employee’s ability to return to work without presenting an immediate and significant risk to his/her own health or safety of others any other requirements in accordance with the City’s Sick Leave policy located in the Personnel Rules and Regulations. Abuse of sick leave shall be subject to progressive discipline.

Management may not require doctor’s verification for sick leave of less than three (3) days unless sick leave abuse is strongly suspected and reasonably demonstrated.

2. City holidays occurring during sick leave shall not be counted as days of sick leave.

3. Employees may only accrue sick leave up to a maximum of 400 hours.

4. Sick leave accruals will be modified or suspended as necessary to ensure that the maximum balance does not exceed these stipulated caps.

5. Upon separation from the City, employees shall not be entitled to compensation for unused sick leave.

SECTION II. Jury Duty
An employee summoned for mandatory jury duty during normal working hours is considered on duty and will receive their regular salary, provided:

A. Any jury fees received by the employee are remitted to the City.

B. Paid jury duty leave is limited to a maximum of thirty (30) days. The employee must present evidence of jury duty attendance to the Human Resources Office when service has been completed. On days when the employee is excused from jury duty or jury duty does not conflict with their work schedule, the employee must report to work. A certificate of mandatory jury service must be submitted to Human Resources to be eligible for compensation.

SECTION III. Bereavement
Full-time employees are entitled to up to five (5) days of bereavement leave with pay upon the death of the following family members:

A. Parent (including stepparent, Mother and Father of spouse or registered domestic partner)
B. Spouse or registered domestic partner
C. Child (including stepchild, son-in-law, or daughter-in-law) 24 D. Sibling (including brother-in-law or sister-in-law of spouse or registered domestic partner)
E. Grandparent or grandchild
F. Court-appointed guardian or other verifiable guardian (subject to approval by the Human Resources Manager)

1. If an employee is required to work while on bereavement leave, that work shall be compensated as overtime.

G. Extended Family Members:

Full-time employees are entitled to two (2) days of bereavement leave with pay upon the death of the following family members:

1. Aunt or uncle

2. Niece or nephew
Bereavement leave with pay is not deducted from sick leave. Full-time employees may use accrued vacation or compensatory time to supplement bereavement leave, subject to prior approval.

SECTION IV: Leave Without Pay
When an employee no longer has sick leave remaining, other types of leave balances such as compensatory time, administrative leave and vacation time must be used. Only after all other leave balances are exhausted, may an employee apply for leave without pay.

Approval of any unpaid leave of absence shall be at the discretion of the City Manager.

SECTION V: Administrative Leave
Employees shall receive eighty (80) hours of administrative leave with pay per fiscal year.

Administrative leave will be provided to employees on a prorated basis based on date of hire and annually thereafter at the beginning of the fiscal year. Administrative leave does not accumulate from year to year. Administrative Leave cannot be paid out.

XVI. LAYOFF, RECALL, RESIGNATION, AND REINSTATEMENT
SECTION I: Layoffs
If the City determines it is necessary to lay off employees, the following order will apply within the affected job family, as referenced in Appendix A:

1. Order of Layoff:
25 Seasonal, temporary, and part-time employees working 18 hours or less per week, as well as contract employees performing work within the job family, shall be laid off first.

After the layoff of seasonal, temporary, and part-time employees working 18 hours or less per week, as well as contract employees performing work within the job family, layoffs shall proceed in the following order:

1. Probationary Employees: Probationary employees within the affected job classification shall be laid off next.

2. Regular Employees by Seniority: Regular full-time and part-time employees shall be laid off based on seniority within the affected classification, with the least senior employees laid off first. Seniority shall be determined by total length of continuous service with the City.

This provision does not apply to contract employees performing work not typically assigned to bargaining unit members.

Displacement ("Bumping"):

A laid-off or displaced employee may displace ("bump") another employee in seniority order under the following conditions:
○ Lateral Movement: Into a classification within the same job family and bargaining unit.
○ Downward Movement: Into a lower-paid classification within the job family and bargaining unit.
○ Prior Classification: Into a classification previously held in another job family (e.g., an employee who previously worked in another department in a position represented by the Union) within the same bargaining unit. ○ An employee may not "bump" into a higher classification. ○ Step Placement for "Bumping":

When an employee bumps into a lower-paid classification within the job family or a classification of previous standing, they will receive a step placement in the new salary range that results in the smallest decrease in pay.
○ Notification:

Employees must notify the City within 48 hours of receiving a layoff notice if they intend to exercise bumping rights.

Notice of Layoff:
○ Employees who are laid off will receive at least 30 calendar days' written notice before the effective layoff date.
○ If 30 days' written notice is not provided, employees will receive 30 days of severance pay in lieu of notice.
○ Written notices will also be promptly provided to the Union President. 26 ○ Benefits will continue through the natural expiration of the 30-day notice period, regardless of whether notice or severance pay is provided.

SECTION II: Recall and Reinstatement
A. Recall

1. Recall from layoff will occur in seniority order within the job family.

2. Seasonal, temporary, and part-time employees working 18 hours or less per week will be recalled only after previously laid-off full-time employees in the affected department have been offered reinstatement.

B. Reinstatement

1. In accordance with the City Personnel Rules and Regulations:
○ Employees may be reinstated within two (2) years if they possess the qualifications, availability, and experience required for the position. ○ Examinations may be waived for reinstatement to the same position, provided the employee meets the qualifications based on merit.

2. Reinstated employees will be considered new appointees with no entitlement to benefits accrued during prior employment but will receive seniority credit for previous service.

3. Reinstated employees will be subject to the same benefits, terms, and conditions as new employees.

No employee from an unrepresented position or another bargaining unit shall be allowed to bump into the bargaining unit covered by this MOU nor shall a member of this bargaining unit be allowed to bump into another bargaining unit.

C. Work Hours and Uniform Requirements
Employees will assume the work hours and uniform or work attire requirements of the position they acquire through these layoff provisions.

SECTION III: Resignation
A. Resignation
If an employee resigns and is rehired into the same classification within 30 calendar days of their last paid day, they will retain the following:
● Seniority
● Title
● Step placement
● Vacation accrual rate
● Anniversary date
● All other service-based benefits under this agreement 27 This process will be deemed "reinstatement" by the City.

B. Exclusions
Employees assigned to the General bargaining unit are not permitted to bump into positions covered by this MOU.

XVII. TRANSFER, PROMOTION, AND DEMOTION
A. General Provisions
Transfers, promotions, and demotions shall be conducted in accordance with the City's Personnel Rules and Regulations, applicable state and federal employment laws, and in the best interest of the City’s operations. Selection and promotion processes may include any combination of the following:
● Written examinations
● Oral interviews
● Performance evaluations
● Assessment of education, certifications, training, and work experience Preference shall be given to veterans in accordance with applicable laws.

B. Promotion
Creation and Use:

Promotional lists may be created and utilized to fill vacancies within the City at the discretion of the Human Resources Manager.

1. Job Posting and Recruitment
● Announcement: New employment opportunities will be announced to provide current employees an opportunity to apply. Job postings are displayed on the City’s website and sent via email communications. ● Posting Period: Job announcements are posted for a defined period, established by the Human Resources Department, to ensure all eligible employees have time to apply.

2. Eligibility Requirements
● Qualifications: Candidates must meet the minimum qualifications outlined in the job description, including education, certification, training, and experience requirements.
● Performance History: Past performance evaluations, attendance records, and disciplinary history may be reviewed as part of the eligibility criteria. 28 3. Selection Process
● The selection process will be established by the Human Resources Department in accordance with the required job functions.

4. Ranking and Certification
● Eligible Lists: A ranked list of eligible candidates is created based on the results of the selection process. In the absence of recall rights, the hiring authority may also consider legitimate transfer or demotion requests along with promotional list candidates.
● Candidate Selection: For each vacancy, the hiring authority is provided the names of the top three ranked promotional and open candidates (or additional names for multiple vacancies). The final selection is made from this list.

5. Final Approval and Offer
● Final Decision: The selecting authority reviews the candidates and makes the final decision, subject to approval by the Human Resources Manager. ● Job Offer: A formal offer or offer of promotion is extended to the selected candidate, including details of the new role, salary, and effective start date.

6. Salary and Step Placement
● Compensation Adjustment: Employees promoted to a higher classification are placed at the first salary step that provides at least a 5% increase in pay. ● Step Increases: Step advancements follow the timeline outlined in the City’s Personnel Rules and Regulations, occurring on the anniversary date of promotion and annually thereafter, contingent on satisfactory performance.
● Step Placement Guarantee: No employee shall be placed off-step or outside of the range assigned to the new classification.

7. Probationary Period After Promotion
● Evaluation Period: Promoted employees are required to serve a probationary period of one year, during which their performance in the new role is assessed.

8. Professional Development
The City shall provide in-service workshops and training opportunities for employees to support their development and readiness for promotional opportunities.
29 B. DEMOTION

1. Definition of Demotion:

A demotion is the involuntary reduction of an employee’s classification to a lower salary grade or position. A demotion may be initiated by the City for reasons including, but not limited to, job performance issues, restructuring, or failure to meet the qualifications required for the current position.

2. Conditions for Demotion:

Demotions shall be made in accordance with the City’s Personnel Rules and Regulations. In cases where a demotion is proposed, the employee shall be given written notice specifying the reasons for the demotion. The employee will have the right to respond to the proposed demotion in writing or in person within a reasonable period of time, as determined by the City.

3. Salary Adjustment Upon Demotion:

When an employee is demoted, their salary shall be adjusted to the step within the lower classification that is closest to their current salary without exceeding it. The employee’s salary may be subject to further adjustment based on the terms of the new position’s pay structure.

4. Senior Employee Rights
An employee who is demoted due to failure to meet job qualifications or performance standards will retain their seniority and any benefits accrued, as per the City’s Personnel Rules and Regulations. The employee shall be entitled to retain all other rights and benefits, including vacation accrual rates, as applicable in the lower classification.

5. Reemployment Following Demotion due to Position Elimination If an employee is demoted due to position elimination or other restructuring reasons, the employee may be eligible for reemployment in a higher classification, provided they meet the qualifications and requirements of the higher position and successfully complete all required examination and interview processes.

6. Appeal Process
Any employee who believes the demotion is unjust or violates the terms of this MOU may file a grievance in accordance with the Grievance and Arbitration Procedure outlined in this MOU. The appeal must be filed within the timeframes specified in the grievance process.

7. Probationary Period Following Demotion
If an employee is demoted to a position in which they have not previously worked or held, the employee will be subject to a probationary period, as defined in the City’s Personnel Rules and Regulations, in accordance with the classification and the employee’s qualifications for the position.

8. No Retaliation
The City shall not retaliate against any employee for exercising their rights under this article, including but not limited to challenging a demotion or participating in an appeal process.
30 XVIII. Probationary Period and Regular Appointment
Regular appointments following the completion of a probationary period shall be conducted in accordance with the City’s Personnel Rules and Regulations. This section, as well as the entire Article, applies to both full-time and part-time employees.

The initial probationary period is one (1) year but may be extended once, for a maximum of six (6) additional months, with the approval of both the Human Resources Manager and the Department Head.

Employees who have not completed their initial probationary period may voluntarily promote, transfer, demote, or be reclassified. However, such employees do not hold status in their prior position for the purpose of "bumping" rights in the event of a layoff.

The computation of the initial probationary period in paid status excludes overtime, standby, and military leaves of absence. Additionally, the probationary period is extended by the duration of any unpaid leave of absence granted during the probationary period.

An employee who has not completed the initial probationary period serves at the discretion of the Department Head and may be released from employment without cause.

Such employees are not entitled to appeal their release, nor are they entitled to utilize the Grievance and Arbitration Procedure outlined in this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to challenge their release.

XIX. HEALTH AND SAFETY
The City and employees agree to adhere to all applicable Federal and State laws related to health and safety, including but not limited to the provisions outlined in Sections A through F below.

A. First Aid Supplies
First aid supplies shall be readily accessible to all employees at all City facilities.

B. Eyewash and Body Flushing Facilities
Where employees may be exposed to injurious or corrosive materials, the City shall provide suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body.

These facilities shall be located within the work area and be immediately accessible for personal use.

C. Confined Space Entry
No employee shall enter a confined space unless the City certifies that the risk level is consistent with the assigned duties of the employee's classification. Confined space entry procedures shall comply with all applicable safety regulations, including those issued by Cal/OSHA.

D. Earthquake Preparedness
The City shall maintain earthquake preparedness measures, including the provision of bottled water, food, and medical supplies. at each facility. The City shall also provide periodic earthquake preparedness training to employees.

E. Driving Record Monitoring
31 All employees who are required to operate City vehicles as part of their job duties shall be subject to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) Pull Notice Program to monitor driving records.

F. Safety Committee
The City shall establish a citywide safety committee to address workplace safety concerns and initiatives. The committee shall include two (2) employees within the local AFSCME bargaining unit.

XX. DISCIPLINE AND DISCHARGE
Disciplinary and discharge actions shall be conducted in accordance with the City's Personnel Rules and Regulations, as well as applicable state and federal laws.

A. Any Director-level management employee may be discharged without cause or be subjected to other disciplinary measures, and shall have no right of hearing or appeal.

B. Performance Improvement Plan (PIP)
The City may place an employee on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) when performance deficiencies are identified. The City shall meet with the employee to discuss the corrective action plan and provide the employee an opportunity to offer input. Employees placed on a PIP have the right to submit a written rebuttal, which will be included in their personnel file.

However, the performance basis of a PIP is not subject to grievance or appeal. The City retains the sole authority to determine the corrective action plan.

C. Paid Administrative Leave
The City reserves the right to place an employee on paid administrative leave pending the outcome of an investigation or any proposed disciplinary action
D. Employee Privacy
Employees have a right to a private life outside of work, provided their personal conduct does not negatively impact their employment relationship with the City.

XXI. MISCELLANEOUS
A. This MOU supersedes all applicable policies and procedures of the City.

B. Nepotism

1. No person shall be hired into any regular or temporary position if they are a relative of a current employee assigned to the same department, and:

2. Either position could directly or indirectly supervise the other; or

3. The duties or responsibilities of the current employee could affect the hours of employment, compensation, benefit levels, or other terms and conditions of employment of the applicant.
32 4. For the purposes of this policy, relative includes, but is not limited to, the following familial relationships:
● Parent(s) (including biological, step, or in-laws)
● Child(ren) (including biological, step, or in-laws)
● Spouse or registered domestic partner
● Sibling(s) (including biological, step, or in-laws)
● Grandparent(s) (including biological, step, or in-laws) ● Grandchild(ren) (including biological, step, or in-laws) ● Aunt(s) and uncle(s)
● Niece(s) and nephew(s)
● First cousin(s)
● Legal guardian(s) or ward(s)
Additionally, in accordance with California law, if such a relationship exists after employment or creates a conflict (such as through marriage or other familial bonds), the City reserves the right to address the conflict through reassignment or other appropriate measures to maintain compliance with this policy.

XXII. GRIEVANCE AND ARBITRATION PROCEDURE
A. Grievance and arbitration procedures shall be conducted in accordance with the City’s Personnel Rules and Regulations. Any allegation by an employee of the Union that there has been a violation of the MOU or the City’s Personnel Rules and Regulations shall be resolved in the following manner:

Step 1 Supervisor Level: Discussed between the Union and the supervisor where applicable. If the supervisor is the source of the complaint, the complainant may proceed directly to step 2.

Step 2 Human Resource Level: Discussed between the Union and the Human Resources Manager.

Step 3 City Manager’s Level: Discussed between the Union president, grievant, Business Agent and the City Manager or designee.

Step 4 Arbitration: Arbitration before an arbitrator.

B. Grievances shall be initially presented to the City at Step 1 by AFSCME within 14 calendar days from the occurrence of the dispute.

C. No grievance shall remain unresolved at any step after presentation for longer than seven (7) working days unless the timelines are agreed to be extended mutually by the parties. After seven (7) work days, AFSCME shall have the right to take it to the next step and will have seven (7) work days to advance the grievance to the next step.
33 D. AFSCME shall act with reasonable dispatch at each step.

E. Discipline is never subject to grievance.

F. There shall be no reprisals of any kind against grievant(s) or participant(s) in the grievance process.

G. AFSCME may refer an unresolved grievance for arbitration to an arbitrator designated by the State Mediation and Conciliation Service in accordance with the Labor Arbitration Rules. The parties shall confer as regards to the selection of a mutually agreeable arbitrator. If said meeting does not result in the selection of an arbitrator, then the Human Resources Manager shall mail to the State Mediation and Conciliation Service a request that a list of seven (7) qualified potential arbitrators be sent jointly to the Union and the City. Within ten (10) work days, the parties shall select an arbitrator by means of alternate striking of names until one name remains. Said individual shall be the arbitrator. Determination of which party shall make the initial strike shall be by lot. Parties shall then proceed to hearing conducted by the arbitrator. The arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the Labor Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association.

1. Questions of arbitrability shall be decided by the arbitrator.

2. The Arbitrator’s award shall be final and binding. The arbitrator shall have no power to add to or subtract from or modify any of the terms of this agreement. The fees and expenses of the arbitration shall be borne equally by the parties.

XXIII. UNION RIGHTS AND DUES DEDUCTION
A. The City of Artesia shall provide AFSCME Local with four (4) bulletin boards at no cost to the budget of the City. These board shall be located in:
a. City Hall Lounge
b. Community Center
c. Maintenance Shop (on Corby Avenue)
d. A.J. Padelford Park
e. Community Development and Planning Office (once fully operational) B. Preparation time for a simple grievance shall not exceed one and a half (1 ½) hours per grievance and for a complex grievance shall not exceed three (3) hours per grievance, however, if more time is needed it shall be granted when reasonable. 34 C. The Union shall be entitled to an aggregate of 80 hours of paid release time each fiscal year for use by the Union President and/or other Union representatives as designated by the Union President for the purpose of Union business related to ASFCME Local 1520 Council 36. In the event that the Union elects the same President for both the rank and file and Managers Union, the total time shall not exceed 80 hours. Representatives shall give the City Manager, their immediate supervisor and the Human Resources Manager a minimum notice of one (1) week in advance of the hours to be taken and certify that the release time is for Union business. No single union representative, including the Union President, may utilize more than 60 hours of Union business time in a single fiscal year. The City Manager reserves the right to deny a request for time off if the requested time impacts City services.

D. The City recognizes the employee’s right to representation by a Union officer at such time as the employer contemplates disciplinary action or any time thereafter.

It shall be the responsibility of the employee to request that the Union officer be present.

E. An employee is entitled to review the contents of their Personnel file. An AFSCME representative may assist such employees in reviewing the file. Material not in an employee’s file at the time of a disciplinary action may not be used against an employee in any subsequent hearing. Any employee, or employees’ representative with written consent and waiver of privacy rights, shall be entitled to review all of his/her personnel file. If an employee wishes to view his/her personnel file, the employee will schedule an appointment with the Human Resources Manager a minimum of 24 hours in advance of viewing time.

F. Only one official personnel file may be maintained by the City on each employee, which shall be kept by the Human Resources Manager in The Human Resources Office.

G. New Employee Orientation

1. The Union will be allowed up to one (1) hour during each New Employee orientation session to speak with new Unit members and to explain the rights and benefits under the M.O.U. The Union will be given notice of a new employee orientation at least ten (10) days prior to the session.

2. The City will hold new employee orientations on a quarterly basis, given there are new employees.
35 3. The City will provide the Union with an Excel electronic copy of the name, home address, personal and work email address, and personal cell phone number of all new bargaining unit employees quarterly; and remittance of the aggregate amount of all dues and other proper deductions made from the salaries of employees covered hereunder shall be made to AFSCME along with an electronic report detailing the employee's name, employee number, bargaining unit, classification title and pay rate, work location, work phone, work email, hire date and deduction amount(s) and type(s).

XXIV. SAVINGS AND AMENDMENT
Any of the rights, power, or authority the City had prior to the signing of this agreement are retained by the City, except those abridged, delegated or modified by this agreement, and then only to the extent that they are so abridged, delegated or modified provided that such management rights do not restrict employees from filing grievances.

XXV. NO STRIKE
A. The Union, its officers, agents, representatives and/or members agree that during the term of this Agreement, they will not cause or condone any strike, walkout, slowdown, sickout or any other job action by withholding or refusing to perform services when scheduled. Employees who strike may be subject under City Resolution 1283 to discipline up to and including termination by the City under the provisions of the agreement.

B. The City agrees that it shall not lock out its employees during the term of this Agreement. The term "lockout" is hereby defined so as not to include the discharge, suspension, termination, layoff, failure to recall, or failure to return to work of employees of the City in the exercise of its rights as set forth in any of the provisions of this Agreement or applicable ordinance or law.

C. Any employee who participates in any conduct prohibited in Section "R' above may be subject to termination by the City.
36 APPENDIX A

CITY OF ARTESIA UNIT MEMBERS
Class Title
Accounting Manager
Assistant Parks and Rec Manager
Bus License Specialist/Revenue Officer
City Clerk
Code Compliance Supervisor
Economic Dev Manager
Management Analyst
Parks and Recreation Manager
Planning Manager
Public Works Manager
Special Projects Manager
Parks and Recreation Supervisor
37 APPENDIX B
SALARY SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2025
(Attached)
38 City of Artesia Full-Time Allocated Classifications A B C D E F Annual $ 237,472.44 $ 243,409.32 $ 249,494.52 $ 255,731.88 $ 262,125.24 $ 268,678.32 Monthly $ 19,789.37 $ 20,284.11 $ 20,791.21 $ 21,310.99 $ 21,843.77 $ 22,389.86 Bi-Weekly 9,133.56 $ $ 9,361.90 $ 9,595.94 $ 9,835.84 $ 10,081.74 $ 10,333.78 Hourly $ 114.17 $ 117.02 $ 119.95 $ 122.95 $ 126.02 $ 129.17 Annual $ 173,426.76 $ 182,098.08 $ 191,202.96 $ 200,763.12 $ 210,801.24 $ 221,341.32 Monthly $ 14,452.23 $ 15,174.84 $ 15,933.58 $ 16,730.26 $ 17,566.77 $ 18,445.11 Bi-Weekly $ 6,670.26 $ 7,003.77 $ 7,353.96 $ 7,721.66 $ 8,107.74 $ 8,513.13 Hourly $ 83.38 $ 87.55 $ 91.92 $ 96.52 $ 101.35 $ 106.41 Annual $ 157,660.68 $ 165,543.72 $ 173,820.84 $ 182,511.96 $ 191,637.48 $ 201,219.36 Monthly $ 13,138.39 $ 13,795.31 $ 14,485.07 $ 15,209.33 $ 15,969.79 $ 16,768.28 Bi-Weekly $ 6,063.87 $ 6,367.07 $ 6,685.42 $ 7,019.69 $ 7,370.67 $ 7,739.21 Hourly $ 75.80 $ 79.59 $ 83.57 $ 87.75 $ 92.13 $ 96.74
Finance Manager Annual $ 143,327.88 $ 150,494.28 $ 158,019.00 $ 165,919.92 $ 174,215.88 $ 182,926.68 Human Resources Manager Monthly $ 11,943.99 $ 12,541.19 $ 13,168.25 $ 13,826.66 $ 14,517.99 $ 15,243.89 Bi-Weekly 5,512.61 $ $ 5,788.24 $ 6,077.65 $ 6,381.54 $ 6,700.61 $ 7,035.64 Hourly $ 68.91 $ 72.35 $ 75.97 $ 79.77 $ 83.76 $ 87.95
Economic Development Manager Annual $ 130,298.04 $ 136,812.96 $ 143,653.56 $ 150,836.28 $ 158,378.16 $ 166,296.96 Parks and Recreation Manager Monthly $ 10,858.17 $ 11,401.08 $ 11,971.13 $ 12,569.69 $ 13,198.18 $ 13,858.08 Public Works Manager Bi-Weekly 5,011.46 $ $ 5,262.04 $ 5,525.14 $ 5,801.40 $ 6,091.47 $ 6,396.04 Hourly $ 62.64 $ 65.78 $ 69.06 $ 72.52 $ 76.14 $ 79.95
City Clerk Annual $ 118,452.84 $ 124,375.44 $ 130,594.20 $ 137,123.88 $ 143,980.08 $ 151,179.12 Accounting Manager Monthly $ 9,871.07 $ 10,364.62 $ 10,882.85 $ 11,426.99 $ 11,998.34 $ 12,598.26 Planning Manager Bi-Weekly 4,555.88 $ $ 4,783.67 $ 5,022.85 $ 5,274.00 $ 5,537.70 $ 5,814.58 Hourly $ 56.95 $ 59.80 $ 62.79 $ 65.92 $ 69.22 $ 72.68
Annual $107,684.40 $113,068.56 $118,722.00 $124,658.04 $130,890.96 $137,435.52 Monthly $8,973.70 $9,422.38 $9,893.50 $10,388.17 $10,907.58 $11,452.96 Bi-Weekly $4,141.71 $4,348.79 $4,566.23 $4,794.54 $5,034.27 $5,285.98 Hourly $51.77 $54.36 $57.08 $59.93 $62.93 $66.07
Senior Accountant Annual $100,282.56 $102,789.60 $107,929.08 $113,325.48 $118,991.76 $124,941.36 Assistant Parks and Recreation Manager Monthly $8,356.88 $8,565.80 $8,994.09 $9,443.79 $9,915.98 $10,411.78 Bi-Weekly $3,857.02 $3,953.45 $4,151.12 $4,358.67 $4,576.61 $4,805.44 Hourly $48.21 $49.42 $51.89 $54.48 $57.21 $60.07
Executive Assistant Annual $88,995.36 $93,445.08 $98,117.40 $103,023.24 $108,174.36 $113,583.12 Management Analyst Monthly $7,416.28 $7,787.09 $8,176.45 $8,585.27 $9,014.53 $9,465.26 Human Resources Analyst** Bi-Weekly $3,422.90 $3,594.04 $3,773.75 $3,962.43 $4,160.55 $4,368.58 Hourly $42.79 $44.93 $47.17 $49.53 $52.01 $54.61
Parks and Recreation Supervisor Annual $82,878.12 $84,950.04 $89,197.56 $93,657.48 $98,340.36 $103,257.36 Code Compliance Supervisor Monthly $6,906.51 $7,079.17 $7,433.13 $7,804.79 $8,195.03 $8,604.78 Maintenance Supervisor** Bi-Weekly $3,187.62 $3,267.31 $3,430.68 $3,602.21 $3,782.32 $3,971.44 Business License Specialist/Revenue Officer Hourly $39.85 $40.84 $42.88 $45.03 $47.28 $49.64 Assistant Planner Annual $73,549.80 $77,227.32 $81,088.68 $85,143.12 $89,400.36 $93,870.36 Administrative Analyst Monthly $6,129.15 $6,435.61 $6,757.39 $7,095.26 $7,450.03 $7,822.53 Lead Maintenance Specialist Bi-Weekly $2,828.84 $2,970.28 $3,118.80 $3,274.74 $3,438.48 $3,610.40 Hourly $35.36 $37.13 $38.98 $40.93 $42.98 $45.13
Code Compliance Officer Annual $66,863.52 $70,206.72 $73,716.96 $77,402.88 $81,273.00 $85,336.68 Recreation Program Coordinator Monthly $5,571.96 $5,850.56 $6,143.08 $6,450.24 $6,772.75 $7,111.39 Accounting Technician II Bi-Weekly $2,571.67 $2,700.26 $2,835.27 $2,977.03 $3,125.88 $3,282.18 Maintenance Specialist I Hourly $32.15 $33.75 $35.44 $37.21 $39.07 $41.03 Annual $60,785.04 $63,824.28 $67,015.44 $70,366.20 $73,884.60 $77,578.80 Monthly $5,065.42 $5,318.69 $5,584.62 $5,863.85 $6,157.05 $6,464.90 Bi-Weekly $2,337.89 $2,454.78 $2,577.52 $2,706.39 $2,841.72 $2,983.80 Hourly $29.22 $30.68 $32.22 $33.83 $35.52 $37.30
Annual $55,259.04 $58,022.04 $60,923.16 $63,969.36 $67,167.72 $70,526.16 Monthly $4,604.92 $4,835.17 $5,076.93 $5,330.78 $5,597.31 $5,877.18 Bi-Weekly $2,125.35 $2,231.62 $2,343.20 $2,460.36 $2,583.37 $2,712.54 Hourly $26.57 $27.90 $29.29 $30.75 $32.29 $33.91
Annual $50,235.60 $52,747.32 $55,384.68 $58,153.92 $61,061.64 $64,114.68 Monthly $4,186.30 $4,395.61 $4,615.39 $4,846.16 $5,088.47 $5,342.89 Bi-Weekly $1,932.14 $2,028.74 $2,130.18 $2,236.69 $2,348.52 $2,465.95 Hourly $24.15 $25.36 $26.63 $27.96 $29.36 $30.82
Administrative Assistant Annual $45,668.64 $47,952.12 $50,349.72 $52,867.20 $55,510.56 $58,286.04 Recreation Specialist Monthly $3,805.72 $3,996.01 $4,195.81 $4,405.60 $4,625.88 $4,857.17 Bi-Weekly $1,756.49 $1,844.31 $1,936.53 $2,033.35 $2,135.02 $2,241.77 Hourly $21.96 $23.05 $24.21 $25.42 $26.69 $28.02
Hourly Positions Proposed P/H
Parking Enforcement $25.00
Recreation Leader III $20.00
Recreation Leader II $19.00
Recreation Leader I $18.00
R15
R12
R11
R10
R8
R9
Maintenance Worker II
R13 No Current Classification Assigned
R14 Planning Clerk**
Special Projects Manager
R7

CITY OF ARTESIA PROPOSED SALARY TABLE

SIX STEP RANGE
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Contracted City Manager
R1 Deputy City Manager
R2 Community Development Director
R3
R4
R5
R6
39 APPENDIX C

HOLIDAY CLOSURE SCHEDULE
2026
Closure from Friday, December 25, 2026 – Sunday, January 3, 2027 12/25 – Christmas Holiday
12/26-27 – Saturday/Sunday
12/28, 12/29, 12/30 – Holiday 3 days
12/31 – New Year’s Day Holiday observed
1/1 – Regular Friday Closure
1/2-3 – Saturday/Sunday
2027
Closure from Friday, December 24, 2027 – Sunday, January 2, 2028 12/24 – Christmas Holiday Observed
12/25-26 – Saturday/Sunday
12/27, 12/28, 12/29 – Holiday 3 days
12/30 – New Year’s Day Holiday observed
12/31 – Regular Friday Closure
1/1-2 – Saturday/Sunday
2028
Closure from Monday, December 25, 2028 – Monday, January 1, 2029 12/25 – Christmas Holiday
12/26, 12/27, 12/28 – Holiday 3 days
12/29 – Regular Friday Closure
12/30-31 – Saturday/Sunday
1/1 – New Years Day Holiday
40 FOR THE CITY OF ARTESIA:
___________________________________ Date _______________________ Abel Avalos, City Manager
___________________________________ Date _______________________ Ericka Jackson, Human Resources Manager
FOR AFSCME:
___________________________________ Date _______________________ Andrew Perry, President
___________________________________ Date _______________________ Karen Lee, Committee Member
___________________________________ Date _______________________ Wayne Palica, Business Agent
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________ Date _______________________ Cynthia Germano, City Labor Attorney

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 9, 2025 ITEM NO: 11B.

TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Resolution Regarding the Salaries and Benefits for Unrepresented Management Employees FROM: Abel Avalos, City Manager
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:

HongDao Nguyen, City Attorney
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council, by motion, Adopt Resolution No. 25-3040: A Resolution of the Council of the City of Artesia, California, Establishing a Compensation Plan and Salary Schedule for Unrepresented Management Employees of the City
BACKGROUND:

In October 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-2902, to establish a compensation plan and salary schedule for Unrepresented Management Employees of the City. Several confidential management-level employees are covered by this resolution for compensation and benefits. Those positions are the Deputy City Manager, Finance Manager, Human Resources Manager, Community Development Director, Human Resources Analyst and Executive Assistant. Resolution No. 22-2902 will expire on June 30, 2025.

A draft Resolution to cover July 1, 2025-June 30, 2029 has been prepared to expressly and formally specify what benefits unrepresented management employees will have. Those benefits and a salary schedule are memorialized in the attached resolution (Attachment 1), which is for Council consideration.

ANALYSIS
The proposed salary schedule and benefits were negotiated between the City and the unrepresented management employees. The following is a summary of the proposed schedule and benefits:

Positions: Defines the four “Unrepresented Management Employees” as Deputy City Manager, Finance Manager, Human Resources Manager, Community Development Director, Human Resources Analyst, and Executive Assistant.

Salary: Implements a six step salary table which represents bringing salaries to the 60th percentile of median salaries studied, consistent with all other employee bargaining units (table attached to Attachment 1); cost of living increases are July 1, 2026 – 3%, July 1, 2027 – 3%; July 1, 2028 – 3% At-will status: Positions continue to be at-will employees but eligible to receive a six-month severance under specified circumstances
Car allowance: $300 per month
Trades the Wellness Benefit of $100 per month to a $100 per month technology benefit Deferred compensation: Up to 3% of salary match
Education Expense: Tuition/student loan reimbursement of up to $4,000 per year Vacation/Holidays and Sick Leave: Vacation accruals based on years of eligible service. Mandatory payout of vacation and sick leave above an annual cap of 320 hours. Same holidays as other employees.

Administrative Leave: Eighty hours of administrative leave with no accumulation nor pay out upon separation.

Medical Benefits: coverage up to the Kaiser plan for the enrolled medical tier; with a $500 per month benefit to be paid if an employee opts-out of the City’s plan with proof of other coverage; $800 City contribution per calendar year into a health reimbursement account
Life insurance and disability: Life insurance coverage that is three times an employee’s salary or up to $300,000, whichever is less; participation in short term and long-term disability insurance coverage Term: The term of this Resolution will be from July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2029 The proposed salary schedule and benefits supports the most valuable asset the City has, its employees – who will be even more important to guiding the City into recovery in the coming years. With this in mind, it is recommended that the City Council approve the salary schedule and benefits.

FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed Resolution will have a fiscal impact, as noted above and as follows:

Increases salaries to 60th percentile of median salaries studied, consistent with all other employee positions Vehicle Allowance: Increased from $150 per month to $300 per month Education Reimbursement increased from $3,500 to $4,000 a year Cost of Living Increases – 3% in years 2-4.

Removes the wellness benefit and replaces with a technology benefit for the same rate.

Keeps medical benefit consistent with current practice
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:

Staff recommends that the City Council, by motion, Adopt Resolution No. 25-2040: A Resolution of the Council of the City of Artesia, California, Establishing a Compensation Plan and Salary Schedule for Unrepresented Management Employees of the City.

Attachments
Resolution No. 25-3040.pdf
1 RESOLUTION NO. 25-3040

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

ARTESIA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A

COMPENSATION PLAN AND SALARY SCHEDULE FOR

UNREPRESENTED MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES OF THE
CITY
WHEREAS, the City of Artesia desires to promote improved employer-employee relations between the City and its employees by establishing and presenting the rights and benefits for Unrepresented Management Employees.

WHEREAS, the City and Unrepresented Management Employees have negotiated terms for compensation and benefits and wish to memorialize the agreed to terms in this Resolution.

WHEREAS, this Resolution is adopted to provide reasonable and orderly procedures for the administration of employer-employee relations between the City and its Unrepresented Management Employees.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARTESIA DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

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

SECTION 2. Definitions.

The following definitions are specific to this Resolution:

A. “City of Artesia” or “City” shall mean the City of Artesia, a municipal corporation.

B. “Immediate Family shall include the employee’s and the employee’s spouse or domestic partner, their parent, grandparent, foster-parent, sibling, step-sibling, spouse, domestic partner, child, foster child, stepchild, or grandchild.

C. “Leave” shall mean authorized time away from work granted to an employee in accordance with the policies and provisions outlined in this Memorandum of Understanding, applicable City policies, and state or federal laws. Leave may include, but is not limited to, vacation, sick leave, holiday leave, bereavement leave, jury duty, and other approved absences.

D. “Unrepresented Management Employees” or “Employee” shall mean the Community Development Director, Deputy City Manager, Finance Manager, Human Resources Manager, Human Resources Analyst and Administrative Secretary. Additional classifications may be added as necessary.

SECTION 3. At Will Status & Severance.

A. Unrepresented Management Employees serve at the will of the City and may be removed at any time with or without cause. Probationary periods, if any, are established only for the purpose of education reimbursement, use of vacation and other related benefits. Probationary periods do not in any way impact the at-will nature of an Unrepresented Management Employee.

B. In the event an Unrepresented Management Employee is terminated by the City at any time that the Unrepresented Management Employee has completed their probationary period, is still willing and able to perform the duties of their position, and the termination is not because the Unrepresented Management Employee (1) has engaged in acts in bad faith and to the detriment of the City; (2) refuses or fails to act in accordance with any specific direction or order of the City; (3) exhibits in regard to their employment unfitness or unavailability for service, 2 misconduct, dishonesty, habitual neglect, or incompetence; or (4) is convicted of a crime involving dishonesty, breach of trust, or physical or emotional harm to any person, the Unrepresented Management Employee will be entitled to six (6) months of their base salary (minus applicable withholdings) (“Severance Benefits”) as of the time of the termination, contingent upon the Unrepresented Management Employee executing a release of a waiver and release of any and all claims against the City, its Councilmembers, officers, and employees, and a covenant not to sue any of those parties, in a form acceptable to the City. If the Unrepresented Management Employee fails or refuses to provide the City with a release of liability, the City may release them without cause without payment of Severance Benefits. Any dispute between the City Manager and an Unrepresented Management Employee regarding whether the Unrepresented Management Employee’s conduct disqualified them from receipt of Severance Benefits shall be resolved conclusively by the City Council, in its discretion, without right of appeal.

SECTION 4. Compensation.

A. Unrepresented Management Employees shall receive a salary as set forth in the Payroll Salary Schedule attached to this Resolution as Exhibit “A” which is incorporated herein by reference.

B. The City shall provide the following Cost of Living increases to Unrepresented Management Employees:

1. July 1, 2026: 3%

2. July 1, 2027: 3%

3. July 1, 2028: 3%
SECTION 5. Vehicle Allowance.

Unrepresented Management Employees shall receive a monthly vehicle allowance of $300.00 per month.

SECTION 6. Deferred Matching Contribution.

The City has adopted a 457(b) Deferred Compensation Plan ("457(b) Plan") under which all City employees are eligible to participate. The City will not make any matching contributions to the 457(b) Plan. The City will also adopt a 401(a) Deferred Compensation Plan ("401(a) Plan"). The 401(a) Plan terms will provide for a City matching contribution to be made on behalf of each employee, on a dollar-for-dollar basis, for the first three percent (3%) of each employee's base compensation that the employee contributed to the 457(b) Plan. Annual contributions to the 457(b) Plan and the 401(a) Plan are subject to the limits set by the IRS. Employees who are aged 50 or order at the end of the calendar year can make annual catch-up contributions to the 457(b) Plan.

SECTION 7. Technology Stipend.

Unrepresented managers shall receive a monthly technology stipend of $100 to support expenses related to technology required for their roles. This stipend may be used toward costs such as:
• Technology necessary for remote work (e.g., internet or equipment). • Cellular phone service bills.
• Other work-related technology expenses.

The stipend will be automatically applied each month and will be treated as taxable income. No additional documentation or receipts are required for disbursement.

SECTION 8. Education Reimbursement.
3 The City offers a discretionary Education Reimbursement Program to assist eligible employees in pursuing City-related courses, degree programs, or vocational training that enhance their skills and benefit the City’s operations.

Eligibility
A. Employee Eligibility:

This program is available exclusively to permanent, full-time, nonprobationary employees of the City.

1. Employees must be in good standing at the time of application and throughout the reimbursement process (they cannot be on an active performance improvement plan, and their most recent evaluation overall rating must be satisfactory or above).

B. Course Eligibility

1. Courses, degree programs, or vocational training must be directly related to the employee’s current role, enhance their job performance, or align with the City’s operational needs.

2. Approval is required prior to the employee beginning the course or training.

C. Benefit Details

1. Maximum Reimbursement:
a. Employees may be reimbursed for eligible education expenses up to a maximum of $4,000.00 per fiscal year.
b. This maximum includes both education reimbursement and student loan repayment.

2. Discretionary Nature: This benefit is discretionary and subject to available funds and approval by the City Manager and the Human Resources Manager.

3. Grade Requirements: For courses where grades of A-F are assigned, a grade of C or better is required for reimbursement eligibility.

4. Documentation: Employees must provide written evidence of successful course completion, such as transcripts, certificates, or other official documentation.

5. Reimbursement Exclusions: If an employee is terminated for poor performance or misconduct or resigns prior to the reimbursement being processed, the City is not obligated to provide payment under this program.

D. Application Process

1. Pre-Approval Exclusions:
a. If an employee is terminated for poor performance or misconduct or resigns prior to the reimbursement being processed, the City is not obligated to provide payment under this program.
b. Both the City Manager and the Human Resources Manager must approve the request in writing before the course begins.

2. Reimbursement Claims:
a. Upon successful completion of the course, employees must submit all required documentation, including proof of grade or completion and itemized receipts, to the Finance Manager for processing. b. Approved reimbursements will be processed in accordance with the City’s payroll or accounts payable schedule.

E. General Provisions

1. Participation in this program does not guarantee advancement, promotion, or any changes to the employee’s role or salary. 4 2. Employees are responsible for any costs that exceed the $4,000 annual limit or are not covered by the program.

SECTION 9. Life Insurance.

The City shall provide life insurance to Unrepresented Management Employees in amount of three times the Unrepresented Management Employee’s salary up to $300,000.00, whichever is less. Unrepresented Management Employees may purchase additional life insurance in $10,000 increments at their own expense. Unrepresented Management Employees may purchase life insurance for their dependents at their own expense.

SECTION 10. Health Reimbursement Account.

The City will contribute $800 per calendar year into a Health Reimbursement Account for each Unrepresented Management Employee. All laws regarding Health Reimbursement Accounts will apply.

SECTION 11. Working Out of Class and Provisional Assignments.

The City may assign employees to work out of class or grant provisional assignments based on the City's operational needs. Employees in such assignments may be eligible for a pay increase after completing 15 calendar days of service in the higher-level position.

If an out-of-class assignment is expected to last 15 days or longer, the Human Resources Manager may authorize a pay increase effective on the first day the out-of-class responsibilities are assumed. All requests for working out of class or provisional assignments must be submitted to and approved by the Human Resources Manager before the assignment begins.

Employees approved for working out of class or provisional assignment will receive a pay adjustment as follows:

1. The employee’s salary will be adjusted to Step A of the higher classification’s salary range or

2. If the employee’s current salary exceeds Step A of the higher classification, they will receive a minimum 5% pay increase, not to exceed the top step of the higher classification’s salary range.

SECTION 12. Vacation & Leave.

A. Vacation

1. Unrepresented Management Employees are not able to take vacation time until accrued. Vacation may only be taken at times agreeable to City Manager. No vacation shall be taken for a period exceeding the maximum hours accumulated at any given
time. Vacation leave only accrues when an Unrepresented Management Employee is in a paid status and not when an Unrepresented Management Employee is on a Leave of Absence for more than 30 days. Accrued vacation leave may not be used before completion of the initial six months of active service with the City of Artesia.

2. All Unrepresented Management Employee shall earn vacation time as follows:

Years of Eligible Service Accruals
0 2 weeks per year
1 2 weeks + 1 day per year
5 2 2 weeks + 2 days per year
3 2 weeks + 3 days per year
4 2 weeks + 4 days per year
5-15 3 weeks per year
16+ 4 weeks per year

3. Unrepresented Management Employees may only accrue vacation leave up to a maximum leave balance of 320 hours in a fiscal year.

4. Any accrued vacation leave above the 320-hour cap shall be paid out annually during the first pay period of December.

5. Upon separation from City employment, any accrued vacation leave will be paid out to Unrepresented Management Employee.

B. Sick Leave
Unrepresented Management Employee shall receive eight (8) hours of paid sick leave for each month of work when an Unrepresented Management Employee is on paid status. In accordance with the City Personnel Rules and Regulations an Unrepresented Management Employee that is unable to report to work due to personal or an Immediate Family member’s illness or injury, must contact the City Manager as soon as reasonably possible.

C. Permissible Uses of Sick Leave
Sick leave may be used for:

1. Personal illness, injury, or disability.

2. Medical or dental appointments.

4. Pregnancy-related complications, delivery, and recovery.

5. Other qualifying events authorized under state law.

D. Extended Illness or Injury
Employees anticipating an extended absence of five (5) days or more may be required to submit a physician’s statement detailing:
• The estimated length of absence.
• Any job restrictions or light-duty requirements.
• The employee’s ability to safely return to work.

CFRA leave and sick leave will run concurrently where applicable.

E. Exhaustion of Sick Leave.

Employees who exhaust their sick leave due to an extended illness or injury may use accrued vacation, compensatory time, or holiday leave as applicable.

F. Sick leave shall not be abused. The City reserves the right to require a satisfactory statement of a licensed physician in the event of suspected abuse when an employee misses work due to an illness, injury, or disability. The Human Resources Manager may require a written statement 6 from the attending physician or dentist to establish that the employee is or was incapacitated and unable to perform their duties or that the employee is capable of and released to return to the performance of all the duties of their position. The physician’s statement must verify that an injury or disability existed, its beginning and ending dates and/or the employee’s ability to return to work without presenting an immediate and significant risk to his/her own health or safety of others any other requirements in accordance with the City’s Sick Leave policy located in the Personnel Rules and Regulations. Abuse of sick leave shall be subject to progressive discipline.

G. Management may not require doctor’s verification for sick leave of less than three (3) days unless sick leave abuse is strongly suspected and reasonably demonstrated.

H. City holidays occurring during sick leave shall not be counted as days of sick leave.

I. Sick leave accruals will be modified or suspended as necessary to ensure that the maximum balance does not exceed these stipulated caps.

1. Unrepresented Management Employees may only accrue sick leave up to a maximum of 320 hours.

2. Any accrued sick leave above the 320-hour cap shall be paid out annually during the first pay period of December.

3. Upon separation from City employment, all accrued sick leave will be paid out to Unrepresented Management Employee.

J. Jury Duty
An employee summoned for mandatory jury duty during normal working hours is considered on duty and will receive their regular salary, provided:

Any jury fees received by the employee are remitted to the City.

Paid jury duty leave is limited to a maximum of thirty (30) days. The employee must present evidence of jury duty attendance to the Human Resources Office when service has been completed. On days when the employee is excused from jury duty or jury duty does not conflict with their work schedule, the employee must report to work. A certificate of mandatory jury service must be submitted to Human Resources to be eligible for compensation.

K. Bereavement Leave
Full-time employees are entitled to up to five (5) days of bereavement leave with pay upon the death of the following family members:

1. Parent (including stepparent, Mother and Father of spouse or registered domestic partner)

2. Spouse or registered domestic partner

3. Child (including stepchild, son-in-law, or daughter-in-law)

4. Sibling (including brother-in-law or sister-in-law of spouse or registered domestic partner)

5. Grandparent or grandchild

6. Court-appointed guardian or other verifiable guardian (subject to approval by the Human Resources Manager)
If an employee is required to work while on bereavement leave, that work shall be compensated as overtime.
7 Employees covered by this resolution are entitled to two (2) days of bereavement leave with pay upon the death of the following family members:

1. Aunt or uncle

L. Administrative Leave

1. Unrepresented Management Employees shall receive eighty (80) hours of administrative leave with pay per fiscal year. Administrative leave will be provided to Unrepresented Management Employees on a prorated basis based on date of hire and annually thereafter at the beginning of the fiscal year.

2. administrative leave does not accumulate from year to year.

Administrative Leave will not be paid out upon separation from City employment.

SECTION 13. Probation
Regular appointments following the completion of a probationary period shall be conducted in accordance with the City’s Personnel Rules and Regulations.

The initial probationary period is one (1) year but may be extended once, for a maximum of six (6) additional months, with the approval of both the Human Resources Manager and the Department Head.

An employee who has not completed the initial probationary period serves at the discretion of the Department Head and may be released from employment without cause. Such employees are not entitled to appeal their release.

SECTION 13. Medical Benefits.

A. The City will contribute an amount equal to the Region 3, CalPERS “Kaiser tier” level of benefits based on the eligible Bargaining Unit employee’s designated level of coverage (i.e., single, two-party, family). To the extent that said City contribution is in excess of the actual premium due for an employee, the employee may designate the excess to be used for payment of dental and/or vision premiums. Any excess amount cannot be cashed out or used for any other purpose.

B. If an Unrepresented Management Employee has a need to change coverage due to a change in family situation (e.g. single to single+1 or single+1 to family) appropriate documentation for the change must be received by the Human Resources Department. Following receipt and approval of the documentation, the City will contribute up to the next level in the employee’s current elected plan. Employees will be responsible for any premium cost differences. 8 C. Employees who choose not to enroll in the City of Artesia’s medical, dental, and vision benefit plans shall receive $500 per month as compensation.

Employees wishing to opt out must provide proof of alternate coverage that meets the minimum essential coverage requirements under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and complete any required opt-out documentation.

SECTION 13. Holidays.

A. The City shall observe the following holidays:

1. New Year’s Day

2. Martin Luther King Day

3. President’s Day

4. Cesar Chavez Day

5. Memorial Day

6. Juneteenth Day

7. Independence Day

8. Labor Day

9. Veteran’s Day

10. Thanksgiving Day

11. Friday after Thanksgiving Day

12. Christmas Day
*All holidays as declared by the Mayor
i. Designation of Holidays for Holiday Office Closure.

Effective calendar year 2026, City of Artesia offices shall be closed for a designated period during the week between the Christmas and the New Year holidays, as determined by the annual holiday schedule attached as Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein.

Unrepresented Management Employees will be paid three (3) days of holiday pay for the closure period.
ii. Essential Personnel: Employees whose roles are deemed essential and require their presence during the designated closure period shall be notified by their department head. Such employees will receive a holiday for use at an alternative time, subject to prior approval. Such time must be used within the six months following the holiday closure and not later than June 30th of the current fiscal year. iii. Department heads and supervisors are responsible for ensuring compliance with this policy and coordinating any necessary staffing adjustments. Questions regarding the Holiday Closure should be directed to the Human Resources Department.

B. Birthday Floating Holiday. Effective calendar year 2026, Unrepresented Management Employees will receive one (1) floating holiday each year, paid at 8 or 9 hours of straight time, depending on the employee’s assigned schedule.

This floating holiday must be used within the employee’s birthday month and will be forfeited if not used by the last day of that month.

C. When a holiday falls on a Saturday, the preceding workday shall be observed as the holiday. When a holiday falls on Sunday, the next day shall be observed as the holiday.

D. The City will continue the practice and return to the Unrepresented Management Employee any leave used if the Mayor or Council subsequently declare any day as a Holiday.

E. Unrepresented Management Employees who work on a holiday or holiday declared by the City Council, shall receive compensatory time equivalent to the 9 number of hours worked. Compensatory time must be used within the 12 months following when it is earned.

SECTION 14. Disability.

A. The City shall provide short-term disability and long-term disability insurance coverage to Unrepresented Management Employees.

B. Long Term Disability: The coverage amount is 66 2/3% of the employee's basic monthly earnings, excluding overtime, up to a maximum monthly benefit of $6,000.

C. Short Term Disability: The coverage amount is 66 2/3% of the employee's basic weekly earnings, excluding overtime, up to a maximum weekly benefit of $1,385.

D. Benefit payments are subject to all provisions of the master policy.

SECTION 15. Retirement.

A. CalPERS Contribution
Employees of the City of Artesia shall be fully responsible for paying 100% of the employee contribution toward their CalPERS retirement. The required contribution rate is determined based on the employee's membership date with CalPERS:

B. Retirement Formula
Tier I—2% at 60—All “classic” Unrepresented Management Employees covered under this provision of this Resolution shall have their final percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service determined in accordance with Section 21345.3 of the Public Employment Retirement Law.

Tier II—2% at 62—All “PEPRA” Unrepresented Management Employees covered under this provision of this Resolution hired on or after January 1, 2013 shall have their final percentage of final compensation to be provided each year of credited prior and current service determined in accordance with Section 7522.20 of the Public Employment Retirement Law based on Article 4 California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013.

C. Retiree Health

1. Current retirees and their dependents will have no change to their level of coverage.

2. Unrepresented Management Employees who retire from the City during the term of the Resolution shall receive monthly employer contributions for medical and dental coverage that is equal to the employer contribution for then-current Unrepresented Management Employees at the same level of coverage as required by Government Code section 10 22892. However, if a retiree removes a dependent from medical coverage that results in a tier coverage change (e.g. Family tier reduced to Employee +1), the retiree shall receive a reduced monthly employer contribution for medical and dental coverage that is equal to the employer contribution for then-current Unrepresented Management Employees in that new tier. A retiree may never receive an increase in the City’s monthly contribution amount as a result of a change in dependents, except as required by Government code section 22892 to ensure that the employer contribution is an equal amount for both current Unrepresented Management Employees and retirees in the same tier. To the extent that a retiree’s circumstances change, resulting in the need for increased coverage (e.g. Employee +1 increased to Family tier), the retiree shall continue to receive the same employer contribution for the tier at which they retired, subject to any increases required by Government Code section 22892. The retiree shall not be entitled to receive the employer contribution for the higher tier. The retiree will be responsible to continue paying the full employee share based on the level of coverage elected. If the share of cost is not paid by the retiree as required, within 30 days of receiving the invoice, all coverages will be terminated.
i. Retirees must apply for Medicare upon reaching eligibility. Once Medicare eligible, the retiree’s coverage will be reduced, and become a secondary plan to Medicare. The employee will incur a share of cost, based on the level of coverage elected. If the share of cost is not paid by the retiree as required, within 30 days of receiving the invoice, all coverages will be terminated. ii. Dependent coverage ends based on policy age limits. iii. Unrepresented Management Employees must work for the City for at least ten consecutive years and retire from the City in order for the employee to be eligible for retiree medical benefits and shall receive the PEMHCA Minimum Employer Contribution
pursuant to California Government Code section 22892.

SECTION 16. Term. This Resolution shall be in effect from July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2029. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the benefits provided under this Resolution shall begin on July 1, 2025.

SECTION 17. The City Manager, or their designee, is authorized to implement the terms and conditions of the Resolution and enter into any agreements deemed necessary subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein.

SECTION 18. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are declared to be severable.

SECTION 19. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon passage.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this 9
th day of June, 2025.
_____________________________

ALI SAJJAD TAJ, MAYOR
ATTEST:
11 _________________________________

JENNIFER ALDERETE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________

BEST BEST & KRIEGER, CITY ATTORNEY
12 EXHIBIT “A”
2025-26 UNREPRESENTED SALARY SCHEDULE
(Attached)
13 City of Artesia Full-Time Allocated Classifications A B C D E F Annual $ 237,472.44 $ 243,409.32 $ 249,494.52 $ 255,731.88 $ 262,125.24 $ 268,678.32 Monthly $ 19,789.37 $ 20,284.11 $ 20,791.21 $ 21,310.99 $ 21,843.77 $ 22,389.86 Bi-Weekly $ 9,133.56 $ 9,361.90 $ 9,595.94 $ 9,835.84 $ 10,081.74 $ 10,333.78 Hourly $ 114.17 $ 117.02 $ 119.95 $ 122.95 $ 126.02 $ 129.17 Annual $ 173,426.76 $ 182,098.08 $ 191,202.96 $ 200,763.12 $ 210,801.24 $ 221,341.32 Monthly $ 14,452.23 $ 15,174.84 $ 15,933.58 $ 16,730.26 $ 17,566.77 $ 18,445.11 Bi-Weekly $ 6,670.26 $ 7,003.77 $ 7,353.96 $ 7,721.66 $ 8,107.74 $ 8,513.13 Hourly $ 83.38 $ 87.55 $ 91.92 $ 96.52 $ 101.35 $ 106.41 Annual $ 157,660.68 $ 165,543.72 $ 173,820.84 $ 182,511.96 $ 191,637.48 $ 201,219.36 Monthly $ 13,138.39 $ 13,795.31 $ 14,485.07 $ 15,209.33 $ 15,969.79 $ 16,768.28 Bi-Weekly $ 6,063.87 $ 6,367.07 $ 6,685.42 $ 7,019.69 $ 7,370.67 $ 7,739.21 Hourly $ 75.80 $ 79.59 $ 83.57 $ 87.75 $ 92.13 $ 96.74
Finance Manager Annual $ 143,327.88 $ 150,494.28 $ 158,019.00 $ 165,919.92 $ 174,215.88 $ 182,926.68 Human Resources Manager Monthly $ 11,943.99 $ 12,541.19 $ 13,168.25 $ 13,826.66 $ 14,517.99 $ 15,243.89 Bi-Weekly $ 5,512.61 $ 5,788.24 $ 6,077.65 $ 6,381.54 $ 6,700.61 $ 7,035.64 Hourly $ 68.91 $ 72.35 $ 75.97 $ 79.77 $ 83.76 $ 87.95
Economic Development Manager Annual $ 130,298.04 $ 136,812.96 $ 143,653.56 $ 150,836.28 $ 158,378.16 $ 166,296.96 Parks and Recreation Manager Monthly $ 10,858.17 $ 11,401.08 $ 11,971.13 $ 12,569.69 $ 13,198.18 $ 13,858.08 Public Works Manager Bi-Weekly $ 5,011.46 $ 5,262.04 $ 5,525.14 $ 5,801.40 $ 6,091.47 $ 6,396.04 Hourly $ 62.64 $ 65.78 $ 69.06 $ 72.52 $ 76.14 $ 79.95
City Clerk Annual $ 118,452.84 $ 124,375.44 $ 130,594.20 $ 137,123.88 $ 143,980.08 $ 151,179.12 Accounting Manager Monthly $ 9,871.07 $ 10,364.62 $ 10,882.85 $ 11,426.99 $ 11,998.34 $ 12,598.26 Planning Manager Bi-Weekly $ 4,555.88 $ 4,783.67 $ 5,022.85 $ 5,274.00 $ 5,537.70 $ 5,814.58 Hourly $ 56.95 $ 59.80 $ 62.79 $ 65.92 $ 69.22 $ 72.68
Annual $107,684.40 $113,068.56 $118,722.00 $124,658.04 $130,890.96 $137,435.52 Monthly $8,973.70 $9,422.38 $9,893.50 $10,388.17 $10,907.58 $11,452.96 Bi-Weekly $4,141.71 $4,348.79 $4,566.23 $4,794.54 $5,034.27 $5,285.98 Hourly $51.77 $54.36 $57.08 $59.93 $62.93 $66.07
Senior Accountant Annual $100,282.56 $102,789.60 $107,929.08 $113,325.48 $118,991.76 $124,941.36 Assistant Parks and Recreation Manager Monthly $8,356.88 $8,565.80 $8,994.09 $9,443.79 $9,915.98 $10,411.78 Bi-Weekly $3,857.02 $3,953.45 $4,151.12 $4,358.67 $4,576.61 $4,805.44 Hourly $48.21 $49.42 $51.89 $54.48 $57.21 $60.07
Executive Assistant Annual $88,995.36 $93,445.08 $98,117.40 $103,023.24 $108,174.36 $113,583.12 Management Analyst Monthly $7,416.28 $7,787.09 $8,176.45 $8,585.27 $9,014.53 $9,465.26 Human Resources Analyst** Bi-Weekly $3,422.90 $3,594.04 $3,773.75 $3,962.43 $4,160.55 $4,368.58 Hourly $42.79 $44.93 $47.17 $49.53 $52.01 $54.61
Parks and Recreation Supervisor Annual $82,878.12 $84,950.04 $89,197.56 $93,657.48 $98,340.36 $103,257.36 Code Compliance Supervisor Monthly $6,906.51 $7,079.17 $7,433.13 $7,804.79 $8,195.03 $8,604.78 Maintenance Supervisor** Bi-Weekly $3,187.62 $3,267.31 $3,430.68 $3,602.21 $3,782.32 $3,971.44 Business License Specialist/Revenue Officer Hourly $39.85 $40.84 $42.88 $45.03 $47.28 $49.64 Assistant Planner Annual $73,549.80 $77,227.32 $81,088.68 $85,143.12 $89,400.36 $93,870.36 Administrative Analyst Monthly $6,129.15 $6,435.61 $6,757.39 $7,095.26 $7,450.03 $7,822.53 Lead Maintenance Specialist Bi-Weekly $2,828.84 $2,970.28 $3,118.80 $3,274.74 $3,438.48 $3,610.40 Hourly $35.36 $37.13 $38.98 $40.93 $42.98 $45.13
Code Compliance Officer Annual $66,863.52 $70,206.72 $73,716.96 $77,402.88 $81,273.00 $85,336.68 Recreation Program Coordinator Monthly $5,571.96 $5,850.56 $6,143.08 $6,450.24 $6,772.75 $7,111.39 Accounting Technician II Bi-Weekly $2,571.67 $2,700.26 $2,835.27 $2,977.03 $3,125.88 $3,282.18 Maintenance Specialist I Hourly $32.15 $33.75 $35.44 $37.21 $39.07 $41.03 Annual $60,785.04 $63,824.28 $67,015.44 $70,366.20 $73,884.60 $77,578.80 Monthly $5,065.42 $5,318.69 $5,584.62 $5,863.85 $6,157.05 $6,464.90 Bi-Weekly $2,337.89 $2,454.78 $2,577.52 $2,706.39 $2,841.72 $2,983.80 Hourly $29.22 $30.68 $32.22 $33.83 $35.52 $37.30
Annual $55,259.04 $58,022.04 $60,923.16 $63,969.36 $67,167.72 $70,526.16 Monthly $4,604.92 $4,835.17 $5,076.93 $5,330.78 $5,597.31 $5,877.18 Bi-Weekly $2,125.35 $2,231.62 $2,343.20 $2,460.36 $2,583.37 $2,712.54 Hourly $26.57 $27.90 $29.29 $30.75 $32.29 $33.91
Annual $50,235.60 $52,747.32 $55,384.68 $58,153.92 $61,061.64 $64,114.68 Monthly $4,186.30 $4,395.61 $4,615.39 $4,846.16 $5,088.47 $5,342.89 Bi-Weekly $1,932.14 $2,028.74 $2,130.18 $2,236.69 $2,348.52 $2,465.95 Hourly $24.15 $25.36 $26.63 $27.96 $29.36 $30.82
Administrative Assistant Annual $45,668.64 $47,952.12 $50,349.72 $52,867.20 $55,510.56 $58,286.04 Recreation Specialist Monthly $3,805.72 $3,996.01 $4,195.81 $4,405.60 $4,625.88 $4,857.17 Bi-Weekly $1,756.49 $1,844.31 $1,936.53 $2,033.35 $2,135.02 $2,241.77 Hourly $21.96 $23.05 $24.21 $25.42 $26.69 $28.02
Hourly Positions Proposed P/H
Parking Enforcement $25.00
Recreation Leader III $20.00
Recreation Leader II $19.00
Recreation Leader I $18.00
R15
R12
R11
R10
R8
R9
Maintenance Worker II
R13 No Current Classification Assigned
R14 Planning Clerk**
Special Projects Manager
R7

CITY OF ARTESIA PROPOSED SALARY TABLE

SIX STEP RANGE
Fiscal Year 2025-26
Contracted City Manager
R1 Deputy City Manager
R2 Community Development Director
R3
R4
R5
R6
14 EXHIBIT “B”

HOLIDAY CLOSURE SCHEUDLE
2026
Closure from Friday, December 25, 2026 – Sunday, January 3, 2027 12/25 – Christmas Holiday
12/26-27 – Saturday/Sunday
12/28, 12/29, 12/30 – Holiday 3 days
12/31 – New Year’s Day Holiday observed
1/1 – Regular Friday Closure
1/2-3 – Saturday/Sunday
2027
Closure from Friday, December 24, 2027 – Sunday, January 2, 2028 12/24 – Christmas Holiday Observed
12/25-26 – Saturday/Sunday
12/27, 12/28, 12/29 – Holiday 3 days
12/30 – New Year’s Day Holiday observed
12/31 – Regular Friday Closure
1/1-2 – Saturday/Sunday
2028
Closure from Monday, December 25, 2028 – Monday, January 1, 2029 12/25 – Christmas Holiday
12/26, 12/27, 12/28 – Holiday 3 days
12/29 – Regular Friday Closure
12/30-31 – Saturday/Sunday
1/1 – New Years Day Holiday

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 9, 2025 ITEM NO: 11C.

TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Financial Plan and Approving a Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26 FROM: Jamie Murguia, Finance Manager
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:

Melissa Burke, Deputy City Manager
Abel Avalos, City Manager
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council, by motion, adopt:

1. Resolution No. 25-3049, Adopting a Financial Plan and Approving a Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26;

2. Resolution No. 25-3050, Determining and Adopting an Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2025-26 for the City of Artesia in Accordance With Article XIIB of the Constitution of the State of California;

3. Resolution No. 25-3051, Approving and Adopting a City-Wide Salary Schedule as Required by the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CALPERS) For, Respectively, Unrepresented Management Employees, Employees of the Managers and Supervisors Unit, and Employees of the General Unit;

4. Resolution No. 25-3052, Approving a Statement of Investment Policy, and Repealing Resolution No. 25-3030; and

5. Resolution No. 25-3053, Adopting a Citywide Capital Improvement Program.

BACKGROUND:

The Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26 Budget process began with a City Council goal-setting session held on March 5, 2025. The City Council met to set both early action goals and long-term priorities for the upcoming fiscal year.

Council's goals established the strategic direction of the FY 2025-26 spending plan. The Action Goals were identified as those that would address the community’s most pressing needs:

Enhance Public Safety
Implement Capital Improvement Projects
Invest in Staff Development
Two additional goals were identified as long-term goals:

Expand City Offerings
Increase Economic Development
Following the goal-setting session, the City Manager and Finance Manager convened meetings with staff to gather departmental input and budget requests. The City Manager, Deputy City Manager and Finance Manager then aligned these requests with Council's goals to establish a draft Budget. Staff convened the Finance Committee on May 14, 2025 for a briefing on the draft Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget prior to bringing it before the City Council. The draft Budget was then presented to the City Council at the Budget Study Session held on June 2, 2025, where the General Fund Budget and Capital Improvement Plan Budget were reviewed in detail.

ANALYSIS:

The FY 2025-26 Budget advances all of the goals set by the City Council, with significant financial investment in the Early Action Goals.

GENERAL FUND REVENUES
The City’s General Fund revenue is up, in large part due to the passage of Measure AAA,which implemented the City’s Transaction and Use Tax (TUT), as well as a fully implemented Cannabis Tax. Fiscal Year 2025-26 will be the first year the City sees a full cycle of these revenue sources. Together, the two account for $3.9 million in added revenue to the General Fund Budget, providing the City more resources to accomplish the Goals set by the City Council. As shown in the Chart below, the City relies heavily on Sales Tax for General Fund Revenue. The addition of TUT funds significantly increases the revenue base, allowing for a higher level of service delivery to the Artesia community. Overall, General Fund Revenue is budgeted at $18,844,326, up 26.4% from FY 2024-25. 1 GENERAL FUND REVENUES
The Budget estimates a modest General Fund surplus of $205,585.

GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
The FY 2025-26 General Fund Budget funds the City’s general operating expenses; including public safety, public works, parks and facility maintenance, community events, recreational programs, senior services, and personnel to serve the community. General Fund Expenditure is $18,638,741 an increase of 21.87% over Fiscal Year 2024-25. 2 GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
In furtherance of the Council’s goals, the Budget includes funding for numerous contracts, programs, capital improvement projects, and personnel development.

Enhance Public Safety
The FY 2025-26 Budget invests $6,268,956 in Public Safety. The contract with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department for law enforcement services increased 5% over Fiscal Year 2024-25 levels. The proposed Public Safety budget fully funds the City’s four-person Special Assignment Officer (SAO) team and dedicated Sergeant. In addition, the General Fund allocates $300,000 for a private security contract, to provide supplemental public safety patrols for a maximum effect within the community. Further, as specified in the Capital Improvement Plan, special revenue funds will be utilized to address deputies’ needs, including $160,000 for the purchase of a new Sergeant’s vehicle and additional Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) cameras to be installed throughout the City. The Budget includes an additional $29,500 in funding for the City’s home alarm rebate program to increase neighborhood safety, provides funding for a commercial alarm rebate program, and provides funding for scholarship opportunities for at-risk youth.

Implement Capital Improvement Projects
The FY 2025-26 budget for the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) boasts over $17 million in projects, from combined funding sources. The CIP utilizes a variety of funding sources, including Development Impact Fees; county, state, and federal grants; Gas Tax; SB1; and Local Return Funds. Maximizing and leveraging all available resources results in a variety of projects that carries out the City Council's goals.

The Budget directs well over $7.5 million towards road improvements. The Budget proposes to supplement its $6 million award of congressionally directed grants with additional funding sources in an effort to address more infrastructure needs throughout the City.

In Public Works, the General Fund Budget allocates $85,000 towards the refurbishment of the Water Tower. These funds will be used towards a structural assessment and maintenance of the City’s most notable landmark. The Budget also allocates $150,000 towards the replacement of two Public Works vehicles. With the replacement of these vehicles, the City will complete the multi-year process of cycling out all aging fleet vehicles and upgrading its vehicle fleet. The Budget also allocates $196,000 towards capital projects for the repair of sidewalks, curbs, and gutters.

In Parks and Recreation, the CIP Budget allocates more than $6.69 million towards capital improvements of current facilities, expanded open space at AJ Padelford Park, and the construction of the Artesia Botanical Garden Invest in Staff Development
The FY 2025-26 Budget advances the goal of Staff Development in a multitude of ways, not the least of which is the implementation of market-rate salaries across all positions. This salary adjustment as well as continued investment in health and welfare benefits, makes the City an attractive place to work, and will go a long way toward recruiting top-level talent and retaining experienced and productive employees. In addition, the Budget invests in current staff by filling vacancies with internal personnel – providing current employees an opportunity for career advancement within their City employment.

Further, in an effort to better serve the community and create a more structurally sustainable organization, the City created a Maintenance Supervisor position and reassigned the Special Projects Manager from the City Manager’s Department to Public Works, added a Planning Clerk to the Planning Division, and a Human Resources Analyst to Human Resources.

The FY 2025-26 Budget also includes nearly $27,000 for a new part-time management internship program, with the goal of connecting college or advance-degree seeking students with an opportunity to work on local government projects.

Expand City Offerings
The FY 2025-26 Budget allocates funding to Administrative Services, Community Development, and the City Clerk departments to further digitize the City’s records, making them easier for the public to access.

The Budget allocates $120,000 to Community Development
to acquire new permitting, and plan processing software and implementing GIS mapping technology. Together, these systems will allow the department to make planning services more available to the public, as well as function more efficiently internally.

For the City’s senior community, the FY 2025-26 Budget allocates an additional $40,000 for Senior Programming.

These additional funds will be used towards the senior meal program, as well as to offer expanded social opportunities for the senior community.

The Budget also proposes increased funding for the City’s youth, with $10,000 allocated towards a revised graduation banner program that will cover the costs of the banners for all graduating high school students that live in Artesia, ensuring the celebration of their accomplishments.

Increase Economic Development
A strategic initiative of the City Manager’s Office is the creation of a Business Improvement District (BID) in the downtown area of Artesia. The BID would be a collaborative effort between the City, business owners, and property owners to foster a more vibrant downtown and local economy. The FY 2025-26 Budget allocates $75,000 to the Economic Development Department to begin the process of developing the BID.

In addition, the Budget allocates $13,000 for business recognition and the expansion and promotion of Restaurant Week. The City has hosted Restaurant Week for the past three years, with 2025 having the highest level of participation. The City wants to continue to invest in the promotion and success of its local businesses and restaurants and introduce new events to celebrate the importance of our business partners.

Staff is presenting Council with a balanced budget that provides meaningful progress towards the Goals established by Council earlier this year. The Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget focuses on investing in the Artesia community – its residents, businesses, and the personnel that serve it.

Staff is proud to propose a Budget for adoption that accomplishes a high level of service delivery and programming while maintaining the City’s fiscal integrity.

Appropriations Limit
In November 1979 Voters approved Proposition 4, adding Article XIIIB to the State of California's Constitution, which established annual Appropriations Limits on state and local governmental entities. This is also referred to as the “GANN Limit,” and establishes a limit on the proceeds of taxes that may be appropriated for spending in a fiscal year. Proceeds of taxes would include, for example, revenues derived from regulatory licenses, user charges, and user fees to the extent that the proceeds exceed the cost of providing the regulation, product or service; state subventions for general purposes; and interest earned from the investment of the proceeds of taxes. Of the City's General Fund revenue, $16,164,990 is considered proceeds of taxes. Exclusions can be made from the Appropriations Limit for capital outlay. The City has $509,011 in exclusions. The annual adjustment is calculated using population and per-capita personal income inflation factors provided by the State of California's Department of Finance. For Fiscal Year 2025-26, the Appropriations Limit has been calculated to be $16,159,149. The City is within its GANN limit based on applicable proceeds of taxes revenue and capital outlay exclusions.

FISCAL IMPACT:

General Fund Expenditures and Transfers-out total $18,638,741, while General Fund Revenues and Transfers-in total $18,844,326. The impact of adopting the Fiscal Year 2025-26 is a net surplus of $205,585 to the General Fund.

RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:

Staff recommends that the City Council, by motion, adopt:

1. Resolution No. 25-3049, Adopting a Financial Plan and Approving a Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26;

4. Resolution No. 25-3052, Approving a Statement of Investment Policy, and Repealing Resolution No. 25-3030; and

5. Resolution No. 25-3053, Adopting a Citywide Capital Improvement Program.

Attachments
Budget FY2025-26.pdf
Reso. No. 25-3049 (Budget).pdf
Reso. No. 25-3050 (GANN).pdf
Reso. No. 25-3051 (Salary Schedule).pdf
Reso. No. 25-3052 (Investment Policy).pdf
Reso. No. 25-3053 (CIP).pdf

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction4
Budgeting Process9
Financial Policies 10
Organizational Chart 17
Executive Summary 18
Priorities and Issues 19
Personnel Changes 34
Salary Schedule 38
Departments Summary 40
General Fund 41
City Council 50
City Attorney 54
City Manager 57
City Clerk 62
Administration 67
Human Resources 73
Risk Management 78
Artesia Towne Center 82
Finance 86
Planning 93
Building and Safety 98
Economic Development 102
City Engineer 106
Code Compliance 110
Parking Enforcement 115
Parks and Recreation 120
Community Promotions 126
Public Works 130
Public Safety 136
Funds Summary Overview 140
Summer Lunch Program 143
Artesia Housing Authority 148
AJ Paddleford Park Expansion 154
Bicycle/Pedestrian TDA 3 159
Billboard 164
YOUTH ACTIVITIES LEAGUE (YAL) GRANT 169
Citizen Options Public Safety (Cops) 174
Community Facilities District 179
CDBG 184
Lacmta Measure M 189
Lacmta Measure R 194
Lacmta Tod 199
Prop A/Park Improvement Fund 204
Lacmta Proposition A 209
Lacmta Proposition C 214
SB1 RMRA 219
Scaqmd 224
Gas Tax, State 229
Street Light Maint. District 235
Cal Fire Urban Grant 240
Development Fees 245
Measure W 250
Recycled Oil 257
Public, Education and Government (PEG) 261
CNRA Specified Grant 266
Housing Urban Development 271
SB 1383 Local Assistance Grant 276
Bond Project Pioneer Blvd 281
Bond Project Housing 285
Successor Agency Admin 287
Successor Agency Bond 291
Successor Agency RORF 296
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT 301
Capital Improvement Plan 306
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) 307
Appendix 312
Glossary 313

TRANSMITTAL LETTER

CITY OF ARTESIA

BUDGET MESSAGE AND TRANSMITTAL LETTER
June 9, 2025
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council,
I am pleased to transmit to you the proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26 Budget. The Budget is the result of a collaborative effort, led by the City Manager’s Office and the Finance Department. Department Heads and City personnel worked hard to ensure that City Council goals and priorities are met, and the highest-level services are provided to the Artesia community, while remaining focused on the City’s long-term financial health.

With a significant increase to the City’s General Fund anticipated in FY 2025-26 – as a result of the passage of Measure AAA in November 2024, and the fully implemented Cannabis Tax – it was critical to have Council’s input early in the Budget process to ensure Staff developed a Budget that aligned with Council priorities and addressed the community’s needs.

The foundation of the FY 2025-26 Budget was laid on March 5, 2025 when Council met and developed early action and long-term goals for the City of Artesia. The Action Goals were identified as those that would address the community’s most pressing needs:

Enhance Public Safety
Implement Capital Improvement Projects
Invest in Staff Development
Two additional goals were identified as long-term goals:

Expand City Offerings
Increase Economic Development
I am pleased to share that the FY 2025-26 Budget advances all of these goals, in meaningful ways that will have a positive and direct impact on the residents of and business-owners in Artesia.

GENERAL FUND REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES
The City’s General Fund revenue is up, in large part due to the passage of Measure AAA,which implemented the City’s Transaction and Use Tax (TUT), as well as a fully implemented Cannabis Tax. Fiscal Year 2025-26 will be the first year the City sees a full cycle of those revenue sources. Together, the two account for $3.9 million in added revenue to the General Fund Budget, providing the City more resources to accomplish the Goals set by the City Council. As shown in the Chart below, the City relies heavily on Sales Tax for General Fund Revenue. The addition of TUT funds significantly increases the revenue base, allowing for a higher level of service delivery to the Artesia community. 1 GENERAL FUND REVENUE
Introduction
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 4
Conservative revenue projections were used to estimate the City’s revenue. Given the uncertainty in the global economy, Staff wanted to remain optimistic but responsible in their projections. Overall, General Fund Revenue is budgeted at $18,844,326, up 26.4% from Fiscal Year 2024-25. The Budget estimates a modest General Fund surplus of $205,585.

The FY 2025-26 General Fund Budget funds the City’s general operating expenses; including public safety, public works, parks and facility maintenance, community events, recreational programs, senior services, and personnel to serve the community. General Fund Expenditure is $18,638,741 an increase of 21.87% over Fiscal Year 2024-25. 2 GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
Introduction
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 5
HIGHLIGHTS OF PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 BUDGET
In furtherance of the Council’s goals, the Budget includes funding for numerous contracts, programs, capital improvement projects, and personnel development.

Not only does the FY 2025-26 Budget invest in services, but it also invests in the community. The Budget includes an additional $29,500 in funding for the City’s home alarm rebate program to increase neighborhood safety, provides funding for a commercial alarm rebate program, and provides funding for scholarship opportunities for at-risk youth.

Implement Capital Improvement Projects
Perhaps one of the most exciting components of the FY 2025-26 Budget is the investment in Capital Improvement Projects. The budget for the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) boasts over $17 million in projects, from combined funding Introduction
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 6
sources. The CIP utilizes a variety of funding sources, including Development Impact Fees; county, state, and federal grants; Gas Tax; SB1; and Local Return Funds. Maximizing and leveraging all available resources results in a variety of projects that carries out the City Council's goals.

The Budget allocates $50,000 to Community Development to acquire new permitting software and begin the process of implementing GIS technology. Together, these systems will allow the department to make planning services more available to the public, as well as function more efficiently internally.

For the City’s senior community, the FY 2025-26 Budget allocates an additional $40,000 for Senior Programming. These additional funds will be used towards the senior meal program, as well as to offer expanded social opportunities for the senior community.

The Budget also proposes increased funding for the City’s youth, with $10,000 allocated towards a revised graduation banner program that will cover the costs of the banners for all graduating students that live in Artesia, ensuring the celebration of their accomplishments.

Increase Economic Development
Introduction
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 7
A strategic initiative of the City Manager’s Office is the creation of a Business Improvement District (BID) in the downtown area of Artesia. The BID would be a collaborative effort between the City, business owners, and property owners to foster a more vibrant downtown and local economy. The FY 2025-26 Budget allocates $75,000 to the Economic Development Department to begin the process of developing the BID.

In addition, the Budget allocates $11,000 for business recognition and the expansion and promotion of Restaurant Week.

The City has hosted Restaurant Week for the past two years, with 2025 having the highest level of participation. The City wants to continue to invest in the promotion and success of its local businesses and restaurants and introduce new events to celebrate the importance of our business partners.

CONCLUSION
It is my sincere pleasure to present the Council with a balanced budget that provides meaningful progress towards the Goals established by Council earlier this year. The Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget focuses on investing in the Artesia community – its residents, businesses, and the personnel that serve it. I am proud to say that the proposed Budget accomplishes a high level of service delivery and programming while maintaining the City’s fiscal integrity.

It is my recommendation that the City Council adopt the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget as presented.

Sincerely,
Abel Avalos
City Manager
Introduction
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 8

BUDGETING PROCESS
The kickoff to the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget process was a City Council goal-setting session held on March 5, 2025. The City Council met to set both early action goals and long-term priorities for the upcoming fiscal year. Council's goals established the strategic direction of the Fiscal Year 2025-26 spending plan.

From there, the City Manager and Finance Manager met with Department Heads to get their input and budget requests.

The City Manager, Deputy City Manager and Finance Manager then aligned these requests with Council's goals to establish a draft Budget. Staff convened the Finance Committee on May 14, 2025 for a briefing on the draft Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget prior to bringing it before the City Council. The draft Budget was then presented to the City Council at the Budget Study Session held on June 2, 2025, where the General Fund Budget and Capital Improvement Plan Budget were reviewed in detail. The final Budget went before the City Council on June 9, 2025 for adoption.

Budgeting Process
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 9

FINANCIAL POLICIES

CITY OF ARTESIA

STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY
Fiscal Year 2025-26

1. POLICY:

This statement is intended to provide guidelines for the prudent investment of the temporarily idle cash of the City of Artesia (City) and outline the policies for maximizing the efficiency of the City's cash management system. The City of Artesia shall invest public funds in such a manner as to comply with state and local laws; ensure prudent money management; provide for daily cash flow requirements; and meet the objectives of the Policy, in priority order of Safety, Liquidity and Return on investment.

1. SCOPE:

This investment policy applies to all financial assets and investment activities of the City, except for proceeds of debt issuance. Debt proceeds shall be invested in accordance with the "Permitted Investments" and/or investment provisions for each specific bond indenture and/or bond document.

The Policy applies to the following funds, and is accounted for in the City's annual audited financial statements.

1. 1.

A. General Fund
B. Special Revenue Funds
C. Debt Service Funds
D. Capital Improvement Funds
E. Enterprise Funds
F. Internal Service Funds
G. Successor Agency Funds
H. Any joint powers authority funds.

2. STANDARDS OF PRUDENCE:

The City Treasurer authorized to make investment decisions on behalf of the City of Artesia investing public funds pursuant to this policy is a trustee, and therefore a fiduciary subject to the prudent investor standard. When investing, reinvesting, purchasing, acquiring, exchanging, selling, and managing public funds, the City Treasurer shall act with care, skill, prudence, and diligence under the circumstances then prevailing, that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiarity with those matters would use in the conduct of funds of a like character and with like aims, to safeguard the principal and maintain the liquidity needs of the agency. Within the limitations of this section and considering individual investments as part of an overall strategy, the City Treasurer is authorized to acquire investments as authorized by law.

1. INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES:

When investing, reinvesting, purchasing, acquiring, exchanging, selling, and managing public funds, the primary objective of the City Treasurer shall be to safeguard the principal of the funds under its control. The secondary objective shall be to meet the liquidity needs of the City. The third objective shall be to achieve a market average rate of return Financial Policies
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 10
consistent with the primary objectives of safety and liquidity, throughout budgetary and economic cycles. At no time should safety or liquidity be compromised in exchange for higher yields.

1. Safety: Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments of the City of Artesia shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. To attain this objective, the City Treasurer will diversify its investments by investing funds among a variety of securities with independent returns.

2. Liquidity: The City’s investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City of Artesia to meet all operating requirements which might be reasonably anticipated.

3. Return on Investments: The City's investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of obtaining a reasonable and competitive market rate of return taking into consideration risk constraints, prudent investment principles, and the cash flow characteristics of the portfolio.

4. AUTHORITY:

The authority to invest City funds is vested in the City Treasurer in accordance with Artesia Municipal Code 2-4.305. All investment decisions and investment of funds shall be made in full compliance with this policy, the California Government Code Sections 53600 et. seq., and all other relevant state and federal requirements as well as any amendments or additions to such requirements.

Management responsibility for the investment of City funds is vested in the City Treasurer who shall prepare written procedures for the operation of the investment program and safekeeping of investment instruments consistent with this investment policy.

1. ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST:

Elected officials and employees of the City involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program, or which could impair their ability to make impartial decisions under the Political Reform Act and Government Code Section 1090 et seq. Elected officials and employees shall disclose to the City Manager any material interests in financial institutions that conduct business with the City, and they shall further disclose any personal investment position or financial asset that could be related to the performance of the City's investment program. Elected officials and employees shall subordinate their personal investment transactions to those of the City particularly with regard to the time of purchases and sales.

Any firm proposing to provide any type of investment service to the City shall acknowledge their familiarity with the provisions of the Political Reform Act, Government Code Section 81000 et seq. and CA Code of Regulations 18110 et seq. and the provisions limiting contractual conflicts of interest under Government Code Section 1090 et seq. Any firm proposing to provide any type of investment service to the City shall also acknowledge their familiarity with and agree to abide by any Federal or State law, regulation, rule or policy pertaining to or limiting campaign contributions by such firms, their employees, spouses or agents.

All persons, firms, broker/dealers, financial institutions and advisors providing investment services or bond issue assistance shall disclose to the City Manager and the Treasurer all fee sharing, fee-splitting and commission arrangements with other entities or persons prior to the City agreeing to buy an investment or issue bonds.

1. AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL DEALERS AND INSTITUTIONS:

The City Treasurer, or the City’s designated Investment Manager, shall select all security dealers and depositories subject to City Council approval. The City shall conduct its investment transactions with several competing, reputable security broker/dealers. The selection process shall focus on financial viability, knowledge, experience, and ethics in the fixedincome securities industry. The City Treasurer, or the City’s designated Investment Manager, will maintain a list and a written agreement with financial institutions authorized to provide investment services subject to City Council approval.

Financial Policies
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 11
All financial institutions and broker/dealers who desire to become qualified bidders for investment transactions must supply the City Treasurer, or the City’s designated Investment Manager, with the following: audited financial statements, proof of National Association of Security Dealers certification, proof of state registration, completed broker/dealer questionnaire, and certification of having read the City's investment policy and depository contracts. The City Treasurer, or the City’s designated Investment Manager, will conduct an annual review of the financial condition and registrations of qualified bidders.

1. AUTHORIZED AND SUITABLE INVESTMENTS:

Authorized and suitable investments shall mean and include any of the following securities to the extent the same are permitted by applicable federal and state code:

Direct Obligations of the United States of America, specifically U.S. Treasury bills and notes. There are no portfolio percentage limits for Direct Obligations of the United States of America.

Direct Obligations of the U.S. Government Agencies, guaranteed directly or indirectly by the United States government and/or directly or indirectly by any of the following: Banks for Cooperatives, Federal Intermediate Credit Banks, Federal Home Loan Bank System, Export-Import Bank of the United States, Federal Financing Banks, Federal Land Banks, Federal Farm Credit Bank, Government National Mortgage Association, Farmers Home Administration, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, Federal National Mortgage Association, Federal Housing Administration, Student Loan Marketing Association, and the Resolution Funding Corporation. There are no portfolio percentage limits for Direct Obligations of the U.S. Government Agencies.

Certificates of Deposit which are federally insured or fully collateralized by permitted investments as defined herein; issued by institutions which are either a nationally or state chartered bank, or thrift, or savings and loan. No more than 30% of the City’s portfolio may be invested in Certificates of Deposit.

Guaranteed Investment Contracts that meet the requirements of City / Successor Agency/joint powers authority bond documents may be utilized for the investment of those specific bond proceeds.

Banker's Acceptances which are issued by banks with a rating of "A" or higher by Standard and Poor's or Moody's at the time of investment, and do not exceed 180 days maturity. No more than 10% of the City’s portfolio may be invested in Banker's Acceptances.

Repurchase Agreements with any federally insured state or national bank of primary government bond dealer on the Federal Reserve reporting dealer list. All repurchase agreements must be covered by a master repurchase agreement.

The term of such repurchase agreement may not exceed two weeks. The repurchase agreement must be 102% collateralized by U.S. Treasury securities that are free and clear of any third party lien or claim. The collateral must be delivered to the custodian or third party acting as agent for the City. No more than 10% of the City’s portfolio may be invested in Repurchase Agreements.

Government Pools
Government sponsored investment pools (Pools) are permitted under California Government Code Section 53601 et seq. and an excellent short-term investment option for cash management facilities. These pools can provide safety, liquidity, and yield in a single diversified investment. However, thoughtful investigation and due diligence are required, both initially at time of purchase, and ongoing analysis to determine that the investment pool is being managed in a manner consistent with the objective of the Policy. The following guidelines include, but are not limited to:

1. 1.

Financial Policies
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 12
A. Shall have attained the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not less than two nationally recognized statistical rating organizations.

B. The Pools mark to market weekly at a minimum.

C. The Pool provides comprehensive, timely monthly reports which include detailed transaction listings, reports realized and unrealized gains and losses, provides accurate market values for each security, provides quality rating for individual securities, takes delivery DVP, provides third party safekeeping of all investments, and for whom an audit is conducted annually by an independent auditor with no relationship to the Pool.

There is no portfolio percentage limit for Government Pools.

State of California's Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) Investment in LAIF may not exceed the current LAIF limit and should be reviewed periodically.

Los Angeles County Pool
Investment in the Los Angeles County Pool may not exceed the current pool limits and should be reviewed periodically.

California Asset Management Program (CAMP)
Investment in CAMP may not exceed the current pool limits and should be reviewed periodically.

California Cooperative Liquid Assets Securities System (CLASS) Investment in California CLASS may not exceed the current pool limits and should be reviewed periodically.

Government Securities Money Market Fund(s) which invest only in U.S. Government Securities, and the net asset value is stabilized at one dollar. The fund shall have the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating by not less than two of the three largest nationally recognized rating services. No more than 10% of the City’s portfolio may be invested in Government Securities Money Market Fund(s).

Sweep Accounts in a banking institution at which the City currently does business may be utilized for the temporary placement of funds. Such placement of funds is intended to be for a temporary period, not to exceed seven days. It is acknowledged that the individual investment instruments which comprise said sweep accounts may or may not conform to the City's Statement of Investment Policy.

Specifically excluded as investments are: reverse repurchase agreements; longer-term U.S. Treasury, Agency, and corporate bonds with maturities exceeding five years; mortgage-backed securities; leveraged investments; derivatives of any kind at any time; and other investments not permitted under applicable government codes.

1. DIVERSIFICATION OF INVESTMENTS:

It is the City's policy to minimize portfolio risk by diversifying maturity, sector, and class allocations. Default risk shall be minimized by investing in an assortment of permitted investments as mentioned above. To minimize overall portfolio risk, the following not-to-exceed diversification goals shall guide the City's operating fund portfolio, based upon the portfolio structure at the time of purchase. Percentage limitations stated below will be calculated and applied at the time of purchase of the investment instrument. Not-to-Exceed-Limits stated below apply to the par value of the investments not the market value. Such limits shall also be within any requirements of state law.

1. MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUNDS
Money market mutual funds provide another safe, liquid and diversified investment option for the City's surplus capital:
however, certain conditions need to be met both initially and on an ongoing basis. The money market may only invest in Financial Policies
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 13
US Government securities permitted under this policy and under California Government Code Section 53601 et seq. with final stated maturities of one year or less "Government Money Market Funds." In order to be an eligible money market investment under this section, the primary objective of the money market, as stated in the fund's prospectus, is to maintain a constant $1.00 Net Asset Value (NAV). The following additional guidelines include, but are not limited to:

1. 1.

A. Only invests in US Government securities, and the weighted average maturity of the portfolio is less than 180 days.

B. The fund shall be registered with the SEC.

C. The fund shall have a minimum of $500 million in total asset size of portfolio at time of investment, and should not drop below this threshold.

D. The money market shall have attained the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not less than two nationally recognized statistical rating organizations, and shall maintain these ratings for the duration of the investment.

2. COLLATERALIZATION:

All demand deposits, time deposits and repurchase agreements are to be fully collateralized with securities authorized by the California Government Code and the City. The eligible collateral for repurchase agreements must be those investments authorized by Section 53601 of the California Government Code. The Treasurer may specify the type of eligible collateral for use in repurchase agreements. Eligible collateral must be in book entry form. Collateral is valued at current market plus accrued interest through the date of valuation.

1. 1.

A. The cost value (book value) of collateral pledged for demand deposits must at all times be equal to or greater than the amount on deposit, plus accrued interest, in accordance with the following ratio:

U.S. Treasury Securities 110%

1. 1.

A. The cost value (book value) of collateral pledged for repurchase agreements must at all times be equal to or greater than the par amount, plus accrued interest, with the following ratios:

U.S. Treasury Securities 102%
U.S. Government Agencies 102%
Cash (in immediately available funds) 100%
It is the policy of the City to require reports at least on a quarterly basis from institutions with which the Treasurer has pledged security interest. The Treasurer shall monitor the adequacy of collateralization to ensure that balances are collateralized in accordance with the ratios approved herein.

Financial Policies
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 14
With regard to repurchase agreements, it is the policy of the City to initiate a margin call in the event pledged collateral falls below the appropriate ratio.

Collateralized investments and deposits often require substitution of collateral. Any broker or financial institution requesting substitution must contact the City through the City Treasurer, for approval in the event the counterparty to the transaction is not authorized under agreement with the City to make substitutions.

1. SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY:

The City Treasurer shall take possession of all of the City's investment securities pursuant to Government Code Section 53608 which, in pertinent part, provides as follows:
"A local agency purchasing or obtaining any securities prescribed in this section, in a negotiable, bearer, registered, or nonregistered format, shall require delivery of the securities to the local agency, including those purchased for the agency by financial advisors, consultants, or managers using the agency's funds, by book entry, physical delivery, or by third party custodial agreement. The transfer of securities to the counterpart bank's customer book entry account may be used for book entry delivery. For purposes of this section "counterparty" means the other party to the transaction. A counterparty bank's trust department or separate safekeeping department may be used for the physical delivery of the security if the security is held in the name of the local agency."

1. MAXIMUM MATURITIES:

The average dollar weighted maturity of the total portfolio shall not exceed 2 years. No investment shall have a maturity date in excess of 5 years from date of purchase without the approval of the City Council prior to any such transactions. No more than 35% of the total portfolio shall be invested in instruments with maturities beyond 3 years at the time of purchase, and no more than 20% of the total portfolio shall be invested in instruments with maturities beyond 4 years at the time of purchase. Maturities shall be staggered to minimize liquidity risk and to enhance the stability of incoming cashflows. At least 10% of the portfolio shall be invested in instruments which can be liquidated on one day's notice.

1. INTERNAL CONTROL:

The City Treasurer shall establish procedures that separate the internal responsibility for management and accounting of the investment portfolio. An analysis by an external independent auditor shall be conducted annually to review internal controls, account activity and compliance with policies and procedures.

1. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND EVALUATION:

Investment performance is continually monitored and evaluated by the City Treasurer. Investment portfolio reports are generated on a monthly basis and submitted to the City Manager and the City Council Finance Committee. The investment portfolio reports are to be submitted within 60 days of the end of the reporting period.

The portfolio shall be designed to attain a market average rate of return comparable to the average one year U.S.

Constant Maturity Treasury (CMT).

An annual audit of the City's Investment Policy, practices, procedures and portfolio status will be conducted by an independent auditor. The auditor will provide the City Manager and City Council with written observations and recommendations regarding the adequacy of investment controls.

1. REPORTING:

The City Treasurer shall provide the City Council with monthly reports about the City's investments. These reports shall include, at a minimum, the following information for each type of investment held in the City's investment portfolio: the Financial Policies
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 15
issuer; date of purchase; date of maturity; amount of investment; current market value; yield on investment; yield and total return on portfolio; income generated from investments; and a description of unusual investment activity or developments during the month for which the report is prepared.

The City Treasurer shall prepare such a report for each month. The City Treasurer shall deliver each monthly report to the Mayor and each City Council Member no later than sixty (60) calendar days after the close of the month for which each report is prepared.

In the event that an investment advisor is retained by the City Council, the investment advisor shall prepare and deliver a report for each month's investment activity as required herein to the City Treasurer in such time as to allow the City Treasurer to comply with the delivery times for each report required by this policy.

The City Treasurer may be relieved from that office in the event of any failure to comply with the reporting requirements of this policy.

1. INVESTMENT POLICY ADOPTION:

The City of Artesia Investment Policy shall be adopted by resolution of the City Council. The Policy shall be reviewed annually by the City Treasurer and the City Council and any modifications made thereto must be approved by the City Council.

Financial Policies
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 16

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
Organizational Chart
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 17

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Executive Summary
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 18

PRIORITIES AND ISSUES
City of Artesia
Goal Setting Report
Report Assembled By:

Authors:

Mike Egan, Director
Kylie Sun, Senior Business Analyst
Emma Totaro, Junior Business Analyst
March 2025
Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 19
Table of Contents

1. Table of Contents

2. Executive Summary

1. Purpose

2. City of Artesia Background

3. Goal Setting Process

3. Early Action Goals

1. Goal #1: Enhance Public Safety

2. Goal #2: Implement Capital Improvement Projects

3. Goal #3: Invest in Staff Development

4. Long-Term Goals

1. Goal #1: Enhance Public Safety

2. Goal #2: Implement Capital Improvement Projects

3. Goal #3: Invest in Staff Development

4. Goal #4: Expand City Offerings and Facilities

5. Goal #5: Increase Economic Development

5. Artesia City Council Long-Term Goals

1. Enhance Public Safety

2. Implement Capital Improvement Projects

3. Invest in Staff Development

4. Expand City Offerings and Facilities

5. Increase Economic Development
Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 20
Executive Summary
Purpose
Voters in the City of Artesia solidly approved Measure AAA on the November 5, 2024, municipal ballot. The Measure implemented a three-quarter cent sales tax increase to enhance local services. The Measure is expected to produce a 20% increase to the City’s General Fund, or a little more than $3 million per year.

On March 5, 2025, Tripepi Smith facilitated a public goal-setting session with the Artesia City Council and members of the City’s executive team. The Council discussed a broad range of overall goals and developed an early action plan to address the community’s most pressing needs. That early action plan focuses resources on public safety, infrastructure projects and staff development for the immediate future. Additional goals will be developed as staff capacity and revenues continue to grow.

City of Artesia Background
The City of Artesia is a small, vibrant community celebrated for its rich cultural diversity, thriving small business sector, outstanding restaurants, quality parks programs and innovative public education system.

The City initiated this goal-setting effort to quickly focus resources on important community projects and to enhance organizational capacity, aiming to maintain its positive trajectory in service delivery.

In recent years, Artesia has made significant strides. In late 2021, the City faced serious financial challenges, including insufficient revenue, inadequate financial reporting and high staff turnover in critical positions. However, over the past few years, Artesia has successfully addressed many of these issues.

The City expanded its revenue base by implementing voter-approved cannabis sales and securing voter approval for Measure AAA. In August 2024, Artesia’s Finance Department received a clean audit report for the 2022-23 fiscal year, marking the completion of a backlog in financial reporting that spanned multiple years — an important achievement.

Additionally, the City received a clean audit report for the 23-24 fiscal year in February 2025, demonstrating Artesia’s commitment to responsible financial management and transparency.

Furthermore, Artesia is currently conducting a class and compensation analysis to establish a competitive compensation structure that will attract and retain top local government talent.

Goal Setting Process
The City of Artesia engaged Tripepi Smith to lead its goal-setting process to guide the upcoming 2025-26 fiscal year budget. The process included the following:

Deliverable Date
Goal Setting Facilitation Proposal February 10, 2025
Kick-Off Call with the City Manager and Deputy City Manager February 24, 2025 Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 21
City Council Goal Setting Workshop to discuss goals and objectives
March 5, 2025
City Council Meeting to review and adopt the Goal Setting Report
March 17, 2025
Following a strategy call with the City Manager and Deputy City Manager, Tripepi Smith identified consolidated concerns and priorities and presented five general goals at a special meeting of the City Council the City’s executive staff held on March 5, 2025. The City Council discussed and elaborated on the general goals, agreeing upon three goals for immediate action with revised objectives.

From the March 5 meeting, Tripepi Smith created a work plan for each goal, as seen in the Tactical Steps columns below.

The report is based on the City Council's consensus around the goals and expanded objectives.

Early Action Goals
Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 22
Goal #1: Enhance Public Safety
Artesia will be a safe and secure City.

Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 23
Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 24
Objectives Tactical Steps

1.1 Address deputies’ needs.

Seek input from the Sergeant and deputies about
necessary resources to address crime more effectively.

Fund additional safety programs and resources for
deputies to increase public safety.

1.2 Hire a private security company for patrol
support, similar to the efforts of neighboring
cities.

Explore local private security companies.

Discuss and hire a private security company to aid current deputies and Sheriff’s Department staff.

1.3 Coordinate private patrols with LASD for
maximum effect.

Create a patrol plan with deputies and private security to ensure that all areas of Artesia are regularly patrolled.

Ensure each patrol grouping has a regular section to create familiarity with community members.

1.4 Increase security cameras (general video
monitoring, fixed Automated License Plate
Readers (ALPRs) and ShotSpotter cameras)
Add security cameras to the Civic Center (City Hall,
Community Center and Artesia Park), City streets and local neighborhoods.

Regularly maintain and monitor security cameras.

Create a maintenance and replacement plan to ensure
cameras continue functioning as intended.

1.5 Address gang issues.

Establish ongoing communications with neighboring cities to address evolving issues.

Educate the Council and staff through a Roundtable about gang history and culture to better understand the situation and prevent further gang violence.

1.6 Boost community engagement and resident
relationships with local law enforcement.

Invest in signage and materials to expand the reach and awareness of the neighborhood watch program.

Create a standard of regular deputy safety checks for
patrolled neighborhoods.

Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 25
Invest in mailers that promote Artesia’s public safety efforts and how to get more involved.

Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 26
Goal #2: Implement Capital Improvement Projects
Artesia will complete standing projects and improve residents’ quality of life with future projects.

Objectives Tactical Steps
Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 27

2.1 Complete outstanding City projects.

Finish any current Capital Improvement Projects, such as the walking trail.

2.2 Resurface and improve City streets.

Accelerate street repairs, both main and neighborhood streets.

Fill potholes in a timely manner.

Introduce traffic-calming measures on main streets to enhance vehicular and pedestrian safety.

Improve street drainage.

Consider utilizing rubberized asphalt when repairing streets for environmental sustainability.

2.3 Repair sidewalks.

Fix sidewalks to increase walkability and safety in Artesia.

Increase the number of streetlights or illumination with LED on select City streets to enhance brightness and improve safety.

2.4 Convert remaining alleys to concrete. Finish pouring and laying concrete in the remaining Artesia alleys.

2.5 Beautify Artesia.

Focus on the area near the 91 Freeway, a critical entry point into the City.

Introduce foliage veils and murals to decrease graffiti.

2.6 Repair public restrooms at Artesia
Park.

Remodel and repair the public restrooms in Artesia Park to increase public safety and resident satisfaction.

2.7 Introduce more trashcans and
increase trashcan maintenance.

Introduce more trashcans around the City and in City parks.

Upgrade existing trash cans.

Implement a maintenance plan to ensure trash cans are emptied on a timely basis.

Goal #3: Invest in Staff Development
Artesia will be a City that regularly invests in current and future staff development.

Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 28
Objectives Tactical Steps

3.1 Invest in current
staff.

Based on the results of the Class and Compensation Study and labor negotiations, modify the salary tables to increase staff retention and loyalty.

Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 29
Implement regular staff development and bonding to ensure staff satisfaction and regular learning.

3.2 Update outdated
software.

Invest in new software that is user-friendly.

Explore AI programs to help expedite City processes.

3.3 Hire and attract
new staff.

Hire new staff that will enhance Artesia and add necessary roles to expedite City Processes in multiple departments.

Long-Term Goals
The Artesia City Council's long-term goals are outlined in the following links. These goals are ambitious and forwardlooking, and they will help to ensure that Artesia remains a vibrant and thriving community for years to come.

Goal #1: Enhance Public Safety
Goal #2: Implement Capital Improvement Projects
Goal #3: Invest in Staff Development
Goal #4: Expand City Offerings and Facilities
Goal #5: Increase Economic Development
Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 30
Artesia City Council Long-Term Goals
Enhance Public Safety
Develop a survey or status review of vacant properties
Ensure that residents know the City is keeping track of the open lots with current projects Address public safety issues with open lots - examples:

Abandoned lots on Artesia Boulevard
Icehouse behind Stater Bros
Hold a community meeting in Padelford to address safety issues in North Artesia Implement additional and uphold current public safety ordinances Expand the alarm system rebate program
Give away Ring systems to low-income residents and renters Advertise the existing rebate program
Get regular updates on the effectiveness of public safety programs Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR) program
Catalytic converter ordinance
Holding guardians responsible for property damage caused by minors Discuss additional public safety programs
Sky Knight Helicopter program
Drone program
Shot Spotter
Implement Capital Improvement Projects
Assess City trees
Explore other options for more attractive and environmentally friendly trees Keep Tree City USA designation
Make the City aesthetically pleasing for residents and visitors Discuss priorities for the botanical garden
Including, public safety, beautification and a timely project completion Set goals for each major project to keep projects on task and timely Invest in Staff Development
Discuss how to bring City staff up to market rate
Provide an intern opportunity for local youth
Invest in new software that is easy for people to use
Invest in an AI model to enhance City work
Hire for staff needs
Introduce full-time employees in departments based on operational needs.

Reassess the code enforcement department for expansion and success Improve and expedite the business licensing and permits process Explore offering business licensing solutions out of City Hall Explore outsourcing the building permits
Do a survey about employee satisfaction and bring it up to at least 80% Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 31
Expand City Offerings and Facilities
Improve Artesia Park
Discuss the future of the splash pad and old memorial flag pole Update landscaping
Revive the rose garden
Upgrade and increase trash cans
Revamp bathrooms
Potentially replace with a modern modular unit
Conduct a cost analysis on Artesia events to figure out event value and resident attendance Ask residents about what events they would like to see or what events they enjoy Ensure the offered events hit a variety of demographics Have more inclusive events catering to resident interests Explore Future events
India Independence Day (8/15)
Be more open to hosting other possible cultural events
Explore closing down Pioneer Boulevard for numerous events Farmers market
Pioneer days
Cultural events
Increase budget transparency and City Council meeting awareness Invest in mailers and quarterly printed newsletters to increase resident knowledge and engagement Hold more town halls to increase public awareness and resident comments Implement a monthly e-magazine
Create a City app for services
Create a business improvement district on downtown Pioneer Boulevard Make the area a true destination for merchants and residents Have formal discussion regarding “Little India”
Will be good for revenue, the City and residents
Promote for the Olympics, World Cup, the opening of the Metro Train, etc.

Capitalize on visitor attractions
Food District
Jewelry District
Little India
Arts and Culture District
Invest in the downtown
Increase Economic Development
Implement Strategic Economic Development Plan with Kosmont Secure revenue for the City through:

Billboards
Business licensing
Business license sweeps (by code officers)
Establish connections between top businesses and the City Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 32
Offer staff and services to build the relationship
Create a database of commercial business property owners and property managers for internal use Connect tenants with property owners and managers to fill empty lots Create an economic development support position
Create an ad hoc committee to function as an economic development sounding board Role: To review and work with staff on the implementation of the economic development strategic plan Mayor Pro Tem Trevino and Councilmember Manalo appointed Priorities and Issues
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 33

POSITION SUMMARY
Councilmember Elected
Councilmember Elected
Mayor Elected
Councilmember Elected
Mayor Pro Tem Elected

CITY MANAGER
City Manager 1.000
Executive Assistant 1.000

PARKS AND RECREATION
Parks & Recreation Manager 1.000
Parks & Recreation Supervisor 1.000
Recreation Program Coordinator 1.000
Recreation Program Coordinator 1.000
Recreation Program Coordinator (Grant
Funded)

1.000
Parks & Recreation Specialist 1.000
Parks & Recreation Leader II 0.475
Personnel Changes
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 34
Parks & Recreation Leader I 0.475
Parks & Recreation Leader I 0.475
Parks & Recreation Leader I 0.475
Parks & Recreation Leader I 0.475
Parks & Recreation Leader I 0.475
Parks & Recreation Leader I (Grant Funded) 0.475
Parks & Recreation Leader I (Grant Funded) 0.475

ADMINISTRATION
Deputy City Manager 1.000
Management Analyst 1.000
Management Analyst 1.000
Management Analyst 1.000
Management Analyst 1.000
Intern 0.475

FINANCE
Finance Manager 1.000
Accounting Manager 1.000
Senior Accountant 1.000
Administrative Analyst 1.000
Accounting Technician II 1.000
Personnel Changes
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 35

PUBLIC WORKS
Public Works Manager 1.000
Special Projects Manager 1.000
Administrative Analyst 1.000
Lead Maintenance Specialist 1.000
Maintenance Specialist I 1.000
Maintenance Specialist I 1.000
Maintenance Worker II 1.000
Maintenance Worker II 1.000
Maintenance Worker II 1.000

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Community Development Director 1.000
Economic Development Manager 0.000
Code Compliance Supervisor 1.000
Code Compliance Officer 1.000
Code Compliance Officer 1.000
Parking Enforcement Officer 0.475
Parking Enforcement Officer 0.475
Parking Enforcement Officer 0.475
Personnel Changes
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 36

PLANNING
Planning Manager 1.000
Assistant Planner 1.000
Planning Clerk 1.000

HUMAN RESOURCES
Human Resources Manager 1.000
Human Resource Analyst 1.000
Administrative Assistant 1.000
Administrative Assistant 1.000

CITY CLERK
City Clerk 1.000
Position Summary Total 44.700
Personnel Changes
Personnel Changes
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 37

SALARY SCHEDULE
Salary Schedule
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 38
Salary Schedule
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 39

DEPARTMENTS SUMMARY
Departments Summary
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 40

GENERAL FUND
The General Fund accounts for the revenues and expenditures used to carry out basic governmental activities of the City, such as general government, public safety, parks and recreation, public works, and community development. Revenue is recorded by source (e.g., taxes, licenses and permits, intergovernmental, charges for services and fines and forfeitures).

General Fund expenditures are made primarily for current day-to-day operations and operating equipment. They are recorded by major functional classification and operating departments. This fund accounts for all financial transactions not properly accounted for in another fund.

Summary
Revenues vs Expenditures Summary
Comprehensive Fund Summary
Revenue Actual Revenue Surplus Revenue Budgeted
Expenses Actual Expenses Budgeted
2023 2024 2025 2026
0 $5M
$10M
$15M
$20M
Comprehensive Fund Summary
Category FY 2025 Amended FY 2026 Budgeted
Beginning Fund Balance - -
Revenues
Taxes $10,796,084.54 $13,810,390.00
Licenses & Permits $1,544,576.00 $1,545,561.34
Special Revenue $22,000.00 $15,000.00
Miscellaneous (Interest, Rent, etc.) $908,792.78 $1,243,310.57 Fees for Recreation and Passports $231,550.00 $181,500.00 Franchises and Peg Fees $950,000.00 $900,000.00
General Fund
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 41
Category FY 2025 Amended FY 2026 Budgeted
Planning, Building and Safety, and Community
Development Fees
$240,000.00 $270,000.00
Fines, Forfeitures & Penalties $215,000.00 $145,000.00
Transfers In - $733,564.00
Total Revenues $14,908,003.32 $18,844,325.91
Expenditures
Salaries $3,291,170.00 $4,398,051.00
Other Pay $129,108.00 $87,674.00
Benefits $1,037,338.38 $1,470,278.00
Other Expenses $1,709,942.00 $1,914,203.44
Programs $865,444.00 $1,059,850.76
Planning Commission Expenses $3,300.00 $3,800.00
Professional Services $697,376.00 $770,000.00
Contract Services $5,135,133.00 $5,760,294.00
Utilities $2,115,119.00 $2,302,729.00
Supplies $52,950.00 $93,250.00
Maintenance/Repairs $29,343.00 $220,800.00
Facility Maintenance $79,600.00 $71,600.00
Capital $148,046.00 $401,000.00
Transfers - $65,211.00
Senior and Recreation Programs - $20,000.00
Total Expenditures $15,293,869.38 $18,638,741.20
Total Revenues Less Expenditures -$385,866.06 $205,584.71 Ending Fund Balance -$385,866.06 $205,584.71
General Fund
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 42
Revenues by Object
Historical Revenue by Object
Sales and Use Tax Prop tax in-lieu of VLF Building Permits No Tax City Transaction and Use Tax Franchise fees
Business License Interest Income Transient Occupancy
Planning Fees Cannabis Tax Rental Income
Transfer in Capital Transfer In Measure V
Prior Deposit Revenue Miscellaneous Reimbursements Parking/Traffic Fines RPTTF Disbursement/AB1290 Industrial Waste Inspection SA Admin Allowance Cannabis Community Benefit Grant Income City Parking Fines Int'l St Fair Fees/Sponsors Transfer Tax Inspection Fee Solid Waste Agreement Fees Pay station credit income Code Enforcement Fines Recreation Fees (General) Baseball Fees (Youth) Cannabis Permit Facility Use Fees Motor Vehicle In-Lieu VFL Passport Applic Accept Fee C&D Program Admin Fee Merchant Paid Parking State Mandated Reimbursement Cell Tower Rent Land Use Fee Sponsorships Miscellaneous Revenue
Pay Station coin income Application Fee Forfeited Permits Road/Procession Permit Banner Program Adult Sports
Late/early a.m./film permit Youth Soccer Sheriff Cost Recoveries Business License Permit Candidates Fees Outstanding Check Revenue Handicap Parking Permit Massage Service Permit Adopt-A-Wall Donations $12M
$17M $15M$19M
---$$$777999,,,222777555 ---$$$222333,,,444222222
FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 FY2026
-$10M
0 $10M
$20M
General Fund
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 43
FY26 Revenues by Object
Sales and Use Tax $4,262,882 22.62%
Transaction and Use Tax $3,151,000 16.72%
Prop tax in-lieu of VLF $2,635,428 13.99%
Building Permits $1,500,000 7.96%
No Tax City $1,295,080 6.87%
Franchise fees $900,000 4.78%
Business License $810,000 4.30%
Cannabis Tax $750,000 3.98%
Interest Income $750,000 3.98%
Transfer in $733,564 3.89%
Transient Occupancy $590,000 3.13%
Rental Income $262,000 1.39%
Planning Fees $200,000 1.06%
Measure V $160,000 0.85%
Cannabis Community Benefit $105,000 0.56%
RPTTF Disbursement/AB1290 $80,000 0.42%
Solid Waste Agreement Fees $63,886 0.34%
City Parking Fines $60,000 0.32%
Industrial Waste Inspection $60,000 0.32%
Parking/Traffic Fines $55,000 0.29%
Int'l St Fair Fees/Sponsors $55,000 0.29%
Transfer Tax Inspection Fee $55,000 0.29%
Cannabis Permit $40,961 0.22%
Cell Tower Rent $30,000 0.16%
Code Enforcement Fines $30,000 0.16%
Recreation Fees (General) $30,000 0.16%
Baseball Fees (Youth) $30,000 0.16%
Motor Vehicle In-Lieu VFL $21,000 0.11%
Facility Use Fees $20,000 0.11%
Passport Applic Accept Fee $16,500 0.09%
State Mandated Reimbursement $15,000 0.08%
Merchant Paid Parking $14,000 0.07%
Grant Income $10,425 0.06%
Sponsorships $10,000 0.05%
Miscellaneous Reimbursements $10,000 0.05%
C&D Program Admin Fee $10,000 0.05%
Pay station credit income $8,000 0.04%
Adult Sports $3,000 0.02%
Pay Station coin income $2,000 0.01%

18.8M
General Fund
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 44
Application Fee $2,000 0.01%
Road/Procession Permit $2,000 0.01%
Late/early a.m./film permit $2,000 0.01%
Miscellaneous Revenue $1,000 0.01%
Youth Soccer $1,000 0.01%
Sheriff Cost Recoveries $1,000 0.01%
Business License Permit $600 0.00%
Category
FY 2025
Amended
FY 2026
Budgeted
FY 2025 Amended vs. FY 2026 Budgeted (%
Change)
Sales and Use Tax $4,108,000.00 $4,262,882.00 3.77%
Prop tax in-lieu of VLF $2,512,284.54 $2,635,428.00 4.90% No Tax City $1,201,300.00 $1,295,080.00 7.81%
Measure V $200,000.00 $160,000.00 -20.00%
Business License $800,000.00 $810,000.00 1.25%
Motor Vehicle In-Lieu VFL $21,000.00 $21,000.00 0.00%
Transient Occupancy $550,000.00 $590,000.00 7.27%
RPTTF
Disbursement/AB1290
$75,000.00 $80,000.00 6.67%
Massage Service Permit $500.00 - -100.00%
Late/early a.m./film permit $500.00 $2,000.00 300.00%
Business License Permit $600.00 $600.00 0.00%
Building Permits $1,500,000.00 $1,500,000.00 0.00%
Handicap Parking Permit $500.00 - -100.00%
Road/Procession Permit $1,500.00 $2,000.00 33.33%
Grant Income $32,350.00 $10,424.61 -67.78%
Transfer Tax Inspection Fee $55,000.00 $55,000.00 0.00% State Mandated
Reimbursement
$22,000.00 $15,000.00 -31.82%
Application Fee $2,000.00 $2,000.00 0.00%
Banner Program $1,500.00 - -100.00%
Baseball Fees (Youth) $20,000.00 $30,000.00 50.00%
Adult Sports $1,000.00 $3,000.00 200.00%
Candidates Fees $200.00 - -100.00%
Facility Use Fees $20,000.00 $20,000.00 0.00%
Franchise fees $950,000.00 $900,000.00 -5.26%
Industrial Waste Inspection $55,000.00 $60,000.00 9.09% Int'l St Fair Fees/Sponsors $51,050.00 $55,000.00 7.74% Merchant Paid Parking $14,000.00 $14,000.00 0.00%
Passport Applic Accept Fee $13,000.00 $16,500.00 26.92% Pay Station coin income $8,000.00 $2,000.00 -75.00%
Pay station credit income $65,000.00 $8,000.00 -87.69%
Recreation Fees (General) $35,000.00 $30,000.00 -14.29% Sheriff Cost Recoveries $1,000.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
Youth Soccer $1,000.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
Code Enforcement Fines $30,000.00 $30,000.00 0.00%
City Parking Fines $60,000.00 $60,000.00 0.00%
Parking/Traffic Fines $125,000.00 $55,000.00 -56.00%
Land Use Fee $10,000.00 - -100.00%
Revenues by Object
General Fund
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 45
Category
FY 2025
Amended
FY 2026
Budgeted
FY 2025 Amended vs. FY 2026 Budgeted (%
Change)
Planning Fees $175,000.00 $200,000.00 14.29%
C&D Program Admin Fee $10,000.00 $10,000.00 0.00%
Interest Income $450,000.00 $750,000.00 66.67%
Rental Income $227,600.00 $262,000.00 15.11%
Cell Tower Rent $27,786.00 $30,000.00 7.97%
Outstanding Check
Revenue
$1,000.00 - -100.00%
Miscellaneous Revenue $1,000.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
Miscellaneous
Reimbursements
$10,000.00 $10,000.00 0.00%
Sponsorships $5,000.00 $10,000.00 100.00%
Transfer in - $733,564.00 -
Transaction and Use Tax $773,500.00 $3,151,000.00 307.37% Cannabis Tax $500,000.00 $750,000.00 50.00%
Cannabis Permit $40,976.00 $40,961.34 -0.04%
Solid Waste Agreement
Fees
$61,856.78 $63,885.96 3.28%
Cannabis Community
Benefit
$81,000.00 $105,000.00 29.63%
Total Revenues $14,908,003.32 $18,844,325.91 26.40%
Expenditures by Department
Historical Expenditures by Department
Law Enforcement Administrative (General) Parks & Recreation (General) Public Works Maintenance Fiscal Services (General) Planning Risk Management Code Compliance City Manager
Building & Safety (Engineering) City Council Human Resources Legal Services Community Promotions City Clerk
Economic Development City Engineer Parking Enforcement
Artesia Towne Center General
$11M
$14M
$15M
$19M
FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 FY2026
0 $5M
$10M
$15M
$20M
General Fund
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 46
FY26 Expenditures by Department
Law Enforcement $6,268,956 33.63%
Public Works Maintenance $2,208,021 11.85%
Administrative (General) $1,560,778 8.37%
Parks & Recreation (General) $1,469,083 7.88%
Fiscal Services (General) $1,190,807 6.39%
Planning $832,724 4.47%
Risk Management $661,267 3.55%
Human Resources $612,459 3.29%
Code Compliance $564,007 3.03%
City Council $500,733 2.69%
Legal Services $425,400 2.28%
Building & Safety (Engineering) $398,563 2.14%
City Manager $368,379 1.98%
Community Promotions $363,450 1.95%
City Clerk $326,036 1.75%
Economic Development $263,341 1.41%
City Engineer $220,611 1.18%
Parking Enforcement $201,393 1.08%
Artesia Towne Center $137,522 0.74%
General $65,211 0.35%
Category
FY 2025
Amended
FY 2026
Budgeted
FY 2025 Amended vs. FY 2026 Budgeted (%
Change)
General - $65,211.00 -
City Council $395,425.00 $500,733.28 26.63%
Legal Services $332,600.00 $425,400.00 27.90%
City Manager $364,361.00 $368,378.75 1.10%
City Clerk $382,826.00 $326,035.99 -14.83%
Administrative (General) $1,445,487.00 $1,560,778.00 7.98% Human Resources $351,808.00 $612,459.00 74.09%
Risk Management $620,254.00 $661,267.00 6.61%
Artesia Towne Center $117,142.00 $137,522.00 17.40%
Fiscal Services (General) $891,216.00 $1,190,806.50 33.62% Planning $1,084,235.00 $832,724.00 -23.20%
Building & Safety
(Engineering)
$354,489.00 $398,563.00 12.43%
Economic Development $206,658.00 $263,341.00 27.43%

18.6M
Expenditures by Department
General Fund
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 47
Category
FY 2025
Amended
FY 2026
Budgeted
FY 2025 Amended vs. FY 2026 Budgeted (%
Change)
City Engineer $213,595.00 $220,611.00 3.28%
Code Compliance $466,641.00 $564,007.18 20.87%
Parking Enforcement $210,479.00 $201,393.00 -4.32%
Parks & Recreation (General) $1,252,867.00 $1,469,083.47 17.26% Community Promotions $298,958.00 $363,450.00 21.57%
Public Works Maintenance $1,056,804.38 $2,208,021.03 108.93% Law Enforcement $5,248,024.00 $6,268,956.00 19.45%
Total Expenditures $15,293,869.38 $18,638,741.20 21.87% Expenditures by Expense Type
Historical Expenditures by Expense Type
Contract Services Salaries Utilities
Other Expenses Benefits Programs
Professional Services Capital Other Pay
Facility Maintenance Maintenance/Repairs Supplies
Transfers Senior and Recreation Programs Systems Maintenance Planning Commission Expenses Expense
$11M
$14M
$15M
$19M
FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 FY2026
0 $5M
$10M
$15M
$20M
General Fund
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 48
FY26 Expenditures by Expense Type
Contract Services $5,760,294 30.90%
Salaries $4,398,051 23.60%
Utilities $2,302,729 12.35%
Other Expenses $1,914,203 10.27%
Benefits $1,470,278 7.89%
Programs $1,059,851 5.69%
Professional Services $770,000 4.13%
Capital $401,000 2.15%
Maintenance/Repairs $220,800 1.18%
Supplies $93,250 0.50%
Other Pay $87,674 0.47%
Facility Maintenance $71,600 0.38%
Transfers $65,211 0.35%
Senior and Recreation Programs $20,000 0.11%
Planning Commission Expenses $3,800 0.02%
Category
FY 2025
Amended
FY 2026
Budgeted
FY 2025 Amended vs. FY 2026 Budgeted (%
Change)
Salaries $3,291,170.00 $4,398,051.00 33.63%
Other Pay $129,108.00 $87,674.00 -32.09%
Benefits $1,037,338.38 $1,470,278.00 41.74%
Other Expenses $1,709,942.00 $1,914,203.44 11.95%
Programs $865,444.00 $1,059,850.76 22.46%
Planning Commission
Expenses
$3,300.00 $3,800.00 15.15%
Professional Services $697,376.00 $770,000.00 10.41%
Contract Services $5,135,133.00 $5,760,294.00 12.17%
Utilities $2,115,119.00 $2,302,729.00 8.87%
Supplies $52,950.00 $93,250.00 76.11%
Maintenance/Repairs $29,343.00 $220,800.00 652.48%
Facility Maintenance $79,600.00 $71,600.00 -10.05%
Capital $148,046.00 $401,000.00 170.86%
Transfers - $65,211.00 -
Senior and Recreation
Programs
- $20,000.00 -
Total Expenditures $15,293,869.38 $18,638,741.20 21.87%

18.6M
Expenditures by Expense Type
General Fund
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 49
City Council
MANAGING DEPARTMENT HEAD: City Council
PRIMARY ACTIVITIES:

The City Council establishes goals and objectives and sets policy on issues affecting the City. This includes enacting laws and directing actions as required to provide for the general welfare of the community through programs, services and activities. The City Council is also charged with adopting the annual operating budget, and ensuring that it includes sustainable revenue for essential City services. As the elected representatives for the residents of Artesia, the City Council interacts and collaborates with the City’s state and federal representatives, and serve on intergovernmental task forces, committees and joint public authorities. The City Council also provides policy guidance to City staff on local, state and federal matters affecting Artesia.

Expenditure Summary
Historical Expenditures Across Department
Expenses Actual Expenditures Over Budget Expenses Budgeted FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 FY2026
0 $100K
$200K
$300K
$400K
$500K
$600K
City Council
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 50
Expenditures by Object
Historical Expenditures by Object
Salaries Special Contract Services Lobbyist
Retiree Health Insurance Employee Benefits Travel & Meeting - Councilmember Dues/Subscription/Publication League/CCCA Conferences PERS - Unfunded Liability Automobile Allowance Office/Department Supplies Miscellaneous Expense Mayoral Transition Travel & Meeting - Mayor Retirement - Employer Contr Travel & Meeting - Mayor Pro Tem Council Workshops Printing Medicare / Social Security Tax Leave Buy Back Telephone Wages (Part Time) Retention Bonus Flex Deductible Reimb Equipment/Property Rental Maintenance/Repair Phone Allowance Website Maintenance HVAC System Service/Maintenance Security Postage Copy Paper City 457 Match
Special Program Activities IT Services Overtime
Water
Category
FY 2025
Amended
FY 2026
Budgeted
FY 2025 Amended vs. FY 2026 Budgeted (%
Change)
Salaries $102,091.00 $110,267.00 8.01%
Retention Bonus $2,135.00 - -100.00%
Overtime $2.00 - -100.00%
Leave Buy Back $1,500.00 $3,000.00 100.00%
Retirement - Employer Contr $6,988.00 $7,915.00 13.27%
PERS - Unfunded Liability $11,325.00 $11,896.00 5.04%
Medicare / Social Security Tax $2,487.00 $2,270.00 -8.73% Employee Benefits $38,204.00 $46,002.00 20.41%
City 457 Match $83.00 - -100.00%
Flex Deductible Reimb $915.00 $943.00 3.06%
Automobile Allowance $9,918.00 $10,800.00 8.89%
Phone Allowance - $600.00 -
Retiree Health Insurance $39,042.00 $62,090.28 59.03%
Lobbyist - $103,800.00 -
Special Contract Services $93,000.00 $20,000.00 -78.49% Dues/Subscription/Publication $21,100.00 $21,100.00 0.00% Office/Department Supplies $6,000.00 $6,000.00 0.00%
Postage $100.00 - -100.00%
Printing $5,600.00 $5,600.00 0.00%
$253K
$344K
$395K
$501K
FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 FY2026
0 $200K
$400K
$600K
Expenditures by Object
City Council
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 51
Category
FY 2025
Amended
FY 2026
Budgeted
FY 2025 Amended vs. FY 2026 Budgeted (%
Change)
Council Workshops $5,500.00 $5,500.00 0.00%
League/CCCA Conferences - $30,000.00 -
Travel & Meeting - Mayor Pro
Tem
$7,360.00 $7,500.00 1.90%
Travel & Meeting -
Councilmember
$22,330.00 $23,000.00 3.00%
Travel & Meeting - Mayor $7,360.00 $7,500.00 1.90%
Mayoral Transition $4,985.00 $6,750.00 35.41%
Miscellaneous Expense $7,400.00 $8,200.00 10.81%
Total Expenditures $395,425.00 $500,733.28 26.63%
Expenditures by Expense Type
Historical Expenditures by Expense Type
Other Expenses Salaries Utilities
Benefits Professional Services Programs
Supplies Other Pay
$253K
$344K
$395K
$501K
FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 FY2026
0 $200K
$400K
$600K
City Council
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 52
FY26 Expenditures by Expense Type
Other Expenses $266,236 53.17%
Salaries $110,267 22.02%
Benefits $68,530 13.69%
Professional Services $21,100 4.21%
Utilities $20,000 3.99%
Programs $6,000 1.20%
Supplies $5,600 1.12%
Other Pay $3,000 0.60%
Category
FY 2025
Amended
FY 2026
Budgeted
FY 2025 Amended vs. FY 2026 Budgeted (%
Change)
Salaries $104,228.00 $110,267.00 5.79%
Other Pay $1,500.00 $3,000.00 100.00%
Benefits $58,595.00 $68,530.00 16.96%
Other Expenses $105,302.00 $266,236.28 152.83%
Programs $6,000.00 $6,000.00 0.00%
Professional Services $21,100.00 $21,100.00 0.00%
Utilities $93,000.00 $20,000.00 -78.49%
Supplies $5,700.00 $5,600.00 -1.75%
Total Expenditures $395,425.00 $500,733.28 26.63%
Personnel Summary
FTE Summary: 5.5
Councilmembers - 5
Executive Assistant - .5
501K
Expenditures by Expense Type
City Council
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 53
City Attorney
MANAGING DEPARTMENT HEAD: City Attorney
PRIMARY ACTIVITIES:

The City Attorney’s office is a contracted service (Best, Best & Krieger LLP), which provides legal representation, support, and counsel to staff and the City Council on all legal matters relating to the City’s operations. The City Attorney reviews a variety of legal documents for the City, including Agreements, municipal code amendments, resolutions, litigation matters, and ensures compliance with State and County laws.

Summary of Goals
Expenditure Summary
Historical Expenditures Across Department
Expenses Actual Expenditures Over Budget Expenses Budgeted FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 FY2026
0 $100K
$200K
$300K
$400K
$500K
City Attorney
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 54
Expenditures by Object
Historical Expenditures by Object
Special Contract Services City Council Projects Code Enforcement Planning Attorney Spec Services City Manager
Settlement Attorney Services
Category
FY 2025
Amended
FY 2026
Budgeted
FY 2025 Amended vs. FY 2026 Budgeted (%
Change)
Attorney Spec Services - $75,000.00 -
Code Enforcement $45,100.00 $52,600.00 16.63%
Planning $35,520.00 $42,300.00 19.09%
Special Contract Services $180,000.00 $188,500.00 4.72% City Manager $19,980.00 $16,000.00 -19.92%
City Council Projects $52,000.00 $51,000.00 -1.92%
Total Expenditures $332,600.00 $425,400.00 27.90%
Expenditures by Expense Type
Historical Expenditures by Expense Type
Utilities Professional Services
$337K
$373K
$333K
$425K
FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 FY2026
0 $200K
$400K
$600K
Expenditures by Object
$337K
$373K
$333K
$425K
FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 FY2026
0 $200K
$400K
$600K
City Attorney
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 55
FY26 Expenditures by Expense Type
Professional Services $236,900 55.69%
Utilities $188,500 44.31%
Category
FY 2025
Amended
FY 2026
Budgeted
FY 2025 Amended vs. FY 2026 Budgeted (%
Change)
Professional Services $152,600.00 $236,900.00 55.24%
Utilities $180,000.00 $188,500.00 4.72%
Total Expenditures $332,600.00 $425,400.00 27.90%
425K
Expenditures by Expense Type
City Attorney
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget | Artesia Page 56
City Manager
MANAGING DEPARTMENT HEAD: City Manager
PRIMARY ACTIVITIES:

The City Manager’s Office serves as the executive arm of the City, providing overall direction and coordination of all City operations, to ensure that the City Council’s objectives and goals are met or exceeded and that costs do not exceed the adopted budget. The City Manager’s Office oversees the following functions: personnel management, budget adoption, legislative advocacy, economic development, intergovernmental relations, public safety, capital improvements and legal services. In addition, the City Manager’s Office assists the City Council in the development and formulation of policies, goals and objectives, provides direction to all City departments, and represents the City’s interests throughout the region.

FY 2024-25 ACCOMPLISHMENTS:

Established collaborative partnerships with State and Federal representatives.

Attained $6 million for the Citywide Road Rehabilitation Project.

Maintained transparency in all city operations.

Implemented goal setting workshop with City Council for citywide visioning.

Implemented the City’s 2025 Legislative Platform.

Initiated quarterly All Hands meetings with upper and lower management to collaborate on city issues, moving the city forward.

In collaboration with the Mayor, streamlined the City Council committees to be more efficient and effective.

Summary of Goals
FY 2025-26 OBJECTIVES:

Ensure that policies and program objectives set by the City Council are executed effectively and efficiently.

Seek grant opportunities and explore innovative methods to fund critical projects.

Artesia City CouncilJune 9, 2025

Artesia City Council
June 9, 2025