Artesia City Council
September 8, 2025

Cover Letter: Engineering Design Services for the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Roadway Pavement Rehabilitation Project - Project No. 2025-004
RFP Required Statement: This proposal
shall remain valid for a period of not less
than one hundred twenty (120) calendar
days from the date of this submittal.
[email protected] (555) 555-0125

RKA Corporate Resolution for Signing Authority
02 Introduction and Understanding

About Us:

Founded in 1981, RKA Consulting Group, is
California- based multidisciplinary civil
engineering and municipal services firm. We have
proudly provided services to more than 65 cities
and public agencies throughout southern
California, building trusted relationships and a
reputation for quality and responsiveness. With 40
professionals, we specialize in street rehabilitation,
transportation engineering, capital improvement,
traffic design, storm-water, municipal
infrastructure, and construction management.

Additionally, RKA provides comprehensive
Building & Safety services, including plan check,
permit review, and building inspection, serving as
an extension of municipal staff to support
efficient, compliant community development.

With a focus on accuracy and care, we tailor our
approach to align with the City's goals and deliver
results that reflect Artesia's identity and priorities.

Our team is committed to working in partnership
with the City to bring this project to life by
enhancing infrastructure, improving public safety
and supporting accessibility and mobility
throughout the surrounding streets.

Introduction
RKA Mission:

RKA's mission is to exceed client expectations by
delivering reliable, high-quality, and cost-effective
solutions rooted in technical expertise.

RKA Core Values:
• Quality and Integrity
• Client-Focused Services
• Innovation and Sustainability
• Collaborative Partnerships
Firm at a Glance:
• Legal Name: RKA Consulting Group
• Headquarters: Walnut, California
398 Lemon Creek Drive, Suite E, Walnut, CA, 91789
(909) 594-9702 www.rkagroup.com
• Founded: 1981
• Employees: 40
• Cities Served: 65+
• Certified CA Corp. License: #C1155995
• Small Business License: #53690
Ownership:

RKA is owned and managed by three principals:

David Gilbertson, P.E., T.E., P.L.S. (President),
Cody Howing, P.E., QSD (Director of Engineering),
and
Raymond Tao, P.E. (Director of Building and
Safety)
They collectively bring decades of expertise and
experience serving municipal clients, delivering
high-quality engineering and building and safety
services solutions tailored to the unique needs of
each community.

Key Services:
• Civil Engineering
• Roadway Design
& Rehabilitation
• Transportation
• Regulatory Compliance
• Federally Funded
Project Management
• Traffic Signal & Street
Light Upgrades
• Water, Sewer, & Storm
Drain Infrastructure
• Storm Water &
Environmental
Compliance
• ADA Compliance &
Accessibility
• Grading & Site
Development
• Construction
Management
• Utility Coordination
• Building & Safety
Services
Department Key Roles Staff
Count
Principals/
Owners
Executive Leadership, Professional
Engineers, Department Directors 3
Administration Office Operations, HR, Finance,
Marketing, Intern 5
Engineering
Professional Engineers, Project
Managers, Designers,
Construction Managers, Public
Works Inspectors, Interns
18 Building and
Safety
Plan Check Engineers, Plans
Examiners,
Building Inspectors, Permit
Technicians, Intern
12 RKA Organization:

We take pride in maintaining a well-balanced and
agile organization structure that supports
responsiveness and quality at every level. The below
structure outlines our core departments, leadership
team and staffing resources. The team is primarily
based at our main headquarters located in Walnut,
California, with additional team members,
supporting full-time roles and dedicated hours at
our client agencies.

Experience Across Southern California:

We have proudly collaborated with the following local agencies:
• Claremont
• Coachella
• Covina
• Corona
• Desert Hot Springs
• Diamond Bar Downey
• Duarte
• Fontana
• El Centro
• Glendora
• Indio
• La Quinta
• La Verne
• Lawndale
• Manhattan Beach
• Monrovia
• Montebello
• Monterey Park
• Moreno Valley
• Norwalk
• Palm Springs
• Pasadena
• Pico Rivera
• Pomona
• Rosemead
• San Dimas
• San Gabriel
• San Marino
• Sierra Madre
• Signal Hill
• South Gate
• Stanton
• Torrance
• Temple City
• Walnut
• Artesia
• Baldwin Park
• Beverly Hills
• Bradbury
• Buena Park
• Carson
• Cathedral City
• Chino
• Chino Hills
Project Understanding
RKA understands that the City of Artesia's
objective is to rehabilitate residential roadways
identified as being in poor, very poor, or serious
condition in the recent Pavement Management
System (PMS), guided by Pavement Condition
Index (PCI) data as shown in Map 1 below. This
map shows a visual representation of the roadway
priorities and helps guide the scope of
rehabilitation efforts. Our goal is to help the City
maximize the number of streets that can be
improved within the available construction
budget, ensuring safe, durable, and accessible
streets for the community.

To achieve this goal, our team will conduct
detailed field investigations and data collection to
fully document existing conditions, utilities, and
constraints. We will evaluate cost-effective
pavement rehabilitation methods consistent with
the Greenbook standards and City of Artesia's
Standards for this project. RKA will develop Plans,
Specifications, and Cost Estimates (PS&E) at three
milestone completions. This approach ensures the
City remains engaged throughout design,
development with opportunities to review and
provide input at the 60%, 90% and 100% PS&E
stages.

Our design will also address concrete
improvements such as sidewalks, curbs, gutters,
and curb ramps to ensure ADA compliance and
enhance community mobility.

Our Commitment to Excellence:

We are dedicated to exceptional customer service
and responsiveness, ensuring the City's needs are
met through clear communication, timely action,
and customized solutions for each project. As a
smaller, locally rooted firm, we work respectfully
and collaboratively with City staff, residents, and
stakeholders, bringing a solutions- oriented
approach that builds trust and fosters strong
relationships. We manage projects with
professionalism, proactive communication, and
genuine care for the communities we serve.

Efficient Project Execution:

RKA consistently delivers projects on schedule and
within budget. We follow a milestone-based
approach that helps keep the project organized and
moving forward at the right pace. For this project,
we will complete all design work within 90 days of
the Notice to Proceed and maintain close
coordination with the City to ensure timely progress
and successful completion.

Map 1– Pavement
Condition Index (PCI)
for project area
03 Experience
Relevant Experience
Garey Avenue Rehabilitation - Aliso Street to Monterey Avenue City of Pomona Client Contact:

Pomona, California Matt Pilarz, P.E., Principal Civil Engineer Construction Cost: [email protected]
$8.3 million (909) 620-2281
Project Description:

RKA provided design engineering services for the Garey Avenue Rehabilitation project (Aliso Street to Monterey Avenue), a significant initiative for the City of Pomona, which aimed at enhancing community walk-ability, beautification, and infrastructure. RKA involvement spanned the entire project lifecycle, from design to construction management, encompassing detailed engineering for pavement rehabilitation, landscaped medians, ADA-compliant sidewalks and ramps, traffic signal upgrades, and street lighting. This project included strict guidelines with federal funding requirements and environmental compliance (NPDES, SWPPP).

RKA's experienced team provided meticulous project management, including budget and schedule tracking, utility and agency coordination, public outreach, and positive quality control.

Fiscal Year 2019-2020 Street Improvement Project
City of South Pasadena Client Contact:

South Pasadena, California Anteneh Tesfaye, Deputy Director of Public Works Construction Cost: [email protected]
$6.8 million (626) 403-7240
Project Description:

RKA provided engineering design, construction management, and inspection services for the FY 2019-20 Street Improvement Project. The project underwent a significant revision following the City’s adoption of a new Water Master Plan, requiring full replacement of aging water mains across all impacted streets. RKA effectively led the redesign effort and managed the technical and field coordination required for the expanded scope, which encompassed full replacement of water mains, valves, services, and fire hydrants; significant pavement reconstruction due to waterline trenching; expanded curb and gutter replacement on Arroyo Verde Road, Pine Street, and Maple Street. Additionally, RKA supported construction management and public works inspection on behalf of the City.

Relevant Experience:

Street Resurfacing - Colver Rimhurst Bridger Glentana et al Project City of Covina Client Contact:

Covina, California Rafael Fajardo, City Engineer/Director of Public Works Construction Cost: [email protected]
$750,000 (626) 384-5489
Project Description:

Provided full-scope professional engineering services for resurfacing multiple street segments, including cold milling and placement of new 4-inch asphalt concrete pavement, miscellaneous concrete improvements, and ADA curb ramp replacements. We led utility coordination by securing as-builts, identifying conflicts, and developing cost-savings strategies during design. Created tailored project exhibits and optimized plan sheets for clarity and contractor efficiency. Supported bidding and construction with responsive RFI handling, fair RFP processes, and oversight to minimize delays. Successfully delivered the project under budget, achieving durable infrastructure improvements and positive community satisfaction.

The project involved resurfacing segments
including Colver Place, Rimhurst Avenue,
Ivescrest Avenue, Haller Street, Bridger
Street, Glentana Street, Enid Avenue, Vogue
Avenue, Janalinda Avenue, and Waterbury
Avenue.

Area 5 Residential Streets Pavement Rehabilitation
City of Downey Client Contact:

Downey, California Matt Baumgardner, P.E., Director of Public Works Construction Cost: [email protected]
$4.8 million (562) 904-7102
Project Description:

RKA provided comprehensive engineering design services for the City of Downey’s multi-phase Residential Streets Pavement Rehabilitation Program, covering Areas 5, with the goal to extend pavement service life, improve surface conditions, and enhance ADA accessibility across a mix of collector and local streets within predominantly residential neighborhoods. RKA led field assessments, topographic surveying, project management, utility coordination, ADA compliance reviews, preliminary and final PS&E documents, and value-engineered street rehabilitation strategies such as slurry seal, cape seal, mill and overlay, and 4” full-depth reconstruction. We managed coordination with utilities and proactively supported the City in prioritizing repairs based on budget constraints and PCI analysis, with the scope also including concrete spot repairs, sidewalk trip hazard mitigation, curb ramp upgrades, and drainage review. Kelsoe and Associates served as project subconsultant, performing topographic and monument surveying for this project. RKA worked closely with City staff from initial street selection in the Area 5 limits, through final bid-ready construction documents, ensuring constructability, cost efficiency, and minimal disruption to residents.

04 Project Overview &
Detailed Work Plan
Project Overview
Our approach emphasizes locally responsive solutions that align with Artesia's commitment to walkability, safety, and cultural identity. We take into careful consideration the residential communities affected by the project scope, with focus on improving the streets that residents walk daily, where children play, and where both local and visitors travel.

The primary objective for the Residential Engineering Services for the FY 25/26 Roadway Pavement Rehabilitation Project is to extend the roadway service life and improve the pavement surface conditions.

The additional benefits of achieving these goals include reducing future maintenance costs and improved safety and aesthetic enhancements to the City. This project area is concentrated in the residential neighborhoods bounded by Artesia Boulevard, Pioneer Boulevard, 183rd Street, and the City’s eastern limits, which include asphalt roadways currently rated in "Poor," "Very Poor," or "Serious" condition based on the City's 2025 Pavement Management System (PMS) update. The City's recent PMS update identifies treatment options based on the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) as shown on Tables 1 & 2 below:

As part of our project methodology, RKA initiates each opportunity with a comprehensive field visit to the project site and its surrounding community. This assessment allows us to observe the existing conditions firsthand, engage with the local environment, and gain a deeper understanding of the community's needs. By walking the streets, we are better equipped to design responsive, context-sensitive solutions to best reflect Artesia's long-term goals. The project areas are comprised of a mix of arterial (major roads), collector (main neighborhood roads) and local streets. The land uses are predominantly residential with commercial zones along main neighborhood roads or high traffic routes. Most commercial zones are located along Pioneer Boulevard with a few more locations along Artesia Boulevard. For any commercial businesses impacted by the project scope, we will collaborate with the City to ensure timely communication and regular updates, aiming to minimize disruptions to business operations.

In the field review, much of the pavement appears to be in a serviceable condition. The recently updated PMS recommends reconstruction as the repair solution for all streets with PCI lower than 55. Our process will include a value engineering approach that will strive to yield effective solutions for pavement maintenance while extending value and maximizing the number of streets that fit into the project budget
A potential approach may include incorporating various maintenance methods including cape seal, mill and overlay and full reconstruction as needed. In our evaluation, if most of a street is in operational condition but there are certain sections that need deeper repairs, we can incorporate localized full depth repairs to revitalize the structural section in those specific areas which will facilitate lower cost maintenance options for the roadway segment. RKA will evaluate all options and propose the best approach considering cost, effectiveness and impact to residents.

The City of Artesia would also like to include concrete improvements to sidewalks, curb ramps, curbs, and cross gutters. While it is not feasible to upgrade all concrete improvements within our project boundaries, the project presents an opportunity to address any trip hazards that may be present as shown in Table 1 — Treatment Decision Matrix Table 2 — Feasible Treatment for AC Pavement M&R Type Treatment Description
Preventive Slurry
Resurfacing Overlay
Rehabilitation Mill & Overlay
Reconstruction Remove existing pavement and construct
6" AC, 6" Aggregate Base
PCI Range AC Roadways
M&R Treatment Unit Cost ($/SF)
100-95 Monitor $0.00
95-70 Preventive $0.31
70-60 Resurfacing $2.96
60-50 Rehabilitation $4.70
50-0 Reconstruction $17.63

Figures 4 – Sidewalk on East side of Horst Avenue
between Rendova Street and Ashworth Street and
Figure 5– Sidewalk on North side of 183rd Street
East of Horst Avenue. These existing conditions
pose a danger to both community residents and
visitors and will be a priority to improve for public
safety and regulatory compliance.

Similarly, curb ramps are also features that will be
reviewed to ensure all mandatory upgrades are
completed to achieve ADA compliance. Based on our
field review, many curb ramps looked to be ADA
compliant in regard to slopes and landing area
requirements, with only the truncated domes
missing. However, there are curb ramps that would
need a full reconstruct to make it ADA compliant.

For example, the intersection of Thornlake Avenue
and 179th Street, as shown in Figure 6– Southwest
Corner of Thornlake Avenue and 179th Street, curb
ramp is completely missing at each intersection.

These mandatory curb ramp updates can be a
significant cost to be considered in the planning
process of developing the project streets and repairs.

Cross gutter plus curb and gutter spot repairs will
also be identified for repair as part of this project.

Special attention will be given to flat areas where standing water might be present with the goal of improving the flow where possible.

For Example, Figure 1 – Grayland Avenue south of Ashworth Street shows the existing pavement conditions where the PMS recommends a full reconstruction on this street segment. Alternatively, RKA believes a 2 inch mill and overlay would be an appropriate repair option to extend the service life of this segment.

Similarly, Figure 2 – Elaine Avenue North of Rendova Street shows existing conditions of Elaine Avenue between Rendova Street and Artesia Boulevard. The PMS recommends full pavement reconstruction but a cape seal would be reasonable to repair this pavement section. There are a few streets that do show notable degradation and will require a reconstruction section approach to effectively improve the PCI of those roadways and bring them to a reliable level Figure 3 – Ashworth Street between Devlin Avenue and Elaine Avenue is an excellent example of a street segment that would be a strong candidate for reconstruction.

The City has set the project budget of approximately $6,000,000 of Community Project Funded Congressional Directed Spending Grant Funds. The recently approved update to the City’s PMS planning budget for the zone reflects an exceeding budget to repair the listed streets. RKA is well versed in extending and maximizing available funding to make the largest impact to the system's maintenance.

We will offer a range of solutions designed to deliver high-quality improvements that align with Artesia's goals.

We evaluate the structural integrity, assess the Pavement Condition Index (PCI), and consider the available budget to develop the most effective strategy for street improvements. In addition to reviewing the defined project limits, we apply our engineering principles to identify potential opportunities or overlooked factors that may enhance the overall scope and community impact. Through close collaboration with the City, we aim to optimize outcomes and ensure that all relevant considerations are brought to the table for discussion.

Figure 2
Figure 1
Figure 6
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 3

Within this project scope, we will also assess cross gutters conditions, suggesting necessary repairs or improvements to ensure they contribute to a safer and more accessible streets. In consideration of the budget, RKA can
recommend improvements after all street repairs are
completed and will collaborate with the City for review.

Where feasible, repairs will focus on replacing outdated cross gutters with a concrete channel along the flow line to improve drainage and eliminate trip hazards and improve ADA accessibility for pedestrians.

Examples are shown in Figure 7 — Cross Gutter at
Figure 8
Figure 7
Intersection of Ibex Avenue and 180th Street. We pay close attention where standing water may accumulate, evaluating drainage conditions as part of our assessment. Where feasible, we aim to improve water flow to enhance the overall functionality and longevity of the street infrastructure.

Lastly, the City would like to reconstruct two existing alleys to incorporate concrete pavement. RKA has identified the recently constructed alley east of Seine Avenue as a reference and understands the City's expectations. We will follow all specified requirements and design standards to ensure these improvements meet the intended functionality, durability, and community needs. The existing asphalt section will need to be completely removed and 6-inches of Plain Cement Concrete (PCC) will be constructed over 4-inches of class II base and cold joints will be specified every 10 to 15 feet. A topographic survey will be obtained for these alleys to ensure proper joining of the adjacent properties and verify positive drainage conditions are possible.

In closing, we are well-positioned to support the City's needs through our local experience, proven methodology, and technical expertise. We are confident in the strength of our team, the quality our our services, and the collaborative partnership we bring to the City. We look forward to working together to enhance the community's roadway with safe, durable, and well-executed improvements that reflect shared priorities and long-term value.

Detailed Work Plan
TASK No. 1 – Project Management
Following receipt of the Notice to Proceed, RKA will coordinate with City staff to hold a project kick-off meeting. RKA will develop a meeting agenda with the project scope and existing conditions in mind.

While the primary intent of the meeting is to introduce the project team and establish a detailed plan for the project execution, having some preliminary field information developed from a full project drive through will aid in facilitating meaningful discussion on some of the detailed conditions that will drive the design approach. RKA will produce the meeting minutes and a list of any action items resulting from the meeting as well as set the future dates of monthly project status meetings.

Following the project kick-off meeting RKA will move forward with scheduling all sub-consultant work associated with the project including topographical survey. A schedule of the proposed sub-consultant work will be relayed to the City staff to ensure the City is informed of the activities occurring in the field.

The topographic survey would be reviewed, and any perceived obstacles would be highlighted and brought to the attention to the City.

During the course of the project RKA will coordinate monthly progress meetings and 60%, 90% and 100% design review meetings. RKA will keep in continuous contact with City staff to expedite any coordination details that arise during the planning and design phase of this project. Any other meetings deemed necessary will also be coordinated and covered under this task of the project.

RKA will develop a project schedule specific to the details that are developed from the kickoff process.

The schedule will include the project development details but will be updated monthly as the construction scope develops. Features may include permits, stakeholder coordination, scheduling of design investigations, field meetings and other details critical to developing a successful design product.

A major focus for RKA is to develop constructible design documents and complete the needed coordination to minimize or completely avoid construction phase delays from outside entity coordination..

As part of the process to yield construction documents that will usher in a smooth construction phase, it is to include a thorough quality control process. RKA will submit a plan for the City’s reference. In summary, the process will require deep involvement by the project manager and principal engineer to ensure the project details are clearly conveyed and accurate to the conditions of the project. The process will start with the full field review of the project. Senior staff will have a hands-on approach to making recommendations to the City, reviewing documents and tracking schedules and costs. In addition to the qualified staff that are assigned to manage the project, RKA will conduct an internal review of the project details by staff not assigned to the project to ensure the prospective a fresh set of eyes gets integrated into the process and final result.

TASK No. 2 – Field Investigation and Analysis
RKA will coordinate with City staff to conduct a field review of each street segment and confirm the details of the PMS prior to initiating discussions on repair options. The project area will be evaluated to identify areas that may have had recent work completed and may not require maintenance. The project streets will be updated and approximate costs for each maintenance level action will be provided accordingly. RKA will work with City staff to identify critical project features that need to be included in the project. Items including streets that may have a history of complaints, traffic sensitivity to construction impacts, critical access to major points of interest, and freeway access paths will be evaluated for the project. Once a general approach to the key features is established, RKA will develop a proposed method of repair for each street using the budget as guidance to maximize efficiency. The list will include the type of repair and rough assessment of construction costs specific to each respective street segment. RKA will implement any adjustments requested by the City and revise the project scope to fit the changes accordingly.

TASK NO. 3- Preliminary Design
Following the project kick-off meeting, RKA will initiate the project utility coordination process. As-built request letters will be developed for each utility identified as present in the project vicinity. A project utility tracking log will be maintained to assist in summarizing utility coordination efforts and serve as a reference in confirming the requests are met with adequate response. In the event utilities fail to respond to the first request letter, additional letters will be sent out and alternative measures to contact those utilities will be employed to ensure all potential utilities impacted by the work are notified.

RKA will also work with City staff to develop an inventory of as-builts for sewer, storm drain, and other public agency owned utilities that may be in the project area. Roadway as-builts, if available, will also be utilized in developing the project base files and referenced in design approach decisions. All utility information obtained through this process will then be translated into the project design base files for reference on the final design plans.

In conjunction with the start of the utility coordination process, RKA will schedule Kelsoe and Associates, our sub consultant surveyor, to initiate the topographical survey of the alleys. It’s assumed in this proposal that topographical survey will be limited to the two alleys and no other street segment will be surveyed. RKA may be able to expand and provide additional savings by providing alternative methods of rehabilitation upon future review of the potential project limits.

RKA will perform a field review of the selected streets to examine and document the project sites. RKA will capture existing geometric configuration of streets and intersections along with any existing concrete improvements. RKA will evaluate conditions and identify improvements to meet ADA standards. Any areas or locations which need special attention beyond maintenance or repair of existing facilities will be identified to the City to consider inclusion into the project scope.

A key task in the preliminary design phase of work is to complete a full job walk. This walk will be utilized as

an opportunity to identify and quantify possible concrete repairs, identify and quantify pavement repairs, identify curb ramps that do not meet ADA standards, and to develop photo documentation with written descriptions of the existing conditions for reference by City staff and the design team. During the project field walk, key issues of concern can be identified yielding opportunity for RKA to provide the City with proposed design approach and discussion with City staff on identifying the best path of resolution for the project needs.

This task also serves as an important part of RKA’s QC process and will include photographic documentation of the conditions on the project streets.

Findings in the field will also be cross referenced against the project utility as-builts to identify any possible missing information regarding existing utilities in the project area. At the conclusion of this task RKA will provide to the City the field survey, preliminary plans detailing proposed pavement repair approach, utility notices and log, and a preliminary inventory of concrete repairs for the project.

TASK No. 4 – Prepare 60% Design Plans
At the conclusion of Task 3, RKA will meet with City staff to review progress and discuss the proposed design approach for each street. RKA will develop a meeting agenda to focus the discussion on key features identified in the previous task. Meeting minutes will be developed and distributed along with any action items. At the start of this Task, the general improvements will be identified and 60% draft plans will begin to be developed based on field findings and City staff discussions. The plans will be developed on 24”x36” plan sheets and will include a title sheet, typical sections, details, construction notes, street improvement plans, and striping plans.

The street improvement plans for street segments will feature an area map highlighting the project limits and proposed pavement, repair striping and concrete improvements. Changes to the centerline profile are not anticipated and are excluded from the scope of this project. Plans will include City’s “Title Block” provided from City staff.

As the project improvements develop into defined quantities, RKA will produce a preliminary engineer’s estimate for the project. The estimate will be based on quantifiable unit of work with costs derived from other similar and recently constructed projects. The scope and scale of a project have significant impact on the bid pricing for a project and thus will be considered. Given the size of the project, it’s anticipated that a reasonable economy of scale will be achieved.

At the conclusion of this task, RKA will provide two (2) 11x17 60% plan sets and PDF files for the City’s review and comments. A preliminary engineer’s estimate will also be submitted to assist with the City’s review of the project design phase. RKA will also meet with staff to review the draft documents. At this time any remaining details that have been identified will be worked through to finalize the proposed improvements.

TASK No. 5- 90% Design Plans, Technical Specifications and Engineer’s Estimate At this time in the project design phase, RKA will develop and provide the 90% documents and details identified in the project RFP. Finalized details on the project improvements will be added to the project plans and quantified as part of the project technical specifications and estimate. RKA will utilize the City’s format to develop the technical specifications that the contractor will be required to conform to on the project. These technical specifications will be combined with the City’s boilerplate contract documents for use in bidding and construction contract administration.

Details of the construction phase scheduling will be developed and integrated in the specifications to best fit the City’s scheduling constraints. Depending on the extent of the proposed pavement repair, a particular schedule may be required to best limit impact sites or travel corridors. Alternatively, City events or other projects may also be impacted by the proposed work. RKA will coordinate with City staff to identify the dates of concern and provide proposed scheduling restrictions that fit the City’s needs, but also keeps the project moving at an acceptable pace.

RKA will make sure to include in the specifications and the cost estimate, items for the tie out and reset of survey monuments, reset if missing monuments, and filing the corner records with the County. The plans and

specifications will also include the adjustment of valves and manholes, traffic loops, striping, pavement markers, traffic control and erosion control.

RKA will conduct an in depth QC review of the draft 90% documents. The review will include additional field review, utility correspondence confirmation, document editing, and estimate analysis. The 90% plans submitted to the City will be at a level of completion that the project manager is satisfied to set out for construction. At the conclusion of this task, RKA will provide two sets of 11x17 90% construction plans and PDF files, a copy of the contract specifications, and a copy of the engineer’s estimate for the City’s final review and comment.

TASK No. 6- 100% Plans and Bid Document Submittal
At the conclusion of Task No. 5, RKA will provide final documents conforming to the details as outlined in the RFP for the final submittal of design documents. Any final comments provided by the City review will be addressed.

TASK No. 7- Final 100% PS&E and Bid Document Submittal
At the conclusion of Task No. 6 and final City approval, RKA will provide final stamped and signed documents conforming to the details as outlined in the RFP for the final submittal of design documents. Final mylar plans will be provided along with the associated CAD files, physical and electronic versions of word documents. Utility coordination letters, logs and as-builts in addition to any other related correspondence will also be provided to the City with the final submittal package.

The Design phase will be completed within 90 days as outlined in our Schedule, located in Section 6.

TASK No. 8- Bid and Construction Support, As-built Drawings During the bidding process, RKA will provide bid clarifications and addenda (if necessary), provide answers to contractor’s questions, attend the bid opening, and if needed, also evaluate the bid results and perform the necessary research of references of the apparent lowest responsible and responsive bidder. RKA will also attend the pre-construction meeting. During construction, RKA will review RFIs and submittals that may be necessary for the project and provide a written response within three (3) business days of receipt. After construction is complete, RKA will take the red-lines provided by the Contractor depicting all changes made during construction, and create as-built plans for the City’s files.

Quality Control

QA/QC PLAN
A strong Quality Assurance and Quality Control program is critical to ensuring that the project details are accurately conveyed in the project design documents, estimates and construction bid quantities and respective scope. At every stage of our projects, we implement a strong system of tools and quality checks to ensure that our deliverables meet the highest standards. From initial planning to final delivery, we rely on structured workflows, version control for tracking changes and iterative drafts to include feedback and revisions, to maintain consistency and accuracy. We utilize kick off meetings, planning checklists and approval sign-offs by a senior team member to ensure quality standards are met.

Additionally, a constructability review of the project improvements also serves as a valuable approach to confirm there are no unintended consequences resulting from the proposed improvements. We aim to minimize construction-phase modifications by throughly identifying and addressing potential fields conditions during the design process. Verification of existing pavement conditions is a particular concern for this project. With adequate knowledge of the existing conditions, pavement rehabilitation approaches can then be developed within the proposed project budget. For example, a proposed 2” cold mill on a street with 3” of existing asphalt may result in the remaining pavement failing during construction traffic. An alternative approach could be proposed with a variable edge grind and overlay, or even full reconstruction. We present multiple solution pathways to give the City flexibility in decision-making and ensure the selected approach aligns with current priorities and long-term goals.

05 Project Team

Project Team
The following team members, are committed to the Engineering Design Services for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Roadway Pavement Rehabilitation project, and we acknowledge any changes to this team following contract award are subject to City approval. Cesar Ortiz, P.E., T.E., QSD, is committed to be the project manager and will be the primary point of contact.

PRINCIPALS-IN-CHARGE
David Gilbertson, PE, TE, PLS
Cody Howing, PE, QSD
Key Personnel

PROJECT MANAGER
Cesar Ortiz, PE, TE, QSD
Key Personnel

QUALITY CONTROL/
Alternative PM
Bobby Lin, PE, QSD
Key Personnel
Roadway Engineering Team
Diego Diego, EIT
Andrea Hernandez, EIT
Tyler Jung
Tanios Ghaoui Survey Subconsultant
Kelsoe & Associates
Bob Kelsoe
Key Personnel

CITY OF ARTESIA
RKA Team members are located in
Walnut, CA. The Survey Subconsultant is
located in Corona, CA.

Professional Summary:

Kelsoe & Associates., is a full-service land surveying firm serving private and public sector clients throughout the Western United States with licenses in California, Nevada, and Utah. Founded in 1994, Kelsoe & Associates provide comprehensive surveying services with approximately 25 professionals and 8 survey crews dedicated to meet the needs of clients. Their team utilizes advanced technology including state-of-the-art equipment like the robotic total stations and GPS receivers to optimize their scope of work.

The team is vital for preventing costly mistakes and disputes, maximizing land potential, and ensuring projects comply with legal and regulatory requirements. Kelsoe is a valued partner providing dependable support and a proactive approach which has been instrumental in ensuring project milestones are met with efficiency and professionalism.

Kelsoe & Associates
Land Survey Subsconsultant
30 Years of
Experience
Qualifications:

Contact Information:

Robert Kelsoe, President
(951) 736-0755
[email protected]
Specialized Disciplines: Public Works Infrastructure, Design Survey, Construction Staking, Right-Of-Way Engineering
Founded: 1994
Employees: 25
Survey Crews: 8
Professional Summary:

David Gilbertson, P.E., T.E., P.L.S., is a seasoned professional engineer, traffic engineer, and licensed land surveyor with over 39 years of experience in municipal engineering and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) management. As President and Principal at RKA Consulting Group, Dave leads the project team, prioritizing quality control and strategic advice to guarantee project success. Dave brings a valued combination of technical expertise, leadership, and a practical, solutions-focused approach to infrastructure projects. He delivers consistently ensuring client satisfaction, community safety, and high standards of quality and performance. Dave currently holds leadership roles such as City Engineer, City Surveyor and Traffic Engineer for several Southern California cities, including Bradbury, Norco, San Dimas and Walnut. Additionally, his expertise includes roadway improvements, traffic signal design, grading, land development, assessment districts and managing capital budgets.

Experience:
• City and Traffic Engineer, City of Walnut: Responsible for the City’s Capital Improvement Program, which includes the design and implementation of all capital projects. Supervises the review and plan checking of all subdivisions and development projects. Responsible for the analysis and implementation of traffic systems, signal timing, and roadway improvements to enhance public safety and optimize traffic flow. Serves as the primary point of contact and liaison for city staff and project stakeholders.
• City Engineer, Cities of Bradbury, Norco, San Dimas: Leads the design and management of all Capital Improvement Programs, conducts surveys and data analysis for planning and construction of projects, and directs the review and plan checking of subdivisions and development projects. As City Engineer, serves as technical advisor to city leadership, attends council and public meetings, and takes a proactive approach to addressing resident concerns. • Contract Engineer, City of Covina: Provides development review and plan checking services for subdivisions and private development projects in the City of Covina, ensuring compliance with municipal codes and regulations.
• La Puente Road Rehabilitation Project, City of Walnut: Led citywide street rehabilitation project with direct oversight of specifications, plans, and cost estimate. As part of the City's Pavement Management Program (PMS), this project consisted of 1 mile of mill and overlay improvements including concrete improvements, signing and striping, and traffic loop replacements.

David Gilbertson, P.E., T.E., P.L.S.

President and Principal-in-Charge
B.S.C.E. California State Polytechnic University, Pomona , CA P.E. - Registered Civil Engineer, CA RCE 46624
T.E. - Traffic Engineer, CA TE2365
P.L.S. - Professional Land Surveyor, CA 6941
Specialized Disciplines: Traffic Signal Design, Traffic Operations & Data Analysis, Land Development, Grading and Drainage System Design, Infrastructure Design, Roadway Improvements, ADA Compliance, Right-of-Way Engineering, City Engineering, Capital Improvement Program Management, City Surveyor, Quality Control, Assessment Districts Engineering
39 Years of
Experience
Qualifications:

Professional Summary:

Cody Howing, P.E., QSD, is a licensed civil engineer with over 18 years of experience in municipal engineering, Capital Improvement Program (CIP) management, NPDES compliance and storm-water management. As Director of Engineering and Principal at RKA Consulting Group, Cody manages the team, advises on project strategies, and provides guidance to ensure the successful delivery of all projects. Cody currently holds leadership roles as City Engineer for the cities of Duarte and La Verne, managing capital budgets, infrastructure design, construction, assessment districts and development reviews. Additionally, his expertise includes roadway improvements, traffic signal design, grading, and land development. Cody brings an extensive background in federal and state funding compliance, effectively managing project scopes to meet regulatory requirements. Cody is a trusted partner and experienced resource for developing and implementing infrastructure solutions to support city goals, surpass community expectations and adhere to all regulatory standards.

Experience:
• City Engineer, Cites of Duarte and La Verne: Responsible for the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP), including the design, infrastructure planning, budgeting, and implementation of all capital projects. Responsible for coordination with developers, reviews plans for municipal compliance, and serves as the primary point of contact and liaison for stakeholders and staff. As City Engineer, he serves as technical advisor to city leadership, attends council and public meetings, and takes a proactive approach to addressing resident concerns. • Garfield Avenue Water and Street Improvement Project, City of South Pasadena:

Responsible for construction management and public works inspection for water main replacement, pavement resurfacing, and ADA curb ramp upgrades. Implemented fusible PVC pip slip-lining into riveted steel pipes and restored curb, gutter, and sidewalks impacted by tree root systems. Worked collaboratively to support the city in enhancing streets and improving sidewalk safety, benefiting both residents and visitors. • Major Street Rehabilitation, City of Pomona: Managed comprehensive street rehabilitation including pavement overlays, cold central plant recycling, median construction, landscaping, and infiltration trench installation. Coordinated with partners such as Caltrans, SCRAA, and local businesses, with a focused approach to residents to ensure smooth project execution and satisfaction.

Cody Howing, P.E., QSD
Director of Engineering and Principal-in-Charge
B.S.C.E. California State Polytechnic University, Pomona , CA REA- Caltrans Resident Engineer Academy Cert. of Completion P.E. - Registered Civil Engineer, CA RCE 86054
QSD- Qualified SWPPP Developer, CA C86054
Specialized Disciplines: Roadway Improvements, Right-of-Way Engineering, ADA Compliance, Infrastructure Design, Federal and State Funding Compliance, NPDES Compliance & Storm-water Management, Grading and Drainage System Design, Right-of-Way Engineering, City Engineering, Capital Improvement Program Management,
Construction Management, Quality Control, Assessment Districts Engineering
Qualifications:
18 Years of
Experience

Professional Summary:

Cesar Ortiz, P.E., T.E., QSD, has over 10 years of experience in civil engineering, managing public infrastructure design projects throughout Southern California. As Engineering Manager at RKA, he has led a wide range of roadway improvement efforts, including pavement rehabilitation, signing and striping improvements, ADA compliance upgrades, and intersection enhancements.

Cesar's expertise spans to storm drain systems, water and sewer infrastructure, grading design, and traffic signal enhancements including traffic control design.

Previously, as Principal Engineer for the City of Buena Park, Cesar managed the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Currently, Cesar serves as the Deputy City Engineer for the City of Baldwin Park, with primary focus on land development and City engineering services. Serving as a key resource for quality assurance and control, Cesar provides technical advisement and strategic direction to address project challenges, implement best practices and guide subconsultants, with a focus on aligning outcomes with the City's goals and ensuring project success.

Experience:
• Deputy City Engineer, City of Baldwin Park: Contract Deputy City Engineer, supervising all land development review, issues grading permits, and administering subdivision reviews to ensure compliance and smooth coordination between multiple stakeholders including developers, planning, building and public works departments. Attends the City Council meetings and provides reporting and analysis to management. • Garey Avenue Rehabilitation Project, City of Pomona: Provided strategic direction for the design of over two miles of roadway construction including median improvements, lighting upgrades, the rehabilitation of 8 traffic signals and the implementation of a Class II bike lanes.

Collaborated with Caltrans to manage and coordinate improvements within the designated right-of-way, contributing to the effective management of a key intersection segment. • Residential Streets Pavement Rehabilitation, Area 5 Project, City of Downey: Managed project scope through detailed pavement condition assessments to prioritize rehabilitation needs, enabling strategic budget allocation and cost-effective delivery within financial requirements.
• B Rehabilitation from Bonita Avenue to Foothill Boulevard Project, City of La Verne:

Provided strategic direction and advisement for the design services for the rehabilitation of B Street. Provided strategic planning and implementation for traffic calming elements, including bulb-outs, to enhance safety of pedestrians and improve overall traffic flow for the City.

Cesar Ortiz, P.E., T.E., QSD
Engineering Manager and Project Manager
10 Years of
Experience
B.S.C.E. California State Polytechnic University,
Pomona , CA
P.E. - Registered Civil Engineer, CA -RCE 92742
T.E.- Traffic Engineer, CA, TE- 3131
QSD- Qualified SWPPP Developer, CA C92742
Certifications: Water Treatment Operator (T2
45748), Water Distribution Operator (D3 56149)
Specialized Disciplines: Active Transportation
Design, ADA Compliance, City Engineering, Land
Development, Traffic Engineering, Construction
Management, Quality Control
Qualifications: Awards:

APWA: 2024- Southern
California ChapterEmerging Leader of the
Year
ASCE: 2025 - Orange County Chapter- Civil
Engineer of the Year,
Private Sector
ASCE: 2025- MLAB
Chapter- Outstanding Civil Engineer in Private Sector

Professional Summary:

Bobby Lin, P.E., QSD, is a seasoned Civil Engineer with over 15 years of experience managing public infrastructure design projects throughout Southern California. As a Project Manager, he has led a wide range of roadway improvement efforts, including pavement rehabilitation, pedestrian facility design, ADA compliance upgrades, and intersection enhancements. He possesses a deep understanding of municipal design standards and is highly proficient in the application of Greenbook specifications.

Recognized for his technical expertise and collaborative leadership style, Bobby fosters trusted relationships with agency staff, stakeholders, and multidisciplinary design teams. His commitment to responsive communication and efficient project delivery has consistently resulted in cost-effective solutions that align with client goals and community needs. His leadership continues to drive the advancement of resilient and accessible public infrastructure.

Experience:
• Commercial Street Improvements and Roadway Rehabilitation, City of Santa Fe Springs:

Led the PS&E development for the rehabilitation of Shoemaker Avenue, Springdale Avenue, Wakeman Street, and John Street within a heavily trafficked commercial district. Oversaw the design and implementation of Full Depth Reclamation (FDR) as the pavement rehabilitation approach. The scope of work also included redesigning curb and gutter profiles to eliminate drainage deficiencies and reconstructing pedestrian facilities to meet current ADA standards. • Chino Hills Parkway Pavement Rehabilitation, City of Chino Hills: Managed the PS&E development for the rehabilitation of approximately three miles of Chino Hills Parkway, a major arterial serving both the City of Chino Hills and the City of Chino. The project involved implementing pavement rehabilitation strategies including slurry seal and grind-and-overlay treatments. Additional improvements included ADA-compliant curb ramp design, updated signing, and striping plans. Bobby led coordination efforts between both jurisdictions to ensure seamless design integration and consistent standards across city boundaries. • 2023-24 Annual Arterial Pavement Rehabilitation Project, City of Burbank: Directed the PS&E development for the rehabilitation of three major arterial roadways—Verdugo Avenue, Victory Boulevard, and Alameda Avenue—throughout the City of Burbank. The project implemented grind-and-overlay resurfacing to improve pavement condition across all corridors. Additional scope included ADA-compliant curb ramp design, pavement dig-outs, and removal and reconstruction of deteriorated sidewalks and driveways. Outdated striping was redesigned to current standards, improving vehicular guidance, safety, and functionality.

Bobby Lin, P.E., QSD
Senior Project Manager and Quality Control
15 Years of
Experience
B.S.C.E. University of California Irvine, CA
P.E. - Registered Civil Engineer, CA -RCE 85563
QSD- Qualified SWPPP Developer, CA C85563
Specialized Disciplines: Roadway Rehabilitation, Active Transportation Design, ADA compliance & Accessibility
Improvements, Utility Coordination, Construction Support, Project Management, Quality Control
Qualifications:

06 Project Schedule
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish
0 CITY OF ARTESIA - FY 25/26 ROADWAY

PAVEMENT REHABILITATION
90 days Tue 8/12/25 Mon
12/15/25
1 TASK 1 - PROJECT MANAGEMENT 90 days Tue 8/12/25 Mon 12/15/25 2 1.1 PROJECT KICK-OFF MEETING 0 days Thu 8/14/25 Thu 8/14/25 3 1.2 PROJECT SCHEDULE UPDATES AND TRACKING 90 days Tue 8/12/25 Mon 12/15/25 4 1.3 PROJECT COORDINATION MEETING 60%

SUBMITTAL
0 days Mon 11/17/25 Mon 11/17/25
5 1.4 PROJECT COORDINATION MEETING 90%

SUBMITTAL
0 days Fri 12/5/25 Fri 12/5/25
6 1.5 PROJECT COORDINATION MEETING 100% 0 days Mon 12/15/25 Mon 12/15/25 7 TASK 2 - DATA GATHERING AND ANALYSIS 14 days Mon 8/18/25 Thu 9/4/25 8 2.1 FIELD ASSESMENT AND PMS VERIFICATION 4 days Mon 8/18/25 Thu 8/21/25 9 2.2 AS-BUILT RESEARCH 2 days Mon 8/18/25 Tue 8/19/25
10 2.3 UTILITY RESEARCH AND COORDINATION 14 days Mon 8/18/25 Thu 9/4/25 11 TASK 3 - PRELIMINARY DESIGN 10 days Mon 8/25/25 Fri 9/5/25 12 3.1 TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY 10 days Mon 8/25/25 Fri 9/5/25 13 TASK 4 - 60% DESIGN PLANS 35 days Mon 9/8/25 Fri 10/24/25 14 4.1 STREET IMPROVEMENT PLANS 30 days Mon 9/8/25 Fri 10/17/25 15 4.2 SIGNING AND STRIPING PLANS 30 days Mon 9/8/25 Fri 10/17/25 16 4.3 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS 30 days Mon 9/8/25 Fri 10/17/25 17 4.4 ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE 30 days Mon 9/8/25 Fri 10/17/25 18 60% PLANS SUBMITTAL 0 days Fri 10/17/25 Fri 10/17/25 19 4.5 CITY REVIEW 5 days Mon 10/20/25 Fri 10/24/25
20 TASK 5 - 90% PS & E 25 days Mon 10/27/25 Fri 11/28/25 21 5.1 STREET IMPROVEMENT PLANS 20 days Mon 10/27/25 Fri 11/21/25 22 5.2 SIGNING AND STRIPING PLANS 20 days Mon 10/27/25 Fri 11/21/25 23 5.3 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS 20 days Mon 10/27/25 Fri 11/21/25 24 5.4 ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE 20 days Mon 10/27/25 Fri 11/21/25 25 5.5 DRAFT SPECIFICATIONS 20 days Mon 10/27/25 Fri 11/21/25 26 90% PS&E SUBMITTAL 0 days Fri 11/21/25 Fri 11/21/25
27 5.6 CITY REVIEW 5 days Mon 11/24/25 Fri 11/28/25
28 TASK 6 - 100% DESIGN PS & E 11 days Mon 12/1/25 Mon 12/15/25 29 6.1 STREET IMPROVEMENT PLANS 10 days Mon 12/1/25 Fri 12/12/25 30 6.2 SIGNING AND STRIPING 10 days Mon 12/1/25 Fri 12/12/25 31 6.3 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS 10 days Mon 12/1/25 Fri 12/12/25 32 6.4 ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE 10 days Mon 12/1/25 Fri 12/12/25 33 6.5 DRAFT SPECIFICATIONS 10 days Mon 12/1/25 Fri 12/12/25 34 100% PS&E SUBMITTAL 0 days Mon 12/15/25 Mon 12/15/25

1.1 PROJECT KICK-OFF MEETING
60%
90%
100%
60% PLANS SUBMITTAL
90% PS&E SUBMITTAL
100% PS&E SUBMITTAL
11 14 17 20 23 26 29 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 2 5 8 11 September 2025 October 2025 November 2025 December 2025 January 2026 Task
Split
Milestone
Summary
Project Summary
External Tasks
External Milestone
Inactive Milestone
Inactive Summary
Manual Task
Duration-only
Manual Summary Rollup
Manual Summary
Start-only
Finish-only
External Tasks
External Milestone
Progress
Deadline

PROJECT SCHEDULE

CITY OF ARTESIA
FY 25/26 ROADWAY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT

RKA CONSULTING GROUP
Project: CITY OF ARTESIA - FY 25/26
Date: 7/24/2025
07 Cost Proposal
Project
Principal
$210/hr
Project
Manager
$180/hr
Project
Engineer
$150/hr
Engineering
Technician
$110/hr
Survey
Subsconsultant
(Kelsoe)
Total Fee
Design Tasks
Task 1 - Utility Coordination 4 4 8 14 $ 4,300.00
Task 2 - Records Research and Field Investigation 4 8 14 10 $ 5,480.00 Task 3 - Topographic Survey (Alley Intersections Only) 2 $ 11,695.00 $ 11,995.00 Task 4 - Construction Plans 30 140 650 120 $ 142,200.00 Task 5 - Engineer's Cost Estimate 4 8 16 10 $ 5,780.00
Task 6 - Specifications 2 12 20 6 $ 6,240.00
Task 7 - Bidding/Construction Support and As-built Drawings 2 4 8 2 $ 2,560.00 Total Labor Hours 46 176 718 162
$ 178,555.00
7/31/2025
PS&E for FY 25/26 Roadway Pavement Rehabilitation Project Engineering Design Services
City of Artesia
Survey Subsconsultant- Required Hourly Rate- 2 Person Survey Rate $250.00/hour The hourly rate schedule is part of the consultant's quote for use in invoicing for progress payments and for extra work incurred that is not part of this RFP and a pricing schedule for all services being offered by the consultant.

08 References
Client References
RKA proudly partners with local agencies, offering services from city engineering to full-service municipal engineering. Our team provides roadway design and rehabilitation, ADA compliance improvements, traffic signal and lighting upgrades, storm drain and utility systems, site development, regulatory compliance, and construction support. Our clients trust us to deliver high-quality, tailored solutions across design, construction management, inspection and specialized disciplines, ensuring communities prosper.

Client City Years of Service Contact Information
Walnut 1981- Current
(44 Years)
Melissa Barcelo, Director of Public Works
[email protected]
(909)595-5605
21201 La Puente Road, Walnut, CA 91789
Duarte 1999-Current
(26 Years)
Stephanie Sandoval, Public Works Manager
ssandoval@
accessduarte.com
(626) 357-7931
1600 Huntington Drive, Duarte, CA 91010
San Dimas 2006-Current
(23 Years)
Shari Garwick, Public Works Director
sgarwick@
sandimasca.gov
(909)394-6260
245 East Bonita Avenue, San Dimas, CA 91773

City Project Name Client Contact Information
Pomona Garey Avenue Rehabilitation
Matt Pilarz, P.E. - Principal Civil Engineer
[email protected]
(909) 620-2281
South
Pasadena
Fiscal Year 2019/2020 Street
Improvement
Anteneh Tesfaye- Deputy Director of Public Works
[email protected]
(626) 403-7240
Covina
Street Resurfacing - Colver,
Rimhurst, Bridger, Glentana et al
Rafael Fajardo- City Engineer/Director of Public Works
[email protected]
(626) 584-5489
Downey Area 5 Residential Streets
Pavement Rehabilitation
Matt Baumgardner, P.E.- Director of Public Works
[email protected]
(562) 904-7102
Project Specific References
RKA has proudly partnered with with the below local agencies with a similar scope of work for rehabilitation and resurfacing projects. For additional project information, please refer to Section 3- Experience.
09 Required Statements
RFP: Required Statements
The following statements are provided to comply with the requirement of the RFP:

1. All federal laws and regulations shall be adhered to notwithstanding any state or local laws and regulations. In case of conflict between federal, state, or local laws or regulations, the strictest shall be adhered to.

2. RKA will not discriminate illegally against any employee or applicant for employment pursuant to applicable law.

3. RKA shall comply with the California Labor Code., pursuant to said regulations entitled: Federal Labor Standards provisions; Federal Prevailing Wage Decision; and State of California Prevailing Wage Rates, respectively.

4. RKA shall comply with the Copeland Anti-kickback Act (18 USC 874 C) and the implementation regulation (29 CFR 3) issues pursuant thereto, and any amendments thereof.

Agreement for Professional Services

1. RKA confirms that we have reviewed the City's copy of the Agreement for Professional Services included in the RFP and are willing to accept its terms and conditions as presented.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: September 8, 2025 ITEM NO: 10A.

TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Resolution to Update the Facility Use Fee Schedule FROM: Edith Guerra, Parks and Recreation 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 the City Council adopt Resolution No. 25-3064, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Artesia, California, Approving and Adopting Amended and Updated Facility Use Fee Schedule and Repealing Resolution No. 18-2720 and make a determination from CEQA pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(8).

BACKGROUND:

On August 13, 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 18-2720, updating the City of Artesia ("City") Facility Use Regulations and Facility Use Fee Schedule. Under the Facility Use Guidelines (Exhibit A), facility users are required to pay a staffing fee when City staff are needed to operate, supervise, or maintain facilities during rentals outside of normal operational hours.

The current Staff Overtime Fee of $35 per hour (Section VII.F.1.h, Exhibit A) was set in 2018. Since then, the following changes have occurred:

State-mandated minimum wage increases.

Cost-of-living adjustments and wage increases under labor agreements for full-time and part-time staff.

Increases in benefit, retirement, and employer payroll tax contributions.

These changes have significantly increased the City’s actual cost of providing staff support for facility rentals and events which occur outside of normal operations.

ANALYSIS:

City staff conducted a cost-of-service analysis, comparing the actual labor cost for Recreation and Maintenance staff to the current recovery rate of $35 per hour. This analysis found that the City’s actual cost is now up to $58.61 per hour depending on the classification of the assigned staff member.

To maintain compliance with the City’s cost recovery policy and avoid General Fund subsidies for non-City uses, staff recommends updating the Staff Overtime Fee to $58.00 per hour per employee assigned to work an event.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Adjusting the Staff Overtime Fee to $58.00 per hour will ensure that users of City facilities pay the actual cost for staffing services. This will:

Maintain the City’s policy of cost recovery for non-City uses.

Reduce General Fund subsidies for private rentals and special events.

Sustain staffing levels necessary for safe and high-quality service during rentals.

RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt Resolution No. 25-3064 a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Artesia, California, Approving and Adopting Amended and Updated Facility Use Fee Schedule and Repealing Resolution No. 18-2720 and make a determination from CEQA pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(8).

Attachments
Artesia - CC Resolution No. 25-3064 (Amending and updating Facilty Use Regulation Fees) and Exhibit A- Fee Schedule.pdf RESOLUTION NO. 25-3064

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

ARTESIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND ADOPTING

AMENDED AND UPDATED FACILITY USE FEE SCHEDULE
AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 18-2720
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Artesia finds that in order to better serve the community and aid in the coordination of park and recreation facilities, it is deemed necessary to amend and update its rules and regulations and fee schedule for the use of said facilities by the public; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted an amended and updated Facility Use Regulations and the Parks and Recreation Department Facility Use Fee Schedule (the “Fee Schedule”) on August 13, 2018, by Resolution No. 18-2720; and WHEREAS, since the amendment and update of the Facility Use Regulations and Fee Schedule in 2018, staff has continued to analyze the costs of maintenance, operations, and administration related to the use of the City’s park and recreation facilities and has found it necessary to further update the Fee Schedule to better recover the City’s costs, including increases in the City staff salary, benefits, and overtime hourly fee charged to permittees for use of facilities beyond the hours of operation of the Parks and Recreation Department; and
WHEREAS, since 2018, State-mandated minimum wage increases, negotiated cost-of-living adjustments, and higher benefit and retirement contribution costs have substantially increased the City’s actual hourly cost to provide recreation and maintenance staff for facility uses; and
WHEREAS, based upon the results of the City’s review, the existing facility user fees no longer adequately reflect the City’s costs of maintenance, operation, and administration related to the use of the City’s park and recreation facilities; and WHEREAS, the City’s cost recovery policy requires that facility use fees recover the cost of services provided for non-City uses, so as to avoid subsidizing private rentals and special events with General Fund resources; and
WHEREAS, the facility user fees are subject to the provisions of the Mitigation Fee Act, pursuant to Government Code section 66000 et. seq. and more specifically the public hearing requirements of section 66018; and
WHEREAS, prior to holding said public hearing, the City published notice in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the public hearing pursuant to Government Code section 6062a and said notice provided the date, time, and location of the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City has held a duly noticed public hearing at which all oral and written presentations were made as part of a regularly scheduled meeting; and WHEREAS, City Staff has analyzed the City’s costs to maintain, operate, and administer the City’s park and recreation facilities and finds that the City’s proposed facility user fees do not exceed the reasonable cost of providing the services and use; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the question of whether or not to adjust or establish the facility user fees to reflect the amount that is required to recover the estimated reasonable costs to the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to adopt the facility user fees; and WHEREAS, in adopting this Resolution, the City Council is taking action only on those facility user fees set forth in Exhibit “A,” attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, all other fees, charges, taxes, and assessments imposed by the City that have not been modified by this Resolution shall remain in full force and effect.

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

SECTION 1. All of the above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.

SECTION 2. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the setting or revision of facility user fees pursuant to this Resolution is exempt from environmental review under Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(8) of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), which provides an exemption for the establishment or modification of charges by public agencies which the public agency finds are for the purpose of meeting operating expenses.

SECTION 3. The City Council further finds that all substantive and procedural requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act have been satisfied and specifically, the City Council further finds the following:
a. based upon the information and documents prepared for and presented to the City Council to support this action, the facility user fees are for the purposes of and necessary for: (i) meeting operating expenses, including employee wage rates and benefits; (ii) purchasing or leasing supplies, equipment, or materials; (iii) obtaining funds necessary for the operations and maintenance of City property and facilities; and (iv) any other costs incurred by the City attributable to providing the services for which the facility user fees are imposed; and
b. the facility user fees specified by this Resolution do not exceed the reasonably estimated costs of providing the services for which the facility user fees are imposed.

SECTION 4. The City Council hereby approves and adopts the Facility Use Fee Schedule attached as Exhibit "A," attached hereto. Exhibit “A” shall be incorporated into the City’s consolidated schedule of fees.

SECTION 5. The City Council authorizes annually, effective July 1, 2026 and each July 1 thereafter, that the City Manager, or City Manager designee, at their discretion, may administratively adjust the facility user fees, without additional City Council action or approval, for (i) costs related to staff labor based upon the annual percentage increase for cost of living increases established pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Artesia and the American Federation of State, City and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 1520, Council 36 General Unit (the “MOU”), as may be amended from time to time; and/or (ii) for all non-staff labor related costs based on the percentage increase from the prior year annual Consumer Price Index – All Urban Consumers for Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, California (“CPI”), calculated by the 12-month change as of March each year as published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, or a similar index if the CPI is no longer published or is otherwise not available.

If at the time a cost of living increase is due for staff labor for any year, and the MOU, for whatever reason is not otherwise available, then the City may implement the same cost of living increase applicable from the immediate preceding year. If the CPI does not change or decreases in any given year, no change shall be made to the user fee schedule applicable that year. In no event shall the facility user fees be increased annually to exceed the costs of providing the services.

SECTION 6. Any and all provisions of prior resolutions, specifically Resolution No. 18-2720, of the City Council establishing or modifying facility user fees for use of City park and recreation facilities and services set forth in Exhibit “A,” are hereby repealed and replaced as of the effective date of this Resolution with the facility user fees in the manner set forth in Exhibit “A” provided, however, that such repeal shall not excuse or affect the failure of any person or entity to pay any fee heretofore imposed upon such person or entity. The City Council desires to clarify that in adopting this Resolution, it is taking action only on those facility user fees set forth in Exhibit “A” which have been modified from prior resolutions of the City Council. All other fees, charges, taxes, and assessments imposed by the City that have not been modified by this Resolution shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 7. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Resolution and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one of or more sections, subsections, clauses, or phases be declared invalid or unconstitutional on their face or as applied.

SECTION 8. This Resolution and the facility user fees contained in Exhibit “A” shall be effective immediately.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 8th day of September 2025. _______________________________

ALI SAJJAD TAJ, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________

JENNIFER ALDERETE, CITY CLERK
EXHIBIT “A”

PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT FACILITY USE FEE SCHEDULE [See Attached Fee Schedule]
Room/Area of Use Maximum
Capacity
Albert 0. Little Community Center
Meeting Room A or B 40
Southeast Multipurpose 75
Room
East Multipurpose Room 150
West Auditorium 150
Entire Hall 300
Artesia Park
Unsheltered Picnic Area
*I
Sheltered Picnic Area 10 tables
Sports Courts: Tennis,
*
Basketball, Soccer
Lights for a single type of
*
Sports Court
Baseball Diamonds
*
1,2,3, or 4 No Lights
Lights for single Baseball
*
Diamonds
Pee Wee Diamonds & Open
*
Space Areas
Grass Area Inside Baseball
*
Diamond Fence - No Lights

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF ARTESIA

FACILITY USE FEE SCHEDULE
Minimum Group 2 and
Hours of Use Group 3 Users
2 hours $30 per hour
5 hours $36 per hour
5 hours $60 per hour
5 hours $78 per hour
5 hours $132 per hour
None Free
4 hours $15 per hour
1 hour $10 per hour
1 hour $5 per hour
1 hour $30 per hour
per field
1 hour $10 per hour
per field
1 hour $30 per hour
per area
1 hour $60 per hour
1 Outdoor spaces have variable capacities depending on the type and location of the Use.

Group 4 Users Group 5 Users Security
Deposit
$50 per hour $80 per hour $150
$60 per hour $90 per hour $150
$100 per hour $130 per hour $150
$130 per hour $160 per hour $150
$220 per hour $250 per hour $300
Free Free $50
$25 per hour $55 per hour $75
$15 per hour $20 per hour $150
$5 per hour $5 per hour
$50 per hour $80 per hour $150
per field per field
$10 per hour $10 per hour Estimate
per field per field Costs
2 $50 per hour $80 per hour $150
per area per area
$100 per hour $130 per hour $500
2 Users requesting use of field lights will be charged an estimated light security fee based on the estimated duration and time of day of the event and expected sunset time. Any unused light security funds will be refunded following the use along with the security deposit. If the light security fee is insufficient for the time the lights are on, the balance will be deducted from the facility use security deposit.

A-1
Baseball Diamonds 1-4
* Maximum of $720 per day $1,200 per day $1,500 per day $800 Tournament & Snack Bark 14 hours
Use/No Lights
Field Lights for tournament
* 1 hour $40 per hour $40 per hour $40 per hour Estimate and irrass area use (all lights). Costs
2 Room/ Area of Use Maximum Minimum Group 2 and Group 4 Users Group 5 Users Security Capacity Hours of Use Group 3 Users Deposit
North Artesia Community Center/ AJ Padelford Park
Multipurpose Room 120 5 hours $60 per hour $100 per hour $130 per hour $150 Classrooms A, B, or C 20 1 hour $15 per hour $25 per hour $55 per hour $150 Sheltered Picnic Area 5 tables 4 hours $15 per hour $25 per hour $55 per hour $100 Basketball Court
* 1 hour $10 per hour $15 per hour $20 per hour $150
Open Space
* 1 hour $30 per hour $50 per hour $80 per hour $150
All Uses scheduled outside of facility operational hours will be assessed a $58 per hour per staff fee to keep facilities open. At no time will a facility use occur without staff members present.

The Facility Use Fee Schedule will be reviewed annually beginning June 1, 2026 to ensure the fees assessed are adequate to recover the cost of operations in association with facility uses.

A-2

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: September 8, 2025 ITEM NO: 11A.

TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Schematic Design for Public Service Center Project Located at 18730 Clarkdale Avenue, the Former Library Facility
FROM: Mario Flores, Management Analyst
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 approve the schematic design for the Artesia Public Service Center Project, which includes conceptual design plans, structural calculations, schematic design renderings of materials and furniture, and probable construction cost estimates.

BACKGROUND:

The former library facility at 18730 Clarkdale Avenue served as a vital resource for residents for over five decades, offering a wide range of books, programs, and community events. However, in 2017, Los Angeles County opened a new, larger library to better meet the needs of the growing population. Since the library relocated, numerous discussions have occurred regarding potential uses for the vacant facility. The City of Artesia ("City") was presented with a rare opportunity to re-purpose this facility to serve the evolving needs of the community. Recognizing longstanding challenges such as limited space at City Hall, inadequate public counter and storage areas, and the lack of an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and office space for Sheriff Deputies, the City Council committed to transforming the facility into a Public Service Center. This new use will centralize key departments and resources, provide office space for deputies, and create a multipurpose area that can serve as an EOC and meeting room, ensuring the building continues to benefit residents in meaningful ways.

The Artesia Public Service Center project is being funded through a combination of secured and anticipated resources. Architectural design services, not to exceed $67,000, are covered by a grant from the California Natural Resources Agency, obtained with the support of Assemblymember Sharon Quirk-Silva. Beyond the design phase, additional project costs are expected to be supported through a mix of Development Impact Fees, grants and Capital Improvement Funds. By leveraging these diverse funding streams, the City is able to move the project forward without impacting the General Fund, ensuring that vital services can continue uninterrupted while the facility is modernized to meet community needs.

In August 2024, the City Council approved a contract with the firm, BOA Architecture Inc. (BOA), to develop the design and construction documents, and to provide construction oversight for the project. Since then, BOA has collaborated closely with City staff to prepare cost estimates, conceptual design plans, structural calculations, and schematic design renderings of materials and furniture, ensuring the project vision is both functional and financially feasible. At the August 11, 2025, City Council meeting, staff recommended the formation of a Public Service Center Design Ad-Hoc Committee and the appointment of two Council Members to collaborate with staff on the rest of the project's design and implementation. The proposed design is now at 90 percent completion.

ANALYSIS:

Throughout the design process, City staff and BOA have remained focused on creating a facility that is both functional and cost-efficient, while ensuring it meets the City’s long-term service needs. As part of the preliminary design phase, BOA prepared a probable construction cost estimate of $1,897,767.38. This estimate reflects a comprehensive scope of work, including major renovations such as restroom demolition and rebuilds, structural framing, new doors and windows, interior finishes, fire sprinkler retrofits, plumbing and HVAC upgrades, and a complete electrical and fire alarm system modernization. It also accounts for security systems, IT infrastructure, and office furnishings. The estimate incorporates general conditions, overhead, profit, bonding, insurance, and a 15 percent contingency to cover unforeseen circumstances
On August 22, 2025, City staff and the Ad-Hoc Committee met with BOA to review the proposed design for the Public Service Center. BOA presented the schematic renderings, materials listings, and estimated construction costs, providing a comprehensive overview of the project. Overall, both City staff and the Ad-Hoc Committee expressed strong support for the design, noting that it effectively addresses the City’s space limitations and community service needs. Feedback from the Ad-Hoc Committee was largely positive, with only a few questions raised regarding finishing details and final material selections, items which do not need to be finalized until the construction phase of the project. The design is at 90 percent completion and is now before the City Council for approval prior to the entering the final stages of development and being submitted for planning and building and safety review.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no impact to the general fund related to approving the design and directing staff to move forward at this time.

The proposed design is projected to be close to the currently funded amount for the project. However, these are rough estimates which will be updated before construction is bid out for development. When the construction documents are finalized, the item will be brought back to the City Council to approve the construction plans, along with any additional information regarding funding allocation. The City is also awaiting a grant award determination which will fund the EOC portion of the project, which is expected to be verified in early 2026.

RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve the schematic design for the Artesia Public Service Center Project, which includes conceptual design plans, structural calculations, schematic design renderings of materials and furniture, and probable construction cost estimates.

Attachments
082125 Public Service Center Schematic Design Renderings Materials Furniture.pdf

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: September 8, 2025 ITEM NO: 11B.

TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Consideration of an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) FROM: Carmen Zambrano, Management Analyst
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 receive and file the Enhanced Infrastructure Finance District feasibility analysis presentation.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Artesia ("City") is evaluating the use of Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFD) to capture value from new development to fund critical infrastructure and community priorities (without new taxes). EIFDs were created in 2014 (SB 628) following the dissolution of Redevelopment Agencies and have since become the predominant tax-increment financing (TIF) tool in California, with more than 30 districts formed statewide, including six in Los Angeles County.

EIFDs fund public facilities and investments by capturing a portion of future property tax increment revenue as development occurs within district boundaries. Importantly, EIFDs do not increase property taxes or impose new taxes on landowners. The commitment of future EIFD funding has also proven catalytic for private sector investment and enhances eligibility for additional resources, including County contributions and competitive state and federal grants.

At Staff’s direction, Metro’s Value Capture Support team prepared analysis confirming EIFD feasibility to support economic development through infrastructure investment. Alternatives of boundaries, partnerships, and revenue allocations have been assessed, with TIF capacity estimated at up to $60 Million. A City-only strategy would generate favorable returns, though partnering with Los Angeles County would enhance financial feasibility.

Subject to City Council feedback, next steps include evaluating a County partnership and potentially adopting a non-binding Resolution of Intention, with full EIFD formation possible by mid-2026.

ANALYSIS:

Potential Artesia EIFD Boundaries
Draft EIFD boundaries have been evaluated based on opportunity sites for new development or rehabilitation, including the Downtown Specific Plan area and other mixed-use and commercial sites, with the Metro Southeast Gateway Line (SGL) Pioneer Station at the core.

The draft boundary totals approximately 324 acres (about 31% of City acreage and 25% of assessed value).

Boundaries are not required to be contiguous, allowing focus on areas with the greatest growth potential while protecting General Fund revenues from other areas. Funding generated within the EIFD may be used flexibly within or outside the district boundaries.

Eligible Projects
EIFDs may fund infrastructure and public facilities of community significance with a useful life of 15+ years, including maintenance. Example projects identified by City staff and consultants include:

Metro 3% local cost match contribution for the Southeast Gateway Line Water, sewer, and utility capacity enhancements
Roadway and streetscape improvements along Pioneer Blvd.

Affordable housing gap funding
Metro station first/last mile connections and Historic District Multi-Use Trail improvements Park improvements for Artesia Park and A.J. Padelford Park Public safety / Sheriff facilities
Broadband infrastructure
The Infrastructure Financing Plan (IFP) is typically kept broad and flexible to allow adaptation over the district’s 50- year lifespan.

Funding Capacity, Partnerships, and Fiscal Considerations EIFD funding capacity is estimated at up to $60 million on a present-value basis over 50 years. Revenues would accrue annually and could support bond financing once increment levels are sufficient.

These estimates assume the City allocates 50% to 75% of its share of future property tax increment within the EIFD boundary, with additional upside possible through a partnership with Los Angeles County. The County has adopted an EIFD Participation Policy and has previously partnered with La Verne, Palmdale, Carson, and Lakewood, as well as formed its own EIFD in West Carson.

From a City fiscal perspective, EIFD participation does not encumber existing resources but allocates a portion of future increment. A detailed fiscal analysis would confirm the General Fund’s ability to “afford” the allocation and assess overall return on investment. Importantly, EIFDs are designed to leverage outside resources: County match dollars, private development, and competitive grants that award higher scores for cities with established financing districts.

Governance
Implementation of an EIFD requires creation of a Public Financing Authority (PFA).

City-only EIFD: Three City Councilmembers + two public members appointed by Council.

City + County EIFD: Five-member board consisting of two City Councilmembers, one County Supervisor (or designee), and one public member appointed by each body.

The PFA adopts bylaws governing terms, officers, and meeting schedules. It oversees implementation of the IFP, with authority to approve minor amendments (e.g., revenue updates). Major amendments (e.g., new projects or allocation increases) require approval by the City Council and any partner legislative body.

Next Steps and Timing
Subject to City Council feedback, next steps include evaluating a County partnership and potentially returning with a non-binding Resolution of Intention.

If Council directs implementation, formation would take approximately 8-10 months, including 5-8 public meetings of the City Council, PFA, and County Board of Supervisors (if applicable).

Public outreach will include a dedicated EIFD web page, mailed notices to affected property owners and residents, and newspaper advertisements. The process is subject to state law protest provisions, which require discontinuation if a majority of affected property owners or residents oppose.

Potential Date Task
May 2025 -
September 2025
a) Conduct outreach/discussion among City staff and Council, County staff and Board of Sup District staff and Board, other relevant stakeholders
b) Final determination of EIFD boundaries, targeted projects, governing Public Financing Au Board composition
October 2025 -
November 2025 c) Participating taxing agencies adopt Resolution(s) of Intention (ROI) and formally establish PFA FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no immediate fiscal impact associated with receiving this presentation. If an EIFD is ultimately established, it would provide the opportunity to use tax increment financing to fund targeted infrastructure investments within the City. Detailed fiscal impacts would be evaluated as part of the Infrastructure Financing Plan (IFP) development process and presented to the City Council for consideration prior to approval.

RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:

Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the Enhanced Infrastructure Finance District feasibility analysis presentation.

Attachments
Artesia Value Capture Analysis Summary.pdf
December 2025 -
January 2026 d) PFA directs the drafting of the Infrastructure Financing Plan (IFP) February 2026 e) Distribute draft IFP to property owners, affected taxing entities March 2026 f) PFA holds an initial public meeting to present the draft IFP to the public and property owners April 2026 g) City Council/legislative bodies of other affected taxing entity contributing increment adopt approving IFP
May 2026 h) PFA holds first public hearing to hear additional comments and take action to modify or reject 30 days after “f”)
June 2026 i) PFA holds second public hearing to consider oral and written protests and take action to termina proceedings or adopt IFP and form the district by resolution (at least 30 days after “h”) Prepared by the Metro Value Capture Support Advisory Team Morgner, Kosmont Companies, NBS, Community Connections
Value Capture Support
Feasibility Analysis Summary
City Council
September 8, 2025
Executive Summary
2 • Artesia has the ability to use “Value Capture” tools to fund public infrastructure and community amenities by leveraging future development (potentially over $170M in value) driven by transportation investment. • Metro has assembled a team of consultants to help cities along transit corridors evaluate and implement these Value Capture tools, such as Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFD). • The City would not encumber any existing revenues, but rather allocate a portion of future revenues. • A City-only approach would likely achieve favorable “return on investment”, but partnering with the County could further increase the financial impact by unlocking additional “matching funds”. • These tools can also enhance the City’s ability to secure state and federal grants.

Executive Summary (Continued)
3 • EIFDs could generate up to ~$60M (present-value funding capacity) through tax increment financing (with a County match).
• Current uncertainty in Federal infrastructure funding makes local tools more essential to deliver long-term economic development.
• Pending City Council feedback, the next step would involve evaluating partnership with the County of Los Angeles and returning to the City Council with an update, potentially including a Resolution of Intention to form an EIFD.
4 $0M
$100M
$200M
$300M
$400M
$500M
$600M
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Years from District Formation
What is Tax Increment Financing (TIF) –Not a New Tax
A “Retirement Account” for Infrastructure
Baseline Property Value at District Formation
All Property Tax Stays with General Fund
New Property Value from
New Development / Rehabilitation
Some Portion (e.g., 50%) of Property Tax Available to
TIF District, Remainder Stays with General Fund
New Total
Value After
TIF District
All Property
Tax Goes to
General Fund
Assessed
Property Value
within District
Boundaries
(Illustrative)
Note: Illustrative example. Growth of assessed value assumes future development in a linear fashion through buildout. Some portion (e.g., 50%) of new property tax increment would be directed to the TIF district, while remainder (e.g., other 50%) would stay with General Fund.

EIFD Fundamentals
Communicating in a Digital World
5 45 years from first bond issuance Long Term
Districts
Governance Public Financing Authority (PFA) implements Infrastructure Financing Plan (IFP) Approvals Mandatory public hearings for formation with protest opportunity; no public vote Any property with useful life of 15+ years & of communitywide significance; purchase, construction, expansion, improvement, seismic retrofit, rehabilitation, and maintenance Eligible
Projects
Types of Projects EIFD Can Fund
Partial List
6 Roadway / Parking / Transit
Brownfield Remediation
Storm / Flood / Public Facilities Parks / Open Space / Recreation Libraries & Childcare Facilities Affordable Housing
Broadband Small Business /
Nonprofit Facilities
Wildfire Prevention / Other
Climate Change Response
Why are Public Agencies Authorizing Financing Districts? Communicating in a Digital World
7 1. Return on Investment: Private sector investment induced by district commitment accelerates growth of net fiscal revenues, job creation, housing production, essential infrastructure improvements

2. Ability to attract additional funds / other public money (“OPM”): Tax increment from other entities (county, special districts), federal / state grants / loans (e.g., for transit-oriented development, water, housing, parks, remediation)
Districts in Progress Statewide
(Partial List)
Fully Formed In Formation Process Under Evaluation
Jurisdiction Purpose
Apple Valley Industrial and housing supportive infrastructure Banning (CRIA) Downtown revitalization, industrial infrastructure Barstow Industrial and housing supportive infrastructure Brentwood Housing, employment, and transit-supportive infrastructure Buena Park Mall reimagination, tourism-supportive infrastructure Calipatria (CRD) Economic and climate resilience infrastructure Carson + L.A. County Remediation, affordable housing, recreation Citrus Heights Mall reimagination
Covina Downtown housing and blended use supportive infrastructure Fairfield Downtown, housing, and transit-supportive infrastructure Fresno Downtown, housing and transit-supportive infrastructure Fresno County Industrial and commercial supportive infrastructure Humboldt County Coastal mixed-use and energy supportive infrastructure Inglewood (CRD) Transportation and affordable housing
Imperial County Renewable energy, housing and infrastructure La Verne + L.A. County Housing and transit-supportive infrastructure Lakewood + L.A. County Mall reimagination, smart streets, affordable housing Long Beach Economic empowerment and affordable housing
Los Angeles (Downtown, San Pedro, other) Affordable housing and transit-supportive infrastructure Los Angeles County West Carson Housing / bio-science / tech infrastructure Madera County (3 Districts) Water, sewer, roads and other housing infrastructure Modesto + Stanislaus County Downtown, housing, and recreation infrastructure Mount Shasta Rural brownfield mixed-use infrastructure
Napa Downtown, housing, tourism supportive infrastructure Norwalk + L.A. County Affordable housing and infrastructure Ontario Airport-related, blended use, infrastructure
Palmdale + L.A. County Housing, blended use, transit infrastructure Pittsburg Housing, commercial, and tech park infrastructure Placentia + Orange County Housing and TOD infrastructure Rancho Cucamonga Blended use and connectivity infrastructure Redlands Education related blended use, mall reimagination Redondo Beach + L.A. County Parks / open space, recreation infrastructure Riverside County Thousand Palms Housing, hospitality, medical supportive infrastructure Sacramento County (Unincorporated) Industrial / commercial supportive infrastructure Salinas Water, sewer, and other housing supportive infrastructure Sanger Commercial, hospitality, supportive infrastructure Santa Cruz (EIFD + CRD) Downtown, blended use, and climate resilience infrastructure Santa Fe Springs Housing and transit-oriented development infrastructure Santa Rosa + County of Sonoma Downtown investment, affordable housing, aging infrastructure Vacaville Housing and business park infrastructure
Yucaipa Housing and commercial infrastructure
Potential Value Capture Focus Areas:

Commercial and Specific Plan Areas
9 • Approx. 324 acres (~31% of City)
• Approx. $577M in existing assessed value (~25%
of City)
• Metro Southeast Gateway Line Pioneer Station at
the core
Source: NBS, Los Angeles County Auditor-Controller (2025) 10 a) Metro SGL 3% local cost match contribution (approximately $15M in May 2025) b) Water, sewer, other utility capacity enhancements
c) Roadway, streetscape improvements along Pioneer Blvd. d) Affordable housing (e.g., gap funding to facilitate affordable housing development) e) SGL first and last mile improvements / improvements to the Historic District Multi-Use Trail adjacent to the future SGL line
f) Park Improvements for Artesia Park and A.J. Padelford Park g) Public safety / Sheriff facilities
h) Broadband internet infrastructure
Example Potential Investments to Receive EIFD Funding
11 City allocation includes allocation from both AB8 + MVLF in-lieu. County allocation does not include MVLF in-lieu. * Bonding capacity assumes Year 5 is first bond issuance for EIFD. “Year 10” means tenth year of revenue following district formation. Net proceeds shown. Bondable revenue assumes $25,000 admin charge, 150% debt service coverage. 6.0% interest rate; 30-year term. Proceeds net of 2% underwriter's discount, estimated reserve fund (maximum annual debt service), costs of issuance estimated at $350,000. Issuance costs may be payable from Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit-Oriented Development grant awarded to Los Angeles County Metro.

Source: Kosmont Financial Services (KFS), registered municipal advisor.

EIFD Revenue and Bonding Capacity Scenarios
EIFD Revenue
Allocation Scenario
Year 10
Accumulated
Revenue +
Bonding
Capacity*
50-Year
Present-Value
@ 3%
Discount Rate
A) City 50% + County Dollar Match
(~33% of County share) $9,943,000 $39,875,000
B) City 75% + County Dollar Match
(~49% of County share) $15,246,000 $59,813,000
Los Angeles County EIFD Participation Policy
12 Property Tax Increment:
• City share contributed  County share contributed
• County contributes less than 100% of its share

Fiscal Analysis: Positive net impact to County General Fund  Board Priorities: Supports affordable housing, homeless prevention, workforce development, or sustainability 
Regional and Community Significance: As related to Board priorities above, job creation, blight removal, or improvements to regional transportation 
Affordable Housing: 20% of units or tax increment will be set aside for affordable housing uses  “But for…” Test: Contribution of County property tax increment is necessary precondition for targeted projects 
Public Agency and Community “Return on Investment”
13 • Maximize Metro transportation infrastructure investment • Housing production
• Economic revitalization, climate resilience, quality of life • Sustainable infrastructure investment
• Job creation and wages
• Acceleration of development and related fiscal revenues for City (and County) general funds • Attract other funding not otherwise available for City projects 14 Illustrative EIFD Formation Schedule
▪ Tax increment allocation begins fiscal year following district formation ▪ Debt issuance, if desired, would occur after a stabilized level of tax increment has been established (may be 3-5 years) Target Date Task
Feb – August 2025
a) Conduct outreach/discussion among City staff and Council, County staff and Board of Supervisors, other relevant stakeholders
b) Final determination of EIFD boundaries, targeted projects, governing Public Financing Authority (PFA) Board composition
Oct / Nov 2025 c) Participating taxing agencies adopt Resolution(s) of Intention (ROI) and formally establish PFA Dec 2025 / Jan 2026 d) PFA directs the drafting of the Infrastructure Financing Plan (IFP) February 2026 e) Distribute draft IFP to property owners, affected taxing entities, City Council, County Board of Supervisors March 2026 f) PFA holds an initial public meeting to present the draft IFP to the public and property owners April 2026 g) City Council/legislative bodies of other affected taxing entity contributing increment adopt resolution(s) approving IFP
May 2026 h) PFA holds first public hearing to hear additional comments and take action to modify or reject IFP (at least 30 days after “f”)
June 2026 i) PFA holds second public hearing to consider oral and written protests and take action to terminate proceedings or adopt IFP and form the district by resolution (at least 30 days after “h”) 15 Potential Next Steps
• Address questions, receive and incorporate feedback from City Council • Evaluation potential EIFD partnership with the County • Return to City Council with an update
• Based on City/County feedback, consider non-binding Resolution of Intention 16 THANK YOU
Questions?
17 APPENDIX
18 Example Development Assumptions with Specific Plan Area Absorption Assumed over First 10 Years of District Lifetime Note: AV at buildout values in current 2025 dollars. In actuality, model assumes absorption over time with annual escalation of assessed value factors.

Sources: Downtown Specific Plan; CoStar (2025)
Land Use # SF or Units Estimated
AV Factor
Estimated
Total AV at Buildout
Residential 378 units $350K per unit $132 million
Hotel 111 rooms $300K per room $33 million
Commercial / Retail 17,900 SF $350 PSF $6 million
Total New Development Assumed within Study Area $172 million • Specific Plan allows for up to 1,962 new residential units and up to 78,901 new commercial square feet, envisioned over approximately 20 years • This analysis focuses on the following assumptions deemed to me more likely in the nearto-mid-term (5-10 years out) 19 • Primary potential contributors of property tax are City and County
• City share varies by area and averages ~6.7% of every $1 collected in property taxes – City is a no-low
property tax City subject AB 1197 Tax Equity Allocation (TEA)
▪ City additionally receives equivalent of ~11.1% of
property tax in lieu of motor vehicle license fees (MVLF), also available to EIFD
• County General Fund share varies by area and averages ~27.2%
▪ County additionally receives property tax in lieu of MVLF, also available to EIFD, but not incorporated into this
analysis to be conservative
• School-related entities cannot participate
As counties tend to rely more heavily on property tax revenue sources generated by new development within incorporated jurisdictions, it is Kosmont’s experience that it is not reasonable to assume allocation of property tax in lieu of MVLF by the County. As cities benefit from additional non-property tax revenue sources (e.g., sales tax, transient occupancy tax) from new development, it is Kosmont’s experience that it is reasonable for cities to consider contributing property tax in lieu of MVLF.

Tax Rate Area (TRA) weighted average distributions for EIFD Study Area shown. Post-ERAF (Education Revenue Augmentation Fund) distribution.

Parcels within former Redevelopment Agency Project Areas are subject to RPTTF revenue flow until expiration of ROPS obligations (2046 for Artesia).

Source: Los Angeles County Auditor Controller (2025)
Property Tax Revenues Available to EIFD
Property Tax Distribution
City

6.7%
County

27.2%
Other / School
Entities (not eligible)

66.2%
+ MVLF (separate from
distribution of 1% general levy)
~11.1% = 17.7% total
20 Potential Cash Flow / Debt Issuance Approaches
• Metro VCS team members are in active discussions with public finance underwriters regarding TIF debt issuances in other jurisdictions
• Underwriters have proposed several approaches for the leverage of tax increment for accelerated debt issuance (e.g., 2-3 years from district formation), for example:
a) Tax increment only
b) Overlapping TIF and CFD (CFD Backstop) – landowners / developers must be willing to pay CFD special taxes in the short term (e.g., 5-10 years) until tax increment reaches a level to cover debt service
c) Tax increment with City or County general fund backstop • There are advantages and disadvantages with each approach (e.g., upfront proceeds available, public agency risk, cost of capital)
• Additional alternatives are available if private sector partners (e.g., landowners / developers are willing to advance infrastructure funding in exchange for reimbursement from TIF proceeds)
21 Financing Districts work better with a Multi-Agency Partnership & Attract Other Funding
Other Public Sources
▪ Cap-and-Trade / HCD grant & loan
programs (AHSC, IIG, TCC,CERF)
▪ Prop 68 parks & open space grants
▪ Prop 1 water/sewer funds
▪ Caltrans ATP / HSIP grants
▪ Federal EDA / DOT / EPA funding
▪ Federal ARPA, Invest Act, IIJ Act
Other Private Sources
▪ Development Agreement / impact fees
▪ Benefit assessments (e.g., contribution from CFD)
▪ Statewide Community Infrastructure Program (SCIP)
pooled financing
▪ Private investment
• Ideal strategy includes City and County partnership
• District which involve a City / County joint effort are more likely to win state grant funding sources • Districts explicitly increase scoring for CA state housing grants (e.g., IIG, AHSC, TCC)